Fred Alan Wolf (aka ‘Dr. Quantum’) is a best-selling author of philosophically-oriented books on modern physics for the general reader. He recently offered this review of my new book, Understanding Our Unseen Reality: Solving Quantum Riddles (Imperial College Press):
“Ruth Kastner is emerging as one of the latest new interpreters of the mysteries of quantum physics and as such provides a unique perspective that she calls the Possibilist Transactional Interpretation or PTI based on the TI theory of John Cramer, expounded earlier by Paul Davies, with both theories based on Richard P. Feynman’s earlier absorber theory. In her latest book she expands on her PTI through using some clever everyday analogies to bring the complexities of quantum physics into the realm of the non-expert. I think that she handles the non-relativistic quantum physics quite well with the PTI, but I find it difficult extending the PTI into quantum field theory although she does make a clear distinction between virtual and real processes using it. For example, there is little discussion of how antiparticles are related to their mirror image particles using the PTI—something that Feynman’s concept of a particle going backward in time with negative energy appearing as an antiparticle going forward in time with positive energy handles quite well. This is certainly a well-worthwhile read for those of you interested in how we are still grappling with understanding quantum physics 115 years after its inception.”-Fred Alan Wolf
I thank Dr. Quantum for his review and for his question concerning antiparticles. PTI has no problem handling antiparticles, but I decided to hold off on that topic and to address it in a future work. For this introductory book, I wanted to focus on the basics. But in a nutshell, for those who are curious, there are four solutions to the Dirac equation and two of those involve negative energies. Those are still antiparticle states (i.e., positrons) in PTI, and they end up conveying positive energy in any transaction. Remember also that at the virtual or offer-wave level, we are dealing only with possible energy, and this is not restricted to positive values. It is only actualized energy that must be positive. I welcome discussion concerning this or any other aspect of PTI, via this website.
I should add that I neglected to reference Prof. Wolf’s book Star Wave (1984, Macmillan) which was the first book for the general reader to discuss Cramer’s TI. I apologize for this oversight. It should be noted however that his interpretation of the transactional picture (invoking consciousness to explain collapse) differs from PTI in that PTI takes the physical process of absorption, together with a form of spontaneous symmetry breaking, as sufficient to explain the fact that we find deterninate measurement results. This issue is also discussed in Chapter 4 of my earlier book.
5 thoughts on “Dr. Quantum on my new book (http://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/p993)”
Love your book, you are clearly on the path of truth, more so than I’ve seen out of any physicist so far. I just wanted to point you toward the scientific and spiritual writings of Emanuel Swedenborg 1688-1772 (who wrote many ground-breaking scientific works before having a spiritual revelation and claiming that God decided to show him for reporting purposes the spiritual world). He wrote about how time in the spiritual world relates to changes of spiritual states, and relative differences between spiritual states is expressed by different positions or space (all of which “orbits” the spiritual sun, which is God, who gives off love (heat) and truth (light) which leads to its third (use) – each good/love having its own corresponding truth (God itself being a personhood of Divine Love and Wisdom). Angels, which are the people in heaven, perceive God within them as well, and God speaks through them at times). Even other differences in the environments reflect differences in spiritual states, etc. Some people never face the sun in this spiritual environment, and some always have it in front of their face even when they’re facing each other (facing the sun relates to being led by love to the Lord, facing the moon(s) relates to being led by truth / love to the neighbor – even the light from the moon(s) seems much brighter than the light of our physical sun).
He also said that despite the idea of the atom, there is no minimum particle (which people thought was the atom at the time), but that all particles are typically divisible by 3 other types of interacting particles to infinity, but that the expressions and behaviors of these objects would be more and more “perfect” and incredible or magical, or in other words more reflect the workings of the divine.
He also believe that free will was inherent in the smallest objects, and that the smallest part of a universe couldn’t exist without this property. And more radically, that the point of the universe was to create a heaven of human beings, but those in hell (although continually being reformed in some way) consider it home and that heaven is hell to them seeing as how it reflects opposite states (and they still typically reject the existence of the afterlife). The opposite of the spiritual sun is making your key focus love of self, and the opposite of the spiritual moon(s) is making your key focus love of the world.
Also, God foresees all evil and provides all good (since goodness is a derivative substance of God), and nothing is allowed into existence if it doesn’t lead to good in some way. And that Heaven is considered the “Grand Human” and all states/even societies in heaven symbolically relate to parts of a human, and humanness itself is actually derived/received from God (although the part of God that corresponds to his/her soul goes beyond humanness). That God is the only true person, and each of us is one only to the extent we reject evil and accept good from God while actively acknowledging that source. But of course, since we are always finite the ratio of us to God is always zero (forgetting the fact that even what we have is of God and his/her mercy).
Not to ramble on, but there’s a lot more you may find even more interesting written by him. He was quite prolific, free PDFs of his books and YouTube vids can be found at Swedenborg.com. Specifically his spiritual works, which all of these points come from (the books Divine Love & Wisdom and Divine Providence you may find particularly interesting). Sorry if I’ve wasted your time, you haven’t mine!
Fascinating. Thanks, I’ll look into this. Glad you enjoyed the book!
Spacetime is a necessary concept but it is the frame of reference from which the observer views reality. If you change your time you can change your space (time travel or time manipulation) and this implies that stepping outside of your frame of reference by changing the flow of time means you can enter into an alternate or different spacetime. Antimatter may be such interactions where its merely matter that has left our spacetime reference and entered into a different spacetime by changing the time. This also explains the idea of how the consciousness of the observer can alter the outcome.
Could you explain what are the main differences between your two books on the PTI subject :
The Transactional Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics – The Reality of Possibility
Understanding Our Unseen Reality – Solving Quantum Riddles
Is the second one more suitable for an introduction to non specialists readers ?
Does it contain new theoretical developments, revised discussion ?
I am presently reading reading the article of Wheeler – Feynman of 1945 (W-F) : “Interaction with the Absorber as the Mechanism of Radiation”. I realize that you are on the edge of this way of thinking physics which started with Mach (not cited in W-F paper), Tetrode, Ritz, Lewis, Wheeler, Feynman, Einstein, Cramer … Woodward (and his space thruster revolution). You are in good company !
Thanks Emile–my new book is completely non-technical and suitable for the layperson so more suitable for an introduction to the basic concepts. It also does have new theoretical developments, although only the conceptual aspects are presented.
I agree this is the fruitful way to go, I feel I am “standing on the shoulders of giants”!