Yesterday I shared a post by
nanowerk.com about quantum physics. In that posting I said that
Pamela and I have been interested in quantum sciences for years and
we recently watched www.whatthebleep.com. That got both of us
thinking about spirituality and science. In the program the argument for our all-inclusive oneness was based upon the quantum position - put in very crude layperson terms - that because in very structure of the universe there are no boundaries therefore everything is a part of everything else. All my career I have been a
behavioral scientist while Pamela is a biology professor. That
program, our discussions and many pictures of science and nature
later, I find myself truly believing that this is the evidence of the
oneness in which I have always believed. This belief, however, did
not emerge from new knowledge but from experience to which this new
knowledge was applied. Applying the new knowledge, the new
understanding of quantum science (1) to experience I see the match,
like the right key slipping into a lock. The next step, which sounds
easy but is perhaps the most difficult, is turning that analogous key and opening the lock. Staying with my analogy, my growing knowledge of the quantum world is the key to unlock my experiences. Therefore I need to view my experience in light of the knowledge. Until quantum physicists like Dr. Amit Gaswami (2) no one would have thought of putting quantum science and spirituality in the same sentence.
I must start by saying that I do not apologize for any lack of scientific rigor. This is rather like our going wading in Iceberg Lake where in late July our feet began to go numb in less than a minute forcing us to get out of the water and reassess our behavior. With that said, my first violation is going to be that I am going to use the Quantum Theory as an axiom. That means that I only have one hypothesis; viz. H1 = that in a life experience one may have a brief encounter with the reality of our all-inclusive oneness. Our null-hypothesis, H0, is therefore that there are no such encounters. My second violation is that I am going to test my hypothesis on a past experience over which there was no control. But that isn't that uncommon in historic research as opposed to empirical research.
I must start by saying that I do not apologize for any lack of scientific rigor. This is rather like our going wading in Iceberg Lake where in late July our feet began to go numb in less than a minute forcing us to get out of the water and reassess our behavior. With that said, my first violation is going to be that I am going to use the Quantum Theory as an axiom. That means that I only have one hypothesis; viz. H1 = that in a life experience one may have a brief encounter with the reality of our all-inclusive oneness. Our null-hypothesis, H0, is therefore that there are no such encounters. My second violation is that I am going to test my hypothesis on a past experience over which there was no control. But that isn't that uncommon in historic research as opposed to empirical research.
A ~ I need to give you background on the experience I am going to explore. In this particular example we are given the opportunity to likewise explore the possible effect of being out away from human influence. In this case we are in the wilderness. This may appear to be muddying the waters but, besides the fact that this blog is entitled The Old Conservationist, I have observed that the situations where one has such experiences as we are going to explore tend to be in areas well away from human influence.
Bowman Lake is a 7.7 mile long lake in the wilderness of Glacier National Park in northwestern Montana. It is about ten miles from Canada and 30 miles from Idaho. Bowman Lake is 31 miles from the nearest paved road. The last 6 miles of the trip wind up the side of the mountains. The road is exceptionally narrow and sometimes runs close to the edge of a sheer drop. Actually it is little more than a trail that is wide enough for a powerful 4x4 vehicle to negotiate. It took us 55 minutes to travel that six miles. Looking at the picture to the right, which is quite representative of the last six miles, you will be struck by the solitude. This was a place far away from the normal distractions of human occupied terrain.
Arriving at the lake we unloaded our kayaks. They are the short stubby lake or river kayak as opposed to the long sleek ocean going vessel, but they are extremely easy to carry and serve us well. We put a few items in our waterproof bags and set out to the far end of the long rather narrow lake. At it's widest it isn't more than a quarter of a mile wide. The water was like glass and the kayaks glided easily with minimal effort. We weren't in any hurry. It was July 8th and the sun wouldn't set until almost midnight.
Looking at the satellite photo to your right and the picture below you will notice that starting at the southwest end of the lake you move into a deep mountain valley with snow covered peaks all around you. This seems to heighten the senses. Most people I know report feeling what they might describe as "a rush". Is that rush a chemically induced excitement. Probably.
As we made our way up the lake we encountered only one other kayak and they were a good half mile or more away from us. Other than that we were totally alone during our almost eight hour voyage. There was a lot of time to glide along, admire the view and think. That's when we both had the sense of oneness. Neither of us said to the other 'oh, do you feel at one with nature?' The fact that we both had an experience where we felt an all-inclusive oneness didn't come out until we were talking about spirituality and quantum physics recently.
B ~ How do we proceed from here? How do we test the hypothesis? If we accept that we had some sort of experience, which we are identifying as an awareness of our all-inclusive oneness which lasted for a finite period of time, then we might ask 'which came first, the experience or the knowledge?' The experience was July 8, 2014. Pamela had done some reading on quantum sciences and spirituality prior to our trip but we had not talked together about that. In fact, I just learned that she had prior knowledge. I, on the other hand, had done some reading about quantum theory and I had definitely formulated my own beliefs of oneness but I had neither read nor heard anything about quantum sciences and spirituality. Therefore for me the experience must have come first. That would imply that knowledge gave definition to experience.
Are we on a role yet? Well, slow down I think I'm about to throw us a curve. I just acknowledged an unanticipated variable - viz. that Pamela had prior knowledge. Whether she had experience before or after that knowledge is unknown. We have to consider that in the quantum world our consciousness effects our physical surroundings because nothing is fixed in the first place.(3) So does this mean that the nature around us didn't alter our perceptions in any way but that we created the environment necessary to momentarily see the reality of our oneness? After all, both of us had a concept of all-inclusive oneness before the trip. If the brain has previously encountered oneness, then it will have identified, categorized and determined expectations for when oneness is encountered again.
C ~ Lest this turn into a dissertation, let me summarize and leave you with some questions. I do believe that we had one of those marvelous experiences where our consciousness collided with the reality of our all-inclusive oneness. Therefore I would say to give points to our hypothesis. Even though I believe that, in my case, knowledge gave definition to experience, we have to be careful since Pamela had both previous knowledge and previous experience. Furthermore quantum physics would most likely hold that there had to be an experience for the brain to identify, categorize and determine expectations. The program www.whatthebleep.com used the example of the native Americans who first encountered Columbus couldn't see his ships. The quantum theory would be because their brains hadn't had the opportunity to identify, categorize and determine expectation. The example I used with students and patients is how one might walk by a friend or family member on the street if there was no expectation of seeing them there. So the relationship of knowledge and experience in consciousness is still up for grabs - as though any conclusions I draw here are going to effect the quantum science community. The third point, which really has nothing to do with the hypothesis; viz. the relationship of the location of the experience to human influence; appears to have great potential.
I'm going to leave you to ponder all this on your own. And you are welcome to share your thoughts. Just the process of considering and exploring can be very enlightening. And, to bump it up a notch, add this to the mix . . .
Humans talk about nature as though it is other, when in reality we too are a part of nature. This attitude or belief is extremely restrictive and limiting. Could it be that we need to escape the confines of human influence in order to be able to return to our realization of our all-inclusive oneness? Could it be that parks, forests, wilderness areas, oceans and other places undisturbed by human influence and restrictiveness are a prime location for our self-searching? After all, isn't escaping the mundane the purpose of all places of religious worship - churches, mosques, shrines, etc?
 |
| Road to Bowman Lake |
Arriving at the lake we unloaded our kayaks. They are the short stubby lake or river kayak as opposed to the long sleek ocean going vessel, but they are extremely easy to carry and serve us well. We put a few items in our waterproof bags and set out to the far end of the long rather narrow lake. At it's widest it isn't more than a quarter of a mile wide. The water was like glass and the kayaks glided easily with minimal effort. We weren't in any hurry. It was July 8th and the sun wouldn't set until almost midnight.
 |
| Satellite view of Bowman lake |
Looking at the satellite photo to your right and the picture below you will notice that starting at the southwest end of the lake you move into a deep mountain valley with snow covered peaks all around you. This seems to heighten the senses. Most people I know report feeling what they might describe as "a rush". Is that rush a chemically induced excitement. Probably.
As we made our way up the lake we encountered only one other kayak and they were a good half mile or more away from us. Other than that we were totally alone during our almost eight hour voyage. There was a lot of time to glide along, admire the view and think. That's when we both had the sense of oneness. Neither of us said to the other 'oh, do you feel at one with nature?' The fact that we both had an experience where we felt an all-inclusive oneness didn't come out until we were talking about spirituality and quantum physics recently.
 |
| Bowman Lake from our point of departure |
Are we on a role yet? Well, slow down I think I'm about to throw us a curve. I just acknowledged an unanticipated variable - viz. that Pamela had prior knowledge. Whether she had experience before or after that knowledge is unknown. We have to consider that in the quantum world our consciousness effects our physical surroundings because nothing is fixed in the first place.(3) So does this mean that the nature around us didn't alter our perceptions in any way but that we created the environment necessary to momentarily see the reality of our oneness? After all, both of us had a concept of all-inclusive oneness before the trip. If the brain has previously encountered oneness, then it will have identified, categorized and determined expectations for when oneness is encountered again.
C ~ Lest this turn into a dissertation, let me summarize and leave you with some questions. I do believe that we had one of those marvelous experiences where our consciousness collided with the reality of our all-inclusive oneness. Therefore I would say to give points to our hypothesis. Even though I believe that, in my case, knowledge gave definition to experience, we have to be careful since Pamela had both previous knowledge and previous experience. Furthermore quantum physics would most likely hold that there had to be an experience for the brain to identify, categorize and determine expectations. The program www.whatthebleep.com used the example of the native Americans who first encountered Columbus couldn't see his ships. The quantum theory would be because their brains hadn't had the opportunity to identify, categorize and determine expectation. The example I used with students and patients is how one might walk by a friend or family member on the street if there was no expectation of seeing them there. So the relationship of knowledge and experience in consciousness is still up for grabs - as though any conclusions I draw here are going to effect the quantum science community. The third point, which really has nothing to do with the hypothesis; viz. the relationship of the location of the experience to human influence; appears to have great potential.
I'm going to leave you to ponder all this on your own. And you are welcome to share your thoughts. Just the process of considering and exploring can be very enlightening. And, to bump it up a notch, add this to the mix . . .
Humans talk about nature as though it is other, when in reality we too are a part of nature. This attitude or belief is extremely restrictive and limiting. Could it be that we need to escape the confines of human influence in order to be able to return to our realization of our all-inclusive oneness? Could it be that parks, forests, wilderness areas, oceans and other places undisturbed by human influence and restrictiveness are a prime location for our self-searching? After all, isn't escaping the mundane the purpose of all places of religious worship - churches, mosques, shrines, etc?
=========
(1) I use the term quantum science(s) in order to speak in a general sense of all forms of quantum study and theory - e.g. quantum physics, quantum mechanics. They all share a common theoretical starting position.
(2) Taken from the Center for Quantum Activism website: "Theoretical Quantum Physicist Dr. Amit Goswami served as a full professor at the University of Oregon’s Department of Physics from 1968 to 1997. He is currently a pioneer of the new paradigm of science called “science within consciousness,” an idea he explicated in his seminal book, The Self-Aware Universe, where he also solved the quantum measurement problem elucidating the famous observer effect." http://www.amitgoswami.org/
(2) Taken from the Center for Quantum Activism website: "Theoretical Quantum Physicist Dr. Amit Goswami served as a full professor at the University of Oregon’s Department of Physics from 1968 to 1997. He is currently a pioneer of the new paradigm of science called “science within consciousness,” an idea he explicated in his seminal book, The Self-Aware Universe, where he also solved the quantum measurement problem elucidating the famous observer effect." http://www.amitgoswami.org/
(3) I must again remind the reader that I am not a quantum scientist and am an absolute novice in the field, so please bear with me if I don't quite get it right. But since this is my analysis, then I guess that I should be able to express my own expectations and understandings of the quantum realm. This does create a dilemma of sorts, but I'll have to deal with that later. Like I said, it's like wading in Iceberg Lake. After less than a minute we had to get out and re-evaluate our behavior.
One of a plethora of interesting articles:
"Is Consciousness Related to Quantum Physics?" Andrew Zimmerman Jones http://physics.about.com/od/QuantumConsciousness/f/IsConsciousnessQuantum.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment