More discrepancies between Vedanta (and Christian Science?) and quantum physics

  Table of Contents

We have already seen some discrepancies between Vedanta and quantum mechanics (here).  However, in the paper below, we find additional differences between the two. These arguments may also apply to Christian Science. 

Consciousness, Quantum Mechanics, Duality, Monism and Vedanta: Speculations and Facts by Sarma N. Gullapalli

PDF Available Here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WmIwW2OSIssIsZ_wL38gNEzDvu6-eVGV/view?usp=sharing

Vedantic Consciousness and Quantum Mechanics

Quantum mechanics, in which wave function defines all probable (not yet realized) outcomes for physical event, out of which one is observed (realized) at the time of measurement, has naturally invited philosophical comparisons of quantum mechanics with Vedanta which says that the physical universe is unreal and that the only Reality is Paramatma the omnipresent highest level of consciousness (Parama: highest, Atma: consciousness) that also resides in all living beings at a lower level as Jivatma (Jiva: living being, Atma: consciousness) through which instantiations of physical objects are observed (as if real). Such philosophical discussions are indeed very enlightening in the search for some underlying common truth. There are strong arguments both for and against similarities between quantum mechanics and Vedanta. To cite a few, review paper by Jonathan Duquette (2011) ‘Quantum Physics and Vedanta: A perspective from Bernard d’Espagnat’s Scientific Realism’; Goswami (1995) ‘The Self-Aware Universe, how consciousness creates the material world’. Krishnamoorthy (2017) ‘Quantum Physics came from Vedas: Schrodinger and Einstein read Vedas’; ISKCON (2009) ‘Vedic Knowledge and Quantum Mechanics’.

But, certain important fundamental aspects must be considered, for completeness in such comparisons: (1) Quantum mechanics quantizes energy, which is also conserved. In Vedanta, the energy behind physical universe is Paramatma, any attempt at quantization of which is not only meaningless, it would degrade the very concept of Paramatma. Moreover, energy of Paramatma is limitless, so conservation of energy is meaningless. (2) Quantum mechanics deals entirely with physical reality, nothing unreal. All objects exist in physical reality at all times, only their state (out of all possible states) is undefined till measurement (observation). In Vedanta, physical existence itself is regarded as unreal, the only Reality is meta-physical Paramatma. (3) Applying physical quantum mechanics to meta-physical Vedanta invites the problem of finiteness of velocity of propagation of wave function as defined by Schrodinger’s wave equation which includes physical parameters such as mass and momentum, whereas meta-physical consciousness can span the entire universe in an instant.

Until now, all scholarly discussions of quantum mechanics and Vedanta have been based on the prevailing view of wave-particle duality, namely that depending on observation the particle somehow mysteriously changes to wave or from wave to particle. New development discussed in Part 1 resolves this mystery and adds much desired clarity: Physical particle always remains particle and mathematical wave always remains wave, there is no role of consciousness. Other aspects of wave function such as wave function collapse, superposition of states, non-local action at a distance and quantum jump have also been shown not to involve consciousness or metaphysical mysticism. For example, with reference to Goswamy (1995), the following statements, which may be valid per prevailing view, are not true per the new development: p45 “in order to understand the behavior of quantum mechanics, however, we seem to need to inject consciousness – our ability to choose – according to the complementarity principle and subject – object mixing”; p48 “The antithesis of material realism is monistic idealism. In this philosophy, consciousness, not matter, is fundamental”; p85 “As soon as a conscious being observes, the material reality becomes manifest in a unique state”; p107 “The idealist resolution of the Schrodinger’s cat demands that the consciousness of observing subject choose one facet from the multifaceted dead-and-alive coherent superposition of the cat and thus seal its fate. The subject is the chooser”.

The claim that the material world is created by one’s conscious observation, is not justified either by quantum mechanics (as shown in part 1), or by Vedanta:

ivatma is same as Paramatma (Self), but diluted by ignorance. (Swami Chinmayananda SelfUnfoldment p 41 “An individual is the Self as though degraded by ignorance, which finds expression in the world as thoughts and actions”). Paramatma does not directly interact with one’s senses (Radhakrishnan p 581-4 Kena Upanishad verses 1.2 to 1.9). That interaction occurs through Jivatma. Thus, Jivatma does not create the physical objects in the world through observation. 

Furthermore, Vedanta talks about cyclical nature of creation, without a beginning or an end, not a particular time in the distant past when the universe was “created”. In the Creation Hymn (Rg Veda hymn 10-129), Vedic sages pose to themselves difficult questions about how the universe came to be, followed by suggestive answers, followed finally by honest “who knows?”, kindling further inquiry, guiding one towards the truth. This hymn hints at nothingness, neither existence nor non-existence, neither air nor space, neither death nor immortality, neither darkness nor light, then the ONE enclosed in nothing breathed, the calmness of nothingness perturbed by ripples leading to the universe we see. Nothingness without beginning or end, cyclical creation is but like ripples disturbing the eternal nothingness. Such deeply inquiring knowledge was transmitted from teacher (guru) to student (sishya) in a strictly oral tradition over thousands of years, to this very day, long after writing, books and notebooks became available. 

The import of this is that Vedanta is all in the mind, the field of thoughts, requiring mental discipline and memory power, the central role of consciousness. This remarkable oral tradition that has survived to this day has been studied and documented by Professor David M. Knipe (2015 Vedic Voices – Intimate Narratives of a Living Andhra Tradition) who spent thirty years with Vedic families in the Godavari river delta region of Andhra Pradesh, India. 

To summarize, the essence of Vedanta is illustrated in Figure 7, which for completeness includes also the Hindu concept of cycle of rebirths before (by doing good and not evil) Jivatma merges with Paramatma which is salvation terminating the cycle of rebirths.

Also shown is the distinction between monist (Advaita) and dualist (Dvaita) interpretations of Vedanta. Note that in Vedanta, consciousness is entirely meta-physical, as compared with physical treatments of consciousness as a zone in the brain.

Scholars who claim that the concepts of quantum mechanics came from Vedanta (Krishnamurthy, ISKCON) base their claims in part on the high praise for Vedanta by some founding fathers of quantum mechanics like Erwin Schrodinger (wave equation), Werner Heisenberg (uncertainty principle), Niels Bohr (quantized atomic structure) and Von Neumann (mathematical frame work), and also Robert Oppenheimer (atomic bomb). This, naturally demands clarification.

None of the scientists Erwin Schrodinger, Werner Heisenberg, Niels Bohr, Von Neumann and Robert Oppenheimer based their scientific work on Vedanta. Their high praise for Vedanta was strictly their subjective philosophical opinions. Their objective scientific work was entirely based on hard experimental evidence verifiable by any scientist, nothing subjective. Rooted in classical physics which had explained by late nineteenth century most of what physicists had thought was to be known, by the dawn of twentieth century they were confronted with formidable fundamental discrepancies (anomalies) which classical physics just could not explain. It is a testament to their collective genius that they, along with other eminent scientists like Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Max Born and Paul Dirac, painstakingly came up with quantum physics which resolved the anomalies. But, unlike classical mechanics which made intuitive sense, quantum mechanics is totally counter-intuitive and weird, which puzzled them and troubled them. It was in this context, namely that what is true at atomic level (quantum mechanics) was not what seemed to be true at macro level (classical mechanics) - for example a particle can also behave like a wave – that Erwin Schrodinger, Werner Heisenberg, Niels Bohr, Von Neumann and Robert Oppenheimer found comfort in Vedanta which teaches that the world we observe is not what it seems to be, the truth that drives the world is far more subtle.

Erwin Schrodinger (1944 ‘What is Life?’): “From the early great Upanishads the recognition Atman = Brahman (the personal self equals the omnipresent, all-comprehending eternal self) was in Indian thought considered, far from being blasphemous, to represent the quintessence of deepest insight into the happenings of the world. The striving of all the scholars of Vedanta was, after having learnt to pronounce with their lips, really to assimilate in their minds this grandest of all thoughts.” This shows his high regard for Vedantic philosophy. His remark “The unity and continuity of Vedanta are reflected in the unity and continuity of wave mechanics. This is entirely consistent with the Vedanta concept of All in One” shows how he felt comfort in the unifying wisdom of Vedanta in the context of his wave equation that unified the particle and wave nature of light. But his development of quantum mechanical wave equation in 1925 was entirely and strictly based on objective facts of physical experimental evidence and related theories, not Vedanta. The fact that Schrodinger read Vedas does not mean he based his wave equation on Vedas, to which he makes no reference in postulating his wave equation.

When Robert Oppenheimer saw the explosion of his prototype atomic bomb at White Sands test range in 1945, he was reminded of Lord Krishna’s revelation of Vishwarupam described in Bhagavat Gita verse 9-12: If the radiance of a thousand suns were to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendor of the mighty one. It is said that he later recounted that another Bhagavat Gita verse 11-32 had also entered his mind at that time: "kālo'smi lokakṣayakṛtpravṛddho lokānsamāhartumiha pravṛttaḥ" ("I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds”). Because of this we cannot claim that Oppenheimer based his design of atom bomb on Bhagavat Gita. He based it entirely on objective experimental facts and theories of atomic physics.

Note that the other founding fathers of quantum mechanics like Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Max Born and Paul Dirac had not sought Vedanta for comfort. In fact, Paul Dirac was atheist. Scientists are also human beings, and they are entitled to their own subjective personal opinions about religions and spirituality. But their scientific work was never based on religion or spirituality. To say so would be unfair to them. Isaac Newton believed in the Biblical notion of the Last Day when the world would end, and he even predicted the date of the Last Day (that date passed without the world ending) but he never based his scientific work on his religious beliefs. In fact, Newton’s laws of motion and his law of gravitation explained and supported Kepler’s heliocentric model of planetary motions which was at that time vehemently opposed by the Church which believed in geocentric model (a short time before Newton, natural philosopher Bruno Giordano was brutally burnt alive at the stake by the Church for his belief in Kepler’s heliocentric model, and seventy year old Galileo had barely escaped death by recanting his belief in heliocentric model on his knees before the Church). When science and religion are mixed, terrible things can happen: religion can lose its spirituality, and science can lose its objectivity.