What the Bleep do we Know?

The title of this post refers to the movie we've been watching in gym class (don't ask why). The movie proposes several scientific/philosophic theories for consideration, each one revolving around the central idea: thoughts and perception can change reality. The theories presented in this movie are highly controversial and, I must say, the quality of (acting in) the movie itself is not great (it's part documentary and part story). Nevertheless, the ideas played with in the movie have been bouncing around in my head for a while, and it's only fair to give them some consideration.

So. The part of the movie that struck me most spoke of our ability to change reality with our thoughts - based on quantum physics. Basically, according to quantum physics research, when we see something, a certain part of our brain activates in order to interpret what the eyes are seeing. The same part of the brain activates in the same way when we close our eyes and imagine the same object. According to the movie, this implies that we don't actually know when we're really seeing something vs. just thinking or imagining that we see it, since the images we "see" in our mind when we think we are "seeing" what's around us are really the brain's interpretation of information from the eyes. In orther words, our eyes can be seeing one thing, and our brain can be showing us something entirely different.

Furthermore, the movie delved into the idea of the "observer effect" and delved into several bold conclusions. It discussed the following idea: if an object is not in our reality, we cannot see it. Its example: the chief of a Native American tribe who had never seen a European ship before. According to legend, he noticed the ocean water rippling from an unknown - invisible - source. The ships appeared to him only after he observed the ripples for some time and finally concluded that some sort of giant water craft had to be causing them. Whether or not this is true...? - well, I'll just say that I'm refraining from comment on the movie's credibility.


Nevertheless, the movie followed through on that idea to several more wilder (if possible) conclusions. It suggested that when we can't see an object that is, for example, behind us, it doesn't have a position. It played with the properties of quantum physics to show that since everything is made of atoms, and since atoms are made of almost nothing (with their mass concentrated in the center at the tiny nucleus), our minds are actually the deciding factor in determining where the positions of those objects are. It also mentioned that, according to quantum physics, an atom can be in two places at once. It went on to conclude, therefore, that when we have our back to an object, that object can be in several different places at once, since it lacks a fixed position determined by our mind (because, philosophically speaking, unless an object is part of our reality, it might not really be there in the first place, and if it is, since we are really the only thing we can be sure exists (the rest of the world may be a figment of our imagination), we can techincally manipulate the objects around us). From there, it went on to say that we actually have the ability to change our surroundings since, philosophically speaking, each one of us knows for a fact ONLY that we are the only person who exists in the world/universe and everything else might as well be a figment of our imagination. Thus, everything around us is subject to what our minds percieve it to be, and is, therefore, also subject to what our minds want it to be.

These last several ideas had me thinking. Suppose, for a moment, that all of the above is true. If we really do have the ability to change our physical surroundings, then why don't we? According to the movie, in order to do this we would have to undenyingly accept the fact that we CAN - with every single fibre of our being. Due to our nature and our inborn instincts, this is almost impossible.

So - this last comment is what really triggered my imagination. If we really could get our minds to accept their ability to change their surroundings, we could make ourselves, say, walk on water. Or, we could make an object exist in two places at once. Or three. Or four. Or... everywhere. So, why can't we? Well, I think the problem is that this physical manipulation of everything undermines all of the basic principles upon which we were built, upon which we evolved, upon which we exist. If we were to try to make a chair, for example, not have a fixed position and occupy many different places at once, what's to stop the chair from becoming us? From becoming the world? I don't know if this makes sense outside of my mind, but I think that there's a reason that we can't change our reality. I'm not necessarily referring to God, or nature, or anything else that's controlling our ability to do so - I just don't think we're wired for those kinds of manipulations, and I think that it's for a good reason. I don't think we would be able to control the power that such mind control would unleash, and I think we would eventually destroy ourselves if allowed to wield such power.

I could go on with this for another several pages or, probably even the length of enitre blogs, but... I'll just stop here :-)