If you went to church in the 18th century, you would have heard God described as a celestial clockmaker who had wound up the universe and left it to run itself. Today, the wind-up is the Big Bang and the clock's parts are subatomic particles. But the problem of creating matter out of emptiness remains the same.
How does matter form from the immaterial? What gives particles their mass, and how do they stick together? The physicists at the CERN facility in Europe are busy using the massive multibillion-dollar Large Hadron Collider to try to answer those questions by hunting for the elusive Higgs boson, the so-called "God particle."
The search takes place between the visible and the invisible. The hypothetical Higgs boson is a virtual particle, which means it can be coaxed to enter spacetime for the tiniest flash of a millisecond. It operates at the Planck scale, which is millions of times smaller than the nucleus of an atom.
The excitement over finding the Higgs particle is that physical science will have uncovered the mechanism for how the tangible world arises from the intangible. That's as close to the divine act of creation as physics can get. Yet there's an irony in basing the solid physical universe on -- nothing. Could this in fact be where materialism destroys itself from within? The Higgs boson may be the key to unlocking the mystery of creation by affirming very different things than materialism dreams of.
Assuming that the particle allows itself to be discovered, the second step is the exploration of the invisible domain. It is literally nothing, and yet everything comes from it. Centuries ago the wisdom traditions of the world compared creation on a small scale to creation on a massive scale. The great sages noted that our minds are nothing, too. Before a thought appears, there is emptiness and silence. And yet once the mind produces its creations, they are potent, meaningful, and coherent.
Creation doesn't move from the invisible to the visible with random particles like foam on the surface of the sea. They look random in the Large Hadron Collider, but the scientists running the machine, who are themselves part of creation, don't have bodies that fly apart into a cloud of particles. Rather, our bodies, like the human brain and DNA itself, are exquisitely ordered creations, the farthest thing from random events.
Physical forces cannot explain such exquisite order, much less the meaning we derive from it, which is why God came into being. The God particle delivers the tiniest bits of the clock but not the maker. I do not mean that an actual person in the sky made the universe. Keeping strictly with the scientific worldview, the maker must be impersonal, intelligent, universal, invisible, yet manifest in the visible world. The only viable candidate is consciousness.
The Higgs boson particle represents a tiny stepping stone toward a theory of creation that rests upon consciousness as the primal stuff of the cosmos. Many theorists are already getting there; it's been several decades since the concept of a self-aware universe has been in play.
Someday it will be commonplace to concede that the intangible, immaterial domain of quantum physics is conscious. In that world of virtual particles, non-locality, and indeterminacy, things don't exist with shape, hardness, or color. Their existence is a fleeting display of tendencies, and the superposition of possibilities. It will be a major realization for science to recognize that all of these tendencies and qualities are tendencies of consciousness.
The third step to a full comprehension of the universe will be connecting the consciousness, which is the ground of the cosmos, to our individual experience of consciousness. Our ground of existence is the same as the ground state of the universe. This is the message of Vedanta: Atman is Brahman. Individual consciousness fully awakened is the same as the essential nature of the entire cosmos. Somehow our consciousness participates and is integral to the creation of the universe. Sadly, by the time we realize our true creative role, our ignorant actions might have already destroyed our planetary home.
The creative function of consciousness in quantum mechanics was originally outlined in the Copenhagen Interpretation which says that an observer is required in order to collapse the wave function into a single occurrence and produce a measurable outcome. Without a conscious observer, the wave function remains a superposition of eigenstates that are not real in a measurable way.
The Many Worlds theory of quantum mechanics seeks to avoid the need for an observer and the collapse of the wave function by positing enough parallel universes to contain all possible states of the wave function. But in the end, to solve the measurement problem without an observer, a measuring apparatus is needed that is physical yet when analyzed quantum mechanically would not itself be a wave function, or superposition of eigenstates. No one can explain what kind of matter that would be.
The Transactional Interpretation describes quantum interactions in terms of a standing wave formed by retarded (forward-in-time) and advanced (backward-in-time) waves. Here it is assumed that the interaction with the measurement device somehow activates the emission of a possibility wave going backward in time. This is a way to avoid the need of an observer, but like the Many Worlds theory it too implies a dualistic universe that takes us outside of the rules of quantum measurement. Again, the equipment that measures the wave function would have to be made out of matter that does not obey quantum physics with the superposition of possibilities.
A more promising theory of quantum mechanics is David Bohm's paradigm of Implicate and Explicate Order where primacy is given to wholeness over the parts which include space, time, particles, and quantum states. In this view, the parts unfold from the whole.
Sir Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff, PhD. have evolved the Orchestrated objective reduction model (Orch OR) and this I find to be the most progressive theory to bridge universal consciousness and individual consciousness. Penrose starts with the position that consciousness is fundamentally non-algorithmic and therefore incapable of being duplicated by a computer or machine. He proposes that consciousness could be explained through quantum theory with a new type of wave function collapse in the brain. Hameroff's expertise in the field of neurophysiology provided a likely quantum link in the microtubules in the neurons. Instead of the conventional view is that consciousness emerges from complex computation among brain neurons, they propose that consciousness involves sequences of quantum computations in microtubules inside brain neurons, not between them in the dendrites and synapses. The quantum computations in the brain are also ripples in fundamental spacetime geometry, the most basic level of the universe.
Penrose suggests that quantum wave function collapse happens by itself above the Planck scale. He postulates that each quantum superposition has its own spacetime curvature and these bits of curved spacetime form a kind of blister in spacetime maintaining superposition. But when it gets larger, beyond the Planck scale, gravity's influence makes it unstable and it collapses. That is the objective reduction or collapse of the wave function into a measurable particle.
This theory approaches the perspective of Vedanta, where Brahman the all-inclusive consciousness is the self-interacting dynamic of observer, observed and process of observation. This process of self-interaction gives rise to all diversity and phenomenon while it remains unaffected by it. As science continues to probe the exotic and extreme reaches of physics we can take some comfort that we are actually coming closer to understanding what is most intimate to us, our own consciousness, our self. The tangible springs from the intangible, and that intangible is what we are and what we call God.
Follow Deepak Chopra on Twitter: www.twitter.com/DeepakChopra
Robert Urquhart: CERN Higgs Boson V Comic Sans Debacle
SUTRA:
The Buddha said: If your conception of a mind is 'between' is correct, it implies a position for it.
(Quantum?)
Now according to our inference, where is this intermediate position? Do we mean that it is (in or on) the body? If it is on the surface of the body, it cannot be in its center, and the conception of a mind in the center is no different from that of a mind in the body.
(Moreover) is its position manifest or not? If it is not, it does not exist. If it is, it is not fixed. Why?
For instance, if a stake is driven into the ground to mark a center, when seen from the east it is in the west and when seen from the south it is in the north.
As this stake can only lead to confusion, so is (our) conception of Mind... in between the completely chaotic.
~Buddha~
Is there only One Universe.... or is our Universe nothing more than a small bubble floating in an Ocean of Billions of countless other Universes making up the Multi-Verse?
what qualifications herr copernicus had
It is hubris in the most utmost form for someone, like Chopra and some of the posters below, to think they know the answers to the questions that have plagued humans for all time and probably always will. Answers make you feel very good, especially ones that are non-falsifiable.
Also, just because, as jjdrma puts it, "Vedic scholars had realized and documented these (ideologies) over 5 K ago"
So did the old testament, over 5k years ago.
My postmasters qualifications are in biological and healing arts sciences (not in humanities or physics). iam not a ‘religious’ person at all, i havent visited a place of worship in last 14 -15 yrs. Aristotle. Plato, Copernicus and vedic scholars before them were all thinkers. These genius men haven’t had probes to explore cosmos. There is no schism between spirituality and science. If our probes and other gadgets out there cannot provide EVIDENCE about the dimensions of universe and its origin, then we need to have a working hypothesis to go about. The premise that cosmos is endless seems to be logical (and scientific) for now. How can u imagine cosmos otherwise, just stretch your imagination for second. You can say after some distance there wont be any celestial bodies out there (I wont argue with that) but there got to be an infinite (empty) space that goes on and on forever. That’s what I meant. I brought in mulltiverse here for only one reason. The big bang. If I accept bigbang to herald the genesis of cosmos, since I wont concede that there was NOTHING before that, I have no alternative but to say that OUR OWN universe banged opened and expanded into the already existing OTHER universes around it.
NO SCIENTIST KNOWS THIS OR CLAIMS TO KNOW THIS FOR SURE. THERE ARE ONLY THEORIES AT THIS POINT IN TIME. You think you know the answer's to the universe (I can't believe I am arguing about this) or even know that it is NOT a finite universe. That is closed minded. All of the theories of the universe are possible to some extent at this point in time!
As a scientist this is incorrect and couldn't be farther from the truth. Spirituality is based in faith, which is the absence of reason.
The collective intelligence of human race from its inception till its demise (remember dinosaurs are extinct now?) cannot find out the truth (about creation). The infinite theory is currently most acceptable…iam not arrogant iam logical. Can you show me any evidence that cosmos is finite? I like nondualism as there is no evidence to prove dualism. Also because nondualism says it all. U me god and cosmos are all one entity.
please tellmewhat old testament said.Iam not clear on thatif you believe jesus is your savior I have no arguement against that ..ididnt say advaita is my saviour or god, it calms down my inquisitive mind abou the me and HIM dilemma.Thats all.Noone is expected to save me.
This sums up a flaw in your reasoning.
How can you subscribe to a theory that is non-falsifiable?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiable
This is a tautological statement which is a logical fallacy.
There are 2 possibilities: God exists or God does not exist. Both possibilities are mindboggling.
The same I would aver is true of the "God Particle": if it exists (and perhaps to entertain the God will provide it) it will at best give an insignificant few plenty to write about but for the majority it will provide nothing in respect of the true purpose of life, that being "to become realized!"
On the downside, "the worst case scenario" the continued experiments at CERN risk interfering with the very delicate mathematical balance that permits us to experience being.. if CERN were to alter an aspect of the universe (i.e alter it's mass by forcing a particle into another dimension) by just the most insignificant amount.. our universe will cease to be.....
still the great minds out there who's desire for prestige is probable worth the annihilation of the all of us.
regards gm23
How do you know this?
Is this this the interpretation of the physicists that run CERN?
The physicists at CERN still are unsure of exactly what they will find.
What makes you the expert?
If the entire human atomic mass can be condensed to nothing more than the size of a Sugar cube.... then who are you.... where are you.... do you matter on a Universal scale?
Can you please elaborate?
Does this make sense to anyone else?
How does Myoho know so much about things that no one else knows about?
The real is brahma, the creator.Vedas.
The big bang also violates the law of the conservation of energy.
How can you be so sure of yourself?
This is not true, generally speaking, for most physicists and cosmologist.
Where are you getting your information?
"Freedom from the desire for an answer is essential to the understanding of a problem." J.Kishnamurti
regards
'Science is utterly beguiled by two major superstitions: that the universe exists ‘out there’ outside our consciousness and that there has to be a fundamental particle of matter - now dubbed ‘the God particle’. These replicate the fundamental religious fallacy that, contrary to scripture, God is ‘up there in heaven’ rather than dwelling within us as our true self. The first so-called commandment says not to place other gods before the true God within, but in bowing down to symbols of God (even holy men), religion falls into the same trap as science.
Science, you built a Large Hadron Collider - where irresistible hubris collides with unstoppable finance - hang on everybody, we’re getting really close, just give us more time and another billion and we’ll find this darn, pesky little particle once and for all.'
Love and light, Paul Hunting.
Science is fundamentally different from religion in that it seeks to understand what is. Religion already knows what is, even if it relies on superstition, lies, and ignorance. Science doesn't state that the 'god particle' HAS to exist, only that the standard model of particle physics PREDICTS it exists. Are you honestly saying that scientists should just give up on trying to explain the origin of matter because it might contradict the god hypothesis?
And the fact that scientists spend billions of dollars does not make them haughty or arrogant. A scientists will change his position on a certain topic if a particular piece of evidence contradicts that topic on the drop of a hat. But no matter how much evidence is shown to the contrary, religioniststs will ALWAYS believe in god (notice how I said believe instead of accept).
I am a physicist and don't see the Higgs Boson as a good particle. That is the media's name for it, Physicist's generally do not call it such. And show me one scientist that has said "there HAS to be a fundamental particle". That statement in itself goes against simple logic, no scientist thinks this, if you disagree, prove it.
"irresistible hubris" You have no clue what is going on in science right now. It is the farthest thing from the truth that the reason why the LHC was built was specifically to find the God particle. Give me a break!
Hmmm... a term that the layman can understand. Or, attempt to anyway.
However, you see that the majority of the people posting on this thread fail to understand. The very mention of the words 'God Particle' imparts in to their own minds "Creation".
I didn't see it... I do not understand it... my beer is in the way of the TV... and Jerry Fallwell tells me I have a purpose... therefore there must be a creator.
99.9% of them cannot even fathom the Multi-Verse.
Meditation children.... meditation!
watch, listen, learn, meditate, understand.
Wanna know why?
You say that the scientific method is the only reliable and predictable tool we have for understanding the universe. Then you say that "consciousness" is unable to be defined by science. While you say that science is giving us unprecedented insight into consciousness - you also say that there is some quality to "consciousness" which is inherently immune to the scientific method. - ie: it's untestable.
You go on to say that we can only use "subjective" means to understand consciousness. And, you never actually define "consciousness". But that sounds like a vague, undefined faith. So it seems to me that you are making up a religion based on a belief that is no different than those offered by more conventional religions. It's so vague, that you can't even define what you are talking about.
Don't misunderstand my tone - I like you. You are a poet and a sage - and I enjoy listening to your imaginings. As a non-believer in the supernatural, I still understand the need to "feign" a religious experience. Every once in a while, you just have to take a deep(ak) breath and imagine that you are one with the universe. I don't know what a soul is - but I know it's good for the psyche/mind.
'I' as an observer here REALLY enjoyed your post.
Not attempting to interfere with what you are saying here to Deepak, but man that is DEEP.
Most of 'us' think there is a 'personal God'... however with the fairly recent acknowledgement of mathematical theory that what we know as the Universe is just one of BILLIONS of other alternate Parallel Universes. Each with it's own unique properties.
Each new Universe created by the impact of two other Universes.
Mathematically... there can be NO Creator. There are more Parallel Universes than there are Stars in our own Galaxy... and that which reside in the other hundreds of billions of Universes that exist within the Multi-Verse outside of our view or understanding.
The Multi-Verse has always existed (immeasurable life and immeasurable light).
Uhh...no. That is one of many theories that still have zero experimental evidence. Nice one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretation_of_quantum_mechanics
"with the fairly recent acknowledgement of mathematical theory"
So you are saying we have recently acknowledged mathematical theory!? This is the funniest thing I have read all day. Thanks!
Again, it is noted that Deepak CLAIMS that the Universe has 'consciousness', yet never offers any evidence in support of this extraordinary claim.
-Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.- Carl Sagan.
That living beings, since the time without beginning, have been subject continuously to birth and death because they do not know the permanent True Mind whose substance is, by nature, pure and bright. They have relied on false think- ing which is not Reality so that the wheel of Samsara turns.
You really ARE confused.