Sunday, July 20, 2008

Quantum Twins

Because atomic behaviour is so unlike ordinary experience, it is very difficult to get used to, and it appears peculiar and mysterious to everyone ... we shall tackle immediately the basic element of the mysterious behaviour in its most strange form. We choose to examine a phenomenon which is impossible, absolutely impossible to explain in any classical way, and which has in it the heart of quantum mechanics. In reality it contains the only mystery. We cannot make the mystery go away by 'explaining' how it works. We will just tell you how it works. - Dr. Richard Feynman, Nobel Prize Laureate for Physics *

This book I am reading, "Quantum Physics and Theology, an unexpected kinship", by John Polkinghorne (a former physicist and current Anglican priest) is an interesting book insomuch as the relationship between religion and quantum physics made mention to in "What the Bleep do we Know?" has hooked my mind into a positive environment so that I have come to want to see things in a different way from that which I have lived the past 43 years of my life.

The writing is neither particularly compelling (to me), nor by any means an easy read (for me), and I predict this will be one of those little books (only 110pgs the size of a paperback) that take a very long time to read little by little, page by page.

There are definite ways that science develops, and rules that are followed with regards to creating theories, experimentation, developing thoughts, and accepting, or rejecting them in the community. The author also shows that this is very true of theology - that there are definite ways it has developed and rules followed (except for conducting experiments), and is comparing how these two seemingly clashing aspects of looking at the world are in fact more similar than most people surmise.

The interesting thing for me will be to learn how theology also has similar rules and regulations that affect the outcomes we have come to known as the Bible, and how it is seen in the various Christian religions of the day. I have never studied the bible, nor have I ever gone into theology (which is different than bible study altogether), so I admit to having absolutely no knowledge of theology, or the "formal study of religion". Some may understand this through their history with their church, and their studies as they grow, but I think that many who "go to church and study the bible" may not be entirely aware (nor want to be aware), that the actual field of the study of religion, is much more than just reading passages out of the King James Bible, and believing that they are the "word of God", simply because that's what their religious leader tells them. I do understand that the ministers and priests who take up those roles must be just as educated in this field as any physicist or chemist or literature university professor in their specific field, but in truth, I have never bothered to ponder it on a deeper level. Until now.

Polkinghorne makes no mistake in saying that just as in religion (e.g. "God is unknowable"), there are inexplicable things we simply have to accept in science because although they can be proven with repeatable experimentation, they cannot be explained.

I find this aspect very interesting indeed and look forward to slogging my way through this little book, and sharing any new vocabulary I come upon (already several!) as well as concepts, with you.

Yesterday, right at the end of the first chapter, the author was talking about, in science, how all arguments must be verified through experimentation, even if the HOW is not particularly well-understood. He used a quantum physics effect called the EPR Effect (Einstein Podolski Rosen) to illustrate this while then going on to show a theological example as well. This EPR Effect can be verified by all physicists, and every single one accepts it as a truth, even though they are unable to explain it. It is a known effect that is essential in the further understanding of the deeper study of quantum physics.

Since most are more knowledgeable in studies of the Bible, let me share with you the theological example first...

"The Christian God is the crucified God, the One who is not just a compassionate spectator of the suffering of creatures, but a fellow-sharer in the travails of creation. The concept of a suffering God affords theology some help as it wrestles with its most difficult problem, the evil and suffering present in the world."

Although it is understood throughout the theological channels that this concept cannot be explained fully, and must be accepted even though it is only partially-understood, as in "how can God be both an observer AND a participant?", it is still fundamentally accepted and critical to the further studies and beliefs.

All of this is fine and dandy and although I do find it interesting... it's not really something that I would consider blogworthy... for me.

That is until I came to the paragraph which describes the EPR Effect. That is when my world took a monstrous shift to the left, and I paradigmed and sashayed to the right.

Stefnee has commented on how it is amazing and sometimes eerie on how her twins just KNOW what is going on between the two. Jenny has mentioned it. Michelle has mentioned it as well just very recently. Not coming from "twin stock" and not knowing two twins except for Burp and Barf, the girls across the street who used to babysit us, I really haven't had an opportunity to study it. But of course parents, and siblings, and probably psychologists do.

The other day Stefnee and I had a good discussion about this, and about the connection. We were having our usual NewAge Wackhead wonderfully deep discussion on breathing, on "NOWing", on "presencing", on twinning and on the connecting through the Red Thread that I have talked about in the past. At that time she brought up the wonderment of how her twins "just know" and seem to move in total harmony with one another.

Of course that intrigued me because I love those litttle guys like they were my own (they aren't, I swear!), and to actually meet them, see their similarities, and difference for a week and then to discuss them (not like lab rats, thankyouverymuch), is a growing interest in me as my desire to move into a more spiritual realm of study is increasing at a phenomenal rate. Stefnee also expressed her wonderment at looking at her two individual sons who were, at one point in time, one single entity. Please keep this point in mind when you read further.

Here is one of many scientific effects that have been experimentally verified, and subsequent predictions made based upon the existence of this effect without a complete understanding. Now I have gone through the internet and read some of the stuff out there, and my brain hurts. I don't plan on reading more on the mathematics of this effect, because it really doesn't interest me on that level. I also saw some papers talking about how the effect was explained and so forth. I like how science always progresses. Nothing is ever really wrong in physics, but it just changes because our perceptions, our growth and understanding of the models change.

"The EPR Effect is a counterintuitive togetherness-in-separation that implies that two quantum entities that have interacted with each other remain mutually entangled, however far they may subsequently separate in space. Effectively, they remain a single system, for acting on the one "here" will produce an immediate effect on its distant partner."

The quote with which I led into my discussion was made by the Nobel Physics Laureate Dr. Richard Feynman (late) who was trying to explain to his students at a lecture the incomprehensible concept that, according to quantum physics, electrons are in a continual state of existing "here", and "there" at the very same time. And in our world of definites, it would seem absolutely impossible to be sitting here in my house writing this, while eating oreo cookie flurries with Stefnee and Scooter at the McDonald's in Stefnee, Kansas at the same time. But, apparently, according to quantum mechanics, it is possible; as long as you don't consider it and try to catch me both here and there. In that case, I will only be either here, or there when you decide to measure it. Electrons can always be measured quantifiably (that means they must be "here" when we are measuring them otherwise we wouldn't see them), which brings up the question, "what happens if we are measuring when they are 'there', and not 'here' at the time of the experiment?" Scientists have to live with this brain imploding concept it seems.... "God is Unknowable"

A question above and beyond the concept of physical twins arises in my drive to study more of the spiritual realms... if there are physical twins, can there be spiritual ones? And could this perhaps be a possible "scientific understanding" of the mysterious NewAge Wackhead Mumbo Jumbo Spiritual concept that people have when they talk about past, present, future lives, or lives intertwined with one another throughout the ages? A sort of ... twinning of souls?

I love you.

Cam

* R. Feynman, 'The Feynman Lectures on Physics', vol. 3, Addison-Wesley, 1965, p.7

Other quotes upon request.

38 comments:

  1. I just added a paragraph near the end and made some further modifications to the end so you may want to refresh to catch that point. It's rather "yummy" in a very present sort of way.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Very thought provoking, Wouk...

    I have often wondered.. and marveled at the wonderment of my twins. I know that they share a very different bond than fraternal twins.. because.. like you mentioned... at one time.. they were ONE. they were one egg, one sperm. one cell mass... that divided...


    I think about things like... if life begins at conception and the soul is intact with the body at that moment... then.. do they share a soul? Can they? Is it possible to share a soul??

    They are so fluid... so expressive with each other.. and yet... sometimes.. they don't say a word.. and they know. They just... ARE.

    I can't classify it as telepathic communication or.. reading each others minds or anything that has a label... they just... are two people who are one. Yet... two. and it makes my brain explode. but I love it.


    I don't really know what I think about the twinning of souls.... I've always said.. that the notion of Soul Mates is a silly, romanticized idea... and pretty far fetched... but... recently, I've begun to open my heart and my mind to the notion that while soul MATES may not exist, the possibility of a soul TWIN is entirely plausible. After all... the term soul mate implies... that two souls mate, exclusively... shutting out all others and existing in this little bubble of bliss... while the term soul twin implies equality, joint existence and it includes the ones around the twinning.

    I will never be a part of Simon and Silas's Twinness... but that doesn't mean that it doesn't encompass me, and include me.... and for that... I am blessed...

    I love YOU Cam!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Robin - YOU KNOW that as I was writing this, the entire time I was thinking... "Robin's known all this shit for 20 years already and I'm just finally catching on!" I LOVE YOU, Miss SmartyPantsKnowItAll! (you ARE!)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Think that would fit on a business card? ;)

    Great blog. I LOVE to talk about stuff like this, but I must go to bed. I am tired. Happy, but tired.

    Had a fantastic weekend and will try to write all about our adventures with the Dalai Lama, etc. tomorrow morning. I'll give you a preview of what his Holiness concentrated on:

    Start Here

    Happy Self

    leads to:

    Happy Family

    leads to:

    Happy Community

    leads to:

    Happy State

    The rest will have to wait until tomorrow.

    Oi Stef! Save me an Oreo, please!?!

    'Night. LY2.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Robin - If we stop thinking about it, you should be able to go to bed and be enjoying oreos with Stefnee. Good night! I love you!!

    ReplyDelete
  6. *slips an Oreo under the pillow for Robin*

    ReplyDelete
  7. "There are definite ways that science develops, and rules that are followed with regards to creating theories, experimentation, developing thoughts, and accepting, or rejecting them in the community. The author also shows that this is very true of theology..."

    Uh, no, it's not.

    One of the big differences between science and theology is that science makes testable predictions, which cause theories to be accepted, modified, or rejected. Theology is merely an accumulation of authority, revelation, and tradition. Views may become Canonical over time, and some beliefs may fall by the wayside (sorry Purgatory isn't real anymore, and no we aren't refunding any indulgences) but none of that changes the fact that theology is a Rococo construction built on a series of misperceptions about the natural world, and wishful thinking regarding mortality.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It occurred to me that I think scientists have actually determined that the soul does indeed have a mass. If this is so, as the soul is energy, it might also consist of the same kind of energy that everything is made of.... matter, or particles. Electrons? Perhaps. Perhaps not. But if they were made of just a different frequency of emitting matter, wouldn't that also mean they should fall under the laws of the universe as we discover them? Couldn't the soul just be another form of matter that would then be affected by (but not necessarily bound by) the EPR Effect? And if that were so.... then perhaps, as Stefnee mentions, that form of energy can act in the same way that her twins form of energy (manifest in a different frequency, is all) were at one point one... and then split.

    I think the scientists in "What the Bleep..." talk about this kind of weird stuff.

    Of course life forms do not have to be made of the same basic carbon building blocks as us; we might be the anomaly. So, that may also mean that souls don't need to follow the same laws as our universe.

    Rob - I'll let you know how this goes. I was hoping you'd come in and pshaw this. In fact, the author is going to explain how, the analogous route in theology is true and that it is in fact not just an accumulation of authority, revelation, and tradition.

    Sometimes it's nice to see things from a different angle there, my friend. I knew you studied pretty much everything... I didn't realize you also have a doctorate in theology! We hit 38C here today. Did you survive your heat island?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Dude, nobody has ever weighed the soul. The whole 21 grams thing is based on the work of Dr. Duncan McDougall who performed his 'experiments' on consumptives (and their corpses) back around 1901. His experimental controls were unsatisfactory, and he selectively reported his data, disregarding those patients who did not show the proper weight loss. Regardless of McDougall's shortcomings numerous Christians have engaged in this type of soul searching over the years, and yet his results have never been replicated.

    ReplyDelete
  10. It's taken me three readings of this to BEGIN to try to wrap my brain around what's being said.

    I still don't know what inexplicable things there are in science that are proven but can't be explainedand are just accepted.

    I'm left with a headache... or maybe my brain aches.

    I'll leave this for those of you much smarter than i to ponder.

    To me it's not a matter of provability OR faith.

    I just don't really care.

    Either way, i'm along for the ride.

    After all, what's the alternative?

    What i KNOW is there's BACON waiting in the kitchen...seeya!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Quite the thought provoking post. Here I go, yet again...

    Some believe we were all once one entity. Many, if not most, accept the concept of soul mates, twin souls. I think there are many manners of soul pairing.

    Numerous psychological studies have been made on twins. I recall it is common for them to develop a private language.

    "Nothing is ever really wrong in physics, but it just changes because our perceptions, our growth and understanding of the models change." - Perhaps a metaphor of life?

    To disclaim: I am not a physicist and have only a nodding acquaintance with quantum mechanics, though likely will spend altogether too much time delving today. ;)

    An argument against the said EPR effect is that it appears as sophistry, a failure of reasoning. To wit, it seems to rely on plausible (as opposed to logical) restrictions arbitrarily placed upon (versus intrinsic to) the model. Quantum mechanics would not otherwise appear to be inherently in self-conflict.

    Feynman's key word would therefore be counter-intuitive [emphasis added].

    Personally, I find it likely that time and space as we understand them are constructs built on artifacts of brain structure. Functioning by linear processing, we are predisposed, literally 'hard-wired', to perceive the environment in such a manner. Though a great capacity for parallel processing is evident, such is still linear in origin.

    The reality is likely that we cannot wrap our little minds around existence, and are forced to interpret its facets, akin to the blind men and elephant parable.

    Neither "past" nor "future" appear to exist in any separate form (which, incidentally makes time travel a misnomer :D ). My thinking is along the lines of the 'zen watch', which shows no time, but simply flashes "NOW".

    There is only now.

    Unconditional Love!

    ReplyDelete
  12. My eyes are glazing over at the thought, but my friend posits this theory, God is the who and we are discovering the how.

    ReplyDelete
  13. *takes a bite of Oreo* Thanks, Stef!

    Bitterman - You snarky bastard. Have I told you lately that I love you? Science is it own religion, my friend. Purgatory is back in because the Pope re-opened Limbo. But in case you're worried I have made a pact with my friend Mike to get some legal paperwork drawn up stating that upon his death he will become the Keeper to the Portal of Limbo and I his messenger... I shit you not.

    You're right, no refunds on indulgences...

    My soul weighs approximately 5 ounces - the same as a coconut carrying swallow (without the coconut).

    Cam - Ever see the movie Powder? If not, I am encouraging you to rent it.

    Here here! Jen makes an extremely valid point - even science depends on a 'faith' of sorts. Hypothesis defined: a proposition, or set of propositions, set forth as an explanation for the occurrence of some specified group of phenomena, either asserted merely as a provisional conjecture to guide investigation (working hypothesis) or accepted as highly probable in the light of established facts. {borrowed from dictionary dot com}

    I need more coffee.

    Carry on! I'm loving this.

    ReplyDelete
  14. What... is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?

    ReplyDelete
  15. I heart you guys! Just posted some Tibetan music for y'all. Had to convert the files to mp3 so Multiply would let me upload them. Enjoy!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Now you're making me think too much. Twin souls? Yes, I think that can be. Soul mates? I have a different take on that one -- I think you can have more than one soul mate and that a soul mate is not necessarialy a romantic connection. Perhaps we are always connected to those who have entered our lives, maybe even to those who have not entered it yet. Is it possible that we recognize on some level that person that is meant to be connected to us?

    Stefnee, you're right about twins. There is something there that defies any measuring. My mother and father were both twins.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Sally - I hope not of each other!

    Robin - I was going to call vonB a "soulless bastard" but snarky will do quite nicely.

    Fool - I like your watch! Can I get it on the net? But seriously, very very good comment. I have only gotten through the first 20 pages of this teeny book so I am really looking forward to seeing how this physicist turned minister explains how religion is just as strict at postulating as science.

    vonB - You Soulless Bastard! Go take a happy pill!

    Jen - Bacon is likely the actual solution to the ultimate riddle, and I believe you are onto something!

    I'm off to the hospital for the final check up. See you later, gang. I love you!

    ReplyDelete
  18. Cam,
    If my preferred 'happy pills' were legal (or even decriminalized) I'd be sucking them back like I was a vacuum cleaner on crystal-meth.

    ReplyDelete
  19. So... are you saying that you can't get enough of what you take at the moment because what you are taking is ill-legal?

    ReplyDelete
  20. I have no knowledge of those events, Senator.

    Actually I'm just putting in my little plug for a relatively free market in drugs. As John Stuart Mill once said, “The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good is not sufficient.”

    ReplyDelete
  21. I forgot I have had a miraculous experience, so I have to tell, I touched a woman and felt and saw a surge of energy from my head down my arm into her, bright blue light and she said, you have healing hands, not its static. machhines about but not touching any, none above my head, so you explain it, because I have to keep saying it. God will not let me be.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Twins totally entrigue me. My Aunt and Uncle are twins, and the way Stefnee describes her boys is the same as what I observe with them.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Amen!

    The craze of legislating self protection has gone too far. Seat belts and motorcycle helmets - Spare me. The social cost argument doesn't hold water, either. As shown after CA adopted a helmet law, people in accidents w/o brain buckets didn't burden medical care, statistically speaking, they died. Adoption of the initiative resulted in the drain proponents used to justify it. Grrr!

    Don't get me wrong. Always wore a helmet and regularly use belts, but feel it is a matter of personal choice. Individuals should be able to choose the risk of feeling the wind in their hair. Sheesh, next thing will be laws requiring safety equipment in the shower to prevent slip/falls.

    Freedom with responsibility, please.
    Unconditional Love!

    ReplyDelete
  24. I agree with peppercheese. Confused and I like it that way. God is God and I'm not. Some things I will never figure out this side of heaven. I have a connections to people that I do not understand because we have both had a heavenly experience.

    ReplyDelete
  25. That hug with you in Stefnee, Kansas was a heavenly experience for me..... and I'm not sure that God had anything to do with that!

    ReplyDelete
  26. Ok Cam if you say so. but I know that God was involved in getting me there.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Don't forget G! He played a big role in getting you there, too!

    ReplyDelete
  28. Cam the sensualist, I like that. It must be the tea ceremony.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Peppercheese - Nah... it was the herpes drugs (for the shingles zoster, not VD!!)

    ReplyDelete
  30. Yea I guess so, though it was my idea to come more than his. The conversations was more like I'm going, do you want to come to Kansas to or do you want to stay in home. But it sure was great not having to drive, I am much more of a rider type.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Rachel Lovegood, Easy Rider.... I like it! No no no I LOVE it!

    ReplyDelete