• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Does Matter Really Exist?

Iacchus

Unregistered
I
Joined
Dec 24, 2003
Messages
10,085
I'm going to attempt to do this once more, and hopefully I won't get into trouble this time. ;)

Now, these are the words of the Nobel prize winning physicist and, father of quantum physics, Max Planck ...

As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear-headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as the result of my research about atoms this much:

THERE IS NO MATTER AS SUCH!

All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particles of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.
Click to expand...
Now, I can understand why the mods chose to move the other thread to the Science and Technology forum, however, please understand that Max Planck was a deeply religious man and, that the notion of the "matrix of all matter" has its religious implications as well. Which, is what I really wished to discuss.

In fact if anyone saw the "woo program," The Power of Intention, on Public TV the other night (which quoted Max Planck in full here), it might help bring it all into perspective.

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Iacchus said:
I'm going to attempt to do this once more, and hopefully I won't get into trouble this time. ;)

Now, these are the words of the Nobel prize winning physicist and, father of quantum physics, Max Planck ...

Now, I can understand why the mods chose to move the other thread to the Science and Technology forum, however, please understand that Max Planck was a deeply religious man and, that the notion of the "matrix of all matter" has its religious implications as well. Which, is what I really wished to discuss.

In fact if anyone saw the "woo program," The Power of Intention, on Public TV the other night (which quoted Max Planck in full here), it might help bring it all into perspective.

Thanks!
Click to expand...

I certainly am not going to argue with Max Planck, but I have always thought that contentions like "Nothing is really real" or "matter doesn't really exist" are completely nonsensical. The thing we call existence is what matter does. It is not as though we have other concept of existence other than the kind of existence that matter exhibits. The notion that matter might not really exist suggest that there some sort of more real concept of existence. What matter does is what we call existence.
 
billydkid said:
I certainly am not going to argue with Max Planck, but I have always thought that contentions like "Nothing is really real" or "matter doesn't really exist" are completely nonsensical. The thing we call existence is what matter does. It is not as though we have other concept of existence other than the kind of existence that matter exhibits. The notion that matter might not really exist suggest that there some sort of more real concept of existence. What matter does is what we call existence.
Click to expand...

Indeed, it's a fun mental and intellectual excersise, but no matter what answer we finally arrive at, it doesn't change anything.
 
billydkid said:
I certainly am not going to argue with Max Planck, but I have always thought that contentions like "Nothing is really real" or "matter doesn't really exist" are completely nonsensical. The thing we call existence is what matter does. It is not as though we have other concept of existence other than the kind of existence that matter exhibits. The notion that matter might not really exist suggest that there some sort of more real concept of existence. What matter does is what we call existence.
Click to expand...

Well said. It why I have great difficulty with the 'spiritual' objections to the material. IMO its all material - it might be strange material but its still material.
 
If something is intelligible and comprehensible to all of us, sensible in the same way as the same thing, and it is consistent with itself, then it's not going to make a difference whether or not it is real. What can be learned from it, is going to remain true.
 
As I grew up I became increasingly interested in philosophy, of which they* profoundly disapproved. Every time the subject came up they repeated with unfailing regularity, "What is mind? No matter. What is matter? Never mind." After some fifty or sixty repetitions, this remark ceased to amuse me.

- Bertrand Russel
Click to expand...

* = His family
 
billydkid said:
I certainly am not going to argue with Max Planck, but I have always thought that contentions like "Nothing is really real" or "matter doesn't really exist" are completely nonsensical.
Click to expand...
Is this what he's really saying? I'm not so sure. I think what he's saying is that matter is the extension of something else, the matrix of which we cannot begin to comprehend, unless we had some understanding that the supernatural exists. In other words, whatever it is that gives rise to matter (its form and structure) exists on the other side of it.

The thing we call existence is what matter does. It is not as though we have other concept of existence other than the kind of existence that matter exhibits.
Click to expand...
Yet the only portal we have of understanding this is through the mind which, is not directly attached to anything physical.

The notion that matter might not really exist suggest that there some sort of more real concept of existence.
Click to expand...
Yes.

What matter does is what we call existence.
Click to expand...
Meaning, that part of existence which the mind observes as "physical." Which isn't to say it doesn't exist, however, just that it owes its existence to another system (or matrix) that exists beyond it.
 
Last edited:
Bob Klase said:
I fail to see why we must assume that.
Click to expand...
Well, if God existed, and we understood this to be the case, it wouldn't be so much a matter of assuming anything would it? Granted, it would be for those who had yet to become "enlightened" but, then again that's the way it works for just about anything.
 
I'm going to attempt to do this once more, and hopefully I won't get into trouble this time. - Iacchus
Click to expand...

Just curious but do you have any reason to think this might be the case?

We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. - Max Planck
Click to expand...
Well he was just plain wrong about that wasn't he? Why must we assume that? Sounds like a 'god of the gaps' assertion: The mind of God must hold these quantum rascals together.

People live in the culture and beliefs of their times. Maybe if Max lived today he would say something different and new.

'Enlightened' is kind of a sucky authoritarian word. When you come to agree with me you are enlightened.
 
Iacchus said:
Now, these are the words of the Nobel prize winning physicist and, father of quantum physics, Max Planck ...
Click to expand...
So, have you managed to find out when he actually said this or are we still going on the word of "a woo program" and a bunch of websites with no sources?
 
Kopji said:
Just curious but do you have any reason to think this might be the case?
Click to expand...
Obviously that depends.

Well he was just plain wrong about that wasn't he? Why must we assume that?
Click to expand...
Was he? And why is it that you must assume this?

Sounds like a 'god of the gaps' assertion: The mind of God must hold these quantum rascals together.
Click to expand...
Yes, this would be entirely true if, God does not exist. So, why must we assume this?

People live in the culture and beliefs of their times. Maybe if Max lived today he would say something different and new.
Click to expand...
Mabye, maybe not.

'Enlightened' is kind of a sucky authoritarian word. When you come to agree with me you are enlightened.
Click to expand...
Which, would be entirely contingent upon what we assume, now wouldn't it?
 
Donks said:
So, have you managed to find out when he actually said this or are we still going on the word of "a woo program" and a bunch of websites with no sources?
Click to expand...
Well, according to this bloke named Gregg Braden, he gave the speech in Florence, Italy. Which, is about all I can come up with I'm afraid.
 
Last edited:
Iacchus said:
Well, according to this bloke named Gregg Braden, he gave the speech in Florence, Italy. Which, is about all I can come up with I'm afraid.
Click to expand...
I'm finding it a little hard to believe that "a statement that shook the foundation of physics in his time" left no trace except for contradicting information from unreliable sources.
 
Donks said:
I'm finding it a little hard to believe that "a statement that shook the foundation of physics in his time" left no trace except for contradicting information from unreliable sources.
Click to expand...
Well, it was broadcast on Public Television the other night for everyone to see. Are you suggesting that Public Television is an unreliable source? While I agree, if in fact Planck didn't say this during his Nobel acceptance speech, it was a dumb move on the part of the people who produced the program to suggest that he did. Oh, and if you're attempting to refute that he ever said it all, let's not forget the original source that I cited it from.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom