literarydiscussions.myfreeforum.org

Sitaram · Site Admin Joined: 14 Sep 2005 Posts: 1079

: Fri Jun 13, 2003 1:13 am
Subject: Quantum and Indra's Net

http://www.sulekha.com/chpost.asp...ilosophy&show=0&cid=63206

One might say that since this awkward quantum theory deals with the
very "tiny", who cares?

Wrong. As a matter of fact the very existence of solid bodies, the
strength and physical properties of materials, the nature of
chemistry, the colors of substances, the phenomena of freezing and
boiling, the reliability of inheritance, these, and many familiar
properties, require the quantum theory for their explanations.

==========================

Sitaram: I am reading a 1955 book on physics/philosophy by Werner
Heisenberg... very interesting...

Sergeant_Pepper: I was just about to ask, who is Werner
Heisenberg? Didn't you quote him in the "A Process Beyond Control"
email?

Sitaram: Yes, exactly..

http://www.sulekha.com/chpost.asp...ilosophy&show=0&cid=62542

Sitaram: But today, I read him saying (regarding Quantum Phyics):

"We began to turn the question around, rather than looking at a
physical event and searching for the mathematical foramlism which
could express it... we began to ask if it were rather not the case
that NO EVENT can take place, unless there exists a mathematical
formalism which is able to express or describe the event "

Inotherwords (I think), positing a relationship or symmetry between
physical causality and mathematical models... but it was in a section
where he discussed Heraclitus, who said "all is fire", which,... if
Heraclitus had used word ENERGY,.... would have fit quite well with
quantum, and what the pre-Socratics say about opposites and strife
(discord). But... reading him today made me think of something...

Sergeant_Pepper: And that is?

Sitaram: Stephen Hawking says there may well be countless black
holes in our universe... and (other physicists speculate)... inside
each black hole (which is itself an expanding big bang time space
continuum) are countless OTHER blackholes...

Sitaram: Well... think of one-to-one correspondence between physical
event and mathematical model/equation

Sitaram: well... suppose EACH atom in our universe is somehow a
shadow or projection of a black hole universe somewhere... a
mapping ... suppose events in our universe ripple through the
infinite manifold/matrix of universes within universes.

The Srimad Bhagavatam speaks somewhere of how each of us has an
analogue in Krishna-Loka, even if only a blade of grass or an ant.

Sergeant_Pepper: Doesn't that also mean that in actuality, there
exists no real matrix or matrices, because doesn't a matrix infer a
finite limit?

Sitaram: Well... I am just coining or borrowing a word... (since
matrix , from "mother", means womb)

Sergeant_Pepper: ah, got it

Sitaram: a matrix, in a way, (like the movie) is something in which
something else is embedded, but also nurtured

Sitaram: the "net of Indra".... each intersection is an eye which
beholds every other intersection.....

hmmm.... possibly, this matrix of eyes (black holes/atoms) is self-
nurturing and bootstrapping in the Buddhist sense of "dependent co-
arising"

==========

The Bhagavad-Gita.

The Harvard Classics. 1909–14.

Chapter VII

KRISHNA:

LEARN now, dear Prince! how, if thy soul be set

Ever on Me—still exercising Yôg,

Still making Me thy Refuge—thou shalt come

Most surely unto perfect hold of Me.

I will declare to thee that utmost lore,

Whole and particular, which, when thou knowest

Leaveth no more to know here in this world.

Of many thousand mortals, one, perchance,

Striveth for Truth; and of those few that strive—

Nay, and rise high—one only—here and there—

Knoweth Me, as I am, the very Truth.

Earth, water, flame, air, ether, life, and mind,

And individuality—those eight

Make up the showing of Me, Manifest.

These be my lower Nature; learn the higher,

Whereby, thou Valiant One! this Universe

Is, by its principle of life, produced;

Whereby the worlds of visible things are born

As from a Yoni. Know! I am that womb:

I make and I unmake this
Universe:

Than me there is no other Master, Prince!

No other Maker! All these hang on me
As hangs a row of pearls upon its string.

===========

http://www.heartspace.org/misc/IndraNet.html

FAR AWAY IN THE HEAVENLY ABODE OF THE GREAT GOD INDRA, THERE IS A
WONDERFUL NET WHICH HAS BEEN HUNG BY SOME CUNNING ARTIFICER IN SUCH A
MANNER THAT IT STRETCHES OUT INDEFINITELY IN ALL DIRECTIONS. IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE EXTRAVAGANT TASTES OF DEITIES, THE ARTIFICER HAS
HUNG A SINGLE GLITTERING JEWEL AT THE NET'S EVERY NODE, AND SINCE THE
NET ITSELF IS INFINITE IN DIMENSION, THE JEWELS ARE INFINITE IN
NUMBER. THERE HANG THE JEWELS, GLITTERING LIKE STARS OF THE FIRST
MAGNITUDE, A WONDERFUL SIGHT TO BEHOLD. IF WE NOW ARBITRARILY SELECT
ONE OF THESE JEWELS FOR INSPECTION AND LOOK CLOSELY AT IT, WE WILL
DISCOVER THAT IN ITS POLISHED SURFACE THERE ARE REFLECTED ALL THE
OTHER JEWELS IN THE NET, INFINITE IN NUMBER. NOT ONLY THAT, BUT EACH
OF THE JEWELS REFLECTED IN THIS ONE JEWEL IS ALSO REFLECTING ALL THE
OTHER JEWELS, SO THAT THE PROCESS OF REFLECTION IS INFINITE
THE AVATAMSAKA SUTRA

FRANCIS H. COOK: HUA-YEN BUDDHISM : THE JEWEL NET OF INDRA 1977

1. The Holographic Nature of the Universe

Long before the existence of the hologram, the jeweled net is an
excellent description of the special characteristic of holograms:
that every point of the hologram contains information regarding all
other points. This reflective nature of the jewels is an obvious
reference to this.

This kind of analogy has been suggested by science as a theory for an
essential characteristic of the cosmos, as well as as the functioning
of the human brain, as beautifully described in The Holograpic
Universe by Michael Talbot.

2. The Interconnectedness of All Things

When any jewel in the net is touched, all other jewels in the node
are affected. This speaks to the hidden interconnectedness and
interdependency of everything and everyone in the universe, and has
an indirect reference to the concept of "Dependent Origination" in
Buddhism. Additionally, Indra's Net is a definitive ancient correlate
of Bell's Theorum, or the theory of non-local causes.

3. Lack of a substantive self

Each node, representing an individual, simply reflects the qualities
of all other nodes, inferring the notion of 'not-self' or a lack of a
solid and real inherent self, as seen in the Advaita Vedanta school
of Hinduism and Buddhism in general.

4. Non-locality

Indra's Net shoots holes in the assumption or imputation of a solid
and fixed universe 'out there'. The capacity of one jewel to reflect
the light of another jewel from the other edge of infinity is
something that is difficult for the linear mind, rational mind to
comprehend. The fact that all nodes are simply reflections indicates
that there is no particular single source point from where it all
arises.

5. Innate Wisdom

The ability to reflect the entirety of all light in the universe
attests to the inherent transcendant wisdom that is at the core of
all nodes, representing all sentient beings, and to the inherent
Buddha Nature.

6. Illusion or Maya

The fact that all nodes are simply a reflection of all others implies
the illusory nature of all appearances. Appearances are thus not
reality but a reflection of reality.

7. Universal Creativity

A familiar concept in various high dharmas is one of an impersonal
creative intelligence that springs forth into reality through the
instruments of all living beings.

8. The Mirror-like Nature of Mind

The capacity to reflect all things attests to the mind being a mirror
of reality, not its basis. This is a common thesis among various
schools and religions.
And Indra's Net has been used as a defining metaphor for the
Internet. One major web hosting site is www.indra.com

The following are some quotes and interesting web sites regarding
Indra's Net:

Indra's Net is a core metaphor of HuaYen.

Stephen Mitchell, in his book The Enlightened Mind, wrote:

"The Net of Indra is a profound and subtle metaphor for the structure
of reality. Imagine a vast net; at each crossing point there is a
jewel; each jewel is perfectly clear and reflects all the other
jewels in the net, the way two mirrors placed opposite each other
will reflect an image ad infinitum. The jewel in this metaphor stands
for an individual being, or an individual consciousness, or a cell or
an atom. Every jewel is intimately connected with all other jewels in
the universe, and a change in one jewel means a change, however
slight, in every other jewel."

(It's also interesting to note that contemporary physicists are in
general agreement that this ancient metaphor is indeed a good
description for the universe.)

As one of the West's preeminent philosophers defined human
interaction:

The [people] are the primary units of the actual community, and the
community is composed of the units. But each unit has in its nature a
reference to every other member of the community, so that each other
member of the community, so that each unit is a microcosm
representing in itself the entire all-inclusive universe.

--Lecture: Body and Spirit, 1926, Alfred North Whitehead

========

http://www.camelhumps.com/qm/frameset.html

All major religions introduce the idea of "the Unseen". How can
quantum mechanics, as we have scratched its surface, help us better
see this issue?

Scientists (like Einstein and Bohr) disagreed on the interpretation
of quantum mechanics, however they agreed on the undisputed fact that
we can never ever "see, measure or know" any thing precisely on the
quantum level (uncertainty principle). This implies that there is a
dark area covering part of my vision, a closed dark room in my house
right in front of us, but we'll never be able to really see what is
inside no matter how wonderful and fascinating this inside. So, we
are forced to believe in a whole unseen world without seeing anything
in it except the door.

As far as our perception of reality, Bohr and Heisenberg believed
that quantum mechanics is as good as it gets, that the picture of the
world is actually foggy, and the electron does not really have a
position unless we measure it. So measurement "creates" reality.

If I believe in all of that, then I have a big problem. I am a double
standard person. How did I know that these results are actually for
real, not probability manifestations? Because Bohr and Heisenberg
assumed that the measuring device, human beings, etc… do have a
physical reality. But if the devices and human beings and everything
else are nothing but a group of atoms. So how come when an atom is
alone, measuring its position creates it, while when trillion atoms
are packed together, their position creates a measurement. I am not
as smart as Mr. Bohr or Mr. Heisenberg but if this is not a basic
flaw, what is?

Does God exist? I don't think there is a third possibility. Either He
exists or not. I don't believe there is anyone (believer or non-
believer) who may think that God's existence is a continuous function
(like 91% exists and 9 % does not exist…)

However if we ask the question "Do you believe in God?" Who can claim
that he or she believes in God as he or she believes in their own
existence? Only very few. And who can claim that he disbelieves 100
%.Only very few. Where are the rest of us. In between. (continuous
output).Isn't it interesting that people are divided continuously
over such a sharp and distinct issue.

Here is an astonishing resemblance with quantum mechanics. As we
discussed before, the whole idea of quantum mechanics was based on
the "quantum" The sharp indivisible jump from an energy level to
another. Yet look at where it leads us, an indeterministic
probabilistic world. Actually classical physics is quite the opposite
in this respect. The physical value is continuous and can assume any
value. However a baseball or the moon can be described exactly as it
goes from point A to point B with perfect certainty.

Two Students of Quantum in Dialogue regarding the question

Tweedledum: Do you believe in God?

Tweedledee -Of course not.

Tweedledum -Why not?

Tweedledee -Because there is no need for God in our modern world.

Tweedledum -How come?

Tweedledee -People used to believe in God because they couldn't
explain rain, wind, birth and all other aspects of life. They had to
resort to the unseen, the supernatural. Now, we can explain
everything around us scientifically without the need to introduce
anything beyond the realm of science.

Tweedledum -Is that so? What about all this energy and matter in the
universe, where did it come from? According to the first law of
thermodynamics, matter and energy cannot be created.

Tweedledee -Wait a minute. As you know there is a theory accepted by
the majority of scientists (the Big Bang) which says that all matter
and energy were concentrated in a tiny spot (singularity) some 13
billion years ago. At singularity, all physical and material laws
break down.

Tweedledum -So when our scientific laws can't explain a physical
phenomena, you say the law breaks down. Never mind. What do you think
of quantum mechanics and its implications?

Tweedledee -What about it? It further weakens the idea of God,
because it shows that, if there is a God, he enjoys playing dice with
the world he created…

Tweedledum -You atheists are even stranger than quantum mechanics…If
the universe is governed exactly by precise physical laws, you claim
that everything is explained perfectly via scientific laws; hence
there is no need for God. And if the universe behaves strangely in an
unpredictable probabilistic way, you claim that if there is any God,
he doesn't know how to govern the world he created.

Tweedledee -But that's perfectly true. The world which you claimed to
be created by God is not consistent. If as you said there is one God
who created everything, shouldn't this world have the same nature…

Tweedledum -Not at all, and I shall use your own argument to beat
it. You said a while ago that failure to explain physical phenomena
made our ancestors believe in a supernatural being, and since modern
science enabled us to explain these phenomena, hence there is no need
for God, right?

Tweedledee -Right.

Tweedledum -What if our own modern science conveyed to us the
undisputed fact that there is an absolute limit to our "knowledge"
(uncertainty principle), I don't think that there is any physicist,
believer or not, who thinks that 1000 years from now we shall be able
to measure the position or velocity more precisely than the limit
imposed by Heisenberg principle. So science taught us that there is
an area where we can never step in, not now, not ever. What does that
tell you?

Tweedledee -It tells me there is no God.

Tweedledum -The exact same thing tells me there is definitely God.

Tweedledee -I knew we would never agree on this issue.

Tweedledum -Me too...

=======

The English physicist Paul Adrien Maurice Dirac (1902-1984) made
significant contributions to the development of quantum mechanics.
He devised a number of new mathematical formulations of quantum
mechanics that have since proved to be of great importance. Dirac's
fame comes from his formulation in 1928 of a mathematical description
of elementary particles that accords with both quantum mechanics and
the theory of relativity. The Dirac equation involved matrices rather
than scalar quantities. These properties of the Dirac equation were
of major importance for theoretical physics. Moreover, to everyone's
astonishment, the Dirac equation provided the first rigorous
description of the spin of elementary particles.The equation having
solutions for negative particle mass, Dirac concluded that each
particle should have an antiparticle. This and other consequences of
the equation were later confirmed by experiment. Dirac is therefore
considered to be a founder of modern quantum electrodynamics. Dirac
was Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge (1932-1969) and
professor of physics at Florida State University (1971-1984). In 1933
he was awarded the Nobel Prize for physics with Erwin Schrodinger.

Get your own free IRC Chat room