Scientists as Mystics. Is this good science?

The common division of the world into subject and object, inner world and outer world, body and soul is no longer adequate

The sub title above is quoting Ken Wilbur.

This is an older blog that I have re structured and re-posted. I feel that its contents are timeless and as such they deserve contemporary interest.

These nine quotations below are a reminder to us all that non-local (metaphysical) physics remains alive and well in all epochs. In my opinion this situation will never change. For example when you think that the Standard model does not say what causes particles to have the properties that they do, or where mass and charge come from you know that there are still huge numbers of metaphysical ‘gaps’ for them yet to fill. This is with respect to them  forming a unified theory of everything. Furthermore, and perhaps more significantly, physicists cannot yet accurately demonstrate that which is microscopic and macroscopic in physics. (Metaphysical means ‘things’ that scientists have not yet discovered or been able to scientifically describe and test yet. It does not  mean pseudoscience as is commonly believed in the wider community). This is although  they mostly know such ‘things’ are real. Consciousness is a good example of this. I believe that one day scientists will be subtly driven to the conclusion that reality-physics is a process. It is a both a pre-geometric and geometric process relative only unto to itself. The original source of the following quotations can be found at the bottom of this blog. All scientists quoted remain highly respected in the science community.

Quote:

.

Scientists as Mystics

Max Planck
“…I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.”
The Observer, London, January 25, 1931  )

Werner Heisenberg
“The common division of the world into subject and object, inner world and outer world, body and soul is no longer adequate.”

Erwin Schroedinger
“Subject and object are only one. The barrier between them cannot be said to have broken down as a result of recent experiments in the physical sciences, for this barrier does not exist”.

Schrodinger (1961) claims that the Vedic slogan “All in One and One in All” was an idea that led him to the creation of quantum mechanics.

“Consciousness is never experienced in the plural, only in the singular. How does the idea of plurality (emphatically opposed by the Upanishad writers) arise at all? … the only possible alternative is simply to keep the immediate experience that consciousness is a singular of which the plural is unknown; that there *is* only one thing and that what seems to be a plurality is merely a series of different aspects of this one thing produced by deception (the Indian maya) – in much the same way Gaurisankar and Mt. Everest turn out to be the same peak seen from different valleys.” (From: What is Life)

Sir James Jeans
“Mind no longer appears as an accidental intruder into the realm of matter; we are beginning to suspect that we ought rather to hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter.”
J. Jeans, The Mysterious Universe (New York: Macmillan, 1932), 186.

Sir Arthur S. Eddington
“All through the physical world runs that unknown content, which must surely be the stuff of our consciousness. Here is a hint of aspects deep within the world of physics, and yet unattainable by the methods of physics. And, moreover, we have found that where science has progressed the farthest, the mind has but regained from nature that which the mind has put into nature.”
Sir Arthur S. Eddington, Space, Time and Gravitation: An Outline of the General Relativity Theory (1920)

Bernard d’Espagnat
“the doctrine that the world is made up of objects whose existence is independent of human consciousness turns out to be in conflict with quantum mechanics and with facts established by experiment.”
Bernard d’Espagnat, “The Quantum Theory and Reality,” Scientific American, Vol. 241, No. 5 (November 1979), pp. 158-181.

Roger Penrose
“…the contemporary understanding of material is very different now from the way it used to be. If we consider what matter really is, we now understand it as much more of a mathematical thing…But I think that matter itself is now much more of a mental substance…”
Journal of Consciousness Studies 1:24

Freeman Dyson
“[Is mind] primary or an accidental consequence of something else? The prevailing view among biologists seems to be that the mind arose accidentally out of molecules of DNA or something. I find that very unlikely. It seems more reasonable to think that mind was a primary part of nature from the beginning and we are simply manifestations of it at the present stage of history. It’s not so much that mind has a life of its own but that mind is inherent in the way the universe is built.”
Interview with Freeman Dyson in U.S.News and World Report, April 18, 1988, 72.

Source: http://www.endlesssearch.co.uk/science_scientistmystics.htm