Your mind is a lab

By Pankaj / Frank van den Bovenkamp, April 25, 2016

Albert Einstein reportedly once said: "I'm not extra-ordinarily intelligent, but I can completely focus on one single subject for a long time on end". Along a similar line, the reknowned Dutch theoretical physicist (and head of Princeton IAS) Robbert Dijkgraaf, when he was asked what he is doing the whole day, said that he and his fellow researchers are essentially hanging on the couch during office hours, to think about the secrets of the universe.

Some, if not most fabled breakthroughs in physics and other sciences all sprang from the intuitional mind. Your mind is a laboratory, not just in theory, but as a true scientific instrument which can actually, physically emulate the macrocosmic process in microcosmic form. It can essentially operate all by itself - it doesn't need you for that. Rather it needs you to be very silent and observant, not creating any disturbance at all.

The way we learn about, and do sadhana (spiritual practice) is normally in the spirit of morality as the very foundation of mental expansion. That's where it starts, but that's not the end of the story. Morality is a means, not a goal. The goal, one could argue, is to use sadhana to explore all the possibilities of life, to create, experiment and experience.

Here, the thinking intellect is purely the servant. All by itself the analytical mind cannot create anything. In the bigger scheme of things it is a sub-ordinate faculty - it is the camel on which the mystic, the scientist, the poet rides through the desert. Yet it is a very important tool, firstly to help find orientation and discipline, and then, in the creative phase, to share the gems of insight in a practical way.

Einstein, along with many if not most of his colleques, such as for example Wolfgang Pauli, was an intuitionalist, far more than a mathematician. Yet others, such as Paul Dirac, showed that same genius in mathematics. Probably more than in any other field, physicists are aware of, and candid about their limitations, their sheer lack of understanding of the fundamental processes of nature.

Microvita theory could be yet a new line of thinking which stretches our mind's intuitional capacities to the limit, more even than modern physics. People often say: "I don't think I really understand it, but trying to has a greatly mind-expanding effect". Therefore, just like we cannot explain electricity in terms of steam-power, or quantum particles in terms of Newtonian mechanics, we should not resort to "old line of thinking" philosophical archetypes in order to explain microvita - verily, in the words of Sarkar, "in order to hide our imperfections and conceal our limitations". Microvita theory is not Shiva-Shakti philosophy. It is a prospective, not a retrospective approach.

The Macrocosm does not need something to create something - it is entirely self-sufficient, in a historical sense as well as from moment to moment. In order to find a deeper order and meaning, to make progress in physics, to liberate the intellect from the materialistic paradigm, this we need to internalize. We currently don't know the true nature of "intrinsic spin", of "Pauli exclusion", and of several other crucial concepts in modern physics.

New discoveries in the field of sub-wave interactions help to better understand for example "de Broglie waves" forming an electron and the "magnetic moment" in more fundamental terms, that is, within the context of "Knower-I" and "Doer-I" as in microvita theory. One cannot exist without the other, and at the same time their equilibrium cannot be explained thermodynamically. It requires a new factor, decelerating and accelerating energies in a conscientious way, this way intelligently forming the sub-structure of life in carbonic atoms and molecules. It is partially intuitional science, numerical and other mathematical analysis and ultimately physical lab research.

In microvita science however, unlike other sciences, the intuitional factor may never completely be cancelled out. The Svabhava, "the characteristic bearing of Consciousness" remains a part and parcel of the equation. Without it, the cosmic equation will never be conclusive. With it, we ourselves become a part of it. We cannot remain outsiders like in traditional science. This is new, it is a science of engagement just as much as an analytical approach and one might say, more than anything else, this constitutes the "new line of thinking" introduced by P.R. Sarkar.


Back to