Bonjour, cliquez-ici pour vous inscrire et participer au forum.
  • Login:



Discussion fermée
Page 4 sur 4 PremièrePremière 4
Affichage des résultats 46 à 48 sur 48

La physique de la conscience de Philippe Guillemant

  1. mtheory

    Date d'inscription
    août 2004
    Localisation
    Clermont Ferrand
    Âge
    47
    Messages
    11 629

    Re : La physique de la conscience de Philippe Guillemant

    Je reproduit in extenso un passage du traité de cosmologie de Linde où il s'interroge sur les rapports entre l'esprit et la matière. Pour moi sa position me semble très raisonnable
    « Prior to the advent of the special theory of relativity, space, time, and matter seemed to be three fundamentally different entities. In fact, space was thought to be a kind of three-dimensional coordinate grid which, when supplemented by clocks, could be used todescribe the motion of matter.

    Special relativity did away with the insuperable distinction between space and time, combining them into a unified whole. But space-time nevertheless remained something of a fixed arena in which the properties of matter became manifest. As before, space itself possessed no intrinsic degrees of freedom, and it continued to play a secondary, subservient role as a backdrop for the description of the truly substantial material world.The general theory of relativity brought with it a decisive change in this point of view. Space-time and matter were found to be interdependent, and there was no longer any question of which was the more fundamental of the two.

    Space-time was also found to have its own inherent degrees of freedom, associated with perturbations of the metric gravitational waves.Thus, space can exist and change with time in the absence of electrons, protons, photons, etc.; in other words, in the absence of anything that had previously (i.e., prior to general relativity) been subsumed by the term matter. (Note that because of the weakness with which they interact, gravitational waves are exceedingly difficult to detect experimentally, an as-yet unsolved problem.)

    A more recent trend, finally, has been toward a unified geometric theory of all fundamental interactions, including gravitation. Prior to the end of the 1970’s, such a program— a dream of Einstein’s — seemed unrealizable; rigorous theorems were proven on the impossibility of unifying spatial symmetries with the internal symmetries of elementary particle theory . Fortunately, these theorems were sidestepped after the discovery of supersymmetric theories. In principle, with the help of supergravity, Kaluza–Klein,and superstring theories, one may hope to construct a theory in which all matter fields will be interpreted in terms of the geometric properties of some multidimensional superspace.

    Space would then cease to be simply a requisite mathematical adjunct for the description of the real world, and would instead take on greater and greater independent significance, gradually encompassing all the material particles under the guise of its own intrinsic degrees of freedom.Of course, this does not at all mean that the concept of matter becomes useless. The issue at hand is simply the revelation of the fundamental unity of space, time, and matter, which is hidden from us in much the same way that the unity of the weak and electromagnetic interactions was hidden until recently.


    According to standard materialistic doctrine, consciousness, like space-time before the invention of general relativity, plays a secondary, subservient role, being considered just a function of matter and a tool for the description of the truly existing material world. It is certainly possible that nothing similar to the modification and generalization of the concept of space-time will occur with the concept of consciousness in the coming decades. But the thrust of research in quantum cosmology has taught us that the mere statement of a problem which might at first glance seem entirely metaphysical can sometimes, upon further reflection, take on real meaning and become highly significant for the further development of science.


    We should therefore like to take a certain risk and formulate several questions to which we do not yet have the answers.

    Is it not possible that consciousness, like space-time, has its own intrinsic degrees of freedom, and that neglecting these will lead to a description of the universe that is fundamentally incomplete?
    Will it not turn out, with the further development of science, that the study of the universe and the study of consciousness will be inseparably linked, and that ultimate progress in the one will be impossible without progress in the other?After the development of a unified geometrical description of the weak, strong,electromagnetic, and gravitational interactions, will the next important step not be the development of a unified approach to our entire world, including the world of consciousness?

    All of these questions might seem somewhat naive and out of place in a serious scientific publication, but to work in the field of quantum cosmology without an answer to these,and without even trying to discuss them, gradually becomes as difficult as working onthe hot universe theory without knowing why there are so many different things in the universe, why nobody has ever seen parallel lines intersect, why the universe is almost homogeneous and looks approximately the same at different locations, why space-time is four-dimensional, and so on. Now, with plausible answers to these questions in hand, one can only be surprised that prior to the 1980’s, it was sometimes taken to be bad form even to discuss them.

    The reason is really very simple: by asking such questions, one confesses one’s own ignorance of the simplest facts of daily life, and moreover encroaches upon a realm which may seem not to belong to the world of positive knowledge. It is much easier to convince oneself that such questions do not exist, that they are somehow not legitimate, or that someone answered them long ago.It would probably be best then not to repeat old mistakes, but instead to forthrightly acknowledge that the problem of consciousness and the related problem of human life and death are not only unsolved, but at a fundamental level they are virtually completely unexamined. It is tempting to seek connections and analogies of some kind, even if they are shallow and superficial ones at first, in studying one more great problem — that of the birth, life, and death of the universe. It may conceivably become clear at some future time that these two problems are not so disparate as they might seem »

    -----

    “I'm smart enough to know that I'm dumb.” Richard Feynman
     


    • Publicité



  2. obi76

    Date d'inscription
    mai 2007
    Localisation
    Paris
    Âge
    32
    Messages
    15 014

    Re : La physique de la conscience de Philippe Guillemant

    Citation Envoyé par mtheory Voir le message
    Si, si c'est bien dans la ligne de ce que pense Penrose. Pauli avait des idées similaires et c'est le cas de Linde aussi.
    Là j'ai appris un truc... merci
    L'ouverture d'esprit ne se limite pas toujours à une fracture du crâne...
     

  3. Deedee81

    Date d'inscription
    octobre 2007
    Localisation
    Courcelles - Belgique
    Âge
    55
    Messages
    27 434

    Re : La physique de la conscience de Philippe Guillemant

    Bonjour,

    Je prend sur moi de fermer. Essentiellement à cause de ça :


    Citation Envoyé par ScienceFollower Voir le message
    Bonjour mtheory,
    [...] je pense que ça ne fera pas de mal de considérer ces idées et d'essayer de les comprendre et les discuter, même si pour le moment ça reste au stade balbutiant d'une éventuelle nouvelle physique.
    [...] j'aimerai bien le recentrer sur les théories avancés par l'auteur[...]

    J'ai pourtant été très clair plus haut. La plupart de ce qui est avancé par l'auteur est tout simplement hors charte. Ni plus, ni moins.
    Attention, je ne dis pas que c'est faux ni sans intérêt et ça peut très certainement se discuter sur d'autres forums, mais pas sur Futura qui n'est pas fait pour ça.
    On ne discute pas jardinage dans un forum de plomberie, on ne discute pas de ces sujets sur Futura. A chaque forum sa vocation.

    Ceci dit, il y a eut pas mal de réponses intéressantes, y compris de scientifiques de métiers. Donc le fil n'aura pas été vain. En outre si un autre modérateur trouve que j'ai été trop dur et souhaite prolonger le débat, au moins un certain temps, il peut réouvrir. Je ne m'en offusquerai pas.

    Merci,
    Tout est relatif, et cela seul est absolu. (Auguste Comte)
     


    • Publicité







Sur le même thème :





 

Discussions similaires

  1. physique quantique et conscience
    Par jonh35 dans le forum Physique
    Réponses: 1
    Dernier message: 09/12/2015, 17h37
  2. L'observateur et la conscience en physique
    Par Syst. dans le forum Physique
    Réponses: 75
    Dernier message: 09/06/2014, 22h05
  3. vidéos congrès Physique et conscience
    Par Rincevent dans le forum Physique
    Réponses: 3
    Dernier message: 22/12/2005, 12h24
  4. Temps physique, Cerveau et conscience !
    Par GottferDamnt dans le forum [ARCHIVE] Philosophie
    Réponses: 23
    Dernier message: 09/02/2005, 19h50