Bibliographic record
Abstract
The last century has witnessed a remarkable conflation of thought between contemporary physics and the Jewish mystical tradition or Kabbalah. Nowhere does this merger resonate more cogently than with ideas promulgated by the influential and iconoclastic physicist, David Bohm. Notwithstanding the radically different lexicons invoked, there exist striking conceptual parallels between the ‘implicate-explicate orders’ and ‘holographic universe’ of Bohmian mechanics and the fundamental Kabbalistic principles of Enclothement, Interinclusion, and Interpenetration. In this confluence of Bohmian mechanics and Jewish mysticism, and drawing on additional insights derived from mainstream quantum and relativistic physics, a Kabbalistic ontology of consciousness incorporating the tenets of panpsychism and panentheism is presented. The phenomenon of synchronicities is analysed through the lenses of Kabbalistic panpsychism and Bohmian physics to underscore further the conceptual homologies that exist between these disparate disciplines. Potential implications of this exercise for epistemology, science, and religion are briefly considered.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".