# What Does it Feel Like to be a Bat?

It is a sensible question: What does it feel like to be a bat? Although we can never really know the answer (because we can never be bats), we know that there is an answer. It feels like something to be a bat. よく, at least we think it does. We think bats have 意識 and conscious feelings. 一方, it is not a sensible question to ask what it feels like to be brick or a table. It doesn&#8217;t feel like anything to be an inanimate object.

# 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.

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?

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.

# 時間の問題

Time, 他方では, has no direct sensory backing. And for this reason, it becomes quite difficult to get a grip over it. 時間とは何ですか? We sense it indirectly through change and motion. But it would be silly to define time using the concepts of change and motion, because they already include the notion of time. The definition would be cyclic.

Assuming, for now, that no definition is necessary, let’s try another perhaps more tractable issue. Where does this strong sense of time come from? I once postulated that it comes from our knowledge of our demisethat questionable gift that we all possess. All the time durations that we are aware of are measured against the yardstick of our lifespan, perhaps not always consciously. I now wonder if this postulate is firm enough, and further ruminations on this issue have convinced me that I am quite ignorant of these things and need more knowledge. Ah.. only if I had more time. 🙂

どんな場合でも, even this more restricted question of the origin of time doesn’t seem to be that tractable, 結局. 物理学では、時間を持つ別の深い問題を抱えています,,en,これは、方向性に関係しています,,en,時間が方向を持っている理由は簡単に説明することはできません,,en,矢印,,en,この矢印は、物理的相互作用を支配する基本法則で自分自身を提示していません,,en,物理学のすべての法律は時間が可逆的です,,en,重力の法則,,en,電磁気や量子力学では、すべての時間反転に対して不変です,,en,彼らは前方または後方に行く時間と同じに見えます,,en,そこで、彼らは、我々は時間の矢を体験する理由として何の手掛かりを与えません,,en,私たちは、その時間を知っています,,en,我々はそれを経験として,,en,方向性であります,,en,私たちは、過去を思い出すことができます,,en,ではなく、将来,,en,私たちが今やっていることは、将来に影響を与えることができます,,en,ではなく、過去,,en,我々は後方ビデオテープを再生した場合,,en,一連のイベント,,en,花瓶のために一緒に来てガラスの破片のような,,en,私たちに面白い見ていきます,,en. It has to do with the directionality. It cannot easily explain why time has a direction — an arrow, 言ってみれば. This arrow does not present itself in the fundamental laws governing physical interactions. All the laws in physics are time reversible. The laws of gravity, electromagnetism or quantum mechanics are all invariant with respect to a time reversal. すなわち, they look the same with time going forward or backward. So they give no clue as to why we experience the arrow of time.

まだ, we know that time, as we experience it, is directional. We can remember the past, but not the future. What we do now can affect the future, but not the past. If we play a video tape backwards, the sequence of events (like broken pieces of glass coming together to for a vase) will look funny to us. しかしながら, 私たちは、太陽系内の惑星の動きをテープで止めた場合,,en,または原子における電子雲,,en,そして、物理学者に後方にそれを果たしました,,en,物理法則は可逆的であるので、彼は、配列中に面白いものを見つけられないでしょう,,en,物理学は、時間の矢統計コレクションの緊急財産とみなし,,en,この時間の熱力学的な説明を説明するために、,,en,我々はいくつかのドライアイスを置く空の容器を考えてみましょう,,en,その後しばらくして,,en,私たちは、コンテナ内の二酸化炭素ガスの均一な分布を見ることを期待します,,en,一度広がります,,en,私たちは、容器内の気体が固体のドライアイスの中に凝固することを期待しないでください,,en,どんなに長い間、我々は待ちます,,en,コンテナ内に均一に拡散CO2の映像は自然なものです,,en,後方プレイ,,en, or the electron cloud in an atom, and played it backward to a physicist, he would not find anything funny in the sequences because the physical laws are reversible.

Physics considers the arrow of time an emergent property of statistical collections. To illustrate this thermodynamic explanation of time, let’s consider an empty container where we place some dry ice. After some time, we expect to see a uniform distribution of carbon dioxide gas in the container. Once spread out, we do not expect the gas in the container to coagulate into solid dry ice, no matter how long we wait. The video of CO2 spreading uniformly in the container is a natural one. Played backward, それは時間の矢の我々の感覚に違反しているため、コーナーで固体のドライアイスに凝結コンテナ内のCO2ガスのシーケンスは、私たちに自然に見えるではないでしょう,,en,容器内のCO2の見かけの均一性は、我々はそこに配置され、ドライアイスの統計的に有意な量のためであります,,en,私たちは、少量を入れて管理している場合,,en,CO2の5つの分子を言います,,en,我々は完全にたまには一箇所での分子の会衆を見ることを期待することができます,,en,時間の矢は、統計的または熱力学的性質として現れ,,en,時間の方向性は、可逆的な物理法則から出てくると思われるが,,en,基本的な法律でその不在は、哲学的に満足のいく未満に見えるん,,en,時間の問題」への思い,,en,ギャビン,,en,あなたの投稿は深いです,,en,Mkhan,,zu.

The apparent uniformity of CO2 in the container is due to the statistically significant quantity of dry ice we placed there. If we manage to put a small quantity, say five molecules of CO2, we can fully expect to see the congregation of the molecules in one location once in a while. このようにして, the arrow of time manifests itself as a statistical or thermodynamic property. Although the directionality of time seems to emerge from reversible physical laws, its absence in the fundamental laws does look less than satisfactory philosophically.

# 水の半分バケツ

あなたはこれらの哲学的hairsplittingsの2ちょうど別の1との間の区別を考慮してもよい, それは本当にありません. 何スペースです, エンティティ空間の一種であっても何, 物理学の巨大な意味を持っている. 例えば, それは本質的にリレーショナルである場合, その後物質の不在下で, スペースはありません. 多くの家族用の非存在下では様, あなたは家族を持っていない. 一方, それは、コンテナのようなエンティティがある場合, スペースは、すべての事項奪う場合であっても存在する, いくつかの問題が表示されるのを待っている.

だから何, あなたが求める? よく, の水の半分バケツてみましょうし、それを周りにスピン. 漁獲内の水を一度, その表面は放物線形状を形成する — あなたが知っている, 遠心力, 重力, 表面張力、すべてのこと. 今, バケツを停止, その代わりに、その周りに宇宙全体を回転. 私は知っている, それはより困難である. しかし、あなたはそれをやっていると想像. 水面は放物線になります? 私はそれがなると思います, バケツの電源を入れるか、その周りに回転して全宇宙の間に大きな違いはありませんので、.

もちろん, 私たちは宇宙を空にし、バケットを回転する方法がないので、私たちはそれがために起こっているどの方法を知る方法がありません. しかし、それはそれに基づいてスペースと建物の理論の性質を推測するから私たちを防ぐことはできません. ニュートンの空間は、容器状である, 彼らの心にいる間, アインシュタインの理論は宇宙のリレーショナル概念が.

そう, あなたが参照してください。, 哲学は重要ではありません.

# なぜ光の速度?

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.

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.]

# スペースとは何ですか?

これは奇妙な質問のように聞こえる. 我々は、すべてのスペースが何であるかを知っている, それが私たちの周りのすべてです. 私たちは私たちの目を開くと、, 我々はそれを参照してください。. シーイングは信じるされている場合は, その後質問 “スペースとは何ですか?” 確かに奇妙なものである.

リアリズムのグリップから脱却するためには, 私たちは質問接線方向にアプローチする必要が. それを行う1つの方法は、視力の神経科学と認知の基礎を研究することによってである, そのすべての後にスペースの現実に有力な証拠を提供しています. スペース, 概して, is the experience associated with sight. もう一つの方法は、他の感覚の体験相関を調べることです: 音とは何ですか?

それでは、ヒアリングの責任の感覚信号を見てみましょう. 私たちは知っているように, これらは、その周りに空気中の圧迫とくぼみを作る振動体によって作成された空気中の圧力波である. 池の波紋のような多くの, これらの圧力波は、ほぼすべての方向に伝播する. これらは私たちの耳によってピックアップされている. 巧妙なメカニズムによって, 耳は、スペクトル分析を行い、電気信号​​を送信する, 概ね波の周波数スペクトルに対応する, 私たちの脳へ. あることに注意してください, これまでのところ, 私たちは、振動体を持っている, バンチングと空気分子の拡散, と空気分子のパターンについての情報を含む電気信号. 私たちは、まだ音を持っていない.

それは私たちの聴覚感覚入力の内部認知表現を鳴らす呼び出ししても意味がありません? あなたが同意する場合, その後現実自体が私たちの感覚入力の私たちの内部表現である. この概念は、実際にははるかに深遠それは最初に表示されていることである. 音の表現である場合, とても香りがある. だから、スペースがある.

 フィギュア: 感覚入力の脳の表現の過程のイラスト. 臭気は、化学組成と濃度レベル私たちの鼻の感覚の表現である. 音が振動するオブジェクトによって生成される空気の圧力波のマッピングです. 間近に, 私たちの表現はスペースです, そしておそらく時間. しかしながら, 我々はそれが表現であるかわからない.

なぜそれが私たちが宇宙の背後にある物理的な原因を知らないということです? 結局, 我々は、匂いの経験の背後にある原因を知っている, 音, など. 視覚的な現実を越えて見るために私達ができない理由は、感覚の階層にある, 最良の例を使用して説明. の小さな爆発を考えてみましょう, オフに行く爆竹のような. 我々は、この爆発が発生した場合, 我々は、フラッシュが表示されます, 報告を聞く, 燃え薬品の匂いを嗅ぐと熱を感じる, 私たちは十分に接近している場合は、.

これらの経験のクオリアは、同一の物理的なイベントに起因する — 爆発, よく理解された物理学. 今, 我々は同じ経験を持つに感覚をだますことができるかどうか見てみましょう, 本物の爆発の非存在下での. 熱と香りが再現することが非常に簡単です. 音の経験はまた、使用して作成することができ, 例えば, ハイエンドのホームシアターシステム. 私たちは、爆発の視線経験を再作成するにはどうすればよい? ホームシアター体験は、本物の再生不良です.

[この投稿は、からかなり借りている 私の本.]

# ライト所要時間効果と宇宙論的機能

この未発表の記事では、私の以前の論文の続編です (また、ここで掲載 “電波源とガンマ線バースト管腔ブームですか?“). このブログのバージョンでは、抽象が含まれています, 導入と結論. 記事の完全版は、PDFファイルとして提供され.

.

#### はじめに

スペース, その中のオブジェクト, そして彼らの動きがある, 概して, 光学知覚の製品. 一つは、誰もそれを知覚するように知覚が現実から生じることを当然のそれを取る傾向にある. この記事では、, 私たちは私たちが知覚することは、基礎となる現実の不完全または歪んだ画像であるという立場を取る. さらなる, 私たちは、基礎となる現実のための古典力学をしようとしています (そのために私たちは絶対のような用語を使用, 実体のか物理的な現実) それが私たちの知覚映像と収まる場合には、私たちの認識が見て与えていない (私たちは、感知されたか、驚異的な現実を指す可能性がある).

この記事では、, 私たちはモデルの他の影響を見て. 私たちは、光の移動時間の間の類似で始まる (LTT) 特殊相対性理論での効果と座標変換 (SR). SRはLTTの効果に基づいて、部分的に導出されているため、これらの類似性はほとんど驚くべきものである. 次に、LTT効果の形式化として、SRの解釈を提案し、この解釈に照らして、いくつかの観測された宇宙の現象を研究.

#### ライト所要時間に及ぼす影響とSRの間の類似点

アインシュタインの原論文の座標変換が導出される, ある程度, 光移動時間の現れ (LTT) 効果とすべての慣性系における光速度不変を課すの結果. これは、最初の思考実験の中で最も明白である, 棒で動く観測者が自分の時計を見つけるところにより、ロッドの長さに沿って光の進行時間の差に同期していません. しかしながら, SRの現在の解釈に, 座標変換は、空間と時間の基本的な性質と考えられている.

SRのこの解釈から生じる一つの問題は、2つの慣性フレーム間の相対速度の定義が曖昧になることである. 観察者によって測定された可動フレームの速度である場合, その後、コア領域から始まるラジオジェットで観察された超光速運動は、SRの違反となります. そのLT効果を考慮して、我々は推論することがある速度である場合, その後、我々はsuperluminalityが禁止されていること余分なアドホック仮定を採用する必要が. これらの困難は、SRの残りの部分からの光の走行時間の影響を解きほぐすすることが望ましい場合があることを示唆している.

このセクションでは、, 我々は、脳によって作成された認知モデルの一部として、空間と時間を検討します, と特殊相対性理論が認知モデルに適用されると主張している. 絶対的な現実 (SR-のような空間·時間は、私たちの認識となっている) SRの制限が従うことはありません. 特に, オブジェクトはsubluminal速度に制限されていない, 彼らは空間と時間の私たちの知覚のsubluminal速度に制限されているかのように、彼らは私たちに表示される場合があります. 我々は、SRの残りの部分からLTT効果を解きほぐす場合, 我々は、現象の広い配列を理解することができます, 私たちはこの記事で見るように.

SRとは異なり、, LTTの効果に基づいて考察がオブザーバーに近づいたオブジェクトの変換法の本質的に異なるセットになり、それらの彼から後退. より一般的に, 変換は、物体の速度及び監視者の視線との間の角度に依存する. LTTの効果に基づく変換式は、非対称的にオブジェクトに近づくと後退TREATので, 彼らは双子のパラドックスへの自然なソリューションを提供, 例えば.

#### 結論

SRとは異なり、, LTT効果は非対称である. この非対称性はsuperluminalityに関連した双子のパラドックスへの解像度と想定因果関係違反の解釈を提供します. さらに, superluminalityの知覚はLTT効果によって変調される, と説明して $gamma$ 線バーストと対称ジェット. 私たちは、記事で示したとおり, 超光速運動の認知も、宇宙の膨張と宇宙マイクロ波背景放射のような宇宙論的な現象の説明を保持している. LTT効果は、我々の認識の基本的な制約として考慮されるべきである, その結果、物理学の, むしろ孤立した現象のための便利な説明としてより.

SRの座標変換は、空間と時間の再定義と見ることができる (または, より一般的に, 現実のもの) 光による移動時間の効果に対する運動の私たちの知覚の歪みに対応するために. 一つは、SRが適用されると主張するように誘惑される “リアル” 空間と時間, ではない私たちの知覚. 議論のこのラインは質問を頼む, 何本物だ? 現実は私たちの感覚入力から始まる私たちの脳内に作成さだけ認知モデルである, 視覚入力は、最も重要である. スペース自体は、この認知モデルの一部である. 空間の性質は、私たちの知覚の制約のマッピングである.

# 特殊相対性理論の哲学 — インドと西洋の解釈の比較

– Editor

Key Words: Relativity, Speed of Light, 現象論, アドヴァイタ.

#### はじめに

The philosophical basis of the special theory of relativity can be interpreted in terms of Western phenomenalism, which views space and time are considered perceptual and cognitive constructs created out our sensory inputs. このような観点から, the special status of light and its speed can be understood through a phenomenological study of our senses and the perceptual limitations to our phenomenal notions of space and time. A similar view is echoed in the Brahmanマヤ における区別 アドヴァイタ. If we think of space and time as part of マヤ, we can partly understand the importance that the speed of light in our reality, as enshrined in special relativity. The central role of light in our reality is highlighted in the Bible as well. These remarkable parallels among the phenomenological, Western spiritual and the アドヴァイタ interpretations of special relativity point to an exciting possibility of unifying the Eastern and Western schools of thought to a certain degree.

#### Special Relativity

Einstein unveiled his special theory of relativity2 a little over a century ago. In his theory, he showed that space and time were not absolute entities. They are entities relative to an observer. An observer’s space and time are related to those of another through the speed of light. 例えば, nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. In a moving system, time flows slower and space contracts in accordance with equations involving the speed of light. ライト, 従って, enjoys a special status in our space and time. This specialness of light in our reality is indelibly enshrined in the special theory of relativity.

Where does this specialness come from? 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 question has remained unanswered for over 100 年. It also brings in the metaphysical aspects of space and time, which form the basis of what we perceive as reality.

#### Noumenal-Phenomenal and Brahman–マヤ Distinctions

アドヴァイタ3 view of reality, what we perceive is merely an illusion-マヤ. アドヴァイタ explicitly renounces the notion that the perceived reality is external or indeed real. It teaches us that the phenomenal universe, our conscious awareness of it, and our bodily being are all an illusion or マヤ. They are not the true, absolute reality. The absolute reality existing in itself, independent of us and our experiences, です Brahman.

A similar view of reality is echoed in phenomenalism,4 which holds that space and time are not objective realities. 彼らは単に、私たちの知覚の広さ. このビューでは、, all the phenomena that happen in space and time are merely bundles of our perception. Space and time are also cognitive constructs arising from perception. このようにして, the reasons behind all the physical properties that we ascribe to space and time have to be sought in the sensory processes that create our perception, whether we approach the issue from the アドヴァイタ or phenomenalism perspective.

This analysis of the importance of light in our reality naturally brings in the metaphysical aspects of space and time. In Kant’s view,5 space and time are pure forms of intuition. They do not arise from our experience because our experiences presuppose the existence of space and time. このようにして, we can represent space and time in the absence of objects, but we cannot represent objects in the absence of space and time.

Kant’s middle-ground has the advantage of reconciling the views of Newton and Leibniz. It can agree with Newton’s view6 that space is absolute and real for phenomenal objects open to scientific investigation. It can also sit well with Leibniz’s view7 that space is not absolute and has an existence only in relation to objects, by highlighting their relational nature, not among objects in themselves (noumenal objects), but between observers and objects.

We can roughly equate the noumenal objects to forms in Brahman and our perception of them to マヤ. この記事では、, we will use the terms “noumenal reality,” “absolute reality,” または “物理的実在性” interchangeably to describe the collection of noumenal objects, their properties and interactions, which are thought to be the underlying causes of our perception. 同様に, we will “phenomenal reality,” “perceived or sensed reality,” そして “perceptual reality” to signify our reality as we perceive it.

As with Brahman causing マヤ, we assume that the phenomenal notions of space and time arise from noumenal causes8 through our sensory and cognitive processes. Note that this causality assumption is ad-hoc; there is no a priori reason for phenomenal reality to have a cause, nor is causation a necessary feature of the noumenal reality. Despite this difficulty, we proceed from a naive model for the noumenal reality and show that, through the process of perception, 我々はできる “導き出す” a phenomenal reality that obeys the special theory of relativity.

This attempt to go from the phenomena (空間と時間) to the essence of what we experience (a model for noumenal reality) is roughly in line with Husserl’s transcendental phenomenology.9 The deviation is that we are more interested in the manifestations of the model in the phenomenal reality itself rather than the validity of the model for the essence. Through this study, we show that the specialness of the speed of light in our phenomenal space and time is a consequence of our perceptual apparatus. It doesn’t have to be an input postulate to the special theory of relativity.

#### Perception and Phenomenal Reality

The properties we ascribe to space and time (such as the specialness of the speed of light) can only be a part of our perceived reality or マヤ, で アドヴァイタ, not of the underlying absolute reality, Brahman. If we think of space and time as aspects of our perceived reality arising from an unknowable Brahman through our sensory and cognitive processes, we can find an explanation for the special distinction of the speed of light in the process and mechanism of our sensing. Our thesis is that the reason for the specialness of light in our phenomenal notions of space and time is hidden in the process of our perception.

These features of the noumenal reality are identical to the notion of Brahmanアドヴァイタ, which highlights that the ultimate truth is Brahman, the one beyond time, space and causation. Brahman is the material cause of the universe, but it transcends the cosmos. It transcends time; it exists in the past, present and future. It transcends space; it has no beginning, middle and end. It even transcends causality. For that reason, Brahman is incomprehensible to the human mind. The way it manifests to us is through our sensory and cognitive processes. This manifestation is マヤ, the illusion, これ, in the phenomenalistic parlance, corresponds to the phenomenal reality.

For our purpose in this article, we describe our sensory and cognitive process and the creation of the phenomenal reality or マヤ10 as follows. It starts with the noumenal objects (or forms in Brahman), which generate the inputs to our senses. Our senses then process the signals and relay the processed electric data corresponding to them to our brain. The brain creates a cognitive model, a representation of the sensory inputs, and presents it to our conscious awareness as reality, which is our phenomenal world or マヤ.

This description of how the phenomenal reality created ushers in a tricky philosophical question. Who or what creates the phenomenal reality and where? It is not created by our senses, brain and mind because these are all objects or forms in the phenomenal reality. The phenomenal reality cannot create itself. It cannot be that the noumenal reality creates the phenomenal reality because, in that case, it would be inaccurate to assert the cognitive inaccessibility to the noumenal world.

This philosophical trouble is identical in アドヴァイタ も. Our senses, brain and mind cannot create マヤ, because they are all part of マヤ. もし Brahman created マヤ, it would have to be just as real. This philosophical quandary can be circumvented in the following way. We assume that all events and objects in マヤ have a cause or form in Brahman or in the noumenal world. このようにして, we postulate that our senses, mind and body all have some (unknown) forms in Brahman (or in the noumenal world), and these forms create マヤ in our conscious awareness, ignoring the fact that our consciousness itself is an illusory manifestation in the phenomenal world. This inconsistency is not material to our exploration into the nature of space and time because we are seeking the reason for the specialness of light in the sensory process rather than at the level of consciousness.

Space and time together form what physics considers the basis of reality. Space makes up our visual reality precisely as sounds make up our auditory world. Just as sounds are a perceptual experience rather than a fundamental property of physical reality, space also is an experience, or a cognitive representation of the visual inputs, not a fundamental aspect of Brahman or the noumenal reality. The phenomenal reality thus created is マヤ. ザ· マヤ events are an imperfect or distorted representation of the corresponding Brahman events. 以来 Brahman is a superset of マヤ (または, equivalently, our senses are potentially incapable of sensing all aspects of the noumenal reality), not all objects and events in Brahman create a projection in マヤ. Our perception (または マヤ) is thus limited because of the sense modality and its speed, which form the focus of our investigation in this article.

In summary, it can be argued that the noumenal-phenomenal distinction in phenomenalism is an exact parallel to the Brahmanマヤ における区別 アドヴァイタ if we think of our perceived reality (または マヤ) as arising from sensory and cognitive processes.

#### Sensing Space and Time, and the Role of Light

The phenomenal notions of space and time together form what physics considers the basis of reality. Since we take the position that space and time are the end results of our sensory perception, we can understand some of the limitations in our マヤ 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.11

The exclusivity of EM interaction is not limited to our 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. 物理学の, the fundamental interactions are modeled as fields with gauge bosons.12 In quantum electrodynamics13 (the quantum field theory of EM interactions), photon (or light) is the gauge boson mediating EM interactions. Electromagnetic interactions are responsible for all our sensory inputs. 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, red shift 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 phenomenal reality, whether built upon direct sensory inputs or technologically enhanced, is made up of a subset of EM particles and interactions only. What we perceive as reality is a subset of forms and events in the noumenal world corresponding to EM interactions, filtered through our sensory and cognitive processes. で アドヴァイタ parlance, マヤ can be thought of as a projection of Brahman through EM interactions into our sensory and cognitive space, quite probably an imperfect projection.

The exclusivity of EM interactions in our perceived reality is not always appreciated, mainly because of 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. The gravity sensing in our ears 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.

This assertion that there is no sensing in the absence of EM interactions brings us to the next philosophical hurdle. One can always argue that, in the absence of EM interaction, there is no matter to sense. This argument is tantamount to insisting that the noumenal world consists of only those forms and events that give rise to EM interaction in our phenomenal perception. 言い換えると, it is the same as insisting that Brahman is made up of only EM interactions. What is lacking in the absence of EM interaction is only our phenomenal reality. で アドヴァイタ notion, in the absence of sensing, マヤ does not exist. The absolute reality or Brahman, しかしながら, is independent of our sensing it. 再び, we see that the Eastern and Western views on reality we explored in this article are remarkably similar.

#### The Speed of Light

Knowing that our space-time is a representation of the light waves our eyes receive, we can immediately see that light is indeed special in our reality. In our view, sensory perception leads to our brain’s representation that we call reality, または マヤ. Any limitation in this chain of sensing leads to a corresponding limitation in our phenomenal reality.

One limitation in the chain from senses to perception 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.

The importance of the speed of light, しかしながら, is respected only in our phenomenal マヤ. Other modes of perception have other speeds the figure as the fundamental constant in their space-like perception. The reality sensed through echolocation, 例えば, has the speed of sound as a fundamental property. 実際には, it is fairly simple to establish14 that echolocation results in a perception of motion that obeys something very similar to special relativity with the speed of light replaced with that of sound.

#### Theories beyond Sensory Limits

The basis of physics is the world view called scientific realism, which is not only at the core of sciences but is our natural way of looking at the world as well. Scientific realism, and hence physics, assume an independently existing external world, whose structures are knowable through scientific investigations. To the extent observations are based on perception, the philosophical stance of scientific realism, as it is practiced today, can be thought of as a trust in our perceived reality, and as an assumption that it is this reality that needs to be explored in science.

Physics extends its reach beyond perception or マヤ through the rational element of pure theory. Most of physics works in this “extended” intellectual reality, with concepts such as fields, forces, light rays, 原子, 粒子, その他, the existence of which is insisted upon through the metaphysical commitment implied in scientific realism. しかしながら, it does not claim that the rational extensions are the noumenal causes or Brahman giving raise to our phenomenal perception.

Scientific realism has helped physics tremendously, with all its classical theories. しかしながら, scientific realism and the trust in our perception of reality should apply only within the useful ranges of our senses. Within the ranges of our sensory perceptions, we have fairly intuitive physics. An example of an intuitive picture is Newtonian mechanics that describe “通常の” objects moving around at “通常の” speeds.

When we get closer to the edges of our sensory modalities, we have to modify our sciences to describe the reality as we sense it. These modifications lead to different, and possibly incompatible, theories. When we ascribe the natural limitations of our senses and the consequent limitations of our perception (and therefore observations) to the fundamental nature of reality itself, we end up introducing complications in our physical laws. Depending on which limitations we are incorporating into the theory (e.g., small size, large speeds etc.), we may end up with theories that are incompatible with each other.

Our argument is that some of these complications (そして, うまくいけば, incompatibilities) can be avoided if we address the sensory limitations directly. 例えば, we can study the consequence of the fact that our senses operate at the speed of light as follows. We can model Brahman (the noumenal reality) as obeying classical mechanics, and work out what kind of マヤ (phenomenal reality) we will experience through the chain of sensing.

The modeling of the noumenal world (as obeying classical mechanics), もちろん, has shaky philosophical foundations. But the phenomenal reality predicted from this model is remarkably close to the reality we do perceive. Starting from this simple model, it can be easily shown our perception of motion at high speeds obeys special relativity.

The effects due to the finite speed of light are well known in physics. 私たちは知っている, 例えば, that what we see happening in distant stars and galaxies now actually took place quite awhile ago. A more “advanced” effect due to the light travel time15 is the way we perceive motion at high speeds, which is the basis of special relativity. 実際には, many astrophysical phenomena can be understood16 in terms of light travel time effects. Because our sense modality is based on light, our sensed picture of motion has the speed of light appearing naturally in the equations describing it. So the importance of the speed of light in our space-time (as described in special relativity) is due to the fact that our reality is マヤ created based on light inputs.

#### Conclusion

Almost all branches of philosophy grapple with this distinction between the phenomenal and the absolute realities to some extent. アドヴァイタ Vedanta holds the unrealness of the phenomenal reality as the basis of their world view. この記事では、, we showed that the views in phenomenalism can be thought of as a restatement of the アドヴァイタ postulates.

When such a spiritual or philosophical insight makes its way into science, great advances in our understanding can be expected. This convergence of philosophy (or even spirituality) and science is beginning to take place, most notably in neuroscience, which views reality as a creation of our brain, echoing the notion of マヤ.

Science gives a false impression that we can get arbitrarily close to the underlying physical causes through the process of scientific investigation and rational theorization. An example of such theorization can be found in our sensation of hearing. The experience or the sensation of sound is an incredibly distant representation of the physical cause–namely air pressure waves. We are aware of the physical cause because we have a more powerful sight sense. So it would seem that we can indeed go from マヤ (音) to the underlying causes (air pressure waves).

しかしながら, it is a fallacy to assume that the physical cause (the air pressure waves) です Brahman. Air pressure waves are still a part of our perception; they are part of the intellectual picture we have come to accept. This intellectual picture is an extension of our visual reality, based on our trust in the visual reality. It is still a part of マヤ.

The new extension of reality proposed in this article, again an intellectual extension, is an educated guess. We guess a model for the absolute reality, または Brahman, and predict what the consequent perceived reality should be, working forward through the chain of sensing and creating マヤ. If the predicted perception is a good match with the マヤ we do experience, then the guesswork for Brahman is taken to be a fairly accurate working model. The consistency between the predicted perception and what we do perceive is the only validation of the model for the nature of the absolute reality. さらに, the guess is only one plausible model for the absolute reality; there may be different such “solutions” to the absolute reality all of which end up giving us our perceived reality.

It is a mistake to think of the qualities of our subjective experience of sound as the properties of the underlying physical process. In an exact parallel, it is a fallacy to assume that the subjective experience of space and time is the fundamental property of the world we live in. The space-time continuum, as we see it or feel it, is only a partial and incomplete representation of the unknowable Brahman. If we are willing to model the unknowable Brahman as obeying classical mechanics, we can indeed derive the properties of our perceived reality (such as time dilation, length contraction, light speed ceiling and so on in special relativity). By proposing this model for the noumenal world, we are not suggesting that all the effects of special relativity are mere perceptual artifacts. We are merely reiterating a known fact that space and time themselves cannot be anything but perceptual constructs. Thus their properties are manifestations of the process of perception.

When we consider processes close to or beyond our sensor limits, the manifestations of our perceptual and cognitive constraints become significant. 従って, when it comes to the physics that describes such processes, we really have to take into account the role that our perception and cognition play in sensing them. The universe as we see it is only a cognitive model created out of the photons falling on our retina or on the photosensors of the Hubble telescope. そのため情報担体の有限速度の (すなわち光), 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, but space and time are only a part of our perception of an unknowable reality—a perception limited by the speed of light.

The central role of light in creating our reality or universe is at the heart of western spiritual philosophy as well. 光のない宇宙は、単にあなたがライトをオフにしている世界ではありません. それは確かにそれ自体を欠い宇宙である, 存在しない宇宙. It is in this context that we have to understand the wisdom behind the notion that “地は形がなかった, and void'” 神は光があることが原因とされるまで, 言って “光あれ。” Quran also says, “Allah is the light of the heavens.” The role of light in taking us from the void (無) to a reality was understood for a long, 長い時間. Is it possible that the ancient saints and prophets knew things that we are only now beginning to uncover with all our advances in knowledge? Whether we use old Eastern アドヴァイタ views or their Western counterparts, we can interpret the philosophical stance behind special relativity as hidden in the distinction between our phenomenal reality and its unknowable physical causes.

#### 参考資料

1. Dr. Manoj Thulasidas graduated from the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), マドラス, で 1987. He studied fundamental particles and interactions at the CLEO collaboration at Cornell University during 1990-1992. After receiving his PhD in 1993, he moved to Marseilles, France and continued his research with the ALEPH collaboration at CERN, ジュネーブ. During his ten-year career as a research scientist in the field of High energy physics, 彼はオーバー共著 200 出版物.
2. アインシュタイン, A. (1905). Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper. (On The Electrodynamics Of Moving Bodies). 物理学の史料, 17, 891-921.
3. Radhakrishnan, S. & Moore, C言語. A. (1957). Source Book in Indian Philosophy. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NY.
4. Chisolm, R. (1948). The Problem of Empiricism. The Journal of Philosophy, 45, 512-517.
5. Allison, H. (2004). Kant’s Transcendental Idealism. Yale University Press.
6. Rynasiewicz, R. (1995). By Their Properties, Causes and Effects: Newton’s Scholium on Time, スペース, Place and Motion. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 26, 133-153, 295-321.
7. Calkins, M. ザ·. (1897). Kant’s Conception of the Leibniz Space and Time Doctrine. The Philosophical Review, 6 (4), 356-369.
8. Janaway, C., ed. (1999). The Cambridge Companion to Schopenhauer. Cambridge University Press.
9. Schmitt, R. (1959). Husserl’s Transcendental-Phenomenological Reduction. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 20 (2), 238-245.
10. Thulasidas, M. (2007). アンリアル·ユニバース. Asian Books, シンガポール.
11. Electromagnetic (EM) interaction is one of the four kinds of interactions in the Standard Model (Griffths, 1987) of particle physics. It is the interaction between charged bodies. Despite the EM repulsion between them, しかしながら, the protons stay confined within the nucleus because of the strong interaction, whose magnitude is much bigger than that of EM interactions. The other two interactions are termed the weak interaction and the gravitational interaction.
12. In quantum field theory, every fundamental interaction consists of emitting a particle and absorbing it in an instant. These so-called virtual particles emitted and absorbed are known as the gauge bosons that mediate the interactions.
13. Feynman, R. (1985). Quantum Electrodynamics. Addison Wesley.
14. Thulasidas, M. (2007). アンリアル·ユニバース. Asian Books, シンガポール.
15. リーズ, M. (1966). Appearance of Relativistically Expanding Radio Sources. ネイチャー, 211, 468-470.
16. Thulasidas, M. (2007A). 電波源とガンマ線バースト管腔ブームですか? International Journal of Modern Physics D, 16 (6), 983-1000.