Reality in the context of Physics

Click here to edit subtitle

Diagram 1 added May 28th 2015,  this new representation first appeared on FQXi.org essay competition 2015 . For full symbol key see words and symbols page. Diagram 2 was added to the discussion page of the  FQXi 2010-11 contest entry  'What is reality in the context of physics' and is a pre-runner of the later 3D version un the home page and most recent version (Diagram 1 ) more clearly showing the reality interface. Diagram 2 is still useful as it clearly shows Image reality is contained within Object reality.
                                                   Why this arrangement?

The ability to explain has been the purpose of science from the outset. Observation of nature has been to give facts that could be used by natural philosophers or scientists to counter superstition and ignorance and give better understanding of the natural world. Though it is undeniably difficult to impart wisdom without knowing the matters of fact, the scientific method alone is also not adequate for the purpose of giving understanding. Facts must be correctly fitted together as correlation is not the same as causation.

Experiments from both classical mechanics and quantum physics are compatible with this framework. The Image reality (or Output reality) fits with Einsteinian relativity and observations fitting that mathematical analysis. The path of a particle travelling through the sequence of iterations of the Object reality (no longer existing) might be regarded as a string. The space-time manifestation of an object upon observation could be thought of as the wave function collapse where possibilities for the properties of the actualised object become a certain known manifestation when the iteration selected is observed. The manifestation only comes into being upon observation when the facet of reality under consideration is altered.

The framework may look complicated, however it is not difcult to comprehensd when familiar with its structure and the terminolgy that is used with it. Its structure is necessary for its function. The strucure can't be simlified without forfeiting that explanatory function.  

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................This  framework depends upon the meaning of the words used (definitions are included), the relationship of the ideas described and the matters of fact supplied by scientific experiment. This makes it more than just induction of theory from matters of fact, analysis of results. It is self consistent, allows various theories to sit together without contradiction, does not require alteration of experimental facts, overcomes paradox and answers questions. It is important that paradox is avoided or overcome as it is an indication of error. Overcoming many paradoxes is a major accomplishment of the explanatory framework. It does all of this while complying with the verification principle of the Vienna circle logical positivists. As well as solving many problems for physics that have threatened the future of the science and its reputation, it allows physics to move a step closer to ideas from other branches of human investigation of reality. Biology, Psychology, Philosophy and Theology. It supplies a new conception of the Absolute which is compatible with the best scientific theory.

Not mere Newtonian space nor Einstein’s space-time continuum. It comprises “what is” the uni-temporal Object universe comprising the matter and particles and medium of the universe, and the data pool of potential sensory data (which may be related to holographic ideas of the universe); the ongoing process of continual change , the Action of the Object universe giving causality and creation at the foundational level of reality; and the observation of the creation, input data being combined to give an out put image reality via a reality interface. These are 3 different but interrelated aspects, no one of which is suffice to describe the Entirety of the reality of the universe on its own.

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Although the presentation of this framework is rather philosophical, that is a result of its development to answer the foundational questions and paradoxes, which it does. However the lay out of the diagram should allow more mathematical representations to be developed from it for use with other mathematical models within physics. It will enable the mathematics used by physicists to be correctly interpreted within the Entirety of the explanatory framework rather than as matter of fact which are isolated fragments of reality. Eventually it will be possible to regard all aspects of reality in the context of physics in correct correspondence with each other and with the Entirety of the reality of nature.  The diagram provided together with the word list with definitions should be sufficient to allow the explanatory framework to be understood and used within physics. It is most important that physicists know which facet of reality they are working with and whether relativity or simultaneity should apply. 

....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Experimental physics, exploring nature at the extremes of what is possible at this time, is giving results to add to mankind's accumulated knowledge but attempts to explain those results seem to portray nature as being at odds with human experience of reality and logical thought. The body of physics knowledge can be counter intuitive, self contradicting and paradoxical. Research has been providing data but rather than providing answers to foundational questions about reality it has added further questions and confusion.Scientific knowledge builds upon prior knowledge. The hope has been that further scientific investigation, founded upon the body of prior knowledge, will provide the vital clue giving a solution. An answer to such foundational questions as whether QM or Einsteinian relativity is the best description of the reality of the Universe or why does there seem to be an arrow of time?

 That approach has failed, as it has not been lack of experimental data, the matters of fact, that has led to the problems.It has been the inability to find the correct realtionship of ideas. Development of this framework is not just linear building of knowledge upon knowledge but some adjustment of the interpretation of knowledge, so that it can co-exist. It is not altering the evidence from experiment, or replacing theory that has been shown to be consistent with experimental results but chnging how it is explained. So it is still consistent with the spirit of scientific induction of theory from experimental facts not undermining it. Facts must be correctly fitted together as correlation is not the same as causation. (This is the case with the curvature of space -time, which by use of this framework can be seen to be an emergent phenomenon that can be deduced from observation but is not the cause of gravity. As the actualised Object in external reality is not within space-time but only its observer manifestation fabricated from received data.)

Disproof

This explanatory framework can be dis-proven by the discovery of a worm hole in space-time permitting time travel or discovery of any object or time traveller that has verify-ably travelled directly to the observed Present from a time other than the only time within Object reality according to this framework, Uni-temporal Now.

Experimental evidence 

It may be possible to show that a space-time Output reality can self develop for a virtual organism with simple sensory ability exposed to a sequence of uni-temporal virtual environments, with objects or parts within it of survival value and other objects or parts that are dangers to survival. By selection of those organisms best able to survive, the algorithms used by the organisms to navigate and locate the means to survive will also be selected. Using virtual organisms the evolution rate can be greatly accelerated compared to a natural organism.

It can be hypothesized that eventually those organisms best able to survive will have developed algorithms giving some kind of internal map of the external environment on which decisions about locomotion can be based. This would demonstrate that space-time experience is an emergent phenomenon from data processing and not an indication of an external space-time environment.

This framework does not disallow faster than light speed travel, if inertia is overcome, but will disallow observation of it, as  sensory data transmission is limited to c. ( How this can theoretically  be achieved is an interesting topic for discussion elsewhere.)