Schrodinger is one of the fathers of quantum physics. At the heart of quantum mechanics lies the Schrodinger equation.
Schrodinger is one of the rare scientists who has thought deeply about the process of science itself. As pointed out earlier on this blog, he also recognizes that at the that science excludes the observer from the field of observation. While it is the most important thing in the whole business of life (the ground of being as vedanta says). In addition science also excludes subjective objects from its enquiry, leaving a "colourless and soundless and unpalpable" universe.
Here is a collection of some of the quotes from him on these lines.
"[the principle of objectivation] [...] By this I mean the thing that is also frequently called the "hypothesis of the real world" around us. I maintain that it amounts to a certain simplification which we adopt in order to master the infinitely intricate problem of nature. Without being aware of it and without being rigorously systematic about it, we exclude the Subject of Cognizance from the domain of nature that we endeavor to understand."
"[...] The reason why our sentient, percipient and thinking ego is met nowhere within our scientific world picture can easily be indicated in seven words: because it is itself that world picture. It is identical with the whole and therefore cannot be contained in it as a part of it. But, of course, here we knock against the arithmetical paradox; there appears to be a great multitude of these conscious egos, the world is however only one. This comes from the fashion in which the world concept produces itself. The several domains of 'private' consciousness partly overlap. The region common to all where they all overlap is the construct of the 'real world around us'. With all that an uncomfortable feeling remains, prompting such question as: is my world really the same as yours? Is there one real world to be distinguished from its pictures introjected by way of perception into every one of us? And if so, are these pictures like unto the real world or is the latter, the 'world in itself', perhaps very different from the one we perceive? [...]
Schrodinger is one of the rare scientists who has thought deeply about the process of science itself. As pointed out earlier on this blog, he also recognizes that at the that science excludes the observer from the field of observation. While it is the most important thing in the whole business of life (the ground of being as vedanta says). In addition science also excludes subjective objects from its enquiry, leaving a "colourless and soundless and unpalpable" universe.
Here is a collection of some of the quotes from him on these lines.
"[the principle of objectivation] [...] By this I mean the thing that is also frequently called the "hypothesis of the real world" around us. I maintain that it amounts to a certain simplification which we adopt in order to master the infinitely intricate problem of nature. Without being aware of it and without being rigorously systematic about it, we exclude the Subject of Cognizance from the domain of nature that we endeavor to understand."
"[...] The reason why our sentient, percipient and thinking ego is met nowhere within our scientific world picture can easily be indicated in seven words: because it is itself that world picture. It is identical with the whole and therefore cannot be contained in it as a part of it. But, of course, here we knock against the arithmetical paradox; there appears to be a great multitude of these conscious egos, the world is however only one. This comes from the fashion in which the world concept produces itself. The several domains of 'private' consciousness partly overlap. The region common to all where they all overlap is the construct of the 'real world around us'. With all that an uncomfortable feeling remains, prompting such question as: is my world really the same as yours? Is there one real world to be distinguished from its pictures introjected by way of perception into every one of us? And if so, are these pictures like unto the real world or is the latter, the 'world in itself', perhaps very different from the one we perceive? [...]
There is obviously one one alternative, namely the unification of minds or consciousness. Their multiplicity is only apparent, in truth there is only one mind. This is the doctrine of the Upanishads. [...]
Still, it must be said that to Western thought this doctrine has little appeal, it is unpalatable, it is dubbed fantastic, unscientific. Well, it is so because our science – Greek science – is based on objectivation, whereby it has cut itself off from an adequate understanding of the Subject of Cognitanze, of the mind. But I do believe that this is precisely the point where our present way of thinking does need to be amended, perhaps by a bit of a blood-transfusion from Eastern thought. That will not be easy, we must beware of blunders – blood transfusion always needs great precaution to prevent clotting. We do not wish to lose the logical precision that our scientific thought has reached, and that is unparalleled anywhere at any epoch. [...]
No comments:
Post a Comment