Карасев Александр Владимирович. Bernard Haisch. The God Theory

Bernard Haisch. The God Theory

A. V. KARASEV

Another doomed attempt to wrest science out of the grip of reductionism. Doomed to failure - because it is built on the terminology of atomism.

In order to succeed in this hopeless endeavor, it is necessary to abandon atomistic terminology from the very beginning. The physical theory should be based on the properties of the observer. The terminology should be based on the assumption that the world consists not of their particles, but of connections between observed events.

This is the only way to legitimize the position of the existence of the invisible world and build on this position a new picture of the world.

This beautiful book [1] reminds me of the works of Rupert Sheldrake [2]. The authoritative scientist offers revolutionary ideas against atomism, materialism and reductionism - to develop the ability to understand and use the creative energy of divine consciousness, which is the fundamental nature of all living things. And with the same unfortunate result as Sheldrake. Despite their former authority in scientific circles, these ideas are perceived as eccentricity at best. And even pseudoscience.

And all because they are trying to fight against atomism on a atomist field. Therefore, all such attempts are hopeless. It is necessary first of all to realize that the foundation of atomism is the position that there is nothing in the world except emptiness (space-time) and atoms (particles). As soon as this position is accepted as the basis of physics - that's finish. Further struggle is useless, it is doomed to defeat [3].

In essence, Haish is trying to legitimize and introduce into science the concept of the Invisible World. Here is the main stumbling block, after overcoming which everything will go like clockwork.

What is this - the Invisible World?

It is known that matter is an objective reality given to us in sensations. But is there (besides the obvious matter) some other reality that is fundamentally inaccessible to us in these sensations?

The basis of any idea of ??the existence of some spiritual principle (including religion) is the assumption of the existence of such a reality - the Invisible World. It is precisely this position that Haisch is actually trying to substantiate in his discussion with the Materialists.

Materialists (they are also atomists, they are also reductionists) completely denies the possibility of the existence of the Invisible World. As Epicurus taught, the world is as we see it. There is no invisible world. There is no sky - but there is one atmosphere. This belief is based on extrapolation, which is the essence of the atomistic picture of the world:

	Random synthesis		Evolution		Evolution		Class struggle
Particles, atoms, molecules	>	Cells	>	Flora and fauna	>	Man	>	Society

In classical mechanics, the motion of particles is completely described by the observed properties of these particles - coordinates and momenta. That is, there is no invisible world in the movement of particles. More precisely, the hypothesis of the invisible world was not needed here. From this, the atomists concluded that there is no invisible world at all. And all the diversity of the Universe is explained by various combinations of elementary particles.

Quantum mechanics, it would seem, have seriously shaken this previously unshakable foundation. It has been established that even at the physical level, at the level of elementary particles, it is impossible to describe their motion based only on the observed characteristics. That the motion of these particles is described by some fundamentally unobservable array of information - a wave function. It can be calculated, it can be predicted from considerations of symmetry, but it is fundamentally impossible to completely measure it. It would seem that there is the end of reductionism. But no.

The point is that the same atomistic terminology is used to solve quantum problems. This is understandable - after all, no one needs to describe the behavior of one, separately taken particle. Moreover, it is fundamentally unpredictable. In practice, it is always required to predict the motion of a huge mass of these particles. That is, it is necessary to move from quantum physics to classical physics - to predict the readings of some classical instrument. But this transition is possible only if in quantum physics the classical atomistic terminology is initially used. Therefore, the construction of quantum physics - starting from Bohr's postulates up to the Schrodinger equation and Feynman diagrams - is carried out on the basis of atomistic terminology. Let us emphasize that such a structure is inevitable precisely for solving applied, pragmatic problems. And there is no other way here.

For example, to calculate lasers, one can give a damn about all quantum effects, the interference of observed events, etc. It is enough just to add stimulated radiation to the kinetic equations. However, it will not be clear where it comes from. And why the forcedly emitted photon should be exactly the same as the one already flying past the inversely excited atom. But again, you don't have to bother with this. Allah knows better!

In physics, the prevailing opinion is that there are no other problems besides applied and pragmatic ones. That the very attempts to set other tasks go beyond the limits of science. Thank God, there are still quite authoritative scientists who fundamentally reject such reductionism. Such are Haish and Sheldrake. And in the past - Poincare and Schrodinger. In their common belief, physics should not only describe elementary processes, but also explain (at least speculatively) the manifestations of life, personality and mind.

But even these giants are forced to use atomistic terminology. There is no other! And then this is what happens.

Along with the atomistic terminology, the atomistic extrapolation is involuntarily, subconsciously accepted. That is, an atomistic picture of the world.

It turns out that quantum phenomena open up a new, as it were, higher level in the picture of the world. But the scope of this level is limited only to elementary processes. Indeed, the dynamics of even large biomolecules is practically absolutely classical. And there is nothing to say about cells - including neurons with axons. This is how it turns out that the processes of thinking - and, consequently, of consciousness - are described at the previous - classical atomistic level.

It turns out that quantum mechanics gives atomistic extrapolation only a slight modification, in which a new quantum level of knowledge of nature rises exclusively above elementary processes:

Wave function
Particles, atoms, molecules	>	Cells	>	Flora and fauna	>	Man	>	Society

Further extrapolation follows the old path. And with it the whole picture of the world remains at the level of classical mechanism. And quantum phenomena seem like a capricious eccentricity of nature at an elementary level.

To break out of the shackles of atomism (aka materialism, aka reductionism), it is necessary from the very beginning to build physics on the basis of postulating the properties of an observer [4]. Then the properties of space-time will not be postulated initially, based on nothing. But they will arise in the observer in the process of processing and memorizing events available to him in sensations.

Of course, it will be flattering to me if a neural network is chosen as the observer model, and the observed events are represented by the firing of neurons, which are convenient to describe in SQL. This is a neural picture of the world [5]. But, of course, it is far from the only possible one. The main thing is that the terminology of the new physics should not be atomistic. So that the world appears to be composed not of atoms, but of connections. Not so important - of neural connections or any others.

Yes - such physics will be very inconvenient for applied problems. Perhaps even the word - inconvenient - is too weak here. More precisely, applied physics will become absolutely impossible. But no one proposes to calculate laser pulses in this way. But the prospect of a deeper understanding of a different picture of the world, which Sheldrake and Haish are trying to build, will open.

In the new picture of the world, the quantum level of knowledge of nature should become the main, one might even say - the highest, covering not only elementary processes, but also the entire diversity of the universe:

Wave function	<	Associative memory	<	Personal essence	<	Sentient entity	<	Generalizing personality
Particles, atoms, molecules		Cells		Flora and fauna		Man		Society

And the lowest level of cognition (the level of materialism) will be only an observable projection of the upper quantum level. That is, the flow of events observed at the lower level is formed at the upper level - in the invisible world. And not only for elementary, but for all processes.

Thus, in science, the concept is legitimized - the invisible world. Previously - in quantum mechanics - this concept could only be attributed to the motion of particles, which is determined by an invisible array of information - the wave function. Now the existence of cells, organisms and humans is determined not by the movement of atoms inside the body, but by the dynamics of equally invisible arrays of information - higher entities, generalizing personalities [6]. Yes - the movements of the invisible world by themselves are fundamentally not observable - both for particles and for more complex objects.

The invisible world appears only as a stream of visible events. But just as the movement of particles cannot be described without a wave function, so the behavior of living nature and human society cannot be understood without the concept of higher generalizing personalities from the invisible world.

Only on this basis is it possible to substantiate the ideas of both Sheldrake and Haisch and Schrodinger and Poincare.

Literature

1. Bernard Haisch. The God Theory

2. Karasev A.V. Legitimation of Rupert Sheldrake's teachings in the neural terminology of quantum mechanics http://samlib.ru/k/karasew_a_w/rs.shtml

3. Karasev A.V. Against Epicurus. http://samlib.ru/k/karasew_a_w/epikur.shtml

4. Karasev A.V. Observer model in Poincare's picture of the world. http://samlib.ru/k/karasew_a_w/poincare.shtml

5. Karasev A. V. Neural picture of the world. Bulletin of new medical technologies. 2002.vol. 9.N 2.http: //samlib.ru/k/karasew_a_w/nkmfs.shtml

6. Karasev A.V. Parallel worlds, information fields, collective intelligence in the neural picture of the world. http://samlib.ru/k/karasew_a_w/if_cm.shtml

Оставить комментарий © Copyright Карасев Александр Владимирович (kar64382@mail.ru) Размещен: 29/12/2020, изменен: 29/12/2020. 18k. Статистика. Статья: Естествознание Скачать FB2		Ваша оценка:
Аннотация: Another doomed attempt to wrest science out of the grip of reductionism. Doomed to failure - because it is built on the terminology of atomism. In order to succeed in this hopeless endeavor, it is necessary to abandon atomistic terminology from the very beginning. The physical theory should be based on the properties of the observer. The terminology should be based on the assumption that the world consists not of their particles, but of connections between observed events. This is the only way to legitimize the position of the existence of the invisible world and build on this position a new picture of the world.

Карасев Александр Владимирович : другие произведения.

Bernard Haisch. The God Theory