Notices
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Physics and Mysticism

  1. #1 Physics and Mysticism 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    21
    Physics and mysticism seem to be coming to a somewhat similar vision.
    I've been reading about how at both the sub atomic and cosmic level the definition of reality is becoming somewhat fluid. About how at the subatomic level the quantum foam seems to be in disobedience to all known physical laws. Time and space are confused and variable at this level. At the cosmic level with dark matter, dark energy, space being warped, black holes etc. reality seems to be "stranger than we can imagine".

    On the other hand mystics attain states of consciousness where reality does not appear the same as it does normally. There is a realization that "I know nothing."
    Everything appears as a web of intertwined thought energy with our own consciousness only being an "eddy" in the flow. The Hindus call it "maya" (illusion)
    Buddhism has been accused of being more the study of reality than of God, likening existence to a dream.

    Just one point. Thats all. How would you define a "point" in space/time. How could you fix and define a point? With everything moving in relation to each other, time flowing at different rates the only way you could define a point would be in relation to another object in space/time. Would you give the point a duration? If so it would not be able to define it as the same point because during that duration everything would have shifted in relation to said point. Unless time is made of units instead of a steady flow, for a point to be static it would have to exist with no passage of time. Or in other words a point by definition cannot exist. What I am getting at is there cannot be a defined point unless that point were to be at the place and instant of the big bang. (if there was a big bang)
    If a single fixed point is impossible to define, what then is real?

    It seems that both science and the mystics have come to the realization that the world is not as concrete and "real" as we think.

    Best Wishes
    Randy J.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2 Re: Physics and Mysticism 
    . DrRocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by czydiamond
    Physics and mysticism seem to be coming to a somewhat similar vision.
    I've been reading about how at both the sub atomic and cosmic level the definition of reality is becoming somewhat fluid. About how at the subatomic level the quantum foam seems to be in disobedience to all known physical laws. Time and space are confused and variable at this level. At the cosmic level with dark matter, dark energy, space being warped, black holes etc. reality seems to be "stranger than we can imagine".

    On the other hand mystics attain states of consciousness where reality does not appear the same as it does normally. There is a realization that "I know nothing."
    Everything appears as a web of intertwined thought energy with our own consciousness only being an "eddy" in the flow. The Hindus call it "maya" (illusion)
    Buddhism has been accused of being more the study of reality than of God, likening existence to a dream.

    Just one point. Thats all. How would you define a "point" in space/time. How could you fix and define a point? With everything moving in relation to each other, time flowing at different rates the only way you could define a point would be in relation to another object in space/time. Would you give the point a duration? If so it would not be able to define it as the same point because during that duration everything would have shifted in relation to said point. Unless time is made of units instead of a steady flow, for a point to be static it would have to exist with no passage of time. Or in other words a point by definition cannot exist. What I am getting at is there cannot be a defined point unless that point were to be at the place and instant of the big bang. (if there was a big bang)
    If a single fixed point is impossible to define, what then is real?

    It seems that both science and the mystics have come to the realization that the world is not as concrete and "real" as we think.

    Best Wishes
    Randy J.
    Nope.

    Spacetime is a mathematical 4-manifold. "Point" has its usual meaning.

    No mysticism, except by those who lack understanding and wish to make it mystical.

    Mysticisn is antithetical to science.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3 Re: Physics and Mysticism 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRocket
    Quote Originally Posted by czydiamond
    Physics and mysticism seem to be coming to a somewhat similar vision.
    I've been reading about how at both the sub atomic and cosmic level the definition of reality is becoming somewhat fluid. About how at the subatomic level the quantum foam seems to be in disobedience to all known physical laws. Time and space are confused and variable at this level. At the cosmic level with dark matter, dark energy, space being warped, black holes etc. reality seems to be "stranger than we can imagine".

    On the other hand mystics attain states of consciousness where reality does not appear the same as it does normally. There is a realization that "I know nothing."
    Everything appears as a web of intertwined thought energy with our own consciousness only being an "eddy" in the flow. The Hindus call it "maya" (illusion)
    Buddhism has been accused of being more the study of reality than of God, likening existence to a dream.

    Just one point. Thats all. How would you define a "point" in space/time. How could you fix and define a point? With everything moving in relation to each other, time flowing at different rates the only way you could define a point would be in relation to another object in space/time. Would you give the point a duration? If so it would not be able to define it as the same point because during that duration everything would have shifted in relation to said point. Unless time is made of units instead of a steady flow, for a point to be static it would have to exist with no passage of time. Or in other words a point by definition cannot exist. What I am getting at is there cannot be a defined point unless that point were to be at the place and instant of the big bang. (if there was a big bang)
    If a single fixed point is impossible to define, what then is real?

    It seems that both science and the mystics have come to the realization that the world is not as concrete and "real" as we think.

    Best Wishes
    Randy J.
    Nope.

    Spacetime is a mathematical 4-manifold. "Point" has its usual meaning.

    No mysticism, except by those who lack understanding and wish to make it mystical.

    Mysticisn is antithetical to science.
    What is the usual meaning of a point....

    Nope mysticism has a deep relation to physics..its not because i don't understand science it because i feel it....
    www.physics-gallo.blogspot.com
    " If you give up i'm sure it'll give quite relief. No one will bother you or even pay attention to you. It feels alright but is still very painful."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4 Mysticism is not magic 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    21
    To say that mysticism and science are antiethical is to admit ones total ignorance of what mysticism is.
    R.J.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5 Re: Physics and Mysticism 
    Forum Sophomore schiz0yd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Warwick, RI
    Posts
    171
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRocket

    Nope.

    Spacetime is a mathematical 4-manifold. "Point" has its usual meaning.
    you say this as if it is true. math is our way of rationalizing the universe as something we can comprehend since it allows us to give proportions and ratios to everything. if there was only one single simple object in the entire universe, all of its attributes would be unknown because they could not be comprehended without comparison to something else. i think this is what is meant by "point". to me its as if the universe is only possible in the context of interactions. again I am taking this to seem as though you are justifying that the concept of "point" is nothing more than the standard definition, despite that this definition was created about the concept. whydowecareaboutwhatwebelieve?

    also the connection between physics and mysticism seems like a relation to chaos. all i can say is that alchemy is a terrific way to truly comprehend reality, since it allows you to experience (and experience is entirely different from and ABOVE comprehension or understanding) irrational chaos as a way of 'supporting the opposing viewpoint' as they say in writing and therefore better understand rational ideas by contrast.
    I prefer to use my right brain to study the universe rather than my left brain.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Moderator Moderator Dishmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Heidelberg, Germany
    Posts
    1,624
    Quote Originally Posted by czydiamond
    To say that mysticism and science are antiethical is to admit ones total ignorance of what mysticism is.
    R.J.
    Mysticism is looking for answers by assuming the supernatural and superstition instead of using reason and empiricism. Science is exactly the opposite.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    21
    There is no superstition in mysticism, which you define with a very broad brush.
    Mysticism is the practice of viewing life and consciousness from a different perspective. Traditionally practiced through meditation and more recently using psychoactive substances and or meditation. Believe me, things can look VERY different. The previous poster mentioned a state of chaos, which in physics we have recently become aware of. Mystics have been aware of this for thousands of years.
    Called the wall of unknowing or the veil. Reality seems to be very much an illusion, a steam of energy more than matter. Ever heard of consensus reality? One of mysticism's prime tenets, if it can be said to have tenets, is that "I know nothing". I think many physicists, when beginning to understand the chaos inherent in the subatomic and cosmic and temporal (and how many more we know nothing of) levels of the universe, begin to realize the same. "I know nothing".
    R.J.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Junior Steiner101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    251
    I think what he is getting at is that at the very edge of our understanding at the moment, there is a lot of uncertainty and probability involved. So the only thing that seems to link the two is the "Unknown", but i dont agree they are remotely related.
    Science seeks to reduce the unknowns at least until its clear they are part of the mechanism, like the uncertainty principal. Whereas mysticism seeks to worship the "unknown" as something supernatural and spiritual, requiring faith without evidence.

    just because science concedes to some things in the universe being uncertain as part of the structure, you cant say that means mysticism and science are merging together.
    This is just another manifestation of the "god of the gaps" arguments. And all this "I know nothing" stuff is purely philosophical. Everyone knows when it comes down to it you cant prove anything as being real outside of your own head, but thoughts like that dont belong in this section. If we take that attitude we might as well forget the whole scientific endeavour then!
    'Aint no thing like a chicken wing'
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    21
    You seem to imply that we are on the very edge of getting it. Just like the Buddhists and Hindus cant seem to quite get it I think they at least know it better.
    You guys would love some of the Tibetan Buddhists, they have been accused of being atheists because they view themselves as more trying to understand reality than of worshiping a god.
    I think that they differ amongst them selves as to whether there is a god or if reality is more an amorphous, shifting, undirected consciousness.
    Many folks have taken to creating their own religions from other peoples writings or hearing. We are all nuts anyway and we are able to imagine many things.
    I in no way demean science except to say that some are too dogmatic in dismissing any but the traditional material way of looking at things. How in the world can you think we're even close? When the entire basis of the physical world is found to be only chaos? Can you measure good or evil? I wonder if the stars are aware? Ever smell the air just after it rains? Can you define the space between wakefulness and dreams? Can't you see the beauty, love and structure apparent all around us, all too often hidden by our own stupidity.
    Lots of mystics, I think, have lost it a bit when they view reality as being uncaring, or impersonal and random. Trouble is we cant find our own way back. I'd be awfully scared right now if this is all we have. Why all the misery amidst all the goodness? Kind of like a piece of s**t in the middle of a really beautiful lawn.
    I'm not a stockbroker but I really think there is a correction coming.
    R.J.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope MagiMaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,440
    The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible. ~ Albert Einstein
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    21
    Who was it that said that "the universe is not only stranger than we can think, but stranger than we can imagine."

    It has also been said that men are "ever learning but not able to come to the knowledge of the truth"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    87
    I do not think that any form of mysticism can carry us any further than science can. I have read some opinions on this, and most of them hover along the fact that science is inherently limited due to its reliance on empiricism while spiritual knowledge is virtually limitless.

    However, if you start to look at it, you see that every form of spiritual knowledge has to limit itself at some point through a basic doctrine. Rather than relying on a set of determinable and measurable quantities, spiritual knowledge relies on a set of basic and immutable truths that are not really attained through anything but an empiric deduction or a set of personal experiments -- so they really hit against the same wall. This is, in fact, normal; just like we find a fact that contradicts the theory of relativity to be irrational and impossible, a Buddhist will find a fact that contradicts the generality of Samsara to be irrational and impossible. It's the same kind of limit, only a different kind of wall.

    So if you are thinking that spiritual knowledge can take you further than science can, think again. The only other major difference is that scientists also try to test their conclusions against reality, while most mystics try to frame and bend the reality until it takes the shape required to fit their truths.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    21
    I agree with you that there are the same limits to the mystic as there are to science.
    I hate to try to put this into words, as I am not really a poet, and words cannot convey the intangible, but most mystics view our condition as being lost in a sea of dreams. The mystical traditions generally teach acceptance of this being lost and not knowing, trusting that the universe will work stuff out in the end.
    There are many mystics who do not believe in God, but instead see reality as being uncaring, just a flow of living, peaceful, aware energy, flowing without direction throughout eternity.
    Mans unhappiness is caused by his blindness.
    While I agree that both science and mysticism, which both rely on our own abilities is no ultimate answer.
    We are all lost children who imagine ourselves to be found.
    That is why I endeavor to put my trust in the One in whose thoughts we all have our being. Faith is something which cannot be proven or disproved, but let me ask you, "Have you seen the stars tonight". We are meant for so incredibly much more than what we have.

    Best Wishes
    Randy J.
    We are Here?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    97
    you should read these books on science and mysticism


    http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com...y/theology.pdf
    PROLEGOMENON TO THE STUDY OF THE SIMILARITIES IN MYSTICAL THEOLOGY AND SCIENCE


    http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com...Decentred1.pdf

    PROLEGOMENON TO A NEW COPERNICAN REVOLUTION
    A NEW SCIENCE MAN LOOSES HIS PRIVILEGED PLACE AT THE CENTRE OF THE UNIVERSE AS A PRIVILEGED KNOWER MAN IS DECENTRED
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15 Re: Physics and Mysticism 
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRocket
    Quote Originally Posted by czydiamond
    Best Wishes
    Randy J.
    Nope.

    Spacetime is a mathematical 4-manifold. "Point" has its usual meaning.

    No mysticism, except by those who lack understanding and wish to make it mystical.

    Mysticisn is antithetical to science.
    And yet, most of the great scientists who actually pushed things forward read mystical texts along the way. Fermi quotes from the Baghavad Ghita (however you spell that...) Both Einstein and Newton studied alchemy. (Or at least one of Einstein's wives said that he was constantly reading alchemical texts.)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16 Re: Physics and Mysticism 
    Forum Junior Finger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    266
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    And yet, most of the great scientists who actually pushed things forward read mystical texts along the way. Fermi quotes from the Baghavad Ghita (however you spell that...) Both Einstein and Newton studied alchemy. (Or at least one of Einstein's wives said that he was constantly reading alchemical texts.)
    And yet, all of their actual discoveries came from reality, not adherence to some mystical text. Any similarities between superstitions and science are only ever noticed after the fact through very vague and liberal interpretation. There is no such thing as the aether. Saying that Newton believed in it doesn't make it exist and neither does redefining the word. (And no, Einstein did not believe in the aether, nor anything else in alchemy.)
    Artist for Red Oasis.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    and even if he did it wouldn't matter. His theories, as well as newton's, exist independent of what they personally believe.

    and besides that, mystical texts are great reads as long as you know they aren't grounded in reality
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by Arcane_Mathematician
    and even if he did it wouldn't matter. His theories, as well as newton's, exist independent of what they personally believe.
    Yeah. I'm thinking that it certainly didn't hurt. There's no reason a modern physicist should avoid investigating that stuff.


    and besides that, mystical texts are great reads as long as you know they aren't grounded in reality

    It was probably just a pass time or hobby for most, but there's no way to tell what they did with the half-completed conjectures they were reading. Maybe they stumbled onto something in the text that could be turned into a good idea by correcting some logical mistakes, and adding some reliable data. Like "fixer upper" ideas.

    It's no different than being fascinated with Star Wars or Star Trek, or any number of science fiction writers, except the ideas in an arcane text usually have multiple contributors instead of just one.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Moderator Moderator Dishmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Heidelberg, Germany
    Posts
    1,624
    Quote Originally Posted by czydiamond
    There is no superstition in mysticism, which you define with a very broad brush.
    Mysticism is the practice of viewing life and consciousness from a different perspective. Traditionally practiced through meditation and more recently using psychoactive substances and or meditation. Believe me, things can look VERY different. The previous poster mentioned a state of chaos, which in physics we have recently become aware of. Mystics have been aware of this for thousands of years.
    Called the wall of unknowing or the veil. Reality seems to be very much an illusion, a steam of energy more than matter. Ever heard of consensus reality? One of mysticism's prime tenets, if it can be said to have tenets, is that "I know nothing". I think many physicists, when beginning to understand the chaos inherent in the subatomic and cosmic and temporal (and how many more we know nothing of) levels of the universe, begin to realize the same. "I know nothing".
    R.J.
    Fine. Then mysticism is using subjective experiences as opposed to objective verification. The latter is what science is all about. Trying to use methods like meditation to find answers implies that there should be something else than what can be described by reason and empiricism - which I deny. Any "subjective truth" is by definition outside science, because it is not verifiable. Sure. Things may look very different. But do these experiences have anything to do with reality, or are they just a result of a mental state?
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •