Quantum Drummer

From Ancient Greece to Modern Times

The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.

• F. Scott Fitzgerald

The first indications of the appearance of the concept of Complementarity in Western Culture is found in the town of Ephesus in ancient Greece, also known as the birthplace of Western Philosophy. Heraclitus (540-480 B.C.) is probably the first philosopher that described that “the world could not exist without the clash of opposing currents” (Kelso & Engstrøm, 2008, p. 19). There is also evidence that prior to the Greeks, shamans from indigenous tribes in Siberia held the belief that nature was divided “into two coexistent worlds, the physical and the spiritual.” In older cultures, like the Chinese, there is clear evidence of the use of the concept, as it is found in the Tao te Ching (600-400 B.C.E) which indicates: “The Tao begets one. One begets two. Two begets three. And three beget the ten thousand things. The ten thousand things carry yin and embrace yang. They achieve harmony by combining these forces.” (Kelso & Engstrøm, 2008, p. 20).

In modern times, Complementarity, as mentioned before, has been mainly tied to quantum physics and the work of Niels Bohr in the work related to the duality wave ~ particle as part of the development of the quantum model of the atom. There is quite strong evidence that Bohr was able to bring Complementarity into Physics due to his previous education in Psychology, mainly received from his mentor, Professor Harald Høffding and his cousin, the Psychologist Edgar Rubin, with basis on the ideas of the great Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard. Regardless, of how much influence did Bohr get from Psychology, there is also evidence that the American Psychologist William James worked with the concept in the last part of the 19^th Century in the analysis of the condition of split consciousness.

In order to develop his main work in physics: the “Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics”, Bohr had to step away from the Classical Physics paradigm, action that was courageous and risky. The keepers of the Dogma of Physics, including Albert Einstein, consistently rejected Bohr’s work, and Einstein never accepted Bohr’s work. No matter how many challenges Quantum mechanics has had in the past hundred years, this theory continues to be proven right, and is one of the two major pillars of Physics, together with Einstein’s Relativity. The Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics has its basis on the Complementarity found in the dual nature of light, which establishes that light maintains the characteristics of a wave AND of a particle simultaneously, depending on the method of measurement that is being used.

Bohr always considered that Complementarity was much more than just a tool to be used in Quantum Physics, and in the last 40 years of his life he focused his efforts in expanding the knowledge of Complementarity in other fields of human knowledge. His efforts achieved limited results, the most important being his influence on Biology through Francis Crick, co-discoverer of the DNA structure, and Max Delbrück, considered the father of the field of Microbiology.  By the end of the 20^th Century the Concept of Complementarity has evolved into other methods, particularly Coordination Dynamics and Metastability, which are used mainly in Neuroscience and Brain system analysis (Kelso & Engstrøm, 2008).

The power of the idea of the use of complementary pairs, and the mental model of Both/And and Integration, rather than Either/Or and Differentiation, has been limited.

The Encouraging Work of Frank Wilczek

In 21^st Century science, the concept of Complementarity has received limited interest. As much as Quantum Physics, has been proven time after time, including its most mysterious phenomena, such as quantum entanglement, and the complementarity nature of light, the old materialistic, “Newtonian” paradigm is still dominating the mental model of people. Yes, in general terms, physicists accept the fact that quantum theory is correct, but they mostly prefer to change the subject, whenever possible. The power of the left-hemisphere of the brain is alive and well. There is much at stake for Western Culture to engage in a paradigm change and leave materialism, reductionism and causality, and allow wider mental models of uncertainty, complex and self-organizing systems, and non-causality to be openly accepted. Einstein’s “Spooky action at a distance” still generates discomfort in the dogma keepers one hundred years later, and as is always the case in these situations, they prefer to ignore the facts and change the conversation subject.

However, there are some courageous individuals that refuse to let Complementarity go away, and recognize the value that the concept can bring to human knowledge.

Recently, it has been a pleasant surprise to learn about the work and publications of Frank Wilczek. Dr. Wilczek is the Herman Feshbach Professor of Physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2004 for his work as a graduate student on the discovery of asymptotic freedom in quarks, in the field of Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD). Two of his books: A Beautiful Question: Finding Nature’s Deep Design (2015) and Fundamentals: Ten Keys to Reality (2021), together with multiple publications in Scientific American and Brainpickings.org present very powerful ideas of a new way of looking to nature and reality to the general public. These are the type of publications that can help in showing the potential for a new paradigm, steps that can allow for changes in mindset that can help individuals, communities and societies to embrace more open-minded methods, providing opportunities and benefits to all humanity in the 21^st Century.

In his book: Fundamentals, Wilczek (2021) describes how “Complementarity is an attitude toward experiences and problems that I’ve found eye-opening and extremely helpful. It has literally changed my mind. Through it, I’ve become larger: more open to imagination, and more tolerant.” (p. 206). This is a very powerful statement, particularly coming from a leader of the field of Physics. The most dramatic difference that I find in this comment when comparing it to the traditional way of thinking about Complementarity is the description of it as “an attitude toward experiences.” Normally the way that scientists talk about Complementarity is just a mechanical definition that describes how pairs of opposites combine to describe a certain element, but in this case, Wilczek is giving us the message that Complementarity is a way of thinking, a way of looking at nature with the lens of a new paradigm, and on top of that, he indicates how this has made him grow and opened his mind, as well as make him “more tolerant.” What is the importance of this comment about him becoming more tolerant? To me is the affirmation that Complementarity is a way to break the old paradigm, and to break the old dogma. More tolerant to new ideas, new opportunities, and tolerant to the possibility that through Complementarity some of the old limitations of the dogma could be broken.

Another important element discussed by Wilczek is the following:

“The world is simple and complex, logical and weird, lawful and chaotic. Fundamental understanding does not resolve those dualities. Indeed, as we have seen, it highlights and deepens them. You can’t do justice to physical reality without taking complementarity to heart.

Humans, too, are wrapped in dualities. We are tiny and enormous, ephemeral and long-lasting, knowledgeable and ignorant. You can’t do justice to the human condition without taking complementarity to heart” (p. 207).

This is a beautiful way to describe the condition of both physical reality and human condition as full of dichotomies that need complementarity to understand. It does accept the complexity of the world, not forcing, as the old dogma tries, to insist that nature is simple, therefore only simple answers are true. As I have mentioned in previous publications, nature has simple phenomena with simple descriptions, and complex phenomena with complex descriptions. The universe is too complex to insist that only simple answers are valid. Also, this description recognizes human nature, giving it a very special position, but also acknowledging its limitations. In this paragraph, Wilczek summarizes the complementary nature in a simple and clear way.

Wilczek proposes two basic messages of complementarity as follows:

1 – The questions you want answered mold the concepts you should use

2 – Different, even incompatible, ways of analyzing the same thing can each offer valid insights (p. 218).

These two items, again, provide a very simple but powerful view on the benefits that complementarity can provide. Particularly item 2: by describing the importance of different and “even incompatible” approaches as offering valid insights, Wilczek is proposing that there is value in breaking the artificial silos created by the way knowledge has been divided in incompatible categories.

Another important reflection proposed by Wilzcek indicates:

“…complementarity is an invitation to consider different perspectives. Unfamiliar questions, unfamiliar facts, or unfamiliar attitudes, in the spirit of complementarity, give us opportunities to try out new points of view and to learn from what they reveal. They foster mind expansion” (p. 219).

In closing his reflections on complementarity, Wilzcek mentions: “The world is complex beyond our ability to grasp, and rich in mysteries, but we know a lot, and are learning more. Humility is in order, but so is self-respect” (p. 221).

The dichotomy Humility ~ Self-Respect, a balanced way to continue our search for a new paradigm for the 21^st Century.