Jump to content

Quatum Physics As Proof Of God?


Elaine
 Share

Recommended Posts

I haven't been on here long so it might be that this has been discussed before. ( In that case I apologise, so if someone could link me up that would be fine tx ;) )

 

I'm not incredibly scientifically clued up( other than reading tons of science fiction maybe) LOL

 

So I was wondering if any of the seemingly many more knowledgeable members here could maybe comment on this

 

I specifically quote one article I have Googled, but there are many others.

 

The reason I ask is this topic has come up in conversations with a friend who I value as a great critical thinker. :)

 

Thanx

 

Goswami is convinced, along with a number of others who subscribe to the same view, that the universe, in order to exist, requires a conscious sentient being to be aware of it. Without an observer, he claims, it only exists as a possibility. And as they say in the world of science, Goswami has done his math. Marshalling evidence from recent research in cognitive psychology, biology, parapsychology and quantum physics, and leaning heavily on the ancient mystical traditions of the world, Goswami is building a case for a new paradigm that he calls "monistic idealism," the view that consciousness, not matter, is the foundation of everything that is.

 

A professor of physics at the University of Oregon and a member of its Institute of Theoretical Science, Dr. Goswami is part of a growing body of renegade scientists who in recent years have ventured into the domain of the spiritual in an attempt both to interpret the seemingly inexplicable findings of their experiments and to validate their intuitions about the existence of a spiritual dimension of life. The culmination of Goswami's own work is his book The Self-Aware Universe: How Consciousness Creates the Material World. Rooted in an interpretation of the experimental data of quantum physics (the physics of elementary particles), the book weaves together a myriad of findings and theories in fields from artificial intelligence to astronomy to Hindu mysticism in an attempt to show that the discoveries of modern science are in perfect accord with the deepest mystical truths.

 

Quantum physics, as well as a number of other modern sciences, he feels, is demonstrating that the essential unity underlying all of reality is a fact which can be experimentally verified. Because of the enormous implications he sees in this scientific confirmation of the spiritual, Goswami is ardently devoted to explaining his theory to as many people as possible in order to help bring about what he feels is a much needed paradigm shift. He feels that because science is now capable of validating mysticism, much that before required a leap of faith can now be empirically proven and, hence, the materialist paradigm which has dominated scientific and philosophical thought for over two hundred years can finally be called into question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Monistic idealism is more of a pantheism or panentheism than a theism or monotheism. It's the idea that the ground for the existence is consciousness, and the universe has emerged from this consciousness and even being a part of it. The use of the word "God" can be a bit misleading in this case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The observers are us! We are the consciousnesses that select out the infinite myriad of quantum possibilities - right back to the beginning of the universe!

 

+1 Andy got there first.

 

Stephen Hawking "The Grand Design" touches on this point and is fairly easy to follow for a noob to the Quantum world.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about "proof of God" but what is in the quote is how I view reality.

What brought me to that view was not only quantum physics but also Einstein's theory of relativity, thoughts about the beginnings of time and space at the so-called Big Bang and thoughts about the nature of my own consciousness and its relationship to a possible universal consciousness penetrating or observing every bit and particle in the universe.

 

One late night riding home through the dark on my bike when I was brooding on all these things, it struck me that I was not a true atheist after all and I started longing for a closer tie to such a central or cosmic consciousness.

 

I'm convinced this paradigmatic shift will occur at some point in the not so far future.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about "proof of God" but what is in the quote is how I view reality.

What brought me to that view was not only quantum physics but also Einstein's theory of relativity, thoughts about the beginnings of time and space at the so-called Big Bang and thoughts about the nature of my own consciousness and its relationship to a possible universal consciousness penetrating or observing every bit and particle in the universe.

 

One late night riding home through the dark on my bike when I was brooding on all these things, it struck me that I was not a true atheist after all and I started longing for a closer tie to such a central or cosmic consciousness.

 

I'm convinced this paradigmatic shift will occur at some point in the not so far future.

 

Me, too. I'm waiting to see what or who triggers it. Right now my bets are on either Stuart Kauffman or Eckhart Tolle.

 

I'm not quite ready yet. Soon. Good luck!

 

Phanta

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One late night riding home through the dark on my bike when I was brooding on all these things, it struck me that I was not a true atheist after all and I started longing for a closer tie to such a central or cosmic consciousness.

 

I'm convinced this paradigmatic shift will occur at some point in the not so far future.

 

Me, too. I'm waiting to see what or who triggers it. Right now my bets are on either Stuart Kauffman or Eckhart Tolle.

 

I'm not quite ready yet. Soon. Good luck!

 

Phanta

 

I'm very interested in Quantum Physics and I'm curious what part suggests a central consciousness. Quantum entanglement is my guess, since it's one of the least understood principles so far.

 

edited because spellcheck doesn't catch homonyms (principal)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Monistic idealism is more of a pantheism or panentheism than a theism or monotheism. It's the idea that the ground for the existence is consciousness, and the universe has emerged from this consciousness and even being a part of it. The use of the word "God" can be a bit misleading in this case.

 

Have to admit I had to Google Monistic Idealism ( Thanx for teaching me something new) Think I might have found my Label LOL. I do agree with you. I guess the use of the word "God" to me is just semantics as I have a (what I now know what to call) more monistic view of "god" which can cause confusion during discussions with those with a more theist or dualistic view.

 

Obviously the "proof" of any higher consciousness does not prove the existence of a personal God (And argument I should have realised myself ) :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The observers are us! We are the consciousnesses that select out the infinite myriad of quantum possibilities - right back to the beginning of the universe!

 

Good One :) I like that

 

 

 

+1 Andy got there first.

 

Stephen Hawking "The Grand Design" touches on this point and is fairly easy to follow for a noob to the Quantum world.

 

 

 

 

Thanx will try and get hold of that. Love Hawking

 

I don't know about "proof of God" but what is in the quote is how I view reality.

What brought me to that view was not only quantum physics but also Einstein's theory of relativity, thoughts about the beginnings of time and space at the so-called Big Bang and thoughts about the nature of my own consciousness and its relationship to a possible universal consciousness penetrating or observing every bit and particle in the universe.

 

One late night riding home through the dark on my bike when I was brooding on all these things, it struck me that I was not a true atheist after all and I started longing for a closer tie to such a central or cosmic consciousness.

 

I'm convinced this paradigmatic shift will occur at some point in the not so far future.

 

Well if that ties into my "beliefs" The best way to achieve any closer tie to a central or cosmic consciousness, would be to achieve that tie to whatever fragments of that consciousness is available to you ( other living conscious beings) yeah those sucky humans :D , and whatever Higher self you could validate for yourself (spirit connection) :)

 

I like this: The Michael Teachings

 

The Michael Teachings is a channeled system of self-understanding that encourages personal responsibility and a keen awareness of how your choices shape your life. It encourages one to see the life from a higher perspective, while honoring the everyday challenges of being human. This teaching is just one map of many for finding your way through your life, your relationships, and the universe.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One late night riding home through the dark on my bike when I was brooding on all these things, it struck me that I was not a true atheist after all and I started longing for a closer tie to such a central or cosmic consciousness.

 

I'm convinced this paradigmatic shift will occur at some point in the not so far future.

 

Me, too. I'm waiting to see what or who triggers it. Right now my bets are on either Stuart Kauffman or Eckhart Tolle.

 

I'm not quite ready yet. Soon. Good luck!

 

Phanta

 

I'm very interested in Quantum Physics and I'm curious what part suggests a central consciousness. Quantum entanglement is my guess, since it's one of the least understood principles so far.

 

edited because spellcheck doesn't catch homonyms (principal)

 

My guess is the Copenhagen interpretation - ie. the collapse of the wave function as you observe an object.

 

Though it does not suggests a central consciousness, only that something has to be measured/observed to be "real". Until it's not measured/observed by somebody it only has probabilities and not definite values.

 

I don't think it has anything to do with a god, but someone who wants to mix it up with religion can suggest a central consciousness as a universal observer. But if everything is observed by a universal observer ("god") then we wouldn't have the problem with the probabilities in the first place, would we? Then everything would have definite values independently from what WE obsereve or measure, since it's already been observed by "god".

 

Anyway, I'd say it's just another case of "god of the gaps". There are so many things we don't understand yet about quantum mechanics, so it gives some room for religious and mystical speculations like the above one.

 

We have seen in the history of science that often when science couldn't explain something right away, religious folks jumped in and explained it with "god". Then of course, sooner or later it turned out that the phenomenon had nothing to do with god.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One late night riding home through the dark on my bike when I was brooding on all these things, it struck me that I was not a true atheist after all and I started longing for a closer tie to such a central or cosmic consciousness.

 

I'm convinced this paradigmatic shift will occur at some point in the not so far future.

 

Me, too. I'm waiting to see what or who triggers it. Right now my bets are on either Stuart Kauffman or Eckhart Tolle.

 

I'm not quite ready yet. Soon. Good luck!

 

Phanta

 

I'm very interested in Quantum Physics and I'm curious what part suggests a central consciousness. Quantum entanglement is my guess, since it's one of the least understood principles so far.

 

edited because spellcheck doesn't catch homonyms (principal)

 

My very limited understanding of Quantum Physics (almost none) points to Quantum Entanglement. I'm a hugemungous skeptic, though...just exposed to a lot of people in my life who are making these statements. There was a piece on NPR about this... Can Positive Thoughts Help Heal Another Person? The applicable bit is near the bottom, starting with "The Love Study". I've shelved that information away for future consideration, as science and psychology around QE emerge.

 

The Tolle and Kauffman...I have not yet read much of. Jut on the verge... So, I'm not sure they are into Quantum Physics at all. But Kauffman does have this idea about self-organizing systems, and that humanity is one of them. A self-organizing system theory must address some kind of collective movement/awareness...something. That's why I mentioned him. No idea yet if Tolle is into QP.

 

That's all I've got. Just a lead, nothing more.

 

Phanta

 

I don't believe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then of course, sooner or later it turned out that the phenomenon had nothing to do with god.

You don't seem to understand.

According to this new paradigm, the whole reality including all phenomena is embedded in a cosmic consciousness or if you wish, they are a projection of that supreme consciousness. It has no significance whether you call that a "god" or not because it is not something external, not something outside reality that you can discuss as if you were discussing another phenomenon.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then of course, sooner or later it turned out that the phenomenon had nothing to do with god.

You don't seem to understand.

According to this new paradigm, the whole reality including all phenomena is embedded in a cosmic consciousness or if you wish, they are a projection of that supreme consciousness. It has no significance whether you call that a "god" or not because it is not something external, not something outside reality that you can discuss as if you were discussing another phenomenon.

 

 

 

 

 

OK, I see.

 

Though I don't feel this cosmic, "supreme consciousness" and I can't see how quantum physics "proves" that. I still suspect some kind of "god of the gaps" things here (the word "god" being used loosely here - you can replace it with mysticism or something).

 

I feel that I'm a part of the cosmos, when I look up the nights sky I feel we ultimately belong there - but nothing led me to believe so far that it's some kind of "consciousness".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then of course, sooner or later it turned out that the phenomenon had nothing to do with god.

You don't seem to understand.

According to this new paradigm, the whole reality including all phenomena is embedded in a cosmic consciousness or if you wish, they are a projection of that supreme consciousness. It has no significance whether you call that a "god" or not because it is not something external, not something outside reality that you can discuss as if you were discussing another phenomenon.

 

 

 

 

 

So the fabric or nature of reality itself is Consciousness, and without consciousness there would be no reality. I guess it is possible to validate this in a very small self centred personal way for each person, and obviously harder to validate in a universal sense. The whole tree in the forest thing? Always messes with my head, but when you are not conscious you do not experience anything? Unless you dream of course.... see already confusing myself. Maybe I should forget about quantum physics :D It surely does test the boundaries of science and philosophy for the un-knowledgeable at least :)

 

Maybe it's not something easily validated in a personal way because even when one's personality then ceases to exist one would still be part of the greater consciousness

 

anyhow just rambling

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You don't seem to understand.

 

And you have no proof of your personal objective assumption.

 

I understand that reality in the sub-atomic realm is much different than on a macroscopic level, and physicists are making inroads to that world every day. No experiment thus far has shown that a divinity is involved. I don't see that it is impossible, but so far unneeded for the system and experimentally unproven.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you have no proof of your personal objective assumption.

Proof, which is a part of logic and reasoning is something that can only be found at the level of phenomenon, the world of objects.

Consciousness is part of the subjective world, not something that you can objectify.

So the only way to investigate the dimensions of consciousness is by diving into the depths of your own consciousness.

The argument that 'there is no objective proof' has no value when you discuss this new paradigm.

You could say that the proof is in the experience, although this kind of experience is not related to normal sense related experiences, it is more like waking up from the dream of being caught up in the small I-consciousness where everything seems separate.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I think reductionists (or mechanists) and creationists have a a lot in common despite their superficial differences.

 

We are not machines.

 

Say it with me. Say it with pride.

 

I am not a machine!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Proof, which is a part of logic and reasoning is something that can only be found at the level of phenomenon, the world of objects.

 

 

Since the world of objects is where I reside most of the time, it's my prime concern. If a non-object smacks me upside the head, I'll get concerned.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the world of objects is where I reside most of the time, it's my prime concern. If a non-object smacks me upside the head, I'll get concerned.

No-one is forcing you to break the spell and unlike in religion there is no hell waiting for you if you stagnate.wink.gif

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you have no proof of your personal objective assumption.

Proof, which is a part of logic and reasoning is something that can only be found at the level of phenomenon, the world of objects.

Consciousness is part of the subjective world, not something that you can objectify.

So the only way to investigate the dimensions of consciousness is by diving into the depths of your own consciousness.

The argument that 'there is no objective proof' has no value when you discuss this new paradigm.

You could say that the proof is in the experience, although this kind of experience is not related to normal sense related experiences, it is more like waking up from the dream of being caught up in the small I-consciousness where everything seems separate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It sounds like when Xtians say their strong faith is based on "personal experience" and they believe because Jesus "feels so real" for them.  Looking back I never really felt this, even though I was trying to force myself believe I do. I have the same problem with this "supreme consciousness". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds like when Xtians say their strong faith is based on "personal experience" and they believe because Jesus "feels so real" for them. Looking back I never really felt this, even though I was trying to force myself believe I do. I have the same problem with this "supreme consciousness".

I personally have no problems with the personal experiences of xians.

The only things I don't like about religions are their irrational approach, their sectarian attitudes, their dogmas and their empty ritualism.

But I know from experience that people who turn atheists often don't distinguish between religious people and people pursuing a more universal rational type of spirituality.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Truth is dependent on a paradigm or a belief, how can it possibly be Truth?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Truth is dependent on a paradigm or a belief, how can it possibly be Truth?

I don't believe Truth depends on either.

Nor do I believe that you can prove God by Quantum Physics.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yet such a thing is the backbone of the religious institution, from the Catholic Church to Soto-shu to Dr Goswami (and his "What the *bleep*..." cronies) and all points in between.

 

So my next question would be, how is Quantum God any different than Religious God? It's nature is only known and transmitted by a select few- does it matter that the Vedas were traded for the Standard Model?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only things I don't like about religions are their irrational approach, their sectarian attitudes, their dogmas and their empty ritualism.

But I know from experience that people who turn atheists often don't distinguish between religious people and people pursuing a more universal rational type of spirituality.

 

How true. I would only quibble a bit with the "irrational approach" and the "empty ritualism."

Sometimes a "irrational" approach is effective and what is most needed. It cuts through the nonsense that is most of human thinking anyway and goes into a nonverbal level. Humans are mostly not rational in my opinion - their behavior indicates it.

 

Rituals are only empty if there is no underlying significance to what you are doing, or you are simply doing it as a habit, without reflecting on the meaning or having any devotion.

 

I really do think that the topic of consciousness is a fascinating one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.