Skip to main content

Integral Physics

Just as standard i.e. conventional Mathematics provides the essential tool for analytic science (which we misleadingly define as "science") Holistic Mathematics provides the essential tool for a new form of integral science with a truly extraordinary potential for development.

When properly understood in a more comprehensive manner, every (analytic) branch of science has its integral equivalent based on a truly holistic appreciation of symbols.

So for example we can validly speak of Integral Physics and Integral Economics (just to give two examples with which I have been mainly concerned).

Though I had developed many general notions, with some important specific illustrations, concerning integral science, recently I returned to physics with a view to a more detailed investigation.

So during the Summer I completed three main articles, which still require some minor revisions, with the promise of a fourth to come (researched for, but not yet written).

The first article is more general in nature relating to the precise nature of an integral - as opposed to analytic - interpretation of physics.

One simple way of explaining the distinction is with respect to the comparison as between the rational and contemplative worldviews. So standard physics - in formal terms - is strictly based on rational criteria whereas integral physics is directly based on a contemplative worldview (indirectly conveyed through a distinctive paradoxical appreciation of rational symbols).

Now the most comprehensive form of physics - Radial Physics - then combines both rational and contemplative understanding in a manner that greatly enhances both single aspects. However - except in a very preliminary manner - I have not concentrated on Radial Physics as there is vast undiscovered territory yet to be explored at an integral level.

The second article explores Einstein's Relativity (Special and General) indicating the integral equivalent of key concepts. I found this very exciting as it opens up an entirely new appreciation of the nature of relativity.

Putting it briefly standard understanding is based on the quantitative interpretation of movement (within a fixed logical interpretative system).

Integral understanding by contrast is based on an alternative qualitative interpretation of movement (where logical interpretation itself changes becoming progressively more dynamic).
And this essentially is what happens through authentic contemplation. So in a way I am examining the precise implications of changes in contemplative understanding for the appreciation of physical reality.

The third article then applies the integral approach to quantum mechanical understanding. One key conclusion from my investigations here is that one cannot attempt to divorce physical understanding of reality at a quantum physical level from the corresponding manner of its psychological interpretation.
Once we properly realise this, the findings of quantum physics are fully in accordance with the enhanced intuition of the contemplative world view.

The final - and most ambitious - article proposes to deal with the world of strings.

We will perhaps return to give a flavour of this in future blogs.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Number 137

The number 137 has raised considerable interest. Its reciprocal (1/137) approx. is referred to as the fine structure constant in physics and is related to the probability of electrons (or other particles) emitting or absorbing particles. Much has been written regarding the "mystical" properties of this number. Indeed some years ago my attention was drawn to its significance through correspondence relating to Jungian archetypes. And just recently an interesting article by Giorgio Piacenza has been published on Frank Visser's Integral World web-site. Without wanting to claim too much for the "mystical significance" of this number, I would like to initially broaden the topic to highlight some important general properties of prime numbers (of which 137 is a specific example). From one perspective prime numbers can be viewed as the basic building blocks of the natural number system (which we literally view in a linear manner as stretched out on a strai

Higgs Boson or Higgs Illusion

I was looking at the BBC Horizon programme last night on the Higgs Boson which proved quite interesting. As was widely reported in the media late last year, a determined attempt has been made to find convincing experimental evidence for the existence of the Higgs Boson which if verified would help to complete the standard particle model of physics. One outstanding problem with this model is that it had yet to provide a convincing explanation as to how particles acquire mass. And as this requirement is crucial for explaining the existence of all phenomena, the issue is of great importance. It had been proposed in the late 60's by Peter Higgs that what gives mass to particles is related to a seemingly invisible field viz. the Higgs Field. And as all fields are associated with corresponding particles, it was postulated that if this supposition of the existence of a new field was correct that it should in principle be possible to detect its associated particle. However the tech

Special Relativity - a new perspective

In his famous 1905 article where he introduced his "Special Theory of "Relativity", Einstein successfully challenged our conventional notions of space and time. This world view maintained that measurements of space and time were absolute for all observers. For example, if one carefully measured the length of a car, then this distance would remain the same for all observers (irrespective of movement). So for example from this viewpoint as a car accelerated, its length would remain the same (despite the increase in speed!) However Einstein convincingly demonstrated that such understanding is in error and that the actual distance crucially depends on the relative movement of what is measured. Though we do not notice such differences at speeds significantly less than that of light, they do exist. For an object travelling at 87% of the speed of light, measured length would be just half of that registered in static terms. Such differences equally apply to time with a moving ob