井中之居: 2013/10

2013年10月28日星期一

菲林之魅 ── KODAK EKTAR 100 ── 黃泥涌水塘、大坑道

逢星期六下午，我有如朝聖般往山上跑。以往跑步時見到美麗的景色或有趣的情景，身上沒有相機，只好舉起「手機」來拍，但受制於「手機」的照相功能先天不足，鮮有拍得令人稱心的照片。

上星期六，好一個風高物燥、嬌陽掛天的下午，身心皆爽。決定帶備相機乘巴士往黃泥涌水塘去，再沿平日經常跑步的路線 ── 黃泥涌峽道、大坑道 ── 走一趟，邊走邊拍。

從一大堆未開盒的菲林中，挑了卷柯達 EKTAR 100，裝進了 NIKON F2A，配了顆 NIKKOR AF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5D ，另備一顆 NIKKOR-N.C. Auto 24mm f2.8 ，步出家門……

二十年來這裏都沒有大變，最顯著的莫過於塘中的魚，昔日是色彩斑斕的錦鯉，如今只餘顏色暗黑的不知名的魚

位於大坑道與畢拉山道的交界處附近，有一個舊式巴士站，極盡 form follows function 的意念，最近髹了新漆

過了樂活道的交界處，有一段行人路只有一尺闊，路邊一道半腰高的石欄，下面是懸崖，可鳥瞰政府大球場

過了白建時道，有另一個舊式巴士站

這是衛斯理村的入口，外觀如舊，但村裏人去樓空，閘門長期上鎖

2013年10月10日星期四

A Succinct and Faithful Description of Quantum Theory, then What?

The follow was excerpted from Section 7.3 in Chapter 5 of "Wholeness and the Implicate Order", a collection of David Bohm's essays:-

Every physical situation is[...]characterized by a wave function[...] This wave function is not directly related to the actual properties of an individual object, event, or process. Rather, it has to be thought of as a description of the potentialities within the physical situation. Different and generally mutually incompatible potentialities[...]are actualized in different experimental arrangements[...] In general, the wave function gives only a probability measure for the actualization of different potentialities in a statistical ensemble of similar observations carried out under a specified conditions, and cannot predict what will happen in detail in each individual observation[...] In quantum theory it has no meaning to discuss the actual state of a system apart from the whole set of experimental conditions which are essential to actualize this state.

And from Section 7.4 in Chapter 5:-

[...W]ave equation[...]is linear[...] Such linearity of equations[...]allows us to regard 'state vectors' as having a kind of autonomous existence[...] This complete autonomy of the 'quantum state' of a system is supposed to hold only when it is not being observed. In an observation, it is assumed that we have to do with two initially autonomous systems that have come into interaction. One of these is described by the 'state vector' of the observed object and the other by the 'state vector' of the observing apparatus.//In the consideration of this interaction, certain new features are introduced which correspond to allowing for the possibility of actualizing the observed system's potentialities at the expense of others that cannot be actualized at the same time.

What a succinct and faithful description of quantum theory!

As Schrödinger's cat illustrates, 'reduction of wave function' is, indeed, odd and incomprehensible. I previously had thought the so-called 'reduction of wave function' be merely a metaphor of 'the observer's getting known of the truth'. Surely, the Schrödinger's cat can only be either dead or alive at any time. Common sense tells that there is no dead-alive mixed state being a linear combination of the dead state and the alive state. It is only the knowledge of the observer that matters - the observer does not know the outcome (dead or alive) until the chamber containing the cat is opened. In this sense, 'wave function' is a representation of the observer's knowledge instead of a true physical entity of the observed. However, if wave function is 'knowledge', how can interference take place? I have no idea.

Apart from the Schrödinger's cat problem, I have been messed up most by quantum entanglement. Pursuant to the theory of relativity, the speed of light is ultimate that transmission of information cannot exceed. However, it was said that the instantaneous quantum entanglement had truly been observed in experiments.

Bohm put forth the notion of 'hidden variables' (something 'sub-quantum') and claimed that it could explain the essential features of quantum mechanics. Yet, how can the Schrödinger's cat problem be resolved? How can quantum entanglement be explained?

Bohm introduced the theory of holomovement:

[...A] total order is contained, in some implicit sense, in each region of space and time[...] Different pictures would look indistinguishable and yet have different implicate orders, which differences would be revealed when they were explicated[...] Generally speaking, the laws of physics have thus far referred mainly to the explicate order. (excerpted from Section 3 in Chapter 6)

[...W]hat 'carries' an implicate order is the holomovement, which is an unbroken and undivided totality[...T]he holomovement is undefinable and immeasurable. (excerpted from Section 4 in Chapter 6)

With a multi-dimensional holomovement, quantum entanglement is well explained:

[...N]on-local, non-causal relationship of distant elements can be understood by regarding each of the 'particles' constituting a system as a projection of a 'higher-dimensional' reality, rather than as a separate particle, existing together with all the others in a common three-dimensional space. (excerpted from Section 4 in Chapter 7)

Bohm further enriched his theory by regarding the holomovement (which is primary, self-existent and universal) as 'life implicit', and "inanimate matter be a secondary, derivative, and particular abstraction from the holomovement":-

[...W]e do not fragment life and inanimate matter, nor do we try to reduce the former completely to nothing but an outcome of the latter. (excerpted from Section 6 in Chapter 7)

Is it talking about life and inanimate matter be different projections of a multi-dimensional being in the holomovement? Should we take that Schrödinger's cat be actually "alive-and-dead": whether it is "alive" or "dead" in our ordinary sense merely depends on what projection would be captured in that particular instance of holomovement when the observation is made?

Perhaps we should even not be surprised if we see Schrödinger's cat had become Pavlov's dog after the chamber is opened. They are merely different projections of a superdimensional being, right?

The lesson that I have learnt from this book is that: When you are introduced with something said to be "undefinable and immeasurable", DON'T ASK!