Category: wolfgang Pauli

  • Atom and Archetype: The Pauli/Jung Letters, 1932-1958 Edited by C. A. Meier

     

    Atom and Archetype:
    The Pauli/Jung Letters, 1932-1958
    Edited by C. A. Meier
    With a new preface by Beverley Zabriskie
    Translated by David Roscoe

    PAULI AND JUNGIAN ANALYSIS

    In his physics, Pauli sought a unified field. But his personal life was one of fragmentation and dissociation. Within one year, his mother poisoned herself in reaction to his father’s involvement in an affair, and Pauli plunged into a brief marriage with a cabaret performer. At thirty, he turned to Jung for help.

    Jung, in his 1935 lectures at the Tavistock, offered the following example of dreams effecting change:

    I had a case, a university man, a very one-sided intellectual. His unconscious had become troubled and activated; so it projected itself into other men who appeared to be his enemies, and he felt terribly lonely because everybody seemed to be against him. Then he began to drink in order to forget his troubles, but he got exceedingly irritable and in these moods he began to quarrel with other men. . . and once he was thrown out of a restaurant and got beaten up.16

    Jung saw that “he was chock-full of archaic material, and I said to myself: ‘Now I am going to make an interesting experiment to get that material absolutely pure, without any influence from myself, and therefore I won’t touch it.’” He referred Pauli to Dr. Erna Rosenbaum, “who was then just a beginner . . . I was absolutely sure she would not tamper.” Pauli applied the same passionate brilliance to his unconscious as to his physics. In a five-month Jungian analysis, Pauli recorded and spontaneously illustrated hundreds of his dreams. “He even invented active imagination for himself He worked out the problem of the perpetuum mobile, not in a crazy way but in a symbolic way. He worked on all the problems which medieval philosophy was so keen on.”17 For three months, “he was doing the work all by himself, . . . for about two months, he had a number of interviews with me . . . I did not have to explain much.” Jung believed Pauli “became a perfectly normal and reasonable person. He did not drink any more, he became completely adapted and in every respect normal . . . He had a new center of interest.” Jung had thirteen hundred of Pauli’s dreams as the basis for his research into alchemical symbolism in a modern psyche. “At the end of the year I am going to publish a selection from his first four hundred dreams, where I show the development of one motif only.”18
    The physicist F. David Peat believes Jung’s assessment of Pauli’s state after his termination with Dr. Rosenbaum was too positive. Pauli’s new “reasonableness” didn’t last, and later he again drank excessively.
    While Pauli’s work aimed toward a “psychophysical monism,” his intense inner tensions seemed to manifest physically in the so-called Pauli Effect, when his mere presence caused laboratory equipment to explode or fall apart.19 His internal “monotheism” and his sharp critical acumen and tongue earned him the titles “scourge of God,” “the whip of God,” and “the terrible Pauli.” Even in the midst of personal disarray, Pauli kept his stance as a scientist of such rigor that he was called “the conscience of physics.” Asked whether he thought a particular physics paper was wrong, he replied that was too kind–the paper was “not even wrong.”20 Heisenberg’s account of a 1927 conversation reveals that, in his youth, Pauli was concerned about the distinctions between knowledge and faith.21 Heisenberg saw that behind Pauli’s
    outward display of criticism and skepticism lay concealed a deep philosophical interest, even in those dark areas of reality or the human soul which elude the grasp of reason. And while the power of fascination emanating from Pauli’s analyses of physical problems was due in some measure to the clarity of his formulations, the rest was derived from a constant contact with the field of the creative and spiritual processes for which no rational formulation as yet exists.22 For Pauli, the creativity of science included considerations of the psyche. In science, he subscribed to the quantum uncertainty theory that the position and presence of the observer changes the perception and reality of what is observed. To that thesis–that one cannot measure the wave and the particle at the same time–he added a psychological dimension, observing that insofar as the scientist must opt to know “which aspect of nature we want to make visible . . . we simultaneously make a sacrifice, . . . [a] coupling of choice and sacrifice.”23 Pauli demonstrated the value of intuition to science’s empiricism. As Weinberg recounted,

    physicists in the early 1930’swere worried about an apparent violation of the law of conservation of energy when a radioactive nucleus undergoes the process known as beta decay. In 1932 Wolfgang, . . . Pauli proposed the existence of a convenient particle he called the neutrino, in order to account for the energy that was observed to be lost in this process. The elusive neutrino was eventually discovered experimentally over two decades later. Proposing the existence of something that has not yet been observed is a risky business, but it sometimes works.24

    In a metaphysical leap, Pauli referred as well to “forms belonging to the unconscious region of the human soul” and stated that “the relation between a sense perception and Idea remains a consequence of the fact that both the soul and what is known in perception are subject to an order objectively conceived.”25 He acknowledged that he had realized in a dream that the quantum-mechanical conception of nature lacked the second dimension, which he found provided by the archetypes of the unconscious.
    It seems, however, that he could not find his way to the uncertainty, the “choice and sacrifice” that allows for reparation within analysis. While Pauli knew “that a truly unified view must include the feeling function, since without feeling there is no meaning or value in life, and no proper acknowledgment of the phenomenon of synchronicity,” M.-L. von Franz said that he later sought only a “philosophical discussion of dreams”:

    He wrote to me . . . [and] made it clear that he did not want analysis; there was to be no payment. I saw that he was in despair, so I said we could try. The difficulties began when I asked him for the associations which referred to physics. He said, “Do you think I’m going to give you unpaid lessons in physics?” . . . He wanted something, but he didn’t want to commit himself. He was split.26

    Van Erkelens speculates that Pauli would have had to submit to a transference and to a deeper Eros than “his inner urge to develop a unified view of matter and spirit.” For whatever reasons, von Franz and Pauli were not able to achieve the relational bond that holds and contains explosive emotional material and so allows surrender to one’s unconscious and to a suffered analytic relationship.
    Jung and Pauli corresponded and later met, not for analysis but for a comparison of ideas–Pauli pursuing Jung’s synchronicity thesis and Jung fostering Pauli’s understanding of the archetypal and collective factors in the psyche. Through their contact, William James’s two fields, to which both Jung and Bohr had been attracted, come together again. Von Franz writes that the

    notion of complementarity introduced by Niels Bohr to provide a better explanation for the paradoxical relationship between waves and particles in nuclear physics can also be applied to the relationship of conscious and unconscious states of a psychic content. This fact was discovered by Jung, but it was particularly elaborated by Wolfgang Pauli.27

    http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s7042.html

    COPYRIGHT NOTICE: Published by Princeton University Press and copyrighted, © 2001, by Princeton University Press. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the publisher, except for reading and browsing via the World Wide Web. Users are not permitted to mount this file on any network servers. Follow links for Class Use and other Permissions. For more information, send e-mail to permissions@press.princeton.edu

  • Jung Pauli Field and RAW psych’ travel

    My paper given at the Star Ship conference has the basic equation for the timescape effect in the Jung-Pauli field. The Jung-Pauli field is the Seth Lloyd hologram computer software at our future de Sitter event horizon “boundary” of our observable universe whose area is the entropy of the interior hologram images that were and every material object are.–Jack Sarfatti, October, 2011.

    As information increases unpredictability increases, some information theorist said in 1989 at the world future society, I just learned from listening to RAW.

    I still listen to Robert Anton Wilson a lot, and for many reasons, one is that it feeds my own natural wonder in a way no other writer does, dead or alive. But, with such a mass of subjects covered by RAW in such a scientific and rational way where does one begin who wants to communicate the feeling of reading RAW? and/or information theory in general, which RAW approximates with his unique species of hologrammic prose. (one might propose influences on this hologrammic Prose as being Pound’s Ideogramic Method, Joyce’s nat language and linguistic relativistic fiction, Alfred Korzybski’s General Semantics, Schroedinger, Einstein and Bohmian equations, and mixed with Sufi stroke cabbalistic stroke Burroughsian styling)


    Needless to say RAW embodies the Hermetic principle, and the general Eastern philosophical leaning toward holism. Both in his writing technique and writing subject matter, and in his life philosophy and way of communicating RAW reflects the very general principle of holism, and so it’s no surprise he himself liked to call his particular writing style hologrammic prose.

    You can simply research all words beginning with the prefix HOL to get an idea of how far this general principle has entered 21st century culture. Holistic health and healing, holographic cosmology, holographic neurology, Holographic data storage remain strong 2012 memes floating around the web-sphere. A careful re-reading and focus upon the ‘holographic’ and ‘holistic’ themes and explicit mentioning in RAW’s work is a research programme I highly recommend and have been pursuing over the last 5 years.

    Over the last week (Feb 14-21) I have come to a new vision of how RAW’s interpretations of Quantum Mechanics and Cosmology, neurology and a special kind of writing (hologrammic prose) reflect some of the latest ideas in the more specific area of cosmological physics. In particular ‘holographic’ models of cosmology, in the tradition of David Bohm, Jack Sarfatti and yes, Giordano Bruno.

    Let me try to explain. And at least give you some mixed media links and source material for you to catch my drift.    

    “Now both men are dead. Physics has undergone great advances with its grand unified theories and its current development of superstring theory. Yet the central question remains: What is the nature of Pauli’s great dream? What is that speculum that lies between the worlds of mind and matter? Will it be possible to develop a new physics and a new psychology which are complementary to each other? This is not simply some intellectual problem or an idle inquiry; rather, it is vital to our very human survival.–F. David Peat.
    http://www.paricenter.com/library/papers/peat26.php

    The third part of a lecture given by Prof. Arthur I. Miller (University College London) on Thursday 10 December 2009 at CERN.

    Since Kepler believed in the famous dictum, “as above so below,” it was natural to assume that the solar system reflected an image of the Trinity and the human mind itself. Such ideas are certainly not far-fetched. David Bohm has told me how, while working on his theory of the plasma state, he felt that the whole plasma was a living thing, a society of electrons, as it were. Over the past decade, Bohm has been lecturing and thinking not only about physics but also about society, religion, and human consciousness. He explores these integrations on many levels without any sense of inner division. This approach would be familiar to Pauli, who pointed out how science and religion have a common origin which, alas, has been forgotten today.–http://www.paricenter.com/library/papers/peat26.php

    “The first four hundred were basis for his research into alchemical symbolism in a modern psyche. In a later collaboration, Pauli supported Jung’s synchronicity principle as scientific, and Jung fostered Pauli’s understanding of the archetypal and collective factors in the psyche. They each explored the interconnections between the energies of psyche and matter, and the possibilities of acausal order and synchronicity. Pauli’s ground-breaking discoveries gave scientific demonstration of alchemical intuitions. Through him, alchemical and archetypal insights entered the discourse of physics. Through Jung, the apprehensions of microphysics entered our psychological language and thought.–http://www.pep-web.org/document.php?id=joap.040.0531a

    “Jung and Pauli were convinced that synchronistic events reveal an underlying unity of mind and matter, subjective and objective realities. Synchronicity was (and continues to be) a prime target for criticism of Jung that for decades bordered on outright dismissal by many in the scientific and academic communities. For example, historian of science Suzanne Gieser writes that she finds Pauli’s interest in Jung “unusual” because “most of those with an academic or scientific background dismiss Jung totally.”5http://www.metanexus.net/essay/wolfgang-pauli-carl-jung-and-acausal-connecting-principle-case-study-transdisciplinarity



    http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_11_3_atmanspacher.pdf