Re: Quantum theory: A resonance effect?


"slehar" <slehar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1133537315.903073.253980@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> No offense but that seems to me to be a bit of
>> an over generalization.
>
> What exactly is the over-generalization? The notion that the world is
> entirely analog, and the only thing that makes it discrete is
> resonance?

Well you silently snipped the context, but, yes, that
is a generalization, an opinion, an aesthetic observation.
It is kind of like saying 'Everything is blue except that which
is a different color.'

>
> Think about it. There are two kinds of events or happenings in the
> universe: cataclysmic chaotic unpredictable unique events, and periodic
> regular repeating events. Every one of the latter that I can think of
> are examples of resonance of one sort or another.
>
> The most prominent example of the former is the Big Bang itself--a
> single, unique, unitary event that could never have possibly been
> predicted (if anything existed before it to make that prediction), and
> it will never happen again, or at least if it does, it must also come
> as a complete un-predictable surprise.
>
> But that cataclysmic creational thunderclap left countless billions of
> echos in its wake, in the form of particles, which are standing-wave
> resonances of that primordial energy resonating round and round at
> various harmonic frequencies, and the microwave background radiation,
> which actually only *peaks* at microwave frequency, but leaves traces
> across the spectrum at different frequencies, and every one of these
> waves is itself a kind of oscillatory resonance, except in the form of
> travelling waves, rather than standing waves. All that remains of the
> Big Bang today is the resonance echos of that singular event, like the
> waves in a pond after a stone is thrown in.

I'd say calling a galaxy analogous to a wave in a pond is a whopper
of a generalization.

>
> The particles from that creation interact in one of two ways: either
> they collide with each other randomly and unpredictably, then move on
> for an unpredictable interval till the next collision, or they fall
> into a periodic resonant relationship, from protons and electrons that
> merge into neutrons, forming a larger standing wave resonance, to
> electron orbitals in periodic patterns around the atomic nucleus, to
> atoms that merge into molecules with their own characteristic larger
> resonances, to agglomerations of particles from dust grains to
> snowballs to asteroids to planets to stars, which admittedly are not so
> resonant, but more irregular.

Yup. Everything is resonant except that which is not.

>
> A planet in orbit around a sun is another periodic resonance, like a
> pendulum swinging in circles instead of back and forth, with a
> continuous range of elliptical rotations in between. The resonance of
> planetary orbits is seen most clearly during their formation from the
> planetary disk, with countless rings and spokes, like those now seen in
> the rings of Saturn, that eventually condense into near-circular orbits
> spaced at harmonic intervals due to resonance effects between planets
> at different orbital radii. Everything on earth that is regular and
> predictable, from the daily rotation of day and night, to the seasonal
> variation, to the annual cycle, to the cycle of ice ages, is again a
> resonance phenomenon. All else is chaotic and random and unpredictable.


Yup. Everything is resonant except that which is not.

>
>
> Ok, I'll admit I'm taking it a bit too far. It is perhaps an
> over-generalization, there are other patterns which are not exactly
> resonance, for example the periodic pattern of a DNA molecule is not
> itself a resonance effect, even though its component atoms and
> molecules are each tiny resonances. But there is a kernel of truth
> there, that suggests that there is something truly magical and
> creational about the principle of resonance, it is the only physical

That is aethetics, opinion, faith.

> principle that postpones the steady advance of entropy, and
> spontaneously creates periodic order out of chaotic disorder.

Clearly you don't understand thermodynamics.
(Nor chaos theory.)

>
>>> I have proposed ... it is the resonance principle of our brains
>>> that explains our special affinity to music
>
>> It seems more likely to me that various things in nature that
>> have bearing on survival also produce sounds (lions roar, rumble
>> of rocks falling, buzz of honey bees, baby's cry). Evolution has
>> selected us to have some programmed responses (mental states/feeling)
>> to sounds. Music, as all sound, stimulates those same circuits
>> elliciting
>> a mixture of the associated states/feelings.
>
> Well think about the phenomenon of *consonance*, i.e. which notes sound
> good with which other notes. When the frequencies of notes f1 & f2 are
> related by harmonic intervals (octaves, fifths, thirds,...) then they
> are perceived to be consonant, they sound good together. There is
> nothing in nature that has those relations except for manifestations of
> resonance. Then think of periodicity--when notes form periodic
> patterns, not just simple alternations CGCGCGCG..., but compound
> patterns, CEGECEGE..., CEEGEECEEGEE, and compound hierarchical
> patterns, CECEGEGEADADGEGE, with compound hierarchies of compound
> hierarchies in endless symmetrical and periodic patterns, stepping on
> harmonically related frequencies, THOSE are the melodies that we find
> aesthetically appealing, and yet nothing in nature has those kinds of
> patterns except for harmonic resonances of various sorts.

But here, on the other hand, you say that nothing is resonant
except that which is.

> I claim that
> this is no accident,

Who did it then?

> but a manifestation of the fact that resonance is
> the principle of pattern formation and detection in the brain.

But according to you everything is resonance, so the above
doesn't seem to say much.

>
> Take a look at this brief cartoon presentation of the magic of harmonic
> resonance and how it operates in biology and in the brain.
>
> http://cns-alumni.bu.edu/~slehar/HRez/HRez.html
>
> (this is work in progress, to be extended when I have the time)

I look forward to the calculations and controlled experiments.

>
> Steve Lehar
>

--
rb


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Quantum theory: A resonance effect?
    ... are examples of resonance of one sort or another. ... travelling waves, rather than standing waves. ... electron orbitals in periodic patterns around the atomic nucleus, ... snowballs to asteroids to planets to stars, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Stable Orbit Formulae?
    ... concentric orbits around Sol. ... planets will evolve into orbits where they avoid mutual interaction ... restricted version of the 1:1 resonance problem. ... You're gonna have to gloss it over, because anything else is Pandora's Box, and you've just chaged your careers from game writer to astrophysicist. ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Stable Orbit Formulae?
    ... Thanks to your participation, and the new references, my interest in the ... able to verify that Bode's Law is not a resonance problem. ... Bode's Law, however stated, has AIUI never been considered as absolutely ... might be found relating the periods of successive planets. ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: The Nature of Mass
    ... Using waves alone, ... Resonance does not behave like the photoelectric effect does. ... photoelectric effect and resonance: at higher frequencies, ... properties of the body like its mass and its physical extent (amongst ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: This Weeks Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 222)
    ... analysis of the solar system. ... finite differencing error like a standard ODE integrator would do. ... Among Giant Planets ... transport and resonance transitions ...
    (sci.physics.research)