touch - how electrons remember

8/13/2019 Touch - How Electrons Remember

1/12

touch

SensuousTheory

andlVultisensory

Media

Laura U. Marks

HH

Universityof l\,4innesotaPress [,4inneapolis / London


2/12

i Ir l'.r,1, \.'l(,

I ':' I

Scc 1rlcs),17 4S irr coryrigttirrrrloliginirlprrblicittorriltlorllrtioltill)otltl)r('\'i-ousl1, ublishetttttcriitlirl tllisbook.

(opvright2tX)2by thc lcgcrrtsol'thc LJrrivcrsityof i\'f irtrtcsotit

llrigltts rcscrvctl.No pat t 3f'tlispr.rtrlicttitrttttlaybc tcrtrtlttcct,storctl itl it

|ctricvalsystcl' or trllslllittct'rl irrll'1rrrtrtllllyltrt'lllcitlts'clcctroltic'lllccltitni

cirl,photocoryirrg,r'ccorcling,ol otlrcll'isc,r,,'ithottt thc Priol*'rittcllIcrlllissiorltlf'thc publishcr.

I)ublisherlb,thc llnivclsityol lirrlresotl)rcssI I I 'l hirtlAvctrttcSorrth' Slritc 290JVI irrrrcapolis,lvlN5ir40 I -2i20h t t 1l://rvlvrv.trptcss.ttltl lt.ctltt

l.ibrirr'1'ol' ( )otrgrcss ( atitlogirlu-itl-l)tlblictionI )ta

NIarl


3/12

11. HowElectronsRemember

viewnga thing fromthe outside, considering its relatons of action andreactonwithother thngs, it appears as matter. Viewngit from the inside, lookingat itsimmediate character as feeling, it appears as consciousness.

-Gharles SandeF Pehce

This essay willargue that digitalimages are existentially connected to theprocesses that they image, contrary to common understanding.Thanksto the ability ofsubatomicparticlesto communicatealong traceablepathways, wecan fairsay that electrons remember. The two fundamen-tal questions on which this argumentis builtwillpromptexcitingforaysintoquantum physics and electronic engineering.First,what is the mate-rial basis of electronicimaging?Second, is this materialbasis significant-

lydifferentforanalog and digitalelectronicimaging? I invite thereaderto assume a subatomicempathy as we lookat the lifeof the electrons inelectronicimaging.Readers familiarwiththeoreticalphysics or electron-ic engineeringmay findthe following annoyinglysimplifred,but theymay also appreciate the enthusiasm of a neophe, me.

The activityof electrons exemplifieswhat ManuelDe Landa callsnonorganiclife.De Lnda argues that supposedly inert matter, fromcrys-tals to the rocks and sand in a riverbed, exhibitsself-organizingbehaviorand even acquires experience,which entitleit to be considered non-organic life.l Ineffect, De Landais sayingnot that rocks are like humans

161

H


4/12

;;; J' ;J. rocks. yet the reverse is impricit:he effec-tivelyrearticulateslifeas something that is not the sole propertyof or-ganic creatures. I suggest that the same nonorganic lifeexists at the levelof subatomic particles.The memory thatI attributeto electrons does nothave to do withwillor self-consciousness, but withan emergent self-organizing principle.

We mightalso say that electrons have lifeinsofar as they communi-cate, and they communicate insofaras they are interconnected. This istrue of allof us, according toCharles Sanders Peirce's notion of synechism,

the basic principleof connectivity.Peirce held that all realityis inter-connected through the never-ending process of semiosis, of utteranceand interpretation. ByPeirce's account, ultimatelythere is no distinctionbetween matter and thought. All'signsrequire at least two Quasi-minds:a Quasi-utterer and a Quasi-interpreter, 'Peirce wrote. Thought is notnecessarily connected witha brain. It appears in the workof bees, ofcrystals,and throughoutthe purelyphysicalworld;and one can no moredeny that it is really there, than that the colors, the shapes, etc. of objectsare there. 2 By this account, trees certainlyfallin the forest regardless ofwhetherany conscious being is there to witness the event. A tree's fallingis an utterance, which is interpreted by the ground on whichand the airthrough whichit falls.Subatomic particles,too, are continuallyuttering,or at least Quasi-uttering.They only trulycome into being-and thesame is true forall of us-when their effects are Quasi-interpreted.

It is common forcriticsto note that in digitalmedia the indexical linkbetween imageand represented object, theexistentialconnectionbe-tween them, is irrevocablysevered. In photograph film,and analogvideo it is possible to trace a physicalpath fromthe object represented, tothe lightthat reflects off it, to the photographic emulsionor cathode raytube that the lighthits, to the resultingimage.In digitalimagingthis pathis not retraceable, foran additionalstep is added: convertingthe image

intodata, and thereby

breakingthe linkbetween image and physicalref-erent. Anyiterationof the image may be altered, and there is no genera-tional differenceto alert us to the stage at which the change occurred.For many people (usuallmedia theoristsmore than practitioners)thisqualitativechange occasions fear for the status of the image as real.Practicallas a result of the potential digitalalteration of any electronicimage, video and photographycan no longer serve as indexicalevidence,forexample in the courtroom.Theoreticallthe semioticfoundationofphotographic images in the real worldis thought to be destroyed in digi-tal media.

How ec rons emem erThese concerns are accurate, though it is exaggerating to see the ad-

vent of digitalmedia as a watershed between truthfuland constructedimage making, as historiansshow that Photographic media have beentinkered withsince their inceptions.What Iquestion in the current rheto-ric about the loss of indexicalityin the digitalimage is that it assumes aconcurrent loss of materialityof the image. As aresult it is assumed thatdigitalimages are fundamentallyimmaterial,and that, forexample, toenter cyberspace or to use VR is to enter a realm of pure ideas and leavethe meat of the material bodybehind. Digitaland other electronic im-ages are constitutedby processes no less materialthan photographfrlm,and analog videoare.

When we lookat the physical process whereby electronic images areconstituted and transmitted, we findthat it is indeed possible to retracethe path traversed by the image. Electronic imaging is indexical in thebroadest sense, in that the medium is the physical traceof the objectwhose image it transmits.3 I willargue that the analog or indexicalrela-tionship is maintainedinsofaras the activityof electrons can be traced toa wave function.When the wave functionis broken, the indexicalbond islost as well.Yet we can stilltrace digitalinformationto interconnectedmatter.

Certainlythe electronic image, both analog and digital,would seem tobe a physical object insofaras it is constituted by barrages of electronsand photons. Gene Youngbloodenthusiastically made this pointback inthe analog days: On the most fundamental level electronicvisualizationrefers to the video signal itselfas a plastic medium,as the'material' ofelectronic presence. . . . This isn'tvisual art orpicture-making;it is thething itselt the visibleprocess of the electronic substance. a Yet in myplunge intothe world ofphysics I have found that the fieldis stillfraughtwithquestions concerningthe entity of the electron. Roughlyput, is it aparticleor is it a wave, is it a thing ormerely a symptom,and does matter

as such existor can it onlybe approximatedby equations?Do They Exist,and Can We KnowWhere They Are?To trace the various electronicpathways throughcathode ray tubes, sili-con chips, copper cables, opticalbers, and other media, it is firstneces-sary to lookat the behaviorof individualelectrons. This means enteringthe worldof quantum physics. The excursionthat followscleaves to theminority realist interpretationassociated with AlbertEinstein,ErwinSchrdingerto a degree, David Bohm,and John Bell,as opposed to thedominant positivist argument associated withWerner Heisenberg and

How t ectrons emem er


5/12

;'u;;,-'l;;'0nr,,., is remarkabrysimlarto the campdifferences in semiotics about the relationshipof the sign to realitand hence the question of whether realityis knowable in itselfor onlythroughsigns. Realists likeBohm are more likepeirce, whilepositivistslike Heisenberg are more like saussure. The formerargue for a materialconnectionbetween realityand the descriptionof realitwhilethe latterargue that the connectionbetween the two is entirelysymbolic,or at leastcan onlybe understood in symbolic terms. A realist myself,I choose tolearn fromBohm's theories for the same reason that my semioticloyal-ties lie withPeirce.It may surprise other readers, as it surprised me, that quantum physicsis nowconsidered not a radical theory but an orthodoryamong physi-cists, to the degree that an acronym,QUODS,has been coined formem-bers of the quantum-orthodory-doubtingsubculture.s Since we humani-ties scholars are supposed to mistrust orthodoxiesof all sorts, this newsmay inviteus to lookmore sympatheticallyon the continuingdebatesamong the last century's physicists.

Mostphysicists,followingSchrdinger (as interpretedby NeilsBohr),Werner Heisenberg, MaxBorn,and others, believe that at a quantumlevelwe cannot knowmatter as such.6 Orthodox quantumphysics isnonobjective, that is, does not assume that its mathematicalmodels havea physical counterpart in the world.In contrast, the pocket of realistsrepresented most stronglyby Einsteinand Bohm positedan ontologicaltheory of quantum mechanics: quantum mechanics does not simplyprovidea mathematical model for the worldbut describes how thingsare. For the realistminoritthere is continuitybetween classical andquantum physics, in that both describe actual materialevents.

Quantum physicsdates to early twentieth-centuryconfirmationsthatsubatomicparticlescan also be described as waves. In r9o5 Einsteindemonstrated that lightbehaves in the manner of particles having energyE = htr, where is Planck's constant and is

thewavelengh

of light.Hisspecial theoryof relativitthe famous E = mc2, argued that space andtime must be treated similarly.From these two discoveries LouisdeBroglie,in t926, calculated that photons must have wave properties, andthat theirmomentum, can be calculated by p = h/1. De Broglietermedhis discovery the pilotwave theory, because it implies that every par-ticle is accompanied by a wave.

That same year Schrdinger suggested an answer to the question, if aparticlewas a wave, howcould that wave change withtime so that it sat-isfies these twoequations and stillmove as a particle? His answer, a dif-

How t ectrons emem er -ferential equationfor the wave formof a subatomic particle, is stillthecornerstone of modernphysics. Thisequation gives the probabilityofwhere a particle(an electron or a photon) willbe observed at a given mo-ment, ifan observationof its positionforces it to become localized. Topredictwhere an electron is likelyto be, lookat where Schrdinger's wavefunctionhas a large amplitude.Where the amplitude is small, electronswillbe scarce. Where it's large, there willbe lots ofelectrons. Schrdinger'sequation was revolutionarybecause it combinedparticleand wave func-tions, makingit possible to interpretthe behaviorof matter as bothwavelike andparticlelike. Whattakes the equation out of the realm ofmaterialism(describing physicalmatter) and intopositivism(describingonlywhat can be observed) is that the electron'spositionremains un-known, and the wave equation can only predict the probabiliryof whereit willbe seen ifobserved.i

In ry27Heisenberg took this developmentfurther inthe directionofpositivismwithhis uncertaintyprinciple. Whenan electronthat hasbeen struck by a gamma ray emits a photon, whose momentum is desig-nated p and position is designated q,

pxq>h

-the product of theuncertaintyof the electron's momentum and ofits positionexceeds Planck's constant (). Using this equationwe can cal-culate the photon's momentum withgreat precisionifwe give up know-ing anhing about its position,and vice versa. Furthe the equation im-plies that we can't know either ofthese quantitiesindependentl justtheir statisticalspread . (The same equation describes the relationshipof time and energy.)

Accordingto the Heisenberg uncertaintyprinciple,the measurer ofsubatomic particles is part of the experimentalsituationand influencesitsoutcome, for electrons behave differentlywhen they are being watched.

1- E.oElectronprobabi I ity distrbutionsforhydrogen.

How lectrons emem er


6/12

;;;;;ffi. ,, -u oses into a singte etectron when itis being measured. If it's measured witha wave detector, waves are detect-ed; ifwitha particledetector, particles are detected.8 This findingsup-ported the emergingbelief that said the electron (or photon) is episte-mologicallyunknowable.e Heisenberg's uncertainty principlehas frlteredinto popularculturein a slew of metaphors, for example the argumentthat people behave differently whenthey are observed by a camera thanthey wouldif the camera were not there. But physicists continue to de-bate howto interpret it,and whether to bother.

At the history-makingSolvayconference in Brussels n tgz7, de Broglie,supported by Einstein, proposedthe pilot-wavetheory. However, at thesame conference, Heisenberg and Born introduced their theoryof quan-tum mechanics, a theoryof particles that explains discreteor quantalpropertiesobserved on the quantal scale. Their theorywas embraced, de-spite Einstein'scomplaint that it did not fullyexplainthe physicalworld,and became the hegemonic position in theoreticalphysics.

Mathematician David Wick pointsout that quantum mechanics isunique withinphysics in that its equationsare knownbut not its prin-ciples.r0Orthodoxquantum mechanics does not presume to be an on-tologbut simplyan explanationof ourexperiences. Hence the commoninterjectionFAPR for all practicalpurposes, in quantum conversations.For most physicists,the fact that quantum mechanics worksFAPP detersthem from investigatingfurther.The quotable Einstein once comparedthe 'Bohr-Heisenbergtranquilizingphilosophy'to a soft pillowon whichto rest one's head :ll it cannot explain matter,but it successfirlly describesit. For the most part, quantummechanics has gone on to other things,withthis unknowabilitytucked away in its fundamentalequations.

One of the fundamentalparadoxes of quantum physics is nonlocality.This principlewas firstdemonstrated in a thought experiment devised byEinstein, BorisPodols, and Nathan Rosen (EPR).Two charged particles(atoms or photons) are separated and sent to twodevices

thatdetect the

particle's spin, up or down. Thedirectionof either particlecannot beknownuntilit is measured, that is, untilthe wave functionis collapsed.

Aftermany runs,

detector r reads UUDUDDDU...detector z reads DDUDUUUD...

In other words,the particles continue to behave as though they are related.The EPR experiment suggests that each particle knows what the otheris doing. Ineffectone particlemust wait untilthe other particleis mea-

How lectrons emem ersured, and then take the opposite value accordingly.A classical explana-tionwould require some local hidden variable to tell each particlewhatstate to assume when it was measured and then to communicateit to theother, which wouldassume the opposite state. This is impossible becausethe particles wouldhave to communicateat faster than the speed of light.The realist Einsteinworriedabout this spooky actionat a distance r2that cannot be explained classically. Laterthoughtexperiments by|ohnBell determinedquantumtheorycould explainnonlocality;Bell's in-equality was popularized in Gary Zukav'sThe Dancing Wu-LiMasters,whichfed a burgeoning interest in findingcorrelations between quan-tum physics and Eastern mysticism.r3Nonlocalityhas been confirmedexperimentally.Moststrikinglin a recent experiment atCERN inGeneva, photons separated by an EPR device have traveled overro km.ra

Meanwhile,realist physicists werenot satisfiedwiththe mere practi-calityof quantum equations. Theywanted to explain the nature of mat-ter, and thus had to return to the wave-particlerelationship.Beginning inthe r94os, David Bohmdeveloped de Broglie'spilot-wavetheory to arguethat a single electron is a member of a whole of many electrons, joined ina common wave. Electrons are likecorks bobbing on waves in the sea. Ifone electron moves, the paths of the other electrons that are entangledwithit on a shared wave willbe modifred. Thishypothesis followsfromSchrdinger's equation, whichalthough it is used to calculate theproba-bilitythat the electronis doing certain things,also describes a relation-ship between electronand wave. Bohmheld that each electron ona givenwavelengthhas the wave functionencoded into it. It remembers whereit came from,and thus remains linked to other electrons sharing thewave even when they are physicallyfar distant. Thismeans that the pho-tons of sunlight that warmour faces are physicallyconnected to the starthat emittedthem, arrivingon a common wave.rs

Quantumtheory's principleof nonlocalitymeans that even distant

objects affecteach other as part of a single system. The whole cannotbereduced to an analysis in terms of its constituentparts. Individualelec-trons act as a whole in theirconnection withother electrons. Not onlyelectrons in proximityto each other, forexample, those coursing totheirdemise on the video screen, but electrons as far apart as those in my handstyping inOttawaand your eyes reading in Cairo share a common wave.

Bohm explainsthese relationships in terms of his theoryof the im-plicate order, which explains nonlocal connectionsin terms of implicitpatterns. We may think ofnonlocalityas a specific exampleof Peirce'ssynechism, thetheory that realityis interconnected through constant

ili l-low ec ons emem er - v


7/12

acts of utterance and interpretation.Bohm uses the terms explicate,unfolded,for that whichis apparent in a given system, and implicate,enfolded, for that whichis latent in the same system. Bohm arguesthe universe contains an indefinitelylarge set of fields that may neverknownin their entiret but that become explicate throughThus the forms that we can identifyare contingent unfoldingsof aimplicateorder. Whatever persists witha constant formis sustainedthe unfoldmentof a recurrent and stable pattern which isbeing renewed by enfoldmentand dissolved by unfoldmenr.When

renewal ceases the formvanishes. l6 His elegant illustrationis atwo glass cylindersone inside the other, witha layer of viscous fluid,gerin, between them, but otherwise airtight.When a drop of ink isin the liquidand the inside cylinderrevolves, the inkdrop is drawninto a thread or unfolded; whenit is revolved in the other direction,thread of inkis enfoldedback to a dot. The line is implicatein theA morecontroversialexample of implicateorder is the idea thatstick pins in a figurerepresenting my enemy, my enemy, wherever heshe maybe, suffers as a result. This magic might be explained innonlocalconnectionsbetween the twoof us. (Notto say thatwouldhave believed in voodoo.)What Bohm's principleof theorder means forphysics is that we need not distinguishbetweenand wave, saymg we can measure onlyone or the other. Accordingtoimplicateorder, the particleis enfolded in the wave that carries it,unfoldsor expresses itself whennecessary-for example, when awave hits the surface of a cathode ray tube. In Peirce's terminology,say that the photon stream utters and the CRT surface interprets.

Bohm's ideas were ridiculedor dismissed by most physicists. Hislectualexilewas compounded when in 1949 he was called before theUn-AmericanActivitiescommittee.Because he refused to testift,hekicked out of Princeton. Witha recommendationletter from

to what degree do theykeep an indexicalor analog connectionto the

got a job in So Paulo, but his intellectualdeath sentence waswhen the U.S. State Department revoked his passport. Rendered

of whichthey are images? Tkinga tip fromGene Youngblood'sialist enthusiasm,let me trace the electronicpathway for an analog

Bohmwas unable to participatein the discussions around

Say we have a camera, any camera. The lightthat reflectsoffan objectimage and then for its digitalcounterpaft.

physics.ls Recent research in quantumcomputingand theof subatomic particles,whilenot exactlyproving Bohm's theories, i

is focused on the camera lens is composed of waves. Say it's lightre-

dence that the freld is beginning to entertain the idea of nonlocality

froma purpleflower,embodyingits colorin the wavelengfh

Analog Pathways

purple. Purple photons, photonswithwavelengthpurple,willon the lens, producingan image that is the analog of the purple

Ifall matteris intimatelyinterconnectedby wave-surfingelectrons,all electronicimages have an indexicalor analog connection

lnside thevidicontube of an analog video camera, the image isfo-

ec ons emem er

not on a lens but on a photoconductinglayer.2o Incident lightexcitesin the photoconductor, dislodgingphotons at wavelengthsthatto correspond to the colorofthe objectbeing recorded. Then

photon beam fromthe vidicontcathode scans the phosphor-coatedof the photoconductor, stimulatingthe phosphor torelease pho-

which are what we see. To recognize the lightintensirythe beamon the charge of the waves ejeaed bythe photoconductor.2r

enlargement fromHowTV Works (a9771, by Dan Sandin. Courtesy of Electroniclntermix.

- now leclrons erne loer


8/12

Allthis means that it is individualelectrons that travel allthefromthe cathode to the screen, where they crash and die a brilliantin the release of thousands of photons, formingthe lightpatterns onphosphor-coated surface of a video monitor.In consumer NTSCat the rate of z5o pixels perscanline times the same number of linegmeans that each video frame is composed of 6z5,ooo electronic pulses,times a second. So in a conventional analog video image we know3z5oo,ooo electrons are givingup their existence every second inbring us an image. Or, to speak synechistically,3z5oo,oooelectrons

Quasi-uttering,and the cathode is Quasi-interpretingthem, asIn synechism there is no death, only interpretation.The point of this analog map is to show that a calculable

electrons move along a set of common wavelengths ll the way fromobject to the image. In broadcast, the same set of waves disperses intoethe perhaps to be received by a satellite transponder. When theof the purplefloweris broadcast, its indexicallikeness undulates toends of the universe on the waveforms that compose it. Images maybe transferred along wiresor opticalcables. When energy is appliedwire,a wave populatedby hordes of electrons conductsequilibratingthe changing pressure ofelectrons pushed to one endwire.Here theirmotionis governed by the overarchingwavefoot traffic inGrand CentralStation is governed by the arrivalandture of trains.z2 In all these forms oftransmission, thanks to thewave relationship,the images retain an indexical relationship toject they represent.

DigitalPathwaysNow letus imaginean alternative electronicpath, this time foranproduced by a digitalvideo camera, stored on a hard disk, andprojected. We willsee that this activitycontinues in large part to be

pixels assigned to the image. The other is the amount of memory de-

driven, thatis, constituted bystreams of electrons and thus

to calculating theintensityper pixel.When you set your monitorto

in the analog situation.But thereare two importantdifferences,the fact that most computers, beingdigital,rely on approximations.

those memory strings are allowedto be. 256 colors or thousands of colors, you are assigning how

image. A program divides the image surface into small areas (alsopixels)and calculates for each a set of numericalvalues. These

What happens when an image is digitized?23Say we have a

of Indexicality7simple stepis the rst crucialchallenge to both the indexicalityof

spond to the intensitor number of photons per second, for

image and the individualityof the electrons. It is here that the image

quencies of red, green, and blue. The resultingvalues are

its existential connectionto its referent. Lightwaves, whose fre-

turn to a stringof 0s and ls. In this process there are two waysrichness of the analog informationmay be diluted.One is in the

and intensityphysicallyrepresent the colorand brightness of theare translated into symbols when the image is encoded in stringsnumbers. At this point loss of indexicalityis not a question of image

digitalimage may havehigher resolutionthan an analogof the physical relationshipof image to object. Digitization

the analogical relationshipbetween object and image,henceforth

crucial,where the indexicalrelationshipis broken.as information.We shall see that there is another point, perhaps

However,withindigitalcircuits,electrons continueto exert them-

the most workadaymedium of digitalcalculations, thesiliconchip.in analog ways. To demonstrate this,let me trace the electron'spath

n, whichis cheap and can be highlyrefined, is the most popular

weapons. Likeother elements in the fourthcolumn of the periodicsiliconis indifferentlypromiscuous:the fourelectrons in its outer

for digitalcalculations in applicationsfromcoffeemakers to

allowsiliconatoms to forman extensive networkof electro-bonds.2a Silicon's four-electron bondingproduces a crystal

re that is both stable and ductile.Whilethe metals are conductors,ing thatmetal atoms catch and pass electrons withthe energy of aspeed, unidirectionalsoccer game, silicon,whichmoves electronssluggishlis termed a semiconductor.2s Controlledimpurities in

siliconcause electrons to flowin onlyone direction throughthe ma-Where negative, thereare more free-floatingelectrons than can be

by the siliconatoms in the crystal lattice,whichrush to distance

An electron can occupy onlya given band in the orbit of an atom.s eagerly migratewhen a charge is applied.

froma charge; where positive,there are a few holes to which

voltage is applied to silicon dopedwithphosphorus, the extra elec-are onlytoo willingto make the quantum jump to a higher state of

to go but up.26 Withinthe siliconchip, then, electrons continue tohemistry's anthropomorphic termforelectrons withno

idow ec rons J- /


9/12

ride waves in a microindexicalway. In any transistor-reliantdevice,lof excited electrons are speeding throughgates and causing other Iof electrons to get excited and seek a wavelength of theiroiorr, io

,,ess, franticrelay race. Digitalcomputersby definitionworkwithrnary difference of on and offsignals or positiveand negative rTheir OR, AND,NOT, and NANDcircuitsare operated by combiof these signals. These circuitsare themselves electronpathwap.rthe behaviorof electrons in siliconchips continues to index theirated wave.

Loss of Indexcality2The crucial characteristicof digitalcomputers that breala therelationshipis the same characteristic that makes computers aoDigitalcomputers cannot tolerate intermediate states between 0Every circuitcontains a flip-flop',circuitthat eliminatesstates by ignoringweak signals. Only a strong signal, the cumulathaviorof masses of electrons, registers a change in the circuit.It ispoint that the wave-particlerelationship is overridden.Theattentiononly to massive hordes of electrons and quashes thethe few. Anychange in the state of an individuarelctron is olchanges in the whole.Thus in digitalcomputers, quantumnthe shared properties of electrons on a common wave, is not

touch - how electrons remember

Documents