There is too much quantum supernaturalism around, too many experiments showing that the objective world is a world that moves forward in time like a clock, which says that action at a distance, especially instantaneous action at a distance, is impossible, which says that a thing cannot be in two or more places at the same time, represents an illusion of our thinking.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
To say that consciousness causally affects atoms is to open Pandora’s box. This would turn objective physics on its head; physics would cease to be self-sufficient, and we would lose all confidence.<\/p>\n
Today we are faced with a great dilemma in physics. In quantum physics\u2014the new physics\u2014we have found a theoretical framework that works; it explains a myriad of laboratory experiments. Quantum physics has led to extremely useful technologies such as transistors, lasers and superconductors. And yet, we cannot understand the meaning of the mathematics of quantum physics without offering an interpretation of the experimental results, which many people can only look at as paradoxical and even impossible. Take a look at the following quantum properties:
\n\u2022 A quantum object (such as an electron) can be in more than one place at the same time (wave property).
\n\u2022 A quantum object cannot be said to manifest itself in ordinary space-time reality until we observe it as a particle (wave collapse).
\n\u2022 A quantum object ceases to exist here and simultaneously begins to exist somewhere else; however, we cannot say that he passed through the space separating these places (quantum leap).
\n\u2022 The manifestation of a quantum object caused by our observation simultaneously affects its correlated counterpart object – no matter how far apart they are (quantum action at a distance).<\/p>\n
Today, many physicists suspect that something is wrong with material realism, but are afraid to rock the boat that has served them so well for so long. They do not realize that their boat is adrift and needs new navigation under the guidance of a new worldview.<\/p>\n
Is there an alternative to material realism in which mind and matter are integral parts of one reality, but a reality that is not based on matter? I am convinced that there is. The alternative I propose in this book is monistic idealism. This philosophy is monistic, not dualistic, and it is idealism, since the main elements of reality are considered ideas (not to be confused with ideals) and their awareness, and matter is considered secondary. In other words, instead of asserting that everything (including consciousness) is made of atoms, this philosophy postulates that everything (including matter) exists in consciousness and is controlled from consciousness. Note that this philosophy does not say that matter is unreal, but only states that the reality of matter is secondary to the reality of consciousness, which itself is the basis of all that exists – including matter. In other words, in response to the question: \u201cWhat is matter?\u201d, a monistic idealist would never say, \u201cIt is immaterial.\u201d<\/p>\n
You may object – what happens when the ball falls from one step to another? Doesn’t he occupy intermediate positions during his descent? This is where the unusualness of quantum theory comes into play. For a ball on a ladder, the answer must obviously be positive, but for the case of a quantum ball (atom or electron), Planck’s theory gives a negative answer. A quantum ball can never be found in any intermediate position between two steps; he is either on one or the other. This is quantum discontinuity.<\/p>\n
De Broglie was interested in the fact that the standing waves of a guitar string create a discrete spectrum of frequencies called harmonics. The lowest frequency sound is called the first harmonic, which determines the tone we hear. Higher harmonics\u2014the musical sounds that give a note its characteristic quality\u2014have frequencies that are multiples of the first harmonic. Stationarity is a property of waves in a confined space. Such waves can easily be produced in a cup of tea. De Broglie asked whether the electrons of an atom are localized (confined) waves? If so, do they form discrete stationary wave patterns? For example, maybe the lowest atomic orbit is the one in which one electron produces the lowest frequency stationary wave – the first harmonic – and higher orbits correspond to stationary electron waves of higher harmonics<\/p>\n
Erwin Schr\u00f6dinger – went on to discover the wave equation for matter, now known as the Schr\u00f6dinger equation. It is the cornerstone that replaced Newton’s laws in the new physics. The Schr\u00f6dinger equation is used to predict all the amazing qualities of submicroscopic objects found in our laboratory experiments. Werner Heisenberg discovered this same equation even earlier, but in a less clear mathematical form. The mathematical formalism that grew out of the work of Schr\u00f6dinger and Heisenberg is called quantum mechanics.<\/p>\n
Probability breeds uncertainty. For an electron or any other quantum object, we can only talk about the probability of its being in such and such a place, or that its momentum (mass times velocity) is equal to such and such, but these probabilities form a distribution described by a bell-shaped curve. The probability will be maximum for some position value, and this will be the most likely location of the electron. However, there will be a whole range of positions in which there is a significant chance of finding an electron. The width of this region corresponds to the uncertainty of the electron position. The same arguments allow us to talk about the uncertainty of the electron momentum.<\/p>\n
The principle of uncertainty undermines the philosophy of determinism. According to the uncertainty principle, we cannot accurately determine the position and speed (or momentum) of an electron at the same time; any attempt to accurately measure one makes knowledge of the other uncertain. Therefore, the initial conditions for calculating a particle’s trajectory can never be precisely determined, and the concept of a well-defined particle trajectory becomes unusable.<\/p>\n
If we want to measure the charge on an electron, we must trap it in something like a cloud of vapor in a condensation chamber. As a result of this measurement, we must assume that the electron wave collapses, so that we are now able to see the path of the electron through the vapor cloud (Fig. 10). According to Heisenberg, \u201cthe path of an electron only comes into existence when we observe it.\u201d When we make a measurement, we always find an electron localized as a particle. We can say that our measurement reduces the electron wave to the particle state.<\/p>\n
Why then do we seem so separate in our everyday experience? As the mystics insist, this separateness is an illusion. If we meditate on the true nature of our self, we discover – as mystics of all times have discovered – that behind all diversity there is only one consciousness. This one consciousness-subject-self has many names. Hindus call it atman; Christians call it the Holy Spirit, or in Quaker Christianity, the inner light. Whatever it is called, everyone agrees that the experience of this one consciousness is of inestimable value.<\/p>\n
What is the meaning of the experience of oneness? For the mystic, it opens the door to a transformation of being that liberates love, universal compassion and freedom from the cohesion of life in acquired separateness and from the compensatory attachments to which we cling. (In Sanskrit this liberated existence is called moksha.)<\/p>\n
For a determinist, probability is simply a convenience of thinking: the physical laws governing the movements of individual objects are completely certain, and therefore completely predictable.<\/p>\n
Wigner’s paradox arises only when he makes the unfounded dualistic assumption that his consciousness exists separately from the consciousness of his friend. The paradox disappears if there is only one subject, rather than separate subjects as we usually understand them. The alternative to solipsism is a single subject-consciousness. When I observe, I see the whole world of manifestation, but this is not solipsism, since there is no individual seeing self as opposed to other selves. Erwin Schr\u00f6dinger was right when he said: \u201cConsciousness is the only thing for which there is no plural.\u201d Etymology and spelling have preserved the uniqueness of consciousness. However, the existence of terms such as \u201cI\u201d and \u201cmine\u201d in language leads us into a dualistic trap. We consider ourselves separate because we talk about ourselves in this way.<\/p>\n
PREFACE<\/a> There is too much quantum supernaturalism around, too many experiments showing that the objective world is a world that moves forward in time like a clock, which says that action at a distance, especially instantaneous action at a distance, is impossible, which says that a thing cannot be in two or more places at the same time, represents an illusion of our thinking.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":384,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[41,40],"tags":[63],"class_list":{"0":"post-453","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-modern-philosophy","8":"category-philosophy","9":"tag-amit-goswami"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/planeta21vek.ru\/artemiada\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/453","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/planeta21vek.ru\/artemiada\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/planeta21vek.ru\/artemiada\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/planeta21vek.ru\/artemiada\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/planeta21vek.ru\/artemiada\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=453"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/planeta21vek.ru\/artemiada\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/453\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":454,"href":"https:\/\/planeta21vek.ru\/artemiada\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/453\/revisions\/454"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/planeta21vek.ru\/artemiada\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/384"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/planeta21vek.ru\/artemiada\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=453"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/planeta21vek.ru\/artemiada\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=453"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/planeta21vek.ru\/artemiada\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=453"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nPART I. The Union of Science and Spirituality<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 1. THE CHAPTER AND THE BRIDGE<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 2. OLD PHYSICS AND ITS PHILOSOPHICAL HERITAGE<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 3. QUANTUM PHYSICS AND THE DEATH OF MATERIAL REALISM<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 4. THE PHILOSOPHY OF MONISTIC IDEALISM<\/a>
\nPART II. IDEALISM AND THE RESOLUTION OF QUANTUM PARADOXES<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 5. OBJECTS IN TWO PLACES AT THE SAME TIME AND EFFECTS THAT PRECEDE THEIR CAUSES<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 6. THE NINE LIVES OF SCHRODINGER\u2019S CAT<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 7. I CHOOSE WITH THEREFORE, I AM<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 8. THE EINSTEIN-PODOLSKY-ROSEN PARADOX<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 9. RECONCILIATION OF REALISM AND IDEALISM<\/a>
\nPART III. SELF-REFERENCE: HOW ONE BECOMES MANY<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 10. EXPLORING THE MIND-BODY PROBLEM<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 11. IN SEARCH OF THE QUANTUM MIND<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 12. PARADOXES AND COMPLEX HIERARCHIES<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 13. \u201cI\u201d OF CONSCIOUSNESS<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 14. UNIFICATION OF PSYCHOLOGIES<\/a>
\nPART IV . RETURN OF CHARM<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 15. WAR AND PEACE<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 16. EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL CREATIVITY<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 17. THE AWAKENING OF BUDDHA<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 18. IDEALISMAL THEORY OF ETHICS<\/a>
\nCHAPTER 19. SPIRITUAL JOY<\/a>
\nGLOBAR OF TERMS<\/a>
<\/b><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"