Thursday, August 11, 2011
More on Consciousness and Reality
Here is a further excerpt from the text I posted yesterday from the blog of "Letranger." I lost track of his discussion after yesterday's post--it became too technical for me to follow. However, I think it is good to peek into the world of science now and again to see where their theories are leading them. The author (as quoted below) does not explain "holographic universe" nor "many worlds theory," but rather assumes we are familiar with these (and general explanations of such concepts are available from various sources.) However, many physicists go well beyond the general, and frankly some of the current theories seem more like science fiction than science.
Actually, Letranger is calling for science to recognize the role of consciousness in creating our own sense of reality, and is primarily addressing an audience of fellow scientists caught in the old paradigm of matter/energy, space, and time as the governing factors of the "universe."
What the rest of us know without permission from science ( and this is called common sense) is that we do not live (experience our lives) in terms of things and matter, but rather as a flowing stream of thoughts and feelings. When we have a transcendent experience--as attending a great concert or a special moment in nature or even falling in love--we are not interacting with the material world, but rather enter into some other plane of consciousness--whether of joy or pain, grief or ecstasy.
Kundalini is the final evidence of our immersion in the subjective universe. To know Kundalini bliss is to experience an unrepeatable moment, for which there are no adequate words or scientific equivalents. Yet it is the most real experience of our lives, for it is response at the cellular level, and that in and of itself needs no further proof.
Certain ancient teachings tell us that consciousness itself is the foundation of all our sense of the reality, and thus thought precedes creation. Did the universe begin as a thought in the mind of "god"? Was the small point at the very beginning--before the Big Bang--simply a thought, and wouldn't such an admission clarify many of the questions scientists occupy themselves with as to how the world began? (But of course this would be heresy in the world of science.)
When Buddha was asked what is truth, he did not answer but simply held up a flower.
Here is more from Letranger:
There’s something fundamentally wrong with the conventional scientific paradigm of the world that is held in the minds of most scientists. That paradigm is the idea that the world consists of matter and energy that exist within space and time. The usual idea of matter and energy is the atomic hypothesis, which says that at a fundamental level all matter and energy is composed of point particles, like the electron and photon. Those point particles exist at points of space, and trace out paths through space over the course of time. Quantum theory only extends the classical idea of a point particle to a sum over all possible paths. But those point particles only exist if there is a pre-existing space and time for particles to exist within. This is the kind of paradigm described by any quantum field theory.
