alan wallace
September 2008 
Dr. Alan Wallace's new book HIDDEN DIMENSIONS
Posted on Aug 11th, 2007
by 
Gien
Gien
I would like to bring to your attention the recent publication of Alan Wallace’s latest book: Hidden Dimensions: The Unification of Physics and Consciousness (Columbia University Press, 2007).
Here is a brief overview:
Bridging the gap between the world of science and the realm of the spiritual, B. Alan Wallace introduces a natural theory of human consciousness that has its roots in contemporary physics and Buddhism. Wallace’s “special theory of ontological relativity†suggests that mental phenomena are conditioned by the brain, but do not emerge from it. Rather, the entire natural world of mind and matter, subjects and objects, arises from a unitary dimension of reality that is more fundamental than these dualities, as proposed by Wolfgang Pauli and Carl Jung.
To test his hypothesis, Wallace employs the Buddhist meditative practice of samatha, refining one’s attention and metacognition, to create a kind of telescope to examine the space of the mind. Drawing on the work of the physicist John Wheeler, he then proposes a more general theory in which the participatory nature of reality is envisioned as a self-excited circuit. In comparing these ideas to the Buddhist theory known as the Middle Way philosophy, Wallace explores further aspects of his “general theory of ontological relativity,†which can be investigated by means of vipasyana, or insight, meditation. Wallace then focuses on the theme of symmetry in reference to quantum cosmology and the “problem of frozen time,†relating these issues to the theory and practices of the Great Perfection school of Tibetan Buddhism. He concludes with a discussion of the general theme of complementarity as it relates to science and religion.
The theories of relativity and quantum mechanics were major achievements in the physical sciences, and the theory of evolution has had an equally deep impact on the life sciences. Yet rigorous scientific methods do not yet exist to observe mental phenomena, and naturalism has its limits for shedding light on the workings of the mind. A pioneer of modern consciousness research, Wallace offers a practical and revolutionary method for exploring the mind that combines the keenest insights of contemporary physicists and philosophers with the time-honored meditative traditions of Buddhism.
for more info, visit: www.sbinstitute.com
Access: Public
Hi!
My professor in philosophy, David Favrholdt, is probably one of the worlds greatest experts in Niels Bohr, and therefore also in Quantum mechanics. He say that there is a very simple misunderstanding of quantum mechanics, which now have grown into a world-wide philosophy (specially within spiritual groups). The misunderstanding is, that quantum mechanichs should support the philosophical theory named subjectivism - meaning, that it is the human consciousness, which creates the phenomenons. It is not the physicist´s consciousness (the subject) which makes the electron behave like a wave. It is the macro-physical (material) research devices, which influences the electron in a certain way, so that you unambiguous know, that if you work with this kind of apparatus, then the electron will always behave like a wave.
The same misunderstanding exists concerning Einsteins theory of relativity - that it should support the philosophical theory named relativism,
On the background on such misunderstandings, I think that Alan should be careful not to end up in a so called reductionism - a philosophical viewpoint, that claim that it is a scientific viewpoint. But as a philosophical statement its very interesting
Furthermore. Personally I don't think that you can ever watch consciousness scientifically, because science work with empirical observation. You can watch the brain, and the thoughts, but not consciousness in itself, because in itself consciouness is the unmanifested Source.
Love from Morten
It seems to me that consciousness is the subjective experience and science is the empirical study. Well of course these are. Not to say there are not links to this. What we think is tightly bound by forces in the eternal world which impinge on our physical need to survive.
I think often of the relationship between atman and brahman as a unifying principle of the subjective and objective.
Nevertheless consciousness is a mode of evolution where higher states of consciousnesss come about (via Aurobindo) and therefore serves the survival instinct. This is not a form of Spencerism (survival of the fittest as a social law) but rather can be a unifying principle when the reality of survival depends on cooperation.
But the scientific study cannot be overlapped with subjective consciousness (in my humble opinion) because the apparatus used for understanding (the tools involved) are very different and while science is not metaphysically sound, consiousness is not empirically sound. Finding a synthesis is where a true advance in knowledge lies. I don't think such an endeavor is impossible if we can more adequately identify and refine the modes of enquiry
When I was five years old I got absorbed by the philosophical question: Are we dreaming? Do we dream this long dream we call life?
We are going into an old philosophical Question, the problem of consciousness. I could also go into another of my teachers Erich Klawonn. I could also see the film Matrix.
But what falls me into mind is my fictional mentor Jorge Luis Borges. He were not interested in philosophy, but in the beauty in philosophy. Here is a poem from him. Its called Descartes:
I am the only man on Earth and maybe
There are neither earth or Man.
Maybe I am mislead by a god.
Maybe a God has condemt me Time, this big
Illusion.
I am dreaming the moon and I dream my eyes
which see the Moon.
I have dreamt the first days evening and morning.
I have dreamt Karthago and the legions which has
destroyed Karthago.
I have dreamt Lucanos.
I have dreamt Golgatha´s hill and the cross in Rome.
I have dreamt geometry.
I have dreamt the spot, the line, the expanse and
the cubic content.
I have dreamt the yellow, the blue and the read.
I have dreamt the illness created by my childhood.
I have dreamt the landmaps, the kingdoms and
a sertent duel in a morning dawn.
I have dreamt the incredible pain.
I have dreamt my sword.
I have dreamt Elizabeth of Boehmen.
I have dreamt doubt and wisdom.
I have dreamt the day yesterday.
Maybe there was not any yesterday, maybe I was not
Born.
Maybe I am dreaming that I have been dreaming.
I feel a bit of cold, a bit of fear.
Over Donau the night rests.
I keep on dreaming about Descartes and his
Fathers believes.