Science ebook recommendations

[jbjb]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Perhaps even "understanding what a wave function really is"? At a level "beyond" simply a mathematical construct? I'm not sure that I do, but equally, I'm not sure that it's necessary to do so.

Exactly - the key thing is that the models work. The fact that it's difficult or impossible to grasp it intuitively (non-mathematically) in a way that makes sense according to our every-day feel for how things work shouldn't be held against it. As Einstein said: "The more success the quantum theory has the sillier it looks."

QM has had so much success that it's completely irrelevant how silly it looks!

/JB

[WT Sharpe]

I would never say that reality should make sense. We didn't evolve under a biological need to understand how things work on the atomic level, or cosmic level for that matter. It's a wonder our species of ape has learned as much as we have about things beyond the need to eat, sleep, and fornicate, but even so there's far more out there we don't understand and probably will never understand then there are things we do understand.

[Ninjalawyer]

At this point, I feel like HarryT's point above, that quantum physics absolutely does not require a concious observer, already demolishes the entire basis of Lanza's book. However, at the risk of beating a dead horse, I will add a few bits from a review of Lanza's book by Steve Novella (a neurosurgeon who also does the Skeptics Guide to the Galaxy podcast).

On the requirement for a concious observer and the two-slit experiment:

The core of Lanza’s argument rests on a misunderstanding of quantum mechanics. This is the most disappointing aspect of a generally disappointing argument, because it has so long been demolished by physicists. Lanza argues that nothing exists without an observer, and actually cites the double-slit experiments for support.

He is making two key mistakes here. The first is the confusion of “observer” with “consciousness” (actually his entire premise rests upon this fallacy). He states that when the physicist is looking light will go through the two slits as particles, making two clumps of light on the other side. If the physicist is not looking, however, the light will pass through as a wave and make an interference pattern.

This is wrong. The results of the experiment depend not at all on the presence or absence of an observer or a consciousness. What matters is whether or not there is a detector in each slit, detecting the presence of the photon as it passes through the slit. In other words, if the photon has to interact with any particle of matter, then the probability wave must collapse and it behaves like a particle. If the photon is not detected, however, then it continues to travel as a wave until it hits the film or photon detector on the other side of the slit, at which point the wave function collapses.

On the anthropic principle:

Lanza then goes on to his next mystery, the anthropic principle. I will let him explain it:

"Why are the laws of physics exactly balanced for animal life to exist? There are over 200 physical parameters within the solar system and universe so exact that it strains credulity to propose that they are random — even if that is exactly what standard contemporary physics baldly suggests. These fundamental constants of the universe — constants that are not predicted by any theory — all seem to be carefully chosen, often with great precision, to allow for existence of life and consciousness (yes, consciousness raises its annoying head yet another time). We have absolutely no reasonable explanation for this."

This is essentially correct, the universe has all the physical laws necessary, and sometimes within a very narrow band of tolerance, to allow for stable complex forms such as life. Further, we have no idea why this is the case. Lanza is trying to make the gaps argument that our current understanding of the universe does not work, therefore we should listen to his biocentrism nonsense. As I stated in part I, he is confusing the fact that our current scientific understanding is incomplete with the idea that it is fundamentally flawed and needs to be chucked out. This is the same line of argument used by science-deniers, like creationists.

I will admit that the anthropic principle does present a perplexing puzzle. This does not mean that the universe had to be created, by either a god or by our own consciousness. It simply means we have more science to do.

Skipping to the conclusion:

Robert Lanza’s arguments are shockingly fallacious and are not only easy to refute, they have already been refuted many times. Yet Lanza, in his other life, appears to be a successful researcher. Speculating about this apparent paradox is interesting and may contain some useful lessons.

Lanza's basic argument comes down to this (according to Novella): Quantum mechanics is really weird and counterintuitive, therefore my particular brand of supernaturalism is true.

Part 1 and 2 of the review are available here and here, respectively.

[WT Sharpe]

Thanks for posting that, Ninjalawyer. You can always trust Dr. Novella to present a clear and devastating rebuttal of such arguments as those presented by Robert Lanza. The Skeptic's Guide is a great podcast.

[Section8]

Since this thread has taken on a discussion of quantum physics, maybe a book recommendation is in order. As a mere interested layman, with no degrees in physics, the one popular level book which I think really gave me a sense of the workings of quantum mechanics was The Cosmic Code by Heinz Pagels.

Amazon
Barnes & Noble

[jandrew]

Originally Posted by Section8

Since this thread has taken on a discussion of quantum physics, maybe a book recommendation is in order. As a mere interested layman, with no degrees in physics, the one popular level book which I think really gave me a sense of the workings of quantum mechanics was The Cosmic Code by Heinz Pagels.

Amazon
Barnes & Noble

I will second that book recommendation

[FlorenceArt]

Originally Posted by Section8

Since this thread has taken on a discussion of quantum physics, maybe a book recommendation is in order. As a mere interested layman, with no degrees in physics, the one popular level book which I think really gave me a sense of the workings of quantum mechanics was The Cosmic Code by Heinz Pagels.

Amazon
Barnes & Noble

Thank you for the recommendation. I added that book to my LybraryThing wishlist. And while searching for it, guess what I found just below it in the search results? "The Da Da De Da Da Code" by Robert Rankin.

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by FlorenceArt

Thank you for the recommendation. I added that book to my LybraryThing wishlist. And while searching for it, guess what I found just below it in the search results? "The Da Da De Da Da Code" by Robert Rankin.

That looks hilarious. I just downloaded a sample. The title sucked me in, but the blurb didn't hurt:

The world's Master of Far-Fetched Fiction takes us into the heart of the Da Da De Da Da Code, wherein lies the music of the angels—and the music of the devil. Aliens, flying saucers from hell, the Multiverse, the Illuminati—every wacky, way-out conspiracy theory ever heard are all here, wrapped into a plot that will leave Dan Brown fans breathless, Michael Shea readers stupefied, and Raymond Khoury lovers incredulous.

The only thing that doesn't belong on that list, in my opinion, is the multiverse. Woo-woo artists are always concocting all sorts of B.S. concerning other dimensions, but the idea that we might live in a Multiverse and the idea that reality may be a multidimensional construct are ones that have only gained strength in scientific circles in recent years.

All that aside, I remember what I heard a caller to Coast to Coast with George Noory say on his show one night. The poor fellow called in after finding a cat in the house. He knew he didn't let it in, and his wife said she didn't let any cat in. "There's only one explanation," he told Noory. "The cat obviously entered the house from another dimension." Well, yeah. That would have been my first thought, too.

[FlorenceArt]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

That looks hilarious. I just downloaded a sample. The title sucked me in, but the blurb didn't hurt:

I think I'll have to check out that book too. I read one book by Rankin which I found very funny, The Hollow Chocolate Bunnies of the Apocalypse.

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

All that aside, I remember what I heard a caller to Coast to Coast with George Noory say on his show one night. The poor fellow called in after finding a cat in the house. He knew he didn't let it in, and his wife said she didn't let any cat in. "There's only one explanation," he told Noory. "The cat obviously entered the house from another dimension." Well, yeah. That would have been my first thought, too.

Well, as Sherlock Holmes used to say, when you've ruled out the things you don't want to believe, only the outrageous remains, and that must be the truth. Or something to that effect.

[Angst]

Originally Posted by Rizla

Lanza dedicates a chapter to the experiment and addresses your point and gives a physical example that rebuts your statement. I read this part several times because I needed to be sure. If I get a chance later, I will give you details of his example, but maybe you should just read the book yourself. He spends a chapter referencing the double-split experiment and it's very early in the book.

I've run into this before: Google "eigenstate" and "collapsing the wave function" for more information. I remember looking it up after reading a fictional story by Greg Egan.

BTW: if you like hard science fiction, check out Greg Egan.

[FlorenceArt]

The University of Chicago Press free ebook of the month is An Orchard Invisible and is about... seeds! A DRM's PDF unfortunately. No idea how good it is, but I downloaded it. And probably won't read it, just like all the others

[Rizla]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Rizla, as a (former) professional physicist myself, I have to say that this guy sounds like a kook. Quantum mechanics works according to the laws of probability; consciousness ain't a part of "the rules". I really have no wish to read crackpot books about things that I already understand.

That's up to you if you don't wish to entertain new ideas.

Robert Paul Lanza is an American medical doctor, scientist, Chief Scientific Officer of Advanced Cell Technology (ACT)[1] and Adjunct Professor at the Institute for Regenerative Medicine, Wake Forest University School of Medicine.

In addition, the author has been in the fore-front of stem-cell research. He's hardly a "kook" as you so colorfully described him.

Now, I said I would try to read and describe the chapter pertinent to the double-slit experiments which seem to be the crux of this discussion and the book. The question is "Does the act of knowing (consciousness) collapse the wave function, or is it a side-effect of the measuring apparatus?" The author describes three experiments that he says proves that it is the act of knowing that causes the collapse. Unfortunately I don't think I can do his explanations justice.

However, as I understand it, I think the following link demonstrates a similar point as the author's:

After a Short Delay, Quantum Mechanics Becomes Even Weirder

The results, reported this week in Science, prove that the photon does not decide whether to behave like a particle or a wave when it hits the first beam splitter, Roch says. Rather, the experimenter decides only later, when he decides whether to put in the second beam splitter. In a sense, at that moment, he chooses his reality.

Also, this link references it: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/...their-observer

Anyway, I recommend Biocentrism to readers with open and inquiring minds. It's not perfect, but it will make you think. Don't be put off by the book's detractors who dismiss it as "crackpot." I suspect that their understanding of quantum mechanics is not as complete as they like to think.

[jbjb]

Originally Posted by Rizla

Now, I said I would try to read and describe the chapter pertinent to the double-slit experiments which seem to be the crux of this discussion and the book. The question is "Does the act of knowing (consciousness) collapse the wave function, or is it a side-effect of the measuring apparatus?" The author describes three experiments that he says proves that it is the act of knowing that causes the collapse. Unfortunately I don't think I can do his explanations justice.

Considering the double-slit experiment, the interference pattern disappears when the apparatus to determine which slit the photon (or electron, or whatever is the subject of the particular experiment) went through is added. It does not require anyone to actually observe the output from that apparatus.

If consciousness was required to collapse the wave function, the interference pattern would appear and disappear as the experimenter chose to look at or not look at the detector output. This isn't the effect we see.

However, as I understand it, I think the following link demonstrates a similar point as the author's:

After a Short Delay, Quantum Mechanics Becomes Even Weirder

Again - the effect in this experiment is dependent on the presence or otherwise of the second beam-splitter. There's nothing to suggest a requirement for any consciousness.

/JB

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Rizla

In addition, the author has been in the fore-front of stem-cell research. He's hardly a "kook" as you so colorfully described him.

The fact that he's knowledgeable about biochemistry does not magically make him an expert in quantum mechanics. With the greatest respect to the gentleman (and to you) I'm pretty sure that I know an awful lot more about QM than he does.

[Greg Anos]

Just remember this...

The model is always expendable, and should be eventually be expended.

Observable facts aren't.