Bruce Scott-Hill

All matter including ourselves and our environment, are made up of these subatomic (i.e. quantum particles). So, it is not too surprising, that at the larger macro size level, we can similarly make an effective choice (albeit subconsciously) almost instantly amongst possible probabilistic large scale events, and in addition, alterations to mass - comprised of these subatomic particles. For events, this is of course self-evident - if we note that this is exactly what we always do continuously every time we drive a car in a subconscious manner - since on such occasions, we inevitably make constant subconscious choices amongst perceived probabilistic future events, without even being aware of it, while controlling the car. Fortunately, reality usually matches our intent exactly, otherwise we would crash. It is also noteworthy that all mind/consciousness decisions we make concerning events, logically always precede action. Since subatomic particle events themselves shape and manipulate matter, our mind/consciousness, over a time period (a few hours or days in our large mass environment), are thought due to experimental evidence; to not only affect, alter, but also to even create, matter and therefore our environment over time - in accordance with our individual and collective choices. This is of course very difficult to believe, but well supported by quantum behaviour and laboratory experiments. It also surprisingly conforms with esoteric ancient teachings. It also suggests perhaps to Christians and others, a loving God - who provides us with free will, but of a quality and scope unrecognised previously, but now seen as being beyond our wildest imaginings.

If the above were not enough to test our belief system, surprisingly, the above has a further mind-blowing consequence in relation to “The Big Bang”. From the above, “consciousness” must now be regarded as always providing a “Primary” function - since, as shown above, its existence is not only critical and necessary “to create our reality”, but its activity must always precede (and determine) events. This therefore means that a conscious creator mind must have preceded the Big Bang. Therefore, these fundamental properties of quantum physics fully support the concept of a God/Creator.  

 From this, several corollaries follow: -

-              The probabilistic nature of quantum physics and choice, suggests a free will capability (as mentioned above).

-              The logical consistency and rationality of all the above, clearly suggests design - as it allows the life we participate in to be created by sensible and rational decisions/choices to be made by the conscious purposeful minds of all living entities. Which must of course also include as well, the conscious mind of a God/creator.

-              The alternative proposition that all reality arose by chance, is not supported by the logical scientific consistency and rationality inherent and evident in the above. Moreover, with the atheistic alternative suggestion that the universe might have arisen by a massive quantum fluctuation, one would expect in nature, not just many, but a majority of uncaused random instances of chaos, irrationality and disorder. This however, is simply not evident in our universe, nor does it conform to the experimental evidence which in contrast, always aligns with all the known inviolate universal laws of physics, which have been found to uniformly apply throughout the entire universe.

-              Finally, this suggests that (not unreasonably), if our soul/consciousness were of a quantum sized particle (e.g immediately following death), an afterlife would be possible where consciousness intent would enable us to create an environment instantly (due to our low mass), but suited to our individual and collective desires – as is stated in almost all esoteric literature and many Eastern religions.  The inventor of cloning and a scientist considered the Einstein of Biology Professor Robert Lanza supports the above in his 2010 book called Biocentrism, authored by himself and quantum physicist Bob Berman . The following are extracts taken from his book on pages 55 and 79.

To aid clarity to the above by providing more detail, and reverting to the case of small subatomic i.e. discrete quantum particles Professor Lanza says:

“However, if they are not being observed, they cannot be thought of as having any real existence - either in duration or a position in space. Until the mind sets the scaffolding of an object in space, until it actually lays down the threads (somewhere in the haze of probabilities that represent the objects range of possible values), it cannot be thought of as being either here or there. Thus, quantum waves merely define the potential location a particle can occupy. When the particle is observed, [and a subconscious choice made – my addition], it will be within the statistical probability for that event to occur. A wave of probability isn’t an event or a phenomenon, it is a description of the likelihood of an event or phenomenon occurring. Nothing happens until an observation is made.

Again and again, observations have consistently confirmed the observer-dependent effects of quantum theory. In the past decade physicists at the National Institute of Standards and Technology have carried out experiments that, in the quantum world, is equivalent to demonstrating that ‘a watched pot doesn’t boil’. It seems, said Peter Coveney there, “that the act of looking at an atom prevents it from changing.” (Theoretically, if a nuclear bomb were watched intently enough, it would not explode, that is, if you could keep checking its atoms every million trillionth of a second. This is yet another experiment that supports the theory that the structure of the physical world, and of small units of matter and energy - in particular, are influenced by human observation.)

In the last couple of decades, quantum theorists have shown in principle, that an atom cannot change its energy state as long as it is being continuously observed. So, now, to test this concept, the group of laser experimentalists at NIST held a cluster of positively beryllium ions, the water so to speak, in a fixed position using a magnetic field, the kettle. They applied heat to the kettle in the form of a radio-frequency field that would boost the atoms from a lower to a higher energy state. This transition generally takes about a quarter of a second. However, when the researchers kept checking the atoms every four milliseconds with a brief pulse of light from a laser, the atoms never made it to the high energy state, despite the force driving them to it. It would seem that the observation process associated with measurement gives the atoms “a little nudge,” forcing them back down to a lower energy state – in effect, resetting the system to zero. This behaviour has no analog in the classical world of everyday sense awareness and is apparently a function of observation.

Arcane? Bizarre? It’s hard to believe such effects are real. It’s a fantastic result. When quantum physics was in the early days of discovery at the beginning of the last century, even some physicists dismissed the experimental findings as impossible or improbable. It is curious to recall Albert Einstein’s reactions to the experiments: “I know this business is free of contradictions, yet in my view it contains a certain unreasonableness.”

It was only with the advent of quantum physics and the fall of objectivity that scientists began to consider again the old question of the possibility of comprehending the world as a form of mind. Einstein, on a walk from The Institute for Advanced Studies at Princeton to his home on Mercer Street, illustrated his continued fascination and scepticism about an objective external reality, when he asked Abraham Pais if he really believed that the moon existed only if he looked at it. Since that time, physicists have analysed and revised their equations in a vain attempt to arrive at statement of natural laws that in no way depends on the circumstances of the observer. Indeed, Eugene Wigner, one of the twentieth century’s greatest physicists, stated that it is not possible to formulate the laws of [physics] in a fully consistent way without reference to the consciousness of [the observer].” So when quantum theory implies that consciousness must exist, it tacitly shows that the content of the mind is the ultimate reality, and that only an observation can confer shape and form to reality - from a dandelion in a meadow to sun, wind and rain.

And so, what we perceive as reality is a process that involves our consciousness. Also, the behaviour of subatomic particles – indeed all particles and objects – is inextricably linked to the presence of an observer. Without the presence of an observer, they at best exist in an undetermined state of probability.