There are no hidden realities, so says Neils Bohr. Science is the taking of ideas and using them to create reality in a comprehensible and usable form. So, I was thinking about entanglement, and sought to correlate this natural physical reality and parlay it unto the societal interactions at work in our world today.
There has been much discussion about the failures of capitalism, and it is this idea I am thinking about and how entanglement may translate to where capitalism may end up as a result. My angle is from a humanistic viewpoint: Who are these persons behind the scenes of our world systems.
First off, I believe that the volition of everyone's actions either bears fruit or it doesn't. Reason counts. If you can cut linoleum to fit snug around a bath tub, then people are going to pay you for that, and you can live fairly well. That is what is good about life, you can get better at some things that you apply yourself in, genes playing a part, too. I am pretty good (not great) at taking two ideas from different realms and synergistically applying them for new purposes. So I have to explain these two different ideas of entanglement and the Monetary System first, at least as I narrowly define them.
Entanglement has been verified by the EPR paradox and Bell's Inequality Theorem. Two things brought together become in a knit relationship from the forces imparted on them, and combines together their own inherent compositions with an additional component that each shares with the other from the interaction. These things are tied forever together by inextricable forces in their futures without regard to time or distance between them. The forces one feels upon the other at a future time and location may be small, but real in regards to the their previous interactions. In regards to a single Carbon Atom, for instance, it maybe the interactions it can create with other atoms or electromagnetic forces that it impart on it a kind of self-preservation and eagerness to be. It has a history, an identity, through its interactions within its realm of existence. I know it seems to make little sense to give a personality to an inanimate atom, but really, can you think of why it would want to be at all, if there wasn't some benefit. Of course, all Carbons are alike, on the outside, but this is part of the thrust of the article, and that is things that are acquiring new relationships, and hence entangled, do by this very nature hold close and hide these interactions because of the unique identifier involved with the interaction. It could reveal its history of interactions, but it would make no impression on something that did not partake of the interaction. So, it just stays a carbon atom to us, until the interaction occurs, where it reveals to the inter-actor, which is sometimes us, what it is. A single-malt scotch or an elegant perfume may be revealed when we become party to these interactions of a carbon atom.
I don't want to digress now about how we change in the interaction with a carbon atom, but I will comment here about species. Every unique kind of animal is entangled with their environment, and in fact is shaped by it, like Darwin's shorter, stronger nut-beaked Finches and longer slenderer flower beaked evolved cousins on the Galapagos islands. A niche environment will bring on a predator, which in turn will force new survival strategies by the prey, and the ones who can best survive in that eco-system are the ones who are there, and the others, who could not epigenetically continue new entanglements to their surroundings, are not.
But, getting back to carbon, why does a carbon hide the impetus of its being, its history of entanglements which make it what it is, so that we could not differentiate one carbon from the other? Well, for one thing, it is in the quantum realm, and we perceive them to be acting very fast, so our interaction towards them would be very slow at any scale. No interaction taking place makes much of a difference in the blur. The other, as I pointed out, is that it would make little impression on the party not involved in the interactions it had had previously. Perhaps the only reason we can interact at all with the carbon stems from our mutual birth in the big bang energy orgy. Still, there is a wall that designates something's descriptors so that it is what it is and not what it isn't. Obviously in a collapsing supernova a carbon could become an iron atom, and does, so it then has become so entangled it requires new descriptors over its identity. Such a thing may exist where a carbon becomes sentient, if it has lived through enough interactions, of a world of all it's past happenings, being able to trans-mutate its knowledge to the carbon through vicariously experiencing all its entangled partners collapsing wave function of their encounters. Here is were the rubber meets the road of reality. The entanglement lasts, but only evanescently until it gives up the interaction by integrating into a new identity of old interaction passing back information of new interaction and the transaction is complete. It could never have again what it once had with the other before, that old history is gone, and a newer model with a different persona has come into being from new experiences. They can no longer relate to each other the way they once could. One had changed into the new while the other had re-lived the old for a last time. In short, where the entropy had increased initially, the the entropy decreased again after the interaction at a distance ceased from its own volition. So the carbon needs it's integrity, it has to fall back onto what it is so it can continue it's quest for new experiences. Carbon builds a “wall” to protect its being, after the entanglement ends and entropy decreases, it starts anew again in more enterprises.
Living in a “wall”, hiding your undertakings to all but who are privy, will make a prosperous approach to survival, but it cannot be done unevenly or the entropy will decrease until it is spent to non-significance. No one will want to interact with a self-serving entity, ready to pounce without warning to obtain a new spoon that isn't there for shits and giggles. The rest of us can't live on memories alone, but we need to stimulate with new experiences of our being, we need to engage with rational beings who respect our actual surroundings and want what we have to offer as genuine and real, however hard it is for the other person to relinquish their half of the “wall” of emotion, and that spoon that won't be there later (or will it be there, it is a risk, but sometimes a pleasantly rewarding one, sometimes wrenching.)
Scaling up this quantum entanglement to a real-world scale and in the realm of the Monetary System, we can start first with what the “wall” is in this system. The wall makes money legal tender. It will be there, voila, when the right addition to the mix is made to deserve it. The money itself can be thought of, abstractly, then as the experiences in a quantum entangled event. It ties the buyer and seller together, for a time, the reason the purchase was made, thus fulfilled, now goes to the respective parties as increased and then decreased entropy of their own situations. The initial thrill and consanguinity of the transaction is the action of the parties at work, increasing entropy. Capital equipment decreases slowly for the buyer, while the money is spent on upkeep of the sellers systems, etc., and entropy decreases1. The “wall” here then is money itself, and is nothing but an impasse to the destruction of the entity, or business, else its self-preservation at creating new experiences would be made open to decay. Extrapolating that to how the business cycle has slowed down today, and then how this wall is making businesses deadened by its weak protecting function, it would seem a new paradigm for how this wall is constituted be investigated. My suggestion is to allow lots of new experiences, new businesses, to partake, to keep the entanglement worthy of refreshing our lives with meaning. The carbon would do it.
And finally, the Monetary System is an entity too. It will peter out from its “wall” that will not allow any new entanglement, because it becomes based on a bluff, an ending of the entanglement rather than the initial real interaction. The system decreases it's own existence value by ordering a set of pre-established circumstances rather than being a part of that unpredictable happy circumstance of genuine increasing entropy, the real risk. It's a stagnation of fortune because the spoon is not there, but, take my word for it, it's coming. It will need a reason for existence, but won't find one without a commitment to self-preservation, and the finality of its works, for itself and everyone it deals with. That is what is happening because that is how the world works.
1. The potential for entropy is more accurate.
No comments:
Post a Comment