Chris Fuchs on John Wheeler and the Quantum Principle (with a little help from Amanda Gefter)

[rseyedoc]

Fascinating how several ancient "religions" came to the same realization that subject, object and observation are all part of the same system through calming the mind and dissolving the distinctions. In Buddhism anyway, observers see the universe very similarly because their karma is very similar.

[Cosmalano]

This is a talk I’ve revisited several times over the past few months. I love it so much. Tonight I got an idea in my mind listening to this perspective, one that’s something like, “what is the big bang?” it’s the universal quantum phenomenon; everything in the universe could “create facts” about the big bang by measuring it, as if being able to do so, “see” the big bang, was a criteria for being in the universe. And this becomes what the big bang ultimately is, the thing everything can measure (to some degree, even if through some intermediary measurement of something else that can directly measure it). And in order for this “seeing” to be possible, gravity must exist, as gravitation is the universal interaction; gravity is the only thing that could link the big bang to everything else. For example, although the big bang is implicit through the phenomena around us, we would need to use gravity to measure it directly since there is no light from the big bang, only the CMB. It seems this link between the big bang and everything else is done through measurement, as spacetime proves to be a deficient phenomenon for describing gravity. It’s as if measurement provides the basis for a more general theory of gravity, and the big bang is really just the big measurement!

I also think I understand why Wheeler suggests that the quantum principle is all that survives in gravitational collapse. If we try describe changing topologies, as one might like to do in nuclear fission for example, we are left unable to do so given the tools of differential geometry, the tools of GR. Because it appears that changing the connectivity of space is essential for particle physics, we are left to conclude that GR is insufficient as a basis for any fundamental physics, as it couldn’t account for the fluctuating topology that would occur due to the quantum principle (I understand as, you might imagine quantum GR to imply you have spacetime described to be in a superposition of different topologies), “a collapse and uncollapse of spacetime” everywhere and always thanks to this quantum h leading to a fluctuating topology. So whatever the fundamental theory is, it will be able to describe fluctuating topologies and therefore come equipped with a way to describe collapse, as WELL as “uncollapse” which I suppose you might say is what the big bang was, perhaps even a measurement. It inspires an idea of gravitational collapse being something of an act of “fact destruction” then I suppose, returning things to superposition, and so I believe this lends itself to the “law without law” idea or the “reprocessing of the universe” idea, that the universe only has the laws it has arbitrarily, and the only actual law is that there are no laws really because the laws can change, I guess due to this “collapse and uncollapse of spacetime” sort of idea leading to sort of “fact creation and destruction”.

Always more to read from Wheeler so who knows where I’ll be next time I come back here! After I wrote this, I read a bit more, and I’m not sure it’s even really as tidy as I say here! Very interested to hear the thoughts of others!

[JoshFlorii]

If it's not too early to bring poetry and love into a discussion of physics, I would offer this poem on soulmates. It addresses the strange similarities of "physical" forces to conscious perceptions.

what is weight
but the force of longing to be together
why else do i ache in my bones and my soul
with the heaviness of what wants to be
pulling me like gravity

that's how it was your soul found mine
in a longing that bends both space and time
i felt your love reaching out
like a hand holding mine
asking me to find you somewhere in the future

chance alone can't answer why
coming home is in your eyes
we aren't strangers, after all,
i've known you a lifetime

This is how I perceive the world - the longing of some conscious force pulling me into itself, bending space time in the medium. Maybe physics will reach poetry if we reveal consciousness to be fundamental, who knows.

[markv]

I find the collaboration between Fuchs, Gefter, and Bitbol almost unbearably exciting. Can you publish or point to any more videos from this conference?

[ingvarhallstrom]

It's a Sandbox Universe, a game played out in real time with the physical properties we call reality. And we are part of the game, or rather a happenstance consequence of this particular round. Being in game characters, we as the observers observe other parts of the game, in game. There's no difference between object and subject because both are objects within the game, we just happen to think there's a difference because we are that object. It's all script.