God and Soul in Quantum Theory. / By Socratus. /

Pseudoscience and the Paranormal
1

God and Soul in Quantum Theory. / By Socratus. /
=.
Can the conception of God and Soul have Physical Background?
My answer is: “Yes, God and Soul have physical background
and can be explained by physical formulas, equations and laws.”
I will try to prove my position.
=.
Question: what is God?
The Religious answer:
God is something Absolute, Infinite, Eternal, Spiritual,
the Highest form of Consciousness, Who created everything
in the Universe.
The Physical answer ( in my opinion) is more concrete:
There is an Absolute, Infinite, Eternal Reference Frame and IT is
Vacuum in the condition of Absolute Zero: T=0K,
that take the functions of God and create everything in the Universe.
Zero Vacuum T=0K is a “solo fabric” of creation everything in the Universe.
Zero Vacuum T=0K is a Metaphysical / Spirit World.
How can I prove my opinion?

  1. God does not create this Material World directly Himself.
  2. To create Material World and everything in It, God uses Spiritual Particles.
  3. The modern name of these Spiritual Particles is Quantum of Light.
    Quantum of Light is most phenomenal particle in the World.
    Quantum of Light is the structural essence of the Material World.
    The essence of all material objects is Quantum of Light.
    Through the behavior of Quantum of Light we can understand
    what an Absolute God has the Highest form of Consciousness.
    ==========…
    a)
    In the Vacuum Quantum of Light has maximal speed : c=1
    (from our earthly- gravity point of view).
    No material particles can ever attain this velocity. It means that this
    constant characteristic brings quantum of light to the world which
    is different from Material World and this is Vacuum World of Spirits.
    b)
    Many kinds of so-called different particles (waves) are only different
    manifestation / modifications of Quantum of Light.
    How can I prove this opinion?
    It seems that different particles create different waves:
    EM-waves, Gamma-Radiation waves, Röntgen-Radiation waves,
    Light-Waves, Ultraviolet -waves, Super/Ultra-High-TV-waves,
    Short/Mid/Long wave- length Radio Emission waves . . . but . .
    . . . but the energy of each of them is written by formula: E=hf.
    It means that the difference between all these particles / radiations
    depends only on frequencies and the background of these modifications
    is one and the same particle: Quantum of Light in different frequencies.
    c)
    Question:
    Why the simple quantum particle electron has six ( 6 ) formulas:
    +E=Mc^2 and -E=Mc^2 ,
    E=h    f and e^2=ahc,
    E=-me^4/2h    ^2= -13,6eV and E= ∞ ?
    My answer:
    Because an electron and quantum of light / photon and antielectron
    are one and the same particle in different actions and conditions and
    " The Law of conservation and transformation of energy/ mass "
    unites them together.
    d)
    The Quantum of Light is not static / firm particle.
    Quantum of Light is an elastic particle and can change its geometrical form.
    e)
    Through so-called “vacuum fluctuation / transformation” Quantum of Light
    can materialize or dematerialize its body ( virtual particle can become real
    and vice versa) using its own inner impulse h or h*=h/2pi.
    (Newtonian physics explains movement as a result of outside influence,
    Quantum physics explains movement as a result of own inner power / impulse
    of particle and therefore Quantum physics is only a modern Aristotle’s metaphysics)
    f)
  4. The potential state of Quantum of Light in the Zero Vacuum is: E=Mc^2.
  5. In the straight constant movement its speed is c=1 and its energy is: E=hc
    Quantum of Light behaves like a “particle”.
  6. In the rotation around its axis Quantum of Light behaves like “wave”
    with energy: E=h*f. In the Zero Vacuum nobody has influence on
    behavior of Quantum of Light. Quantum of Light by himself decided
    in which state He wants to be, it means that Quantum of Light has some
    kind of consciousness. The consciousness of Quantum of Light can evolve.
    Quantum of Light takes part in creation atom, cell, flower, . . . etc . . . and
    in creation every living being. And Its evolution of consciousness is going
    step by step (from atom, cell, flower . . . to living being ) according to ancient
    Vedas conception: ‘ from vague wish up to a clear thought ’
    g)
    Now . . . . . if . . . .
    If Quantum of Light have some kind of consciousness which can evolve
    and the Absolute Zero T=0K gave the birth to this Spiritual Particles . . . .
    then . . . . then it means that the T=0K have an Absolute the Highest form of Consciousness.
    =====================…
    P.S.
    The tendency to understand “God” by physical laws, formulas,
    equations using the Quantum Theory will be never ended.
    a)
    Does Quantum Physics Make it Easier to Believe in God?
    https://www.bigquestionsonline.com/content/does-quantum-physics-make-it-easier-believe-god
    b)
    Does Quantum Physics Prove God’s Existence?Does Quantum Physics Prove God's Existence?
    c)
    Does quantum theory prove God exists?
    404

In 1954 Einstein wrote:
" All these fifty years of conscious brooding have brought me
no nearer to the answer to the question, ‘What are light quanta?’
Nowadays every Tom, Dick and Harry thinks he knows it,
but he is mistaken.'‘

In 1987 Feynman wrote:
‘ It is important to realize that in physics today,
we have no knowledge of what energy is.
We do not have a picture that energy comes in little
blobs of a definite amount. ‘
================ . . .
My concussions:
We don’t accepted Absolute Reference Frame T=0K and therefore
we don’t know what Quantum of Light and Electron are and therefore
every speculation is possible. I say:

  1. God is simple: T=0K
  2. Soul is simple: Quantum of Light
    ( c/d=pi, R/N=k, E/M=c^2, h=0, c=0, i^2=-1, h=E/t, h=kb,
    h=1, c=1. h*=h/2pi, c>1, E=hf , e^2=ach , e^i(pi)= -1)
  3. Everything else (material) is complex.
    ========================….

‘If we were looking for something that we could conceive
of as God within the universe of the new physics, this ground
state, coherent quantum vacuum might be a good place to start.’
/ Book ‘The quantum self ’ page 208, by Danah Zohar. /
=============== . . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus.
===…

2

By the way . . . . . .
Quantum of Light has long history:
Vedas’ " purusha"
Plato’s " ideas" ,
Kant’s " thing in itsel ",
Leibniz’s " monades " . . . . . etc . . .
No matter what their names are
but they are forces that give rise to all Nature’s phenomena.
==…

3

Proofs of God in a photon
Proofs of God in a photon | The Independent | The Independent

4

God and Religious Toleration/The proof of God
God and Quantum Physics
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/God_and_Religious_Toleration/The_proof_of_God#God
==…
P.S.
The tendency to understand “God” by physical laws, formulas,
equations using the Quantum Theory never will be ended.
===…

5

" . . . ok… so who created the creator ? "
=.
Nobody can create something that is beginningless and endless . .
. . . and Timeless between them.
“Beginningless + Endless + Timeless” is Itself Unique Primary
Physical and Mathematical Parameter = Infinity ( T=0K.)
Everything else in the Universe is limited.
This limited ( as material and as well spiritual) can be understood
by physical formulas an laws.
==============…
Israel Socratus

6

socratus is potatus

7

The Universe (as a material reality) was emerged from one common source.
The ancient Vedic teachers called it – Brahman,
Lao-Tzu called it – Tao,
The prophets of the Book called it – Yahweh or Allah.
Today the scientific officially community called this “common source”– Big Bang.
Of course, there is also a scientific possibility that the "common source
for the material reality " can be . . . 11- dimensions or M- dimensions, . . .
But tomorrow . . . .
When the next revolution rocks physics, chances are it will be about nothing -
— the vacuum, that endless infinite void.

===…

" The problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion,
is the basic problem now before physics. Really, if you can’t correctly
describe the vacuum, how it is possible to expect a correct description
of something more complex? "
/ Paul Dirac ./

The most fundamental question facing 21st century physics will be:
What is the vacuum? As quantum mechanics teaches us, with
its zero point energy this vacuum is not empty and the word
vacuum is a gross misnomer!
/ Prof. Friedwardt Winterberg /

Wikipedia :
“ Unfortunately neither the concept of space nor of time is well defined,
resulting in a dilemma. If we don’t know the character of time nor of space,
how can we characterize either? “

“Now we know that the vacuum can have all sorts of wonderful effects
over an enormous range of scales, from the microscopic to the cosmic,”
said Peter Milonni
from the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.

Although we are used to thinking of empty space as containing
nothing at all, and therefore having zero energy, the quantum
rules say that there is some uncertainty about this. Perhaps each
tiny bit of the vacuum actually contains rather a lot of energy.
If the vacuum contained enough energy, it could convert this
into particles, in line with E-Mc^2.
/ Book: Stephen Hawking. Pages 147-148.
By Michael White and John Gribbin. /

Somehow, the energy is extracted from the vacuum and turned into
particles…Don’t try it in your basement, but you can do it.
/ University of Chicago cosmologist Rocky Kolb./

Vacuum – the very name suggests emptiness and nothingness –
is actually a realm rife with potentiality, courtesy of the laws
of quantum electrodynamics (QED). According to QED,
additional, albeit virtual, particles can be created in the vacuum,
allowing light-light interactions.
http://www.aip.org/pnu/2006/768.html
. . . . . .
=============================…

8

If I may offer another more fundamental comparison between the concept of a sentient “God” (in its broadest form) and a scientific non-sentient equal.
This is based on David Bohm’s hypothesis of “Wholeness and the Implicate Order”.
Robert E Wilkinson (metaphysicist),

In order to break the code of the Transcendent dimension, science must learn to reverse this process of divine alchemy. It must abandon its philosophy of continued dismemberment or scientific reductionism in favor of a cosmological, or whole systems approach. Scientists must learn to embrace the view that material reality is not a collection of separate objects as it appears, but an undivided whole in which all parts merge and unite in one totality. Fortunately there are some theorists who recognize this possibility and are beginning to agree that the next great paradigm shift in science will be a cosmological revolution, because Cosmology, once the mother of all science, embraces the whole of reality and describes its order. One of the most impressive theories emerging out of scientific cosmology respecting these ancient truths was set forth by the late physicist, David Bohm in his book, Wholeness and the Implicate Order. Using the language of mathematics, Bohm set out to describe the transcendent reality and its graded energetic hierarchy in four basic states or orders of energy beginning with the physical world, which he called the Explicate Order.
'The Explicate Order, weakest of all energy systems, resonates out of and is an expression of an infinitely more powerful order of energy called the Implicate order. It is the precursor of the Explicate, the dreamlike vision or the ideal presentation of that which is to become manifest as a physical object. The Implicate order implies within it all physical universes. However, it resonates from an energy field which is yet greater, the realm of pure potential. It is pure potential because nothing is implied within it; implications form in the implicate order and then express themselves in the explicate order. Bohm goes on to postulate a final state of infinite [zero point] energy which he calls the realm of insight intelligence. The creative process springs from this realm. Energy is generated there, gathers its pure potential, and implies within its eventual expression as the explicate order.' Will Keepin, David Bohm, Noetic Science Journal When Bohm's resonant fields are arranged in a vibrational hierarchy they represent energy in successive states of manifestation from infinitely subtle to the gross physical reality.
The Zero Point Order which Bohm identified as the realm of insight-intelligence bears an unmistakable resemblance to the supreme spiritual realization of Indian metaphysics known as the Brahman, a perfectly inactive, pure noetic plenum realized as Absolute Being. The Brahman is characterized by a complete fusion of Time and Consciousness which is experienced as Timelessness, or undifferentiated Time. In this state Time-energy vibrates at such an intense rate that it appears static and thereby lacking any element of periodicity or denseness. Hence it cannot produce any form or any division of Consciousness-substance into distinct crystallised objects in Space.
http://www.quantumyoga.org/QuantumBrahman.html Here is where I see common ground for science and metaphysics. The tool which might provide testable evidence for a proper identification of the properties of the Wholeness. From this we could draw a conclusion that "Potential" (That which may become reality) is the functional scientific equivalent of an allegorical sentient Order we named "God, the Creator".
9

@Write4U
The common ground for science and metaphysics
Zero Point Order = Brahman = Absolute Being = (T=0K)
Eternity –> Zero –> Time
(zero is more than nothing)

10

The idea that God Himself is Absolute space (T=0K) seems very strange.
Strange but it is not new.
English philosopher Henry More (1614 – 1687) in his books
" An Antidote against Atheism" and " Enchiridion Metaphysicum"
wrote that the Absolute space must be a real existence . . . .
. . . an essential being . . . a genuine spiritual substance . . .
Absolute space is the divine essence . … Absolute space is divine . .
Absolute space is no other than God Himself . . .
Absolute space is God . . . .
And this Absolute space can generate “spirits of nature” - active agents
through whom the will of God becomes expressed in the world of matter.
/ Pages 147 - 148, 162. / . . . . . and
" Absolute space for Newton is not only the omnipresence of God;
it is also the infinite scene of the divine knowledge . . . ."
/ page 260 /
/ Book: The metaphysical foundations of modern science. By E.A. Burtt./
=…

11
The idea that God Himself is Absolute space (T=0K) seems very strange. Strange but it is not new. English philosopher Henry More (1614 – 1687) in his books " An Antidote against Atheism" and " Enchiridion Metaphysicum" wrote that the Absolute space must be a real existence . . . . . . . an essential being . . . a genuine spiritual substance . . . Absolute space is the divine essence . .. Absolute space is divine . . Absolute space is no other than God Himself . . . Absolute space is God . . . . And this Absolute space can generate "spirits of nature" - active agents through whom the will of God becomes expressed in the world of matter. / Pages 147 - 148, 162. / . . . . . and " Absolute space for Newton is not only the omnipresence of God; it is also the infinite scene of the divine knowledge . . . ." / page 260 / / Book: The metaphysical foundations of modern science. By E.A. Burtt./ =..
But this is not a true equivalence. He takes a scientific fact and attributes this to a metaphysical motivated sentience. Actually, the reverse is true. In the ages of scientific ignorance all unexplained phnemona was attributed to "spititual beings", witness mythology. All "acts of god" have been scientifically explained by science. No mythological gods! Yet, there is one metaphysical, but causal God which has resisted scientific explanation, because it cannot be falsified. But in reality, we deal daily with universal potentials, which are not sentient in themselves. The fundamental definition of Potential is: "That which may become reality". This simple definition is as profound as the concept of God, but can be scientifically defended. i.e. a "probability wave" is a potential; E = MC^2 is a potential. Potential MUST exist before an action is possible in reality. It has preceded the beginning of time iteself. It is the common denominator of everything, past, present, and future. The functional equivalent of God. But it is NOT sentient in and of itself. Bohm postulates that the presence of sufficient potential leads to expression in reality. He calls it the "Implicate". And IMO he did not mean "Insight Intelligence" to be understood as meaning a God, but rather a permissive condition, with the potential for becoming expressed in reality via QM. And, IMHO, that is the difference.
12

The candle of God is the soul of man.
/ Talmudic proverb /
It means that the soul is like the flame of a candle . . .
and the flame of candle is like a quantum of light.
==…

13
The candle of God is the soul of man. / Talmudic proverb / It means that the soul is like the flame of a candle . . . and the flame of candle is like a quantum of light. ==..
The soul is like a quantum of light? Is a quantum of light sentient? Is the "soul" sentient? How about the souls of every living thing on earth, quanta? With due respect, all these allegories depicting man as god's favorite creation is hubris. We are a newcomer to the world stage and man is a result of all that has come before. But if any living thing demands respect and supportive care, it is the simple honeybee, which feeds more natural and domesticated life than any other organism, including man and is responsible for 70% in the propagation of flowering plants and trees. Man has become a surface nuisance and it won't be god, but natural selection which will determine if man is even worthy of intelligence.
14
The candle of God is the soul of man. / Talmudic proverb / It means that the soul is like the flame of a candle . . . and the flame of candle is like a quantum of light. ==..
The soul is like a quantum of light? Is a quantum of light sentient? Is the "soul" sentient? How about the souls of every living thing on earth, quanta? With due respect, all these allegories depicting man as god's favorite creation is hubris. We are a newcomer to the world stage and man is a result of all that has come before. But if any living thing demands respect and supportive care, it is the simple honeybee, which feeds more natural and domesticated life than any other organism, including man and is responsible for 70% in the propagation of flowering plants and trees. Man has become a surface nuisance and it won't be god, but natural selection which will determine if man is even worthy of intelligence. Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature and My supreme dominion over all that be. / Bhagavad Gita, chapter 9, text 11 / ===. . .
15
Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature and My supreme dominion over all that be. / Bhagavad Gita, chapter 9, text 11 / ===. . .
socratus, this is a forum for discussion and debate, not airy assertions of transcendency. If you do not wish to engage in reasoned debate you should go elsewhere, and continued replies to reasoned questions with this kind of nonsense is against the rules and may lead to banning.
16
Soctratus, Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature and My supreme dominion over all that be. / Bhagavad Gita, chapter 9, text 11 / ===. . .
Fools deride anything they don't understand. Fortunately there are few fools on this forum and they understand the meaning of that verse. I, for one do understand the metasphysical and allegorical MORAL nature of all scripture. But if taken literally, assigning a motivated intelligence to the fundamental function of spacetime is an argument from ignorance. Especially if man is considered to be special "in the eyes" of potential expression of these natural laws. A little too convenient, IMO. In fact, most deist scripture speaks of an Implaccable condition, without asserting a sentient intelligence. At best it can be said that the Universe functions in a psuedo intelligent mathematical way. By standards of critical thinking, it means nothing more than that the Universe functions n accordance with immutable Laws of Nature. But these natural laws are not sentient in and of themselves. and it is not necessary that a motivated intelligence was causal to these laws. Accepting the premise that Universal Potential is the mathematical probability that an event will occur, is sufficient for this Universe to exist.
17
Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature and My supreme dominion over all that be. / Bhagavad Gita, chapter 9, text 11 / ===. . .
socratus, this is a forum for discussion and debate, not airy assertions of transcendency. If you do not wish to engage in reasoned debate you should go elsewhere, and continued replies to reasoned questions with this kind of nonsense is against the rules and may lead to banning. @ dougsmith / Administrator Don't take this Bhagavad Gita's proverb personally ===..
18
Soctratus, Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature and My supreme dominion over all that be. / Bhagavad Gita, chapter 9, text 11 / ===. . .
Fools deride anything they don't understand. Fortunately there are few fools on this forum and they understand the meaning of that verse. I, for one do understand the metasphysical and allegorical MORAL nature of all scripture. But if taken literally, assigning a motivated intelligence to the fundamental function of spacetime is an argument from ignorance. Especially if man is considered to be special "in the eyes" of potential expression of these natural laws. A little too convenient, IMO. In fact, most deist scripture speaks of an Implaccable condition, without asserting a sentient intelligence. At best it can be said that the Universe functions in a psuedo intelligent mathematical way. By standards of critical thinking, it means nothing more than that the Universe functions in accordance with immutable Laws of Nature. But these natural laws are not sentient in and of themselves. and it is not necessary that a motivated intelligence was causal to these laws. Accepting the premise that Universal Potential is the mathematical probability that an event will occur, is sufficient for this Universe to exist.
There were people who said ‘God ‘ and thought about 'Zeus.' There are people who say ‘God ‘ and think about 'Holly Cow.' There are people who think what God is an old man with long white beard. But scientist Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington wrote: " The Reasons of a modern science give, maybe the opportunity to make the conclusion that the religion became acceptable for sensible scientific mind, since 1927." It means what there is some way to explain the essence (!) of Religion using Physics. ==..
19
Spcratus, It means what there is some way to explain the essence (!) of Religion using Physics. ==..
I disagree. Cite me one physical attribute of a (any) god that can be analysed and quantified. Gods were invented even before man came along and the proof can be seen today in the behavior of Chimpanzees. They also have "unseen" adversaries who make it rain and thunder. Religion can be explained from a psychological viewpoint, but in the absence of physical properties the physical sciences are useless. And if Physics ever find the prime causality, I am willing to place a bet that this causality is NOT sentient in and of itself. Quantum functions mindlessly, as can be proven repeatedly.
Quantum, In physics, a quantum (plural: quanta) is the minimum amount of any physical entity involved in an interaction. Behind this, one finds the fundamental notion that a physical property may be "quantized," referred to as "the hypothesis of quantization". [1] This means that the magnitude can take on only certain discrete values. A photon is a single quantum of light, and is referred to as a "light quantum". The energy of an electron bound to an atom is quantized, which results in the stability of atoms, and hence of matter in general. As incorporated into the theory of quantum mechanics, this is regarded by physicists as part of the fundamental framework for understanding and describing nature at the smallest length-scales. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum
Where is the need for sentience in Quantum? And if a sentient god is not required for action at micro scale, then it logically follows that a sentient god is not required for physical action in the macro world. You cannot have it both ways. p.s. I agree with your signature line, but rather than explaining the existence of a god, it will disprove the existence of any motivated god, IMO.
20
p.s. I agree with your signature line, but rather than explaining the existence of a god, it will disprove the existence of any motivated god, IMO.
Nobody knows what vacuum is. Nobody knows what quanta light are. Therefore every speculation is possible. ===...