This experiment in quantum physics named the “double slit” experiment shows that mater as perceived by a “normal” human being is not so in “reality.”
Most human beings will perceive matter as “particles.” However, as we can see in this experiment a particle could be a “wave” as well. This paradox has been named the “wave–particle duality.” If you would like to know more about this, please read this wiki article.
By watching this practical video, we can see that everything depends on the observer who is “measuring” what appears to be “reality.”
How is that related with spirituality?
Spirituality had the answer long ago. There is a pre-ordained Drama which moves everything from the quantum level of the electron through a particle. This is something which Science hasn’t quite figure it out.
There is also a “role” which perceives and observes the things happening in the Drama in a particular way. That role is within the Drama.
Observation based on expectation (as in the experiment) is not observing but inferring, thinking.
This is the same phenomena that a human being displays. When we observe life, when we observe our own inner world; we already have an expectation of “what to get out of it.”
If “I” observe “my thoughts,” it is so I can get rid of my wasteful thinking. That is an expectation which will not allow me to observe.
This is why, reality as it is or “truth” could be observed when that “I” is not there, for otherwise; there is thought and with that thinking there is an entity called the “me” manipulating information based on previous experiences.
To understand this principle of duality means to understand the principle of “being and non-being.” A person immersed in spirituality, may want to consider the following points:
1) what “I” observe is not necessarily real.
2) What my logic and reasoning are able to find as “facts,” are not necessarily true.
3) There is a paradoxical quality in very phenomena in life, so if “I” attach myself to a particular belief or concept; “I” will be missing the other side which duality brings. There is the reality of the concept but also the reality of the “no-concept.”
4) As long as there is “I” there cannot be the whole picture. “Truly” observing is not possible.
5) The way we have perceived the world as emphasized by “traditional” physics, mathematics, history and any other source of human knowledge is not truly real, for the “I” has been lingering in that observation. This is what is commonly known as “biased” perception.
6) This is the reason why we should not be attached to a concept or perception of the senses, for it is a half-truth as best.
7) Egolessness is the way to observe without bias.
A drop of water belongs to the Ocean just like a human being to the Drama of life. To feel separated as “me” different from life, means not to see the “reality” of being the same thing at the same time.
Om shanti dear divine brother.
Thanks for churning gyan in a different way and sharing it with us. Brother, i have some questions and some (different) perceptions which i would like to share ….
1.( “What is interesting is that something that doesn’t have mass makes up something “bigger” that has mass.
Mathias: Something that doesn’t have locality makes up something that has ubication….
Ananda: Yes!” )
Brother, the mass of an electron is almost negligible but what ‘creates’ the mass of an atom is the mass of protons and neutrons which form the nucleus of the atom. On a C-12 scale which measures the mass of an atom, the weight of a proton and and the weight of a neutron are approximately 1; and that of an electron is 1/1836.
So, based on the atomic number (number of protons+ number of neutrons) of an atom, the total weight / mass of an atom is calculated. So, though the electrons are ‘weightless’ and circle round the nucleus in the atom, and do not have a fixed location, the atom does have a fixed location and has a fixed mass. So, when they (atoms) come together, they can create huge objects which have considerable mass, and occupy space.
2. Brother, please check this sentence –
(“Human beings nowadays are in a distinct level of consciousness. In that “perception” there is a location and ubication.”)
Did you mean to say, ” In that consciousness they perceive a location and ubication’? (instead of, “In that perception there is a location and ubication.”)
3. In my simple understanding – the entire corporeal world is constantly changing according to the law of entropy. Our thought energies also influence them no matter how far away they may be located. As we transform ourselves by the end of each kalpa, they too get transformed. And we see the stars, moon etc. in the same location in stayug (every kalpa) and in the same location where they ‘existed’ in kaliyug every kalpa.
Please correct me if these thoughts are not accurate.
Thank you for your good questions!
On questions number 1, by all scientific experiments and what not, you are right! Electrons do have mass. BUT, how can you explain that they can be in two different places at the same time? Mass means a single location (in my understanding) but I could be wrong. However, as your probably noticed Mathias changed the wording and said: “Something that doesn’t have locality makes up something that has ubication….”
By doing that, the issue of having mass or not having mass does not become the problem, but to explain how is it possible for things to be at different places at the same time. (No locality for the microscopic elements but there is a “clear” locality, ubication for a greater item which those smaller items make up.)
Let me add that your numbers for weight of the microscopic elements could vary depending on the theory in fashion. However, it looks “impressive” to know such numbers.
Sir Roger Penrose is one of the most publicized physicists from the UK. It appears to me that he has the “freedom” to be able to think in an “unorthodox” way and still being listened to. Other scientists may not enjoy such privilege. Here is an article about the location issue of the electrons. http://discovermagazine.com/2005/jun/cover#.UPnAKCdEEsI
On question #2, either way is fine. Consciousness gives you a particular perception, or location and ubication. A perception gives you a particular ubication and location. The meaning is that what we perceive is largely in part through the roles that we play. That perception is usually a “collective thinking” type of role, which will change in time according to the Drama.
On question #3, we “think that we transform.” Everything transforms without “our” thinking, but our thinking happens at the time when things transform… 🙂 It is a unity. I can’t think how our thinking can bring stars back to the same position they were in 5000 years… but it does not mean that it couldn’t happen. What I can clearly see is that our perception on how stars “move” in space is flawed, but “right” according to the Drama.
Here is a good article to read if interested in the intricacies of quantum mechanics.. https://www.bigquestionsonline.com/content/does-quantum-physics-make-it-easier-believe-god