The Big Data Show

Aviva Ori is an Israeli visual artist (1922-1989) …. Prof. Yuval Harari is a contemporary Israeli historian (1976 ….). Paraphrasing on an interview with him on Wired, maybe in the near future “Big Data” will be the visual artist …I will be redundant

….But both (Yuval Harari, Aviva Ori) and myself (the redundant visual artist) are manufactured on the backstage of the quantum world  where the Very Big Data has his ultimate life show.

My “Complementary Principle”

..From a conventional point of view, as a visual artist perceiving a classical world (not quantum), my occupation, as a picture maker, is simply to put things together to make art (for  whatever that is)..So here below is a picture I create and named “My “complementary principle“”….. So what has Art to do with Complementary  which is a quantum concept ?

Portrait of a kibbutz member

                                      Particle…………………………………..and…………………………………Wave

Well, I will go straight to the point. The Danish physicist Bohr one of the founding fathers of quantum mechanics coined the word “complementary”  meaning among others: particle and wave, (There is more to that..) Well as a fan of Science Fiction, seeking after a connection between art  and quantum mechanics, I found the following text:  “From Cubist Simultaneity to Quantum Complementarity by” Christophe Schinckus.

The abstract says:

“This article offers a contribution to the history of scientific ideas by proposing an epistemological argument supporting the assumption made by Miller whereby Niels Bohr has been influenced by cubism (Jean Metzinger) when he developed his non-intuitive complementarity principle. More specifically, this essay will identify the Bergsonian durée as the conceptual bridge between Metzinger and Bohr. Beyond this conceptual link between the painter and the physicist [etc…].” ...See here for the full text.

So…I the visual artist  looking after a connection between me  and the weird quantum mechanics… and he, Niels Bohr the  prize Nobel physicist, doing the same in reverse, as by  Miller’s assumption,  was influenced by cubism (Jean Metzinger) when he developed his non-intuitive complementarity principle….??

Today it is common practice that some scientists are also artist and that a minority of artist are very curious about quantum mechanics’s potential to make art.. (See here) So for me it’s not an  unusual coincidence…

Now,  I presume that I am 95% classical (not quantum) in every day mode. I perceive science and my own art making on the same epistemic and ontological  footing: they share together  the same Newtonian  space and time (for all practical purpose) and share Einsteins Relativity for light speed, not very practical in my atelier… but my above picture’s name point to the fact that I somehow mentioned my quantum attributes: particle (myself) + wave (myself) in my  ordinary every day life..Is it factually correct? Or is it Science Fiction like the movies “Interstellar” and “Blade Runner 2049…………….

The 95% classical and 5% quantum appearance of myself and Noah

 Let’s see,  I quote from the article: “Scientists take next step towards observing quantum physics in real life”

..”Small objects like electrons and atoms behave according to quantum mechanics, with quantum effects like superposition, entanglement and teleportation. One of the most intriguing questions in modern science is if large objects – like a coffee cup – could also show this behavior. Scientists at the TU Delft have taken the next step towards observing quantum effects at everyday temperatures in large objects. They created a highly reflective membrane, visible to the naked eye, that can vibrate with hardly any energy loss at room temperature. The membrane is a promising candidate to research quantum mechanics in large objects.”  Read more at...

Now I am a large object like the coffee cup, so there is in me some leftovers of quantumness ..that I can not see and feel but that I can imagine in the same way Rene Magritte’s painting “This is not a pipe” or in the  “My Quantum Complementarity” picture.

To resume…Remembering that the majority of artist,  galleries, art schools, museums, critics, curators, art magazines, lives in the explicit classical world (non quantum), don’t raise the question of why we live in a classical world that perhaps implicitly is manufactured in the quantum world does not mean that our every day perceptions are absolute. And more to that, that new “visual concepts” on the verge of science fiction can  factually be  create taking into account the “implicit” back stage of the quantum weirdness.

So the whole  above story,  my be condensed in  a few words “The Translation from the Quantum (microscopic weird world) to the Classical (our old good world)”  implies that without the quantum  back stage there is no old good world… and that the art world with her whole machinery  artist,  galleries, art schools, museums, critics, curators, art magazines, is included in and comes from the quantum….so what can a curious visual artist (me) do with that… if not make another art closer to a more fundamental “reality”. Our own good old reality being perhaps only an approximation an average (like temperature)….Its fun.

The sum over histories of my life

 

My Leftovers. Superposition. Particle. Wave.

,Leftovers…………………………………………. Leftovers………………………Leftovers…………………………………….Leftovers

The Decoherencer……………………………………………..The Decoherencer………………………………….The Decoherencer

 

Wave…….Particle……….Wave…………Particle…………Wave…………Particle………….Wave………….Particle………….Wave

 

 

….being human in a perhaps “non existing” classical world…

‘I am a visual artist and  from time to time I ask myself is picture drawing painting etc nothing more than modelling a fake reality…. as many physicist argue ….

 

The thinking of Ridley Scott:

Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner, released in 1982, was a towering landmark of cyberpunk cinema that spawned decades of imitations, redefined dystopian sci-fi, and questioned what it means to be human. (see here )…

The decoherencer expulse a falling angel….

How a physicist think:

…”Alan Bustany, Trinity Wrangler, Triple A Science Student
Answered Oct 22, 2016 ……………”Which statement is more accurate: “an electron is neither a particle nor a wave”; or “an electron is both a particle and a wave”?
Both statements are misleading. And they are misleading for a very fundamental reason, the understanding of which will enhance your appreciation of the scientific method and what fundamental science is all about.
They are misleading because you and I think we understand what a particle or a wave is. That is, we have an intuitive, or even a sophisticated, understanding of classical particles and classical waves. In circumstances not too far removed from our everyday experience, reality plays by well-behaved rules that generally conform to the intuitions our brains have developed over millions of years of evolution. Even then we can occasionally be fooled by various forms of illusion.

…one of possible paths in a field…

The scientific method aims to replace our intuition, analogies, and models with measurable, verifiable, independent evidence – especially in situations far removed from everyday experience: scales of atoms; speeds approaching that of light; large gravitational fields; and so on. In dealing with extreme situations, thinking of analogies like “little billiard balls” or “waves reflecting off a wall” can be positively detrimental. That is certainly the case when you consider Quantum Field Theory (QFT) for subatomic particles like an electron.

 

The Decoherencer create a Falling Angel,,,

In QFT (Quantum Field Theory) you have some mathematical model of reality that predicts certain measurable effects that correspond with astonishing accuracy to actual measurements. Some effects, such as quantum entanglement, are very counterintuitive but nevertheless seem to express what is actually going on. Some of the mathematical objects in QFT can, under certain circumstances, be interpreted as particles or particle-like. Others can be interpreted as waves or wave-like. Some can be interpreted as particle-like in some circumstances and wave-like in other circumstances.

What, then, is really going on underneath? Unfortunately this question does not even make sense. A scientific theory incorporating a mathematical model is just that, a model of reality. We can never know in principle whether it is the correct model or even if such an entity exists”... See Quora,,,

So this is quite a subjective science fiction story ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

 

 

.

Whats the Trouble with Art

Question: is art a commodity a fact or a dream….? Answer: I don’t know…but tentatively… it is something I like and need… so it is a (like,need) and it is…. the physicist J.A. Wheeler says it is “it from bit” see here   

So a bit is information it is physical…”it”:  the picture the paint the canvas the photo the Fabriano paper the computer screen …. my (like,need) etc… So my art production is selling bits to someone absorbing my bits and calling it Art and paying me with bitcoins….

So “Whats the Trouble with Art” …. art is a classical perception: pictures salon galleries museums sellers curators  artists etc…. the trouble is that art does not reveal the borderline between the classical perception and the Qubit “perception” – the quantum world where “it is from Qubit”

So this is my own subjective Science Fiction see the “Interstellar”  movie

this picture correlate my bits to your bits trough the veiled qubits….

prof. Leonard Susskind…  I (like,need) his bits…

this  drawing is art representing the fuzzy bit/qubit space in my or your salon….