QUANTUM CIRCUIT AND CLASSICAL CIRCUIT- A THOUGHT EXPERIMENT

Which way will the electron(s) go in these experiments-the upper (high resistance) way or the lower (low resistance) way? Ohm’s law will hold in:

1) both the experiments,

2) won’t hold in any,

3) will hold in 1 & won’t in 2

4) will hold in 2 & won’t in 1                         ???

In fig: 1 experiment, Ohm’s law will hold (How? and why?-explained later). But, will Ohm’s law hold on fig: 2 experiment, which takes place with a single electron? For simplicity, let us consider that the connecting wires has no or zero resistance or/i.e. wire is a superconductor.

So, what will happen to electron(s) when they reach the decisive point [point “A” – the point where the path separates into the path to High Resistance (HR) and to Low Resistance (LR)]? What will electrons decide about where to go? The path through HR is a lengthy one, not because it appears so in the figure but, because there is more resistance which will resist the motion of electron(s) through it more, compared to LR. Thus slowing it down more and making it late to its target at positive (+ve) terminal of the cell, compared to the path through LR. You might think it will take the path that takes less time. But, how does the electron(s) Know which path is short in time before it even gets there? So, lets discuss the possible cases:

In case the number (no.) of electron is more than 1 (say 2): As the first electron (an electron ahead-say e1) reaches point “A” , it, say, makes a random choice to go to any of these paths (HR path or LR path).

                                               { NOTE: the question still remains: Does it really make the random choice? or does the choice depend on something, some other parameter[s] (variable[s] or factor[s] )-any parameter[s] other than itself? If yes, what is that/are those parameter[s]? Can we ever find the parameter[s], or will we forever go on jumping from one to another parameter/set of parameters in the process of finding the ultimate parameter/parameter set, that exists at infinity? Now by ultimate parameters[s], it means that the parameter[s] is/are the most basic, on which all the parameters depend, and which doesn’t depend on any other parameter[s]. Its like the final frontier}.

Now, if it gets through LR path, the second electron (electron behind-say e2) will have nothing (no guidance) that allows it to choose (actually forces) one over other i.e. it will have to make a random choice-a choice that is actual one and not the forced one. But, if e1 chooses, of course randomly/makes actual choice, to take the HR path, the resistance HR will resist its motion more compared to LR. Now, on resistance, e1 will slow down and with this e2, that is behind it, will feel a force-guess which?, of course the electromagnetic force (say EmF).

This force will resist e2 and the possibility to slip or be forced to the LR path will increase, as there is less resistance that forces it towards HR path or back home to negative (-ve) terminal, compared to the force/ resistance that forces it to the LR path. Now, this probability when merged with the common and equal probability (0.5)-{may or may not be equal if not is considered.}-of choosing the HR or LR path, will of course give the higher probability than the probability that is associated with choosing (actually being forced) the HR or back home path. Isn’t it? Did we get the sense of Ohm’s law? Yes, that is why and how Ohm’s law holds in fig: 1 experiment.

Before going any further, lets discuss about choice or choosing (actual or real choice) and being forced. Actually, being forced isn’t choice and the term “forced choice” is incorrect, as they (being forced and choice) are complementary of one another, or one can even say opposite or antonyms.                                                                  

{NOTE: the choice dealt in this discussion is a general choice and doesn’t only refer to the choice made by electron(s) but, to any and every choice(s)}. 

So, if choice depends on “Nothing”/no any other variable[s] or is independent of any other variable[s] (example: force, here EmF), then the choice is an actual choice. Else i.e. if it depends on other variable[s], it is being forced. But again, to make sure that the choice is independent of any other variable[s], one must run a search party for infinity. Even if at least one is found, one cannot be certain whether choice is independent or not. This is because, even if choice, also a parameter, depends on some other parameter[s], and if this new parameter[s] doesn’t depend on any other parameter[s] for sure, choice will remain independent since the new parameter[s] on which choice depends is independent of any other[s].

                                           {NOTE: In case there is parameters i.e. more than one parameter, these parameters may or may not depend on one another plus the other[s]  i.e. that doesn’t belong to the group of parameters considered here. The case with the later (other[s]) can only be certain at infinity, i.e. can never be certain. If they depend on one another, the cases may arise: one with, and the other without, the most basic or ultimate parameter[s], in relative term of course, as the most ultimate parameter[s] lies at infinity and cannot thus ever be realized or known. The other way to say this is that the most ultimate parameter[s], does not exist.

Now, these cases of with or without ultimate[s] also clearly contains further two cases: one with only one ultimate and the other with more than one ultimate. in case there is no any ultimate, one has the task of searching for the variable[s] that doesn’t depend on this group but, on which the group depends, and this task may go on for infinity. Also, it isn’t necessary that all the variables of this group must depend on only one new variable, which if exists, is certainly comparatively their ultimate variable. So, there may exist a group of new variables, and these variable also may and may not depend on one another plus the other[s], and it goes on forever. 

                                           The case with one or more than one ultimate is also the same as with no ultimate. And so is true for the case with only one parameter. Also, this is the reason behind the quantum uncertainty and its totally the law of pure numbers. It clearly suggests how the laws of our universe and even the laws of whole Nature is the result or is the laws of numbers. While further deep dealing into the law(s) of numbers will lead us to conclude that the ultimate law of Nature is that there is no law at all. And the laws we perceive is just the illusion and result of the laws of numbers/no law. This is further to come in other chapters and had been dealt under the chapter nature of Nature}.

Now, this means the new variable[s] is purely random-doesn’t depend on any other parameter[s] than itself, and has the gut to make choices (the actual ones). So, choice, as it depends on this independent variable[s], is also purely random and thus makes or can make equivalently random (actual) choice(s). Isn’t it? So, actually, even the so called “forced choice” or “being forced” is also a random choice indeed, and there exists no such thing as “forced choice” or “being forced” thing. Also, it seems and is clear that any phenomenon or decision or choice is purely random and thus Nature is purely random. Isn’t it? So, what is pure choice then? Since there exists no forced choices, every choice is a pure/random choice. But what exactly is a pure choice? Since there is no exactly any decisive factor/ ultimate factor and every choice is random as discussed above, the choice without any reason is a pure choice. And since there can’t be only one choice or choosing of one over another until it is biased or has some decisive/ultimate factor or force, the choice must be of the both or all i.e. both among the two or all among the all must be chosen or performed, and is chosen or performed in the parallel universes.

Please don’t misunderstand, the choice of making choice (choice of choice) actually means nothing but just a usual choice in assuming any value, example: electron’s choice of taking any path between HR and LR path. So, if A, B, C and so on are some variables, then A depend on B and B on C and so on to infinity.

Also, maybe A depends on C and C depends on B and B depends on K and K on F and C and so on. Also, H may depend on P and P on L and R and Q.

It may happen that A depends on F and C depends on F but A and C has no relation or are independent of each other.

There may be branching: A depends on 1,2,3 and these three are independent of each other but depends on B or B and C or B and C and D, and that these (B, C and D) are independent of each other. And so on…

But, what with fig: 2 experiment?

In case the no. of electron is equal to one: In this case, since there is no any parameter or decisive factor like the electromagnetic force due to the other electron that forces the electron to take the HR path or LR path, what will the lonely electron do? Will it choose the LR path? If yes, then why? How will the electron know about the HR before interacting with it? Or will the electron make its pure choice i.e. random choice? of course it will, as there is nothing like “forced choice” or “being forced” or simply forced,a s we dealt earlier. But, there are of course apparent forces like the EmF. So, how will the lonely electron act without the assistance of the apparent force?

It obviously must take both the paths (HR and LR) as discussed above-exactly what quantum mechanics would suggest. As a result parallel universes comes to sight.

However, what happens after this is most interesting. The electron now takes both the path. Let us represent electron taking HR path by eH and the electron taking LR pth by eL. Obviously, eH feels more resistance and is slowed more than eL. So, eH must reach its destination/target later than eL. Of coursr the +ve terminal of cell is the target but, so is the light bulb ahead and before the +ve terminal of the cell. Thus, the light bulb must glow twice, at first due to eL and after some time due to eH. right?

We can easily experiment this but, is it what we will observe? As with our observation, we may just observe one glow (either by eH or eL). This is because the other glow (either eL or eH) might be observed by the other “we” , in the parallel universe of ours. According to this, we when not observing, when electron is in both the HR and LR path i.e.is in the parallel universe and we too become the part of the parallel universe on observing i.e. when light bulb glows. We as well get divided into parallel forms. And thus, according to this, any entity or subject which is the part of experiment or apparatus or interaction (example: observation), is in the parallel universe. This is exactly opposite to the interpretation of the general quantum mechanics, which says that on observation the parallel universes collapses to one to give a single output universe. In this case the general quantum interpretation would be: The eH and eL electrons when not being observed by the observer are in parallel universes and when the observer observes them i.e. when the light bulb glows, the parallel universes eH and eL merge/collapse into one universe which is the observer’s (which is only one) universe or fall into observer’s universe. Here, in this interpretation of quantum mechanics, observer is sole and only one and that sole and only one observer is given the emphasis and seems to lead or be center to all the phenomenon.

Whereas in the interpretation provided by this article, observer is not a particular identity but every identity in the experiment/in the apparatus is an observer and an observed. So, this interpretation allows universes within universes and parallel universes within parallel universe, and its all jumbled and more complicated. So, according to this interpretation of this article, we and the universe as a whole actually get divided into further parallel universes. And the “universe” by this interpretation is defined as collection of all the mutually interacting (example:observing) entities only.

So, actually its not about the observer doing an experiment and the experimental entities behaving in a particular way and observer observing them in different ways when they observe and not observe the entities. Its actually about a universe-a set of mutually interacting entities-which interacts in different ways and with a different sets of values corresponding to different them-parallel universes, and its also about different universes interacting or not interacting with each other when they observe and  don’t respectively. For example: The experimenter (sole observer of general Quantum mechanics) is or in a different universe and the circuit with electron(s) flowing, is or in a different other universe. But, when they interact i.e. when experimenter observes the circuit, and so does the circuit to the experimenter, these two, experimenter and circuit universes, get into one universe with other similarly mutually interacting entities, if any.

More to come…