HE THINGS THAT THE FUTURE BELONGS TO ZEN AND EXPLAINS WHY

Mechanized minds: AI's hidden impact on human thought - Big Think
https://bigthink.com/thinking/the-mechanized-mind-ais-hidden-impact-on-human-thought/

Wow, a wonderful technique

I'd never been interested in Stoicism, but I recently came across this:

If you're fond of a jug, say, 'This is a jug that I'm fond of,' an then, if it gets broken, you won't be upset. If you kiss your child or your wife, say to yourself that it is a human being that you're kissing; and then, if one of them should die, you won't be upsetting.
                                   Epictetus

And it seems to work even when it comes to kissing yourself. 

ZEN FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF QUANTUM MECHANICS - 6

ONE THING I WANT TO WARN YOU ABOUT


I now dwell on our entanglement with environment and what it takes to be unentangled; and for that I start with the most banal kind of it: our entanglement with material things. In fact, very often it's the main obstacle to enlightenment since for many material things are not only the main source of their self-worth but even part of their identity. (In this regard, the walking meditation described in this blog* can really help: when you move the earth with your legs, everything on it comes and goes except you.)

Then the question you have to answer is this: how can you make sure that your possessions will always remain just a tool, not an emotional entity?

To answer this, we have a new perspective: the idea that freedom means being unentangled. It's not an abstraction; it's your practice and way of living; it's freedom from and freedom to at the same time. You may not even realise how unusual this perspective is for the majority (at least these days, people in either the East or the West simply can't afford the luxury of having such a lifestyle). Exploring it, you enter uncharted territory so don't be surprised if you find something that defies common sense and would never occur to a 'normal' person. For example, does wealth always make us free? (Note that once we start to analyse our relationship with wealth, it's not only about things but also people since wealth is a social phenomenon.)


One of the reasons why I bring up this topic is because I want to worn you that if you make decisions based on Zen intuition as I describe it,** you'll wind up in a wonderful but unstable state (the state is really wonderful: I'm almost 60, but I still feel free and happy like a teenager skipping school).


As far as I'm concerned, following this path, I did quite well in an unstable and even chaotic environment -- in Bulgaria in the 1990s -- at least much better than the majority that would stick to their permanent jobs; for them, it was a disaster. There was absolutely no security, but on the flipside, there were a lot of opportunities. I was pretty good at spotting and taking advantage of opportunities but bad at the next stage that many believe busyness is abot: creating a permanent state of codependency with clients -- a sort of symbiosis -- creating bonds, in a world. The former and the later are of absolutely different nature and require completely different skills. And then when I came to Europe (Bulgaria wasn't in the EU at the time), I found a completely different environment: that they'd traded opportunities for security and didn't realise that the former is always at the expense of the later.


And perhaps one of the most surprising things I've discovered is the fact that if you think of freedom as being unentangled, then wealth makes you free only to a certain point, but then the richer you get, the more you get entangled with others if only because you need to protect your possessions -- it's up to you to prove me wrong -- although investing money into realising your ideas can be a solution, of course.

In this view, it's okay to be a hunter and go hunting every day, but for some reason it always tends to end up in some stable state of codependency. Psychologists even say that codependency is a sign of maturity, but I doubt that 'maturity' is the right term here. (I once read a Zen master describing his teaching experience; he says that enlightenment is hardest to achieve for emotional women and psychologists -- perhaps because they can't imagine what it's like to be unentangled.) Stuart Kauffman, I already mentioned him,*** in his At Home In the Universe: the Search for the Laws of Self- Organisation and Completely claims that complex systems, including living organisms, naturally tend to evolve to thrive right on the edge of chaos -- the ordered state is too rigid, the chaotic, well, too chaotic -- one must add if they're independent players of course.

.

And of course the question arises: can such unentangled individuals unite together to cary out projects, especially long-term ones, to defend themselves, to cooperate in a word? I bet they can, which for many may be quite revolutionary: Freud, for instance, believed that the only force that could unite us into society was Eros; I mean his division of human instincts into Eros and Thanatos is wrong. Because there're indeed two tendencies, but they're: a tendency to merge and a tendency to detach. Once you start thinking in these terms, everything falls into place.

To be continued

_______________

* https://0zen1.blogspot.com/2016/03/the-main-trick-walking-zazen_22.html
** https://0zen1.blogspot.com/search/label/intuition
*** https://0zen1.blogspot.com/2024/06/zen-from-perspective-of-quantum.html

ZEN FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF QUANTUM MECHANICS - 5

Free Will - 2

So, I see free will as the ability to make choices that aren't determined by past events. I reckon it's real, and I explained how it works in my previous post. However, there's no way for me to prove that I'm right. The reason I can't prove it is that being in this state of mind -- where time flows from the future to the past, i.e., seeing the world from the perspective of the centre of the Universe* -- is inherently a subjective experience since you're on your own in this state.

Now, recall Waugh's model:** there are two distinct frames of reference/viewpoints: the centre of the Universe viewpoint and the viewpoint of humans from an awkward position in the Universe. Relativity reflects our viewpoint, while quantum mechanics reflects Nature's viewpoint from the centre of the Universe. The Universe, and time in particular, is perceived differently from each viewpoint, and it's precisely this difference that allows the reconciliation between general relativity and quantum mechanics.

I'm not sure if his model is correct, but I do agree that there are two perspectives: from one, time flows from the past to the future; from the other, when you're the centre of the Universe, it flows from the future to the past, and it's precisely this duality which makes free will possible.

So, I can also add, the reason I can't prove that it's sometimes possible to make decisions undetermined by the past -- actually, it's an even more general problem, for example, many feel that Determinism is wrong, but they just can't prove it -- is because general relativity doesn't emerge from quantum mechanics. Instead, they both emerge from something more fundamental (it sounds strange that we're considering the emergence of Possibilities, which, by definition, exist in the future). The Crystallizing Block Universe theory*** makes this clearer: there are two realms that overlap in the present.

In other words, there are things in the Universe which, by definition, cannot be proven empirically and will always remain part of our individual subjective experiences and, as a result, beliefs. I think it's no coincidence that many physicists today are interested in Buddhism and Zen in particular.

To be continued.

____________________________

*The Walking Zen - Zen without a Teacher: ZEN FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF QUANTUM MECHANICS - 1
https://0zen1.blogspot.com/2024/06/zen-from-perspective-of-quantum.html

**RRCAT Physicist claims that physics and cosmology are both in crisis because of writing model of universe
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/rrcat-physicist-claims-physics-cosmology-033021388.html

***What is time? An astronomer explains the search to find its origin
https://www.astronomy.com/science/what-is-time-an-astronomer-explains-the-search-to-find-its-origins/

***The Crystallising Universe
https://plus.maths.org/content/crystallising-universe

ZEN FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF QUANTUM MECHANICS - 4

 Free Will - 1

As is known, determinism leaves no room for free will since, in a completely deterministic world, only one outcome is possible. However, some reckon, including myself, that free will can emerge from the nature of the quantum world. Yet, trying to explain free will by probabilistic outcomes of wave function collapse may not be the solution if only because these outcomes are always random, and we can't control or influence them. In the long term, we can't claim responsibility for our actions in either case: whether our decisions are completely predetermined or a matter of random quantum chance.

Instead, let's remember that wave functions exist in the realm of Possible* -- you already know which interpretations of quantum mechanics I adhere to** -- which means that their present state is not determined by the past. Possibles exist in the future and from there, affect the present -- this is what I mean by the oppositely directed arrow of time in this blog.*** As I read in one forum, 'We humans live embedded in the constraints of space and time, but wave functions don't.'

When you are in a state like a wave function (unentangled or, in other words, independent), you're free from your past (your karma) and guided by your intuition (an anticipation of the future), which tells you what you should do in the long run to maintain this state of mind. There's nothing mystical about it; it's simply a natural result of being independent -- what I call Zen intuition.****

Then the choice you face is always a binary one: whether to remain independent and enjoy the benefits of being like a wave function, such as continuing to be able to make a choice, or to merge with something and become part of it.

To make it clear, if, for example, you start to ponder what is the best thing to trade your independence for, then it's no longer a matter of free will since you've already made your choice. Free will is relevant to those who are unentangled, and from their perspective, the choice is always between merging and not merging. The only exception might be if you are entangled and decide to break those bonds.

On top of that, some physicists believe that entanglement could be the reason for the existence of the arrow of time. What, then, does it mean to be unentangled? In any case, in this state, you're absolutely free and independent to such an extent that you're on your own.

To be continued.

__________________________

*A Hypothesis: Res Potentia and Res Extensa Linked By Merriment
https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2011/01/03/132607500/an-hypothesis-res-potentia-and-res-extensa-linked-by-measurement

*Is The Possible Ontologically Real?
https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2012/01/09/144899020/is-the-possible-ontologically-real

** The Walking Zen - Zen without a Teacher: ZEN FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF QUANTUM MECHANICS - 1
https://0zen1.blogspot.com/2024/06/zen-from-perspective-of-quantum.html

*** https://0zen1.blogspot.com/search/label/time

**** The Walking Zen - Zen without a Teacher: intuition
https://0zen1.blogspot.com/search/label/intuition

To be continued 

ZEN FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF QUANTUM MECHANICS - 3

As mentioned, there are two perspectives from which you can see the world. From one, the reference point is outside of you, and you're on the periphery. From the other, the reference point is you, and you are the centre of the Universe.

So, what happens during zazen, for example, when you lose the centre and a thought comes into your mind? You become entangled, in a quantum sense, with someone or something. This process always drains your energy, and you may even feel as if you've lost something. A manipulator can make you doubt your plans and ambitions, causing the sensation that a part of you has been taken away. In reality, you've lost nothing but only gained, and all you have to do is cut off these new bonds to become disentangled, i.e. independent, again -- this is a well-known Zen wisdom, and now you can see why it works.

What I'm suggesting is that a part of your potential has transformed into these new bonds. These are the same bonds responsible for Einstein's 'spooky action at a distance'; the process is quite reversible, with no loss of information in this case.

To be continued.

ZEN FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF QUANTUM MECHANICS - 2

So, what happens when you've finally become unentangled (during zazen, for example, if you're doing it correctly, of course)? Firstly, you begin to feel that you're the centre of the Universe. That is, it's no longer you moving along the road, but the road moving relative to you.* # (Actually, it's the correct perception of really indeed since physicists claim that the geometry of the Universe is a such that 'every point in space, every observer can be lay equal claim to being at the very centre themselves.')

Once you reach this state, you can be fully aware of your body and the external world at the same time, and you start to be able to intuitively grasp reality instantly as a whole.

Secondly, you begin to feel that time flows from the future to the past** -- that's how time flows when you're the centre, the reference point. It's the same as the previous point, but now it's about your perception of time: it's not you're moving from the past to the future, but the future is moving towards you. Indeed, we always say that the future turns into the past, not the other way around.

I reckon this means that in this state, your present is determined by the future, not the past, so you have a choice (I'll dwell on free will in some upcoming posts). At this point, you begin to anticipate the future -- this is what I call Zen intuition -- but surprisingly, it's all about how you have to act in the long run to maintain this state of mind.

Some may say that all we see is the past, but it actually isn't. It takes for the brain about 0.1 seconds to process visual information, so to correct our perception, the brain models the future and anticipates what's going to happen. Otherwise, if we, for instance, walked at a speed of 1 metre per second, the error, the lag, would be 0.1 metres.

What I've learnt from my Zen practice is that there're two perspectives. From one perspective, as the majority see the world, you're part of something -- a group, tribe, etc -- it's a realm of hierarchy; you share opinions and ideologies with others; your present is entirely determined by the past; you explore the world empirically.

From the other perspective, you're the centre; you're alone: the whole universe is just you. You perceive it instantly as a whole, and in this way you understand it; you see and evaluate the world from your own standpoint; you're free: your present is not determined by the past, so you have a choice.

To be continued.


________________________________

* https://0zen1.blogspot.com/2016/03/the-main-trick-walking-zazen_22.html

** https://0zen1.blogspot.com/search/label/time

ZEN FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF QUANTUM MECHANICS - 1

ZEN FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF QUANTUM MECHANICS - 1

What can a Zen practitioner gain from quantum mechanics? Quite a lot, I think, because it can help you get a grasp of how the mind works and therefore better understand what the correct Zen practice should be. To me, this is perhaps the most important question Zen needs to answer now since currently, there are at least two different ways of doing zazen among Zen practitioners --  sometimes you can trace this division as the difference between Rinzai and Soto Zen -- as a result, they achieve two different states of mind, but no one seems to care.

Now you can see why I called this series 'Zen from the Perspective of Quantum Mechanics,' not the other way around, although my own interpretation of quantum mechanics — QM from my perspective -- comes first, of course. In a nutshell, I've found a perspective from which, in my view, (almost) everything falls into place, and from which it's easy for me to explain what I mean.

Quantum mechanics has a reputation for being 'strange' or 'weird,' but is it really? I reckon the reason why some find it 'strange' is because they've got hold of the wrong idea of time.

Let me make it clear: I'm by no means a physicist, but through my Zen practice, I've started to suspect that consciousness has a quantum nature and that Einstein's idea of time (that the world is predetermined; now is just an illusion, and there's no place for free will) is wrong.

So, what makes quantum mechanics 'weird'? Several things:

1. Wave-Particle Duality:

Particles exhibit both particle-like and wave-like properties. For example, in the double-slit experiment, we send a single photon through two thin slits in a plate, and the photon behaves not like a single particle but a cloud of probabilities  -- a fuzzy cloud of all possible states in which it exists simultaneously -- so this cloud goes through both slits at the same time (by the way, that part of the cloud that hit the partition between the two slits bounces back) and then interferes with itself like a wave (a single photon marks a dot at the detector screen behind the plate, as expected, but if we continue doing this for many photons, we can see an interference pattern built up from individual dots -- just as waves interfere in water, canceling out where a crest meets a trough).

This cloud of all possible states is called the wave function of the photon; i.e., a wave function describes the probability distribution of finding a particle in various states. So you can say that it's the wave function of the photon is going simultaneously through the slits.

2. Quantum Superposition:

Quantum particles can exist in multiple states simultaneously. A particle in a superposition state doesn't have a specific position, energy, or any other physical property until it' measured. Schrödinger's cat thought experiment illustrates how bizarre this would be in our macroscopic world. (Otherwise, if quantum mechanics applied to a cat, it would be described as a "wave function' in a superposition of 'alive' and 'dead.")

3. Uncertainty Principle: It's impossible to know both the exact position and momentum of a particle simultaneously. The more precisely you measure one, the less precise the other becomes.

4. Quantum Entanglement:

Particles can be entangled, meaning the state of one particle instantly influences the state of another regardless of the distance separating them -- Einstein called it 'spooky action at a distance'. Thus, when you measure something about one particle in an entangled pair, you immediately know something about the other particle—you can deduce its quantum state. (Funny enough, we can find something like this in folklore: she keeps his knife while he is away, and when the knife suddenly rusts, she knows something has happened to him.)

5. Quantum State Collapse:

When a particle in quantum state is measured (i.e., when it becomes entangled with the external world, the measurement equipment, for example), its wave function collapses from a superposition of states (sum of states) into a single state. As mentioned, entangled particles can retain some wave function's properties -- like Einstein's spooky action at a distance  -- but when a particle undergoes a more complex entanglement with its environment, its wave function collapses to a single possibility. This is why quantum phenomena are absent in our macroscopic world: under normal circumstances, a quantum system would undergo rapid entanglement with many other particles that make up the environment. 

So, what's wrong with Einstein's idea of time?

Quantum mechanics will seem strange to you if you stick to Einstein's idea of time -- Block Universe: the Universe is predetermined from the very beginning, and there's no difference between the past, the president and the future; all three of them simultaneously coexist (and it’s just the peculiarities of your consciousness that allow you to experience only the present moment).

I'm sure you've heard of the many-worlds interpretation; it's really weird, but it's just an attempt to reconcile indeterminacy of quantum mechanics with Einstein's deterministic idea of time -- all possible outcomes of quantum measurements are physically realised in some Universe.

Meanwhile, there are other ideas of time:

In 2011, there was a discussion on NPR's blog 13.7: Cosmos And Culture, and Stuart Kauffman came up with some interesting ideas*: 'reality consists of two Realms, the Possible and the Actual linked by quantum measurement 'process': The quantum world lies in the Possible, the classical world, in Actual; 'measurement' in his view is becoming.

Thus, Possibles are ontologically real (another way of saying real), and at the same time they don't obey Aristotle's Law of the Excluded Middle: 'A' or 'Not A' -- and there's nothing in the middle or 'A' and 'Not A' either. So in the double slit experiment 'the photon possibly does pass through the left slit and simultaneously possibly does not pass through the left slit; AND phone does pass through the right slit and simultaneously does not pass through the right slit.'

It's quite apparent that Kauffman rejects Einstein's idea of time although without mentioning this  -- he seems to share the same view as George Ellis and Tony Rothmam (see below). For him, the Possible refers to the future, and the Actual, to the past. 

The Crystallising Block Universe** 

George Ellis and Tony Rothman came up with interesting new ideas that restore the view that 'now' is special and free will exists. They called it the Crystallising Block Universe: the future of the current moment is a cloud of probabilities and is determined by the laws of quantum mechanics; the past, is fixed and stored as a set of information resembling a hologram, and what we call the present is the boundary between these two regiments, where the indeterminacy of the future is crystallising into the certainty of the past. 

Thus, instead of the (may be infinite) divergence of the many-world interpretation, we have a convergence of all possible states into a single frozen state. Note also that, in this case, time flows from the future to the past: the Possible turns into the Actual.

Waugh's model***

Waugh's model implies the existence of two different frames of reference/viewpoints: the centre of the Universe viewpoint and the viewpoint of humans from an awkward position in the Universe. Relativity is our viewpoint, while quantum mechanics is nature's viewpoint from the centre of the Universe. The Universe, and time in particular, is perceived differently from each viewpoint, and it's precisely this that allows the reconciliation between general relativity and quantum mechanics. From the centre of the Universe viewpoint, simultaneity is absolute, and there's indeed absolute universal time (as demanded by quantum mechanics) because the time passed since the Big Bang is simply a function of the radius of the Universe. From our viewpoint, locality is absolute, i.e., the velocity c is the upper limit and remains constant for every observer.

Now I'll give you an idea of what I'm going to explore in the following posts. It's quite apparent to me that human relationships are of the same nature as quantum entanglement, but to notice this simple fact one must be unentangled. And it's exactly from this perspective, being like a wave function, that you start to understand the true meaning of non-attachment, freedom, and, therefore, what the correct Zen practice should be.

Living beings tend to manipulate each other, establishing hierarchies — sexual intercourse, for example, is just a type of manipulation —and all this happens at a very archaic level. What we call telepathy, at least at an emotional level, does exist. Some people are quite aware of this; others, not so much — perhaps because they're too much entangled, whereas the phenomenon in question is, I guess, a type of entanglement. 

To be continued.

________________________________

*A Hypothesis: Res Potentia and Res Extensa Linked By Merriment
https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2011/01/03/132607500/an-hypothesis 

Is the Possible Ontologically Real? 
https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2012/01/09/144899020/is-the-possible-ontologically-real

**What is time? An astronomer explains the search to find its origin: https://www.astronomy.com/science/what-is-time-an-astronomer-explains-the-search-to-find-its-origins/
** The Crystallising Universe https://plus.maths.org/content/crystallising-universe
*** RRCAT physicist claims that physics and cosmology are both in crisis because of the writing model of the universe. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/rrcat-physicist-claims-physics-cosmology-033021388.html