Scientific support for eastern philosophical models grows

[savithru]

With the recent experiments in quantum mechanics putting an end to scientific realism and an objective reality a growing number of philosophers, physicists and psychologists are showing keen interests in eastern philosophy.


“QUANTUM PHYSICS AND VEDANTA”: A PERSPECTIVE FROM BERNARD D'ESPAGNAT'SSCIENTIFIC REALISM – Jonathon Duquette.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...1.01202.x/full

Towards a philosophical reconstruction of the dialogue between modern physics and Advaita Vedanta: an inquiry into the concepts of akasa, vacuum and reality – Jonathon Duquette.

https://papyrus.bib.umontreal.ca/jspui/handle/1866/4866

It is worth noting that d’Espagnat himself notices that the similarities between his conception of veiled reality and “the great eastern philosophical systems should be considered. . . ”

- Jonathon Duqette, philosopher of religion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMFQy6KXAws

[the_analyzer]

Namaste,
Thanks for the links. I am quite interested to know how close Advaitic understanding of the universe is to science.

One of your links does say though that "Based on this study, the dissertation argues that comparisons relying on conceptual affinities alone generally fall short of establishing a productive dialogue between Advaita Vedanta and modern physics." I think in essence this is the problem. Advaita conceptually sounds like quantum physics, but is nowhere near as informative as physics in my opinion. Similar case with neuroloscience. Advaita never really says much about Brahman except that it is consciousness. But what is this consciousness and how can it possibly be the substratum of the Universe is left for the student to figure out for themselves. I have always seen this as a bit of a cop out. But I would like to know how these gaps can be filled by advaita in detail.
Thanks
-TA

[savithru]

Namaste,
Thanks for the links. I am quite interested to know how close Advaitic understanding of the universe is to science.

One of your links does say though that "Based on this study, the dissertation argues that comparisons relying on conceptual affinities alone generally fall short of establishing a productive dialogue between Advaita Vedanta and modern physics." I think in essence this is the problem. Advaita conceptually sounds like quantum physics, but is nowhere near as informative as physics in my opinion. Similar case with neuroloscience. Advaita never really says much about Brahman except that it is consciousness. But what is this consciousness and how can it possibly be the substratum of the Universe is left for the student to figure out for themselves. I have always seen this as a bit of a cop out. But I would like to know how these gaps can be filled by advaita in detail.
Thanks
-TA

It is very much important to understand that the epistemology of quantum mechanics or modern science is completely different from the epistemology of Advaita. They both are epistemologically incompatible which is often missed by scholars and thinkers in this field and based on this I totally agree with the conclusion of the paper.

That is not the correct approach to close the gap between quantum mechanics and Advaita as Richard Jones rightly points out.

As Richard H. Jones notices, it is incorrect to equate the unified field with Brahman, which is not an extended and structured field embedded in the spacetime continuum (as the unified field) but pure consciousness “beyond” space, time and even mind.

- Jonathon Duqette

It is incorrect to equate Brahman with the quantum field which was the cause of all this mess and confusion in this field which was mainly proposed by scholars like Panda and Fritjof Capra without realizing the epistemology of Advaita is completely different from that of quantum mechanics.

More importantly it was not the similarities between quantum mechanics and Vedanta that attracted physicists of the past century into it rather it was the failure of quantum mechanics to give a complete objective account of reality was what led physicists to look for alternative philosophical models of reality. Quantum mechanics and Advaita have no similarities between each other whatsoever.

The deep understanding that we have no access to ultimate reality in the “new physics” but only to “shadows on the wall,” had a significant impact on the great physicists of the last century: it led the most sensitive among them to look “outside the cave,” i.e., beyond physics, to know more about this reality. Their interest for the doctrines, ideas and concepts of Eastern philosophies corroborates this. It is not, as many authors believe, that there are particular affinities between the worldviews of physics and mysticism. As Wilber rightly points out, it was the “radical failure of physics, and not its supposed similarities to mysticism, that paradoxically led so many physicists to a mystical view of the world.”

-Jonathon Duqette

Eastern religions should be understood in its own milieu.

In the context of parallelism, Richard H. Jones notices how Eastern thinkers can sometimes put Western thought on a pedestal to justify their own views, and how problematic such attempt can be:

[When making parallels] it could be that Western thought is unconsciously or consciously being taken as the supreme standard, with a corresponding lack of sensitivity to other interests: Asian thought must be shown to be positivistic in a time when positivism was in vogue, or existential for those who value existentialism. . .Or it must share our moral values, if not our beliefs. The various traditions cannot stand on their own terms but must be related to a Western standard. The danger here is in distorting the fundamental nature of these traditions in order to fulfill this demand rather than in understanding them in their own milieu.

So what is the correct approach to bridge the gap between quantum mechanics and Advaita?

The correct approach is to test for interpretations of quantum mechanics which demand a non-physical mind to collapse the wavefunction and there are quite a few of them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpr...s_the_collapse

von Neumann/Wigner interpretation: consciousness causes the collapse

In his treatise The Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, John von Neumann deeply analyzed the so-called measurement problem. He concluded that the entire physical universe could be made subject to the Schrödinger equation (the universal wave function). Since something "outside the calculation" was needed to collapse the wave function, von Neumann concluded that the collapse was caused by the consciousness of the experimenter.[22] This point of view was prominently expanded on by Eugene Wigner, but he later abandoned this interpretation.[23][24] Variations of the von Neumann interpretation include:

Subjective reduction research

This principle, that consciousness causes the collapse, is the point of intersection between quantum mechanics and the mind/body problem; and researchers are working to detect conscious events correlated with physical events that, according to quantum theory, should involve a wave function collapse; but, thus far, results are inconclusive.[25][26]

Participatory anthropic principle (PAP)

John Archibald Wheeler's participatory anthropic principle says that consciousness plays some role in bringing the universe into existence.[27]

Other physicists have elaborated their own variations of the von Neumann interpretation; including:

Henry P. Stapp (Mindful Universe: Quantum Mechanics and the Participating Observer)

Bruce Rosenblum and Fred Kuttner (Quantum Enigma: Physics Encounters Consciousness)

Add another one which is supported by Bernard D'Espagnat -
Quantum weirdness: What we call 'reality' is just a state of mind

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/bl...m-entanglement

This is the correct approach to bridge the gap between quantum mechanics and Advaita because in Indian psychology it is just the opposite the processes in the brain doesn't produce consciousness but a metaphysical mind retrospectively creates empirical reality. If more support grows for this hypothesis then its very much likely that we are with in the grasp of non-dualistic thought and that the universe is indeed non-dual.

It just gives additional reasons to rigorously study Advaita but science doesn't prove that Advaita is true but it is just a pointer to an independent reality.