Animals have different sensory capabilities compared to us humans. Cats, halimbawa, can hear up to 60kHz, while the highest note we have ever heard was about 20kHz. Tila, we could hear that high a note only in our childhood. Kaya, 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.
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, parang. That’s how my blog was born. The motivation to continue blogging comes from the memory of how my first book, Ang imitasyon Universe, 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. At, 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. Halimbawa, 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, Ang imitasyon Universe. 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?
Sa mundo ngayon, 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. Pagkatapos muli, 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, bagaman, what I said about the irrelevance of philosophy can be said about, sabihin, physics as well, despite the fact that it gives you computers and iPads. Halimbawa, 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. Hindi bababa sa, 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, halimbawa), 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.
Sa aking pagtingin, 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. Pagkatapos muli, of what practical use is life itself?
Ano ang kaya espesyal na tungkol sa liwanag na dapat malaman bilis nito sa pangunahing istraktura ng space at oras at sa aming katotohanan? 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. Ang utak ay lumilikha ng isang nagbibigay-malay na modelo, isang representasyon ng madaling makaramdam input, at nagtatanghal ng ito sa aming nakakamalay kamalayan bilang katotohanan. Our visual reality consists of space much like our auditory world is made up of sounds.
Just as sounds are a perceptual experience rather than a fundamental property of the physical reality, espasyo ding karanasan, o isang nagbibigay-malay na representasyon ng visual input, hindi isang pangunahing aspeto ng “the world” our senses are trying to sense.
Space at oras nang sama-sama bumuo ng kung ano ang isinasaalang-alang ng physics sa batayan ng katotohanan. The only way we can understand the limitations in our reality is by studying the limitations in our senses themselves.
Sa isang pangunahing antas, kung paano gawin ang aming mga pandama gumagana? Ang aming kahulugan ng paningin ay nagpapatakbo ng paggamit ng liwanag, at kasangkot sa paningin sa pangunahing mga pakikipag-ugnayan ay bumaba sa electromagnetic (IN) kategorya dahil ilaw (o photon) ay ang tagapamagitan ng em mga pakikipag-ugnayan. The exclusivity of EM interaction is not limited to our the long range sense of sight; all the short range senses (pindutin ang, panlasa, amoy at pagdinig) ay din em sa kalikasan. Upang maunawaan ang mga limitasyon ng aming pagdama ng puwang, hindi namin kailangan i-highlight ang em likas na katangian ng lahat ng aming mga pandama. Space ay, sa pamamagitan ng at malaki, ang resulta ng aming paningin kahulugan. Ngunit ito ay kapaki-pakinabang upang panatilihin sa isip na nais namin ay walang sensing, at sa katunayan walang katotohanan, sa kawalan ng em mga pakikipag-ugnayan.
Tulad ng aming mga pandama, lahat ng aming mga teknolohikal na mga extension sa aming mga pandama (tulad ng teleskopyo radyo, Electron microscopes, redshift measurements and even gravitational lensing) gamitin em mga pakikipag-ugnayan ng eksklusibo upang sukatin ang aming uniberso. Kaya, hindi namin maaaring makatakas ang pangunahing mga hadlang sa aming pagdama kahit na ginagamit namin modernong mga instrumento. Maaaring makita ng isang bilyon light years ang mas malayo ang teleskopyo Hubble kaysa sa ating naked mata, ngunit kung ano ang nakakakita nito ay pa rin ng isang bilyong taon na mas luma sa kung ano ang nakikita ng aming mga mata. Our perceived reality, built kung sa direct madaling makaramdam input o technologically pinahusay, is a subset of electromagnetic particles and interactions only. 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. Arises pagkalito na ito dahil ang aming mga katawan ay sakop sa grabidad. May masarap na pagkakaiba sa pagitan ng “pagiging nakabatay sa” at “kawalan ng kakayahang pakiramdam” gravitational puwersa.
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. Given that the dark matter exerts gravitational force on the subject, 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. Halimbawa, 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. Sa kawalan ng pakikipag-ugnayan ng em, imposibleng pakiramdam grabidad, o anumang bagay na para sa bagay.
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, kung saan ay ang gauge boson ng aming mga pandama. Ang may hangganan bilis ng pakiramdam modality impluwensya at distorts ang aming pagdama ng paggalaw, espasyo at oras. Dahil ang mga distortions ay nakita bilang isang bahagi ng aming mismo katotohanan, ang root dahilan ng pagbaluktot nagiging isang pangunahing ari-arian sa aming mga katotohanan. This is how the speed of light becomes such an important constant in our space time. The sanctity of light is respected only in our perceived reality.
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 at cosmological phenomena. When it comes to the physics that happens well beyond our sensory ranges, talaga mayroon kami sa isinasaalang-alang ng papel na ang aming pagdama at cognition-play sa pagkita ng mga ito. 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. Dahil sa bilis may hangganan ng carrier impormasyon (lalo photons), ang aming pagdama ay pangit sa paraan bilang upang bigyan kami ng impresyon na ang espasyo at oras na sundin ng mga espesyal na relativity. Ginagawa nila, ngunit espasyo at oras ay hindi ang ganap na katotohanan. They are only a part of the unreal universe that is our perception of an unknowable reality.
[This again is an edited excerpt from my book, Ang imitasyon Universe.]