European Journal of Science and Theology

_______________________________________________________________________

HEISENBERG AND THE LEVELS OF REALITY Basarab Nicolescu1

Universit Paris 6, Paris, France LPNHE, 4 Place Jussieu, 75005 Paris (Received 23 August 2005)

Abstract
We first analyze the transdisciplinary model of Reality and its key concept of !"evels of Reality#$ We then compare this model %ith the one ela&orated &y Werner 'eisen&erg in ()*2$

Keywor s! levels of reality+ levels of perception+ o&,ect+ su&,ect+ -uantum physics+ realism+ space time+ discontinuity+ incompleteness+ ./del0s theorems+ causality+ unification of physical interactions+ Werner 'eisen&erg+ kno%ledge process+ 1eutsche 2hysik$

1. Introduction
3he idea of 4"evels of Reality0 came to me during a post doctoral visit at "a%rence 5erkeley "a&oratory+ in ()67$ 8 did not understand from %here %as coming the resistance to the unification &et%een the relativity theory and the -uantum mechanics$ 3his %as the starting point of my reflection$ At that time+ 8 %as %orking %ith .eoffrey 9he%+ the founder of &ootstrap theory$ 3he discussions %e had together and %ith other colleagues from 5erkeley+ have stimulated me to formulate this idea$ 8t is at 5erkley that 8 have &egun %riting a
(

: mail; nicolesc<lpnhep$in2p3$fr+ =a>; ?33 ( **62)*26

Nicolescu"Euro#ean Journal o$ %cience an &'eolo(y 1 )*005+, 4, ,-.

&ook regarding the epistemological and philosophical e>tensions of the -uantum physics$ 8n ()@(+ 8 %as intrigued &y the notion of 4veiled Real0 &y 5ernard d0:spagnat A(B+ that did not seemed to me to &e a satisfying solution to the pro&lems 8 %as dealing %ith and 8 decided to make pu&lic my notion of 4"evels of Reality0$ 3herefore+ 8 introduced this notion into an article pu&lished in ()@2 A2B$ 3he form of this concept %as resumed in the first edition of my &ook 4Cs+ the particle and the %orld0 A3B$ After%ards+ during the years+ 8 developed this idea in several &ooks+ articles and conferences$ 8n ())2+ 8 %as invited as an e>pert to the plenary session of the 2ontifical Academy of Dciences dedicated to the study of comple>ity in sciences$ 8 spoke on Eature considered from the -uantum physics point of vie% and 8 presented my approach concerning the "evels of Reality A*B$ 3he great Austrian physicist Walter 3hirring+ present at the congress at Fatican+ gave me a little article+ unpu&lished yet+ %here 8 have discovered his important considerations on the nature of physical la%s+ in the case of different "evels of Reality A5B$ 5ut the &ig surprise came in ())@+ %hen 8 discovered the %ork of Werner 'eisen&erg+ 42hilosophy G 3he manuscript of ()*20 A7B$ 3his te>t has provoked in me a verita&le astonishment &ecause 8 found the same idea of "evels of Reality+ o&viously under a different form$$ 'eisen&erg0s &ook had an amazing history; it %as %ritten in ()*2+ &ut it %as pu&lished in .erman only in ()@*$ 8t %as translated in =rench in ())@$ As far as 8 kno%+ there is no :nglish translation of this %ork$ 3he opinion that 8 %ant to e>press in this paper is in total agreement %ith those of the -uantum mechanics founders; Werner 'eisen&erg+ Wolfgang 2auli and Eiels 5ohr+ &ut due to space reasons+ 8 %ill treat in the present study only the philosophical ideas of 'eisen&erg$ 8 shall start &y e>posing my o%n ideas+ to continue &y studying the correspondence that e>ists &et%een them and those of 'eisen&erg$

Heisen/er( an t'e Levels o$ 0eality

2$

!assica! r"a!is# and $uantu# r"a!is# 3he modern science is founded on the idea of a total separation &et%een

the o&serving su&,ect and the Reality+ assumed to &e completely in e#en ent from the first one$ 5ut+ at the same time+ in the modern science are given three fundamental postulates+ %hich are e>tending at a supreme degree the research of la%s and order; 3he e>istence of universal la%s+ %ith mathematic characterH 3he discovery of these la%s &y the scientific e>perimentH 3he perfect reproduci&ility of the e>perimental data$ 3he e>traordinary success of the classical physics+ from .alileo+ Iepler and Ee%ton until :instein+ have confirmed the validity of these three postulates$ At the same time+ they have contri&uted to the instauration of a si1#licity paradigm+ %hich &ecame dominant during the J8Jth century$ 3he classical physics is founded on the idea of continuity+ in agreement %ith the evidence supplied &y the sense organs; %e can0t pass from one point of the space and of the time to another+ %ithout passing through all intermediary points$ 3he idea of continuity is intimately linked to a key concept of the classical physics; t'e local causality$ :very physical phenomenon could &e understood &y a continuous chain of causes and effects; to every cause at a certain point corresponds an effect to an infinitely near point and to every effect at a certain point corresponds a cause to an infinitely near point$ 3here is no need of any direct action at distance$ 3he concept of eter1inis1 is central in the classical physics$ 3he classical physics e-uations are such that if one kno%s the positions and the velocities of the physical o&,ects at a certain moment+ one can predict their positions and velocities at any other moment of time$ 3he la%s of classical physics are deterministic la%s$ 3he physical states &eing functions of position and velocity+ it results that if the initial conditions are kno%n (the physical state
%

Nicolescu"Euro#ean Journal o$ %cience an &'eolo(y 1 )*005+, 4, ,-.

at a given moment of time) one can co1#letely predict the physical state at any other moment of time$ &'e o/2ectivity of the classical physics is fundamentally linked to the kno%ledge of an o&,ect moving in the ( dimensional time and the 3 dimensional space$ 3he central role of the space time in four dimensions %as not altered &y the t%o relativity theories of :instein+ restricted and general+ that constitute the apogee of the classical physics$ 3he -uantum mechanics is in a total conceptual rupture %ith the classical mechanics$ According to 2lanck0s discovery+ the energy has a discontinuous+ discrete structure$ 3he iscontinuity means that &et%een t%o points there is nothing+ no o&,ects+ no atoms+ no molecules+ no particles+ ,ust not'in($ And even the %ord 4nothing0 is too much$

A physical -uantity has+ in -uantum mechanics+ several possi&le values associated %ith given pro&a&ilities of occurrence$ 5ut in a physical measurement %e get o&viously ,ust one single result$ 3his a&olition+ via the measurement process+ of the plurality of possi&le values of an o&serva&le -uantity had an o&scure meaning &ut it already clearly indicated the e>istence of a ne% type of causality$ Deven decades after the -uantum mechanics %as &orn+ the nature of this ne% type of causality %as clarified thanks to a rigorous theoretical result G the 5ell0s theorem G and also to high precision e>periments$ A ne% concept made in this %ay its entrance in physics; t'e non-se#ara/ility$ 3he -uantum entities continue to interact+ never mind the distance &et%een them$ 3herefore+ a ne% type of causality appears G a (lo/al causality that concerns the system of all physical entities+ in their ensem&le$

&

Heisen/er( an t'e Levels o$ 0eality

3he -uantum entities G the 4-uantons0 G are at the same time corpuscles and %aves or+ more precisely+ they are neither corpuscles nor %aves$ 3he famous uncertainty relations of 'eisen&erg sho% %ithout any am&iguity that is impossi&le to localise a -uanton into an e>act point of the space and an e>act point of time$ 8n other %ords+ it is impossi&le to assign a %ell determined tra,ectory to a -uantum particle$ 3he in eter1inis1, reigning at the -uantum scale+ is a structural indeterminism+ fundamental and irreduci&le$ 8t does not means neither hazard nor imprecision$$ 3he so called 3uantu1 #ara o4es (as+ for e>ample+ the famous parado> of 4Dchr/dinger cat0) are false parado>es+ &ecause they point out contradictions e>clusively in correlation %ith the natural+ ordinary language+ %hich is that of the classical realismH these end to &e parado>es %hen the language appropriate to the -uantum mechanics is used$ :ven if they are instructive %hen one %ants to sho% the incompati&ility &et%een the classical and -uantum realism+ these parado>es &ecome useless in the conte>t of the -uantum ideas$ 3he true -uestion is the incompati&ility &et%een the classical realism and the -uantum one$ 3he classical o&,ect is localised in space time %hile the -uantum o&,ect is not localised in space time$ 8t moves into an a&stract mathematical space+ ruled &y the alge&ra of operators and not &y the alge&ra of num&ers$ 8n -uantum physics+ the a&straction is no longer a simple tool to descri&e reality &ut a constitutive part of reality itself$ 3he classical o&,ect is su&,ected to the local causality+ %hile the -uantum o&,ect is not su&mitted to this causality$ 8t is impossi&le to predict an individual -uantum event$ Kne can predict only the occurrence pro&a&ilities of the events$ 3he key of understanding this seemingly parado>ical and also irrational situation (from the point of vie% of classical realism) is the -uantum superposition principle; the superposition of t%o -uantum states is also a -uantum state$ 8t is impossi&le to o&tain the classical mechanics as a particular case of the -uantum mechanics &ecause the h constant characterising the -uantum

'

Nicolescu"Euro#ean Journal o$ %cience an &'eolo(y 1 )*005+, 4, ,-.

interactions G the famous 2lanck constant G has a %ell determined value$ 3his value is different from zero$ 3he limit h L 0 has no rigorous meaning$ 3he radical &reak &et%een the classical and -uantum realism e>plain %hy one had not succeed until no% to unify the theories of relativity and of the -uantum mechanics into a single one+ despite the fulminating evolution of the -uantum field theory resulting in the superstrings theory$ 8t is even possi&le that such a unifying theory %ill never &e found$ 1oes this incompati&ility mean that %e have reached a limit in the physical description of reality+ or that a ne% characteristic of reality is to &e discoveredM 8t is this second possi&ility that 8 %ant to e>plore no%$ (. T)" L"*"!s o+ R"a!it, 8 interpreted the incompati&ility &et%een the -uantum mechanics and the classical mechanics as meaning the necessity of enlarging the domain of reality+ &y a&andoning the classical idea of e>istence of only one level of reality$ "et0s give to the %ord 4reality0 its pragmatic and ontological meaning$ 8 understand &y Reality+ everything that resists to our e>periences+ representations+ descriptions+ images or mathematical formalisms$ 8n -uantum physics+ the mathematical formalism is insepara&le from e>periment$ 8t resists+ in its manner+ &oth &y the care for the internal selfconsistence and &y the need to integrate the e>perimental data %ithout destroying this selfconsistence$ We also have to give an ontological dimension to the notion of Reality$ 3he Eature is an immense an ine>hausti&le source of the unkno%n that ,ustifies the very e>istence of science$ Reality is not only a social construction+ the consensus of a community+ an intersu&,ective agreement$ 8t has also a transsu/2ective dimension+ to the e>tent %here a simple e>perimental fact could ruin the most &eautiful scientific theory$ Kf course+ 8 make the distinction &et%een 0eal and 0eality$ 0eal means w'at it is+ %hile 0eality is connected to the resistance in our human e>perience$

Heisen/er( an t'e Levels o$ 0eality

3he real is+ &y definition+ veiled forever+ %hile the Reality is accessi&le to our kno%ledge$ 8 define a Level o$ 0eality as an ensem&le of systems invariant to the action of a num&er of general la%s; for e>ample+ the -uantum entities su&mitted to the -uantum la%s+ %hich are on radical &reak %ith the la%s of the macrophysical %orld$ 3his means that t%o levels of Reality are i$$erent if+ passing from one to another+ there is a &reak of the la%s and &reak of the fundamental concepts (as causality+ for e>ample)$ 3he iscontinuity present in the -uantum %orld is also present in the structure of the "evels of Reality+ &y the coe>istence of macrophysical %orld and the microphysical %orld$ 3he "evels of Reality are radically different from the organisation levels+ as they %ere defined in the systemic approaches$ 3he organisation levels do not suppose a rupture of fundamental concepts; a certain num&er of organisation levels &elong to only one and the same "evel of Reality$ 3here is no discontinuity &et%een the organisation levels &elonging to a %ell determined Reality level$ 3he organisation levels correspond to different arrangements of the same fundamental la%s+ %hile the "evels of Reality are generated &y the coherent action of radically different ensem&les of la%s$ 3he "evels of Reality and the organisation levels offer the possi&ility of a ne% ta>onomy for the eight thousand academic disciplines e>isting no%$ Nany disciplines could coe>ist at an only and the same "evel of Reality even if they correspond to different organisation levels$ =or e>ample+ the Nar>ist economy and the classical physics &elong to the only and same level of reality+ %hile -uantum physics and psychoanalysis &elong to another "evel of Reality$ 1ue to the notion of "evels of Reality+ the Reality ac-uires a multidimensional and multireferential structure$ 3he "evels of Reality also allo% defining useful notions as; levels of language+ levels of representation+ levels of materiality or levels of comple>ity$

Nicolescu"Euro#ean Journal o$ %cience an &'eolo(y 1 )*005+, 4, ,-.

3he Reality comports+ according to my approach+ a certain num&er of levels$ 8n fact+ the previous considerations concerning t%o "evels of Reality could &e easily generalised to a larger num&er of levels$ 3he follo%ing analysis does not depend on the fact that this num&er is finite of infinite$ =or the terminological clarity0s sake+ 8 shall assume that this num&er is infinite$ K&viously+ there is coherence &et%een the different levels of Reality+ at least in the natural %orld$ 8n fact+ a vast sel$consistence seems to rule the evolution of the Cniverse+ from the infinitely small to the infinitely large++ from the infinitely short to the infinitely long$ =or e>ample+ a very small variation of the coupling constant of the strong interactions &et%een -uantum particles %ould lead+ at the infinitely large scale G our Cniverse+ either to the conversion of all hydrogen in helium+ or to the ine>istence of comple> atoms as the car&on$ Kr a very small variation of the gravitational coupling constant %ould lead either to ephemeral planets+ or to the impossi&ility of their formation$ =urthermore+ according to the actual cosmological theories+ the Cniverse seems a&le to create itsel$ %ithout any e>ternal intervention$ An information flu> is transmitted in a coherent manner from a "evel of Reality to another level of Reality of our physical Cniverse$ :very "evel of Reality has its o%n associated space time$ 3hus+ the classical "evel of Reality is associated to the four dimensional space time+ %hile the -uantum "evel of Reality is associated %ith more than four dimensions$ 8n the most sophisticated and the most promising theory for the unification of all physical interactions G the N theory (4N0 from 4mem&rane0)+ the space time must have eleven dimensions; one time dimension and ten space dimensions$ 3he superstrings modify in an interesting manner our conception on the physical reality$ 3he superstring+ fundamental entity of the ne% theory+ is an o&,ect s#rea in space$ 9onse-uently+ it is logical impossi&le to define w'ere and w'en are interacting the superstrings$ 3his characteristic is in the spirit of -uantum mechanics$ Kn the other hand+ their finite dimension implies that there is a li1it of our possi&ility to e>plore reality$ Kur anthropomorphic convention

1/

Heisen/er( an t'e Levels o$ 0eality

of distance is no longer applica&le$ Eeither the Cniverse nor any of its o&,ects have any meaning over this limit$ =inally+ the space dimensions are of t%o kinds; large+ vast+ visi&le (as the three dimensions of %hat %e consider as our o%n space) and small+ wra##e on themselves+ invisi&le$ A ne% 0elativity Princi#le emerges from our model of Reality; no Level o$ 0eality constitutes a #rivile(e #lace $ro1 w'ere one coul un erstan all t'e ot'er Levels o$ 0eality$ A "evel of Reality is %hat it is &ecause all the other levels simultaneously e>ist$ 8n other %ords+ our model is non hierarchical$ 3here is no fundamental level &ut the a&sence of fundaments do not means an anarchical dynamics$ 3he fundaments are replaced &y the unified and coherent dynamics of all "evels of Reality+ %hich are already discovered or %ill &e discovered in the future$ :very "evel of Reality is characterised &y its inco1#leteness; the la%s ruling this level are ,ust a part of the ensem&le of la%s ruling all the "evels of Reality$ 3his property is in agreement %ith the ./del theorem+ concerning the arithmetic and all mathematical theory containing the arithmetic$ 3he ./del theorem tells that a rich enough a>ioms system has either undecida&le or contradictory results5 3he dynamics of the "evels of Reality is made clear in a pertinent manner &y three thesis formulated &y the physicist Walter 3hirring A5B;

&'e laws o$ any in$erior level are not co1#letely eter1ine /y t'e su#erior level laws5 3hus+ %ell anchored notions in the classical thinking+ as 4fundamental0 and 4accidental0+ must to &e re e>amined$ What is considered fundamental at a certain level may appear as accidental at a superior level and %hat is considered accidental or incomprehensi&le at a certain level could appear as fundamental at a superior level$

&'e laws o$ an in$erior level e#en 1ore o$ t'eir e1er(ency circu1stances t'an o$ t'e su#erior level laws5 3he la%s of a certain level essentially depend of the local configuration that they are referred at$ 3herefore+ there is a kind of local autonomy for the respective level of Reality$ 5ut certain internal

11

Nicolescu"Euro#ean Journal o$ %cience an &'eolo(y 1 )*005+, 4, ,-.

am&iguities concerning the inferior level la%s are solved &y the consideration of superior order la%s$ 3he self consistence of these la%s reduces the la%s am&iguity$

&'e laws 'ierarc'y a vance in t'e sa1e ti1e wit' t'e Universe itsel$5 8n other %ords+ %e assist at the &irth of la%s as the Cniverse develops$ 3hese la%s pre e>isted at the 4&eginning0 of the Cniverse as possi&ilities$ 8t is the evolution of the Cniverse that actualises these la%s and their hierarchy$ 3he zone &et%een different levels of Reality and the zone &eyond all

levels of Reality is in fact a 6one o$ non-resistance for our e>periments+ representations+ descriptions+ images or mathematical formalisations$ 3his transparency zone is due to our &ody and sense organs limitations+ no matter %hat measurement instruments are prolonging these sense organs$ 3herefore+ %e have to deduce that the 4distance0 (understood as topological distance) &et%een the e>treme levels of Reality is $inite$ 5ut this finite distance does not mean a finite kno%ledge$ :>actly as a straight line segment contains infinity of points+ the finite topological distance could correspond to infinity of "evels of Reality$ &'e 7/2ect is defined+ in our model+ &y the ensem&le of "evels of Reality and its complementary non resistance zone$ We see therefore+ all the difference &et%een my approach of Reality and that of 5ernard d0:spagnat$ =or d0:spagnat it is in fact only one level of reality G the empirical reality G surrounded &y a diffuse zone of non resistance+ %hich corresponds to the veiled Real$ 3he veiled Real+ &y definition+ do not resist$ 9onse-uently+ it does not have the characteristics of a level of Reality$ 8nspired &y the phenomenology of :dmund 'usserl A6B+ 8 assert that the different "evels of Reality are accessi&le to the human kno%ledge due to the e>istence of different levels o$ #erce#tion+ %hich are in &iunivo-ue correspondence %ith the "evels of Reality$ 3hese levels of perception allo% a more general+ unifying+ inclusive vision of the Reality+ %ithout e>hausting it$ 3he coherence of the levels of perception assumes+ as in the case of "evels of Reality+ a zone of non-resistance to the perception$

10

Heisen/er( an t'e Levels o$ 0eality

3he ensem&le of levels of perception and its complementary zone of non resistance constitute+ in our approach+ the %u/2ect$ 3he t%o zones of non resistance+ of the K&,ect and of the Du&,ect+ must to &e i entical in order to have an information flu> a&le to circulate in a coherent manner &et%een the K&,ect and the Du&,ect$ 3his zone of non resistance corresponds to a third 8nteraction term &et%een the Du&,ect and the K&,ect+ %hich could not &e reduced neither to the K&,ect nor to the Du&,ect$ Kur ternary partition ODu&,ect+ K&,ect+ 8nteractionP is+ of course+ different from the &inary partition ODu&,ect+ K&,ectP of the classical realism$ 4. H"is"nb"r12s #od"! Eo%+ 8 %ant to analyse the correspondence &et%een my ideas and those of Werner 'eisen&erg (()0( ()67)+ e>pressed in his 8anuscri#t o$ 9.4*$ As %ritten in the e>cellent introduction to this &ook A7+ p$ (6B+ the a>e of the philosophical thinking of 'eisen&erg is constituted &y !t%o directory principles; the first one is that of the division in "evels of Reality+ corresponding to different o&,ectivity modes depending on the incidence of the kno%ledge process+ and the second one is that of the progressive erasure of the role played &y the ordinary concepts of space and time$# A7+ p$ 2*0B =or 'eisen&erg+ the reality is !the continuous fluctuation of the e>perience as gathered &y the conscience$ 8n this respect+ it is never %holly identifia&le to an isolated system! A7+ p$ (77B$ 3he reality could not &e reduced to su&stance$ =or us+ the physicists of today+ this is evident; the matter is the comple>us su&stance energy space time information$ As %ritten &y 9atherine 9hevalley !the semantic field of the %ord reality included for him everything given to us &y the e>perience taken in its largest meaning+ from the e>perience of the %orld to that of the souls modifications or of the autonomous signification of the sym&ols$# A7+ p$ (*5B

1(

Nicolescu"Euro#ean Journal o$ %cience an &'eolo(y 1 )*005+, 4, ,-.

'eisen&erg does not speak in an e>plicit manner a&out 4resistance0 in relation %ith reality+ &ut its meaning is fully present; !the reality %e can talk a&out G %rites 'eisen&erg G is never the reality 4in itself0+ &ut only a reality a&out %hich %e may have kno%ledge+ in many cases a reality to %hich %e have given form$# A7+ p$ 266B 3he reality &eing in constant fluctuation+ all %e can do is to understand partial aspects thanks to our thinking+ e>tracting processes+ phenomena+ and la%s$ 8n this conte>t+ is clear that one can0t have completeness; !We never can arrive at an e>act and complete portrait of reality# A7+ p$ 25@B G %rote 'eisen&erg$ 3he incompleteness of physics la%s is here&y present at 'eisen&erg+ even if he does not make any reference to ./del0s theorems$ =or him+ the reality is given as 4te>tures of different kind connections0+ as 4infinite a&undance0+ %ithout any ultimate fundament$ 'eisen&erg states ceaselessly+ in agreement %ith 'usserl+ 'eidegger and 9assirer (%hom he kne% personally)+ that one has to suppress any rigid distinction &et%een Du&,ect and K&,ect$ 'e also states that one has to end %ith the privileged reference on the outer material %orld and that the only approaching manner for the sense of reality is to accept its division in regions and levels$ 3he resem&lance %ith my o%n definition of Reality is striking$ 'eisen&erg distinguishes !regions of reality# ( er :ereic'

er

;ir<lic'<eit) from !levels of reality# ( ie %c'ic't er ;ir<lic'<eit)$

!We understand &y !regions of reality# G %rites 'eisen&erg G A$$$B an ensem&le of nomological connections$ 3hese regions are generated &y groups of relations$ 3hey overlap+ ad,ust+ cross+ al%ays respecting the principle of non contradiction$# 3he regions of reality are+ in fact+ strictly e-uivalent to the levels of organization of the systemic thinking$ 'eisen&erg is conscious that the simple consideration of the e>istence regions of reality is not satisfactory &ecause they %ill put on the same plan the classical and the -uantum mechanics$ 8t is the essential reason that leads him to
14

Heisen/er( an t'e Levels o$ 0eality

regrouping these reality regions in different "evels of Reality$ 'is motivation is therefore identical %ith mine$ 'eisen&erg regroups the numerous regions of reality in three distinct levels$ !8t is clear %rite 'eisen&erg G that the ordering of the regions has to su&stitute the gross division of %orld into a su&,ective reality and an o&,ective one and to stretch itself &et%een these poles of su&,ect and o&,ect in such a manner that at its inferior limit are the regions %here %e can completely o&,ectify$ 8n continuation+ one has to ,oin regions %here the states of things could not &e completely separated from the kno%ledge process during %hich %e are identifying them$ =inally+ on the top+ have to &e the "evels of Reality %here the states of things are created only in conne>ion %ith the kno%ledge process$! A7+ p$ 362B 'eisen&erg0s approach is compati&le %ith the Relativity 2rinciple present in my approach$ 9atherine 9hevalley underlines that 'eisen&erg suppresses the rigid distinction &et%een !e>act sciences of the o&,ective real %orld and the ine>act sciences of the su&,ective %orld# and he refuses !any hierarchy founded on the privilege of certain nomological conne>ion forms+ or on a region of the real considered more o&,ective than the others# A7+ p$ (52B$ 3he first "evel of Reality+ in the 'eisen&erg model+ corresponds to the states of things+ %hich are o&,ectified independently of the kno%ledge process$ 'e situates at this first level the classical mechanics+ the electromagnetism and the t%o relativity theories of :instein+ in other %ords the classical physics$ 3he second "evel of Reality corresponds to the states of things insepara&le from the kno%ledge process$ 'e situates here the -uantum mechanics+ the &iology and the consciousness sciences$ =inally+ the third "evel of Reality corresponds to the states of things created in conne>ion %ith the kno%ledge process$ 'e situates on this "evel of Reality philosophy+ art+ politics+ 4.od0 metaphors+ religious e>perience and inspiration e>perience$

1%

Nicolescu"Euro#ean Journal o$ %cience an &'eolo(y 1 )*005+, 4, ,-.

8f the first t%o "evels of Reality of 'eisen&erg entirely correspond to my o%n definition+ his third level seems to me to mi> levels and non levels (i$e$ non resistance zones)$ 8n fact+ philosophy+ art and politics represent academic disciplines+ %hich are conforming to the intrinsic resistance of a "evel of Reality$ :ven the 4.od0 metaphors+ if they are integrated to a theology+ could correspond to a "evel of Reality; theology is+ after all+ a human science as the other ones$ 5ut the religious e>perience and the inspiration e>perience are difficult to assimilate to a "evel of Realityl$ 3hey rather correspond to the passage &et%een different "evels of Reality in the non resistance zone$ We have to underline+ in this conte>t+ that 'eisen&erg proves a high respect for religion$ 8n relation %ith the pro&lem of .od0s e>istence+ he %rote; !3his &elief is not at all an illusion+ &ut is only the conscious acceptance of a tension never realised in reality+ tension %hich is o&,ective and %hich advances in an independent %ay of the humans+ that %e are+ and %hich is yet at its turn nothing &ut the content of our soul+ transformed &y our soul$# A7+ p$ 235B =or 'eisen&erg+ %orld and .od are indissolu&le linked; !this opening to the %orld %hich is at the same time the 4%orld of .od0+ finally also remains the highest happiness that the %orld could offer us; the conscience of &eing home$# A7+ p$ 3@6B 'e remarks that the Niddle Age made the choice of religion and the JF88 th century made the choice of science+ &ut today any criteria for values vanished$ K&viously+ there is an important difference &et%een the t%o definitions of the "evel of Reality notion$ 3he a&sence of resistance and the a&sence of the discontinuity in the 'eisen&erg0s definition e>plain this difference$ !3he concepts are+ so to say+ the privileged points %here the different "evels of Reality are inter%eaving# G %rote 'eisen&erg$ 'e specifies on; !When one is -uestioning the nomological conne>ions of reality+ these last ones are found every time inserted into a determined reality levelH it could not at all &e interpreted differently from the concept of reality 4level0 (it is possi&le to speak a&out the effect of a level onto another one only &y using very generally the 4effect0 concept)$ Kn the other hand+ the different levels are connected in the

1&

Heisen/er( an t'e Levels o$ 0eality

associated ideas and %ords and %hich+ from the &eginning+ are in simultaneous relation %ith the numerous conne>ions#$ A7+ p$ 256B 3his is vague enough and necessarily introduces confusion &et%een the organisation levels and the levels of Reality$ 8f the levels are 4inter%eaving0+ one can0t understand ho% is possi&le to introduce a classification of the levels of Reality$ 3he nomological conne>ions characterise as %ell the reality regions and the levels of Reality$ 3herefore+ they are not sufficient in order to distinguish 4region0 from 4level0$ 8n fact+ 'eisen&erg does not e>plicitly impose the non contradiction principle that could lead him to the discovery of the "evels of Reality discontinuity$ 'o%ever+ the discontinuity is mentioned a fe% times in the 8anuscri#t o$ 9.4* &ut only in relation %ith history; history of representations+ history of the individual+ history of humanity$ 'eisen&erg also insists on the intuition role; !Knly the intuitive thinking G %rote 'eisen&erg G can pass over the a&yss that e>ists &et%een the concepts system already kno%n and the ne% concepts systemH the formal deduction is helpless on thro%ing a &ridge over this a&yss$# A7+ p$ 27(B 5ut 'eisen&erg doesn0t dra% the logical conclusion that is imposed &y the helplessness of the formal thinking; only the non resistance of our e>periences+ representations+ descriptions+ images or mathematical formalisations could &ring a &ridge over the a&yss &et%een t%o zones of resistance$ 3he non resistance is the key of understanding the discontinuity &et%een t%o immediately neigh&our levels of Reality$ 5ut this important difference &et%een the t%o definitions of the "evels of Reality+ that of 'eisen&erg and mine+ do not erase the motivation of introducing these levels+ motivation %hich is identical in &oth cases$ 8n order to finish+ 8 %ant to make a fe% &rief considerations on the political and intellectual conte>t in %hich %as %ritten &'e 8anuscri#t o$ 9.4*$ 1uring the Eazism+ the anti Demitism included the attacks against the relativity theory and the -uantum mechanics+ vie%ed as products of the Western decadence$ 3he promoters of =eutsc'e P'ysi< presupposed that there is only one

1'

Nicolescu"Euro#ean Journal o$ %cience an &'eolo(y 1 )*005+, 4, ,-.

level of reality$ 8t is strange to find as leaders of =eutsc'e P'ysi< t%o remarka&le physicists; 2hilipp "enard (Eo&el prize in ()05) and Qohannes Dtark (Eo&el prize in ()())$ 3he anticonceptualism of the =eutsc'e P'ysi< holders+ at %ar against 4the Qe%ish physics0+ %as virulent$ 3he kno%ledge had to discover the uni-ue reality &y a language near to the intuition$ According to them+ the e>periment %as in front of the theory$ 3heir &lack sheep %as the a&stract space of the -uantum events+ %hile+ for them+ the space time could only that of our ordinary e>perience+ %ith four dimensions$ 8t is other%ise interesting to find the attachment of totalitarian systems to the four dimensional space time$ 3here is an astonishing passage in 8aterialis1 an e1#iriocriticis1 (()0))+ %here "enin attacked the physical theories implying a multidimensional space time+ proclaiming that one can make revolutions only in four dimensions$ We may also add here that the notion of "evels of Reality is also mining the fundaments of the dialectical materialism$ 9atherine 9hevalley %as right to %rite; !the 8anuscri#t o$ 9.4* appeared as an effort to make #'iloso#'ically i1#ossi/le an ideological operation as that of =eutsc'e P'ysi<# A7+ p$ )*B$ 3he manuscript has circulated among the .erman physicists and students$ 3o speak a&out "evels of Reality in the conte>t of the =eutsc'e P'ysi< fight against 4Qe%ish physics0 %as e-uivalent %ith a true act of resistance against the national socialism$ R"+"r"nc"s
A(B 5$ dR:spagnat, > la 0ec'erc'e u 0el+ .authier Fillars+ 2aris+ ()@(+$ 6) (02$ A2B 5$ Eicolescu+ 3e NillSnaire+ 1 (()@2) 7@$ A3B 5$ Eicolescu+ Nous, la #articule et le 1on e+ "e Nail+ 2aris+ ()@5$ A*B 5$ Eicolescu+ Levels o$ ?o1#le4ity an Levels o$ 0eality+ in &'e E1er(ence o$ ?o1#le4ity in 8at'e1atics, P'ysics, ?'e1istry an :iolo(y+ 5$ 2ullman (ed$)+ 2rinceton Cniversity 2ress+ 2rinceton, ())7+ 3)3$ A5B W$ 3hirring+ =o t'e Laws o$ Nature Evolve@+ in ;'at is Li$e@ - &'e Ne4t Fi$ty Aears! %#eculations on t'e Future o$ :iolo(y, N$2$ Nurphy and "$A$ KREeil (eds$)+ 9am&ridge Cniversity 2ress+ 9am&ridge+ ())5$

1-

Heisen/er( an t'e Levels o$ 0eality

A7B W$ 'eisen&erg+ P'iloso#'ie B La 1anuscrit e 9.4*+ translated from .erman and introduction &y 9$ 9hevalley+ Deuil+ 2aris+ ())@$ A6B :$ 'usserl+ 8 itations cartsiennes+ translated from .erman &y .$ 2eiffer and :$ "evinas+ Frin+ 2aris+ ()77$

1.