Implicate and explicate order: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 00:37, 21 October 2020

Revision as of 00:52, 21 October 2020

Line 51:

Bohm employed the [[hologram]] as a means of characterising implicate order, noting that each [[region]] of a [[photographic]] plate in which a hologram is observable contains within it the whole three-dimensional image, which can be viewed from a range of perspectives. That is, each region contains a whole and undivided image. In Bohm's words:

<blockquote> There is the germ of a new notion of order here. This order is not to be understood solely in terms of a regular arrangement of objects (e.g., in rows) or as a regular arrangement of events (e.g., in a series). Rather, a total order is contained, in some implicit sense, in each region of space and time. Now, the word 'implicit' is based on the verb 'to implicate'. This means 'to fold inward' ... so we may be led to explore the notion that in some sense each region contains a total structure 'enfolded' within it".<ref>{{harvnb|Bohm|1980|p=149}}</ref> </blockquote>

Bohm noted that, although the hologram conveys undivided wholeness, it is nevertheless static.

In this view of order, laws represent invariant relationships between explicate entities and structures, and thus Bohm maintained that, in physics, the explicate order generally reveals itself within well-constructed experimental contexts as, for example, in the sensibly observable results of instruments. With respect to implicate order, however, Bohm asked us to consider the possibility instead "that physical law should refer primarily to an order of undivided wholeness of the content of description similar to that indicated by the hologram rather than to an order of analysis of such content into separate parts ...".<ref>{{harvnb|Bohm|1980|p=147}}</ref>

=== Implicate order in art ===