M (as in "mirror") theory

[sat chit ananda]

This is merely a proposal of a workable metaphor. It may be of use in the same way that the metaphor of gravity being the curvature of spacetime is useful. Sometimes the simplest of ideas can be the catalyst to a major shift in discovery and understanding. I offer this as an idea in the hopes that the model might be useful.

 

What if the membranes in M theory had mirror-like qualities? The use of two mirrors facing each other as a metaphor presents some interesting parallels to how physics describes the functioning of reality.

 

If a particle (and all of physicality) is actually more like the image in a mirror and we have two mirrors facing each other, such an interaction describes phenomena such as:

 

• how it appears as though there are many electrons where there may actually only be one.

• How it appears as though there are infinite universes where there may actually only be one.

• Why it is that each particle appears to have a pair particle with exactly opposing qualities.

• Entanglement and the observation/WF collapse issue. Two mirrors facing each other would give the appearance of there being two particles interacting instantaneously, each having opposing qualities, but in actuality it would be a singular entity. QM is able to “look at both mirrors” simultaneously. And/or, it is able to investigate the qualities of the mirrors rather than focusing on the image in the mirrors. The purely objective “consciousness” of mathematics is not distracted by the “spell of maya” that human consciousness is. Human consciousness has a deeply-rooted bias toward focusing on physicality. We cannot help but focus on the image in the mirror. When looked at through the filter of mathematics, consciousness is better able to investigate itself free from such bias.

• Inflation. The moment one mirror is placed in front of another mirror, there is a procreation of the image in both mirrors that occurs at the speed of light. If the mirrors are very close together this would produce an almost instantaneous and infinite “expansion” of the image. I'm guessing that the math describing such an interaction would reveal something very similar to that of the inflationary epoch.

• Quantum jumps between energy orbits is the focusing on each successive image in the mirror. Nothing is really moving in all of this, other than consciousness. The only “movement” is the act of the focusing of consciousness. Consciousness can focus on the images, which brings about the appearance of physicality, or it can focus on the mirror, via “pure thought”, or it can focus on itself, which is getting into spirituality, which I won't do here.

   

  Mirrors are used in the making of a hologram. If the holographic principle is a workable metaphor, then there must be a mirror-like aspect to the process.

   

  I have the strong intuition that the fundamental “mirrors” are the interaction of thought and matter. Causation is fundamentally not at the physical level, but rather is the interaction of thought and physicality mirroring each other. Both are mutually dependant, but not really causally related.

   

  This metaphor may also be of use in other fields such as psychology (thought-action) and biology.

[ajb]

To be useful as some kind of heuristic interpretation it needs to reflect some actual calculation or mathematical construction within the theory. The analogy of the trampoline and the bowling ball is okay, if you understand a little differential geometry, but in no way does it replace the actual calculations.

 

So my question to you is how does your "mirror" reflect how people calculate in M-theory?

[sat chit ananda]

I don't know. I'm not sure how the mind operates when working in the realm of mathematics. I would assume that, at least every now and then, a correlation with physicality forms in the mind's eye. If the image that forms is less coherent with physicality, then the resulting thought processes (equations in this case) will reflect this.

 

If it so happens that having an image of two mirrors facing each other brings about a new and more coherent path for/of thought, then that would be cool.

 

Simple ideas (eg: falling at the same speed of an elevator) can bring about profound shifts in perspective.

[ajb]

So your "analogies" or "metaphors" are seemingly disjoint from M-theory? Is this one of those "not-even-wrong" moments?

[sat chit ananda]

It is, as always, whatever you want it to be.

[Delta1212]

That's not really how a metaphor that is meant to explain something works. If it can mean whatever you want it to mean, then it doesn't really mean anything at all.

[davidivad]

can the mirrors be held by arangutans?

 

you said, "Human consciousness has a deeply-rooted bias toward focusing on physicality."

my first question is how does that make you feel?

 

mirrors are a classical presentaion of mysticism. they can invoke a sense of awe. this distracts the mind from using those skills required for good science.

[ajb]

It is, as always, whatever you want it to be.

So no use at all...great!

[sat chit ananda]

David Bohm used the analogy of two cameras focused on a fish in an aquarium in an attempt to better understand QM. Would you ask him if the cameras could be held by orangutans? I have a feeling you guys would be treating what he was saying a little differently than what I am saying, even though we are saying pretty much the same thing.

 

A lot of people are trying to makes sense of what QM is telling us about reality. I just happened to see that the phenomena of two mirrors facing each other produces results that are exactly like those resulting from quantum theory. If there is no way to apply math to the analogy then it is of no use. If there is a place to start (perhaps the interaction of light between two mirrors) and the math produces something familiar, then maybe you're onto something.

 

How do I feel about human consciousness being biased toward physicality? Like we are all characters in a dream. Some of us are aware of true Self, as in a lucid dream, and most of us believe we are the dream character.

[ajb]

David Bohm used the analogy of two cameras focused on a fish in an aquarium in an attempt to better understand QM. Would you ask him if the cameras could be held by orangutans? I have a feeling you guys would be treating what he was saying a little differently than what I am saying, even though we are saying pretty much the same thing.

But Bohm was well versed in the mathematics of quantum mechanics. I would imagine any analogies he was able to develop actually reflected how we actually use quantum mechanics. However, analogies are just that and one has to be careful taking them too seriously.

[Sensei]

how it appears as though there are many electrons where there may actually only be one.

 

Where did you get such idea?

When electron annihilate with positron gamma photons are produced. Then gamma photons can be absorbed by some charged particles and new bunch of photons emitted with lower energy, lower frequency.. And after a while energy that was in electron and positron is spread in millions or billions of other particles..

 

How it appears as though there are infinite universes where there may actually only be one.

 

Susskind proposed multi universe idea as explanation of why physical constants have values, as they have, in our universe.

Who is believing in it, won't be searching for sense in why physical constant have value as we measure.

[sat chit ananda]

But Bohm was well versed in the mathematics of quantum mechanics. I would imagine any analogies he was able to develop actually reflected how we actually use quantum mechanics. However, analogies are just that and one has to be careful taking them too seriously.

All systems of thought (even mathematics) are analogy. I don't take any of them seriously.

[Phi for All]

All systems of thought (even mathematics) are analogy. I don't take any of them seriously.

 

Even if this is true, it doesn't make all systems equal. Some systems deserve more serious attention than others.

[Endy0816]

You can use mirrors as a metaphor, but keep in mind that is all they can ever be.

 

Mirrors are not perfectly reflective and the act of observation limits that which can be observed.

 

You start doing the math and it only shows standard energy conservation. Anything you've gotten out of them beyond that is entirely internal.

[davidivad]

David Bohm used the analogy of two cameras focused on a fish in an aquarium in an attempt to better understand QM. Would you ask him if the cameras could be held by orangutans? I have a feeling you guys would be treating what he was saying a little differently than what I am saying, even though we are saying pretty much the same thing.

 

A lot of people are trying to makes sense of what QM is telling us about reality. I just happened to see that the phenomena of two mirrors facing each other produces results that are exactly like those resulting from quantum theory. If there is no way to apply math to the analogy then it is of no use. If there is a place to start (perhaps the interaction of light between two mirrors) and the math produces something familiar, then maybe you're onto something.

 

How do I feel about human consciousness being biased toward physicality? Like we are all characters in a dream. Some of us are aware of true Self, as in a lucid dream, and most of us believe we are the dream character.

 

yep, all you are doing is "WOW"ing yourself.

 

this is a common event for people who haven't had the chance to see the beauty that math bestows upon the things we can't percieve.

if you truly want to "understand" things at this level, then give the math a try.

it is the only language we have that even comes close to describing it.

[sat chit ananda]

 

Even if this is true, it doesn't make all systems equal. Some systems deserve more serious attention than others.

Perhaps. I would submit that those systems that offer an answer to the problem of vexation and suffering should be given the most attention. Can QM and the newly developing physics possibly address this issue? If consciousness is involved, and it is accepted as being involved, then maybe it's not too big of a stretch to see physics integrating with other fields such as psychology and spirituality to help shed light on the cause and cessation of suffering.

 

yep, all you are doing is "WOW"ing yourself.

 

this is a common event for people who haven't had the chance to see the beauty that math bestows upon the things we can't percieve.

if you truly want to "understand" things at this level, then give the math a try.

it is the only language we have that even comes close to describing it

 

I believe what you say is true about mathematics. It does seem that it reveals a more fundamental level of reality than that which is the physicality of our senses. However, not even pure thought is ultimate Reality.

 

I understand things beyond what any language can describe. One ceases to even care about the "how" when they understand the "why".

 

If you want to understand yourself and all of reality, give meditation a try. Seriously.

[Phi for All]

Perhaps. I would submit that those systems that offer an answer to the problem of vexation and suffering should be given the most attention. Can QM and the newly developing physics possibly address this issue? If consciousness is involved, and it is accepted as being involved, then maybe it's not too big of a stretch to see physics integrating with other fields such as psychology and spirituality to help shed light on the cause and cessation of suffering.

I believe what you say is true about mathematics. It does seem that it reveals a more fundamental level of reality than that which is the physicality of our senses. However, not even pure thought is ultimate Reality.

 

I understand things beyond what any language can describe. One ceases to even care about the "how" when they understand the "why".

 

If you want to understand yourself and all of reality, give meditation a try. Seriously.

 

This seems like a silly argument, if I understand it correctly. You seem to be saying that physics falls short as a solution to suffering, therefore it doesn't deserve your attention.

 

And I'm sorry, but the whole "I understand things beyond what any language can describe" sounds like some kind of special pleading, like you shouldn't have to bother studying math because you're so enlightened. Meditation? It's good for calming, but trying to learn with only yourself as input? I can see why it appeals, it means you don't have to try very hard.

[davidivad]

i do actually meditate...well, there are no chakras involved.

 

i have a cycle.

i read about something or work on something and then i take a break in the old captain's chair with my eyes closed.

my eyes give a few quick flutters and then my mind is free to tackle things. i have actually found that when i am working with something hard, i can usually come up with an answer if i "sleep it off."

 

i know that sounds wierd.

[sat chit ananda]

 

This seems like a silly argument, if I understand it correctly. You seem to be saying that physics falls short as a solution to suffering, therefore it doesn't deserve your attention.

 

And I'm sorry, but the whole "I understand things beyond what any language can describe" sounds like some kind of special pleading, like you shouldn't have to bother studying math because you're so enlightened. Meditation? It's good for calming, but trying to learn with only yourself as input? I can see why it appeals, it means you don't have to try very hard.

Try not thinking for just one minute. Then imagine working on stopping the thought process entirely. Sound easy?

 

The way to end vexation and suffering within you is via introspection. Upon inquiry into one's own thought-action process, understanding is gained about how one's entire subjective experience operates. You actually begin to see the subtle workings of the mind. This is basically becoming aware of what is labelled the subconscious. The more one pays attention to the thought-action process, the more understanding is gained and from is understanding one can work on vexation at it's source. Just as one can understand the subtle more fundamental workings of the physical realm via mathematics, so can one understand the more fundamental workings of the Self, and all of humanity, via introspection into the source of thought.

 

Understanding via thought can bring understanding about what you are thinking about. Understand thought itself and you understand everything.

i do actually meditate...well, there are no chakras involved.

 

i have a cycle.

i read about something or work on something and then i take a break in the old captain's chair with my eyes closed.

my eyes give a few quick flutters and then my mind is free to tackle things. i have actually found that when i am working with something hard, i can usually come up with an answer if i "sleep it off."

 

i know that sounds wierd.

Doesn't sound weird at all. True insight comes from something outside all the mental churning. The thinking seems to be different from the insight.