Electron Dreams

Is one really All?

Allow me to explain: Reality (that is consensus reality) behaves like a canvas that shapes and transforms before the beholder.

BuzzzAn End to the Schrodinger Conundrum—the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle assumes that the observer also has powers to predict unconsciously the outcome. You see, the observer cannot inherently possess the qualities of a conductor, as the Uncertainty Principle implies. Because the electron appears as a wave and particle, the observer cannot have any bearing upon the outcome. The real question is the observer sees either wave or particle because both he and the electron are one and the same.

From the electron’s perspective (does this seem so outrageous? Are humans not also electrons; more complex certainly as there are amalgamations of many electrons to form layers of skin, organs, hair, etc. etc., but electrons all), is not the observer also particle and wave? Not metaphorically the same, mind you, but actually.

When you stare at your reflection before breakfast, do you marvel that you appear? Do you question whether you are there or not there? Do you wonder if you are both here and there? Do you try to walk through the looking glass? It is the same with the observer and electron, as the electron becomes reflection of the observer, and the observer reflection of the electron. As such, what measurable difference between observer and electron can there be?

Inside the Riemann SphereGolden Symmetrywhen the electron moves as does the observer. Think of the intimacy between observer and electron as analogous to the eye of the beholder, only observer and electron are more like eye and beholder. As if the observer were the eye and electron the beholder, and electron as the eye and observer as the beholder. If this relationship seems symbiotic, no actual host and parasite exist, as the existence of host and parasite assumes there is a distinction between them. With observer and electron, no such distinction exists.

Oneness as Reciprocal Union—the concept of oneness is the same mistake as the uncertainty principle assumes there is distinction between observer and electron. This thought is not in error, but incomplete. There is no distinction between any singular entities (the proverbial ‘We’ whatever that includes) from which to pinpoint an all-encompassing oneness, no origin. To say We Are All One is to observe the electron in wave state. I posit, mustn’t there first be a distinction to have elements that can connect into this action at a distance known as oneness?

Peering in again at the Uncertainty Principle: How is it possible for any one (any beholder or electron) to possess control (that is the ability to determine as observer the eventual appearance of the electron)? I mean, the idea that the observer can inherently possess the ability to control (conduct, as if the observer were separate) the universe to such an extent as to predict the electron and himself is kind of just like hugging yourself.

Homage to BoschLet us follow another thread further. To believe that because the boat has a motor and rudder whoever holds the wheel steers the boat across the ocean is like thinking the observer controls/conducts the appearance of the electron as wave or particle. No matter what the engine horsepower or nuclear powered propulsion used, one hiccup from the ocean depths renders any expense useless.  It is more like the ocean steers the boat. The conundrum of the Uncertainty Principle occurs because humans do not control the motion of electrons, they and the electron move simultaneously, neither conductor, neither observer or observed, neither at the wheel, both floating along in quantum foam.

Einstein spoke of relativity; I can see his point. In the guise of oneness, the only point of reference from which all things can be relative is the reflection, which means relativity may actually be an illusion.

...and so on to Infinity...Ones Within Ones (or A Way Out of the Heisenberg Absurdity) —  See, the beholder and the electron may be symmetrical (do not be so limited in imagination, symmetry does not have to be identical in appearance to be symmetrical. Two concepts can be symmetrical, as such two conceptual masses, an object, can be symmetrical of one another’s motion). This is no contest to thinking; however, let us move laterally to the left and see what we can see. Imagine a Cartesian coordinate system, x-, y-axis. Turn the axis sharply to the left and arrive at a z-axis, a 90-degree turn from the y-axis. If you turn your mind 90 degrees from the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle . . . are we still beholder or electron, wave or particle? This idea of borders must first be unlearned.

“People say to me, “Are you looking for the ultimate laws of physics?” No, I’m not… If it turns out there is a simple ultimate law which explains everything, so be it — that would be very nice to discover. If it turns out it’s like an onion with millions of layers… then that’s the way it is. . . . [M]y interest in science is to simply find out about the world and the more I find out the better it is, I like to find out…” ~Richard Feynman

Limits to GrowthOneness and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle are incomplete as within the depths of their meaning sits the assumption that there is but one level of observation. That of the observer and electron as separate, so the conundrum is the observer can only see the electron as wave or particle and nothing else. Within the Uncertainty Principle and Oneness exists the real question that there is no distinction between observer and electron, like the electron the observer is both wave and particle as well. As Einstein’s theory of relativity posits, the observer and electron are relative to one another, in motion simultaneously, so observer cannot see beyond wave or particle. The illusion exists because the observer has only a single lens perspective; there are other ones. The flaw of oneness, which assumes We Are All One, rather than We Are All Ones Within Ones . . .  within ones, and so forth in all directions. It is more a matter of peeling away the layers, than a single perception.

Quantum_reflections_003Oneness does not stop at one, no prime mover exists (no which from which there is no whicher. Apologies to my fine fellow, Alan Watts), no origin, no nicely spelt out beginning to the story, motion does not require cause and effect or effect and cause. As the photon emitted from the electron, it simply moves as randomness disguised as cause and effect.

When oneness appears as social diversity (the continual perpetual mind-spinning circular categorization of intangibles, the tree-ing of an otherwise single concept, i.e., departmental hierarchy within a body corporate) bureaucracy abounds, actually epitomizes that there is no real origin. When it is used for the pleasure of finding things out then you have onion-ing. Where each one within one has all other ones, yet, out of nothing also appears as a new one (within one). Analogous to a field of probable action constantly flexing to accommodate new ones, without bias or judgment.

Like an elaborately woven tapestry with fractal designs, the tapestry as first layer oneness (or the observer’s perspective/perception), and all the threads are the ones within. One can look at the tapestry and say We Are All One, and then one can look at a thread and say We Are All One. It is not so much that we forego the trees for the forest or the forest for the trees, as looking closely at a thread. It works in the other direction, too; the tapestry does not end at its borders. Think of the tapestry as our known universe, and the threads as people-ing, earth-ing, sun-ing, solar system-ing, hell, it could even be universe-ing.

Let us not end here (wherever ‘here’ may be; our imaginary 90-degree turn), as further question beckons: What is I?

The Portal*Image Credits (all work used with permission through CC license)–
“Limits to Growth” by anua22a
“Homage to Bosch” by ellenm1
“The Portal” by Neil Carey
“Buzzz” by Gloria
“…and so on to Infinity…” by anua22a
“Inside the Riemann Sphere” by fdecomite
“Quantum_reflections_003” by Caitlin Tobias

This post originally appeared on EXPLORINGtheLATERAL here.

Advertisements

Deranged Delusions

deranged delusions dance before dawn
daring to be real in the fit of a new day

apologies for carefree freedom rings
ringing but w/no bells, just sound

trees killing themselves in cities
ocean waves rolling tides over white music

but no voices
volunteers borrowing some other country’s sorrow

in the middle of the day, crying
crime of 3:30am prepubescent penal passions

love raining elusively over neo-noir-nouveau fashion
shows

silly salacious serenity says too many faces of insanity
saddam hussein’s feral feeble reminders

of a death invented just so we can stay alive
sublime silence screaming behind bars

bare & naked & nothing else to see in
nonsense

sensing this moment: a now, & now

the end

QOTD Eustace Conway

The ancient people understood that  our world is a circle, but we modern people have lost site of that. I don’t live inside buildings because buildings are dead places where nothing grows, where water doesn’t flow, and where life stops. I don’t want to live in a dead place. People say that I don’t live in a real world, but it’s modern Americans who live in a fake world, because they have stepped outside the natural circle of life.

Do people live in circles today? No. They live in boxes.  They wake up every morning in a box of their bedrooms because a box next to them started making beeping noises to tell them it was time to get up. They eat their breakfast out of a box and then they throw that box away into another box.  Then they leave the box where they live and get into another box with wheels and drive to work, which is just another big box broken into little cubicle boxes where a bunch of people spend their days sitting and staring at the computer boxes in front of them. When the day is over, everyone gets into the box with wheels again and goes home to the house boxes and spends the evening staring at the television boxes for entertainment. They get their music from a box, they get their food from a box, they keep their clothing in a box, they live their lives in a box.

Break out of the box! This not the way humanity lived for thousands of years. ~Eustace Conway from the book The Last American Man by Elizabeth Gilbert

Chicago suburbs from the air

*Image Credits  (all artwork used with permission through CC license)
“Tijuana Suburbs” by Nathan Gibbs
“Chicago suburbs from the air” by Scorpions and Centaurs

Little Boxes

Little boxes on the hillside,
Little boxes made of ticky tacky,
Little boxes on the hillside,
Little boxes all the same.
There’s a green one and a pink one
And a blue one and a yellow one,
And they’re all made out of ticky tacky
And they all look just the same.
~Malvina Reynolds, “Little Boxes”

Words and music by Malvina Reynolds

*Image Credit (artwork used with permission through CC license)
“Calgary Suburban” by Evan Leeson

Related Articles

The Consciousness and Noise

“Consciousness is incompatible with multi-tasking. . .” ~WWW:WATCH by Robert J. Sawyer

The Universe Is In Us by Tahar AbroudjameurPerhaps this could be reason as to why I don’t like noise and why the brain cannot process beyond a certain volume of noise or static. Perhaps the act on the brain is like multi-tasking, due to the number of stimuli required to be processed. At a certain level, this noise invades rather than soothes. In other words, it throws the brain into an erratic state, discombobulation. It’s the difference between the brain handling series of stimuli while in nature (or some other quiet environment) as this is not so much a great noise so does not tax the brain. In a social environment (or a noisier environment), the brain is forced to compute several constructions simultaneously, but like the eyes suffer saccades. For example, while in a mall or McDonald’s, the brain must compute (i.e., process) the bright lights, the colors, the hardness of the booth, the various sounds from the kitchen area (the ice machine, the fry beep, voices from the employees), voices from customers both inside and outside at the drive-thru window, all while trying to write or read or converse. All activities that otherwise Into The Cosmos by Exper Giovanni Rubaltellirequire concentration, and the brain simply cannot keep up, so crashes (the brain doesn’t really do this, I merely make use of the analogy to illustrate better my meaning). The brain crashing is the equivalent of shattering or breaking down (a kind of dissociation, or splitting) and is no longer able to function (why there is a loss of time when this happens and entering into a fugue-like state) optimally. Too much stimuli, indeed. I know when I lived outside in the woods and when I would enter an establishment once out of the woods, I experienced this kind of dissociation frequently. It is the same when entering any kind of arena in society, i.e., social institutions, social gatherings, social agencies, the brain needs concentration in order to hold onto consciousness as well as to attain higher levels of consciousness. Perhaps this is why monasteries are not located in cities, why retreats are always located in remote areas, well outside civilization, and why sanitariums are often surrounded by nature. In civilization, it is more difficult for the consciousness to live in harmony. If so, what is lateral thinking really? Perhaps, closer to multi-dimensional cognition.

However, McDonald’s (and other such establishments) were not created to be an environment of thought and conversation. Interaction is manufactured for eating and any movements associated with eating. In McDonald’s commercials, customers (other than the narrator) are always eating and smiling. McDonald’s is meant to be a noisy environment, where thought is not likely to happen. Only mindless eating, creating repeat customers. The function of McDonald’s as a place of eating, is to make it a fun, exciting experience eating McDonald’s food. Bring the family, bring the kids, brings your friends. McDonald’s wants you to do one motion, repeatedly. . . eat.

Shopping Ma(u)ls are no different. The purposeful design of every Spheres by Nova-Imagesshopping mall is to lead you into stores to buy. Repeatedly. As many times as possible. A shopping mall’s deliberate function is to create for you the illusion of a fun and exciting experience buying. Bring the family, bring the kids, bring your friends. Bring grandma. Every occasion can be marked with a buying experience.

Both McDonald’s (and other such establishments) and Shopping Malls are constructed to be loud, noisy environments to attract and keep your attention. Inserting into an unquiet mind instructions to buy and how to feel about the experience. The mind is busy noticing every advertisement, designed to attract your attention, sometimes on a subconscious level. With noise, McDonald’s and Shopping Malls can bombard your mind into oblivion, or, in other words, a highly suggestible state. Like traffic lights ‘influence’ the flow and congestion of traffic, Shopping Malls ‘influence’ you not to think about anything for any period of time. The idea is not to think, only Buy.

Because of the way the brain works if it hears a sound, especially the sound of a human voice, then it wants naturally to listen, which requires the brain to start attempting to decipher what is being said/conveyed and to start ascertaining meaning, processing, it sets to the task automatically. Well, what if there were a room full of voices, full of conversations, how does the brain process them and retain, especially if it is an unfamiliar environment? Unless the body goes from one conversation to the other, spending only a few seconds at each, perhaps it could process this,  but for how long? It simply cannot process them simultaneously, all at once. One at a time, would require effort but it could easily be done, especially if only a few tidbits need to be conveyed and the meaning is immediately understood (not complex, i.e. not requiring a great amount of thought to understand. This is why it would be harder at an unfamiliar place, such as a foreign country and the native language were unknown). In other words, not much sustained conversation is required.

Untitled by Jon MartinMcDonald’s and Shopping Malls like it very much that you act like an infant or a toddler, entertained by a bombardment of amplified false notions. Verbs transmutated into nouns, like grammatical alchemy. Harry Potter has nothing on the neuroscience packaged into the design (the look, the feel, the ambiance) of a shopping mall and McDonald’s. From color to how many steps it takes for you to arrive at the counter from the entrance. An eating zombie, cowering, like a baby, from quiet and responding predictably to introduced stimuli.

“The behavior of organisms including human beings is predictable & therefore controllable. Give me a baby and I can make any kind of man” ~John B Watson

For me, this noise is not necessary, which is good, because I don’t want it. What actual and real enjoyment could be had surrounded by noise scrambling the brain, completely motivated by emotion and dramatic representation of those emotions regardless of their relevancy? Within quiet, however, the consciousness is like a chaotic stillness. Unpredictable in its motions, yet calm. The absence of static; a dynamic tapestry of randomness.

“Once I rose above the noise and confusion, just to get a glimpse beyond this illusion.” Carry On Wayward Son, Kansas

Consciousness Awakening by Ralph Buckley

Artwork (in order of appearance)–

“The Universe Is In Us” by Tahar Abroudjameur
“Into The Cosmos” by Exper Giovanni Rubaltelli
“Spheres” by Nova-Images
“Untitled” by Jon Martin
“Consciousness Awakening” by Ralph Buckley