Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
A Quiet Space | moderated by Clive Elwell

Quantum Theory and the Mind


Displaying posts 61 - 69 of 69 in total
Mon, 09 May 2016 #61
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4903 posts in this forum Offline

On reflection Max, with my limited understanding, a lot of quantum theory points towards this oneness, this wholeness, that we are talking about.

For example a particle like an electron  can 'exist', if that is the word, (a sort of shadow existence perhaps) anywhere in the universe. The is a definite probability that it could be found anywhere (I think this only applies to a 'free' particle, one not bound to others}. It is not until it is measured, or observed, that it is somehow materialises in one particular place.

I know it sounds weird, like much of QT, but effectively such a particle, before it is observed, can be in different places at the same time (it fact it can be at ALL places at the same time. It exists as a 'wave function', so called, although this is more of a mathematical description.

Being 'in different places at once', or 'in different states simultaneously', it can actually 'interact with itself', and this can be observed. This is quite serious, it is, for example, the basis of an extremely powerful quantum computer that is actually being built.
But when this wave function is observed, when a scientist tries to detect it, everything changes, Suddenly it is a classical particle, in a particular position. This is the observer conundrum. A s I said to Mike, the observer cannot be regarded as separate, isolated, from what he observes. The act of observation/interaction, is crucial.

One is reminded of K's statement that things only exist in relationship. Without relationship there is no existence! I see the act of observation, or interaction, as 'relationship'.

This is so incredible Can it be that what we are seeing, as above, is that it is consciousness that creates the matter? And a person is part of that consciousness?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 09 May 2016 #62
Thumb_original_avatar max greene United States 1324 posts in this forum Offline

Clive,

What quantum physics is discovering is beyond the incredible. The speed of the fastest computers is mind-numbing, and they will become even faster before quantum physics is through with them. And this is only one aspect of quantum physics. (Currently, there is a Chinese computer that will do 33.86 quadrillion bits per second.)

I've read a little of what you are describing. Strange how it ties with what Krishnamurti had to say -- there is existence only in relationship; the observer is not separate from the observed; everything is related. And probably more.

One "probably more," as I see it, is the case of "the past" and "the future." Where are past and future, if non-locality is the truth?

The relativity of Einstein and conventional physics is at odds with non-locality. Physicists are trying their best to reconcile the two. It may be that they cannot be reconciled, as relativity is tied to the speed of light, as I understand it. And the speed of light is a crawl, compared to non-locality.

max

This post was last updated by max greene Mon, 09 May 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 10 May 2016 #63
Thumb_stringio richard villlar France 624 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

All is linked. .. all is one and single thing... all is here and then, is that "all" can have a signification? Because the fact is that we are looking for a signification an answer? Is there?

Maybe the absence of answer is the answer...

vivre, est le verbe de la vie...

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 10 May 2016 #64
Thumb_stringio Daniel Paul. Ireland 124 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

richard villlar wrote:
All is linked. .. all is one and single thing... all is here and then, is that "all" can have a signification? Because the fact is that we are looking for a signification an answer? Is there?

Maybe the absence of answer is the answer...

Hello richard...en anglais prononcer "ritchcherde" :-)))))

Very interesting questioning I think...you know when this unexpected energy was-is there and you like some know it as well, one impression I had, amongst many, is that for once whatever is happening, whatever takes place in the "mental" is lived to its "accomplishment", to its end, to its blooming so entirely, then something takes place...

would you say so too ?

then what happens is beyond the analytical control competences....in itself it is quite simple...but to take place for real is another matter....

And cannot be a goal as we see it by experience....

not that much to do is left in fact...

looking for an answer is refusing without knowing it to be guided by something which is not "us"...

I even had applied that without making a fuss of it when rebuilding houses...which is here is a problem, then leave the problem talks....then solutions show themselves by themselves too...

so it could even be that so called practical aspect would contain a sort of right guidance as well if we leave the problem speak...

Many real manual workers, those sustaining this world despite the usually pure intellectual leaders , know that fact....let the problem speak.....

Dan ...........

This post was last updated by Daniel Paul. (account deleted) Tue, 10 May 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 10 May 2016 #65
Thumb_stringio richard villlar France 624 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

Daniel Paul. wrote:
whatever takes place in the "mental"...
something takes place...

Daniel Paul. wrote:
would you say so too ?

of course Dan. something is. in this moment, even when the mental through thought (self), even throught fear, say I'm dying... when you left... "?" takes place and then........... pas de mots...

Richard wrote:
Maybe the absence of answer is the answer

when this "?" is, then, there is no questioning,

vivre, est le verbe de la vie...

This post was last updated by richard villlar (account deleted) Tue, 10 May 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 10 May 2016 #66
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4903 posts in this forum Offline

max greene wrote:
What quantum physics is discovering is beyond the incredible

Yes, and as I understand it these computers are based on the premise that a particle can be in state A, or state B, or A nad B simultaneously. That is, like me being in Auckland, London, or Auckland and London simultaneously. No one really 'understands' this, but the maths is clear, and people go ahead and construct based on this principle.

Interestingly, the particle has to be isolated from all possibility of relationship for this to be possible. No peeping!

Yes, this issue of time Even Bohm, I think, once said that he accepted that it did not really exist. But what about all those equation in science which begin by assuming “let t = “ etc? And the equations give predictions which work.

The fact that the speed of light is exceeded by the non-locality effect is somewhat explained, I believe, by the fact that the phenomena cannot be used to send information. But do not ask me to explain that! The QT book I am reading at the moment is called “Everything that can happen does happen” :-)

But the most puzzling question to me is this: how can the human brain be so immensely clever, capable, in the scientific/technical field, and so completely stupid psychologically? Any comments on this, anyone? If so, please start a new thread.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 10 May 2016 #67
Thumb_original_avatar max greene United States 1324 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Yes, this issue of time Even Bohm, I think, once said that he accepted that it did not really exist. But what about all those equation in science which begin by assuming “let t = “ etc? And the equations give predictions which work.

The equations may work, but the assumption, as I see it is flawed. The physicists speak of "space/time," but the truth is that time is a measure, and time measures distance, not space. Space is obviously just as immeasurable as is the "interval" in non-locality. As a matter of fact, the formula is D=rt, not S=rt.

Physicists should say, space/present, not space/time. Correct is space/present and distance/time.

max

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 10 May 2016 #68
Thumb_farside0411 m christani United States 650 posts in this forum Offline

Time is distance, from here to there, from the actual to the ideal.

mike

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 11 May 2016 #69
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1165 posts in this forum Offline

"Time is just a stream I go a-fishin in."

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 61 - 69 of 69 in total
To quote a portion of this post in your reply, first select the text and then click this "Quote" link.

(N.B. Be sure to insert an empty line between the quoted text and your reply.)