Archive for August, 2010

Madrilene Interview ( 6 ): World as potentiality – an extraordinary methodological challenge

Posted by on Monday, 30 August, 2010

It can be stated that tertium states  preface the fuzziness ( fuzzy logic ) , which introduces  a continuity of  intermediary states ( non – A ) between the two extremes ( A and anti – A ), for example “ an ocean of gray ”  between white and black. The change is fundamental : from now on  there is no more ” just subject ” or ” just object “,  not ”  just real ”  or ” just possible ” , not  “just wave”  or ” just particle”, not ”  just good ” or ” just bad “…

M. – Why “world as potentiality”? In the “Beyond Descartes” book recently published at, you preferred to give as a contemporary alternative to the Cartesian metaphor “world as machine” – world as an organism, expression due to Whitehead,  which even Bohm seemed to adopt when he suggested that actual physics is more likely a quantum organism than quantum mechanics.

F. – The two models – potential and organismic – are not mutually exclusive but rather exhibit important overlapping areas. My impression is that the passing from potential to  real (actual)  comes with more ample methodological implications than the one from machine to organism (not to omit that any organism is, within some limits, a machine, be it a mechanical or biochemical one). Just as I will show in the following the categories couple actual / potential is in any case more relevant for physics and physicists. For example from the beginning we can delimit in an operational manner the existence of two worlds and correlatively two distinct, even though inseparable, physics – a world / physics of the actual that I will designate from now on by “A (this world is practically identical with the Newtonian world or in Bohmian terms with “unfolded order”). On the other side there is a potential world / physics which will be designated by “P”. Referring to this P world C. Noica made this memorable statement: “Today we live in possible”.

M. – Which is in your opinion the right relation between “possible” and “potential” categories?

F. – The potentiality represents “concrete possibility”, clipping from possible two extremely important  sub-systems – real possibility and virtual possibility. In the above mentioned statement Noica rather aimed the concrete possibility, therefore potentiality. In regards to the rapport between the two worlds A and P (each of them possessing not only its own specific physics but equally some distinct channels to transfer information), I wish to emphasize:

i. the P horizon, contrary to what the modern science admitted, it is the fundamental horizon, taking into account that the actual depends on potential equally as genesis / evolution and as returning to P (potentialization).

ii. According to contemporary methodology between P and A there is a quasi-continue transition (in both directions), mentioning that none of the actuals / reals is brought to the terminus point, the potential states being always present in a variable proportion within the set of actualized states, imprinting the real systems beside the just mentioned continuity some intrinsic instability.

To note: the traditional / Darwinian  model of natural selection / evolution is limited twice:

  • as an A /actualized only  approach (  the most relevant  examples being the European  Fr.  Jacob’s ” The Possible and the Actual” and its American , more recent and more elaborated, counterpart – ” The Touchstone of Life ” signed by  Werner R. Loewenstein), with no operational reference  to fundamental actual / potential interface,  and
  • as exclusively extrinsic / causal  ( system / environment ) approach  – interaction only, ignoring what I called  the ” P-natural selection” centered on the  design ( Entwurf in Heideggerian terms ) involving the control exerted by the Whole in two complementary  modalities – the intrinsic one  ( through existentialia / das Er-eignis ) conferring authenticity to the living being, as well as  a non-classical extrinsic one , through synchronization, resonance and  coherence ( see  the chapter  ” Attunement and Distant Healing ” in my book ). Obviously,  for most A- authors / researchers  my last  addendum seems improper, superfluous or even …mystical , because they  inertly  promote  a positivist / reductionist  attitude toward potentiality which  leads to awkward deduction/ genesis of P-information ( spirit, mind ) from …matter and / or energy. Let me remind you ( including  to the Jacob- Loewenstein distinguished team ) the P- standpoint due to a celebrated biologist – George  WALD       ( Nobel Prize ) : ” Mind,rather than emerging  as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always…the source and condition  of physical reality.” -cf. Dr. Larry DOSSEY .

M. – How could we specify the transition from modern to contemporary physics using the already mentioned categories?

F.World / physics A can be accurately characterized  by (excessive) preference for realism and locality, the most… authorized representative  being Albert Einstein (to note that virtually all his methodological failures took place not on A realm but only when he tried – and did it for decades ! – to apply the type A methodology to the P horizon). Symmetrically, the P world / physics are defined by potentialism and nonlocality. Two worlds, two physics, two distinct methodologies and two distinct truths. In my debatable opinion the most interesting exponents of P physics are (in alphabetical order): (Arnold / Kolmogorov), Aspect, Deutsch / Everett, (Dossey), d’Espagnat, Gisin, Hiley / Bohm, Horne,     ( Penrose, Shimony, Zeilinger, Zeh and Zurek (the parentheses denote physicists by adoption, Penrose: fifty / fifty ).

Their promotion leader, prematurely departed at just 62 years old, was by far J.S. Bell. According to my own personal opinion again, the researchers belonging to this generation (including some from the above mentioned group) have spent special methodological resources oriented more toward the demonstration / legitimation of nonlocality (with formidable performances !) leaving somehow in subsidiary the potentialism promotion, having as an effect a certain lagging in conceptual development envisaging the nature / essence of some processes such as: measurement, entanglement, potentialization, genuine genesis – all involving the actual / potential interface.

M. – In the motto of this article it has been emphasized the prevalence of continuum in comparison with discrete within contemporary physics. At the same time it is asserted that our universe is moving from nonlocality to locality / localization. There is some inconsistency between the two evolutions?

F. – Not at all: the evolution of the universe and epistemic progress are  different processes,  not  separated nor solidary. However it needs to be underlined the methodological ascendant of the continuum, respectively of wavy / vibrational processes in contemporary scientific knowledge: in “Beyond Descartes – from Separability to Inseparability ” I have shown that presently we are in full crisis of the discrete, thus being normal that particle – central concept in modern science – to lose some ground against wave (respectively, fields of vibrational energy).   H. – D. Zeh goes even further asserting that since actual quantum mechanics no longer demands the existence of discontinuities in time (quantum jumps), space (particles), nor even in space -time (quantum events), one can conclude that the quantum mechanics itself lost its quantum character, the just apparent discontinuities above mentioned can be objectively described with the help of decoherence – itself a continuous process.

M. – What happens? This discrete  (understood mainly as particle) crisis and correlatively  the consideration of discontinuities just some apparent entities seem to promote the idea that the only necessary and sufficient category for contemporary knowledge should be continuum. I think this has gone too far: for me, the discrete crisis means just the passing of discontinuity into subsidiary (toward continuum), and not its exclusion.

F. – There is not a question of eliminating discontinuity from contemporary epistemology / ontology.  I remind here the ( very ) pertinent question formulated by Parker Palmer in the following, integrative  terms : ” We  think the world apart. What will  it be  like to think  the world together? ” Thus,  it can be reproached to professor Zeh at most a tendency toward some abstractization of a P (potentiality) type. A tendency of opposite direction – abstractization of A (actualization) type – was exhibited by Einstein when, on the basis of his pertinent explanation of photoelectric effect, he aimed to exclude continuity, asserting that the light wave/ electromagnetic field in general, would actually be a (permanent) superposition of quantum oscillators, in other words a sum of discontinuities. To note that in contrast to old / traditional quantum mechanics centered (via N. Bohr) on the law of  excluded middle ( ” everything is either A or not- A ” ) or , simpler , on  Aristotelian / Cartesian antinomic logic: either / or, the new quantum mechanics is based on a very different logic (both / and) promoting not exclusion but rather the inseparability / harmonization of complementary entities: subject / object, potential / actual, continuum / discrete, etc. My  preferred solution to this temptation toward  any type of abstractization is suggested ( generally ) by Bohm, Palmer Parker , and especially by the  both / and logic: in original quantum ensemble we have potentially both states – “wave” and “particle” as ” aP ” states ( though Bohm, in its ” Wholeness and the Implicate Order “, p.163 , considers the two quantum states as ” mutually incompatible potentialities “) their actualization ( aP → Ap ) being specifically accomplished depending on the type of decoherence involved: “wave – decoherence” or “particle-decoherence”; the wave actualization leads to particle potentialization but in no way to its exclusion (according to Cartesian either / or logic); the same solution ” both / and ” may contribute to a correct interpretation of the Young (two slits) experiment: 9 out of 10 of   current interpretations     ( including Young’s ! ) are inaccurate ( abstract, unilateral ) pushing on  the real /wavy aspect  and / or  on the exclusion  type of  logic ” either / or “.

Another remark: taking into account that Bohm suggested that the term “mechanics” (in quantum mechanics) should be replaced with “organism”; that the “quantum” term has also became improper (since quantum is no longer at the center of this physical science), it may be concluded that now more than ever the new quantum mechanics needs a new dialectics.

M. – What could this dialectica nova bring to the field of contemporary quantum mechanics?

F. – Everything depends on the actual desire of the physicists to detach themselves from the traditional ideological ballast, from their notorious FAPP opportunism consisting of promoting, with an incontestable success, the prediction of quantum formalism, ignoring explanation: why is this happening this way and not another. Here are some of my own dialectical suggestions:

  • Centering on potentiality: the decisive resignation from the classical realism and centering of existential concept not on real but rather on potential; of course, you can avoid  the potentiality’s central role either by assuming ( as the modern science did ) the genesis deficiency ( no p → a ) or assuming ( as Everett did ) the genesis excess ( all p → a ) ;  for instance David Deutsch, in The Fabric of Reality – a very interesting book, but..- consider our tangible universe as much as the shadow versions of the multiverse as a constellation of reals to which the potential / possible is just ” a memory fact “, conserving its spooky character attributed with great methodological candor by Albert Einstein. Right now , I think , we need a  new, non – Cartesian, non-Everettian  perspective considering any real as a Tertium ( A/P ) state, belonging to a dynamic existential continuum in which  “ actual / real” formations (actually of Ap type) to harmoniously coexist with “P” formations ( actually of  aP type ). In this context many conceptual inaccuracies can be filtered, for example: physical / mental dualism (the mental / spiritual however having a specific physical nature: aP);  superluminal  speeds of  correlations  propagation aiming toward infinity – within the aP field become normal ones (without defying the theory of relativity which “competence” in the Ap field remains firmly established), while the speed of instantaneous propagation of “pure” potentialities (?) becomes inconsistent (just like reaching… the temperature of absolute zero), etc. Interestingly, the new perspective confers to the dreams, intuition and last but not least mathematics a physical -subtle status since both the symbols and the numbers ( the universal constants also) may be interpreted as functions of  aP type.  At this point a realist – skeptic might object: ” The numbers 2 and 4 in ‘ 2+2=4 ‘ arithmetical expression – physical entities? ” ( excuse me : consider the symbols       ” + ” and  ” = ” too !):  how else could we explain the physical  amazing  discoveries /anticipations acquired by mathematical calculation? It’s time to put an end to the reductionism carried out by modern science which still continues – in an elaborated,  peer reviewed manner – to identify the existent with the actual / real, psyche with consciousness, time with duration…If you think that it is too difficult to  consider matter as an Ap entity and the mind / spirit ( and numbers too ) as an  aP one , it’s only due to the intellectual / Cartesian cut ( either / or ) and   I suggest to read / reread  the following, healing quote, signed with  about 50 years ago by Carl G. Jung ( Man and his symbols- 1964 , pp 94/95 ):

  • “  Today, for instance we talk of ” matter” . We describe its  physical properties (…) but  the word ” matter”  remains a dry , inhuman and purely  intellectual concept, without any  psychic significance  for us. How different was the former image  of matter – the Great Mother that could  encompass and express  the profound meaning  of Mother Earth. In the same way, what was the spirit  is now identified with  intellect and thus ceases to be the Father of All …( this way)  the immense  emotional energy expressed in the  image of ” our Father”  vanishes  into the sand  of an intellectual desert.”  ( p. 98 ):… ( As the modern man ) ” developed consciousness  so his conscious mind  lost contact with some of that primitive  psychic energy”...Moreover, in “Memories, Dreams, Reflections ” – Vintage Books, New York ( 1989 ), Jung considers  repeatedly  the concept ” wholeness of nature ” /  inseparability, underlying that the numbers and / or mythologems …” express the dynamics of  certain subliminal processes” ( or aP type processes in my formulation ) ; p. 311: ” The properties  of numbers  are , simultaneously, properties of matter, for which  reason  certain equations  can anticipate  its behavior”, for instance  ” Equations  governing the turbulence  of heated gases existed  long before  the problems  of such gases had been precisely investigated.”
  • Rethinking in-formation (spirit, time, finality): recognizing the primordial role of information – in comparison with matter and energy – in genesis and organization / functioning of the universe and correlatively promoting of the new status (physical, however not ergonic) of potentiality /probability waves, reduced by the A (actualist) physicists to simple mathematical fictions; this way making possible the universal transfer of the Form, according to David Bohm’s concept of active information. The extraordinary role attributed to physical selection / choice (predicted by Russian physicist N.A.Umov, 1900) in universal  informational play, in articulation / inseparability of  A and P horizons, and, last not least, in recognizing the subjectivity itself as an irreducible objective/ onto-logical datum of the universe / multiverse.

In the following I wish to briefly elaborate on the increasing role of information along a series of distinct but inseparable stages – description / control / genesis which unfortunately were often taken over isolated, or undervalued as major existential factors.

1.  Communication as description of the real system states: the subject is rather passive in comparison with the object and “information” is reduced to a transfer of “objective data”  being evidently subordinated to matter and energy. Maintaining the quantitative integrity of the message appears on the forefront, respectively the ratio signal / noise, redundance, etc. (this is the well-known Shannon / Weaver / Wiener moment; as remarkable guests: Clausius and Boltzmann as well as a notable absence … information).

2.  Control – this time both the subject and information are no longer shadows but they are radically activated allowing us to assume that we are dealing with a new, active type of information / subject; in this new context the role of ergonic factors (matter / energy) becomes comparable if not equal to nonergonic factors (acausal correlations, probability / intentionality waves of aP type). The amplified role of information is manifested this time not as much in changing the physical states of the system but rather in altering their probabilities, the transition from communication / description to control being accompanied by an incontestable rising in the existential rank of the subject / consciousness and correlatively of the meaning / semiosis (see the section “Dasein in Broad Sense” on this site or in my book “Beyond Descartes”).

3.  Genesis – constitutes the superior stage of the subject / information participation to reality,concomitantly marking the exponential increase of the form and meaning role in selection / evolution / genesis processes, the Bohmian concept of in-formation sparingly present in the 2nd stage (the control being, however,a particular case of in-formation) now becomes decisive, fundamental: form / meaning become effectively generative. Interestingly, the environment (this time including the subject / consciousness as a major environmental factor), transfers its instantaneous form to the wave function, its collapse may be smoothly interpreted as an informational process of  a control / genesis essence: indeed the actualization as a physical / subtle process ( aPAp ) could be started by synchronization (an in-formational process equally active in the real and possible) using at its minimal level the probability / intentionality or more exactly potentiality waves, fact anticipated by some open, integrative minds such as George WALD, Henry MARGENAU, J.A. WHEELER and more recently Larry DOSSEY, likely their unconsciousness was resonant with the above mentioned information metamorphosis. Their unconventional ideas were expressed in some clear statements which naturally scandalized the modern world inertially obedient to Cartesianism: Mind…(is) the source and condition of physical reality.” Nothing mystical or paradoxical, just somehow…subtle.

Sir Quantum or Mr. “It from Bit” alias…

  • Universal constants as cosmic sensors: firmer correlation between universal constants with quantum vacuum (“a field of all fields”) going as far as considering these constants as cosmic sensors of vacuum activity as a sui generis dynamic system. If the average annual variation (10 -15 , or so) of these constants suggested by astrophysics is confirmed then one can conclude that – independently of other methodological considerents, older or newer – we are able to measure (from within) the universe.

  • The new ether: rethinking potentiality as the new ether (having the vacuum as a generator) which through its special feature of superconductivity (in rapport with potentiality /” probability” waves propagation) may explain both the universal and constant character of universal constants as well as the mystery of entanglement and / or acausal correlations propagation with faster than light /quasi infinite speed. Invariance toward geometrical distance may suggest a common or similar origin for both  universal constants and entanglement. The Aspect – Gisin experiments are actually a type P version of the Michelson – Morley experiment (of A type) with the fundamental distinction that this time the outcome was a positive, confirmative one: the P ether does exist. So far these ( Aspect- Gisin ) experiments  were rather punctually or at best regionally  interpreted as some  answers to the type A challenge called “ Einstein – Podolsky – Rosen ”. “Einstein’s ‘elements of reality’ do not exist”- if this conclusion literally expressed among others by Michael Horne, is all-in-all finished most likely we are going to encounter the new ether.

World as Potentiality – an Extraordinary Methodological Challenge

Posted by on Monday, 30 August, 2010

Interviuri Madrilene (6): Lumea ca potentialitate – o extraordinara provocare metodologica

Comment of the week:

Melaine Iozzo

I just wanted to compose a small remark in order to say thanks to you for all the amazing secrets you are sharing here. My considerable internet look up has at the end been recognized with really good knowledge to share with my partners. I ‘d tell you that most of us visitors actually are definitely fortunate to dwell in a useful website with so many marvellous individuals with beneficial techniques. I feel very much happy to have discovered your web site and look forward to many more pleasurable times reading here. Thanks a lot once again for a lot of things.

“Starile  T ( tertium ) prefateaza logica     ( starea ) fuzzy care introduce o continuitate de stari intermediare     ( non-A ) intre cele doua extreme ( A si anti-A), de exemplu “ un ocean de gri” intre alb si negru; schimbarea este fundamentala: de acum nu mai avem “doar subiect” sau “ doar obiect”, nici   “ doar  real” sau “doar posibil”, nici “ doar unda” sau “ doar particula”, nici “doar bine” sau “ doar rau”…

M.- De ce “ lumea ca potentialitate”? In cartea  Beyond Descartes, recent publicata de,  ai preferat sa indici ca alternativa   contemporana la metafora cartesiana    “ lumea ca masina “ – lumea ca organism , formulare datorata lui Whitehead – la care  parea sa subscrie  si Bohm atunci cand  sugera ca  fizica actuala este mai curand  un organism cuantic decat o mecanica cuantica.

F.- Cele doua modele – potential si organismic – nu sunt reciproc exclusive ci prezinta importante arii de suprapunere.Impresia mea este ca  trecerea de la potential la actual/ real  vine cu implicatii metodologice  mai ample  decat cea de la masina la  organism ( sa nu omitem faptul ca orice organism este, intre anumite limite , o masina , fie ea mecanica sau biochimica ).Asa cum voi arata mai departe cuplul de categorii actual / potential  este mult mai relevant pentru fizica si fizicieni. Spre exemplu , de la bun inceput,  putem delimita la modul operational existenta a doua lumi si doua  fizici distincte ( desi inseparabile ) –o lume / fizica a actualizatului ( care se confunda practic cu lumea / fizica newtoniana sau , in termenii lui Bohm  cu “ unfolded order” ), pe care o voi desemna mai departe  prin litera “ A “ ; exista si lumea / fizica  potentiala ( o voi nota cu “ P “ ). Referindu-se la aceasta lume P , Noica  a facut o afirmatie  memorabila :  “ azi traim in posibil”.

M.- Care este , in opinia ta, raportul corect  dintre categoriile “posibil” si “ potential”?

F.- Potentialitatea reprezinta  “posibilitatea concreta”, ea decupand  din posibil doua subsisteme de mare interes stiintific si anume –  posibilitatea reala si posibilitatea virtuala. In expresia amintita  Noica  avea in vedere mai curand  posibilitatea concreta deci potentialitatea.Cu privire la raportul dintre cele doua lumi  A si P ( fiecare dispunand nu doar de fizica sa specifica ci si de  canale distincte pentru realizarea transferului de informatie) as dori sa fac doua sublinieri : i.orizontul P , in opozitie cu ceea ce admitea  stiinta moderna , este orizontul fundamental, tinand cont ca  actualizatul depinde de  potential atat ca geneza ( ceva exista inainte de a fi dat! )  cat si ca revenire la P  ( potentializare ).ii. Conform metodologiei contemporane , intre P si A exista o tranzitie cvasi-continua  ( in ambele sensuri ), cu mentiunea ca niciun  actual/ real nu este dus pana la capat, starile  potentiale fiind totdeauna prezente , intr-o proportie variabila , in multimea microstarilor actualizate, imprimand astfel sistemelor ( reale ) pe langa continuitatea amintita si o anumita instabilitate intrinseca.

Demn de notat: modelul darwinist al selectiei naturale / evolutiei prezinta doua limite metodologice redutabile, distincte :

  • ca abordare exclusiv  de tip A ( bazata pe actuali )- cel mai relevant exemplu european  constituindu-l cartea lui Fr. Jacob ” The Possible and the Actual ” ( in care, conform asteptarilor posibilul  face doar figuratie ) in vreme ce de la americani  voi indica lucrarea mai recenta si mai elaborata “ The Touchstone of Life ”  semnata de  Werner R. Loewenstein, ambele nefacand nicio trimitere operationala la interfata fundamentala  actual / potential; vreau totusi sa subliniez ca in aria ” A” aceste lucrari au o valoare incontestabila , putand fi  considerate,  fara exagerare, drept  A- capodopere !
  • ca abordare exclusiv  extrinsec – cauzala  ( sistem / mediu )  implicand doar interactiunea ( va mai amintiti de ” decizia ” grabita a lui Engels : ” dincolo de interactiune nu mai exista nimic ” ?). Ambele aspecte mentionate ignora ceea ce eu am numit ” selectie naturala de tip P “ concept centrat pe modelul “proiect / design” ( Entwurf, in termeni heideggerieni ) implicand controlul exercitat de Intreg in doua modalitati  complementare: una intrinseca – prin intermediul existentialia or das Er-eignis, conferind autenticitate fiintei , precum si una extrinsec- neclasica bazata  pe influente mai subtile decat interactiunea ( sincronizare, rezonanta, coerenta),   pt. detalii vezi cap. ” Attunement and Distant Healing ” din cartea ” Beyond Descartes…”.Evident , pt. cei mai multi autori/ cercetatori de tip A selectia de tip P  poate parea improprie , superflua sau chiar …mistica  deoarece ei promoveaza  inertial o atitudine  pozitivist – reductionista fata de potentialitate, ajungand sa afirme ca P -informatia  ( spiritul, mintea )  ar fi generate de …materie si / sau energie. Ajunsi aici , merita sa va reamintesc dv. precum si distinsilor  reprezentanti ai echipei Jacob / Loewenstein, punctul de vedere de tip – P , exprimat fara ezitare de  un alt celebru  biolog , laureat al Premiului Nobel,- George WALD :Mind  rather than  emerging  as a late outgrowth  in the evolution of life , has existed always…the source  and condition of physical reality.” ( conf. Dr.Larry DOSSEY ).In fine, o precizare de interes global , trans-biologic:  forma fundamentala de adaptivitate este oferita de adaptarea oricarui tip de real la  potentialul-posibil ( = modelul  originar ).

M.- Cum am putea defini, punand in lucru categoriile mentionate , trecerea de la fizica moderna la cea  contemporana?

F.- Lumea si fizica A pot fi caracterizate cel mai fidel prin preferinta ( excesiva ) pentru realism si localitate, reprezentantul  cel mai…autorizat fiind Albert Einstein ( tin sa subliniez ca  practic toate rateurile metodologice ale lui Einstein au fost “consemnate “ nu pe terenul “ A” ci atunci cand a incercat – si a facut-o cu obstinatie timp de decenii! – sa aplice metodologia de tip A realitatilor de cu totul alta natura – anume celor de tipul “P”. In mod simetric, lumea si fizica P sunt caracterizate prin potentialism si nelocalitate. Doua lumi, doua fizici , doua metodologii distincte si, atentie, doua adevaruri. In opinia mea – discutabila, desigur – cei mai reprezentativi exponenti ai fizicii P sunt , in ordine alfabetica : ( Arnold/ Kolmogorov), Aspect, Deutsch / Everett,  (Dossey ), d’Espagnat, Gisin, Hiley / Bohm, Horne,      ( Penrose, Shimony,  Zeilinger, Zeh si Zurek (parantezele indica fizicieni prin…adoptie, in cazul lui Penrose: fifty / fifty ).

Seful de promotie, disparut prematur la doar 62 ani, a fost incontestabil J.S.Bell. Din pacate , din nou conform propriei mele opinii,  cercetatorii din aceasta generatie ( inclusiv unii din grupul sus-mentionat ) au depus eforturi metodologice speciale orientate mai mult catre impunerea / legitimarea  nelocalitatii ( cu performante realmente formidabile ), lasand totusi intrucatva pe planul  secund promovarea potentialismului in general, de aici rezultand o anumita ramanere in urma a dezvoltarii conceptuale vizand spre exemplu natura unor procese ca masurarea, entanglement-ul, potentializarea , geneza autentica , toate implicand interfata actual / potential ( posibil).

M.- In motto-ul propus de noi  se scoate in evidenta prevalenta continuului asupra discretului in fizica actuala. In acelasi timp se sustine ca universul  nostru evolueaza de la nelocal la localizare. Exista o contradictie intre cele doua pozitii ?

F.- Nu:  evolutia universului si progresul cunosterii sunt procese diferite, ele nefiind nici separate dar nici solidare. Oricum , trebuie subliniat ascendentul metodologic care revine continuului respectiv  proceselor ondulatorii / vibrationale  in cunoasterea stintifica actuala: in  Beyond Descartes am aratat ca in prezent  ne gasim in plina criza a discretului, fiind deci in firea lucrurilor  ca particula – concept – cheie  in stiinta moderna, sa piarda progresiv teren in competitia , totusi complementara , cu unda             ( respectiv cu  campurile de energie vibrationala). H.-D. Zeh merge chiar mai departe sustinand ca intrucat mecanica cuantica actuala  nu mai reclama existenta discontinuitatilor nici in timp ( salturi cuantice ), nici in  spatiu ( particule ), nici chiar in spatiu-timp (  evenimente cuantice ), se poate trage concluzia ca insasi mecanica cuantica nu mai este…cuantica,discontinuitatile amintite – aparente – putand fi descrise obiectiv cu ajutorul decoerenteiea insasi un proces…continuu.

M.- Ce se intampla?  Aceasta criza a discretului (inteles ca  particula sau nivel corpuscular) si , corelativ, considerarea  discontinuitatilor ca fiind ( doar ) aparente par sa acrediteze ideea ca singura categorie – necesara si suficienta – pt. cunoasterea contemporana ar fi…continuul. Eu cred ca se merge prea departe: pt. mine  criza discretului inseamna  trecerea discontinuitatii in subsidiar ( in raport cu continuul ) , nicidecum excluderea primei  categorii din descrierea naturii, a vietii.

F.- Nu se pune problema excluderii discontinuitatii din epistemologie sau  ontologie: daca este sa se excluda ceva din modelul ” particula elementara” atunci da, se poate renunta fara nicio paguba (  dimpotriva !) la  atributul ” elementara” ( introdus pe baze speculative ) precum si la  particula in sens clasic ( nu doar separata de unda ci chiar opusa acesteia! ). Profesorului Zeh i se poate reprosa cel mult  o anume tendinta spre abstractizarea de tip P. O tendinta de sens opus – abstractizare de tip A – a manifestat Einstein  atunci cand, pe fondul explicatiei pertinente data de el efectului fotoelectric a incercat sa excluda…continuitatea, sustinand ca unda luminoasa,  campul electromagnetic in general, ar  fi de fapt o superpozitie ( permanenta ) de oscilatori cuantici, altfel spus , o suma de discreti. Se cuvine subliniat faptul ca, spre deosebire de vechea mecanica cuantica ( centrata – via N.Bohr –  pe o logica de tip antinomic : either / or ) noua mecanica cuantica are la baza o logica diferita ( both / and )  promovand nu  excluderea ci  armonizarea entitatilor complementare : subiect ↔ obiect; potential ↔ actual; continuu ↔ discontinuu, etc. Solutia sugerata de logica noua, de tip  both / and, la tentatia abstractizarii  de un tip sau altul : in ansamblul cuantic  exista in mod potential atat starea de “ unda” cat si cea de ” particula” ca stari aP reciproc compatibile ( desi Bohm in  cartea ” Wholeness and the Implicate Order ” p. 163 considera  cele doua stari cuantice drept ” mutually incompatible potentialities ” – incompatibilitatea lor -if any – este indusa abia ” in final “,  de  contextele experimentale, respectiv de intalnirea cu ” target”-ul cand  actualizarea lor se produce in mod diferentiat, dupa tipul decoerentei implicate : “decoerenta – unda” sau “decoerenta-particula”; actualizarea undei presupune, desigur, potentializarea- mai exact ramanerea in potential- a caracterului corpuscular, dar nu eliminarea lui ( cf. logicii  either / or); aceeasi solutie ” both/and ” poate conduce la interpretarea  corecta a   experimentului lui Young (” two slits ” experiment ): cam 9 din 10 dintre interpretarile curente sunt metodologic inacurate  ( abstracte, unilateral-realiste , in alti termeni= reductioniste fata de potentialul posibil existent si , mai cu seama, activ, sub forma unor unde potentiale care pre-” programeaza”  subtil dar decisiv intregul proces ).

Inca o remarca : tinand cont ca Bohm  sugerase  ca termenul “mecanica ”  ar trebui inlocuit  cu cel de  ” organism”; ca termenul ” cuantica”  a devenit inadecvat ( intrucat nu quantum-ul  s-ar gasi in centrul preocuparilor acestei stiinte ) in fine ca , pornind de la premisa legitima a inseparabilitatii se poate ajunge la  promovarea curioasa a…separabilitatii, etc. se poate conclude ca, mai mult ca oricand, noua “mecanica cuantica” are nevoie de o dialectica noua.

M.-  Ce ar putea aduce semnificativ aceasta dialectica nova in campul mecanicii cuantice contemporane?

F.- Totul depinde de dorinta efectiva a fizicienilor de a se debarasa de balastul  ideologic traditional, de oportunismul lor notoriu  consistand in  promovarea ( cu un succes incontestabil ) a  predictiei ( formalismului cuantic ” FAPP” ) neglijand  explicatia: de ce se intampla asa si nu altfel. Iata cateva dintre sugestiile mele :

i. Pe primul plan- potentialul: renuntarea decisa la realismul clasic si centrarea conceptiei despre existenta  nu pe realul  ( nefundamental ) ci pe potentialul posibil; evident, centralizarea potentialului poate fi evitata in doua modalitati: fie  prin renuntarea la geneza autentica ( no p→ a ) -cazul stiintei moderne pt. care numai starea actualizata este relevanta , fie  considerand maximum de geneza ( all p→ a ) – cazul  modelului MW al lui Everett; in ambele cazuri potentialul straluceste prin absenta, desi , trebuie sa recunoastem asimetria situatiei:  in vreme ce Cartesianismul reprezinta trecutul, ” Everett ” poate deveni – cine stie? -metodologia viitorului.  Din pacate multi fizicieni remarcabili,  David Deutsch, spre exemplu,  (  vezi cartea sa The Fabric of Reality– extrem de interesanta dar…) sar peste etape metodologice distincte,vazand de pe acum  atat universul nostru tangibil cat si versiunile shadow ale multiversului doar ca o constelatie de reali, potentialul- posibil pastrandu-si caracterul  ” spooky ” – fantomatic atasat lui, cu multa …candoare metodologica ( de pe o pozitie de tip A, vezi mai sus ) de catre  Einstein. Convingerea mea  este ca in prezent,pentru a progresa  in cunoastere si/sau modelare onto-logica avem nevoie de o perspectiva  noua, deopotriva  non-Cartesiana si non-Everettiana, care sa promoveze decis inseparabilitatea considerand fiecare “real” ca o stare Tertium  ( A/P state )- apartinand unui  continuu existential-dinamic  in care formatiunile de tip  ” real”  ( de fapt Ap) sa coexiste armonios cu cele de tip aP. In acest context numeroase inexactitati  conceptuale  traditionale ar fi   filtrate, spre exemplu: dualismul fizic /mental ( mentalul avand totusi o natura fizica specifica : aP ), vitezele de propagare supraluminice – tinzand spre infinit – in domeniul aP devin  normale ( fara a sfida teoria relativitatii a carei “competenta”  in aria Ap ramane  ferm stabilita ), in schimb  viteza   instantanee de propagare a   potentialitatilor        ” pure ”  ( ? ) devine inconsistenta ( ca si atingerea temperaturii …zero absolut ); interesant , noua perspectiva confera visurilor, intuitiei si, last not least ,   matematicii un statut fizic-subtil intrucat atat simbolurile cat si numerele insesi ( deci si constantele universale ) vor putea fi interpretate ca functii de tip aP ; replicii standard a adeptilor realismului local usor de anticipat: ” Cum numerele  2 si 4 din expresia aritmetica ‘2+2=4’ sa fie considerate entitati fizice? ii contrapun replica mea: scuzati-ma, simbolurile “+ ” si  “=” , de asemenea! –  cum altfel s-ar putea explica descoperirile / anticiparile fizice rezultate din / prin calculul matematic ? A venit, in fine , momentul sa  punem capat reductionismului practicat  de cunoasterea moderna care- intr-o maniera consolidata, peer reviewed- continua inca sa  identifice existentul cu actualizatul / realul, psyche cu constientul, timpul cu durata, etc. Daca va pare prea dificil sa  acceptati  ca materia poate fi o entitate de tip Ap sau mintea / spiritul – o entitate cu adevarat complementara, de tip aP, aceasta se datoreaza exclusiv “ticului” intelectual / Cartesian ( logicii ” either / or ” ) promovand separarea /separabilitatea, admisa pro tempore,  ca proces / caracteristica fundamental(a): este ca si cum ai pastra schelaria neatinsa , timp de decenii, dupa darea in folosinta a cladirii; pt. a intelege aberatia acestei pozitii metodologice este indicat sa cititi / recititi  paragraful care urmeaza , semnat cu aproape 50 ani in urma de catre Carl G. Jung – ” Man and His Symbols ” pp.94 /95 in care este  reliefata  fara  ezitari pierderea de catre omul modern, aservit gandirii binare, a perspectivei  totalitatii, a inseparabilitatii / continuitatii ( intrebati-va , impreuna cu mine, daca  logica / gandirea fuzzy  nu avanseaza cumva  -este adevarat , printr-o codificare distincta, specifica – un mesaj asemanator a carui finalitate este tocmai de a ne ajuta sa restabilim legatura cu Intregul ):

“  Today, for instance we talk of ” matter” . We describe its  physical properties (…) but  the word ” matter”  remains a dry , inhuman and purely  intellectual concept, without any  psychic significance  for us. How different was the former image  of matter – the Great Mother that could  encompass and express  the profound meaning  of Mother Earth. In the same way, what was the spirit  is now identified with  intellect and thus ceases to be the Father of All …( this way)  the immense  emotional energy expressed in the  image of ” our Father”  vanishes  into the sand  of an intellectual desert.”  ( p. 98 ):… ( As the modern man ) ” developed consciousness  so his conscious mind  lost contact with some of that primitive  psychic energy”…Mai mult,  in ” Memorii,  Dreams, Reflections” – Vintage Books New York, 1989, Jung face repetate trimiteri la ” wholeness of  nature ” ( inseparability ), precizand  ca numbers and mythologems ( archetypal images of the invisible world ) ” express the dynamics  of certain  subliminal processes” ( procese de tip aP in formularea mea);  p. 311 :  ” The properties of numbers are, however, simultaneously , properties of matter, for which reason certain equations  can anticipate  its behavior ” ca exemplu : ” Equations  governing  the turbulence of heated gases  existed long before  the problems of such gases had been precisely  investigated.”

ii. Regandirea rolului in-formatiei ( spiritului, timpului, finalitatii ) : recunoasterea rolului primordial al formei / informatiei – raportat la materie  si energie – in geneza si organizarea / functionarea universului si, corelativ,  promovarea  noului statut ( fizic desi nu ergonic ) al undelor de probabilitate /potentialitate    ( reduse de fizicienii de tip A – actualisti –  la simple fictiuni matematice ) care sa permita transferul universal al Formei, compatibil ( in spirit desi nu in litera ) cu ideea – model de informatie activa  ( David Bohm ).  Rolul exceptional care revine alegerii fizice ( prezis de fizicianul rus Umov, 1900 ) in jocul informational universal, in articularea  universurilor de tip A si P. Cateva   precizari despre finalitate- un concept de mare interes metodologic care prea adesea este abordat …cu fata spre trecut, ceea ce  inseamna fie esuarea intr-un misticism grotesc , fie separarea brutala a  orizonturilor existentiale  ( social / biologic / inanimat ). Bohr , in tr-un articol binecunoscut  ( Physical Science and  the Problem of Life , din 1957  ) se raporteaza la finalitate  luand ca baza   punctul de vedere exprimat ( in 1910 )  de catre  tatal sau – fiziologul Christian Bohr si ajunge  inevitabil – via ” notion of  purposiveness ” – la concluzii mai curand separatiste  privind raportul dintre  organ / organism si  inorganic ( quantum ) systems : ” Here we must realize, that  the description and comprehension  of the closed  quantum phenomena  exhibit  no feature indicating that  an organization of atoms  is able to adapt itself  to the surroundings  in the way  we witness in the maintenance and evolution  of living organisms.” In cartea  ” Beyond Descartes “ eu am incercat sa depasesc  aceasta perspectiva quasi-cartesiana facand uz de ” situatia physis “ care, promovand nu inchiderea ci deschiderea fata de mediu / surroundings,  face posibila o abordare  inseparabila  ( desi distincta ) a sistemelor  animate / inanimate,  afirmand abilitatea  adaptiva, intrinseca, a sistemelor   cuantice; evident, in acest efort de  generalizare am pornit nu de la conceptul de…scop / purpose care  conduce nemijlocit la   excludere ( conform logicii  either / or )  ci  de la  mecanismul  fizic  mult mai generos / flexibil   implicat in categoria netraditionala  ” natura alege ”  ( Umov – Dirac ).

In cele ce urmeaza doresc sa reliefez rolul crescand al informatiei de-a lungul unui sir de momente  distincte  dar inseparabile     ( descriere / control / geneza )  care  , din pacate , sunt fie  preluate  izolat , fie subevaluate ca factori existentiali de prim rang:

1. Comunicarea ca descriere a starilor sistemului real : subiectul este pasiv in raport cu obiectul, iar informatia consista doar intr-un transfer de …date ” obiective “, fiind evident subordonata materiei si energiei. Pe primul plan trece  prezervarea integritatii  cantitative in deosebi a mesajului, respectiv  raportul semnal / zgomot, redundanta, etc.   Acesta este, evident,   momentul Shannon /Weaver/ Wiener, avand  unele  prezente remarcabile ( Clausius  si Boltzmann), precum si  o  absenta notabila (… informatia  ).

2. Controlul – de aceasta data atat subiectul cat si informatia se activizeaza, putandu-se afirma ca avem a face cu un nou tip de informatie / subiect; ponderea factorilor ergonici ( materie / energie ) devine comparabila daca nu chiar egala cu factorii neergonici ( corelatii acauzale, unde de probabilitate/ potentialitate de tip aP ). Rolul creativ crescut al formei / informatiei / meaning-ului  se manifesta nu atat in schimbarea   starilor fizice ale sistemului cat in  modificarea probabilitatilor  acestora, tranzitia de la  ” descriere” la ” control ” fiind  insotita de o incontestabila ridicare in rang existential a subiectului ( constiintei ), a se vedea sectiunea ” Dasein in broad sense ” pe acest site sau in cartea “Beyond Descartes”.

3. Geneza propriu – zisa, constituie stadiul superior al  participarii  informatiei / subiectului la realitate, marcand totodata cresterea exponentiala a rolului FORMEI si MEANING-ului in procesele de selectie / evolutie /geneza – conceptul bohmian de “ in-formare ” prezent in mod ” timid ” in stadiul 2  ( controlul fiind  totusi o forma particulara, inferioara de in-formare ) devine acum decisiv , fundamental : forma / meaning-ul  devin generative (  cu circa doua decenii in urma afirmam ca  exista deja temeiuri sa se consemneze transformarea progresiva a  mecanicii cuantice in SEMIOTICA CUANTICA ! Interesant, mediul ambiant ( incluzand de aceasta data subiectul / constiinta ) isi transfera ( sau nu ! fiind vorba de o alegere efectiva  ) forma instantanee functiei de unda , colapsul  acesteia  putand fi interpretat ” smoothly ” ca un proces informational de control / geneza determinat  de  interactia instantanee a amplitudinilor instantanee  maxime din potential si real  : in adevar  actualizarea ca  proces fizic subtil de in-formare  poate fi declansata de  sincronizare ( proces de in-formare activ atat in real cat si in posibil ), putand fi produsa, la nivelul minimal, de undele de probabilitate ( mai exact:  potentialitate / intentionalitate  ale gandirii / constiintei ) fapt anticipat  de unele minti deschise , integrative  ca George WALD, Henry MARGENAU, J.A.WHEELER si, mai recent,  Larry DOSSEY , al caror subconstient a fost  rezonant cu metamorfozele mentionate  mai sus ale formei /informatiei. Ideile lor neconventionale au fost exprimate  in enunturi care, firesc,  au scandalizat  lumea moderna aservita  Cartesianismului : ” Mind …(is ) the source and condition  of physical reality.” Nimic mistic sau paradoxal, doar intrucatva…subtil si, de ce nu , oarecum confuz ( nu asa   ni se infatiseaza, de regula,noul autentic ? ) in sensul ca eu NU as fi articulat niciodata mintea   direct cu realul ci cu actualul, realul/ realizarea presupunand procese de  amplificare / stabilizare  in a caror desfasurare mintea  – cea umana, cel putin – trebuie  sa rezoneze  cu  un mediu favorabil ( la asa ceva se raporteaza/ limiteaza  schema  fuzzy , prezentata mai sus : subiect↔ obiect).Interesant , confuzia mentionata  intre nivelurile existentiale actual / real  l-a incurcat  chiar si pe Einstein atunci cand  marele fizician  isi permitea   referinte shaky de tipul ” imi place sa cred ca Luna este pe cer chiar si atunci cand noi, pamantenii, nu o privim ” ( ? ). Cinetica existentiala , rezultata  din combinarea  conceptual – metodologica a cosmologiei, teoriei evolutiei  ( fizico-chimico – biologice ) , precum si a conceptului – model  ” EINSELECTION ” datorat  fizicianului american W. ZUREK,  sta marturie ca  atat  Luna de pe cer cat si…mult mai pamanteanul  Schrödinger’s cat  erau deja  colapsate ( actualizate / realizate ) cu mult inainte ca  privitorul  uman sa-si poata exercita aptitudinile… decoherent / creationiste.


iii. Constantele universale = senzori cosmici :corelarea mai stransa  a constantelor universale cu vacuumul cuantic (” a field of all fields “) mergand pana la considerarea acestor constante ca senzori cosmici ai activitatii vacuumului ca sistem dinamic sui generis. Daca variatia anuala medie a acestor constante  sugerata de astrofizica se confirma  inseamna ca , independent de alte considerente metodologice mai vechi sau mai noi , noi putem face – din interior! -masuratori asupra universului.

iv. Noul eter: regandind  potentialitatea  ca noul ether ( avand vacuumul ca generator ) care prin insusirea speciala a superconductiei ( fata de propagarea potentialitatii /undelor  de probabilitate ) poate explica  atat  caracterul universal / constant al  constantelor universale   cat si…” misterul” entanglementului si / sau al propagarii corelatiilor acauzale cu viteze supraluminice. Invarianta fata de distanta geometrica  poate sugera  ca atat constantele universale cat si  entanglementul  pot avea o origine  comuna sau cel putin una  similara.Experimentele Aspect – Gisin sunt de fapt ” versiunea de tip P ” a experimentului Michelson – Morley,de tip A , cu deosebirea ca  de aceasta data , rezultatul a fost unul pozitiv, de confirmare: da, eterul P exista, este  efectiv. Deocamdata experimentele Aspect -Gisin au fost interpretate mai curand ” regional” , ca un raspuns la  provocarea  de tip A  numita ”  Einstein- Podolsky-Rosen “. ” Einstein’s “ elements  of reality” do not exist “. Daca aceasta concluzie – exprimata , intre altii, de Michael Horne – este dusa pana la capat , dam de ” noul eter”.



Felecans’  Month

GM Yuri SHULMAN ( stanga ) , felicitandu-si adversarul dupa …0-1 ( our gratitude to  Betsy DYNAKO, for  her excellent – copyrighted – photo  job).

Ceva exceptional s-a intamplat cu / in familia Felecan intre 1 august – 1 septembrie 2010 : in vreme ce  eu , decanul de varsta,  am reusit sa public la  o carte deosebita ( dedicata… ramurii tinere a familiei) – Beyond Descartes – from Separability to Inseparability, Florin Jr.- Maestru International a jucat  impotriva  Marelui maestru international Yuri Shulman Rating 2715  ( Campion USA pe 2009 si co-campion, neinvins , pe 2010 ) o partida de sah remarcabila , care a fost  selectata de catre USCL drept “ cea mai buna partida a saptamanii“. Tinand cont ca , deocamdata  ratingul fiului meu ( care revine in sah dupa o intrerupere voluntara de aproape 10 ani! ) este mult inferior ( 2415 ), toata lumea se astepta ca Florin sa fie dominat  clar, sa piarda ” de justete ” . Ei bine, adevarul simplist al aritmeticii a fost inca o data contrazis :  Marele maestru a fost cel care a intrerupt mersul ceasului  recunoscand victoria  adversarului romano-american. Bineinteles ca, de aici de departe , ne bucuram/ mandrim  sa dedicam aceste doua impliniri de exceptie Romaniei – tara noastra originara in care amandoi ne-am nascut si, atentie , ne-am format fizic si spiritual sub semnul echilibrului , al curajului sacrificial, al performantei autentice, inalte. Cat de curand voi reveni pe acest site cu o detaliere, sper , interesanta privind  in mod special evolutia sportiva a lui Florin Jr., intitulata ( provizoriu )    “ Renasterea unui campion din…cenusa americana.” Pana atunci cateva dedicatii muzicale  ad hoc: Lena ne-a omagiat ” isprava ” cultural- sportiva   din acest  prag de toamna cu un waltz- mix…aprilin ( amandoi  suntem nascuti in aprilie ) : April – Flowers show ( Andre Rieu  Strauss Medley) – multumiri, Lena! Bedankt, Andre! – in vreme ce eu – tatal si antrenorul exclusiv al juniorului Florin- i-am daruit fiului meu , prin intermediul marelui nostru co-ardelean Stefan Hrusca piesa -unicat ” Un copac cu flori” ( versiunea  georgegrama 2007 ). Audiati cele doua  perle muzicale impreuna cu noi , credeti in noi  iar noi  vom incerca sa  nu va dezamagim in evolutiile noastre viitoare, ceea ce , sincer,nu va fi chiar un joc/ foc  de artificii; daca vrea cineva  sa stie, honestly, cam cum e viata , la varf in deosebi, in America poate cel mai bun raspuns il da Andre Rieu impreuna cu John Sheahan : preluati cu atentie mesajul lor , muzical desigur, intitulat ” Andre Rieu &The Dubliners” ( code: Endargu 2006 ) cu un accent special pe ultima parte. Poate  Lena are dreptate : pt.  a tine ” ritmul” trebuie sa fii / ramai  aprilin.Cu un mic amendament: ritmicitatea  americana nu inseamna  doar solicitare bruta ci si  placere /sarm / antren, altfel ne-am destrama urgent. Cele bune din U.S., Florin Sr.

Felecan Wins USCL Game of the Week

Congratulations to IM Florin Felecan of the Chicago Blaze, whose victory Wednesday night over GM Yury Shulman has been selected as the U.S. Chess League’s Game of the Week. The game, which was analyzed yesterday by Florin and NM Jeremy Kane, is also the league’s Upset of the Week, owing to Yury’s 300-point ratings advantage.

Jim Dean, prize decision judge (1st place, 5 points): This felt like a fairly easy decision. Felecan beats Shulman with Black in a KID, and it’s not the first time! Shulman vs Felecan at the Chicago Open in 2009 started the same way, but this time Felecan varied with 7… exd4, rather than 7… h6. It seemed like Felecan was well prepared as he accumulated a large time advantage and played sharply throughout. A very nice win to save the match for the Blaze!

Replica la : “Un roman lucid : performanta sau intamplare ( orbire sahista)?”

Mesajul  semnat “un roman lucid”  care pune la indoiala  performanta reala prezentata  in “ Luna Felecanilor ” , pare izvorat mai curand din  amaraciune / venin decat din  luciditate ( evident, in sah , ca si in viata reala de altfel , intamplarea  are contributia ei ). Acest mesaj piezis mi-a readus in memoria vie o istorioara  sugestiva a unui mare scriitor :  un om condamnat  pe nedrept de semenii sai sa-si traiasca restul vietii intr-o hazna  este salvat de Dumnezeu care il teleporteaza pe malul marii  cu “albastrul ei infinit” (vorba Angelei. Bucura-te Similutzo – o meriti! – ca iata ai in sufletul nostru o camaruta privilegiata, mobilata cu dichis si.. neuitare ),cu nisip ,vegetatie  si briza definitorie fara de care marea nu e mare. Dupa o vreme, asteptand un raspuns , Divinitatea risca un

-Ei?  La care raspunsul (… lucid ) nu se mai lasa asteptat:

– Tot o hazna, Doamne…

Replica mea:

1. Nu se poate vorbi de orbire sahista intr-o partida premiata de specialisti ( la concurenta cu unele partide jucate de reputati mari maestri americani ). Partida ( 49 mutari ) a avut desigur si mutari discutabile/ slabe , de ambele parti, dar pe ansamblu  a fost apreciata ca “ remarcabila”.

2. Sa nu omitem aspectul  realmente exceptional : nu constituie o exceptie  ca pe scaunul din fata ta , oricine ai fi tu , sa se aseze campionul USA – 2009? Iar faptul ca se…intampla sa-l si invingi, nu tine de exceptional? Cu atat mai mult cu cat partida in discutie reprezenta o revansa: la Openul Chicago 2009  Florin il invinsese pe campion intr-o partida  similara.

3. “E  cam aiurea sa  implici curajul intr-o partida de sah.” Chiar asa? Eu am jucat si box si sah si pot atesta …dinauntru ca atitudinea curajoasa este  critica in ambele tipuri de confruntare. Florin reprezenta clubul- fanion al statului Illinois in intalnirea respectiva,  avand ca adversari la mesele din dreapta si stanga alti doi mari maestri ( Nakamura si Finegold ) care , sub ochii lui,  si-au executat  de plano adversarii ( colegii lui Florin ). Avand un rating inferior cu 300 puncte fiul meu ar fi avut si el…dreptul la infrangere, totusi a luptat si a invins! Eu l-am felicitat pentru curaj in primul rand!Am fost” aiurea”? ( Uneori, recunosc, mi se intampla. Nu acum! ).

Daca romanul nostru este  in adevar o minte lucida , iata, ii sugerez ( ca parinte ) sa-si probeze  dotarea exceptionala in cazul  Madalinei Manole – o insailare ( ! ) , pornind de la premisa  ca nu exista o  mama normala  care sa-si  paraseasca de buna voie copilul iubit  fiindca…fiindca…

AROMA DE FEMEIE – o precizare

Am fost chestionat …la modul rastit  in legatura cu scoaterea ” Aromei… ” de pe site si trebuie sa recunosc : mi-a facut placere. Scoaterea a fost decisa de o acuza luata poate prea in serios anume ca ” prea am exagerat cu scoaterea in evidenta a protagonistelor vietii mele.” Nu neg, dar daca eu n-as fi facut-o atunci cine? Mai cu seama ca e vorba nu de pretextualitati ci de fiinte care-mi sunt  efectiv aproape de inima: daca  una din ele, sa zicem Reli,  ar ciocani la usa mea as deschide si in loc de cuvenitul  Buna ziua , etc. as …certa-o: Doamne, de ce ai intarziat atata?

Marea surpriza  ( pt. mine cel putin ) a fost ca ” Aroma…” – desi editata exclusiv  in limba romana , a ajuns  la cititorii ( cititoarele, mai exact ) de limba engleza: de-ale Internetului…Oricum promit sa reafisez  “Aroma de femeie ” pt. un interval scurt, in cateva zile : fiind trimis la “Trash” nu am pastrat decat o copie pe foaie si voi avea de dactilografiat 2 pagini. Dar …”protagonistele ” merita truda, va asigur!

In incheiere am si o …veste super: site-ul meu ( ) va atinge curand, dupa doar un an de la infiintare, cifra extraordinara ( pt. mine ) de 2 milioane cautari, articolul cel mai apreciat de cititori fiind nu About us ( cum anticipam eu ), nici “Dasein in broad sense” ( cum anticipa Lena ) ci “Collapse of Dualism and the Rise of  Inseparability” -preferinta clara a unor profesionisti  (  americani, romani si canadieni  ) de prima mana. Ultimul mesaj de apreciere vine insa de la o viitoare specialista- Laura . Iata-l ( replica mea o puteti citi la finalul articolului mentionat ) :

I am doing research for my university thesis, thanks for your great points, now I am acting on a sudden impulse.

– Laura

Madrilene Interview #5: A hot story – telomeres / telomerase…

Posted by on Wednesday, 25 August, 2010

M. – Lately there is a lot of talk about the involvement of telomeres / telomerase within our daily lives. However the majority of people consider this problem as belonging rather to the science fiction realm. Immediately after my arrival in US you have recommended me to take part in an individual program to activate telomerase, which I did as instructed. My question is, how relevant can it be, here and now, this telomeres / telomerase story for all of our readers, equally men and women?

F. – The actual relevance of telomerase activation is extraordinary and it does not exclusively concern the Hollywood stars or government executives. All individuals characterized by a proactive attitude have to ask themselves about their personal status of telomeres. After my arrival in US (1997) I have bestowed a special attention to the connection between stress (emotions), the state / length of telomeres and the so-called apoptosis process; my interest was seriously amplified by the lecture of a very accessible article (authors: Epel E.S. et al, titled: Accelerated telomere shortening in response to life stress – Proc. Natl Acad Sci USA 2004, Dec 07, 101 (49):17312-5). As a joke I must mention that the term “et al” seen above also includes Elizabeth Blackburn – a remarkable researcher that last year she was distinguished with a Nobel Prize along with two other telomerist colleagues – Carol Greider and Jack Szostak. The subject being vast I wish to limit myself to a couple of ideas / points that, in my opinion, just open the gate (if there is interest we will return with a new Madrilene Interview entirely dedicated to the structure and dynamics of telomeres and the activation of telomerase).

  • In contrast with the already well-known researchers in this field that limit themselves into considering only oxidative stress, I promote a broader approach thinking that the non-oxidative stress is just as important (see Copper Overload – the Western Metabolic Bomb, on this blog).
  • The length of telomeres (that can reach 15,000 of pairs of bases) influences not only the life duration but equally its quality, for instance there are studies demonstrating the correlation between telomeres shortness and colon cancer.
  • The deactivation state of telomerase is mainly determined by the excess of cortisol in the system, in other words by the adrenal glands status.
  • The telomerase enzyme (actually a transferase) is constituted by two subsystems: a protein and a  RNA subunit.
  • The interest toward the control of the relationship between telomeres / telomerase is doubled: the activation targets the cellular / organismic immortality while deactivation / removal from the system target the eradication of all types of cancer.
  • A study from England has established that poor people have shorter telomeres with about 10 years than the rich ones. The explanation would be a different stress perception as much as the available anti-stress defenses.
  • The ones that wish to immediately take over the initiative in the (re)activation process of telomerase can do the following steps:
  1. To be… happy, to exclude any sources of negative emotional tensions such as envy, revenge desire, etc. having as an outcome massive cortisol increase; evidently this entails to become more flexible, more forgiving (hard isn’t it?); I emphasize that this apparently naïve message does not come from either religion or moral / ethics, but truly from the core of contemporary science; please note that  caffeine / coffee significantly contributes to  cortisol raising.
  2. To be physically active (gym, running, games without stakes) and psychically active: urgently and sincerely attach yourself to a human partner, even temporary (isn’t all like this?),  to a cat / dog or even a plant.
  3. To use as a supplement the relaxant L-theanine (a capsule of 100mg a day) in the morning with the exception of week-ends as well as 5 grams of ribose daily, to energize (since almost all Westerners 35-40 years old have big problems with the enzymes producing this special glucid), to note that ribose appears in the telomerase structure at RNA level.

Conclusion: The results (different but significant) appear after about 4 weeks.

Beyond Descartes – From Separability to Inseparability

Posted by on Monday, 16 August, 2010

(, Kindle Edition, 263 pages, $29.99, author Florin F. Felecan Ph.D.)

Recently – at the beginning of August – Amazon has electronically published under the above mentioned title, my first “American” book – a unique book – since it provides in absolute premiere a non-Cartesian conceptual and methodological frame that contemporary science and culture imperiously needed it.  The chosen theme that I dedicated about 10 years of my life was not a random one since beyond Descartes we encounter a fabulous world which we are just beginning to disentangle. The truly amazing fact is not as much that this non-Cartesian world really exists but rather that it is a fundamental one.

Organized on two parts approximately equal as page numbers, the first part is dedicated to the content of the Cartesian revolution, which according to my introductive study (pp. 5-27), consists in transition from the methodological syncretic horizon specific to Scholasticism to a new, modern horizon – distinct and separable. In contrast with other authors, some of them considering that the revolutionary Cartesian contribution would consist in the introduction of certitude into epistemology (such thing is actually impossible), I have tried to show that Descartes in fact revolutionized the traditional methodology through something completely different such as the discovery and obstinate promotion (even though on rationalist premises) of distinctiveness (this central concept of the book is illuminated on pages 6-10), showing that the non-Cartesian revolution itself has as a defining characteristic the elaboration under the sign of inseparability of a new, non-linear concept of distinctiveness centered on specification / individualization. Taking into account that the Discourse on  Method constitutes, equally in the modern and contemporary world, one of the most known / widespread works I have decided to reproduce in the first part of the book the entire Discourse, with a short introductory study, making it available to the reader in a superior English version.

The second part of the book also debuts (p. 127) with a study entitled “non-Cartesian Revolution: Inseparability, Physis Situation and Nonlinear Rationality”. I personally recommend the chapter “Detachments” (pp. 143 – 184), as well as the introduction of “Physis Situation” concept / model which essentially defines the methodological specific of contemporary knowledge, specific that moves further away every day from linear – equilibrium situation, typical for the entire modern scientific knowledge.

The book ends with an “Index of terms” (p. 260), from which I would suggest the following ones: the collapse of dualism; communication in broad sense; dialogues Felecan-Prigogine; dualism and complexity revolution; the main contemporary methodological dangers (Cartesianism being the first!); the new structure of causal relation; the reductionism of modern culture toward potentiality; the stages of scientific knowledge; tuned reality; world as organism, etc.

As a final note I wish to mention that I dedicate this book to my 6 + 1 children: Florin, Natasha, Nadia, Alexandra, Emilian, Otilia and…Tatiana.

Beyond Descartes – From Separability to Inseparability

Posted by on Monday, 16 August, 2010

( Amazon. com , Kindle Edition, 263 pages, $ 29.99, author: Florin F. Felecan, Ph. D. )

Recent – la inceputul lunii august – a publicat in Editia  electronica sub titlul mentionat mai sus prima mea carte “Americana” – o carte unicat  intrucat  ofera  in premiera absoluta  un cadru conceptual si metodologic non-cartesian de care  stiinta – si cultura – contemporana avea atata nevoie. Tematica aleasa – careia i-am dedicat circa 10 ani din  viata –nu este deloc intamplatoare intrucat  dincolo de Descartes  ne intalnim cu o lume fabuloasa pe care abia  in ultima vreme am inceput sa o descifram. Dar ceea ce este cu adevarat surprinzator  este nu atat faptul ca  aceasta lume non-cartesiana  exista in mod real ci ca ea este una fundamentala.

Structurata pe doua parti aproximativ egale ca numar de pagini , prima parte este consacrata  continutului revolutiei cartesiene care  conform amplului studiu introductiv ( pp 5-27 ) consista in trecerea de la orizontul metodologic sincretic propriu scholasticismului la un orizont nou , modern – distinct si separabil.Spre deosebire de alti autori – unii dintre ei considerand ca aportul revolutionar al cartesianismului ar consta in…  introducerea certitudinii in epistemologie ( asa ceva este irealizabil! ), am incercat sa arat ca de fapt Descartes a revolutionat metodologia  traditionala prin cu totul altceva , anume prin descoperirea si promovarea  obstinata , e drept pe baze rationaliste , a  distinctivitatii – acestui concept central al cartii i-am consacrat paginile ( 6- 10 ), aratand ca  revolutia non-cartesiana insasi are ca o caracteristica definitorie elaborarea – sub semnul inseparabilitatii – a unui concept  de distinctivitate nou, nelinear centrat pe specificare / individualizare. Tinand cont de faptul ca  Discursul cartesian asupra metodei reprezinta una dintre elaborarile culturale cele mai raspandite atat in lumea moderna cat si in cea contemporana, am decis sa reproduc  in prima parte a cartii, in intregime acest Discurs, cu un scurt studiu introductiv, punandu-l  astfel la dispozitia cititorului, intr-o versiune engleza de calitate superioara.

Partea a doua a cartii debuteaza de asemenea ( p. 127 ) cu un studiu intitulat “ Non-Cartesian Revolution: Inseparability, Physis Situation and Nonlinear Rationality”. Recomand in mod special capitolul “ Detachments , pp 143- 184 , precum si introducerea conceptului – model “ Situatia Physis” care defineste in mod esential specificul metodologic al cunoasterii contemporane, specific care se indeparteaza cu fiecare zi de situatia linear – echilibriala tipica pentru intreaga cunoastere moderna.

Cartea se incheie cu un Index of Terms ( p. 260 ) din care detasez cativa, mai importanti : colapsul dualismului; comunicarea in sens larg;  dialoguri Felecan – Prigogine; dualismul si  revolutia complexitatii ; principalele pericole contemporane ( cartesianismul fiind  primul din seria citata de mine ); noua structura a relatiei cauzale; reductionismul culturii moderne  fata de potentialitate; stadiile cunoasterii stiintifice;  realitatea acor-data ( Tuned Reality ) ; lumea ca organism, etc.

In final doresc sa mentionez  ca lucrarea este dedicata celor 6 + 1 copii ai mei si anume : Florin, Natasha, Nadia, Alexandra, Emilian , Otilia  si…Tatiana .


Atmosfera si viata : viata fara atmosfera ( in-sufletire ) e doar un joc cu pietricele

Lena mi-a  prezentat un mesaj extrem de critic trimis pe adresa ei si  semnat Amalia – Bucuresti, cf. caruia – intre altele – “ omul acesta ( adica eu ) fabuleaza…neavand  nici cea mai mica idee despre ce inseamna a fi femeie ( sotie, mama , bunica ) astazi in Romania “. Imi pare rau , Amalia, dar eu sigur vad /simt /extrag  din ecuatia vietii contemporane- de acolo si de aici – nu mai putin ci mai mult, poate chiar mult mai mult decat vezi tu. Acolo unde eu vad  un “deficit de viziune” tu vezi numai ” bani putini” si e normal ca in aceste conditii sa fim profund divergenti.Vreau sa  te asigur ca eu si fosta mea sotie am parcurs toate etapele spre penibilul saraciei fara leac previzibil, dar nu ne-am pierdut speranta. Doar un exemplu: prin anii de pomina ( ’80), desi lector universitar ( cu 5 copii de intretinut ) nu am recurs la subterfugiile securistice uzuale ( as fi putut ! ) ci am preferat sa merg cu sotia, diminetile,  la cules  menta din liziera padurii Cristian, pt. a putea oferi un ceai  familiei la micul dejun; uneori  dezgropam a doua , chiar a treia oara cuiburile de cartofi din gradina, cu rezultate previzibile  totusi…salvatoare; cu toate acestea  in aceeasi saptamana , ne-am deplasat ca invitati la Universitatea Bucuresti pt. a prezenta o conferinta absolut insolita “ Finalitatea  inorganica ” in fata unui auditoriu select ( academicieni, profesori, cercetatori ); crede-ma atmosfera a fost  de cea mai inalta calitate ; peste ani, le multumesc din suflet tuturor participantilor pt. interes, aplauze ( desi…mainile noastre, poate si sufletele,  erau inca inverzite de menta saracilor).

Majoritatea mesajelor primite, din fericire , nu sunt din categoria ” Amalia”, spre exemplu unele    exprima multumiri” din inima” pt.  atentionarea asupra muzicii  cu totul speciale  daruite noua tuturor de catre Andre Rieu, reprosandu-ne ca nu oferim destule indicii pt.  decodarea exacta a pieselor muzicale recomandate ( este adevarat, uneori  exista mai multe versiuni, de calitate inegala). Ei bine , Andre Rieu insusi este criticat de catre unii (profesionisti, inclusiv ) chiar pt. ceea ce aduce el nou si inconfundabil: atmosfera. Eforturile vizibile ” cu ochiul liber” ale lui Andre de a-si pune muzica sub semnul  inseparabilitatii sub forma deschiderii spre auditoriu – pe care adesea il invita sa cante…cu sau fara orchestra, spre natura ( vezi Serenata unde  el a montat un pian  pe o terasa, alaturi de o colivie cu un locatar f. muzical) sau spre vizual, sunt eronat interpretate de unii ca o  “mac-donald “-izare a  muzicii ( junk music ) sau ca un populist path spre o degradare a clasicitatii muzicale. Mda, exista totdeauna acest risc de a subestima / desconsidera rolul atmosferei in viata cotidiana, Amalia fiind prezenta  in numeroase ipostaze.Cu toate acestea viata merge inainte, iar inseparabilitatea se impune progresiv ca o valoare culturala centrala a vietii contemporane. Cam de doua ori pe luna, in week-end, merg cu Lena  la un party mai curand cultural, unde noi prezentam  partea muzicala, accentuand pe Europa si, normal, Romania. Programele noastre sunt primite- de catre majoritatea americana a asistentei-  extrem de pozitiv, Andre Rieu fiind  oaspetele  de referinta ( recent am prezentat, cu succes !, si pe Lady Gaga ( piesa Alejandro ), profesionalismul- putin cam exorcizat -al  teamului “LG ” fiind totusi deasupra oricaror indoieli: credeti-ma , Lady Gaga este mult mai mult …Lady decat Gaga! Tin sa subliniez ca piesele romanesti prezentate in paralel ( de fapt la concurenta! ) cu creatii europene de prima mana, s-au impus totdeauna fara probleme. Iata cateva “experimente” pe care le puteti reproduce relativ usor la domiciliu: Richard Clayderman- Balada para Adelina + Ivo Pogorelich – Fur Elise  + Zana Dunarii de Ciprian Porumbescu ( ultima piesa , dedicata de mine fiicei mele Natasa – un amestec intim de organizare…cazona si de tandrete: in cele doua momente ” suave” , distincte , Lena m-a atentionat: Hopa, aici Natasa  seamana leit cu mine. Am alaturat, de asemenea,  Andre Rieu ” The Dubliners” si Hora Staccato ( de Gr. Dinicu , notatia si executia: Jascha Heifetz), precum si  Bolero-ul lui Ravel, Vltava de Smetana si , last not least, Balada lui Ciprian Porumbescu, rezultatul – o minunatie! Nu omiteti realizarea tehnica exceptionala a lui Andre – Amazing grace ( The Song of all Songs, codificata Hamburg 4 U- 2008 ) pe care eu am audiat-o  de cateva ori inainte de a merge la slujba funerara  dedicata sotiei ( versiuni  care nu trebuie omise: Nana Mouskouri – Amazing grace si  realizarea  emotional unica a familiei Kelly ( paddy crying ) cu acelasi nume.Ultima data le-am prezentat pe toate trei sub titulatura comuna ” Never Lose Hope”.

Concluzia noastra nu poate fi alta decat : adevarata viata trebuie cautata – si gasita! – cu orice pret , dincolo de pietricele.