Today I chose to be a writer

Tomorrow I think I'll Be a Fisherman

Leave a comment

Quantum Craziness and the Pre-Socratics

Quantum Craziness and the Pre-Socratics
Ancient Philosophy
Fouad Bocti
“I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by.”
-Douglas Adams

At the center of all great Pre-Socratic’s (PS) is the notion of the one. The premise that at an inconceivable level all things exist in a state of singularity. Now, this concept creates an irrefutable loop; if all things are one, and consciousness is the product of division then how could conscious beings conceive the singularity?

Despite all their tools and particle colliders; modern day scientists have ignored this ancient truth, they have hit a wall- for to observe is to consciously affect the results. Try as they may to find their god particle, they are forgetting Parmenides; we cannot rely on our senses to come to an understanding of Being, reason is the only tool we possess to do so. This paper is an effort to combine the wacky world of quantum mechanics and the lucidity of pre-Socratics in order to further understand this being called the universe.

Using reason ancient philosophers discovered accurate principles about cosmology and physics without the use of scientific paraphernalia, a truly amazing feat. Not to undermine the ingenious efforts of theoretical physics, but PS were able to imagine such ideas as quantum entanglement (Heraclitus’ Tension), Planck scale (IT IS), atoms (Anaxagoras seeds, Socratic forms), and the works. This is proof that a true understanding of being can be achieved through the use of pure reason.

The different philosophers that were covered all had their own perk to overcoming this ultimate gap between man and the cosmos. One cannot know an illusion for if the illusion is known it ceases to be! Ironically that is exactly what has occurred. An electron pops in and out of existence, and mass is mostly empty… the illusion is no longer… or is it?

Observation and its Side Effects

“Observing the process will change it. And afterwards even if you subconsciously rearrange it, it doesn’t seem any less true” – Built To Spill, In Your Mind

Ever wonder how cameras affected people? Well, lets think about this. A photographer has a reason to be filming. For him/her the moment is probably a happy one, or a majestic one, and as the flash goes off, everyone is smiling regardless of the level of happiness they are experiencing, the beauty of life is captured in an instance. Chances are most people smile for the picture, because they are aware that a picture will be seen by others, meaning they have to be a part of the happy moment regardless of their actual involvement in it. A photographer will venture into the wild for days to capture a preconceived moment, and find it, the singularity which is consciousness will react to the call of Intention One way or the Other.

The same goes for a particle. In a famous experiment called the double slit experiment, which involves a particle beam of electrons passing through two closely-spaced slits onto a screen which would reflect the fashion in which the particles pass through the slit. If marbles were used to represent this particle beam, the marbles would pass through the slit and create a slit shape on the screen. This seems rational enough, but the results were not so rational when electrons were used, the electron beam that passed through the slit created an interference pattern Instead of a slit shape on the screen. An interference pattern is a property of waves not particles, and is the result of waves colliding with one another and forming a pattern.  Dumbfounded, physicist figured the electrons from the beam were interfering with one another and creating this interference pattern. So they created an apparatus that could fire one electron at a time, hence no interference from random electrons. To their surprise, there was the interference pattern again, being reproduced one particle at a time! “The conclusion was inescapable, the single electron left the projector as a particle, became a wave of potential, passed through both slits, interfered with itself and hit the screen as a particle” *1 (Fred Alan Wolf, Down the Rabbit Hole, 2003). In order to understand how this was happening, they attached a detector to try and see which slit the particle was actually going through because it couldn’t logically be going through both. What happened next really freaked some people out and caused huge debates among the scientific community. As soon as the particle was observed, it acted like a particle again! So no interference pattern, meaning there were two bands of electrons behind the two slits. The only different variable was the act of observing the electron to see which slit it went through. The electron somehow knew it was being watched, and as if to appease the scientists that expected it to act as a particle, it acted like a particle! Just like the subjects of the photograph are appeasing the photographer’s expectation of happiness in that moment when the picture was taken, or the way nature will show its beauty to those who seek it, the electron appeased the logical result expected by years and years of Newtonian wired brains, truth is always camera shy.
This has been coined by modern cosmologists as “the collapse of the wave function”, a wave of potential collapses upon being observed onto one of many potential possibilities.

The point here is that electrons qualify as a substantial part of matter, since science is about the documentation and observation of matter and its attributed phenomena, and electrons are sensitive to our preconceptions, no observation or documentation is Truth because electrons are formidable pranksters. Also, we can surmise that observation is sensory, and since observation changes the process, senses are redundant in knowing the process. This puts quite a large dent on our accumulated knowledge of physics. We can now assume that proof has become irrelevant, the IT IS cannot be measured; it can only be experienced. Using reasoning we can now deduce that Oneness, due to the “entanglement” or meshing of consciousness and matter as proposed above, is in fact very real and that separation and division is an illusion necessary to uphold intelligence.

*1) The electron goes through all the possibilities simultaneously: both, neither, one then the other. A “wave of potential”, it is in a state of superimposition.

My Mind is your Mind and your Mind is Mine

“So crucify the ego, before it’s far too late
And leave behind this place so negative and blind and cynical
And you will come to find that we are all one mind
And capable of all that’s imagined and all-conceivable
So let the light touch you, so let the words spill through
And let them pass right through
Bringing out our hope and reason” – Tool, Reflection

Parmenides claims that Being is still and unchanging, he claims Being IS, it cannot become, and cannot be born. Still-Being according to Parmenides goes even deeper than the physical universe; it prevails in a level of existence that is inconceivable. Why then, did Parmenides claim “truth did not reside within mortals”? If IT IS, then what IS “there” logically should also BE “here” because IT IS, or it may just not be at all. In the poem “On Nature”, Parmenides warns “Never must you think that nothingness can be” This is diametrically opposed to Heraclitus’ view; “Things which are put together are both whole and not whole, brought together and taken apart, in harmony and out of harmony; one thing arises from all things, and all things arise from one thing” (Fragment 10).  If we applied the observation effect, It Is when its being observed and It Is Not when no ones watching, very much like Schrödinger’s cat, who isn’t dead or alive until someone peeks. This is where it gets tricky, Explaining a superimposition clearly is likely to make my brain hemorrhage, but Heraclitus describes this state using the conjunction “and” to illustrate the link between the two which are one. Nothing and something are both things, when something ends and nothing begins then something would have begun and must eventually end becoming nothing, which is still something which…. you see where this goes? The key is in the link of the two, this ability to zone into the infinite, it Is within the infinite that nothing and something merge to become Some-One.

Essentially the universe is experiencing itself subjectively through us and other intelligent observers (I mean all Life in the universe! not just humans), and we are experiencing it experiencing itself (John Archibald Wheeler designed a visual representation of this, the universe as a u shape with an eye on one ending observing at its other end). This would mean that we exist within a self-conscious entity- Anaxagoras’ Mind- the Nous.

Mind is universal; our consciousness is a fractal of this universal Mind. Although, according to Anaxagoras, Mind is separate of the ingredients of Everything, but has caused everything to become in motion or in revolution. “nous controlled the whole revolution, so that it started to revolve in the beginning. First it began to revolve from a small region, but it is revolving yet more, and it will revolve still more… And whatever sorts of things were going to be, and whatever sorts were and now are not, and as many as are now and whatever sorts will be, all these nous set in order. And nous also ordered this revolution, in which the things being separated off now revolve, the stars and the sun and the moon and the air and the aether. This revolution caused them to separate off.” (59 B12,). Unity and oneness still exist but separate of Mind.
For sake of this paper, Mind is now going to be referred to as Intelligence; intelligence being the force that creates order and understanding. So it is Intelligence that is separate of the singularity, it is intelligence that causes the need for the illusion of separation because intelligence cannot survive with out it. It needs to create order from chaos. Imagine a world where things were really all one, all our minds connected so that no thought was private, a world where all possibilities are all true simultaneously a world with only men or only women. Truthfully, nothing would exist if that were the case because everything that does exist would exist in the same time/space. Remember Einstein: “no two things can occupy the same place at the same time” “the big crunch” as cosmologists say.

In the “mortal realm” all things exists in duality. So if the nous is 1 and the physical Universe is 0, then  as a result all things in the physical realm are paired in such a fashion; “opposing polarities” (man-woman, hot-cold Etc). Something strange happens at this point; all things that are paired in such a fashion meet occasionally and are either unified or blown to smithereens. And it is in that unification that a glimpse of the singularity is caught, be it war, love, the meeting of great minds. Our fashion of reproduction is an affirmation of this pattern after all; two lovers create one entity (considering twins as one entity) and that one entity will spend its life seeking to reconnect in one way or another, two great minds will reach an agreement that each will hold against another mind. This is similar to Hegel’s ideas regarding the Progression of history being the clash of thesis and Antithesis, once harmony is reached there is no more history.

This creates the ultimate paradox; that knowledge of Singularity cannot be applied to our dualistic reality. When knowledge is not applied, it is lost and becomes irrelevant. The secret of the Universe has no value in our subjective reality! No wonder mankind is so lost and misled; the most important hindsight is meaningless to our materialistic endeavors- maybe that’s the reason that regardless how many times the nature of our existence is scrutinized, it is ignored and the process of discovery is repeated, after all someone needs to watch the universe be, otherwise the universe would cease to be. Douglas adams, author of Hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy says: “There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened.” And so we people are players in an everlasting struggle that can be found in the bulk of Heraclitus’ ideas regarding Logos and the Unity of Opposites “As a single, unified thing there exists in us both life and death, waking and sleeping, youth and old age, because the former things having changed are now the latter, and when those latter things change, they become the former.


Curd, PC. (2007). Anaxagoras. Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved January 19, 2011, from

Hooker, RH. (1996). Heraclitus. Greek philosophy. Retrieved January 19, 2011, from

Hooker, RH. (1996). Pre-Socratic Philosophy. Greek philosphy. Retrieved January 19, 2011, from

Gerard, R.G.B. (2007). Parmenides and the way of truth. New York: Monkfish.
Gerard, R.G.B. (2007). Remembering Heraclitus. New York: Monkfish.
Gerard, R.G.B. (2007). Anaxagoras. New York: Monkfish.

Custer, R.W.C. (2007). Gods quantum code. New York: Richard W. Custer.