Bridge to Unity: Unified Field-Based Science and Spirituality
... Four fields were identified: electromagnetic, weak and strong nuclear, and gravitational fields -frequently held to be insentient, non-conscious, random energy. This 1-level model is depicted from surface to deepest layers of the physical universe in this chart: 1,2 1-level physical model Universe (ultra-macroscopic) Local environment (macroscopic) Individual and social behavior Biological systems/body/brain Molecular processes (microscopic) Organic, non-organic chemical processes Basic elements (ultra-microscopic) Atomic particles Electromagnetic force-particle field Weak force-particle field Strong force-particle field Relativistic gravitational force-particle field ...
... The non-physical levels are not measurable within the limits of conventional physical space -which is frequently held to break down and no longer apply at the Planck scale. 1,2,3,4 In this expanded ontology, change is guided by subtle mental levels underneath the physical layers. Because the non-local, non-physical levels are more interdependent (in particle language, entangled), it is even more evident that influences determining definite physical outcomes are only probabilistically calculable (measurement problem, non-computability). ...
... This also may help to envision how the quantitative, measurable values of the Planck scale, light-speed, and relativistic gravity (also charge/spin/mass that characterize 'particle' interactions) transition to deeper, non-measurable, non-physical levels of spacetime. 1,2 Added insight might be gained by Wheeler's 16 'it from bit' and the Bekenstein Bound concepts. 17 These concepts describe an abstract geometry of information space that generates conventional space. ...
This paper overviews how local physical matter naturally links to non-local, non-physical energy, intelligent minds, and the all-inclusive unified field. The paper concludes with consideration of what is needed for these phenomenal levels of nature to be empirically validated.
... This seems to be another major step in the attempt to explain the dynamics of an underlying, more interdependent, non-local spacetime field without yet committing to real sub-Planck scale spacetime, a third level of spacetime distinguishable from both conventional physical spacetime and the infinite unified field. (Boyer, 2008(Boyer, , 2021. Some QT interpretations now propose a real level of nature in-between the classical physical level and the unified field. ...
... Some QT interpretations now propose a real level of nature in-between the classical physical level and the unified field. These 3-level models offer a conceptual bridge to cross the mind/body gap, extending physics to a real place for minda major step closer to the completely holistic Vedic 3-in-1 model (Boyer, 2008(Boyer, , 2018(Boyer, , 2021. ...
... This progress adds another distinction to the gross/local and subtle/not-local levels: the gross local/ level as physical and the deeper 'subtle non-local' level as non-physical. The physical level can be defined as objects and processes limited by the relativistic gravitational field, the speed of light, and the Planck scale; whereas, the underlying subtle, not-local, non-physical levels would not be subject to these limitations (Boyer, 2008(Boyer, , 2021(Boyer, , 2022a. The Vedic 3-in-1 model includes the manifest finite physical level, the unmanifest, infinite unified field level, and the manifest finite non-physical level in-between them (where a real information field of mind can be located). ...
Abstract: Major progress in modern physics in the past century to more abstract, holistic theories extend the known range of nature-classical, quantum, quantum field, to unified field theories. Mind and consciousness are now also being examined-which is needed to include the full range. This paper introduces a completely holistic ancient model, with some detail on how contemporary models can map onto it to include the full range of nature. We 'll start with the simple 'ocean/wave' analogy to help clarify what a completely holistic account means. It also can help, as we proceed, with an intuitive sense of abstract quantum theories difficult to grasp even for many scientists.
Key terms: unified field, levels of nature, classical and quantum theories, completely holistic model
... The chart below depicts this one-level model, generally accepted in mainstream modern science. Of major significance is that, in contrast to the three-level model described earlier as top-down, the one-level model is bottom-up, with the deepest, most inclusive levels on the bottom and theorized to be non-sentient, inherently randomly fluctuating energy fields (Boyer, 2008(Boyer, , 2021a. ...
... These three-level models offer a conceptual bridge to help cross the mind/body gap. They extend physics into a more comprehensive model that includes a real place for real mindsa major step closer to the holistic 3-in-1 Vedic model discussed later in more detail (Boyer, 2008(Boyer, , 2018(Boyer, , 2021a. ...
... However, it added to the one and twolevel models a third real field in-between. This in-between level is a subtle, nonphysical, mindlike, finite field deeper than the gross physical level, but within the super-implicate order or allencompassing unified field (Boyer 2008(Boyer , 2012(Boyer , 2018(Boyer , 2021a. ...
... The chart below depicts this one-level model, generally accepted in mainstream modern science. Of major significance is that, in contrast to the three-level model described earlier as top-down, the one-level model is bottom-up, with the deepest, most inclusive levels on the bottom and theorized to be non-sentient, inherently randomly fluctuating energy fields (Boyer, 2008(Boyer, , 2021a. ...
... These three-level models offer a conceptual bridge to help cross the mind/body gap. They extend physics into a more comprehensive model that includes a real place for real mindsa major step closer to the holistic 3-in-1 Vedic model discussed later in more detail (Boyer, 2008(Boyer, , 2018(Boyer, , 2021a. ...
... However, it added to the one and twolevel models a third real field in-between. This in-between level is a subtle, nonphysical, mindlike, finite field deeper than the gross physical level, but within the super-implicate order or allencompassing unified field (Boyer 2008(Boyer , 2012(Boyer , 2018(Boyer , 2021a. ...
... The most powerful is the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN near Geneva, Switzerland, with the capability to probe to about 10 -19 cm. However, energy levels needed in order to probe the theorized tiniest scales are still far greater even than these most powerful instruments available (Boyer, 2008(Boyer, , 2021. *Content in this paper has been drawn from books by R.W. Boyer: Pointless: The reality behind quantum theory (Routledge publication, 2021) and Bridge to Unity: Unified field-based science and spirituality (2008). ...
... It is the phenomenological basis for the assumption of the independence of observed and observer that is fundamental to the 'objective' scientific method. Logically, it must eventually give way to a deeper unity in scientific progress toward a single, completely unified field (Boyer, 2008(Boyer, , 2021. ...
... A fundamental inconsistency seems to be that for millions of years classical physical processes preceded evolution of organisms that are complex enough to develop consciousness. If so, then how could such classical physical processes, requiring quantum wavefunction collapse, take place if conscious observers had not yet evolved in nature (Boyer, 2008)? This requires unpacking the concept of the wavefunction and its collapse with respect to the theorized fundamental role of consciousness (Boyer, 2012). ...
... But it has severe inadequacies with respect to the ontology of quanta, quantum fields, mind, and consciousness. Also, instantaneous collapse and fundamental randomness preclude causal explanationwhich was a core objective in science [6]. ...
... This brings into modern science a logically consistent conceptual model of the causal efficacy of real conscious observers. It posits a nonlocal causality, in which space and time are more interconnecteda field of real nonlocal causal waves [1,6]. Causation is spread out in waves or fluctuations of a subtler nonlocal medium (or non-material 'aether') permeating conventional relativistic spacetime and independent local objects and their classical 'billiard ball' mechanics. ...
... The Vedic account can be characterized in the reverse way as a conscious-based holistic top-down consciousness→mind→matter ontology. In this consciousness-based model, consciousness is not just ordinary awareness of an object of experience, is not proto-conscious bits that merge into sentient cognitions, is not accounted for by classical or quantum descriptions of brain function supervening on the physical, and does not emerge from physical complexity [1,6]. ...
... But this doesn't invalidate all notions of it. Empirically validated nonlocality suggests a deeper ontologically real level of spacetime (Boyer, 2008). Nonlocality means real 'quantum objects' that are interconnected in a way not accounted for by physical spacetime limited by light-speed, fundamental force fields, or abstract information fields in local causality. ...
... In such a model, causal influences might be more spread out than in classical billiard ball/particleinteraction causal models. This can be associated with a nonlocal causal wave (Boyer, 2008). This model would mean there is 'active' information in the nonlocal interdependent wave-field that precedes and shapes classical local events. ...
... Ordinary discrete local events with particle interaction causal mechanics would be embedded in a larger, subtler field involving nonlocal causal dynamics. Real nonlocal minds could influence local physical matter (mind over matter) via real nonlocal mental intentions (Schwartz, Begley, 2002: Boyer, 2008, 2013 in this nonlocal field. Such more advanced scientific models are developing now, associated with the concept of an underlying subtle field that includes nonlocal 'quantum mind.' ...
Nonlocality has been supported by experimental evidence since the 1980s. This paper offers a theoretical framework for what and where it is, based on recent quantum field theories that identify three levels of nature: 1) finite local field of physical matter/energy; 2) infinite unified field; and 3) finite nonlocal field in-between. The inbetween level is where ‘quantum mind’ is placed; and for the first time in modern science, this allows a logically coherent model of how mind causally influences brain and behavior. Importantly, these three-level models are converging toward the ancient Vedic 3-in-1 holistic account of ontological levels of nature. They reflect revolutionary progress on foundational issues about the matter-mind-consciousness relationship.
... Instead of the reductive physicalist worldview that consciousness and mind are epiphenomenal and fundamentally non-existent, they are the basis of matter and direct its orderly expressions all along the way in 'evolutionary pathways' (Davies, 1991). Real non-physical mind underlies physical parts and guides behavior at each stage (Boyer, 2008(Boyer, , 2014. ...
... Further, the three fundamental principles, qualities, or forces (gunas) differentiate into five subtle constituents (tanmatras) and five gross constituents (mahabhutas). Correspondences can be made between the five gross constituents (mahabhutas) on the physical level in the Vedic system and particle-force fields identified in physics (Hagelin, 1989;Boyer, 2008;. ...
... To link this system to the fundamental physical particle-forces identified in modern physics, one reasonable speculative correspondence (Boyer, 2008; is that 'space' is most closely associated with gravity (but also would encompass the other fundamental strong, weak, and electromagnetic forces in latent form). Likewise, 'air' might express the gravitational and strong forces (with the weak and electromagnetic forces latent). ...
Like many terms in modern science, ‘laws of nature’ are used as if the meaning is clear. After hundreds of years of objective research, however, whether the laws exist on their own or are just ideas such as equations, and whether they are universal and guide change or are just empirically identified patterns, seem to be not yet known. Also, there is little certainty about their whereabouts if they really do exist. Scientific progress from concrete matter to energy to abstract information, and to the interdependence of objective and subjective, brought these issues to prominence again. In Part I, perspectives of a selection of well-known theorists including Paul Davies, Roger Penrose, Henry Stapp, Max Tegmark, David Bohm, and Albert Einstein are reviewed. In Part II, the ancient holistic Vedic account as re-clarified by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi is then shown to offer a more comprehensive meaning of ‘laws of nature.’
... Signifiers of sentient life-intelligence, intentionality, selective attention, survival instinct-have not been identified at more fundamental levels, and neither have the source of order, meaning in nature, nor mind and consciousness. This should be a valuable clue in pursuing the source of order in modern science (Boyer, 2008). ...
... The Sankhya system in Vedic literature (as well as other aspects including Ayur-veda, natural medicine) enumerates the completely holistic 3-in-1 ontological model. As the Sankhya levels of nature are interpreted in this paper, only at the gross physical level is nature expressed in terms of space localizing in Planckscale quanta into classical, independent objects in ordinary gross perception where particleinteraction mechanics and their corresponding thermodynamics apply (Boyer, 2008(Boyer, , 2012. (In other words, the subtle level of 'mind is not physically 'hot'). ...
... Importantly, some cutting edge models do posit a nonlocal information field space that underlies local space-time geometry and allows for nonlocal causality (e.g., Bohm & Hiley, 1994, Boyer, 2008. These deeper views of ontologically real levels of nature beyond the conventional physical space-time gravitational field need to inform cosmological theories such as those described earlier. ...
'Consensus' big bang theory is frequently associated with a reductive view of the universe as emerging from an infinitely dense, infinitesimally small singularity or even nothing (ex nihilo). But wouldn't nothing mean no potential, energy, temperature, information, or random quantum fields to bang out when the 'right values' of 'unstable nothing' arose? Let us instead consider a coherent alternative, in which the universe emerged within an infinite eternal unified field that cannot be 'banged out of.' It can be called a singularity in the sense that it is the singular totality, and 'nothingness' in that it transcends all 'things'-but not literally nothing. This paper summarizes progress in cosmological models toward a holistic account in which the entire universe phenomenally emerges within infinite eternal 'space-time.' The shift from reductionism to holism has immense implications for the origin and structure of nature-as well as our phenomenal relation to it as conscious beings with real minds and free will-consistent with ancient Vedic cosmology.
... Taking the next step in this direction, it is useful to recognize that all third-person objective observations are also first-person subjective observations. Rigorous experimental methods and consensual validation, hallmarks of objective science, are based on intra-subjective (first-person) and inter-subjective (second and third-person) consistency (Boyer, 2008). Recognition that subjectivity underlies all objectivity opens up serious consideration of systematic means to develop our subjective minds directly in order to gain reliable scientific knowledge-the purpose of the ancient Vedic developmental account and missing ingredient in modern science, to be discussed later. ...
... This view will be helpful in bridging ontology in scientific realism with the Vedic developmental model of levels of reality. It points to different limiting properties of spacetime that distinguish different ontological levels (Boyer, 2008;. In other words, the challenge to scientific realism may not be to realism but to build better conceptualizations and descriptions of subtler levels of reality, associated with levels of spacetime. ...
... Again, this translates into different mediums of spacetime, with different causal dynamics. The particle interaction causal model in local relativistic spacetime needs to be supplemented by a nonlocal causal wave model in a nonphysical, nonlocal, interdependent texture of spacetime, discussed later in the Vedic model as levels of reality associated with levels of spacetime (Boyer, 2008;2012a). ...
The shift from particle to field theories has been crumbling pillars of classical objective science, and is reverberating in philosophy of science. Fundamental issues implicit in objective science-process of observing, observer or subject, dividing line between objective and subjective-are now more explicit. These issues are examined in this critique of scientific realism, held to be the best argument for objective science. A developmental model of levels of reality in different states of consciousness is introduced as a more integrated framework for addressing the core challenges to scientific realism.
... To add socio-cultural relevance to the abstract theories of space discussed in this paper, the Newtonian classical view was associated with popular beliefs in an absolute basis of nature, providing an ethical and moral foundation for daily life. When different views emerged in relativity and quantum theories, they were misinterpreted in popular social thought, contributing to deconstruction of ethical and moral foundations (Boyer, 2008). The socio-cultural impact of theories of space and time in physics will be noted briefly as we proceed in this paper. ...
... But core aspects of the observer-self-observation and causal efficacy of mind-remain outside. If these aspects of the observer exist, they also possibly could be in the theorized abstract information space below conventional spacetime, inasmuch as there seems to be no room for them in a supposedly closed causal physical nexus of conventional spacetime (Stapp, 2007;Boyer, 2008). ...
... In other words the principle that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts needs to be supplemented with the principle that the parts emerge from the completely unified (prior existing) whole, rather than the whole emerging from a collection of parts (Boyer, 2008). Bohm (1980, pp. ...
According to the consensus cosmological theory of the inflationary big bang, the universe originated about 14 billion years ago with no initial conditions, inherent nature, order, or purpose-from literally nothing. Instantaneously it was randomly fluctuating quantized gravity and Higgs fields that through spontaneous symmetry breaking formed into four fundamental particle-forces. The forces congealed into atomic structures, elements, stars, planets, organic molecules, living cellular organisms, and eventually humans with complex enough nervous systems to generate higher-order conscious mind with apparent causal control of its lower-order parts. How the closed physical causal chain unlinked and inserted a causally efficacious conscious mind at some stage of neural complexity is inexplicable; there is no room for it in the physicalist view-it must be epiphenomenal and a fundamental misperception. A coherent alternative is developing in quantum and quantum gravity theories of a proposed information space or nonlocal mental space underneath the physical. The progression of theories is overviewed with respect to the nature of space, and are shown to be increasingly consistent withs the ancient Vedic tradition of knowledge that makes room for a causally efficacious conscious mind.
... This is summarized in the phrases 'the microcosm reflects the macrocosm' and, also, 'the individual is cosmic.' 3,7 Through time, interactions of the 3 properties of inherent order, energy, and resistance to change (also called maintenance, creative, and destructive operators in mathematics/physics) naturally congeal into complex biological organisms with a unitary sense of 'self.' In the Vedic 3-in-1 account, these levels also relate to natural states of consciousness. ...
... The paramānus are structured by the spacetime field being further limited, sharply curving back into atomic forms. 2,7 This is suggestive that the concept of compactification of 'higher dimensions' in string/M-theory is applied in the opposite direction in the Vedic account: compactification is from a subtler field with wave-like dynamics to a more concrete field of quantized particle-like mechanics. ...
Superdeterminism, indeterminism, quantum uncertainty, zero-point energy (ZPE), virtual particles, dark matter, dark energy, inflationary big bang, 'everything from nothing,' 'self-organizing' randomness, quantum entanglement, 'quantum body,' and 'consciousness emerging from the brain' are briefly overviewed. Though these concepts can be helpful, they reflect fragmented understanding and experience of nature. A unified field theory needs to include phenomenally independent, discontinuous diversified parts (quantized matter, energy, information qubits) and more interdependent, continuous, unified wholes (mind, self, consciousness). A completely holistic account-including real 'free will'-is introduced as the context for examining these popular 'illusions.' Brief overview of the reductive modern physics account of nature Classical physics included the study of nature as waves (e.g., such as ocean, light, or sound waves). The continuous macroscopic waves were reduced to tiny discontinuous bound matter particles (atoms, elementary particles) flowing together through spacetime. Quantum theory (QT) posited even tinier quanta, combining particle mechanics and wave mechanics in wavicles. Quantum field theory (QFT) turned them upside down, positing wavicles as textural fluctuations of unbounded wave fields. This progress, from bounded 'particles' to unbounded 'wave fields,' simply reflects increasingly abstract modeling of independent objects to account for their deeper interdependence. It's a 1-level model in which only the causally closed physical level of nature is real-sometimes called physical realism. Then, unified field theory was added-a 2-level model (classical/quantum fields and a unified field). Recently, more abstract modeling of interactions in quantized wave fields led to an information field as the generator of matter and energy (e.g., 'it' from 'bit' theory 1). The increasing abstractions brought into objective science the largely ignored topic of subjectivity. But subjectivity is not accounted for in either the 1-level model or the 2-level model of nature. Now, the need to account for biological intelligence, mind, and consciousness is acknowledged to develop an all-inclusive unified field theory. In this paper, 'real' refers initially to our ordinary daily experience of the finite physical universe, then deeper finite levels, as 'relative realities,' and then the all-inclusive unified field as the one 'Reality.' The popular 'illusions' examined in this paper are attempts to integrate abstract mathematical (epistemic) reasoning and concrete empirical (ontic) evidence for more precise calculations in a more unified theory of nature that includes real subjective minds and consciousness. This requires reconnecting 'objects' in imagined (epistemic) mathematical space to (ontic) 'objects' in real space-the 'old mind-body problem' now being revisited in the context of the 'new measurement problem.' The 'illusions' reflect progress to a 3-level model that includes non-physical finite levels in-between the physical finite level and the all-inclusive unified field. This has revolutionary implications for more comprehensive understanding and experience of nature, and for much healthier living on Earth. 2 Brief overview of the holistic ancient Vedic account of nature In the Veda (translated as "total knowledge" 3), consciousness itself is the bottom-line unified field. Remaining within itself as the all-inclusive Reality, through its self-referral dynamics of 3 inherent properties-order, energy, resistance to change-it manifests the vast diversity of finite, ephemeral, relative realities. Natural phenomena manifest as subjective individual structures, then refined subtle and less refined gross 'objective' physical structures. Fluctuations/vibrations/ pulsations/interactions express Nature's wonderful, awe-inspiring diversity in a nested hierarchy of 3 levels: 1) transcendent infinite universal consciousness; 2) non-physical, nonlocal, finite levels (including 'subjective' minds/souls); and 3) the familiar physical, local, finite level (including 'objective' bodies/brains).
... The predictions are tested through 'objective' empirical observation, and then the theories are reevaluated for a better fit with the observations. It thus has been described as a self-correcting process, in which theories are continually improved to withstand rigorous logical inquiry and objective testing (Boyer, 2008). ...
... This addition can reverse disintegrative trends from cultural relativism and existential meaninglessness that have eroded societal coherence. It further can bridge chasms that historically separated modern science, religion, and spirituality (Boyer, 2008). ...
Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras in ancient Vedic literature identifies the essential practice of Yoga as settling mental activity to inner silence, samadhi. Vedic proponent Maharishi Mahesh Yogi has re-clarified the systematic technology to experience samadhi effortlessly, the Transcendental Meditation® technique. Its efficacy is supported by extensive research on transcendental consciousness as a fourth state in addition to waking, dreaming, and sleep that results in a wide range of mental, physical, and social health benefits. This effortless technique has been distinguished from concentrative, contemplative, and mindfulness practices that correlate with psychophysiological signatures associated with the ordinary waking state of consciousness. Direct experience of samadhi expands the systematic means to gain knowledge associated with the ordinary waking state that has been fundamental to modern science.
... This also can be interpreted to mean that space does not begin from an infinitely dense singularity, Planck-size quantum, or 'nothing' banging outward. Rather, infinite eternal spacetime condenses into subtle nonlocal and gross local mediums of spacetime with different limitations (Boyer, 2007;2008;2010). Maharishi (1976) explains: "This process of consciousness becoming aware of itself creates an unmanifest space-time geometry within the field of consciousness. ...
According to Hameroff and Penrose’s 2014 review of their ‘Orch OR’ theory, “The nature of consciousness, the mechanism by which it occurs in the brain, and its ultimate place… are unknown.” We propose that these issues are unknowable in their ultra-reductive approach. Their review completely left out the holistic view of consciousness as primary, even though it has been the most enduring view throughout history. Also, their review overlooked recent theories of an ontologically real nonlocal information field, a major step toward the holistic view. Reductive assumptions about physicalism, quantum wavefunction reduction, the mind/brain relationship, panpsychism, and the structure of the universe are reconsidered in light of the holistic view.
This paper lists major 'unsolved problems' in physics today. Then progress is overviewed from fragmented, reductive, classical, independent objects to interdependent objects in QFT to holistic unified field theory beyond random matter/energy. At the forefront are subtler notions of spacetime that bridge gaps between orderly matter/energy, mind/intelligence, and consciousness. A completely holistic unified field model is summarized and applied to exemplify how to address the 'unsolved problems.'
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.