World Famous Comics: Wholeness and the Implicate Order (Routledge Classics)
Wholeness and the Implicate Order (Routledge Classics)
By: David Bohm Publisher: Routledge Average Rating: Binding: Paperback Label: Routledge Number of Items: 1 Number of Pages: 284 Publication Date: November 15, 2002
Product Description: In this classic work David Bohm, writing clearly and without technical jargon, develops a theory of quantum physics which treats the totality of existence as an unbroken whole.
Bohm understood the main difficulties in the interpretation of quantum mechanics but also went deep into the understanding of the human mind, being in close contact with Krishnamurti for years. This book is the result of his deep understanding of those two "worlds" apparently disengaged. Excelent but demanding book.
more to life i always knew there was more to life than what our eyes display through our eyes. if you think about the film THE MATRIX (2005) you will start to believe that there is more to life than what lies in front of us. What lies have they told us?
Such are the questions you will find yourself asking of everyone and every thing. For example, I went to a restaurant recently. Or did i?
Very interesting, and provacative, but how credible! I started hearing about `string theories', the ten dimensions of space', and `holographic universes' so I decided it was time to do some reading and decipher science fiction from real science. I started with Talbot's `Holographic Universe" which I thought was awesome and followed it with Bohm's "Wholeness and the implicate order".
I read the soft cover and came away from Bohm's book realizing three things: FIRST, quantum physics is mathematics. It is 99.9999...% "theoretical" mathematics. And I use that word very loosely. It seems that physicists plug in symbols (to represent some predetermined set of criteria or condition(s) that is suppose to have a material counterpart in our physical reality), one after another to form an equation, and then try to `balance' it on paper. If it balances, it is true and they plug in more symbols to expand on their `theory'. If it doesn't balance they create new symbols for different sets of criteria and conditions hoping (or until) it does balance. Other than the `symbol' used, there is no connection between the mathematical equation and actual physical reality. The consequential outcome of such non-physical, mathematically theoretical, thought experiments is/are two new `catch phrases', `Explicate Order' and `Implicate Order'. The explicate order is everything that can be perceived by our senses or instruments, i.e. "our physical reality" including but not limited to: rocks, trees, ourselves and others, stars, moon(s), solar systems, Universe(s), etc., etc.. The Implicate order is `thought to be' this infinitely massive shadow universe that can neither be experienced nor measured from which our physical reality (the explicate order) comes `into being'. On pg. 235, Bohm describes it this way, "So we are suggesting that it is the implicate order that is autonomously active while, as indicated earlier, the explicate order flows out of a law of the implicate order, so that it is secondary, derivative, and appropriate only in certain limited contexts." In another part of the book Bohm suggests that when a person grows in height it is because we are renewed (blink on and off) at a rate that is faster than our senses can detect and each renewal (which comes from the implicate order) is slightly taller than the previous one.
SECOND, words like `Theory' and `Hypothesis' have been redefined by the scientific community to validate these `theoretical equations' and give them some apparent, if not undeserved, credibility. The American Heritage Dictionary defines a "Theory" as: "1. A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena."
There are no `facts or phenomena', just symbols that represent facts and phenomena and nothing is being `repeatedly tested', instead an equation is being repeatedly balanced. So much so that the scientific community has redefined `Theory' as: "A well-tested mathematical model of some part of science. In physics a theory usually takes the form of an equation or a group of equations, along with explanatory rules for their application." (From OneLook dictionary search/science/Theory - Misunderstood physics terms) This new definition sounds more like a `hypothesis' than a theory. The American Heritage Dictionary defines a hypothesis as: 1." A tentative explanation for an observation, phenomenon, or scientific problem that can be tested by further investigation." "Any" equation is a hypothesis, whether it is for wind/weight load in architecture or a new business paradigm or a new concept about our Universe, until it can be tested in reality. There is no way, and Bohm confesses to this, to test this implicate/ explicate `theory' in the real world. It is an idea, a hypothesis at best and just more mathematic symbols at its worst.
THIRD, physicists don't have a clue what is going on. Bohm says that the implicate order (that place from whence our reality comes) is an ever evolving and ever changing realm that probably comes from another implicate order which probably comes from another implicate order, none of which will ever be verified. He says that the implicate order metamorphoses from one state to another to bring about what we see as reality.
On page 202 he says, "What happens on the broader context of implicate order we shall then call metamorphosis. This indicates that the change is much more radical than the change of position of orientation of a rigid body, and that it is in certain ways more like the changes from caterpillar to butterfly (in which everything alters in a thorough going manner while some subtle and highly implicit features remain invariant).
I emailed a Christian friend of mine about my take on the book and especially Bohm's quote on metamorphosis of the implicate order and he responded: "at least they ( the scientifc community ) are good for a few laughs ! LOL they are worshiping the creation instead of the creator."
This is a well-written book. I enjoyed it. It really got me thinking outside of my usual `box'. Is his theory credible? Did this "autonomously active" realm called the implicate order come from a sterile and inorganic big bang?
Autonomous means: "Not controlled by others or by outside forces; independent" Autonomous implies self-directed, self-governing and self-ruling. How can an inanimate realm be autonomous? If there is any credibility to this line of thought I cannot help but wonder what is behind this `autonomy'?
I would recommend this book, after Talbot's Holographic Universe. Talbot will help you to visualize what Bohm is trying to convey. I believe it is really written for the scientific community and a bit `heavy' for the non-initiated, but worth reading non-the less. Is this science? I have to say no! Is it interesting? I have to say yes! Is it credible? You decide for yourself! Even Maddoff's Ponzi scheme looked good on paper!
Accurate This book initially describes the limitations imposed on us by the language we have developed, which in turn affects our world view, so to use that same language to review it is somewhat futile, if one accepts the premise of the narrative, which I do.
In as few words as possible, there is a lot of truth here.
(I am surprised no reviewer has mentioned Science and Sanity by Alfred Korzybski. It sits on a completely different library shelf, and comes from a different perspective, but from what I remember from reading it 10 years ago, It covers some common territory. If you are familiar with those concepts, and have some fairly rudimentary 20th century physics theory, then you have a journey here which should help you see the world as it very likely is.)
For example, when we are young, we are taught that an atom is a very small particle, which may be a helpful way of looking at it, but in fact does not accurately define it. So if we become reliant on that, or any definition, which we tend to do, that definition begins to obscure, rather than reveal the truth. Perhaps an atom is an energy field. But if we attempt to define energy, we will clearly have developed another obstacle.
We need a vantage point to see and describe our universe more effectively, and that is what this book starts by giving us.
To describe this book as poorly written or hard to read, with no disrespect, I think may be to miss the point. Our way of looking at the world since the start of recorded history has not helped us greatly - we can see that by just looking around. To correct it is probably not going to be a walk in the park, but this book may be a start.
That said, I think you would have to really enjoy both the topic and reading itself for me to recommend this book to you, as it sometimes has a textbook, rather than narrative feel. Nonetheless, 5 stars.
Brilliant scientists have amazing thoughts and theories This book is an excellent brief thought of the briliant scientific achievement from Newton, Einsten, etc... making you to think about their correlation with the nature complexity. The scientists have given us equations from simple and limited tests in order to be used in a wider manner, on the other hand the nature is much more complex than that and correlates all the variances non-linearly to release the proper and substantial output. The extensive effort to create an unique and general physics law/equation which cover from the quantum mechanics to the universe is a though task. Dr. Bohm gives you the chance to think about that using a simple and enthusiastic written.
Anything Goes Trivia
Trevor
Megaton Man
