Modern science seems to support parts of the metaphysical ideas in these blogs.. The oneness of all can be seen shining through in the holographic theory of the universe, and quantum physics. I became interested in this, because in my experience of oneness I saw how every one of my atoms reflects every other atom in the universe and vice versa. A hologram is a good metaphor for it, although imperfect.
So I started to investigate quantum physics. I knew I was on the right track when for the first time I read about the net of Indra in the book “the Tao of Physics.” Subsequent readings have deepened this understanding.
There are several established interpretations of what the math of quantum physics actually means.
Many of the more established interpretations all work well until they have to reckon with consciousness. No science has yet figured out that part. It’s like, well, our mathematics (so states the Copenhagen interpreting of quantum physics) explains it all pretty well, so let’s not start asking why, because that leads down the rabbit hole and we’ll have to deal with consciousness. So just shut up and compute..
But consciousness is in there somewhere, and we do have to account for it.
There are a handful of interpretations that attempts to explain what it all means or why this may be so (this is called ontology), for example, the quantum interpretation of David Bohm.
He states, that underlying the world we experience and measure there is an infinite quantum field that joins everything. This then guides elementary particles such as electrons, photons, etc. So in a way, it sets up the probabilities for things to happen, which is very much like the idea above how we set up probabilities of events to happen.
Another theory, the many-worlds-theory of Hugh Everett states that there could be infinite worlds besides our own, and with each outcome of some measurement a new universe is spawned. Most people dismiss this, as it is hard for us to fathom infinity. But it does give some scientific basis for the notion of alternate realities and probable selves.
Finally, I want to meation the transactional interpretation by John Cramer, which is time symetrical with waves traveling both into the future and the past to form a transaction between two particles. This interesting theory does indeed resolve many quantum paradoxes, and treats time as a whole.
I think that much of science and metaphysics say close the something, and it may very well be that over time the two will somehow converge, at least in some key areas, and form a uniform understanding.
Namaste — I bow to you and the Divine in you.
Copyright © Hanns-Oskar Porr