Unseen is an essential component of the Muslim faith as mentioned in many verses in Qur’an and many Hadiths. Thus, the significance of having faith is to believe in something unseen. Accordingly, a belief in nothingness is simply a rejection of the belief in the unseen. It should be recalled here that Allah (S.W.T), Who has the full knowledge of the worlds of the seen and the unseen, has guaranteed the true believers great rewards. Allah (S.W.T) says: Indeed, those who fear their Lord Unseen will have forgiveness and great reward (Al-Mulk, 12). Scientists believe that the accurate image of the real ingredient can never be entirely understood in this physical Universe since humans are limited by their physical apparatuses. Hence, there must be other states, but humans have no apparatus to observe and understand them. What exactly does the unseen mean? Quantum physics, which had its bases at the beginning of the 20th century, is an extremely dedicated pattern of science, which unlike Newtonian physics investigates and clarifies how the whole thing in the visible world comes into being. It is fundamentally studying the nature of physical existence beginning at the subatomic, unseen, level. Additionally, quantum physics divides nature into two parts; on one side of the partition there is the observed system whereas there is the observer on the other side. One difficulty is where you place the isolating line, which relies upon who is doing the observation? More topical findings in quantum physics are rapidly mutating the world in an exceedingly extraordinary and optimistic manner. Unlike classical physics, awareness crosses the threshold of quantum theory and circumstance at the onset. Thus, there is no way to interpret quantum theory without in some way addressing awareness. Unambiguously, awareness takes an obvious and strong role. Otherwise stated, it is avoided by presenting the concept of hidden variables. They, generally, start with the assumption that the physical world should be dealt with unaccompanied by the human observer. The Many Worlds interpretation, consistently, is vital to quantum interpretations since it brings about the ultimate observer outside of space and time. This has obvious theistic implications; therefore, the theologians have not been very keen to attribute to Allah (S.W.T) the role of ultimate observer who brings the whole quantum Universe into being. Arguably, there are parallel Universes mentioned within the Qur’an that one does not have access to. These worlds are widely talked about within the Qur’an, the world of the unseen and seen, Allah (S.W.T) says in surah Al-Ra’d:9; “All-Knower of the unseen and the seen, the Greatest, the Highest”. Accordingly, believe in the Ghaib: literally means a thing not Seen. This investigation, with the aim of redirecting the focus of the scientists, emphasized that there are no discrepancies between some of Quantum physics’ interpretation and the belief in the unseen. Therefore, the systematic analysis posed by the authors in this study, through three Qur’anic examples, namely, Moses and Al- Khidr, Joseph (P.U.H) and regaining sight for Jacob (P.U.H) and Prophet Solomon’s death and the Jinns, attempt to analyze these apparently manifold subjects, with the purpose of analyzing the Qur’anic concepts and universalizing the perceptions of quantum physics.
Unseen is an essential component of the Muslim faith as mentioned in many verses in Qur’an and many Hadiths. Thus, the significance of having faith is to believe in something unseen. Accordingly, a belief in nothingness is simply a rejection of the belief in the unseen. It should be recalled here that Allah (S.W.T), Who has the full knowledge of the worlds of the seen and the unseen, has guaranteed the true believers great rewards. Allah (S.W.T) says: Indeed, those who fear their Lord Unseen will have forgiveness and great reward (Al-Mulk, 12). Scientists believe that the accurate image of the real ingredient can never be entirely understood in this physical Universe since humans are limited by their physical apparatuses. Hence, there must be other states, but humans have no apparatus to observe and understand them. What exactly does the unseen mean? Quantum physics, which had its bases at the beginning of the 20th century, is an extremely dedicated pattern of science, which unlike Newtonian physics investigates and clarifies how the whole thing in the visible world comes into being. It is fundamentally studying the nature of physical existence beginning at the subatomic, unseen, level. Additionally, quantum physics divides nature into two parts; on one side of the partition there is the observed system whereas there is the observer on the other side. One difficulty is where you place the isolating line, which relies upon who is doing the observation? More topical findings in quantum physics are rapidly mutating the world in an exceedingly extraordinary and optimistic manner. Unlike classical physics, awareness crosses the threshold of quantum theory and circumstance at the onset. Thus, there is no way to interpret quantum theory without in some way addressing awareness. Unambiguously, awareness takes an obvious and strong role. Otherwise stated, it is avoided by presenting the concept of hidden variables. They, generally, start with the assumption that the physical world should be dealt with unaccompanied by the human observer. The Many Worlds interpretation, consistently, is vital to quantum interpretations since it brings about the ultimate observer outside of space and time. This has obvious theistic implications; therefore, the theologians have not been very keen to attribute to Allah (S.W.T) the role of ultimate observer who brings the whole quantum Universe into being. Arguably, there are parallel Universes mentioned within the Qur’an that one does not have access to. These worlds are widely talked about within the Qur’an, the world of the unseen and seen, Allah (S.W.T) says in surah Al-Ra’d:9; “All-Knower of the unseen and the seen, the Greatest, the Highest”. Accordingly, believe in the Ghaib: literally means a thing not Seen. This investigation, with the aim of redirecting the focus of the scientists, emphasized that there are no discrepancies between some of Quantum physics’ interpretation and the belief in the unseen. Therefore, the systematic analysis posed by the authors in this study, through three Qur’anic examples, namely, Moses and Al- Khidr, Joseph (P.U.H) and regaining sight for Jacob (P.U.H) and Prophet Solomon’s death and the Jinns, attempt to analyze these apparently manifold subjects, with the purpose of analyzing the Qur’anic concepts and universalizing the perceptions of quantum physics.
However, the observations encompassed by classical physics excludes the observer from the physical reality, yet the deep-down understandung of nature --{\it the quantum theory}-- can not avoid the intrusion of observer into the measurement process. Indeed, the quantum physics experiments have knocked the door of a new paradigm: in which science of consciousness is an important axiom. In the present work, it is argued --by taking into account of the views of learned scientists and philosophers-- that modern science is incomplete and lacking something in the basic understanding of nature \cite{r}. Classical physics has failed to explain the dynamics of the microscopic particles, eventhough modern scientific researches are based upon the prejudice posed by classical physics: keeping the outer physical universe as a separate entity, that is something quite independent of the observer --human mind. One should not forget that human-being is a part of nature and human mind is an essential component of our observations. Basically, it is the observer --the consciousness-- which makes perception possible. The working of human mind must be included in our scientific theories. In fact, human free will is an illusion and nothing in the entire universe (with life) lies outside the domain of science and determinism.
In classical physics there is, in accordance with common sense, an objective world ‘out there’. That world evolves in a clear and deterministic way, being governed by precisely formulated mathematical equations. This is as true for the theories of Maxwell and Einstein as it is for the original Newtonian scheme. Physical reality is taken to exist independently of ourselves; and exactly how the classical world ‘is’ is not affected by how we might choose to look at it. Moreover, our bodies and our brains are themselves to be part of that world. They, also, are viewed as evolving according to the same precise and deterministic classical equations. All our actions are to be fixed by these equations - no matter how we might feel that our conscious wills may be influencing how we behave. Such a picture appears to lie at the background of most serious 1 philosophical arguments concerned with the nature of reality, of our conscious perceptions, and of our apparent free will. Some people might have an uncomfortable feeling that there should also be a role for quantum theory - that fundamental but disturbing scheme of things which, in the first quarter of this century, arose out of observations of subtle discrepancies between the actual behaviour of the world and the descriptions of classical physics. To many, the term ‘quantum theory’ evokes merely some vague concept of an ‘uncertainty principle’, which, at the level of particles, atoms or molecules, forbids precision in our descriptions and yields merely probabilistic behaviour. Actually, quantum descriptions are very precise, as we shall see, although radically different from the familiar classical ones. Moreover, we shall find, despite a common view to the contrary, that probabilities do not arise at the minute quantum level of particles, atoms, or molecules - those evolve deterministically - but, seemingly, via some mysterious larger-scale action connected with the emergence of a classical world that we can consciously perceive. We must try to understand this, and how quantum theory forces us to change our view of physical reality.
The great advances in science precipitated by the advent of quantum mechanics in the 20th century have profound implications for the nature of reality. The universe is now assumed to be fundamentally quantum at all scales of existence. As such, ancient questions about what the roles of human beings in the universe are, what is the relationship between the observer and the observed, the role of the mind, existence itself and the nature of experiences, can now also be approached in new scientific ways. This provides the opportunity to explore mathematical formalisms that relate to relationships between the observer and the observed, through three principles or universal laws which apply at all levels of existence. These principles form the essence of a vast ocean of qualia of experience. Such approaches that we advocate here provide a formalism that goes beyond specific interpretations of quantum mechanics and have strong philosophical foundations in both Western philosophy as well as the monistic contemplative systems of the East. We present a plausible thesis that what is the unifying principle of all existence is universal Consciousness, which when turned within is pure Awareness of Being. The mind and the countless experiences of qualia in this inner vision encompass ancient eternal views of contemplation where the observer, the observer and the process of unifying them form an undivided wholeness. The exalted ancient yet modern view would resonate with both the non-dual ancient teachings as well as different interpretations of quantum mechanics wherein the observed system and the observing subject are inexorably tied together in an undivided Wholeness of Being. The role of the mind is critical and we use the term Exalted Mind to distinguish higher functions from ordinary mind. The implications for humanity are indeed profound, in our view form the foundation of the emerging scientific and medical paradigms, the dawn of a new era of conscious non-dual, science-based Awareness.
This brief survey analyzes the epistemological implications about the role of observer in the interpretations of Quantum Mechanics. As we know, the goal of most interpretations of quantum mechanics is to avoid the apparent intrusion of the observer into the measurement process. In the same time, there are implicit and hidden assumptions about his role. In fact, most interpretations taking as ontic level one of these fundamental concepts as information, physical law and matter bring us to new problematical questions. We think, that no interpretation of the quantum theory can avoid this intrusion until we do not clarify the nature of observer.
Quantum mechanics is usually defined in terms of some loosely connected axioms and rules. Such a foundation is far from the beauty of, e.g., the `principles' underlying classical mechanics. Motivated, in addition, by notorious interpretation problems, there have been numerous attempts to modify or `complete' quantum mechanics. A first attempt was based on so-called hidden variables; its proponents essentially tried to expel the non-classical nature of quantum mechanics. More recent proposals intend to complete quantum mechanics not within mechanics proper but on a `higher (synthetic) level'; by means of a combination with gravitation theory (R Penrose), with quantum information theory (C M Caves, C A Fuchs) or with psychology and brain science (H P Stapp). I think it is fair to say that in each case the combination is with a subject that, per se , suffers from a very limited understanding that is even more severe than that of quantum mechanics. This was acceptable, though, if it could convincingly be argued that scientific progress desperately needs to join forces. Quantum mechanics of a closed system was a beautiful and well understood theory with its respective state being presented as a point on a deterministic trajectory in Liouville space---not unlike the motion of a classical N -particle system in its 6N -dimensional phase-space. Unfortunately, we need an inside and an outside view, we need an external reference frame, we need an observer. This unavoidable partition is the origin of most of the troubles we have with quantum mechanics. A pragmatic solution is introduced in the form of so-called measurement postulates: one of the various incompatible properties of the system under consideration is supposed to be realized (i.e. to become a fact, to be defined without fundamental dispersion) based on `instantaneous' projections within some externally selected measurement basis. As a result, the theory becomes essentially statistical rather than deterministic; furthermore there is an asymmetry between the observed and the observing. This is the point where consciousness may come in. Complemented by an introduction and several appendices, Henry Stapp's book consists essentially of three parts: theory, implications, and new developments. The theory part gives a very readable account of the Copenhagen interpretation, some aspects of a psychophysical theory, and, eventually, hints towards a quantum foundation of the brain--mind connection. The next part, `implications', summarizes some previous attempts to bridge the gap between the working rules of quantum mechanics and their possible consequences for our understanding of this world (Pauli, Everett, Bohm, Heisenberg). The last section, `new developments', dwells on some ideas about the conscious brain and its possible foundation on quantum mechanics. The book is an interesting and, in part, fascinating contribution to a field that continues to be a companion to `practical' quantum mechanics since its very beginning. It is doubtful whether such types of `quantum ontologies' will ever become (empirically) testable; right now one can hardly expect more than to be offered some consistent `grand picture', which the reader may find more or less acceptable or even rewarding. Many practicing quantum physicists, though, will remain unimpressed. The shift from synthetic ontology to analytic ontology is the foundation of the present work. This means that fundamental wholes are being partitioned into their ontologically subordinate components by means of `events'. The actual event, in turn, is an abrupt change in the Heisenberg state describing the quantum universe. The new state then defines the tendencies associated with the next actual event. To avoid infinite regression in terms of going from one state of tendencies to the next, consciousness is there to give these events a special `feel', to provide a status of `intrinsic actuality'. The brain of an alert human observer is similar in an important way to a quantum detection device: it can amplify small signals to large macroscopic effects. On the other hand, actual events are not postulated to occur exclusively in brains. They are more generally associated with the formation of records. Records are necessarily part of the total state of the universe: it is obvious that the state of the universe cannot undergo a Schrödinger dynamics and at the same time record its own history. `The full universe consists therefore of an exceedingly thin veneer of relatively sluggish, directly observable properties resting on a vast ocean or rapidly fluctuating unobservable ones.' The present ideas also bear on how the world should be seen to develop. While conventional cosmology encounters problems as to how to define the intial conditions, which would enter the governing equations of motion, here `the boundary conditions are set not at some initial time, but gradually by a sequence of acts that imposes a sequence of constraints. After any sequence of acts there remains a collection of possible worlds, some of which will be eliminated by the next act.' Connected with those acts is `meaning': there has always been some speculation about the special significance of local properties in our understanding of the world. One could argue that correlations (even the quantum correlations found, e.g., in the EPR-experiments) were as real as anything else. But also Stapp stresses the special role of locality: the `local observable properties, or properties similar to them are the natural, and perhaps exclusive, carriers of meaning in the quantum universe. From this point of view the quantum universe tends to create meaning.' This sounds like an absolute concept: meaning not with respect to something else, but defined intrinsically---not easy to digest. The role of consciousness in the developing quantum universe requires more attention. `The causal irrelevance of our thoughts within classical physics constitutes a serious deficiency of that theory, construed as a description of reality.' This is taken to be entirely different within quantum mechanics. `The core idea of quantum mechanics is to describe our activities as knowledge-seeking and knowledge-using agents.' `21st century science does not reduce human beings to mechanical automata. Rather it elevates human beings to agents whose free choices can, according to the known laws, actually influence their behaviour.' An example with respect to perception is discussed: `Why, when we look at a triangle, do we experience three lines joined at three points and not some pattern of neuron firings?' The brain `does not convert an actual whole triangle into some jumbled set of particle motions; rather it converts a concatenation of separate external events into the actualization of some single integrated pattern of neural activity that is congruent to the perceived whole triangle.' How convincing is this proposal? It is hard to tell. I think Henry Stapp did a good job, but there are tight limitations to any such endeavour. Quantum mechanics is often strange indeed, but it also gives rise to our classical world around us. For the emergence of classicality jumps and measurement projections (the basic phenomena connected with those fundamental events of choice) are not needed. Therefore, I doubt whether the explanation of the evolution of our world really allows (or requires) that much free choice. On the other hand, most scientist will agree that empirical science was not possible without free will: we could not ask independent questions if this asking was part of a deterministic trajectory. The fact that the result of a quantum measurement is indeterminate (within given probabilities) does certainly not explain free will. How about the type of measurment? The experimentalist will have to assume that he can select the pertinent observable within some limits. But given a certain design the so-called pointer basis (producing stable measurement results) is no longer a matter of free choice. `The main theme of classical physics is that we live in a clocklike universe.' Today it is often assumed that the universe was a big (quantum-) computer or a cellular automaton. Many would be all too happy to leave that rather restrictive picture behind. But where to go? Stapp suggests giving consciousness a prominent role: `The most profound alteration of the fundamental principles was to bring consciousness of human beings into the basic structure of the physical theory.' How far we are able to go in this direction will depend on the amount of concrete research results becoming available to support this view.
The symbolic and mental nature of science that had been divulged for the first time by the Qur'an has also been recognized by quantum physics thirteen centuries later, i.e., in the first decades of the twentieth century. Isl (a) over barm and quantum physics are compatible due to a shared phenomenological approach which denies that we can know the substance of anything or that matter has a substance at all. In other words, both entirely depend on signs ((a) over bary (a) over bart), appearances (phenomena) or symbols that cannot have any substance or corresponding reality as independent, material entities in the external world. It is through the elimination of material substance that human consciousness has gained its pivotal and fundamental position and placed science into its proper place. Although quantum physics does not depend on the unity and oneness of God, such a religious basis can easily be supplied by Islam.