My quantum life : why did I wrote this blog ?


The idea of lea­ving a tes­ti­mo­ny of resi­lience to my daugh­ter Lena about what I expe­rien­ced on the night of December 19, 2013 is the ori­gin of this blog. I don’t know how – when she was only 22 months old at the time – she per­cei­ved and expe­rien­ced being sepa­ra­ted from her mother without notice for 15 days after the aneu­rysm break that shook me. I don’t know how she per­cei­ved and expe­rien­ced being immer­sed in an effer­ves­cence mar­ked by both love and fear. I don’t know, and does it real­ly mat­ter ? The essen­tial thing for me and what I dare to hope will be most pre­cious and use­ful to her is to show her my love while trans­mit­ting to her the fruit of my expe­rience.


Resilience comes through awareness


Obviously, this blog has taken me much fur­ther than just lea­ving a tes­ti­mo­ny. Very ear­ly in the wri­ting pro­cess, I knew that this could not just be a sto­ry to tell Lena. Because what hap­pe­ned to me that night gave me – as Eckhart Tolle calls it – a « glimpse of what pre­sence, awa­ke­ning or conscious­ness means » [1]. That was the begin­ning of my resi­lience. That night felt like a life­time. Paradoxically, it was a concen­trate of a few seconds, which it took me seve­ral months to rea­lize, incor­po­rate and express.

During this per­iod, I dis­co­ve­red Eckhart Tolle’s tea­ching, which has uncom­mon­ly adjus­ted my per­cep­tion of life. And more than that, the way I feel life flo­wing in and around me. Resilience comes through awa­re­ness. Eckhart Tolle’s tea­ching reflects with great accu­ra­cy what I expe­rien­ced on that strange decem­ber night. This is why it see­med obvious to me that it should be my first rea­ding grid.

I could have left it at that. But the theme of conscious­ness ins­pi­red me, inha­bi­ted me. I wan­ted to explore it fur­ther. I wan­ted to unders­tand the mys­te­ry behind this aneu­rysm rup­ture that took place at a time and place that pro­ved so oppor­tune for me. I nee­ded to anchor my change in conscious­ness. However, I wasn’t trying to ratio­na­lize this expe­rience. I just wan­ted her to have her place as I had expe­rien­ced it. And, in this way, it offers a high­light of this dif­ferent order of things to which it invi­ted. An ambi­tious request, in short. It pushed me to begin research that, against all odds, led me to the world of science.


For a more conscious science

I dis­co­ve­red that science, and espe­cial­ly phy­sics, had some­thing to say about conscious­ness. At first, I was both intri­gued and per­plexed by this dis­co­ve­ry. For until then, my vision of science was more like this simple thought : conscious­ness does not seem to be part of scien­tists’ consi­de­ra­tions. Except – per­haps – for quan­tum physicists.

I remem­ber that in high school, math and phy­sics were my favo­rite sub­jects. Today I unders­tand why I never wan­ted to pur­sue these two dis­ci­plines after my science bac­ca­lau­reate. I felt, without being able to explain it to myself at the time, that I wasn’t going to find what I was loo­king for. Because, for me, science – at least as I had been taught or as I per­cei­ved it – lacked breath, heart, and mea­ning. The advan­tage of not having ven­tu­red into this science too far from my aspi­ra­tions is that I remai­ned avai­lable to ano­ther way of approa­ching… science, precisely.


When theory ignores experience


What dif­fe­rence does it make to approach science in rela­tion to conscious­ness ? When I began wri­ting these pages, I did not think I would ask myself this ques­tion. But the more I pro­gres­sed in my research on conscious­ness, the more it see­med to me that we were not approa­ching things in a very coherent way. Despite the abun­dance of examples and tes­ti­mo­nies on alte­red states of conscious­ness, which are even more ins­truc­tive than our ordi­na­ry states of conscious­ness, scien­tists per­sist in igno­ring them in many dis­ci­plines. Thus, they deprive them­selves of an ins­pi­ring and mea­ning­ful light.

I dis­co­ve­red that in the field of phy­sics, our approach is not neces­sa­ri­ly bet­ter. At least – as I thought at the time – out­side quan­tum phy­sics, inso­far as it uses conscious­ness to explain cer­tain phe­no­me­na. But even in this area, eve­ry­thing is not so simple after all. I have been inter­es­ted in quan­tum theo­ries for seve­ral years and yet it was only after my expe­rience that a fun­da­men­tal ques­tion came to me : how is conscious­ness real­ly vie­wed by quan­tum phy­si­cists ? Is it a conscious­ness deta­ched from men­tal ? Is it a conscious­ness of uni­ty and infinity ?

Still, one thing see­med obvious to me even after December 19 : the rela­tion­ship bet­ween phy­sics and conscious­ness does stop at quan­tum phy­sics. And for good rea­son, without uni­fi­ca­tion with Einstein’s phy­sics, conscious­ness seems some­how « phy­si­cal­ly » locked up in the world of the infi­ni­te­ly small. In my opi­nion, this can­not be satis­fac­to­ry, because the sepa­ra­tion crea­ted contra­dicts a vision and an expe­rience of conscious­ness sha­red by many people, star­ting with me.


When experience meets theory



In a see­min­gly inco­herent, mea­nin­gless world, a world in which we feel sepa­ra­ted from each other, a world gover­ned by our men­tal, a world where we struggle against the flow of life, I do this impos­sible expe­rience : to let go and feel that I exist on a lar­ger plane of conscious­ness, where eve­ry­thing is connected.

To feel this connec­tion vibrate inside me and simul­ta­neous­ly to expe­rience it out­side. To feel that there is an under­lying order, from which some­times emerges such a strong reso­nance bet­ween people or events that won­ders can hap­pen. A reso­nance that is at the heart of the theo­ry of uni­fi­ca­tion pro­po­sed by the phy­si­cist Nassim Haramein.

Although I think per­so­nal expe­rience remains the best evi­dence, I have found remar­kable reso­nance in his theo­ry (see articles on the uni­fied field theo­ry). Better : I unders­tood that what hap­pe­ned to me is nei­ther irra­tio­nal nor magi­cal, it is sim­ply phy­sics. As he says himself :


« What we consi­der spi­ri­tual or meta­phy­si­cal is gene­ral­ly phy­sics that we do not yet unders­tand. » [2]


I don’t remem­ber exact­ly under what cir­cum­stances Nassim Haramein’s theo­ry came to me. When I star­ted my research, I was rea­ding a lot of phy­sics theo­ries. The fact that I am not a phy­sics spe­cia­list gave me the advan­tage of approa­ching them with an open mind… and the disad­van­tage of having to spend a lot of time and ener­gy trying to unders­tand them.


For an exploration of consciousness

In gene­ral, their authors were trying a wor­thy quest for uni­fi­ca­tion. Unfortunately, my hope of fin­ding mea­ning, conscious­ness, sim­pli­ci­ty and cohe­rence in it was dwind­ling from theo­ry to theo­ry. So, when I dis­co­ve­red the « Connected uni­verse », I just thought : « Ok, let’s go for a new theo­ry ! ». As I went into more detail, I rea­li­zed that at last conscious­ness see­med to be a wor­thy sub­ject for a physicist.


Consciousness is first

Consciousness, cohe­rence, and uni­fi­ca­tion are present in his theo­ry. Nassim Haramein gives us scien­ti­fic proof that eve­ry­thing is connec­ted. In a simple, ele­gant and ins­pi­ring way. The pro­mise was beautiful :




« All the mas­ters have told us that eve­ry­thing is One, maybe we should try to apply that to phy­sics. » [3]



The pro­mise has been kept, and the essay trans­for­med. Unity is no lon­ger a concept in his theo­ry, just as it is no lon­ger a belief in my experience.

Nassim Haramein’s sta­te­ment may seem com­ple­te­ly out of place in the mouth of a phy­si­cist. But the fact is that Nassim Haramein is a non­con­for­mist phy­si­cist. Probably because his mind is more sha­ped by nature than by aca­de­mic stu­dies and degrees in physics.

He lear­ned phy­sics by him­self in the eve­nings when he wor­ked as a ski or diving ins­truc­tor during the day. Then all day long, in his van, when he left eve­ry­thing to devote him­self to it. He has been prac­ti­cing medi­ta­tion since the age of 11, he has tou­ched states of expan­ded conscious­ness, where eve­ry­thing is inter­de­pendent and connec­ted. And far from lea­ving his per­so­nal expe­rience aside, he starts from this expe­rience to approach science. And it brings conscious­ness to the heart of phy­sics (see also the article Who is Nassim Haramein ? for a lit­tle more aca­de­mic information ;)).

Rather than consi­de­ring eso­te­ric, phi­lo­so­phi­cal and scien­ti­fic approaches as sepa­rate from each other, I pre­fer­red to pool the infor­ma­tion gathe­red in an attempt to get a broa­der view of things. This is in line with my concep­tion of life, where eve­ry­thing is connec­ted and inter­de­pendent.


Consciousness is the way

Therefore, this tes­ti­mo­ny of resi­lience and this research should be taken sim­ply for what they are : an explo­ra­tion, an inves­ti­ga­tion and a connec­tion of dif­ferent points of view. Like many pro­jec­tors with dif­ferent fil­ters that light my expe­rience. My only selec­tion cri­te­rion, and so the only rea­son for their pre­sence in these pages, was that this infor­ma­tion reso­nates with what I have expe­rien­ced and what I feel to be true. It was sim­ply a mat­ter of obser­ving what mir­ro­red my expe­rience, what made sense, and what was use­ful for me to conti­nue on my way.

This approach can be seen as a pure­ly sub­jec­tive view of things. Which, in fact, seems to take us away from science. No doubt this is the vision of many scien­tists. They would pro­ba­bly bene­fit from lis­te­ning to phi­lo­so­phers :


« The more sub­jec­ti­vi­ty you allow for, the more objec­tive des­crip­tion you can achieve. » [4]


This is what the French phi­lo­so­pher of science Michel Bitbol teaches us. And this is the path I invite you to fol­low with me. Because as we will dis­co­ver on this blog, before having a more accu­rate per­cep­tion of life, I believe we still have a long way to go.


Your jour­ney can start here.

You can get into the expe­rience that kept me busy that night by rea­ding My sto­ry.






Notes and references            

[1] TOLLE Eckhart, Quiétude, Québec : Ariane Editions, 2003, p.18, free trans­la­tion
[2] HARAMEIN Nassim, quo­ted by Resonance Science Foundation
[3] HARAMEIN Nassim. (sep­tem­ber 25, 2013). Nassim Haramein Complete [Podcast]
[4] BITBOL Michel, De l’intérieur du monde. Pour une phi­lo­so­phie et une science des rela­tions, Paris : Flammarion, 2010, quo­ted by NEXUS n°70, september-october 2010, p.37, free translation


2 thoughts on “My quantum life : why did I wrote this blog ?

  1. Hello, I real­ly appre­ciate your mes­sage. I hope the content of this blog will ins­pire you. God bless you.

  2. اشكرك جدا علي هذه المدونة استمتعت بالقراءة والمحتوي الملهم والرائع بالرغم لم اكمل كل ما كتبتي وانا اتابع قراءة شرحك لمبادي هيرميس السبعة والرسوم التوضيحية الخاصة بالمبادي …حقا بارك الله فيك واسعدك طول حياتك مع احبابك
    تحياتي لك

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be publi­shed. Required fields are mar­ked *

©2018–2023 My quan­tum life All rights reserved