New Age Religion is wrong...
by John SkieSwanne
New Age Religion is wrong... on a small but important detail. No, this is not an opposition to New Age Religion. In fact I approve of this religion,
as it's one of the few remaining religions which actually seems to be open-minded about both science and spirituality, and I applaud its efforts to
promote morality, science, but also love and peace.
But, I would like to point out a major fault in this religion. Remember that New Age heavily relies on science to make accurate metaphysical
hypothesis. So, if New Agers are reading this, please understand that I am not pointing out this to attack you, but in fact so you can improve your
religion even further by correcting the faulty parts. Perfection may never be achieved in reality, but it must never be given up as (at least) a
Now let's examine which detail of the Religion is faulty: The New Age's interpretation of an important aspect of modern physics.
Most New Agers are familiar with the aspect of physics we call, The Observation-Triggered Wavefunction Collapse. I saw some New Agers simply call it,
the Observation Principle. In plain english: the observation of a subatomic particle will alter its momentum or its position.
In essence, this is absolutely correct. Where New Agers got it wrong is not the definition of the phenomena, but the definition of an "observation".
In physics, an "observation" is not exactly the action of just looking at something with our physical eyes. In 1927, Werner Heisenberg discovered
the Uncertainty Principle. He showed that to try and measure a particle, let's say an electron, you must be able to get an image of it.
(For you great physicists out there: please note that I am here overlooking the Copenhagen interpretation - for the sake of simplicity, I will just go
with a classical approach here. I hope I won't be considered too heretic...)
Werner showed that to measure a particle's position for instance, you have to send a beam to it (since electrons are way too small to be visible to
naked eyes). The beam will hit the electron, and you'll be able to guess where it is. This action of measuring the position with a beam was called an
"observation". Since emitting a beam right at an electron will "knock" this electron out of its original trajectory, you can't really measure its
real-time position. And it means the knock lets you know only where it was... Never where it is now.
Imagine you're in a road, during the night, with a GPS. For some reason, your headlights are down, so you drive at 30 mph, blind in the dark. Your
car represents the measuring beam. Suddenly, a bird hits your windshield. The bird represents the target particle your car will "observe" by hitting
with it. On your GPS, your position during the hit was at 10000 feet south from home, and 10000 feet east. Does that mean the bird is at these
coordinates? Nope. Since your car carried momentum, and so did the bird, and since you can't know what incident direction the bird was coming from,
it means the bird was indeed observed at these coordinate, but now it bounced some other way, and its current position is still unknown.
In physics, "observation" is not just staring at something. You can't collapse an electron's wave function in your pencil simply by staring at it.
You actually have to measure the target with some kind of beam or something, be able to compress the wide possibilities of position of the electron,
and THAT will be called an "observation".
Unfortunately, some people like Michio Kaku and many others started stating (incorrectly) that just turning your eyeball at an object will change its
very subatomic properties. This is a major misunderstanding of the phenomena, and most physicists I meet are perplexed by this grossly misleading
statement. This pseudoscience was fed to the people by sensationalist media, and now we have worldwide communities who subscribe to, basically, mumble
jumble and bullshlarah.
Before I close this thread, I would like to remind you what the Many-Worlds interpretation is: Multiple possibilities but which are all real (as
opposed to only one is real after measurement). One of its implications is that observation has no particular effect on matter, since all
possibilities are real and history is simply a change of world each time two systems interact with one another (are "observed"). Many-worlds
proposes answers to many "anomalies", such as the double-slit experiment (which is again not caused by people staring at the slits but by direct
measurement of the photon position with instruments that actually detect passage).
In conclusion: I hope many New Agers will have find the material I posted beneficial. You may wish to check Wikipedia for further information - if so,
then you can bypass searching, sit back, and simply check out this post's references:
At Time's End,