{"id":814,"date":"2018-04-06T01:36:12","date_gmt":"2018-04-06T01:36:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/entangledenergy.net\/?p=814"},"modified":"2018-04-07T04:04:10","modified_gmt":"2018-04-07T04:04:10","slug":"random-thoughts-about-nothing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/entangledenergy.net\/index.php\/2018\/04\/06\/random-thoughts-about-nothing\/","title":{"rendered":"Random thoughts about nothing"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Why should randomness be the ultimate goal of existence?\u00a0 Why couldn&#8217;t perfect order be that ideal state of existence?\u00a0 If &#8220;nothingness&#8221; represents perfect order, then it possesses lowest possible entropy, and lack of any randomness.\u00a0 Why couldn&#8217;t &#8220;nothing&#8221; be satisfied with this arrangement?<\/p>\n<p>One thing &#8220;nothingness&#8221; eliminates, along with everything else, is probability.\u00a0 In the case of &#8220;nothingness&#8221; with perfect non-randomness, it represents the lowest possible probability.\u00a0 There is one possibility.\u00a0 There are no other options.\u00a0 There is only a state of perfect order.\u00a0 &#8220;Nothing&#8221; is nothing.\u00a0 It can never be something else.\u00a0 And this represents the highest possible energy level.<\/p>\n<p>However, all existence moves toward maximum entropy, or disorder.\u00a0 It moves toward perfect randomness, maximum probability, and maximum possibilities.\u00a0 The purest probability represents entropy, and maximum possibilities.\u00a0 This includes &#8220;nothingness.&#8221;\u00a0 You may argue that &#8220;nothing&#8221; is nothing, it doesn&#8217;t exist.\u00a0 And you might be right.\u00a0 But could &#8220;nothing&#8221; move toward a lower energy level or lazier existence by producing more and more randomness, moving toward entropy?\u00a0 It could do this by forming opposing identical pairs of &#8220;somethingness&#8221; so that if these pairs were combined, they would once again form &#8220;nothingness.&#8221;\u00a0 This may be the earliest ancestor of entanglement.<\/p>\n<p>But, we can discuss this production of pairs of &#8220;somethingness&#8221; (e.g., electron and positron, etc.) in a future blog.\u00a0 For now, let&#8217;s focus on randomness, probability, and possibilities.<\/p>\n<p>Consider the double-slit experiment.\u00a0 Photons or electrons are &#8220;shot&#8221; at the double-slits and exist in any number of possible positions.\u00a0 The &#8220;particles&#8221; apparently exist as wavelike structures that pass through both slits at the same time, showing up as interference patterns on the screen behind the double slits.\u00a0 The interference pattern looks just like the pattern that would be created by waves of water flowing through the double slits and hitting the screen.\u00a0 The strongest interference pattern exists at the center of the interference distribution and the patterns get weaker outward from center, analogous to a &#8220;normal distribution.&#8221;\u00a0 The particle can exist in any position along this normal distribution, but has the highest probability of existing near the center of the normal curve and less and less probability of existing outward from the center.\u00a0 So the particles shot through the double slits possess a degree of probability in terms of position.\u00a0 For each particle, it&#8217;s position has a lot of possibilities governed by probability.<\/p>\n<p>When a device measures which slit the particle passed through, then an odd thing happens.\u00a0 The pattern on the screen consists of two dominant lines only, as if solid objects passed through the two slits.\u00a0 There is no evidence of wavelike behavior.\u00a0 There is only evidence of solid objects passing through one or the other slit.\u00a0 In this case, the position of the particle has only two possibilities:\u00a0 the particle passes through the left slit or it passes through the right slit.\u00a0 In this case, there is less randomness, less entropy, and few possibilities compared to the unmeasured particles that, for some reason, pass through the slits as a wavelike structure.<\/p>\n<p>In terms of particle position, the wavelike structure passing through both slits at the same time has greater randomness, greater entropy, and more possibilities than when the position of the particle is measured with a detector.\u00a0 When the position of the particle is measured, there is only one possibility.\u00a0 It has passed through one of the two slits.\u00a0 When its position is measured, all the possibilities of its position have collapsed into one possible position &#8211; the position at which it was observed.\u00a0 In the case of measured position, there is less randomness, less entropy, and only one possibility.<\/p>\n<p>So the wavelike structure exists at the lower energy level while the particle, once observed, exists at a higher energy level.\u00a0 So, at least in this case, the wavelike structure is the preferred existence, since it has greater randomness, greater entropy, and more possibilities.\u00a0 It exists at a lower energy level.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Why should randomness be the ultimate goal of existence?\u00a0 Why couldn&#8217;t perfect order be that ideal state of existence?\u00a0 If &#8220;nothingness&#8221; represents perfect order, then it possesses lowest possible entropy, and lack of any randomness.\u00a0 Why couldn&#8217;t &#8220;nothing&#8221; be satisfied with this arrangement? One thing &#8220;nothingness&#8221; eliminates, along with everything else, is probability.\u00a0 In the &hellip; <a href=\"http:\/\/entangledenergy.net\/index.php\/2018\/04\/06\/random-thoughts-about-nothing\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Random thoughts about nothing<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[43],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-814","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-directional-balance"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/entangledenergy.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/814","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/entangledenergy.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/entangledenergy.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/entangledenergy.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/entangledenergy.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=814"}],"version-history":[{"count":13,"href":"http:\/\/entangledenergy.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/814\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":827,"href":"http:\/\/entangledenergy.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/814\/revisions\/827"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/entangledenergy.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=814"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/entangledenergy.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=814"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/entangledenergy.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=814"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}