Does physics leave room for the spiritual?

kagosielu

kagosielu

Sword of Attila
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Points
0
People often refer to ghost and spirits and all the religious like as supernatural. Meaning outside the realm of science, so it can't be proven or disproven. But what if it's not?

I mean, with all the stuff I read about quantum mechanics(with even that, it's still pretty confusing to me, but I love it), it seems more that ever science has become mystical.

I was just thinking. Even though we can many things in electrons proton and neutrons and the element made from them, we've learned there's much more to the universe than just the stuff on the periodic table. There's gravity, there's dark matter, there's dark energy. Could there be room in there for what would be the spirit?

If there's more more to the universe than atoms, maybe that leaves room for the spirit too, right? And maybe someday, it can be scientifically found and proven. And then we'll have a name for it, just like we have names like "quarks", "axion", "glueball", "meson", "plasmon" and so forth.

Am I right here? Or just completely ignorant about science?
 
kagosielu said:
People often refer to ghost and spirits and all the religious like as supernatural. Meaning outside the realm of science, so it can't be proven or disproven. But what if it's not?

I mean, with all the stuff I read about quantum mechanics(with even that, it's still pretty confusing to me, but I love it), it seems more that ever science has become mystical.

I was just thinking. Even though we can many things in electrons proton and neutrons and the element made from them, we've learned there's much more to the universe than just the stuff on the periodic table. There's gravity, there's dark matter, there's dark energy. Could there be room in there for what would be the spirit?

If there's more more to the universe than atoms, maybe that leaves room for the spirit too, right? And maybe someday, it can be scientifically found and proven. And then we'll have a name for it, just like we have names like "quarks", "axion", "glueball", "meson", "plasmon" and so forth.

Am I right here? Or just completely ignorant about science?
Click to expand...

You may be right. But even if we were to find and name that which we today regard as supernatural, in answering such questions new mysteries will be created. There is always another question, always a beyond. And I say good!! How tedious life could become without questions to ponder.

Tao
 
kagosielu said:
People often refer to ghost and spirits and all the religious like as supernatural. Meaning outside the realm of science, so it can't be proven or disproven. But what if it's not?

I mean, with all the stuff I read about quantum mechanics(with even that, it's still pretty confusing to me, but I love it), it seems more that ever science has become mystical.

I was just thinking. Even though we can many things in electrons proton and neutrons and the element made from them, we've learned there's much more to the universe than just the stuff on the periodic table. There's gravity, there's dark matter, there's dark energy. Could there be room in there for what would be the spirit?

If there's more more to the universe than atoms, maybe that leaves room for the spirit too, right? And maybe someday, it can be scientifically found and proven. And then we'll have a name for it, just like we have names like "quarks", "axion", "glueball", "meson", "plasmon" and so forth.

Am I right here? Or just completely ignorant about science?
Click to expand...

Hi Kago,

Quantum physics is explained, for the average dummy like me, in analogical terms. IOW, it's explained in little anecdotal analogies like the Schroedinger's cat analogy. When you convert an object-less, or non local reality to an analogy of an object based reality there are always going to be problems in the storyline. The first problem is that it starts to sound as if Classical reality can be manipulated by an observer. This may be true metaphysically, but it is not true physically.

What is spirituality?

Chris
 
Rather than trying to define spirituality as what it is, it might be easier to talk about what it isn't.
For example, I might observe that spirituality seems independent of syllogism though it might include it.
Accordingly I might be able to say that spirituality isn't linear.
 
China Cat Sunflower said:
The first problem is that it starts to sound as if Classical reality can be manipulated by an observer. This may be true metaphysically, but it is not true physically.
Click to expand...

There are now many stringently monitored experiments that prove beyond doubt that a variety of animals are psychically linked to their owners. Such abilities are commonly, in the scientific community, dismissed as metaphysical. The brain functions of the animals and the mechanisms they employ for such remote viewing is a mystery to us. Classical reality does not explain all observables. In human ESP tests the results consistently show that the average ability is about 5% above random chance. A small figure but over the course of the 1000s of subjects that have taken part it is significant. Some individuals are able to get much higher scores. It could be that classical reality is a convenient rather than an accurate way to look at things.
The implications for mankind's foray into the world of quantum mechanics may turn out to be of little significance for day to day life. On the other hand it may be a revolution of the highest order that changes the whole way we perceive reality. We have so far only discovered there is a box of tricks, who knows what we will find when we really open it.

Tao
 
The fact that different properties are observed under different sets of experimental conditions doesn't prove that observation changes anything intrinsic.

Chris
 
kagosielu said:
People often refer to ghost and spirits and all the religious like as supernatural. Meaning outside the realm of science, so it can't be proven or disproven. But what if it's not?

I mean, with all the stuff I read about quantum mechanics(with even that, it's still pretty confusing to me, but I love it), it seems more that ever science has become mystical.

I was just thinking. Even though we can many things in electrons proton and neutrons and the element made from them, we've learned there's much more to the universe than just the stuff on the periodic table. There's gravity, there's dark matter, there's dark energy. Could there be room in there for what would be the spirit?

If there's more more to the universe than atoms, maybe that leaves room for the spirit too, right? And maybe someday, it can be scientifically found and proven. And then we'll have a name for it, just like we have names like "quarks", "axion", "glueball", "meson", "plasmon" and so forth.

Am I right here? Or just completely ignorant about science?
Click to expand...

Quantum Theory gets more fun than that. They have decided that there are 10 dimensions plus 1. The 10 dimensions "stack" and we only know less than half of them. And the added one is for Chaos where none of the rules in the other 10 hold true.

Also lately they have decided that the Big Bang is to be replaced with something like a Big Whoosh. That two membranes (usually called just Branes) touched causing a huge influx of matter and energy into our brane (now our universe).

So old proofs such as "Matter and Energy cannot be created or destroyed but only converted" need to be re-examined. Its still true enough but the items it was used to disprove need a new view now that we have new places it could come from. Just because we could not measure such things before no longer makes them untrue.


Gandalf Parker
--
"If God created the Universe then where did he stand while doing it? Huh? HAHA!"
"He stood in the other brane and poked his finger thru. Please try to keep up."
 
A scientist might realize that with all things that use energy there is a resulting product that can never be measured with science. That physical something can not be independently measured... it is in spirit.

Tao_Equus said:
You can safely remove the "might be able to".
Click to expand...
Disavowing rational proof for the power of a desired assumption... I see.
 
I don't believe in ghosts or demons or goblins, but there are some phenomena that are hard to explain. I suspect that the way our memories are processed in our brains is akin to a destructive holographic interaction. What we imagine in our Science fiction about 'Solid holograms' could be similar to what happens in our brains, and it would explain how we simulate things, make projections, psychically connect to other animals, etc. I've had a few really good precognitive warnings (but also two times I falsely panicked about a loved-one's safety), and possibly had some psychic connection with animals through visualization. These experiences I had aren't things I've explored, though. They just happened. I think the easiest animals to test for psychic connections would be cats, because of their group hunting style.
 
OK I’m struggling to get off first base here.


Physics is the science of matter[1] and its motion,[2][3] as well as space and time[4][5] — the science that deals with concepts such as force, energy, mass, and charge. Physics is an experimental science;[6] it is the general analysis of nature, conducted to understand how the world around us behaves.[7]

Spirituality, in a narrow sense, concerns itself with matters of the spirit, a concept closely tied to religious belief and faith, a transcendent reality), and God. Spiritual matters are thus those matters regarding humankind's ultimate nature and purpose, not only as material biological organisms, but as beings with a unique relationship to that which is beyond both time and the material world.

(courtesy of Wiki)


Isn’t the OP like saying “Does architecture leave room for musical appreciation?”



s.
 
Snoopy said:
OK I’m struggling to get off first base here.


Physics is the science of matter[1] and its motion,[2][3] as well as space and time[4][5] — the science that deals with concepts such as force, energy, mass, and charge. Physics is an experimental science;[6] it is the general analysis of nature, conducted to understand how the world around us behaves.[7]

Spirituality, in a narrow sense, concerns itself with matters of the spirit, a concept closely tied to religious belief and faith, a transcendent reality), and God. Spiritual matters are thus those matters regarding humankind's ultimate nature and purpose, not only as material biological organisms, but as beings with a unique relationship to that which is beyond both time and the material world.

(courtesy of Wiki)


Isn’t the OP like saying “Does architecture leave room for musical appreciation?”



s.
Click to expand...
Ha! Brilliant, Snoopy! :cool:
Many buildings are specifically designed for their acoustical properties. Now, in order to answer the question, we just have to figure out how to "look for signs of 'acoustical (spiritual) design' within the 'architecture' of physics." :)
 
seattlegal said:
Ha! Brilliant, Snoopy! :cool:
Many buildings are specifically designed for their acoustical properties. Now, in order to answer the question, we just have to figure out how to "look for signs of 'acoustical (spiritual) design' within the 'architecture' of physics." :)
Click to expand...

I'll take that to be Brilliant as in Crap then me old flower. I tried to come up with an analogous comparison using two unrelated spheres and that's what you do to me. Right off my Christmas card list. What I meant was that spirituality does not fall under the aegis of physics.

Last night I watched a programme on meditation. The programme was "done" by a scientist. Although she was open minded (cf other famous scientists ;)) and the programme interesting (cos of the subject and content e.g. Matthieu Ricard) the approach was a perfect example of what I'm trying (and failing) to put accross. She kept banging on about THE scientific approach which seemed to mean find a way to create an experiment and vary just one variable and look for a statistically significant change in the only other variable. Concerning meditation. Concerning the mind. Not two chemicals in a test tube. :mad:


We were supposed to be amazed that meditation produced better mental health (real happiness, less depression) than with endless prescription drugs (courtesy of science).

She thought it an amazing idea that meditation might be of benefit to everyone?! Why!!??

s.

OK you may have found a button.
 
Snoopy said:
I'll take that to be Brilliant as in Crap then me old flower. I tried to come up with an analogous comparison using two unrelated spheres and that's what you do to me. Right off my Christmas card list. What I meant was that spirituality does not fall under the aegis of physics.
Click to expand...
Sorry. Does this mean everything is not interconnected? :(

Last night I watched a programme on meditation. The programme was "done" by a scientist. Although she was open minded (cf other famous scientists ;)) and the programme interesting (cos of the subject and content e.g. Matthieu Ricard) the approach was a perfect example of what I'm trying (and failing) to put accross. She kept banging on about THE scientific approach which seemed to mean find a way to create an experiment and vary just one variable and look for a statistically significant change in the only other variable. Concerning meditation. Concerning the mind. Not two chemicals in a test tube. :mad:
Click to expand...
Since the mind is ever changing, you will not be able to isolate just one variable and still have 'mind,' so to speak (at least that's what I think. :eek:) However, you can look for patterns within the whole.
OK you may have found a button.
Click to expand...
:D
 
seattlegal said:
Sorry. Does this mean everything is not interconnected? :(
Click to expand...

Yes, ultimately. But down here in Relativeville, no!


Since the mind is ever changing, you will not be able to isolate just one variable and still have 'mind,' so to speak (at least that's what I think. :eek:)
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. :)

However, you can look for patterns within the whole.
Click to expand...

Perhaps. But this sort of looking is like looking for flowers using a flame thrower as the optical instrument.

s.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top