My own efforts has led to a far clearer understanding of the physical and the spiritual. It is all a part of my mathematica.
1 Our
apparent empirical mathematica relies on the five natural logic
operators we all know from Boolean algebra as well as a sixth natural
operator whose core role is to promote the ideal. This was
unfortunately an error of omission when symbolic logic was policed up
under Russel and Whitehead.
2 I
recently understood that this sets up the central role of Spirit and
Soul in relation to the Physical creation described exactly in my
article Cloud Cosmology and the neutral neutrino using my published
metric.
With
this mathematical foundation in place, the physical universe
naturally evolves as well as Spirit and Soul. Again Soul is the
ideal while Spirit is the evolved interaction in the Physical
attached to the Soul.
Physicist’s Explanation of Why the Soul May Exist
Last
Updated: June 24, 2014 10:51 am
The
universe is full of mysteries that challenge our current knowledge.
In "Beyond Science" Epoch Times collects stories about
these strange phenomena to stimulate the imagination and open up
previously undreamed of possibilities. Are they true? You decide.
Henry
P. Stapp is a theoretical physicist at the University of
California–Berkeley who worked with some of the founding fathers of
quantum mechanics. He does not seek to prove that the soul exists,
but he
does say that the existence of the soul fits within the laws of
physics.
It
is not true to say belief in the soul is unscientific, according to
Stapp. Here the word “soul” refers to a personality independent
of the brain or the rest of the human body that can survive beyond
death. In his paper, “Compatibility of Contemporary Physical
Theory With Personality Survival,” he wrote: “Strong doubts about
personality survival based solely on the belief that postmortem
survival is incompatible with the laws of physics are unfounded.”
He
works with the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics—more
or less the interpretation used by some of the founders of quantum
mechanics, Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg. Even Bohr and Heisenberg
had some disagreements on how quantum mechanics works, and
understandings of the theory since that time have also been diverse.
Stapp’s paper on the Copenhagen interpretation has been
influential. It was written in the 1970s and Heisenberg wrote an
appendix for it.
Stapp
noted of his own concepts: “There has been no hint in my previous
descriptions (or conception) of this orthodox quantum mechanics of
any notion of personality survival.”
Why Quantum Theory Could Hint at Life After Death
Stapp
explains that the founders of quantum theory required scientists to
essentially cut the world into two parts. Above the cut, classical
mathematics could describe the physical processes empirically
experienced. Below the cut, quantum mathematics describes a realm
“which does not entail complete physical determinism.”
Of
this realm below the cut, Stapp wrote: “One generally finds that
the evolved state of the system below the cut cannot be matched to
any conceivable classical description of the properties visible to
observers.”
So
how do scientists observe the invisible? They choose particular
properties of the quantum system and set up apparatus to view their
effects on the physical processes “above the cut.”
The
key is the experimenter’s choice. When working with the quantum
system, the observer’s choice has been shown to physically impact
what manifests and can be observed above the cut.
Stapp
cited Bohr’s analogy for this interaction between a scientist and
his experiment results: “[It's like] a blind man with a cane: when
the cane is held loosely, the boundary between the person and the
external world is the divide between hand and cane; but when held
tightly the cane becomes part of the probing self: the person feels
that he himself extends to the tip of the cane.”
The
physical and mental are connected in a dynamic way. In terms of the
relationship between mind and brain, it seems the observer can hold
in place a chosen brain activity that would otherwise be fleeting.
This is a choice similar to the choice a scientist makes when
deciding which properties of the quantum system to study.
The
quantum explanation of how the mind and brain can be separate or
different, yet connected by the laws of physics “is a welcome
revelation,” wrote Stapp. “It solves a problem that has plagued
both science and philosophy for centuries—the imagined
science-mandated need either to equate mind with brain, or to make
the brain dynamically independent of the mind.”
Stapp
said it is not contrary to the laws of physics that the personality
of a dead person may attach itself to a living person, as in the case
of so-called spirit possession. It wouldn’t require any basic
change in orthodox theory, though it would “require a relaxing of
the idea that physical and mental events occur only when paired
together.”
Classical
physical theory can only evade the problem, and classical physicists
can only work to discredit intuition as a product of human confusion,
said Stapp. Science should instead, he said, recognize “the
physical effects of consciousness as a physical
problem that needs to be answered in dynamical terms.”
How This Understanding Affects the Moral Fabric of Society
In
another paper, titled “Attention, Intention, and Will in Quantum
Physics,” Stapp wrote: ”It has become now widely
appreciated that assimilation by the general public of this
‘scientific’ view, according to which each human being is
basically a mechanical robot, is likely to have a significant and
corrosive impact on the moral fabric of society.”
He
wrote of the “growing tendency of people to exonerate themselves by
arguing that it is not ‘I’ who is at fault, but some mechanical
process within: ‘my genes made me do it’; or ‘my
high blood-sugar content made me do it.’ Recall the infamous
‘Twinkie Defense’ that got Dan White off with five years for
murdering San Francisco Mayor George Moscone and Supervisor Harvey
Milk.”
No comments:
Post a Comment