Single Photon Resonator

There are many questions about the nature of the universe that do not have precise answers, but people still ask and answer them anyway. Even very smart people ask about the location of a photon in beamsplitter device, but a single quantum photon exists in a superposition of locations with a superposition of frequencies inside any resonator. A single quantum photon is necessarily defined by both its locations and its frequency spectrum, which includes its phase or polarization. The more precisely you measure the photon location, the less precisely you can know the photon spectrum and vice versa.

A single classical photon exists as a pulse of light with both a location and a spectral superposition of frequencies and phases called a spectrum. A single quantum photon location in a beamsplitter device can be in a superposition of locations and any measurement will affect the single photon spectrum since the measurement becomes part of the device. Any simultaneous knowledge of both photon location and spectrum is necessarily limited by the uncertainty principle and the fact that it is a single photon.

Even very smart people can ask the absurd question about a quantum photon location in a beamsplitter resonator and location has no meaning since single photon has no classical meaning. A photon is a superposition of all frequencies and phases and all locations in the entire universe that happen to make up what we call a pulse of light that shows up on one path with one spectrum. This is how the universe works and yet, these same very smart people seem forever confused by the discrete nature of quantum matter and action.

Why is the universe full of things that happen? Why do things happen at all? Why do things happen to one person and not to someone else? These are questions that people ask and answer all the time, but there are no single precise answers to such questions. The things that happen to us are simply how the universe is and there is no further explanation needed, just belief in the way the universe is.

However, all things that happen are outcomes that have matter action precursors and so we can find out a lot about the matter and action that causes something to happen, but we cannot know everything. Even though there are answers to all questions about the matter and action precursors that cause something to happen within the universe, there are limits to the precision of any answer. Classically, however, there is no limit to the precision of knowledge besides the complexity of chaos. However, in quantum space and time, precise knowledge of both location and momentum is not possible. In fact, a more precise measurement of location results in more uncertainty in the spectrum of a photon. Thus, there is a discrete quantum limit to simultaneous knowledge of both the matter and action that causes something to happen.

Both double slit and beamsplitter resonators as well as any laser resonators are all examples of photon resonators and there are many ways to fabricate a single photon resonator at light wavelengths. Such a light resonator includes a source, confinement of some sort with mirrors and beamsplitters, lenses and apertures, and a detector. Depending on dephasing time and frequency of the source and detector, there are any number of semiclassical approximations or simplifications for the quantum phase superposition and entanglement that are a part of even a single photon resonator. However, since quantum superposition and entanglement of a single photon with itself has no completely classical meaning, and the many semiclassical questions will necessarily result in absurd semiclassical answers.

For example, a 1996 sciAm article reported a photon resonator that detects objects with a photon that never hits those objects. The underlying assumption is that it is only by photon absorption or emission that we detect objects, but of course this is not true. A shadow is a perfect example of detecting an object with the photons that do not hit the object instead of those that do. Since there are two or any number of paths in superposition within this single photon resonator, this resonator recorded an object shadow by blocking one path and thereby changing the photon output along the other path. Therefore, the photon that passed through the resonator recorded a change without ever hitting the object. The authors then implied that the photon was identical before and after, but that was really not true either. The photon spectrum did change and in particular, the phase and polarization of the photon changed and that recorded change showed the blockage of one path.

In other words, a single photon carries both frequency and phase information and so the photon did change even though it did not hit the inserted object. This single photon resonator is analogous to the hydrogen atom, since hydrogen is also a single photon resonator where photon exchange between the electron and proton binds the hydrogen orbits. Thus, a hydrogen atom resonator is an electron source, a proton detector, and photon confinement due to exchange. Note that a hydrogen atom is completely symmetric (actually, not quite because of spin polarization) and therefore also equivalent to a proton source and electron detector. Creation formed each hydrogen atom in the universe by emitting a photon of light complementary in frequency and phase to the photon exchange that binds hydrogen. In fact, this complementary photon pair is the biphoton that we call gravity force.

There are many semiclassical approximations for single photon resonators including the hydrogen atom and these approximations often result in semiclassical confusion. This confusion is due to the underlying quantum phase correlation, interference, and entanglement that have no classical meanings. A single photon, electron, or proton can actually interfere or entangle with itself while in relativistic gravity, there is no such self-energy of quantum phase coherence. A very common semiclassical approximation is to completely neglect of the role of quantum phase and in particular, to completely neglect the roles of source and detector phase entanglement.

Thus, just as there is no way to really explain the bonding of a hydrogen atom without quantum phase or to locate the photon being exchanged, there is likewise really no way to precisely locate a single photon in a quantum resonator, either. Hydrogen is made up of two opposite semiclassical charged particles, but what bonds the electron and proton of hydrogen is photon exchange, which makes no classical sense at all. The semiclassical observer can then imagine the photon as a free particle independent of its source and detector traveling independently in space and time. While this is often a very useful semiclassical approximation, the neglect of source and detector quantum phase entanglement can lead the observer to many absurd semiclassical conclusions.

One absurd conclusion is that a semiclassical electron falling into a proton eventually exceeds the speed of light. Another absurd conclusion is that since a semiclassical electron moves through space and time in its orbit around a proton, there is instantaneous communication across the diameter of the orbit. In fact, these same absurd semiclassical conclusions result from any single photon resonator given semiclassical approximations.

A second very common semiclassical approximation that a single photon behaves in a similar manner to a large collection of photons. However, while a large number of uncorrelated photons give a classical statistical average classical behavior, a single photon will necessarily show only a quantum outcome just as a large number of highly correlated photons become a laser. Therefore, a single photon does not have a single classical determinate outcome because even a single photon represents a quantum superposition of many possible outcomes and not just a single classical outcome like a classical cannonball.

Unlike a classical cannonball, which only has a semiclassical mass, a photon and indeed all quantum matter, even cannonballs, have both masses and a spectrum of frequencies and phases and so no two photons or particles are ever exactly alike. Even though two photons may come from the same source and end up at the same detector, they never have exactly the same spectrum. Therefore, ignoring quantum phase entanglement for any single photon resonator like a double slit or a beam splitter can lead to absurd semiclassical determinate answers instead of uncertain quantum answers.

Including quantum phase entanglement and decay in a single photon resonator resolves all of these semiclassical paradoxes with probabilistic quantum answers. Quantum nonlocality and action at a distance are both the direct outcomes of semiclassical and determinate assumptions that completely ignore quantum phase entanglement and decay. Classically, there is no limit to the precision of the simultaneous knowledge of the mass and action of a particle or body like a cannonball. However, there is a discrete quantum limit to the precision of the simultaneous knowledge of matter and action, the uncertainty principle, because quantum matter and action have quantum phase and entanglement.

A classical cannonball has a classical mass measurable to an arbitrary classical and relativistic precision as long as the cannonball is at rest. However, the electrons, protons, and neutrons of the quantum cannonball are never at rest since they are all in perpetual motion, even at absolute zero temperature. Therefore, the cannonball mass actually depends on its temperature as well as on the atmosphere it is in contact with and so on. Thus, there are a large number of semiclassical approximations that we make when we measure a classical cannonball rest mass. When we measure the quantum mass of a cannonball, its action is always a part of that quantum measurement and the relativistic rest mass is then just a semiclassical approximation that has no quantum meaning. And there is a semiclassical assumption that the universe does not change during the course of the measurement, but the universe does in fact change all the time and those changes do actually affect the measurement, if only very slightly.

Quantum phase entanglement and decay can lead to very complex analyses called two-dimensional photon spectroscopy. The more complex the photon resonator, the more complex the spectral analysis and even very smart people can end up with absurd semiclassical answers given semiclassical approximations. There are really two outcomes for source and detector phases and pure decay to heat is just one outcome while pure dephasing is a second outcome that results in no heat. Semiclassical approximations usually assume pure decay and completely neglect the pure dephasing of quantum phase, but many of the absurd semiclassical conclusions of the double slit and beamsplitter resonators result from the neglect of pure dephasing and entanglement.

Classically, atom excitation energy decays only to heat and results in a classical emission spectrum after quantum phase decay. However, it is possible for quantum phase to diffuse to other matter and couple source and detector even though the excitation energy does not decay to heat. Rather, quantum phase entanglement persists and the emission spectrum evolves and can result in photon echoes and other pure phase entanglements that have no classical meaning at all.

Thus there is no Wittgenstein sense to the many absurd questions about semiclassical single photon resonators. Single photons as well as large numbers of highly phase correlated photons in resonators have only quantum and not really classical answers. Thus, the determinism of gravity relativity is a very misleading semiclassical approximation for the biphoton phase correlation of quantum gravity. It is the biphoton phase entanglement and correlation of the emitted and exchanged photons of hydrogen and all matter in the universe that is gravity force. In other words, gravity force is due to a persistent biphoton quantum phase correlation and so gravity relativity is a very good approximation that neglects the fundamental role of phase for the biphoton of quantum gravity.

The penultimate photon resonator is a black hole where only photon phase exchange binds matter into a pure phase gravity photon resonator while the ultimate photon resonator is the universe itself. A black hole outcome represents a pure quantum phase matter action that really has no meaning in classical space and time. A black hole quantum phase or spin outcome preserves all of its precursor matter action information as both matter and pure phase and there is no meaning for black hole space and time. Our notions of space and time as well as black holes then all emerge from things that happen and really space and time and black holes do not therefore have meaning without things that happen. Space, time, and black holes all emerge from the causal set of the precursors and outcomes of discrete matter action.

Measuring Free Will

In a recent FQXi conference, Ian Durham proposed a measure of free will as the distance, zeta, in a Mahalanobis phase space of possible outcomes from a precursor to the outcome of a free choice. His argument was then that a free choice is somehow inevitable and therefore would be a shortest zeta path in the multidimensional decision space of all possible outcomes. However, if a choice is truly inevitable based on its zeta distance, then that choice would be determinate and not free after all.

One thing is very clear...it is even more difficult to define free will than it will ever be to measure free will and so it is important to first define free will in order to ever hope to measure free will. If it is not clear exactly how we make free choices versus determinate choices in the first place, measuring free choice would then be undefined as well.

However, if there were a determinate measure of free will precursors to a choice like a scalar zeta, it is clear that that would not then be free choice since a predictable choice cannot be a free choice. There are only two ways out of the determinate conundrum of individual freedom versus social responsibility; the noise of classical chaos and noise of quantum phase. In particular, a free choice is one that we make based on gut feeling and so there may be any number of constraints on that free choice. Feelings derive from emotions and how exactly we feel about a choice can be impossible to truly know.

There are many things that we cannot ever truly know and neither the noise of classical chaos nor the noise of quantum phase have completely knowable precursors even though those precursors do exist for each in the causal universe. Unknowable precursors represent the mystery of free choice and being and feeling and are things that we must simply accept. The universe is after all just the way that it is first of all. The precursors of free choice must be unknowable since free choice represents the balance between individual freedom and social responsibility and we achieve that balance with our feelings and not by reasoning. The noise of classical chaos, Shannon noise, is what we call random action but the noise of classical chaos is actually not really random at all. In fact, classical chaos is in principle infinitely resolvable and therefore knowable with infinitely resolvable space and time. Therefore classical random noise is actually just a recognition of a practical limit of the knowable precursors precursors of random noise. However, the noise of a quantum superposition outcome has a well-defined discrete limit and yet will still not have completely knowable precursors even though quantum choices can be very likely.

While classical choices all have knowable precursors, quantum choices do not since they are superpositions of precursors and outcomes and do not have infinitely resolvable precursors. The decay of quantum phase results in a real outcome and so even a real outcome does not have any precisely knowable precursors, just more likely precursors. Quantum phase decay is a consequence of the very slow intrinsic change in the universe. Quantum outcomes do have more likely precursors and our individual freedom and social responsibility mean that we cannot know the precursors of free choice with infinitely resolvable precision even though those precursors do exist in a causal universe.

In other words, while we believe might that we are free and socially responsible, we cannot ever be completely certain about individual freedom or about social responsibility, we just have feelings about them. This means that there is a discrete quantum limit to the knowledge that we may have about our individual freedom and so there are fundamental mysteries about the universe that we must simply accept as the way that the universe is.

Thus, individual freedom exists in a balance with social responsibility as the fundamental duality of the mystery of free choice. Random choices are unpredictable just like free choices are unpredictable and so Durham argues along with many others that random choices are not free choices. Likewise, choices by instinct, Durham further argues, are also not free choices and so the classical reasoning of chaos imposes its infinitesimals and infinities upon our discrete causal quantum universe. Random action is just a convenient shortcut for the practical limit for knowledge of precursors and it is always ironic that in a causal universe things can ever happen for unknowable causes.

What classical physics really means by random is not that random things are fundamentally unknowable, but rather that random things are just practically unknowable. Classically, there is no limit to resolving uncertainty except just a practical limit since all action has infinitely divisible momentum along with infinitely divisible displacement. Thus random simply represents the practical limit to knowing the classical precursors of classical outcomes.

In fact, there is a classical practical limit to knowing Shannon noise, but that does not then mean that noise is truly random. In fact, computer algorithms simulate random noise to arbitrary precision quite well with determinate algorithms. Therefore, the universe really is not fundamentally random as Durham claims, but more like effectively random just like the determinate computer algorithms of noise are not fundamentally random. Classical Shannon noise is then what we call random but in a classical causal universe, each bit of Shannon noise does actually have knowable precursors in an infinity of divisibility.

Quantum phase noise is really very similar to classical Shannon noise, but quantum phase noise includes quantum phase and the phase decay of the universe. Quantum phase decay is the fundamental driver in the discrete causal universe and quantum phase decay is therefore not really random in the classical sense. Quantum phase noise is random in the quantum sense of superposition and correlation and the likelihood of Schumacher's qubits and von Neumann's density matrices. Unlike the unlimited divisibility and knowledge of Shannon's bits, qubits represent the discrete limit of knowledge in the quantum universe.

Free choice is of course an essential part of our nature and we have a free choice between the selfishness of individual freedom and the compassion of social responsibility. The most direct free choice is how we freely choose to act like other people and then how they freely choose to act like we act. When we agree with other people about a conscious state, our subjective feeling becomes an shared objective feeling, but even very smart people like Durham can still disagree about the natures of free choice and free will as well as individual freedom versus social responsibility.

Even more objective measures of free choice are in the resonances of neural action potentials as EEG spectra. Although EEG resonances are objective measures of the conscious state, EEG’s do not necessarily measure the quality of any conscious state...at least not with present technology. In fact, every neural action potential network, even those of a mouse or even a house fly or indeed a pond hydra, show the resonances of some kind of limited neural free choice. However, fundamental particles do not show neural resonances and therefore are not conscious. Measuring both waking and sleeping state EEG's of neural networks provides objective measures of awake conscious spectra versus the unconscious spectra of sleep as resonance frequencies and resonance widths.

The EEG spectrum delta mode is a fundamental resonance of human neural action potentials at 1.5 Hz with a full width of 1.5 Hz. The fundamental modes of free choice are the overtone alpha modes at 11 Hz = 7x delta and beta modes at 21 Hz = 14x delta and represent the human conscious state, all with similar widths. These multiples are not accidents of nature but rather are a consequence of the neural structures of the hexagonal close-packing of the eye's retina and the sound octaves of the ear's cochlea. Thus humans have many of the same neural resonances as other sentient neural action potentials.

While the peaks and overtones of each neural spectrum represents the complexity of a moment of thought, the peak widths represent the phase decay from a precursor thought to an outcome thought. Thus, an objective measure of free choice is in the state-to-state neural transition of a precursor to an outcome spectrum as thoughts. It is then the phase decay of each moment of thought from one EEG spectrum to another that is the objective measure of free choice and not really an inevitability of some sort of determinism. Human choice is due to the primitive brain's amygdala, one of many organs of the primitive brain of subconscious thought versus the cerebral brain of conscious thought, and so the phase decay of choice is somehow due to the amygdala.

A classical determinate argument supposes that a precursor spectrum completely determines an outcome spectrum, but that is clearly not the case. Rather, there are a large but finite number of possible outcome spectra that exist in superposition with a precursor spectrum. Therefore free choice is not Durham's determinate scalar zeta but rather a complex zeta that includes phase and a phase decay along with uncertainty for our quantum choices. Since it is not possible to know our own quantum phase and all possible outcomes, it is also not possible to precisely know the precursors for choices that we make even though some outcomes are more likely than others. All of the possible outcomes affect free choice just as do all of the precursors for a moment of thought.

Our morality then arises from a the decay of a superposition of the spectra of choice between the many but finite possible spectra of individual freedom and social responsibility. These spectra are all Jungian archetypes, some intrinsic and some that we learn from persuasion and imitation of others as we grow up and mature. While we can change how we feel about a choice by learning new archetypes, it is simply not possible to always know precisely why we feel the way that we do feel and that is the uncertain nature of free choice.

Quantum Causal Asymmetry

Causal Asymmetry in a Quantum World

PHYSICAL REVIEW X 8, 031013 (2018)

Jayne Thompson, Andrew J. P. Garner, John R. Mahoney, James P. Crutchfield, Vlatko Vedral, and Mile Gu

Start excerpt...
...Consider a cannonball in free fall. To model its future trajectory classically, we need only its current position and velocity. This remains true even when we view the process in reverse time. This exemplifies causal symmetry. There is no difference in the amount of information we must track for prediction versus retrodiction.

However, this is not as obvious for more complex processes. Take a glass shattering upon impact with the floor. In one temporal direction, the future distribution of shards depends only on the glass’s current position, velocity, and orientation. In the opposite direction, we may need to track relevant information regarding each glass shard to infer the glass’s prior trajectory.

Does this require more or less information? This potential divergence is quantified in the theory of computational mechanics [6]...

[6] J. P. Crutchfield, Between Order, and Chaos , Nat. Phys. 8, 17 (2012).
End excerpt...

This paper shows a quantum causal asymmetry that does not exist classically and uses a cannonball as an example of classical time reversal symmetry of prediction and retrodiction. However, including the atmospheric friction around the cannonball trajectory results in the same classical versus quantum complexity dilemma as this actual cannonball trajectories as a painting in1628 by Diego Ufano shows.

Even the simplest actual classical cannonball trajectory involves much more classical than quantum information since the trajectory is continuous and infinitely divisible but chaotic due to atmospheric friction. However, the quantum trajectory involves discrete jumps or hops and quantum therefore ultimately limits the information needed for retrodiction. However, the price to pay for that quantum limit is in a limited uncertainty while classically, there is no limit to the uncertainty and therefore the information is unbounded.

The cannonball trajectory makes up a causal set of precursors and outcomes and are all predicated on atmospheric eddies at a higher resolution. Eventually, a discrete quantum limits the information for quantum retrodiction and so provides a kind of quantum arrow of time. Although not discussed in this paper, it is quantum phase decay that brings quantum and classical retrodiction together as one.

Our Subconscious Free Will

It is now well established that we make decisions based on irrational subconscious feeling and not based on conscious rational reasoning. Perhaps the most compelling evidence is that of the delay between when we are conscious of a choice and when that choice shows up in the brain MRI. However, it is not then true that we do not have free will or free choice despite the fact that our subconscious and not conscious mind determines choice. Many people argue that since subconscious decisions are based on irrational feeling and not based on rational reasoning that we then do not have free choice and our choices are all somehow persuaded by a determinate universe.

However, how we feel about things and therefore how we make choices derives from a spectrum of emotions that in turn arise from a spectrum of subconscious archetypes of free choice. Free choice involves a recursion of thought, memories, and feeling and archetypes are what we believe in and expect and are what affect our emotions and therefore feelings and memories. Some of our subconscious archetypes are innate but they are by no means completely fixed and constant and constantly evolve in life. As other people and things that happen persuade us to believe differently, so our beliefs evolve as a result of the persuasion of others and how they act. Instead of directly perceiving reality, our archetypes provide a template of what we call perception and we respond to things that happen with emotions and feeling. Irrational feeling then determines how we make free choices and why we have free will.

The technical reason that we have free will is that we actually cannot always know the reasons why we make the choices that we make even though those reasons do exist. What we do is first make a choice based on our subconscious feeling and then we rationalize that choice with conscious reasoning that may or may not have had anything to do with our choice. In very technical terms, we each live in our own subjective quantum universe of matter, action, and phase and while matter action is how things change, quantum phase is also a part of how things change and we also have quantum phase that affects how we feel. In fact, the very nature of neural action potentials has to do with quantum phase so our quantum phase affects how we see matter action and then also how we perceive reality.

A large number of classical events like flips of a coin toss or neural action potentials, necessarily also entangle quantum phase noise. This is because even though a macroscopic event entangles only very small amounts of quantum phase noise, large numbers of such events by design do. While a classical event is never really random, a quantum event is truly random in the sense that quantum is not predictable with arbitrary precision.

Each moment of thought is an EEG power spectrum of neural resonances of a large number of neural actions and each free choice represents an outcome EEG spectrum. Every precursor spectrum of thought is a superposition with a large but finite number of outcome spectra and it is quantum phase decay that transitions from the precursor to outcome spectrum in what we call a free choice. Although each free choice is an outcome spectrum due to the collapse of precursor spectra superposition, it is not possible to predict the precise outcome of free choice from just the precursor spectra superposition even though it is possible to often predict the most likely choice. Therefore, there are no precisely certain outcomes given a known precursor and this is why we have free choice and free will.

Therefore it is also not possible for anyone to know all of the precursors for their free choices even though those precursors do exist in a causal discrete set universe. Our free choices are free precisely because it is not possible for anyone to actually know all of the precursors for our free choices. The very definition of free choice is that these choices are ours and ours alone and we are free to choose to bond or conflict...

The outcome of a precursor superposition is not precisely certain and neural superpositions exist for only very short times. Once we make a free choice, the outcome follows even though the precise precursor remains uncertain.

One of the most important free choices we make is the balance between the conflict of individual free choice and the bonding of compassionate social responsibility of coerced choice. We actually need free choice to survive even though it leads to conflict and we need as well as some compassion to bond with others, cooperate, mate, and have a family. Our subconscious archetypes are how we perceive the world as well as how we feel about what we perceive. Although some archetypes are innate, we learn most archetypes from the many narratives that we see, hear, and feel as well as in how we see others act, since we often then act like we see others act. This is all part of the mystery of free choice.

Inequalities in Education, Life Expectancy, and Income

We live in an age where our entire civilization benefits from the technological advances of the enlightenment. All of the measures of progress show a steady advance and in particular, the three key competencies of education, life expectancy, and income all show steady progress in individual free choice. However, there are still very large variations within each of these competencies and our social responsibility struggles with the wealth distribution even though there is average or mean progress. In effect, the means of progress reflect the individual free choice of its individuals while the distribution of progress about those means reflects each individual’s social responsibility to reduce disparities in each competency.

The likelihoods of IQ, long life, and income all show distributions that peak in likelihood at about the same incomes. While long life tends to follow IQ, the likelihood for income crosses around the median income. Long life and IQ then do not increase at the same rate as increasing income. When you are $25,000 income, you gain 15% longer life for an $10,000 income increase, but at $150,000 income, you only gain 1.9% longer life for the same $10,000 income increase.

The basic dilemma of inequality is not really in progress, which is rapidly occurring in any event, but rather in how much social responsibility people have in reducing the unequal distribution of progress. Civilization has long struggled with the dilemma of inequality given the fundamental natural inequality as a result of variation of human ability across each competency. That is, individuals have their own free choices for education, health, and income, but individuals also have a socially responsible free choice for reducing the inequalities of opportunity for education, long life, and income. All outcomes are unequal because human abilities are unequal, but those inequalities can be exacerbated from limited access to education, health care, and to free and fair markets for creating new wealth, i.e., equality of opportunity. Inequality that is largely a result of the large natural variations in individual quality of life, ability to learn, and of course, ability to create wealth is simply human.

There are a total of 14 competencies that completely define people’s free choices: education, health care, housing, transportation, food, energy, environment, tools, communication, security, leisure, risk, administration, and money. While education and health care both relate directly to progress, the progress for income and wealth distribute across all 14 competencies as wealth that people earn as income or spend as consumption. Money represents wealth and facilitates commerce among competencies and people make money by specializing in the products of a particular competency and then tend to distribute that wealth to a limited set of competency products. People produce in some competencies and consume some of the 14 competency products and this commerce is therefore the most important reason for innovation and progress across all competencies.

These 14 competencies make up the macro economy and each individual creates wealth in one competency and then distributes that wealth as consumption among the other 13 in order to survive. While the 14 competencies are a very rational description of the way civilization is, people basically do not really make rational decisions, people make free choices based on their feelings. Feeling is the root of free choice and the result of a set of five emotion complements and subconscious archetypes. It is by feeling that we make our decisions and not by rational thought and so the archetypes that we learn early in life are what guides free choice in our lives.

Others persuade us into free choice as we grow up by acting like we act and then persuading us to act like we see others act as well. By this persuasion, we acquire the grand narratives and archetypes of civilization as free choice. Free choice and feeling either bonds us into cooperation with others or separates us from others with conflict. We adopt a set of unconscious archetypes that are then how we feel about others and feeling is how we make free choices.

Even though outcomes all have causal precursors, it is not possible to know all precursors even though they do exist. This is fundamentally because both the precursor and we have quantum phase and that phase limits what we can know about quantum superposition. This means that fundamentally each free choice that we make is for one of many possible outcomes and we can only know the precursors within some uncertainty. The outcomes that we choose are not then determinate and instead, there are many possible outcomes that are subject to quantum uncertainty.

This does not mean that outcomes are random, but rather means that outcomes simply have some unknowable precursors even though they can have fairly rational precursors. If you are hungry, it is certain that you will eventually eat or you will not survive very long. However, when, where, and what you will decide to eat are all free choices that really have unknowable precursors. If you are lonely, you will likely seek companionship, but with whom, when, and where are all free choices and not random at all.


Census.gov, Table A-2. Selected Measures of Household Income Dispersion: 1967 to 2017

life expectancy versus income in the United States
http://www.equality-of-opportunity.org/health/

IQ and Permanent Income: Sizing Up the “IQ Paradox”
https://humanvarieties.org/2016/01/31/iq-and-permanent-income-sizing-up-the-iq-paradox/

The Wonder and Glory of the Pulsed Universe

It is things that happen that make up the universe and most of all that means that it is the universe most of all that just happens. The very slow matter action of the universe pulse is a very slow action that happens very slowly. Although the very fast atom matter actions are what make up the universe, all very fast atom matter actions are still subject to very slow universe matter action as well. In effect, there are two dimensions of time and three dimensions of space that all emerge from matter action.

Time and space have meaning for everywhere in the universe of atoms except at certain boundaries called event horizons. The matter accretions known as black holes, exist beyond the time and space of the universe of atoms since there are no longer any atom matter actions for a black hole. Instead, each black hole exists as only a mass, a quantum phase, and a surface or event horizon and yet black holes are still subject to the overarching universe matter action. Thus the very slow change of the universe pulse still has meaning for a black hole very slow change. Black hole decay along with the universe decay then represents the destiny of all atom matter action as the universe matter-action pulse decays. The eventual decay of the universe into a single black hole outcome becomes the precursor to an expanding antiverse outcome.

The eventual universe precursor is then in a superposition with an antiverse outcome until a dephasing occurs and the antiverse expansion then begins from the black hole precursor. This antiverse expansion of antimatter the becomes the eventual precursor to another shrinking matter universe like the universe that we find ourselves inside of today.

We know that we are in a shrinking universe of growing force because of the many different measurements of matter decay along with force growth. The kilogram standard has decayed over 130 yrs, the earth day has decayed over 50 years, atomic clocks all dephase at characteristic rates per atom, and pulsars all show a limiting frequency decay.

We know that we are in a growing force universe because the Hubble galaxy red shifts occur despite the universe of shrinking matter. The further wonder is that all of science is completely convinced that the universe expands and does not shrink at all. Relativistic gravity is simply a manifestation of a shrinking universe of quantum matter.

The universe matter pulse complements the photon pulses that bind matter and result in quantum gravity as well. An exchange spin = 1 photon binds each electron and proton and has an emitted spin = 1 photon with complementary phase. These spin = 1 phase complements result in a spin = 2 biphoton or graviton whose exchange with other matter biphotons is quantum gravity. Since gravity biphoton exchange does not depend on quantum phase, gravity is always attractive and therefore unlike photon exchange, which depends on quantum phase.

ABC Time

This is a great review of the classical meanings of time given by many over the years. I am especially fond of McTaggart’s A, B, and C times, but have always been intrigued by his conclusion there was no coherent single answer. That always seemed odd...a philosopher without coherence?

Farr also mentions some physics, but he only just touches on relativity and quantum mechanics and he does not say anything about quantum phase at all. Farr states that the equations of relativity and quantum physics are fully reversible...but that is not true at all. Relativity represents all matter actions on irreversible determinate geodesics paths and those actions are not reversible in any sense and so there is never any causal confusion with relativity. In fact, the irreversible determinate paths of relativity are absolutely predictable to an unlimited classical precision. All precursors are prior to their outcomes and that is local cause and effect.

It is quantum action that shows a causal confusion of time in quantum reversibility. The quantum nature of matter action shows that quantum phase is very important but quantum phase does not seem to play any role in gravity relativity. Reconciling microscopic quantum phase with the macroscopic irreversible reality of gravity relativity provides a nice understanding of time as emergent, not axiomatic.

Time is not an infinitely divisible and continuous flow of gravity relativity, rather the notion of time emerges from a very large number of discrete and reversible quantum matter actions or changes. All quantum action is reversible because even though a precursor occurs for every outcome, the precursor and outcome exist together as a superposition for some very brief dephasing time. Therefore, one dimension of time emerges from a characteristic dephasing time that comes from the very slow and inexorable change in the universe. A very precise measure of dephasing is the time it takes for two atomic clocks to dephase from each other.

Once two quantum clocks dephase, the outcome then becomes part of our irreversible macroscopic gravity relativity and given a very large number of outcomes, the dephasing ensemble is effectively irreversible. However, the inescapable quantum result is even though all outcomes have precursors, not all outcomes have precisely knowable precursors. In the quantum world there are just more likely and never certain precursors and so there is a discrete quantum limit to the precision you can know about an outcome.

The second time dimension is in the very rapid ticks of atomic clocks, which all run in the same very slow direction of universe dephasing, the first time dimension. Despite the microscopic reversibility of each pulse of light in an atomic clock, the macroscopic nature of an atomic clock results in dephasing and therefore, from dephasing emerges an irreversible flow of events.

Note that time only has two dimensions because there are two kinds of things that happen; slow universe changes and fast atom changes. First of all, the universe changes very slowly as a single gravity event and second, atom changes are very fast and involve a very large number of quantum events. The two dimensions of time simply emerge from the two very different kinds of things that happen in the universe and therefore the flow of time does not exist otherwise....I still like McTaggart’s times though...

Interpreting Irrational Quantum

The universe changes by quantum matter action and so quantum phase, matter, and action are all just the way the universe is. Quantum phase, matter, and action and are therefore all very useful archetypes for predicting outcomes from precursors. There really is no need to interpret the nature of quantum phase just as there is no need to interpret the natures of quantum matter or action. While people do not often ask about the interpretation of the very intuitive and causal realities of matter and action, people do still ask about the interpretation of the somewhat less intuitive and irrational quantum phase. People ask, how can a single particle exist in two different places? Are there particles or are there waves? In particular, people ask how is the counter intuitive quantum phase surreality consistent with the more intuitive macroscopic reality of relativistic gravity matter action like cannonballs.

All matter vibrates or oscillates and so there are no particles that are completely at rest. Moreover, any two particles or bodies can be in phase or out of phase or anywhere in between. Two particles that are in phase can bond in a collision by emitting light or another particle and two particles that are out of phase will scatter and not bond. A further unusual quantum feature is that a particle affects itself and so a particle can be in or out of phase with itself as well as with other particles.

Of course, two people who like each other are also in phase and will bond while two people who do not like each other are out of phase and will conflict and therefore not bond. A single person can also like or not like themselves as well. Even though we don’t normally associate the intuitive feelings of bonding among people with quantum phase correlation, quantum phase bonding is a perfect analog for human bonding. Quantum phase is also a perfect analog for how people feel about themselves as well. Of course, all of reality is made up of quantum phase bonds as well as conflicts and there also does seem to be phase interference, entanglement, and superposition in relations among people.

Quantum phase bonds and conflicts are a common part of our macroscopic reality and the pure quantum phase of light pulses make up an irrational phase exchange bonds of matter. Quantum phase is also an important part of the universe matter pulse, but macroscopic gravity relativity on the cosmic scale does not include the bonding of quantum phase even though microscopic charge certainly does. Things happen when one discrete quantum state transitions to another discrete quantum state in a fully reversible process known as wavefunction collapse. Quantum reversibility creates an irrational causal confusion for time direction that irreversible macroscopic reality does not have. Macroscopic things always happen somehow irreversibly and seemingly without regard to the irrational quantum phase and in fact our notion of time emerges from the irreversible entropy that results from large numbers of matter actions.

The key to the irreversible nature of macroscopic reality is with the decoherence of any quantum phase entanglement. Phase decoherence collapses large numbers of reversible wavefunction superpositions into the effectively irreversible entropy of a large causal set of matter actions. The electron motion in a hydrogen atom is the result of a charge bond with negligible gravity. Nevertheless, two hydrogen atoms at 70 nm separation have their charge dipole-induced-dipole or dispersive attraction equal to their gravity attraction. At 70 nm separation, gravity and charge fluctuations are equal as a characteristic and continuous perturbation in both time and space.

Each hydrogen atom has a quantum phase correlated with the photon emission that formed that hydrogen atom. This means that the two (or more) photons of these two hydrogen atoms have persistent dispersive attractions that we call gravity. The phase correlation of this biphoton means that there will be slight differences in the gravities of atom particles due to each atom’s history. But the averaged gravity of large bodies of matter created together will be very similar.

The universe pulse gives a characteristic quantum gravity noise known as continuous spontaneous localization (CSL), which collapses wavefunctions and makes our macroscopic reality real by dephasing matter actions. Normally, gravity is too small to affect charge at a microscopic scale, but the very slow universe pulse fluctuation frequency of 0.255 ppb/yr at 70 nm is sufficient as the plot below shows.

This plot also shows that it will take another 2-3 orders of magnitude sensitivity with gravity wave detectors to finally confirm the mattertime decay of our universe pulse. However, mattertime decay does show up in a large number of other measurements, but those measurements are invariably complicated by classical noise. Note that it is the very slow quantum fluctuations in the universe pulse, 0.26 ppb/yr, that collapse wavefunctions at 70 nm, but the dephasing of quantum wavefunction collapse occurs everywhere in the universe.

Matter decay and force growth are everywhere and in everything that happens. Here is a plot of the mattertime decay versus frequency for a large number of periodic events. Pulsars are rotating neutron stars that show very characteristic pulsing as well as decay and pulsar decay follows the mattertime decay line. However, pulsars also decay by radiation of light and gravity and so this complicates the interpretation as a universal decay.

The Allan deviation of atomic clock synchronisation also follows the mattertime decay line as well as the earth spin decay and the moon-earth distance, as well as the approach of Andromeda galaxy. Of course, this could all be just a coincidence, but it does mean that the electron charge radius, re, does decay and therefore the electron spin period as well.

The next plot shows the decay of the kilogram standard, IPK, over 130 yrs relative to a number of secondary standards and the IPK decay is 0.51 ppb/yr or twice the mattertime decay. Thus far the IPK decay has no explanation and in mattertime, the frequent careful cleaning of the secondary standards actually adds mass to keep many of the secondary standards constant over time. The IPK cleaning only happened each of the three times it was measured.

The decay of earth’s day in the next plot includes a very much greater annual variation from 1963 to 2015. There are large annual fluctuations of several ms as well as a long term decay that is consistent with 0.26 ppb/yr. However, most of the variations are due to perturbations of the moon and planets along with tidal heating of earth’s oceans also occurs and this complicates the interpretation.

Thus the quantum dephasing decay of the universe pulse makes our macroscopic reality real and yet still consistent with our surreal quantum time confusion. Quantum phase does have macroscopic effects as light polarization and interference, but very large bodies have all dephased and therefore do not show quantum phase effects.

The universe pulse is after all the pilot wave that guides all light and matter action. Pilot wave or de Broglie-Bohm theory is a deterministic quantum mechanics that creates hidden variables as pilot waves to guide all matter particles, not wavefunctions. However, the universe pulse as a pilot wave and so does not introduce any hidden variables since that is just the way the universe is. Thus, the relativistic gravity Hamilton-Jacobi equation becomes the basic equation of motion as a quadratic and relativistic form of the quantum Schrödinger equation. The Klein-Gordon equation is also a quadratic and relativistic form of the Schrödinger equation and is the basis for quantum field theory and the standard model of particle physics.

Interviews of Carroll and Rovelli on FQXi.org

These FXQi interviews of Carroll and Rovelli are both quite interesting since they are two very smart people with related but very different narratives about the nature of physical reality. Measurement guide science and narratives without measurements are really what guide philosophy and such narratives have no role for science. Narratives without measurement guide philosophy and into perpetual discourse among many very smart philosophers about the nature of physical reality.

“Every philosopher disagrees with every other philosopher and so only one philosopher can ever actually be correct.” Paul Skokowski.

These narratives are really mostly philosophy wrapped in the technical jargon and methods of science and therefore these two narratives with and without measurements are a confused discourse. An outcome may be determinate or it may be uncertain, but it is not clear from these narratives which is determinate and which is certain. Carroll links cause and effect and entropy with his multiverses and avoids the conundrum of microscopic reversibility versus macroscopic entropy. Carroll does not suggest any measurements although his choice implies determinism. Classical causality means that both macroscopic and microscopic measured outcomes have precursors, while quantum causality means that you cannot precisely measure all precursors. Rovelli, in contrast, seems to believe in free choice and not in determinism and offers meaning for reality without multiverses.

In fact, observer quantum phase always affects a quantum measurement and it is not possible for an quantum observer to measure their own phase. For most macroscopic measurements, though, quantum phase plays no role in causality since the decay of quantum phase is so fast. However, when quantum phase decay is slow, the superposition of precursor and outcome results in causal confusion since the notion of symmetric time has no arrow.

There is a fundamental causal confusion in the symmetry of our quantum reality and yet there is no causal confusion in the changing universe of gravity relativity. Quantum phase obviously does play a role in quantum gravity but relativistic gravity seems inconsistent with quantum gravity. This is because superpositions of quantum gravity precursors and outcomes result in many possible paths and that seems inconsistent with the single paths of relativity’s determinate geodesics. Carroll suggests that multiverses explain the other possible paths of quantum gravity while Rovelli suggests that it is rather meaningful information that decides the single path from quantum gravity, not multiverses.

Neither Carroll nor Rovelli acknowledge the unknowable precursors that result from quantum phase correlation and superposition, but both accept the notions that the universe changes and that outcomes all have precursors. However, they do not discuss the two very different kinds of changes that make up things that happen: First there is the very slow change of the universe due to gravity and the universe pulse dephasing; Second, there are the very fast changes of atoms due to charge.

Mainstream science argues that atoms and forces at rest are constant for all time and so atoms and forces do not change with the slow expansion of the universe under gravity from the big bang. Despite gravity and charge being attractive, the expanding universe therefore only changes space, not matter or action. However, the equivalence of matter and energy in relativity means that mass does increase with motion, and matter-energy equivalence then means that time slows just as matter increases with increasing velocity.

The mattertime universe pulse decay supposes instead that the universe pulse of matter decays very slowly in concert with its very slow growth of the action of force. Not unlike a photon pulse of light. the combination of decaying matter and increasing force give the illusion that the universe slowly expands from a big bang. Universe pulse decay is then consistent with gravity relativity just as gravity force slowly grows. This complementary matter decay and gravity increase gives the illusion that gravity stays constant over time.

The universe pulse illusions of constant atoms, constant force, and expanding space are all very strong and dominate science. Very few in science acknowledge that it is even possible for the very slow decay of universe matter to complement a very slow growth of force, which then gives the arrow of time and is still consistent with mass increasing with motion just like relativity. This very slow mass decay and force growth is what I call mattertime and also means that time and space emerge from change and that entropy of atoms is different from the entropy of the universe pulse. Atom entropy derives from the very fast changes of atom states while universe entropy derives from the very slow changes of universe states, which include atom entropy.

Black holes are endpoints of time and space, but black holes are still subject to the slow changes of matter and action. In mattertime, the universe pulse destiny is a single black hole and that destiny births the next antiverse/universe pulse. The first half pulse is the antiverse expansion that grows with antimatter precursors then the universe second half pulse matter decay outcomes.

In mainstream science, matter condenses first by charge and then by gravity into stars, black holes, galaxies, galaxy clusters, and large-scale structures and those bodies all decay by charge and gravity radiation. All of this decay seems inconsistent with an ever-expanding universe, but all of this observed matter decay is completely consistent with the universe pulse of mattertime decay. In fact, mattertime decay results in a gravitization vector force that couples moving stars and is analogous to the magnetization vector force that couples moving charges. Gravitization is a large scale vector force that, along with gravity, bonds stars into galaxies, galaxies into clusters, and clusters into large-scale structures.

In any case, these two philosophers each believe they are correct and disagree with each other. The last artifact of standards is the kilogram standard and the IPK has decayed by 0.51 ppb/yr over the last 130 yrs, exactly twice the matter decay of 0.26 ppb/yr from the ratio of hydrogen gravity and charge forces times the hydrogen orbit frequency, Gm_H²/(q²c² 10^-7) (c/r_B). This is the plot that shows the IPK decay relative to the secondary standards, which average to a constant due to weight gain as a result of their frequent cleaning process.

Mattertime 6: Axioms of Mattertime

Mattertime 6 is the latest in the mattertime series and introduces the basic axioms of matter action...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kns4WS7Q9qE

Mattertime 5: Two Big Rabbit Holes to Avoid...

Understanding physical reality means avoiding two very deep rabbit holes of mainstream science.

mattertime5

• First rabbit hole is the notion of infinitely divisible time and space, Zeno’s paradox
    −time and space both emerge from discrete causal sets and so infinitely divisible time and space are illusions of our discrete reality.

• Second rabbit hole is the notion of relativity without any quantum phase, Schrödinger’s phase decay paradox
    −quantum phase decay plays no role in gravity relativity
    −quantum gravity emerges from discrete causal sets with quantum phase decay limiting entanglement and correlation

Zeno's paradox is quite well known and has many different versions that all amount to the impossibility of infinitely dividing space and time.

Schrodinger's phase decay paradox is known at the superposition of cat alive and dead at the same time and place according to quantum theory. Fundamentally, the decay of quantum phase completely resolves this paradox, which completely ignores the role of quantum phase decay in superposition states. Even though there is indeed a very short time where the cat's microscopic states are in a large number of quantum superpositions, quantum phase decay limits quantum superposition for all macroscopic objects.

There are scientists who spend their entire career in either or both of these rabbit holes and even make money from their book sales.

Mattertime 4, consciousness

Mattertime 4, consciousness...

https://youtu.be/JpNubdEDtP8

Mattertime 3, five emotion complements

Mattertime 3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHs_bDp7fH4

Mattertime 2...The Gifts of Father Time and Mother Earth

Although there are one hundred some odd elements as well as electrons, protons, and neutrons as well as charge and gravity forces, there is also a simpler and ancient way of breaking down reality.

The gifts of Father Time are the universe, galaxy, sun, life, and civilization while those of Mother Earth are air, water, soil, stone, and fire. While technical people need the higher resolution detail, most people do not and can function well with the simple elements of our Father and Mother.

Gifts of Father Time and Mother Earth

Matter Time 1...Things That Happen...

This is the first video in a series that will introduce matter time, which is a very different interpretation of reality from time and space. Instead of time and space existing as a blank slate for continuous and infinitely divisible matter action, discrete matter and action exist first of all. Time and space emerge from discrete matter and action and the universe exists because things happen and not because of time and space.

Matter Time 1

Maudlin's Problem With Quantum Theory

The Problem With Quantum Theory

Institute of art and ideas interviewed Tim Maudlin about his problem with quantum theory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC3ckLqsL5M

Very nice interview shows the philosophical approach of Maudlin as opposed to the technical approach of physical science. While Maudlin argues that philosophy is very confused about the nature of physical reality even after 100 years of the very successful technical predictions of quantum science, science simply accepts quantum because it works really well. Science accepts quantum because it works while philosophy asks what quantum means and gets confused by both the question and the answer. Philosophy is, after all, really a discipline that asks questions without objective and testable answers, then answers them all the while arguing endlessly with other philosophers about the answers and about the nature of physical reality.

Maudlin argues that the axioms of infinitely divisible and determinate time and space are fundamentally incompatible with the discrete uncertainty of quantum knowledge. While this is true, Maudlin does not consider it possible to have a universe without first of all time and space, but that is exactly the quantum matter action universe of discrete aether that we have.

Philosophy is very useful for asking important questions but philosophy will never answer questions that have no answers. Why are we here? Why are we here right now? Why is it us and not someone else that is right here right now? What is the meaning of life? What is the meaning of quantum mechanics? Why is the universe the way that it is? 

These are all questions that have no answers, but are nevertheless useful questions to ask and discuss because that is what consciousness does. After all, it is not always clear which questions we might find out how to answer with new knowledge. "What is consciousness?" is just such a question that does not have an answer but might have an answer with better knowledge. Consciousness is therefore always asking questions without answers and then continuing to find meaning either in discovering the answers or in the endless discourse that follows uncertainty. This is basically because we cannot always know the limits of what we can know even though we know there are limits to what we can know. We do need to keep asking and answering unanswerable questions in order to find the horizon of answers where we just lack knowledge.

The inherent uncertainty of quantum phase means that there are outcomes that have precursors that will always be unknowable. Since we ourselves have quantum phase, we can only know matter phase of an action relative to our own matter phase. This fundamental quantum uncertainty limit shows that the world is not deterministic and that every free choice that we make affects the outcomes of the entire universe. Besides quantum uncertainty, there is also uncertainty from the chaos of determinate actions. Given a very large number of determinate actions, chaos means that it is not possible to predict motion better than some uncertainty of matter action.

The Hasse diagram shows precursors and outcomes of the universe at low resolution starting with the CMB creation precursor to hydrogen, stars, and then galaxies. Higher resolution Hasse diagrams will show more and more detail until the resolution limitations of classical chaos called noise. However, the infinite divisibility of space and time in a determinate universe means that there is no limit to the precision of determinate knowledge.

But, unlike classical knowledge, quantum knowledge is not infinitely knowable and there is a discrete uncertainty limit for quantum knowledge. In the discrete actions of discrete matter, there is a quantum uncertainty between action and matter that represents our unknowable quantum phase. Unlike the infinitely knowable classical chaos of infinitely divisible time and space, quantum phase represents a finite precision for knowledge that we can know. This is because we are made up of the same quantum phase and amplitude as are all outcomes and we cannot ever know our own absolute quantum phase. We only ever know the quantum phase of an outcome relative to our own quantum phase and so that represents the limits of what we can know.

Cosmic Now

Cosmic Now
Okay...so we can't really know that there is a now or present time in the universe since all we can ever sense are things that happen in the past. In other words, all we really know are outcomes and we presume those outcomes all have precursors and so we assume that there is a whole universe of precursor memories that we call now.

https://aeon.co/essays/is-that-leaf-falling-here-and-now-cosmic-koans-on-time

Anthony Aguirre starts with the popular fine-tuning statement that grabs one of the 65 or so physical constants and supposes that any small variation in just that one constant would mean that life could not exist. This is not a good place to start any argument about the universe since as long as you change constants together there are a large number of possible universes. Do we really need koans?

In fact, changing constants in concerted ways is how the universe actually works and is the fundamental principle of accelerating light in mattertime. Mattertime starts with just two constants for matter and action and results in a pulsed universe with shrinking matter and growing force, which means accelerating light. Thus, Aguirre's example of proton charge variation makes no sense without electron charge variation. Given electron and proton charge growth along with matter decay is the basis the universe and explains everything with accelerating light. Instead of a big bang, the universe begins as an antiverse ends with the chaos of aethertime.

So the question of a cosmic now with an infinitely divisible time makes no sense in the causal set universe of precursors and outcomes. Very similar questions come up about the meaning of the infinitely divisible nothing of empty space and time. But since, space and time both emerge from the discrete things that happen in discrete aether, there really are only two constants that determine all others with accelerating light. The total universe matter and its decay are the two constants that determine all others and so yes, there are a large number of other possible universes as well.

We simply must accept that this is the universe that we have...

BlackHoleTime

Black Holes and Time

Black holes represent the end of atomic time for matter and atomic time literally stops at a black-hole event horizon. Neither atomic time nor space have any meanings at a black hole event horizon. What does it mean when atomic time stops ticking? It does not mean that the universe is at the end of cosmic time...

Atomic clocks only represent one of the two dimensions of time and the other cosmic time dimension is the very slow change of the universe. The universe changes as a result of its very slow action and those changes give time a second dimension as cosmic time. That is, cosmic time is the slow change of the universe beyond the ticks of atomic clocks and therefore beyond the event horizons of black holes. In fact, black holes represent the very slow matter decay of cosmic time and a kind of eternally collapsing object. Eternally collapsing objects are an alternative explanation for black holes.

The very slow cosmic time of the universe is in basically the quantum dephasing time of universe matter. The universe changes because of its very slow dephasing time and that slow change turns out to be what drives the much faster changes of atomic time as well.

The very slow change of the universe is in its cosmic dephasing time and for a pulsed universe, that cosmic dephasing time means the very slow decay of matter. This very slow decay of matter complements a very slow growth in force and the combination of matter decay and force growth are what make up the reality that we see. In fact, the very slow universe cosmic decay time is what creates gravity force as the amplitude and phase of the universe pulse.

Charge force is very much stronger than gravity force and charge force comes about on atomic time scales. All matter oscillates with both phase and amplitude and the relative phase and amplitude of matter oscillation is charge force. Each charge bond results in a complementary photon emission and phase and it is the biphoton complements between neutral matter bodies that then result in gravity force.

Persuasion Is Consciousness

Persuasion is an integral part of conscious free choice since choosing to bond with others is fundamental to not only our own conscious free choices, but the conscious free choices of others as well. As a result, in fact, persuasion is all about free choice. We only know a person is conscious by how they persuade us that they are conscious and they only know we are conscious by how we persuade them that we are conscious. In persuasion, a person freely chooses to tell a story to persuade one or more other people to make or not make a particular free choice or set of choices. Free choice is therefore different from coerced choice. Free choice is how people change the world and so free choice is also how people persuade the free choices that others make to change the world. Free choice as a result of persuasion is therefore what makes free choice what it is since our conscious free choice to persuade is how we change the world.

While it is possible to persuade some people with a good story, that story will not persuade everyone and some people may choose to not even listen to a persuasion and therefore remain unconvinced. The outcome of an unsuccessful persuasion would then be indeterminate. In fact, some people may find a persuasion not only unconvincing, they may also persuade with a story of their own. In fact, when the outcomes are very even, the stories then tend to polarize into factions for and against instead of a negotiation and compromise. After all, free choice reduces all decisions to a binary free choice of either a determinate action or an indeterminate inaction.

There is an argument that our choices are all determined by the persuasion of others and not by our own conscious free choices. This argument suggests that free choice is really an illusion as a result of the determinate persuasion of others, i.e. their conscious free choices. Conscious free choice would then be an illusion of the many determinate ideologies that persuade us to make the conscious free choices that we make. However, we are not born with conscious free choice and must learn conscious free choice by the persuasion of others and when we freely choose and act like them, we too are conscious. We learn conscious free choice from persuasion and so persuasion is completely compatible with an indeterminate free choice and the nature of the conscious free will.

The real illusion, then, is the illusion of a purely determinate universe where we are just subject to fixed fates and always also subject to determinate persuasions. In contrast, there is an irreducible discrete uncertainty in every indeterminate outcome even though there are precursors for both determinate and indeterminate outcomes. This means that there are indeterminate precursors that are not knowable for an outcome even though precursors do exist for even indeterminate outcomes. With free choice, we negotiate with other people all of the time and yet we do not always call all such negotiations persuasion. Free choice and negotiation are highly entangled with persuasion even though we do not normally associate negotiation with free choice. Likewise, we do not usually associate persuasion with free choice, either, but both negotiation and persuasion are necessarily free and not coerced choices.

Free Will and Agency

Science keeps bringing up the issue of free will in vain attempts to somehow define free choice as a determinate outcome of the brain machine. If there were a measurement for free choice, then it would make sense for science to make claims about free choice. Since there are no measurements of free choice, it makes no sense for any science claims about free choice and any statements about free choice are then subjective opinions, not objective measurements of science. Thus, to believe in free choice simply means that you believe that choices make a difference and also that the precursor feelings of choice are not always knowable.

People who say that they do not believe in free choice still believe that their decisions matter and as a result, they freely choose to believe in their own lack of free choice. However, without a belief that their choices make a difference there would be no meaning and purpose and choice in their lives would be subject to the all-consuming despair of nihilist chaos.

In our relational reality, people with free choice bond with some people and not with other people and those neural bonds and conflicts result from often very powerful emotions and feelings. Since people freely to choose to bond with some people and not with others, this is free choice and the reasons and feelings do not always have knowable precursors. People also freely choose to persuade others that there is no free choice despite there are no measurement for free choice. The determinate argument is that who you freely choose to bond with or who you freely choose to persuade is due to determinate precursors, the present, any possible outcomes, and the noise of classical chaos. Since classical chaos is ostensibly random, that means that no future is certain, but the determinate argument is that even that does not mean we have free choice.

People argue that since determinate atoms are also subject to uncertain outcomes and determinate atoms are not conscious and do not have free choice, determinate people likewise do not have free choice even though they make free choices with unknowable precursor feelings. Free choice, though, involves neural action potentials and atoms do not have neural action potentials. In addition, quantum entanglement and superposition mean that quantum phase noise is somewhat different from the classical noise of chaos. In fact, science neither understands how neural action potentials result in free choice.

It is very likely that the bonding of neural action involves entanglement and superposition in ways that science does not yet understand.  For example, since every macroscopic action has some quantum phase noise, repetitive macroscopic actions like flips of a coin toss or neural impulse of a brain tend to result in mixing classical and quantum phase noise. Quantum phase is, after all, very important for the charge bonds of matter and so it is very likely that quantum phase is also important for neural bonds and even gravity bonds.

Quantum phase is at the root of both consciousness and free will archetypes. Our relational reality involves charge bonds, neural bonds, and gravity bonds as shown below.

Free choice makes consciousness possible because how we choose an outcome depends on both precursors and all possible outcomes. Since science cannot define or even measure free choice, science cannot measure or even define free choice either. The free choice of a single outcome from a superposition of many possible outcomes is exactly what makes us conscious. In fact, free choice really is our basic archetype for without free choice and free will, the universe would be determined only by its initial conditions and not by the neural action potentials of free choice.

Atoms do not have free choice, but that does not mean that a mind, which is made up of a large number of atoms, also does not have free choice. Just like a coin will have very well defined heads and tails, flipping a coin results in a 50% probability and uncertainty of landing heads or tails. Neural action potentials are then like flipping a coin and are necessary for free choice just as they are necessary for free will as well. Although science cannot measure free choice or free will, people are conscious and therefore do have free choice as well. Science stating that there is no free choice suggests that science can measure and know all of the precursors of free choices that we all make to an unlimited precision. However, it is simply not possible to know all of the precursors to free choice with unlimited precision since quantum phase noise limits the precision of any knowledge.

One argument for determinate outcomes is that a computer algorithm can use sensory data to make choices for action according to a person who freely chose to compose that algorithm. The algorithm did not make the choice...the programmer made the choice and the algorithm is simply an extension of the emotions and feeling of the programmer. The argument that robots and artificial intelligence show consciousness is not true since there is no measure of consciousness and no artificial consciousness either.

Free choice is the result of a large number of neural action potentials and each neural action potential is subject to a discrete quantum uncertainty just as all action in the universe is subject to discrete quantum uncertainty. Therefore, while the universe is largely determinate in that every outcome has a knowable precursor to some precision, there are discrete outcomes that have unknowable discrete precursors even though those discrete precursors do exist. For example, entanglement and superposition can couple discrete outcomes in discrete precursors that are not possible to know with unlimited resolution. While the determinate chaos of noise certainly make discrete neural outcomes uncertain, the entanglement and superposition of quantum phase noise also makes neural outcomes uncertain even though outcomes do entangle and correlate with other outcomes.

Unlike the determinate noise of classical chaos with unlimited resolution, the uncertain noise of quantum phase is also subject to entanglement and superposition and therefore has a well-defined limited resolution. Entanglement and superposition make the precursors of quantum phase noise as discrete outcomes that are inherently unknowable and at limited resolution. The limited resolution of discrete quantum phase is what make up free choice and free will as opposed to the unlimited resolution of determinism. Once again, the outcomes of free choice and free will follow from the lack of any measurable and therefore knowable discrete precursors even discrete precursors exist for every discrete outcome. Although we can rationalize many of the choices that we make, there are many choices that we make for which we can never know the reasons. This is because we make many decisions based on our feelings and feelings derive from emotions and unconscious archetypes and therefore feelings do not always have knowable causes even though there are causes for all feelings.

Science argues that quantum phase coherence has no role in choice or free will and therefore no role in neural action potentials either. However quantum phase coherence along with entanglement is part of all matter and can and does affect many things that we feel we understand very well since we do not often consider the role of discrete quantum phase in macroscopic action. After all, most people's lives lie outside of science and include art, music, literature, religion, law, government, commerce, crafts, and so on.

People have the freedom to choose many different outcomes for their lives, but science often feels the need to persuade people with the subjective opinion that people do not really have any free choice. Science claims that free will is an illusion, but this is a subjective opinion often masquerading as an objective measurable fact. For example, a recent blog post states:

1) You never had free will.
2) Your story has not yet been told.
3) Input matters.
4) Understand yourself.

Saying you never had free will makes it seem like you have measured free will and have repeatedly found that it is not present in anyone that you measured. Since there is actually no measure of free will, it is incorrect to then claim that no one has free will. After all, there might be someone somewhere that has free will even though you may not have free will. Since you admit that everyone believes that they have free will, it makes it very difficult to then state that free will does not exist.

Everyone who has lived is part of the collective memory of civilization. History tells more stories about famous people than those who are not famous, but family relationships tell many more stories than any popular history ever could. While input certainly matters, it is by a lifetime of experience and memories that we make decisions, not just by immediate input. Moreover, the superposition of a large number of precursors as well as possible outcomes all affect free will. Understanding yourself is tantamount to understanding consciousness. Since there are no objective measures for consciousness, subjective claims about understanding consciousness and free will have no objective meaning.

Free choice has everything to do with individual freedom and social responsibility, which are way beyond the measurements of science. In fact, politics limits individual freedom and social responsibility with science, but such limits can then use social responsibility to justify killing their own people. Thus, Nazis claimed the science of eugenics and Marxists claimed the science of class oppression and surplus capital as ideologies of social responsibility that justified killing many people. The Nazi eugenics was based on a science that supposed racial struggle would improve civilization while Marx's profit from surplus value was based on an economic science and that a class struggle would improve civilization.

In both cases, murderous regimes used an ideology of social responsibility to justify the killing of many millions of people to benefit a much larger number of people. In fact, the murder of so many people increased suffering and misery much more than pleasure and joy. In contrast, it is the primacy of the individual and the social responsibility of the free market that, despite its flaws, seems to have unleashed a great wealth of human productivity for civilization.