New Age Philosophy and Modern Physics part 2

The other physics phenomenon that seems to come up a lot with new age philosophers is wave-particle duality.  This is not what they usually call it. What they are interested in is the idea that observation affects the measurement.  Let me take a minute to describe the basic double-slit experiment that is used to validate this.

You take a laser and turn it down super low so that only one photon goes through the experiment at a time.  The individual photons go though a very closely spaced pair of slits.  And hit a photographic screen on the opposite side.  Each individual photon hits the screen leaving a single dot as if it was a particle, a miniature cannonball.  However, if photons were little cannonballs then after several hundred photons you would see two clusters of dots ... one behind each of the two slits.  But this is not what you see.  What you see is a distribution of photons consistent with a wave going through the slits.  See the picture I 'borrowed' from another website.

Now we get to the interesting part.  IF we add a sensor to the experiment in between the slits and the photographic screen to find out if the photon went through the left slit, the right slit, or both THEN we get two clusters of dots like for little cannonballs.  ( I didn't quickly find a picture I liked, so I used copy and paste to modify the picture from above and create the picture below. )

 

Never mind the exact details of this new sensor, suffice it to say that this part is tricky and a lot of physicists have reviewed and repeated the experiment.  Details of the sensor is something that I don't consider myself qualified to comment on.  The experiment has been performed to varying degrees with photons, electrons, atoms, and molecules by various researchers.  Let me get back to that in a second or two (see item 1 below).

 

The new age philosopher gets excited about this experiment because the act of observing the photon affected it's behavior.  It is important to note however that the experimenter still had no control over where the photon went.  So while there was an effect, there is no control.  This is an important distinction.  All credible scientific sources and theories of which I am aware do not allow the observer to have control. 

 

When I point this out, I am usually rebuffed with anecdotal stories of experiments where thoughts reduced crime, changed the shape of water crystals, or a hundred other things.  I have looked into several of these and found no credible scientific evidence.  One that comes up a lot is Dr. Emoto's "Messages from Water" or a similar publication by the same author.  There are several issues with this including but not limited to:

 

1) Lack of peer repetition.  I have found no publications from other researchers that substantiate the claims.  There is however, a publication testing crystal formation at specific temperatures which appears to disprove Dr. Emoto's hypothesis.  But the author (Libbrecht) was only testing for temperature, not the mood of the technician.

 

2) No blind tests.  In fact, the good Doctor has been quoted as denouncing this procedure.  So the person taking the picture of the water crystal knows exactly what to expect and can easily affect the results.

 

3) Limited data release.  The good Doctor has chosen to only release one picture from 1 in 100 samples tested.  This means that he could have chosen whatever he wanted to support any hypothesis.  Full disclosure would require releasing a video of every sample.

 

If somebody wanted to substantiate the claims of Dr. Emoto, they could do a blind experiment where the photographers are given samples from three groups without knowing which group they are from.  One group could be "love", another "hate" and the last unlabeled.  Then it would be the photographer's job to determine which group the sample came from.  The accuracy of their categorization would go a long ways to substantiate or disprove Dr. Emoto's claims. 

 



So, why do new age philosophers gravitate towards the same examples regardless of the fact that they do not actually provide evidence of their claims or beliefs?  I suppose it is the same reason we all do it, we want to believe what we want to believe and we want to be lazy about it too.  But I do get frustrated having the same conversation over and over again ... especially when it is with the same person(s).

New Age Philosophy and Modern Physics part 1

It seems that science is doomed to be used to justify the beliefs of individuals who have a very limited understanding.  I write this post knowing that I am by no stretch of the imagination an authority or minor expert on quantum physics.  In fact, I found some of the conclusions and consequences of quantum physics so abhorrent that I switched my major in college from physics to applied physics just to avoid two classes on the topic. 

So why do I take the time to write this?  I have repeatedly had portions of a conversation with people who want to cite experiments and conclusions from quantum theory as evidence of one belief or another.  Unfortunately, they never get the basics right and invariably end up on the defensive rather than learning anything.  Excuses range from them not being able to remember some key detail and therefore claiming that we must be talking about different things all together to outright dismissing what I have to say because it is irrelevant or inaccurate.  I really should just let it go.  But apparently I am not going to just yet.

A recent conversation involved a description of what I am fairly certain was quantum entanglement.  Person X could not remember the word entanglement but described two objects that were connected some how and that when researchers did something to object A it affected object B instantly and over great distance.  Honestly, even that description is far clearer than what was given to me.  I am not certain why they were excited by this.  But they followed up by talking about anecdotal evidence (with no specifics as to dates, names, or locations) of twins or parents who 'instantly knew' when something bad had happened to their sibling or child. 

So why bring up quantum entanglement (or something like it)?  If you take the time to wiki this topic, you will find that current theories and corresponding research indicates that no information can be communicated via quantum entanglement.  This is not a route to faster than light communication.  Therefore, it has no bearing on topics such as remote viewing even in its familial variation. 

However, there is a well established and understood scientific phenomenon which does relate to the interconnectedness of people and communication 'instantly' over great distances.  It is called radio.  Suppose that we radiate emotions and ideas.  We would similarly receive those emanations just like a radio does.  It would be foolish to assume that science has discovered all the forces and phenomena in the universe.  I think that it is quite possible that there is an emotive phenomenon that science has not discovered.  I also think that it is equally reasonable that emotions do radiate in the electromagnetic.  However, I have not seen any compelling research or evidence to either effect. 

I wish to write more on this subject but have spent far more time in the last while dealing with little children than trying to write ... so I am going to give up for a bit. 

Easy Pizza

I almost called it "homemade", but that would be stretching it for me.  I love pizza more than most people.  There is a huge range of enjoyable pizza out there, but my favorite is my homemade pizza.  Unfortunately, the crust takes about 1.5hours by itself, so I don't make it very often.  It is more common for me to eat freezer pizza or pizzeria pizza, but I like the easy pizza better than either of those.  Simplest recipie:

Loaf of store bought french bread. cut it in half to expose the largest inner surface possible in one straight cut (parallel to the table when the loaf is just sitting there).

Sauce.

Spices.

Grated cheese.

Toppings of choice.

Bake it in the oven.

Now for the long version.

Bread:  The more artisan breads can make a very good pizza.  However, often they are cooked to have an almost burned color to give that fire baked appeal.  Not good for a loaf of bread you intend to put back into the oven.  Also they tend to have a much harder outer crust which is great if you like it and have good molars.  These are not appropriate for little kids or the elderly.  I often get the cheapest loaf of bread that has the softest possible crust ... because I have little kids.  They still just eat the toppings ... but at least they could eat the crust.

Sauce:  Jars of "pizza sauce" are abhorrently thin and are only good for adding a little color to the crust.  If you want something to carry the tomato flavor and mix with your spices, then I recommend one 6oz (the smallest size) can of paste mixed with one can of diced tomatoes in sauce or juice.  Often I don't have the "in sauce" or "in juice" and settle for the normal ones and drain them.  If I have the soft french bread I still drain the "in sauce" and "in juice" varieties as the softer bread gets soggy easier.  But the "in sauce" or "in juice" makes the sauce taste fresher and less bitter.  BTW this is a lot of sauce.  Probably enough for two loaves.

I often add diced spinach to the sauce which can make the sauce a little bitter even with the baby spinach.  I don't mind the bitter sauce.  I have found spring mix works well without making the sauce bitter.  But stay away from kale.  Far away.

Spices.  I don't like most of the Italian or Pizza spice mixes.  They are not balanced right.  They are always short on thyme and often omit the nutmeg.  Yes don't forget the nutmeg.  Just a dash.  You shouldn't be able to taste in the sauce unless you are trained.  Other spices include garlic, basil, and oregano in order of importance.  And NO black pepper.  Why you would want that in your pizza sauce is beyond me.  The exact balance of spices depends on your personal tastes.  If you are really into that tomato flavor, you may even consider replacing diced tomatoes with stewed tomatoes that have been cut to a size of your preference.  I warn you though, one inch thick slabs of stewed tomatoes are a bad idea.  IF you do go big on the tomatoes consider adding extra basil too.  On the other side of the spectrum you may consider petite diced tomatoes and extra garlic.

The spices do not have to be premixed into the sauce at all.  I will usually cut slivers of a young white or yellow onion (not from the heart of the onion) and mix them into the sauce as well as the garlic.  I am extra sensitive to garlic but still love the flavor so I can't tolerate a bite of pizza with extra garlic.  As for the rest of it though ... a bite with heavy basil or oregano is a treat.  It makes the pizza less monotonous.  I like to sprinkle the basil, oregano, and thyme on top of the sauce.

Cheese:  I am not that picky about my cheese.  But never get the finely grated cheeses as they end up melting differently.  I usually get pre-grated low moisture mozzarella.  A mix with some provolone maybe a little romano or mild cheddar is also good.  A minimum amount of cheese is one 8oz package of grated mozzarella per loaf of bread.  You may find that this is too little for your tastes.  Adding another 2oz of mild cheddar to the mix generally fills it out nicely.  Putting a total of 12oz of cheese on is getting fairly generous ... but 16 oz is probably over the line even for an afficionado. I don't usually save cheese to put on top of the other toppings.  Unless it is a little medium cheddar to crisp on top of a pizza with few toppings.

Toppings: Everybody has their favorite toppings.  I will just comment on three toppings:  pepperoni, sausage, and pepperocini.

Most packages of pepperoni are just too thin or greasy or both.  The small round ones are usually thicker and drier and better for pizza.  Outside of that you may consider getting expensive pepperoni, but at least stick to the main brands.

Sausage is usually really "breakfast sausage".  This is in no way appropriate for pizza.  Most stores that package "italian style" sausage really just cut some spices into their breakfast sausage.  This is a mistake.  If you want sausage get one that was made for pizza.  You may consider a link sausage like Linguica.  That is perhaps the most overlooked pizza meat.  If more pizzerias made it a standard meat it would not take long before it was more popular than pepperoni. 

Pepperocini.  My favorite brand is Mezzetta, but lots of brands are pretty good.  Do not buy pre-sliced pepperocini.  They have to be left to pickle intact and you have to cut the stems off after the fact.  The flavor difference far more significant than which brand you buy.  If I get them at a pizzeria I always ask if they were pre-sliced; if they were I will not get them. 

I have convinced several people to try a two topping pizza with nothing but pepperocinis and linguica.  They are usually quite impressed and about one in five of them decide it is their new favorite.

But don't be shy to experiment with your pizza.  The whole pizza does not have to have a new brand of olives or an unusual topping like pistachios (which are great but may require some other adjustments for you to really appreciate them).  You can make a little test corner.  You can also get the dinner party involved and let them top their own section with whatever they like.  Just be aware that a lot of toppings have a lot of water and too many can drown your pizza.

Bake:  The bake time kind of depends on the toppings.  More water from extra vegetables or thick layers of cheese requires more time at a lower temperature.  Grated cheese has lots of air which makes it a decent insulator (a big part of why you don't want finely grated cheese).  Adding a blanket of pepperoni and mushrooms on top only adds to this problem.  You have to get the cheese to 150F to properly melt through.  And you have to get the sauce to 120F or hotter especially if there were raw onions that you need to cook.  On a pre-baked loaf of bread you don't have to worry about dough temperature, but if you had fresh dough you would need to get the top layer of dough to 140F or so and you have to do it before the sauce absorbs in.  This is why most pizzerias don't do thick toppings, thick sauce, or thick crust ... or at least don't do it well.

I really don't know the exact temperatures for all the ingredients, but I do know cook times in my conventional oven at high altitude.  A standard loaf with about 10 oz of mozzarella, some pepperoni, and extra thick sauce takes about 13 min at 350F followed by another 3min at
425F.  Adding bell pepper, 2oz of extra cheese, and mushrooms means about 17min at 350F and 3min at 450F.  The last hot part is to brown the cheese after it is melted as well as steam off any residual juices.  A vegetarian deluxe pizza might take 20min at 325 and 5min at 425.  I never go above 450F or below 325F no matter how thick the toppings. 

That said, remember the bread is bre-baked.  Putting the pizza on a stoneware pan will help keep the crust from cooking as much.  If you have a convection oven, this won't make much difference.  

God's Injustice

Last Sunday in church we were talking about Job, and although the class did not get into the topic of justice, my mind did.  Job is a great story for understanding justice and injustice.

We sometimes want to think that justice means equal outcome for equal effort and talent.  We see from Job that this is not the case.  God does not guarantee good things to good people. In fact, He says "...that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all." Ecc. 9:11

 Sometimes, people get lost in the idea that a person 'will not be tempted beyond that which they are able' to resist.  This leads them to think that really bad things only happen to the strongest individuals.  But here again, this does not appear to be the case.  Sometimes, people break. 

What are we left with then for God's judgement and justice?  Is it just reward in heaven and recompense in the hereafter?  In some ways, it is not even that. 

The parable of the laborers in the vineyard (Matt 20: 1-16)  appears to have been composed to illustrate that the reward for following God's commandments does not correlate with the effort in following them and further to express that this is just by definition.  However, I think that by societies' standards, if the issue with the laborers were taken to a court of modern law the judge would side with the all-day laborers.

Further, it appears that opportunities in this life are not equal.  A person whose family comes to God is surely blessed with more exposure to the gospel than a person related solely to atheists ... by no fault of their own.

Even further, if we allow the definition of salvation to mean eternal increase, we are given no guarantee that the rate of increase will in any way correlate to our talents and sacrifices.

Such is the injustice of God.  However, I don't want to be misread as criticizing the Almighty.  I am trying to point out the twisted views of justice that we have developed.  The truth is that God blesses everybody beyond what we deserve.  If it is not the same as the next guy or not quite the blessings we wanted ... tough.  We miss the point when we worry about justice.  What we really need to focus on is mercy and charity.

Poem: All the King’s Men

Each day you put it together

What entropy has undone

You brush and shower

You stretch and run

You wash dishes

And sweep floors

You run errands

And do chores

But in the end

And in the beginning

And everywhen in between

Entropy …

Entropy is winning

Winning everything you’ve seen

Though life be undone

Live the life you dream

And entropy will say you’ve won

You’ve won,

You’ve won everything you’ve seen.

Aquarium Light Lamp Hack

(Satirical)



I decided to redo the aquarium to remove the lid and grow plants on top ... the only problem was getting the lighting I needed.  I went through several ideas that I decided would not work for me before deciding to get a tall floor lamp.  This turned out to be an ordeal, and so I am writing this for anybody else who would like to benefit from my experience.




- Look online and find the cheapest lamp that might work and balk at the cost.

- Go to Walmart and see that they have a hooked floor lamp at 81" high for only $20 and buy it.

- While opening the lamp, notice it says "flexible" and get a sick feeling as you realize that the 81" is with the lamp pointing up, not bent over.  The lamp is too short.

- Realize you can avoid admitting you made a mistake, by buying a second lamp, taking some of the vertical pipes from it. and making a taller and a shorter lamp.

- Take a moment to think about how clever you are.

- Take apart lamps with bear hands, including pulling the electrical wires out of the bulb socket.

- Have conversation with wife to reassure her that you are being safe.

- Go to test the pipe fittings and realize that even though the packaging on the two lamps are identical, the fittings are in fact different.

- Count to 10 to avoid swearing in front of children.

- Sing counting songs with children.

- Go to hardware store to buy nuts to protect the threads on the pipe fittings as you remove them.

- Remove the first pipe fitting and realize that inside of the pipes are not threaded and it doesn't matter that the threads are different between the lamps.

- Count to 10 to avoid swearing in front of the children.

- Sing counting songs with children.

- Try to push wires though the pipes.

- Realize you should have tied a string on the wires before pulling them out of the pipes so that you could use the same string to pull the wires back through the pipes.

- Get needle and thread, using needle as weight to pull thread through pipes.

- Realize that pipes and inserts are magnetic and needle will not easily go through pipes.

- Reassure wife that you are not damaging the furniture while you beat the pipes against the sofa and rug to get the needle through.

- Give the children hugs and reassure them that you do love them and you are not angry with them.

- Connect pipes.

- Realize you don't know which wire is "hot" and which is "neutral" and that it does matter.

- Get electrical tester and determine that it is broken.

- Wait for wife to run errand so you can avoid explaining to her what you are doing next.

- Get ladder so you can steal nine volt battery out of smoke detector and test the wires by "sparking" them.

- Talk to children about ladder safety and staying off the ladder while you are on it.

- While taking apart smoke detector threaten children if they don't get off the ladder.

- Convincingly threaten to beat children.

- Console children and reassure them that you still love them.

- Explain to wife why children are crying when she gets home.

- Test wires and try to reattach them to the bulb socket.

- Realize that you have damaged the socket by ripping the wires out with your bare hands.

- Count to 20 to avoid swearing in front of children.

- Sing counting songs with children.

- Find super glue.

- Retest wires so you know which one is which.

- Glue wires and fingers to bulb socket.

- Count to 100 to avoid cursing in front of children while you rip your fingers off the socket.

- Realize that no amount of singing is going to make your children like numbers after that.

- Finish assembling lamps and admire how good they look.

- Test wiring with and without having them plugged in to verify that they work well and are safe.

- Admire your work and think of all the money you saved.

- Look up the other lamp online to figure out exactly how much money you saved, and see that the lamp is now on sale for the same amount you have spent.

- Swear in front of children.

UPDATE:
In hind sight, it would have been cheaper and easier to buy a stool to put the lamp on.  On the up side, I really like the shorter lamp on the table next to the recliner as a reading light.

Mahan Complex

This is a term that I take credit for coining.   This is not saying much since I have heard nobody else use it.

Basically, I use it to refer to somebody who feels a need to be master of a great secret. 

We all can get lost in excitement about a new idea or insight.  I know I have.  But this is something different.  It is something about how the individual needs something to be true.  You often see it with conspiracy theorists.  They get wrapped up with UFOs or 9-11 as a US government sponsored bombing.  (I think everybody agrees it was the result of a conspiracy, the argument is about whose.)  But this is something different.  The person equates their personal value or status with their insights and knowledge of these theories.  Because of this, they become unhinged from the reality of the evidence and lack the ability to learn.  Often these are really smart people that you would expect to know better too.  They often jump from one theory to another over time, but will generally never disavow a theory.  You can also see this with health fads, MLMs, and religions.  Some individuals get mixed up in some or all of these.

As a sad example, take example X.  He was a professor of physics at BYU.  He got put on administrative leave shortly 9-11.  He was convinced that the Twin towers came tumbling down due to government planted implosive and or thermite devices.  The problem wasn't that he thought there was a consipracy.  The problem was that he was tarnishing the University by publishing papers and holding special lectures about it where-in he failed to present any real evidence or research.  Further, he did this in stead of some of other research etc. I watched one (that is to say I watched only one) online video of him in a BYU lecture hall filled with impressionable students.  He honestly seemed very enamored with the attention and took time to make a fair number of jokes at the expense of others.  He was always a jovial professor, so making jokes in and of themselves was not out of character.  However, after about 30 minutes of speaking, the only evidence he had given was time stamp on a video that looked like the tower fell faster than free fall.  This is intriguing, but he failed to address several key questions that needed to be addressed in the process such as,  was the time stamp accurate?  Would this be characteristic of all implosive demolitions and only of implosive demolitions?  Would this be characteristic of all demolitions of exo-load buildings?  (I made up the work exo-load.  I don't know what you call it.  But I do know that most sky-scrapers are designed so that the weight of the building is carried by a core structure, while the twin towers were designed so a large portion of the weight was carried by the external skin so it is possible that the middle of the building had fallen first and via rebar etc was pulling the outer skin down faster than gravity)  Those are just the first three questions that came to mind.  In 30 minutes, I don't remember any plans to investigate these or similar questions, nor do I remember any reporting on such investigations being done.  Perhaps it was intended as a charismatic lecture.