Do you think the idea of Interconnectedness as maybe implied by Quantum Entanglement is the same thing as ...?

Question

... the recurring Mysytical and/or Worldview notion of Universal Oneness (of all things)?
.
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5poD3nXdJ8
.
.
.

So you wanna go a lil' deeper down the rabbit hole, do you? :-) ... Okay then:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ja0UUKbVlhA&feature=related
.
.
.

Answer 1

Absolutely. I felt it once. Seriously. I really did. Truly.

Answer 2

Yes, I surely don't think it coincidence that before modern physics, philosophies described in a broad sense many uncanny and later discoverable, scientific realities.

(Quantum Entanglement also speaks for something like that if there's a graviton, it travels faster than light speed, or through point singularities. If there were only two masses in the universe, no matter how distant, the force of gravity of each upon the other would be instantaneous.)

Answer 3

When it comes to religion i think the Buddhist have it better then most but I'm staying out of religion. Quantum Entanglement is a very interesting subject whether it has been prove possible, I don't know. The shortest distance between two points is zero not a strait line.

Nice video by the way.

Answer 4

My thougts on it are that there replace into no super bang, the enormous bangs infact occurs interior the human cnsciousness from the place a seed is produced that's related entangled with the source does bring up as a seed information which has ability to speedy differentiate fairly some varieties of cosmic our bodies inclusive of human souls at super speed lots so as that the speedy differentiation is construed as an explosion by using the human eye wit all its upload-ons invented by using the techniques that's decrease than information. So this one factor of ability is the human soul which contemplated upon and whilst the two opposite poles of the Shiva and shakthi comes into interplay a single seed or Hiranyagarbha of the cosmos or a seed which infact has to enhance right into a cosmos is formed which differniates into each and every gross factors metamorphosing from directly to the different interior the presence of sentient Ether that's the media for evolving or differntiating. The techniques has no place. The techniques is made up of earth and is the infrastructure or the motherboard by which whilst electrical energy passes the computing gadget comes alive. further whilst thelife tension or the cosmic ability or the soul of the physique passes by using techniques, the gadget turns into alive. techniques can't create information. information is Ether the primordial gross ingredient. each and every thing in this universe and the multiverse are related. A coming up, persevering with and dissoluting set of cosmic our bodies with information might desire to be seen as universe, that is quite a few galaxies or one. The wole universe has information. techniques is purely the blue print for human physique to paintings. Human physique, its working and the flexibility of human beings to return back to the source as a sparkling effective differntiatig source is the purpose of human delivery. An illiterate co-passenger.

Answer 5

I think there is some merit to the perspective that what we know of Quantum theory boils down to an algorithm for computing the probabilities of experiemntal results, but it gives no physical account of individual quantum processes.n Thus, quantum theory just gives us knowledge of how our measuring instruments will function.

But I think it is sidestepping the question which is concerned with the implications of a particuliar phenomena, which we call Quantum Entanglement. I prefer to call it "spookiness".

Bohr and the gang were just concerned with epistemology. In contrast this question is concerned with an ontology of a quantum state ( in the spirit of "the-many-worlds" gang, Ghiriardi gang or the Gell-Mann and Hartle gang).

I really don't know very much about "The Worldview notion of Universal Oneness" but it strikes me as somewhat similar to David Bohm's attempt to move beyond a Cartesian framework which he calls the "implicate or enfolded order", which he explains as the "enfoldment of a whole structure into each region of space" (as happens in a hologram). He feels that this can give one an intutitive grasp on Hilbert space itself.

So the question might be "Is the notion of Universal Oneness comforable with David Bohm's ontological expalnation of Quantum "pre space".

It would normally be a difficult question for me to answer with any degree of confidence since I know very little about Mysticism, but then again, I also know very little about physics, thereby, neutralizing" my lack of confidence.

So I will say emphatically "Yes", because I like to sound certain of such things. :-)

Answer 6

(Raising hand) I have a question, Sir!!! Since I am at a primary level on the subject can we please talk in simpler terms? My question is, are there undeniable proofs that identical twins raised in different environments, miles apart, not actually knowing of the existence of the other, can feel the pain or happiness (whole gamut of emotions) of each other with equal force 'instantaneously'? If the answer is an emphatic 'Yes', then I'm buying this theory. Thank you very much, Sir.

P.S. You may consult your wide-eyed, apparently (grey- beard and bald-head being the pointers) well-experienced, learned professor on the same...

P.P.S. Is that our friend QT, in the beginning of the video???

Answer 7

This is more easily understandable if one considers the actual scale of the components of an atom. If one takes into account the fact that the neutrons, protons and electrons of an atom actually have huge spaces between them it becomes clear that the atoms that make up seemingly solid objects are made up of 99+ percent empty space.

This alone does not seem too important till you add the idea that the atoms that make up seemingly solid objects are more of a loose conglomeration that share a similar attraction but never really touch each other.

At first glance this does not really seem relevant, but closer analysis reveals that this adds a tremendous amount of empty space to solid objects that are already made up of atoms that are 99 percent space. When so-called solid objects are seen in this light it becomes apparent that they can in no way be the seemingly solid objects they appear to be.

We ourselves are not exceptions to this phenomenon.

These seemingly solid objects are more like ghostly images that we interpret as solid objects based on our perceptual conclusions.

From this we must conclude that Perception is some sort of a trick that helps us to take these ghostly images and turn them into a world we can associate and interact with. This clever device seems to be a creation of our intellect that enables us to interact with each other in what appears to be a three dimensional reality.

I hope that helps to answered your question.

Love and blessings Don

Answer 8

No.
I don't buy any of the "Tao of Physics" stuff. You can use string theory and curled dimensions, quantum entanglement, etc, etc, to prove anything you want to.
And remember....it's just MATH. The hambletonian operator, the Schroedinger equation...probability densities are just mathematical equations.
However, math itself implies that something is fixed and eternal (ie: 2+2 = 4 before the big bang, eternally, fixed). The ancient Greeks believed in a sort of "sacred geometry" (you might enjoy reading the book by that same name) that to them spoke of a "prime mover" or a transcendant intelligence.
Ya, string theory and the T.O.E. are interesting, but they don't prove Eastern religion in any sort of way.
Sorry....
The only thing that the T.O.E. search really has shown is that scientific rationalism of Hegel and the late 19th century Germans is all hogwash. The whole concept of "there can't be anything that I don't see or understand...or there can't be anything supernatural (weird in the physics sense)" seems ridiculous in the face of things we now suspect. It seems Edwin Abbott was prescient with his little "Flatland" allegory, eh?

Answer 9

Pathetic intellectual imposture all the way.

This kind of new age or eastern religion bull crap cherry picks modern science all the time, and yet they violate one of the fundamental assumptions of science. Occam's razor. When you have to choose an explanation scientifically, you have to choose the most economically sound explanation of the world and that is naturalistic and rigorously materialistic.

Answer 10

Yes, I think the Buddhists have had it right all along.