Is Physics Beginning to Look Like Advaita Vedanta?
Updated: 6 days ago
What Stephen Hawking, Multiple Realities, and an Ancient Indian Philosophy Made Me Wonder About the Nature of Reality
I recently started reading Stephen Hawking's The Grand Design. I expected physics, but what I found was philosophy.
After the first two chapters, I began pondering a question much larger than physics: What is reality? More intriguingly, is the reality we experience the same as ultimate reality?
I am still learning about Advaita Vedanta, so I do not claim to have found an answer. However, something in Hawking's work reminded me of a central idea in Advaita: what appears to us as reality may not be the complete or ultimate picture. This connection sparked my desire to explore it further.
The Observer Changes the Question
We often assume reality is simply "out there." A tree is a tree. Time is time. Space is space. An event occurs, and everyone should agree on what happened.
Modern physics has made this intuition uncomfortable. Einstein's theory of relativity showed that measurements of space and time depend on the observer's frame of reference. Quantum mechanics pushed this further, challenging our classical assumptions about what "physical reality" means.
Hawking refers to this as model-dependent realism, the idea that our descriptions of reality depend on the models we use to understand and predict what we observe. This does not imply that reality is imaginary. Instead, it suggests that our description of reality may not be reality itself. That distinction resonated with me.
What If What We Experience Is Only an Appearance?
This is where my thoughts turned to Advaita Vedanta.
Advaita is centered around non-duality, literally meaning "not two." At its core is the idea that ultimate reality, Brahman, is not fundamentally separate from the individual self, Atman. Our ordinary experience suggests otherwise. I am here, you are there; this is my body, that is another's; this is my success, that is yours. Advaita questions whether this apparent separateness represents the deepest level of reality.
The concept of Maya is central here. It is often translated as "illusion," but this can be misleading. A better starting point is that Maya is the way reality appears to us through the limits of our perception and understanding. The world we experience is not dismissed as unreal; Advaita simply asks whether what we experience is the ultimate reality. Suddenly, I found myself thinking about Hawking again.
Are These Really the Same Idea?
Probably not, and here we need to be cautious. Physics and Advaita Vedanta serve different purposes. Physics operates through observation, mathematics, experiments, and testable predictions. In contrast, Advaita is a philosophical and spiritual tradition focused on consciousness, self, and ultimate reality.
Thus, it would be incorrect to claim that "quantum physics proves Advaita Vedanta." It does not. Nor does model-dependent realism establish the truth of Advaita.
However, we can still explore whether there is an interesting resonance between them. Both challenge the comforting assumption that everyday experience provides a complete picture of reality. This, in itself, is a fascinating starting point.
The Wave and the Ocean
An old metaphor helps me grasp the Advaita idea of oneness. Imagine a wave in the ocean. We can point to it and say: this is a wave. It has a shape and a location. It rises and falls. It appears to be an individual thing. However, the wave has no existence apart from the ocean; it is not separate from the water that constitutes it. At one level, we can meaningfully discuss the wave as an individual phenomenon. At another level, it is simply the ocean taking a particular form.
Could our individual existence be something like that? We experience ourselves as separate. But what if that separation is not fundamental? This is one of the ideas in Advaita that I find genuinely beautiful. It raises an extraordinary question: if everything is ultimately one, why do we experience ourselves as separate?
What About Free Will?
This connects to another thought that the book prompted.
We perceive ourselves as independent decision-makers. I decide, you decide, governments decide, companies decide. Yet, every human decision unfolds within a physical universe governed by natural laws. Our brains contain billions of neurons; our bodies hold trillions of cells; chemical and electrical processes run continuously beneath our awareness. We do not decide when our cells divide, when our hearts beat, or when we age. We still do not fully understand how consciousness emerges from the brain's physical processes.
And yet we feel something very strongly: I am choosing.
So, what is free will? Is it an independent force within us or merely a feeling produced by the brain? If every person is choosing within the same physical universe, perhaps the messiness of human civilization becomes clearer: billions of seemingly separate centers of choice, constantly colliding—my interests against yours, my freedom against another's. Advaita offers a radically different perspective: what if the apparent separation itself is part of the problem?
The Mystery of the Universe
In 1929, Edwin Hubble's observations provided compelling evidence that the universe is expanding. Almost a century later, we are still deciphering what that truly means. We have discovered galaxies billions of light-years away, detected gravitational waves, and identified exoplanets. We have built theories of extraordinary precision. Yet, we still do not know what dark matter actually is or what dark energy ultimately represents. We lack a complete theory unifying gravity with quantum mechanics. We do not understand why the universe has the laws and constants it does or, most fundamentally, why there is something rather than nothing.
Every generation pushes the boundaries of knowledge a little further. And with each advance, the boundary of mystery seems to recede even further. This is strangely humbling.
Perhaps the Real Lesson Is Intellectual Humility
Maybe this is where physics and philosophy intersect—not in their answers, but in their ability to make us question our assumptions. Physics tells us the universe is stranger than everyday experience suggests. Philosophy urges us to examine the assumptions behind that experience. Advaita prompts us to question the very distinction between the observer and what is observed.
None of these perspectives provides a final answer. Perhaps that is precisely the point. I am not writing this because I believe modern physics proves an ancient Indian philosophy. I have not discovered that, and I do not think anyone has.
I write this because the questions seem worth asking:
Could there be different valid descriptions of the same reality?
Is the reality we experience fundamentally different from ultimate reality?
Why do we experience ourselves as separate?
What is consciousness—a product of matter or something deeper?
If the universe operates on laws we do not fully understand, what does that mean for free will?
I do not know. But that seems like a good place for a student to begin—not with a conclusion, but with a question.
And perhaps the most interesting education starts when we become comfortable saying: I don't know. Let me find out.
About the Author
Dr. SP Mishra is the Founder of India Career Centre, a Hyderabad-based career guidance, study-abroad consulting, and educational research organization. He writes and speaks on career decision-making, higher education, skills, employability, and the future of work in India. He also hosts the India Career Centre Podcast. Connect with him on LinkedIn.
References
The Grand Design, Stephen Hawking, Leonard Mlodinow
An Introduction to Indian Philosophy, Satishchandra Chatterjee, Dhirendramohan Datta
You may watch the following short video as well.
Comments