So are the Vedic chaps right when they say that the UF is a field of pure awareness that creates the universe on a moment by moment basis and without affecting the outcome of that universe?
Possible, but I think it's an example of an analogy with the flat field of awareness you get when meditating sometimes. I don't believe that subjectively gained knowledge is reliable as we've seen no experimental confirmation for it. An attempt was made to show that the three gunas were in fact the three forces that need unification in modern physics, the weak and strong nuclear forces and gravity. Nice try, but it came back to the old hide-the-proton game. String theory gets round this by inventing many extra dimensions for inconvenient particles to fall into. All well and good, but we quite obviously don't live in a 9 - 14 dimensional universe so the dimensions were wrapped up real small so they don't affect our everyday lives. In fact whatever experiment you try and do if the prediction requires the creation of new particles you can simply claim that we are living in a different string theory universe! Which is clever if you don't ever want to be proved wrong but it doesn't seem like reat science. And it's only ever going to raise more questions because string theory, being dependent on a solid backdrop of time and space that Einstein tells us doesn't exist, isn't fundamental anyway. It's also a long way from the beautiful simplicity of the unified field spoken of in the Vedas. So... Q: Is God the unified field? A: John Hagelin says yes (OK he says consciouness is the UF but it's the same thing) but his ideas aren't the same as the vedic prediction. In fact they are so much more complex, untested and maybe even untestable that it's clear the analogy between strings and gunas has been stretched too far. As the only "evidence" comes from meditation, it's going to have to be a "Don't Know" on this one, but then it seems like such a wild extrapolation from super-strings to subjective contemplative states that it's probably better to say: Why bother even asking the question? Because it's another possible, if bizarre, consequence of QP as it's currently understood. Don't believe a word of it myself.
