TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Quantum Mysticism

Quantum Mysticism

Here's a great article I've just found: While you guys seem to be worrying about creationism in North America, this is what worries me down here in Brasília... god damn hippies

quote:

Quantum Mysticism The fuzzy embrace of science and religion By Margaret Wertheim In the pantheon of modern myths, few have wrought more damage than the one which asserts that science and religion are inherent foes. With its dogmatic rejection of evolution, creationism tears apart school boards, bowdlerizes textbooks and pushes the U.S. further down the international index of scientific literacy. Yet far from being the historical norm, creationist hostility to science is itself the aberration, a puerile interpretation of Scripture that finds its roots not in the long span of Christian intellectual history, but in a narrow stripe of fundamentalism that raised its head in the 1920s and effloresced into a tumorous mass of the body politic in the 1970s. For most of Western history, if the religious spirit has �erred� it has been in the opposite direction, of overzealously interpreting scientific theories and discoveries as proof of the divine. For Copernicus, who hewed to the Neo-Platonic tradition of associating light, and hence the sun, with God, a heliocentric cosmos affirmed the deity�s primary role. Johannes Kepler, who discovered the laws of planetary motion, likewise saw in these cosmic �harmonies� the imprint of a divine architect. And no less a giant than Isaac Newton believed that in the force of gravity he had found evidence of a cosmic overseer. History abounds with religious enthusiasts who have read spiritual portent into the arrangement of the planets, the vacuum of space, electromagnetic waves and the big bang. But no scientific discovery has proved so ripe for spiritual projection as the theories of quantum physics, replete with their quixotic qualities of uncertainty, simultaneity and parallelism. A new film, What the #$*! Do We Know!, opening June 18, abandons itself entirely to the ecstasies of quantum mysticism, finding in this aleatory description of nature the key to spiritual transformation. As one of the film�s characters gushes early in the proceedings, �The moment we acknowledge the quantum self, we say that somebody has become enlightened.� Starring Marlee Matlin as Amanda, a confused and questing photographer whose life is slowly unraveling, What the #$*! Do We Know! intercuts her existential meltdown with interviews from a dozen �experts� who deliver snack-size sermons linking personal psychology through neurobiology to quantum mechanics. At one point in a playground, Amanda is enticed by a precocious child (a quantum-sprite) onto a basketball �court of unending possibilities,� where he asks, �How far down the rabbit hole do you want to go?� Lamely appropriating that most beloved literary trope, we are duly propelled down a CGI tunnel (the sphincter-cam effect) into the quantum realm � which appears here as an expensive computer-animated pageant of shimmering potentials. What we find down the rabbit hole is a universe �liberated� from the materialism of classical physics, a realm that one expert describes as a place where �we have to accept that everything around us � chairs, tables, everything � is just possible movements of consciousness.� From there it is a mere bunny hop to the proposition that each of us, with the right consciousness, can �infect the quantum field� and create reality for ourselves. �We are here to be creators. We are here to infiltrate space with ideas and mansions of thought,� another of the experts announces near the end of the film. By acknowledging consciousness as �the ground of all being,� the message of quantum physics, we are told, is that we can all become �like the great avatars of history � Jesus and Buddha.� Ever alert to novel possibilities for spiritual inflation, the New Age movement has long embraced the potential of science. In the �60s, the means of choice was chemistry, the flower-power revolution having been fertilized by a nutrient soup of psychotropic drugs. Hippies journeyed to the mystical havens of India and Tibet, but mostly they journeyed inward, seeking to expand their horizons through chemical travel. In our current, comparatively abstemious age, pharmaceuticals have been replaced by physics, with equations rather than molecules becoming the transport to the transcendent Beyond. The ground for this transition was laid by physicists themselves in Fritjof Capra�s The Tao of Physics and Gary Zukav�s The Dancing Wu Li Masters, two best-selling books from the 1980s that explored the parallels between quantum physics and Eastern �ways of knowing.� At the same time, Paul Davies (God and the New Physics) and Stephen Hawking (A Brief History of Time) were promoting a fusion of God and science in a nebulously Christian context. Deepak Chopra, uncannily attuned to the psychical currents, mined this vein a decade ago in Quantum Healing. But the apparatus has been most shamelessly exploited in that apotheosis of pop-spiritual hogwash, The Celestine Prophecies, in which the final step to enlightenment comes when one�s atoms vibrate so quickly the self �crosses over� to a higher plane. Like the Prophecies, What the #$*! Do We Know ends on a pitch of quivering promise, delivered by one of the experts: �If we can change, we can become the scientists of our life � which is the whole reason why we are here.� But who are these people? Not until the end credits do we learn their names, or even their professions. The common factor seems to be that all have written books with titles like The Quantum Self and Conscious Acts of Creation. There are several medical researchers, a psychiatrist, a couple of therapists and four card-carrying physics Ph.D.s, one of whom is a Stanford professor. The filmmakers are eager to tout that credential � particularly on their Web site � banking on the authority of institutional science to sell their message of spiritual uplift. For many scientists, however, the embrace of the New Age is almost as irksome as is the hostility of the fundamentalists. At least the latter can be challenged on the battlefields of empirical evidence. But how does one fight a befuddled and besotted lover? Along with the Stanford physicist, one of the film�s most prominent voices is J.Z. Knight, a Yelm, Washington, mystic who channels an 11,000-year-old spirit named Ramtha. At one point, Knight/Ramtha tells us that quantum physics is the only science that can explain �how a mustard seed is the size of heaven,� an endorsement that will surely leave most physicists quivering. The problem here is not just that the science itself is never explained in a meaningful way, but that we have no idea at any point whether physicists actually say what we are being told they say, or if this is simply Ramtha�s take on quantum mechanics. Rather than dispel confusion, the film encourages it. Fred Alan Wolf, one of the actual physicists, tells us that �the trick in life is not to be in the know, but to be in the mystery.� Later, he adds, �If you study this science long enough and deeply enough, and you don�t come out feeling wacko about it, then you haven�t understood a thing.� Which appears to be the aim. Quantum mysterions may embrace science in principle, but they have little more interest than creationists in learning about it in practice. Under their adoring gaze, the mathematical formalisms of quantum mechanics, which make concrete predictions accurate to dozens of decimal places and which underlie the technologies of microchips and lasers, are stripped of all empirical content and reduced to a set of syrupy nostrums. At the same time, quantum mysticism promotes a vision of spiritual satisfaction achieved not by the hard transformative work of ritual or study, but by the mechanism of consumer choice. In the infinite sea of possibility here promoted, nothing is real except what you choose to accept. Which is not that far from the creationist position � there, too, empirical evidence is brushed aside and reality becomes what you�d like it to be.

So far, I've never had a decent explanation from any "quantum theorist" regarding what mysticism and quantum physics have to do with one another. I've gone as far as studying a bit of quantum physics so I knew what it was all about... but, alas, no spirits, no higher consciousness, no "God"

�If you study this science long enough and deeply enough, and you don�t come out feeling wacko about it, then you haven�t understood a thing.�

So, they're kind of aiming for some kind of modernised 'Scientology' or something?

I've never had a use for this little chap.
But I think he belongs here...

this all is to hard for me
but intresting to read .

quote:

Originally posted by Lilith So, they're kind of aiming for some kind of modernised 'Scientology' or something?

No, not really. This is not a systematised such as "Scientology", and it isn't restricted to one specific faith either. The only thing in common that enthusiasts seem to have is a "New Age"-like world-view, which is itself very broad.

Most of the people that believe in such form of mysticism, here in Brazil, seem to be Kardecists/Spiritists though. The reason why they seem quick to embrace this cause can be seen in the first paragraph of the Wikipedia article: Spiritism is a scientific and philosophical doctrine established in France in the mid 19th Century by the French educator Hippolyte L�on Denizard Rivail, under the pseudonym Allan Kardec, which has also evolved into various forms of religious practice, among them some forms of syncretism that are often referred to by the same name (and Quantum Mysticism could be a way of legitimising the spiritist doctrine as science). I've heard bold claims about "ethereal bodies" and "energy" as a proof in Quantum Theory to their beliefs.

Sometimes I wonder whether that's a way of confusing your thought so non-specialists can't refute it

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Sometimes I wonder whether that's a way of confusing your thought so non-specialists can't refute it

It's kept this riff-raff out, may as well be speaking in tongues.
The catholics keep their riff-raff out with old-latin, same old tricks I suppose.

Break out the bong and black lights man!

Re: Quantum Mysticism

quote:

Originally posted by Lira So far, I've never had a decent explanation from any "quantum theorist" regarding what mysticism and quantum physics have to do with one another. I've gone as far as studying a bit of quantum physics so I knew what it was all about... but, alas, no spirits, no higher consciousness, no "God"

I think it's probably because, superficially at least, the claims made in the field of quantum physics often closely resemble the nature of religious claims. The concept of invisible forces that act in counter-intuitive ways constitutes the violation of "intuitive ontological expectations" that's central to all religious beliefs (link). The idea that everything in the universe is ultimately reducible to a set of basic elements and inviolate laws is an idea that must appeal to the absolutist and irreducible world-views of religious minds. It also has a (perceived) memetic advantage over conventional religions: it is seen to be based entirely on hard science.

Of course, the point is, that once these lunatics are finished with it it doesn't resemble science at all. It co-opts the language of hard-science, sure, but that's about where the parallels end. The quote in there is a pretty good example of what I'm talking about :

�If you study this science long enough and deeply enough, and you don�t come out feeling wacko about it, then you haven�t understood a thing.�

This is basically just a bad misquotation of Neils Bohr:

"If you think you can talk about quantum theory without feeling dizzy, you haven't understood the first thing about it." (link)

They've borrowed the language and ideas of the scientists, but they've also managed to get it fundamentally wrong and to miss the point of it completely. Bohr was illuminating the often grandly counter-intuitive nature of astrophysics, but certainly was not suggesting that it was "wacky" or "mysterious". Bohr also said:

""Nothing exists until it is measured."

and

"There is no quantum world. There is only an abstract physical description. It is wrong to think that the task of physics is to find out how nature is. Physics concerns what we can say about nature."

This is the demarcation between science and fantasy that these "stoner-scientists" just fail to grasp. Making shit up isn't scientific. Making claims that are completely unsubstantiable isn't scientific. Promoting indulgence in "mystery" ahead of empirical illumination isn't scientific. The belief that we can "infect the quantum field" through passive observation and abstract theorising is so crazy that if I don't think of a way to finish this sentence soon my fingers are going to drop off.

The problem is that this sort of "philosophy" - some ungodly, misinformed conflation of pseudo-science and near-Eastern thought - is everywhere at the moment. On a philosophy forum I post at occasionally, in a debate about free will (link), someone tried to claim that there could be no deterministic influences in human behaviour because of the "Uncertainty Principle"! I mean, what the fuck? How can you misunderstand something that badly? I'm reminded of the words of Alexander Pope:

"A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again."

I'd rather these people not study science at all than to sort of skim through "A Brief History of Time" (how the fuck does that book promote "a fusion of God and science", by the way?), writing down all the words and concepts that seem cool somehow and then using them liberally without making any effort to properly understand what they mean. Give me an uninformed idiot over an idiot who only thinks he's informed any day of the week.

Whoa, nice post, Renegade

By the way, how do you find those papers?

so many words, so little meaning.

Re: Re: Quantum Mysticism

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade I think it's probably because, superficially at least, the claims made in the field of quantum physics often closely resemble the nature of religious claims. The concept of invisible forces that act in counter-intuitive ways constitutes the violation of "intuitive ontological expectations" that's central to all religious beliefs (link). The idea that everything in the universe is ultimately reducible to a set of basic elements and inviolate laws is an idea that must appeal to the absolutist and irreducible world-views of religious minds. It also has a (perceived) memetic advantage over conventional religions: it is seen to be based entirely on hard science. Of course, the point is, that once these lunatics are finished with it it doesn't resemble science at all. It co-opts the language of hard-science, sure, but that's about where the parallels end. The quote in there is a pretty good example of what I'm talking about : �If you study this science long enough and deeply enough, and you don�t come out feeling wacko about it, then you haven�t understood a thing.� This is basically just a bad misquotation of Neils Bohr: "If you think you can talk about quantum theory without feeling dizzy, you haven't understood the first thing about it." (link) They've borrowed the language and ideas of the scientists, but they've also managed to get it fundamentally wrong and to miss the point of it completely. Bohr was illuminating the often grandly counter-intuitive nature of astrophysics, but certainly was not suggesting that it was "wacky" or "mysterious". Bohr also said: ""Nothing exists until it is measured." and "There is no quantum world. There is only an abstract physical description. It is wrong to think that the task of physics is to find out how nature is. Physics concerns what we can say about nature." This is the demarcation between science and fantasy that these "stoner-scientists" just fail to grasp. Making shit up isn't scientific. Making claims that are completely unsubstantiable isn't scientific. Promoting indulgence in "mystery" ahead of empirical illumination isn't scientific. The belief that we can "infect the quantum field" through passive observation and abstract theorising is so crazy that if I don't think of a way to finish this sentence soon my fingers are going to drop off. The problem is that this sort of "philosophy" - some ungodly, misinformed conflation of pseudo-science and near-Eastern thought - is everywhere at the moment. On a philosophy forum I post at occasionally, in a debate about free will (link), someone tried to claim that there could be no deterministic influences in human behaviour because of the "Uncertainty Principle"! I mean, what the fuck? How can you misunderstand something that badly? I'm reminded of the words of Alexander Pope: "A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again." I'd rather these people not study science at all than to sort of skim through "A Brief History of Time" (how the fuck does that book promote "a fusion of God and science", by the way?), writing down all the words and concepts that seem cool somehow and then using them liberally without making any effort to properly understand what they mean. Give me an uninformed idiot over an idiot who only thinks he's informed any day of the week.

LOL, that explains a lot.

Re: Quantum Mysticism

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Here's a great article I've just found: While you guys seem to be worrying about creationism in North America, this is what worries me down here in Brasília... god damn hippies So far, I've never had a decent explanation from any "quantum theorist" regarding what mysticism and quantum physics have to do with one another. I've gone as far as studying a bit of quantum physics so I knew what it was all about... but, alas, no spirits, no higher consciousness, no "God"

Well, in quantum wave functions, you have calculating "probabilities" of all states of matter that tend to cause the emergence of memetic, interlinked networks all echoing into each other.

The deal is basically that all matter does not exist as you know it until you've perceived it: the atom, electricity, smily faces on the computer screen, etc. They are all *everything* *constantly*, in a kind of hyperswitched state of pure potential energy.

As soon as you come into contact with them, you form a permanent bond or link with that which you perceive in a myriad of ways, just by having experienced it and having it experience you. The result, once many events and objects have suchly interacted, is a universe that is constantly being created on the brink of potentials... not a great example, but think of a video game, where anything can lurk off the screen, but you don't know what that is until you have actually moved to that spot on the screen in the game.

Though I would not link this anywhere near "religion" per say, I would definitely say that it has a lot of spirituality in and of itself.

It's about the unknown, and the beautiful craziness that is our ridiculous and awesome universe.

Re: Re: Quantum Mysticism

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade "If you think you can talk about quantum theory without feeling dizzy, you haven't understood the first thing about it." (link)

Yes, great quote... and it's true, as well.

But you don't feel dizzy because it's difficult to understand; you feel dizzy because understanding it causes the ramifications of the theory to submerge you in a sense. Kind of like perspective-zooming out of yourself and seeing the smalled glimpse of what could possibly be the universe, and losing your breath.

It's also beautiful that human minds are/were cunning and intuitive enough to even come up with such a smooth and beautiful theory; though it is rather publicized since it's got a lot of mathematics behind it due to attempts to tie it into other theories (a la 'theory of everything').

Though there are a lot of other really great theories that don't get so much media attention... all sorts of dimensionality (yes, 4D Space-Time is a *theory* and probably doesn't really exist as we think it does, even if you see and feel it as you do in your mind!), isotropics and homogeneity, chaos theory (causality), synchronocity, simultaneity, blah blah blah

quote:

Originally posted by Lira By the way, how do you find those papers?

I've read Boyer before (which is where I got that concept from) and rather than go into detail about it I just did a quick search for a link that'd explain it properly. Fortunately one of the first results was that expansive article written by Boyer himself.

Shibby, I'll address your posts when I have the time.

quote:

Originally posted by Lira So far, I've never had a decent explanation from any "quantum theorist" regarding what mysticism and quantum physics have to do with one another. I've gone as far as studying a bit of quantum physics so I knew what it was all about... but, alas, no spirits, no higher consciousness, no "God"

May I recommend you The Tao of Physics by Fritjof Capra ? Quite an interesting book.

Google gives a link to download it here


Amazon review

quote:

First published in 1975, The Tao of Physics rode the wave of fascination in exotic East Asian philosophies. Decades later, it still stands up to scrutiny, explicating not only Eastern philosophies but also how modern physics forces us into conceptions that have remarkable parallels. Covering over 3,000 years of widely divergent traditions across Asia, Capra can't help but blur lines in his generalizations. But the big picture is enough to see the value in them of experiential knowledge, the limits of objectivity, the absence of foundational matter, the interrelation of all things and events, and the fact that process is primary, not things. Capra finds the same notions in modern physics. Those approaching Eastern thought from a background of Western science will find reliable introductions here to Hinduism, Buddhism, and Taoism and learn how commonalities among these systems of thought can offer a sort of philosophical underpinning for modern science. And those approaching modern physics from a background in Eastern mysticism will find precise yet comprehensible descriptions of a Western science that may reinvigorate a hope in the positive potential of scientific knowledge. Whatever your background, The Tao of Physics is a brilliant essay on the meeting of East and West, and on the invaluable possibilities that such a union promises. --Brian Bruya

Believe it or not, there is a statue of Lord Shiva on the CERN (Conseil Europ�en pour la Recherche Nucl�aire or European Council for Nuclear Research) facility. CERN is the largest particle physics laboratory in the world. Capra has drawn parallels between the cosmic dance of Shiva and the so called dance of the sub atomic particles. This statue does not endorse this view ofcourse. It is a gift from India to the facility.

quote:

On June 18, 2004, an unusual new landmark was unveiled at CERN, the European Center for Research in Particle Physics in Geneva � a 2m tall statue of the Indian deity Shiva Nataraja, the Lord of Dance. The statue, symbolizing Shiva's cosmic dance of creation and destruction, was given to CERN by the Indian government to celebrate the research center's long association with India. In choosing the image of Shiva Nataraja, the Indian government acknowledged the profound significance of the metaphor of Shiva's dance for the cosmic dance of subatomic particles, which is observed and analyzed by CERN's physicists. The parallel between Shiva's dance and the dance of subatomic particles was first discussed by Fritjof Capra in an article titled "The Dance of Shiva: The Hindu View of Matter in the Light of Modern Physics," published in Main Currents in Modern Thought in 1972. Shiva's cosmic dance then became a central metaphor in Capra's international bestseller The Tao of Physics, first published in 1975 and still in print in over 40 editions around the world. A special plaque next to the Shiva statue at CERN explains the significance of the metaphor of Shiva's cosmic dance with several quotations from The Tao of Physics. Here is the text of the plaque: Ananda K. Coomaraswamy, seeing beyond the unsurpassed rhythm, beauty, power and grace of the Nataraja, once wrote of it "It is the clearest image of the activity of God which any art or religion can boast of." More recently, Fritjof Capra explained that "Modern physics has shown that the rhythm of creation and destruction is not only manifest in the turn of the seasons and in the birth and death of all living creatures, but is also the very essence of inorganic matter," and that "For the modern physicists, then, Shiva's dance is the dance of subatomic matter." It is indeed as Capra concluded: "Hundreds of years ago, Indian artists created visual images of dancing Shivas in a beautiful series of bronzes. In our time, physicists have used the most advanced technology to portray the patterns of the cosmic dance. The metaphor of the cosmic dance thus unifies ancient mythology, religious art and modern physics."

Source

quote:

Originally posted by Omega_M May I recommend you The Tao of Physics by Fritjof Capra ? Quite an interesting book. Google gives a link to download it here Amazon review Believe it or not, there is a statue of Lord Shiva on the CERN (Conseil Europ�en pour la Recherche Nucl�aire or European Council for Nuclear Research) facility. CERN is the largest particle physics laboratory in the world. Capra has drawn parallels between the cosmic dance of Shiva and the so called dance of the sub atomic particles. This statue does not endorse this view ofcourse. It is a gift from India to the facility. Source

Thanks actually kind of cool

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r Thanks actually kind of cool

yeah... shiva's pretty hot.

i like my mates to have 3 or more eyes!

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby yeah... shiva's pretty hot. i like my mates to have 3 or more eyes!

Metaphorically that is

eastern philosophy is the shit. studying it totally changed my view on life for the better

Cheers, Omega, I've just downloaded the Tao and, as soon as I finish it, I'm going to post my impressions

ps.: That statue looks simply amazing

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.