This article was downloaded by: [Jennifer Burwell]On: 22 March 2013, At: 11:59Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Science as CulturePublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/csac20

Figuring Matter: Quantum Physics as aNew Age RhetoricJennifer Burwell aa Department of English, Ryerson University, Toronto, CanadaVersion of record first published: 12 Mar 2013.

To cite this article: Jennifer Burwell (2013): Figuring Matter: Quantum Physics as a New AgeRhetoric, Science as Culture, DOI:10.1080/09505431.2013.768222

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2013.768222

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representationthat the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of anyinstructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primarysources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Figuring Matter: Quantum Physics as aNew Age Rhetoric

JENNIFER BURWELL

Department of English, Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada

ABSTRACT The language through which scientific advancements are relayed reflects

specific social, political, and cultural needs and expectations, as well as specific

constellations of hopes and anxieties. Constructions and applications of atomic

discourse provide a material touchstone that is no less tangible than any other aspect

of scientific enquiry. The 1970s New Age movement saw the deployment of quantum

concepts with the publication of Fritjov Capras (1975) widely popular The Tao of

Physics and Gary Zukavs (1979) The Dancing Wu Li Masters, and from these

publications the notions of quantum consciousness and quantum mysticism were born.

In the late twentieth and early twenty-first century, the post-New Age concept of

quantum healing began to structure a cluster of self-help programs, while at the same

time quantum get-rich schemes developed a presence on the internet. In these

reconfigurations of the quantum, atomic particles have been transformed into vivified

agents whose unique movements and interactions promise to secure health, happiness,

and wealth to self-directed and depoliticized consumers. The commodification inherent

in this process extends increasingly to encompass areas of subjectivityfor example,

spiritualitythat historically have been considered immune to overt commercialization.

This extension of the commodification process is evidenced in the way that quantum

methodologies are commercialized and then sold to people as a means of advancing,

not just their financial interests, but their spiritual well-being as well. The new

economy of the atom also emerges from the late-twentieth and early twenty-first century

retreat from the public sphere and the attendant atrophy of the public sphere as a site

of interpersonal engagement. At the same time, the invocation and application of

quantum rhetoric touches on a deep contemporary sense of being unmoored and the

need for structured guidance as a means toward a renewed sense of control over ones

life. The nomadic quality of quantum language and concepts ensures that, no matter

what an individuals complaint or desire, there exists a quantum strategy to ameliorate

or realize it. This remarkable adaptability marks twenty-first century quantum language

Science as Culture, 2013

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2013.768222

Correspondence Address: Professor Jennifer Burwell, Department of English, Ryerson University, 350 Victoria

Street, Toronto, Ontario M5B 2K3, Canada. Email: jburwell@ryerson.ca

# 2013 Process Press

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

as unique, not only within the discipline of physics, but also relative to all fields of

scientific inquiry.

KEY WORDS: Science studies, quantum mysticism, quantum healing, get-rich schemes

Introduction

Physics shows us that while the world shapes us, the language that we use

shapes the world (Gregory, 1988, p. 200).

Historically, immense effort has been expended in the effort to verify empirically

and objectively the theories related to the study of the atom and its constituent

parts. Most recently, this effort has been manifested in the much talked about cre-

ation of the leviathan CERN semi-conductor designed to find the smallest unit of

matter, popularly represented as the God particle. That an atomic particle can be

represented in such a symbolically laden manner underscores the extent to which

even a hard science such as physics is shot through with cultural meaning.

My focus in this article is on the language of New and post-New Age quantum

mysticism, quantum healing, and quantum get-rich programs. Using these

examples, I examine the manner in which applications of the quantum relate

to the social, political, and economic conditions of their production. Traditional

self-help and personal growth literature is packaged and sold to consumers in

the language of common sense. Why, then, would those interested in offering

accessible and engaging self-help models choose this most conceptually inaccess-

ible of sciences in order to draw in their clientele? What individual and societal

priorities encourage and benefit from current popular constructions of the

quantum, and what does the post-New Age use of quantum language tell us

about dominant forms of subjectivity in the late twentieth and early twenty-first

century?

I begin this article by introducing two case studies that reflect the extent to

which physics is inflected by its time and place. The first case examines

Newtons billiard ball atoms in the political and economic context of radical

individualism, and the second considers Yakov Frenkels collectivist atomic

model in the political context of developing Soviet Russia. After establishing

the relationship between physics and these respective worldviews, I proceed to

summarize the foundational concepts of quantum physics, focusing in particular

on those concepts that are later taken up in the New Age and post-New Age

erasconcepts such as wavicles, non-locality, and complementarity. Following

my discussion of these foundational concepts, I examine how the pioneers of

quantum theory, aware of the distance between quantum concepts and everyday

experience, expressed their sense of intransigence of their results to represen-

tation. This distance between quantum concepts and the language of everyday

2 J. Burwell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

experience, I argue, is precisely what gives these concepts the nomadic potential

to be redeployed in contexts far removed from their origins.

I go on to track how the initial language used to describe quantum phenomena

has been manipulated to position the self in mutually affecting relationships to

other subjects as well as to the entire cosmos. I do so by analyzing the rhetorical

strategies used in New Age and post-New Age texts and websites that advance

models based on the concepts of quantum consciousness/mysticism, quantumhealing, and quantum enrichment. I begin with a summation of the concept of

quantum consciousness and its distance from how the original framers posited

the relationship between object and observation in quantum physics. I go on to

examine two foundational New Age books written in the 1970s: Fritjov Capras

(1975) The Tao of Physics and Gary Zukavs (1979) The Dancing Wu Li

Masters, noting how the notions of quantum consciousness and quantum mysti-

cism were born with these two books on the complementary relation between

physics and eastern philosophy. After Capra and Zukav, I argue, the relation

begins to thin considerably between the concepts of quantum physics as they

were initially articulated, and post-New Age quantum language. I demonstrate

in particular the manner in which quantum phenomena have been massaged to

create the promise of spiritual and financial gain. In post-New Age reconfigura-

tions of quantum particles, I conclude, popularizers turn atomic particles into vivi-

fied agents whose unique movements and interactions promise to secure

commodified forms of health, happiness, and wealth to depoliticized consumers.

Constructing the Atom: Two Historical Cases

While my primary interest is in quantum language, it is useful to examine how

earlier theories of the atomic world have emerged from the political, cultural,

and economic forces defining their historical moment. One of the most examined

relationships between physical science and historical context is the mechanistic

concepts of mass and force developed by Isaac Newton. In particular, Newtons

mechanism has been examined for how its revolutionary empirical method

helped produce the dominant symbols of a new worldview characterized by

radical individualism (see Westfall, 1973; Gardner, 1979; Gross, 1988; Pyle,

1995). Danah Zohar (1994, p. 14) argues that the genius of the sixteenth and

seventeenth century scientific revolution was its articulation in a clear and appeal-

ing set of metaphors that capitalized on wider economic and cultural currents.

Zohar (1994, p. 14), whose overall argument criticizes the Newtonian world-

view, observes that the stage was set for Newtons view of the material world

by Descartes emphasis on a mind/body split, and that Newtons modelemerged out of the philosophy of dualism in Western thought. For Newton and

his contemporaries, Zohar (1994, p. 14) argues, reality consisted of discrete,

impenetrable particles, each isolated in its own place in absolute space and absol-

ute time. Newtons mechanistic atom influenced the radical individualism of firm

Figuring Matter 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

believers in atomic mechanism such as Thomas Hobbes, John Stewart Mill,

Robert Boyle, and John Locke, the latter having once described himself as a

mere underlabourer to the incomparable Mr. Newton (1690, cited in Zohar,

1994, p. 14). Zohar (1994, p. 14) observes that this liberal individualism,

wherein individuals were free to pursue their interests and purposes in private

and without state interference, was a particle model. This model portrayed

people as isolated unitsdiscrete atoms or billiard balls interacting by way of

external forces rather than internal motivations. Barbara Taylor (1999, p. 613)

similarly associates the emphasis on individual welfare with a Newtonian world-

view in which the individual becomes the atomthe single unit of social matter

that is the basic building block for all social groupings. In this sense, Newtonian

atomism thus supported a single point of view, with a clear opposition between

objectivity and subjectivity, reason and experience, and a subject/object dichot-omy wherein observers stood outside and apart from what they observed

(Zohar, 1994, p. 14).

Taking up atomic discourse within an entirely different historical context,

Alexei Kojevinikov (1999) examines the historically specific political philos-

ophies of scientists during the formation of Soviet Russia. Kojevinikov (1999,

p. 296) considers how the ideology of collectivism and the limitations on

freedom in the developing Soviet Russia influenced the relative freedom ascribed

to atomic particles. In his examination of the transfer of metaphors and concepts

between scientific and political discourses, Kojevinikov (1999, p. 300) argues that

the development of a new fundamental language in physics and of some of its

highly sophisticated mathematical models was enabled by the collectivist con-

ception of freedom.1 As an example, Kojevinikov (1999, p. 300) cites Yakov

Frenkels experiences during revolutionary times, which includes periods of per-

sonal deprivation and persecutionincluding being jailed in 1919 for having

worked with the Red administration. These obstacles, argues Kojevinikov,

directly influenced Frenkels theories about freedom and, in particular, about

the amount of [freedom] that could be achieved by people in real life and by par-

ticles in real bodies. Kojevinikov describes how Frenkel, a committed socialist

and collectivist, used metaphorical terms borrowed from the language of the revo-

lutionary era in describing his model of electron behavior. For example, in

summing up how the electric current in a metallic body is represented by electrons

gliding from one atom to another in a chain, Frenkel (1924, cited in Kojevinikov,

1999, p. 304) wrote,

In this way, valence electrons become free electrons, contributing to the

electrical conductivity of metals. It must be noted that they are not free in

the real sense of the word. On the contrary, they are bound more strongly

to the body of the metal than within isolated atoms. But they have become

emancipated from the domination of particular atoms; they no longer

belong to individual atoms but to the entire collective formed by these atoms.

4 J. Burwell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

Along with the specific reference to collectivism in this description, Frenkels use

of words such as emancipated and domination suggests not merely a general

political preoccupation with his political context, but also a particular relation

to that context. Frenkel seems almost to want the electrons he champions to be

free of the overbearing atom. It is no significant stretch to view the electron

here being cast as individuals pursuing free association in the face of a domineer-

ing, bureaucratic State.

Both Newton and Frenkel advance models of the atomic world that draw from

and reinforce very specific personal and societal worldviews, expressing

through the atom their viewpoints concerning the economic and political

dynamics of their time. Far from being accidental or objective, Newtons and

Frenkels language was laden with political agendas and opportunism. Each

reflected the priorities of their time; in Frenkels case to express his own hopes

and beliefs, and in Newtons case to capitalize on the success of rising social

and political groups.

Quantum Physics in the West: Foundational Concepts

Something unknown is doing we dont know what (Eddington, 1981, p. 291).

Concepts that at first express axiomatic principles in their original discipline can,

over time, accrue and dispense meanings that expand to become touchstones for

wider-ranging sensibilities. Such is the language of quantum physics. The

highly influential Copenhagen School, led by Neils Bohr and Werner Heisenberg,

produced several early twentieth-century experimental results and mathematical

proofs that formed the mortar of the quantum theory. It is, I argue, the quantum

analogies and relations described by proponents of the Copenhagen School that

have proved to be particularly culturally portable and open to adaptation. Much

of the nomadic potential of quantum concepts and language derives from the

fact that the principles of quantum physics are far removed from common sense

and experience. One of the best known and most discussed results in the develop-

ment of quantum physics was the observation that under certain experimental con-

ditions, units of matter appeared to behave in paradoxical and mutually exclusive

waysspecifically, simultaneously as particles and as waves. To gain a full under-

standing of the specific behavior of subatomic particles, it was necessary to con-

sider together both its wave properties and its particle properties. From this

premise emerged Neils Bohrs Principle of Complementarity: the argument

that mutually exclusive viewpoints must be adopted if one is to explain the para-

doxical behavior of subatomic units of matter.

The second significant experimental result in quantum physics concerned the

impossibility of simultaneously discerning both the position and momentum of a

subatomic particle. As Arthur Eddington (1981, p. 223) explains, to be observed

an electron must be illuminated in some manner. Once illuminated, however, the

Figuring Matter 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

particle undergoes a kick (known as a quantum leap or quantum jump) of an

unpredictable amount. This means, observes Eddington (1981, p. 223), that the

condition of our ascertaining the position is that we disturb the electron in an

incalculable way which will prevent our subsequently ascertaining how much

momentum it had. Nothing is or can be known with any specificity about the

position and momentum of the particle prior to the act of observation;

however, the very act of observation fundamentally disrupts the specificity

that it strives to achieve. Prior to observation, subatomic material must be under-

stood to exist in multiple states simultaneously. For Eddington (1981, p. 223),

this indeterminacy is a symbol for [the] causal failure that defines many

quantum phenomena. From this indeterminacy emerged Werner Heisenbergs

(1958) Uncertainty Principle, which acknowledges that all we are left with

regarding the position and momentum of the particle is an indeterminate field

of probability. Like Eddington, Heisenberg viewed this result as foundational

to matter, rather than as a failure of technology that could be remedied in the

future with more precise instruments.

Central to post-New Age discourse, is the quantum phenomenon known as

quantum entanglement or non-locality. The term non-locality describes how

the act of influencing the behavior of a particle at one location can instantaneously

influence the behavior of another particle at an arbitrary distance from the first.

This means that if one knows the state of one of the particles in the pair, then

one can discern the state of the other particle without actually observing it. This

mutually affecting relationship was theorized mathematically in a 1935 thought

experiment written by Einstein, Daniel Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen. While the

authors main agenda was to challenge the Copenhagen Schools assertion that

one could not simultaneously measure the momentum or position of a particle,

the paper also offered mathematical proof that under certain circumstances,

quantum mechanics predicted a breakdown of locality. This breakdown of locality

undermined the realist perspective characterizing separate bodies as distinct and

non-transferable configurations.

Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosens mathematical model (which came to be

known as the EPR Paradox) was later experimentally verified by J. S. Bell

(1964). Bell concluded that the outcomes predicted by quantum theory and

expressed in his experiment were inconsistent with any theory that retained a

notion of locality, and that quantum physics was inherently non-local.

Acting together as a single system, subatomic particles appeared to have the

ability to tell what the other particle was doing and to respond in a correspond-

ing manner. Einstein remained throughout his career critical of the concept of

quantum non-locality and its disruption of classic notions of causality, calling

the phenomenon of non-locality spooky action at a distance. While not uncon-

tested, the main principles of Quantum Theory were generally accepted by the

mid-1920s, and continued to be refined and verified throughout the twentieth

century.

6 J. Burwell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

The Challenge of Quantum Language

Where the thing ends, no word may be (Stevens, 2002, p. 107).

Increasingly, science studies have considered the fundamental role that language

plays in the production and consumption of scientific knowledge (see, for

example, Gross, 1988; Bono, 1990; Harris, 1990, 1991; Brown, 2003; Hellsten,

2008). Referring to quantum physics, Guy Rotella (1987, pp. 172173) argues

that the world of particle physics is the place where the classical models (or meta-

phors) of science break down. Liliane Papin (1992, p. 1254) more specifically

observes that,

scientific language started losing its stability with the recognition of the dual

character of light as wave and particle, a recognition that tore apart not only

the fundamental correspondence assumed between nouns and specific attri-

butes but the basic eitheror categorization central to classical science.

Instead of the eitheror of classical science, quantum physics presents a both

and wavicle model that challenges the basic syntax of linear representation. For

Papin, the problem extends to the relationship between language and lived experi-

ence. Papin (1992, p. 1254) writes, when the laws governing the universe are not

susceptible to purely rational understanding and are inadequately rendered by our

familiar language, what remains is at best approximative and essentially meta-

phoric. I would go further and argue that the problem of representing quantum

phenomena derives from the very nature of metaphor. According to Lakoff and

Johnson (1980, pp. 1819), the spatial characteristics fundamental to all metapho-

ric language originate in our experience as discrete entities. Elaborating on this

theory, they write:

We are physical beings, bounded and set off from the rest of the world by the

surface of our skins, and we experience the rest of the world as outside us.

Each of us is a container, with a bounding surface and an inout orientation.

We project our own inout orientation onto other physical objects that are

bounded by surfaces. Thus we also view them as containers with an inside

and an outside (1980, p. 29).

How, then, to represent a set of material phenomena that seem to have no bounds,

no discrete borders, and no identifiable position and direction?

Many of the founders of quantum physics expressed a keen awareness of the

difficulty of translating quantum phenomena into meaningful language. Neils

Bohr (1958), Werner Heisenberg (1958), Albert Einstein (1966), and Arthur

Eddington (1981), and Hungarian-American mathematician John Von Neumann

(1955) all discussed the apparent irreconcilability between what quantum theory

tells us about the microscopic behavior of matter, and what may strikes us as

Figuring Matter 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

common sense on a macroscopic level. Von Neumann (n.d., cited in Papin, 1992,

p. 1256) held that quantum phenomena are difficult to explain because existing

language was inadequate to the task of conveying them. Bohr (1958, cited in

Lightman, 1989, p. 100) lamented,

We [quantum physicists] find ourselves here on the very path taken by Ein-

stein of adapting our modes of perception borrowed from the sensations to

the gradually deepening knowledge of the laws of nature. The hindrances

met with on this path originate above all in the fact that [. . .] every word

in the language refers to our ordinary perceptions.

Since quantum phenomena universally undermined the conventions and associ-

ations attached to our ordinary perceptions, quantum physicists were left without

access to a language that was both loyal to proven quantum phenomena and at

the same time consistent with everyday experience and sensation. Eddington

(1981, pp. 189190) went so far as to conclude that scientists had yet to advance

to the point wherein quantum concepts could be made operational in narrative.

The abstract nature of quantum concepts necessitates a highly approximate

language that exceeds the metaphoric nature of all scientific models.2 Its radically

figurative nature is precisely what opens quantum language to the kinds of meto-

nymic slippages capitalized on by proponents of quantum consciousness and

quantum enrichment programs. Terms such as wavicle, non-locality, uncer-

tainty/indeterminacy, and quantum leap have proven to be particularly adapt-able and thus susceptible to refiguration. The term wavicle, for example, has

been deployed in a host of ways, most often to affirm the holistic nature of

quantum healing against the fragmenting and alienating mind/body split of con-ventional medical practices. The term non-locality has been refigured in popular

discourse to suggest that consciousness stretches over and between individuals

and the cosmos. From this, popularizers of quantum concepts conclude that the

individual or cosmic mind can be applied or engaged to produce both physical

and psychical changes at great remove from the object of its consideration. The

term quantum jump/leap has become the moniker for a host of pseudo-mysticaltransformations: from one state of consciousness to another, from a state of illness

to a state of wellness, from a state of poverty to one of wealth. Finally, the terms

uncertainty and indeterminacy, initially referring to that gap wherein quantum

particles can be said to be in multiple states simultaneously, become a locus of

radical possibility. This possibility provides a point of access through which

open and properly instructed acolytes can apply their will to transform their lives.

The Concept Quantum Consciousness

[The Buddha] worked toward the understanding of life and compassion in

much the same way a physicist attempts to comprehend the world. . . . He

sought the laws of existence (F. A. Wolf, quoted in Golden, 1997).

8 J. Burwell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

Albert Einstein and Leopold Infeld (1966, p. 137) took pains to explain that the

impact of observation in quantum phenomena should not be misunderstood to

imply that subjective features ought to be brought into the description of nature.

Einstein and Infeld (1966, p. 54) also took pains to detail what they mean when

they describe the transition from the possible to the actual that takes place

during the act of observation:

We have to realize that the word happens can apply only to the obser-

vationnot to the state of affairs between two observations. It applies to

the physical, not to the psychical act of observation [. . .]; it is not connected

with the active registration of the result by the mind of the observer.

They stress that the only function of the observer, whether it be experimental

apparatus or human being, is to register outcomes; the observer does not influence

these results in a cause/effect manner (Einstein and Infeld, 1966, p. 137).In contemporary popular use of quantum discourse, Einstein and Infelds out-

right rejection of any psychical aspect to the observation of quantum phenomena

disappears. This is particularly evident in the rhetorical strategies wherein

quantum statistical probabilities are transformed into the notion of human poten-

tiality and empowerment. Here, the dynamics of matter is harvested unproblema-

tically to construct a one-way causal relation between the consciousness of an

observer and his or her physical surroundings. Post-New Age quantum prac-

titioners conscript such concepts as non-locality, uncertainty, and wave/particleduality to advance their own brand of observer/observed dynamics. In doing so,they filter the fundamentals of quantum physics disruption of causality through an

anthropocentrism perspective that takes the undecidability of events at the

quantum level for a form of animated potential that has, as its main characteristic,

the plasticity of the material world to the human will. Popular accounts in particu-

lar emphasize a state of mutual responsiveness between matter and the human

mind. Through a process of transliteration, the original explanatory analogies

and metaphors of quantum physics are literalized and then reconstituted to

confer a strong cause and effect relation between human consciousness and the

material world. Observers share their status as protagonists with a dynamic

material world, and the mind is freed to seize opportunity from its physical

surroundings.

As Victor Stenger (1997, p. 58) observes, some have inferred that the very

nature of the universe is non objective, but depends on the consciousness of the

observer. . . . [This] implies that the universe exists only within some cosmic,

quantum field of mind. Jeremy Campbell (1990, p. 36) observes that, the

notion that a quantum happening is relative to an observer . . . has been elaborated

into a more daring hypothesis: namely, that observation is the whole point of the

universe, and that all physical law is relative to the observers. In this respect,

Zohars invocation of a quantum alternative to Western dualism and Newtonian

Figuring Matter 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

determinism is fairly typical. The indeterminacy, unpredictability, and both/andquality of quantum phenomena, she claims, stresses a creative interaction wherein

the subject/object dichotomy is replaced by an observer/participant holism. Thequantum observer, Zohar (1994, p. 14) asserts, stand inside what they observe,

with the result that their goals, consciousness, and intentions actively make the

reality that they observe.

Within quantum consciousness, subjectivity expands to include the entire uni-

verse, whose existence becomes an artifact of human consciousness. Quantum

phenomena, such as entanglement, now similarly cast as an extension of individ-

ual consciousness, is seen as enabling human paranormal activity. Well-known

nuclear physicist and quantum guru Amit Goswami (1975, cited in Stenger,

1997, p. 58) states that psychic phenomena such as distant viewing and out-of-

body experiences are examples of the non-locality operation of consciousness.

The notion of observer/participancy that is fundamental to popularizers of thequantum flies directly in the face of Einsteins insistence that our consciousness

acts only to register quantum events, not to participate in them.

Quantum Mysticism

What is the difference between a cathedral and a physics lab? Are they not

both saying: Hello? (A. Dillard, 1988, cited in OMalley, 2007, p. 10).

According to Victor Stenger (1997, p. 2), one of the primary critics of quantum

mysticism, quantum mystics interpret the wave function as some kind of

vibration of a holistic ether that pervades the universe. In this view, writes

Stenger (1997, p. 2), wave function collapse occurs instantaneously throughout

the universe by a willful act of cosmic consciousness. In reality, however,

quantum practitioners make much more varied use of the wave function, while

at the same time peppering their models with reference to revised principles of

non-locality and uncertainty. These references appear most often in their

account of the relationship between the observer and the observeda relationship

that proves foundational to the fields of quantum mysticism and quantum healing.

Several of the theoretical physicists responsible for developing and promoting

the tenets of quantum theory already expressed a degree of mysticism in their writ-

ingsmost notably, theoretical physicist David Bohm (1980). Bohm (1980,

p. 236) describes the explicate order as that which is present to the senses,

with matter and consciousness sharing this explicate (manifest) order. In the

implicate order, Bohm argues, the mind enfolds matter in general and the

body in particular. According to Bohm (1980, p. 265), the body enfolds not

only the mind but also in some sense the entire material universe, so that the con-

stituent atoms of the body are actually structures that are enfolded in principle

throughout all space. Bohms sense of an implicate but invisible cosmic

oneness offers a suggestive model for those looking to quantum theory for the

10 J. Burwell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

suggestion of a deeper reality beyond our immediate grasp. The continuum that

Bohm constructs between matter and consciousness thus appeals to New Age

adepts looking for a profound reality that posited an inclusive and animate

cosmos.

Fritjof Capras 1975 book, The Tao of Physics, is typically cited as the first sig-

nificant popularized blending of quantum physics and mysticism. In this widely

read book, Capra (2010) asserts that the basic oneness of the world advocated

by Eastern mysticism is similarly revealed in modern physics. Capra promises

that as we study the various modes of subatomic physics we shall see that they

express again and again the same insightthat the constituents of matter and

the basic phenomena involving them are all interconnected, interrelated, and inter-

dependent; that they cannot be understood as isolated entities, but only as inte-

grated parts of the whole (2010, p. 131). Sal Restivo (1978, cited in Leane,

2001, p. 420) describes Capras basic strategy as the parallelist method of juxta-

posed quotations. This method, notes Restivo (1978, cited in Leane, 2001,

p. 420), rests on the basic assumption that, if the rhetorical, imagery, and meta-

phoric content of statements on physics and mysticism is similar, then the concep-

tual context must be similar. Restivos description of Capras methodology aptly

sums up the rhetorical strategies employed by virtually all later popularizers of

quantum language.

Another widely read book that proposes links between physics and Eastern

mysticism is Gary Zukavs 1979 book, The Dancing Wu Li Masters. Like

Capra, Zukav touches on general parallel logics between the new physics and

Easternparticularly Buddhistphilosophies. Zukav (2001, p. 264) asserts, for

example, that the quantum viewpoint that all particles exist potentially as differ-

ent combinations of other particles parallels a Buddhist view. Later, he (2001,

p. 266) claims that,

although this book is not about [a comparison between] physics and Bud-

dhism per se, the similarities between the two, especially in the field of par-

ticle physics, are so striking and plentiful that a student of one necessarily

must find value in the other.

According to Zukav (2001, p. 347), the study of complementarity, the uncertainty

principle, and quantum field theory produce insights into the nature of reality very

similar to those produced by the study of Eastern philosophy (Zukav, 2001,

p. 347). The rhetoric expressing dynamics within the physical world, argues

Zukav, can provide a conceptual container for understanding Buddhism; at the

same time, the language of Buddhism offers an instructive framework for the

study of the physical world in general, and particle physics in particular.

Capra and Zukav, whose books were written in the 1970s, clearly align with the

Western New Age movement in subscribing to a philosophy wherein the universe

is characterized by holism and a kind of universal consciousness. At the same

Figuring Matter 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

time, Capra in particular offers detailed, informed, and sophisticated explanations

of developments in physics in the twentieth century. Ultimately, it is the laws of

physics that they seek to explain. In both cases, their demonstrated knowledge of

physics outstrips their exposition of Eastern mysticism, and associations to

Eastern practices in their books often appear as throwaway lines or afterthoughts

buried within their expositions of physics or tacked onto the end of chapters. Capra

does, in fact, acknowledge his merely passing summation of Eastern practices, but

then justifies it by asserting that mysticism simply cannot be taught in a book. This

last assertion also becomes central to later popularizers, who typically construct

themselves as gurus possessing secret knowledge.

As theoretical and philosophical works, both Zukavs and Capras texts are

more interested in universal dynamics than in the individual subject. Following

a long tradition characterizing the study of the physical world, Capra and Zukav

view it as worthy of consideration as a wonder in itself. This orientation dis-

tinguishes them from later efforts to conscript quantum physics as a foundation

for a radically subjective relation to the world. This individualization is realized

in what I call the post-New Age relation to physics that developed toward the

end of the twentieth century, when subjectivity enters as the dominant

concern. The historical origins of this emphasis on the subjective has many

causes. On the one hand, it may be traced back to the fragmentation and collapse

of collective movements such as the New Left (see Graff, 1989), and the ensuing

emphasis on individualized and eventually depoliticized identity politics (see

Kauffman, 1990). The rise of the internet has similarly encouraged an increasing

personalization, both in terms of individual consumption and the publication of the

self through sites such as Facebook.

At the same time, there exists a perceived loss of control that can be traced to

the acceleration of a surveillance society focused on mapping the individual

subject through technologies such as biometrics, applied in a world where

power is diffuse and intangible, and it is no longer clear who is doing what to

whom. Uncertain job prospects and mounting personal debt, combined with an

economic machinery that becomes less and less intelligible at the same time

that it becomes more and more unstable, exacerbate this sense of powerlessness

and disorientation. It is not surprising, then, that popular culture is shot through

with products that promise a renewed control over the direction of ones relation-

ships, finances, career, and health. The offer to take back the reigns is evidenced

by the number of books that offer strategies that will assist individuals in their

search to regain a lost sense of agency and control (see, for example, Jasper,

1999; Morris, 2002; Braiker, 2004). Complementing this offer of self-empower-

ment is an emphasis on personal happiness and well-being that dominates

popular culture and has entered both academia and the State in the form of the

metrics through which the health of society is assessed.

The conceptual framework of quantum physics has been enlisted in the con-

struction of a host of related methodologies that, once operationalized, will

12 J. Burwell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

enlighten people on how to take advantage of the infinite choice and possibility

available to them. The immensely popular 2004 film What the Bleep Do We

Know? (also written as What toe #$! Du vS (k)pow!?) sums up the extent towhich post-New Age quantum rhetoric is associated with both subjective possi-

bility and personal empowerment. Toward the beginning of the film, Amit

Goswami states that quantum physics, very succinctly, is the physics of possi-

bility. Later in the film, William Tiller observes, if reality is my possibility,

then the question is: how can I make it better, how can I make it happier?.

According to Joe Dispensa, we ought not to buy into the idea that we have no

control, nor should we continue believing that the external world is more real

than the internal. This new science [of quantum physics], says Dispensa, is

just the opposite. It says that whats happening within us will create whats hap-

pening outside of us. Throughout the film, the emphasis is on the extent to which

we create our own reality, and that reality is a function of our perceptions, our

minds, and the unacknowledged power of our own thoughts.

Post-New Age Mysticism: Healing the Mind and Body

Kidneys never make decisions alone; they work in constant consultation with

the quantum mechanical body (Chopra, 1990, p. 136).

After Capra, the best-known (and most successful) proponent of the connection

between consciousness and quantum physics is physician Deepak Chopra.

Chopra (1990) claims that we participate in a cosmic connection to the

quantum world, and that the inconceivable region from which photons emerge

is the same as that from which we fetch thought and experience. Chopra acknowl-

edges that physicists could object that he is just making metaphors, and that an

unlocatable particle is fundamentally different from the hidden worldmind;

however, he insists on the notion of quantum non-locality on a cosmic scale.

Chopra (1990, pp. 118119) argues, for example, that particles separated by

immense, macrocosmic distances of spacetime know what the other is

doing, and that this knowing demonstrates the fact that the entire universe is

knitted together by a kind of memory network, or universal consciousness.

Chopras primary claim is that we can cure all our ills simply through the appli-

cation of our mental energy to our bodies, since both body and mind ultimately are

made up of the cosmic stuff of consciousness. If asked for a definition of quantum

healing, says Chopra (1990, p. 241), I would say this: quantum healing is the

ability of one mode of consciousness (the mind) to spontaneously correct the mis-

takes in another mode of consciousness (the body). Our organs, says Chopra,

work in constant consultation with the quantum bodyitself an interconnected

field of intelligence and experience. For Chopra, the specific connection between

mind and body may begin at the atomic level, but it extends into more macrocos-

mic bodily elements such as molecules and even DNA itself, which he claims also

Figuring Matter 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

possess quantum properties.3 As with all quantum events, says Chopra (1990,

p. 100), something inexplicable happens beneath the surface to form the all-

knowing intelligence of DNA. DNA lives at the point of transformation, con-

stantly delivering messages from the quantum world to ours, tying new bits of

intelligence to new bits of matter. The point of diving into the realm of the

quantum body, Chopra (1990, p. 100) says, is to change the blueprint itself,

thus transforming our individual physiology in its entirety. Chopra (1990, p. 97)

presents, as one of many examples, the case of a female patient who

healed herself of cancer (with Chopras guidance) through the mere application

of her mind. Chopra calls this patients case a quantum event because the funda-

mental transformation she enacted on her body went deeper than her organs and

travelled directly to the source of the bodys quantum existence in universal

time and space.

For Chopra, quantum effects provide the foundation for all of natures flexi-

bilitya flexibility that enables inexplicable transformations of non-matter into

matter, time into space, and mass into energy. He frequently uses the term

quantum leap to described the mysterious transformations that emerge out of

the application of mind to the body. In general, Chopra uses quantum terminology

(combined in an undifferentiated way with the mass/energy theory of relativity) ina manner that is both allusive and elusiveinvoking quantum concepts without

really reflecting on or explicating their specificity or origins. Despite his fuzzy

science and radical claims, Chopra has managed to convert his assisted

quantum healing into a multi-million dollar financial juggernaut that rests on

the variety of workbooks and workshops available to the consumer who wishes

to follow Chopras guided quantum self-help program.

Other proponents of quantum healing include James A. Putnam and Robert

Jahn. According to Putnam (2003, p. 2), our experience comes to us through

the intermediaries of photons. For Putnam (2003, p. 2), our bodies are being con-

stantly bombarded by photons that originate from an immeasurable number of

sources, each photon striving to pass on some small bit of cosmic information.

The photons notify us, Putnam (2003, p. 2) says, in a manner that offers us

the constant opportunity to search inside our being and discover a form of knowl-

edge that is always already there for the taking. The information that we can glean

from photons, properly selected and interpreted, then wakens our genetically

inherited intelligence, potentially leading to enlightenment and self-actualization.

The information that photons provide must be decoded, howeverrerouted and

analyzed internally with the help of an enlightened guide. Summed up,

Putnams theory represents the apotheosis of individual consciousness, an anthro-

pic cultivation of the subatomic realm that casts humans as the central actors in

and beneficiaries of a universe that, in all its plenitude, becomes a home for

humankind.

Robert Jahn (1998, p. 103), director of Princetons PEAR lab and Dean Emer-

itus of the universitys Engineering Department, offers a partial summation and

14 J. Burwell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

enthusiastic endorsement of this sort of stylized and complementary relationship

between consciousness and quantum reality. The first premise, writes Jahn

(1998, p. 103), is that consciousness can insert information into its environment.

Atoms themselves are of the mind, says Jahn, and our heads are TV sets that

transduce the consciousness waves out of which our universe is built (1998,

p. 103). Following from this premise is the fact that one consciousness can

form a telepathic link or resonance with another, potentially leading to clairvoy-

ance and psychokinesis.

There exists no shortage of quantum-based healing programs on the internet.

While quantum healing programs do continue to appear in the forms of books,

the reach, flexibility, and interactivity of the internet offers several advantages

for the packaging and sale of quantum healing. Sites can offer layered access,

wherein the homepage functions as a teaser that contains vague reference to a

novel quantum approach. To learn more about the program and to realize the

promised results, consumers must navigate away from the homepage, where

they typically are presented with the opportunity to register for workshops and

buy a host of products. Sites can offer simultaneously a number of unique products

and workshops, thus allowing visitors to tailor their use of the site to their individ-

ual means and needs. Perhaps more importantly, any claims that the sites make do

not have to be vetted for publication, thus allowing for a further loosening up of

how the term quantum is deployed.

The radical disarticulation of the term quantum from its origins is evident on the

Quantum Touchw (2010) site, which offers a simple, yet powerful energetichealing modality using light touch, the breath and a variety of other techniques

to bring about well-being, both physical and spiritual. Along with selling a

host of products, the site promises to put the visitor in touch with quantum

touch therapists, whose techniques appear to focus on facilitating healing by

amplifying our life-force energy or chi. Quantum Touch therapist Dr Pallavi

invokes two scientific conceptsneither of which are particularly associated

with quantum physics. The first is resonance: the tendency in a system for

even small forces to produce large-amplitude oscillations. The second is entrain-

ment, wherein two interacting oscillating systems assume a common period.

Using the Quantum Touch technique, Pallavi argues, we can create a more

intense and more accurately attuned frequency of life-force energy. The bodys

ability to heal itself is amplified to a higher frequency via quantum touch,

after which this field of high energy can be applied to areas of pain, stress, inflam-

mation, or disease. The quantum touch is a personalized touch; through direct

contact, the specific ailments of the consumer are addressed.

Pallavis use of science rhetoric here goes beyond the parallelist method for

which Restivo critiques Capra, dispensing with metaphor as a way of establishing

the relation between scientific terms and modes of healing. Instead, she relies on a

more superficial metonymic relationship, wherein amplitude is annexed New

Age energy fields to create a rhetorical bridge that establishes the connection

Figuring Matter 15

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

between science and the Eastern concept of chi. This metonymy is even more

evident in the sites title. Here, the relation between the quantum and healing is

established merely by combining the terms quantum and touch, and then further

tightening the link with the use of the registered trademark symbol. While purport-

edly grounded on scientific methodologies, Pallavis makes no real attempt to

connect his mode of healing with actual quantum concepts. Quantum rhetoric is

condensed and reduced to the title she assigns her practice, and in the process

the term quantum becomes a commodified cipher. This commodification is

expressed directly in the fact that the site attaches the registered trademark

symbol to its moniker, at once suggesting its value (the process must be protected

from imitators) and underscoring its status as a product.

Profiting from the Quantum: Get-Rich Schemes

For the first time, combine the powerful lessons from quantum physics with

the amazing secrets to getting filthy rich (Conjur, 2006).

The commodification of quantum logic present in the marketing of quantum

healing programs is accelerated in personal wealth oriented quantum enrichment

programs. In these mostly online-based programs, profit no longer accrues to the

practitioner merely as a secondary gain to the necessary sale of manuals and work-

shops. Rather, it is offered directly to consumers in the form of online get-rich-

quick schemes that propose applying the principles of quantum physics to

achieve near-instant financial success. Many of these sites leaven their focus on

financial gain with healthy doses of rhetoric about general payoffs that include

finding peace of mind, developing a healthier body, and resolving inner conflict;

however, the prospect of getting rich is never far from sight.

The online Quantum Prosperity Program, led by certified Quantum Biofeed-

back Specialist Heidemarie Garbe, employs what she calls a Quantum Biofeed-

back Instrument (referred to throughout the cite as EPFX/SCIO). According toGarbe, this instrument was created by Professor William Nelson, described as a

confirmed genius who has worked with NASA. After entering the subjects

names into the program and then placing his or her photo on a radionic plate,

this quantum device allegedly scans and harmonizes the subjects energy fields.

Inputting the intent of prosperity into the program enables the instrument to

free up the blocked flow of (financial) abundance in our livessometimes

subtly, sometimes dramatically transforming the lives of the participants. All of

this, the developers claim, is based on the current and most cutting-edge under-

standing of quantum physics.

Garbes methodology possesses at least two advantages: its quick, and it

doesnt involve any effort on the part of the client. Discerning the connection

between The Quantum Prosperity Program and quantum physics is, however,

no easy task. While physics does concern itself with both massenergy

16 J. Burwell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

relationships and quantum fields, the term energy field is more typically associ-

ated with the New Age notion of aura, particularly as it has appeared historically

in esoteric forms of spirituality and alternative medicine. Nevertheless, the term

energy field has the feel of science. In this sense, the term acts as a bridging

metaphor that links scientific method with post-New Age rhetoric. Blogger

Violet (Violets View, 2009) begins her entry by stating to her reader: unlimited

abundance is natural to you and always available to you. It is your true nature to

have wealth. Abundance is universal energy and money is a symbol of that

energy. Money, adds Violet (2009), is the unlimited friendly energy of the uni-

verse. The proof is already out there, Violet (2009) proclaims: You already have

access to anything and everything you could ever imagine or possibly conceive.

Quantum physics tells us that. As it turns out, money itself is not the root of

all evil (although Violet admits that it can be used for evil ends); in fact, money

is our cosmic friend, waitingwantingto come into our lives and transform

them for the better. Because Violet offers a friendly, morally just, and scientifi-

cally legitimized way of gaining money, the participant is invited to see profit

as a kind of ethical cosmic imperative. The frequent use of the term transfer of

energy suggests a closer connection to relativity, and the word quantum

seems to be invoked merely as a rhetorical flourish to establish a cutting edge cur-

rency to her program.

On his Quantum Jumping site, Bert Goldman (2009) launches arguably the

most improbable use of the oft-invoked concept of quantum jumping.

Goldman tells his reader:

[My] Visualization Technique Will Transform You Into A Universe-

Hopping Utopian Being. Once Ive shown you how, youll be able to use

the untapped power of your mind to jump into alternate universes, and

visit alternate versions of yourself who already have all the skills, knowledge

and experience you desire . . . The smarter you. The richer you. The healthier

you. The sexier you. Theyre all out there, and all you need to do is talk to

them.

Goldman (2009) provides a long list of experimental verifications in the familiar

form of enthusiastic testimonials. Sarah, for example, affirms how she quantum

jumped to a successful version of herself and then visualized herself interacting

with this other self. After decoding a cryptic phrase from her other self concerning

cleaning up, Sarah had an epiphany and subsequently started up a profitable

business fluffing houses for the market (Goldman, 2009). Stan had always

wanted to write, so he quantum-jumped into a parallel world and connected

with his already widely published doppelganger to learn the craft of writing and

to pick up some strategies for successful publishing. In another jump, he encoun-

tered his globally recognized public speaker self. As a result of this encounter,

Stan says, he now knows that if he should be asked to speak he can do so with

Figuring Matter 17

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

all the flair and skill that [he] learned during [his] Quantum Jump. Finally,

Vincent, a would-be musician, visited his own multiple gold record-winning

doppelganger, who provided him with ideas, titles, and in some cases music, for

new songs.

To ground his claims, Goldman (2009) combines the notion of a quantum

jump with the Many Worlds Theory, first advanced by Hugh Everett in 1955.

Everetts Many Worlds Theory (1973) denies the wave function collapse in

favor of the position that all potential states persist, and that every possible

outcome of every quantum event survives within its own history or world.

Everything that could have happened in our world, but didnt, does occur in the

pasts and futures of a potentially infinite number of universes.

In effect, Goldman (2009) shrinks individuals to the level of subatomic particles

who move at will between different versions of themselves. Goldmans subjects

speak in a self-reflexive fashion to more attractive selves who will help them

along the road to realizing themselves as they always imagined they could be.

The social implications latent in this deployment of atomic phenomena are far

from insignificant; in fact, Goldmans model nicely illustrates the socio-political

dynamics informing the advanced or post-New Age quantum discourse. The

newly consumer-oriented atom/individual is thoroughly disconnected from anylarger political or social reality, and the focus is solely on individual gain. The

instantaneous transformation that Goldman offers releases people from the

arduous task of learning from life experiences and applying these experiences

in a gradual process of overcoming social and individual obstacles to gain

insight into their personal nature and societal context.

In his online program, Know How to be Rich, Robert Anthony (2004) dis-

penses altogether with the typical generalized personal enrichment packaging of

balance, health, and happiness that is present in some of the other sites, and gets

right to the point: making money. Anthonys program is offered via an appar-

ently secret-laden six CD box set that, as described by Anthony, offers a

loose combination of the observer/participant principle of quantum physics,the Newtonian law of attraction, and the aforementioned New Age energy

fields. By changing our energy fields, Anthony promises, we can produce phys-

ical changes in our surroundings, literally attracting financial success. Knowing

how to be rich, observes Anthony, is far more important than the actual making

of money. Anthony states that, after much seeking (along the lines of a mystic

pilgrimage), he realized that what he needed was not some new system or set

of teachings that promised wealth. Instead, he says, What I desperately needed

was PROOF: Scientific, Indisputable, Immediately Verifiable Proof . . . And thatproof came in the form of QUANTUM PHYSICS . . . It was irrefutable. It was

scientific, and it was indisputable. Once you understand the basics of

quantum physics, which Anthony explains on his CDs, you will finally see

clearly how your thoughts, ideas, and beliefs control the outcome of your life.

Anthony is so confident that his clients will make revolutionary financial

18 J. Burwell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

gains he is willing to swallow all the risk and lay bare [his] most prized secrets

for the taking.

Most get-rich sites combine the economic term prosperity with the more gen-

eralized term abundancethe latter suggesting a kind of undefined plenitude

that will banish hardship and need. Using terms associated with the economic reg-

ister but that also possess extra-economic connotations increases the chance that

anything of benefit that happens to the client during or after taking the program

can be interpreted as a direct outcome of their participation. Finally, by casting

money as part of a cosmic bounty available to everyone and dispensed by a gen-

erous and caring universe, quantum enrichment practitioners release people from

the sleazy feeling that they have selfishly invested in these sites just to make

money for their personal use.

That quantum concepts are so mysterious and counter-intuitive only helps

practitioners emphasize the fact that they possess some sort of elemental

secretsecret being a term that appears at least once and typically many

times on each get-rich site. At the same time, the inaccessibility of quantum con-

cepts to laypeople justifies the need for a quantum master to guide consumers

eager to better realize their personal potential, achieve health, or simply to

make money. Many of these gurus speak of travelling around the world, studying

or apprenticing under primarily Eastern mystics who eventually revealed secrets

reserved only for the initiated. These searches prove futile, however, until prac-

titioners learn the secrets offered by quantum physics. Eastern methods of

achieving enlightenment typically require disciplined commitment, and take

years or even decades to yield that enlightenment. By taking this burden upon

themselves, quantum gurus release clients from a difficult and protracted labor

and instead offer them instant gratification. For people dealing with the

modern malaise of loneliness, alienation, and stress, people who lead hectic

lives with little time or patience for undertaking years of arduous meditative

practice, the instant personal alchemy promised by quantum-fuelled transform-

ation offers an attractive alternative.

Because almost all quantum experts cloak their techniques in secrecy, it is often

difficult to discern, without signing up and paying for the workshops/CDs/books,precisely how the practitioners incorporate the premises of quantum physics into

their methodologies. Indeed, many of the references to Eastern mysticism seem

precisely to serve the function of situating quantum knowledge at an inaccessible

remove from the layperson. The week-by-week teaser lists of topics (see, for

example, Anthony, 2009), however, suggest that most quantum programs,

broken down to their constituent parts, offer little more than traditional instruction

in sound business practices, and the power of positive visualization, self-confi-

dence, and commitment. Quantum testimonials function in a similarly convention-

al way, with the exception that they add quantum references that transform these

testimonials into experimental evidence which legitimizes a foolproof (because

scientific) product.

Figuring Matter 19

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

Conclusion

The language through which scientific advancements are relayed is neither neutral

nor transparent. Rather, this language reflects specific social, political, and cultural

needs and expectations, as well as specific constellations of hopes and anxieties.

Constructions and applications of atomic discourse provide a material touchstone

that is no less tangible than any other aspect of scientific enquiry. From Newtons

liberal individualist billiard ball atom to Frenkels collectivist atom with its rela-

tive levels of freedom, and finally to the contemporary commodified and person-

alized atom of quantum consciousness, quantum healing, and quantum enrichment

programs, one consistently finds in atomic models the expression of societal ten-

dencies. In this sense, the atom and its component parts have served as well as

reflected worldviews just as much as it has reflected scientific advances. In fact,

worldviews and scientific advances are inseparable, with existing societal priori-

ties driving the relative degree to which a given model is accepted and applied.

Reflected in the work of Fritjov Capra (1975) and Gary Zukov (1979), New Age

quantum consciousness retains a close allegiance to the theory and experimental

results in the physics of the twentieth century. The authors construct themselves

as teachers and guides whose main agenda is simply to enlighten the public on

the semi-mystical wonders of the cosmos and our relationship to it. In opposition

to this, post-New Age quantum vendors transform particles into animate agents

whose unique movements and interactions with individuals are said to secure

the health and happiness of self-directed individual subjects.

The process of commodification extends increasingly to encompass areas of

subjectivityfor example, spiritualitythat historically have been considered

immune to overt commercialization. In their promotion and consumption,

quantum healing and quantum enrichment programs operate quite comfortably

within the context of advanced capitalism. This extension of the commodification

process is evidenced in the way that quantum methodologies are commercialized

and then sold to people as a means of advancing, not just their financial interests,

but their spiritual well-being as well. The new economy of the atom also emerges

from the late twentieth and early twenty-first century retreat from the public

sphere and the attendant atrophy of the public sphere as a site of interpersonal

engagement. As such, the specifically public and political nature of the earlier con-

figurations of atomism as evidenced by Newton and Frenkel is supplanted by the

subjective language of personal betterment and individual gain. Through the

reconstitution of quantum concepts, incorporated and commodity-orientation sub-

jects are invited to exploit quantum dynamics for their consumption of self-

fulfillment.

Following the manner in which atomic behavior is cast and then deployed rhet-

orically is an exploration, not just of matter, but also of what matters. The affinity

between quantum physics and the transition from an objective to a subjective

orientation toward the material world helps explain how easily contemporary

20 J. Burwell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

popularized quantum language has accommodated a mode of being-in-the-world

that is self-directed and, arguably, narcissistic. In its contemporary Western

setting, the promise offered by the majority of quantum practitioners takes advan-

tage of societal tendencies characterized by depoliticized and self-interested indi-

viduals. At the same time, the invocation and application of quantum rhetoric

touches on a deep contemporary sense of being unmoored and the need for struc-

tured guidance as a means toward a renewed sense of control over ones life. The

nomadic quality of quantum language and concepts ensures that, no matter what

an individuals complaint or desire, there exists a quantum strategy to ameliorate

or realize it. This remarkable adaptability marks twenty-first century quantum

language as unique, not only within the discipline of physics, but also relative

to all fields of scientific inquiry.

Notes

1Collectivism as a political term originated with opponents of Marxism and those in favor of

anarchistic communism over authoritarian communism. It referred to the theory that the

means of production should be owned neither by private individuals nor by the state, but by

free associations of laborers (Kojevinikov, 1999, p. 297).2For further discussion of the metaphoric nature of scientific language, see: Black (1962), Hal-

loran and Bradford (1984), Gross (1988), Jones (1990), Harris (1991) and Hellsten (2008).3As biologists become more adept as observing phenomena on a nanoscale, there is a growing

belief that key influences on gene expression and function may emanate from subatomic or

quantum dynamicsin other words, that some form of uncertainly principle may operate at

the genetic level. Seeing DNA from a quantum perspective, they propose, offers a new way

to understand how information could travel backwards from the environment to DNA to

produce adaptive mutations. This novel approach to explaining how mutations operate at the

level of DNA, however, is a far cry from the explicitly causal relation that Chopra constructs

between the human will and DNA.

References

Anthony, R. (2004) Know How to be Rich. Available at http://www.robertanthonyonline.com/

(accessed 23 December 2011).

Bell, J. S. (1964) On the EinsteinPodolskyRosen paradox, Physics, 1(3), pp. 195200.

Black, M. (1962)Models and Metaphors: Studies in Language and Philosophy (Ithaca, NY: Cornell

University Press).

Bohm, D. (1980) Wholeness and Implicate Order (London and New York: Routledge).

Bohr, N. (1958) Atomic Theory and Human Knowledge (New York: Wiley).

Bono, J. J. (1990) Science, discourse, and literature: the role/rule of metaphor in science, Theory andPractice, pp. 5989 (Lebanon, New Hampshire: University Press of New England).

Braiker, H. (2004)Whos Pulling Your Strings? How to Break the Cycle of Manipulation and Regain

Control of Your Life (New York: McGraw Hill).

Brown, T. (2003) Making Truth: The Role of Metaphor in Science (Chicago: University of Illinois

Press).

Figuring Matter 21

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

Campbell, J. (1990) Observer and object, reader and text: some parallel themes in modern science

and literature, in: J. W. Slade and J. Y. Lee (Eds) Beyond the Two Cultures: Essays on

Science, Technology, and Literature, pp. 2337 (Ames: Iowa State University Press).

Capra, F. ([1975] 2010) The Tao of Physics: An Exploration of the Parallels between Modern

Physics and Eastern Mysticism (Boston, MA: Shambhala Publications).

Chopra, D. (1990) Quantum Healing: Exploring the Frontiers of Mind/Body Medicine (New York:Bantam Books).

Conjur, L. (2006) Quantum Info Wealth. Available at http://www.quantum-creators.com/qiwhome.

html (accessed 6 September 2012).

Dillard, A. (1988) Teaching a Stone to Talk: Expeditions and Encounters (New York: Harper

Perennial).

Eddington, A. (1981) The Nature of the Physical World (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press).

Einstein, A. and Infeld, L. (1966) The Evolution of Physics: From Early Concepts to Relativity and

Quanta (London: Simon and Shuster).

Einstein, A., Podolsky, B. and Rosen, N. (1935) Can quantum-mechanical description of physical

reality be considered complete? Physical Review, 47, pp. 777780.

Everett, H. (1973) The theory of the universal wavefunction, in: B. DeWitt and N. Graham (Eds) The

Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, pp. 3140 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton Uni-

versity Press).

Frenkel, J. (1924) Beitrag zur Theorie der Metalle, ZP, 29, pp. 214240.

Gardner, M. (1979) Realism and instrumentalism in 19th-century atomism, Philosophy of Science,

46, pp. 134.

Golden, F. (1997) Searching for the soul in the realm of physics (review), San Francisco Chronicle,

January 27.

Goldman, B. (2009) Quantum Jumping. Available at http://www.quantumjumping.com/ (accessed

1 September 2011).

Goswami, A. (1975) The Self-Aware Universe: How Consciousness Creates the Material World (Los

Angeles, CA: Tarcher Books).

Graff, G. (1989) Co-optation, in: H. A. Viser (Ed.) The New Historicism, pp. 168182 (New York:

Routledge).

Gregory, B. (1988) Inventing Reality: Physics as Language (New York: John Wiley & Sons).

Gross, A. G. (1988) Discourse on method: the rhetorical analysis of scientific texts, Pretext, 9,

pp. 169186.

Halloran, S. M. and Bradford, A. N. (1984) Figures of speech in the rhetoric of science and technol-

ogy, in: R. J. Connors, E. P. J. Corbett and L. Ede (Eds) Essays on Classical Rhetoric and

Modern Discourse, pp. 179193 (Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois Press).

Harris, R. A. (1990) Assent, dissent, and rhetoric in science, Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 20(1),

pp. 1337.

Harris, R. A. (1991) Rhetoric of science, College English, 53(3), pp. 282307.

Heisenberg, W. (1958) Physics and Philosophy (New York: Harper).

Hellsten, L. (2008) Popular metaphors of bioscience: bridges over time? Configurations, 16(1),

pp. 1132.

Jahn, R. (1998) Psychic truth, Life Magazine, 2(7), p. 103.

Jasper, J. (1999) Take Back Your Time: How to Regain Control of Work, Information, and Technol-

ogy (New York: St. Martins Griffin).

Jones, R. S. (1990) Physics as Metaphor, 2nd edn. (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press).

Kauffman, L. A. (1990) The anti-politics of identity, Socialist Review, 20(1), pp. 6780.

Kojevinikov, A. (1999) Freedom, collectivism, and quasiparticles: social metaphors in quantum

physics, Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences (HSPS), 29(2), pp. 295331.

22 J. Burwell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980) Metaphors We Live By (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago

Press).

Leane, E. (2001) Knowing quanta: the ambiguous metaphors of popular physics, The Review of

English Studies, 52(207), pp. 411431.

Lightman, A. P. (1989) Magic on the mind: physicists use of metaphor, The American Scholar,

58(1), pp. 97101.

Locke, J. ([1690] 2008) An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, Book I (Oxford: Oxford Uni-

versity Press).

Morris, J. T. (2002) The Simplify Journal: A Workbook to Help You Regain Control of Your Life,

White Plains (New York: Peter Pauper Press).

OMalley, J. (2007) The eye and I, America: The National Catholic Weekly. Available at http://

www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=10467 (accessed 26 December

2011).

Papin, L. (1992) This is not a universe: metaphor, language, and representation, Publications of the

Modern Language Association of America (PMLA), 107(5), pp. 12531265.

Putnam, J. A. (2003) Human Intelligence. Available at: http://newphysicstheory.com/Human_

Intelligence.pdf (accessed 23 December 2011).

Pyle, A. (1995) Atomism and Its Critics (Bristol: Thoemmes Press).

Quantum Touchw. Available at: http://www.quantumtouch.ca (accessed 6 December 2011).Restivo, S. (1978) Parallels and paradoxes in modern physics and Eastern mysticism Ia critical

reconnaissance, Social Studies of Science, 8(2), pp. 143181.

Rotella, G. (1987) Comparing conceptions: Frost and Eddington, Heisenberg and Bohr, American

Literature, 59(2), pp. 167189.

Stenger, V. J. (1997) Quantum Quackery. Available at http://www.csicop.org/si/show/quantum_

quackery (accessed 26 December 2011).

Stevens, J. (2002) Symbolic matter: DNA and other linguistic stuff, Social Text, 20(1), pp. 105136.

Taylor, B. B. (1999) Physics and faith: the luminous web, The Christian Century, 29 June,

pp. 612619.

The Quantum Prosperity Program. Available at http://www.quantumprosperityprogram.com

(accessed 1 September 2011).

Violets View (2009) Money and the science of wealth. Available at http://violetsview.hubpages.

com/hub/Get-RichThe-Science-of-Attracting-Money (accessed 1 September 2011).

Von Neumann, J. (1955) The Mathematical Foundation of Quantum Mechanics (Trans. R. T. Beyer)

(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).

Westfall, R. S. (1973) Newton and the fudge factor, Science, 179(4075), pp. 731732.

What the Bleep do We Know? (2004) [DVD] Directed by B. Chasse, M. Vicente and W. Arntz

(United States: Fox Video).

Zohar, D. (1994) Forces of reaction, Sunday Times, February 6, p. 14.

Zukav, G. ([1979] 2001) The Dancing Wu Li Masters: An Overview of the New Physics (New York:

William Morrow and Company).

Figuring Matter 23

Dow

nloa

ded

by [J

ennif

er Bu

rwell

] at 1

1:59 2

2 Marc

h 201

3