On Wednesday, April 10, 2013 12:04:14 AM UTC-4, ColinHales wrote: > > Colin’s Wackier Version: > > > > Because the space they operate in, at the scale in which the decay > operates, there are far more dimensions than 3. > They decay deterministically in >>3D and it appears, to us, to be random > because of the collapse of the spatial dimensions to 3, where we > As long as the "collapse" has a spatial result, I see no reason why the other dimensions would have a spatial aesthetic. Our own creativity and choice manifests in public space as a private sensory-motor participation. This ordinary awareness is, I suggest, is the origin of all implicate orders, zero point fields, compactified dimensions, and probably dark matter/dark energy as well. Rather than a collapse from intangible quantitative dimensions, the microcosm carries the same orthogonal-symmetric aesthetic oscillation as we do - from proprietary significance to generic entropy. It is not a collapse from abstract dimensions of *more* axes, but a de-saturation to a reduced sensory protocol, where only the impersonal, unintentional qualities are preserved; i.e. dispositions must be indirectly inferred from positional relations over time. With private intention, dispositions are generated directly and influence positional relations over time.
humble observers gain access to it. Same reason atoms jiggle in space. Same > reason an electron is fuzzy. Smoothness in >>3D looks fuzzy to us. > If you had to represent your will as a set of isolated positions, it would look fuzzy too. Thanks, Craig > > Quantum mechanics is a statistical description that is predictive in 3D. > It explains nothing. > > > > I offer explanation, not description. > > > > J > > > > > > *From:* [email protected] <javascript:> [mailto: > [email protected] <javascript:>] *On Behalf Of *Craig Weinberg > *Sent:* Wednesday, 10 April 2013 1:19 PM > *To:* [email protected] <javascript:> > *Subject:* Re: Why do particles decay randomly? > > > > > > On Tuesday, April 9, 2013 7:54:27 PM UTC-4, Russell Standish wrote: > > It is hard to answer this question precisely, because the large, > radioactive nuclei are very complex structures, for which exact solutions > of > Schroedinger's equation cannot be obtained. Rather these things are > usually studied via Hartree-Fock approximations. > > However, in loose visual terms, you can think of a neutron as being in > a superposition of states, some of which are an electron-proton pair > separated by a substantial distance. If the electron finds itself too > far from its partner proton, the weak force is too weak, and the > electric force is shielded by the orbital electrons, so the electron > escapes, becoming the beta ray. This explanation has left out an > obvious factor - an anti-neutrino must also be created as part of the > process. This is often explained as being required to preserve lepton > number - but conservation of lepton number is a somewhat ad hoc law - I > don't know the real physical reason why lepton number is conserved. > > Anyway, the point of randomness is that this is a quintessential > quantum process, very closely related to the phenomenon of quantum > tunneling. Unless there exists a hidden variable-type theory > underlying QM (which basically appears to be ruled out by > Bell+Aspect), the process must be completely random. > > > I wonder if we looked at the behavior of cars driving on the highway, > would we conclude that the variation in how long they travel before exiting > the highway must be completely random? Maybe the hidden variable is that > matter knows what it is doing? > > Craig > > > > Cheers > > On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 05:57:11AM -0700, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > If any particle were truly identical to another, then they could not > decay > > at different rates. While we see this as "random" (aka spontaneous to > our > > eyes), there is nothing to say that the duration of the life of the > > particle is not influenced by intentional dispositions. Particles may > > represent different intensities of 'will to continue' or expectation of > > persistence. In this sense, organic molecules could represent a > Goldilocks > > range of time-entangled panpsychism which is particularly flexible and > > dynamic. Think of the lifetime of a molecular ensemble as the length of > a > > word in a sentence as it relates to the possibilities of meaning. Too > long > > and it becomes unwieldy, too brief and it becomes generic. > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Everything List" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an email to [email protected]. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. > > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > > > > -- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) > Principal, High Performance Coders > Visiting Professor of Mathematics [email protected] > University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] <javascript:>. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]<javascript:> > . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
