It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Quantum Physicist Wins $1.4M Templeton Prize For Writing on "Veiled Reality"

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 02:57 PM
Actually, this work does not prove the existence of God, but that the universe is a simulation. The machine that simulates the universe saves resources by not rendering what is not observed, just like in a 3d game that hidden or clipped polygons are not rendered.

posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 03:07 PM
It is not god I deny, but the god depicted in so many religions.

There is not much else I can add to the thread besides that.

posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 03:33 PM

Quantum Physicist Wins $1.4M Templeton Prize For Writing on "Veiled Reality"

Nothing new to me... And it should be disturbing that the average Joe doesn't get a prize, our Joe's have been describing philosophical stuff like this way before any prize winning physicist. And what about the kids who come to the conclusion there's no such thing as nothing? They too get nothing for thinking this.

posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 04:20 PM
Quantum Physics can actually be evidence for the existence of God lol. Kind of confusing I know, but it's evidence.

posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 04:32 PM
The mathematical nature of God has now been derived by:
1. showing that the sacred geometries of the Tree of Life (Otz Chiim), the Sri Yantra and the I Ching table of 64 hexagrams are isomorphic. This has profound implications;
2. extracting and abstracting the essential isomorphism;
3. demonstrating that, because of this isomorphism, the properties of holistic systems represented by sacred geometries are characterized by the same set of parameters;
4. demonstrating that these parameters are prescribed mathematically by a minimal set of ten numbers. These numbers are the number values, obtained by gematria, of the ancient Hebrew Divine Names:
EHYEH (21), YAHWEH (26), ELOHIM (50), EL (31), ELOHA (36), YAHWEH ELOHIM (76), YAHWEH SABAOTH (129), ELOHIM SABAOTH (153), EL CHAI (49) & ADONAI (65). For example, quantum mechanics requires spinless strings to have 26 space-time dimensions. This is the number value of YAHWEH.

Dr Stephen Phillips' research (downloadable PDFs) can be studied at

His analysis provides spectacular evidence of how the group mathematics of E8 and E8xE8, the symmetry groups of unified superstring forces, is encoded in sacred geometries. He shows also how the latter are the geometrical basis for the codon and anticodon structure of human RNA.

For those of you who are tired of endless, vague, philosophical arguments and questionable analogies between quantum theory and consciousness and for those of you who want to see the beautiful, perfect, mathematical nature of the divine paradigm revealed in rigorous, objective terms that find amazing expression in, for example, the seven musical scales, brane and superstring physics, human RNA and the human skeleton, his research papers will reward the effort needed to understand them.

posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 06:23 PM

Originally posted by cognoscente
"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." Bernard d'Espagnat

The only quote of his I really happen to disagree with... He's saying that if some consciousness were not present to observe some phenomenon, then the phenomenon would cease to exist. Ostensibly, the results of current experimentation actually supports this hypothesis. I think this more a reflection of our lack in technological ability. I'm sure people in the future will look back on that quote and find it humorous; it might appear in some high school physics textbook as some marginal historical anecdote. The field is still immature, and so it is clearly too early to make such assumptions. I'm not surprised at all that religion has hopped onto this development so quickly... A £1.4 million reward is not all insignificant; it surely adds a degree of credence to the work. Of course, they would undoubtedly go out of their way in recognizing whatever work attempts to recognize religion.

That said, it is quite remarkable how the positivist natural philosophies are just now beginning to fail to provide solutions for an increasingly irreconcilable pool of scientific data. The social sciences have long been confronted by this barrier. Sociology is currently the most afflicted. Fortunately, this does tell us one thing. We clearly lack computational power. For example, if the social sciences were ever to match the level of clarity of the natural sciences, that would require processing power akin to that of the popular Wachowski brothers' movie "The Matrix". Massive simulations would have to take place in order to ever construct logical scientific sentences for certain social phenomena. Likewise, technological advances in the natural sciences should harmonize our current analytical deficiency.

[edit on 17-3-2009 by cognoscente]

I find this very dismissive and rude... and more importantly, typical of the common atheist view. I don't know if the poster is an atheist, but to take a quote from a scientist who put so much time and effort into his research and say it will be considered "humorous" by future generations is completely disrespectful. His work may just as well be considered groundbreaking and essential to whats known in the future as scientific fact. You don't know and neither do I, which is why I would never dismiss your point of view or his in such a snooty manner.

posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 07:19 PM
reply to post by daeoeste

Thx for posting it here!

I do believe strongly that there is a reality beneath quantum mechanics, and things can and do influence one another instantaneously regardless of how much space /distance stretches between them.

My 'God' perception is more an energy moving EVERYWHERE.
Take for example that some people say: God is everywhere, everything, the beginning AND the end (circles of continuation) and sayings of such ... now think in tiny particles, smaller even then atoms, that are and that move.

They can change other bigger particles, like molecules. There are also particles that go rigth through the globe all the time ...

Then try to think in strings, countless ones, vibrating, moving in all directions.... that is the energy that symbolizes God for me. Not a religieus God perse but in all religions one can find descriptions of parts of what God IS. An energy that travels/moves/is beyond our current imagination.

At the time Einstein stated that nothing could travel faster than the speed of light, that was what the worldculture then could comprehend.

Nowadays we have the quantum theory in which EVERYTHING is possible and where the bizarre comes into reality.

Quantum teleportation is a possibility, wheiter the process runs via thoughts or mass. Science already prooved that entangled particles reflect each other’s properties. Even if the information doesn't travel between them by any conventional means what we know of NOW.

I believe quantum mechanics will bring us closer to understand the God-principle.

posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 07:30 PM

Originally posted by Pellevoisin

"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." Bernard d'Espagnat

the question is not about something ceasing to exist because it is not observed, but rather the observable scientific data demonstrates that the act of observation actually changes the quantum reality being studied.

Absolutely agree!

To me Quantum Physicist proves that all things are connected, and can respond within our own consciousness to become reality.

By the same process of introspection you must also agree that any difficulty lies only within yourself.

Jesus said:
Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. (Mark 11:24)

So therefore, I believe, it is the strength of the belief within your own consciousness that changes reality...............FAITH!

posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 08:31 PM
I'm sorry if my comments appeared impetuous, but his writing is thoroughly anecdote-ridden. It's exactly what you would expect from any writing attempt to . I'm certain advances in current methodology will provide a tenable, reducible conclusion to this phenomenon. It's like early fundamentalist Christians and their use of the theory of catastrophism to explain the evolution of different species. Technically some sort of punctuated equilibrium event does occur every know and then, resulting in speciation, but it's not like those events were deliberately enacted by God, specifically in order to eliminate species deemed unworthy, and to allow the "higher forms" to remain alive... You can see where this kind of thinking obviously benefits the idea that humans are preferable beings, fashioned in image of their God. This idea of uniformitarian catastrophism granted credence to religious institutions by contorting existing scientific knowledge in accordance with prior dogma.

"Quantum mechanics introduced another point of view, which consists essentially that the aim of science is not to describe ultimate reality as it really is,” d’Espagnat recounted by phone Friday from Paris. Rather, it is to make account of reality as it appears to us, accounting for the limitations of our own mind and our own sensibilities."

The aim of science is to approximate reality through the creation of logical axioms of knowledge, to produce irreducible bodies of gradually improving knowledge. I'm honestly surprised he mentioned that science attempts to describe ultimate reality. Nothing can describe reality. I presume he only included that sentence because that is currently the general perspective of the public. Natural realism has been an exhausted philosophy of science for the past two hundred years. That type of thinking would have eliminated the theories of both Darwin and Einstein immediately. Instead, they have been advanced, regardless of the fact each of them were at odds with contemporaneously accepted data, and only later did evidence emerge that gave crucial support for each of their theories. The greater our technological ability, the more our processing power, the more we will be able to make conjectures about theories whose data is seemingly nonexistent and yet inevitably prove them correct regardless.

I also think most of you are interpreting this backwards. This subtle misunderstanding is probably a result of syntax changes in his own internal language translation when talking on the phone. D'Espagnat admits that advances in quantum mechanics reflects our inability to evolve scientifically. If ultimate reality is inaccessible to observers, he implies that perhaps we should modify the way we conduct science and formulate theories. That's why I made my brutish comments. Beyond that, I don't particularly care if I was rude or not; with a claim like that criticism is unavoidable. I hope I was being appropriately objective.

In response to a previous post that pointed out my failure to understand the concept; yes, an observed nonlocal phenomena fails to account for reality in that whatever reality we have come to know is merely a result of observational capacity. This discrepancy, however, will ultimately be reconciled with growth in observational capacity and technological ability in the form of extensional human observers, or computers.

I provided a couple links in my previous post. It seems the world is moving on:
Here is the full paper on recent advancements in Quantum measurement techniques:
Implications of study:

[edit on 17-3-2009 by cognoscente]

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in