Friday, August 29, 2014

Questions and answers about time

Answering to question is the best possible manner to develop ideas in more comprehensible form. In this respect the questions of Hamed at my blog have been especially useful. Many questions below are originally made by him and inspired the objections, many of them discussed also in previous discussions. The answers to these questions have changed during latest years as the views about self and the relation between experienced time and geometric time have developed. The following answers are the most recent ones.

Question: The minimalistic option suggests very strongly that our sensory perception can be identified as quantum measurement assignable to state function reductions for upper or lower boundaries of our personal CD. Our sensory perception does not however jump between future and past boundaries of our personal CD (containing sub-CDS in turn containing…)! Why?

Possible answer: The answer to this question comes from the realization that in ordinary quantum theory state function reductions leaving the reduced state invariant are possible. This must have counterpart in ZEO. In ZEO reduces zero energy states are superpositions of zero energy states associated with CDs with second boundary fixes inside light-cone boundary and the position of the second boundary of CD varying: one can speak about wave function in the moduli space of CDs. The temporal distance between the tips of CD and discrete lattice of the 3-D hyperbolic space defined by the Lorentz boosts leaving second tip invariant corresponds to the basic moduli.

The repeated state function reductions leave both the fixed boundary and parts of zero energy states associated with this boundary invariant. They however induce dispersion in the moduli space and the average temporal distance between the tips of CDs increases. This gives rise to the flow of psychological time and to the arrow of time. Self as counterpart of observer can be identified as a sequence of quantum jumps leaving the fixed boundary of CD invariant. Sensory perception gives information about varying boundary and the fixed boundary creates the experience about self as invariant not changed during quantum jumps.

Self hierarchy corresponds to the hierarchy of CDs. For instance, we perceive from day to day the - say- positive energy part of a state assignable to this very big CD. Hence the world looks rather stable.

Question: This suggests that our sensory perception actually corresponds to sequences of state function reductions to the two fixed boundaries of CDs of superposition of CDs so that our sensory inputs would alternately be about upper and lower boundaries of personal CDs. Sleep-awake cycle could correspond to a flip flop in which self falls asleep at boundary and wakes up at opposite boundary. Doesn't this lead to problems with the arrow of time?

Possible answer: If we measure time relative to the fixed boundary then the geometric time defined as the average distance between tips in superposition of CDs would increase steadily and we get older also during sleep. Hence we would experience subjective time to increase. Larger CDs than our personal CD for which the arrow of time remains fixed in the time scale of life cycle would provide the objective measure of geometric time.

Question: What is the time scale assignable to my personal CD: the typical wake-up cycle: 24 hours? Or of the order of life span. Or perhaps shorter?

Possible answer: The durations of wake-up periods for self is determined by NMP: death means that NMP favors the next state function to take place at the opposite boundary. The first naive guess is that the duration of the wake up period is of the same order of magnitude as the geometric time scale of our personal CD. In wake-up state we we would be performing state function reduction repeatedly to say "lower" boundary of our personal CD and sensory mental images as sub-CDs would be concentrated near opposite boundary. During sleep same would happen at lower boundary of CD and sensory mental images would be at opposite boundary (dreams,…).

Question: Are dreams sensory perceptions with opposite arrow of time or is some sub-self in wake-up state and experiences same arrow of time as we during wake-up state? If the arrow is different in dreams, is the "now" of dreams in past and "past" in the recent of wake-upe state

Possible answer: Here I can suggest an answer based on my own subjective experiences and it would be cautious "yes".

Question: Why we do remember practically nothing about sensory perceptions during sleep period? (Note that we forget actively dream experiences).

Possible answer: That we do not have many memories about sleep and dream time existence and that these memories are unstable should relate to the change of the arrow of personal time as we wake up. Wake-up state should somehow rapidly destroy the ability to recall memories about dreams and sleep state. Wake-up memory recall means communications to geometric past, that is to the boundary of CD which remains fixed during wake-up state. In memory recall for dreams in wake-up state these communications should take place to geometric future. Memory recall of dreams would be seeing to future and much more difficult since the future is changing in each state function reduction so that dream memories are erased automatically during wake-up.

Question: Does the return to childhood at old age relate with this time flip-flop of arrow of time in the scale of life span: do we re-incarnate in biologically death at opposite end of CD with scale of life span?

Possible answer: Maybe this is the case. If this boundary corresponds to time scale of life cycle, the memories would be about childhood. Dreams are often located to the past and childhood.

5 Comments:

At 11:59 AM, Blogger Hamed said...

Dear Matti,

Thanks for the posting.

1-After reduction of wave function of an electron in some boundary of CD(suppose in lower boundary), if at this moment of consciousness we go from lower to upper boundary and observe the wave function of the electron(In other words we are observing geometric time evolution of electron in this process), what does we see about the evolution of the wavefunction? Is this correct?: We see the electron wave function just over a small 3-surface in lower boundary(because of the reduction in lower boundary) and when we are going from lower to upper at the moment of consciousness we see electron wave function propagates over more regions or over more and more small 3-surfaces.

2-In the double slit experiment, we know the wave function of the electron go from both of the slits. But just after the reduction of the wave function on the screen, if we go back to the geometric past, does we see this electron is going in one of the slits or in both?

if the questions isn't clear tell me to explain more about them.

 
At 6:07 AM, Anonymous Matti PItkanen said...


Dear Hamed,

nice to hear about you after long pause!

I hope that following gives answer to your questions.


a) Call the boundary of CD at which state function reduction is occurring repeatedly, lower boundary- The contents of sensory consciousness would come from the superposition of CDs with upper boundary boundary at different temporal distance from lower one with some average temporal distance.

Sensory input would come from repeated quantum state function reductions not changing the state at the "lower boundary". This would give rise to flow of time and to self with lifetime identifiable as the increase of average temporal distance of upper boundary from lower one. This is important difference from the original picture years ago which identified quantum jump with any quantum jump. Fixed lower boundary is responsible for the experience that self is something stable. Upper boundary for the experience about changing external world.

The first state function to given boundary of CD would be analogous to a measurement of position. Now it would localize say upper boundary of CD to a fixed light cone boundary of M^4 and reduce the part of zero energy state at it. At lower boundary delocalisation would occur. Localization for boundary would induce delocalisation to opposite boundary.

This suggests a new interpretation of Uncertainty Principle. Simultaneous measurement of x and p would be modified. The measurement of x would correspond to localisation for the lower boundary of CD and simultaneous measurement of p to sensory perceptions getting information from the state assignably to upper boundaries of CDs in their superposition.

In double slit experiment the geometric past changes so that it corresponds to the outcome of the measurement. 3-D wave functions are replaced by time evolutions inside CD. Electron's 4-D wave function after localisation to slit would correspond to classical orbit going just through this slit.

 
At 12:52 PM, Blogger Ulla said...

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v506/n7489/full/nature12994.html

Dark Forces....

 
At 12:29 AM, Blogger Hamed said...

Dear Matti,

Sorry for Long delay. I must manage my time.

"Sensory input would come from repeated quantum state function reductions not changing the state at the "lower boundary". This would give rise to flow of time and to self with lifetime identifiable as the increase of average temporal distance of upper boundary from lower one"

I don’t understand it. Suppose a person has 20 years old, but his lifetime is 30 years. As I understand the average temporal distance of upper boundary from lower one of CD of the person is 30 years. In repeated quantum state function reductions, his lifetime is increased!!!? But what about his current age(20 years old)?

 
At 1:10 AM, Anonymous Matti PItkanen said...



Dear Hamed,

No! Experienced duration of time during the period when reductions occur to same boundary repeatedly (and would not change state at all in ordinary QM) correspond to the *increase the average temporal distance between tips of CDs* involved.

The distance between the tips of CD is NOT the duration of experienced life time. The INCREASE of this distance is since sensory percepts come from upper boundaries of CD in superposition and this distance increases on the average. This gives rise to the experienced flow of time correlating with increase of geometric time.

Essentially a generalisation of ordinary quantum measurement theory allowing to understand the notion of self and the relation between subjective time and geometric time is in question. One does not anymore just assume that time corresponds to 3-D wavefront proceeding in space-time.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home