Posted on 12/19/2003 7:47:15 AM PST by Mr. Silverback
G. K. Chesterton once told a story about "an English yachtsman who slightly miscalculated his course and discovered England under the impression that it was an island in the South Seas."
The yachtsman "landed (armed to the teeth and speaking by signs) to plant the British flag on that barbaric temple which turned out to be the pavilion at Brighton." Expecting to have discovered New South Wales, he realized "that it was really old South Wales."
Chesterton was talking about the way in which we cast off the truths we learned as children, only later, if we are fortunate, to rediscover them as adults. What we dismissed as "simple" often turns out to be far more profound than we ever imagined.
According to Stephen M. Barr, a theoretical particle physicist at the University of Delaware, what's true about people is also true about science. In his new book, MODERN PHYSICS AND ANCIENT FAITH, Barr tells us that after the "twists" and "turns" that science took in the twentieth century, it, like Chesterton's yachtsman, wound up in "very familiar surroundings": a universe that "seems to have had a beginning . . . [and is] governed by laws that have a grandeur and sublimity that bespeak design."
Instead of man being merely the result of a "fortuitous concourse of atoms," we now know that the "universe and its laws seem in some respect to balance on a knife's edge" -- exactly what is needed for the possibility of life. A slight deviation here or there, and we wouldn't exist -- the anthropic principle.
These and other "recent discoveries have begun to confound the materialist's expectations and confirm those of the believer in God," writes Barr.
Notice, he said "materialist's," not "scientist's." As Barr makes clear, sciences like modern physics can and must be separated from materialism. Materialism is the belief that nothing exists besides matter, and it is a philosophical opinion. It may have, as Barr puts it, "[grown] up alongside science," but it's not science. Remember that, a critical point.
The assumption that you have to take a materialist worldview in order to do science is simply wrong. There's nothing about physics, for example, that assumes, much less demands, that view of the universe. In fact, many of the greatest scientists, like Newton, Galileo, and Copernicus, were religious believers.
Despite these facts, philosophical materialism has become so identified with science that scientists, and the general public, often have trouble telling them apart, which is why the discoveries that Barr describes come as a surprise, and their implications are resisted by many within the academy.
These implications aren't inconsistent with science, but rather with their dogmatic materialist worldview. Resisting these implications has required ingenious, almost fanciful, attempts to interpret the evidence in a way consistent with the materialist worldview.
Tomorrow I'll tell you about some of these discoveries and how they have "damaged the credibility of materialism." It's an important story about how science, far from being the enemy of faith, is only at war with those who, against the evidence, insist that England is "Tahiti."
In 1992, before he and she were elected, I knew they were bad news and so informed my friends and associates. The following 8 years were like living a nightmare. I was amazed and disgusted, again and again, at the vast number of people who supported him no matter how heinous his behavior. If ever a worthless individual has graced the planet, Clinton is it, and if ever a dangerous one has graced it, Hillary is it.
Patrick!!! You look so cute when table-pounding!
I don't much go for the aether theory myself. In fact, the consensus seems to be that it has been adequately disproved, "falsified." Anyhoot, you don't need an aether when you've got a universal vacuum field (Zero-Point) that's just as "big" as our entire inflationary universe.
You want to see direct data supporting this theory. But I think we're limited to reasoning from indirect data. For instance: Non-local effects -- simultaneous action at a distance (no matter how great the distance) of "entangled" particles -- have been repeatedly experimentally confirmed. Simultaneity implies superluminal velocities for the propagation of such effects. In turn, one conjectures that a field (not an aether, for action via an aether would apparently be constrained by the speed of light) is necessary to mediate such phenomena; it may also be the case that the primary vacuum field -- of which all other fields have been conjectured to be "daughter fields" -- may not even exist in 4D space-time as we are accustomed to perceive such.
The electromagnetic (EM) and quantum vacuum fields appear to have an indispensable function in life (biology) and consciousness:
"The more subtle level behind the EM one is the level of quantum-vacuum interactions (QVI). [Ernst] Laszlo (1995) proposed that QVI may offer the solutions for the present problems of cosmology, biology, psychology and parapsychology. I worked out a quantitative model which shows the relationship between the different levels of our environment and the progressively deeper mental levels existing within us (Grandpierre, 1995a, b).
"It is pointed out that the deeper mental levels (Grandpierre, 1995a), on which the ‘aware consciousness’ builds up, have larger capacity, are faster, therefore they require more subtle material carriers beyond the molecular and neural units, reaching the quantum range. Assuming a finite energy exchange between the vacuum field and the brain within the bounds of the uncertainty principle, a relation is found between the physical size of the brain and its relevant time scales. Using the time scales for information processing within the brain as a whole and within its cells, the characteristic frequencies of the electromagnetic and vacuum waves are obtained in the visible and the ultraviolet spectral ranges. It is pointed out that the formula derived for the couplings between the different mind levels gives values for the frequencies between the Universe and Man which are physically possible and actually plausible." -- A. Grandpierre, "The Physics of Collective Consciousness," 1996.
As you can see, PH, physics is "sneaking" into biology in a very big way. One consequence is that organisms can best be thought of, not as "discrete units" separate from everything else (the "classical" biological view) but as localized field structures participating in global fields -- thus nothing is truly separated from everything else.
So it seems perfectly reasonable to me to conclude, for instance, that Bill Clinton has an EM field to which one may react; and that "he" is part of a "collective" field in which others also participate. Thus we have an illustration of what is meant by "collective consciousness." For consciousness appears to be mediated by EM and quantum vacuum waves -- propagating in fields.
I find all this totally fascinating! Laszlo's and Grandpierre's (et al.) speculations may yet prove to be a "wrong turn." But these ideas are building support within the scientific community. I'm content to wait for further work to be completed before dismissing out of hand the relevance of field theory to human life and consciousness.
Here's wishing you a happy, healthy, and prosperous New Year, dear PH!
Alamo-Girl, I had the same first reaction to Clinton, also via TV. As I recall, it was the keynote speech he gave at the 1988 Democratic National Convention. It was a totally visceral reaction -- I remember saying to myself, my God, I hope this man does not have a future in national politics!!! He just wouldn't shut up, though the audience was restless and clearly wanted him to. But he just stood his ground, as if determined to woo them to his side; and he conveyed the impression that he would keep at it as long as it took, until he got their "love." He reeked to me of arrogance and narcissism. And it turns out I think I was entirely correct in that impression.
I thought then that he was a very scary man. And nothing he's ever done since has persuaded me otherwise. FWIW.
Have a happy, blessed New Year, Alamo-Girl!
PH, still grumbling and mumbling "... no data, no verifiable data ... ," raises a glass of New Year's spirits [the verifiable, potable kind], and manages to say: "God bless us, every one!"
The same to you from me, Patrick. God bless, and Happy New Year!
Thank you so very much for well reasoned reply, djf! I always enjoy your posts.
It is difficult to love someone who wishes to destroy you, but that is the culmination of Matthew 5 (Sermon on the Mount.)
I am also drawn to another remark you made at post 165. You said:
Some people assert that God must have created Himself.
Others (I am one) say that God the Creator exists outside of space and time and thus there is no beginning for God, i.e. the creation is not something in which the Creator exists. There is no "before" the big bang or any multi-verse or dimensional parallel in ekpyrotic cosmology.
This is another area wherein each person must work out his own understanding. Mine is somewhat unique but is based on the Word, Jewish tradition and science:
I pondered on this state at length and deduced that God must have wanted to reveal Himself and thus there was a beginning.
Then I pondered how God would go about revealing Himself. I deduced He would create beings who could think to whom He would reveal Himself and would commune. I further deduced how He would go about communicating Himself to these beings, i.e. that He is good and truth and so forth.
These attributes would have no meaning in any language unless they were set in contrast to what they are not. (How would you know if you are happy if you have never been sad?) Thus, I pondered that He would create good and evil, love and hate, et al so that a language could be formed, the Word.
I then pondered He would communicate His will to the thinking beings so they would know Him. I also pondered that, for the words to have meaning, He would give them numerous manifestations of all these contrasts - space/time, geometry, particles, energy, matter, creatures.
One of the ideas of the Jewish Kabbalah that rings true to my spirit is that the Scriptures are another name for God, i.e. it reveals who He is. So I see all of creation - spiritual and material - and the Word as God revealing Himself.
Here's wishing you a wonderful New Year. And indeed, "God bless us every one."
A most beautiful meditation, Alamo-Girl, and well worth pondering.
Thank you oh so very much for sharing your experience! I'm very glad to say that it appears we are on the same "wave length". I'm also very, very glad that Dubya was elected. IMHO, the direction has been steadily correcting ever since.
Happy New Year, my dear friend and mentor!
Since the first pass, and after you mentioned the possibility of an extra time dimension --- I've read many articles by Vafa and others which may suggest extra dimensionality as an alternative to, or alternative "location" for, such a field. This is going to be fun - we live in very interesting times, betty boop!
I'm glad you have an interest in this meditation and very much look forward to reading your views!
That is for sure, A-G!!! And we are so privileged to be living in this time! With every fiber of my being I suspect that truly momentous things are afoot in this world: The human future is wide open! But we must be careful, for the way widening before us is strewn with perilous opportunities....
I imagine that the demand being placed on us is not just that we be intelligent, rational; but that we also be wise. "We" being all of us -- that is, the human species.
May God bless us, each and every one. And may He ever continue to look kindly on the human race in general....
Astounding, yes, Mr. K. But I'll bet you can figure out why and how that sort of thing happens all the same.
I much appreciate your astute remarks. Thank you so much for writing!
Happy New Year!
Me too, djf. These poor victims were not our "enemies," and we can relate to and feel pathos for their terrible suffering because we are human beings, too. The fact that their government (which they do not control) stinks and causes problems for the rest of the world is irrelevant here, IMO.
Likewise the post-war suffering of the common people of Iraq is so awfully sad. My heart goes out to these innocent, well-meaning people who are being indiscriminately slaughtered by their so-called "fellow Muslims" in order to make some kind of point on behalf of a supposedly spiritual being that, to me, looks and comports himself a hell of a lot like Satan.
For what??? What kind of God would sanction the gratuitous suffering and slaughter of innocent human beings as some kind of fitting sacrifice for his altar??? I'd thought it's been a very long time since the human race had (thankfully!) moved out of the Aztec or Baal mode....
These days, Islam is getting a very bad reputation in this world, if you were to ask me. What worked in the seventh century does not seem to "cut it" anymore...not judging from what I've seen "in the Muslim street" these days....
Yet better times are ahead of us -- let us hope and pray. In the meantime, Happy New Year, djf!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.