What If Electrons Had Feelings?
I have a conclusion that differs from Feynman’s
I want to make another bold statement.
From a rational standpoint. Hear me out.
I have previously argued that an atom and a molecule are organisms. Two criteria have helped me make this conclusion.
The first is physical existence.
Existence is a spontaneous thing. We don’t know much about spontaneous existence. But once physical entities exist, the theory of Organismal Selection argues that they struggle to avoid annihilation.
They do that through the second criterion — probability.
The bold statement concerns electrons and their possibility of having feelings.
Tendency to avoid annihilation
To better understand my argument, consider catalysts.
Catalysts are known to increase the speed of reactions without participating in the chemical changes of the reaction. In reality, they are part of the reaction, but they remain structurally unchanged.
For a catalyst to serve its role, it has to remain intact. Unchanged. In the case of chemical reactions, it has to avoid annihilation.
Thus, the baseline requirement for a catalyst is the baseline requirement for any physically existing entity. First, physical existence. Secondly, it has to avoid annihilation, which in the case of chemical reactions, is to avoid getting changed by the same chemical reactions.
Now, when we introduce probability into the equation, the catalysts appear to have a baseline requirement seen in all known biological organisms.
Let’s assume the catalyst has a probability of getting consumed by the chemical reaction is 1/1000. It has to be a small number because we know that in most cases, catalysts remain unchanged.
This probability is the same as the probability of being annihilated. It also means the probability of NOT being annihilated is 1–1/1000. That is, 999/1000. Relatively, a huge number. Significantly larger than 1/1000.
What do these numbers mean?
Out of 1000 reactions, a catalyst will remain structurally unchanged 999 times, and get destroyed one time. Formally speaking.
If it participates in several similar reactions, without it being changed, then we can conclude with some modicum of certainty that it has a tendency to avoid annihilation. That is, in the space of possible outcomes for the catalyst, 999 are successful. 1 is not. The catalyst has a tendency to succeed, or a tendency to NOT fail.
In my theory, I call it the tendency to avoid annihilation.
This tendency to avoid annihilation is the same as in other organisms.
The numbers 1/1000 and 999/1000 can be the numerical equivalent of the same entity that tries to avoid annihilation. Probability then has the ability to identify organisms. First by physical existence ( in this case 1/1000) and secondly, by the ability to avoid annihilation (in this case 999/1000).
1/1000 defines existence because once you die, you cease to exist. Especially how you have been known. You progressively lose structure and form. This fraction, 1/1000, thus, defines existence. The remainder, 999/1000 defines how much the existent entity tries to avoid death.
Catalysts, hence, teach us one thing — for any entity whatsoever that serves the role of a catalyst, it must have the baseline requirement of avoiding annihilation. Only then can it serve its role in not just one chemical reaction, but in others.
Catalysts have physical existence. Most have a structure. They preserve these structures in many chemical reactions. Thus, catalysts, then have a tendency to avoid annihilation. By this criteria, catalysts are organisms.
Now, back to the electron.
Electrons lack a structure but they pursue mergers
Electrons do not have a structure as we understand them from chemistry and physics. They have a mass, a very small one, and a spin.
Despite lacking structures, they do have a physical form of existence. We have never seen one, but we have features that tell us if an electron is present.
Electrons, however, have a way of avoiding annihilation.
We can use the same example of probability.
Let’s say the catalyst has the ability to form a chemical bond with another catalyst. It then doubles the speed of the chemical reaction.
What the probability tells us is when these two catalysts merge, the emergent chemical structure will have a smaller probability of annihilation.
If the other catalyst also had a probability of 1/1000, when the two merge, we’ll have:
1/1000 ×1/1000 = 1/1,000,000.
It means they can participate in more chemical reactions without being changed. One million reactions and only one will fail. The rest, 999,999 will not. They are more efficient catalysts when merged than when solitary by themselves.
It also means that the probability of avoiding annihilation is 1–1/1000,000 = 999,999/1,000,000.
This is orders of magnitude larger than each catalyst by itself.
The moral of this short example is mergers increase the tendency to avoid annihilation. Any entity with the ability to merge will seek the merger if it wants to avoid annihilation.
Organisms do just that. At the subcellular level, genes merge to form a genome. The genome merged with biological catalysts, called enzymes, to produce cellular structures. You can continue with the same logic at higher levels of complexity.
Electrons also do that.
They form a cloud around atomic nuclei. It’s an electrostatic merger between the negatively charged electrons and the positively charged nucleus.
Usually, it takes a lot of energy to break such mergers. All known mergers have a threshold for breakage. The existence of a threshold implies the opposite — it shows the tendency to preserve the merger. A tendency to preserve a merger shows a tendency to avoid annihilation.
Electrons, thus, are no different from atoms, from molecules, from a cell, and from you.
According to the theory of Organismal Selection, electrons are organisms. They have a physical form of existence. They also have a tendency to avoid annihilation.
There is another method that allows such small entities to avoid annihilation, through motion, but I’ll leave that for another article.
For now, we have all we need to explore the possibility of electrons having feelings.
What if they had feelings?
When anyone mentions feelings, it’s hardly a good thing.
When Feynman contemplated the existence of electrons with physics, he imagined the impossibility of physics. Feelings are mercurial.
Today, you are happy, tomorrow, you’re sad. Happiness and excitement fill people with energy. Sadness does the opposite.
So electrons with feelings would not have the same predictive patterns we know. If it were happy, it would move fast, if it were sad, it would move slowly.
But I want us to think about it differently.
Let’s assume it only has one feeling — the urge to avoid annihilation.
As small as it is, it only has two options. Consistently be in motion — scientifically, it’s been proven that this slows down time — or seek mergers. This is exactly what we observe from electrons.
What we fail to appreciate is when we talk about feelings, we must have a baseline. The baseline for feelings is a tendency.
If you tend to continue decreasing your weight in line with your goals, then you remain pleased. You feel pleased. If you tend to do the opposite, chances are you will not be pleased with yourself. A tendency is the baseline for feelings.
We have seen how organisms have a tendency to avoid annihilation. Electrons, according to the theory of Organismal Selection, are organisms. Thus, they have a baseline requirement for feelings.
The feelings, however, are not as complex as ours.
What Feynman does is conflate the feelings of complex organisms such as ourselves and that of a simple organism as that of the electron. Both have the tendency to avoid annihilation, the baseline tendency of feelings, but for one, it’s more complex. For the electron, it just wants to avoid annihilation.
As I conclude…
Electrons still can behave as they do from physical experiments and observations without breaking the edifice of physics. By sticking to the two strategies of avoiding annihilation, they perform as expected by physicists and chemists.
I therefore do not agree with Feynman in this respect.
Simply because electrons have a tendency to avoid annihilation, my bold statement is:
Electrons have feelings — baseline feelings.
Physics will remain intact despite this interpretation.
That’s the beauty of the theory of Organismal Selection.
Or maybe I’m just in my feelings.
