#basil hiley

Suppose locality is a relationship, could it be that quantum phenomena are in some sense beyond space-time and are merely projected into space-time by our macroscopic instruments? In other words, could quantum processes be evolving in some more general space, which for convenience we call simply 'pre-space'. This pre-space (Hiley 1991, Hiley and Monk 1993) would then give rise to Wheeler's (1980) pre-geometry. In this view, the space-time of the classical world would be some statistical approximation and not all quantum processes can be projected into this space without producing the familiar paradoxes, including non-separability and non-locality. In classical physics everything is local so that a single space-time can provide a contradiction free description.

Image: Another kind of wave function. Whitley Bay, England 2013.

In quantum mechanics uncertainty is fundamental. The Chapter 2 of The Undivided Universe is concerned of the typical interpretations of this quantum indeterminacy. This indeterminacy is considered to be a basic feature quantum mechanics and not just a statistical effect of some unknown “hidden variables”.

In a system where quantum mechanics apply, the exact state of the particle cannot be known precisely. Only when the particle is measured, a momentary quantum state of that particle/wave can be known. As such, this act of measurement cannot really be separated from the observed quantum system. A popular approach is to describe a quantum system with a group of discrete quantum states within a probability space. When this system is observed, it produces an eigenvalue or a mix of eigenvalues of a possible quantum state(s). 

However, it is good to understand that despite that this indeterminacy cannot be totally separated by a measurement, it does not automatically mean that consciousness creates the reality, or something like that. Quantum mechanics is still a practical theory despite its strangeness; and it has been created to understand the fundamental physics at the atomic and sub-atomic level. Making generalization into the macroscopic scales of universe is highly nontrivial, and to me it seem very speculative - was that speculation expressed either with normal language or with mathematics.

There are naturally much more to the quantum indeterminacy, but it seems to me that Bohm and Hiley are actually interested in a perspective where there is a sort of a hidden variable, which would describe the seen indeterminacy. They call this the quantum potential, which I will try to describe later. As we will observe, their view is a causal one, but not at all in the mechanical manner of classical physics. 

Interpretation of quantum stuff is a fuzzy business, and I find it challenging to write about in a short manner. I am not really even qualified speak about with total confidence. I might even be expressing the whole point totally wrong. Regardless, it will be interesting to see what Bohn & Hiley can make out of it. This is a study diary after all.

Quantum mechanics has been a popular target for people who are trying to connects physics with some spiritual ideas. However, a lot of that talk seems to involve quite a lot of wild speculation, without any actual understanding of quantum theory. There is also a connected tendency to antagonize “mainstream scientists”, when they no not swallow such speculations. This is very unfortunate, because you cannot really advance science by ad hominem attacks and hostile generalization.

Even though I have background in interest towards connection between conciousness and quantum phenomena, I have not invested heavily into some idea about it, because I just do not have enough reliable data to have an opinion as a scientist. I think it is better to emphasize the rigorous criteria of physics, than build your foundation on unreliable speculation.

However, of those people who have tried to interpret quantum mechanics in an unusual manner, I have quite liked David Bohm (1917–1992). His “ontological interpretation” of quantum theory has been picked up by many quantum conciousness enthusiasts, as a basis for their case. However, as far as I understand, what David Bohm was trying to do was to primarily understand quantum mechanics.

Some time ago a friend of mine gave me a copy of The Undivided Universe, by David Bohm and Basil Hiley, which is the most complete expression of the Bohm’s interpretation, but which I have not read through to this day due to its heavy substance. However, I had very recently an opportunity to listen a talk by Basil Hiley about their theory and I found mathematical basic of it surprisingly sound. 

Therefore, I am going to read the book once and for all, and while I read it, I will write my learned insight into this blog. I am not an expert in quantum mechanics, as my specialization in physics is something else. However, I have solid grasp of the theoretical basics QM, and I have seen a Hilbert space operator or two in my life.