The Human Mind As A By-Product Of A Vast Informational Process Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 302):

We mention these admittedly speculative ideas to illustrate the profound change in perspective that has accompanied the move toward a postmechanistic paradigm. In place of clod-like particles of matter in a lumbering Newtonian machine we have an interlocking network of information exchange — a holistic, indeterministic and open system— vibrant with potentialities and bestowed with infinite richness. The human mind is a by-product of this vast informational process, a by-product with the curious capability of being able to understand, at least in part, the principles on which the process runs.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, the paradigm that replaced the Newtonian "mechanism" was that of Quantum Theory, which introduced the distinction between systems of interdependent potential, quantified in terms of waves of probability, and the instantiation of that potential as particles of matter, quantified in terms of frequencies.

Both potential and instance constitute information in the sense that they are meanings (theory) construed of meanings (data) construed of experience, and "this vast informational process" is the conscious processing that construes and reconstrues experience as meaning. That is, the human mind is not the by-product of the process, but the process itself.

In this context, the ability of the human mind to understand is the ability of conscious processing to reconstrue meanings as theory, in accordance with assumptions and methodology of science. This ability is provided by language.

The Interrogation Of Nature Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 301-2):

The process of science is a process of interrogation of nature. Each experimental measurement, each observation, elicits answers from nature in terms of information bits. But more fundamentally, the essentially quantum nature of the physical world ensures that, at rock bottom, all such measurements and observations are reduced to answers of the simple "yes-no" kind. Is an atom in its ground state? Yes. Is an electron's spin pointing up? No. And so on. And because of the inherent uncertainty of quantum physics, these answers cannot be foretold. Moreover, the observer plays a key role in deciding the outcome of the quantum measurements — the answers, and the nature of reality, depend in part on the questions asked.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, the questions put to nature and the answers they elicit as information bits are the meanings of language. The process of science includes reconstruing the meanings of data as the meanings of theory.

What Quantum Theory demonstrates is that yes-no polarity is a feature of instances, such as particles, but it is the space between yes and no, probability, that is a feature of the potential that particles instantiate. This, in turn, demonstrates that making meaning is interpersonal as well as ideational, since probability is an interpersonal assessment in terms of modality.

The key role of the observer is that it is the observer who construes experience as meaning, and as experimenter, decides which questions are to be answered — questions which depend on the theory being tested, and so on the assumptions on which the theorising is founded.

In this view, reality is the meaning that conscious processing construes and reconstrues of experience.

Wheeler's 'It From Bit' Though Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 300-1):

In an article entitled "Information, Physics, Quantum: The Search for Links," the theoretical physicist John Wheeler claimed, at the end of the 1980s, that there was no escape from the conclusion that "The world cannot be a giant machine, ruled by any pre-established continuum physical law." It would be more accurate, opined Wheeler, to think of the physical Universe as a gigantic information-processing system in which the output was as yet undetermined. As an emblem of this massive paradigm shift, he coined the slogan "It from bit." That is to say, every it — every particle, every field of force, even spacetime itself — is ultimately manifested to us through bits of information. …

Wheeler is an extreme exponent of the "participatory universe" philosophy, in which observers are central to the nature of physical reality, and matter is ultimately relegated to mind.

Blogger Comments:

To be clear, modelling the world as a giant machine is reconstruing experience as human technology.

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, the information-processing system is conscious processing and the information it processes is the meaning it construes of experience. Wheeler's 'it' is the construal of experience as first-order meaning (phenomena), and Wheeler's 'bit' is the reconstrual of first-order meaning as second-order meaning (metaphenomena). It is not that every 'it' is manifested through bits of information, but that every 'it' is construed as bits of information.

In this view, it is not that matter is relegated to the mind, but that matter is a construal of experience as meaning by conscious processing.

The Genetic Code Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 284-5):

Nucleic acids are responsible for storing and transmitting all the information required to build the organism and make it function — the genetic code. The code includes instructions for the manufacture of specific enzymes and specific structural proteins. One type of nucleic acid, DNA (short for deoxyribonucleic acid), takes the form of the now familiar long-chain molecules wound into a double helix. The double helix is where the information needed to replicate and operate the organism is encoded.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, the genetic code is an identifying relation between two levels of abstraction: chemical tokens (DNA molecules) and biological values (genes). The identity encodes genes by reference to DNA molecules, and decodes DNA molecules by reference to genes.

From this perspective, the relation between codons of DNA and amino acids is the realisation relation between system and structure, with each codon being a specific selection expression of the DNA system.

The emergence of the genetic code is the emergence of chemistry as tokens of biological values.

"The Need To Adopt A Rather Vague Definition Of Life" Reconsidered

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 280-1):

We have no difficulty in recognising life when we encounter it on Earth. Men, mice, mushrooms and microbes are all undeniably living. Yet what essential features do these systems display in common? Frequently cited properties of life are the ability to reproduce, response to external stimuli, and growth. The problem here is that other, manifestly inanimate systems also share these properties. Flames readily reproduce. Crystals both reproduce and grow into more organised structures. Bubbles respond to external stimuli by retreating when approached. 

Furthermore, once we probe below the level of our everyday experience — below the level accessible to our senses, especially those of sight and touch — there is no clear division, after all, between what is living and what is not. The classic example is the virus. In spite of the fact that viral diseases clearly involve biological activity, the virus itself does not even satisfy one of the criteria for life we have already mentioned — it cannot reproduce by itself, or with the aid of another virus. A virus can multiply only by invading a host cell and taking over its biochemical functions. In essence, it turns the cell into a production line for more viruses. It could be argued that under these circumstances the cell is no longer living, since it has lost the ability to reproduce itself. In isolation, though, viruses can be reduced to an inert dry powder, and differ little in their properties from other substances with less organised biological effects. 

These difficulties oblige us to adopt a rather vague definition of life.

Blogger Comments:

To be clear, an essential feature of life is metabolism: the set of life-sustaining chemical reactions in organisms. The absence of metabolism is symptomatic of the absence of life.

The Mechanistic Point Of View Of Random Mutations And Natural Selection

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 279):

According to the mechanistic point of view, living organisms are just machines, albeit complicated and wonderful machines. The evolution of life on Earth is likewise seen as a mechanistic affair, but a creative element is introduced through random variations. Most biologists accept that random mutations and natural selection alone can satisfactorily account for the form of all living organisms, once life had got started.

Blogger Comments:

To be clear, this mechanistic point of view is the reconstrual of Nature in terms of human technology.

To be clear, chemical mutations are only random with respect to biological advantage. They come about though non-random chemical processes.

Given the evolutionary emergence of biological chemistry from non-biological chemistry, some form of chemical variation and selection, before "life had got started", cannot be ruled out.

The Notion Of The Biosphere As A Single Living Organism

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 279):

… one of the few ideas to emerge from science and reach out to strike a chord with a wide cross-section of ordinary people in recent decades has been the concept of Gaia, the hypothesis that the Earth itself may, in some sense, be regarded as a single living organism.

Blogger Comments:

To be clear, It is not so much that the biosphere is a single living organism, but that every single organism is a highly integrated ecosystem.

The Physical Universe As An Information-Processing System Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 277):

… scientists are increasingly thinking of the physical Universe less as a collection of cogs in a machine and more as an information-processing system. Gone are the clod-like lumps of matter, to be replaced instead by "bits" of information. This is the shape of the emerging universe paradigm — a complex system in which mind, intelligence and information are more important than the hardware. The time has come for us to take a look at life, mind and intelligence, not as a parochial human concern, but in their cosmic context.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, the information-processing system is the conscious processing, a senser sensing and a sayer saying, reified as 'mind', and the information is the meaning, realised in wording, projected by conscious processing. The physical Universe is the construal of experience as material order meaning (phenomena), and theories of the physical Universe are reconstruals of material order meaning as semiotic order meaning (metaphenomena).

The Spontaneous Creation Of Virtual Microscopic Wormholes Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 272-3):

Just as quantum fluctuations in the vacuum create temporary photons, so, on an even smaller scale, they should spontaneously create temporary (virtual) wormholes. The size of these wormholes is typically twenty powers often smaller (10⁻²⁰) than an atomic nucleus. Thus, on an ultramicroscopic scale, space would be a labyrinth of such structures, endowing it with the complicated topology that has been dubbed spacetime foam. With masterly understatement, such tiny tunnels through spacetime are simply referred to by relativists as "microscopic" wormholes.

Blogger Comments:

In terms of the General Theory of Relativity, wormholes involve the gravitational curvature of space-time. From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, it is not space-time that is curved, but geodesic trajectories of bodies through space. In this view, the geometry of wormholes is not the geometry of space, but the geometry of geodesic trajectories through space.

From the same perspective, the creation of temporary photons is the instantiation of quantum potential as particles, in space, for a brief time. On this model, the creation of temporary wormholes is the instantiation of potential trajectories through space, in space, for a brief time.

Time Travel Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

 Davies & Gribbin (1992: 272):

The conventional position is that time travel should not be permitted by any physical process whatsoever, precisely because it would threaten the consistency of physics.

Consider, for example, the case of the time traveller who visits his grandmother when she is still a child and murders her. If the grandmother dies as a child, then the time traveller could never have been born, and could not, therefore, carry out the murder after all. But if the grandmother was not murdered, the time traveller would have been free to murder her.

 

Blogger Comments:

As previously explained, from the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, the notion of travelling through time can be seen as a category error that arises from treating time as if it were equivalent to space.  For space, there is the distinction between 'moving from here to there' and 'extending from here to there', but for time, there is no distinction between 'moving from now to then' and 'extending from now to then'.  In the case of time, both renderings construe the Extent (duration) of the unfolding of the process.

That is, there is motion from one location in space to another, but only duration from one location in time to another. Time is the dimension along which the process unfolds, from its beginning to its ending. In this view, the notion of "travelling" backward in time is therefore nonsensical.

The 'Smearing Out' Or Removal Of The Singularity Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 266):

The balance of opinion among the experts is that all matter entering a black hole eventually encounters a singularity of some sort. But what if quantum effects remove the singularity somehow? 

Unfortunately, since we have no complete quantum theory of gravity, we cannot model the consequences of quantum effects in smearing out the singularity with any confidence. Whether they actually result in the complete removal of the singularity is uncertain. Some physicists expect this to be the case, and even argue that the very concepts of space and time will cease to apply under these extreme conditions. Just what sort of structures might replace them is a matter for conjecture. The safest position, therefore, is to regard the singularity as merely a breakdown of known physics, rather than the end of all physics.

Blogger Comments:

As previously explained, from the perspective of the universe outside a black hole, matter entering a black hole never reaches the singularity, because the ever increasing expansion of time intervals entails that this would take an infinite amount of time.

As previously explained, from the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, even the misapplication of quantum theory to space-time has no bearing on what is purported to happen at the singularity itself, since the uncertainty only lies in the range of potential locations of the singularity.

From the perspective of the General Theory of Relativity, on the one hand, the concepts of space and time do apply within the event horizon of a black hole, if only because these are the dimensions that are affected by the matter that created the black hole; and on the other hand, space and time are dimensions, not structures, and thus cannot be replaced by structures.

On the basis of the above, the singularity is not a breakdown of known physics. Moreover, physics, in the sense of phenomena (data), only ends when the construing of meaning ends, and physics, in the sense of metaphenomena (theories), only ends when the reconstrual of meaning ends.

The Squeezing Of Matter Into A Singularity Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 264-5):

If, then, an object that falls into a black hole cannot reemerge into the outside Universe, what happens to it? As we have explained, any object that encounters the singularity is annihilated: it ceases to exist. A precisely spherical ball of ordinary matter, for example, collapsing to become a black hole, will shrink to the common centre. All the matter will be squeezed into a singularity.

Blogger Comments:

As previously explained, from the perspective of locations outside the event horizon, where meaning-makers are situated, matter falling towards the singularity never actually reaches it, and so is never compressed to an infinite density.

Further, the notion that matter is infinitely compressed at the singularity confuses matter with spatial dimensions. It is the three dimensions of space intervals that are hypothetically "compressed" to the zero dimensions of a singular point in space.

The confusion of matter with spatial dimensions is also demonstrated by the authors' wording "object that encounters the singularity", which presents a location, a point in space, as if it were a thing that could be encountered.

Time At The Event Horizon Of A Black Hole Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 264):

As you approach the event horizon of a black hole from the outside, so the flow of time in your vicinity slows down more and more as measured by a distant observer. However, the observer who crosses into the hole through the event horizon notices nothing unusual — the event horizon has no local significance — even though at the boundary the time warp becomes infinite. To an outside observer, it will appear to take you forever to reach the event horizon; in a sense, time at the surface of a black hole stands still relative to the time experienced by a distant observer. So anything that happens to you inside the hole lies beyond the infinite future as far as the outside Universe is concerned.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of the General Theory of Relativity, viewed through Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, time neither flows, nor slows down, nor stands still, nor becomes warped. Approaching the event horizon of a black hole, it is the unfolding of processes that slows down, relative to the unfolding of processes at the location of a distant observer, as time intervals (between ticks of a clock) increasingly expand with increasing spatial proximity to the centre of mass.

But processes do not cease to unfold at the event horizon, because such a scenario corresponds to the expansion of time intervals to infinity, which corresponds to the contraction of space intervals to zero at the singularity. 

At the event horizon, space intervals, in the direction of the singularity, are only contracted to an extent that is sufficient to curve the geodesic of light within the event horizon. This means that time intervals at the event horizon are finite, not infinite (since space and time intervals are inversely proportional), and consequently, that processes do indeed unfold at the event horizon, relative to the unfolding of processes at distant locations.

Moreover, processes continue to unfold inside the event horizon, taking longer and longer, relative to the unfolding of processes outside the event horizon, as time intervals expand with increasing proximity to the singularity, though such processes are not observable from outside, since the means of observing them, light, is confined within the event horizon.

The Notions Of Gravity Bending Space And Slowing Time Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 264):

Gravity, remember, not only bends space but also slows time.

Blogger Comments:

To be clear, in the authors' terms, gravity is the bending of space and the slowing of time, not the cause of bending and slowing. The cause of the bending and slowing is the presence of matter.

However, from the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, this is a very succinct statement of the misunderstandings of space and time in the field of physics.

On the one hand, it is not space that bends, but the geodesic through a gravitational field, caused by the contraction of space intervals in the direction of a centre of mass.

And on the other hand, it is not time that slows down, but the unfolding of processes, as measured by the expansion of time intervals, as between ticks of a clock.

Approaching The Centre Of A Black Hole Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

 Davies & Gribbin (1992: 263-4): 

It may be that quantum effects cause spacetime to become fuzzy very close to the centre, with the singularity smeared out over the Planck scale, about 10⁻³⁵ of a metre. At this stage we do not have a reliable enough theory to know. … 

The already fierce gravity of the hole rises without limit as the centre is approached, which has two effects. If you fell into the hole feet first, your feet would be closer to the centre than your head, so they would be pulled progressively harder than your head, stretching your body lengthwise. In addition, all parts of your body would be pulled toward the centre of the hole, so you would be squeezed sideways. 

At the end of this spaghettification you would be crushed into nonexistence (or lost in a haze of quantum uncertainty). 

Blogger Comments:

To be clear, the singularity of a black hole is the hypothetical point at which the intervals of the three dimensions of space contract to zero. According to the General Theory of Relativity, the contraction of space intervals is caused by the presence of matter. Therefore, if, contrary to the first law of thermodynamics, matter were indeed "crushed into nonexistence" at the singularity, then the cause of the singularity would cease to exist, and so the cause of the crushing would cease to exist… creating a logical paradox. On this basis, the claim that matter is annihilated at the singularity is not logically tenable in terms of the General Theory of Relativity.

Moreover, from this perspective, relative to time intervals outside the event horizon, time intervals inside the event horizon increasingly expand with increasing proximity to the singularity, where they hypothetically expand to infinity. This means that, from the perspective of all locations outside a black hole, where experience is construed as meaning, processes inside a black hole, such as falling toward the singularity, take longer and longer to unfold with proximity to the singularity, where they cease to unfold altogether. From this perspective, in-falling matter never reaches the singularity.

On the other hand, from the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, in misapplying quantum theory to space-time, the uncertainty only lies in the range of potential locations that the singularity can be actualised as an instance of that potential. But, in any case, the actual location of the singularity within the black hole has no bearing on what is purported to happen at the singularity itself.

The Inside Of A Black Hole Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 263):

By definition, we can never see inside a black hole. But theory can be used to infer what it would be like for an observer to enter a hole and explore its interior. The key to understanding the physics of black holes is the so-called event horizon. Roughly speaking, this is the surface of the hole. Any event occurring within the hole (inside the event horizon) can never be witnessed from the outside because no light (or other form of signal) can escape to convey information about such events to the outside world. 

If you should find yourself inside a black hole's event horizon, not only could you never escape but, like the star that preceded you, you would be unable to halt your inward plunge. Just what happens when you arrive at the centre of the hole nobody knows for sure. According to the general theory of relativity there is a so-called singularity there, a boundary of space and time at which the original star (and any subsequent infalling matter) is compressed to an infinite density and all the laws of physics break down.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of the General Theory of Relativity, viewed through Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, at the event horizon, space intervals in the direction of the centre of the black hole contract to the extent that the geodesic trajectory of light is curved below that horizon, and time intervals (as between ticks of a clock) expand in inverse proportion to that spatial contraction.

Inside the event horizon, space intervals continue to contract in the direction of the centre of the black hole, the singularity, where space intervals hypothetically contract to zero, since a singularity is a point with no dimensions.

By the same token, time intervals inside the event horizon continue to expand, in inverse proportion to space intervals, in the direction of the singularity, where they hypothetically expand to infinity. This means that, relative to processes outside the event horizon, the processes inside the event horizon, such as the infalling of matter, take longer and longer to unfold as the matter approaches the singularity, where processes cease to unfold altogether.

On this basis, from the perspective of locations outside the event horizon, where meaning-makers are situated, matter falling towards the singularity never actually reaches it, and so is never compressed to an infinite density.

Moreover, the notion that matter is infinitely compressed at the singularity confuses matter with spatial dimensions. It is the three dimensions of space that are hypothetically "compressed" to the zero dimensions of a singular point in space.

For these reasons, from the perspective of locations outside of a black hole, a black hole is not empty of matter, and it is because of this that it "retains" its gravitational effect on the dimensions of space and time.

The Emptiness Of A Black Hole Reconsidered

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 259):

We now know, from relativity theory, that no force in the Universe can prevent the star from continuing to collapse, once it has reached the light-trapping stage. So the star simply shrinks away, essentially to nothing, leaving behind empty space — a hole where the star once was. But the hole retains the gravitational imprint of the erstwhile star, in the form of intense space and time warps. Thus the region of gravitational collapse appears both black and empty — a black hole.

Blogger Comments:

On the one hand, the notion that a star shrinks away to nothing is inconsistent with the first law of thermodynamics,

On the other hand, from the perspective of the General Theory of Relativity, gravity is a relation between matter and space-time, such that the presence of matter contracts space intervals and expands time intervals, increasingly so towards the centre of mass. A black hole thus comprises both matter and the effect of the matter on space-time. 

Thus, if the matter of a black hole were truly to disappear, the effect of the matter on space-time, its "gravitational imprint", would also disappear. On this reasoning, a black hole cannot be empty, since it must contain sufficient matter to contract space intervals to the extent that the geodesic of light is curved within its event horizon.

The Notion Of A "Rolled Up" Space Dimension Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 244-5):

The idea that space may have more than three dimensions actually has a long history. Shortly after the general theory of relativity was developed, when only two fundamental forces (gravity and electromagnetism) were properly recognised, a German mathematician called Theodor Kaluza found a way to describe electromagnetism in terms of geometry, just as Einstein had described gravity in terms of geometry. The electromagnetic field, Kaluza pointed out, could be regarded as a kind of space warp, but not a warp in the ordinary three-dimensional space of our perceptions. Instead, Kaluza's space warp lay in a hypothetical fourth dimension of space, that, for some reason, we do not see in daily life. … 

Kaluza's theory was taken up by a Swedish physicist, Oskar Klein, who found a way to explain why we do not notice the fourth dimension of space. Klein argued that this is because the extra space dimension is "rolled up." Just as a hosepipe looks like a one-dimensional line from a distance, but is in reality a cylinder, so four-dimensional space could be wrapped into a hypertube (Figure 40). What we previously thought of as structureless points in three-dimensional space are, Klein asserted, really tiny circles in the fourth dimension.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, the notion of a 'rolled up' space dimension derives from confusing dimension with trajectory. (The curved shape of a hose-pipe is not a curved dimension; what is curved is the trajectory of any body traversing its surface.) When Einstein described gravity as the curvature of space-time, the curvature he actually described was the curvature of the path of a photon in the vicinity of a massive body, not a curvature of space. 

According to the General Theory of Relativity, gravity is the increasing contraction of space intervals with increasing proximity to a centre of mass. Because space intervals are shorter in the direction of the centre of mass, relative to space intervals in other directions, the shortest path that a passing body takes unless acted upon by another force, the geodesic, is curved in the direction of the centre of the massive body.

This confusion of dimension with trajectory invalidates not only the Kaluza-Klein theory, but all versions of String Theory that depend on the notion of a curved dimension.

The Electric Field Of An Electron Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 236, 237):

Because of quantum uncertainty, we can envisage a particle such as an electron as surrounded by a cloud of virtual photons which buzz around it like bees round a hive. Each photon emitted by the electron is rapidly reabsorbed. Photons nearer the electron are allowed to be progressively more energetic because they do not venture far from home, and so need exist only for the briefest duration. Picture, then, the electron immersed in a shimmering bath of evanescent quantum energy, intense near the electron but dwindling steadily with distance. This restless, seething ferment of virtual photons is, in fact, precisely the electron's electric field, described in quantum language. 

If another electron enters the melee, it can absorb one of the first electron's attendant photons, with the exchange producing a force in the way we have already described [for electron scattering]. But if no second electron (or other charged particle) is present, the temporary photons have nowhere to go but back to the original electron. In this way, each electron acts on itself through its own photon cloud (Figure 39).

 

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, the electric field of an electron is the region of the instantiation of its electric charge potential. It is not quite the case that the virtual photons are emitted and reabsorbed by the actual electron, but that the virtual photons are momentary instantiations of this potential, with the duration of their instantiations inversely proportional to energy they instantiate.

The Duration Of Virtual Particles Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 236, 252):

Quantum uncertainty allows a messenger particle to come into existence, fleetingly, so long as it soon disappears again. In quantum mechanics, uncertainty is a precise thing, and the energy of the short-lived quantum is determined by the duration of its existence, and vice versa — shorter-lived quanta can have more energy than longer-lived quanta, so that the product of energy and duration is always less than the limit set by the quantum rules. … 

Thanks to quantum uncertainty, virtual X particles can exist for a very brief duration (remember that the lifetime of a virtual particle is inversely proportional to its mass) and so they have only a very short range.

 

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, this means that the duration of the instantiation of a virtual particle is inversely proportional to the mass of the particle, which is proportional to the ability of a process mediated by the particle to unfold. That is, the less potential mass and energy to be instantiated, the longer the duration of the instantiation.

A Quantum Theory Of Gravity Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 235):

To bring gravity into the fold, and produce a fully unified theory of a superforce, it will be necessary to provide a quantum description of gravity. As we explained, the quantum theory began when it was discovered that electromagnetic waves come in discrete quanta, or photons; so it seems reasonable to assume that gravitational waves are likewise associated with quanta. These are known as gravitons. As yet, gravitons are entirely hypothetical particles. Indeed, it seems unlikely that their effects will ever be directly observable, so we must rely on theory to tell us about their properties.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Quantum Theory, it is not reasonable to assume that gravitational waves are associated with quanta, because waves associated with quanta are probability waves, whereas gravitational waves are not.

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, photons are instances of the potential quantified as waves, whereas gravitons cannot be instances of gravitational waves because gravitational waves are not quantifications of potential, but actual propagations of relative contractions of space intervals. From these perspectives, the attempt to provide a quantum description of gravity is a futile exercise.

The Virtual Particles Of Quantum Electrodynamics Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 230-1):

A charged particle, such as an electron, which is the source of an electromagnetic field, can be envisaged as a point of matter at the centre of a field of unseen electromagnetic energy, surrounding it like a halo extending into space. When another electron approaches close to the first electron, it senses the field and experiences a repulsive force. It is as though the field of one electron sends out a message: "I'm here, so move." The message travels through the field in the form of a disturbance, which exerts a mechanical effect both on the receiving particle (action) and on the transmitting particle (reaction). In this way, electrically charged particles act on one another across empty space. 

And, of course, in the classical picture of this process at work the messages linking all charged particles in a network of action and reaction are carried by ripples in the electromagnetic field, that is, by electromagnetic waves. 

Quantum theory retains the basic idea of a field, but the details are radically altered. Electromagnetic disturbances, as we have seen, can be emitted or absorbed only in discrete packets, or quanta, known as photons, so we must envisage the disturbance in the electromagnetic field which conveys the interaction as involving the exchange of photons. These photons, in effect, carry the messages between electrons and other charged particles. Instead of envisaging the field of one electron continuously disturbing the path of another, we must picture instead the first electron emitting a photon which is then absorbed by the other (Figure 37).

It is rather like firing cannonballs across space; the first electron recoils in response, while the second is deflected by the impact. The disturbance therefore takes place abruptly. An observer would see the end result as the scattering of one electron away from the other, and infer that their electric charges were causing a repulsion.

Blogger Comments:

To be clear, by this description, the electromagnetic force between electrons is said to be conveyed by a disturbance propagating through an electromagnetic field. In classical physics, this disturbance is interpreted as an electromagnetic wave, whereas in quantum physics, it is interpreted as an emitted and absorbed virtual photon. 

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, a particle is an instance of a probability wave, and so the wave in the Feynman diagram (Figure 37) actually represents the potential of a virtual photon.

Cosmic Coincidences Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 226-7):

For some people, the exceedingly fortuitous arrangement of the physical world, which permits the very special conditions necessary to human observers' existence, confirms their belief in a creative Designer. Others, however, point to the many-universes theory as a natural explanation for cosmic coincidences. If an infinite array of universes really does exist, each of which realises a slightly different cosmic possibility, then any universe, however remarkable or improbable, is bound to occur somewhere in the array. It is no surprise then that the Universe (or universes) that we perceive is of this remarkable sort, for only in a cosmos in which the conditions necessary for life to form have occurred (by chance) will observers arise to ponder over the meaning of it all.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, the anthropocentric conceit of fortuitous coincidences giving rise to the existence of human observers confuses two distinct types of cause: result and purpose. Human observers are the result of chance events, not the purpose of them, not least because chance events, by definition, are not purposeful. It is because 'purpose' implies consciousness that the category error invites belief a 'creative Designer'.

From the same perspective, the 'many-universes theory' misconstrues potential as actual, mistaking different potentials in one universe for different instances of universes.

Everett's Many-Worlds Interpretation Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 219-20):

This is where the many-worlds interpretation seems to force itself on us. In terms of serious physics, as opposed to the pages of science fiction, the idea dates from 1957, with the work of an American, Hugh Everett. It has since been refined by others. As we remarked earlier, the many-universes theory resolves the cat paradox by supposing that the Universe divides into two copies, and both then coexist in parallel with each other. There is thus no impediment to applying quantum mechanics to the entire Universe, if we are prepared to entertain the rather fantastic notion that the whole Universe is continually splitting into countless copies, each in a slightly different state, one for every possible outcome of every possible quantum interaction. The Everett theory suggests a sort of multiple reality, in which an infinite number of entire universes coexist. Bizarre though this may seem, the actual mathematical formalism involved is identical with standard quantum mechanics. The novelty of the theory concerns only the interpretation of the quantities that appear in the equations.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, the many-worlds interpretation mistakes potential for actual, misconstruing potential instances as actual instances.

The Mind Collapsing The Wave Function Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 219):

Various resolutions have been proposed to break out of this deadlock. According to one highly speculative point of view, it is necessary to invoke the concept of mind at some stage, and to argue that the chain of regress ends when the result of the measurement enters somebody's consciousness. This endows the world with an extremely subjective element, for it obliges us to suppose that, in the absence of observation, the external world does not exist in a well-defined sense. It is as though through our observations we actually create, rather than explore, the external world.

 

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, this "highly speculative" point of view is entirely valid. However, it is not that 'in the absence of observation, the external world does not exist in a well-defined sense', but that the absence of observation is the absence of construing experience as an existing external world. But all such construals are intersubjective, not subjective, because the meanings that are construed are those of a socially exchanged semiotic system (language).

An Infinite Regress Of Collapsing Wave Functions Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 218-9):

As far as the world outside the box is concerned, however, we can regard the whole laboratory as just a bigger box. If the experimenter has looked inside the box and determined the fate of the cat, a colleague working in the lab next door may not know this. Does the quantum wave of the whole lab collapse only when the colleague opens the door and asks how the cat is getting on? This clearly leads us into an infinite regress. Each quantum system can be collapsed into a definite state on being measured by another system outside itself, but then the larger system goes into an indeterminate state and must be collapsed into reality by yet another system outside of it, and so on.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, there is no infinite regress here. Just as the perception of the cat is meaning construed by the experimenter on opening the box, the perception of experimenter's lab is meaning construed by the colleague on opening its door. And so on.

The Collapse Of The Wave Function Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 218):

The very concept of a superposition of live-cat and dead-cat states waiting to be resolved when someone looks in the box seems absurd, because presumably the cat itself knows whether it is dead or alive. Does this knowledge not constitute an observation leading to a collapse of the quantum wave into a definite state one way or the other? Surely it is not necessary for all quantum observations to be conducted by human beings before they can be regarded as producing a definite state of reality? But if a cat can do the job, what about an ant? Or a bacterium? Or can we dispense with a living component in the experiment altogether, and leave it all up to a computer, or even a camera?

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, the 'very concept of a superposition of live-cat and dead-cat states waiting to be resolved when someone looks in the box' is not absurd, because the superposition is of potentiality, not of actuality, and it is only by looking in the box that one of those two potentials can be instantiated.

To be clear, the cat does not know whether it is dead or alive. On the one hand, a dead cat cannot know anything, because knowing requires a functioning brain. On the other hand, the meaning 'I am alive' is linguistic meaning, and so not meaning that can be construed by a species without language. What is true is that a live cat in the box construes its experience as perceptual meaning, at the very least, whereas a dead cat does not.

On this basis, other species, computers and cameras cannot collapse the wave function, because this requires the ability to construe experience as an instance of linguistic meaning.

The Act Of Measurement Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 218):

The Aspect experiment essentially lays to rest Einstein's hope that quantum uncertainty and indeterminism can be traced back to a substratum of hidden forces at work. We have to accept that there is an intrinsic, irreducible uncertainty in nature. An electron or other quantum particle generally does not have a well-defined position or motion unless an actual measurement of position or motion is made. The act of measurement causes the fuzziness to give way to a sharp and definite result. It is this combination of uncertainty and of the collapse of the quantum wave when an observation is made that leads to the paradox of the cat in the box.

 

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, it is not that 'an electron or other quantum particle generally does not have a well-defined position or motion unless an actual measurement of position or motion is made' but that these meanings are not construed unless a measurement is made.

By the same token, it is not that 'the act of measurement causes the fuzziness to give way to a sharp and definite result' but that the act of measurement — the collapse of the wave — is the instantiation of potential meaning as actual meaning.

In this view, Schrödinger's 'cat in the box' experiment presents no paradox, since it is not until the observation is made that potential meaning — either 'the cat is alive' or 'the cat is dead' — is instantiated as actual meaning .

The Violation Of Bell's Inequality Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 217-8):

Although Bohr provided a defence of his position in the face of this formidable challenge, the case rested until the 1960s as a pure thought experiment. Then John Bell of CERN extended the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment to a wider class of two-particle processes, producing general rules that all such systems must obey if they are to comply with Einstein's "common sense" picture of reality. Bell found that these rules incorporate a mathematical restriction now known as Bell's inequality. For the first time, it became possible to consider an actual laboratory test of these ideas. If the experiments showed that Bell's inequality is obeyed, Einstein would be proved right; but if the inequality was violated, Einstein would be proved wrong. Following Bell's work, a series of careful experiments has been performed, culminating in an accurate test of Bell's inequality by Alain Aspect, of the University of Paris, in 1982. Aspect's experiment consisted of performing simultaneous measurements on pairs of oppositely directed photons that were emitted in a single event from the same atom, and so possessed correlated properties. The results? Einstein was wrong. This conclusion has since been confirmed by repeated experiments.

Assuming one rules out faster-than-light signalling, it implies that once two particles have interacted with one another they remain linked in some way, effectively parts of the same indivisible system. This property of "nonlocality" has sweeping implications. We can think of the Universe as a vast network of interacting particles, and each linkage binds the participating particles into a single quantum system. In some sense the entire Universe can be regarded as a single quantum system. Although in practice the complexity of the cosmos is too great for us to notice this subtle connectivity except in special experiments like those devised by Aspect, nevertheless there is a strong holistic flavour to the quantum description of the Universe.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, particles are not linked parts of the same system, but interdependent instances of the same system. That is, the relation is not of part to whole (extension: composition), but of token to type (ascription: instantiation).

From this perspective, the violation of Bell's inequality demonstrates the interdependency of instances of potential, in the construing of experience as meaning.