The American Scholar - A New Theory of the Universe - By Robert... http://www.theamericanscholar.org/archives/sp07/newtheory-lanza.

html

Spring 2007

A New Theory
of the Universe
Biocent rism buil ds on q uant um physics
by putt ing life into th e eq uation

By Robert Lanza

While I w as si tt in g one n ig ht wi th a p oet fri end

wat chin g a gre at o pera perf or med i n a tent un der
a rc l ights , the poet to ok my arm and po in ted
sil ently. Far up, blu nd er ing o ut o f the n ig ht, a huge
Cecrop ia m oth s wept p ast fro m lig ht t o li ght o ver
the po st ur in gs of t he actors . “He d oesn’t k now ,” m y
frie nd w hi spere d excited ly. “He’s p assi ng thro ugh
an alie n un iv ers e br ig htly li t but i nvis ib le to him .
He’s i n anot her p lay; he d oesn’t se e us . He do esn’ t
know. Ma ybe it ’s happ enin g r ig ht n ow to u s.”
—Loren Eiseley

T he wo rl d is not, on th e who le, th e pl ac e we have l ea rned abo ut in our sch oo l

bo oks. This po int wa s hammer ed h ome one re ce nt n ight as I cros se d th e
ca us ew ay of the smal l i sla nd wh er e I live. The p ond wa s d ark and sti ll . S eve ral
st range glow ing obj ect s c au gh t my at te nt ion on th e sid e of th e road, and I
squa tt ed do wn to obs er ve one of th em wi th m y fla sh li gh t. The cre at ure tur ne d
out to b e a gl ow wor m, th e l um inou s l arva of th e E urop ean b eet le Lamp yris noctilu ca.
Its seg me nt ed li tt le oval b od y wa s primiti ve—l ike som e tril ob it e tha t had ju st c rawle d
out of the Cambria n S ea 500 milli on yea rs ag o. The re we were , the b ee tl e and I , tw o
living ob je cts that had e nt er ed into e ac h oth er s’ world. I t cea se d em it tin g it s green is h
lig ht , and I, fo r my pa rt, tu rned of f my fl as hl ight .

1 of 12 6/13/07 9:17 AM
The American Scholar - A New Theory of the Universe - By Robert... http://www.theamericanscholar.org/archives/sp07/newtheory-lanza.html

I wonder ed if our inter ac ti on wa s d if fe re nt from th at of any oth er tw o obj ec ts in th e

universe. W as th is p rimitive li tt le grub jus t anot he r col le ct io n of atom s— prot ein s and
mol ec ul es spi nning awa y li ke the p la net s roun d th e su n? Had sci en ce redu ce d li fe to
the l evel of a m ech anis t’s l og ic , or wa s th is wi ngle ss be et le , b y virtu e of b ein g a living
cre at ure, c rea ti ng i ts ow n ph ys ical re al ity ?

The la ws of p hys ic s and ch em is try c an ex pla in th e bio lo gy of li ving sy st em s, and I ca n

rec it e i n de ta il the ch em ical fou nd ati ons and c el lu la r orga nizatio n of animal cel ls :
oxida ti on, bi op hy si cal me ta bol is m, al l th e c arboh yd rate s and amino aci d pa tt er ns. Bu t
the re wa s m ore to th is lu minou s l it tl e bu g than the sum of it s b io ch emi ca l fun ct ions. A
ful l und er st andi ng of li fe ca nnot be fo un d b y l oo king at ce ll s and m ole cu le s throu gh a
microsc op e. We h ave y et to l ea rn th at ph ys ic al ex is te nce c annot b e di vorce d from th e
animal l if e and str uc tu re s that c oordi nate se nse pe rcep ti on and e xpe rien ce . I nde ed , i t
see ms l ikel y th at th is c re at ure w as t he c en te r of it s ow n sphe re of rea li ty j us t as I wa s th e
cen te r of m ine .

Altho ug h the b ee tl e d id n ot move, it had sen so ry c el ls th at transmitt ed m es sa ge s to th e

cel ls i n it s brain. Pe rhaps t he c re at ure w as t oo p rimit ive to c ol le ct da ta a nd p inpoint m y
loc at io n i n spa ce . Or m ay be my ex is ten ce in it s u niverse was li mited to the pe rcept io n
of some h ug e and h ai ry sh ado w sta bi li zing a fl as hli gh t i n the air. I do n’t know. B ut as I
sto od u p and lef t, I am s ure th at I di spers ed i nt o the h aze of pr ob abil it y s urroun di ng th e
glo ww orm’s lit tl e wo rld .

Our sci enc e fa ils to rec og nize th os e spe ci al prop ert ie s of li fe th at make i t fun da men ta l
to m ate rial rea li ty . This v iew of the world— bi oc ent rism—revolves aroun d th e wa y a
sub je ct ive ex per ie nce, w hich we cal l co nsci ou sne ss , re la te s to a p hy sic al p roce ss . It i s a
vast m ys te ry and one that I h ave p ursu ed m y e nt ire li fe . The co ncl us io ns I h ave draw n
pla ce bi olo gy above th e ot he r scie nces in the att em pt to sol ve one of natur e’s b igg es t
puz zles , the th eo ry of ever yt hing th at ot her d isc ip li ne s h ave b ee n p ursu ing for th e l as t
cen tu ry. S uc h a th eo ry wo ul d u nite al l known ph en omena u nde r one u mbrel la ,
fur nish ing sci en ce w ith a n al l- enc ompa ss ing e xp la natio n of n atu re o r re ali ty .

We ne ed a revol uti on i n ou r un de rst andi ng o f sci en ce a nd o f th e wor ld . Li ving in a n ag e

dom inat ed b y sc ie nce , we have co me m ore and more to be li eve in an ob je cti ve,
emp iric al re al it y and in the go al of rea ch ing a c omp le te u nde rsta nd ing of tha t re ali ty .
Part of the thrill that ca me with the annou nce me nt that th e hum an gen ome had b ee n
map pe d or wit h th e id ea tha t we are cl ose to u nd ers ta nd ing th e bi g bang res ts i n ou r
des ire fo r compl et en ess .

But w e’re f ool ing ou rse lves .

Mos t of the se co mp re he nsive the orie s are n o more th an sto ries th at fai l to take i nt o
acc ou nt o ne cruc ia l fac to r: w e are c re at ing t he m. It i s th e bi olo gica l creat ure th at make s
obs er vati ons, n ame s wh at i t ob se rves , and creat es s to ries . Sc ie nce has not su cce ed ed i n
confronti ng the ele me nt of e xi st enc e that is at once most fa milia r and m os t
mys te riou s— consc io us ex pe rienc e. A s E me rson wrot e i n “Ex pe rien ce, ” an es sa y that
confronte d the f ac il e p os it ivis m o f his age : “We have le arne d t hat we d o not s ee d irect ly ,
but me di at ely , and that we h ave no me ans of co rrect ing the se c ol ored and di st orting
len se s which we are or of co mp uti ng th e amoun t of th ei r e rrors. Pe rha ps th es e
sub je ct le nses have a crea ti ve p owe r; p er hap s th er e are n o ob jec ts .”

Biolo gy i s at first gla nce an u nlikel y so urce for a n ew the ory of the u niverse. B ut at a
tim e whe n bi ol og is ts b el ie ve the y h ave d isc over ed the “u niversal c el l” i n the fo rm of
emb ryonic st em c el ls , and whe n c os molog is ts li ke S te ph en Hawking pred ict th at a
unify ing th eo ry of th e un ivers e may be dis co vere d in the n ex t tw o de ca de s, sho uld n’t
bio lo gy se ek to u nify e xi st ing th eo ries of the ph ys ical world a nd th e l iving wo rl d? W hat
oth er d is ci pli ne c an a pp roach i t? B iol og y sh ou ld be t he f irst and la st s tud y of s ci en ce. It
is ou r ow n natu re that is u nlocked b y me ans of the h um anly c rea te d natu ral sc ien ce s

2 of 12 6/13/07 9:17 AM
The American Scholar - A New Theory of the Universe - By Robert... http://www.theamericanscholar.org/archives/sp07/newtheory-lanza.html

use d to un de rsta nd the un iverse. Ever since the re motes t of ti me s p hilos op he rs h ave
acknowl ed ge d the p rimacy of consc io us ne ss— th at all truths and p rincip les of be ing
mus t beg in wi th th e ind ivid ua l m ind and se lf . Thu s Des ca rtes ’s ad age : “C ogi to , e rgo
sum .” (I think, the re fore I am.) I n ad dit io n to De sc artes , who b rough t ph ilo so ph y i nt o
its m od er n era , th er e w er e many ot he r ph ilo so ph er s who a rgue d a lo ng t he se li ne s: Ka nt ,
Leibniz, Bisho p Be rkele y, Sch op enh au er , and H en ri B ergso n, t o n ame a fe w.

We have fai led to prote ct sci en ce ag ai nst spe cu la ti ve ex te nsions of n at ure , co nt inuing
to ass ign p hy si ca l and math ema ti ca l p rope rties to h ypoth et ic al en tit ie s b ey ond what i s
obs er vabl e in n at ure. The e th er of th e 19 th c en tu ry, th e “s pa cet ime” of E inste in, and
the st ring the ory of rec en t de ca de s, which pos it s n ew d imen sio ns sh owi ng up i n
dif fe re nt rea lms , and not only i n st rings but i n bu bb le s sh immer ing do wn t he b ywa ys o f
the un iver se —all the se are ex ampl es of thi s spe cu la tio n. Inde ed , un se en di me nsions
(up t o a hu ndred i n som e th eo ries) a re n ow e nvisi oned e veryw he re , som e cu rl ed u p l ike
sod a st raws at e very po int in s pac e.

Today ’s preoc cu pa ti on w it h p hy sic al th eo rie s of e veryt hing ta kes a wrong turn from th e
pur po se o f sc ie nce—t o ques ti on a ll things rel en tl es sly . Mo de rn p hy si cs h as b eco me l ike
Swi ft ’s kingd om of Lap ut a, fly ing absu rdly on an is la nd above th e ea rth and i nd if fer en t
to wh at i s be ne at h. Whe n sc ien ce t ries t o re so lve it s co nf lic ts by ad di ng a nd s ub tracting
dim en si ons to th e u niverse li ke ho us es on a Mo nopo ly bo ard, we n ee d to l ook at ou r
dog mas and re co gni ze th at th e c racks in th e sys tem are j us t the point s that l et the li gh t
shi ne m ore direc tl y on th e my st ery o f li fe.

The urge nt and p rimary q ue st ions of the un iver se have bee n u nd er ta ken by th os e
phy si ci st s wh o are trying to ex pl ain th e origins of ever yt hing wit h grand u nifie d
the orie s. B ut a s ex ci ti ng a nd g la morous as th es e th eo rie s are, th ey are a n evas io n, i f not
a rever sa l, o f th e cen tral m ys te ry of knowl ed ge : th at the la ws o f th e wo rl d we re s omeho w
cre at ed to p roduc e th e obs er ver. And m ore impor ta nt th an this, th at th e ob ser ver in a
sig nifi ca nt se nse crea te s rea li ty and n ot th e othe r way arou nd . Rec og nit io n of this
insight l ea ds to a s ing le t he ory t hat un ifi es o ur u nde rsta nd ing o f th e wor ld .

Mod er n sc ie nce ca nnot e xp lai n why the l aw s of p hy si cs are e xactl y b alanced f or animal
life to e xi st . Fo r exa mp le , if t he bi g bang h ad bee n one-p art- in-a b ill io n more p ow erf ul ,
it wou ld have rus he d ou t too fa st for th e ga la xi es to form and for li fe to b eg in. If th e
str ong nu cl ea r force wer e de cre as ed b y tw o pe rce nt , at omic nu cl ei wou ld n’t h ol d
tog et he r. Hyd roge n wo ul d be the only ato m in the un iverse. If the gravita tio nal fo rce
wer e de crea se d, s ta rs ( inclu di ng t he s un ) wo uld not ign it e. The se a re j us t th re e of m ore
tha n 200 ph ys ic al p arame te rs wit hin the sol ar sys te m and universe so e xact that the y
cannot be random. Inde ed, t he l ac k of a sc ie nt if ic ex pl anat ion h as a ll owe d th es e fa cts t o
be hija cked as a d ef ens e of i nt ell igen t des ign.

Witho ut p er ce pt io n, the re i s in e ff ec t no rea li ty . No th ing has ex is te nce un le ss y ou , I, o r

som e li ving c rea tu re p er cei ves it , and h ow i t is p erc ei ved further i nf lu en ces that
rea li ty . E ven time i tse lf is not e xe mp te d from b ioc en tris m. Ou r sen se of th e forw ard
mot io n of t ime i s re al ly th e re su lt of a n infi nite nu mber o f dec is io ns t hat o nly se em to be
a smo ot h co nt inuou s pa th . At e ac h momen t we are at th e ed ge of a pa radox known as
The Arrow , first d es cribe d 2 ,500 y ea rs ago b y the p hilo so phe r Zen o of Ele a. St arting
log ic al ly w ith t he p remis e th at n oth ing ca n be in t wo p la ces a t once , he re as oned t hat a n
arrow is only i n one pl ace du ring any given i nstance of it s fl ight . B ut if i t i s i n only one
pla ce , it m us t b e at res t. The arrow mu st th en b e at re st at ever y momen t of i ts flig ht .
Logic al ly , m ot ion i s i mpo ss ib le . B ut is moti on impos si bl e? Or rath er, i s this analog y
pro of th at th e forwa rd moti on of ti me is not a fe at ure of the ex te rnal wo rl d b ut a
pro je ct io n of somet hing wi thi n us? Time i s n ot an abso lu te re ali ty b ut an as pe ct of ou r
consc io us ne ss.

This p arad ox li es at the he art of one of th e gre at revol ut io ns of 20th-ce nt ury p hys ic s, a
revol ut io n tha t has ye t to ta ke h ol d of ou r un de rstandi ng o f th e wo rld a nd o f th e de cis ive
role that co nsci ou sne ss pl ay s in de te rmining th e natu re of rea li ty . The u ncer tai nt y

3 of 12 6/13/07 9:17 AM
The American Scholar - A New Theory of the Universe - By Robert... http://www.theamericanscholar.org/archives/sp07/newtheory-lanza.html

princip le i n quantum p hy si cs is m ore prof ou nd th an i ts n ame sug ge st s. I t me ans that

we m ake ch oi ce s at every mome nt i n wh at we c an de ter mine about th e wo rl d. W e
cannot know w ith c ompl et e a cc urac y a quant um p artic le ’s m ot io n and i ts p os it ion a t th e
same time— we have to c ho ose one or the oth er . Thu s th e c onsc io usn es s of the ob ser ver
is de ci si ve in d et er mining wh at a pa rtic le do es a t any g iven mo me nt .

Ein st ei n wa s f rust rated by th e threa t of quantu m un cer ta inty to t he h yp oth es is h e cal le d

spa ceti me , and spac et ime tu rns ou t to b e i ncomp at ib le wit h th e wo rl d d isc over ed b y
quant um p hy sic s. Whe n Ei nst ei n sh ow ed th at t he re is n o un iver sa l now , it f ol lo wed t hat
obs er vers co uld sl ic e u p rea lit y i nt o p as t, pre se nt , and , fut ure , i n d if fe re nt way s, al l
wit h equa l rea li ty . But w hat, e xactl y, i s b ei ng s li ced u p?

Spa ce and ti me a re not st uff th at c an be b rough t b ac k to th e la bo ratory i n a m armalad e

jar for analys is . In fa ct , spac e and time fa ll into the p rovince of bio lo gy—o f animal
sen se p er ce pti on—not of phy si cs . They are prop ert ie s of the m ind , of the l angua ge b y
whi ch we h um an b ein gs and animal s rep re se nt th ings to ourse lve s. Phy sic is ts v ent ure
bey ond th e sco pe of the ir sci en ce— be yo nd th e li mits of m at er ial p he nome na and
law —w he n the y try to as si gn ph ysi ca l, math em ati ca l, or ot he r q ua li tie s to spa ce and
tim e.

Ret urn to th e revela ti on th at we are thinking animal s and that th e m at er ial wo rl d i s th e

elu si ve su bs trat um of our co nscio us act ivity c ont inua ll y d ef ining and rede fi ning th e
rea l. We mu st bec ome s ke pt ic al of t he h ard re al ity o f ou r most c he rishe d co ncep tio ns o f
spa ce a nd t ime, and of t he ve ry n ot io n of an e xt er nal rea li ty , in o rder to rec og nize th at i t
is the a ct ivity of c onsc io usn es s it se lf , bo rn of our bio lo gical se lves, wh ich in s ome se nse
cre at es t he wo rl d.

Des pi te suc h things as th e de velo pme nt of su pe rcond uc ti ng su pe rcol lid er s co nt aining

eno ug h niob iu m-tit aniu m wi re t o ci rcle t he ear th 16 times, we u nd er sta nd the un iverse
no bet te r than the fi rst h um ans wit h suff ic ie nt co nscio us ne ss to th ink. Wher e d id it al l
com e from? W hy d oe s th e un iver se e xi st? Why are we her e? In one a ge , we bel ie ve t hat
the wo rl d is a grea t b al l re st ing on th e b ack of a tu rtle ; in th e n ext , that a f ai ry un iverse
app ea re d ou t of now he re and is e xp anding into not hingne ss . In one age , ange ls p us h
and p um me l th e pl ane ts abo ut ; in anot he r ag e, e veryt hing i s a me aningle ss acc ide nt .
We ex ch ange a wo rl d- bea ring t urtle f or a bi g bang.

We are li ke Lore n E is el ey’s m ot h, bl un de ring from l ight to li gh t, un able to di sce rn th e

great p la y th at b la ze s un de r th e op er a te nt . Turn n ow to th e ex pe rime ntal find ings of
mod er n sc ie nce, which requi re u s to re co gnize —at l ast —o ur rol e i n th e crea ti on of
rea li ty f rom mome nt t o mome nt . Co nscio us ne ss c annot ex is t wi th out a li ving, bi ologi ca l
cre at ure to e mbod y i ts pe rcept ive p ow er s of c re at ion. The re fo re we mu st tu rn to th e
log ic o f life, t o bi olo gic, i f we are to un de rsta nd th e wo rl d a roun d us .

Spa ce and time are the tw o co ncep ts we take m os t for grant ed in our li ves. We h ave
bee n tau gh t that the y are me as urable . The y e xi st. They ’re rea l. And that rea li ty has
bee n re info rce d ever y d ay o f ou r l ives .

Mos t of u s li ve wi th ou t th inking abst ractl y abou t time and space . They are su ch an
int eg ral p art of ou r l ives th at exa minati on of the m i s as u nnat ural as an e xaminatio n of
wal king or b re at hing. In f ac t, many p eo ple fe el s il ly t al king a bo ut tim e and s pa ce in an
abs trac t, analy ti cal wa y. The q ue st io n “D oe s ti me e xi st ?” c an see m l ike so m uc h
phi lo so ph ic al bab bl e. Af te r all, th e c lo ck ti cks, th e y ea rs pa ss, we age and d ie. Isn’t
tim e the only thing we ca n be ce rtai n of? Equa ll y i nconso nant is th e q ue st io n of
wheth er or not spac e e xi st s. “O bviou sl y spa ce e xi st s,” we m igh t answe r, “b eca us e we
live in i t. We m ove throu gh i t, dr ive th rough i t, buil d in i t, me as ure it.”

Time and spa ce are e as y to tal k and think about . Fi nd yo urself sh ort of e it he r or
bot h—la te fo r work, st anding i n a stal le d sub wa y c ar pa cked wi th ride rs— and i ss ue s of
tim e and spac e are obvio us: “It’s c rowde d and I’m un co mf orta ble and m y b os s i s go ing

4 of 12 6/13/07 9:17 AM
The American Scholar - A New Theory of the Universe - By Robert... http://www.theamericanscholar.org/archives/sp07/newtheory-lanza.html

to kill m e fo r be ing la te .” B ut ti me and spa ce as ou r so urce of c ompreh en sio n and

consc io us ne ss is an abst racti on. Our d ay- to -d ay ex pe rienc es i ndi ca te noth ing of this
rea li ty to us . Rat he r, life h as ta ug ht us th at tim e and spac e are ex te rnal and e ter nal
rea li ti es . They bo un d al l ex per ie nces and are more fun da me ntal th an l if e it se lf. The y
are a bo ve a nd be yo nd hu man ex pe rie nce.

As animal s, we are organize d, wired , to th ink th is wa y. W e us e dat es and p lac es to

def ine ou r e xpe rien ce s to o urse lves a nd t o ot he rs. Hist ory de sc ribes th e pa st by p lac ing
peo pl e and e vent s i n ti me and spa ce . Sci en ti fi c the orie s of th e big b ang, ge ol og y, and
evo lu ti on are stee pe d i n the lo gic of ti me and spa ce . They are e ss en ti al to our ever y
movem en t and m omen t. To p la ce o ursel ves as t he cr eato rs of t ime and s pa ce , not as th e
sub je ct s of i t, goe s ag ai nst ou r co mmon s en se , li fe e xp eri en ce , and ed uc at io n. I t ta ke s a
radic al shift of pe rspec ti ve for any of us to en te rtai n th e id ea that spa ce and time are
animal se nse p er ce pt ions, bec au se th e impli ca ti ons are s o st artli ng.

Yet we a ll know that spac e and ti me are not th ings —ob je ct s th at you ca n se e, f ee l, tas te ,
tou ch , or sme ll. The y are int angibl e, li ke gravity . In fa ct the y are mod es of
int er pret at ion and un de rsta ndi ng, p art of the animal l og ic that mold s sens at io ns i nt o
mul ti di me nsional o bj ect s.

We l ive on the e dge of time , wh er e to morrow h as n’t hap pe ne d ye t. E veryth ing bef ore
thi s mome nt is p art of th e hist ory o f th e u niverse, go ne f oreve r. O r so we bel ie ve.

Think fo r a minut e abo ut tim e flo wi ng forwa rd into the futu re and h ow e xt raordi nary i t
is th at we are h ere , al ive on the e dg e of all time. I magine all the d ays and hou rs that
have pas se d since th e b eg inning of ti me . N ow st ac k the m like ch airs on to p of e ac h
oth er , and se at yo urse lf on th e v er y top . S ci en ce has n o rea l ex pla nati on fo r why we ’re
her e, for wh y we ex ist n ow . A cc ordi ng to the cu rrent p hy si oce nt ric world view , i t’s j us t
an acc id en t, a one -in-a-g azil li on ch ance th at I am h er e and th at yo u are th er e. The
sta ti st ic al p robabil it y of bei ng on top o f ti me o r infi nity i s so s mall a s to be me aningle ss .
Yet t his is ge ne rall y h ow t he h uman mind co ncei ves tim e.

In c las si ca l sc ie nce, h umans p la ce all things in time and spac e on a co nt inuum . The
universe i s 15 to 20 bi lli on ye ars ol d; th e e arth five or six. Ho mo er ec tus ap pe ared fou r
milli on ye ars ago , b ut he to ok th ree -and -a-h alf mill io n y ea rs to di sc ove r fire, and
anoth er 4 90,000 to i nvent ag ricul tu re . And so fo rth. Time in a me ch anist ic un iverse
(as d esc ribe d b y N ew to n and Ei nste in and Darwi n) is an arrow u po n which even ts are
not ch ed . Bu t imag ine , inst ea d, t hat rea li ty i s li ke a s ou nd reco rding. Lis ten ing to a n ol d
pho nograp h d oe sn’t al te r the re co rd it se lf, and de pe ndi ng on whe re th e n ee dl e i s
pla ce d, yo u hea r a c er ta in pi ec e of m us ic . This i s wha t we ca ll th e p re se nt . The mu si c
bef ore and aft er the so ng y ou are he aring is what we ca ll th e pa st and th e futu re .
Imagine , i n l ike manner , that ever y m omen t and d ay en du re s in natu re al wa ys. The
rec ord do es not go awa y. Al l nows (al l the songs on the rec ord) e xi st simul ta ne ous ly ,
alt ho ug h we c an only ex pe rien ce th e world (o r the re co rd) p ie ce by pi ec e. If we co ul d
acc es s al l li fe —the who le rec ord—w e c ould e xpe rien ce i t non-se quent ia ll y. W e co ul d
know our c hildr en as tod dl ers , as te en ag ers , as se nior ci ti ze ns—al l now . In th e e nd ,
eve n E inste in admit te d, “ No w [Bes so —o ne o f his old est frie nds ] h as d ep arte d from t his
str ange w orld a l it tl e ahea d of m e. That me ans nothi ng. Pe op le l ike us . . . know t hat th e
dis ti ncti on be tw ee n pas t, p re se nt, and futu re i s only a st ub bornly pe rsist en t il lu sio n.”
That th ere i s an irre versibl e, on-f lo wi ng co nt inuum of eve nt s linke d to ga la xi es and
sun s and th e e arth i s a f anta sy .

It’s i mp orta nt h er e to addr es s a fund ame nt al quest io n. We have c lo cks that ca n

mea su re time . If we c an m eas ure ti me, d oe sn’t th at p rove it e xists ? Ei nst ei n
sid es te pp ed the q ues ti on b y si mp ly d efining time as “wh at we me as ure wit h a c loc k.”
The em ph as is for ph ys ic ist s i s on the me asu ri ng. Howe ver, th e e mph as is sh ould b e on
the we, the obse rver s. Meas uring ti me d oes n’t prove its p hy si ca l ex ist en ce . Cl ocks are
rhyth mic things . Hum ans us e the rhyt hms of so me eve nt s ( li ke th e ti cking of c lo cks) to
tim e ot he r even ts ( li ke the rot ati on of th e ea rth) . This i s not ti me , bu t rath er , a

5 of 12 6/13/07 9:17 AM
The American Scholar - A New Theory of the Universe - By Robert... http://www.theamericanscholar.org/archives/sp07/newtheory-lanza.html

com pa riso n of even ts. Sp ec if icall y, ove r the age s, hu mans h ave obse rved rhyth mic
eve nt s i n natu re : th e p eri od ic it ies of the moon, th e su n, th e fl oo di ng of the N il e. W e
the n c re at ed oth er rhy th mic th ings to m ea su re n at ure’s rhyt hms: a pe nd ul um, a
mec hanica l spring, an e le ctronic de vice . We ca ll ed th es e manmade rhyt hmic d evice s
“cl oc ks.” We use th e rhy thm s of spe ci fic even ts to ti me oth er spec ifi c e vent s. Bu t th es e
are j us t events, n ot to be co nf use d wi th ti me .

Qua nt um mec hanics d es crib es the tiny world of th e ato m and it s c onsti tu en ts wit h
stu nning ac cu racy . It is u se d to des ign and b ui ld m uc h of the te chnol og y th at drives
mod er n soc ie ty —transi st ors, la se rs, and even wi re le ss co mmun icati on. B ut q uantu m
mec hanics in m any ways th re at ens not only ou r e ss ent ia l and abs ol ut e n oti ons of spac e
and ti me , b ut indee d, al l N ew to nian-Darwinian co ncep tio ns of orde r and sec ure
pre di ct io n.

“I think i t is saf e to sa y th at n o one u nde rsta nd s quantu m me ch anics ,” sai d No be l

phy si ci st Rich ard Fey nman. “Do n ot keep say ing to yo ursel f, i f y ou c an po ss ib ly avoi d
it, ‘But h ow ca n i t b e like tha t?’ bec au se yo u wil l go ‘dow n the drai n’ into a bli nd al le y
from which n ob od y has y et esc ap ed .” The re as on sci en tis ts go dow n the d rain is that
the y ref us e to acc ep t the imme dia te and obvio us impl icati ons of the ex pe rimen ta l
findi ngs of q ua nt um th eo ry. Bioc ent rism i s th e only h um anly co mp re he nsibl e
exp la nati on for ho w the wor ld ca n b e the way it is . B ut, as th e N ob el lau re at e p hy sic is t
Ste ven Weinbe rg admi ts , “It’s an u np lea sa nt t hing t o bring p eo pl e into t he basi c la ws o f
phy si cs .”

In orde r to ac co unt for wh y space and ti me wer e re la tive to th e ob se rver, Ei nst ei n

ass igne d to rtuo us m at he matic al p rope rties to a n invisi bl e, i nt angib le e nt it y th at cannot
be se en or to uc he d. This fol ly c ontin ue s wi th the advent of quantu m me ch anics .
Des pi te t he c en tral role o f th e ob se rver i n thi s th eo ry—e xte nd ing it f rom space and t ime
to the very prop er ti es of matt er its el f— sc ie nti st s sti ll di smiss the obs er ver as an
inconvenien ce to the ir the orie s. It has be en proven ex per imen ta lly th at wh en st udy ing
sub at omic p artic le s, t he o bs erver a ct ua ll y alt er s and de te rmine s wh at i s pe rcei ved . The
wor k of th e obs erver is h ope le ss ly en ta ngled i n that which he is at te mp tin g to ob ser ve.
An el ec tron tu rns ou t to be b ot h a parti cl e and a wave. B ut h ow and wh er e suc h a
parti cl e wi ll be l oc ate d re mains e nt irel y d ep en de nt up on t he ve ry a ct o f o bs er vatio n.

Pre-qua nt um ph ysi ci st s tho ug ht th at th ey co ul d d et ermine the traj ec to ry of indi vidua l

parti cl es w it h com pl et e ce rtainty . They a ssu me d th at t he beh avior o f pa rtic les wou ld be
pre di ct able if ever yt hing wer e known at the ou ts et —th at th er e was n o l imit to th e
acc urac y wi th wh ich th ey c ou ld me asu re th e ph ys ic al p rope rties of a pa rtic le . Bu t
Werne r Hei se nbe rg’s un ce rtainty princip le sh ow ed th at this i s n ot th e c ase . You ca n
know ei the r th e v el oc ity of a p artic le or i ts lo ca ti on bu t n ot b oth . If yo u know one, yo u
cannot know the oth er. Heis en be rg co mp ared th is to the li tt le man and woman in a
wea th er h ou se , an o ld folk a rt d evic e th at f unc ti ons as a h ygromet er , indi ca tin g th e ai r’s
hum id it y. The tw o fi gur es rid e opp os it e eac h ot he r on a bala nce bar. “If o ne c omes ou t,”
Hei se nber g sai d, “ th e o th er g oe s i n.”

Consi de r for a mome nt that y ou a re wa tc hing a fi lm o f an archer y tou rname nt , wit h th e

Zeno’s arrow pa radox in mind . A n arch er sh oo ts , and the arrow fli es . The camer a
fol lo ws the arrow’s traje ct ory from th e arche r’s bow tow ard the targe t. Su dd en ly th e
pro je ct or s to ps o n a si ngle f rame o f a stil le d arrow. Y ou s ta re a t th e i mag e of an a rrow i n
mid fl ight . The p au se in the fi lm ena bl es yo u to know th e p osi ti on of th e arrow— it ’s j us t
bey ond th e grand st and, abou t 20 feet abo ve the grou nd . Bu t y ou h ave lo st al l
informati on a bo ut it s mome nt um . It is go ing nowh er e; i ts velo cit y i s zero . I ts pa th i s n o
lon ge r know n. It i s unc er ta in.

To mea su re th e p os it ion prec is el y at any giv en inst ant i s to l oc k i n on one st at ic frame ,

to pu t the movie on pau se , so to spea k. Co nver sely, as soo n as you obs erve momen tu m
you can’t i so la te a frame , be ca use momen tu m is the sum ma ti on of many frames . Yo u
can’t know one a nd t he o th er w it h co mp le te a cc urac y. The re i s un ce rtainty as y ou h one

6 of 12 6/13/07 9:17 AM
The American Scholar - A New Theory of the Universe - By Robert... http://www.theamericanscholar.org/archives/sp07/newtheory-lanza.html

in, w he th er on m ot io n o r po si ti on.

All of this m akes sen se from a b io ce nt ric p ers pe ct ive: ti me is th e i nner form of animal
sen se that animat es e vents —the sti ll frame s—o f th e spat ia l wo rl d. The m ind animate s
the world like the m ot or and gea rs of a proje ct or. E ac h wea ves a seri es of sti ll pi ctu re s
int o an order , into t he “ cu rren t” of li fe. Mot io n is c re at ed i n ou r mind s by run ning “f il m
cel ls ” to ge th er. Remem be r th at e veryt hing y ou p er cei ve, even this pa ge, i s be ing
rec onst ruct ed i nside you r h ead . I t’s happe ning t o y ou right n ow . Al l of e xp er ie nce is a n
org anized w hirl of i nfo rmat io n in yo ur brain.

Hei se nber g’s u nce rtai nt y p rinci pl e h as it s roo t h er e: pos it io n ( lo ca tio n in spa ce )
bel ongs to the out er world , and m oment um ( wh ic h involves the tem po ral) b el ongs to
the inne r world . B y p en etr at ing to the bo tt om of matt er, sc ie nt is ts have re duc ed th e
universe to i ts m ost b as ic l og ic. Time is n ot a fea tu re of th e ex ter nal spat ia l wor ld .
“Co nt em po rary sc ie nce ,” sai d Hei se nberg, “t od ay more th an at any p re vious time, has
bee n fo rced by n at ure h er se lf to p os e aga in the ol d ques tio n of the po ss ib il ity of
com preh en di ng re al it y by m en ta l proc ess es , and to answe r it i n a sl ight ly d if fer en t
way .”

Twe nt y- fi ve h un dred yea rs la te r, the Zeno arrow pa radox fi nall y make s sen se. The
Ele at ic sch oo l of ph il os oph y, wh ich Zeno b rill ia nt ly d ef en ded , was right . S o wa s
Hei se nber g wh en he sai d, “A pa th c omes into e xi st enc e only whe n yo u ob se rve i t.”
The re i s ne ith er time n or m ot io n wit ho ut l ife. Re al it y i s not “t he re” wit h de finit e
pro pe rtie s wai tin g to be di sc ove re d b ut ac tu al ly co me s i nt o b ei ng de pen di ng up on th e
actio ns o f t he o bs er ver.

Anoth er aspect of moder n ph ys ic s, in add it io n to quantu m unc er ta inty, als o st rikes at

the co re of E inst ei n’s co ncep t of di sc re te e nt it ie s and spa ce tim e. Ei nstei n h el d that th e
spe ed of li gh t i s c ons ta nt and that even ts in one p la ce ca nnot i nf lu en ce eve nt s i n
anoth er p la ce s imul taneo us ly . In t he rel ati vity t he ory, t he s pe ed o f li gh t has to be ta ke n
int o ac co un t for i nf ormati on to travel from one pa rtic le to anoth er . Ho wev er ,
exp er imen t af ter exp er imen t has sh own tha t th is i s not th e ca se . In 1965, Irish p hy sic is t
John Be ll c re ate d an e xp eri me nt t hat sh owe d th at s ep arate p arti cl es ca n infl ue nce e ac h
oth er i nsta nt aneou sl y over gre at d is tance s. The e xp er imen t has be en p er forme d
numer ou s ti me s and c onfirms tha t the p rope rties of p ol arized l ight are corre la te d, or
linke d, no m at te r ho w far apa rt th e p artic le s are. Ther e is so me kind of
insta nt aneo us— fa st er t han l ight —c ommunic at io n bet we en t he m. A ll of t his impl ies t hat
Ein st ei n’s c once pt of spac et ime , ne atl y divid ed into sepa rate re gions b y li ght v el oci ty ,
is un ten able . I nste ad , the en ti ti es we ob se rve are fl oati ng in a fi el d of mind th at is not
limit ed by an ex te rnal spac et ime.

The ex pe rimen ts of Hei se nbe rg and Be ll cal l u s back to e xp er ie nce it se lf , th e

immed ia cy of the i nfinite h ere and now, and sh ake ou r u ne xamined trust in obj ect ive
rea li ty . B ut anot he r sup po rt fo r b io ce ntris m i s th e famous two ho le ex pe rimen t, wh ic h
dem ands th at we go one st ep further : Zen o’s arrow d oe sn’t ex ist , m uc h l es s fly , with ou t
an ob se rver. The tw o- ho le ex pe rimen t go es st raight to the co re of q ua ntu m ph ysi cs .
Sci en ti st s h ave di sc over ed tha t i f the y “wa tch ” a su bato mic p artic le pa ss th rough ho le s
on a b arrie r, i t be haves li ke a p artic le : li ke a tiny bu ll et , it p as ses throu gh one or th e
oth er h ol es . Bu t if the sc ie nt is ts d o not obs er ve the p artic le , th en i t ex hibit s th e
beh avio r of a wa ve. The tw o- hol e ex pe rimen t has many v er sio ns, bu t in short: I f
obs er ved, pa rticl es be have l ike obj ect s; if un ob ser ved, th ey be have l ike waves and ca n
go th roug h more th an on e ho le a t t he s ame t ime.

Dub be d q uantu m we irdn es s, this wa ve-p artic le dua li ty has be fud dl ed sci en ti st s fo r
dec ad es . Some of th e great es t ph ys ic ist s have d es cribe d it as impo ss ib le to int ui t and
imp os si bl e to formu la te into wo rds , and as i nvali da ti ng co mmon se nse and ordin ary
per ce pt io n. Sci en ce has e ss ent ia ll y c once ded th at quantu m p hys ic s i s
incompreh en sib le ou ts ide of co mp le x math em at ics . How ca n q uantu m p hy sic s b e so
imp er viou s to me ta ph or, vis ua li zatio n, a nd la ngua ge ?

7 of 12 6/13/07 9:17 AM
The American Scholar - A New Theory of the Universe - By Robert... http://www.theamericanscholar.org/archives/sp07/newtheory-lanza.html

If we acce pt a l ife-c re at ed re al it y at fa ce valu e, i t b ec omes si mp le to und er st and. The

key ques tio n i s wa ves of wh at ? Back in 1926, the No bel la ureat e p hy si cis t Max B orn
dem onst rate d th at q uantu m wa ves are wa ves of p ro babi lit y, n ot waves of m ate rial as
the Aus tria n ph ys ic is t Erwin Sc hrödi nger h ad the orized. They are sta ti sti ca l
pre di ct io ns. Thus a w ave of prob abili ty i s n ot hing b ut a lik ely ou tcom e. In fact, outs id e
of tha t i de a, th e wave i s n ot th ere . I t’s n ot hing. As John Whee le r, th e e minen t
the oret ic al p hy sic is t, once sa id , “N o ph eno me non is a rea l ph en omen on u nt il i t is an
obser ved ph eno me non.”

A parti cl e ca nnot be tho ug ht of as having any d ef inite e xi st enc e— ei th er d urati on or a

pos it io n in s pac e— un ti l we ob se rve it. U nt il t he m ind s et s th e sc af fol di ng o f an o bje ct i n
pla ce , an ob jec t ca nnot be th ou gh t of as be ing e it he r h er e or the re . Thus, q uantu m
waves me rel y d ef ine th e po te nt ia l lo ca ti on a pa rticl e c an o cc up y. A wa ve of p robabil it y
isn’t an event or a p henome non, it is a d esc ript io n of the l ikeli ho od of an e vent or
phe nome non oc cu rring . N oth ing h app en s un ti l the e vent i s ac tu al ly obs er ved. I f yo u
wat ch it go throug h the b arrie r, th en th e wave fun ct io n c ol la pse s and the pa rticl e goe s
throu gh o ne h ol e or th e ot he r. If you d on’t w at ch i t, th en t he p artic le d et ec to rs will s ho w
tha t it c an go t hrou gh more t han o ne h ol e a t th e sa me ti me .

Sci en ce h as be en grappl ing with th e impl ic ati ons of th e wa ve-p artic le dua li ty e ver
since i ts d is co very i n th e fi rst half of th e 20th c en tu ry. But fe w pe opl e acce pt this
princip le at fac e v al ue . The Cop en hagen inte rpre tat io n, pu t i n p lac e b y Hei se nbe rg,
Nie ls B oh r, and Born i n the 1920s, set o ut t o do j ust t hat. B ut it w as t oo u nse tt li ng a sh if t
in wor ld view to ac ce pt in full . A t p re se nt, the impli ca ti ons of the se ex pe rimen ts are
convenien tl y ignore d b y l imiti ng th e n ot ion of quantu m b eh avior to th e m ic rosco pi c
wor ld . B ut do ing this h as no basi s i n rea so n, and i t is be ing c hal le nged in la bo ratorie s
aroun d th e world . Ne w ex pe rime nt s ca rrie d ou t wi th hu ge m ol ec ule s c al led bu ckyba ll s
sho w tha t quantum real it y ext en ds into the macrosc op ic wo rl d as we ll . E xp er ime nt s
make i t cl ea r that anot her we ird quantu m ph en omen on known a s e nt angle me nt , wh ic h
is u su all y asso ci at ed w it h th e micro world, is als o re le vant on macro sc al es . An ex cit ing
exp er imen t, re ce nt ly prop ose d (s o-c al le d sca le d- up su pe rpo si ti on), wo ul d furnish th e
mos t p ow erf ul evide nce to da te tha t the b io ce nt ric view of the world i s c orrec t at th e
lev el o f living orga nisms.

One of th e m ai n rea son s m os t p eo ple re je ct th e Cope nhag en inte rpret at io n of q uantu m

the ory is th at it l ead s to th e d re ad ed do ct rine of soli psis m. The la te He inz Pag el s once
com me nt ed : “If y ou de ny the ob je ct ivity of th e wor ld u nless y ou obs erve it and are
consc io us of it , th en y ou end up wit h so lip si sm—the b el ief th at y ou r co nscio us ne ss i s
the only one.” I nd ee d, I once h ad one of m y arti cl es ch al le nged by a rea de r who too k
thi s ex act p os it ion. “I wo ul d li ke to ask Robe rt Lanza,” he wrot e, “w he th er he fee ls th e
wor ld w il l co nt inue t o ex is t af te r th e de at h of h is c onsc iou snes s. If not, i t’ll be hard l uc k
for a ll o f u s sh ou ld we o ut li ve hi m” ( New S cienti st , 1991).

What I w ou ld quest io n, wit h res pec t to so li psis m, i s the a ss um pt ion th at our indi vidua l
sep arat en es s i s an abs ol ut e rea li ty . B el l’s e xp eri me nt impl ie s the e xiste nce of li nkage s
tha t transc en d ou r ordinary wa y of thi nking. A n old H indu poe m say s, “Kn ow i n thys el f
and all one self- sa me so ul ; b anis h the d rea m th at su nd ers p art from who le .” If time i s
onl y a st ub bornly p er sis te nt il lus io n, as w e h ave seen , the n th e same c an b e sai d abou t
spa ce . The dis ti ncti on be tw ee n her e and the re i s al so not an abso lu te real it y. W ith ou t
consc io us ne ss, we c an take any per so n as our n ew frame of re fe re nce. I t is n ot m y
consc io us ne ss or y ou rs alon e, b ut our s. That ’s the ne w so li psism the e xp er ime nt s
manda te . The the oris t B er nard d ’Es pa gnat , a c ol la bo rator of Ni els B oh r and Enric o
Fer mi, h as sai d that “non-se parabil it y i s now one of th e most ce rtain gen era l co nce pt s
in p hys ic s.” This i s not to s ay t hat ou r mind s, l ike th e pa rticl es i n Be ll ’s e xp er ime nt , are
linke d in any way that ca n viola te the l aw s of c au sa li ty. In this same se nse, the re i s a
part of us co nnec ted to th e gl ow wo rm by the po nd n ea r m y h ous e. It is the pa rt that
exp er ie nces c onsc io us nes s, not in ou r e xt ernal em bo dim en ts bu t i n ou r i nner bei ng.
We c an only imagine and rec ol le ct things while i n th e b ody ; th is is for sure, b eca us e

8 of 12 6/13/07 9:17 AM
The American Scholar - A New Theory of the Universe - By Robert... http://www.theamericanscholar.org/archives/sp07/newtheory-lanza.html

sen sa ti ons and me mories are mol de d int o th oug ht and know led ge i n the brai n. And
alt ho ug h we id en ti fy ou rsel ves wit h ou r th oug ht s and aff ec ti ons, it i s an e ss ent ia l
fea tu re o f r ea li ty t hat w e ex pe rie nce th e w orld p ie ce by p ie ce.

The sphe re of ph ys ic al rea li ty fo r a gl ow wo rm and a hu man are dec id ed ly di ff ere nt .

How ever , the ge nome i ts el f i s c arbon-b as ed . Carbon is fo rmed at th e h ea rt of sta rs and
sup er nova exp lo si ons, formati ve p roce sse s of the u niverse . Lif e as we know i t i s l imite d
by ou r spat io -t emp oral l og ic —th at i s, the gen ome traps u s in the u niverse wi th wh ic h
we are famil ia r. Animals ( inclu di ng th os e tha t evolved i n the pa st ) spa n pa rt of th e
spe ct rum of th at p os sib il it y. Ther e are surel y ot he r inf ormatio n sy st em s t hat co rresp ond
to oth er ph ysi ca l rea lit ie s, un iverses based on lo gic co mp le tel y d if fe rent from ours and
not base d on spa ce and ti me . The un iverse of spa ce and ti me be lo ng un iquel y to u s
gen ome- base d a nimals .

Eug en e Wigner , one of the 20th ce nt ury’s grea tes t p hys ic is ts , ca ll ed i t impo ssi bl e “t o
formu la te the la ws of [p hys ic s] i n a ful ly c onsi ste nt way wit hou t re fe re nce to th e
consc io us ne ss [ of the obs erver ].” Inde ed , quantum the ory impl ie s th at c onsc io usn es s
mus t ex is t and th at t he c ont en t of t he m ind is t he u lt imate rea li ty . If we do n ot lo ok a t it ,
the moon do es n ot ex is t in a d ef inite st at e. In thi s world , only an ac t of ob se rvat ion ca n
confe r sh ap e a nd f orm t o re al it y—t o a da nde li on i n a mea do w or a se ed p od.

As we h ave se en, the world ap pe ars to b e d es igne d for l if e not ju st at the m ic rosco pi c
sca le of th e atom , bu t at th e le vel of the u niverse it self. I n c osm ol og y, sci en tis ts h ave
dis co vere d th at th e un iver se h as a l ong li st of trait s that make it app ea r as if ever yth ing
it c onta ins—f rom atom s to stars— wa s ta il or-mad e fo r u s. Many are c al li ng this
revel at io n the Gol di lo cks p rincip le, b ec au se the co smos i s not too this or too that , bu t
jus t right for li fe . Oth ers are c al ling i t the anthrop ic princip le , b ec aus e the un iverse
app ea rs t o be hu man ce nt ere d. A nd s ti ll ot he rs a re ca ll ing it inte ll igen t d es ign, beca us e
the y b el ieve i t’s no ac ci de nt that th e h ea vens are so ide al ly su ite d for us. By any name ,
the d is co very i s ca us ing a hu ge c ommot io n wi th in the ast rop hy si cs c ommunit y and
bey ond.

At th e momen t, the only atte mp t at an e xp la natio n ho lds that God m ad e the u niverse .
But t he re i s anot he r ex pla nati on bas ed o n sc ie nce . To und er st and th e my ste ry, we n ee d
to ree xamine th e e veryd ay wo rl d we l ive i n. As unimaginabl e as i t m ay see m to u s, th e
log ic o f quantum p hy si cs is i ne sc ap abl e. E very m orning we o pe n our f ront d oo r to bring
in th e pa pe r or to go to wo rk. We ope n th e doo r to rai n, snow, or trees swa yi ng i n th e
bre ez e. W e th ink the world c hu rns alo ng whe th er we h ap pe n to ope n th e doo r or n ot .
Qua nt um m ec hanic s te lls u s it d oes n’t.

The tree s and snow e vaporat e when we ’re sle epi ng. The kitch en di sa ppe ars whe n we ’re
in th e bath room. Whe n yo u tur n from o ne room t o th e nex t, w he n you r animal s ens es n o
lon ge r p er ce ive the so un ds of th e d is hw as her , the ticking c lo ck, the smel l of a c hic ke n
roast ing— th e kitc hen and al l it s seem ingl y di sc re te b it s di ss ol ve i nt o noth ingness —o r
int o wa ves of p robabil it y. The u niverse burst s into e xi ste nce from l if e, n ot th e ot he r wa y
aroun d as we have be en ta ugh t. Fo r eac h life the re is a un ivers e, it s own u niver se . W e
gen er at e sphe re s of rea li ty , indi vidu al b ub ble s of ex is te nce . Our p la ne t is com pris ed o f
bil li ons of s ph er es of rea li ty , ge ne rated by ea ch i nd ividu al h um an a nd p er hap s even by
eac h animal .

Imagine ag ai n y ou ’re on the sta lle d sub wa y car worrie d about b ein g la te fo r work. The
eng inee rs ge t the th ing run ning aga in and m os t of the ot he r c ommu ter s soo n
dis em bark. W hat i s y ou r u niverse at the mome nt ? The sc re ech ing sou nd of me ta l
wheel s aga inst m et al tracks. Yo ur fel lo w pa ss en ge rs. The ads fo r Roga ine and tec h
sch oo ls . What is n ot y ou r universe? E veryt hing outs id e yo ur range of p er ce pt ion d oe s
not e xi st . No w sup po se that I ’m wit h you on th e train. My i nd ivid ual sph er e of real it y
int er se ct s wit h y ou rs. W e tw o h um an be ings wi th ne arly i den ti ca l p er ce pt io n too ls are
exp er ie ncing t he s ame h arsh l ighti ng a nd un co mf orta ble s ou nd s.

9 of 12 6/13/07 9:17 AM
The American Scholar - A New Theory of the Universe - By Robert... http://www.theamericanscholar.org/archives/sp07/newtheory-lanza.html

You get th e i de a. Bu t h ow ca n thi s re all y be? You wa ke up ever y m orning and y ou r

dre ss er i s st il l acros s th e room from y ou r co mf ortable spo t in the b ed. You p ut on th e
same pa ir of je ans and favorit e shi rt and shu ff le to the kitch en i n sl ip per s to m ake
cof fe e. H ow c an a ny one in h is right m ind po ssi bl y su gg es t th at the grea t wo rl d ou t th er e
is co nstruc ted i n ou r hea ds ?

To more ful ly gras p a un ivers e of sti ll arrows and di sa pp ea ring moons, l et ’s tu rn to

mod er n e le ct ronics. Yo u know from e xp er ie nce th at so me th ing i n the bl ac k b ox of a
DVD pl ay er tu rns an i nanimate dis c int o a m ovie. The e le ct ronics in the DVD co nverts
and a nimate s the i nf ormatio n on t he d isc i nt o a 3-D sho w. Likew is e you r brai n animate s
the un iver se . I mag ine the brai n as the ele ct ronics in yo ur DVD pl ay er . E xp lai ne d
anoth er way, the b rain tu rns e le ct roche mica l informati on from our fi ve se nses i nto an
order , a seq ue nce— into a fa ce , into th is p ag e— into a un if ie d th re e- di men si onal who le .
It transfo rms se nsory i npu t i nt o someth ing so real th at fe w p eop le ever ask ho w i t
hap pe ns. St op and think abo ut this fo r a m inute. Our m inds are so go od at i t th at we
rarel y e ver ques tio n whe the r the w orld is a ny th ing ot he r than wh at w e i magine i t to be .
Yet t he brain—not th e ey es —is th e organ s ea le d insi de a vaul t of bone, l oc ke d insid e th e
cranium , th at “s ee s” th e un iver se.

What we i nte rpre t as th e world i s b rough t i nt o ex is te nce insi de ou r he ad . S ens ory

informati on d oes not i mp re ss u po n th e brain, as p arti cl es of lig ht i mp re ss u pon the f il m
in a c amer a. The i mage s yo u se e are a c onstr uc ti on b y th e b rain. Eve ryth ing yo u are
exp er ie ncing r ight n ow ( pre te nd y ou ’re bac k on t he s ubw ay ) is bei ng a cti vely g en era te d
in y ou r m ind —the har d p la st ic sea ts , the graff it i, the da rk rem nant s of ch ew ing gu m
stu ck to th e flo or. A ll phy si ca l thing s—s ub wa y turnst il es , train pl atf orms, n ew spa pe r
racks, th ei r shap es , soun ds , and odo rs— al l thes e sen sat io ns are ex pe rie nced insid e
you r he ad . Ever yt hing we ob se rve is b as ed on th e di re ct i nt er ac ti on of en er gy on ou r
sen se s, wh et he r it is m att er ( li ke yo ur sh oe sti cking to the flo or of a subw ay c ar) or
parti cl es o f l ight ( em itt ed f rom sparks as a s ub way t rain roun ds a c orne r). A ny th ing t hat
we do n ot obs erve di re ct ly, e xi st s only as pot en ti al —or m at he mati cal ly spe aking —as a
haze of p robab il it y.

You may quest io n wh et he r th e brai n ca n real ly cre at e ph ys ic al rea li ty. Ho wev er ,

remem be r tha t drea ms and sc hizop hren ia (c onsi der the m ovie A Beaut iful Mi nd )
pro ve th e c apa ci ty of t he mind to c onst ruct a spat ial -t em po ral re al it y as re al as the one
you are ex pe rien ci ng n ow . The vis io ns and so un ds sch izop hreni c p at ie nts se e and h ea r
are j us t as re al t o the m as t his p ag e or th e ch ai r you ’re si tti ng o n.

We have al l se en pi ct ures of th e primiti ve e arth wi th it s volca noes overfl ow ing wit h

lava, or read abou t how the so lar syst em it se lf co nd en se d out of a gia nt swirli ng ga s
clo ud . Sci en ce has so ugh t to ex te nd th e phy si ca l world b eyo nd the ti me of our ow n
eme rgen ce . It h as f oun d ou r fo ot st ep s wa nd eri ng bac kward un til on some far sho re t he y
wer e transmut ed i nt o a trail of mu d. The c os molo gis ts pic ke d up th e st ory of t he mol te n
ear th a nd c arried i ts e volut io n backward in t ime to t he i nsen sat e pa st : from m inera ls by
deg re es b ack throu gh th e lo wer forms of m at ter —o f nu cle i and quarks— and bey ond
the m to the big bang. It se em s only n at ural t hat li fe and the world of th e inorganic m us t
sep arat e at so me p oi nt.

We c ons id er p hy si cs a kind of mag ic and do n ot s ee m at all fa zed wh en we he ar t hat th e

universe— indee d th e l aw s of natur e th em selves— ju st ap pe ared fo r n o re as on one d ay .
From th e di nosau rs to th e big b ang is an en ormou s di st ance. Per haps we sho ul d
remem be r th e ex pe rimen ts of Frances co Red i, Lazzaro Sp al la nzani, and Loui s
Paste ur—bas ic bi ol og ical ex pe rimen ts that p ut to re st th e th eo ry of spo nt ane ou s
gen er at io n, the be li ef th at life h ad aris en spo nt aneo us ly from d ea d m at ter (as, fo r
insta nce, mag go ts from rot ti ng mea t and mice from b und le s of old clo th es )—and not
make th e sa me m is ta ke f or t he o rigin of the u niver se i ts el f. W e are wo nt to imagi ne t ime
ext en di ng a ll t he w ay bac k to the bi g bang, be fore li fe ’s e arly beg inning i n th e se as . Bu t
bef ore matt er ca n ex ist , it h as to be ob ser ved by a co nsci ou sne ss .

10 of 12 6/13/07 9:17 AM
The American Scholar - A New Theory of the Universe - By Robert... http://www.theamericanscholar.org/archives/sp07/newtheory-lanza.html

Phy si ca l rea li ty be gins and e nd s wit h the animal ob ser ver. Al l oth er ti me s and p lac es ,
all ot he r obj ec ts and even ts are prod uc ts of th e imag inat io n, and se rve only to un it e
knowl ed ge i nt o a l og ic al w ho le . We are pl ea se d wi th su ch b oo ks a s N ew to n’s Pr in cip ia ,
or Darwin’s Ori gi n of Sp ecies. B ut they i nst il l a c ompla ce ncy i n the rea der . Darwi n
spo ke of th e p oss ib il it y th at li fe em erged from inorg anic matt er i n some “wa rm lit tl e
pond.” Tryi ng to trace l if e do wn th rough si mpl er st age s i s one thing, bu t as su ming i t
arose sponta neo us ly from n onli ving matte r wants for th e rigor and at te nt ion of th e
quant um t he orist .

Neu rosc ie nt ist s b el ie ve that the p robl em of consc io us nes s c an so me day be so lved once
we u nde rsta nd all the syn ap tic conne ct io ns i n th e brain. “The too ls of ne uros ci enc e,”
wro te p hilos op he r and aut ho r David Chal me rs ( Scienti fic Ameri can, De ce mber 19 95 )
“ca nnot provid e a full acc ou nt of co nscio us ex pe rien ce, al th ou gh th ey have m uc h to
off er . . . . Co nscio us ne ss m ight be e xp la ined by a n ew kind of t he ory.” Ind ee d, in a 198 3
Nat io nal Acad em y Re por t, the Res ea rch Briefing Pane l on Cog niti ve S cie nce and
Artif ic ia l I nte ll igen ce sta te d that th e q ue st ions to which it c once rned i ts el f “re fle ct a
singl e un de rlying great sci en ti fic m ys te ry, on pa r wit h un de rst andi ng the evol ut ion of
the u niverse, th e origi n of l if e, or t he natu re o f ele me nt ary parti cl es .”

The mys te ry i s pl ai n. N eu rosc ien ti st s have d evel op ed theories that migh t he lp to

exp la in h ow se pa rate p iec es o f informati on a re inte grat ed in t he brain and th us s ucc ee d
in e lu ci da ti ng how di ff er en t at trib ut es of a sing le pe rcei ved obje ct —s uc h as the sha pe ,
col or, and sme ll of a flo we r—are merge d into a co he re nt whol e. The se th eo ries refl ec t
som e of th e imp orta nt wo rk that i s occ urring in the fi el ds of n eu rosci en ce and
psy ch ol og y, bu t the y are th eor ie s of str uc tu re and fun ct ion. The y tel l us nothi ng abou t
how t he p er fo rmance of the se f un ct io ns is acc ompa nied b y a co nsc io us e xp er ien ce ; and
yet th e d if fi cul ty in un de rst andi ng co nsc io us ne ss lie s p re ci se ly h er e, in th is gap in ou r
und er st andi ng of h ow a subj ec ti ve e xpe rien ce e merge s from a p hy sic al p roce ss. E ven
Ste ven Weinber g co ncede s th at a lt hou gh c onsc iou snes s may h ave a ne ural co rrel at e, it s
exi st en ce d oes n ot s eem t o be d eri vabl e from ph ys ic al la ws .

Phy si ci st s be li eve tha t th e th eo ry o f ever yt hing is hover ing righ t arou nd the c orner , and
yet c ons ci ou snes s i s sti ll la rgel y a my st er y, and p hy si ci sts h ave n o i de a h ow to e xpl ai n
its e xi st enc e from ph ys ic al la ws . The q ue st io ns ph ys ic ist s lo ng to ask abou t natu re are
bou nd up wit h the p robl em of c onsc iou snes s. Phy si cs can furnis h no answe rs fo r th em .
“Le t man,” de cl ared Em er so n, “ th en l ear n th e re vela tio n of a ll n at ure and al l th oug ht t o
his he art; thi s, name ly; th at the High es t dw el ls wi th h im; that th e sou rce s of n at ure are
in his ow n mind.”

Spa ce and time, n ot p rotei ns and n eu rons, hol d th e answ er to th e probl em of

consc io us ne ss. Whe n we co nsid er th e ne rve i mp ul se s ent er ing the brain, we re al ize t hat
the y are n ot woven tog et he r au to mati cal ly , any m ore th an the info rmati on is i nsid e a
com pu te r. Our tho ugh ts h ave an order , not of them se lves , bu t be cau se the m ind
gen er at es the spa tio -t em po ral rel at io nships i nvolved i n ever y ex pe rie nce. W e ca n
never h ave any ex pe rien ce that doe s not co nf orm to t he se rel at ionsh ip s, f or t he y are th e
mod es of animal log ic th at mold sen sa ti ons i nto ob je ct s. It wou ld be er roneo us ,
the re fo re , to c once ive of the mind as ex is tin g in space and ti me be fore thi s pro ce ss , as
exi st ing in th e ci rcui try of th e brain b ef ore th e u nd er st andin g po si ts in i t a
spa ti o- te mp oral order . The sit ua ti on, as we have se en , i s li ke pl ay ing a CD— th e
informati on l ea ps int o three -di me nsio nal so un d, a nd in t hat way , and i n th at wa y only ,
doe s th e mu sic i nd ee d e xi st .

We are li ving th roug h a p rofo un d s hift i n w orld view , from th e b el ie f th at ti me a nd sp ac e

are e nt it ie s in t he un iver se t o one i n wh ic h ti me a nd s pa ce be lo ng t o th e li ving. Think o f
all the re ce nt b oo k ti tl es— The En d of Science, The E nd of Hi st or y, The E nd of
Ete rn it y, The En d of Certa in ty, The E nd of N atur e, and The E nd of Tim e. Only for a
momen t, whil e we sort out th e re al ity that tim e and space d o not e xi st , wi ll it fee l l ike
madne ss .

11 of 12 6/13/07 9:17 AM
The American Scholar - A New Theory of the Universe - By Robert... http://www.theamericanscholar.org/archives/sp07/newtheory-lanza.html

Robert L anza is vice president of r esearch and scientific development at

Advanced Cell Technology and a professor at Wake Forest U niversity School of
Medicine. He has written 20 scientific books and won a Rave award for medicine
from Wired m agazine and an “ all star” award for biotechnology from M ass
High Tech: The Journal of New England Technology.

This article is copyrighted by the author. It may not be reproduced without permission of the publisher.
For reproduction or distribution rights, please contact scholar@pbk.org.
__________________________________________________________

Copyright © 2007 The American Scholar. All rights reserved.

Home | Current Issue | Archives | Contact Us | Subscribe

12 of 12 6/13/07 9:17 AM