### How quantum arithmetics affects basic TGD and TGD inspired view about life and consciousness?

In previous posting I proposed what I call quantum arithmetics as an answer to the question how real and p-adic physics correspond to each other. What happens is that rationals are replaced with quantum rationals. Same is done also for the algebraic extensions of rationals. One can however get worried and wonder what this means for quantum TGD and TGD inspired theory of consciousness. Is something perhaps lost? I considered this already in some blog comment but realized that the question deserves a separate blog posting. The general conclusion "Calm down!: Nothing is lost but a lot is gained".

The vision about real and p-adic physics as completions of rational physics or physics associated with extensions of rational numbers is central element of number theoretical universality. The physics in the extensions of rationals are assigned with the interaction of real and p-adic worlds.

- At the level of the world of classical worlds (WCW) the points in the intersection of real and p-adic worlds are 2-surfaces defined by equations making sense both in real and p-adic sense. Rational functions with polynomials having rational (or algebraic coefficients in some extension of rationals) would define the partonic 2-surface. One can of course consider more stringent formulations obtained by replacing 2-surface with certain 3-surfaces or even by 4-surfaces.
- At the space-time level the intersection of real and p-adic worlds corresponds to rational points common to real partonic 2-surface obeying same equations (the simplest assumption). This conforms with the vision that finite measurement resolution implies discretization at the level of partonic 2-surfaces and replaces light-like 3-surfaces and space-like 3-surfaces at the ends of causal diamonds with braids so that almost topological QFT is the outcome.

How does the replacement of rationals with quantum rationals modify quantum TGD and the TGD inspired vision about quantum biology and consciousness?

**What happens to p-adic mass calculations and quantum TGD?**

The basic assumption behind the p-adic mass calculations and all applications is that one can assign to a given partonic 2-surface (or even light-like 3-surface) a preferred p-adic prime (or possibly several primes).

The replacement of rationals with quantum rationals in p-adic mass calculations implies effects, which are extremely small since the difference between rationals and quantum rationals is extremely small due to the fact that the primes assignable to elementary particles are so large (M_{127}=2^{127}-1 for electron). The predictions of p-adic mass calculations remains almost as such in excellent accuracy. The bonus is the uniqueness of the canonical identification making the theory unique.

The problem of the original p-adic mass calculations is that the number of common rationals (plus possible algebraics in some extension of rationals) is same for all primes p. What is the additional criterion selecting the preferred prime assigned to the elementary particle?

Could the preferred prime correspond to the maximization of number theoretic negentropy for a quantum state involved and therefore for the partonic 2-surface by quantum classical correspondence? The solution ansatz for the modified Dirac equation indeed allows this assignment (see this): could this provide the first principle selecting the preferred p-adic prime? Here the replacement of rationals with quantum rationals improves the situation dramatically.

- Quantum rationals are characterized by a quantum phase q=exp(i2π/p) and thus by prime p (in the most general but not so plausible case by an integer n). The set of points shared by real and p-adic partonic 2-surfaces would be discrete also now but consist of points in the algebraic extension defined by the quantum phase q=exp(i2π/p).
- What is of crucial importance is that the number of common quantum rational points of partonic 2-surface and its p-adic counterpart would depend on the p-adic prime p. For some primes p would be large and in accordance with the original intuition this suggests that the interaction between p-adic and real partonic 2-surface is stronger. This kind of prime is the natural candidate for the p-adic prime defining effective p-adic topology assignable to the partonic 2-surface and elementary particle. Quantum rationals would thus bring in the preferred prime and perhaps at the deepest possible level that one can imagine.

**What happens to TGD inspired theory of consciousness and quantum biology?**

The vision about rationals as common to reals and p-adics is central for TGD inspired theory of consciousness and the applications of TGD in biology.

- One can say that life resides in the intersection of real and p-adic worlds. The basic motivation comes from the observation that number theoretical entanglement entropy can have negative values and has minimum for a unique prime (see this). Negative entanglement entropy has a natural interpretation as a genuine information and this leads to a modification of Negentropy Maximization Principle (NMP) allowing quantum jumps generating negentropic entanglement. This tendency is something completely new: NMP for ordinary entanglement entropy would force
always a state function reduction leading to unentangled states and the increase of ensemble entropy.
What happens at the level of ensemble in TGD Universe is an interesting question. The pessimistic view is that the generation of negentropic entanglement is accompanied by entropic entanglement somewhere else guaranteeing that second law still holds true. Living matter would be bound to pollute its environment if the pessimistic view is correct. I cannot decide whether this is so: this seems like deciding whether Riemann hypothesis is true or not or perhaps unprovable.

- Replacing rationals with quantum rationals however modifies somewhat the overall vision about what life is. It would be quantum rationals which would be common to real and p-adic variants of the partonic 2-surface. Also now an algebraic extension of rationals would be in question so that the proposal would be only more specific. The notion of number theoretic entropy still makes sense so that the basic vision about quantum biology survives the modification.
- The large number of common points for some prime would mean that the quantum jump transforming p-adic partonic 2-surface to its real counterpart would take place with a large probability. Using the language of TGD inspired theory of consciousness one would say that the intentional powers are strong for the conscious entity involved. This applies also to the reverse transition generating a cognitive representation if p-adic-real duality induced by the canonical identification is true. This conclusion seems to apply even in the case of elementary particles. Could even elementary particles cognize and intend in some primitive sense? Intriguingly, the secondary p-adic time scale associated with electron defining the size of corresponding CD is .1 seconds defining the fundamental 10 Hz bio-rhythm. Just an accident or something very deep: a direct connection between elementary particle level and biology perhaps?

For details and background see the new chapter Quantum Arithmetics and the Relationship between Real and p-Adic Physics of "Physics as Generalized Number Theory".

## 5 Comments:

The spinors (as rational numbers) are fused from reals and primes/p-adics, or the source of reals/primes. ??

Both ways? Emergent spinors then? can they be made of pure energy/light?

Spinors can be seen as objects with several complex number valued components. Quantum arithmetics would apply also to them. I am unable to say that spinors consist of pure energy/light. In field theory spinors are fields describing fermions- coding their spin degree of freedom.

There was intensive study in ancient times of the giant squid, which has giant neurons, easily visible to the naked eye. It posed a mortal hazard to pearl divers, in a very lucrative trade, which commanded the best resources of the time. Primes as markers of essential ideas allowed their free combination by association. The impact or intensity of an idea (Arabic wa'hm; Latin estimatio) and reflex judgement of intent (Arabic ma'an; Latin intentio) are likely derivative ideas, pertaining to the heart as the seat of reflex consciousness. But cerebral consciousness (Hippocrates, Socrates) involves the Logos and is not merely associative.

http://vixra.org/abs/1110.0046

Nor are intensity and magnitude the same, vide conjugate pairs in thermodynamics. Mie was distinctive for sepoarating them in electromagnetism.

Your query about the location of pain echoes Johannes Mueller, a Kantian whose legacy influenced Niels Bohr. At the time, Mie and Hilbert supporting him occasioned the comment that consciousness was being bought into physics.

I can appreciate length-scales and sheets, but why Standard Theory via SUSY? It belongs to an era which expected the max of symmetry analysis, but the degree of breaking is now acknowledged to be high, and the theory iotself is broken!

To Orwin:

The issue of qualia should be of deepest interest for every theoretical physicist who has not forgotten that physics is after all about contents of our conscious experience.

If I want to be precise I would see that consciousness is always about something and as such not a property of any system: it is in the quantum jump, between two different quantum worlds, and its contents is about the region in which non-determinism of quantum jump is located.

Neuroscientists have for a long time thought that sensory qualia are in brain but in TGD framework the localization to the sensory organs looks more natural and one can overcome various objections against the idea.

Brain would be only a builder of symbolic representations. Among other things it would classify and give names, and build associations- maybe by quantum entanglement. It would also actively build standardized mental images by feedback to sensory organs.

If cognition is p-adic it is not possible to localize cognitive consciousness in brain: only cognitive representations in the intersection of real and p-adic worlds could be localized to brain, or body, or magnetic body.

Hi Orwin,

you asked about SUSY.

Generalization super-conformal symmetry for 2-D basic objects to that for light-like 3-D objects is the cornerstone of quantum TGD and explains among other things why our space-timei is 4-dimensional and why M^4xS, M^4 4-dimensional Minkowski space.

Broken SUSY is a natural prediction in light sector of the theory but this SUSY differs from the standard one. In particular, the construction of super-partners is concrete microscopic process. Add to the partonic 2-surface parallelly moving right handed neutrino or antineutrino. R-parity is not conserved since right handed neutrinos can transform to left handed ones and super-partners to partner plus neutrino (the simplest decay).

Shadronization is an essential new element allowing to solve the problem of "missing missing energy". This means that squarks form shadrons which in turn transform to hadrons via R-parity conserving processes. As a strong interaction this process is faster than the selectroweak decay of squarks to quarks and electroweak gauginos. This explains the "missing missing energy" which forced to conclude that squarks have masses above 5-10 TeV: in TGD framework squarks could essentially same masses as quarks -both in M_107 and M_89 physics!

As Lubos tells in his posting, SUSY builders have now accepted that R-parity must be broken if they want to build any phenomenology consistent with LHC. They are making their last desperate attempts to save their SUSY: the price is high: one must give either lepton or baryon number conservations and very probably this prediction will kill this variant of SUSY.

Post a Comment

<< Home