Is There a Possible Link Between the Two?
The Law of Attraction
About a week ago, I opened up a fortune cookie that read “Change your thoughts, and you change the world.” I might have taken this as mindless drivel, were it not the fact that I’ve been working on an article in which this statement is very relevant.
Before I started reading Kurzweil, my last reading selection was “The Secret” by Rhonda Byrne. For those of you that don’t know, this book supports a new-age-ish notion called “The Law of Attraction.” Basically, it states that your thoughts go out into the universe and attract like things. We’re talking more than kharma here. What it says is that your thoughts (whether good or bad) cause the universe to rearrange events and circumstances to meet your expectations. “Thoughts become things.” In other words, they are physically manifested as the result of your thoughts. Now, you’re not going to see something appear out of mid air. Any “manifestation” – be it an object or a desired situation -- will be explainable by some ordinary appearing chain of events. You may even call it coincidence. But if you see specific coincidences happen repeatedly, it isn’t really coincidence, is it.
Obviously, as a rational human being, I’m very skeptical. Nonetheless, the notion intrigued me enough to do some research on related topics – as well as trying to put the idea to use in my own life. The jury is still out on this one, but I will say that I’ve had some very interesting “coincidences” over the last month or so. I certainly don’t think that practicing the ideas in this book can be harmful. One of the prerequisites for the LOA to work for you is to be grateful for everything you already have in your life. That’s damn good advice no matter what. If nothing else, that has made me a happier person when I manage to practice it. Trying to reap the benefits of a possible LOA also has helped precipitate in my mind what I actually want in life. I found that there are things I thought I wanted that I really don’t, and vice-versa. That too, from any perspective, is a good thing.
The rest of this article will attempt to form some relationship between the LOA and some other phenomena experienced in both the scientific and every day experience. Where there is science involved, I’ll try to speak as plainly as possible so as not to lose your attention. I’ll also admit right up front that any connections are purely speculative. Some of the science is also speculative. I’m not trying to definitively prove anything here – just trying to demonstrate that there may be some commonality between different schools of thought worth investigating. As to why I am doing this – it’s because if I’m sure of one thing, it’s that there are a lot of things about our apparent reality that we don’t fully understand. While standing on firm scientific (or religious!) ground is always comforting, I think it’s good for people to reach out a little beyond their comfort zones and explore new ideas. Not all of them will be fruitful – but they don’t all need to be to make progress.
Quantum 101
In the book “The Secret” there is some reference to quantum theory. Unfortunately, it is very vague. It’s just enough to make the casual reader think that there is some proof-positive scientific reasoning that validates the LOA. The author also casually cites Einstein and Jesus Christ, among others, to support her ideas. I’m fairly certain that neither one would have supported the notion of the LOA – at least, not in a secular context. I’m going to go into quantum theory a bit deeper than Byrne did, and show why I think there is a possible connection to LOA. I’m also going to be intellectually honest in what I know and don’t know – and what is experimentally proven scientific theory, and what is simply speculative.
For those of you who have aversions to scientific discussions, you might want to skip down to the section on “backward causality.” J
For a tiny “particle”, such as a photon (smallest packet of light), measurable properties such as position, polarity, etc, are somewhat vague (this is known as quantum superposition). This can be illustrated in the classic double-slit experiment in which photons pass through two slits and interfere with each other to create an interference pattern on a screen, thus behaving like waves. Even if only 1 photon at a time is emitted, the same pattern appears. This implies that the photon actually passes through both slits and interferes with itself. In order to explain this, the position of the photon is sometimes described by a probability function. Another interpretation is that the photon takes all possible paths at the same time. (I’ll avoid the many-worlds interpretation for now. Way too confusing!) This same effect can be seen with larger particles such as electrons, and even complete atoms – but the larger the particle, the harder it is to see the effect.
Role of the Observer
If we repeat the double-slit experiment, and this time put a photon detector in front of one of the slits, something interesting happens. By detecting the photon, we cause the probability wave to collapse (a.k.a. quantum decoherence), and the photon now behaves like a particle. The interference pattern disappears, and we end up with two spots on the screen corresponding to where the photons passed through the slits. In effect, we forced the photon to “make up its mind” not only about where it is, but also where its been.
There is some debate as to what really causes quantum decoherence. Some scientists believe that it actually takes a conscious observer – but this is only speculation. Kurzweil definitely falls into this camp. He gives a great example in “The Age of Spiritual Machines” involving a quantum computer. I won’t try to explain the details of quantum computing here. Suffice it to say that the answer to a problem in a quantum computer is provided through the act of observation and decoherence. Now suppose that answer is stored in the memory of a conventional computer and then printed on a sheet of paper. According to Kurzweil, the quantum state of the computer remains in superposition as long as no conscious observer actually looks at the answer printed on the paper. Not only that, but the state of the conventional computer’s memory, and what is actually printed on the paper remain vague – perhaps the answers don’t even exist. It is not until a conscious observer looks at the answer on the paper that this ambiguity is instantly resolved throughout the whole system, and the answer now exists. This seems like a really difficult thing to prove – but yet there are scientists that take this seriously. The biggest argument against this is that quantum effects don’t really apply to objects of significant mass. The infamous Schrödinger's cat thought experiment illustrates these points.
Thinking about this may give you pause the next time someone asks the question, “If a tree falls in the forest, and nobody is there to hear it, does it make a sound?”
“Spooky Action at a Distance”
When two photons (for example) are produced together in the right way, there is a relationship between them called “entanglement.” One experiment involves entangled photons and polarizers. Each photon in an entangled pair goes its own way, and then, after traveling some distance, they each go through a polarizer and a detector. The interesting thing is that when one photon makes it through the polarizer, so does the other one. There is an intimate relationship between the two particles – what affects one seems to affect the other the same way. Einstein called entanglement “spooky action at a distance.”
One might explain this by saying that the two photons were given matching “states” at the time they were created that caused them to behave the same way as they passed through the polarizers/detectors. But for a particle in quantum superposition, there isn’t a defined state. Also, the measurements from this experiment show that this is not the case. (Sorry, I don’t have the citation, but this is what the quantum physicists in “The New Physics and Cosmology – Dialogues with the Dalai Lama" explained).
So, this would seem to indicate that there is some effect that gets communicated from one photon to the other as the result of detection. No matter the distance between the two detectors, the effect is instantaneous. This would seem to violate the idea that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. It doesn’t really, though. There is not actually any information communicated. We can not decide to decohere one photon to a particular state, and then have someone on the other side measure that effect. We can only measure that they are both doing the same random thing.
Backward-Causality
As penumbra pointed out “Interestingly, I have heard an alternative to the current model of nondeterminism in Quantum theory. It essentially replaces the quantum entanglement explanation for perceived action at a distance with a reverse causation explanation--instead of particles being able to instantaneously affect each other's state over an arbitrarily large distance, the theory postulates that the particles are responding to a common cause at some point in the future--in the context of any observation which reveals such particles to have a connected state, the experiment itself is the common future-cause.”
The existence of backward-causality would have profound implications. In effect, it says that what happens in the future determines what happens in the present. It also implies that what happens in the present determines what happens in the past. As to this last point, there was an article I saw a few months back in which theoretical physicist Paul Davies suggests that the universe evolved to contain consciousness because consciousness resolved ambiguities in the universe’s past, causing it to converge to a state that allowed it to develop consciousness. Say hunh? OK, well, read the story here. The important takeaway here is that there are, in fact, scientists who are seriously evaluating backward-causality. I saw another article very recently about an experiment that hopes to prove or disprove backward-causality. I’m a little dubious about this experiment after reading through it, though. I’m not sure it’s actually going to prove or disprove anything.
As a side note, my first brush with Buddhism would suggest that their beliefs do not fit in with this model. They seem to be very set on forward cause-and-effect relationships. I have more reading to do, so we’ll see.
Tying it All Together
In “The Secret”, one example of how (according to the author) the Law of Attraction applies in our life with out us even realizing it are those strange coincidences when we’re thinking about someone who we haven’t seen in months or years. For some reason, they pop into our minds, and then, amazingly, they end up calling us on the phone or bumping into us a short time later. Others may attribute such occurrences to some sort of psychic or telepathic phenomenon.
Here’s some alternative speculation on my part, though. What if these coincidences, and the LOA – not to mention the observation of quantum entanglement – are ALL manifestations of backward-causality? My explanation for the LOA would then be that in the present, a certain outcome is believed/expected, and then the universe goes back and makes the past consistent with those results. (Or, alternatively, your future-self actually experiences the manifestation, and through backward-causality, the happenings in the present and past adjust to accommodate this reality).
Yeah, I know it’s a stretch – but just maybe there is something worth understanding here. It would be really cool if there was some kind of common explanation for all these weird observations. But, as I mentioned earlier, the strange behavior seen in the quantum world probably doesn’t apply at the macro level. On the other hand, our thoughts could very well be operating at the quantum level – so how does that fit in with this discussion?
True or not, it’s still really awesome to ponder. As I said in a previous post, backwards causation may mean that regardless of what your situation is -- regardless of any mistakes you think you may have made -- you have the power, right now, to determine what your life is, and give meaning to the past that brought you here to this moment. Perhaps that is true anyway.
jbravo
22 Comments
I read somewhere that he has the funds and is going ahead with his experiment _ but I cant' find that report.
Anyway, as Cramer said, ""It doesn't seem like it should work, but on the other hand, I can't see what would prevent it from working," Cramer said. "If it does work, you could receive the signal 50 microseconds before you send it."
maaaan, you sure go to great lengths to be provocative!! *s*
Alright, earsz -- I want you to try the beer thing and report back to us. You have to imagine that you already have it. "Ask, believe, receive" is the mantra. You have to say in your mind "I'm so grateful and happy, now that I have this refreshing, cold beer". *s* Just don't actually ask someone for a beer, or go grab one yourself -- that doesn't count. This means, you may have to go without a beer for awhile -- or maybe not. Try to stay positive. :-)
Leaving to chance or my random thoughts, could light off a disposable about one in ten, but when i focusssed my mind purely on the image of a lit cigarette (and the pure thought of the pleasure of the nicotine hit that came with that) and cleansing my mind of all else, lit 100% for three days. The wind would just seemingly die off at the point i "chose" to light my ciggie.
I smoke a pack a day - so thats 75 from 75 hits against reality.
Dropped the focus (as my control event to the experiment) - back to one ten depending on wind - re-added the focus - back to virtual 100% success.
I call that a result.
In Byrne's book, feelings are explained as the feedback mechanism from the universe that let you know if you are having the right thoughts. If you are having positive thoughts in line with what you want, you get good feelings. Bad feelings, then, are a warning to change your thoughts before you manifest what you don't want. Anyway -- that's her interpretation.
I'm glad that someone else around here who considers themself grounded in science is also exploring these ideas. If I'm starting to get a little nutty, at least I'm in good company. :-)
I don't have explicit "proof" - but i have enough to keep reading to look for it. It's very challenging stuff for someone like me who's a complete sceptic in all things, but i think you have to test all theorys in order to able to comment on their validity or lack thereof (imho)
However, I have learned as well that you must be careful what you wish for because you just might get it- but it is not always exactly how you saw it for yourself- its like the genie in the bottle- they will grant you your wish- EXACTLY how you wish it-
Like in the movie Bedazzled where Branden Frasiers character wished to be very very Rich and he became a Colombian drug lord with the authorities after him. Extreme example of course, but its a good warning when asking for the Universe to do something for you. ;)
There are 7 guiding, natural Laws to our Universe and they are as follows:
The Law of Perpetual Transmutation-
* Energy moves into physical form.
* The images you hold in your mind most often materialize in results in your life.
The Law of Relativity-
* Nothing is good or bad, big or small... until you RELATE it to something.
* Practice relating your situation to something much worse and yours will always look good.
The Law of Vibration and Attraction-
* Everything vibrates, nothing rests.
* Conscious awareness of vibration is called feeling. Your thoughts control your paradigms and your vibration (which dictates what you attract).
* When you are not feeling good, become aware of what you are thinking, then think of something pleasant.
The Law of Polarity-
* Everything has an opposite: Hot - Cold ... Up - Down ... Good - Bad.
* Constantly look for the good in people and situations. When you find it, tell the person. People love compliments and the positive idea in your mind makes you feel good. Remember, good idea - good vibrations.
The Law of Rhythm-
* The tide goes out ... night follows day ... good times - bad times.
* When you are on a down swing, do not feel bad. Know the swing will change and things will get better. There are good times coming - think of them.
The Law of Cause and Effect-
* Whatever you send into the Universe comes back. Action -- re-action are equal and opposite.
* Say good things to everyone; treat everyone with total respect and it will all come back. Never worry about what you are going to get, just concentrate on what you can give.
The Law of Gender-
* Every seed has a gestation or incubation period. Ideas are spiritual seeds and will move into form or physical results.
* Your goals will manifest when the time is right. KNOW they will.
Hey you know AdGuy always gets the last word! ;)