Old age mystics or gurus will take digs at modern ones
by calling them 'new age' tauntingly, as if their own notions being of ancient
origins or derived from ancient texts are any superior. I would place both,
although unable to distinguish them, in the same pan as that of
pseudoscience.
Bigger disappointments are the new-age biologists,
extending themselves into areas of physics, cosmology and quantum physics which
are definitely not their area of expertise at all. They will mercilessly use
Quantum Physics experiments and the weirdness of its results to distort notions
in theri popular books with unexplained concepts like consciousness.
They would be better off replacing the term consciousness with 'god’.
Like the new age gurus, they rely on misunderstood
results of quantum physics, relativity theory, the big bang origin of the
universe and so their hypothesis also fall into the category of what is
generally known as “pseudoscience”.
Distorting results of particle physics, special theory
of relativity, quantum physics and most recently the results from CERN on the
Higgs-Boson particle discovery ( which the media immediately termed as the ‘God
particle’) is not new. You can find earlier books by Physicists and by cell
biologist who believe in the power of consciousness to bring changes to biology
itself, and even to matter and other physical realities!
A pseudoscience is a set of ideas put forth as
scientific whey they are not scientific.
Such authors claim that consciousness created the
universe ( replace the word with god, and see how this claim is any different
from religion).
The idea is just as absurd as from religion. Such
hypotheses are not scientific theories because nowhere are there any testable
predictions that the hypothesis can offer. A scientific theory must offer
results and be able to predict results that are testable, verifiable and
falsifiable. In fact,most fall into the category of ideas that are so bad, they
even can’t said to be false. Idealism category is where they belong at best.
They only attempt to explain life, the universe and everything else, presuming
that explaining something is science.
Quantum physicists point out some huge and common
distortions that a pseudo-scientist will use:
The double slit experiment : here she/he confuses
observer with ‘consciousness’.
The results of this experiment do not depend on if
there is an observer like a conscious being present or absent. It depends on
whether or not there is a detector, before or after the photon passes through
the silts. If
the photon has to interact with any particle of matter, then the probability
wave must collapse and it behaves like a particle. If the photon is not
detected, it continues to travel as a wave until it hits the film or photon
detector on the other side of the slit, where the wave function collapses. The only thing that matters is whether or not
the photons are detected or interacted with in any way prior to or after
passing through the slits. This has absolutely nothing to do with consciousness
or an observer. This is the common misunderstanding of the
quantum gurus and many other popular authors.
Another of his/her common mistake is to extrapolate
from quantum experiments, in which conditions are very carefully controlled, to
normal everyday macroscopic conditions. Something like in the analogy to your
kitchen, as if your kitchen is not really there unless you are there to observe
your kitchen. (If I am in the bathroom, the kitchen is not there). There is no
justification in quantum mechanism for such a macroscopic extrapolation. Particles
will interact with each other to collapse all the wave forms and when we get to
a kitchen all the quantum weirdness disappears and essentially classical
physics rules in the kitchen. The kitchen certainly does not disappear. It is a
macroscopic phenomenon, not a microscopic event.
Yet another misunderstanding frequently used by such
authors is the observer effect from Einstein’s theory of relativity. Here they
use the idea that since time and space are relative to the observer, then time
and space are only in the mind and have no objective reality. The theory of
relativity is actually about using space-time instead of time and space
separately. The framework of reference becomes space-time. This made sense of
the experiments in particle physics as well as space physics or cosmology.
Again, they have used this misunderstanding of relativity theory to misguide
the public into believing that objective reality is something that comes out of
consciousness.
Really, consciousness
comes out of matter, out of objective reality.
A subjective
experience, when out of touch with objective reality is termed psychosis or
even hallucination or delusion, of grandeur or of humility.
Besides these distortions of science, other scientific
concepts like the Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, the Schrodinger’s cat
experiment of wave equations, the particle’s entanglement at a large distance (
the famous spooky action at a distance), have also been misused by unscrupulous
authors and gurus.
No doubt that a hypothesis is an idea, a form of
idealism at best or a belief system. But if it offers no testable predictions,
nor has any practical applications like actual scientific hypothesis have, it
is predominantly pseudoscience.
There are certainly gaps in science which are not yet
filled, but that does not mean that these gaps will never be filled. What
pseudoscientists do is that they propose hypothesis which try to fill the gaps
with inexpiable terms like consciousness (equating this to god,
which is just another unexplained term).
These hypotheses are not
testable, verifiable or falsifiable, and so are clearly not scientific.
However, as cognitive
sciences advance with neurosciences probing the brain, intelligence has become
a little more intelligible, and at a very abstract level of analysis, the
problem has been solved. But consciousness or sentience, the raw sensation of
toothaches and saltiness and intoxicating music, is still a riddle. Still even
consciousness is not as difficult a mystery as it used to be. Parts of the
mystery have been ripped off and turned into ordinary scientific problems.
The pseudo-scientific ideas
of consciousness, do work in selling their books though, to the gullible
general public, which again has no clear idea of what quantum physics or
relativity or cosmology or neuroscience is really about, and so they buy the
idea and the book.
And that is what really matters for the new age authors: selling their books,
or for the old school age / new age gurus: expanding their cult following, or new-age
authors metamorphosing into new-age cult leaders.
Quantum physicists point out some huge and common distortions that a pseudo-scientist will use:
The double slit experiment : here she/he confuses observer with ‘consciousness’.
Yet another misunderstanding frequently used by such authors is the observer effect from Einstein’s theory of relativity. Here they use the idea that since time and space are relative to the observer, then time and space are only in the mind and have no objective reality. The theory of relativity is actually about using space-time instead of time and space separately. The framework of reference becomes space-time. This made sense of the experiments in particle physics as well as space physics or cosmology. Again, they have used this misunderstanding of relativity theory to misguide the public into believing that objective reality is something that comes out of consciousness.
Really, consciousness comes out of matter, out of objective reality.
Besides these distortions of science, other scientific concepts like the Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, the Schrodinger’s cat experiment of wave equations, the particle’s entanglement at a large distance ( the famous spooky action at a distance), have also been misused by unscrupulous authors and gurus.
No doubt that a hypothesis is an idea, a form of idealism at best or a belief system. But if it offers no testable predictions, nor has any practical applications like actual scientific hypothesis have, it is predominantly pseudoscience.
There are certainly gaps in science which are not yet filled, but that does not mean that these gaps will never be filled. What pseudoscientists do is that they propose hypothesis which try to fill the gaps with inexpiable terms like consciousness (equating this to god, which is just another unexplained term).
However, as cognitive sciences advance with neurosciences probing the brain, intelligence has become a little more intelligible, and at a very abstract level of analysis, the problem has been solved. But consciousness or sentience, the raw sensation of toothaches and saltiness and intoxicating music, is still a riddle. Still even consciousness is not as difficult a mystery as it used to be. Parts of the mystery have been ripped off and turned into ordinary scientific problems.
The pseudo-scientific ideas of consciousness, do work in selling their books though, to the gullible general public, which again has no clear idea of what quantum physics or relativity or cosmology or neuroscience is really about, and so they buy the idea and the book.
And that is what really matters for the new age authors: selling their books, or for the old school age / new age gurus: expanding their cult following, or new-age authors metamorphosing into new-age cult leaders.
