A life in which he questioned the “It from Bit”:
I think of my lifetime in physics as divided into three periods. In the first period, extending from the beginning of my career until the early 1950’s, I was in the grip of the idea that Everything Is Particles. I was looking for ways to build all basic entities – neutrons, protons, mesons, and so on – out of the lightest, most fundamental particles, electrons, and photons.
I call my second period Everything Is Fields. From the time I fell in love with general relativity and gravitation in 1952 until late in my career, I pursued the vision of a world made of fields, one in which the apparent particles are really manifestations of electric and magnetic fields, gravitational fields, and space-time itself.
Now I am in the grip of a new vision, that Everything Is Information. The more I have pondered the mystery of the quantum and our strange ability to comprehend this world in which we live, the more I see possible fundamental roles for logic and information as the bedrock of physical theory. – J. A. Wheeler, K. Ford, Geons, Black Hole, & Quantum Foam: A Life in Physics New York W.W. Norton & Co, 1998, pp 63-64.
Wheeler coined the term “black hole”:
Over a long, productive scientific life, he was known for his drive to address big, overarching questions in physics, subjects which he liked to say merged with philosophical questions about the origin of matter, information and the universe. He was a young contemporary of Albert Einstein and Niels Bohr, was a driving force in the development of both the atomic and hydrogen bombs and, in later years, became the father of modern general relativity.
See also: What great physicists have said about immateriality and consciousness
as to:
And as Anton Zeilinger has also noted:
In fact, in regards to Wheeler emphasizing ‘fundamental roles for logic and information as the bedrock of physical theory’, it is interesting to note:
It is also interesting to note that in Quantum Electro-Dynamics it takes an ‘infinite amount of logic to figure out what one stinky tiny bit of space-time is going to do’:
In fact, in order to make QED work out it was necessary to ‘brush infinite logic under the rug’:
I don’t know about Feynman, but as for myself, being a Christian Theist, I find it rather comforting to know that it takes an ‘infinite amount of logic to figure out what one stinky tiny bit of space-time is going to do’:
Of note: Quantum mechanics has now shown that, not only are logic and information necessary as as a bedrock for physical theory, but consciousness is also necessary:
http://www.uncommondescent.com.....ent-489513
… which consciousness, itself, predicates personality and volition, Philip.
…. ultimate truth, Philip, the Most Holy Trinity, being ultra personal.
As a minimal qualification for acceptance of a paper for peer-review – never mind acceptance for publication – those who submit them – all scientists in every field, not just physics – should be required to provide a signed affidavit that they concur with the metaphysical findings of quantum physics, relating to matter’s emanating from mind, i.e. mind, as the primordial reality. It is, of course, seminal with regard to an empirically-grounded addressing of the issue of the empirically-established supervention of non-locality, the supernatural at the quantum level.
If this had been in force, the ‘la-la land’ of current cosmology (and no doubt a lot of other conjectures by people who refuse to accept the most successful paradigm ever, mathematically proven, moreover, to be unimprovable) would not have seen the light of day.
As it is these obiter dicta from individuals, such as Hawking, can only, through the never-failing good offices of the mainstream media, continue to serve as a distraction from the pursuit of science; and metaphysics (with which it should be in partnership), if it comes to that.
What a hilarious irony that atheists pose as ‘rationalists’, when, they demonstrably treat empirically-proven facts as optional tenets in the field of science.
In a way, it’s a pity that that wonderfully incisive saw (almost worthy of WJM…): ‘You can have your own opinions, but not your own facts’, has such a folksy, ‘down home’ timbre. It needs to be taken absolutely seriously by atheist scientists, as a cardinal principal of reason.
Axel, as I argued here, there’s no basis for your claims in the actual results from QM. Essentially, the QM tests show that there’s something weird about how causality works in the universe, but no reason to thing that weirdness has anything to do with minds or consciousness. For example, the idea that non-locality = supernatural is just plain nonsense.
While some experts (like Wheeler) think there’s consciousness plays a special role in QM, most don’t (see question 10 in this survey). Either way, that’s just an argument from authority, and that must always take second place to examination of the actual evidence and logic… and as I said, that doesn’t seem (at least as far as I can see) to provide any basis for these claims.
BS quote of the day: “For example, the idea that non-locality = supernatural is just plain nonsense.”
Wavefunction collapse is nonlocal (if it’s considered to be a real process, not just an abstract part of the QM formalism), because it happens everywhere at once. Do you consider wavefunction collapse to be supernatural?
Non-locality is a beyond space and time effect. What blows most people away, when they first encounter quantum mechanics, is that the quantum foundation of our material reality blatantly defies our concepts of time and space. Einstein termed it ‘Spooky action at a distance’. Most people consider defying time and space to be a ‘miraculous & supernatural’ event. I know I certainly do! There is certainly nothing within quantum mechanics that precludes ‘supernatural’, beyond space and time, actions from being possible.
In fact Quantum Mechanics demands that ‘supernatural’, beyond space and time, actions be considered true! That the wave function is real, not abstract as many worlds proponents hold, is established by the following:
The following experiment actually encoded information into a photon while it was in its infinite dimensional quantum wave state, thus destroying the notion, held by many, that the wave function was not ‘physically real’ but was merely an ‘abstract’ mathematical description. i.e. How can information possibly be encoded into something that is not physically real but merely abstract?
Here is a more rigorous measurement of the wave function which establishes it as ‘physically real’;
The following paper mathematically corroborated the preceding experiments and cleaned up some pretty nasty probabilistic incongruities. Particularly incongruities with quantum entanglement that arose from a purely statistical, ‘abstract’, interpretation of the wave function.
The preceding mathematical interpretation was empirically corroborated:
The following experiment went even further:
In fact, completely contrary to the many worlds materialistic presupposition that no beyond space and time actions are possible, with consideration of the particle first, it is possible to entangle particles without the particles even interacting first!
It is also important to note that even the ‘real’ wave function must interpreted in a ‘non-local’, beyond space and time, manner: