Here you can read my article from The Magic Happens Now:
Here you can read my article:
“The Mosaic of the soul, the warp and woof of life” by Andreas N. Bjørndal
It is about the virtues of love, wisdom and truth and how you can use every experience in life to gain freedom and truth. Enjoy the magic!
Here you can read my article on VALUE & Virtues in the The Magic Happens Now Magazine
Picture: Is gold coming from the sun, or are the stars the gold in the universe?
© Andreas N. Bjørndal
Here you can read my article on HOPE in the june issue of The Magic Happens Now Magazine, enjoy!
The Atom – building blocks of nature
Atoms are the basic building blocks of nature. The understanding of the atom has gone through exiting steps and we will explore the main ones.
“Atom” comes from átomos (Greek “ἄτομος”, from α-, “un-” + τέμνω – temno, “to cut”), which means uncuttable, or indivisible, something that cannot be divided further.
India – Kanāda and Vedic philosophy
Vaisheshika / Vaisesika (Sanskrit: वैशॆषिक, IAST Vaiśeṣika), is one of the six Hindu schools of philosophy, the Vedic system of India. It was related to the Hindu school of logic, Nyaya. The Vaisesika classifies in categories and says that all in the universe can be reduced to a given number of atoms. Kanāda is considered to be the founder and author of the Vaishesika Sutra (Full text at archive.org).
Kanāda says every object of creation is made of atoms (parmanu) which in turn connect and form molecules (anu). Sources disagree with the time Kanāda lived some say in the 6th century BCE some around the 2nd century BCE.
Greece – Democritus and Greek philosophy
The Greek Democritus (C 460- c 370 BC) is the one that got the fame for having discovered the atom. He mentions many Greek philosophers in his writings. Democritus inherited wealth and could travell and he purchased many writings of other philosophers. The theory of the atom is believed he got from Leucippus that influenced Democritus, but the very existence of Leucippus has been the subject of disagreement between scholars, even amongst the old Greeks themselves.
Democritus claimed that the properties of things were determined by the shape of its atoms. Sweet things had smooth atoms while bitter things are made up of sharp atoms. Not strange in the context of the stage of mathematics at that time in history and the preoccupation with geometry and shapes. Plato and Euclid were younger contemporaries.
If it was Kanāda, Leucippus or Democritus or somebody else who first put forward the concept is uncertain. Some even say the Greeks got the idea from the Egyptians. The god of creation standing between the nothing and the something Atum, also spelled Atom, is even said to be the source of the word atom. Ph.D. George G. M. James in his “Stolen Legacy: Greek Philosophy is Stolen Egyptian Philosophy” show how the concept of the god Atum ”the all and the not yet being” represent the principle of opposites as Democritus talks about the atom as ”movement of that which is” (To on) within ”that which is not” (To me on). James also makes arguments for the transliteration of the Egyptian word into Greek. If one is to accept this as the beginning of the concept of an atom it goes back to 4000 BC.
According to René Adolphe Schwaller de Lubicz (1887–1961) Egyptian gods, or Neteru (pl. – one Neter) as they are called were regarded as principles in nature, more than personifications. Personally I think it was both, as if the Egyptians were still in connection with a deeper layer of consciousness that is collective and is beyond both our awareness and the manifestations in nature.
Kanāda connected his atomic theory with the element and spoke of fire atoms and water atoms etc.
Dalton – Atoms as balls
The next mayor step in the understanding of atoms came from the English chemist, physicist, meteorologist, Quaker and mystic John Dalton (6 September 1766 – 27 July 1844). The earliest mention of the idea came from his work on the absorption of gases (read on 21 October 1803, published):
Why does not water admit its bulk of every kind of gas alike? This question I have duly considered, and though I am not able to satisfy myself completely I am nearly persuaded that the circumstance depends on the weight and number of the ultimate particles of the several gases.
Dalton said elements are made of small atoms, and each atom of an element have the same size, mass, and other properties, while atoms of other elements are different. Atoms cannot be divided, or crushed. They are the building blocks and combine as a whole unit with other atoms to make the different compounds. Chemical reactions are combining, separating or changing the structure of the earlier compounds. Dalton also suggested a “rule of greatest simplicity”, but with the lack of experiments that could confirm it, it was controversial. It is likely to believe his mystical inclined mind was looking for a unified simplicity at the basis of nature.
He also regarded Hydrogen to be the unit = 1, which fits well with modern physics.
So far atoms are dense balls of different size and weight.
J.J. Thomson – electrons as raisins in the pudding
Sir Joseph John Thomson (18 December 1856 – 30 August 1940) discovered in 1897 that cathode rays were composed of an unknown particle. Calculations showed it to be much smaller than the atoms. Compared to its small size it had a very high negative electric charge. The first subatomic particle, the electron was discovered.
This made it necessary to have both positive and negative parts in the atom and the “pudding model” became the updated atom.
Rutherford – gold foil and the nucleus
The famous experiment by Rutherford, where the thinnest layer of gold foil was bombarded with alpha particles to measure the gold atoms – the gold puddings – resulted in discovering the void. Basically he rarely hit anything, most particles went straight through.
The nucleus was discovered and we got a centre with some far off satellites as electrons.
Niels Bohr – complementarity and levels
Niels Bohr discovered those electrons to move in energy levels and that they had a complementary nature as either showing themselves as particles or waves.
This can be difficult to understand, but let us make an analogy. Imagine you have a sheet of paper that you hold up in the air so that electrons going through the paper can create holes. If it is the particle side that goes through it creates a triangular hole if it is the wave nature a circular hole. By the end you have, lets say 50% of each. You conclude from the paper and its holes that reality consists of two things; triangles and circles. Then Bohr says; but imagine they are cones! If they go through with bottom or top they create a circular hole, if side vice the hole becomes triangular. Reality does not consist of triangles and circles but of cones. By going up from a two-dimensional plane to three dimensions, two different things become one and the same. But particles and waves are not flat, so the unification does not become three dimensional but at least four dimensional.
This might just confirm how the atom with time has started to challenge our perception, but we know that is is more unified in its particle-wave aspects than first thought.
Now the atom became like a solar system with a sunny nucleus and electron-planets circling around. The exception would be that more than one planet orbited in the same circle, but still it was a model of the micro cosmos that fitted with the macro cosmos. This model is still what many people believe, learn and teach.
But the modell has advanced more steps. Compare each level or orbital to a surface on a huge ball. With balls around balls, like the Russian Matrjosjka dolls. Imagine each surface of the balls to be a sea that is constantly pulsating. The inner ball pulsates with 1, the next ball is an octave and pulsates with 2, the third a quint and pulsates with 3, the next is an octave of the first octave, the fifth and sixth etc. all increase its waves with one wave length.
The electrons would be the white froth at the top of waves appearing and disappearing from one place to another, without moving from one place to the other. Like a musical note that has a constant sound and a few times additionally sparks up with a flash. The flashes would always amount to a set number in each ball and when one disappears another one appears at one other spot, but it does not move from spot to spot.
Schrödinger – The periodic table and quantum physics
Schrödinger turned the whole periodic table, all the atoms in the universe into mathematics. With equations and four variables he was able to explain all the building blocks or atoms. In many ways this is the most completed understanding in nature with big certainty and good descriptions. As soon as we enter the world of living things we become much more uncertain and different opinions take place one after the other or play against each other.
The atom with Schrödinger is similar but the surface of the balls turn into foggy mist
We can say that with the four variables and a few simple rules basically to explain that each atom is different than another in one way or the other, the principles or laws behind the atoms are simply and beautifully explained. With Schrødinger and his quantum numbers the atoms entered the world of quantum physics and probabilities.
Atom has changed from a geometric solid where shape was believed to carry qualities as taste and colour, into balls of different size and weight. Different shapes became one ball, turning to puddings, from puddings to minute solar systems where particles and waves became one wave-particle. And then into foggy mists that sparkle particles or wave tops almost like a person calling to different friends around the world and make their phone screen brighten up.
The solid ball atom has lost its materiel aspect, but the very small and extremely frequent appearance of “particles” creates a feeling, a perception of a solid surface. If we diminished over selves to the size of an atom, matter would disappear and a sparkling ghost would be the only thing left. It is the same as if you magnify the picture in a paper you would disappear between small coloured dots. Or if you have seen people with banners on a stadiun creating different colourful images, they might appear smooth and connected from distance but are just separated fragments.
The micro cosmos is quantified, but the driving force behind it is not. It is only our perception that is limited. We see circles and triangles where there are ghostly cones. The phenomenon we sense are more connected than our mind is able to perceive.
As we go deeper and deeper into matter it disappear in front of us, it becomes a sparkling fire or a potential energy that incarnates in a split second to excarnate in the next. The atom is like a ghost that comes and goes. Behind every material manifestation there is a ghost.
Why holonity? – suggesting a new concept.
A holon (Greek ὅλον, holon neuter form of ὅλος, holos “whole”) is a word coined by Arthur Koesler in his book The Ghost in the Machine (1967, p. 48) and is used as a concept for something that is a whole and a part at the same time.
And organ is a part of the human organism, but a wholeness in itself. A cell is a part of an organ but a wholeness in itself. Both are wholeness and parts at the same time, a holon.
When you try to understand the uniqueness or personality of a person you take the whole person into account and are looking for qualities or features that are prominent and strong. Or qualities that repeat themselves. He is just so …….., She really is ……, It is typical for him….. . This could be like a mountain or huge lake in the personal landscape. It could represent something strange, rare or peculiar. That would be something unique or dominant.
But it could also be a characteristic feature running through the whole landscape. Like comparing the Norwegian woods with Pina and Spruce to the Amazones or Tundra. In a person that would be a feature running through different aspects or a concepts that can embrace and include other concepts, or qualities that can be recognized in different expressions. What we would call a pattern, an essence or a read tread.
Holonity is the degree of unity in the wholeness. The degree of connection between the parts of a holon in a unified understanding, or conceptualization. The oneness in the wholeness. The unifying red tread. The qualitative feature running through a given quantity. What in a human can be called an essence, a read tread or sometimes her constitution, his personality, her individuality or type.
In the therapeutic field, the ability to connect all the parts, symptoms, manifestations of phenomena in a human and her life into a meaningful theme, or pattern can be very useful. The holonity is the degree of unity that is achieved.
This blogg is about holonity in different fields of knowledge.
In the picture above nature comes very close to a mathematical formula, a fractal that repeats the same pattern into every part of the whole, e.g a high degree of holonity.
“Increasing complexity is regarded as one of the major aspects of evolution.
It is reflected in old creation myths too. From the oriental Tao dividing into yin and yang, becoming the many things (1 , 2 many) to the Bible with Heaven and Earth and later all the lifeforms on Earth.
Science tells us that as the Big Bang expanded and cooled down, galaxies and later stars and solar systems appeared. The primordial nucleosynthesis is the name of the process that happened from the firsts seconds to some 20 minutes after the Big Bang. This created the first few elements, very much later when the universe had cooled down to form galaxies and then stars the heavier elements were created in the stars.
Following Big Bang pure energy slowly turned into matter.
Here on Earth the basic building blocks are molecules a product from simple nuclear sub-atomic particles that created atoms and the atoms come together to create molecules. Everything around us on this planet is build up by molecules.
Atoms quickly form molecules here on earth, they do not exist for long as atoms. Molecules creates virus and cells and all lifeforms are build up of cells.
We do not know how life came about, there are theories of soups of complex molecules and electric charges “by accident” creating life, there are theories of “inseminations” through viral material from outer space. But then we can still ask where did that viral material come from?
If we leave the question open, we can still see and increasing complexity from virus, to the first cells (procaryotic) and later to cells that became so complex as to have their own “head quarters” or nucleus (eucaryotic). These complex cells are the building blocks of all multicellular life; plants, fungi and animals.
Without the plants the earth would not have had an atmosphere of oxygen, laying the foundation for animals. As animals developed we humans turned up. All in an increasing complexity.
Today there are lots of activities, economically, politically, culturally or scientific that is based on the co-operation of hundreds or thousands of people. Behaving like complex organisms (organisations) with intentions, goals, relations and actions.
Humans used to look at the earth as the foundation of the universe. This geocentric world view regarded the universe as a lid, and life was organized as a ladder from chaos through the elements, life forms and angels and higher beings all the way up to God.
Then we open up to the solar system and moved out in to the solar system, the sun became the central nucleus and we a part of a mechanical machinery. All revolving around the sun.
In the last century we have moved out to clusters of suns in galaxies, and clusters of galaxies that today has turned into a network of galaxies looking much like living human tissues.
Perhaps the question of life or not should be turned upside down?
If we look at the universe at not far away small dust particles, but as a coherent organic and aware being.
From that perspective the whole question of where life came from has no sense. It was always there.
The perspective of a living universe, opens us up to a more sophisticated complex and coherent perspective. A conscious universe even more challenging to the contemporary materialistic mind.
But this perspective changes even the perspective of evolution.
A living universe might have planets that has done our cycles of evolution millions of years before us. And what seems to be evolution here, is simply following a pattern or sequence analog to all other similar planets.
A universe that is aware beyond our awareness, gives it not only reflection, intention and care, but wisdom and love.
So did we evolve by trial, failure, coincidence, a survival of the fittest?
Or according to a long long time universal wide plan, with connected intention of love and coherent wisdom of unity? A universal holonity?
The picture is a computer model that shows the evolution of galaxies and stars after Big Bang
Under you see the nevrons in the brain.
“That which is below is like that which is above & that which is above is like that which is below to do the miracles of one only thing”