Even More Random

I haven't written anything in a while.  This is a blatant lie.  I've written lots of things, but they all seem to short, or not coherent enough to actually post up.  There are ideas within that I want to manifest further, connect more deeply and clearly.  There are things missing that I can't quite put my finger on, so their on hold.  The Following, are a collection of thoughts and questions which, while having deeper connectivity issues, are able to stand alone for the time being.  Also, forgive me as I do not have a full, working knowledge of all of these subjects, these are merely musings.

On Quantum Mechanics:
Anti-matter is the section within specific atomic reactions that moves backwards through time, then the emitter-absorber phenomenon in  Wheeler-Feynman electrodynamics might be explained by non-linear time.  The interaction between the two electrons is mathematically uncertain, as the force being exerted by the first electron, depends on the strength of the reaction of the second.  Could this not be explained by particles of anti-matter interacting with the now?

In Quantum Mechanics, what is the "Moment in time" used to measure?  What is the quantity of a fraction of a second?  Aren't you simply measuring the change in the particles from T1 to T2?  A change in velocity, position, charge, mass, even if there is no change from T1 to Tn, is a measured change of 0.

If the Laws of Conservation are correct, the interaction of matter and anti-matter doesn't eliminate the two particles.  More likely is that the interaction causes either the formation of one or possibly two new particles which we have yet to measure, or they move into a different time.

On History:
There is, as far as I can tell, no evidence to support the idea that history, or events within time, repeat themselves in a regular, predictable way, which through knowledge and understanding, some pattern might be divined.  I see  two possible explanations for this logic.  First, that peoples inherent desire to see patterns where none exist, formed this idea that because similar events happened twice, history is repetitive.  Second, is based on a closed universe.  That at some point, the gravitational forces at the center of the universe will overcome the velocity and all motion, both physical and temporal will reverse itself.  But this only occurs in a closed universe, which ours is not. 

On The Human Mind:
I have said before that emotions are capable of being rational responses to stimuli, going against the grand theory that emotion does not equal rationality.  But there is more to it than simple stimuli response.  The idea, that your friend, a sentient being, no longer thinks or feels, elicits real and measurable chemical reactions in your brain.  The human brain, combines molecular chemistry, to create not just logic, but feeling.  It takes a very specific reaction of molecules and ions to produce the right reaction, but on average, the human brain gets it right every time.

On Psychology:
The psychoanalytic theory seems fatally flawed to me.  The basic assumption is that our behavior is subtly influenced by our subconscious motives.  These motives were pushed into the subconscious in early childhood by parents and society.  If they aren't dealt with, they can cause severe emotional problems.  The question is, How did this happen?  Humans created society yes, but human beings came first.  How and why would a human society have evolved with this trait?  It had to start some where, there had to be some biological motive for suppressing primary drives.  The 'What' of the theory is well established, but it doesn't answer any other questions.  And if it is 'society' which helps suppress these desires, then a different society would have them to greater or lesser degrees, which isn't evident.

How is psychology even a science.  It's results aren't reproducible 100% of the time.  When a result comes back outside the bounds of a theory, the theory isn't discarded as being incorrect, it is modified to accommodate, or the result is dismissed.  Its acceptable to dismiss statistical outliers, but psychology doesn't have statistical norms for there to be outliers against.

On Music:
 When I listen to music, I realized I'm not even listening to a persons voice, or real instruments.  The closest thing my Ipod gets to real music is when it plays electronica, or some other digital medium.  All I really hear is the product of converted digital information into precise audio wavelengths generated electronically.