8 Comments
User's avatar
The Complex Now's avatar

Amazing. From a systems theory perspective, the avoidance of action is a high-entropy state. We consume massive amounts of internal energy just to maintain a static equilibrium, avoiding the 'work' required for a necessary phase transition. As I’ve explored in my critiques of modern social structures, when a system (personal or collective) perceives a shrinkage of resources, it tends to self-constrain. We pretend we don't know the way as a defense mechanism against the metabolic cost of real change.

J.Mac's avatar

I’m no longer scared now, I’m free as a bird, silencing critics at 33 and a third.

Antonio Castellaneta's avatar

It is already decided where you step back.

Anna Giovane's avatar

The laws of physics are invariant. Everything else is just noise from virtual particles.

Antonio Castellaneta's avatar

What you say feels true.

But something is already there before we name it.

Anna Giovane's avatar

In physics, noise is defined as an unwanted signal that interferes with the measurement of a true signal. Virtual particles (or quantum vacuum fluctuations) are precisely this ‘background noise’: the quantum vacuum is not empty; it is full of these fluctuations. In Feynman diagrams, these particles appear in the internal ‘loops’. They are considered higher-order corrections—small effects that ‘clutter’ or complicate the measurement of the main trajectory of a real particle.​They are not ‘real’ in the macroscopic sense; they appear and disappear so quickly (due to Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle) that they cannot be directly detected as stable matter. They are, literally, momentary interference.​In the quantum world, it is the observer who collapses the wave function. Without the ‘measurement’ (without the name, without the law), that ‘something’ you speak of is nothing; it is merely an infinite superposition of probabilities with no physical reality.

Antonio Castellaneta's avatar

What you describe may be true.

But even this is seen before it is explained.

Anna Giovane's avatar

Yours is a "canned" response. I’ve just explained to you that without observation there is no physical reality, only probability, and you reply that “it can be seen before it is explained”, ignoring the fact that to see something, an observer is required, and the observer is the measurement. You are contradicting yourself without realizing it.