David Bohm - Da Bomb!

O.K., enough PUNishment....

This article is probably the most profound piece of writing I have ever encountered. I feel that his take on reality eclipses the "greats".

Nuff sed..... Please read!!

www.spaceandmotion.com...

My understanding about quantum physics is that a quantum particle will only materialise when observed.
They showed this with a really cool experiment shooting particals at a board trough a narrow vertical opening. When observed the board was hit and it showed a vertical line where the particals hit the board.

When they did the same experiment without observing, the particals would be spread out across the board showing a wave like.
I believe they show it also in What the bleep do we know somewhere in the beginning where it still about science.

I believe a holographic universe is the best possible explanation we currently have.
We just have to accept order comes from chaos we do not know squat about anything.

Thanks for the post. S&F

Originally posted by Sinter Klaas
My understanding about quantum physics is that a quantum particle will only materialise when observed.
They showed this with a really cool experiment shooting particals at a board trough a narrow vertical opening. When observed the board was hit and it showed a vertical line where the particals hit the board.

When they did the same experiment without observing, the particals would be spread out across the board showing a wave like.
I believe they show it also in What the bleep do we know somewhere in the beginning where it still about science.

I believe a holographic universe is the best possible explanation we currently have.
We just have to accept order comes from chaos we do not know squat about anything.

Thanks for the post. S&F

If by 'observed' you mean wack it with a photon, then sure it acts differently/like a particle after. If you mean that a human sees it, then no. The effect has already taken place by the time we see it. The observer is not us, it is the particle that we used to measure with.

David Bohm did a lot of work with Krishnamurti and they are interesting...very interesting reads.

Here is a link to a conservation between them on youtube:

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by garritynet

If by 'observed' you mean wack it with a photon, then sure it acts differently/like a particle after. If you mean that a human sees it, then no. The effect has already taken place by the time we see it. The observer is not us, it is the particle that we used to measure with.

Yes.
I would be rambling if I'd assume that. Our eyes aren't quite fit to observe the quantum sized universe.

Originally posted by Sinter Klaas
My understanding about quantum physics is that a quantum particle will only materialise when observed.
They showed this with a really cool experiment shooting particals at a board trough a narrow vertical opening. When observed the board was hit and it showed a vertical line where the particals hit the board.

When they did the same experiment without observing, the particals would be spread out across the board showing a wave like.
I believe they show it also in What the bleep do we know somewhere in the beginning where it still about science.

I believe a holographic universe is the best possible explanation we currently have.
We just have to accept order comes from chaos we do not know squat about anything.

Thanks for the post. S&F

I agree with all of your points there.

On point Bohm makes is that the search for the elusive "Theory Of Everything" is essentially fruitless. Any new formulas or theories we construct merely describe one part of the whole relative to us at that time.

All matter is but a single standing waveform in space oscillating at all possible frequencies (quantum physics has already demonstrated a similar principle in Zero Point Energies). The number of possible frequencies does not have a limit i.e. is infinite. Observation is an infinite standing waveform in the opposite direction and "Reality" is the interference pattern formed by the two so in essence is holographic.

[edit on 13-3-2010 by OZtracized]

I have been always keen on David Bohm's and Karl Pribramunderstandings, which were then articulated further in the writings of the late Michael Talbot with his book The Holographic Universe

Google Video Link

Fun ideas to ponder and discuss but does this guy have any math to back it up? I'm all for speculative thinking but if you want to re-invent physics then you have to present math that demonstrates your ideas and observations that reflect that math. Hopefully you can also make a prediciton that can be tested.

Its not enough to just decribe a phenonma like holographic film and then say it also applies to the brain. It might but you've got to do better than just describe the holographic film. You also have to present your, repeatable, observations of the brain that prove that this is how it does in fact do what you say it does. If you want to say that this is also how the universe works then you have to present observations that prove this as well.

Quantum mechanics and Relativity are all written in math and then interpeted with language. If he is going to reinterpet it then he should be able to show how the math works out to prove his interpetation. Or he should be able to show how the math is wrong. Either way if he is challanging the current scientific paradigm he needs to acknowledge the math in some form.

I see a lot of neat ideas but no math, experiments, observations or any mention of them in any specific term. You can't just tell me they exist. You have to show them to me. All the proofs of mainstream science are well documented. Show me his.

Anyway, like I said, they are interesting ideas I agree but I'm not seeing much real science work. Not saying it isn't there, I just didn't see it on this particular site.

David Bohm is one of the inspirations I had when I was heavily into physics. He was a thinker that shunned the standard interpretations of quantum mechanics and brought to light a deeper understanding. He was a plasma physicist and helped usher in the new paradigm of complex adaptive systems, based on process meta-physics as opposed to the standard paradigm based on object meta-physics.
He shunned the view that 'it is all in the mind' and instead showed that a proper understanding of quantum mechanics brings to light our universal connections. It is not all in the mind, the mind is simply part of the whole, a continuous process.

p.s. if you like David Bohm you may also be interested in Ilya Prigogine.

Originally posted by garritynet
Fun ideas to ponder and discuss but does this guy have any math to back it up?

David Bohm authored, among many books, a textbook style introductory called Quantum Theory containing plenty of the mathematics, currently available from Dover ISBN 0-486-65969-0
He further expounds on his ideas in his other books, all worth checking out. I am about to donate my physics library but plan on keeping his books, they are worth the read.

Here is a good David Bohm interview:






[edit on 13-3-2010 by Ionized]

reply to post by Ionized


Excellent. I shall look into it. I know of a bookstore that has many of the Dover science books at a hefty discount, hopefully they have one of these on hand.


Edit: I was watching that first Youtube video (with Talbot) and while hearing the implications of a holographic universe are interesting he provides no scientific argument I should accept the universe as a hologram. To say that if the universe resembles a hologram in some ways that it must resemble a hologram as we know it in all ways is fallacy. Any videos you know of where he explains the science behind this?

I am curious because I was recently listening to the idea of a holographic universe from a friend and I thought it was interesting.

Final edit: This book is the one I am going to read first.

www.amazon.com...

In this one he explains his alternative approach to the current model.

[edit on 13-3-2010 by garritynet]

[edit on 13-3-2010 by garritynet]

reply to post by Ionized


When I read garritynet's post (he is, of course, perfectly entitled to ask these questions) I let out a sigh and resided to the task of tracking down sources and posting links etc.

Given my computer skills I'm really glad you stepped in! I have only recently taken a real interest in Plama Cosmology and now Bohm's work and I feel these two areas can start to answer some of the questions mainstream physics can't. For anyone else reading this, I don't think mainstream physics is wrong as such, it just seems to stubbornly neglect a few things.

reply to post by garritynet


I don't believe the term Holographic universe was even in existence when Bohm was still alive, though I could be wrong. I have not heard him use the term, but it has been several years since I read his books so I might have simply forgotten. edit: Looks like at the end of video 4 that I posted he does make reference to a Hologram, though to what extent Holographic Universe applies to this, I don't know.

Just like 'Electric Universe' is the popularized term for Plasma Cosmology, the term Holographic Universe is probably a popularization attempt for the ideas behind Bohmian wave quantum mechanics. But, having never studied 'Holographic Universe', I wouldn't know.

I studied plasma cosmology as a focus, and in undergraduate I studied Bohm on my own, along with curriculum centered on the Copenhagen interpretations (was physics major.) It has been many years though, I look back at the homework and mathematics I used to do and think to myself "I did this stuff?"... I couldn't begin to describe this in the mathematics nowadays. It is amazing how much that knowledge disappears without continuous study and practice.

Just keep watching that whole interview, and maybe pick up his book 'Wholeness and the Implicate Order'.
edit: Yes Undivided Universe is good too, I have them all

[edit on 13-3-2010 by Ionized]

I just found this video which might help to explain the Holographic universe understandings as surmised by David Bohm and Karl Pribram etc.
I think there is other detailed vids but this one presents the information in easy to understand laymans terms etc.

Google Video Link