Grasscity - Cyber Week Sale - up to 50% Discount

More scientific proof of God

Discussion in 'Religion, Beliefs and Spirituality' started by Smigs, Aug 16, 2007.

  1. Scientific Proof of the Existence of God

    An Interview with Amit Goswami
    by Craig Hamilton

    Goswami is convinced, along with a number of others who subscribe to the same view, that the universe, in order to exist, requires a conscious sentient being to be aware of it. Without an observer, he claims, it only exists as a possibility. And as they say in the world of science, Goswami has done his math. Marshalling evidence from recent research in cognitive psychology, biology, parapsychology and quantum physics, and leaning heavily on the ancient mystical traditions of the world, Goswami is building a case for a new paradigm that he calls \"monistic idealism,\" the view that consciousness, not matter, is the foundation of everything that is.

    A professor of physics at the University of Oregon and a member of its Institute of Theoretical Science, Dr. Goswami is part of a growing body of renegade scientists who in recent years have ventured into the domain of the spiritual in an attempt both to interpret the seemingly inexplicable findings of their experiments and to validate their intuitions about the existence of a spiritual dimension of life. The culmination of Goswami\'s own work is his book The Self-Aware Universe: How Consciousness Creates the Material World. Rooted in an interpretation of the experimental data of quantum physics (the physics of elementary particles), the book weaves together a myriad of findings and theories in fields from artificial intelligence to astronomy to Hindu mysticism in an attempt to show that the discoveries of modern science are in perfect accord with the deepest mystical truths.

    Quantum physics, as well as a number of other modern sciences, he feels, is demonstrating that the essential unity underlying all of reality is a fact which can be experimentally verified. Because of the enormous implications he sees in this scientific confirmation of the spiritual, Goswami is ardently devoted to explaining his theory to as many people as possible in order to help bring about what he feels is a much needed paradigm shift. He feels that because science is now capable of validating mysticism, much that before required a leap of faith can now be empirically proven and, hence, the materialist paradigm which has dominated scientific and philosophical thought for over two hundred years can finally be called into question.

    Interviewing Amit Goswami was a mind-bending and concept-challenging experience. Listening to him explain many ideas with which he seemed perfectly at home, required, for me, such a suspension of disbelief that I at times found myself having to stretch far beyond anything I had previously considered. (Goswami is also a great fan of science fiction whose first book, The Cosmic Dancers, was a look at science fiction through the eyes of a physicist.)

    But whether or not one ultimately accepts some of his more esoteric theories, one has to respect the creativity and passion with which he is willing to inquire. Goswami is clearly willing to take risks with his ideas and is fervently dedicated to sharing his investigation with audiences around the world. He speaks widely at conferences and other forums about the exciting discoveries of the new science and their significance, not only for the way science is done, but for society as a whole. In India, the country of his birth, he is actively involved in a growing organized movement to bridge the gap between science and spirituality, through which he is helping to pioneer a graduate institute in \"consciousness studies\" based on the premise that consciousness is the ground of all being.

    Goswami is considered by some to be a pioneer in his field. By attempting to bring material realism to its knees and to integrate all fields of knowledge in a single unified paradigm, he hopes to pave the way for a new holistic worldview in which spirit is put first. In fact, as far as we know, he is the only new paradigm scientist who is taking a clear stand against the relativism so popular among new age thinkers. At a time when the decay of human values and the erosion of any sense of meaning has reached epidemic scale, it is hard to imagine what could be more important than this.

    And yet, for all the important and valuable work he seems to be doing, in the end we are left with serious reservations as to whether Goswami\'s approach will ultimately lead to the kind of transformation he hopes for. Thinkers such as Huston Smith and E. F. Schumacher have pointed to what they feel is an arrogance, or at least, a kind of naiveté, on the part of scientists who believe they can expand the reach of their discipline to somehow include or explain the spiritual dimension of life. Such critics suggest that the very attempt to scientifically validate the spiritual is itself a product of the same materialistic impulses it intends to uproot and, because of this, is ultimately only capable of reducing spirit, God and the transcendent to mere objects of scientific fascination.

    Is science capable of proving the reality of the transcendent dimension of life? Or would science better serve the spiritual potential of the human race by acknowledging the inherent limits of its domain? The following interview confronts us with these questions.

    The link below is an interview transcript:
  2. Well I agree that consciousness is the foundation for everything that is.

    I'd be interested to see his math for everything though.
  3. No, no, no, no, no, no, no.

    Just a bad interpretation of quantum mechanics. Consciousness is not required to collapse a wave function, just observation. An unconscious object or being could collapse a wave function by measuring it.
  4. Observation is a part of consciousness.
  5. @Hurdy Gurdy Man-

    Wow, unconscious observation... Sounds like dream land ;)

    Annnnnyways I'm interested in seeing the math. I'm trying to do the same thing, been thinking about it a lot that's for sure.

    beat me to it dynasty,

    where exactly is the scientific proof?
  7. Haha, right?
  8. it's chilling with God, waiting to reveal itself.
  9. The collapse of the wave function has been debated by physicists since it's inception in the 1920s.

    The vast majority of physicists follow what is called the Copenhagen Interpretation (based on Bohr's lab in Copenhagen and the main nursery of early quantum theory). This view does not view the wave function as being real. Before measurement, it is meaningless to to try and describe where the particle was, or what its momentum was. The particle had no such characteristic until it was measured, at which point a value occurs that corresponds to the wave function collapsing from a probability of values to the single value. Measurement would collapse the wave function, not consciousness.

    But this is not the law of quantum mechanics, merely a popular view on the nature of it. There are many interpretations such as the Many Worlds view. This view says that every single possibility occur in separate universes, we merely see one of the possible values in our universe. Others profess the need of consciousness.

    The point is, this is all speculation. Physics is based on theory corroborating experiment. No branch of science has been more successful than quantum mechanics in proving the theory correct via experiment. But that is all physics is so far, experiment verifying theory. There has been no way to experimentally prove which view of quantum mechanics is correct. Until then, this topic fits perfectly into the philosophy section.
  10. "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
  11. ^Aristotle.
    Simply entertaining a thought and having confirmed scientific evidence are two completely different things.

    Where is the scientific proof that was promised in the title of this thread?
  12. I think someone is mistaking the word "inference" for the word "proof".

    This is merely an interpretation of quantuum physics, a field that is really in its infancy. But some people are impatient with the wait for conclusions.

    So they just jump,anyway! That's called "Faith".

  13. Well said

    Doesn't matter If there is in this thread or not, because God isn't about scientific proof. Is that too hard a concept to grasp or something? Faith doesn't abide by the same limitations as science, Faith has no boundaries. If the belief in God relied on proof, no one would have reason to believe in a God.
  14. Dont give me that, Im not talking about faith.
    Im talking about scientific proof. Not faith.

    The title of the thread was:


    Is that too hard a concept to grasp or something?

  15. need I say more?
  16. The thread is about supposed scientific proof of god.

    I was asking where the scientific proof was.

    Not, "does scientific proof apply to god?"
  17. roachy boy, I don't know where the proof is either. I wasn't trying to answer it. Something someone else said though made me think of William James so i posted the link.

    Don't take it personally, I wasn't trying to argue with what you were saying. Smigs said what he said without realizing that as of yet is quantum mechanics there is no "proof" of a God, as others said the field is in it's early stages.
  18. Ah, thanks for explaining things Dynasty. :D
  19. I should have been clearer: it's the fact that you're shining light on the particle in order to observe it, not the fact that you're consciously observing it.

Share This Page