Tuesday, July 9, 2013


Prussian blue skies at dusk, sinking into a burnt sienna horizon.

Dipping deeper and deeper into the seemingly unknowable world (if you can call it that!) of Quantum Physics and Quantum Mechanics. Nothing is as it seems, a notion which is at once unsettling and also outrageously thrilling.

An acquaintance stopped by work today, and when this science subject-of-the-day was casually mentioned, the friend said, "Oh, I'm currently reading The Dancing Wu Li Masters ."

I'm reading this, and so is Melinda.
What are the odds, the probability, that a book published in 1979 would be the current choice of reading material for three artists who just happen to be in the same room?

Evidence, indeed, that other forces are at work.


From a Wikipedia article on Synchronicity:

Even at Jung's presentation of his work on synchronicity in 1951 at an Eranos lecture, his ideas on synchronicity were evolving. Following discussions with both Albert Einstein and Wolfgang Pauli, Jung believed that there were parallels between synchronicity and aspects of relativity theory and quantum mechanics. Jung was transfixed by the idea that life was not a series of random events but rather an expression of a deeper order, which he and Pauli referred to as Unus mundus. This deeper order led to the insights that a person was both embedded in an orderly framework and was the focus of that orderly framework and that the realisation of this was more than just an intellectual exercise, but also having elements of a spiritual awakening. From the religious perspective, synchronicity shares similar characteristics of an "intervention of grace". Jung also believed that in a person's life, synchronicity served a role similar to that of dreams, with the purpose of shifting a person's egocentric conscious thinking to greater wholeness.


And finally, something (perhaps) to make you laugh:

Is that a cookie falling from your mouth? Or is it just a Fig Newton of my imagination?
        —She said, with gravity.


  1. Jung, Einstein, and Pauli, may well have been right, but I still prefer to believe in randomness.

  2. Does it count if it's in my to read pile? Along with at least 20 others on memoir, physics and quantum mechanics? I feel like I need to start reading soon, before even more of the physics is beyond my grasp, and before I forget the stories I wanted to tell in the first place.
    Nothing is as it seems, a notion which is at once unsettling and also outrageously thrilling.
    That's the concept that boggles my mind too, that everything is in constant motion at the most micro and macro level, it makes me dizzy to think on it.
    Happy reading, maybe I'll pull out my copy soon.

    1. Mel,
      Please, if you would be so kind, do send along some recommended titles from your to-read pile!!
      So delighted that we share this passion/obsession.

  3. Oh, god, I do love a discussion of synchronicity and Jung. I often throw the i Ching and have an unabashed reliance on it to make decisions. That might sound kooky, and if it does, please know that the cookie quote did indeed make me laugh.

    1. E.,
      Not kooky/cookie!!
      (I'm a tarot girl meself.)