Thursday, February 1, 2018

Obama and Total Failure of African American Politicians



There is a photo going around  Facebook amongst black Facebook communities with JAY Z surrounded by a bunch of artists and celebrities, and many people saying a billion dollars around them yet black society is still down and how selfish these black celebrities are. There was a time perhaps a decade back when a white asked Oprah why doesn’t she help the black community she has enough money. To call black celebrities selfish in this manner is a lack of understanding of how society operates.

I am no great fan of Jay Z, that use of the word nigga is disrespectful and taking blacks for cheap faeces, I have no love for Oprah, incidentally it was Jay Z who first opened my eyes about Oprah, she never once cared for blacks, never tried to help them on her show, years later I would find out she refused to put Sophia Stewart on here show at her most desperate hour, these whites had made billions from her work and refused to give her credit, but is it the role of a celebrity to uplift black society financially? Why are white celebrities not expected to uplift white society financially, this is a phoney argument, let us look at reality as it really is, not as we wish.

A society is made up of individuals, each individual has a purpose to fulfil, and they will fulfil it if they attempt to. A slave calling for riots and is killed has not failed, their purpose was to call for riots and burning of the evil enslaver. A footballer’s purpose is to be the best footballer they can be, a boxers purpose is to be the best boxer they can be, an artist is to be the best artist they can be, a doctor job is to cure people, that is the purpose of being a doctor. An economist must show how the economy works, an artist is to be an artis, you expect a journalist to be honest, that is a journalists role unless they are compromised and think of fancy cars over and above the truth.

One cannot fulfill their role unless they accept they are an individual and have specific potential within them as self, as I, as me, talents unique to the self and use their talents, by merely using those talents they are being part of society, that’s why through the ages great minds have talked of the right of the individual.

The role of a bank is to circulate money around society and hopefully be intuitive enough to get the loan back plus interest. Business thrives with these institutions always ready to give a loan for something viable. A bankers’ role is thus to ensure money circulates in society to what their experience tells them will give them a return, the more capital a bank has the larger the risks it can take. A bank is a pool of capital for the community, what specifically has happened in America and particularly to the African American banks.

Over the last nearly century and a half there have been economic crises, in an economic crises banks come under heavy strain, as a believer in liberty I would say they should get no help, but the reality is Washington has been bailing them out for nearly a century and a. half. Though black banks have existed all this time, only Anglo Saxon and Jewish banks have been bailed out, meaning after every crises Anglo Saxon and Jewish banks would regain their strength and  help their communities, whilst the black banks never got a bailout. Thus Anglo Saxon business and Jewish business no matter the crises always had access to capital, but black business capital pool would always shrink as they got nothing from Washington. The key word is Washington, the political capital of America, Anglo Saxon and Jewish banks have been saved all along by the political process, not by celebrities, it has all been a SCAM to starve the African American from capital, and after each crises black business has less and less access to capital.

It is not talent that Anglo Saxon and Jewish communities are thriving, it has been access to capital, access to FREE MONEY from Washington over a century and a half. It is a pure political issue. In 2008 Obama became President of the great United States, what did he do, the first thing was to save the Anglo Saxon and Jewsih banks so that those communities have access to capital, and he did what every white President has done, ensured the destruction of the capital pool for African Americans even though they ignorantly cheered him on, he changed nothing, but black pundits keep saying oh he saved the economy, and this and that, but there will be another down turn, the African banker will be too weak to distribute money to his community, the final nail in the coffin delivered by a black man, OBAMA.

If Obama spoke at all for the welfare of the African American economy he would have said, sure I agree to give trillions of dollars to the Anglo Saxon and Jewish banks so that they help their communities, but as an African American 1% should go to African American banks, the gutless fool couldn’t even do that, thus African Americans must wait last in line until the most stupid Anglo Saxon and Jew is taken care off before they get a job, because their financial institutions are too weak to care for black business. So yes a black created a car manufacturing plant, but after a crises, no Anglo Saxon or Jewish banker was going to lend them money, they are not part of that community, to own a business and hire thousands of blacks, no Anglo Saxon or Jew is going to agree to such independence. They want to control that’s why Washington and surprisingly even under Obama wanted to achieve. It has been achieved.

This starvation of capital has meant that though Anglo Saxon’s and Jews have received enormous amounts of FREE MONEY, even the most talented black must go hand and cap to them to do an answer will usually be no, the black politician failed to talk for black financial community, the first thing an Anglo Saxon or Jewish politician thinks of, that is survival for a community, and with that free money they come showing off and writing in media they own how talented they are, it is not talent, their politicians spoke for them, OBAMA AS President failed to speak and act, as PRESIDENT he could act for the AFRICAN AMERICAN Financial community, a total failure. A politicians job is to talk for the community, not, win, at the least open your bloody mouth for their survival, Obama like Trump thinks the black community is thriving under white control and blacks must control nothing no matter how talented.

Stop blaming celebrities and look at reality. The African American politician has failed the lifeblood of that society, but they cheer the free condoms from Obama,, you are too many stop reproducing.

Bhekuzulu Khumalo

Monday, January 22, 2018

Knowledge Economics, Drucker, Culture, Google, Race and Reason in Knowledge





Peter Drucker came of fame and popularized the word knowledge economy. He got his ideas from the likes of Schumpeter, Machlup and others including earlier management gurus like Taylor. What are these people calling knowledge economy?

They say their knowledge economy is a part of human evolution, they are a product of their times when wave theory was a wonderful tool of viewing the world and the future. These wave theories where first categorized intellectually by an economist known as Nikolai Kondratiev. He talked of stages of progress, and the stages have been standardized as agricultural/ pre-industrial, industrial revolution, steam age, mass production, oil power, and age of information and technology. Of these stages, those talking of a knowledge economy are talking of the latter stage, the age of information and technology. They are talking about an economy and the associated industries at a certain stage of human evolution. The term knowledge economics came along, and they have fudged with their definition so much that their definition of knowledge economy doesn’t even correspond with what they are considering.

Knowledge is facts that we have, that has been the definition of knowledge since time immemorial. Knowledge economics merely studies these facts we know that we have commodified, it does not look specifically at a certain stage of human development like those who talk of the knowledge economy. Knowledge economics looks at knowledge and knowledge behaves the same be it pre-industry or after this phase of human evolution.

What does knowledge economy tell us about knowledge the resource itself? The reality is it does not say much, it uses knowledge in mystical ways, because it does not need to truly understand knowledge itself because it is talking about a certain phase of human development. Knowledge economics needs to understand the resource knowledge itself, facts we know, and we know cavemen had facts that they knew, or they would not have been able to get food, it is as simple as that. That we exist means humans in the distant past, in the very beginning had facts that they know, simply to eat you need to know what to eat.

Knowledge economics shows us that knowledge is nothing more than information we know, and thus knowledge behaves exactly like all other information. Knowledge economy doesn’t care about this as it is looking at a phase of human development, like those who study the steam age. Thus, knowledge is discrete as all information is discrete, each piece of knowledge is independent this allows us to be able to learn things. Everything is information, you reading this are as much information as a galaxy, those merely studying the knowledge economy can never grasp this fact because the knowledge economy and knowledge economics are not the same thing no matter how much the crabs try and drag the other crab back into the basket.

Knowledge economics acknowledge that everything is information, it acknowledges that all disciplines can only study information, albeit different aspects of information, thus acknowledging that all disciplines are one, separated only by the aspect of information they are looking into, and the different levels of complexity of that information, only accepting everything is information can we appreciate this fact. What has the concept of knowledge economy to do with that?

Dealing with facts we know and understanding that we only no a part of the whole (this whole, all the information is konke, a Nguni word meaning everything), and knowledge economics deals with that part of everything that we know and commodify, this is economics not just economics of a phase in human development. Everything is just information because everything informs us what it is. Understanding this, knowledge economics can take advantage of the first law of information, that merely states that every relationship involves a loss of freedom, this applies to everything in existence. Knowledge economics takes advantage of this law and allows us to understand the ideological question in socio economics in another way. Quoting from the paper Knowledge Economics: Summary and Rationality, “the ideological side of economics deals with the question, there is a loss of freedom, but there is a benefit, how best do we maximize this benefit whilst minimizing the loss of freedom?” This has nothing to do with a phase in human development, this has to do with looking at facts and commodifying those facts that we know and staying in line with the universal laws of information, universal laws of information that affect the knowledge economy but also pre-industrial society a depth that those studying the knowledge economy do not have to deal with.

As knowledge economics deals with commodified information it cannot escape the reality of the algorithm of information and thus understands the pervasive influence of probability on all information, thus affecting our view of rationality. An action can not be known to be rational except in the future, and all information in existence is restricted in the choices available to it. Even in the freest society there is a limited amount of candy you can choose to buy, the most basic of particles has limited choices, it can not be everywhere, the hydrogen particles in the sun are not here and there at the same time. The wildebeest has limited choices for drinking water.

Tyrants have always wanted to control flow of knowledge, the Popes wanted all knowledge to seem to come from them, thus Galileo’s predicament, colonisers want it to seem that all knowledge comes from them. To control this, they always make it irrational to chase after knowledge if you are not one of them, just as a slave master threatens death if a slave escapes to make it more likely to be irrational to try to escape. The powers that be have determined the world needs not know what a black think, he must merely get answers to the bigger questions of existence from others. It has been made irrational to pursue knowledge, Google, claiming that net neutrality means control of the internet want to control it themselves.

Type knowledge economics and google will always direct you to knowledge economy, even though the two are completely different, the idea is to control black thought, hide it, what right does a black man have to show the existence of laws of information, algorithm of information, stick to what whites have to say about knowledge and economics, no matter how shallow that discipline is. We have to accept this reality, and tell the truth to ourselves no matter what they say the owners of google and other tech companies are out to promote their own, not truth as such, that is why liberty is important, it goes back to that question knowledge economics raises, “how best do we maximize this benefit whilst minimizing the loss of freedom” With liberty the black man will have a way to create their own search engines, encyclopedias on the net, social sites, Artificial Intelligence, mine our own resources, without liberty Blacks are open to the same old lies and being swindled materially, artistically and intellectually, actions always speak loudest, type knowledge economics on google, obviously acting in behest of a larger group otherwise why would google be acting as it does. Anybody who believes in freedom will never behave like this strange  entitled cabal fighting knowledge.

@bhekukhumalo

Monday, January 1, 2018

Rationality is Scientific and a Little Philosophical


Let us take the statement the grass is greener on the other side. If the grass is “greener” on the other side, what would a rational human do, he would try to get to the other side. The rational human being in such a situation would obviously want some of that “green” grass. This is a philosophical answer, a rational human is expected to try and get to the “greener” grass, what has science to do with this, rationality is a philosophical concept.

The paper “Knowledge Economics: Summary and Rationality”, it was argued that the algorithm of information explains everything that exists and that essentially everything comes down to probability. But to see that the grass is greener on the other side and that it is rational to get to the other side where the grass is “greener”, what has this to do with probability, it is a philosophical question, next thing there will be claims that the algorithm of information can explain even death, how can death be a probability when everybody knows death is certain, we will die.

One can argue that when one decides to go to the grass that is greener, but how do they understand that the grass is greener on the other side, they can sense it with their eyes, or some other senses, that is not important here, what is important is they sense that the grass is greener on the other side. One has decided that they will cross to the other side, a decision has been made. Here we see the interplay of big concept of rationality and small concepts that work within. It is a rational decision to get to the other side to survive because one can see that the probability of surviving is greater on the other side. But, are the actions taken to get to the other side rational.

If one gets to the other side, they took rational steps to get to the other side. If one does not get to the other side they took irrational steps to get to the other side, they made irrational choices in chasing a rational outcome. A choice is only irrational if it does not lead to a desired outcome. Thus, for a slave it is rational to desire freedom, the choices they make will determine if their actions are rational, if they become free actions are rational, if they do not become free actions are irrational.

One is in their position in life by chance. Planning increases one’s chances of being where they are, but it remains chance. To become some successful businessmen is called risky for a reason, but to take that risk one must make the decision of becoming a business person. The reason why it is greener on the other side is also by chance, it could be your side that is greener except by chance, even if it seems certain, no, the San in Africa are hunters and gatherers in this day only by chance, it does not matter if they have been doing it for the last 10 000 years. Any time in the last 10 000 years they could have made decisions that would have led to a different path.

There is nothing outside the algorithm of information, not even death. Death is not certain because birth is not certain, you can not die if you are not born, and your birth is itself a massive probability, what if your parents never met, what if your grandfather was killed, what if your greatest grandfather going 300 generations back got a disease and died as a kid. Life is extremely rare in our solar system, though we are made up as everything else in the universe, the electrons, protons, and electrons that make up life are extremely rare, the probability that the electrons, protons, and neutrons that make you up ended on the earth are extremely rare, but it has occurred you start believing it was certain.

So rationality itself can be put on a scale, the irrationality of purchasing a rotten apple and a life and death decision must receive different scaling.

Life is rare and should be enjoyed, that is why we push for liberty. Everybody wants a long good life, life as a slave is no good, it is rational to reject it and fight. True one can argue there is death everywhere, stars die, but life as we know it is rare, it last 100 years on a good run, stars exist for billions of years, an electron could last a trillion years, but that same electron representing breathing life, 100 years, as determined by the algorithm of information, iff, and that is a big iff, a life of such a nature occurs, it will be good if it lasts 100 years, for a long time in human history being 35 years old one was an elder, but they still had the potential to enjoy 100 years.

Simple as it is, nothing can exist outside the laws determined by the algorithm of information, we add philosophy to try and understand the results of this algorithm.

Bhekuzulu Khumalo

Tuesday, August 22, 2017

Explaining the Thomas Young Experiment

I am reluctantly posting this paper on this blog in order that people understand where the idea for the paper, "The Photon and Endless Energy" comes from. And even this paper has its roots in scrap thoughts I had trying to reconcile wave theory and information, never forgetting all information is discrete.

This paper needs more working on, however the process of ziyenza can be written about. Another fact that will stand the test of time from this paper will be the explanations for figures 9, 9.1, and 9.2, we know where the particle is going if we understand its charecteristics, the information that makes it up, yes. we can know where each and every particle will end up in the double slit experiment.

Why do we need the sun, only for photons, once we control and capture photons, we do not need the sun.

Explaining the Thomas Young Experiment


Abstract:         Looking at a photon and accepting experiments that have taken place we can understand what happens in the Thomas Young experiment when we try to observe which slit the particle goes through and have an answer for the wave particle duality. Understanding this allows us in practical terms to remove the idea of the power of the human’s mind to control a particle as we accept the only interactions that can be taking place. The major implications of understanding what is happening when we observe the particle deciding which slit to take is we understand the very roots of optics as well as the potential of enormous amounts of energy for humanity. At the end of the discussion lingering questions will remain, where does the photon get its energy from? And secondly if the arguments presented in this paper are proven wrong, then how do we fundamentally see if a photon can not self radiate. As with most papers in dealing with the very small, with light, with quantum mechanics experiments are presented.

Keywords:      captured photons, double slit experiment, energy, information, photon, single photon, ziyenza

Introduction:  Thomas Young first performed what could be dubbed as the most popular and most puzzling experiment in physics back in 1801. Today the experiment is commonly known as the double slit experiment. Hence forth the Thomas Young experiment will be called the double slit experiment, though it would be more academically correct to call it the Thomas Young experiment, acknowledging the origins of the idea.

Though the world tries to portray the findings of quantum mechanics as bizarre, they can only do this because most theories in quantum mechanics are easily testable in principle, what is required most often is the instrumentation. As knowledge increases one discrete piece at a time, one knowl at a time, technology reciprocates, increasing one discrete unit at a time and the instrumentation eventually catches up to the theory and an experiment must take place to verify the theory, with experimentation we either accept or reject the hypothesis. Procedures are firmly placed on how to experiment, but not only how we experiment, how we extrapolate knowledge from the experimentation process, create new theories and eventually when instrumentation catches up experimentation takes place and the theory is either verified or rejected.

After the experimentation process takes place, one can either accept the results or dispute them for example, one can either choose to accept to accept Alain Aspects entanglement experiments and the implications, or one can choose not to support the results of Alain Aspect’s experiments for their own reasons, for their own character make up, the driving forces of their life’s, is entanglement incomparable to light, because of the different physical properties of the phenomenon’s? Accepting experiments is about how one accepts reality, though vaccines in general have proved to be effective, there are still millions who don’t accept the benefits of vaccination.

Entanglement is seemingly one bizarre aspect of quantum mechanics even though it is proven regularly, it is a phenomenon that is part of reality and as scientists to answer many questions we need to look at the isolated phenomenon in relation to the environment, all relationships result in a loss of freedom, this loss of freedom is what experiments try to understand, what is the result of this loss of freedom, what is result of things bumping into each other, do they bounce of, is one absorbed, do they absorb each other, experiments are about seeing relationships in one way or another. Theories set out possibilities in these relationships that are yet known or proven but are based on sound scientific and analytical background.

Light:  Light has some bizarre questions that need to be asked, when we can do this we can solve the riddle of the double slit experiment, what happens when we observe light going through the slits?

Most often what must be considered is right in front of us, they say apples fell in front of Newton, and to millions of other people throughout the millennia, fruits fell from tress all over the world. The information package that was Newton was inclined to understand the principle of why the apples fell from the tree, the relationship between the apples, the apple tree and the earth, all experiments are about understanding relationships. Is understanding light simply a matter of observation what is all around us, light? First, we need to remember how we see that apple fall from the tree, or how do we see how anything falls?

It is a well-known fact that if one was to knock over a box of cigarettes over the side of a table it will fall to the ground, this phenomenon of gravity is verified by nature everyday, every minute, you don’t need a laboratory to prove the existence of gravity, or if a rose will smell the same by any other name, we can see the box of cigarettes fall down to the ground thanks to photons. We can see the beer can that remained on the table thanks to photons, like we can see everything else. We identify common objects like a stool in the way usually thanks to our interactions with photons. We can see that can of beer on the table because it is reflecting light and our photon sensors, our eyes pick up these photons. The photons enter the eye with a certain pattern, interacting with different sensors in the eye, the patterns of the photons are turned into electrical patterns that the brain understands. These patterns allow the brain to differentiate things, direct the hand to hold the can of beer that has mass. Everything we can see will reflect light differently because of locality. Two seemingly identical cans can never reflect photons in the same way because of different locations, hence the brain can differentiate between the two localities, the brain directs the hand not to the empty can but to the full can.

In the illustration above, photon energy affected the electrical circuitry of the brain, this electrical energy was converted into mechanical energy to grab hold of the full can of beer and direct it to the mouth. Light allows us to observe our surroundings. It is photons interacting with our photon sensors that allow us to peer through a telescope, this interaction between photons and our photon sensors, our eyes allow us to see our reflection in the mirror.

This is all readily acceptable, but how does it allow us to explain the Thomas Young experiment, especially what happens when we observe light as it passes through the slits? To observe light one needs sensors, humans have eyes, there is an interaction of electricity and photons and that is how we see. This is but one characteristic of light. But for this to be meaningful we must look at the photon, we must look at light.

Capturing the Photon on April 11, 2013 the 1MIT Technology Review had an article entitled “First Demonstration of the Storage and Release of light in metamaterial.” The capturing sub heading reads “Nobody has been able to trap electro magnetic waves inside a metamaterial and then release them again. Until now.” This is a technological leap through, humans have made light be still like a cigarette lighter on the table. When something is still we can look at it, the lighter on he table, because it is still, we can look at it, see its colour, its size, it’s markings. Now that we can make light still to know it will be to look at it, just as we look at a lighter on the table, imagine the difficulty of observing anything to it true depths if it was always on the move. The fact that Toshihiro Nakanishi and colleagues Takehiro Otani, Yasuhiro Tamayama and Masao Kitano where able to capture photons in such a medium means sooner than we think we will look at light, but we already know what to expect because of past experiments.

As recently as 2015 2Nature Photonics published an article “Extraction of a single photon from an optical pulse”, soon single photons will be captured and studied. It is not at all far fetched to have a thought of looking at the photon.

What would happen if we could look at a photon, we would see the photon. We know from previous experiments that in normal circumstances there is no photon been reflected but we will be able to observe the photon, for us to observe the photon it means that the photon is somehow radiating itself, we shall call this process of self radiating ziyenza, a rose by any other name.

This process of ziyenza should not seem far fetched at all if we are up to date with current events in the experimentation process taking place around the world. For example, we know in normal circumstances there is no photon to photon interaction, but in intense artificially created fields there is photon to photon interaction, and other interesting facts about light and its relationships with its surroundings. In colliders, photons smash into each other, a by product of the collider process, it’s an unintended consequence but a consequence none the less.

On a 3CERN blog, there is an article written in 2014 by Achintya Rao entitled “The LHC as a photon collider,” photons apparently smash into each other producing other particles. Reading the article there are some comments of interest for instance, “As they fly through the LHC, the accelerating protons radiate photons, the quanta of light. If two protons going in opposite directions fly very close to one another within CMS, photons radiated from each can collide together and produce new particles, just as in proton collisions. The two parent protons remain completely intact but recoil as a result of this photon-photon interaction: they get slightly deflected from their original paths but continue circulating in the LHC. We can determine whether the photon interactions took place by identifying these deflected protons, thus effectively treating the LHC as a photon collider and adding a new probe to our toolkit for exploring fundamental physics.”

Observing a Photon:   What is of interest to us are the comments protons radiating photons, the larger quotation is for people to accept that under artificial conditions there can be photon to photon interaction. When protons radiate photons, this is not the same as an atom radiating photons because of changes in its energy composition, this is a proton radiating photons under these artificial conditions, by the end of this discussion, many might very well doubt that it is the proton radiating the photon, but that is not the focus of this discussion. But what we know from experiments is that under intense artificial fields the photon radiates a proton, this means there is an imbalance within the proton and a photon is released. By the end of this discussion we should be able to ask, is it the proton radiating the photon or is it possible other relationships are taking place within the proton because of the intense fields.  

Looking at a photon to see that photon means it must radiate energy, in this case itself, it ziyenza’s itself. This is illustrated in figure 1 below.



For us to observe a photon this is only possible if it radiates itself, for us humans, not yet talking about machines and electronic sensors, just our eyes. Hypothetical but allows us to understand a photon. For us to see the photon it must go through the process of ziyenza. This means that a photon can be in two states, when it is freer or under conditions where it is compelled to go through the process of ziyenza, observing the particle creates the conditions for ziyenza. For us to recognize that the photon is there it must register with our brain by registering with our sensors, our eyes, that turn the photon information into electronic information so that we understand, we never actually ever see the photon, but a product of ziyenza and that is only because we have electronic sensors that can translate photons into electronic images.

When we look away from the photon there is no other sensor in our body that can be able to sense the photon, the relationship with the photon that is stationary and being observed is with the eyes, with the sensors, these sensors detect the photon causing it to be in a condition of ziyenza where it is capable of been in a relationship, to observe the photon, the newly created photons are energy that the eye senses, there is a relationship and an energy cycle is involved. There must be an energy cycle involved because it takes energy to register that there is a photon there.

Figure 2 is showing two observers of the same photon. Note that the photon is already in a state of ziyenza, its behaviour will not change it will interact with the second observer as with the first.



N observers should yield the same behaviour as illustrated in figure 3.



Having seen the behaviour of a photon in relation to our electronic electromagnetic sensors, our eyes, we can add another thought, returning to figure 1 with one observer, what happens when there is another observer observing the photons going to A1. Let us freeze frame everything and introduce observer a second observer A2. For A2 the observed photon is different than A1, this is illustrated in figure 4, and this illustration will be important when thinking about experimentation given the availability of instrumentation, but the strength of dealing with light is there will always come a time when it is possible to carry out it is not like theories that deal with big bang, scientific evidence for and against a big bang, holograph theory, the principle of ziyenza because of the nature of the study of optics will be tested sooner or later. Hopefully one is understanding the electromagnetic field relationship between the eyes and the photons.



Unfreezing the scenario in figure we will realize the photons will be moving at extreme high speeds, A2 registering any of the photons means that the process of ziyenza is still taking place at very high speeds.

Understanding the Double Slit Experiment:   A photon stream will make two patterns, it will either behave as particles, or as a wave. This is an accepted fact, but for clarity it will be important to cover the principles behind the bizarre behaviour of the photon stream. It really is seemingly bizarre and a host of new age principles are based on the reality that the Thomas Young experiment seemingly is unexplainable and there must be something special about human beings to affect the behaviour of a particle by thought alone, affecting matter just as the gods had desired for us. Even some physicists are taking the idea seriously about how powerful the human mind is and are designing experiments towards proving this end.

On May 23, 2017, the online scientific magazine 4Futurism had the headlines “Scientists Have an Experiment to See If the Human Mind Is Bound to the Physical World.” Scientists from the well funded Perimeter Institute in Ontario, Canada, want to test the idea that the human mind is a unique creation able to create matter. This discussion obviously tends towards these are natural phenomenon and the human being does not function outside the laws of nature. Just because we are human does not negate the relationship between electro magnetism and photons. Eyes are photon sensors, just far more sophisticated than say gamma meters or heat sensors, heat is because of photon actions. If heat sensors where as sophisticated as the eye we would see in detail a human face translated into heat patterns, every crack on the face, scar on the ear.

5Lucien Hardy the author of the paper “Proposal to use Humans to switch settings in a Bell experiment” that was the idea behind the article in Futurism, has an interesting quote about what they are attempting to achieve. The quote is as follows, “We suppose some sort of mindmatter duality in which the physical universe is local and super-deterministic. In the absence of minds, then, it is possible to violate Bell inequalities. Now we suppose that minds act on the physical universe locally introducing “new information” into the physical universe through the brain.” He has an experiment in mind and, as has been explained, most concepts in quantum mechanics can eventually be tested then supported or discarded. This is a fundamental advantage of dealing with basic information, logic builds a model, following on previously successful experiments. Hopefully the experiments provided in this discussion will be meaningful in helping us understand light at its most basic, what happens when we look at light, and what are the implications?

Figure 5 below shows a common illustration, the wave pattern of the Thomas Young experiment.



Figure 6 again shows a common illustration, what happens when we observe the process of photon stream going through he double slits, the photon stream instead of behaving like a wave, behaves like particles.



As curios human beings we want to know why this change in the pattern, why is light behaving differently. Accepting the logic that has been laid out in this discussion, we understand that there are two opposite states a photon can be in, this does not in any way argue against the photon having other properties like polarity, another property is it can be in a state of ziyenza, or not. In a state of ziyenza the photon is replicating itself, this means extra energy is being used and it enters a state of lower energy. In this lower energy state, it behaves as what has been called like a particle. When it is not in a state of ziyenza, the particle stream is freer, it is not in a relationship that causes the state of ziyenza. The state of ziyenza is caused seemingly by observation, observation to be registered implies electromagnetic wave field, relationships, within the electromagnetic field and this will be firmly understood in the next two paragraphs.

Figure 7 below shows what is happening when we observe looking to peek into which slit does the particle choose when we observe, the particle stream behaves like particles. Figure 7 is showing what is happening.



In figure 7 we see that we have a sensor that is trying to peek into the secret of what slit does the particle choose. For the sensor to detect the presence of the photon it can only do this through the electromagnetic field, the sensor is electric, there is no other way for us to do this. The sensor and photon interact in the electromagnetic wave, there is no where else for them to interact, and that causes the photon to be in a state of ziyenza, because to measure the photon, it must give of some energy in the electromagnetic field. The energy the photon gives off however is not enough for it not to reach the destination, it just reaches that distance behaving differently, the relationship has changed the destination of the photon.


The highly sensitive sensors replace our eyes to cause the state of ziyenza in figure 7. This should squash the idea that somehow humans are the cause. True by observing humans are the cause of light to behave like a particle instead of a wave, but this is merely because of interactions within the electromagnetic wave, if a dog could observe as keenly as a human it would have the same effect.

Understanding this, it would best be to at this moment discuss the experiment that was laid out by Lucien Hardy where he wants to show that human beings can be used for the entanglement experiment, he should also test chimpanzees, they also switch buttons on and off, it is just the electromagnetic field.

First Experiment:       The first experiment proposed is a simple extrapolation of the original “let’s observe what is happening,” experiment. It is merely adding a second observer to figure 7. This second observer observes the first observer. What is being investigated is the behaviour of the photon stream, the photons. Will we get the effect as laid out in figure 4, this will be a conclusive proof of ziyenza. By merely placing a second observer the dynamics of the experiment change. We have two relationships in the experiment. The first relationship is the original observation, the second relationship is observing the original observation.

What we want from sensor 2, is to merely register increased photon activity and we know that the process of ziyenza is a reality. We can see this set up in in figure 8.



The success of this experiment merely depends sensor 2, S2, detecting increased photon activity going to sensor 1, S1.

Experiment 2: A simple experiment, depending on truth of recent scientific breakthroughs, is simply to observe photon that has been stored thanks to development in technology. For this we modify figure 1 to get figure 9.



Having a stored photon, can a photon sensor sense it, if it can that means the process of ziyenza is taking place. When we read papers about storing a photon/ s, we realize for example that they are in some storage material like metamaterial. The photon must be still and material must not be able to greatly affect by the electromagnetic field and thus not shield the photon/ s from outside interference. If the sensor in figure 9 can sense the photon, that means the photon is somehow radiating itself.

Implications:   Does material radiate photons or do photons radiate themselves given what is now considered peculiar conditions. For example, in the colliders, is it protons radiating photons or are photons radiating themselves from within the proton given the intense electromagnetic fields inside colliders, thus forcing protons to be in a state of ziyenza.

If these experiments prove successful, where does the photon get its energy from to undertake this process of ziyenza, ziyenza is strictly a process of something radiating itself, or self replicating, but it needs energy to do this. The most likely place thanks to previous studies is that this energy comes from dark matter and dark energy. Therefore, further studies in optics should yield results in the near future concerning the nature of dark energy.

Can we replicate this in a large enough scale, if yes then we have possibilities of having solar power even in the dark.

Where is the photon?  Understanding that when we observe the double slit experiment we get particle behaviour, due to influences in the electro magnetic field, we can convincingly say if Ziyenza proves to be true, we know where the photon is, some of the randomness taken out, we only know where it is because these are controlled experiments. Figure 9 shows the effects of ziyenza, wave behaviour and particle behaviour over one another.



Figure 9 argues that we can know where the particle is if we know enough information about that photon, what other information is affecting the information package that is the photon. We can see the if we correspond numerically the numerical values of y and r as same particle given a condition of being observed or not being observed. With more information understanding what is happening we become more certain in understanding where the particle ought to be, we understand that there is a transformation process caused by the process of ziyenza, this is due to the different relationships the photon has with its surroundings in terms of energy, when a photon is observed, it goes to a different energy state compared to when it is not being observed.

Figure 9.1 and 9.2 are merely a visual separation of what is going on in figure 9.


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                
Conclusions:   It is hoped that this paper will introduce other ideas about what is considered “bizarre” behaviour, perhaps it is not the human, just a phenomenon of nature that we have not yet fully realized. These thoughts and corresponding experiments will allow us to postpone the boogeyman for now. Where does light get its energy from? Which particles in the wave spectrum have more energy, for example which particle has more energy given location on wave, y1/ r1 or y13 /r13, how does this affect their 6quantum tunnelling behaviour? These are fundamental questions that will eventually determine the material well being of humanity, boogeyman thoughts will be a hindrance and must be refuted as soon as possible. Those endowed with the resources will eventually have to verify this theory or accept the boogeyman

References:

[1] MIT Technology Review, MIT, https://www.technologyreview.com/s/513581/first-demonstration-of-the-storage-and-release-of-light-in-a-metamaterial/ 30 May 2017
[2] Rosenblum S, Bechler O, Shomroni I, Lovsky Y, Guendelman G, Dayan B. Extraction of a single photon from an optical pulse nature.com http://www.nature.com/nphoton/journal/v10/n1/full/nphoton.2015.227.html 30 May 2017
[3] Rao A. The LHC as a photon collider, CERN Blog http://cms.web.cern.ch/news/lhc-photon-collider 30 May 2017
[4] Scientists Have an Experiment to See If the Human Mind Is Bound to the Physical World, Futurism, https://futurism.com/scientists-have-an-experiment-to-see-if-the-human-mind-is-bound-to-the-physical-world/ 30 May 2017
[5] Hardy L. Proposal to use Humans to switch settings in a Bell experiment, Cornell University Library https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.04620 30 May 2017
[6] Khumalo B, Quantum Phone, Entanglement, and Information, Institute of Knowledge http://instituteofknowledge.blogspot.ca/2015/09/quantum-phone-entanglement-and_5.html 30 May 2017


search

 

Blog Archive

Bhekuzulu Khumalo

I write about knowledge economics, information, liberty, and freedom