Judy, The jury about the reality of physics may still be out. For now, all of these scientists are still speculating. Even Hawking, the English physicist, has bet $100 that the scientists of the Hadron Collider in Switzerland will not find the missing particle needed to prove the unification theory in physics. Instead, Hawking is predicting that the scientists will find more particles to confuse the physics pot, so to speak.
Intuitively, I do appreciate the idea that a musician like Andrea Bocelli can be considered a scientist of the genius kind. The same could be said for Monet and other artists--writers included. Regards, JR > > It's not really a *new* discovery, though. It's about > as old as quantum physics is. > > In his (brilliant, IMHO) introductory essay to his > "Quantum Questions: Mystical Writings of the World's > Great Physicists" (Shambhala, 1984), Ken Wilber > quotes a gaggle of early 20th-century physicists to > exactly this effect. > > He points out that until the development of quantum > mechanics, physicists thought physics *did* describe > reality. Quantum physics proved indisputably not only > that it did not, but that it *could* not. All physics > could provide were symbols, mere shadows of reality. > > Physicists such as Heisenberg, Schroedinger, Pauli, > and Eddington turned to mysticism not because the > new physics validated a metaphysical understanding > of reality, but because the new physics told us > that the true nature of reality was forever beyond > the reach of physics. > > Whether mysticism provides a direct, unmediated > experience of the true nature of reality is another > question, but it's for sure that physics doesn't. > > This isn't even new to D'Espagnat, for that matter. > In 1979 he published an article in Scientific > American titled "The Quantum Theory and Reality," > whose thesis was, "The doctrine that the world is > made up of objects whose existence is independent > of human consciousness turns out to be in conflict > with quantum mechanics and with facts established > by experiment": > > http://www.sciam.com/media/pdf/197911_0158.pdf > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "yifuxero" <yifuxero@> wrote: > > > > > > . > > > http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2009/316/1 > > > Science Cannot Fully Describe Reality, Says Templeton Prize Winner > > > > > > By David Lindley > > > ScienceNOW Daily News > > > 16 March 2009 > > > What is reality? French physicist Bernard d'Espagnat, 87, has spent a > > > lifetime grappling with this question. Over the years, he has developed > > > the idea that the reality revealed by science offers only a "veiled" > > > view of an underlying reality that science cannot access, and that the > > > scientific view must take its place alongside the reality revealed by > > > art, spirituality, and other forms of human inquiry. In recognition of > > > these efforts, d'Espagnat has won this year's Templeton Prize, a £1 > > > million ($1.4 million) award sponsored by the Templeton Foundation, > > > which supports research at the intersection of science, philosophy, and > > > religion. > > > > > > In classical physics, what you see is what you get: Any measurement is > > > presumed to reveal an intrinsic quality--mass, location, velocity--of > > > the thing measured. But in quantum mechanics, things aren't so > > > clear-cut. In general, the measurement of a quantum object can yield a > > > range of possible outcomes, so that the original quantum state must be > > > regarded as indefinite. More perplexing still are "entangled" states in > > > which, despite being physically separated, two or more quantum objects > > > remain linked, so that a measurement of one affects the measurements of > > > the others (ScienceNOW, 13 August 2008). > > > > > > Albert Einstein and others objected to the implications of these lines > > > of thought and insisted that quantum mechanics was an incomplete theory > > > precisely because it did not support old-fashioned literal realism. But > > > that's a lost cause, says d'Espagnat, who studied particle physics early > > > in his career. Instead, he has concluded that physicists must abandon > > > naïve realism and embrace a more sophisticated philosophy of reality. > > > Quantum mechanics allows what d'Espagnat calls "weak objectivity," in > > > that it predicts probabilities of observable phenomena in an > > > indisputable way. But the inherent uncertainty of quantum measurements > > > means that it is impossible to infer an unambiguous description of > > > "reality as it really is," he says. He has proposed that behind measured > > > phenomena exists what he calls a "veiled reality" that genuinely exists, > > > independently of us, even though we lack the ability to fully describe it. > > > > > > Asked whether that entails a kind of mysticism, d'Espagnat responds that > > > "science isn't everything" and that we are already accustomed to the > > > idea that "when we hear beautiful music, or see paintings, or read > > > poetry, [we get] a faint glimpse of a reality that underlies empirical > > > reality." In the possibility of a veiled reality that is perceived in > > > different and fragmentary ways through science, art, and spirituality, > > > d'Espagnat also sees, perhaps, a way to reconcile the apparently > > > conflicting visions of reality that science and religion provide. > > > > > > Arthur Fine of the University of Washington, Seattle, points out that > > > these views--as d'Espagnat acknowledges--have their roots in Immanuel > > > Kant's distinction between "a world of noumena, the essentially > > > unknowable but real stuff, [and] the world of phenomena." But it's > > > problematic, he notes, to think of noumenal concepts as having > > > scientific value if you can't say precisely what they are. > > > > > > D'Espagnat's writings on quantum mechanics lay out with great clarity > > > the genuine puzzles that quantum mechanics presents, says Jeffrey Bub of > > > the University of Maryland, College Park. But he's skeptical about > > > finding common ground among notions of reality from art, science, and > > > spirituality. As he puts it, if there's something about the physical > > > world that quantum mechanics isn't telling you, "it doesn't follow that > > > those gaps can be filled with poetry." > > > > > >
