The uncertainty principle

Definition:

1. It can be expressed in its simplest form as follows: One can never know with perfect accuracy both of those two important factors which determine the movement of one of the smallest particles- its position and its velocity. It is impossible to determine accurately both the position and the direction and speed of a particle at the same instant. [1]

2. It may also be stated as follows: “An object (a human figure or something else) is presented against a background on which its shadow falls, with the amendment that the shadow is that of some quite different object. Example: a naked woman projecting another object in the form of a bird onto a curtain.” [2]

3. I would simply put it this way: One can never know with perfect accuracy the object of one’s own thoughts. As soon as one thinks of an object, the object is disposed by the movement of one’s own thought. It is impossible therefore to determine accurately both the object and its image.

What is an object?

4. Most people would think that objects do really exist out there, like the statue of a woman made of the well- defined curves of marble displaying its own inherent truth to eternity.

5. Beauty is such an aspect of eternal undisputed truth of harmony, which can be perceived either as a well- defined female body or as the music of a bird which sings.

6. Therefore beauty or harmony is a unifying aspect which connects two or many things which share some common properties.

7. For example we can perceive the fine structure hidden in atoms or in the musical scales because our own body is composed of atoms, while our soul vibrates according to the same musical patterns.

8. Knowledge is based on this process of fine- tuning between the smallest and the largest scales, between the most abstract and the most concrete objects.

9. It is this deepest aspect of correspondence between objects and knowledge, which can be thought of as an object, what makes us sure that the external world exists, but also that the way we perceive the world is true, independently of different opinions.

What is knowledge?

10. But this also creates a problem. Since knowledge is built up in comparison to other objects, not as an object on its own, thought needs to create an object of its own image to be compared with.

11. This is how the statue of a woman (‘beauty without soul’) becomes a grown up woman, taking care of her own beauty.

12. This is also how the observer becomes aware of the object (the ‘particle’) he/she observes, knowing at the same time that what he/she observes is an object under the scrutiny of his/her own consciousness. In other words we may say that ‘the observer is observed.’

What is a ‘particle?’

13. However this creates another problem. As the object gets ‘lightened’ by our thought, it also casts a shadow in the mind, in the same sense that physical light produces the shadows of the objects it illuminates (even if the shadow is perceived as the vacuum).

14. By this process of ‘illumination’ all the objects we perceive come about, either in the external landscape or in the internal environment of our own thought.

15. Therefore we may say that while thought makes us see the object by shedding its ‘ample light of perception’ on the object, at the same time thought obscures the object by casting its shadow, making thus the aspects of the object hidden.

16. We may say that thought interferes between the observer and the object he/she observes, in the same sense that the experimenter changes the properties of the object he/she experiments with; or that thought forms a curtain falling inbetween the audience and the actors on the scene.

17. Thus the plot of the theme or the contents of the object we are trying to figure out become implicit, hidden behind the curtain; they appear as the figures on the screen of a shadow play.

What is it that ‘moves?’

18. The ‘particle’ therefore becomes a part of a cut-out figure, held in front of the light, shaded by the observer’s own instruments, while the observer has to guess not only the properties of the particle but also what the whole figure might be.

19. But at the same time the ‘particle’ is an image in the observer’s mind, obscured by the ‘light’ of his/her own effort of attention, as he/she tries to understand the process.

20. In our case the figure is that of a woman (or that of the statue of a woman) whose shadow appears on the wall in the form of a bird.

21. Here we will have to expand the uncertainty principle to include, together with the non- localization of the part (the ‘point- particle’), the ambiguity in the gestures of the whole figure (keeping also in mind that the indeterminacy of the object we try to figure out is fundamentally due to the ‘shading process’ of our own attention).

22. Therefore we have to face another problem. What is it that really moves? We may say that we never perceive our thought moving. Instead what we perceive moving is the object of thought, in the same sense that we don’t see the light (moving) but objects moving (illuminated by light).

23. If we compare our own thought with an object, what we perceive moving is the shadow which the object of thought produces, as if the sun of pure thought were too bright to stare directly at.

24. Therefore we perceive the existence of our thought by the motion of its shadows, in the same sense that we perceive the existence of the air by the motion of a curtain or the rustling of leaves.

25. Accordingly we may perceive the movement of the soul by the flapping of wings, which are projected on a wall, while the soul appears in the form of a bird, in front of a naked body.

26. In our picture the naked body belongs to a woman but at the same time it could be our own idea about perfect beauty incarnated in the form of a woman.

27. Again our thought (or the woman’s thought) is invisible, while what we see is the object of thought or ‘point of interest,’ projected as the shadow of a bird with open wings.

28. The uncertainty or indeterminacy is hanging around this ‘point of interest’ and can also be expressed by the spread of the wings.

Is it desire what ‘moves?’

29. The displacement of objects by the process of our own attention can also be seen as the result of mutual interaction between the object, on which thought is focused, and thought itself.

30. This ‘effect of the double’ may also be represented by the ambiguous function of attention. While attention makes the object visible by concentrating the light, at the same time it ‘burns’ the object at the point of focus.

31. In a similar way thought understands the object by studying the ‘shadows of its own light,’ shed on the object, while we perceive the motion of the shadows as the motion of our own thought or the motion of our own soul.

32. But while we might assume some ‘visible,’ thus measurable, properties of the object, representing ‘real’ particles, it is the hidden aspects of the object which reveal the properties of the true figure (whose separate parts we call particles), but which also make us understand the nature of our thoughts.

33. In fact what we assume as ‘real’ or ‘physical’ properties of the object are the results we take and the conclusions we draw after we have considered the implications of the hidden aspects.

34. It is therefore the hidden aspects or the ‘properties of shadows’ which we perceive as the motion of our thought or the contents of our soul.

35. We may even identify the ‘shadow’ with the ‘soul’ or, better, the aspects of the shadow with the contents of the soul, keeping in mind that both the light and the shadow are complementary parts of the same procedure (the process of thought or consciousness).

36. In the laboratory we may associate these hidden aspects or ‘variables’ with measurable properties of objects, such as the ‘wave-length’ or the ‘intensity of energy,’ related to the localization of motion and position of ‘particles’ respectively.

37. But it is the hidden aspects which are assumed to bring about the entanglement, either between motion (momentum) and position or between different particles, which are also necessary to account for the duality (e.g. wave-particle duality).

38. In the painting the hidden aspects are represented by the ‘beak’ and the ‘claws’ of a ‘bird,’ which ‘entangle’ the woman’s body with its shadow, but which at the same time connect the mind of the spectator with his/her own desires.

39. We may say that the shadows produced by our thoughts are in fact the contents of our own soul expressing the hidden processes of understanding.

40. Perhaps this is also why the fear (of an object) lying in the shadow of our darkest thoughts is always accompanied by a deep and unexplained desire (for the object).

41. But the object which we fear or which causes physical pain is the shadow of our thought or the content of our soul projected on the wall in the form of a bird or a predatory omen, which, using its beak and claws, is ready to devour our body, attributing at the same time the physical properties to the body.

42. Therefore while the shadow spreads its wings (as our thought moves), the woman closes her arms and holds her breasts to protect her secret.

43. This is of course a pretentious movement, as the woman at the same time looks at her breasts in a narcissistic pose, feeling both fearful and willing to be exposed to all the indiscrete eyes of spectators around her.

44. It is naturally pretentious because it is the desire of our own thought as it transforms itself into an object of interest in the form of a woman, a perfect shape, in order to draw all available attention.

45. This everlasting and ever unsatisfied propensity of lust is the hidden variable which describes the contents of our thought (or of any object which may be perceived by thought) and which also explains why thought (or the soul) moves.

46. It is desire what ‘moves’ or it is desire what makes our thoughts move. Or, to put it better, it is desire what we feel by the motion of our thought.

Knowledge is pleasure

47. On first thought it may seem that knowledge is the object of desire (or even vice- versa). But the woman in the picture holds her breasts (the object of desire) not because of desire for knowledge. (Therefore knowledge is not an object of desire.)

48. She doesn’t want to be exposed, although deep inside she would long for the claws and the beaks of predatory birds or for the needles of indiscrete eyes penetrating her body, although at the end, as a perfect thought on her own, she would comply with the eternal ideal, which is thought masturbating by exposing its image to the mirror.

49. In the process thought is attracted by various objects of interest, taking the shape of its own image or adopting the role of various objects and their functions.

50. The function of objects, perceived as properties of the shadows they cast, are the propensities which constitute the intellect, felt as desire.

51. In that sense neither desire is an object of knowledge. In other words when we read a book about love we don’t make love but we learn.

52. Therefore as we have already said knowledge is formed in comparison to or, better, in unison with the objects thought perceives.

53. This coincidence is described as a force (between objects) in physics but it is much more than this, since it is also expressed as a natural propensity or tendency of things (e.g. the object of knowledge attracted to other objects).

54. Consequently it is a form of universal sympathy which includes all interactions between objects, as well as that between the (observed) object and the observer (the object which observes).

55. As soon as the coincidence takes place, the condition of mutual attraction is met and awareness is filled with satisfaction.

56. The whole process, including both the interaction (felt as desire) and the knowledge of the interacting objects, is what we call consciousness and it involves the complete form.

57. So it is not that pleasure is the cause of things. But all physical processes, whatever the cause, leave behind the traces of pleasure.

58. We may say that, in the case of entangled particles or ‘coinciding objects’ in general, as soon as the interaction takes place the vacuum is filled with pleasure, while the observer (who always participates in the physical process) confirms with satisfaction the result of the experiment.

59. Therefore particles can be viewed as ‘vehicles of pleasure,’ as in reality they carry the ‘tension’ or ‘inclination’ between the cut- out parts of the figure which comprises the ‘wave- function’ or the whole form.

60. In that sense desire comes about in the process of understanding these tendencies, which also give rise to the motion of thought, but it is the awareness of the whole procedure which gives rise to knowledge as a unified theory.

61. While neither the woman nor the bird in the picture may understand their mutual relationship, the spectator may enjoy the pleasure of knowing.

Where is the object to be found?

62. The object which we have ended up playing with can be as tangible as an instrument we use for masturbation or as abstract as using the same instrument to trigger a thought process.

63. Pleasure can be as crude as a nude woman holding her breasts, as indifferent as no one paying attention (even while having sex) or as subtle as understanding the relationship between thought and the instrument of pleasure beyond any scale of measurement.

64. In fact both the ‘object of thought’ and the ‘object of pleasure’ can be seen as properties of the same wider context or object in the same sense that ‘position’ and ‘momentum’ are properties of the same particle.

65. This object will have a physical appearance, like that of (the statue of) a woman in the picture, and an emotional content consisting of some properties, such as the ‘beak’ and the ‘claws’ of the ‘bird.’

66. These psychic imprints are embedded in the shadow of thought and are expressed as the propensities of the motion of thought, which becomes a moving object.

67. Therefore we have an object which consists of tendencies and images, while at least one of these images (its own picture) has to be another object.

68. In that sense in order to have a picture or a painting, we need at least one viewer, even if that viewer is the painter himself/herself.

69. In the same sense a particle cannot be dislocated (by observation) if there isn’t any observer to perform the experiment, who, furthermore, will not be able to interpret correctly the phenomenon if he/she is not aware of his/her own role.

70. Thus where is the ‘object?’

71. According to Heisenberg (the first definition) the object may be found on the measuring device (the instrument of pleasure).

72. According to Magritte (the second definition) it may be found on the curtain (the instrument of thought who measures pleasure).

73. According to the third definition (in my own words) it is the object which creates space and motion (the instrument of thought who creates the measure).

74. This is equivalent to comparing the ‘real object’ with the ‘image of the object’ inside our thoughts.

75. The real object may be a subatomic particle or a beautiful woman, while the virtual object is the same as the real one, except that it is found in its pure, ‘objective’ form.

76. In fact the implied image of the object is the real object, therefore what we see is the projection made by the unconscious.

77. Again the object happens to be found in our thought, either as pure as pure thought or as ‘dirty’ as the shadow.

78. However we never perceive the object of pure form but the impure object described by the shadow. We may take the pure form by removing all the impurities, but only after some ingenious suggestions.

79. This is the same as with light. We try to figure out what light may be by studying the properties of the traces light leaves behind.

80. The same goes for the woman of our dreams. Not only we are excited by the hidden aspects of beauty lying behind her covered breasts, but we are also inclined to evaluate her attitude according to her next move (which never occurs).

81. Thus the instrument is the measure and the object is ‘displaced’ by this coincidence (which in fact is equivalent to a natural tautology) between the (metric) nature of the instrument and the process of measuring (using the same instrument).

82. Therefore there may not be two objects, the ‘One’ and the ‘Other One,’ the ‘real object’ and the ‘implied image,’ but the ‘real object as an image of Consciousness reversed to reality.’

83. This object may in fact be identified with Consciousness, a perfect form which will contain both the Light of pure thought and the Shadow of thought’s multiple representations.

84. However we have just made the same division, once again, and at the same time we have also performed the same loop- It is impossible to determine accurately both things at the same time…

85. We need at least an Object (therefore two objects: the ‘Object’ and ‘Us’).

86. We may say this as we take a look at the mirror and pose for the last time the same question we asked before: Where is the object to be found?

87. We may simply call this object the Mirror.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle]
[2] [http://www.mattesonart.com/1943-1947-sunlit-renoir-period.aspx]

12/31/2015

Painting: [The uncertainty principle (Le principe d’ incertitude), Rene Magritte]