I’m very proud of this success. Within one year 500 copies of “Kwantumfysica, informatie en bewustzijn” sold through the regular bookshops in The Netherlands. Copies sold through my own network of friends, acquaintances en students following my lectures are not counted here. The work was certainly not in vain.
In the meantime I am steadily working on the English version to which a new chapter on consilience is being added. This is going to be the introduction to that chapter:
“In science and history, consilience (also convergence of evidence or concordance of evidence) is the principle that evidence from independent, unrelated sources can “converge” on strong conclusions. That is, when multiple sources of evidence are in agreement, the conclusion can be very strong even when none of the individual sources of evidence is significantly so on its own. Most established scientific knowledge is supported by a convergence of evidence: if not, the evidence is comparatively weak, and there will not likely be a strong scientific consensus. “
book, starting with the scientific revolutions of de 17th century
and, following the threads of its developing history until today, we have
arrived at a perhaps baffling and remarkable result, hard science – physics –
today is not in conflict with the
idea of the existence of an of the body independent consciousness, also called
the survival hypothesis. On the contrary, it supports it.
However, should this idea only surface after studying quantum physics and nowhere else in the science domain, this support would be as whacky as a table supported by only one leg. Therefore, the question is, is survival supported by published scientific research in other domains? Indeed, it is. Some of this research was already mentioned in preceding chapters. It is time now to pay a little bit more attention to all published and reviewed evidential material concerning consciousness being independent of the material body.
“In science and history, consilience refers to the principle that evidence from independent, unrelated sources can “converge” on strong conclusions. That is, when multiple sources of evidence are in agreement, the conclusion can be very strong even when none of the individual sources of evidence is significantly so on its own”. Wikipedia
The 38th Society for Scientific Exploration (SSE) conference was held from June 5-8 in Broomfield Colorado. The theme was “consilience” whereby evidence from diverse and independent sources can be used as valid support for scientific theories. For example, on the one hand in quantum physics a conscious observer seems to be needed to trigger the so-called quantum collapse, on the other hand in current medical science applying advanced life-saving interventions the growing numbers of validated near-death experiences can no longer be ignored. So, in both very different domains, the idea of non-matter-dependent consciousness is confirmed.
Within three days 34 presentations of approx. 20 minutes were held, whether or not supported with PowerPoint slides, offering also the opportunity for three to five questioners after every presentation, and 17 poster presentations set up in the hall in front of the conference hall, for which one and a half hours had been set aside on day 2. Personally, I thought that part was the most accessible because you could come quickly in direct contact with the poster’s creator.
To be honest, in my opinion there were some poster presentations actually deserving a full presentation and vice versa there were presentations that could have been better scheduled as poster presentations.
The translation of my book ‘Quantum Physics, Information and Consciousness’ is a long term project. However, the preview version – epub format – is free downloadable. You’ll find the first four and the last chapter fully translated and all the other chapters have a summary at the end. Click here for more information.
I’m invited to do a poster presentation on June 7 2019 at the SSE conference on consilience. Here is the text of my submission paper:
Submission presentation SSE – english
Interpretations of quantum physics trying to save the idea of an
objective reality existing outside us will not survive critical
examination of their explanation of the so-called quantum collapse.
The following interpretations will be tackled:
Kopenhagen macro apparatus interpretation,
Spontaneous quantum collapse.
However other interpretations that do accept the connection between the conscious observer and quantum reality confer the problem of the nature of this connection to a more or less magical action on physical reality by a non-physical consciousness. Something I often refer to as ‘Harry Potter’ magic. These interpretations are:
No quantum collapse whatever,
Von Neumann Projection Postulate.
Those three interpretations and the Kopenhagen interpretation do recognize the quantum wave being a non-physical possibility wave. The quantum wave function gives the time and location dependent possibility to find the quantum particle in a measurement. Because the mathematic expression for the quantum wave describes a probability, which is also nowhere exact null, the wave should be regarded as just as non-local as a thought. These interpretations acknowledging the role of consciousness do not however solve these problems:
how works consciousness its effect on the non-physical quantum possibility wave,
how it is possible that multiple observer minds manifest the same outcome? When I observe the moon, I’m surely not the only one so how can I possibly manifest the moon?