Initial thoughts upon diving into The Order Of Time by Carlo Rovelli

       Diving into The Order Of Time by Carlo Rovelli, he introduces Boltzmann and his notion of entropy and particularities in relation to time (past vs. future). His basic argument, as I understand it, is that the only reason the past (or events) may be viewed in particulars is due to our subjective observation of them. For example, on page 32 he describes a deck of cards in which the first 26 cards are red followed by 26 cards which are black. While this looks like a particularity, it is limited by the parameters I am applying to the cards based on my observation of them, meaning if I am only looking at the color, then yes I would see them as a particular. But what about the suits? Or the number? For instance, what if I only viewed the cards as their numerical value? Then, depending on the configuration, the cards may not be grouped as a particular at all. This leads to my first of many questions in this paper. Can this not also be applied to the past when discussing time? When observing past events, I may be able to view them as a particular based upon my subjective perception of those events. I can even add events I did not directly experience into that category. For example, I did not go to my cousin’s 10th birthday party but because I have spoken with people who did, saw pictures, signed a card that was mailed, etc. I can subjectively place that event in the past. The difference comes when looking the other direction, into the future. Because it has not been observed, we therefore cannot find particulars or subjectively categorize events. Does that mean the future has not happened? Or does it mean it just has not been experienced yet by an observer that can then categorize it, but by our definition upon observation that would instantaneously make it a past event which then poses the question does the future even exist at all or is it just a manmade idea of that which has not yet been experienced. It seems when an observer is introduced, it is only then that ‘time’ becomes ‘time’ and the past becomes some unit of measure use to express those events. But I’m getting off topic here. Why does this all matter?

We are able to form a sequence of events (or the past) based upon our observations, categorizations and experiences of moments. When we place them in order, this creates time, or a timeline I should say. But we are only able to experience events at a certain rate. As I mentioned before, it seems an observer is necessary for time to exist, but the rate at which the events are observed are not controlled by the observer, but by physics. We are trapped on this pale blue dot (thank you Carl Sagan) and are prisoners of Earth’s mass (for sake of argument I am not including our attempts at space travel and what would happen if a man were, say, on Mars because 1) I am not the smart and 2) We have yet to do achieve that, nor am I saying as a species we will never get off this planet and take up inhabitance elsewhere, but I do need to keep myself from hoping rabbit hole to rabbit hole so for this reason stay with me on the ‘we are trapped on Earth’ idea). Now, thanks to Einstein's general relativity, we now understand that gravity influences time. Time passes slower closer to a body of mass and faster farther away, also known as gravitational time dilation. Knowing this, we are experiencing our universe at the influential rate of Earth’s gravity. So what impact, if any, does this have on our consciousness and thoughts? It seems the next step here is to see if or what a correlation exits between time and consciousness. If time is influenced by both the laws of physics as well as a conscious observer, then I am hoping there will be a quantitative relation between time and consciousness. Perhaps this is how my entanglement piece will eventually be elegantly added into my thesis, since entanglement also requires an observer and influences time. Bare with me as I attempt to explain where I'm headed.

If we have the classic example of two entangled particles, both holding the potential of all possible states and only being identified upon observation, what happens to the potential of all other possible outcomes held by that particle? We would like to think even if one state is observed, say X, and the particle is identified as X, knowing the particle holds information on other possible states, for example Y, the observer should be able to access that information. Through experiments done by several teams including Dr. Robert Spekkens with the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Canada in 2009 and another done by Dr. Stephen Brierley from University of Cambridge in 2015 (Musser) we now know this is not the case. “Alice prepares a photon in one of four possible ways. Classically, we could think of these four ways as two bits of information. Bob then measures the particle in one of two possible ways. If he chooses to measure the particle in the first way, he obtains Alice’s first bit of information; if he chooses the second, he obtains her second bit. The obvious explanation for this result would be if the photon stores both bits and releases one based on Bob’s choice. But if that were the case, you’d expect Bob to be able to obtain information about both bits — to measure both of them or at least some characteristic of both, such as whether they are the same or different. But he can’t. No experiment, even in principle, can get at both bits — a restriction known as the Holevo bound.”(Musser). From what I gather, Holevo’s theorem express there is a limit to the amount of information that can be obtained about a quantum state (yes I had to look this up and sadly the only explanation that even remotely made sense to me was on Wikipedia. I do not intend on using that as a source so I may need to abandon this part of my research, we shall see). I know nothing of this but my layman’s brain read, ‘there is information about that particle that is inaccessible to us’. So I wonder, is this due to our previous discussion that our rate of experience in time is controlled by our location? Meaning, are we only able to obtain a certain amount of information of quantum states because we are on Earth, influenced by its gravity which we already know influences our rate of observing experiences and thus our perceived time. And since our consciousness resides inside our physical bodies on this planet, does that place restrictions on what we can understand? 

So I guess ultimately my take aways from this are, our observations create time, gravity influences rate of time, we are here on Earth and are influenced by both gravity and time. Let’s take this deeper shall we? Our consciousness is trapped in our physical bodies on Earth. Our brains, where we think consciousness resides inside our minds, are made of subatomic particles like everything else in this universe that we know of. Some particles become entangled and hold information we cannot access. If particles make up our brain tissue and some of those are entangled with distant counterparts, is our inability to access this information partly due because of our location restrictions (Earth’s time and gravity) and if so, could those inaccessible states actually be glimpses at alternate universes (I know, I know, but stay with me). Let me give you a crud example. 

If a particle’s state holds the potential of being X, Y, Z, etc. but becomes identified as X due to my observation of it, this then puts the known state of that particle into our timeline and thus our past (since we have already determined once observation takes place the event is then stored on our timeline creating and differentiating future-unknown from past-known). Continuing with this thought, is it pheasable the information of all other possible states the particle could have been prior to observation, let’s say Y, still exists but now in an ‘alternate universe’. In our timeline, our observation sealed its fate so to say by identifying it as X, yet we also know the particle held information of its Y state which we can now no longer access so would this not explain why? We cannot access the information of X particle’s Y information because in our universe and in our timeline, OUR observation made it X, so the particles possible Y state is no longer accessible to us but not because it doesn’t exist, it just doesn't exist in our timeline anymore. 

This leads me to my final thought for today, is it possible that our minds are riddled with entangled particles that are connected with their distant counterparts filled with these different possible states? And if so, how does our consciousness fit into this? Is that what consciousness is? The by product of the connection between entangled particles that makes up our brain tissue? Does that also mean there may be some way our consciousness can access the information in these particles that our physical bodies were unable to?

Let the exploration continue.

Works Cited

Musser, George. Quantum Weirdness Now a Matter of Time. Quantamagazine. 19 Jan 2016.

     https://www.quantamagazine.org/time-entanglement-raises-quantum-mysteries-20160119/

Rovelli, Carlo. The Order of Time. Riverhead Books. New York, NY. 2017.