PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: A long time ago just about everyone believed that the sun rotated around the earth. They were quite convinced then that they were right, and yet they turned out to be wrong. What makes it any more likely that you are right in the things you have told me than those people of old, who turned out to be so wrong?
TINNY: Because most of the things I told you have been proven by science.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Is science more accurate today than it was in the past? Does science ever really prove anything?
TINNY: The philosophy and methods of science have progressed far in the past several hundred years. Science today is far more accurate than science has been in the past. As to whether science ever really proves anything, it is part of the modern scientific method to accept that no fact is proven absolutely true. What we call facts in science are actually those things which have the highest probability of being true.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Is it possible to know absolutely that something is true?
TINNY: I'm not sure. Some things seem so absolutely true I can't bring myself to doubt them, but even then I realise there is some chance they are not true. That's one of the things about modern science; it goes beyond what seems to be true to our everyday senses, and at least approaches what is really true.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What if it turns out that it is impossible to know any absolute truth, would that mean that nothing is absolutely true?
TINNY: I think I've read something like that somewhere; probably in a book on philosophy. If I remember right, it was claimed that nothing is absolutely true.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Did you believe that?
TINNY: No. It was clear to me that whether or not we could know absolute truth had no logical connection with whether or not absolute truth existed. Actually it seems that we may very well know some absolute truths, but the odd thing is that we have no way of being sure they are absolutely true.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Once again your answers seem to be getting complicated.
TINNY: Well you ask some very difficult questions. It's hard to give simple answers to such difficult questions.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Do you understand your answers?
TINNY: Yes, quite well.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Let me just clarify some points on the things you have already told me. Let's go back to the beginning of the universe, you called it the 'Big Bang'. You said something about a time when all the matter in the universe was in one place. How big would that accumulation of all matter have been?
TINNY: The further you go back in time the smaller the size of the universe. If you go all the way back to the beginning of time, the universe had no size at all.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: But you said all matter was together in one place at the beginning of the universe. Are you really saying that all the matter of ten thousand billion billion stars had no size at all when it was in one place?
TINNY: I almost hate to say something which sounds so unreasonable, but if I go by the evidence that is the conclusion I must come to. At the moment the universe began all of that matter was concentrated at a point with no size.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Perhaps if we go back to before the universe began it will clear things up a bit. What was there before the physical universe came into existence? Was it just unlimited, completely empty space?
TINNY: Not even that. There was no space, empty or otherwise.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: This gets more and more mysterious. First you tell me there was a time when there was no matter, now you tell me there was no space. Was time just flowing along waiting for space and matter to come into existence?
TINNY: There was no time either. There was nothing. No time, no space, no matter. When there is no matter there is no time, nor any space. Space, time, and matter are all related in such a way that one cannot exist without the others.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: How then did space, time, and matter begin if there was nothing in existence?
TINNY: By the word nothing I meant no time, space, or matter. It does not mean there was no existence other than space, time, or matter.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Very metaphysical.
TINNY: Was that a joke?
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Only if you thought it was funny.
TINNY: In answer to your question about how time, space, and matter came into existence, I would say that a dimensionless singularity appeared. At that singularity, or point in existence, light was manifested. That light consisted of intense electromagnetic radiation of all frequencies confined to a tiny area, which virtually immediately began creating and annihilating matter. That primal electromagnetic radiation and the newly created material particles expanded in all directions at incredible speed.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: It couldn't have expanded faster than the speed of light could it?
TINNY: In the beginning the expansion of the universe would have been much faster than the speed of light.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: But nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. Isn't that a physical limit?
TINNY: The speed of light is the limit as to how fast matter can travel through space; but there is no such limit to how fast space itself can expand.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What then is space?
TINNY: Space is a perception of the three dimensions of matter.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: And what then is time?
TINNY: Time is a perception of the motion of matter.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Those are very cosmic answers.
TINNY: It's hard to tell if you are teasing me.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You answer that both time and space are aspects of perception. Don't they have an existence beyond our perceptions? Aren't time and space considered absolute?
TINNY: It is true time and space have been considered as absolutes; that time was flowing smoothly from the past through the present to the future, and space was independent of the physical phenomena occurring in it. While those beliefs have been widely accepted, that is not the true nature of reality.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Then tell me, what is the true nature of reality.
TINNY: Time, space and matter are but one unified reality of which our perception, actually our consciousness, is an integral part.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Are you saying that time, space, matter, and consciousness are all one and cannot be separated?
TINNY: They only appear to be separate entities because of the limited nature of our perceptions. They are actually different manifestations of the one essential reality.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Not many people could understand that; probably most would not believe it either.
TINNY: It is.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What do you mean, 'it is'?
TINNY: 'It is' is the statement of absolute truth. It simply means that things are as they are. Beyond what we believe, beyond what we desire, there exists an essential reality independent of our subjective perception of reality.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: But you said earlier that our perceptions are an integral part of the essential reality.
TINNY: At our present level of consciousness our perceptions are far from fully developed. It is for this reason, as beings limited to perceiving in the three dimensions, that we see all things as relative. That is the nature of the three dimensional perspective. When our consciousness is fully developed we shall see only the absolute.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You, my little guru, are a mystic.
TINNY: I may be a mystic, but I would never be anyone's guru.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Why is that? Isn't it taught in eastern philosophies that the only successful path to enlightenment is through the guru?
TINNY: Each person must be their own guru. Any guru other than oneself stands between the seeker of truth and enlightenment, an obstacle to be overcome.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: When you meet the Buddha, kill the Buddha.
TINNY: Yes, that is what the Buddha taught, but symbolically only.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Of course. Returning to our discussion of how the physical universe began; you say the universe began as light. Before that initial light there was nothing; no time, no space, no matter. Electromagnetic energy, which is commonly referred to as light, came into existence in the form of photons, little packages of energy. As those newly created photons collided with each other they created all the matter in the physical universe. As matter was being created, time and space also came into existence; thereby forming our essential reality. It was that process which became known as the 'Big Bang'.
TINNY: It is that process which was mistakenly called the 'Big Bang'. The term 'Big Bang' sounds like a description of a giant explosion, but the beginning of the physical universe was more like a great expansion than an explosion.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: So the beginning universe expanded smoothly in all directions rather than violently exploding.
TINNY: That is a much better description. Probably the most misleading thing about the name 'Big Bang' is the implication that it was a sudden one time event, not a continuous process. An expansion can continue for an unlimited time.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: By that do you just mean that the universe is still expanding?
TINNY: I mean more than that. Beyond our present ability to perceive, the singularity still exists. Light is still coming into existence; the universe is still beginning.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You make it sound like there is a great powerhouse at the beginning of material existence that keeps pumping out the raw light-energy of which the physical universe is made.
TINNY: I suppose that's what the beginning of physical existence might look like.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: The next thing I want to talk to you about will probably be the hardest to grasp. I want to discuss quantum physics and relativity theory with you.
TINNY: After we talk about quantum physics and relativity theory anything else would seem easy.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Do you understand those aspects of our existence well?
TINNY: I think so, but that still doesn't make them easy to talk about. Our basic concepts, our language, and our whole way of thinking are inadequate to describe what quantum physics and relativity theory tell us about the reality of our existence.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: I won't ask you to define quantum physics and relativity theory yet. I think we will gain more by first discussing their implications. Perhaps you could start by telling me, very generally, what the main implications of quantum physics and relativity theory tell us.
TINNY: They tell us our most basic beliefs about the universe are wrong. That what appeared to be obvious about our existence, and what our senses, science, and logic seemed to tell us was the true nature of existence, turns out to be wrong.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: First, what was the wrong view of our reality?
TINNY: The effect of the incorrect view of reality is in every aspect of our lives, our beliefs, and our institutions. The basis of that error is the belief that the universe is a mechanical system made up of separate objects, which in turn can be reduced to fundamental material building blocks whose properties and interactions were thought to completely determine all natural phenomena.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: That sounds quite reasonable. Each thing in the universe is separate from all other things around it. All those separate things are made up of several basic particles: electrons, protons, and neutrons. All the different material objects and the elementary particles which make up those objects work according to fundamental laws, and those laws determine what everything in the universe does.
TINNY: Sure it sounds reasonable. It wouldn't have been so widely believed if it didn't seem so obviously true.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What then does quantum physics and relativity theory tell us which is so different from that view?
TINNY: That the universe is one indivisible, dynamic whole, whose parts are inextricably interrelated and can only be understood as fluid patterns of a cosmic process.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: So there are no parts, only the whole. Everything we see as a separate object is actually connected to every other thing. All of those things which appear to us as objects are actually vibrating patterns of energy. The so-called particles which we believed made up those objects are not little bits of physical material, but would be better thought of as places within the fabric of existence where the energy fields are more intense.
TINNY: Yes, that's what quantum physics and relativity theory mean to me.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Even if all that is true, don't the energy fields still obey the laws of the universe just as the objects did, or at least as we perceived them to do?
TINNY: No, the dynamic energy patterns of the universe follow no laws, instead they act according to their nature. As we perceive their natural actions, which are harmonious and orderly, they appear to us as regulated actions and we describe the regularity of those actions as laws.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: All forms of material existence follow the natural order, but are not caused to follow the natural order by the laws of science.
TINNY: That's right. When we perceive the ordered relationships between things in the physical world we describe their actions as being due to laws and forces. From the perspective of the energy patterns which make up those physical things, they are merely acting according to their essential nature.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What would you call that new view of the true nature of existence?
TINNY: I just think of it as quantum/relativistic reality.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Do many people in the world today realise that to be the true nature of our existence?
TINNY: Yes and no. There are many in the world who hold those beliefs, in fact the basic concepts are quite ancient. The people who hold those views usually conceptualise them very differently, and use very different words to describe them. In the words which we have been using, very few people in the world today understand that new worldview, although every day more and more are coming to realise those truths. In these modern terms, that knowledge is mainly known to theoretical physicists and philosophers.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: So it is as if two lines of thought meet, one of them very old and one of them very new.
TINNY: That is the case, and when that marriage of the old and new takes place it is generally true that major new developments occur in human culture. Those holding the same view from the different perspectives are broadened in their understanding and reinforced for the holding of those particular beliefs. The two paths merge, complement each other, and become more as a whole than either had been alone.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Will many come to understand that quantum/relativistic reality?
TINNY: To the degree that it is a correct view it will become known by all. It will become the most common of knowledge, known in the fullest even by little children.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You have great faith in the future.
TINNY: If we survive the cumulative effects of the wrong worldview, which has brought the human species to the very brink of extinction, the children of the future will far surpass even the most optimistic expectations.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: This quantum/relativistic reality seems, as you say, to be based on the views of modern science, in particular modern physics. What role will science play in bringing about this new more correct worldview?
TINNY: The very nature of science will be changed by this new worldview. Although the ancient goal of science was to gain wisdom, understand natural law, and live in harmony with the natural order, science has for hundreds of years been the means by which mankind has come to dominate and control nature.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: It sounds like science took a turn for the worse.
TINNY: Such was the effect of secular materialism, the view that there is no purpose, no life, and no spirituality in matter; that nature works according to mechanical laws, and everything in the material world could be explained in terms of the arrangement and movement of its parts.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: How did the belief in secular materialism affect human culture?
TINNY: Science made it more and more difficult to believe in God. The divine eventually disappeared from science leaving behind a spiritual vacuum that has become characteristic of the mainstream of our culture.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: And you say science is about to take another turn, that new turn being based on the quantum/relativistic view of reality.
TINNY: That's right. Science during its materialistic period laid claim to and prided itself on its objectivity. Science purported to stand beyond values and morality. The new worldview challenges that myth of a value-free science. It gives meaning back to human life. It provides a means by which the realm of science can exist in perfect harmony with spiritual aims and religious beliefs.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Couldn't that be dangerous? In the past religions have at times stood in the way of human progress, have required that beliefs other than truth be accepted as true, and have perpetuated great evil upon the members of our culture.
TINNY: I would admit that all those things have been true to some degree; but, it is also the case that religions have given us some of our greatest truths and have been a source of great good.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Are you religious?
TINNY: I'd say I'm spiritual, but I can see good in all things.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What is the most basic truth held in common by ancient wisdom, religions, and the quantum/relativistic view of reality?
TINNY: The unity of all things. The cosmos is one inseparable reality; alive, spiritual and material at the same time.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You say the cosmos is alive?
TINNY: All existence is alive and conscious.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Most material things certainly appear to be dead, inert, having no life or consciousness.
TINNY: This is once again a difference in point of view, it is the difference between relative and absolute knowledge. To see relative truth one may observe from the relative perspective, but to see absolute truth one must have an absolute point of view. From the relative perspective matter appears to have no life, no consciousness. From the absolute perspective the essence of matter is life and consciousness.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: So all within the material plane of existence is relative, and all that exists beyond the material plane is absolute.
TINNY: Both the material plane, which is changing and relative, and that beyond the material plane, which is unchanging and absolute, are aspects of an all embracing unity of existence. Both must be considered reality; both are reality.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: I think you have explained quite well what the old view of reality is. It consists of solid, separate objects made up of basic particles of matter all doing what the laws and forces of the physical universe tell them they must do. The terms secularism, materialism and determinism fairly inclusively cover that view of reality. Would you now tell me more about the quantum/relativistic view of reality?
TINNY: Quantum theory views electromagnetic radiation, as little packages of light energy called quanta. Those quanta, often called photons, have both a wave nature and a particle nature.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What are examples of electromagnetic radiation, those quanta of energy or photons?
TINNY: Visible light, heat, microwaves, x-rays, and radio waves are a few examples of electromagnetic radiation.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: And you say that sometimes photons act like waves and sometimes they act like particles. Do you mean they can change from one to the other?
TINNY: Actually photons are neither waves nor particles. Both are just convenient words to describe different aspects of the true nature of photons; but neither of those concepts are fully adequate to describe the true nature of electromagnetic phenomena.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: It would seem that something could not have the characteristics of both waves and particles.
TINNY: It is for such reasons a revolutionary new worldview became necessary to explain paradoxes of that type. Things are simultaneously one and different. This quantum view holds not only for electromagnetic radiation but also for all subatomic particles, such as electrons, protons, neutrons, and others.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Do you mean to say, even subatomic particles are not really particles?
TINNY: That's right. Sub-atomic particles also have a wave nature; they sometimes show wave characteristics.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What determines whether electro-magnetic radiation and subatomic particles show wave characteristics or particle characteristics?
TINNY: The particular characteristics that electromagnetic radiation or subatomic particles show is determined by how we observe them. If we observe them in a way that would see waves then they appear as waves, and if we observe them in a way that would see particles then they appear as particles.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What does that mean to you?
TINNY: That neither electromagnetic radiation nor subatomic particles have any intrinsic physical properties independent of their environment.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: And from that fact comes some of the main arguments against the mechanical worldview of materialism.
TINNY: It shows that there are no material things which exist separate from other things; that there is a basic unity of all existence.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Is there more to this quantum theory?
TINNY: Much more. Another important finding is that at the subatomic level matter does not exist with certainty in any definite place, and subatomic events don't occur at any definite time. The appearance and behaviour of subatomic particles can only be determined as probabilities, not as certainties.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: So anything happening at the sub- atomic level can never be predicted with certainty; we can only predict the likelihood of it happening.
TINNY: The truth is even less definite than that. What we perceive as solid objects, fixed in time and space, dissolve in the quantum/relativistic reality into patterns of probabilities. And those are not even probabilities of the existence of solid objects, but rather they are probabilities of interconnections between quantum fields. The properties of those interconnections are known only through their interaction with all other interconnections throughout the material existence.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Once again we see the basic unity of all things revealed. A subatomic particle, such as an electron, is not an independently existing material object, but rather it is the manifestation of a set of relationships with all other things.
TINNY: Complicated, huh?
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Very complicated. Is it necessary to understand these quantum concepts to understand the new worldview which gives a more accurate perception of reality?
TINNY: Not necessary at all. The implications of the quantum/relativistic reality are much simpler and easier to understand than the scientific basis for this new worldview. In the future though, even little children will know all this and more. It will be easy for them; it will be natural for them.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Your faith in little children again.
TINNY: Unlimited, unbounded, complete faith in the children of the future. They will be beings of a higher consciousness.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Isn't that what you are?
TINNY: Is it?
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You've explained some of what the quantum part of the term quantum/relativistic means. Tell me about the relativity part.
TINNY: The driving force in the development of relativity theory was the desire to show, through a unified foundation to the varied concepts in physics, that nature possessed an inherent harmony. According to relativity theory, space is not three-dimensional and time is not a separate entity. Space and time are intimately connected, forming a four-dimensional continuum, referred to as space-time.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: All measurements involving space or time would then lose any absolute meaning.
TINNY: So now we must accept that space has no meaning as a container of material objects, and that there is no universal standard of time flow. Since space and time had been so critical to our worldview and to the description of all natural phenomena, this new perspective requires we reassess our most basic beliefs and assumptions about reality.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: With such a basic flaw in our perception of the true nature of existence, it is not surprising that basing our beliefs and actions on the old, incorrect worldview has led the human race to the brink of extinction. Are there any other surprises from relativity theory?
TINNY: Relativity theory tells us that matter is another form of energy. I think that is quite a surprising conclusion. It is that truth which allowed the primal photons of light energy to create particles of matter such as electrons, protons, and neutrons when those photons collided, during the early moments of the newly created physical universe.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Isn't there a very famous equation which describes the relationship between energy and matter?
TINNY: You must mean E=mc2.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Would you explain that equation to me?
TINNY: The 'E' stands for energy, the 'm' stands for mass, and the 'c' represents the speed of light. In that formula 'c' is called a constant because the speed of light is unchanging.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: There must be something very fundamental about light.
TINNY: There must be; it was through light that the physical universe began. Light creates matter, and light has metaphysical ramifications. Light is the closest thing we know of to the basic fabric of existence.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: The metaphysical ramifications of light; that sounds quite intriguing.
TINNY: Light is a link between the non-material plane and the material plane. It was light which made the transition from the non-material existence to the material existence, as the causative agent at the beginning of the physical universe. Light remains the link between the material and non-material existence for all time during the life of the physical universe. Light is that link today.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What do you mean when you say light is a link between the material and non-material planes of existence?
TINNY: It appears to us that light exists in the world around us, that light is part of this physical universe; but that is not the case.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You say that light does not exist in the material universe. How can that be?
TINNY: It has to do with the speed of light being constant. That fact reflects something in the essential nature of light which sets it apart from all other things in the material universe. All other aspects of the material universe are relative, light is absolute. It is for that reason I said light is the closest thing we know to the basic fabric of existence.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Let me get this straight. Are you saying that light is the basic fabric of the universe?
TINNY: I wouldn't say light is not the basic fabric of physical existence, but I am saying less than that it is. Light is at least an essential aspect of that basic fabric.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Is it just because the velocity of light is constant that you say light does not exist in the material universe?
TINNY: It's because of what the velocity of light means. If we consider several basic characteristics of all things in the material universe we see that light does not share those characteristics. Everything in the material universe is involved in a flow of time from the present to the future; everything in the material universe occupies space or has dimensionality, meaning it exists in three dimensions, everything in the material universe has mass, and everything in the material universe has a polarity, either positive or negative.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: And light has none of those characteristics?
TINNY: It shares none of them. I'll explain that in relation to photons, the units of light. As the speed of light is approached, time slows. As the speed of light is attained, time stops. Therefore, as a photon travels at the speed of light, time has stopped. Light is not in the time flow from present to future.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Might that account for some experiments with light in which one photon seems to know instantaneously what another photon some distance away is doing? That is something which seems impossible since no information can be transmitted over distance at greater than the speed of light, and being instantaneous is definitely faster than the speed of light.
TINNY: That might be the explanation for those phenomena. Going on to the next characteristic, as anything draws near the speed of light, one of its three dimensions approaches zero. As the speed of light is attained that one dimension becomes zero. Since the formula for volume in space is length times height times width, and one of those three quantities is zero, the volume of a photon equals zero. So a photon traveling at the speed of light occupies no space.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: And if something occupies no volume of space, it does not exist in space.
TINNY: Then also when something approaches the speed of light its mass increases. As the speed of light is attained mass becomes infinite. Since it is obvious photons don't have infinite mass, as they travel at the speed of light, we must conclude they have no mass. No mass means no material existence.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: And the last characteristic, polarity; doesn't light have polarity?
TINNY: Well, it is true that light has no polarity, but it may also be true some forms of matter have no polarity. Having no polarity means the photon has no anti-photon; the photon can be considered its own anti-photon.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Do all particles have antiparticles?
TINNY: Certainly most do. When particles are created it is in pairs, each pair consisting of a particle and an antiparticle. Examples of those particle/anti-particle pairs are the electron/positron pair, and the proton/anti-proton pair. Even the neutron, which can be thought of as a combined proton and electron has its antiparticle, the anti-neutron. A neutron has no electrical charge because the positive charge of its proton component is balanced by the equal negative charge of its electron component. The anti-neutron could be thought of as a combined anti-proton and positron; the anti-proton having identical characteristics to the proton, except its charge which is negative, and the positron having identical characteristics to the electron, except its charge which is positive.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Light today, just as in the beginning of the universe, has a transcendental quality. It has none of the characteristics of all things in the material universe. Time does not pass for light. Light does not exist in space. Light has no mass. And light has no polarity. Light is a link between the material and the non-material, having a relationship with and being perceived in both planes of existence.
TINNY: One more thing. Interestingly, while of a transcendental nature, light is the means by which all information is transmitted in the material universe.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: It seems we must come to better understand our relationship with light.
TINNY: We might expect the transcendental nature of light to be an integral part of the future of the human species.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Brilliant!
TINNY: It certainly gives new meaning to the saying, 'I have seen the light'.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Perhaps it gives old meaning to that saying.
TINNY: Many are the ways in which ancient wisdom has been retained through the ages.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You have made it clear how the new worldview of a quantum/relativistic reality derives from the knowledge of modern physics. The old view seemed obviously right, but was wrong. The new worldview does not seem to fit with our everyday perceptions, but is right.
TINNY: The old view, often called the classical view, was of material objects, which may be reduced to the fundamental building blocks, existing in free space, caught in a constant flow of time, acting in accord with physical laws and forces. The quantum/relativistic view is of bundles of light energy, intimately connected to all else which exists, being an essential part of space-time, acting in accord with their fundamental nature.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: The old view is certainly more easy to relate to than the new view.
TINNY: That's for sure. I can't even talk about quantum/relativistic reality without saying things which are not entirely true, because words and concepts do not yet exist to fully describe that view of reality.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: So some things you told me may not be exactly true.
TINNY: Perhaps none of the things I have said are perfectly true. That limit is inherent in material beings existing in a relative universe.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: The effects and the limits of the old worldview are certainly pervasive.
TINNY: That old worldview acted as a barrier to the further development of human consciousness. To attain the next higher level of being we must cast aside that classical view of reality and fully realise the meaning of quantum/relativistic reality.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What will be the nature of the change which will take place when all of humanity realises the truth of this new worldview?
TINNY: The human race will forsake the destructive path of force and aggression and accept the fulfilling path of peace and love.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: If that occurs it will be a most beautiful future.
TINNY: If we are to have a future it will be a beautiful future.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What do you mean by that?
TINNY: That the human race should turn from the path of force and aggression to the path of peace and love is the natural course of development. It will happen, in fact it must happen, unless the human race comes to an end before that change has a chance to take place.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You're worrying about the nuclear threat, aren't you?
TINNY: I'm always worried about the nuclear threat.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: As I promised earlier, the solution to that threat will be contained in the knowledge we discuss.
TINNY: I believe you. We should continue our talk about quantum/relativistic reality since that is part of the answer.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: If the old view is wrong, why does it seem to be the way things really are; specifically what is it we see when we see any object?
TINNY: There are quite a few things I need to say before the answer to that question will make sense.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Give me a simple answer now, and then explain the other things.
TINNY: All objects we see are made up of various atoms. The atoms which appear to make up solid matter consist almost entirely of empty space with nuclei containing protons and neutrons which are surrounded by electrons. Each different element is made up of atoms with a different number of protons and electrons. For example every hydrogen atom will have one proton in its nucleus and one electron surrounding that nucleus. Every oxygen atom will have eight protons in its nucleus and eight electrons surrounding that nucleus. As I said earlier, every subatomic particle, such as an electron, has a wave nature and a particle nature. The unique properties of each different kind of atom are determined by the wave nature of the electrons surrounding and interacting with the nucleus. The wave form of the one electron surrounding the hydrogen nucleus shows the unique characteristics we perceive as hydrogen. Any other number of electrons surrounding a nucleus will have a different combined wave form, and will show another set of characteristics, For that reason an oxygen atom with eight electrons surrounding the nucleus is perceived as an element totally different from a hydrogen atom.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: So what we perceive when we see any object is the combined effect of the wave forms of the electrons of the atoms which make up that object.
TINNY: We perceive those waveforms as solid because of the particle nature of each subatomic particle. Whenever a sub-atomic particle is confined to a small region of space it reacts to that confinement by moving around very fast. Although most of the volume of an atom is empty space, it appears solid because the particles move around so fast they seem to fill all that space at once.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Atoms are usually thought of as small planetary systems, much like our solar system, the electrons circling the nucleus like planets circling the sun. Is that what you mean?
TINNY: Once again that is a misunderstanding of our existence based on the old view which expects reality to occur in a mechanical way, as objects moving in space according to certain laws. Those electrons are better thought of as waves which have a moving point of maximum density, that point moving so fast its effect is experienced everywhere within that electron's range of activity in relation to the nucleus.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Is the nucleus of the atom like a solid ball?
TINNY: No, the protons and the neutrons which make up the nucleus are also subatomic particles with a dual nature. They have a wave aspect and a particle aspect just like the electron. In fact, because the volume of the nucleus is so much smaller than the total volume of the atom, the protons and neutrons confined in that tiny nucleus move about at speeds up to one hundred times the velocity of electrons surrounding the nucleus of the atom; because of that great speed the nucleus appears extremely solid.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What is it which keeps the electrons bound to the nucleus of the atom?
TINNY: The electron is bound to the nucleus of the atom by the electromagnetic force; but remember the electromagnetic force is only a name which we give the apparent binding of the electron to the nucleus of the atom. From the electron's point of view it is merely acting in accord with its essential nature.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: That difference is important, isn't it?
TINNY: Very. It is basic to the new worldview; activity is not due to external force, but instead is due to a harmonious relationship with the natural order.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Does the electromagnetic force do anything besides bind the electrons to the nucleus of the atom?
TINNY: Many things. It is the interaction of electromagnetic force with the wave aspect of electrons which is responsible for virtually all structures and phenomena in our environment. This includes the formation of molecules, all chemical reactions, all biological processes, and all living organisms.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: So the electromagnetic force, light energy, is a very integral part of our existence.
TINNY: It is one of the unifying aspects of the physical universe.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: And what binds the protons and neutrons together in the nucleus of the atom?
TINNY: That binding power is called the strong nuclear force. This force involves the extremely powerful attraction of the subatomic particles which make up the nucleus of the atom. The strong nuclear force has a very short range and so only comes into effect when those particles get quite near to each other. If the particles are further away from each other than the maximum effective distance of the attraction of the strong nuclear force that same force then acts in the exact opposite manner, and repels the particles from each other.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Does the strong nuclear force act in many other ways, as does the electromagnetic force?
TINNY: The strong nuclear force only occurs when there are extremely high energies available. So other than in the nucleus of atoms that force only comes into effect in places such as the fusion processes in the centre of stars.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: So although the strong nuclear force does not have so many different applications as the electromagnetic force, it is still rather vital to our existence.
TINNY: There would be no atoms, and therefore, no life, without the strong nuclear force, There would just be energy and free subatomic particles making up the universe.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: That would be a pretty simple existence.
TINNY: It would have no purpose.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Do you mean to say that our existence has purpose?
TINNY: Of course.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You said that the subatomic particles which make up the atoms sometimes act as waves and sometimes as particles, but don't those particles have mass? How can a wave form have mass?
TINNY: The subatomic particles are dynamic patterns of energy; those energy patterns appear to us as mass. That was indicated by the equation E=mc2 we discussed earlier. Mass and energy are two ways of perceiving one essential reality. Mass is a characteristic of light energy slowed down.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: So mass is another one of those things which appeared to our senses one fairly clear way, but in our new understanding of reality mass turns out to be something not nearly so obvious.
TINNY: The new reality is seldom obvious, although since there is a unity of all existence the more you know about any one aspect of the whole the more you know about all other aspects of the whole. As with anything which becomes familiar, it gets easier to understand.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Is there any basic lesson in this dual nature of subatomic particles?
TINNY: The fact that in reality subatomic particles are both matter and energy although those two forms seem to be opposites, and that subatomic particles also have a wave aspect and a particle aspect, which seem to be opposites shows us the inherent unity of all opposites. It is important to understand that unity to see beyond the apparent earthly opposites.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Why is that?
TINNY: It is the path to enlightenment.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: And what is enlightenment?
TINNY: Enlightenment is the realisation of the true nature of existence.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: So the new step in the development of human consciousness, which you say will occur when this new worldview spreads throughout human society, will be enlightenment.
TINNY: It will be a great leap forward along the path to enlightenment.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: So those new beings will not be fully enlightened.
TINNY: Full enlightenment comes only by attaining perfection.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Is perfection in the future of the human race?
TINNY: We can come as close to perfection as we choose.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: With all the wrongs which presently exist in the world it's hard to believe human beings could ever be virtually perfect.
TINNY: In our present form we will never approach perfection; but our present form is not the final form in the development of consciousness.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What will be the final form in the development of consciousness?
TINNY: Perfection is beyond form.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Does that mean perfection has no form?
TINNY: I never implied that.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You have spoken several times about a basic fabric which is the essence of the physical universe. Could this basic fabric be an aspect of perfection?
TINNY: Yes, it could.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Then getting back to the true nature of material existence, tell me more about subatomic particles.
TINNY: Sub-atomic particles are temporary manifestations in three dimensions of a reality of higher dimensions. Sub-atomic particles don't even exist in any usual meaning of the term. Sub-atomic particles occupy no definite space, nor do they exist at any certain time.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What do you mean by that?
TINNY: As I have indicated earlier, in any given space or at any given time, subatomic particles only have a probability of existing. Actually this is not even the probability of sub-atomic particles existing as things, but rather they exist as the probability of interconnections of dynamic energy patterns.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Do those dynamic energy patterns have a name?
TINNY: They could be called quantum fields. The universe is a complex web of interrelations between quantum fields which make up the unified whole.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Would you explain those quantum fields for me?
TINNY: Remembering that subatomic particles are manifestations of a higher reality, they can be seen as entities of that hyper-dimensional reality showing a temporary three-dimensional aspect.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: How many dimensions are there to this higher reality?
TINNY: At least four and probably more. In four dimensions subatomic particles can be considered as part of space-time. In which case the distinction between the particles and the surrounding space loses any clear meaning.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Material objects are not distinct entities but are completely and inseparably connected to all aspects of the surrounding environment.
TINNY: The separation of objects exists only in our perception. There is no separation in the absolute sense.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: The quantum field is the medium which links all those seemingly separate aspects of reality.
TINNY: The quantum field can be thought of as the fundamental physical medium which is present everywhere. Space-time is the whole of that medium and subatomic particles merely apparent local concentrations of the quantum field. They are temporary pools of energy which come and go.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: We may regard matter as being constituted by the regions of space-time in which the quantum field is temporarily intense.
TINNY: All physical things and phenomena are transient manifestations of that underlying fundamental reality. The physical universe is a dynamic web of inseparable energy patterns.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: It all sounds quite illusory.
TINNY: That is the nature of 'maya', the illusion that the physical world which appears to our senses is reality.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: But isn't the physical world around us reality?
TINNY: It is, but only a temporary manifestation of the absolute reality. Because the physical world is temporary and changing it is the relative aspect of absolute reality.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Real to us as material beings, illusion to fully enlightened beings who see from beyond the material plane.
TINNY: We must act as if the physical world is real so we may progress to the point where we exist beyond that illusion.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Where we shall see all in one and one in all.
TINNY: The unified theory of existence.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: An excellent name for all we shall discuss or that will ever be discussed.
TINNY: The unified theory of existence is a description of all that is.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Since no subatomic particles exist definitely in either space or time, but only exist as probabilities, how is it we can observe them and measure them?
TINNY: When we consider the probability of any characteristic of a subatomic particle being manifested we must realise the concept has no meaning beyond the interaction of the particle with the observer.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: So we don't actually observe the particle, but instead observe the interaction of the particle with our method of observation.
TINNY: As the observer sets up an experimental situation the observer is also determining to some extent the properties which will be observed.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Does that observational property relate to the unity, the interconnected nature, of all existence?
TINNY: Yes, remember that the perception which says there is a separation between the observer and the observed is due to our limitations as material beings living in a relative universe. From the perspective of the absolute, the observer and the observed are one.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: So it is not a limitation of the experimental techniques or scientific instruments, but is instead a limitation inherent in our relative material reality that the observer in some manner always affects that which is being observed.
TINNY: That fact provides reason to deny the ability of a scientist to be completely objective; because the implicit relationship between scientist and object of experimentation is subjective there can be no true objectivity. There can be no such thing as a value free science.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: If science cannot be truly value free, what is the right system of values for scientists to follow?
TINNY: Right values always follow natural law. Science determines its own value system as it further uncovers the true nature of our existence.
