No development of modern science has had a more profound impact on human thinking than the advent of quantum theory. Wrenched out of centuries-old thought patterns, physicists of a generation ago found themselves compelled to embrace a new metaphysics. The distress which this reorientation caused continues to the present day. Basically physicists have suffered a severe loss: their hold on reality.
Bryce DeWitt
Neill Graham
One of the best-kept secrets of science is that physicists have lost their grip on reality.
News of the reality crisis hardly exists outside the physics community. What shuts out the public is partly a language barrier – the mathematical formalism that facilitates communication between scientists is incomprehensible to outsiders – and partly the human tendency of physicists to publicize their successes while soft-pedaling their confusions and uncertainties.
..
The Copenhagen Interpretation
No one influenced more our notion of what the quantum world is really about than Danish physicist Niels Bohr, and it is Bohr who puts forth one of the quantum physics’ most outrageous claims: that there is no deep reality. Bohr does not deny the evidence of his senses. The world we see around us is real enough, he affirms, but it floats on a world that is not as real. Everyday phenomena are themselves built not out of phenomena but out of an utterly different kind of being.
Far from being a crank or minority position, “There is no deep reality” represents the prevailing doctrine of establishment physics. Because this quantum reality was developed at Niels Bohr’s Copenhagen institute, it is called the “Copenhagen interpretation”. Undaunted by occasional challenges by mavericks of realist persuasion, the majority of physicists swear at least nominal allegiance to Bohr’s anti-realist creed. What more glaring indication of the depth of the reality crisis than the official rejection of reality itself by the bulk of the physics community?
…
Wener Heisenberg, the Christopher Columbus of quantum theory, first to set foot on the new mathematical world, took an equally tough stand against reality-nostalgic physicists such as Einstein when he wrote:
“The hope that new experiments will lead us back to objective events in time and space is about as well founded as the hope of discovering the end of the world in the unexplored regions of the Antarctic.”The writings of Bohr and Heisenberg have been criticized as obscure and open to many interpretations. Recently Cornell physicists N David Mermin neatly summed up Bohr’s anti-realist position in words that leave little room for misunderstanding: “We now know that the moon is demonstratably not there when nobody looks”.
ref: Herbert, Nick (1987). Quantum Reality: Beyond the New Physics. Anchor Books, New York.
the truth on 
m.a.kidwai,CME/IND.RLY.(retd.) on 
Ash’arism:
Allah is creating every single thing at every single moment.
Bismillahi Rahmani Rahim
As salam alaikum Yursil
Now the scientists should look again to our great masters of tasawwuf that long ago knew what they are just starting to think about.
Salams
Nureddin
“In 1982 a remarkable event took place. At the University of Paris a research team led by physicist Alain Aspect performed what may turn out to be one of the most important experiments of the 20th century. You did not hear about it on the evening news. In fact, unless you are in the habit of reading scientific journals you probably have never even heard Aspect’s name, though there are some who believe his discovery may change the face of science.
Aspect and his team discovered that under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them. It doesn’t matter whether they are 10 feet or 10 billion miles apart.
Somehow each particle always seems to know what the other is doing. The problem with this feat is that it violates Einstein’s long-held tenet that no communication can travel faster than the speed of light. Since traveling faster than the speed of light is tantamount to breaking the time barrier, this daunting prospect has caused some physicists to try to come up with elaborate ways to explain away Aspect’s findings. But it has inspired others to offer even more radical explanations.
University of London physicist David Bohm, for example, believes Aspect’s findings imply that objective reality does not exist, that despite its apparent solidity the universe is at heart a phantasm, a gigantic and splendidly detailed hologram”.
(From: http://keelynet.com/biology/reality.htm )
And:
“In 1982, Alain Aspect and a team of physicists were able to actually carry-out the polarization experiment that Einstein had proposed nearly fifty years before (Talbot, 1991, p.52-53). Photon pairs were created by heating calcium atoms with a laser, and then allowed to travel in opposite directions. Aspect discovered that the polarization of one photon immediately polarized the other–just as quantum theory had predicted. The photons were somehow communicating with each other at speeds exceeding the speed of light, or nonlocal connections existed between the electrons, or the separateness of the particles themselves was an illusion.
Bohm (1987) concluded that the implications of nonlocal connections are that objective reality itself is entirely a construct of the human brain. The true nature of reality remains hidden from us. Our brains operate as a holographic frequency analyzer, decoding projections from a more fundamental dimension. Bohm concludes that even space and time are constructs of the human brain, and they may not exist as we perceive them”.
(From: http://www.survey-software-solutions.com/walonick/reality.htm )
This is actually not a discussion limited to physics…it crosses a number of disciplines. Phenomenology (philosophy) deals with this…it may hark back ideas of the Mutazila but, its a little less “certain” than any creed…I’ve also read some stuff relating to Neuroscience which infers, much of the same conclusions.
No “absolute” statement on reality can be made…whether you call it deep reality or whatever, because ultimately, observation means, we got to look at WHO is observing…we are. But how do we observe? Can we be deceived? What sort of things affect perception? In light of these ideas, the word “miracle” then becomes meaningless by its very definition!
Your discussion explored how we observed matter (physical reality)…but everything, comes back to and down to our minds. Consciousness, as we know it cannot be understood. No one can “create” consciousness, or understand the stuff it is made of, how the mind functions and none can adequately define it in easy terms…this is where it enters the world of Psychology.
In sha Allah, if you would like I could write a detailed post on my blog one of these days, sourcing and quoting…real academics and scientist are much more humble and sincere than Dawkins or Hitchens, and recognize their place in the universe…ultimately knowing little to nothing.
Nureddin:
Nice to see I’m not the only one who reads Keelynet!