Witchvox – Magick and Science
I like a scientific explanation for things – I cannot get behind things that require me to ‘take someone’s word for it’. If I can’t do it or see it done, or if you can’t at least explain how it’s done, I’m sceptical, to say the least.
“What if the very act of imagining, visualizing, or having an expectation of an outcome, caused an actual change in the matter and energy around you?”
I’m not sure E=mc^2 is the best example of the theory, but the idea behind the essay is a valid one.
When observation of an experiment affects the outcome, is it unreasonable to suggest that the subject must have an awareness of being observed? Even when the subject is a subatomic particle? I don’t think it is.
(Sentience is not implied, but awareness or consciousness is at least plausible.)
I don’t think the particle knows ‘whether to appear as a particle or a wave’, as that implies a degree of intelligence that I’m currently disinclined to attach to a sub-atomic particle, but expectation can certainly influence outcome.
If that’s the case, the mind seems to be able to affect the physical world and, if so, perhaps magic isn’t so implausible.
—————————————
Bibliography
The Matter Myth – Dramatic discoveries that challenge our understanding of physical reality – Paul Davies and John Gribbin
The Mind of God – Paul Davies
The Cosmic Blueprint – Paul Davies
A Brief History of Time – Stephen Hawkings
*The Eagles Quest – A physicist finds scientific truth at the heart of the shamanic world – Fred Allen Wolf
Parallel Universes – Fred Allen Wolf
*The Spiritual Universe – How Quantum Physics proves the existence of the soul – Fred Allen Wolf
Taking the Quantum Leap – Fred Allen Wolf
The Big Bang Never Happened – Eric J. Lerner
I, also, am very fond of knowing how something works, although I will take “we don’t know how, but we know it works this way”with a mental note “look into that later on”…
Your idea is that if observation affects the behavior of quantum particles, sentience on the part of the particles is implied.
Maybe yes, maybe no. I can think of alternative explanations.
Observation can alter the phenomenom observed without sentience on the observee’s part. For instance, say it’s spring and you’ve opened your doors and windows. The wind is blowing papers around a room. If you step into the door frame to watch this, your body will change the path of the wind and therfore the papers without there being awareness involved.
Althogh, come to think of it, I’ve run into some pretty aware and spunky breezes in my time….
Not looking to rain on your theory. Just figuring that scientific method includes examining alternative possibilities and you might not have thought of this one
Catherine
Foresight
Good catch, thank you ^_^
I need more people to call me out on these unfounded leaps of self-serving logic more frequently. Maybe then, I’ll stop making them.
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but are you suggesting that, by observing, we are potentially interfering with an unknown quantity; a sub-atomic force that can be impacted by our thoughts and/or expectation, in the same way the flow of air molecules is affected by the presence of an immovable object?
There may be a degree of separation (affecting the force that moves that particles rather than the particles themselves), but I don’t believe that this separation negates the ultimate conclusion: that the ability to affect matter through mental exertion is plausible – on a sub-atomic level at least.
I would love to look into this myself, but – given my lack of training and propensity for unfounded leaps of faith – it might be best if I remain on the sidelines of the scientific community for now ^_~
I am, however, very interested in hearing more about this field of research.
Is this an accurate description of the phenomenon? What is happening here? HOW is it happening? And if what we think is happening really is happening, what ramifications does it have for the wider world, and what practical applications could this have – if any?
I’m still questioning things and still looking for answers – I regard it as the duty of humans, as sentient beings, to ask and answer and better understand our universe. I never meant my post to imply otherwise.
All the best,
Kathryn
Hi Kathryn
Don’t find your logic self-serving or ill-founded. Just wanted to point out that there was another possible variable that you hadn’t mentioned but that should be considered. If we’re doing scientific evaluation, sometimes we can’t see all of the possibilities and a supplemental brain can come in very handy at such times
It’s one of the classic tenets in scientific studies that the act of observing something may change it. This is particularly true in anthropology (observing a different culture may cause the members of this culture to act differently- for instance, people on reality shows ;-)….). This can also be true in observation of phenomena not involving sentience, as in my previous example of standing in the door and blocking the wind( which implies, I suppose, that pieces of paper in the wind could potentially become contestants on reality shows…)
And by all means, if you’ve got an inquiring mind, don’t sit on the scientific sidelines. Dive right in- the water’s fine
Catherine
Foresight