I was astonished this morning to come across this week’s New Scientist magazine with the headline, “End of Spacetime-Has the fabric of the universe unravelled?” Ahha I thought: 2010 science is catching up with1950’s Gebser. I can’t tell you what a thrill that gave me. But I’ve been here many times before. The New Scientist can be a terrible tease-all seduction and no satisfaction. Nevertheless I thought I’d give it a go, though as I’ve often told you, my enthusiasm outstrips my ability in the scientific arena.
After a delicious lunch of chicken, salad and home grown potatoes I settled down for a quiet read, only to discover on page 32 that I had fallen into a neuromarketing trap. Apparently they had tested 3 covers on a selection of men(why only men?) who were wired up to a electroencephograph. This is a mechanism that is a tranformationally (rather than incrementally) different way of testing than that which has gone before. What is different is that it taps straight into the subconscious mind and monitors the chemical reactions there.
So in neuromarketing it is the emotional rather than the logical responses that are considered important. The cover that so clearly appealed to me on a sub-conscious level had the word “end” in primary place and showed a picture of ripped denim with a fleshy blood- speckled area beyond. Was it this that attracted me or was it a truth vibe that lit up my body as something had reved up the reward centre in my brain. In fact it had switched on the P300 signal, a spike that occurs a 300 millisecond after one sees something new or meaningful. “End ” is a word that speaks a salient truth to me.
I have been a radical all my life. All children are and I never seemed to grow out of it. Now I observe capitalism’s last stand against its contradictions and wonder…
There is a huge anomaly locked in the centre of modern science. The sums simply don’t fit and the desired elegance is not there. Something is not quite true between Einstein’s theory of relativity and quantum mechanics; gravity is in the way. It seems that independent ‘reality’ can only be preserved when time and space are united and yet this marriage is coming apart at the seams. It looks as if Spacetime was more mirage than marriage all along and now it’s heading for the divorce courts. The whole issue makes me wonder about constants and whether they got the right name.
I am not a mathematician or a scientist but I’ve had a lifelong interest in the big questions and the possible answers. The last 100 years has given us a new language for old ideas found in texts thousands of years old. Science hasn’t quite caught up but it’s on its way. When it gets there it will see that the ‘real’ world is illusion and there are in fact no divisions or dualities. It is ALL ONE.
But this idea wont send a rocket to Mars. And the maths that does that doesn’t require consciousness to be taken into account in a primary way. Mainstream science has yet to incorporate consciousness into its world view. Maybe that’s where the anomaly lies?
It seems that Spacetime is an idea that has had its day. My late hero, Richard Feynman, said that he had his doubts about our grasp of the laws of physics. His Nobel prize-winning work coupling light and matter, depended on inserting a couple of numbers found, he said, through ‘hocus pocus’. I like a scientist with humility,as it means that he has understood the very real but unscientific concept of hubris.
After all it is humans, through their consciousness, who declare that a scientific theory is a law of nature(a constant) and humans are often wrong. The Universe of course will have the final say. We might have created all sorts of technological fireworks but what do they add to the wisdom of the world?
It would seem that wisdom will not reappear until we’ve gone through the whole process. First the marriage, followed by the disillusionment and finally the divorce. Then, behind all the fireworks, perhaps we will find timeless, spaceless truth.