Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
07-21-2003, 12:27 AM | #1 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Romania
Posts: 4,975
|
Proust, the madelaine cookie, and time
I must first say that in science I am pretty ignorant.these are just some thoughts. i am not here to prove a point just to clear my mind.
I learned some months ago about the absolute freezing point. In that temperature (which has not been reached yet in laboratories) every interaction stops including the electrone revolving around the nucleus. (I'll get back on that) I have often though about time , and our perception. One thing that seems important to me is that I doubt that time itself expands or flows in diffrent "tempos" as some might say. I think it is more to our perception that changes itself. When my literature teacher told me about Proust and the classical madelaine story, and that he thought that time can be brought back though memories, I found that strange. One cannot re-live time , because our minds are not time recorders that get information accurately and objectively and store it so it does not change. And I have had experiences when time seems to change, to expand, and have often been the result of either adrenaline (when playing on a stage) which comes from fear, or some empty stomach that always seemed to bring another perception of the world (don't laugh, Andre Gide though that too, read Les nourittures terrestres) and perhaps was the work of some hormones. That always made me ever conciense of every little thing, including the way a leaf turns in the wind and the look on peoples faces. I think it is more the result of some evolutionary process that makes you more concentrated when hungry. So that you can spot any trace of food. That is why fasting is thought to be a spiritual experience. It deprives you of food, and gets you in a special mode. I have noticed in my thinking that I often change my memories, and I try very hard to keep them the same yet still, every remembering changes them. The same way, when I had deja vu, I noticed that they did not start off as observing some similar event, more like identifying the emotional response from a past event with the present one. It always was a recognition of a feeling, than immediately I would change the actual memory to fit it. I have read in some place that the processes of storing memories, and bringing them back into the conscience stream is done by the emotion involved in the experience. The strange thing i noticed soon after my deconversion was the religious experience. that was caused mainly by trying to be a better christian. In that crisis, I tried going to church, that being the eastern orthodox kind. It involves lots of ritual (standing up at certain points, making specific gestures, singing songs you know by heart). It is a brutal experience at least. You are in a crowd, standing or on a very hurtful position on knees, inside a place without ventilation, with incence, and preferably without eating. Every time I went I almost fainted. It all seemed archaic and bizzare, and the look on my friend's face confirmed that (empty glance, like of a person on drugs). I have noticed that after it, she would be "peaceful and pure" but all I saw was an exhausted body and mind . Is religious experience only getting high on your own juices? The only thing that came close to experieceing that was when I played Bach. yet even now, as an atheist, I can play it with the same effect. Now returning to the absolute freezing point. If something gets to that point, doesn't time stop? If nothing happens, no interactions occur, doesn't time dissapear, or at least becomes pointless? And if that is true, does that mean that the more interactions that faster time goes? The more focused I am, like singing on a stage, concentrated on every move I make, the faster time seemes to go, yet when i sit in a bus station waiting for my date, and not being ablet ot hink of anything, 10 minutes seemes ages. Is that time being relative, or our perception? man, all these scholarly threads make me blush.... |
07-21-2003, 01:58 AM | #2 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 1,211
|
As far as proustian memory goes it need not be accurate and objective, only as accurate and objective as the initial experience was. I have certainly experienced moments of proustian memory, usually brought on by music or smells rather than taste and never to quite the extent of 'a la recherche du temps perdu'. Usually the associated sound/smell will just bring a very vivid recollection of an experience and it feels as if I am experiencing it again. I often find myself remembering very clearly a piece of work I wrote up while listening to a particular album.
Since electrons don't actually orbit the nucleus in the way the Bohr's model shows, I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. Even at absolute zero there must be some motion, otherwise Heisenberg's uncertainty principle could be violated. |
07-21-2003, 02:03 AM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 719
|
Absolute zero is forbidden by the uncertainty principle. Nothing can simultaneously possess a perfectly defined position and a perfectly defined momentum. This is why we find out through quantum analysis that simple harmonic oscillators have a non-zero ground state energy. More precisely, the energy eigenstates of a simple harmonic oscillator are given by:
En = (n + ½)h-bar ω, where n is an integer ≥ 0. Notice that the energy cannot be zero; the motion cannot fully stop. This is why at standard pressure there exists no temperature at which helium will solidify (it is fundamentally impossible, at least according to current theories). You can create solid helium if you rachet the pressure way up before cranking the temperature way down, but even then the helium atoms will be vibrating ever so slightly in their crystal lattice. Furthermore, one must note the effect the existence of fermions has on the classical notion that zero temperature implies zero energy (or more precisely, the notion that absolute zero is a physically attainable extremum). The Pauli exclusion principle implies that a system of fermions--such as the electrons in an atom or a free-electron gas--will possess non-zero energy even at zero temperature (or perhaps it would be better to say even when in thermal contact with a bath at zero temperature). The Fermi energy would be the energy of the system's highest occupied state while the system was in contact with this zero-temperature bath. Fermion pressure prevents fermions at higher-energy states from falling down to lower states that are already occupied. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|