THE WAVICLE: A FRAGMENTED JOURNEY INTO WHOLENESS
“This inner fragmentation of man mirrors his view of the world ‘outside’ which is seen as a multitude of separate objects and events. The natural environment is treated as if it consisted of separate parts to be exploited by different interest groups. The fragmented view is further extended to society which is split into different nations, races, religious and political groups.”
–– Fritjof Capra, The Tao of Physics
“The relationship between thought and reality that this thought is about is in fact far more complex than that of a mere correspondence. Thus, in scientific research, a great deal of our thinking is in terms of theories. The word ‘theory’ derives from the Greek ‘theoria’, which has the same root as ‘theatre’, in a word meaning ‘to view’ or ‘to make a spectacle’. Thus, it might be said that a theory is primarily a form of insight, i.e. a way of looking at the world, and not a form of knowledge of how the world is.”
–– David Bohm, Wholeness and the Implicate Order
“Consciousness is the subjective form involved in feeling the contrast between the ‘theory’ which may be erroneous and the fact which is ‘given.’ Thus consciousness involves the rise into importance of the contrast between the eternal objects designated by the words ‘any’ and ‘just that.’ Conscious perception is, therefore, the most primitive form of judgement. The organic philosophy holds that consciousness only arises in a late derivative phase of complex integrations.”
–– Alfred North Whitehead, Process and Reality
The field of physics has been on a profound evolutionary journey; from its Greek roots to classical physics, and finally to its concrescing moment in modern physics. And while modern physics has enabled rapid technological development to unfold since the 20th century, it has also introduced immense existential uncertainty, propagating further the dogmatic relativism that permeates postmodernism. Undeniably, quantum mechanics has been at the forefront of this perplexing mystery, which we call the nature of reality. The quantum world is filled with paradoxical riddles from Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle to Schrodinger’s cat, and perhaps, the most mystical of all is that of the wave-particle duality.
It all began in the 17th century when Issac Newton directed a beam of sunlight against a glass prism, which resulted in a colorful spectrum of refracted light. Newton then translated this revelation into the domain of optics, in which he concluded that light consisted of tiny particles called corpuscles. According to him, light had to be made up of particles and not waves because of the geometric nature in which light reflects and refracts – waves do not carry the shape of solid, straight lines, instead, they travel and unfold with crests and troughs (Baggott, 2004). Despite the fact that his contemporaries, Robert Hooke and Christiaan Huygens had already developed a wave theory of light, Newton’s particle explanation reigned supreme, perhaps due to his recognition for his treatise on the laws of motion that he published in Principia (Jones, 1992). While Newton’s exposition of the nature of light could explain and predict the reflection of light, it was unable to accurately demonstrate the diffraction of light; this could only be proven by the wave theory of light (Jones, 1992).
Only until Thomas Young appeared on the scene did the wave and particle theory of light find a way of truly meeting and honoring each other. In the early 1800s, Young demonstrated that light carried both a wave and a particle nature in his double-slit experiment. This experiment consisted of a light source, a wall with two narrow passages, and a screen behind the wall. The two considerations were: 1) if light behaved in a particle-like manner, then the shining light would go through the two slits and would appear exactly on the screen behind as two bright spots; and 2) if light behaved in a wave-like manner then an interference pattern would appear as “amplification and nullification would reveal a fringe of dark and light spots on the screen behind the slits, instead of just two bright spots (Welch, 2021).” In the end, Young’s experiment demonstrated a clear wave interference pattern as the brightest spots appeared not exactly behind the two slits, but rather in between the space that was separating the two slits. If light consisted of particles, then the brightest spots would appear right behind the two slits. However, due to its wave nature, light entered through the two slits, creating an interference pattern in which the crests and troughs overlapped each other. This overlapping then led to the appearance of dark fringes through deconstructive interference and the appearance of bright fringes through constructive interference on the screen behind the wall.
While the wave demonstrated its superiority in the double-slit experiment, the particle nature of light mysteriously unveiled itself in the moment of measurement. Welch elucidates this phenomenon in The Texture of Time, as she writes:
“If we set up a measuring device to record which slit a photon goes through, then the interference pattern disappears and light acts as particles would, accumulating in two neat piles behind the two slits. The act of measurement changes the behavior of the system. If left to its own devices, the light maintains its wave nature and produces an interference pattern. If we look for particles, however, then light behaves like particles. No longer can scientists assume the objectivity of observations; all observations influence the observed (2021).”
Thus, the observer helps create reality by interacting with it, and in this capacity, we begin to witness a universe which is inherently participatory. Physicist John A. Wheeler approached his field in such a manner as well, and “attempted to approach physical reality not as something “out there”, which is passively described by observers, but to see it as a genesis through conscious dialogue between observers-participants and physical reality, so that the universe emerges as a special articulation of the relationship between human intelligence and physical reality (Nesteruk, 2013).” Wheeler was interested in understanding how physics could enable meaning to unfold through its various experiments and theories, indicating that meaning could only unfold if physicists can see themselves being in a dynamic interplay with nature. In this manner, the relationship between human beings and nature could flourish like a blues or jazz tune in which call and response permeates the essence of the music:
“We find the question in the world but it is still implicit and vague. Through my reply, which itself is a question, the first question becomes sharper so that a more accurate answer becomes possible. Meaning arises in a dialectic relationship between man and the world, but it is not possible to say which of the first begins the ‘interplay’ and which of the two first gives meaning to the other [...] physical reality reveals itself as an evolving complex of meanings in the course of the interplay between questions and answers which the human subject addresses to and receives from that “out there” which is eventually constituted by human observes as the physical reality nature. (Netseruk, 2013).”
Thus, the desire to witness a particle in the double-slit experiment, can be seen as one’s question to nature. And to that question, nature answers back by collapsing the wave function.
While classical physics deals with actualities, quantum physics embraces a world that is embedded in potentialities in the form of probabilities. As Capra indicates in The Tao of Physics, the observer plays a significant role in enabling those probabilities to manifest in quantum experiments: “The human observer constitutes the final link in the chain of observational processes, and the properties of any atomic object can only be understood in terms of the object’s interaction with the observer (Capra, 1975).” However, when an observation is not made, potentiality remains in itself, without actualizing into a determinant factor. This state of non-observed or unmeasured reality is called superposition. One thought experiment that brings to light this very notion is Schrodinger’s Cat (Welch, 2021). Quite simple, Schrodinger stated that if you were to put a cat along with some radioactive substance inside a closed box, you would not really know whether the cat is dead or alive. Only until you open the box, will you know whether it’s still alive or dead. Thus, the opening of the box along with the observation of the cat collapses the state of probability into a concrete actuality. The cat is in a state of superposition (both dead and alive) as long as the box is closed and no observer is present (Baggott, 2004). However, the fact that the cat has to either be dead or alive when an observation is made indicates the collapse of a wave function. The Copenhagen interpretation suggests:
“We can say nothing at all about a quantum particle without making very clear reference to the nature of the instrument which we use to make measurements on it. If our instrument is a double-slit apparatus, and we study the passage of a photon through it, we know that we can understand the physics of the photon-instrument interaction using the wave concept as expressed in the photon’s wave function or state vector. If our instrument is a photomultiplier or a piece of photographic film, we know that the photon-instrument interaction can be understood in terms of a particle picture. We can design instruments to demonstrate a quantum particle’s wave-like properties or its particle-like properties, but we cannot demonstrate simultaneously (Baggott, 2004).”
Thus, our very act of observing and measuring creates a fragmented perception of reality. To measure something means to actualize a causal effect, and strip away from it, pure potentiality.
This implies then, that our ultimate perception of reality is more often than not fragmented; despite the fact that wholeness lies underneath these fragments. Physicist, David Bohm has suggested that reality enfolds as the implicate order, which is the fundamental order of reality, while the explicate order unfolds into a particular valence of the implicate order, depicting the reality that we ordinarily perceive and experience. Bohm describes this enfolding and unfolding process as “undivided wholeness in flowing movement (Bohm, 1980).” Thus, our perception of reality is continuously unfolding, and yet, while reality is also enfolding itself. Why is it that we are unable to fully experience this enfoldment? Is the implicate order in a never-ending state of superposition? Perhaps, as Bohm is elucidating, it is our consciousness, in the form of thought, which ultimately collapses the wave function and in turn creates a reality that is fragmented. As he writes:
“What will be emphasized, first of all in scientific research and later in a more general context, is that fragmentation is continually being brought about by the almost universal habit of taking the content off our thought for a ‘description of the world as it is’. Or we could say that, in this habit, our thought is regarded as in direct correspondence with objective reality. Since our thought is pervaded with differences and distinctions, it follows that such a habit leads us to look on these as real divisions, so that the world is then seen and experienced as actually broken up into fragments (Bohm, 1980).”
The question then arises: why has thought created such a habit?
Mathematician and philosopher, Alfred North Whitehead would suggest that consciousness is actually the crown, not the ground of experience. Thus, consciousness does not play a primary role in our visceral understanding of reality. Whitehead systematizes perception into two categories: causal efficacy (pure physical feeling of casuality) and presentational immediacy (our immediate perception of the external world and all its qualities). “Consciousness,” writes Whitehead,
“Only dimly illuminates the prehensions in the mode of causal efficacy, because these prehensions are primitive elements in our experience. But prehensions in the mode of presentational immediacy are among those prehensions which we enjoy with the most vivid consciousness [...] It follows that the order of dawning, clearly and distinctly, in consciousness is not the order of metaphysical priority (Whitehead, 1978).”
Whitehead is indicating that sense reception, in the form of causal efficacy, is a primary way in which we can come to know the nature of reality. By tuning into our own physical processes, we receive more insight into nature’s physical processes. Perhaps then, through the mode of causal efficacy we may begin to enfold into the implicate order, experiencing “undivided wholeness in flowing movement” as we remain in a state of superposition, and embrace the non-dual reality of a wavicle.
The wave-particle duality evolved out of a tense dialectic, which overtime synthesized itself into a paradox. Can this paradox ever be solved? Does it need to be solved? These questions cannot be answered by thought, they cannot be touched by the late phase of experience which we call consciousness. It can only be touched and felt by the viscerality of experience. As Whitehead eloquently states: “It is evident, however, that the primary function of theories is as a lure for feeling, thereby providing immediacy of enjoyment and purpose (Whitehead, 1978).” If one is lured enough by the intensity of the wavicle, then there is a sure way into feeling its reality. And perhaps Whitehead is indicating something of prime importance when he suggests art as the path into the concreteness of life: “In a sense art is a morbid overgrowth of functions which lie deep in nature. It is the essence of art to be artificial. But it is its perfection to return to nature, remaining art. In short art is the education of nature. Thus, in its broadest sense, art is civilization. For civilization is nothing other than the unremitting aim at the perfections of harmony (Whitehead, 1933).”
References
Baggot, J. (2004). Beyond Measure. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Bohm, D. (1980). Wholeness and the Implicate Order. New York, NY: Routledge Classics.
Capra, F. (1975). The Tao of Physics. Boulder, CO: Shambhala Publications.
Jones, R. (1992). Physics for the Rest of Us. New York: Barnes and Noble
Nesteruk, Al. (2013). A “Participatory Universe” of J. A. Wheeler as an intentional correlate of
embodied subjects and an example of purposiveness in physics. Humanities & Social Sciences, 6(3), 415-437.
Welch, K. (2021). Modern Physics: Excerpts from upcoming book the texture of time.
Manuscript in preparation, California Institute of Integral Studies.
Whitehead, A. N. (1933). Adventures of Ideas. New York, NY: Free Press.
Whitehead, A. N. (1978). Process and Reality. New York, NY: Free Press.
