Quantum Swarm & Perception

By Wal Torres, April 3rd 2011

Copyright © 2011 Gendercare.com. All rights reserved.

Quantum particle swarm and classical physics

Two big questions remain about the ontology of quantum mechanics and classical mechanics.

Decoherence or collapse?
Or both?

As we exit quantum reality and we see it macroscopically as "classic" - reality goes from micro to macro - how and why?

What is real - the collapse of the wave, triggered by the observation - as the Copenhagen Interpretation advocated by Bohr, Heisenberg and Neumann stands, or by an inert decoherence by interaction of particles - even without an observer?

I have two comments in favor of the Copenhagen Interpretation - Bohr's point of view - then studied in detail by Neumann - and now defended by Henry Stapp.

One is that the collapse - in a sense - not necessarily happens out there - but in our perception - an epistemological interpretation - as Bohr's.

Another is that we never perceive the collapse of an individual - a particle - a photon - a quantum of information - but always we realize swarms - of photons or particles or information. These swarms through DECOHERENCE - behave like swarms - that is, behavior is typical for each physical condition out there.

It is because there are typical behaviors of swarms - we perceive what is multiple (in a microscopic level)- as unique in the macroscopic level - due to the quantum mechanics of swarms.

That way our percepti
on perceives macro-structures derived from micro-structures - as "classical".

I'll try to give a simple example.

Imagine three observers - who are real, not occupy the same space at the same time - and any object. A pencil.

The three observers collapse the pencil.

In fact, focus and stimulate the optic nerve, a huge amount of photons reflected at the surface of the same pencil.

In observer say number 1, relate only odd photons

Observer 2 perceives only even photons

Observer number 3 focus photons of prime numbers, which did not cover in 1 or 2.

Each observer will observe EXACTLY the same pencil. Macroscopically. For the swarm of photons leaving the pencil, named prime, even or odd, define the same characteristic of the macroscopic object because all swarms of photons (odd swarm, even or prime) have somewhat in common - due to decoherence.

Indeed every observer collapsed DIFFERENT photons from the same pencil - in that sense each did its particular pencil image - that is individual for each observer - but the pencil-emitting photons is the same outside.

How macroscopic images generated by photons - odd, even or prime ??- are at the same time individual images but also the same image - the three observers in a sense found the same image - from 3 absolutely individual sources of photons? Because strictly each of their images of the same pencil - are individual IMAGES - at the individual microscopic quantum level, but due to decoherence the images are the same at the macroscopic level.

Strictly, the images are self-similar, generated as swarms from different photons!

That's the idea for a scientific theory of mind - WITHOUT PARALLEL WORLDS - but a world in which individuals generate macroscopic IDENTITIES generating macroscopic perception images, even if they are microscopically quite distinct.

My special point is:

There are no paralell worlds or realities, but the same reality observed (collapsed) through different swarms of photons.... that erect a self-similar image..... for all observers (human and non-human observers), through decoherence.

And the swarms are not only photons, but also gustative, olphactory, tactile, etc... (they are all quantum information) from our neural sensors in touch with elementary particles (information) from the outside.

If that idea is real, we all see the same pencil, when we perceive self-similar images of it, through different swarms of photons each observer!


Nobody knows - we know only the swarm images - that are self-similar among them.


Not necessarily - what really collapses are the swarms entangled with our neural systems - generating mind - the perception of the out there - self -similar to all organisms that observe the same pencil.

That is the idea of Bohr, Neumann and Stapp - and i believe it makes sense.

Brain Storming in a Sunday evening at São Paulo - Brazil

Today, April 10th, i am imagining:

Is Quantum Mechanics Ontology or Epistemology?

I believe strictu sensu it is Epistemology, as tought Niels Bohr.

With ontological consequences for the composition of the Universe out there considering a latu sensu perception of the theory - as do some scientists nowadays considering decoherence.

To develop later.