タグ別アーカイブ: 物理的実在性

Sensory and Physical Worlds

Animals have different sensory capabilities compared to us humans. Cats, 例えば, can hear up to 60kHz, while the highest note we have ever heard was about 20kHz. 明らかに, we could hear that high a note only in our childhood. そう, if we are trying to pull a fast one on a cat with the best hifi multi-channel, Dolby-whatever recording of a mouse, we will fail pathetically. It won’t be fooled because it lives in a different sensory world, while sharing the same physical world as ours. There is a humongous difference between the sensory and physical worlds.


What is Unreal Blog?

Tell us a little about why you started your blog, and what keeps you motivated about it.

As my writings started appearing in different magazines and newspapers as regular columns, I wanted to collect them in one place — as an anthology of the internet kind, 言ってみれば. That’s how my blog was born. The motivation to continue blogging comes from the memory of how my first book, アンリアル·ユニバース, took shape out of the random notes I started writing on scrap books. I believe the ideas that cross anybody’s mind often get forgotten and lost unless they are written down. A blog is a convenient platform to put them down. そして, since the blog is rather public, you take some care and effort to express yourself well.

Do you have any plans for the blog in the future?

I will keep blogging, roughly at the rate of one post a week or so. I don’t have any big plans for the blog per se, but I do have some other Internet ideas that may spring from my blog.

Philosophy is usually seen as a very high concept, intellectual subject. Do you think that it can have a greater impact in the world at large?

This is a question that troubled me for a while. And I wrote a post on it, which may answer it to the best of my ability. To repeat myself a bit, philosophy is merely a description of whatever intellectual pursuits that we indulge in. It is just that we don’t often see it that way. 例えば, if you are doing physics, you think that you are quite far removed from philosophy. The philosophical spins that you put on a theory in physics is mostly an afterthought, it is believed. But there are instances where you can actually apply philosophy to solve problems in physics, and come up with new theories. This indeed is the theme of my book, アンリアル·ユニバース. It asks the question, if some object flew by faster than the speed of light, what would it look like? With the recent discovery that solid matter does travel faster than light, I feel vindicated and look forward to further developments in physics.

Do you think many college students are attracted to philosophy? What would make them choose to major in it?

今日の世界では, I am afraid philosophy is supremely irrelevant. So it may be difficult to get our youngsters interested in philosophy. I feel that one can hope to improve its relevance by pointing out the interconnections between whatever it is that we do and the intellectual aspects behind it. Would that make them choose to major in it? In a world driven by excesses, it may not be enough. その後、再び, it is world where articulation is often mistaken for accomplishments. Perhaps philosophy can help you articulate better, sound really cool and impress that girl you have been after — to put it crudely.

More seriously, しかし, what I said about the irrelevance of philosophy can be said about, 言う, physics as well, despite the fact that it gives you computers and iPads. 例えば, when Copernicus came up with the notion that the earth is revolving around the sun rather than the other way round, profound though this revelation was, in what way did it change our daily life? Do you really have to know this piece of information to live your life? This irrelevance of such profound facts and theories bothered scientists like Richard Feynman.

What kind of advice or recommendations would you give to someone who is interested in philosophy, and who would like to start learning more about it?

I started my path toward philosophy via physics. I think philosophy by itself is too detached from anything else that you cannot really start with it. You have to find your way toward it from whatever your work entails, and then expand from there. 少なくとも, that’s how I did it, and that way made it very real. When you ask yourself a question like what is space (so that you can understand what it means to say that space contracts, 例えば), the answers you get are very relevant. They are not some philosophical gibberish. I think similar paths to relevance exist in all fields. See for example how Pirsig brought out the notion of quality in his work, not as an abstract definition, but as an all-consuming (and eventually dangerous) obsession.

私の見解では、, philosophy is a wrapper around multiple silos of human endeavor. It helps you see the links among seemingly unrelated fields, such as cognitive neuroscience and special relativity. Of what practical use is this knowledge, I cannot tell you. その後、再び, of what practical use is life itself?


何がその速度は、空間と時間と私たちの現実の基本的な構造で理解すべきである光についてとても特別です,,en,これは、アルバート・アインスタイン約動体の電気力学上で公開されて以来、多くの科学者をnaggedた質問であります,,en,私たちの空間と時間に光のspecialnessを理解するために,,en,私たちは私たちの周りの世界を知覚する方法勉強する必要があり、現実は私たちの脳内に作成する方法,,en,私たちは、私たちの感覚を使用して私たちの世界を知覚します,,en,私たちの感覚が収集感覚信号はその後、私たちの脳に中継されています,,en,脳は、認知モデルを作成し、,,en,感覚入力の表現,,en,そして現実として私たちの意識の意識にそれを提示,,en,私たちの視覚的な現実はずっと私たちの聴覚の世界を音で構成されてのようにスペースで構成されてい,,en? This is the question that has nagged many scientists ever since Albert Einstein published On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies about 100 years ago.

In order to understand the specialness of light in our space and time, we need to study how we perceive the world around us and how reality is created in our brains. We perceive our world using our senses. The sensory signals that our senses collect are then relayed to our brains. The brain creates a cognitive model, a representation of the sensory inputs, and presents it to our conscious awareness as reality. Our visual reality consists of space much like our auditory world is made up of sounds.

音が知覚的経験ではなく、物理的な現実の基本的な特性があるように,,en,スペースも経験あり,,en,または視覚入力の認知表現,,en,のではない基本的な側面,,en,私たちの感覚は感知しようとしています,,en,空間と時間は一緒に現実の基礎を考えるもの物理学形成します,,en,私たちが現実に限界を理解することができます唯一の方法は、私たちの感覚そのものに限界を研究することによってです,,en,基本的なレベルで,,en,どのように私たちの感覚が動作しません,,en,視力の私達の感覚は、光を使用して動作します,,en,そして視力に関与する基本的な相互作用は、電磁的に落ちます,,en,、IN,,pt,カテゴリ軽いので、,,en,または光子,,en,EM相互作用の仲介があります,,en,EMの相互作用の独占は、視力の私達の長距離意味に限定されるものではなく、,,en,すべての短距離の感覚,,en,味,,en,香りと聴覚,,en, space also is an experience, or a cognitive representation of the visual inputs, not a fundamental aspect of “the world” our senses are trying to sense.

Space and time together form what physics considers the basis of reality. The only way we can understand the limitations in our reality is by studying the limitations in our senses themselves.

At a fundamental level, how do our senses work? Our sense of sight operates using light, and the fundamental interaction involved in sight falls in the electromagnetic (EM) category because light (or photon) is the intermediary of EM interactions. The exclusivity of EM interaction is not limited to our the long range sense of sight; all the short range senses (触れる, taste, smell and hearing) EMは自然界にもあります,,en,宇宙の私たちの知覚の限界を理解するために、,,en,我々は、すべて私たちの感覚のEMの本質を強調表示する必要はありません,,en,スペースがあります,,en,私たちの視覚感覚の結果,,en,しかし、我々が何のセンスを持っていないことを心に留めておく価値があります,,en,そして実際に無い現実,,en,EMの相互作用が存在しない場合に,,en,私たちの感覚と同様に,,en,私たちの感覚にすべての私たちの技術の拡張機能,,en,そのような電波望遠鏡など,,en,電子顕微鏡,,en,赤方偏移の測定、さらには重力レンズ,,en,我々の宇宙を測定するために、専用のEMの相互作用を使用します,,en,私たちは、現代の楽器を使用する場合でも、私たちの知覚の基本的な制約を免れることはできません,,en,ハッブル望遠鏡は、私たちの肉眼よりも億光年離れて見ることができます,,en,私たちの知覚の現実,,en,直接の感覚入力に基づいて構築かどうかを技術的に強化,,en. To understand the limitations of our perception of space, we need not highlight the EM nature of all our senses. Space is, 概して, the result of our sight sense. But it is worthwhile to keep in mind that we would have no sensing, and indeed no reality, in the absence of EM interactions.

Like our senses, all our technological extensions to our senses (such as radio telescopes, electron microscopes, redshift measurements and even gravitational lensing) use EM interactions exclusively to measure our universe. このようにして, we cannot escape the basic constraints of our perception even when we use modern instruments. The Hubble telescope may see a billion light years farther than our naked eyes, しかしそれは何を見ていると、まだ私たちの目が見るものより億歳年上である. Our perceived reality, whether built upon direct sensory inputs or technologically enhanced, 電磁粒子との相互作用のサブセットのみ,,en,それは私たちの感覚と認知空間にEM粒子との相互作用の投影であります,,en,おそらく不完全投影,,en,私たちの知覚の現実でEM相互作用の排他性についてのこの文は、多くの場合、懐疑のビットで満たされています,,en,私たちは直接重力を感知することができます誤解が主な原因,,en,私たちの体は、重力を受けているので、この混乱が発生します,,en,間の微妙な違いがあります,,en,を受けること,,en,感知することができること,,en,重力,,en,この差は、単純な思考実験によって示されています,,en,宇宙の暗黒物質の完全作られたオブジェクトの前に置かれたヒト被験者を想像してみて,,en,いいえ、他の目に見える問題はどこにでもある被験者はそれを見ることができます,,en. It is a projection of EM particles and interactions into our sensory and cognitive space, a possibly imperfect projection.

This statement about the exclusivity of EM interactions in our perceived reality is often met with a bit of skepticism, mainly due to a misconception that we can sense gravity directly. This confusion arises because our bodies are subject to gravity. There is a fine distinction between “being subject to” そして “being able to sense” gravitational force.

This difference is illustrated by a simple thought experiment: Imagine a human subject placed in front of an object made entirely of cosmological dark matter. There is no other visible matter anywhere the subject can see it. 暗黒物質は、被写体に重力の力を発揮することを考えます,,en,彼はその存在を感知することができるようになります,,en,彼はそれに引っ張られます,,en,しかし、どのように彼は彼が引っ張られていることを知っているだろうか、彼が移動していること,,en,彼はおそらくダークマターオブジェクトの重心を検出するために、いくつかの機械的なからくりを設計することができます,,en,しかし、その後、彼はEMの相互作用を利用して、いくつかの問題について、重力の影響を検出します,,en,彼は原因不明の加速を見ることができるかもしれません,,en,彼の体への重力の影響,,en,これはEMの問題です,,en,このような星のような参照オブジェクトに対する,,en,しかし、ここで感知部,,en,星を見て,,en,EMの相互作用が関与,,en,EMの問題を欠いている重力を検出する機械的なからくりを設計することは不可能です,,en,私たちの耳にセンシング重力が再びEM問題に対する重力の影響を測定します,,en, will he be able to sense its presence? He will be pulled toward it, but how will he know that he is being pulled or that he is moving? He can possibly design some mechanical contraption to detect the gravity of the dark matter object. But then he will be sensing the effect of gravity on some matter using EM interactions. 例えば, he may be able to see his unexplained acceleration (effect of gravity on his body, which is EM matter) with respect to reference objects such as stars. But the sensing part here (seeing the stars) involves EM interactions.

It is impossible to design any mechanical contraption to detect gravity that is devoid of EM matter. The gravity sensing in our ears again measures the effect of gravity on EM matter. EMの相互作用が存在しない場合には,,en,重力を感知することは不可能です,,en,またはそのことについて何か,,en,電磁相互作用は、私たちの感覚入力を担当しています,,en,知覚は、私たちは現実を呼び出す私たちの脳の表現につながります,,en,このチェーン内の任意の制限は現実の我々の感覚に対応する制限につながります,,en,現実の感覚からチェーン内の1つの制限は、光子の有限の速度であります,,en,私たちの感覚のゲージ粒子たです,,en,センスモダリティの影響の有限速度と運動の私達の認識を歪めます,,en,これらの歪みは、私たちの現実そのものの一部として認識されているので,,en,歪みの根本的な原因は、私たちの現実の基本的な特性となり,,en,これは、光の速度は、私たちの宇宙の時間に、このような重要な定数となり、どのように,,en, it is impossible to sense gravity, or anything else for that matter.

Electromagnetic interactions are responsible for our sensory inputs. Sensory perception leads to our brain’s representation that we call reality. Any limitation in this chain leads to a corresponding limitation in our sense of reality. One limitation in the chain from senses to reality is the finite speed of photon, which is the gauge boson of our senses. The finite speed of the sense modality influences and distorts our perception of motion, 空間と時間. Because these distortions are perceived as a part of our reality itself, the root cause of the distortion becomes a fundamental property of our reality. This is how the speed of light becomes such an important constant in our space time. 光の神聖さは、唯一の私たちの知覚の現実に尊敬されています,,en,我々は不完全な認識を信頼し、私たちは宇宙スケールで感知するかを説明しようとした場合,,en,私たちは、そのような現代の宇宙論におけるビッグバン理論及び一般相対性理論の特殊な理論として世界の景色で終わります,,en,これらの理論は間違っていないです,,en,この本の目的は、彼らが間違っていることを証明することではありません,,en,ちょうど彼らが認識される現実の記述があることを指摘します,,en,彼らは、感覚入力の背後にある物理的な原因を説明していません。,,en,物理的な原因は、私たちの感覚を超えた絶対的な現実に属し,,en,絶対的な現実と、それを私たちの知覚の区別がさらに発展し、一定に適用することができ,,en,特定の天体物理学,,en,宇宙の現象,,en.

If we trust the imperfect perception and try to describe what we sense at cosmological scales, we end up with views of the world such as the big bang theory in modern cosmology and the general and special theories of relativity. These theories are not wrong, and the purpose of this book is not to prove them wrong, just to point out that they are descriptions of a perceived reality. They do not describe the physical causes behind the sensory inputs. The physical causes belong to an absolute reality beyond our senses.

The distinction between the absolute reality and our perception of it can be further developed and applied to certain specific astrophysical そして cosmological phenomena. それも私たちの感覚の範囲を超えて発生した物理学に来るとき,,en,我々はそれを見るように宇宙は私たちの網膜上やハッブル望遠鏡の光センサ上に当たる光子のうち、作成された唯一の認知モデルであります,,en,私たちの知覚は、私たちの空間と時間が特殊相対性理論に従うような印象を与えるような方法で歪んでいます,,en,彼らはの一部でしかありません,,en,それは、不可知の現実の私達の認識であります,,en,これは、再び私の本から編集抜粋です,,en,知覚的経験,,en,感覚入力,,en,視覚的な入力,,en,視覚的な現実,,en,物理的な現実のアーカイブ,,en, 私たちは本当に口座にそれらを見ることでその私たちの知覚と認知果たす役割を取らなければならない. The universe as we see it is only a cognitive model created out of the photons falling on our retina or on the photo sensors of the Hubble telescope. そのため情報担体の有限速度の (すなわち光子は), our perception is distorted in such a way as to give us the impression that space and time obey special relativity. 彼らはやる, しかし空間と時間は絶対的な現実ではありません. They are only a part of the 非現実的な宇宙 that is our perception of an unknowable reality.

[This again is an edited excerpt from my book, アンリアル·ユニバース.]