Do you believe what you claim to believe?

[Resha Caner]

If I understood the difference between 'fundamental' and 'material' in your usage, I could give you an answer. At the lowest level, all interactions are quantum mechanical; the classical view is effectively an intuitive abstraction of that. You said 'fundamental' was a 'synonym for immaterial', but it's not clear to me what you mean by 'immaterial' either; do you mean the fundamental force-mediating bosons as opposed to the fermions that make up everyday palpable matter? if not, what?

I don't know enough about QM to distinguish bosons from fermions in order to answer your question. I'm trying to be up front that this is a learning process for me. So, I won't necessarily end this conversation in the same place I started. I realize I've no reason to expect you to teach me QM, so I'll just stay in the conversation for as long as you're interested.

Given that, the best way I can answer your question is to ask whether you agree that "everyday palpable matter" exhibits emergent properties not exhibited by QM? If so, that is the separation I intended to distinguish with the terms "fundamental" and "material".

 

[devolved]

I guess, that's where I really don't understand what would be the significance of the concept that a single photon can be detected by the brain, or a visual cortex?

The larger issue with the concept you propose is in how our brain works to process the information. It's a very specific and directed flow through various specialized neural "departments" that interpret patterns and pass these on up the chain to further "departments" that interpret features and eventually determine what specific type of the neural input is detected.

We have to remember that a single neuron is in itself immensely complex entity when we are talking about it's QM scope.

I really don't see that it's very likely that singular quantum events could create a global effect on the brain given the above.

Quantum events seem to be bound to limits of what we'd observe as classical mechanics. It's not yet clear how, but for that reason we won't likely see complex chain reactions from singular event like a photon emission, unless it's a highly unstable combination of matter that could do it... and is suspended in some sort of quantum isolation.

Keep in mind that a 20 watt light bulb generates around 8 x 10^20 photons per second. If one could achieve the effect you are talking about, what would a trillion do?

 

[Resha Caner]

Keep in mind that a 20 watt light bulb generates around 8 x 10^20 photons per second. If one could achieve the effect you are talking about, what would a trillion do?

I didn't intend to specify any particular number or pattern of photons.

 

[devolved]

I didn't intend to specify any particular number or pattern of photons.

You've linked to an article that discusses it in a context of a single photon conditioning (for insects).

http://www.aaai.org/Papers/Symposia/Spring/2007/SS-07-08/SS07-08-012.pdf

I've assumed that by "butterfly effect" you meant something similar.

 

[quatona]

If I've asked you "How can I know that you believe what you believe and not merely adhering to a cultural pattern due to 10% overlap in your personal belief and 90% peer pressure"... what would your answer be?

I´m not an adherent to any religion. My answer (in regards to my metaphysical convictions) would be:
"How´s that any of your business?"

 

[devolved]

I´m not an adherent to any religion. My answer (in regards to my metaphysical convictions) would be:
"How´s that any of your business?"

Great. Thank you for your participation

 

[quatona]

Great. Thank you for your participation

Thanks for asking.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

...the best way I can answer your question is to ask whether you agree that "everyday palpable matter" exhibits emergent properties not exhibited by QM? If so, that is the separation I intended to distinguish with the terms "fundamental" and "material".

OK, that's a reasonable description; so 'fundamental' means micro-scale (QM), and 'material' means macro-scale (everyday matter). In terms of interactions, they're both involved, as they're different views of the same thing (but it's usually simpler to consider the macro-scale abstraction).