Demystifying Quantum Physics

[godnotgod]

Which would be what, exactly? What is my mind "enslaved" by? Trying to learn?

Yep! That's your problem. (I will be your QiGong surrogate instructor here) you need more breathwork, Legion, and less knee jerk cranial monkey mind academic activity.

 

[godnotgod]

Build me a transistor and I'll believe you.

Stop misusing transistors, and I'll believe YOU!:slap:

 

[godnotgod]

Have you ever actually read Plato? I mean even in translation? I have. I spent years learning to be able to read texts like that to understand them (and continue to do so), just like I spent years learning mathematics and mechanics to understand physics.

I have read Plato, but what does that have to do with Plato's Cave Allegory, which is the subject matter at hand? I understand the Allegory, and I understand that your mind is conditioned in exactly the same manner as the prisoners in the Cave Allegory. They don't realize it and neither do you.

I know how much contempt experts in various Eastern practices have for those who claim expertise without walking along the path to acquire it.

I too am aware of their contempt, but how does that apply to me? I have never once claimed any such 'expertise'. All I can do is eat when hungry, and sleep when tired.

If you really knew what you were talking about, Legion, (which it is obvious you do not), you would know that there is nothing to acquire in mystical practice; there is nothing to 'get'; nothing to 'figure out'. But your mind of academia, of learning, of knowledge, of Reason, Logic, and Analysis, thinks there is, does'nt it? That's what you're all about: you think you will 'get somewhere' via the accumulation of factual knowledge, and you even pride yourself on it, as you continue, over and over again, to advertise the fact. So in reality, Legion, it turns out that it is YOU who claims 'expertise', and not I. In fact, I'd be willing to bet you are incapable of just eating when hungry and only sleeping when tired, as your mind is filled with academic chatter from morning 'til night.

Clue 1: more QiGong breathwork.

Clue 2: You cannot acquire something you already have.

You are spoon-fed commercialized "mysticism", stamped and branded.

Tastes like (Tyson brand) chicken, LOL, but at least I am smart enough (must be all that Plato I read back in college) to know not to eat the menu instead of the meal, as you do. Just kindly refrain from beating me up with your Plato brand rubber chicken, OK?

 

[PolyHedral]

Stop misusing transistors, and I'll believe YOU!:slap:

I'm not claiming moral superiority.

 

[godnotgod]

I'm not claiming moral superiority.

Spiritual maturity is not moral superiority! It is precisely it's opposite.

Technology and Science will get mankind nowhere in terms of a true understanding of his own nature and of the nature of Reality (they are one and the same, actually). Only with this kind of understanding will man understand Technology and Science in the proper context.

As I blatanly stated in one previous post, modern man is no better than a Big Monkey running around brandishing Big and Dangerous Toys.

 

[godnotgod]

Nonsense. I can't measure invisible pink unicorns, that's not a limit on the application of reason, it's more like a limit on the application of unreason.

Mathematically, a wave cannot have an exact position and momentum. A well-localized wave is spreading out in all directions, and a wave with a definite momentum is spread out in its position. The discovery that particles are also wavelike was, if anything, a triumph of theoretical and experimental reasoning.

You did notice, did you not, that MEASUREMENT is a product of REASON. IPU's do not exist as the particles in question do. Analogy fails.

The attempt to apply a measurement to the particles in question fails because it is a system that is restricted by the behavior of the particles. Therefore, it has reached its limits in terms of its application, just as Newtonian physics, founded on Reason, have reached its limits in its failed attempts to measure QM. The old paradigms no longer apply.

Back to Osho: all he is saying is that, what is held as true via Reason today is subject to change when new information comes about, rendering the old paradigm(s) invalid. Hence, there are ineluctable limits to Reason, ala Kant.

That is the world of maya, of change, of illusion. The Real world, that of the Absolute, the ground of being, that is behind the phenomenal world of change, is changeless, timeless, limitless, infinite, unborn, and deathless.

Remember figure and ground. Ground is the changeless/formless; figure is form, and therefore subject to change. It is illusory.

 

[godnotgod]

No. But Chopra's statements are misleading about QM, hence the inspiration for this thread. The odds of "unexpected money" coming to you from quantum mechanics are about as good as the odds of an "unexpected home run" being hit by the baseball I described in the OP. It ain't gonna happen. According to quantum mechanics.

...and yet, we have one Deepak Chopra singing the praises of QM while living a monied lifestyle. I say the man is on to something, though he appears to be The Fool on the Hill.

It's like Zen, which is likened to a cool, bubbling mountain spring. You may stop to partake of its waters, or you may choose to just move on. The spring simply continues to bubble forth. :beach:

 

[Mr Spinkles]

IPU's do not exist as the particles in question do. Analogy fails.

IPUs do not exist, and neither do waves which possess definite position and momentum simultaneously. Hence neither can be measured. Analogy succeeds.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Good to know you got the message!

Too bad you fail to understand that 'thou art that' does not come from the Source as a verbal message, but as a realization of one's spiritual state.

Are you familiar with the Arsha Vidya Gurukulam and "its"/their founder Swami Dayananda Saraswati? The centers are a place of intense study of Advaita Vedanta philososphy. There are representatives of other Advaita traditions which criticize the idea that textual study is important. In particular, the "neo-Advaita" dismiss, as you do, the importance of any "verbal message" at all by claiming that personal experience is all that is necessary. Now, some of these claims are no doubt from people who have actually studied a great deal and determined for one or more reasons that the Vedic texts do not need to be studied (e.g., that the Upanishads are no more than one of many different supports for those climbing to the same place).

For others, it seems to be an excuse to claim knowledge without having worked for it.

Let's assume that this isn't you, but that you receive from this "Source itself". Is the information you receive of a type you can't comprehend? That would explain how you misunderstand quantum mechanics and can't explain the grammatical error present in your quote. You didn't say "thou art that", but quoted a transliterated Sanskrit phrase. And unless you are claiming that your Source communicated one of the four Mahāvākyas, a central idea across Vedic schools, in a language you can't understand, then you came across this from some book, website, etc.

Now, lacking your omniscience, and having had a difficult time understanding many concepts of Buddhism, "Hinduism", as well as other Eastern philosophies and their texts, I admit I am not readily able to grasp much of the nuances of these philosophies. Also, some I understand far better than others because they lack the esoteric nature which characterizes mystic texts, from those grouped under the category "gnostic" to the Upanishads. But this I admit, along with many other shortcomings. Because I am a mere human (and not a particularly good one at that), and thus I have only my faculties (perceptual or mental).

You, however, have no such limitations:

Mysticism is merely the gateway to Higher Consciousness, or Cosmic Consciousness. It is more accurate to talk about the connection between Consciousness and Quantum Mechanics. Ordinary consciousness, which includes science, is not aware of this connection for various reasons.

You have direct access to understanding reality itself:

You seem to (coyly) imply that reality cannot be understood unless one reads scientific literature, but unless you first understand reality, how do you expect to understand what scientific literature is about?

You not only understand reality, but can speak for all mystics and characterize all beliefs:

The mystical experience is beyond belief-based systems. It is experiential, not conceptual, as science and religion both are.

Yet with the Source itself at your finger-tips, you can't explain the grammatical error in your quote let alone the ways you have mischaracterized both physics and physicists. Yet when you claim tas tvam asi means "you are that" (or thou art that, or any other connection between the word for "you" and for "that"), and you didn't even know that this is a grammatical error in the text that doesn't correspond to the traditional commentaries, what can we say about your understanding of QM your Source provides? Better yet, whatever it provides you, what basis do you have to claim it enables you to understand all sciences and all religions and characterize what "the mystic" is, when a cornerstone of your philosophy contains a grammatical problem you weren't even aware of and cannot explain?

You see, it is the spiritual experience which occurs first; and then comes the description.

Sometimes it does, it seems. Certainly, across time and space we hear of those who are struck by sudden divine inspiration or revelation (St. Paul, St. Francis of Assisi, Muhammad, Gilgamesh, Siddhartha, and many more). There are those alive today who have seen shamans in remote destinations reaching ecstatic states, and practitioners of magic who use rituals and spells, both to communicate with the divine.

They don't claim that doing this makes them able to understand Sanskrit or quantum mechanics and then offer up youtube videos as evidence.

Just go ask your QuGong instructor. I know he'll set you straight.

He began studying Chinese practices at 15, and went to Tamkang College at 18 to study physics. About 10 years, later, after continued study in Chinese traditions with various masters, he went to the US to study mechanical engineering and obtained a PhD. Only after 6 more years of continuing to study Western science and Chinese martial arts and traditional medicine, did he finally devote himself solely to teaching and studying Chinese practices, but has always and still does emphasize the importance of Western science for understanding.

So if you think a man who studied Western science for 20 years is going to agree with you here, you are sadly mistaken.

But I do make the correction here from 'tas tvam asi' to 'tat tvam asi'; not what you said.

No. You still don't get it. English doesn't have grammatical gender the way Sanskrit does. tvam means "you" or "thou", but it has the grammatical gender masculine. The copula (the verb "are"), in this language, must connect/join a masculine noun or pronoun with some predicate like (adjective, pronoun, whatever) that is masculine.

Simply put, in order for tat tvam asi to mean "you are that" it would have to be sah tvam asi. No "tat" at all. Why the wrong word? If you can't explain something as simple as the reason we have the wrong word here, in a statement you made that is so fundamental, what good is the Source itself that you access when it comes to understanding QM?

 

[godnotgod]

When you declare that your access to some source itself enables you to say that scientist don't understand QM, but you do, because you have access to the source itself, that is the claim of omniscience.

No, it is merely a claim that I have access to the Source, just as everyone does. It's Nothing Special, really. What seems to be the problem, Legion?

The fact that scientists don't understand QM has zilch to do with my access to the Source; they know how QM behaves; they can predict its behavior; but they don't know what it is.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

...and yet, we have one Deepak Chopra singing the praises of QM while living a monied lifestyle. I say the man is on to something, though he appears to be The Fool on the Hill.

Chopra's wealth is not due to some quantum effect, it's due to the credulity of the book-buying public.

 

[godnotgod]

Are you familiar with the Arsha Vidya Gurukulam and "its"/their founder Swami Dayananda Saraswati? The centers are a place of intense study of Advaita Vedanta philososphy. There are representatives of other Advaita traditions which criticize the idea that textual study is important. In particular, the "neo-Advaita" dismiss, as you do, the importance of any "verbal message" at all by claiming that personal experience is all that is necessary. Now, some of these claims are no doubt from people who have actually studied a great deal and determined for one or more reasons that the Vedic texts do not need to be studied (e.g., that the Upanishads are no more than one of many different supports for those climbing to the same place).

For others, it seems to be an excuse to claim knowledge without having worked for it.

Let's assume that this isn't you, but that you receive from this "Source itself". Is the information you receive of a type you can't comprehend? That would explain how you misunderstand quantum mechanics and can't explain the grammatical error present in your quote. You didn't say "thou art that", but quoted a transliterated Sanskrit phrase. And unless you are claiming that your Source communicated one of the four Mahāvākyas, a central idea across Vedic schools, in a language you can't understand, then you came across this from some book, website, etc.

Now, lacking your omniscience, and having had a difficult time understanding many concepts of Buddhism, "Hinduism", as well as other Eastern philosophies and their texts, I admit I am not readily able to grasp much of the nuances of these philosophies. Also, some I understand far better than others because they lack the esoteric nature which characterizes mystic texts, from those grouped under the category "gnostic" to the Upanishads. But this I admit, along with many other shortcomings. Because I am a mere human (and not a particularly good one at that), and thus I have only my faculties (perceptual or mental).

You, however, have no such limitations:



You have direct access to understanding reality itself:


You not only understand reality, but can speak for all mystics and characterize all beliefs:




Sometimes it does, it seems. Certainly, across time and space we hear of those who are struck by sudden divine inspiration or revelation (St. Paul, St. Francis of Assisi, Muhammad, Gilgamesh, Siddhartha, and many more). There are those alive today who have seen shamans in remote destinations reaching ecstatic states, and practitioners of magic who use rituals and spells, both to communicate with the divine.

They don't claim that doing this makes them able to understand Sanskrit or quantum mechanics and then offer up youtube videos as evidence.




He began studying Chinese practices at 15, and went to Tamkang College at 18 to study physics. About 10 years, later, after continued study in Chinese traditions with various masters, he went to the US to study mechanical engineering and obtained a PhD. Only after 6 more years of continuing to study Western science and Chinese martial arts and traditional medicine, did he finally devote himself solely to teaching and studying Chinese practices, but has always and still does emphasize the importance of Western science for understanding.

So if you think a man who studied Western science for 20 years is going to agree with you here, you are sadly mistaken.



No. You still don't get it. English doesn't have grammatical gender the way Sanskrit does. tvam means "you" or "thou", but it has the grammatical gender masculine. The copula (the verb "are"), in this language, must connect/join a masculine noun or pronoun with some predicate like (adjective, pronoun, whatever) that is masculine.

Simply put, in order for tat tvam asi to mean "you are that" it would have to be sah tvam asi. No "tat" at all. Why the wrong word? If you can't explain something as simple as the reason we have the wrong word here, in a statement you made that is so fundamental, what good is the Source itself that you access when it comes to understanding QM?

You go with what you think, and I will go with what is all over the internet, and that is 'tat atvam asi'. Actually, the more accurate translation, as I understand it to be, is 'That thou art'. But this is all beside the point, which is the meaning derived from direct experience of 'there is no self or other', which essentially says the same thing.

All the study in the world is still secondary to the first hand experience, which the academia is about. I go with Phillip Kapleau, Zen Master, who warns against too much book learning. Simplicity has always been key.

When the great Indian sage, Bodhidharma, was asked by the Emperor of China: "And what of the Holy Scriptures?", Bodhidharma replied: 'No holiness is clear, like space.'

There are two ways home: the long and the short. Both are valid. You chose the long road to get to where you have always been; to where you always are.

If you see the Buddha on the road, kill him.

 

[godnotgod]

Chopra's wealth is not due to some quantum effect, it's due to the credulity of the book-buying public.

Yes, he attracts them with the spiritual nourishment they hunger for, and which modern society, religion, science, technology, etc. do not and cannot provide. The West is largely Patriarchal; it is the Mother that nourishes. The East is feminine-based. Get the connection? Yoga, Zen, Wicca, Taoism, etc, are all feminine.

 

[godnotgod]

Now, lacking your omniscience, and having had a difficult time understanding many concepts of Buddhism, "Hinduism", as well as other Eastern philosophies and their texts, I admit I am not readily able to grasp much of the nuances of these philosophies. Also, some I understand far better than others because they lack the esoteric nature which characterizes mystic texts, from those grouped under the category "gnostic" to the Upanishads. But this I admit, along with many other shortcomings. Because I am a mere human (and not a particularly good one at that), and thus I have only my faculties (perceptual or mental).

You, however, have no such limitations:



You have direct access to understanding reality itself:


You not only understand reality, but can speak for all mystics and characterize all beliefs:

These are silly games you play, Legion. False humility is just another form of spiritual pride.

Say! Did you know that THE Buddha was also A buddha?

 

[godnotgod]

IPUs do not exist, and neither do waves which possess definite position and momentum simultaneously. Hence neither can be measured. Analogy succeeds.

IPU's are a fantasy, a mental concoction. They cannot be detected, but waves and particles are indeed detected, though they cannot be measured.

Analogy fails miserably.

Next!

 

[godnotgod]

Which is why there is only one mystical approach (only there isn't), only one interpretation of the Upinasads (only there isn't), only one understanding of reality that "the mystic" has (only there isn't), and why your descriptions of "the mystic" do not cohere with many others (most of whom, at least of those I know, might think physics irrelevant, but wouldn't pretend to understand quantum mechanics because of their access to "the source itself."

.

The saltiness of the sea is the same everywhere, Legion.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Yes, he attracts them with the spiritual nourishment they hunger for, and which modern society, religion, science, technology, etc. do not and cannot provide. The West is largely Patriarchal; it is the Mother that nourishes. The East is feminine-based. Get the connection? Yoga, Zen, Wicca, Taoism, etc, are all feminine.

Wicca was founded by a man. Gerald Gardner relied on Margaret Murray's now thoroughly discredited academic description of the European witch-trials to construct a practice he claimed to have been initiated in. However, as he never was, and Murray only provided a creation story for Wicca (not much in the way of tradition, practice, or belief), he borrowed from ceremonial magic and the occult (particularly from Crowley). Places like Japan and China have been some of the most patriarchal cultures the world has ever known, and as for India? Either you are a denialist or the word sati means nothing to you, not to mention the scores of problems females do and have faced. See e.g., "Violence Against Women: The Indian Perspective". And while you are at it, please explain the Marriage and Suicide patterns we get among young women who are basically given away by their families and kill themselves? Or just study some history before you make claims about the how feminine some of the most sexist places on the planet have been (and in some cases still are).

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

The saltiness of the sea is the same everywhere, Legion.

That's great. But no you've gone from your arrogant claims about the sciences and quantum physics, your omniscience which gives you claims to characterize all belief systems, to waxing on about the feminine nature of countries where WHO and other international organizations are seriously concerned for "missing girls" and now, thanks to what would appear to be steps forward in women's rights (abortion rights), means that we instead of "missing girls" in India they are aborted, or in Taiwan where again abortion is the way to get rid of girls but "missing women" are on the rise as a result.

And when you want to link your understanding of "the Mystic East" with a denial of active, systematic, and ongoing persecution of girls and women involving results ranging from education to death that are the result deep-seated roots in cultural religious expressions, that's where your omniscience claims cross the line. Does it upset me when you make pretensions claims about mysticism, the sciences, etc.? Yes. But that's me being upset. Spreading ignorance of the systematic killing, discrimination, dehumanization, and objectification as part of a socio-religious expression for the sake of your "mystical Source" is going too far. Stick with claiming Wicca is all about women, because at least there we have had those like Valiente, Farrar, Starhawk, WITCH, etc. So you can be as inaccurate there as you want, because there really are extremely strong feminine movements tied to Wicca, regardless of who originally constructed it.

But as soon as you start talking about how the "East" is feminine based, you are no longer trivializing science, religion, and spirituality, you are contributing to the kind of myths that allow the continued culturally and religious based practices which dehumanize, objectify, and seriously harm or kill many, many women or young girls every year. And that is unacceptable unless you have more than "the Source" ******** to back up these claims.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

You go with what you think, and I will go with what is all over the internet, and that is 'tat atvam asi'.

As I thought. The Source Itself is the internet. Fine. You can pretend grammar doesn't exist (or whatever you need to do to justify the grammatical problem you can't explain), and you can continue to misunderstand quantum physics. And there will be, hopefully, people like Mr, Sprinkles to demystify physics for those who want accuracy.


But no more of this ******* ********:

The West is largely Patriarchal; it is the Mother that nourishes. The East is feminine-based. Get the connection? Yoga, Zen, Wicca, Taoism, etc, are all feminine.

You can hate on Western patriarchy if you want to (as long as it isn't in ways that actually reinforce sexist institutions or practices), but your romantic internet-based idealization of the East is no excuse to justify the continual spread of misunderstanding that has already accounted for too much violence against females in your fantasy "mystic East" where the philosophies you describe are, or have been made into, a cultural patriarchy that rivals any the that ever existed in the West.

Spreading myths about evolution or physics are things I take seriously, some more than others. But whatever harms result from the spread of such ignorance pale in comparison to romanticizing some of the most sexist male-dominated regions on the planet where religious/cultural traditions result in the devaluation of female lives in numerous ways. Leave that alone.

 

[zaybu]

Originally Posted by zaybu
I believe what you have left out what is the most important element, Darwin's theory of evolution: the fact that we've evolved from lower species. Evolution has no specific goal other than for a species to survive not only against the natural elements but also against other species. In that struggle, nothing was ever written in cement that we, homo sapiens, would have the brains completely wired to understand every aspects of the universe. But as the dominant species on this planet, we have accomplished quite an extraordinary feat in understanding a good part of this universe with two simple tools: the alphabet and a number system. Just 100 years ago we began to understand why atoms bond to form molecules. Just 50 years ago, we've discovered DNA, the basic stuff of life. I don't think our journey has ended, rather it has just begun. The reality that we can even understand the nature of our limitations, through math and physics, is extraordinary in itself.

I agree. But neither DNA, nor math, nor language are the keys to an understanding of the true nature of Reality. In fact, all three are obstacles. These provide conditioned views. The view required is one that is unconditioned, unborn, ungrown, universal. It is outside the spheres of factual knowledge, of learning, of language, of evolution.

Unfortunately, and in spite of man's incredible achievements and advances, he woefully lacks in spiritual understanding, which is that of his own nature. Because of this deficit, he uses his technology and wealth in destructive and selfish ways, as is evinced by both history and the current state of affairs. Spiritual growth imparts maturity, without which man becomes a dangerous creature, not only to himself but to all other living organisms on the planet. It is this spiritual maturity, and not intellectual knowledge alone, which can bring things back into balance and harmony. The intellect has a tendency to rationalize and justify mass destruction on the grounds of 'we're right; they're wrong'. This is the flaw of Reason.

Well, in our evolution, we are growing to be more mature. (I don't know what spiritual maturity is supposed to be). And most for that reason is technology which is allowing us to communicate from one part of the globe to another, almost instantaneously ( well, at the speed of light). Science and technology has been the driving force behind what is taking place. But there is always the danger that we will use this technology to destroy ourselves ( there was a real threat during the Cold War that lasted 40 years). And therefore, we must always be vigilant. But I believe you have constructed a strawman with spirituality. And this can be detrimental to science. Its method is already under attack in certain parts of the US - the fight for creationism to be taught in science class, the unrelentant fight against global warming, the restriction on stemcell research - all of those fights are in the name of antiquated religious beliefs, which has pitted science versus religion. When people like you and Chopra enter this arena, you are clouding the issue even more. It gives impetus to those who are intended to denigrate science.