Quantum void, Akashic field and information


I like inspiring philosophy videos, they are not lazyly put out and properly reference their claims, HOWEVER, the author does overstate his case in almost every video, if you see a good amount of videos of his you will see that he usually always reference the same people like Seth Loyd, Michael Denton (which is a former ID proponent, by the way), etc. which is kind of an echo-chamber thing. In the specific case of this video, could the physicists he references be right on their metaphysical speculations? Absolutely. But it is far from being consensus or even a majority view. I actually follow Sean Carroll’s blog and I know that he is highly critical of many views shown in the video, though you would think that he supports them based on the way the video and his sequences are put up. I also follow IP videos and I usually like them, but you do have to take them with a grain of salt due to the reasons I layed out, but I do apreciate the effort he puts into them.


But let’s say that the video is right, why use the “akashic” word (which has so much spiritual connotations which are not at all required or implied by the physics) on it?


Also, this video gets very “wooey” after 12:30 until 16:10…I was actually disapointed. IP does usually gets very speculative and overstates his case like I was saying, but not to that extent.

(Scott koshland) #24

I am glad that you like these IP videos. They are thought provoking. I agree that they diverge and extends beyond where I might go especially with the consciousness. The name Akashic is not really that important. Call it what you want, heaven, quantum Zero point energy, hilbert field. There are many references in the Bible for the book of life or records. These references create the understanding that events or information can be retained in what we call heaven. Which I believe points to a timeless dimension that can contain this hierarchal information from our dimension. Certainly we can consider a field or dimension that contains information. I think that is what essentially is being referred to as the holographic information retained at the edge of the black hole. The field could be an information source like the internet cloud or even like a compilation of all the electromagnatic information contained in wireless transmission. It is conceivable that information can be retained in some other dimension from ours as nderstood from the holographic universe. It is becoming less of a distinction Whether we put the science in a spiritual context or we put the spiritual in a scientific context. From my point of view the sciences and the spiritual teachings are merging.

(Matthew Pevarnik) #25

As a Physicist I did a double take at this sentence–my quantum woo feelers are back up as they were at the start of this thread.

How is zero-point energy anything remotely close or similar to ‘heaven?’

Is heaven the lowest possible energy that a quantum mechanical system can have?



Not really. It is one thing to say that the science is consistent with your metaphysical beliefs, but a entirely different thing to say that it proves them. No metaphysical belief has that benefit, even materialistic/atheistic ones. That is what I really hate about these new age gurus (like Ervin Lazslo seems to be), they are not happy with stating that the sciences are consistent with their beliefs, they need to prove (unsucessfully) somehow that it proves or even that they are the same as them, sometimes by making unfalsifiable hypothesis (which is the lesser evil) or by completely distorting them and throwing science out of the window (like the people who say that quantum physics “proves” that your feelings somehow interfere with the vibrations of the molecules in other peoples brains) which are the ones that really get into my nerves.

(Roger A. Sawtelle) #27

Space/time is related to matter/mass. How can it be related to information and quantum space?

There are two kinds of information, the first is “skeletal” which contains the framework of natural law which give nature form. The second kind is the historical record on which the facts of the universe are recorded. Both are very important and very different.

You and others treating quantum mechanics as a cure all, when instead it is a simply the realm of the very small. It is not the God of the Gaps.

(Matthew Pevarnik) #28

Of which of course really big things are made up of really small things. See this brief video on some of the effects of the quantum world on determining what very large stars do:

But I wholeheartedly agree with you in your rejection of quantum woo and magic here:

(Scott koshland) #29

Well keep your woo hat on! How is quantum tunneling and entanglement not woo? These quantum events defy our material world reality. The material world reality is emergent from the underlying quantum events but still we dont walk through walls.

I don’t think God is a woo woo either beyond our understanding. I agree that It is not a God of the Gaps. John 3:12 As Jesus said

I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe how then will you believe when I speak of heavenly things?

It is not impossible for us to understand it’s not magic but would appear to be magic to the ancient mind. Our Lord didnt want to explain Quantum Mechanics to His students.

The holographic theory supports that information can be retained at the edge of the black hole in a 2 dimensional space. So how is it woo that information can be retained from time in a lesser dimension? The Book of life is mentioned over 15 times in the Bible. Does this not mean that they believed information is retained from our world to heaven?

Once again, is not consciousness a higher form of information processing and is not life a hierarchal information system? Did these not emerge from our universe? Does this not tell you what is the underlying principle of our world? No matter how hard they will try Rocks and waveforms dont think but they do contain information. Evolution is like a learning process where emergent information structures are selected over time increasing their information control. This learning or information can be retained.

I know its hard for physicist to warm up to information. We know that information can be thought of in entropic terms and Shannons law to better quantify or conceive it.

The way that I think of it is as a big corporation with the CEO with great wisdom and knowledge at the top directing (controlling) his 10 vice presidents ( with sufficient wisdom knowledge) in charge of 10 groups of the company with each group having 20 managers reporting (controlled) to the vice president and then each of these managers (with their wisdom and knowledge) each manage (control) 50 customer service employees that with (some wisdom and knowledge) work with their customers (with less wisdom and knowledge :slightly_smiling_face:) provide the business with its revenue. This all amounts to the information hierarchy and is the total amount of information controlled.

What does it mean that God is the Supreme consciousness ( all knowing). He controls information. What does it mean that He is the beginning and the end beyond time? Is God not outside the time of our dimension?


Quantum entanglement, as far as I know, is actually predicted by the mathematics of quantum mechanics, that is one of the reasons Einstein thought that quantum mechanics had to be wrong, since it being true would require it. Akashic fields, quantum cure, etc are not, they are just things that people try to force into the weirdness of QM but which are not there at all to try to legitimate them. That is why they are “woo” instead of science.

I’m not saying that that is woo, the interpretations new age gurus make on top of that are.

Ervin Laszlo doesn’t even believe in God from what I’ve read searching the internet, he thinks that the “Akashic field” substitutes God in every necessary way, but I could be wrong, since I haven’t read his work. If that is in fact the case, it strikes me as weird for you to be defending his ideas based on the bible.

(Roger A. Sawtelle) #31


God is Spirit. We must not confuse the Spirit with the physical, nor the rational with the physical. As beings created in the Image of God humans are physical, rational, and spiritual or a trinity. The universe is also, so it has more than one dimension.

(Matthew Pevarnik) #32

The universe is a trinity?

(Roger A. Sawtelle) #33

Yes, God left God’s imprint all over the universe.

While non-believers expected science to reveal that God is no9t evident in the universe, the reverse is true as one should expect. If people do not see God in God’s creation, it is because they are not looking.

(Scott koshland) #34

I agree. To see something is one thing but it takes a deeper understanding to know what you are seeing. I also see Gods work all about us. As we grow we learn more about our God and his creation. When I first see a beautiful mountain I am in wonder of His great work. As my learning continues of all that is involved in the creation of the mountain further deepens my understanding of God and his wonder.

(Scott koshland) #35

I am not really a follower of Laszlo. He is only pointing out that the Akashic Records or Book of life may be connected to information of events being retained somehow in what he calls some type of quantum field. He is just a philosopher. I think he sees this assembly as a cosmic consciousness which could be God. I consider him probably a Gnostic. He seems to believe in an anthropic universe which may be formed by God.

More important The concept of this Akashic or the book of life predate Laszlo and are quite old dating thousands of years to Vedic, Hindu, some Hebrew and other religions beliefs. This is a principle in many of these religions that could be seen as a residence for what we call the soul.

Is there a relationship between the spirit and consciousness? They are both information based. They are immaterial. Consciousness is not physical it is mental and though no doubt requires the brain to occur in our life it is immaterial information processing. How is the spirit not information or information processing?

The last part of Physicist John A Wheeler career he focused on information and came to believe in an information based universe. He called this “it from bit”. In the holographic universe concept information in a lower dimension emerges into the 3 or 4 (time)dimensional universe that we experience. In the black hole holographic model matter is thought to become condensed to 2 dimensional information. This essentially what is proposed to be occurring with “ the book of life”. Information of our spirit could be stored in place that we call heaven.

(Scott koshland) #36

Does what we call space time exist at the quantum level?


The “it from bit” is a metaphysical speculation BASED on science, not science in itself, even Wheeler admited that. If you want to interpret that the holographic principle is “the book of life” its fine, but that is just a metaphysical speculation, not science, at best it could be based on science. I think it is weird that you use the holographic principle as the book of life since using the block universe would be much more fitting in my view, and the block universe itself is a metaphysical speculation that is favored by many physicists (although not science, only BASED on science). Saying that science and spirituality are coming together because of metaphysical speculations seems a little far fetched for me, since metaphysics is not science (at the very best it can be based on science).

(Matthew Pevarnik) #38

Kind of- there should be quantum underlykbgs behind general relativity but nobody yet has it figured out:

Here’s one pop sci article for example:


By the way Matthew, what is your opinion about the block universe and the Andromeda Paradox? I’ve seen some physicists criticizing it for being untestable because Andromeda would be too far away and therefore we could not communicate with it fast enough to see what is happening there, but it still seems pretty reasonable as a thought experiment. Is it another exageration like the ones you discuss here or does it have some more merit?

(Matthew Pevarnik) #40

Seems like a legitimate thought experiment. I think it’s only a paradox in the sense that it’s non-intuitive and seems wrong, until one truly understands special relativity (which I don’t). This sums up my experience on learning about the Andromeda Paradox this evening: