Nonlocal Phonon Spin Sound Ether: Kent A. Peacock philosophy of science

So there are two very amazing articles by philosophy of science professor Kent A. Peacock and both mention the case of the nonlocally entangled phonon vibrations - created between two diamonds. Because we typically think of a vibration needing a medium to "vibrate" - and the definitive cause is sound - which then changes based on the medium. But the question is as the speed of light is proven to be invariant for relativity of spacetime then how can one interpret the potential of an inherent quantum nonlocal medium? In other words there should be no "special" frame of reference (i.e. God) and yet if a nonlocal medium ether exists then why isn't there this inherent real of "no motion" (i.e. a standing wave)?

This is a very fascinating discussion of philosophy of science - and so first of all let's link his two papers.

Would superluminal influences violate the principle of relativity?

KA Peacock - arXiv preprint arXiv:1301.0307, 2013 - arxiv.org

Abstract: It continues to be alleged that superluminal influences of any sort would be
inconsistent with special relativity for the following three reasons:(i) they would imply the existence of a distinguished'frame;(ii) they would allow the detection of absolute motion; and

Happiest Thoughts: Great Thought Experiments of Modern Physics

KA Peacock - 2016 - philsci-archive.pitt.edu

This is a review of those key thought experiments in physics from the late 19th century
onward that seem to have played a particular role in the process of the discovery or
advancement of theory. Among others the paper discusses Maxwell's demon, several of
Einstein's thought experiments in relativity, Heisenberg's microscope, the Einstein-
Schrödinger cat, and the EPR (Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen) thought experiment.

And so who is Kent A. Peacock? He doesn't seem to be referenced much. 

Department of Philosophy, University of Lethbridge, 4401 University Drive, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada. T1K 3M4 peack () 000hg. uleth. ca

 Kent A. Peacock, Professor of philosophy of physics:

There is a subtle fact about relative velocities that is not always explicitly mentioned in books on relativity, and a failure to grasp this subtle fact may be a cause of some of the confusion about superluminal motion. In special relativity all velocities (except for the velocity of light itself) are relative, including zero and infinite velocity....Dainton, et. al., possibly have confused the invariant fact that any superluminal propagation has infinite velocity relative to one frame (which one depends on the spacetime trajectory of the superluminal effect) with the notion (not correct) that any superluminal propagation would be invariantly infinite for all frames....Thus, there certainly is a theory that allows for influences which are instantaneous in one frame and finite (though superluminal) in all others; it is called 'special relativity.'...instantaneous in their mutual rest frame....Whether or not the local clock readings are equal at A and B is therefore independent of whether or not A and B are at the same global time coordinate in some inertial frame or other....Einstein's way of defining time-coordinate simultaneity neither assumes nor requires tha tlight signals be either the fastest or the only way of communicating between distant events; it's only about what can be accomplished with light signals....an obvious candidate is phase: it is far more natural to think of wave functions as reducing over hypersurfaces of constant phase, and this automatically gives a covariant picture; ...While relativity is far more amenable to superluminal influences than has been generally supposed, ultimately it is classical relativity that must adapt itself to the quantum....Bohm and Hiley themselves were not comfortable with theories like de Broglie's later approach because such theories imply that any particle interacts via a four-dimensional wave field with other particles both past and future throughout spacetime....Thus, Bohm and Hiley rejected covariant pictures of nonlocality (such as de Broglie's) not because they are technically out of the question, but because they tend to violate classical expectations or intuitions about causality....while such a theory would do violence to classical intuitions (prejudices?) about the proper order of cause and effect it is quite likely that it would not allow for outright logical paradoxes of the kind that worried Bohm and Hiley....what is not speculative is that (as the example of de Broglie's theory shows) it is not necessarily the case that any account of quantum mechanics in terms of more general physical principles would demand the return to Galilean covariance and a preferred frame;

2013, emphasis in original, "Would superluminal influences violate the principle of relativity"

 

He also focuses on sustainability and ecology.

So he has published on abrupt climate change stating huge ice sheets could melt within weeks or months time - unexpectedly dramatically changing the climate.

his website

O.K.

So his recent talk on climate change

So one of the issues he discusses is a standing wave of light reflecting between two mirrors. The nodes do not move relative to the mirrors but have to move relative to the observer science making the measurement.

But in meditation we realize that we are the light - the biophotons - and so this changes the relativity.

People will have to read his papers for his discussion of the issue.

And as far as a superluminal ether - Professor Peacock states that it only exists relative to the observer but at the same time he states the Big Bang is also based on conditions of quantum entanglement, such that dark energy could also be the observing-ether - the phonon vibrations or acoustic oscillations as sound-current nondualism.

So then 10 years ago he had a book published on the Quantum Revolution.

What I have noticed about scientists is that they are often very good at imitation. In other words learning techniques without really thinking about what the techniques mean - and these techniques include "operators" or "functions" (i.e. mathematical analysis).

But a good philosopher of science, like Kent A. Peacock, then unpacks the tinker-toys of science and examines what the possible deeper meaning is to science. And for me, of course, I see this as the implications for meditation - and they are rich.

For example when he is discussing the issue of light as a standing wave reflecting between two mirrors - he then adds a footnote:

John Norton has cautioned me to speak carefully here.

Yes indeed! Because this reflection of light, as H.W.L. Poonjaji explains (see my more recent sidebar quote) is the secret of nondual formless awareness!!).

So then who is John Norton? http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/jdnorton.html a fellow philosophy of science professor, of course.

Our urge to oversimplify has led to many myths about what powered Einstein's discoveries. Naive thinking? Capricious rule-breaking? Operational thinking? I correct some myths and try to give a more accurate picture of how Einstein made two discoveries: special relativity and the light quantum.

So he is writing on the same topic. I'll check it out.

O.K. so Peacock states that in terms of light then even zero and infinity are relative to each other.

 So it's not that nonlocality does not exist but rather when the light is turned around, there is no individual sense of I, but instead the light is so bright there is an Emptiness of the ego: Time goes to zero and then reverse time as the ether phonon energy is created.

And so there is no "absolute" time but rather two sets of time based on relativity and quantum physics - as de Broglie also realized - one from the future that is superluminal - and measured relative to the past of the observer who is now, in the present, just pure light relative to him(her) self ego.

And so since there is no longer any "absolute simultaneity" as Einstein had to ponder (he read Hume and Mach for his own philosophy of science research) what this means is that noncommutative time-frequency is also the source as eternal motion of consciousness - formless awareness - always in two places at the same time (relative to phase).

The tricky part to realize is that frequency is noncommutative to time and so Dr. Hameroff emphasizes that music as consciousness is actually "anharmonic" as in Indian music. So if 1 is the I-thought as C, the root tonic note, then the octave frequency is 2 also as the same note or pitch, C but 3 is the Perfect Fifth harmonic as G yet at the same time 3 is the Perfect Fifth harmonic as F, only as an undertone subharmonic. So this means G=3=F at the same time - this is called noncommutative phase that is the secret of nonlocal entanglement. Quantum physics is based on a linear operator so it inherently has noncommutative time-frequency so that if you change the order of observation or measurement then the value also changes and so reality is inherently participatory. So this means that relativity then collapses the quantum nonlocality into a subjective sense of I-thought whereas the objective reduction of the waveform is due to the protoconsciousness of the universe that is inherently nonlocal as infinite noncommutative time-frequency resonance. So we can listen faster than time-frequency uncertainty because listening is nonlinear and our brains are quantum coherent at the microsecond pulse or wavelength that has ultrasound frequency - between the right and left ear phase for stereophonic 4D spacetime reality.

But this ultrasound then resonates the brain as a whole, the microtubules, as quantum non-local consciousness. So when we visualize - we "turn the light around" - the biophotons of consciousness and so at zero time, light should be a standing wavelength with the nodes at rest but due to relativity this can only be measured externally - such that light has no rest mass but light does have relativistic mass. So light has then a hidden momentum energy that is not conserved - this is the spin force or the phonon nonlocal ether of light due to noncommutative spacetime. Dr. Stuart Hameroff calls it a noncommutatve scalar field as per Sir Roger Penrose's research into asymmetric time as the origin of the universe. So we can then say the protoconsciousness of the Universe is listening to us all the time and if we turn the light around, as in meditation, since we are the light as our ego consciousness, self, awareness, when the light is turned back to its source, it then captures virtual photons from the future. This is how precognition is also real along with free will, as Dr. Stuart Hameroff details in one of his academic articles.