What do you think?
Rate this book
The Tao of Physics: An Exploration of the Parallels between Modern Physics and Eastern Mysticism
After a quarter of a century in print, Capra's groundbreaking work still challenges and inspires. This updated edition of The Tao of Physics includes a new preface and afterword in which the author reviews the developments of the twenty-five years since the book's first publication, discusses criticisms the book has received, and examines future possibilities for a new scientific world.
366 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1975
1,871 people are currently reading
24.6k people want to read
About the author
Fritjof Capra
100 books620 followersFritjof Capra (born February 1, 1939) is an Austrian-born American physicist. He is a founding director of the Center for Ecoliteracy in Berkeley, California, and is on the faculty of Schumacher College. Capra is the author of several books, including The Tao of Physics (1975), The Turning Point (1982), Uncommon Wisdom (1988), The Web of Life (1996) and The Hidden Connections (2002).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 772 reviews
December 26, 2013
Don't look to Capra for a highly disciplined discourse on particle physics or the nature of cosmology. Nor is this book a deep exploration of Taoism or other Eastern Religious Philosophy. Rather, it is a fascinating mental adventure showing the ways the two schools of thought often developed in parallel and came to similar conclusions from very different beginning points. The author's own words in the epilogue sum it up nicely. "Science does not need mysticism and mysticism does not need science, but man needs both."
That's what I said before reading extensively in physics and cosmology and before watching so many charlatans and the honest but misguided people duped by them try to sell Woo-Woo in place of solid science. I wish I had not written the review above, but I'll let it stand as mute warning to be careful of lay interpretations of science. And a Medical Doctor like Dr. Robert Lanza or a New Age/Alternative Medicine guru like Depak Chopra is not a particle physicist. Their pronouncements on quantum mechanics are no more valid than mine would be if I suddenly set out to perform delicate surgery.
It's very true that weird, seemingly mystical things do go on at the tiny scale of the atom where quantum physics operates. It is NOT true, however, that you can scale that quantum weirdness up to the macro level where human beings, planets, galaxies and universes operate, and draw realistic inferences on the parallels between the macro world and Eastern mysticism. Here's a good discussion of the Woo effect and why it should be avoided, provided by British Physicist Dr. Phil Moriarty on the Sixty Symbols Channel on YouTube.
That's what I said before reading extensively in physics and cosmology and before watching so many charlatans and the honest but misguided people duped by them try to sell Woo-Woo in place of solid science. I wish I had not written the review above, but I'll let it stand as mute warning to be careful of lay interpretations of science. And a Medical Doctor like Dr. Robert Lanza or a New Age/Alternative Medicine guru like Depak Chopra is not a particle physicist. Their pronouncements on quantum mechanics are no more valid than mine would be if I suddenly set out to perform delicate surgery.
It's very true that weird, seemingly mystical things do go on at the tiny scale of the atom where quantum physics operates. It is NOT true, however, that you can scale that quantum weirdness up to the macro level where human beings, planets, galaxies and universes operate, and draw realistic inferences on the parallels between the macro world and Eastern mysticism. Here's a good discussion of the Woo effect and why it should be avoided, provided by British Physicist Dr. Phil Moriarty on the Sixty Symbols Channel on YouTube.
July 10, 2020
I have had this book in my possession off and on over the years, ever since I worked for the author, Fritjof Capra, when I lived in Berkeley in the late 70s. I only knew then that he was a physicist, not realizing that there was such a thing as quantum physics, which I was not introduced to until 2000.
Fritjof was a really interesting person, that is, what I knew about him, which wasn’t much since I was only his housekeeper. Cleaning homes was how I got through college.
Seeing his home, I realized that I got the job because I advertised myself as being meticulous. Fritjof was meticulous. And I loved his house. It was a brown shingled one on a street in Berkeley. It was obvious that he loved nature. His hardwood floors were covered with grass mats that were not easy to clean because you had to vacuum under them as dirt fell into the holes in the design. He had photos on the wall of John Lennon and Yoko Ono, then of his doing Tai Chi. On one of his tables he had the I Ching and a book titled How to Meditate. I borrowed the latter book and read it. He gave me a stack of Brain/Mind Bulletins that I loved and wish now that I had kept. I went out and bought my own copy of The Tao of Physics, read the first chapter and decided it was not any book that I could understand. I now see that I was correct.
As to meditation, I took TM back then, paid $350 for it, which I now realize was a ripoff, and I never used it. Still, the few times I had, but only when with my teacher, my mind expanded somewhat, and I found that peaceful, but I also found it interesting that there was another state of consciousness.
I joined the Vedanta Society in early 2000s, and a man named Dave DeLuca came to the temple in San Diego and gave a lecture on The Four Yugas. He had a section in it where he talked about Quantum Physics. Much like Capra’s book, he used the teachings of Quantum theory as a way to compare it with Hinduism. I liked his lecture so much that obtained his lecture and still have it. It wasn’t the comparison to Hinduism that I liked, but the way physicists saw the nature of reality. (I didn’t last in Vedanta, but that is another story.)
I listened again to DeLuca’s lecture to see what I remembered, and to write this in my review as it say, this is why I love quantum physics, even though I don’t understand it.
He began with saying, “All things are temporary manifestations of God.” Then he mentioned the great physicist, Schodinger and Deepak Chopra’s book, Quantum Healing.
Chopra had said that that the molecules that are in us today can be in a tree or another person tomorrow, and the molecules that were in the moon a month ago could be in us today. He stated that this is not figuratively but literally. But much of this was lost on me, but the idea of our molecules flowing in and out of our body was fascinating.
DeLuca, like Capra, spent a somee time on comparing quantum physics with the Upanishads, but Capra also compared it to what Buddha had said about the nature of reality. While I could see what they both were talking about, I was not so sure that it could be applied in such a way because what the Buddha and the Upanishads had said were too vague to me.
Then DeLuca quoted from another quantum physicist, Max Planck:
“I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.”
So what did I get out of reading Capra? Not much. He had some chapters on Hinduism and Buddhism that I understood since I had been in both religions. I saw where he was coming from in regards to his comparisons. But then Capra brought up a vague notion of karma, and I, personally, do not believe in karma. Perhaps the way he sees karma is not the way that it was taught to me by these religions, which end up sounding much like Christianity in that if you do what is wrong you will end up in some hell, and yes, Buddhism and Hinduism both have hells. I think the idea of karma developed over time, as it was not mentioned in the early Vedas that I am aware of, as I had looked, and when it finally was, it was vague. Then one day, a new Upanishad is written and, well, th
ere is hell in all its glory. I
I also really liked what Schodinger said about Consciousness: “There is no framework where we find consciousness in the plural.” And this, to me, says what the Upanishads have said about the nature of reality, “All is one,” and this is what some who have meditated have experienced—
a oneness with all.
Fritjof was a really interesting person, that is, what I knew about him, which wasn’t much since I was only his housekeeper. Cleaning homes was how I got through college.
Seeing his home, I realized that I got the job because I advertised myself as being meticulous. Fritjof was meticulous. And I loved his house. It was a brown shingled one on a street in Berkeley. It was obvious that he loved nature. His hardwood floors were covered with grass mats that were not easy to clean because you had to vacuum under them as dirt fell into the holes in the design. He had photos on the wall of John Lennon and Yoko Ono, then of his doing Tai Chi. On one of his tables he had the I Ching and a book titled How to Meditate. I borrowed the latter book and read it. He gave me a stack of Brain/Mind Bulletins that I loved and wish now that I had kept. I went out and bought my own copy of The Tao of Physics, read the first chapter and decided it was not any book that I could understand. I now see that I was correct.
As to meditation, I took TM back then, paid $350 for it, which I now realize was a ripoff, and I never used it. Still, the few times I had, but only when with my teacher, my mind expanded somewhat, and I found that peaceful, but I also found it interesting that there was another state of consciousness.
I joined the Vedanta Society in early 2000s, and a man named Dave DeLuca came to the temple in San Diego and gave a lecture on The Four Yugas. He had a section in it where he talked about Quantum Physics. Much like Capra’s book, he used the teachings of Quantum theory as a way to compare it with Hinduism. I liked his lecture so much that obtained his lecture and still have it. It wasn’t the comparison to Hinduism that I liked, but the way physicists saw the nature of reality. (I didn’t last in Vedanta, but that is another story.)
I listened again to DeLuca’s lecture to see what I remembered, and to write this in my review as it say, this is why I love quantum physics, even though I don’t understand it.
He began with saying, “All things are temporary manifestations of God.” Then he mentioned the great physicist, Schodinger and Deepak Chopra’s book, Quantum Healing.
Chopra had said that that the molecules that are in us today can be in a tree or another person tomorrow, and the molecules that were in the moon a month ago could be in us today. He stated that this is not figuratively but literally. But much of this was lost on me, but the idea of our molecules flowing in and out of our body was fascinating.
DeLuca, like Capra, spent a somee time on comparing quantum physics with the Upanishads, but Capra also compared it to what Buddha had said about the nature of reality. While I could see what they both were talking about, I was not so sure that it could be applied in such a way because what the Buddha and the Upanishads had said were too vague to me.
Then DeLuca quoted from another quantum physicist, Max Planck:
“I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.”
So what did I get out of reading Capra? Not much. He had some chapters on Hinduism and Buddhism that I understood since I had been in both religions. I saw where he was coming from in regards to his comparisons. But then Capra brought up a vague notion of karma, and I, personally, do not believe in karma. Perhaps the way he sees karma is not the way that it was taught to me by these religions, which end up sounding much like Christianity in that if you do what is wrong you will end up in some hell, and yes, Buddhism and Hinduism both have hells. I think the idea of karma developed over time, as it was not mentioned in the early Vedas that I am aware of, as I had looked, and when it finally was, it was vague. Then one day, a new Upanishad is written and, well, th
ere is hell in all its glory. I
I also really liked what Schodinger said about Consciousness: “There is no framework where we find consciousness in the plural.” And this, to me, says what the Upanishads have said about the nature of reality, “All is one,” and this is what some who have meditated have experienced—
a oneness with all.
May 15, 2009
It is widely recognized, at least by those outside of science, that scientists are notorious bunglers when it comes to philosophical matters. So it is not surprising, though hardly excusable, that Capra's book displays a level of incompetence that should be immediately obvious to anyone with even a cursory background in logic or philosophy. As a matter of fact, it would be surprising if such an unqualified admirer of Taoism, whose writings Capra notes approvingly are "full of passages reflecting the Taoist's contempt of reasoning" (p. 113), should display much in the way of sound reasoning. While I was not especially sympathetic to Capra's thesis even before I read the book, I at least had high hopes for a compelling argument for his case, but that was wishful thinking. The thesis is that the worldviews of Eastern mysticism provide the best framework for understanding modern physics, and that all the advances in physics in the 20th century unanimously confirm these worldviews. However, the picture that emerges is rather one of the utter incompatibility of Eastern mysticism with physics of any kind, classical or modern.
In order to fully appreciate the force of this book, it is important to keep in mind not only the results of physics, but also the scientific endeavor itself. That endeavor consists of an incredibly strenuous exertion of the human rational faculties to uncover truths about reality that we do not know ahead of time, and to systematize the results of investigation into rigorous theories explaining the phenomena. In contrast to this, according to Capra, "all concepts about reality formed by the human mind are void" (p. 97); "the human intellect can never comprehend the Tao" (p. 113); "whenever you want to achieve anything, you should start with its opposite" (p. 115); "words can never express the ultimate truth" (p. 122); "to believe that our abstract concepts of separate 'things' and 'events' are realities of nature is an illusion" (p. 131); the particles of modern physics "are merely idealizations which are useful from a practical point of view, but have no fundamental significance" (p. 137); "all the concepts we use to describe nature . . . are not features of reality, as we tend to believe, but creations of the mind" (p. 161); "the idea of a constant 'self' undergoing successive experiences is an illusion" (p. 212); "all phenomena in the world are nothing but the illusory manifestation of the mind and have no reality on their own . . . what appears to be external does not exist in reality" (p. 277); "ultimately, there are no parts at all in this interconnected web" (p. 330); "there is no absolute truth in science" (p. 337). This collection of quotes does indeed give an excellent picture of the foundation that Eastern mysticism has to offer for science, but is it even possible to think that this view of the world constitutes fertile soil for the scientific enterprise?
A striking feature of many of Capra's central arguments is the profound gulf between his premises and his conclusions, which would be simply laughable if it were not for the fact that so many people stand to be badly led astray. For instance, Capra leaps from Einstein's famous equation E=mc^2 to the most astounding claim in the whole book, that "modern physicists . . . deny the existence of any material substance" (p. 204). Can this be serious? This is the logical equivalent of saying that "magnetism has been discovered to be an aspect of an electromagnetic field, therefore magnetism doesn't exist" or "scientists have discovered that houses are made of wood, therefore houses don't exist". One of Capra's favorite mantras is that modern physics has discovered that material particles "are not distinct entities" (p. 209). Even if we accept for the sake of the argument his repeated confusion of existence and measurability, it is difficult to see how the fact that particles interact, influence each other, and in some cases are even indistinguishable, means that they are not distinct entities.
If it were not enough to repeatedly outrage every principle of sound reasoning, Capra is equally adept at mangling the most profound discoveries of 20th century physics. He dwells at length on Einstein's General Relativity, arguing that it proves that "geometry is not inherent in nature but is imposed upon it by the mind" (p. 162). In actual fact, General Relativity is the scientific rock upon which all the floundering ships in the fleet of subjectivism are dashed. From Einstein we have learned that the true structure of space and time is actually so incredibly foreign to our everyday intuitions that it is not even possible to understand it without the formidable apparatus of non-Euclidean geometry. Capra goes on in the same chapter to give an example that "shows that we can always determine whether a surface is curved or not, just by making geometrical measurements of its surface, and by comparing the results with those predicted by Euclidean geometry. If there is a discrepancy, the surface is curved; and the larger the discrepancy is - for a given size of figures - the stronger the curvature" (p. 176). But what is it that is curved or not? Something created by our mind? Why are we doing an experiment at all if the geometry of space is nothing but a creation of the mind? But a mind sunk in the quagmires of Eastern mysticism cannot readily recognize such an obvious point. In all of science there is nothing more "objective" than Einstein's General Relativity, a fact of which Einstein himself was well aware.
But this discussion brings up another important point. I would like to know, if it is true that in modern physics "cause and effect lose their meaning" (p. 81) how, even in principle, anyone could ever do a scientific experiment in atomic physics. If the answer is that cause and effect are just illusions of the sensory world, then the question remains, how can we ever do a scientific experiment? Whence comes this illusion, and how can it possibly be trusted to be reliable? If the answer is that cause and effect are indeed principles of macroscopic and sensory reality, but that they are not a part of the unseen "ultimate reality" which underlies all the rest, then I ask, from whence arises this lawfulness in sensory reality? How do we build up from the constituents of a reality where cause and effect are meaningless to an observable world where they are no longer meaningless? This constitutes as insurmountable a leap for logic as it does for science.
As the book drags on, Capra continues to weary us with his absurdities. On p. 288 he claims that fundamental constants are "arbitrary parameters". What does this even mean? Is Planck's constant arbitrary? I would like to see Capra replace it with something else. On p. 334 he says that "scientists do not deal with truth (in the sense of a precise correspondence between the description and the described phenomena); they deal with limited and approximate descriptions of reality." This is certainly contradicted by the staggering precision achieved in modern physics, both in theories and experiments, but such a consideration would most likely not intimidate a mind infatuated with contradictions. Such was certainly not the mind of Johannes Kepler, who spent several years of his life working to account for barely a one tenth of one degree of angle disparity between the orbit of Mars and theory, convinced that the human mind, created in the image of a rational God, could precisely learn the truth about the rational creation of that God. How foreign such a mindset must really be to Eastern mystical thought. Would Kepler have undergone such Herculean intellectual exertions had he shared Capra's conviction that he could attain only limited and approximate knowledge, or would he simply have shrugged his shoulders and decided that Ptolemaic astronomy was "close enough"?
But it is least of all to history that we should look for confirmation of Capra's thesis. In the early chapters he blames Aristotle and Christianity for the ensuing "lack of interest in the material world" (p. 22). But what cultures ever displayed a more profound and studious disregard for the material world than the Eastern mystical traditions? And why would they hold in high regard something that is at best a creation of the human mind and at worst a deceptive illusion? On p. 198-199 Capra considers the idea of an oscillating and organic universe, and goes on to say that "the scale of this ancient myth is indeed staggering: it has taken the human mind more than two thousand years to come up again with a similar concept." But on the contrary, it took the human mind so many thousands of years to overcome organismic and oscillatory theories of the universe. These theories were ubiquitous in all the great ancient cultures, from the Egyptian to the Babylonian to the Indian to the Chinese to the Mayan to the Greek, and it was exactly this conception that so effectively stifled the optimistic and rational view of nature that is indispensable for science.
In conclusion, Capra has done a masterful job of presenting the relevance of Eastern mysticism to modern physics, but even a passing consideration readily reveals that this relevance is only the thorough incompatibility of Eastern mysticism with science of any kind. As Western culture steadily abandons rationality and the human ability to know truth, the philosophies of Eastern mysticism do indeed continue to gain credence and ascendance, but to exactly the same extent we will surely witness the decline of science.
In order to fully appreciate the force of this book, it is important to keep in mind not only the results of physics, but also the scientific endeavor itself. That endeavor consists of an incredibly strenuous exertion of the human rational faculties to uncover truths about reality that we do not know ahead of time, and to systematize the results of investigation into rigorous theories explaining the phenomena. In contrast to this, according to Capra, "all concepts about reality formed by the human mind are void" (p. 97); "the human intellect can never comprehend the Tao" (p. 113); "whenever you want to achieve anything, you should start with its opposite" (p. 115); "words can never express the ultimate truth" (p. 122); "to believe that our abstract concepts of separate 'things' and 'events' are realities of nature is an illusion" (p. 131); the particles of modern physics "are merely idealizations which are useful from a practical point of view, but have no fundamental significance" (p. 137); "all the concepts we use to describe nature . . . are not features of reality, as we tend to believe, but creations of the mind" (p. 161); "the idea of a constant 'self' undergoing successive experiences is an illusion" (p. 212); "all phenomena in the world are nothing but the illusory manifestation of the mind and have no reality on their own . . . what appears to be external does not exist in reality" (p. 277); "ultimately, there are no parts at all in this interconnected web" (p. 330); "there is no absolute truth in science" (p. 337). This collection of quotes does indeed give an excellent picture of the foundation that Eastern mysticism has to offer for science, but is it even possible to think that this view of the world constitutes fertile soil for the scientific enterprise?
A striking feature of many of Capra's central arguments is the profound gulf between his premises and his conclusions, which would be simply laughable if it were not for the fact that so many people stand to be badly led astray. For instance, Capra leaps from Einstein's famous equation E=mc^2 to the most astounding claim in the whole book, that "modern physicists . . . deny the existence of any material substance" (p. 204). Can this be serious? This is the logical equivalent of saying that "magnetism has been discovered to be an aspect of an electromagnetic field, therefore magnetism doesn't exist" or "scientists have discovered that houses are made of wood, therefore houses don't exist". One of Capra's favorite mantras is that modern physics has discovered that material particles "are not distinct entities" (p. 209). Even if we accept for the sake of the argument his repeated confusion of existence and measurability, it is difficult to see how the fact that particles interact, influence each other, and in some cases are even indistinguishable, means that they are not distinct entities.
If it were not enough to repeatedly outrage every principle of sound reasoning, Capra is equally adept at mangling the most profound discoveries of 20th century physics. He dwells at length on Einstein's General Relativity, arguing that it proves that "geometry is not inherent in nature but is imposed upon it by the mind" (p. 162). In actual fact, General Relativity is the scientific rock upon which all the floundering ships in the fleet of subjectivism are dashed. From Einstein we have learned that the true structure of space and time is actually so incredibly foreign to our everyday intuitions that it is not even possible to understand it without the formidable apparatus of non-Euclidean geometry. Capra goes on in the same chapter to give an example that "shows that we can always determine whether a surface is curved or not, just by making geometrical measurements of its surface, and by comparing the results with those predicted by Euclidean geometry. If there is a discrepancy, the surface is curved; and the larger the discrepancy is - for a given size of figures - the stronger the curvature" (p. 176). But what is it that is curved or not? Something created by our mind? Why are we doing an experiment at all if the geometry of space is nothing but a creation of the mind? But a mind sunk in the quagmires of Eastern mysticism cannot readily recognize such an obvious point. In all of science there is nothing more "objective" than Einstein's General Relativity, a fact of which Einstein himself was well aware.
But this discussion brings up another important point. I would like to know, if it is true that in modern physics "cause and effect lose their meaning" (p. 81) how, even in principle, anyone could ever do a scientific experiment in atomic physics. If the answer is that cause and effect are just illusions of the sensory world, then the question remains, how can we ever do a scientific experiment? Whence comes this illusion, and how can it possibly be trusted to be reliable? If the answer is that cause and effect are indeed principles of macroscopic and sensory reality, but that they are not a part of the unseen "ultimate reality" which underlies all the rest, then I ask, from whence arises this lawfulness in sensory reality? How do we build up from the constituents of a reality where cause and effect are meaningless to an observable world where they are no longer meaningless? This constitutes as insurmountable a leap for logic as it does for science.
As the book drags on, Capra continues to weary us with his absurdities. On p. 288 he claims that fundamental constants are "arbitrary parameters". What does this even mean? Is Planck's constant arbitrary? I would like to see Capra replace it with something else. On p. 334 he says that "scientists do not deal with truth (in the sense of a precise correspondence between the description and the described phenomena); they deal with limited and approximate descriptions of reality." This is certainly contradicted by the staggering precision achieved in modern physics, both in theories and experiments, but such a consideration would most likely not intimidate a mind infatuated with contradictions. Such was certainly not the mind of Johannes Kepler, who spent several years of his life working to account for barely a one tenth of one degree of angle disparity between the orbit of Mars and theory, convinced that the human mind, created in the image of a rational God, could precisely learn the truth about the rational creation of that God. How foreign such a mindset must really be to Eastern mystical thought. Would Kepler have undergone such Herculean intellectual exertions had he shared Capra's conviction that he could attain only limited and approximate knowledge, or would he simply have shrugged his shoulders and decided that Ptolemaic astronomy was "close enough"?
But it is least of all to history that we should look for confirmation of Capra's thesis. In the early chapters he blames Aristotle and Christianity for the ensuing "lack of interest in the material world" (p. 22). But what cultures ever displayed a more profound and studious disregard for the material world than the Eastern mystical traditions? And why would they hold in high regard something that is at best a creation of the human mind and at worst a deceptive illusion? On p. 198-199 Capra considers the idea of an oscillating and organic universe, and goes on to say that "the scale of this ancient myth is indeed staggering: it has taken the human mind more than two thousand years to come up again with a similar concept." But on the contrary, it took the human mind so many thousands of years to overcome organismic and oscillatory theories of the universe. These theories were ubiquitous in all the great ancient cultures, from the Egyptian to the Babylonian to the Indian to the Chinese to the Mayan to the Greek, and it was exactly this conception that so effectively stifled the optimistic and rational view of nature that is indispensable for science.
In conclusion, Capra has done a masterful job of presenting the relevance of Eastern mysticism to modern physics, but even a passing consideration readily reveals that this relevance is only the thorough incompatibility of Eastern mysticism with science of any kind. As Western culture steadily abandons rationality and the human ability to know truth, the philosophies of Eastern mysticism do indeed continue to gain credence and ascendance, but to exactly the same extent we will surely witness the decline of science.
April 7, 2015
Ok so I have a small confession to make. I think I might be overrating books. Or at least it looks like it from other reviews I recently read. I usually read them after rating the books myself but sometimes I go the other way around. Today is one of those days.
I must say I find it harder to criticize a bad non–fiction book than a bad novel. And that could be because, first of all, with non–fiction books it's hardly a matter of writing style (unless it's a really good book or a really bad one) and second of all I'm easily amazed by the knowledge I acquire on things I had no previous idea of.
Having said that, I really liked this book. As the book title itself states it's about drawing parallels between modern physics and eastern beliefs. Let me just say: there's actually a lot to talk about, more than I would have imagined. It gives a nice overview on eastern cultures and on those physical phenomena that can be linked to them. I thought it a really interestingly mind–blowing idea I then discovered being already largely discussed in the physics world, with a lot of actual physicists having studied eastern philosophies and all.
This book does a good job in underlining similarities between very different culture fields, something I've always found amazingly fascinating.
I would recommend it to anyone who is always been curious of eastern cultures but never fulfilled that curiosity.
I must say I find it harder to criticize a bad non–fiction book than a bad novel. And that could be because, first of all, with non–fiction books it's hardly a matter of writing style (unless it's a really good book or a really bad one) and second of all I'm easily amazed by the knowledge I acquire on things I had no previous idea of.
Having said that, I really liked this book. As the book title itself states it's about drawing parallels between modern physics and eastern beliefs. Let me just say: there's actually a lot to talk about, more than I would have imagined. It gives a nice overview on eastern cultures and on those physical phenomena that can be linked to them. I thought it a really interestingly mind–blowing idea I then discovered being already largely discussed in the physics world, with a lot of actual physicists having studied eastern philosophies and all.
This book does a good job in underlining similarities between very different culture fields, something I've always found amazingly fascinating.
I would recommend it to anyone who is always been curious of eastern cultures but never fulfilled that curiosity.
December 20, 2019
Summary: A seminal piece that has been going on for 35 editions at this point. You kind of have to read it. I liked lots of it and now better understand the hubbub. Left me wondering if its that we see what we want to see.
Whether or not you'll like vs. love this book has to do with i) where you are spiritually, ii) how much you know about eastern culture and religion, iii) how much you know about science, and iv) what you've been taught all along.
For me, I grew up in the States, but in the South. Additionally, I come from dual cultures and a heavy science background (I knew about/could name quarks definitely by age 12 and that was in the 80s). As a result, this book is better for me as an appreciation for what is confusing.
Here's the thing.... if you're pure western, there is this idea of a split between science and nature, It's crazy. Now it seems like that is not the thing with this book, but when you think to self, all of Eastern Philosophy is nature-based, i.e. it grew out of Animalism, which was worship of nature (although it was later poorly named, so people think its about animal sacrifice). Ok, and Physics... the idea that it is somehow divorced from nature... is fascinating. And I can get that, b/c a lot of physics moves a person toward machines. But you know, like patterns that derive from patterns even in randomness are still, not patterns... a la mandelbrott, but whatevs...
Ok, so that's my quick summary of the point of this book, here's the stuff I wanna keep in the way of quotes.
P. 27 there is a concept of relative knowledge that Capra draws as a parallel to relativity. The rest of the chapter goes through all the implications and how this has been determined through science. It's highly relevant in today's time of data centrism. But it also means that there are multiple realities of which all can be right. Think to watch a train from a stationary point vs moving train stuff. I'm down.
P. 45. I love the two quotes by D.T. Suzuki and W. Heisenberg on Language. Very powerful for today's world of NLP. I think people have to remember that words are imperfect communication devices. He talks about the precision of math language vs. what we then translate that to verbally. I mean, I think it actually goes vice versa as well, but all good.
P. 51 I like how he ends this chapter. He's like.. dude... physics is about stuff that is so small you can't see it. So you are past your ability to sense stuff. His point it turns out that when you get outside of sensation, you enter the philosophical. Well, his idea is the more you do that in science you find at peace with Eastern religion. Curious, no?
P. 68, he talks about the fact that matter is actually waves. We kind of know this in the equation E-mc^2, but people don't really think about the implications philosophically. If it is not matter that separates us from other things, what is it? He then takes it into this concept of we are all one. He needs a few more chapters to let that run. For friends that can handle it, I have talked about this relationship between your energy and your physical being. A lot of the meditation and monks think in these terms. Understanding what it means to own you power/energy and transcend your physical limitations is the work of the next few decades for sure. But it's not stated here.
P. 87-88. I really know nothing of Hinduism and must read the Vedas. Karma, I have studied a bit, but Maya I know donut but love it. The idea is that we are in a state of Maya, which people translate into illusion, but it's imperfect. Maya is this kind of fixed reality viewpoint mentioned at an earlier point in the book. Karma is not so much good or bad, as it's a force that we move with or against. (This I'm inspired to read the vedas to better understand). The deal is that because of Maya we move against karma. But we need to evolve and understand the two and then become one with karma/nature. I seriously dig that way of thinking...
P. 95.... He reviews all of Buddha's noble truths. There are 4. I never thought about how nice it is just to have 4 truths and to study the heck out of them. I think of the 4 as 1) suffering is the deal 2) it sucks 3) you have the power and are the source of suffering 4) enlightenment ... not easy, but it's how you end the suffering. His set us is for late as we shift from a very specific view and purpose of science to this other thing, which we're already seeing. Like... we're def in stage 3, we know that we're killing this earth and poisoning each other via a non-gmo/pesticides/etc food supply. It's just trying to figure out the path out of it. very cool.
P. 109. It's like fate threw this book in my path. I was watching The Man in the High Castle and I was trying to remember why in the plot she was looking at ba gua looking hexagrams (spoiler .. sorry). Well dude.. it's right here. She was referencing the Book of Changes. Sooo adding that to the reading list.
P. 117... he talks about non-action in the context of Daoism. I'll just quote: "Non-action does not mean doing nothing and keeping silent. Let everything be allowed to do what it naturally does, so that its nature will be satisfied."
I love this. It's basically saying: dude... don't push stuff. Nature doesn't push, it just is. It moves around stuff happens. Things evolve. Enjoy the show, man. So difficult to embrace in modern society.
P. 142 - He talks about the idea in the Tao that a duality is a weird form of unity (for lack of a better way to see it) because we are seeing the other that actually doesn't exist. This is kind of like extreme quantum physics... so yeah... I kinda see it... profound Capra. I get that you're into the whole unified theory thing.
P. 163 he talks about how in Buddhism space and times are constructs vs the Western world where they are concrete things. Capra full props on that. You're right. That does make the whole relativity, time as a 4th dimension thing way easier for Eastern minds.
P. 194 he quotes the Tao which says stuff like: The Stillness in Stillness is not real stillness. In the context of science that is SUPER true. I mean we are all these crazy waves and matter is just energy captured at a particular frequency, so yeah dude... Tao said it like it is.
P. 204 He talks about samsara and the way that Buddhists experience an object as an event rather than an object. Our experience of it is something that happens at a place and time. I kinda dig this in a major way as I am also a minimalist... and this take it to a whole other level if you think of a profound tie of this nature (science, philosophy, religion).
p. 241, more iteration of the electrons looking more like a dance than a wave or an actual particle. This idea that movement in a particular time is all you got.
P. 296 he talks about hadrons and this I really did not know. I mean, when you study waves, you thnk ... oh, it looks like a wave. But actually the wave is a physical probabilistic diagram. For Hadron particles that's the deal. I got to incorporate this into my meditation. I think I am constrained by the concept of waves that I have in my head.
p. 311 this is where it becomes so much more clear why he's saying stuff early on about words not being able to describe stuff after we split it past the point of being able to sense it with our main senses. I did not know about this whole Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment aka EPR that disproved that all these different theories just need to be connected. Basically, this dude David Bohm is like.. good try but that's not how stuff behaves. So like, b/c this stuff has no matter and that our concept of object is flawed b/c we don't quite get that time and space deal means that, the idea that any particle spins on its axis is missing the point. The point is that there is no axis or at least one with enough permanence to give any kind of credence to that sort of silliness. Props dude... that must have been really hard to get to.
P. 325 This is the after part and I dig it. He talks about the way we go about solving problems in such a 1D light, when they are all part of this complex system flow. Oh man... it's so hard to talk to people in these terms. They get overwhelmed, but you are so right. good to hear the frustration at articulation so I can appreciate how you've evolved the way you think/talk about it.
I guess my only deal with the book is that you can fit anything into anything else. So both science and the tao come from a study of nature. So are we just using the rich language of the tao or is this really reality... I guess the point of the book is we can't really know.
Whether or not you'll like vs. love this book has to do with i) where you are spiritually, ii) how much you know about eastern culture and religion, iii) how much you know about science, and iv) what you've been taught all along.
For me, I grew up in the States, but in the South. Additionally, I come from dual cultures and a heavy science background (I knew about/could name quarks definitely by age 12 and that was in the 80s). As a result, this book is better for me as an appreciation for what is confusing.
Here's the thing.... if you're pure western, there is this idea of a split between science and nature, It's crazy. Now it seems like that is not the thing with this book, but when you think to self, all of Eastern Philosophy is nature-based, i.e. it grew out of Animalism, which was worship of nature (although it was later poorly named, so people think its about animal sacrifice). Ok, and Physics... the idea that it is somehow divorced from nature... is fascinating. And I can get that, b/c a lot of physics moves a person toward machines. But you know, like patterns that derive from patterns even in randomness are still, not patterns... a la mandelbrott, but whatevs...
Ok, so that's my quick summary of the point of this book, here's the stuff I wanna keep in the way of quotes.
P. 27 there is a concept of relative knowledge that Capra draws as a parallel to relativity. The rest of the chapter goes through all the implications and how this has been determined through science. It's highly relevant in today's time of data centrism. But it also means that there are multiple realities of which all can be right. Think to watch a train from a stationary point vs moving train stuff. I'm down.
P. 45. I love the two quotes by D.T. Suzuki and W. Heisenberg on Language. Very powerful for today's world of NLP. I think people have to remember that words are imperfect communication devices. He talks about the precision of math language vs. what we then translate that to verbally. I mean, I think it actually goes vice versa as well, but all good.
P. 51 I like how he ends this chapter. He's like.. dude... physics is about stuff that is so small you can't see it. So you are past your ability to sense stuff. His point it turns out that when you get outside of sensation, you enter the philosophical. Well, his idea is the more you do that in science you find at peace with Eastern religion. Curious, no?
P. 68, he talks about the fact that matter is actually waves. We kind of know this in the equation E-mc^2, but people don't really think about the implications philosophically. If it is not matter that separates us from other things, what is it? He then takes it into this concept of we are all one. He needs a few more chapters to let that run. For friends that can handle it, I have talked about this relationship between your energy and your physical being. A lot of the meditation and monks think in these terms. Understanding what it means to own you power/energy and transcend your physical limitations is the work of the next few decades for sure. But it's not stated here.
P. 87-88. I really know nothing of Hinduism and must read the Vedas. Karma, I have studied a bit, but Maya I know donut but love it. The idea is that we are in a state of Maya, which people translate into illusion, but it's imperfect. Maya is this kind of fixed reality viewpoint mentioned at an earlier point in the book. Karma is not so much good or bad, as it's a force that we move with or against. (This I'm inspired to read the vedas to better understand). The deal is that because of Maya we move against karma. But we need to evolve and understand the two and then become one with karma/nature. I seriously dig that way of thinking...
P. 95.... He reviews all of Buddha's noble truths. There are 4. I never thought about how nice it is just to have 4 truths and to study the heck out of them. I think of the 4 as 1) suffering is the deal 2) it sucks 3) you have the power and are the source of suffering 4) enlightenment ... not easy, but it's how you end the suffering. His set us is for late as we shift from a very specific view and purpose of science to this other thing, which we're already seeing. Like... we're def in stage 3, we know that we're killing this earth and poisoning each other via a non-gmo/pesticides/etc food supply. It's just trying to figure out the path out of it. very cool.
P. 109. It's like fate threw this book in my path. I was watching The Man in the High Castle and I was trying to remember why in the plot she was looking at ba gua looking hexagrams (spoiler .. sorry). Well dude.. it's right here. She was referencing the Book of Changes. Sooo adding that to the reading list.
P. 117... he talks about non-action in the context of Daoism. I'll just quote: "Non-action does not mean doing nothing and keeping silent. Let everything be allowed to do what it naturally does, so that its nature will be satisfied."
I love this. It's basically saying: dude... don't push stuff. Nature doesn't push, it just is. It moves around stuff happens. Things evolve. Enjoy the show, man. So difficult to embrace in modern society.
P. 142 - He talks about the idea in the Tao that a duality is a weird form of unity (for lack of a better way to see it) because we are seeing the other that actually doesn't exist. This is kind of like extreme quantum physics... so yeah... I kinda see it... profound Capra. I get that you're into the whole unified theory thing.
P. 163 he talks about how in Buddhism space and times are constructs vs the Western world where they are concrete things. Capra full props on that. You're right. That does make the whole relativity, time as a 4th dimension thing way easier for Eastern minds.
P. 194 he quotes the Tao which says stuff like: The Stillness in Stillness is not real stillness. In the context of science that is SUPER true. I mean we are all these crazy waves and matter is just energy captured at a particular frequency, so yeah dude... Tao said it like it is.
P. 204 He talks about samsara and the way that Buddhists experience an object as an event rather than an object. Our experience of it is something that happens at a place and time. I kinda dig this in a major way as I am also a minimalist... and this take it to a whole other level if you think of a profound tie of this nature (science, philosophy, religion).
p. 241, more iteration of the electrons looking more like a dance than a wave or an actual particle. This idea that movement in a particular time is all you got.
P. 296 he talks about hadrons and this I really did not know. I mean, when you study waves, you thnk ... oh, it looks like a wave. But actually the wave is a physical probabilistic diagram. For Hadron particles that's the deal. I got to incorporate this into my meditation. I think I am constrained by the concept of waves that I have in my head.
p. 311 this is where it becomes so much more clear why he's saying stuff early on about words not being able to describe stuff after we split it past the point of being able to sense it with our main senses. I did not know about this whole Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment aka EPR that disproved that all these different theories just need to be connected. Basically, this dude David Bohm is like.. good try but that's not how stuff behaves. So like, b/c this stuff has no matter and that our concept of object is flawed b/c we don't quite get that time and space deal means that, the idea that any particle spins on its axis is missing the point. The point is that there is no axis or at least one with enough permanence to give any kind of credence to that sort of silliness. Props dude... that must have been really hard to get to.
P. 325 This is the after part and I dig it. He talks about the way we go about solving problems in such a 1D light, when they are all part of this complex system flow. Oh man... it's so hard to talk to people in these terms. They get overwhelmed, but you are so right. good to hear the frustration at articulation so I can appreciate how you've evolved the way you think/talk about it.
I guess my only deal with the book is that you can fit anything into anything else. So both science and the tao come from a study of nature. So are we just using the rich language of the tao or is this really reality... I guess the point of the book is we can't really know.
July 31, 2015
I bought this book some 7 years ago, when I was fifteen. At the time I was getting increasingly interested in physics, and at the same time Buddhism. Unfortunately, I also read another book around this time called 'What The Bleep Do We Know?' which turned out to be nothing but 'quantum woo' - that is, pretending that quantum mechanics is all kinds of things that it simply isn't. I decided that The Tao Of Physics is probably something similar and it's been collecting dust on my shelf ever since.
Reading this book, though, I realised that this isn't really what this book is. Sure, there are legitimate criticisms to be made here. For example, some of the similarities are superficial at best. The part that really struck me as overly silly is this part right before section III of the book. On the left page you see, essentially, some scribbled math equations. On the right page you see some Hindu scriptures. I mean, come on! This means absolutely nothing. Another serious criticism has come from Peter Woit, about the fact that Capra uses (and continued to use) the bootstrap theory:
'The Tao of Physics was completed in December 1974, and the implications of the November Revolution one month earlier that led to the dramatic confirmations of the standard-model quantum field theory clearly had not sunk in for Capra (like many others at that time). What is harder to understand is that the book has now gone through several editions, and in each of them Capra has left intact the now out-of-date physics, including new forewords and afterwords that with a straight face deny what has happened. The foreword to the second edition of 1983 claims, "It has been very gratifying for me that none of these recent developments has invalidated anything I wrote seven years ago. In fact, most of them were anticipated in the original edition," a statement far from any relation to the reality that in 1983 the standard model was nearly universally accepted in the physics community, and the bootstrap theory was a dead idea ... Even now, Capra's book, with its nutty denials of what has happened in particle theory, can be found selling well at every major bookstore. It has been joined by some other books on the same topic, most notably Gary Zukav's The Dancing Wu-Li Masters. The bootstrap philosophy, despite its complete failure as a physical theory, lives on as part of an embarrassing New Age cult, with its followers refusing to acknowledge what has happened.'
Although this is a valid criticism, it ignores the biggest part of the book. In the first half of the book Capra simply discusses the similarities in thought between these two distinctly different ways of thinking - an intuitive and 'spiritual' way contra the empirical and rational way of science. He doesn't imply that there is something mystical about quantum mechanics, nor does he pull any New Age-trickery trying to fool you in the way that Deepak Chopra might. For the most part in this book Capra is simply looking at the interesting similarities between these two ways of thinking - and they are striking. It's not like Capra is the first physicist to notice this. Capra uses a lot of quotes in this book (from scientists and religious figures), and here are three interesting ones:
"The general notions about human understanding...which are illustrated by discoveries in atomic physics are not in the nature of things wholly unfamiliar, wholly unheard of, or new. Even in our own culture they have a history, and in Buddhist and Hindu thought a more considerable and central place. What we shall find is an exemplification, and encouragement, and a refinement of old wisdom." Robert Oppenheimer, 1954.
"For a parallel to the lesson of atomic theory...[we must turn] to those kinds of epistemological problems with which already thinkers like the Buddha and Lao Tzu have been confronted, when trying to harmonize our position as spectators and actors in the great drama of existence." Niels Bohr, 1958
"The great scientific contribution in theoretical physics that has come from Japan since the last war may be an indication of a certain relationship between philosophical ideas in the tradition of the Far East and the philosophical substance of quantum theory." Werner Heisenberg, 1958
And here is a picture of Niels Bohr's coat-of-arms, featuring the yin-yang symbol and the words 'contraria sunt complementa,' meaning 'opposites are complementary.'
At the end of the day I simply think about this book as an interesting musing on different ways of thinking about the world and different ways of getting to answers,and some of those answers happened (by complete chance; there is so mystical connection implied here!) to be correct - or at least in the same ballpark! To me, it also underscores what a spriritual endeavour science potentially can be.
Reading this book, though, I realised that this isn't really what this book is. Sure, there are legitimate criticisms to be made here. For example, some of the similarities are superficial at best. The part that really struck me as overly silly is this part right before section III of the book. On the left page you see, essentially, some scribbled math equations. On the right page you see some Hindu scriptures. I mean, come on! This means absolutely nothing. Another serious criticism has come from Peter Woit, about the fact that Capra uses (and continued to use) the bootstrap theory:
'The Tao of Physics was completed in December 1974, and the implications of the November Revolution one month earlier that led to the dramatic confirmations of the standard-model quantum field theory clearly had not sunk in for Capra (like many others at that time). What is harder to understand is that the book has now gone through several editions, and in each of them Capra has left intact the now out-of-date physics, including new forewords and afterwords that with a straight face deny what has happened. The foreword to the second edition of 1983 claims, "It has been very gratifying for me that none of these recent developments has invalidated anything I wrote seven years ago. In fact, most of them were anticipated in the original edition," a statement far from any relation to the reality that in 1983 the standard model was nearly universally accepted in the physics community, and the bootstrap theory was a dead idea ... Even now, Capra's book, with its nutty denials of what has happened in particle theory, can be found selling well at every major bookstore. It has been joined by some other books on the same topic, most notably Gary Zukav's The Dancing Wu-Li Masters. The bootstrap philosophy, despite its complete failure as a physical theory, lives on as part of an embarrassing New Age cult, with its followers refusing to acknowledge what has happened.'
Although this is a valid criticism, it ignores the biggest part of the book. In the first half of the book Capra simply discusses the similarities in thought between these two distinctly different ways of thinking - an intuitive and 'spiritual' way contra the empirical and rational way of science. He doesn't imply that there is something mystical about quantum mechanics, nor does he pull any New Age-trickery trying to fool you in the way that Deepak Chopra might. For the most part in this book Capra is simply looking at the interesting similarities between these two ways of thinking - and they are striking. It's not like Capra is the first physicist to notice this. Capra uses a lot of quotes in this book (from scientists and religious figures), and here are three interesting ones:
"The general notions about human understanding...which are illustrated by discoveries in atomic physics are not in the nature of things wholly unfamiliar, wholly unheard of, or new. Even in our own culture they have a history, and in Buddhist and Hindu thought a more considerable and central place. What we shall find is an exemplification, and encouragement, and a refinement of old wisdom." Robert Oppenheimer, 1954.
"For a parallel to the lesson of atomic theory...[we must turn] to those kinds of epistemological problems with which already thinkers like the Buddha and Lao Tzu have been confronted, when trying to harmonize our position as spectators and actors in the great drama of existence." Niels Bohr, 1958
"The great scientific contribution in theoretical physics that has come from Japan since the last war may be an indication of a certain relationship between philosophical ideas in the tradition of the Far East and the philosophical substance of quantum theory." Werner Heisenberg, 1958
And here is a picture of Niels Bohr's coat-of-arms, featuring the yin-yang symbol and the words 'contraria sunt complementa,' meaning 'opposites are complementary.'
At the end of the day I simply think about this book as an interesting musing on different ways of thinking about the world and different ways of getting to answers,and some of those answers happened (by complete chance; there is so mystical connection implied here!) to be correct - or at least in the same ballpark! To me, it also underscores what a spriritual endeavour science potentially can be.
April 2, 2012
Well, this is my first one star on good reads, that means this book was even worse than the Third Hunger Games book.
The main reason for the one star is just my complete disappointment in this book. I went in to reading 'The Tao fo Physics' expecting to find something that correlated elements of quantum mechanics to the insights of Eastern mysticism and philosophy (which I feel was a reasonable expectation). However, what I found was an author who not only was dull but founded his 'correlations' on the beliefs of famous physicists and philosophers. For a good 1/3 of the book, you, the reader, are submitted to a quote by Einstein (or insert another well known physicist name here) and then a quote by the Buddha (or insert another philosopher, unknown or known here) and Capra going, "see they are saying the same thing!!". Nothing irks me more than this in nonfiction books about physics that target the general public - why have my own beliefs or both explaining things when I can say this landmark figure said this at some point (whether it be in context or not) and therefore it must be true. Ironically, the one thing I really do feel Eastern mysticism and physics have in common are that both demand that if you seek more knowledge, you must always question everything and through this incessant questioning, you begin to gain understanding. Our author here could use a little more of that in his writing ability.
I have very little positive to say about this book unfortunately. I learned a little bit more about Eastern philosophies than I knew, but I feel like there are other books out there that could have conveyed the information Capra tries to present more effectively. I really would not recommend this book to anyone - I fell asleep ~20 times reading this book (no joke, even when I wasn't tired this book put me to sleep), I feel like I gained very little knowledge or understanding from this book, and at some points, it was painfully banal to read. Capra is not good at explaining physics, Eastern mysticism, and certainly not the link between the two.
The main reason for the one star is just my complete disappointment in this book. I went in to reading 'The Tao fo Physics' expecting to find something that correlated elements of quantum mechanics to the insights of Eastern mysticism and philosophy (which I feel was a reasonable expectation). However, what I found was an author who not only was dull but founded his 'correlations' on the beliefs of famous physicists and philosophers. For a good 1/3 of the book, you, the reader, are submitted to a quote by Einstein (or insert another well known physicist name here) and then a quote by the Buddha (or insert another philosopher, unknown or known here) and Capra going, "see they are saying the same thing!!". Nothing irks me more than this in nonfiction books about physics that target the general public - why have my own beliefs or both explaining things when I can say this landmark figure said this at some point (whether it be in context or not) and therefore it must be true. Ironically, the one thing I really do feel Eastern mysticism and physics have in common are that both demand that if you seek more knowledge, you must always question everything and through this incessant questioning, you begin to gain understanding. Our author here could use a little more of that in his writing ability.
I have very little positive to say about this book unfortunately. I learned a little bit more about Eastern philosophies than I knew, but I feel like there are other books out there that could have conveyed the information Capra tries to present more effectively. I really would not recommend this book to anyone - I fell asleep ~20 times reading this book (no joke, even when I wasn't tired this book put me to sleep), I feel like I gained very little knowledge or understanding from this book, and at some points, it was painfully banal to read. Capra is not good at explaining physics, Eastern mysticism, and certainly not the link between the two.
May 5, 2020
Eastern philosophy is not a singular concept - it consists of many schools of thought; some of which the author has conveniently cherry-picked and force fit to draw parallels with Quantum Physics.
Truth be told, the book neither has literary merit, nor does it present any groundbreakingly profound idea. There is a pretence of the latter, but anyone with some familiarity with the field of philosophy will see right through it. The only merit in the book, if one is to force himself to find one, is to see how an author can paraphrase a simple idea again and again, hiding it under the guise of different metaphors and clothing it in different phrases, and make a whole book out of it. To see this, one would have suspend the idea that the author's intent matters at all, and and then appreciate the fact that Fritjof Capra has produced a tribute to Queneau's Exercises in Style, albeit accidentally.
As a matter of fact, I can reproduce the whole book here - and save you the time and expense. Here it is:
Nature/ environment/ the territory/features of reality/heaven and earth/the universe/material world/matter
IS NOT passive/inert/in static equilibrium/still, BUT IS dancing/dynamic/moves/in vibrating motion with rhythmic patterns/ceaseless motion. Notions of Space and Time are merely constructs of the mind/forms of thought/maps of reality/limited/illusory/relative/ intellectual constructs/moh-maya/exist in relation to our "particularising consciousness"/ belong to the realm of experience. And modern physics agrees.
Truth be told, the book neither has literary merit, nor does it present any groundbreakingly profound idea. There is a pretence of the latter, but anyone with some familiarity with the field of philosophy will see right through it. The only merit in the book, if one is to force himself to find one, is to see how an author can paraphrase a simple idea again and again, hiding it under the guise of different metaphors and clothing it in different phrases, and make a whole book out of it. To see this, one would have suspend the idea that the author's intent matters at all, and and then appreciate the fact that Fritjof Capra has produced a tribute to Queneau's Exercises in Style, albeit accidentally.
As a matter of fact, I can reproduce the whole book here - and save you the time and expense. Here it is:
Nature/ environment/ the territory/features of reality/heaven and earth/the universe/material world/matter
IS NOT passive/inert/in static equilibrium/still, BUT IS dancing/dynamic/moves/in vibrating motion with rhythmic patterns/ceaseless motion. Notions of Space and Time are merely constructs of the mind/forms of thought/maps of reality/limited/illusory/relative/ intellectual constructs/moh-maya/exist in relation to our "particularising consciousness"/ belong to the realm of experience. And modern physics agrees.
September 27, 2022
This book has left me speechless.
It made me question and reassess everything.
Although short, I could only take small bites of it and need some time off for reflection to be able to stomach it.
Please go right ahead with confidence and give it a read or a listen.
Keep an open mind the entire way through.
A definite reread, relisten and addition to personal library for me.
It made me question and reassess everything.
Although short, I could only take small bites of it and need some time off for reflection to be able to stomach it.
Please go right ahead with confidence and give it a read or a listen.
Keep an open mind the entire way through.
A definite reread, relisten and addition to personal library for me.
July 14, 2016
«Τα αντίθετα είναι συμπληρωματικά», ισχυρίζεται η σύγχρονη φυσική και αυτό έχει πυροδοτήσει μια σχολή επιστημόνων και μη, οι οποίοι προσπαθούν να αναλύσουν τη φιλοσοφία που προκύπτει πίσω από την επιστημονική θεωρία. Πολλοί προχωρούν ακόμα παραπέρα και προσπαθούν να τη συνδέσουν με φιλοσοφικές ή θρησκευτικές τάσεις που ήδη επικρατούσαν στην ανθρωπότητα, ενώ ταυτόχρονα επιδιώκουν να «φτιάξουν» παράξενες ερμηνείες – αποτελέσματα, χαρακτηριστικότερες των οποίων είναι οι τηλεοπτικές σειρές, όπου στρεβλώνεται ο χώρος, ο χρόνος, η αιτιότητα, η επαναληψιμότητα και ώρες ώρες η ίδια η λογική.
Στο παρόν βιβλίο, ο συγγραφέας, θεωρητικός φυσικός σε κορυφαία πανεπιστήμια των ΗΠΑ (είναι Αυστριακός και όχι από κάποια ανατολική χώρα όπως νόμιζα αρχικά) προσπαθεί να συνδέσει αυτή τη φιλοσοφία με τις διδασκαλίες των ανατολικών θρησκειών (Ινδουισμός, Βουδισμός, Ταοϊσμός, Ζεν). Η προσπάθεια είναι άκρως αξιόλογη και το βιβλίο προτείνεται στους λάτρεις αυτού του είδους (το είδος είναι κάτι σαν science – religion – spirituality). Ο συγγραφέας γνωρίζει και τα δυο κομμάτια (θρησκεία και επιστήμη) που αναφέρει και τα συνδέει όμορφα μεταξύ τους, χωρίς να κάνει κατήχηση (στις ανατολικές θρησκείες εξάλλου αυτό δεν συνηθίζεται) αλλά και χωρίς να γίνεται γραφικός. Δεν περιλαμβάνονται μαθηματικά, οπότε τα κεφάλαια της φυσικής μπορεί να τα διαβάσει και να τα κατανοήσει ο καθένας, οι των θετικών σπουδών φυσικά θα τα βρουν πιο εύκολα.
Το βασικό αξίωμα του βιβλίου είναι ότι με βάση τη κβαντομηχανική και την κατάρρευση της αιτιότητας, πλέον το καθετί γίνεται αντιληπτό μέσα από την αλληλεπίδρασή του με το Σύμπαν. Πλέον δεν υπάρχει καμία απόλυτη αλήθεια για τα πράγματα, παρά όλα εκδηλώνονται ανάλογα με την περίσταση. Το Σύμπαν αποτελεί μια ολότητα και ένα κομμάτι αυτής της ολότητας παρακολουθούμε, με την έκφανση που αποφασίζεται κάθε φορά, ανάλογα με τις συνθήκες. Κάθε υποατομικό σωματίδιο είναι ένας ενεργειακός χορός, σαν αυτό που χορεύουν διαρκώς ο Κρίσνα, ο Βούδας και οι λοιποί θεοί, οι οποίοι είναι ένας θεός, με διαφορετικές εκφάνσεις – εμφανίσεις κάθε φορά (ας με συγχωρέσουν οι οπαδοί των θρησκειών αυτών, το βιβλίο το διάβασα πριν πολλά χρόνια και δεν θυμάμαι καλά τις διδαχές των θρησκειών). Ενέργεια – ύλη, σωματίδιο – κύμα, κίνηση – ακινησία, ύπαρξη – ανυπαρξία, όλα είναι έννοιες που από μόνες τους δεν έχουν καμία σημασία, παρά μόνο σε σχέση με το πώς τις αντιλαμβανόμαστε εμείς. Έτσι, από τη στιγμή που θα στρέψουμε τα μάτια μας σε μια έννοια, τα στρέφουμε απευθείας και στην αντίθετή της, όπως ακριβώς διδάσκουν και οι Ανατολίτες δάσκαλοι.
Οι ανατολικοί μυστικιστές θεωρούν τις έννοιες του χώρου και του χρόνου σαν ιδιαίτερες συνειδησιακές καταστάσεις. Οι έννοιες γιν και γιαγκ – αν και αντίθετες – θεωρούνται συμπληρωματικές, συνθέτουν τη βάση της κινέζικης σκέψης και όλη την ουσία του κόσμου. Η κβαντομηχανική, από την άλλη, περιγράφει τον κόσμο με πιθανότητες και μόνο αφού εκδηλωθεί μια κατάσταση μπορεί να περιγράψει τι έγινε τελικά (αν και όχι γιατί έγινε, παρά μόνο πώς έγινε και πόσο πιθανό ήταν να συμβεί).
Το βιβλίο είναι γεμάτο με θέματα που ιντριγκάρουν και ενδιαφέρουν τον κόσμο, φαίνεται εξάλλου από το Hollywood πόση είναι η επίδραση της φιλοσοφίας της κβαντικής φυσικής. Η άνοδος της γιόγκα, του διαλογισμού και άλλων αντίστοιχων τεχνικών νομίζω ότι το καθιστά εξίσου πρωτότυπο, παρόλο που γράφτηκε πριν 30 χρόνια.
Στο παρόν βιβλίο, ο συγγραφέας, θεωρητικός φυσικός σε κορυφαία πανεπιστήμια των ΗΠΑ (είναι Αυστριακός και όχι από κάποια ανατολική χώρα όπως νόμιζα αρχικά) προσπαθεί να συνδέσει αυτή τη φιλοσοφία με τις διδασκαλίες των ανατολικών θρησκειών (Ινδουισμός, Βουδισμός, Ταοϊσμός, Ζεν). Η προσπάθεια είναι άκρως αξιόλογη και το βιβλίο προτείνεται στους λάτρεις αυτού του είδους (το είδος είναι κάτι σαν science – religion – spirituality). Ο συγγραφέας γνωρίζει και τα δυο κομμάτια (θρησκεία και επιστήμη) που αναφέρει και τα συνδέει όμορφα μεταξύ τους, χωρίς να κάνει κατήχηση (στις ανατολικές θρησκείες εξάλλου αυτό δεν συνηθίζεται) αλλά και χωρίς να γίνεται γραφικός. Δεν περιλαμβάνονται μαθηματικά, οπότε τα κεφάλαια της φυσικής μπορεί να τα διαβάσει και να τα κατανοήσει ο καθένας, οι των θετικών σπουδών φυσικά θα τα βρουν πιο εύκολα.
Το βασικό αξίωμα του βιβλίου είναι ότι με βάση τη κβαντομηχανική και την κατάρρευση της αιτιότητας, πλέον το καθετί γίνεται αντιληπτό μέσα από την αλληλεπίδρασή του με το Σύμπαν. Πλέον δεν υπάρχει καμία απόλυτη αλήθεια για τα πράγματα, παρά όλα εκδηλώνονται ανάλογα με την περίσταση. Το Σύμπαν αποτελεί μια ολότητα και ένα κομμάτι αυτής της ολότητας παρακολουθούμε, με την έκφανση που αποφασίζεται κάθε φορά, ανάλογα με τις συνθήκες. Κάθε υποατομικό σωματίδιο είναι ένας ενεργειακός χορός, σαν αυτό που χορεύουν διαρκώς ο Κρίσνα, ο Βούδας και οι λοιποί θεοί, οι οποίοι είναι ένας θεός, με διαφορετικές εκφάνσεις – εμφανίσεις κάθε φορά (ας με συγχωρέσουν οι οπαδοί των θρησκειών αυτών, το βιβλίο το διάβασα πριν πολλά χρόνια και δεν θυμάμαι καλά τις διδαχές των θρησκειών). Ενέργεια – ύλη, σωματίδιο – κύμα, κίνηση – ακινησία, ύπαρξη – ανυπαρξία, όλα είναι έννοιες που από μόνες τους δεν έχουν καμία σημασία, παρά μόνο σε σχέση με το πώς τις αντιλαμβανόμαστε εμείς. Έτσι, από τη στιγμή που θα στρέψουμε τα μάτια μας σε μια έννοια, τα στρέφουμε απευθείας και στην αντίθετή της, όπως ακριβώς διδάσκουν και οι Ανατολίτες δάσκαλοι.
Οι ανατολικοί μυστικιστές θεωρούν τις έννοιες του χώρου και του χρόνου σαν ιδιαίτερες συνειδησιακές καταστάσεις. Οι έννοιες γιν και γιαγκ – αν και αντίθετες – θεωρούνται συμπληρωματικές, συνθέτουν τη βάση της κινέζικης σκέψης και όλη την ουσία του κόσμου. Η κβαντομηχανική, από την άλλη, περιγράφει τον κόσμο με πιθανότητες και μόνο αφού εκδηλωθεί μια κατάσταση μπορεί να περιγράψει τι έγινε τελικά (αν και όχι γιατί έγινε, παρά μόνο πώς έγινε και πόσο πιθανό ήταν να συμβεί).
Το βιβλίο είναι γεμάτο με θέματα που ιντριγκάρουν και ενδιαφέρουν τον κόσμο, φαίνεται εξάλλου από το Hollywood πόση είναι η επίδραση της φιλοσοφίας της κβαντικής φυσικής. Η άνοδος της γιόγκα, του διαλογισμού και άλλων αντίστοιχων τεχνικών νομίζω ότι το καθιστά εξίσου πρωτότυπο, παρόλο που γράφτηκε πριν 30 χρόνια.
October 4, 2011
Not entirely sure how to take this book. Will come back to it after updating myself on the latest developments.
January 15, 2008
This book bridged a major divide in my perception of the world, bringing together ideas of Quantum Physics and Eastern Mysticism. Capra, trained in both disciplines, does a fine job comparing quotes and emerging universal perceptions of the early pioneers in quantum physics, against philosophers and yogis of the ancient religions of the East. In a beautiful way, you come to discover that each of these disparate disciplines are somehow describing the universe through strikingly similar metaphors. Its not too sci-techy for the average reader, and further gives a great overview of the major Eastern religions, their early founders and principles they are based off.
January 25, 2008
A book that fundamentally changed the way I felt and thought deep down inside at a time of my life when I needed some sort of metaphysical path.
When you strip away the mathematics from the concepts of quantum mechanics and strong theory, etc., you get a bewildering array of thought-provking images that conjure up those posed by the best koans that Zen has to offer. Eastern mysticism meets modern physics.
You will understand that everything is connected.
When you strip away the mathematics from the concepts of quantum mechanics and strong theory, etc., you get a bewildering array of thought-provking images that conjure up those posed by the best koans that Zen has to offer. Eastern mysticism meets modern physics.
You will understand that everything is connected.
December 22, 2007
This book would have been better called "The Buddha of Physics", or something like that. Throughout the whole book there is hardly a single reference to taoism, and certainly no understanding of taoism and its relation to other asian religions.
The great majority of the spiritual/religious references in this book are from Indian Buddhism and Hinduism. A mild smattering of zen. Hardly any Chinese Buddhism.
I found this book incredibly boring. I think I actually started skimming towards the end, which for me before I had a daughter was pretty extreme. I think I found one interesting idea in this whole book, the physics concept of bootstrapping, which took up no more than one or two sentences and a footnote.
If you are really interested in learning how taoism, or asian mysticism in general, relates to modern concepts in physics, the Dancing Wu Li Masters by Gary Zukav is much much better.
The great majority of the spiritual/religious references in this book are from Indian Buddhism and Hinduism. A mild smattering of zen. Hardly any Chinese Buddhism.
I found this book incredibly boring. I think I actually started skimming towards the end, which for me before I had a daughter was pretty extreme. I think I found one interesting idea in this whole book, the physics concept of bootstrapping, which took up no more than one or two sentences and a footnote.
If you are really interested in learning how taoism, or asian mysticism in general, relates to modern concepts in physics, the Dancing Wu Li Masters by Gary Zukav is much much better.
March 30, 2010
I really liked this book; but I admit it had flaws, mainly due to the actual content in relation to the title. First, this book reads more like a review of quantum physics (a subject I'm not qualified to give a critique on in terms of the book's accuracy) than religion. In many cases, the author goes on for pages about quantum physics, in technical detail, and then at the very end sticks in a throw away line about how this is similar to Buddhism or Hinduism because they both believe we are all connected, just like on the quantum level. I thought the way the two were tied together was in all reality, weak.
However, having said this, I liked the book for two main reasons: 1- I'm fascinated by quantum physics (even though I have no formal education) and I'm always looking for books that explain it in simpler terms to me. There was probably nothing new in the book, but for me, he explained things in ways that enabled me to make better connections. I don't have the book in front of me to give examples, but for one, I finally understood why there aren't really any fundamentally basic particles and the importance of the role of the observer to the experiment. I also gained a better understanding of the basics of protons, quarks, neutrinos, etc. This knowledge by itself enriched me from a spiritual point of view, which brings me to my next reason for liking the book:
2- The well laid out explanation of physics allowed me to make the connection to spirituality on my own. In truth, he didn't really need to spell out the similarities and connections to any religion, because on my own, I was able to reach outside the world of quantum physics to postulate a bigger meaning in all aspects of life.
I understand that most scientists, whose jobs require them to be very rigid in their theories, experiments and conclusions, probably cringe at taking science into the spiritual realm, but in the realities of everyday life, we don't live on such a rigid scale. I can't separate my feelings, thoughts, physical reactions, spirituality etc. into neat little boxes like a science experiment- they all blend together to form my life. So to me, it seems inevitable that the more we learn about the world and what it is made of from a scientific viewpoint, the more we are going to ask, what does it all mean in the bigger picture of life?
That is what this book did for me; it made me think about the overall implications of what we are learning scientifically about the world and wonder what it means to us on a human level. I believe from both a scientific and spiritual side that we are all connected and, without getting all new age-y, the implications of this can be profound because we are able to see that what we do to ourselves, each other and the planet are not done in isolation- there is a rippling effect across the universe.
I'll stop here as I don't want to preach; I'll just say I recommend this book to people like me, who are spiritual, but also appreciate the rational science behind the 'mystique.' I like the balance between the two.
Those who are not spiritual in any way; who only believe in that which can be proven with rigid scientific experiments probably need to stay away from this book.
However, having said this, I liked the book for two main reasons: 1- I'm fascinated by quantum physics (even though I have no formal education) and I'm always looking for books that explain it in simpler terms to me. There was probably nothing new in the book, but for me, he explained things in ways that enabled me to make better connections. I don't have the book in front of me to give examples, but for one, I finally understood why there aren't really any fundamentally basic particles and the importance of the role of the observer to the experiment. I also gained a better understanding of the basics of protons, quarks, neutrinos, etc. This knowledge by itself enriched me from a spiritual point of view, which brings me to my next reason for liking the book:
2- The well laid out explanation of physics allowed me to make the connection to spirituality on my own. In truth, he didn't really need to spell out the similarities and connections to any religion, because on my own, I was able to reach outside the world of quantum physics to postulate a bigger meaning in all aspects of life.
I understand that most scientists, whose jobs require them to be very rigid in their theories, experiments and conclusions, probably cringe at taking science into the spiritual realm, but in the realities of everyday life, we don't live on such a rigid scale. I can't separate my feelings, thoughts, physical reactions, spirituality etc. into neat little boxes like a science experiment- they all blend together to form my life. So to me, it seems inevitable that the more we learn about the world and what it is made of from a scientific viewpoint, the more we are going to ask, what does it all mean in the bigger picture of life?
That is what this book did for me; it made me think about the overall implications of what we are learning scientifically about the world and wonder what it means to us on a human level. I believe from both a scientific and spiritual side that we are all connected and, without getting all new age-y, the implications of this can be profound because we are able to see that what we do to ourselves, each other and the planet are not done in isolation- there is a rippling effect across the universe.
I'll stop here as I don't want to preach; I'll just say I recommend this book to people like me, who are spiritual, but also appreciate the rational science behind the 'mystique.' I like the balance between the two.
Those who are not spiritual in any way; who only believe in that which can be proven with rigid scientific experiments probably need to stay away from this book.
November 16, 2021
Fritjof Capra proposes an integration of the mathematical world view of modern physics and the mystical visions of Buddha and Krishna, with two basic themes running connecting both: the fundamental interrelatedness and interdependence of all phenomena and the intrinsically dynamic nature of reality. In my poor understanding of physics, the book is great and increased my interest for further exploration in both topics. As Capra says: “Science does not need mysticism and mysticism does not need science. But man needs both.”
May 11, 2020
El Tao de la física es un libro que fue escrito inicialmente en 1975, pero que ha sido reeditado (ya va en la quinta edición), y ha sido actualizado en algunas pocas partes, con nuevos prólogos y apéndices. Sin embargo sigue vigente porque trata un tema fundamental: el análisis comparativo entre la ciencia occidental y el misticismo oriental, describiendo los fenómenos y descubrimientos de la física cuántica con los fenómenos e introspecciones que resultan de la meditación. Aunque la física cuántica ha avanzado mucho desde entonces, (y algunos modelos ya han sido superados, como el “Bootstrap model” de Geoffrey Chew), no por ello deja de ser relevante esta comparación.
En general trata de describir el paralelismo que existe entre la física cuántica y el misticismo oriental, enfocándose en el budismo, hinduismo y taoísmo. Para ello recurre a una serie de comparaciones entre diversos fenómenos y procesos específicos de la mecánica cuántica, con fenómenos y procesos del misticismo oriental. Así por ejemplo mientras que la ciencia occidental utiliza el método científico para estudiar, medir, percibir y conocer la realidad, de una manera “objetiva” y “extrospectiva”, el misticismo oriental en cambio utiliza la meditación para percibir y comprender la realidad de una manera “subjetiva” e “introspectiva”.
Independientemente de lo debatible que sean las afirmaciones que plantea F. Capra en su libro, lo que a mí más me llamó la atención son las implicaciones epistemológicas que resultan del contenido del mismo. Encuentro que el argumento de fondo, independientemente de la cantidad y relevancia de las comparaciones y analogías que describe extensamente, es el cuestionamiento del método científico como la vía única y exclusiva para el estudio y comprensión de la realidad.
En varias partes expresa frases como estas: “Creo que la ciencia y el misticismo son dos manifestaciones complementarias de la mente humana, de sus facultades racionales e intuitivas”, “La ciencia no necesita del misticismo y el misticismo no necesita de la ciencia; pero el hombre sí necesita de ambos“, “Cada vez que tienen lugar grandes revoluciones científicas, se sienten tambalear los cimientos de la ciencia” (esta última me recuerda invariablemente a Kuhn).
Entonces creo que este libro, es una expresión más, de los muchos intentos que han hecho un sin número de autores, algunos de manera muy profunda y fundamentada, y en cambio otros de manera más superficial y menos preparada, de los temas que comparan y analizan la física cuántica con el misticismo oriental. En común se puede decir que buscan encontrar (como en este libro) una vía alterna para acceder a un método alterno de conocimiento, que supere las limitaciones de la ciencia actual (y la epistemología vigente). Es innegable que hay muchos fenómenos que existen y es incuestionable su existencia, pero que no es posible analizarlos y estudiarlos con el método científico actual, como el usado en la mecánica cuántica. Conforme se avanza más en el estudio de los fenómenos de la mecánica cuántica, y otros campos de naturaleza más subjetiva como la mente y la conciencia, nos hemos encontrado que se vuelve más difícil hacerlos “medibles”, de hacerlos “objetivos” para poderlos estudiar. ¿Se necesita entonces un nuevo paradigma?
Todas las comparaciones que describe F. Capra en su libro, son un extenso conjunto de ejemplos que en el fondo intentan mostrar cómo se podrían analizar y estudiar fenómenos que ocurren en la naturaleza, usando métodos distintos y poder llegar a conclusiones más o menos similares. (Aunque es difícil comprobar por el método científico que las conclusiones obtenidas con el método oriental son similares).
Por ello el libro me pareció muy interesante y motivador, porque es un intento sincero y fundado de acercar dos maneras muy distintas de percibir, comprender y estudiar la realidad. Considero que así como la ciencia se va construyendo, poco a poco, de manera progresiva, sobre la base de los avances previos, donde se van reemplazando o cambiando las antiguas teorías y modelos por unos nuevos, así considero que este libro aporta en este sentido un posible escenario alterno. Como se ha demostrado a lo largo de la historia, los avances no son siempre exactos y directos, avanzan con rodeos, con alternativas que fallan, pero con un intento firme y claro de avanzar y superar lo presente. Por eso me gustó este libro, porque estimula a descubrir nuevas formas de conocer y percibir la realidad.
En general trata de describir el paralelismo que existe entre la física cuántica y el misticismo oriental, enfocándose en el budismo, hinduismo y taoísmo. Para ello recurre a una serie de comparaciones entre diversos fenómenos y procesos específicos de la mecánica cuántica, con fenómenos y procesos del misticismo oriental. Así por ejemplo mientras que la ciencia occidental utiliza el método científico para estudiar, medir, percibir y conocer la realidad, de una manera “objetiva” y “extrospectiva”, el misticismo oriental en cambio utiliza la meditación para percibir y comprender la realidad de una manera “subjetiva” e “introspectiva”.
Independientemente de lo debatible que sean las afirmaciones que plantea F. Capra en su libro, lo que a mí más me llamó la atención son las implicaciones epistemológicas que resultan del contenido del mismo. Encuentro que el argumento de fondo, independientemente de la cantidad y relevancia de las comparaciones y analogías que describe extensamente, es el cuestionamiento del método científico como la vía única y exclusiva para el estudio y comprensión de la realidad.
En varias partes expresa frases como estas: “Creo que la ciencia y el misticismo son dos manifestaciones complementarias de la mente humana, de sus facultades racionales e intuitivas”, “La ciencia no necesita del misticismo y el misticismo no necesita de la ciencia; pero el hombre sí necesita de ambos“, “Cada vez que tienen lugar grandes revoluciones científicas, se sienten tambalear los cimientos de la ciencia” (esta última me recuerda invariablemente a Kuhn).
Entonces creo que este libro, es una expresión más, de los muchos intentos que han hecho un sin número de autores, algunos de manera muy profunda y fundamentada, y en cambio otros de manera más superficial y menos preparada, de los temas que comparan y analizan la física cuántica con el misticismo oriental. En común se puede decir que buscan encontrar (como en este libro) una vía alterna para acceder a un método alterno de conocimiento, que supere las limitaciones de la ciencia actual (y la epistemología vigente). Es innegable que hay muchos fenómenos que existen y es incuestionable su existencia, pero que no es posible analizarlos y estudiarlos con el método científico actual, como el usado en la mecánica cuántica. Conforme se avanza más en el estudio de los fenómenos de la mecánica cuántica, y otros campos de naturaleza más subjetiva como la mente y la conciencia, nos hemos encontrado que se vuelve más difícil hacerlos “medibles”, de hacerlos “objetivos” para poderlos estudiar. ¿Se necesita entonces un nuevo paradigma?
Todas las comparaciones que describe F. Capra en su libro, son un extenso conjunto de ejemplos que en el fondo intentan mostrar cómo se podrían analizar y estudiar fenómenos que ocurren en la naturaleza, usando métodos distintos y poder llegar a conclusiones más o menos similares. (Aunque es difícil comprobar por el método científico que las conclusiones obtenidas con el método oriental son similares).
Por ello el libro me pareció muy interesante y motivador, porque es un intento sincero y fundado de acercar dos maneras muy distintas de percibir, comprender y estudiar la realidad. Considero que así como la ciencia se va construyendo, poco a poco, de manera progresiva, sobre la base de los avances previos, donde se van reemplazando o cambiando las antiguas teorías y modelos por unos nuevos, así considero que este libro aporta en este sentido un posible escenario alterno. Como se ha demostrado a lo largo de la historia, los avances no son siempre exactos y directos, avanzan con rodeos, con alternativas que fallan, pero con un intento firme y claro de avanzar y superar lo presente. Por eso me gustó este libro, porque estimula a descubrir nuevas formas de conocer y percibir la realidad.
May 30, 2015
When I was a kid, my grandmother used to tell me a story about a king who had gone to Brahma, the creator of the universe, to invite him to preside over the inaugural ceremony of a temple he had built. Brahma, excused himself for a minute, and returned to give his consent exactly a minute later. The king returned happily to his kingdom on earth. But, lo and behold, 1200 years had passed. At this point of the story, my grandmother would smile at me and say, "What is a minute for Brahma, is 1200 years for earthlings." My 10 year-self would just be intrigued by the story.
Years later, when I got acquainted with Einstein's theory of relativity and the 'personal' nature of time and space, the first question came to my mind, what came first? Einstein's theory or my grandmother's story?
Vivekananda in his famous address at Chicago said, "From the high spiritual flights of the Vedanta philosophy, of which the latest discoveries of science seem like echoes, …."
Well, echoes or not, but the striking parallels cannot be ignored. And not only with Hindu religion, but also with most oriental philosophies. This book sketches out some of those parallels.
The western approach, which reflects predominantly in classical physics, is that of reductionism. We can understand the thing, if we can understand its basic constituents. So classical physics takes a lots of assumptions and help of constants to go deeper, finer into substances.
On the contrary, the eastern approach, which now the modern physics seem to adapt, tends towards holism. The whole is greater and more complex than the sum of its parts. And there is more ambiguity than constants.
Conflicting and confusing theories exist simultaneously in oriental theories. As if sides of same coin. Nothing is constant. The laws are dependent on the observer than any kind of absolutes. And if we see the quantum theory, that falls in line with similar thought process. The cat is neither dead nor alive, you see.
I don't know much about Buddhism and Taoism. But, with my limited knowledge on Hinduism, I can't call it entirely scientific. However, the parallels of some of its theories with modern science indeed make me question, "How did they know, then?"
Years later, when I got acquainted with Einstein's theory of relativity and the 'personal' nature of time and space, the first question came to my mind, what came first? Einstein's theory or my grandmother's story?
Vivekananda in his famous address at Chicago said, "From the high spiritual flights of the Vedanta philosophy, of which the latest discoveries of science seem like echoes, …."
Well, echoes or not, but the striking parallels cannot be ignored. And not only with Hindu religion, but also with most oriental philosophies. This book sketches out some of those parallels.
The most important characteristic of the Eastern world view - one could almost say the essence of it - is the awareness of the unity and mutual interrelation of all things and events, the experience of all phenomena in the world as manifestations of a basic oneness. All things are seen as interdependent and inseparable parts of this cosmic whole; as different manifestations of the same ultimate reality. The Eastern traditions constantly refers to this ultimate, indivisible reality which manifests itself in all things, and of which all things are parts. It is called Brahman in Hinduism, Dharmakaya in Buddhism, Tao in Taoism.
... ... ...
... ... ...
Quantum theory forces us to see the universe not as a collection of physical objects, but rather as a complicated web of relations between the various parts of a unified whole.
The western approach, which reflects predominantly in classical physics, is that of reductionism. We can understand the thing, if we can understand its basic constituents. So classical physics takes a lots of assumptions and help of constants to go deeper, finer into substances.
On the contrary, the eastern approach, which now the modern physics seem to adapt, tends towards holism. The whole is greater and more complex than the sum of its parts. And there is more ambiguity than constants.
Quantum theory thus reveals an essential interconnectedness of the universe. It shows that we cannot decompose the world into independently existing smallest units. As we penetrate into matter, we find that it is made of particles, but these are not the 'basic building blocks' in the sense of Democritus and Newton. They are merely idealizations which are useful from a practical point of view, but have no fundamental significance. In the words of Neils Bohr, "isolated material particles are abstractions, their properties being definable and observable only through their interactions with other systems
Conflicting and confusing theories exist simultaneously in oriental theories. As if sides of same coin. Nothing is constant. The laws are dependent on the observer than any kind of absolutes. And if we see the quantum theory, that falls in line with similar thought process. The cat is neither dead nor alive, you see.
In the words of Oppenheimer
If we ask, for instance, whether the position of the electron remains the same, we must say ‘no’; if we ask whether the electron’s position changes with time, we must say ‘no’; if we ask whether the electron is at rest, we must say ‘no’; if we ask whether it is in motion, we must say ‘no’.
The reality of the atomic physicist, like the reality of the Eastern mystic, transcends the narrow framework of opposite and contradictory concepts. The Upanishads say:
"It moves, it moves not,
It is far, and it is near,
It is within all this,
And it is outside of all this.
I don't know much about Buddhism and Taoism. But, with my limited knowledge on Hinduism, I can't call it entirely scientific. However, the parallels of some of its theories with modern science indeed make me question, "How did they know, then?"
January 10, 2010
I read this book back when I was a teenage nerd and I think it had a great deal of influence on me, shaping my character and making me what I am today: a middle-aged nerd.
This was one of my earliest exposures to both modern physics and ancient mysticism, and from what I have observed, whatever source first introduces one to these ideas is always held in special esteem. Though highly recommended by others, I didn't enjoy The Dancing Wu-Li Masters, nor the film What the Do We Know nearly as much
(A review of the latter is available here:
http://andyrantsandraves.blogspot.com... )
I frequently find this book at yard sales and used book stores, and I buy it up every time, so that I can give it away to other people. Because I truly think everyone should read it. I think if they grasped some of the ideas presented here, that the world would be a better place. You might think that I am a naive fool, and I'm okay with that. I'll just be sitting here, meditating, holding mutually exclusive thoughts in my head at the same time.
This was one of my earliest exposures to both modern physics and ancient mysticism, and from what I have observed, whatever source first introduces one to these ideas is always held in special esteem. Though highly recommended by others, I didn't enjoy The Dancing Wu-Li Masters, nor the film What the Do We Know nearly as much
(A review of the latter is available here:
http://andyrantsandraves.blogspot.com... )
I frequently find this book at yard sales and used book stores, and I buy it up every time, so that I can give it away to other people. Because I truly think everyone should read it. I think if they grasped some of the ideas presented here, that the world would be a better place. You might think that I am a naive fool, and I'm okay with that. I'll just be sitting here, meditating, holding mutually exclusive thoughts in my head at the same time.
Read
August 10, 2011A seminal classic that was one of the first pieces of reading that began to change my worldview, and till today, remains one of the first attempted ‘consilience�� of science and spirit. Rather than a conventional book summary or review, I would like to capture key sentences/ quotes that adorn the terrain like a string of pearls:
Chapter 1 – Modern Physics: A Path with a Heart
Any path is only a path, and there is no affront, to oneself or to others, in dropping it if that is what your heart tells you....Look at every path closely and deliberately. Try it as many times as you think necessary. Then ask yourself, and yourself alone, one question....Does this path have a heart? If it does, the path is good; if it doesn’t it is of no use.
- Carlos Castaneda, The Teachings of Don Juan
Chapter 2 – Knowing and Seeing
A mystical experience, therefore, is not any more unique than a modern experiment in physics. On the one hand, it is not less sophisticated either, although its sophistication is of a very different kind. The complexity and efficiency of the physicist’s technical apparatus is matched, if not surpassed, by that of the mystic’s consciousness – both physical and spiritual – in deep meditation. The scientists and mystics, then, have developed highly sophisticated methods of observing nature which are inaccessible to the lay person.
- Fritjof Capra
Chapter 3 – Beyond Language
The contradiction so puzzling to the ordinary way of thinking comes from the fact that we have to use language to communicate our inner experience which in its very nature transcends linguistics
- D.T. Suzuki
Chapter 4 – The New Physics
Al my attempts to adapt the theoretical foundation of physics to this (new type of) knowledge failed completely. It was as if the ground had been pulled from under one, to no firm foundation to be seen anywhere, upon which another one could have been built
- Albert Einstein
Chapter 5 – Hinduism
All actions take place in time by the interweaving of the forces of nature, but the man lost in selfish delusion thinks that he himself is the actor. But the man who knows the relation between the forces of nature and actions, sees how some forces of Nature work upon other forces of nature, and becomes not their slave
- The Bhagavad Gita
Chapter 6 – Buddhism
Ashvaghosa probably had a strong influence on Nagarjuna, the most intellectual Mahayana philosopher, who used a highly sophisticated dialectic to show the limitations of all concepts of reality........Hence he gave it the name ‘Sunyata’, ‘the void’, or ‘emptiness’, a term which is equivalent to Ashvaghosa’s ‘tathata’ or ‘suchness’; when the futility of all conceptual thinking is recognized, reality is experienced as pure suchness.
- Fritjof Capra
Chapter 7 – Chinese Thought
That which lets now the dark, now the light appear is Tao
- I Ching, the Book of Changes
Chapter 8 – Taosim
Disputation is a proof of not seeing clearly.
- Chuang Tzu
Chapter 9 – Zen
Before you study Zen, mountains are mountains and rivers are rivers; while you are studying Zen, mountains are no longer mountains and rivers are no longer rivers; but once you have had enlightenment, mountains are once again mountains and rivers again rivers.
- Zen saying
Chapter 10 – The Unity of All Things
One is led to a new notion of unbroken wholeness which denies the classical idea of analyzability of the world into separately and independently existing parts...We have reversed the usual classical notion that the independent ‘elementary parts’ of the world are the fundamental reality, and that the various systems are merely particular contingent forms and arrangements of these parts. Rather, we say that inseparable quantum interconnectedness of the whole universe is the fundamental reality, and that relatively independently behaving parts are merely particular and contingent forms within this whole
- David Bohm
Chapter 11 – Beyond the World of Opposites
It moves. It moves not. It is far, and it is near. It is within all this, And It is outside of all this.
- The Upanishads
Chapter 12 – Space- Time
If we speak of the space experience in meditation, we are dealing with an entirely different dimension....In this space-experience the temporal sequence is converted into a simultaneous co-existence, the side by side existence of things....and this again does not remain static but becomes a living continuum in which space and time are integrated
- Lama Govinda
Chapter 13 – The Dynamic Universe
The stillness in stillness is not the real stillness. Only when there is stillness in movement can the spiritual rhythm appear which pervades heaven and earth
- Taoist text
Chapter 14 – Emptiness and Form
We may therefore regard matter as being constituted by the regions of space in which the field is extremely intense .....There is no place in this new kind of physics both for the field and matter, for the field is the only reality
- Albert Einstein
The Great Void cannot but consist of ch’i; this ch’i cannot but condense to form all things; and these things cannot but become dispersed so as to form (once more) the Great Void
- Chang Tsai
Chapter 15 – The Cosmic Dance
His gestures wild and full of grace, precipitate the cosmic illusion; his flying arms and legs and the swaying of his torso produce- indeed, they are- the continuous creation-destruction of the universe, death exactly balancing birth, annihilation the end of every coming-forth
- Heinrich Zimmer, on the Dance of Shiva
Chapter 16 – Quark Symmetries – A New Koan?
The discovery of symmetric patterns in the particle world has led many physicists to believe that these patterns reflect the fundamental laws of nature. During the past fifteen years, a great deal of effort has been devoted to the search for an ultimate ‘fundamental symmetry’ that could incorporate all known particles and thus ‘explain’ the structure of matter.
- Fritjof Capra
Chapter 17 – Patterns of Change
How do we come to think of things, rather than of processes in this absolute flux? By shutting our eyes to the successive events. It is an artificial attitude that makes sections in the stream of change, and calls them things....When we shall know the truth of things, we shall realize how absurd it is for us to worship isolated products of the incessant series of transformations as though they were eternal and real. Life is no thing or state of a thing, but a continuous movement or change.
- Dr Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan
Chapter 18- Interpenetration
Each portion of matter may be conceived of as a garden full of plants, and as a pond full of fishes. But each branch of the plant, each member of the animal, each drop of its humours, is also such a garden or such a pond
- Leibniz, in Monadology
Chapter 1 – Modern Physics: A Path with a Heart
Any path is only a path, and there is no affront, to oneself or to others, in dropping it if that is what your heart tells you....Look at every path closely and deliberately. Try it as many times as you think necessary. Then ask yourself, and yourself alone, one question....Does this path have a heart? If it does, the path is good; if it doesn’t it is of no use.
- Carlos Castaneda, The Teachings of Don Juan
Chapter 2 – Knowing and Seeing
A mystical experience, therefore, is not any more unique than a modern experiment in physics. On the one hand, it is not less sophisticated either, although its sophistication is of a very different kind. The complexity and efficiency of the physicist’s technical apparatus is matched, if not surpassed, by that of the mystic’s consciousness – both physical and spiritual – in deep meditation. The scientists and mystics, then, have developed highly sophisticated methods of observing nature which are inaccessible to the lay person.
- Fritjof Capra
Chapter 3 – Beyond Language
The contradiction so puzzling to the ordinary way of thinking comes from the fact that we have to use language to communicate our inner experience which in its very nature transcends linguistics
- D.T. Suzuki
Chapter 4 – The New Physics
Al my attempts to adapt the theoretical foundation of physics to this (new type of) knowledge failed completely. It was as if the ground had been pulled from under one, to no firm foundation to be seen anywhere, upon which another one could have been built
- Albert Einstein
Chapter 5 – Hinduism
All actions take place in time by the interweaving of the forces of nature, but the man lost in selfish delusion thinks that he himself is the actor. But the man who knows the relation between the forces of nature and actions, sees how some forces of Nature work upon other forces of nature, and becomes not their slave
- The Bhagavad Gita
Chapter 6 – Buddhism
Ashvaghosa probably had a strong influence on Nagarjuna, the most intellectual Mahayana philosopher, who used a highly sophisticated dialectic to show the limitations of all concepts of reality........Hence he gave it the name ‘Sunyata’, ‘the void’, or ‘emptiness’, a term which is equivalent to Ashvaghosa’s ‘tathata’ or ‘suchness’; when the futility of all conceptual thinking is recognized, reality is experienced as pure suchness.
- Fritjof Capra
Chapter 7 – Chinese Thought
That which lets now the dark, now the light appear is Tao
- I Ching, the Book of Changes
Chapter 8 – Taosim
Disputation is a proof of not seeing clearly.
- Chuang Tzu
Chapter 9 – Zen
Before you study Zen, mountains are mountains and rivers are rivers; while you are studying Zen, mountains are no longer mountains and rivers are no longer rivers; but once you have had enlightenment, mountains are once again mountains and rivers again rivers.
- Zen saying
Chapter 10 – The Unity of All Things
One is led to a new notion of unbroken wholeness which denies the classical idea of analyzability of the world into separately and independently existing parts...We have reversed the usual classical notion that the independent ‘elementary parts’ of the world are the fundamental reality, and that the various systems are merely particular contingent forms and arrangements of these parts. Rather, we say that inseparable quantum interconnectedness of the whole universe is the fundamental reality, and that relatively independently behaving parts are merely particular and contingent forms within this whole
- David Bohm
Chapter 11 – Beyond the World of Opposites
It moves. It moves not. It is far, and it is near. It is within all this, And It is outside of all this.
- The Upanishads
Chapter 12 – Space- Time
If we speak of the space experience in meditation, we are dealing with an entirely different dimension....In this space-experience the temporal sequence is converted into a simultaneous co-existence, the side by side existence of things....and this again does not remain static but becomes a living continuum in which space and time are integrated
- Lama Govinda
Chapter 13 – The Dynamic Universe
The stillness in stillness is not the real stillness. Only when there is stillness in movement can the spiritual rhythm appear which pervades heaven and earth
- Taoist text
Chapter 14 – Emptiness and Form
We may therefore regard matter as being constituted by the regions of space in which the field is extremely intense .....There is no place in this new kind of physics both for the field and matter, for the field is the only reality
- Albert Einstein
The Great Void cannot but consist of ch’i; this ch’i cannot but condense to form all things; and these things cannot but become dispersed so as to form (once more) the Great Void
- Chang Tsai
Chapter 15 – The Cosmic Dance
His gestures wild and full of grace, precipitate the cosmic illusion; his flying arms and legs and the swaying of his torso produce- indeed, they are- the continuous creation-destruction of the universe, death exactly balancing birth, annihilation the end of every coming-forth
- Heinrich Zimmer, on the Dance of Shiva
Chapter 16 – Quark Symmetries – A New Koan?
The discovery of symmetric patterns in the particle world has led many physicists to believe that these patterns reflect the fundamental laws of nature. During the past fifteen years, a great deal of effort has been devoted to the search for an ultimate ‘fundamental symmetry’ that could incorporate all known particles and thus ‘explain’ the structure of matter.
- Fritjof Capra
Chapter 17 – Patterns of Change
How do we come to think of things, rather than of processes in this absolute flux? By shutting our eyes to the successive events. It is an artificial attitude that makes sections in the stream of change, and calls them things....When we shall know the truth of things, we shall realize how absurd it is for us to worship isolated products of the incessant series of transformations as though they were eternal and real. Life is no thing or state of a thing, but a continuous movement or change.
- Dr Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan
Chapter 18- Interpenetration
Each portion of matter may be conceived of as a garden full of plants, and as a pond full of fishes. But each branch of the plant, each member of the animal, each drop of its humours, is also such a garden or such a pond
- Leibniz, in Monadology
February 20, 2014
The Brahman of physics
This is one of the best books I have read which ties the philosophies of Vedanta (Hinduism), Buddhism and Taoism with the laws of physics. The book is divided into three sections; the first section gives a general introduction to the facts of physical reality. The second section discusses the philosophies of Hinduism with references to Bhagavad-Gita and Upanishads; Buddhist philosophy and Chinese thought. The last section discusses the laws of Newtonian physics, and how the reality experienced through classical principles has changed after the discovery of relativistic and quantum physics. The concepts of physics discussed in this section require some undergraduate level physics. The summary of this book is given below:
In relativity, space and time are intimately connected and form a four dimensional continuum; hence they can not be treated separately. There is no universal time flow as in Newtonian dynamics. This means that different observers order events differently in time if they move with different velocities relative to the observed events. In such a case two events which are seen as occurring simultaneously by one observer may occur in different temporal sequences for other observers. All measurements involving space and time thus lose their absolute significance. The absolute space, which is a stage for physical event in Newtonian physics, is abandoned along with the concept of absolute time. Spacetime becomes an element of a language that a particular observer uses for describing a physical event. Relativistic physics also treats gravity as a manifestation of matter curving spacetime in its vicinity, and it also showed that mass is a form of energy and hence it can not be viewed as a static object but a dynamic existence. This mass - energy conversions are well demonstrated in particle - antiparticle interactions; energy turns into this pair and when they annihilate they are converted into pure energy. Since the spacetime is of four-dimensional, and in this dimension all events are interconnected. Particle interactions are interpreted as cause and effect only when space-time diagrams are read in one direction. There is no definite direction in the 4D world and hence no before or after and no causation.
The wave - particle duality of matter at subatomic level does not mean that the wave is three-dimensional waves like water waves but they are probability waves. They are abstract mathematical quantities which are related to the probabilities of finding the particles in various places. In the absence of certainty, the existence of matter or its non-existence becomes diffused. We can never say that fundamental particles exist or they don't exist or it is neither present nor absent, or it exists and do not exist simultaneously until a physical observation is made. For better understanding of the relationship between pairs of classical concepts, Bohr introduced the notion of complementarity. He suggested that the particle picture and wave pictures are two complementary descriptions of the same reality. Each of them only partly correct and having a limited range of application. Each picture is needed to give the full descriptions of the atomic reality and both are to be applied within the limitations of uncertainty principle.
The cosmic web is alive; it grows and changes continually according to the laws of physics. The wave - particle dualism of quantum physics, motions doesn't have paths, existence is reduced to probabilities, and the unification of space and time in relativistic physics implies a highly dynamic interaction with matter wherein all fundamental concepts of reality is interwoven into one reality. The particles are represented by wave packet, and the length of wave packet represents the uncertainty in location. If we localize the particle to a smaller region (length), then the wavelengths will decreases (frequency increases) representing an increase in the velocity and hence the momentum, thus supporting the dynamic nature of reality at its most fundamental level. The dynamic nature is also found at the intergalactic level where the existence of dark matter and dark forces keep the universe in its ever expansionary state. The universe at its edge is moving from us close to the speed of light and farther the cosmic bodies are faster they are moving from us.
The laws of atomic physics are statistical laws according to which the probabilities for atomic events are determined by the dynamics of the whole system. Whereas in classical physics the properties and behavior of parts determine those of the whole. In quantum physics this is reversed, the whole determines the behavior of parts. Probability is used in both classical and quantum physics for similar reasons. In both there are hidden variables that prevent us from making exact predictions. The hidden variables in classical physics are local mechanisms and those in quantum physics are non-local. The latter allows instantaneous connection to a pair of entangled particles anywhere in the universe that would otherwise be precluded by the speed limit of light in classical physics. The structure we observe is a manifestation of an underlying process and matter is a form of energy and not mere stuff or substance. Energy is associated with process. In quantum physic the observer and observed no longer remain separated. Deductive philosophy implied that we need to start with fundamental laws that make the basis of knowledge. The fundamental equations, universal constants, basic concepts are the essential ingredients of building knowledge. Research and experimental evidence in support of a phenomenon and a mathematical model to explain the results is fundamental in science. Thus physics is mainly concerned with rational knowledge and the Vedic mysticism is concerned with intuitive knowledge. In the former as one explores the physics of fundamental particles, and the various physical processes in the atomic world it becomes increasingly clear that matter and energy in spacetime are all interconnected, interrelated, and interdependent, and they are understood as a part of the whole. Indian philosophy and Taoism had profound effect on three great quantum physicists; Erwin Schrödinger (expressed strong belief in Vedanta), Werner Heisenberg (expressed strong belief in Buddhist philosophy) and Niels Bohr (expressed strong belief Taoism).
This is one of the best books I have read which ties the philosophies of Vedanta (Hinduism), Buddhism and Taoism with the laws of physics. The book is divided into three sections; the first section gives a general introduction to the facts of physical reality. The second section discusses the philosophies of Hinduism with references to Bhagavad-Gita and Upanishads; Buddhist philosophy and Chinese thought. The last section discusses the laws of Newtonian physics, and how the reality experienced through classical principles has changed after the discovery of relativistic and quantum physics. The concepts of physics discussed in this section require some undergraduate level physics. The summary of this book is given below:
In relativity, space and time are intimately connected and form a four dimensional continuum; hence they can not be treated separately. There is no universal time flow as in Newtonian dynamics. This means that different observers order events differently in time if they move with different velocities relative to the observed events. In such a case two events which are seen as occurring simultaneously by one observer may occur in different temporal sequences for other observers. All measurements involving space and time thus lose their absolute significance. The absolute space, which is a stage for physical event in Newtonian physics, is abandoned along with the concept of absolute time. Spacetime becomes an element of a language that a particular observer uses for describing a physical event. Relativistic physics also treats gravity as a manifestation of matter curving spacetime in its vicinity, and it also showed that mass is a form of energy and hence it can not be viewed as a static object but a dynamic existence. This mass - energy conversions are well demonstrated in particle - antiparticle interactions; energy turns into this pair and when they annihilate they are converted into pure energy. Since the spacetime is of four-dimensional, and in this dimension all events are interconnected. Particle interactions are interpreted as cause and effect only when space-time diagrams are read in one direction. There is no definite direction in the 4D world and hence no before or after and no causation.
The wave - particle duality of matter at subatomic level does not mean that the wave is three-dimensional waves like water waves but they are probability waves. They are abstract mathematical quantities which are related to the probabilities of finding the particles in various places. In the absence of certainty, the existence of matter or its non-existence becomes diffused. We can never say that fundamental particles exist or they don't exist or it is neither present nor absent, or it exists and do not exist simultaneously until a physical observation is made. For better understanding of the relationship between pairs of classical concepts, Bohr introduced the notion of complementarity. He suggested that the particle picture and wave pictures are two complementary descriptions of the same reality. Each of them only partly correct and having a limited range of application. Each picture is needed to give the full descriptions of the atomic reality and both are to be applied within the limitations of uncertainty principle.
The cosmic web is alive; it grows and changes continually according to the laws of physics. The wave - particle dualism of quantum physics, motions doesn't have paths, existence is reduced to probabilities, and the unification of space and time in relativistic physics implies a highly dynamic interaction with matter wherein all fundamental concepts of reality is interwoven into one reality. The particles are represented by wave packet, and the length of wave packet represents the uncertainty in location. If we localize the particle to a smaller region (length), then the wavelengths will decreases (frequency increases) representing an increase in the velocity and hence the momentum, thus supporting the dynamic nature of reality at its most fundamental level. The dynamic nature is also found at the intergalactic level where the existence of dark matter and dark forces keep the universe in its ever expansionary state. The universe at its edge is moving from us close to the speed of light and farther the cosmic bodies are faster they are moving from us.
The laws of atomic physics are statistical laws according to which the probabilities for atomic events are determined by the dynamics of the whole system. Whereas in classical physics the properties and behavior of parts determine those of the whole. In quantum physics this is reversed, the whole determines the behavior of parts. Probability is used in both classical and quantum physics for similar reasons. In both there are hidden variables that prevent us from making exact predictions. The hidden variables in classical physics are local mechanisms and those in quantum physics are non-local. The latter allows instantaneous connection to a pair of entangled particles anywhere in the universe that would otherwise be precluded by the speed limit of light in classical physics. The structure we observe is a manifestation of an underlying process and matter is a form of energy and not mere stuff or substance. Energy is associated with process. In quantum physic the observer and observed no longer remain separated. Deductive philosophy implied that we need to start with fundamental laws that make the basis of knowledge. The fundamental equations, universal constants, basic concepts are the essential ingredients of building knowledge. Research and experimental evidence in support of a phenomenon and a mathematical model to explain the results is fundamental in science. Thus physics is mainly concerned with rational knowledge and the Vedic mysticism is concerned with intuitive knowledge. In the former as one explores the physics of fundamental particles, and the various physical processes in the atomic world it becomes increasingly clear that matter and energy in spacetime are all interconnected, interrelated, and interdependent, and they are understood as a part of the whole. Indian philosophy and Taoism had profound effect on three great quantum physicists; Erwin Schrödinger (expressed strong belief in Vedanta), Werner Heisenberg (expressed strong belief in Buddhist philosophy) and Niels Bohr (expressed strong belief Taoism).
May 31, 2017
Идея интересная, стиль написания не обрадовал.
November 2, 2014
I'm afraid as hard as I tried I could not make this book work for me. The author discusses a lot about quantum physics (as it was understood in the 1970's) and eastern mysticism. He attempts to correlate the two. The assertions were broad and conjectural, and I ended up confused about both. That may be my fault, not the author's, but so be it.
I was wading through another treatise on quantum physics and relativity at the same, Paul Davie's "The Goldilocks Enigma: Why is the Universe Just Right for Life?" I will write a separate review for this book eventually. Suffice it to say that Professor Davies has an insight that made more sense than anything Capra has to say. Quoting Dr. Davies: "The history of philosophy is so rich and diverse that it would be astonishing if theories emerging from science hadn't been foreshadowed in some vague way by somebody"
That just about sums up my conclusions about Capra's conclusions. Nothing more than vague foreshadowing.
I was wading through another treatise on quantum physics and relativity at the same, Paul Davie's "The Goldilocks Enigma: Why is the Universe Just Right for Life?" I will write a separate review for this book eventually. Suffice it to say that Professor Davies has an insight that made more sense than anything Capra has to say. Quoting Dr. Davies: "The history of philosophy is so rich and diverse that it would be astonishing if theories emerging from science hadn't been foreshadowed in some vague way by somebody"
That just about sums up my conclusions about Capra's conclusions. Nothing more than vague foreshadowing.
November 29, 2022
Far out, this book is a trip.
June 19, 2024
Started reading this book for my yoga teacher certification, kept reading it because it was interesting and I need to read more nonfiction, and finished reading it because I am NOT a quitter. But OMG was the middle of this book such a slog. At some point, he was like “this next part is going to be boring, but think about it as meditation.” And he was right it was boring and I emptied my mind and let his silly little words flow through my head. But honestly if you have to tell your readers a whole section of your book will be boring, isn’t that on you? As a writer? Like let’s have some integrity here.
I thought the concept of the book was really cool and some of the ideas he brought up were super interesting. I enjoyed learning more about physics (though I worry he might have presented a very one-sided and self-serving view of some present debates in physics, like supporting theories proposed by his friends/colleagues, but honestly I don’t know enough about physics to speak to that) and about different strains of eastern mysticism (though I think his authority in this area has been called into question). Mostly, I appreciated the attempt to synthesize scientific and spiritual methods of inquiry and makes sense out of how these two ways of questioning our world can be related.
I thought the book could have been better organized somehow. Often, he would refer to arguments he had made in previous chapters or arguments he was going to make in future chapters (sometimes even repeating quotations he had used to support these arguments!) and it felt like he could have organized his arguments to avoid this irksome pattern. Additionally, in the middle section of the book, there was a very tiresome organization of: physics concept followed by eastern parallel, again and again and again. And yes this is the point of the book but after so many comparisons of this form I just was left asking myself, truly what is the point of listing every single parallel that comes to mind? The thesis has been supported, like let it go??
Overall, some super cool ideas, but maybe a little poorly executed (or I just don’t like nonfiction). We should probably all think about the unity of the universe more often.
I thought the concept of the book was really cool and some of the ideas he brought up were super interesting. I enjoyed learning more about physics (though I worry he might have presented a very one-sided and self-serving view of some present debates in physics, like supporting theories proposed by his friends/colleagues, but honestly I don’t know enough about physics to speak to that) and about different strains of eastern mysticism (though I think his authority in this area has been called into question). Mostly, I appreciated the attempt to synthesize scientific and spiritual methods of inquiry and makes sense out of how these two ways of questioning our world can be related.
I thought the book could have been better organized somehow. Often, he would refer to arguments he had made in previous chapters or arguments he was going to make in future chapters (sometimes even repeating quotations he had used to support these arguments!) and it felt like he could have organized his arguments to avoid this irksome pattern. Additionally, in the middle section of the book, there was a very tiresome organization of: physics concept followed by eastern parallel, again and again and again. And yes this is the point of the book but after so many comparisons of this form I just was left asking myself, truly what is the point of listing every single parallel that comes to mind? The thesis has been supported, like let it go??
Overall, some super cool ideas, but maybe a little poorly executed (or I just don’t like nonfiction). We should probably all think about the unity of the universe more often.
August 18, 2011
Hmmm what to say about this. In some ways I agree that there are a number of parallels at least in the modality of viewing the world through the eyes of the eastern believer and the modern day physicist. But whether or not these parallels are entirely the ones drawn by the author or further expounded on in this book I have some reservations in either regard. Perhaps it was because I did not enjoy being told by the author where these parallels were or being lead around in such a manner. Some of his views of physics seem to be very "outsidist" if there is such a term and some of his views of eastern belief seem to be a bit mixed up. Perhaps because he chose all of eastern philosophy which is so wide ranging and so varied instead of focusing on Taoism or Buddhism for example. Though I do think that there are a lot of similarities in different eastern traditions and ways of thought I don't know if it strengthens the authors case to be flitting about between different philosophies in some cases which contradict each other, when there is often left to be much in terms of personal interpretation of these individual philosophies.
I think what the author is trying to get at is the overall perspective of modern day physics is somehow aligning with what is already "known" in eastern religions. I don't know if that is an important or productive view of the whole matter. I mean what did these religions give us in terms of scientific understanding? And what does science give us in way of spiritual awareness of knowledge? Are these two expected to be married to a happy union? You cannot in my mind marry two ideals that serve different functions. I don't think I would pick this book up as a scientist and say I am now enlightened and turn to the eastern path. Nor do I think that as a believer in any of these eastern paths would I find more grounds for the validity of modern physics. They serve different functions. The parallels drawn did not in my mind make any relation here more concrete.
I think what the author is trying to get at is the overall perspective of modern day physics is somehow aligning with what is already "known" in eastern religions. I don't know if that is an important or productive view of the whole matter. I mean what did these religions give us in terms of scientific understanding? And what does science give us in way of spiritual awareness of knowledge? Are these two expected to be married to a happy union? You cannot in my mind marry two ideals that serve different functions. I don't think I would pick this book up as a scientist and say I am now enlightened and turn to the eastern path. Nor do I think that as a believer in any of these eastern paths would I find more grounds for the validity of modern physics. They serve different functions. The parallels drawn did not in my mind make any relation here more concrete.
October 10, 2019
As being trained with Naval docks on electrical systems on Naval ships and worked and sailed around the globe with techno philosophy I took this book along with me along with other few books which fascinated my being also I was working on my own books interacting with other human beings.I found this book to be read by all technocrats around the globe for feeling world as our global village so we get to remove the boundaries of countries and shunn the passports and make a global passport at least for the people who work globally for all humans so eventually this will work for all human beings as we are all one .We must work in this direction cauz soon we will be a thing of past .This book serves as a tool to help humanity
August 20, 2021
Cuốn này được viết từ những năm 1974, sau 3 lần tái bản thì đã bán được tới hơn 1 triệu cuốn, được dịch ra nhiều thứ tiếng, là con số vô cùng bất ngờ với 1 cuốn sách khoa học, sau này có thêm vài cuốn của Stephen Hawking cũng bán được nhiều như vậy nhưng số phận của mấy cuốn sách này thường chỉ để bày trên giá, không rõ số thực đã đọc hết cuốn là bao nhiêu. Bản dịch tiếng Việt do Nguyễn Tường Bách dịch, một nhà khoa học hiện sinh sống ở Đức, nên chất lượng bản dịch về chuyên môn và truyền tải nội dung nguyên tác là rất tốt, không nhiều bản dịch sách khoa học có chất lượng tốt như vậy.
Tác giả cuốn sách được xem là hậu bối của những nhà Vật Lý vĩ đại như Heisenberg, Bohr... Khi tóm lược lại toàn bộ quá trình phát triển của nền Vật Lý thì trớ trêu thay, tất cả những hiểu biết khoa học chỉ có thể đạt tới mức "gần đúng", mang tính tương đối, mà với khoa học, hiều biết "gần đúng" chưa thể gọi là khoa học, khoa học luôn đòi hỏi sự chính xác tuyệt đối. Những tranh luận về xác suất lượng tử hồi đầu thế kỷ 20 khiến Einstein bực bội nói "Chúa không chơi trò xúc sắc." Vậy rốt cục, Chúa chơi trò gì?
Điểm lại toàn bộ sự phát triển của ngành Vật Lý và triết lý khoa học thống trị phương Tây suốt 2000 năm luôn là mô hình có một vật chất cơ bản, từ vật chất này mọi thứ được tạo thành. Tư duy này đã được chứng thực là đúng đắn và hiệu quả suốt 1 thời gian dài. Thứ gì cũng có thể chia chẻ ra nhỏ hơn, rồi nhỏ hơn nữa, tới khi không thể chia chẻ được nữa ta sẽ có vật chất cơ bản đó. Tới khi đi tới mức hạ nguyên tử, người ta không thể tìm ra nổi hạt cơ bản nữa. Vì thực chất quá chất bắn phá các hạt bằng năng lượng cao, hoá ra không phá vỡ hạt thành loại nhỏ hơn mà biến đổi nó qua trạng thái khác, không có cái nào được xem là nhỏ hơn. Những phát hiện ở cấp độ đó cùng với thuyết trường lượng tử được phát triển thêm, khiến tác giả nhận ra sự tương đồng với các tư tưởng Đạo học phương Đông. Đặc biệt trong Phật giáo và Lão giáo. Vật chất không gì hơn chỉ là 1 trạng thái biểu hiện tạm thời, nó không ngừng biến đổi. Tư tưởng Đạo học hay Phật học không đề cao vai trò của những biểu hiện tạm thời đó - trong Phật giáo còn coi đó là giả tướng, mà là quy luật vận hành và chuyển hoá. Trung Quốc có cuốn sách được coi là tinh hoa về sự vận hành và chuyển hoá này là cuốn Kinh Dịch - sách về sự dịch chuyển, biến đổi. Truyền thống Thiền tông thì luôn đề cao sự quán chiếu, để thấy tất cả những biến chuyển đó, rồi thực chứng. Những thứ này đều nằm ngoài giác quan cảm nhận của con người nên gần như không thể diễn tả bằng lời. Để cố gắng diễn đạt lại thì Đạo Đức Kinh của Lão Tử luôn dùng cách cặp hình ảnh đối lập, Kinh sách đạo Phật thì dùng những công án với câu hỏi và đáp án nhiều lúc gần như vô nghĩa, để giúp phật tử vượt lên trên những giới hạn ngôn từ.
Một tư tưởng đặc trưng nữa là tính khách quan của thực tại cũng không còn đúng. Quan niệm cổ điển cho rằng bất kể có người quan sát hay không thì sự vật luôn như nó vốn thế. Thế giới quan này dễ hình dung cho tất cả mọi người, dù ngủ hay thức, có người quan sát hay không, trời mưa vẫn cứ mưa. Ở thế giới hạ nguyên tử câu chuyện lại khác hẳn, người quan sát quyết định tính chất của hiện tượng được quan sát. Người ta không thể đo vị trí và xung lực của 1 hạt hạ nguyên tử được cùng 1 lúc theo nguyên lý bất định, thứ mà ta quan sát chỉ là thứ mà ta muốn quan sát. Có nhà khoa học còn muốn thay đổi từ "quan sát viên" thành "tham dự viên". Tất cả hoà làm một nhất thể, tương đồng với triết lý không còn ta và vật, không còn vật quan sát, người quan sát, cũng chẳng duy vật hay duy tâm. Mọi thứ tác động lẫn nhau, sinh thành, chuyển hoá bởi quy luật nội tại. Tất cả chỉ là một nhất thể, khi chứng thực được điều đó thì được coi là giác ngộ hay đạt đạo.
Kiến thức trong cuốn sách quả thực rất nhiều, những phần cuối càng nặng về kiến thức khoa học hơn. Đọc có lúc rất khó, đọc chậm và đọc lại mấy lần thì nhiều chỗ mới hiểu hết. Nhưng tác giả vẫn xuất sắc trong việc truyền tải nội dung mà tác giả muốn trình bày, nhiều nhận xét là ông nói giúp được những gì nhiều người muốn nói nhưng không biết cách diễn đạt. Bản dịch chất lượng, nội dung đa dạng, nhiều góc nhìn và mối tương quan giữa khoa học và đạo học. Sách hay. 4,5*
Tác giả cuốn sách được xem là hậu bối của những nhà Vật Lý vĩ đại như Heisenberg, Bohr... Khi tóm lược lại toàn bộ quá trình phát triển của nền Vật Lý thì trớ trêu thay, tất cả những hiểu biết khoa học chỉ có thể đạt tới mức "gần đúng", mang tính tương đối, mà với khoa học, hiều biết "gần đúng" chưa thể gọi là khoa học, khoa học luôn đòi hỏi sự chính xác tuyệt đối. Những tranh luận về xác suất lượng tử hồi đầu thế kỷ 20 khiến Einstein bực bội nói "Chúa không chơi trò xúc sắc." Vậy rốt cục, Chúa chơi trò gì?
Điểm lại toàn bộ sự phát triển của ngành Vật Lý và triết lý khoa học thống trị phương Tây suốt 2000 năm luôn là mô hình có một vật chất cơ bản, từ vật chất này mọi thứ được tạo thành. Tư duy này đã được chứng thực là đúng đắn và hiệu quả suốt 1 thời gian dài. Thứ gì cũng có thể chia chẻ ra nhỏ hơn, rồi nhỏ hơn nữa, tới khi không thể chia chẻ được nữa ta sẽ có vật chất cơ bản đó. Tới khi đi tới mức hạ nguyên tử, người ta không thể tìm ra nổi hạt cơ bản nữa. Vì thực chất quá chất bắn phá các hạt bằng năng lượng cao, hoá ra không phá vỡ hạt thành loại nhỏ hơn mà biến đổi nó qua trạng thái khác, không có cái nào được xem là nhỏ hơn. Những phát hiện ở cấp độ đó cùng với thuyết trường lượng tử được phát triển thêm, khiến tác giả nhận ra sự tương đồng với các tư tưởng Đạo học phương Đông. Đặc biệt trong Phật giáo và Lão giáo. Vật chất không gì hơn chỉ là 1 trạng thái biểu hiện tạm thời, nó không ngừng biến đổi. Tư tưởng Đạo học hay Phật học không đề cao vai trò của những biểu hiện tạm thời đó - trong Phật giáo còn coi đó là giả tướng, mà là quy luật vận hành và chuyển hoá. Trung Quốc có cuốn sách được coi là tinh hoa về sự vận hành và chuyển hoá này là cuốn Kinh Dịch - sách về sự dịch chuyển, biến đổi. Truyền thống Thiền tông thì luôn đề cao sự quán chiếu, để thấy tất cả những biến chuyển đó, rồi thực chứng. Những thứ này đều nằm ngoài giác quan cảm nhận của con người nên gần như không thể diễn tả bằng lời. Để cố gắng diễn đạt lại thì Đạo Đức Kinh của Lão Tử luôn dùng cách cặp hình ảnh đối lập, Kinh sách đạo Phật thì dùng những công án với câu hỏi và đáp án nhiều lúc gần như vô nghĩa, để giúp phật tử vượt lên trên những giới hạn ngôn từ.
Một tư tưởng đặc trưng nữa là tính khách quan của thực tại cũng không còn đúng. Quan niệm cổ điển cho rằng bất kể có người quan sát hay không thì sự vật luôn như nó vốn thế. Thế giới quan này dễ hình dung cho tất cả mọi người, dù ngủ hay thức, có người quan sát hay không, trời mưa vẫn cứ mưa. Ở thế giới hạ nguyên tử câu chuyện lại khác hẳn, người quan sát quyết định tính chất của hiện tượng được quan sát. Người ta không thể đo vị trí và xung lực của 1 hạt hạ nguyên tử được cùng 1 lúc theo nguyên lý bất định, thứ mà ta quan sát chỉ là thứ mà ta muốn quan sát. Có nhà khoa học còn muốn thay đổi từ "quan sát viên" thành "tham dự viên". Tất cả hoà làm một nhất thể, tương đồng với triết lý không còn ta và vật, không còn vật quan sát, người quan sát, cũng chẳng duy vật hay duy tâm. Mọi thứ tác động lẫn nhau, sinh thành, chuyển hoá bởi quy luật nội tại. Tất cả chỉ là một nhất thể, khi chứng thực được điều đó thì được coi là giác ngộ hay đạt đạo.
Kiến thức trong cuốn sách quả thực rất nhiều, những phần cuối càng nặng về kiến thức khoa học hơn. Đọc có lúc rất khó, đọc chậm và đọc lại mấy lần thì nhiều chỗ mới hiểu hết. Nhưng tác giả vẫn xuất sắc trong việc truyền tải nội dung mà tác giả muốn trình bày, nhiều nhận xét là ông nói giúp được những gì nhiều người muốn nói nhưng không biết cách diễn đạt. Bản dịch chất lượng, nội dung đa dạng, nhiều góc nhìn và mối tương quan giữa khoa học và đạo học. Sách hay. 4,5*
June 26, 2021
I really enjoyed the physics in the book and the parallels were quite interesting too. The book went a good depth into the physics. Not being too surface level as well as not being too complex so that the reader cannot stay on track. Very good read, would recommend!
October 3, 2015
This was an amazing book...combining two of my favourite things, namely, ancient philosophy and mysticism, and physics. In both areas, although I already know a fair bit about them, I still felt that I learned so much more from reading this book, because it takes a new view of each of them. And the style of the book reflects its content: it is an integrated whole that flows beautifully, and you feel that science, philosophy, art, and all such intellectual areas that touch upon the nature of reality is a kind of poetry, a song of the cosmos slowly making itself heard in soft flute blows reaching our ears from sages throughout the centuries. It is "Shiva's dance", as Capra puts it.
The basic idea of the book is that modern physics not only has coincidental parallels with Eastern mysticism (Taoism, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.), but that physics is converging toward ideas that have been known to mystics for millenia. Physics is coming to have a more harmonious view of the universe. A universe that is interconnected, a process instead of bits of matter existing in isolation. A universe where there are no fundamental particles, but it contains everything as part of a unified cosmos that is in the process of creation and recreation, and can't be said to exist as particular points, because it is always changing and flowing. This may sounds rather vague, but particle physics is actually taking on some quite similar views, namely, in S-matrix theory and bootstrap models, as well as the dynamic views of quantum field theory and virtual particles.
It was particularly interesting to hear about the Chinese and Indian schools of thoughts, and many quotes from both ancient and modern writers were given. And even with physics, although I thought I wouldn't learn anything new in that regard, Capra explained the uncertainty principle in a really neat way that I've never before, and made me think, "Oh, so that's how it works!" It was so much clearer the way he wrote it compared to anything else I've learned.
Capra has a real talent for synthesizing these distinct areas of thought, and he writes beautifully as well. It is like reading an old philosophy book, not one written in this century: it's interesting, illuminating, and wonderfully written and thought out at the same time.
There are also numerous quotes from physicists, mystics, and philosophers, and just from these, I have created a rather substantial reading list for the next year.
What's needed next is a book on how ancient Greek and Roman philosophy fits into all this, as well as Kabbalism. There may already be some books on this, so I will hunt to find them, and if there are none, then in the future, I will write them :)
So if you are at all interested in physics, mysticism, philosophy, or anything in between, read this book! You will not be disappointed. As far as I can tell, the physics is accurate, even considering that the book is over 40 years old.
The basic idea of the book is that modern physics not only has coincidental parallels with Eastern mysticism (Taoism, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.), but that physics is converging toward ideas that have been known to mystics for millenia. Physics is coming to have a more harmonious view of the universe. A universe that is interconnected, a process instead of bits of matter existing in isolation. A universe where there are no fundamental particles, but it contains everything as part of a unified cosmos that is in the process of creation and recreation, and can't be said to exist as particular points, because it is always changing and flowing. This may sounds rather vague, but particle physics is actually taking on some quite similar views, namely, in S-matrix theory and bootstrap models, as well as the dynamic views of quantum field theory and virtual particles.
It was particularly interesting to hear about the Chinese and Indian schools of thoughts, and many quotes from both ancient and modern writers were given. And even with physics, although I thought I wouldn't learn anything new in that regard, Capra explained the uncertainty principle in a really neat way that I've never before, and made me think, "Oh, so that's how it works!" It was so much clearer the way he wrote it compared to anything else I've learned.
Capra has a real talent for synthesizing these distinct areas of thought, and he writes beautifully as well. It is like reading an old philosophy book, not one written in this century: it's interesting, illuminating, and wonderfully written and thought out at the same time.
There are also numerous quotes from physicists, mystics, and philosophers, and just from these, I have created a rather substantial reading list for the next year.
What's needed next is a book on how ancient Greek and Roman philosophy fits into all this, as well as Kabbalism. There may already be some books on this, so I will hunt to find them, and if there are none, then in the future, I will write them :)
So if you are at all interested in physics, mysticism, philosophy, or anything in between, read this book! You will not be disappointed. As far as I can tell, the physics is accurate, even considering that the book is over 40 years old.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 772 reviews