Advanced theoretical sciences all have their limitations; however, they each provide clues to the spiritual domain. In the 70s, modern classics like Fritjof Capra’s Tao of Physics and Gary Zukav’s The Dancing Wu Li Masters illustrated the extraordinary discoveries of Quantum Mechanics (or New Physics) and their parallels with timeless mystical teachings. Over the last several decades, major leaps in understanding have occurred as the nature of consciousness itself has been recontextualized.

Quantum Mechanics
The contrast between Newtonian and Quantum paradigms of reality can be stated in generalities for the purpose of the spiritual reader. For the scientifically minded, the evolution of mathematical understanding of advanced theoretical physics requires a progression through its development.

Beginning in the late seventeenth century, the deterministic system of Isaac Newton's classical mechanics was expressed in the differential and integral calculus. In the late nineteenth century, James Clerk Maxwell elucidated the electrodynamic discovery of the wave nature of light.

In about 1900, Max Planck's "Black Body Radiation" experiment quantified variables of atomic oscillation and specified the famous "Planck's Constant" (as about 6.625 X 10-34 joule/sec). By 1905, Einstein had analyzed the photoelectric effect and clarified light as composed of particles. In 1913, Niels Bohr quantified the H atom radiation.

In 1923, Compton defined the light particles as photons. By 1927, Davisson, German, and Broglia had clarified that both light and electrons could be either wave or particle. By 1930, the microscopic physics of quantum mechanics had evolved from the combined work of Heisenberg, Schrödinger, Born, Bohr, and Dirac.

Comprehension of advanced theoretical physics is subject to interpretation of the basic epistemology involved in the philosophy of scientific thought. One of the most important philosophical implications of quantum discovery involves the breakdown of the causality principle in subatomic phenomena.

There are certain basics to understanding quantum mechanics that are at some variance with customary beliefs that arise from the usual familiarity with more conventional macroscopic physics.The underlying state to be ascertained is variable and depends on position, momentum, time, potential, kinetic energies, angle, and nonsubstance qualities such as the act of human observation itself, namely, consciousness (the famous Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle).

What is important for the spiritual student to grasp is that the various substratum of what we assume to be reality are profoundly affected and alterable by the mere act of human observation.

Aside from the mathematics, a student of quantum theory may conclude that what one discovers is a product of intention in that what one discovers depends on what one is looking for.

The most often quoted example which demonstrates the implications is the following: When an atom of matter encounters an atom of antimatter, there is an emission of two photons that fly off in different directions. At the time of their emission, there is no rotation to the photon. If one of the photons is looked at by a human observer, however, it instantly begins a rotation. At the same instant of time, the other photon simultaneously begins to rotate in the opposite direction. the phenomenon does not begin of its own but only as a consequence of human observation.This implies that there is an underlying matrix/lattice field underlying both the subjective consciousness of the human and the phenomenological world of matter.

Explanation
The discoveries of Quantum Mechanics required innovations of epistemologic and philosophic comprehension to explain the impact of human observation and participation in scientifically studied events. In 1927, the Copenhagen Solvay conference addressed the problem subsequent to which there were differing interpretations by Bohr, Einstein, Dirac, von Neumann, Wigner, and others to answer the problem that the famous Schrödinger equations were insufficient in not specifying the effect of the observer. This was later termed the Heisenberg choice. (see Stapp, H. P., Mind, Matter, and Quantum Mechanics. New York, Springer-Verlag for Discussion, 1993)

This is the threshold of the jump from the linear to the nonlinear domain. It is interesting that Einstein refused to make the transition and rejected the inclusion of consciousness as an integral element essential to explaining events (this correlates with his calibration level of 499, which is the same as Newton's).

In the explanation given previously of the kinesiologic test, it was noted that the test is a response that indicates "yes" or "not yes." Its correlate in Quantum Theory is called the "von Neumann formulation" in which a complete comprehension of events in Nature requires recognition of two simultaneous processes, called Process I and Process II. Process II is limited to the physical properties while Process I includes the human consciousness elements of intention and selection; that is, what we discover has already been influenced and preselected by the nature of the question inself and its underlying intention.

The problem that confronts the science and consciousness researchers is basically the comprehension of the relationship of context and content and how this relates to brain function in which content and function are dominated by the field effect of context. Choices are thereby open to possible "yes" answers or precluded by "not yes" exclusion.

It is interesting that the intellect's attempt to create a quantum theory of consciousness, (i.e., experience is a consequence of the collapse of the wave function), runs into the "glass ceiling" of the limits of its own dimension and cannot progress farther without a paradigm jump (i.e., consciousness level 500). It then opens into the paradigm of reality of the mystic.

It could be said that the quantum physicist is the expert of content, and the mystic is the expert of context. This interface is the locus of the jump from the linear to the nonlinear, from ego to spirit, and from "knowing about" to "knowing by virtue of identity with" reality.

The purpose of the spiritual work of transcending identification with the ego by its disassembly facilitates the transformation necessary to the dissolution of the limitations of paradigm. The knowingness of self shifts from limited content to unlimited context, and the journey is then complete with the realization of the source of existence itself ”the Infinite "I" of radical subjectivity.

Discussion
Quantum Mechanics provides a rationale to explain such phenomena as the occurrence of the miraculous, the efficacy of prayer, and the exercise of free will in which choice alters potentiality by altering context that, in turn, influences outcome, but not by resort to force, which would be necessary if the sequence were due to an implied causality.

If the universe were limited to deterministic causality (i.e., Newtonian), all events would occur as a consequence of force and would result in an endless chain of dependent causes for which there could be no spiritual accountability or freedom. In Reality, all acts are simply limited to a change of conditions, and subsequent phenomena are merely reactions or responses that are expressions of their own essence and not derived from any external source.

Thus, we can see that the presumed observed perception of a seeming chain of events is, in reality, stimulus and response, within which human consciousness is free to choose among a multitude of possible responses. For example, nobody can 'make' another person angry or 'cause' them to do anything.

In Quantum Mechanics, therefore, it is importantly noted that the discoveries of Quantum Theory lead to a breakdown of the causality principle. This clarifies that 'causality' is a mentation and an operative theory and explanation rather than a provable reality.

We can demonstrate the usefulness of this crucial understanding by using the example of the 'the idea whose time has come'. The idea is the content and the 'time has come' is the context. The context is actually comprised of millions of components; then, at a critical degree of balance, intensity, and density (e.g., socio-political, economic, geographic, etc.), the idea may be activated into a reality.

The mechanism of activation is not due to 'cause' but depends on the volition of the populace and shifting winds of human proclivities. A hit movie can suddenly popularize a bygone era, and suddenly, all kinds of music, decor, clothing styles, and attitudes reemerge. For example, the events of September 11, 2001, reactivated the display of the American flag.

Symbols an be content, context, or both and have subtle but powerful and widespread influence on values, behaviors, and priorities. Whole empires can crash from a public scandal. Thus, we can see that general, nonspecific conditions (context) can increase or decrease the likelihood of the appearance of innumerable potentialities. Therefore, the integrity of prevailing political, economic, sociologic, and spiritual attitudes is of profound importance as they constitute the social context in which innumerable choices are made that influence decisions and actions which have far-reaching consequences.

To further elucidate the interaction of the universe and consciousness, it is necessary to clarify the seeming relationship between 'content' and 'context'. In so doing, it will quickly become obvious that both are actually arbitrary selections of focus of attention. Both terms basically denote a mentalization and a point of view rather than different categories or conditions.

In a field of objects, any one or several can be selected for attention or examination and the remainder become termed 'context'. If we change the selection to another object, then the objects originally selected now shift in terminology from 'content' to constitute part of the new 'context'. For example, if we focus on the planet Earth (content), then the rest of the universe becomes context. However, if we select the planet Mars to examine, then planet Earth becomes part of the context of the rest of the universe.

Thus, we can see that there is no actual discrete divisibility of the Allness of the Totality of Creation except in mentalizing about it via arbitrary perceptions and points of observation. There are only observables and no actual provables, and the observed is a consequence of arbitrary selection within the mind itself.

By a mere shift of focus of attention, content becomes context linguistically and vice versa. Thus, the seeming scintillation of the universe and its descriptions in 'time' and 'events' are 'sequence', and 'cause', 'antecedent', 'consequent', 'here', and 'there' are inherently really depictions of mentalizations rather than representative of some hypothetical 'objective reality'.

All knowledge rests upon and arises out of an epistemological matrix that of itself forms the very context of comprehension. The context of epistemology is in turn the nonlinear qualities of consciousness.Thus, all information systems require a comprehension of the nature of consciousness to reach their full understanding. Ever deeper research inevitably leads to the realization that all knowingness is purely subjective and actually only possible at all because the Self of the investigator already includes all that exists or it would not be capable of the quality and faculty of knowingness in the first place.

The witness of any mentally selected event is thus simultaneously both content and context and therefore trapped in the epistemological dilemma of duality itself. The mind can therefore only 'know about' rather than truly comprehend essence, which is a nonverbal realization in which consciousness and essence are united as Oneness.

From the above analogy and examples, we derive a better understanding of the nonlinear domain: An infinite number of complex, interacting components constitute a field which, in an infinite number of unidentifiable ways, potentates an infinite number of possible responses, all of which are themselves subject to an infinite number of possibilities. Thus, we can see that the hypothetical 'cause' of anything that can be perceived or is invisible is the entirety of the whole universe in its collective totality throughout all time. It thus proceeds out of the totality of all Creation which continues to expand in infinite dimensions more rapidly than the speed of light.

Thus, to believe that the human mind can actually discern a 'cause' of anything at all is really a colossal delusion and a pomposity of egotism. The infinite context of all that exists and of all possibility is obviously God. David R. Hawkins, M.D., Ph.D., I; REALITY AND SUBJECTIVITY pp. 431-436, entspricht Licht des Alls, Anhang D, S. 563-570