#david bohm

[noosphe-re]

Matter may be infinitely subtle. Science doesn’t know all about it, and probably never will. But matter is not just mechanical. Therefore, it could respond to perception in very deep and subtle ways which may be beyond what science could even trace; there could be a change. That’s the notion: that insight or perception will affect the whole thing. It not only affects the inferential understanding, but it also affects the chemical level, the tacit level—everything.

David Bohm, On Dialogue

[funeral]

Truth, Actuality and the Limits of Thought: Twelve Conversations with David Bohm

[mountain-sage]

" On the deepest level, much deeper than atoms or quantums, is NOTHING at all. The crazy thing is that this "NOTHING" creates EVERYTHING from moment to moment.Complete universe is created moment by moment, constantly. All comes out of this "NOTHING", comes from "EMPTINESS", which outside any usual understanding.We are part of an endless " New-creation" in every moment."

Prof. Hans - Peter Dürr

*****

"[T]here is a universal flux that cannot be defined explicitly but which can be known only implicitly, as indicated by the explicitly definable forms and shapes, some stable and some unstable, that can be abstracted from the universal flux. In this flow, mind and matter are not separate substances. Rather, they are different aspects of our whole and unbroken movement."

David Bohm

*****

"Whence come I and whither go I?

That is the great unfathomable question, the same for every one of us. Science has no answer to it."

Max Planck

*****

" What we observe as material bodies and forces are nothing

but shapes and variations in the structure of space."

Erwin Schrödinger

*****

"I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know his thoughts.

The rest are details."

"I see a pattern, but my imagination cannot picture the maker of that pattern. I see a clock, but I cannot envision the clockmaker. The human mind is unable to conceive of the four dimensions, so how can it conceive of a God, before whom a thousand years and a thousand dimensions are as one? "

"We know nothing about [God, the world] at all. All our knowledge is but the knowledge of schoolchildren.

Possibly we shall know a little more than we do now. but the real nature of things, that we shall never know, never."

Albert Einstein

*****

"The existing scientific concepts cover always only a very limited part of reality, and the other part that has not yet been understood is infinite. Whenever we proceed from the known into the unknown we may hope to understand, but we may have to learn at the same time a new meaning of the word 'understanding'"

Werner Heisenberg

[entheognosis]

[civanticism]

CIVANTICISM Wisdom ֎ Truth ֎ Balance ֍ Virtue ֎ Empathy https://www.civanticism.com/

[eyeoftheheart]

The Ending of Time. Fifteen Conversations with David Bohm, Ojai, USA, 1980

It turns out that the end of the world, in other words, the end of time, isn't as bad as some people think. At least not for the saints and sages, mystics and philosophers who consciously step from time into timelessness. For those who have cultivated inner wisdom, the so-called “end” is not an end at all, but a passage into the eternal. Time dissolves, but the awakened remain—untouched by its ebb and flow, stepping into the boundless, eternal now. In terms of Gnosis, the apocalypse is not a literal end but an unveiling—a revelation (apokalypsis in Greek) of the deeper reality that has always been present but hidden beneath the illusion of time and matter.

The saints, sages, and mystics do not fear it because they have already undergone this unveiling within themselves. They have died before they die, shedding the false self to awaken into the pleroma—the fullness of divine being. The world may appear to end, but for them, it is simply the moment when truth is fully revealed.

[whats-in-a-sentence]

Nevertheless, perhaps unjustifiably, Bohm's approach has never caught on.¹³

13. The Bohm or de Broglie-Bohm approach has never received wide attention. Perhaps one reason for this, as pointed out by John Bell in his article "The Impossible Pilot Wave," collected in Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics, is that neither de Broglie nor Bohm was particularly fond of what he himself had developed. But, again as Bell points out, the de Broglie-Bohm approach does away with much of the vagueness and subjectivity of the more standard approach. If for no other reason, even if the approach is wrong, it is worth knowing that the particles can have definite positions and definite velocities at all times (ones beyond our another, even in principle, to measure), and still conform fully to the predictions of standard quantum mechanics – uncertainty and all. Another argument against Bohm's approach is that the nonlocality in his framework is more "severe" than that of standard quantum mechanics. By this it is meant that Bohm's approach has nonlocal interactions (between the wavefunction and particles) as a central element of the theory from the outset, while in quantum mechanics the nonlocality is more deeply buried and arises only through nonlocal correlations between widely separated measurements. But, as supporters of this approach have argued, because something is hidden does not make it any less present, and, moreover, as the standard approach is vague regarding the quantum measurement problem – the very place where nonlocality makes itself apparent – once that issue is fully resolved, the nonlocality may not be so hidden after all. Others have argued the there are obstacles to making a realistic version of the Bohm approach, although progress has been made on this front as well (see, for example, John Bell Beables for Quantum Field Theory, in the collected volume indicated above). And so, it is definitely worth keeping this alternative approach in mind, even if only as a foil against rash conclusions about what quantum mechanics unavoidably implies.

"The Fabric of the Cosmos" - Brian Greene

[tenth-sentence]

Instead, Bohm imagined that the wavefunction of a particle is another, separate element of reality, one that exists in addition to the particle itself.

"The Fabric of the Cosmos" - Brian Greene

[merky-monkey]

[softskyburial]

Hey for anyone that’s feeling weird and unsettled about Oppenheimer I want you to look up David Bohm. Find some old videos of him or watch the documentary about him. He was a student of Oppenheimer and was supposed to be working on the bomb, but he was too communist for security clearance. His own PhD thesis was classified as higher security than his own security clearance and was used towards building the bomb. (Against his will) So he couldn’t do a thesis defense and Oppenheimer just had to graduate him. Bohm eventually had to leave the US because of his radical politics and he was close friends with the spiritual leader Krishnamurti. So there’s a lot of interesting philosophy in David Bohm’s work. I think he’s the physicist hero that tumblrinas are looking for.

[cat--and--books]

22-3-2024: During the past weeks (since my previous Tumblr entry) I've read a very nice old book, namely "Causality and Chance in Modern Physics" by David Bohm (with a foreword by Louis de Broglie), 1957. David Bohm as a person had quite an interesting but also difficult life, because not only were his theoretical physical theories not very well received in the community of physicists, but also as a citizen he came under the political inquisition of the right-wing American anti-communist witch-hunters during the notorious McCarthy era and had to flee from the USA to South America as a consequence. His above-mentioned not-too-long book of 170 pages is a treasure of literature: Meta-Physics (i.e.: Philosophy of Physics and Philosophy of Nature) in the best sense of the term! Though the science of physics has until today not taken the research direction (nor the results) which David Bohm had hoped for, his Philosophy of Nature is still very thought-inspiring and well worth reading also today! In fact almost all eminent physicists of all times were not only scientists but at the same time also wise Philosophers (in particular: Philosophers of Nature), though the professional guild of academic philosophy professors (who are in most cases not genuine philosophers themselves) on their chairs at university have all-too-often ignored them by-and-large. --------------------

[funeral]

One is led to a new notion of unbroken wholeness which denies the classical idea of analyzability of the world into separately and independently existing parts . . . We have reversed the usual classical notion that the independent “elementary parts” of the world are the fundamental reality, and that the various systems are merely particular contingent forms and arrangements of these parts. Rather, we say that inseparable quantum interconnectedness of the whole universe is the fundamental reality, and that relatively independently behaving parts are merely particular and contingent forms within this whole.

David Bohm qt. in Fritjof Capra, The Tao of Physics

[dontcallittimetravel]

Happy birthday to David Bohm, who was the first human to figure out the brain is really nothing more than a home-grown a quantum computer

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Hvítserkur is a 15 m high basalt stack along the eastern shore of the Vatnsnes peninsula, in northwest Iceland. The rock has two holes at the base, which give it the appearance of a dragon who is drinking. The base of the stack has been reinforced with concrete to protect its foundations from the sea. H/t Ebet Dudley [via Robert Scott Horton]

* * * *

“Matter, which appears to be dense according to physics, actually is made up mostly of empty space, with a few very small particules moving around like planets. At high energy, other particles pass through what appears to be solid matter.

[…] As you probe more deeply into matter, it appears to have more and more subtle properties. In my view, the implications of physics seem to be that nature is so subtle that it could be almost alive or intelligent.

[…] The question is whether matter is rather crude and mechanical, or whether it gets more and more subtle, and becomes indistinguishable from what people have called mind.”

— David Bohm, quoted in Renée Weber’s Dialogues with Scientists and Sages: The Search for Unity

[origamiquotes]

In the enfolded [or implicate] order, space and time are no longer the dominant factors determining the relationships of dependence or independence of different elements. Rather, an entirely different sort of basic connection of elements is possible, from which our ordinary notions of space and time, along with those of separately existent material particles, are abstracted as forms derived from the deeper order. These ordinary notions in fact appear in what is called the "explicate" or "unfolded" order, which is a special and distinguished form contained within the general totality of all the implicate order.

David Bohm, Wholeness and the implicate Order, 1980

[johnesimpson]

Peter Matthiessen, Marie Howe, a Maxim for Nostalgists, et al.: 'Painting Eyeballs on Chaos'

From whiskey river's commonplace book:

My foot slips on a narrow ledge: in that split second, as needles of fear pierce heart and temples, eternity intersects with present time. Thought and action are not different, and stone, air, ice, sun, fear, and self are one…

What is exhilarating is to extend this acute awareness into ordinary moments, in the moment-by-moment experiencing of the lammergeier and the wolf, which, finding themselves at the center of things, have no need for any secret of true being. In this very breath that we take now lies the secret that all great teachers try to tell us, what one lama refers to as “the precision and openness and intelligence of the present."...

[Read the rest]