Are eminent physicists mystics as well? I believe they can be if they put their minds to it
Readers who have been following my ideas about science would know that I believe reality is metaphysical. I argue that all cosmic phenomena that is occurring below the Planck line (the cosmic realm I have nominated as being a fourth dimension) is sub-quantum cosmic activity and that it is my concept of fine quantum entanglement that melds sub-quantum phenomena with quantum phenomena. I also strongly argue that the cosmic backdrop to all such activity is primordial awareness, an awareness that is more commonly referred to as consciousness. I debate that the phenomena of consciousness and awareness are quite different from each other and that awareness is the backdrop to reality. I also argue that thought is a common player in all cosmic activity, this is whether it be at a sub-quantum level or not and furthermore I believe the human mind is a key player in this activity as well.
It is against this background I feel it is important for you to peruse the article that I have posted below. I feel the article substantially endorses my point of view about science in this area. The article contains a series of quotes that have been made by eminent physicists in the 20th century. Those with a background in physics will no doubt readily identify with most of the names cited. All these scientists talk about the absolute togetherness of all cosmic phenomena. No phenomena stands alone. Furthermore this act of togetherness, when removed from consciousness is in context with quantum mechanics. I request that you keep the ideas of these eminent scientists in mind as you read my work, together with those of some more contemporary scientists who seem to believe in similar cosmological views to my own. Please note that I have emboldened particular texts that I feel you should make a special note of.
Scientists as Mystics
“…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 )
“The common division of the world into subject and object, inner world and outer world, body and soul is no longer adequate.”
“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)
“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.
“…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
“[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.