accurately.
The lesson of Newtonian physics is that the universe is governed by laws that are susceptible to rational understanding. By applying these laws we extend our knowledge of, and therefore our influence over, our environment. Newton was a religious person. He saw his laws as manifestations of God’s perfection. Nonetheless, Newton’s laws served man’s cause well. They enhanced his dignity and vindicated his importance in the universe. Following the Middle Ages, the new field of science (“Natural Philosophy”) came like a fresh breeze to revitalize the spirit. It is ironic that, in the end, Natural Philosophy reduced the status of men to that of helpless cogs in a machine whose functioning had been preordained from the day of its creation.
Contrary to Newtonian physics, quantum mechanics tells us that our knowledge of what governs events on the subatomic level is not nearly what we assumed it would be. It tells us that we cannot predict subatomic phenomena with any certainty. We only can predict their probabilities.
Philosophically, however, the implications of quantum mechanics are psychedelic. Not only do we influence our reality, but, in some degree, we actually create it. Because it is the nature of things that we can know either the momentum of a particle or its position, but not both, we must choose which of these two properties we want to determine. Metaphysically, this is very close to saying that we create certain properties because we choose to measure those properties. Said another way, it is possible that we create something that has position, for example, like a particle, because we are intent on determining position and it is impossible to determine position without having some thing occupying the position that we want to determine.
Quantum physicists ponder questions like, “Did a particle with momentum exist before we conducted an experiment to measure its momentum?”; “Did a particle with position exist before we conducted an experiment to measure its position?”; and “Did any particles exist at all before we thought about them and measured them?” “Did we create the particles that we are experimenting with?” Incredible as it sounds, this is a possibility that many physicists recognize.
John Wheeler, a well-known physicist at Princeton, wrote:
May the universe in some strange sense be “brought into being” by the participation of those who participate?…The vital act is the act of participation. “Participator” is the incontrovertible new concept given by quantum mechanics. It strikes down the term “observer” of classical theory, the man who stands safely behind the thick glass wall and watches what goes on without taking part. It can’t be done, quantum mechanics says. 8
The languages of eastern mystics and western physicists are becoming very similar.
Newtonian physics and quantum mechanics are partners in a double irony. Newtonian physics is based upon the idea of laws which govern phenomena and the power inherent in understanding them, but it leads to impotence in the face of a Great Machine which is the universe. Quantum mechanics is based upon the idea of minimal knowledge of future phenomena (we are limited to knowing probabilities) but it leads to the possibility that our reality is what we choose to make it.
There is another fundamental difference between the old physics and the new physics. The old physics assumes that there is an external world which exists apart from us. It further assumes that we can observe, measure, and speculate about the external world without changing it. According to the old physics, the external world is indifferent to us and to our needs.
Galileo’s historical stature stems from his tireless (and successful) efforts to quantify (measure) the phenomena of the external world. There is great power inherent in the process of quantification. For example, once a relationship is discovered, like the rate of acceleration of a
The lesson of Newtonian physics is that the universe is governed by laws that are susceptible to rational understanding. By applying these laws we extend our knowledge of, and therefore our influence over, our environment. Newton was a religious person. He saw his laws as manifestations of God’s perfection. Nonetheless, Newton’s laws served man’s cause well. They enhanced his dignity and vindicated his importance in the universe. Following the Middle Ages, the new field of science (“Natural Philosophy”) came like a fresh breeze to revitalize the spirit. It is ironic that, in the end, Natural Philosophy reduced the status of men to that of helpless cogs in a machine whose functioning had been preordained from the day of its creation.
Contrary to Newtonian physics, quantum mechanics tells us that our knowledge of what governs events on the subatomic level is not nearly what we assumed it would be. It tells us that we cannot predict subatomic phenomena with any certainty. We only can predict their probabilities.
Philosophically, however, the implications of quantum mechanics are psychedelic. Not only do we influence our reality, but, in some degree, we actually create it. Because it is the nature of things that we can know either the momentum of a particle or its position, but not both, we must choose which of these two properties we want to determine. Metaphysically, this is very close to saying that we create certain properties because we choose to measure those properties. Said another way, it is possible that we create something that has position, for example, like a particle, because we are intent on determining position and it is impossible to determine position without having some thing occupying the position that we want to determine.
Quantum physicists ponder questions like, “Did a particle with momentum exist before we conducted an experiment to measure its momentum?”; “Did a particle with position exist before we conducted an experiment to measure its position?”; and “Did any particles exist at all before we thought about them and measured them?” “Did we create the particles that we are experimenting with?” Incredible as it sounds, this is a possibility that many physicists recognize.
John Wheeler, a well-known physicist at Princeton, wrote:
May the universe in some strange sense be “brought into being” by the participation of those who participate?…The vital act is the act of participation. “Participator” is the incontrovertible new concept given by quantum mechanics. It strikes down the term “observer” of classical theory, the man who stands safely behind the thick glass wall and watches what goes on without taking part. It can’t be done, quantum mechanics says. 8
The languages of eastern mystics and western physicists are becoming very similar.
Newtonian physics and quantum mechanics are partners in a double irony. Newtonian physics is based upon the idea of laws which govern phenomena and the power inherent in understanding them, but it leads to impotence in the face of a Great Machine which is the universe. Quantum mechanics is based upon the idea of minimal knowledge of future phenomena (we are limited to knowing probabilities) but it leads to the possibility that our reality is what we choose to make it.
There is another fundamental difference between the old physics and the new physics. The old physics assumes that there is an external world which exists apart from us. It further assumes that we can observe, measure, and speculate about the external world without changing it. According to the old physics, the external world is indifferent to us and to our needs.
Galileo’s historical stature stems from his tireless (and successful) efforts to quantify (measure) the phenomena of the external world. There is great power inherent in the process of quantification. For example, once a relationship is discovered, like the rate of acceleration of a
Similar Books
