No Big Deal — Just Some Ruminations on the Nature of Reality
Unlocking the Enigma: Exploring the Connection Between Quantum Physics and Consciousness
Many prominent physicists have dedicated much of their lives to resolving the conflict between quantum physics and macro physics, including Albert Einstein and David Bohm. There have been many. And while I’m hardly a physicist, I’m quite fascinated by the conflict and find myself spending much time contemplating the quandary.
Could it be possible that I may have a hypothesis of some merit? Or maybe it requires a level of thinking that is beyond the math and science, and perhaps more non-physicists contemplating the conflict may add to our collective understanding.
“Bolderdash!” would be the words of many scientists. They would deem me grossly hubristic or naïve to suggest an explanation for something the greatest minds of science have yet to figure out.
True indeed, but I think the question of the essence of matter that behaves decidedly different from the macro world of physicality is beyond our ability to denote with mere numbers and formulae. But neither will I attempt to articulate my hypothesis in mere metaphysical terms. Instead (and I’m taking a deep breath as I ready myself to undertake this attempt) I will delve into the realm of consciousness and the nature of thought.
Okay, without further delay (and taking another deep breath) I share my ruminations on the nature of reality.
An atom . . . yes, let’s start there. Just a single atom — a building block — an element that forms together with other atoms to create molecules. And molecules form together to create other things, such as minerals and even cells, which form together to create sentient life, and so on.
Many minerals form together to create planetary bodies, which by the mere nature of their mass generates a gravitational pull, which leads to the way planetary bodies move through space and time. But it all starts with the atom. The single unit from which all things form.
Okay, this is clear so far.
But it gets weird when we investigate the composition of an atom, which consists of a nucleus made up of protons and neutrons, and a “field” for lack of a better word, of electrons that orbit the nucleus.
In one analogy shared by Gary Zukov in Dancing Wu Li Masters, we view an atom as a 12-story building. In such an example, the size of the nucleus would be that of a grain of salt. In another analogy, Michio Kaku described it as such, “If an atom was the size of a football stadium, it would be empty because the nucleus would be roughly the size of a grain of sand. The atom appears to be solid, but that’s an illusion. The reality is that matter is basically empty.”
Just let that sink in for a minute . . . all of what we perceive to be solid matter is mostly empty space. Even the hardest steel or gemstone is just empty space. Think of that as you whack yourself upside the head with a hammer. It won’t feel like empty space, but it truly is.
But quantum physics gets much weirder still. The electrons that make up the empty space are negatively charged particles that orbit the nucleus in what are referred to as “shells.” Electrons change shells all the time, but they don’t move from one shell to another, they phase out of existence in one shell and back into existence in another. In other words, they don’t always exist. Thus the electron fields (consisting of orbital shells) are not fully in existence, and yet make up the vast majority of what we perceive to be physical matter.
Then there is the befuddling nature of sub-atomic particles and photons behaving both as waves and particles. This has been repeatedly proven in a famous experiment called the double slit. If you’re curious, go to YouTube “double slit experiment” and watch in amazement. This one in particular is really good.
Then there is quantum non-locality, which refers to two particles separated by an infinite distance and yet linked. As we affect one particle the result manifests instantaneously on the other regardless of the distance of separation.
But the most befuddling quandary of all is the fact that the observer of experiments affects the results of the experiment, prompting some notable theoretical physicists to note that the observer and the observed are fundamentally linked. This is the great conflict between the quantum world and the macro.
If I carefully observe a fast-moving bus and intend for my thoughts and observations to change the nature of the bus just as I step in front of it, the result will be catastrophic. In other words, my observation of the bus will have no effect on the bus. But if I observe quantum particles in an experiment, my observation will change such things as the position and velocity of the particles.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to the DEEPER side of things to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.