The science delusion
Firstly, I am not saying that scientific ‘facts’ are wrong here, its more that I feel science makes all sorts of assumptions about what it doesn’t fully know, and that it considers reality to be ‘physical’ ~ and that whole world-view is the delusion!
For me ultimately, a truer understanding of reality may only be found in a philosophical and spiritual resolution. The language of science limits it, as does its ‘beliefs’ which collectively are the delusion.
What is physical?
There are no objects. When we use the term ‘particle’, to the layman that infers ‘a part’ as like e.g. a slice of cake is a part of a whole. Even the term ‘quanta’ implies ‘an amount’ or a packet of physical stuff [energy types mass etc], when in fact the values of every particle are constantly changing and they have no limits/edges or are not otherwise encapsulated in form such to compose ‘an object’. Equally there can be two or more of the same particles in two or more spatial locations at the same time. Thus we can only really consider it all as a whole entity, yet that too cannot be considered an object. Reality is infinite and so is the universe [is unlimited].
Values?
So when it is said [prof Brian Cox, royal institution lecture] that ‘all the values are changing’ i.e. of quantum particles, what are we meaning? Does nature ‘think’ in numbers? If it did then we could visualise the quantum universe as a mass of epicentres with number values attached to them, yet they are continually changing [the values] and relate to multifaceted entities [formerly known as particles/objects] [as above] with no particular location. If we reach back into the singularity far enough [at the beginning of the universe] or if we attempt to find further limits at ‘the edge’ of the universe, I am left feeling we would be unsuccessful. Surely we reach an impasse at which mathematical values are moot [being metaphysical anyway] or otherwise indescript. The same thing goes if we cast a finite universe being cyclic or not, against infinity ~ or anything finite against the infinite. Our definitions become inept and the language fails to describe reality!
To inform?
Everything in the universe and mind is information and an ability to read that [observation and perception]. ‘To inform’, requires an interaction whereby one entity may know another. When things are so fluid that their so called ‘physical’ attributes become at best vague, and ultimately formless and even stateless [‘empty’ even], then no information may occur. This surely is the base nature of reality and yet ‘reality’ must also include ‘nature’, thus there should reasonably be a means by which statelessness interacts with state.
In our minds the answer is fairly more obvious, we have mind as like reality has statelessness, then we have thought just as reality has information, and it is seamless. Again here there is no reason to divide and find limits and to say one thing is physical and the other mental, when we are already removing such a way of seeing things. What we can I think say, is that statelessness comes before ‘state’ in that it is eternal [a different kind of time [non-linear]] and base. We can also say that there is no duality between eternity and nature, statelessness and state, the mental and the physical; because there are no limits et al. Thirdly we may also say that the communication is at least two-way between given existent entities including mind and information. The universe is in a continuous dialogue in the universal and the particular, a constant flux and an infinity; there is thus [all the above considered] no creation nor beginning nor end plausible, and no duality.
Thoughts ladies and gentlemen?
Remember that here we are looking at the whole more than any particular aspect of the argument ~ and I am no physicist, so I just do the best I can to match that to my spirituality.
.