(1) Mathematically, all true science findings must be internally self-consistent with each other via a distance-time-only reference frame (RF); (2) No human qualities of consciousness, intention, emotion, mind or spirit can significantly influence a well-designed target experiment in physical reality (thought to be first proposed by Descartes in ~1600 AD); (3) Nothing with physical mass can travel at or faster than the velocity of electromagnetic (EM) light through physical vacuum (4) Today’s quantum mechanics (QM) can be meaningfully applied to any phenomenon of nature and (5) The “big bang” creation of our physical cosmos grew out of a completely empty physical vacuum.
(1) Mathematically, all true science findings must be internally self-consistent with each other via a distance-time-only reference frame (RF); (2) No human qualities of consciousness, intention, emotion, mind or spirit can significantly influence a well-designed target experiment in physical reality (thought to be first proposed by Descartes in ~1600 AD); (3) Nothing with physical mass can travel at or faster than the velocity of electromagnetic (EM) light through physical vacuum (4) Today’s quantum mechanics (QM) can be meaningfully applied to any phenomenon of nature and (5) The “big bang” creation of our physical cosmos grew out of a completely empty physical vacuum.
A physics-based understanding of how our conscious thoughts can affect our physically described brains is presented. This understanding depends on the shift from the mechanical conception of nature that prevailed in science from the time of Isaac Newton until the dawn of the twentieth century to the psychophysical conception that emerged from the findings of Planck, Bohr, Heisenberg, and von Neumann. This shift converted the role of our conscious thoughts from that of passive observers of a causally closed physically described universe to that of active participants in an essentially psychophysical understanding of nature. 1. The Basic Question and Why It Is Important. Science’s conception of the physical world changed radically during the twentieth century. At the end of the nineteenth century most scientists still viewed the physical universe as essentially a giant machine. This mechanical view emerged from the seventeenth century work of Isaac Newton, who built his conception of nature on the ideas of Rene Descartes. According to Descartes, the universe is composed of two kinds of elements, the first consisting of elements each of which occupies at each instant of time a definite region in space, and the second consisting of elements that include our human thoughts. Descartes allowed these two parts of nature to interact causally within our brains, but Newton specified that the motions of the elements of the first kind are completely determined by laws of motion that refer exclusively to elements of this kind. In Newtonian-type physics these elements of the first kind are, moreover, essentially mechanical, in the sense that they have been stripped of the experiential qualities that characterize our thoughts, such as the conscious awareness of feelings, and the capacity to grasp meanings. Consequently there is in Newtonian-type physics no possibility for any causally effective role for any aspects of our being that are essentially different in kind from the mechanical elements that occur in that type of physics. Descartes’ views accommodated our intuitive feeling that our conscious thoughts can influence our bodily movements – my conscious intent to raise my arm seems to cause my arm to rise – whereas Newton’s physics leads to the contrary conclusion that, in spite of what may seem to be the case, the notion that human thoughts, per se, can affect human actions is a deeply misleading illusion. Newton’s ideas led eventually to the classical physics of the late nineteenth century. Its main premises are these: 2 1. There exists a material universe that develops over the course of time by means of interactions of its tiny mechanical parts with neighboring tiny mechanical parts. 2. These interactions are governed by mathematical laws. 3. These laws entail that the mechanically described future is completely determined by the mechanically described past, with no reference to human thoughts, choices, or
Most interpretations of quantum theory fail to provide a fundamental, complete, self-consistent account of nature describing physical reality itself, as opposed to merely yielding predictions about results of experiments and observations. A paradigm providing a self-consistent foundation for quantum theory and a description of the reality it refers to, generalized to a worldview, is a Quantum Paradigm, where ‘paradigm' is defined as structure of experiential reality. We assert that the fundamental obstruction in the quest for a quantum paradigm is the assumption of objectivity. The subject-object distinction, drawn within experience, has within the natural sciences degenerated into a dichotomy-an absolute split into separate realms-with scientists adopting the classical paradigm where the object pole of experience ("objective reality") can be studied independently from the subject pole ("the experiencer"), with a presupposition that this procedure yields a fundamental description of nature. In fact, the subjective is often eliminated altogether as a fundamental category, and reduced to an epiphenomenon of objective processes. We claim this objectivity assumption precludes a full comprehension and a paradox-free formulation of quantum theory. By challenging this presupposition, i.e. leaving the question open, a coherent understanding of quantum nature falls naturally into place, providing appropriate foundation for quantum theory and an associated world-view. The resulting Quantum Paradigm is "realist" in the sense that it provides a description of what is actually happening: namely the arena of all happening is Mind or Consciousness-from which mind and matter, subject and object, individual and collective, and time and space co-dependently arise. The subject matter of quantum theory then becomes the fundamental mind-function of distinction ("measurement"), resulting in information and its statistical correlations. The message of quantum mechanics is surprising: the basic components of objects-the particles, electrons, quarks, etc.-cannot be thought of as ‘self-existent'. The reality that they, and hence all objects, are components of is ‘empirical reality', of experience."The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine."-James Jeans Anomalous phenomena such as ESP and psychokinesis, collective consciousness, and synchronicity that are considered impossible in the context of the classical paradigm, fit naturally in, and can in turn provide evidence for the Quantum Paradigm. Spirituality and science are shown to be complementary approaches referring to the same reality, Mind, while each discipline retains its integrity. The Quantum Paradigm can be intellectually comprehended, as well as embodied: one can live in quantum reality. A good metaphor for this is "life as a dream": with no "real" objects as distinguished from experienced objects. Experience is "empty" of self-nature in the Buddhist sense, with everything interconnected and co-dependently arising. Experiencing the world by "embodying the Quantum Paradigm" is transformative, healing, and an antidote to alienation resulting from embodying the classical paradigm. Embodying the Quantum Paradigm and living in the Oneness of all creation can help humanity-increasingly lost in the materialism and individualism reinforced by our embodiment of the classical paradigm-and restore intimate connection and harmony with Spirit, Nature and fellow humans; we need such a transformation to survive and thrive in our technological society.
Current physics has progressed beyond the idea that there is an outside world lying somewhere entirely separate from ourselves. It has shown very clearly instead that there are real and functional connections between our minds and the world around us and that our human senses do not and cannot appreciate this more variable world of space-time, interaction and exchange as an objective and real place. Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen were worrying about a part of physics called quantum theory which others like Bohr and Heisenberg were regarding as a complete theory. One new part of physics is suggesting that matter and the universe itself may have connections and correlations in an enfolded universe where there seem to be no clear causes and effects, but only connections.
This paper offers a philosophical examination of the limits of human access to absolute truth, proposing that the primary constraint does not lie in external reality but in the structure of human intention itself. Drawing conceptually from quantum mechanics—particularly ideas associated with superposition and collapse—the paper argues that intention precedes observation and functions as the determining mechanism through which potential states are reduced to singular, experienced outcomes. The central thesis suggests that complete and undistorted truth cannot be fully perceived without dissolving the very mechanism that enables perception and interaction. If truth were accessed in its totality, the process of collapse would cease, along with the dynamic structure of reality as experienced by human consciousness. Reality, therefore, is presented not as direct truth, but as a necessary and continuous distortion produced by intentional perception. The paper further explores the philosophical consequences of this framework, including the impossibility of total truth-perception within lived existence, the role of intention as an invisible boundary between human consciousness and absolute reality, and the implications for life, death, and meaning. Life is framed as an ongoing search for truth, while death is interpreted as the attainment of truth beyond the constraints of intentional collapse. This work is non-empirical and interpretive in nature. Quantum concepts are employed as philosophical analogies rather than physical claims. The paper is intended to contribute to discussions in philosophy of mind, metaphysics, consciousness studies, and interdisciplinary dialogues between science and philosophy.