August 7, 2008
AIMC Physics East & West
The Cultural Influence of Physics: Physics as Modern Religion (980 words)
A google search for the film “What the bleep do we know,” (searched using quotation marks) produces over a million hits -- precisely 1,080,000 hits. This 2004 documentary film explores the worlds of “Quantum Physics, Neurology, and Molecular Biology in relation to the spheres of Spirituality, Metaphysics, and Polish weddings” according to the official website for the film--basically suggesting a connection between the laws of quantum physics and collective consciousness. It has spawned over 100 “Study Groups” across the world, in places as far flung as Argentina, South Africa, Canada, and Turkey.It is hailed as one of the most successful documentaries of all time, and was distributed in over thirty countries. There is some controversy surrounding the film’s message, published in the journal Physics Today, about the accuracy of the science in the film. Whether or not all of the film’s claims can be scientifically proven is not the point of this paper. The point is that ideas being generated by physicists are being grabbed a hold of by millions of lay people. Physics has finally pervaded popular consciousness, and done so in a powerful way. So, what is the strong appeal of this film? Why are millions of people, who probably hated high school physics class, suddenly interested in physics?
There is a famous sequence in the film now titled “I create My Day” spoken by Dr. Joe Dispenza. In the interview, Dispenza talks of consciously designing his destiny from a spiritual standpoint, and by doing so he is “infecting the quantum field.” He goes on to say, “Now if (it) is in fact the observer’s watching me the whole time that I’m doing this and there is a spiritual aspect to myself, then show me a sign today that you paid attention to any one of these things that I created, and bring them in a way that I won’t expect, so I’m as surprised at my ability to be able to experience these things. And make it so that I have no doubt that it’s come from you.” This sounds an awful lot like a prayer to the great “observer” in the sky. You see, popular interpretations of physics have turned God into a scientist.
Science started replacing God in the late 1700s and early 1800s when scientific discoveries began to conflict with Christian thinking. At the end of the 1800s, with the publication of Darwin’s treatise, the “theory of evolution” began to replace a belief in God. Political ideologies, such as communism, which rose to popularity in the early 1900s, further eroded a reliance on religion and God. Perhaps God could be replaced by the social structure? In the West, the social and cultural revolutions of the 1960s and 70s were partially successful because they were rebelling against the Christian thinking and behavior that had made somewhat of a comeback in the post World War II years of the late 1940s and 50s. The social revolution wanted to bring about greater freedoms and traditional Christianity was seen, for the most part, as restrictive. God was no longer speaking to the masses. The scientific worldview had begun to completely take over. In the 1980s and 1990s Christmas got pulled from school, the theory of evolution was commonly taught, and those still adhering to religious views began to home school their children. Yet it seems this mass exodus from churches left people feeling empty. The “Me Generation” got lost in consumerism, cocaine, overeating, and divorce; crime rates went up and things came crashing down. Once forbidden by religion, these behaviors became more and more okay. Scientific thought now led us and, for all its explanations for how things work, science doesn’t offer ethics, rules for the game, nor does it lend a lot of meaning -- it doesn’t answer the “whys” and “who am I” and “how should I behave.”
Enter physics. Physics is the only hard science that circles back around to exploring questions involving God. Through looking deeply at how things work, physicists began to offer up meaningful explanations that sounded a lot like the words of ancient mystics. David Bohm has been quoted as saying, “Individuality is only possible if it unfolds from wholeness.” Niels Bohr said, “Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real.” Physicists even admit to a search for the “God particle.”
The film “What the bleep do we know” packages science and religion together for consumption by popular culture. It gives us permission to pray to the great “observer” in the sky without feeling embarrassed about being “religious” since religion went out of style long ago, around the time of Sir Isaac Newton’s influential temper tantrum when he declared that he would not believe in the invisible, and not believe something simply because someone told him it was. Newton’s Principia Mathematica declares the rules for the scientific method. The first is “We are to admit no more causes of natural things such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances.” The funny thing is that Newton, a pioneer of modern physics, insisted on discovering the world for himself. This method of discovery -- science -- has led us back to God after all.
So we have been on a long journey together, searching for the truth. With Newton we disregarded everything that we could not explain. We lost mystery, and without mystery we lost meaning. From the numbers of people running to see “What the bleep do we know” and buying books with titles like “5 Steps to a Quantum Life: How to Use the Astounding Secrets of Quantum Physics to Create the Life You Want,” it seems that we are welcoming the mystery back, and many of us prefer to have that mystery wrapped in science.
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Week Thirteen: Bionics and Our Biophysical Future
This whole topic is a little depressing to me. If you have any good jokes about lost limbs, I'd love to hear them.
Would you support the development of a “bionic” person?
Bionic parts don’t trouble me as much as perhaps they should. Someone in the market for a bionic replacement probably had a bad accident, or perhaps worked their body so much that the part just wore out. It sure is nice to be able to move around “normally” with all your parts, free of pain. We’ve been giving people false teeth for some time now -- at least since 1789 when George Washington became president. It’s good to be able to chew your food, you know? I know a lot of people of my mother’s generation, born in places where the water wasn’t fluoridated, who have a full set of dentures today. Nothing seems ethically “wrong” with this to me. But when I looked into George Washington’s false teeth I discovered that his dentures (there are four sets that are still preserved) were made of the following materials: gold, ivory, lead, human teeth, horse and donkey teeth.
It is the questioning of the kinds of materials that might be used for bionic parts that gives me pause. Where will the materials come from? Will the demand for bionic parts rise so high that it will impact the earth due to overuse of materials and the fact that today’s bionic parts don’t biodegrade?
Social justice questions come into the picture here, too. Who will receive bionic parts? Only people who can afford them? Will the distribution of bionic parts be equitable?
What impact does having non-human body parts have on the energy system of the body? Is it “healthy”?
The scariest scenario of all this is that the military might put bionics to nefarious uses, as usual--kind of like Robert Downey, Jr., in Iron Man. The military always seems to find a use for new technology - a new way to kill people. Just the opposite use of what “medical advancements” are created for.
But finally, if we have a way to replace limbs lost to diabetes, to cancer, to reckless accidents, to war, what’s to encourage us to live healthier lives, collectively? Why do we have so much diabetes and cancer? Bionics just seems to say “who cares” on these issues, and pushes on forward to the “future” where we can continue to move further and further away from “nature” and invent ways to get around our suffering. So far, judging from where much of our technology has led us, it seems this doesn’t actually alleviate suffering in the end, but increases it.
How would you rate “the control of artificial limbs by thought alone”?
I apologize, but I can’t quite get over how we arrived here...experiments on other animals for “human benefit.” How can something that was created from the suffering of others be a “good” technology? How can we blindly disregard and accept this fact? Some of us recognize that Decartes mind/body split was inaccurate and many of the effects of this thinking were harmful. Decartes performed a lot of experiments on non-human animals for the benefit of science, to satisfy his own curiosity, and with the presumption that non-human animals don’t feel pain. This is profoundly disturbing to me and feels wrong at all levels.
It’s pretty exciting to know that our brain waves are “real” and exciting to think of being able to move physical objects, or even objects on a screen, by thought alone. It feels very empowering. But we have had a number of people claiming these powers for a long time -- psychics, spoon benders, even qigong masters -- and these people were laughed at and disregarded. Only through “real scientific proof” gained through putting a lot of living beings through a lifetime of awful suffering for the benefit of human kind, beings we arrogantly decide are more worthy than other living creatures, do we give credence to this power of the mind. I think that sucks and on principle cannot think these technologies are exciting or cool because they come to us in a most inhumane way.
There are videos on you tube of the experiments that used monkeys to develop these technologies. I’ll spare you from my urge to post some of these videos. These images are difficult, if not impossible, to watch. What kind of life is that for anyone, for any purpose? It kind of takes the fun out of playing one of these mind control video games. And takes away the joy at watching some little kid, whose arm was blown off by a land mine, have use of an artificial limb through thought alone. I just can’t sit quietly with that. I would rather put my efforts into stopping war, diabetes, stroke, and reckless accidents so that we don’t need to use this technology. I’d rather practice trying to bend spoons with my own mind, or honing my “psychic powers,” however hippy dippy that may sound to some people. Or working with people to try to find joy in life without all of their body parts intact.
So I would rate this technology, developed in this way, as awful. It turns my stomach.
I’m sure there are a lot of innovations that I myself take advantage of because some other animal was subject to many lifetimes of hideous experimentation. That’s hard to sit with, too.
Causalities of war...I'm sure robotic limbs would improve their lives.
But this doesn't look like a very happy existance to me.
Would you support the development of a “bionic” person?
Bionic parts don’t trouble me as much as perhaps they should. Someone in the market for a bionic replacement probably had a bad accident, or perhaps worked their body so much that the part just wore out. It sure is nice to be able to move around “normally” with all your parts, free of pain. We’ve been giving people false teeth for some time now -- at least since 1789 when George Washington became president. It’s good to be able to chew your food, you know? I know a lot of people of my mother’s generation, born in places where the water wasn’t fluoridated, who have a full set of dentures today. Nothing seems ethically “wrong” with this to me. But when I looked into George Washington’s false teeth I discovered that his dentures (there are four sets that are still preserved) were made of the following materials: gold, ivory, lead, human teeth, horse and donkey teeth.
It is the questioning of the kinds of materials that might be used for bionic parts that gives me pause. Where will the materials come from? Will the demand for bionic parts rise so high that it will impact the earth due to overuse of materials and the fact that today’s bionic parts don’t biodegrade?
Social justice questions come into the picture here, too. Who will receive bionic parts? Only people who can afford them? Will the distribution of bionic parts be equitable?
What impact does having non-human body parts have on the energy system of the body? Is it “healthy”?
The scariest scenario of all this is that the military might put bionics to nefarious uses, as usual--kind of like Robert Downey, Jr., in Iron Man. The military always seems to find a use for new technology - a new way to kill people. Just the opposite use of what “medical advancements” are created for.
But finally, if we have a way to replace limbs lost to diabetes, to cancer, to reckless accidents, to war, what’s to encourage us to live healthier lives, collectively? Why do we have so much diabetes and cancer? Bionics just seems to say “who cares” on these issues, and pushes on forward to the “future” where we can continue to move further and further away from “nature” and invent ways to get around our suffering. So far, judging from where much of our technology has led us, it seems this doesn’t actually alleviate suffering in the end, but increases it.
How would you rate “the control of artificial limbs by thought alone”?
I apologize, but I can’t quite get over how we arrived here...experiments on other animals for “human benefit.” How can something that was created from the suffering of others be a “good” technology? How can we blindly disregard and accept this fact? Some of us recognize that Decartes mind/body split was inaccurate and many of the effects of this thinking were harmful. Decartes performed a lot of experiments on non-human animals for the benefit of science, to satisfy his own curiosity, and with the presumption that non-human animals don’t feel pain. This is profoundly disturbing to me and feels wrong at all levels.
It’s pretty exciting to know that our brain waves are “real” and exciting to think of being able to move physical objects, or even objects on a screen, by thought alone. It feels very empowering. But we have had a number of people claiming these powers for a long time -- psychics, spoon benders, even qigong masters -- and these people were laughed at and disregarded. Only through “real scientific proof” gained through putting a lot of living beings through a lifetime of awful suffering for the benefit of human kind, beings we arrogantly decide are more worthy than other living creatures, do we give credence to this power of the mind. I think that sucks and on principle cannot think these technologies are exciting or cool because they come to us in a most inhumane way.
There are videos on you tube of the experiments that used monkeys to develop these technologies. I’ll spare you from my urge to post some of these videos. These images are difficult, if not impossible, to watch. What kind of life is that for anyone, for any purpose? It kind of takes the fun out of playing one of these mind control video games. And takes away the joy at watching some little kid, whose arm was blown off by a land mine, have use of an artificial limb through thought alone. I just can’t sit quietly with that. I would rather put my efforts into stopping war, diabetes, stroke, and reckless accidents so that we don’t need to use this technology. I’d rather practice trying to bend spoons with my own mind, or honing my “psychic powers,” however hippy dippy that may sound to some people. Or working with people to try to find joy in life without all of their body parts intact.
So I would rate this technology, developed in this way, as awful. It turns my stomach.
I’m sure there are a lot of innovations that I myself take advantage of because some other animal was subject to many lifetimes of hideous experimentation. That’s hard to sit with, too.
Causalities of war...I'm sure robotic limbs would improve their lives.
But this doesn't look like a very happy existance to me.
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Week Eleven: Energy Medicine and Energy Fields
Acupuncture as effective energy medicine / Human intent as it affects health (these two questions are linked for me)
How can effectiveness of any treatment be measured? My graduate work was in medical anthropology; part of our study turned the lens onto western biomedicine. Studies within this field have shown how the amount of both the patient’s and the physician’s BELIEF in the treatment at hand impacted the efficacy of the treatment. Doctors have been quoted as saying “prescribe this medication while it still works” meaning that new medications often had a kind of “beginner’s luck” while belief in the medication ran high. If physician and patient were coming from two different belief systems, treatment was often not as effective.
I tend to think of almost any treatment as a placebo. Our minds’ belief in the strengths and limitations of treatments, and of our own healing powers, I think ultimately have the greatest impact on our health.
So...is acupuncture effective? To me, the overall metaphor of Chinese medicine is truer to life than the clinical and detached belief system of western biomedicine. Therefore, right off the bat I think it must be more effective, because it is truer to what I believe as a metaphysical reality of union and interconnectedness. Treating the body as a microsystem of the planet is much more respectful than treating the body as though it were a “dumb machine.” Life IS energy, and therefore it makes sense to me to treat the body as an energy system. I do think that “buy in” is almost always essential in any treatment, however. And I think more and more people are allowing themselves to respect their bodies as part of the natural order of things.
The effectiveness of acupuncture will be difficult to study because so many variables are involved and no treatment or practitioner is essentially the same, easily reproduced in exactly the same manner. What will matter, I suppose, is whether or not people who are treated feel as if it were effective and can see/feel the results themselves. I know that I personally have had experiences with acupuncture that affected me so profoundly and deeply that it is almost hard to believe -- kind of like seeing a ghost; the amazement at realizing the universe really is as mysterious and wonderful as we might have hoped, and that we are intimately connected to it as living energy beings! Wow! I have also gathered many, many similar stories from others relating how amazed they were by the profound effectiveness of acupuncture.
Acupuncture in the TV News media tells an interesting story of where we are with it in our popular culture...
Some healing stories about the effectiveness of acupuncture and other energy-based medicine...
What conclusions can you draw from Kirlian photography?
Only that we possess electrical energy which can be photographed.
How can effectiveness of any treatment be measured? My graduate work was in medical anthropology; part of our study turned the lens onto western biomedicine. Studies within this field have shown how the amount of both the patient’s and the physician’s BELIEF in the treatment at hand impacted the efficacy of the treatment. Doctors have been quoted as saying “prescribe this medication while it still works” meaning that new medications often had a kind of “beginner’s luck” while belief in the medication ran high. If physician and patient were coming from two different belief systems, treatment was often not as effective.
I tend to think of almost any treatment as a placebo. Our minds’ belief in the strengths and limitations of treatments, and of our own healing powers, I think ultimately have the greatest impact on our health.
So...is acupuncture effective? To me, the overall metaphor of Chinese medicine is truer to life than the clinical and detached belief system of western biomedicine. Therefore, right off the bat I think it must be more effective, because it is truer to what I believe as a metaphysical reality of union and interconnectedness. Treating the body as a microsystem of the planet is much more respectful than treating the body as though it were a “dumb machine.” Life IS energy, and therefore it makes sense to me to treat the body as an energy system. I do think that “buy in” is almost always essential in any treatment, however. And I think more and more people are allowing themselves to respect their bodies as part of the natural order of things.
The effectiveness of acupuncture will be difficult to study because so many variables are involved and no treatment or practitioner is essentially the same, easily reproduced in exactly the same manner. What will matter, I suppose, is whether or not people who are treated feel as if it were effective and can see/feel the results themselves. I know that I personally have had experiences with acupuncture that affected me so profoundly and deeply that it is almost hard to believe -- kind of like seeing a ghost; the amazement at realizing the universe really is as mysterious and wonderful as we might have hoped, and that we are intimately connected to it as living energy beings! Wow! I have also gathered many, many similar stories from others relating how amazed they were by the profound effectiveness of acupuncture.
Acupuncture in the TV News media tells an interesting story of where we are with it in our popular culture...
Some healing stories about the effectiveness of acupuncture and other energy-based medicine...
What conclusions can you draw from Kirlian photography?
Only that we possess electrical energy which can be photographed.
Week Ten: Living Systems
Dead or Alive?
I know I’m a living system because...
I feel love. That sounds kind of cheesy, I know. I don’t identify so much with my body though as I do my soul. Identifying other things with their spirit essence instead of their physical construction makes it easier to attribute “living” qualities to things like rocks and pieces of trash. Reflecting on this question honestly scares me a bit. I’ve been working hard these last five or so years to identify more with my body -- to “be in” my body more...but today I realize I still think of my body as a rubbery unit that is necessary in order to carry my soul around. That’s not to say I don’t feel the pain in my shoulder today, or that I don’t love a good foot rub, or that dancing, running, singing, and sex aren’t four of the biggest joys in my life, but they are more like extracurricular activities -- the real business is my soul. I’m the sort of person who feels bad if I fling a beloved pillow carelessly on to the ground because I’m worried it will feel lonely. Or I wouldn’t necessarily pile a bunch of blankets on top of each other because the bottom one might feel smothered. I feel immature admitting that...like a little kid who thinks her stuffed animals are truly alive....but I’m wanting to be honest here.
I collect lost and broken things; I think I do this in part because I feel sort of "sorry" for them. Them seem to have quite a bit of "life" left in them still, however...and often get a "new life" with me!
Some items from my collection...they seem alive to me!
I also know I’m a living system because I eat and poop. And because I know I’m going to die some day.
I tend also to associate other people more with their bodies than I associate myself with my body. I have pretty strong intuitions about the location of other peoples’ pain, and where to touch them to alleviate it. Sadly, I don’t tend to know my own body quite so well. And this has been a very interesting exercise. Yikes.
Biophysics and Oriental Medicine...
Systems! It took me awhile to see a connection, but the connection here I think is that they both utilize systems thinking. Do a search for “biophysics” and “systems” and you come up with studies about cellular systems, systems biology, neural systems, populations, ecosystems, descriptions of “living systems” at a microscopic level...etc. Biophysics takes interactions within the systems into account. We are no longer living in isolation. The body is no longer made of separate, discriminate parts like a watch...although if you think about it even watch parts are part of a system (if the spring breaks, so goes the whole thing!). Biophysics is interesting to me because any living system can be studying using biophysics as a lens. The similarity with oriental medicine is of course that oriental medicine views the body as a system interacting within an environment. Parts of the interior and exterior system affect each other. Nothing is occurring in isolation. I think that biophysics’s systems thinking might lend greater credibility to oriental medicine, and that oriental medicine might begin to see western science as more of a like-minded friend. Each could begin to learn more freely from the other.
This image, taken from a biophysics department studying of proteins, looks somewhat similar to something that might be found in a book about the five elements in Chinese medicine....
I know I’m a living system because...
I feel love. That sounds kind of cheesy, I know. I don’t identify so much with my body though as I do my soul. Identifying other things with their spirit essence instead of their physical construction makes it easier to attribute “living” qualities to things like rocks and pieces of trash. Reflecting on this question honestly scares me a bit. I’ve been working hard these last five or so years to identify more with my body -- to “be in” my body more...but today I realize I still think of my body as a rubbery unit that is necessary in order to carry my soul around. That’s not to say I don’t feel the pain in my shoulder today, or that I don’t love a good foot rub, or that dancing, running, singing, and sex aren’t four of the biggest joys in my life, but they are more like extracurricular activities -- the real business is my soul. I’m the sort of person who feels bad if I fling a beloved pillow carelessly on to the ground because I’m worried it will feel lonely. Or I wouldn’t necessarily pile a bunch of blankets on top of each other because the bottom one might feel smothered. I feel immature admitting that...like a little kid who thinks her stuffed animals are truly alive....but I’m wanting to be honest here.
I collect lost and broken things; I think I do this in part because I feel sort of "sorry" for them. Them seem to have quite a bit of "life" left in them still, however...and often get a "new life" with me!
Some items from my collection...they seem alive to me!
I also know I’m a living system because I eat and poop. And because I know I’m going to die some day.
I tend also to associate other people more with their bodies than I associate myself with my body. I have pretty strong intuitions about the location of other peoples’ pain, and where to touch them to alleviate it. Sadly, I don’t tend to know my own body quite so well. And this has been a very interesting exercise. Yikes.
Biophysics and Oriental Medicine...
Systems! It took me awhile to see a connection, but the connection here I think is that they both utilize systems thinking. Do a search for “biophysics” and “systems” and you come up with studies about cellular systems, systems biology, neural systems, populations, ecosystems, descriptions of “living systems” at a microscopic level...etc. Biophysics takes interactions within the systems into account. We are no longer living in isolation. The body is no longer made of separate, discriminate parts like a watch...although if you think about it even watch parts are part of a system (if the spring breaks, so goes the whole thing!). Biophysics is interesting to me because any living system can be studying using biophysics as a lens. The similarity with oriental medicine is of course that oriental medicine views the body as a system interacting within an environment. Parts of the interior and exterior system affect each other. Nothing is occurring in isolation. I think that biophysics’s systems thinking might lend greater credibility to oriental medicine, and that oriental medicine might begin to see western science as more of a like-minded friend. Each could begin to learn more freely from the other.
This image, taken from a biophysics department studying of proteins, looks somewhat similar to something that might be found in a book about the five elements in Chinese medicine....
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Week Nine: Towards a New Synthesis
Can I synthesize East and West?
In physics, I think a synthesis of Eastern and Western views has been apparent since at least the 1950s. In the general culture, I see a synthesis of East and West happening as well, though not quite as fully integrated. The “synthesis” is kind of like an introduction at this point to ways of being and thinking in both Eastern and Western cultures. Just through my own witnessing, and no particular research devoted to the topic, I list here some examples of Eastern / Asian influence in the West, and Western influence in the East:
Eastern influences in the West:
Martial arts: Karate, Tai Chi, Tae Kwon Do, etc.
Yoga / meditation
Chinese medical practices: herbs, acupuncture
Ayervedic medical practices
Buddhist and Hindu practices (books, monasteries, retreats)
Asian cuisine (Indian, Japanese, Chinese, Thai, etc.)
Increase in population of Asians
Products made in Asia are ubiquitous
Presence of the Dalai Lama as a world religious figure
local Asian TV stations
Western influences in the East:
Capitalism (or some version of it)
Increased consumption (energy, cars, food, etc.)
Westernized styles (music, dress, food, etc.)
Allopathic medicine
With increased global communication and travel we have seen ideas and lifestyles from far away places infiltrate previously isolated cultures (except, perhaps, in Wyoming). In places, the East looks more like the West than ever before and the West looks more like the East. I wouldn’t necessarily call this a true “synthesis” at this point, but we seem to be moving in that direction.
Most of these changes occur first at the lowest level --that of popular culture. True synthesis will come when the thinking and practices inform scientific, religious, and medical practices at the root level, which will become apparent when we see a synthesis of these ideas in education--when the new generation learns something from both worlds of thought.
In physics, I think a synthesis of Eastern and Western views has been apparent since at least the 1950s. In the general culture, I see a synthesis of East and West happening as well, though not quite as fully integrated. The “synthesis” is kind of like an introduction at this point to ways of being and thinking in both Eastern and Western cultures. Just through my own witnessing, and no particular research devoted to the topic, I list here some examples of Eastern / Asian influence in the West, and Western influence in the East:
Eastern influences in the West:
Martial arts: Karate, Tai Chi, Tae Kwon Do, etc.
Yoga / meditation
Chinese medical practices: herbs, acupuncture
Ayervedic medical practices
Buddhist and Hindu practices (books, monasteries, retreats)
Asian cuisine (Indian, Japanese, Chinese, Thai, etc.)
Increase in population of Asians
Products made in Asia are ubiquitous
Presence of the Dalai Lama as a world religious figure
local Asian TV stations
Western influences in the East:
Capitalism (or some version of it)
Increased consumption (energy, cars, food, etc.)
Westernized styles (music, dress, food, etc.)
Allopathic medicine
With increased global communication and travel we have seen ideas and lifestyles from far away places infiltrate previously isolated cultures (except, perhaps, in Wyoming). In places, the East looks more like the West than ever before and the West looks more like the East. I wouldn’t necessarily call this a true “synthesis” at this point, but we seem to be moving in that direction.
Most of these changes occur first at the lowest level --that of popular culture. True synthesis will come when the thinking and practices inform scientific, religious, and medical practices at the root level, which will become apparent when we see a synthesis of these ideas in education--when the new generation learns something from both worlds of thought.
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Week Eight: Classical Physics
Newton's Three Laws and Frances
I tell myself not to be afraid of Newton's Three Laws. Though I identify with my Capricorn nature, I also feel tethered to a sometimes uncomfortable earth where the three laws of physics described by Newton show themselves. I don't like to get hit by hurling objects, such as when "two objects interact, say in a collision" exerting equal amounts of force on one another (Newton's third law). The matter of world, and my soft human parts living amongst it, seems awfully dangerous sometimes. Not to mention a little irritating at other times -- tripping on a shoelace, dropping keys in a sewer grate, bumping my head on a sharp edge. Hauling things around this place also feels like an uncomfortable chore at times -- I don't much enjoy moving my stuff from one home to another, for example. All those boxes of books add up to a lot of heavy weight to lift. They do not move themselves (Newton's first law -- objects at rest remain at rest and a force must be applied to change the state of motion of an object).
So. Newton's laws are kind of a drag sometimes. I think a lot of people feel this way, and therefore have invented ways in which to use these same laws to help out with the heavy lifting our lifestyles and this earth seem to require (tow trucks, dollies, back hoes, etc.). My spirit knows differently, however, and moving my body in concert with these laws can feel exhilarating and energizing (running several miles, dancing around, the crack of a bat on a baseball, having sex, etc.).
The other world of imagination, spirit, quantum mechanics, appeals much more to me. It is, I think, the world of energy, whereas Newton's world concerns itself with matter. I love the wide open possibilities in the other world. The surprises and the magic of connection possible in the "other world" where it seems anything is possible.
I want to say something else about Newton's ideas. The scientific method that he presented in Principia Mathematica reminds me of the kinds of things that teenagers might exert to their parents. If human history can be viewed like one long life, taken collectively, then I would propose that beginning in Newton's time we were adolescents (and might be on the verge right now of growing out of this stage). His rules of scientific reasoning basically seem to be saying "I want to validate my OWN experience and will believe only what I carry out on my own, and I will build my own world and beliefs from MY observations and you can't tell me anything different, unless you can prove it to me." Only now do we seem to be confident enough to acknowledge that perhaps some of the old wisdom was good and true, and that maybe our elders knew a thing or two.
One more thing. I don't want to place judgement on our adolescent stage. Breaking things down into parts one can understand the world through its tiniest bits -- it reminds me of the first stanza of the WIlliam Blake poem "Auguries of Innocence":
To see a world in a grain of sand,
And a heaven in a wild flower,
Hold infinity in the palm of your hand,
And eternity in an hour.
Our Energy Efficient Culture
I am repelled by this topic of energy use in the U.S. because I feel ashamed of our collective habits. "Energy efficiency" seems like kind of joke to me, especially with population continuing to rise and more and more regions around the world growing comfortable with Western-style consumption. As long as numbers of people consuming energy continues to rise, even if products are becoming more "efficient," we will continue to use energy at an unsustainable rate. The answer seems to be to just stop using so much. Reduction instead of efficiency?
Descartes has a lot to answer for!
My opinion of Descartes impact on our culture is similar to what I wrote above about Newton. I think it may have been a necessary step toward our growth. Again, for some coincidental reason, I am reminded of William Blake and the "innocence experience innocence" idea of our life cycle. We are born innocent, travel through experiences and lose that innocence temporarily, and in the end return to innocence, but this time consciously and with wisdom. Blake believed that true inncence was impossible without experience. We berate ourselves for the destructive path we have trod down like bulldozers, and place blame on thinkers like Descartes who led the way through the realm of experience, but without Newton and Descartes we would not be on our way to a higher innocence, one that is hard won as we fumble around in the darkness trying to find the light switch.
The Angel
I dreamt a dream! What can it mean?
And that I was a maiden Queen
Guarded by an Angel mild:
Witless woe was ne'er beguiled!
And I wept both night and day,
And he wiped my tears away;
And I wept both day and night,
And hid from him my heart's delight.
So he took his wings, and fled;
Then the morn blushed rosy red.
I dried my tears, and armed my fears
With ten-thousand shields and spears.
Soon my Angel came again;
I was armed, he came in vain;
For the time of youth was fled,
And grey hairs were on my head.
William Blake
I tell myself not to be afraid of Newton's Three Laws. Though I identify with my Capricorn nature, I also feel tethered to a sometimes uncomfortable earth where the three laws of physics described by Newton show themselves. I don't like to get hit by hurling objects, such as when "two objects interact, say in a collision" exerting equal amounts of force on one another (Newton's third law). The matter of world, and my soft human parts living amongst it, seems awfully dangerous sometimes. Not to mention a little irritating at other times -- tripping on a shoelace, dropping keys in a sewer grate, bumping my head on a sharp edge. Hauling things around this place also feels like an uncomfortable chore at times -- I don't much enjoy moving my stuff from one home to another, for example. All those boxes of books add up to a lot of heavy weight to lift. They do not move themselves (Newton's first law -- objects at rest remain at rest and a force must be applied to change the state of motion of an object).
So. Newton's laws are kind of a drag sometimes. I think a lot of people feel this way, and therefore have invented ways in which to use these same laws to help out with the heavy lifting our lifestyles and this earth seem to require (tow trucks, dollies, back hoes, etc.). My spirit knows differently, however, and moving my body in concert with these laws can feel exhilarating and energizing (running several miles, dancing around, the crack of a bat on a baseball, having sex, etc.).
The other world of imagination, spirit, quantum mechanics, appeals much more to me. It is, I think, the world of energy, whereas Newton's world concerns itself with matter. I love the wide open possibilities in the other world. The surprises and the magic of connection possible in the "other world" where it seems anything is possible.
I want to say something else about Newton's ideas. The scientific method that he presented in Principia Mathematica reminds me of the kinds of things that teenagers might exert to their parents. If human history can be viewed like one long life, taken collectively, then I would propose that beginning in Newton's time we were adolescents (and might be on the verge right now of growing out of this stage). His rules of scientific reasoning basically seem to be saying "I want to validate my OWN experience and will believe only what I carry out on my own, and I will build my own world and beliefs from MY observations and you can't tell me anything different, unless you can prove it to me." Only now do we seem to be confident enough to acknowledge that perhaps some of the old wisdom was good and true, and that maybe our elders knew a thing or two.
One more thing. I don't want to place judgement on our adolescent stage. Breaking things down into parts one can understand the world through its tiniest bits -- it reminds me of the first stanza of the WIlliam Blake poem "Auguries of Innocence":
To see a world in a grain of sand,
And a heaven in a wild flower,
Hold infinity in the palm of your hand,
And eternity in an hour.
Our Energy Efficient Culture
I am repelled by this topic of energy use in the U.S. because I feel ashamed of our collective habits. "Energy efficiency" seems like kind of joke to me, especially with population continuing to rise and more and more regions around the world growing comfortable with Western-style consumption. As long as numbers of people consuming energy continues to rise, even if products are becoming more "efficient," we will continue to use energy at an unsustainable rate. The answer seems to be to just stop using so much. Reduction instead of efficiency?
Descartes has a lot to answer for!
My opinion of Descartes impact on our culture is similar to what I wrote above about Newton. I think it may have been a necessary step toward our growth. Again, for some coincidental reason, I am reminded of William Blake and the "innocence experience innocence" idea of our life cycle. We are born innocent, travel through experiences and lose that innocence temporarily, and in the end return to innocence, but this time consciously and with wisdom. Blake believed that true inncence was impossible without experience. We berate ourselves for the destructive path we have trod down like bulldozers, and place blame on thinkers like Descartes who led the way through the realm of experience, but without Newton and Descartes we would not be on our way to a higher innocence, one that is hard won as we fumble around in the darkness trying to find the light switch.
The Angel
I dreamt a dream! What can it mean?
And that I was a maiden Queen
Guarded by an Angel mild:
Witless woe was ne'er beguiled!
And I wept both night and day,
And he wiped my tears away;
And I wept both day and night,
And hid from him my heart's delight.
So he took his wings, and fled;
Then the morn blushed rosy red.
I dried my tears, and armed my fears
With ten-thousand shields and spears.
Soon my Angel came again;
I was armed, he came in vain;
For the time of youth was fled,
And grey hairs were on my head.
William Blake
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Week seven: Chaos Theory
Ordered chaos - does this sound familiar
Yes and no. In the world of cafes and scrambled eggs, cars and streets and shops, weddings and bar-be-ques, funerals and summer novels, newspapers and fall fashions...we westerners usually just go about our lives without thinking much about the nature of “reality.” The straight lines of human built structures, the predictable ticking of the clock, the typical stages of ones life, are all "givens" we hold on to...but what happens when things spin out of control? We do more studies, make straighter lines, build better bridges, blow people up, create prisons, invent alarm systems and stealth technology and drink ourselves into oblivion and continue to search for the laws of the universe that will finally allow us to feel safe, and continue to look for ways to control, or at least predict, our environment and the future.
The intangible uneasiness that leads to so much craziness comes from that deep down feeling that nothing is truly within our control. The surprises are called “freaks of nature” and “freak accidents” and "just bad luck" and “margins of error.” And a million different conflicting explanations will be presented to try to explain what happened, or to try to find someone to blame. We try to make some sense of it in order to figure out how not to be taken by surprise again. There another response to all of this, and that is the complete surrender to chaos--which might be called religion or surrendering to God’s will. But wars break out all the time in the name of God. And priests become pedophiles. And churches kick people out and steal their money...and sometimes evil deeds are justified as being "god's will."
So, the search continues for the God particle, a unified theory of everything -- someone please tell us what is going on! Where are we? Who are we? and Why are we here? Ordered chaos indeed.
The only “answer” that feels right to me is that the message seems to be to stay in the present moment, have faith in the general goodness of everything, allow this universal energy to flow through and keep on trying to do the best we can. Give up the need to control, predict tomorrow, and just do what you can right now, right here, to tune into the moment, and try to spread a lot of love along the way.
Fractals as Patterns of Complex Systems
Fractals present an interesting message, and another solution to “ordered chaos.” Instead of trying to place straight lines over the “mess” of the universe, fractals show a consciousness, a sensibility, to unpredictability. The designs found in fractals are related to the whole, but are not predictable or ever exactly the same. They show infinite originality, but beauty and balance. Like a surprise package that keeps on surprising, without unnerving or exploding, while still making sense, but also without having to be locked up, locked in, and controlled. It’s like someone is saying to us, “Just relax and enjoy the show. Everything will be fine if you just relax.” It’s a place between order and chaos. A place that has meaning without force or coercion. What a relief. What a beautiful message. What an ingenious solution. Not wildly messy, but not predictable and in control either. Balance.
Consciousness out of chaos
I think this “chaos” can be explained only by allowing for every bit of everything and every non-thing to possess consciousness. Using fractals as our window, how can one look at the infinite, chaotic order of fractals and deny this consciousness? Everything is working together with a beautiful unified creativity if only we would relax in this and not try to restrict and restrain and control it. Easier said than done, of course, but eventually maybe we will tire of trying to have all the answers and pushing our desire for control on the infinite creation.
Cool Experiments in Classical Physics...
I read through several of the experiments and played with the silverware for a little while. Looking at the reflection of my face in the front and back of a spoon, flicking the fork tines and hearing the vibration in a table, and looking at how text appears in the reflection of a knife. I am having trouble making any of it meaningful to me. Though I am wondering why the knife seems to hold on to the reflection of the text on the page and the text will move with the knife instead of continue to reflect straight across.
I also read through some of the computer experiments and learned that the computer is giving off radio waves...why?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)