Do physicists agree that unified field exists ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PatentLawyer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Field Physicists
PatentLawyer
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
In the Reykjavik Grapevine, www.grapevine.is (dated 9.5.2009), the journalist Haukur S Magnusson interviewed the American film director David Lynch.

Mr. Lynch said the following:

(Begin quote.)

It is such an interesting time, because quantum physics, for instance, has now
discovered and verified the existence of the unified field at the base of all matter
and mind – at the base of anything that is a thing. This unified field is the same
field that one experiences when transcending. Quantum psychics says that everything
that is a thing has emerged from this field of unity in a process they call
"spontaneous sequential symmetry breaking." Ancient Vedic science – the science of
consciousness – has always known about this unified field. And Vedic science knows
precisely the numerous steps consciousness goes through from the unmanifest level of
unity to all levels of manifestation. It is so great to see that with each step
forward modern science takes, it verifies the ancient Vedic science.

(End quote.)

MY QUESTIONS: Is the first sentence correct ? Do physicists actually agree that (1) a unified field has been discovered, and (2) it is the basis of all matter ?

If so, can you cite publications on this point, which are understandable to the educated non-physicist ?

Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
1) No
2) No
3) Why do you expect Lynch to be knowledgeable about quantum physics ?
4) Is this a trick between "quantum physics" and "quantum psychics" ?
 
humanino said:
1) No
2) No
3) Why do you expect Lynch to be knowledgeable about quantum physics ?
4) Is this a trick between "quantum physics" and "quantum psychics" ?

1) & 2) agreed
3) Dude .. he made like, "Dune", and stuff ...
4) ROFL

In all seriousness, @ the OP, thank you for at least bothering to come here and check out that amazingly broad and incorrect statement before just assuming it was correct and moving forward. I wish more people would check the facts before drawing conclusions. Tip 'o the hat to you sir!
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
24
Views
5K
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
10K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
70
Views
18K
Back
Top