There is no such thing as a particle - Things are at the very most a relationship to something else.
Something is only something if someone chooses to observe it, until the point of observation, it is not anything.
There is no time and no solidity.
The only reality we have is that made by the brain. Different animal, different person, different reality.
Reality is entirely a projection.
This is no longer a philosophical quibble but a measurable, experimentally provable fact, there is nothing of any solidity anywhere.
Nothing, not one thing is separate, it only seems that way.
Your appearance and that around you is a mental projection.
There is no real, at most it is electrical signals represented to us by our brain.
The universe is an electrical event, waves of energy intercept to form the stars and heavenly bodies.
There is absolutely no I.
There is nothing finite, there is no size, infinity is it.
All of the above are Physics.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tao Wow | Daily Cup of Tao
.webp)
16 comments:
Yeah...it's great! Years ago I read something like this..."when the physicist reached the top of Wisdom Mountain their was Lao Tzu reaching out his hand to pull them up"
Might have been from the "Tao of Physics". It's been awhile.
HA :)
Pretty sure it wasn't in The Tao of Physics, but it could well have been. Either way I'm storing that in my bank of great quotes.
What is funny is all these guys going off to do ZaZen for years in the hope of Enlightenment. Then some unsuspecting scientists, naturally non-mystical people and almost all Atheist, got so so deep into physics that they ended up reaching Enlightenment.
Shows you get by not looking.
I also love "what the bleep do we know'...another great physics book that has helped a great number of zenheads.
Another favorite saying of mine (again read somewhere but lost over the annals of time) 'Zen is Taoism disguised as Buddhism'
I really like this post! THank you. It is really beautiful. It really makes perfect sense and I have been coming to this conclusion myself recently.
I'm afraid I have to say, those are most definitely not all physics. Some of it is accepted, and perhaps you can find a couple physicists out there who would agree with the other things, but it is by no means a mainstream scientic position that, for example, nothing is real; scientists STUDY reality. The idea that there is no real would be fundamentally contradictory to the study of reality.
You can state these things as your opinion all day long, and you are free to disagree with absolutely anyone, but please do not misrepresent the facts and claim that these things are all mainstream scientific positions. They're not.
Benjamin what is "real" to you? Is the ground beneath your feet solid? As if you get close enough you will see movement, and if you get close you will see waves of energy, and as you get closer you will see not one bit of evidence for solidity and you will pass right through like a brick passing comfortably between the sun and proxima centauri.
Ok, is it just that I didn't really read about physics when I was younger or have things really sort of come full circle?
Fay it seems that the Physics in School was 1) boring and 2) very Newtonian with even my teacher often saying "this is not really true but it's a good way to get you on the ladder".
Quantum Physics really is quite Mystical (aside from all the numbers and squiggly letters).
If you can find the Movie What the bleep do we know you'll get a nice idea :)
Whether it is solid or not, whether it is wave or particle (I'm assuming that you are referring to wave/particle duality), has absolutely no relevance to its reality.
You will find very few scientists who will tell you that they are studying something that does not exist. Perhaps you have found some - I'm sure you're not just pulling this out of your ass - but it is certainly not a mainstream position.
Do not extrapolate ridiculous conclusions from premises that physicists have set down and then pretend that physicists themselves have come to those conclusions. This is misleading.
You may say that physicists have discovered that reality may be composed of waves, and therefore you think reality is not real, but you may not say that physicists have discovered that reality is not real. They haven't.
My favorite Physicist is Heisenberg, one of many reasons being his coat of arms baring a Tai Chi:
"the apparent duality arises in the limitations of our language. It is not surprising that our language should be incapable of describing the processes occurring within the atoms, for, as has been remarked, it was invented to describe the experiences of daily life, and these consist only of processes involving exceedingly large numbers of atoms."
There is no point getting lost in the words "real" and "unreal" as you are as these words denote a physical reality - we aim here to go beyond such limits of language. For sure, where you look out, there is a reality - BUT it is not what you see it to be, it is something very unreal by the normal accepted ideas of reality that people hold. Light is neither particle or wave. When we look at it in a certain way, we MAKE it particle or wave.
We do the cognition. We form reality.
While I welcome you to the discussion here Benjamin please note that you are not in a place where you will convince us of any solidity or set rules. This blog is about shattering these illusions and uncovering the beauty of the mystery.
You are coming from a very different perspective, you will stand up for ideas that you have from books and so on, from others. We here are exploring "reality" through direct exploration and in doing so we find wonder, wonder that physicists who open themselves to it also find.
So welcome, but open your mind as quoting "the norm" is not what this place is here for :)
I'm not here to convince you of anything. I have no ulterior motive other than to inform you that you are misrepresenting physicists. I certainly do disagree with your beliefs, but that is another matter altogether and not one that I was intending to get into.
You implied that an idea was accepted in mainstream physics - it is not, and I was pointing that out. Don't misinterpret this as anything more than that. You can believe whatever you want - I honestly don't particularly care. Physicists as a whole do not believe what you're saying, and you should not be implying that they do.
Yet, they do... Read Heisenberg, the guy was mystical in his descriptions and not only that had quite an impressive CV as a physicist.
I have to go out now but will read any replies later.
I know who Heisenberg was...it's quite irrelevant how "mystical" his descriptions are. Unless he said in his writings that "there is no reality" or "I do not actually exist," you are misrepresenting him.
It is, of course, conceivable that he did say that, and I just haven't read it - if you can show me where he wrote it, fine - you would still, of course, have to establish that these postulates are an accepted scientific position rather than the errant opinions of one man. Physicists disagree about a great deal all the time.
I am certainly not going to let you say something like "physicists don't believe in reality or the self" without some serious citation. Sorry. If you actually can point to a substantial body of scientific writing that supports this, more power to you - I'd like to see it.
I've always loved physics and quantum theory. This is a great read. Thanks!
Louis de Broglie and Schrödinger, crowning half a century's work in physics, seem to have demonstrated mathematically and in the laboratory that there is nothing real that exists, nothing absolute that could exist. Mass appears to be only resistance to change (to movement of energy), decreasing in bulk in accordance with acceleration and increasing proportionally in energy. Matter, therefore, has no existence as such.
Hui Neng seems to have known that about 1300 years ago. Scientists have now demonstrated it. Wise men believed Hui Neng; the unwise will believe the scientists.
Post a Comment