The connection between esotericism and science, or how the second "parasitizes" the first. Science as a reproducible quantum entanglement of the real trajectory and trajectory of thinking
The paper shows that esotericism is the area of bifurcation of knowledge in which new trajectories of thinking are born. Further, in accordance with the principle of Occam's Razor, some of them are eliminated as not corresponding to the principle of least action. The rest move into the field of regular science. It is shown that our world is a system of nested resonators, which is consistent with Descartes' idea that the world is built from a hierarchy of vortices. This also explains the great importance of boundary conditions in mathematics, since the boundaries of the resonator define the shape of the vortex. At the same time, the discreteness of energy, which is a characteristic feature of all quantum processes, becomes clear, since only isolated structures can persistently exist in the resonator. The general wave function of an entity is proposed as the product of a number of wave functions corresponding to each scale of the Universe. A model is proposed in accordance with which knowledge becomes scientific when the trajectory of thinking and the real trajectory of the system correlate with each other. A model is proposed in accordance with which knowledge becomes scientific when the trajectory of thinking and the real trajectory of the system correlate with each other. This correlation is built using mathematical signs. Since both the real trajectory and the trajectory of thinking are cyclical, their synchronization indicates the quantum entanglement of the real and the symbolic. The Jungian concept of synchronicity is being clarified. At any moment, by explicating a sequence of signs, we reproduce reality. All particles are entangled with each other to varying degrees. Therefore, the task of the experimenter is not to create entanglement, but rather to disentangle the object of study so that it can be studied autonomously.
The paper shows that esotericism is the area of bifurcation of knowledge in which new trajectories of thinking are born. Further, in accordance with the principle of Occam's Razor, some of them are eliminated as not corresponding to the principle of least action. The rest move into the field of regular science. It is shown that our world is a system of nested resonators, which is consistent with Descartes' idea that the world is built from a hierarchy of vortices. This also explains the great importance of boundary conditions in mathematics, since the boundaries of the resonator define the shape of the vortex. At the same time, the discreteness of energy, which is a characteristic feature of all quantum processes, becomes clear, since only isolated structures can persistently exist in the resonator. The general wave function of an entity is proposed as the product of a number of wave functions corresponding to each scale of the Universe. A model is proposed in accordance with which knowledge becomes scientific when the trajectory of thinking and the real trajectory of the system correlate with each other. A model is proposed in accordance with which knowledge becomes scientific when the trajectory of thinking and the real trajectory of the system correlate with each other. This correlation is built using mathematical signs. Since both the real trajectory and the trajectory of thinking are cyclical, their synchronization indicates the quantum entanglement of the real and the symbolic. The Jungian concept of synchronicity is being clarified. At any moment, by explicating a sequence of signs, we reproduce reality. All particles are entangled with each other to varying degrees. Therefore, the task of the experimenter is not to create entanglement, but rather to disentangle the object of study so that it can be studied autonomously.
Lack of understanding of the ideas of quantum physics leads to the fact that the very word "quantum" begins to be perceived as a synonym for something mysterious, incomprehensible, and even doubtful. The arising errors sometimes lead to inadequate media coverage of the development of quantum technologies, as the case with the ignorant reaction of the press in June 2016 to the statement of the Russian authorities about the prospects of quantum teleportation, which some media presented as teleportation from science fiction. Such misunderstandings can impede the formation of the necessary trust in quantum technologies on the part of the business community, politicians and the public. In part, the reason for this state of the art may be the insufficient attention of physicists themselves to the development of popular scientific and pedagogical discourse, which makes it possible to correctly introduce the ideas of quantum mechanics into the context of general culture. For decades, physicists have flaunted the kind of esotericism of quantum mechanics. Journalists love to quote the classics of quantum physics: “Those who are not shocked when they first come across quantum theory cannot possibly have understood it” (Niels Bohr); “I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics” (Richard Feynman); “Quantum mechanics is absolutely meaningless” (Roger Penrose) [1]. Indeed, for many quantum-scale phenomena, no analogues have yet been found in the everyday world, and they are difficult to express in our everyday language. As a result, the introduction to quantum mechanics begins with a description of the mathematical formalism, which becomes an obstacle for the untrained listener and is not suitable for popularization. Moreover, such an approach creates problems for physicists themselves: many of them, studying the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics and being convinced in practice of its effectiveness, do not ask the question of how the founders of this science were able to go in the opposite direction and, starting from experience, find the required formalism. As a result, important problematic and heuristic aspects of the development of science may drop off even professional physicists’ radar. In view of the above, an important task is to find effective explanatory techniques that allow one to talk about quantum phenomena without resorting to mathematical apparatus and without abuse of doubtful metaphors. This article attempts to find such an approach to explaining quantum cryptography. The choice in its favor is determined by the fact that it is one of the most mature quantum technologies of the second generation, which is already beginning to generate a demand for technical specialists to set up and maintain secure quantum communication lines. This activity requires a general understanding of the ideas of quantum mechanics underlying the technology, but at the same time, it does not require full knowledge of the mathematical apparatus that is used in research and development. In accordance with this, the task was set to outline the principle of quantum cryptography without resorting to such abstract concepts as the state space of a quantum system, its bases and the choice between them in quantum measurement. In a popular scientific sense, the advantage of quantum cryptography is a simplicity for understanding. Our experience shows that its main points can be explained to students in about half an hour without extraordinary mental effort. It is also enigmatical and fascinating, since, on the one hand, it is associated with spy codes, and on the other hand, it provides protection based on the laws of nature. Methodologically, the positive aspect of quantum cryptography is valuable. Many fundamental premises of quantum physics are negative: the impossibility of making any measurement without affecting the system, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, the nocloning theorem. At the same time, quantum cryptography, on the contrary, allows an absolutely secure distribution of the encryption key.
The paper is showing the strange facts and realities pertaining to the quantum world and is explaining why it is so difficult to understand and to work with them. The paper is also stressing the important fact, that in order to understand these strange realities pertaining to the quantum phenomena, one should give up the traditional way of thinking of the science and should also renounce the false idea of the rationalism, that the reality can be known and understood only by scientific reasoning according to the limited present stage of science and knowledge.
The intention of this paper is not to build quantum metaphysics but to justify the possibility of a second game through interpreting the ideas, concepts and visions from actual physics with ideas and visions borrowed from physics of the Orient. We are aware that quantum metaphysics is far from Abhinavagupta’s metaphysics. After Culianu we introduce both visions in a deforming grid to build a new ideational universe. This ideational universe is a transmodern construction, which tends to become topical in the context of transdisciplinarity and multidisciplinarity prevalence. Characterization of thinking as theory and determination of knowledge as a theoretical approach takes place in a inwardly beginning of the technical interpretation of thinking. There is an attempt to keep a sense of reason independently towards action. Philosophy is always in the critical situation to justify its existence to science. The safest way to do this is by self-establishing itself as science. But this effort represents the sacrifice of the essence of knowledge: “in the technical interpretation of thinking, the being as self element of thinking is sacrificed (Hidegger, 1988:314)”. To look positively to philosophy as a dodge of science from metaphysics proves not only destructive to philosophy but also harmful to science. Absolute objectivity claims are increasingly refuted by the development of the cognitive approach. Not only social and human sciences require subjectivity as a dimension of objective knowledge, but physics itself considered the hard part of science reaches to formulate indeterminacy (uncertainty) principles. A new perspective that might be required in the philosophy of science is to look at it as to a semiotics of cognitive act.
This is the second in a series of three articles that will outline a proposed scientific model with the goal of stimulating a new vision toward resolving the Mind-matter question and acknowledging an underlying connectiveness in the universe. Scientific is understood to mean that the parts or links already exist as useful concepts in the scientific community. The model being proposed assumes that everyday reality is not simply there nor is it within. Rather, it is suggested that everyday reality is a perception we construct from aspects of the unity within which we are immersed. Parr I presented the basic assumptions of the model and introduced the model by exploring aspects of a reality that extends beyond our limited concepts of three dimensional space plus time. 1 • 2 The power of symbolic patterns in the physical for serving the role of mediator between the happenings in the physical (or outer reality) and the menral (or inner reality) was emphasized. Part II, Mapping Beyond Space-Time, discusses a process of interfacing between Mind and matter consistenr with the concepts of quantum physics. Emphasis is placed upon the quantum feature of non-locality and upon twistor theory. The issues of causality and reproducibility in science are discussed. The article concludes with a description of the dynamics of the process-how the interplay takes place and works. This includes an outline of other symbolic tools of mathematics such as chaos theory that permit extending out three dimensional thinking. In Part III the authors will explore [he relationship of their model to human experience.
Far from regarding physical science as a universal model of human knowledge, Werner Heisenberg relativized the scientificity of natural science, situating this domain of knowledge in a wide range of our modes of experiencing the world. In this paper, with a focus on his critical analysis of the notion of objectivity in quantum theory and other fields, I survey Heisenberg’s view of the world as divided into six distinct areas of reality, including – but not centered on – physical science. I also seek to show how this conception of the structure of reality, specifically of the relation between different areas of reality, is mediated by his mis- or reinterpretation of Bohr’s idea of complementarity.
The fundamental impasses and ruptures in various domains of the canonical, unitary science, or the 'end of science', become the more and more evident. The natural unity of being is recovered within a universal nonperturbative method leading to the dynamic redundance paradigm. It is shown that the unreduced behaviour of any nontrivial (isolated) system includes many equally real, but incompatible dynamic regimes, each of them being roughly equivalent to an ordinary 'complete' solution of the unitary science. Therefore the regimes should 'spontaneously' and randomly replace one another, which provides a universal, purely dynamic origin of randomness. The discovered dynamic redundance leads to the universal, reality-based concept of dynamic complexity and its permanently developing hierarchical structure, alias the world. Its lowest levels give the causally complete mechanics of dynamically quantized elementary fields, extending the double solution found by Louis de Broglie. One obtains a physically complete solution for the 'mysteries' of quantum mechanics, unifyng it with the extended, causal versions of relativity (emergent space and time), quantum and classical gravity (dynamical mass), field theory (electric charge and spin), particle physics, and cosmology. The same key features of the unreduced dynamic complexity determine behaviour of any system at higher levels of complexity described by a case of the single, universal equation in its two related versions, the extended Lagrange-Hamilton (trajectorial) and Schroedinger (distributional) equations. The end of the unitary science opens the renaissance of the ultimately complete and universal understanding initiated by Rene Descartes (but then mechanistically falsified), which is confirmed by many sound, practically important results.