Inside the Mind of God
Rocking the Foundations, Part 2
Click here to read the previous installment
B Y   D R.   M A N J I R   S A M A N T A - L A U G H T O N,   M D

IN ALL THE HEADLINES, and political wrangles that make up our daily news there is an important story that often goes unnoticed. Something is happening to the human population; they are waking up to a new reality. There are no official surveys on how many or in what ways. This is not a subject discussed in the Sunday politics, yet it is changing the views of many.

The Western World, so long devoid of any discussion of soul, is starting to find it was there all along. It is expressing itself in many ways: children walking out of schools to protest against war, medical schools teaching complementary therapies due to public demand, weekend workshops to discuss angelic experiences, the growth of mediums on television. We seem to be growing in awareness that there is more to life: that human beings are more than just the obvious.

As many turn their attention to psychics and the 'paranormal', the skeptics have demanded proof. They claim that some of these practices are not scientific and therefore cannot be true. For many years there has not been a scientific explanation for distant healing, mediumship and other practices. But science has changed. Science has revealed that the universe is much stranger than we first thought. As science reveals these strange secrets, its parallels with esoteric knowledge are becoming clear.

The frontiers of science are revealing that the universe behaves as the mystics have told us all along. We are finally gaining a logical explanation for paranormal phenomena and in modern scientific language. We are finding that soul or consciousness is not only a part of science, it is fundamental to the universe.

The study of consciousness is becoming more common. We can divide those researching consciousness into two camps: those who believe that consciousness is a result of brain activity and those who believe that consciousness is more fundamental. In order to see how this divide came about we need to look back at history.

Losing Our Minds
A discussion of consciousness is largely absent from science. This absence is often ascribed to the philosopher, René Descartes, who decided that mind and body are separate. As the physical body is more easily understood and more obviously compared to the elusive mind, scientists preferred to focus on the body. The study of consciousness and the mind was relegated to the sidelines.

We started to view ourselves as machines composed of various parts. Our minds were simply side effects of the workings of the body. When discussing consciousness we called it an 'epiphenomenon' of the brain as if it were nothing more than an after-thought!

Not only did we see ourselves as machines, but we also saw the whole universe as a giant machine. This had been the way forward for science until the 20th century and remains the path of most scientific disciplines. This approach is often called reductionism. According to this approach, if you reduce a system into its component parts, then learn about the parts, you know all there is to know about that system. Reductionism only considers physical components that you can see, touch and feel, ignoring the possibility of any other qualities existing.

A universe made of mechanical parts can be easily predicted. As discussed in the last chapter, Newton is often seen as having been a great proponent of this view. He believed that if you had information on all the mechanical parts in the entire universe then the future of the universe could be predicted. The universe was a giant clockwork machine: predetermined, without soul or mind. Humans could be seen simply as parts in the machine.

This mechanical, soul-less view that made up the basis of 17th century science became the starting point for all of the systems that now constitute modern Western life, from medicine to economics. We are still living with the legacy of reductionism and it touches every aspect of our lives.

This is easily seen by visiting any Western-style hospital. People are treated according to systems and parts and are likely to see a specialist such as a cardiologist to deal with heart problems. The rationale is that if all the various parts of the body that have broken down are dealt with, and then the person will make a recovery.

The idea of the body comprising separate parts does not stop at the level of major organs and tissues. With the growth of molecular medicine, parts of the machine of the body are just as likely to be molecules. The philosophy of reductionism applies here too. Pharmaceutical drugs are produced to correct any molecules that may have become imbalanced. Again this follows the philosophy of fixing the parts to heal the whole person. The reductionist system in medicine has worked very well for many years but people are now wishing to be seen as more than the sum of the parts, hence the rise of medical modalities that are seen as more holistic.

This holistic movement touches other areas of our lives too, such as economics and ecology. As we begin the 21st century, there is a rising disquiet regarding the view that our universe and ourselves are simply machines. There is a call for a science of holism: a science of more than the sum of the parts. So how do we put the soul back into science? Some may be surprised to find that this movement has already begun.

The Conscious Revolution
We have discussed that for many years, consciousness has been seen as an unimportant subject. Recently there has been a renewed interest in the subject of consciousness, with a growing number of books and television programs attempting to address this faculty.(1, 2)

It is an odd state of affairs: we make observations of our world, these very observations give us the foundations of science itself, yet we do not often explore that the common factor behind these observations is the fact that we are observing. It is amazing that science has thus far largely ignored this ubiquitous phenomenon.

Although we use the act of observation in science we do not ask how we are able to observe at all. It is generally agreed that observation requires an action by a conscious entity. The discussion of observation is, therefore the discussion of consciousness.

It was the birth of quantum physics in the early 20th century that changed this state of affairs. From then on, the phenomenon of consciousness could no longer be ignored by science.

The New Reality
Many will have heard the term, 'splitting the atom'. Taken literally this is a phrase that does not make sense. The word 'atom' comes from the Greek word meaning 'indivisible'. It was thought for many centuries that all matter could be broken into constituent parts. It was envisaged that these parts were similar to tiny, solid, billiard balls.

When the atom was probed more deeply it became apparent that it was not solid. The atom was in fact predominately 'empty' space with just a speck of subatomic particles contained within. These are the particles that many will be familiar with from school science classes: the protons and neutrons in the center or nucleus with electrons occupying 'shells' in orbit around it.

Figure 1 - Classical picture of an atom

Originally it was thought these particles that existed inside the atom were also like solid billiard balls. Further probing of these particles revealed a very different reality. The early forefathers of quantum physics found something they were not expecting. These particles were not solid either.

Instead they found that these particles displayed a very strange type of behavior. It seems that a particle, such as an electron, exists as a wave of probability. This is a very odd concept indeed and one that the early quantum physicists found very difficult to grasp. It is as if when you really get to the fundamental of what an object consists of and reach this subatomic level, where you might expect to find a particle, all you actually find is a map of where that particle might be.

The electron seems to exist as a mere whiff of possibility, existing at this position or that position, until the act of measuring occurs. It is at that moment when its position can be determined. It is the very act of measuring which seems to bring it into the realms of reality and out of probable existence. This property of particles to be sometimes like a wave and sometimes like a point is called wave-particle duality.

Figure 2 - Wave-particle duality
The particle exists as a wave of probability until measurement occurs.

This strange behavior exhibited by particles moved Nobel Prizewinning physicist, Richard Feynman, to say in one of his lectures, "The theory of quantum electrodynamics describes Nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And it agrees fully with experiment. So I hope you can accept Nature as she is - absurd."(3)

Quantum physics introduced the idea that the act of measuring alters the nature of reality, much to the disturbance of those who discovered it. Suddenly we had progressed from passive observers of our universe to active participators. From seeing ourselves as soulless cogs in a clockwork machine universe, we realized that we are important. Our act of observation has an effect on matter. Furthermore, as we discussed earlier, our ability to observe depends on our faculty of consciousness. This means that consciousness is intricately entwined with reality.

This idea caused much upset and debate amongst the early 20th century physicists including Albert Einstein and Neils Bohr. It is interesting to note that we are almost one hundred years on, yet the concept of consciousness affecting matter at the subatomic level is not accepted by some physicists. Other scientific disciplines, such as biology, remain largely unaffected by the findings of the early 20th century. It seems that many people still ignore Feynman's plea to accept that Nature is absurd.

Our Personal Power
The reluctance to accept this could be due to the shock of realizing that as human beings we are not just at the mercy of fate and genetics; we have an influence on reality. But with that realization comes responsibility and that may be hard to accept. It is often easier for us not to accept responsibility for our lives.

I do not think it is a coincidence that the growing interest in quantum theory from the non-scientific public is occurring at the same time as the rise in interest in personal development. Personal development teaches the idea that a person's beliefs can affect their life and can include techniques to help examine beliefs and change them. This helps people take responsibility for their lives. As more people make the link between their personal beliefs and how these affect their lives, the findings of quantum physics gain acceptance. There is much evidence behind quantum physics. It is not just a theory or confined to a laboratory, it also has practical applications. It is a principle called quantum tunneling, derived from quantum physics, that is used in most of the technology of modern life.(4) For example, quantum tunneling is used in the electronic microchips incorporated in most modern equipment from personal computers to televisions, to mobile phones. Although Nature seems to be absurd, we are happy to take advantage of this behavior in our daily lives.

We know that quantum physics is a more accurate description of reality than the Newtonian view. If we are to accept that our mobile phones are real, then we also have to accept the other consequences of quantum physics: that consciousness interacts with matter at a subatomic level. So what is consciousness?

Mind Trek
As we start the 21st century, the scientific world is increasingly turning its attention to the problem of consciousness. Consciousness is generally associated with the brain; therefore this field of research is largely contained within neuroscience. Neuroscience is essentially a branch of biology that specializes in the brain and nervous system. Biology in general has been untouched by the revolution in physics, which has moved from reductionism to the quantum view of reality. As a consequence, biology, and therefore neuroscience, remains stuck in the billiard ball view of reality. It operates with the belief that the examination of every part of a system reveals all there is to know about it.

This is a logical conclusion from our observations of life; people with brain tumors or strokes that damage the brain can undergo personality changes. From this we can conclude that the mind exists in the brain and that the brain produces consciousness. This is an assumption so basic to modern neuroscience that it is rarely questioned.

The goal of neuroscience is to learn everything about the brain and its parts. It is expected that through this process the full workings of the mind will be revealed. Much of neuroscience focuses on mapping the parts of the brain and their various functions.

The assumptions made about the brain by neuroscience form the basis of neurological medicine. My medical training taught me that the mind was in the brain. (It also taught me not to worry too much about the whole concept of the mind.) I was shown the parts of the brain that controlled various parts of the body. As a doctor on a neurology ward, I would often examine patients who had suffered strokes. According to my findings, I would draw a conclusion as to which area of the brain had been affected by the stroke. I would then compare this conclusion with the results seen on the Computerized Tomography (CT) scans, which often show the damaged parts of the brain.

We have observed over time that damage to the brain affects various functions of movement, memory and personality. These qualities are all seen as aspects of mind and consciousness. It is no wonder that neuroscience looks for consciousness within the architecture of the brain. It is from this logical process that we have come to this fundamental assumption of neuroscience.

BRAIN = MIND = CONSCIOUSNESS

Now that functional brain imaging is available with techniques such as Positron Emission Tomography (PET) scans, researchers are asking what area of the brain is responsible for happiness.(5) Neuroscience is attempting to explain transcendent experiences, describing them as unusual activity of the hippocampus area of the brain. This area has even become known as the God spot.(6)

Naturally this type of questioning will give rise to the query; which part of the brain is responsible for consciousness itself? How is it that the mechanical firings of neurons give rise to the inner pictures, memories and thoughts that we all experience? How do flat, electrical processes give rise to our full, three-dimensional inner experiences?

Those who believe that all there is to know about consciousness comes from studying the brain, continue to pursue their current methods of investigation and research. Neuroscience views the brain as a machine and the various neurological chemicals as parts of the machine, interacting with structural parts: the neurons. Yet all these molecules are made up of atoms. Generally biology does not consider activity at the atomic or subatomic level. The molecule is the smallest part of the machine it considers. So what happens if we go deeper than the molecule to the level of the quantum physics and subatomic particles?

The Paradox
As we have seen in our discussions on quantum physics, our own consciousness has an influence on reality at the subatomic level. Often this influence is dismissed as being unimportant to our daily lives. This is due to quantum effects only becoming obvious at the level of the very small, they are assumed to be irrelevant in daily life. To our perception, objects are solid and stable; we do not experience objects flipping in and out of existence.

Yet everyday objects are made up of atoms. If atoms interact with our consciousness, then does that mean that the objects around us do? Even though we may not be aware of it, at a deeper level, all matter behaves in this quantum fashion, even the objects that we see around us which seem so solid. They too, are made up of subatomic particles displaying wave-particle duality and interacting with consciousness. We can see from this logic that it is possible to say that our consciousness interacts with all matter.

In our earlier discussion on quantum physics, we had seen how quantum subatomic particles only exist as a wave of probability until the act of observation. Physicists say that 'consciousness collapses the wave function.' 'Collapsing' describes the way in which the probability wave gains qualities that are certain. Until then it remains in a strange, probable state. It seems that consciousness is the mechanism that collapses the wave function and brings the subatomic particle into being as opposed to just possibly being there. These particles make up the objects we see around us: matter. It could be said, therefore, that consciousness creates matter.

Amit Goswami, a conventionally trained physicist, started to worry about this in the 1960s. He recalls his journey and his conclusions in his books such as, The Self Aware Universe and The Visionary Window.(7,8) He started to realize that science contains a paradox.

He realized that consciousness is responsible for creating matter by collapsing the wave function. The current view in biology, however, is that consciousness emanates from the brain. Yet the brain itself is also made up of atoms that require consciousness in order to exist. The question is - which came first, brain or consciousness?

The way in which Goswami answers this question is by saying that consciousness is the 'ground of all being': that everything in the universe is consciousness. Matter emerges from some inherently conscious ground substance. In this way the paradox dissolves, consciousness came first. Consciousness is a fundamental quality in everything. Many other scientists and scholars are reaching this conclusion such as Peter Russell, Dale Pond, William Tiller, Fred Alan Wolf and Christian De Quincey.(9, 10, 11, 12, 13)

Have we found the 'mind of God' that Stephen Hawking famously left us pondering on at the end of his book A Brief History of Time?(14) Have we been looking in the wrong place for consciousness, as it is an inherent quality in everything, not just the brain?

Consciousness as the ground of all being is not a new idea at all. It is an idea found in many religions and spiritual traditions of the world. Peter Russell, as well as being a physicist, is also a student of Eastern philosophy. He gives some excellent evidence of this tradition in his book From Science to God.(15) For the first time, the same conclusion has been reached from a scientific perspective.

It is important to realize that the introduction of consciousness into physics is not one that was expected or welcomed. The methods used in making the discoveries of quantum physics were in the reductionist tradition. It is by following reductionism that these results were obtained. Science has led us full circle: by eliminating all discussion of consciousness, it has found that consciousness is inevitable in our universe and is inherent in all.

This idea lays the foundation for this book. There are many phenomena in Nature that are not easily explained such as psychic experiences and the origins of life itself. Physics has led us to the conclusion that consciousness is the ground of all being. How does this help us to understand the conundrums of life? What happens if we incorporate consciousness into science? What possibilities can this hold for us? What happens when we put the soul back into science?

Join us next month for more
from Punk Science!

© 2006, Dr. Manjir Samanta-Laughton, MD, All Rights Reserved

Excerpted with permission from Punk Science: Inside the Mind of God by Dr. Manjir Samanta-Laughton, published by O Books (ISBN 1905047932). Available for purchase from your local bookseller, or any of the following online locations: www.amazon.com, www.barnesandnoble.com, www.o-books.com.

For more information, check out www.PunkScience.com.

References for Chapter 2
(1) Winston R. The Human Mind. (Bantam Press) 2003.
(2) Carter R. Mapping The Mind. (Phoenix) 2000.
(3) Feynman RP. Q.E.D. The Strange theory of Light and Matter. (Penguin Books Ltd) 1990.
(4) Al-Khalili J. Quantum: A Guide for the Perplexed. (Weidenfeld & Nicolson) 2003.
(5) Newberg A, D’Aquili EG, Rause V. Why God Won’t Go Away. (Ballantine) 2001.
(6) Persinger MA. Propensity to report paranormal experiences is correlated with temporal lobe signs. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 1984; 59: 583- 586.
(7) Goswami A. The Self-Aware Universe. (Tarcher/Putnam) 1995.
(8) Goswami A. The Visionary Window. (Quest Books) 2000.
(9) Russell P. From Science to God: Exploring the Mystery of Consciousness. (New World Library) 2005.
(10) Pond D. ed. Universal Laws Never Before Revealed. (Infotainment world Books) 1995.
(11) Tiller WA. Science and human transformation. (Pavior) 1997.
(12) Wolf FA. Starwave (Macmillan) 1984.
(13) De Quincey C. Nature has a Mind of It’s Own. Network. 2002; 80: 6-9.
(14) Hawking S. A Brief History of Time. (Bantam) 1995.
(15) Russell P. From Science to God: Exploring the Mystery of Consciousness. (New World Library) 2005.