JUNG AND PAULI A Meeting of Rare Minds BY EVERLEY ABRISKIE B Z Readers of the Swiss psychiatrist C. G. Jung are more familiar with Wolfgang Pauli’s unconscious than with his waking life and achievement. ThroughJung’sPsychology andAlchemy—anexpositionof“theproblemof individuation” and “normal development ... in a highly intelligent person”—depthpsychologistshaveknowntheNobellaureate’sdreams,not hisprofessionalgenius.Meanwhile,thescientistswhocontinuePauli’spur- suit of the nature and composition of the material universe know little of the quantum physicist’s depth exploration of his unconscious, his fascina- tion with the interface of matter with psyche, and his collaboration with Junginprobingconnectionsthatappeartobeacausal. Inturn,manywhoknowJung’sstudiesofpsychicphenomenaarenotso at ease with his development of the parallels between psychic process and the material matrix in which the mental is embedded. For those who lack Jung’sscientificbackgroundandgrasp,hisclaimofanempiricalmethod,his pursuitofthemetaphorsofalchemy,andhisevocationofanalogiesinphys- icstopsychicmechanismshaveseemedfar-fetched,tangential,difficult,or unnecessarilyencumbering.YetJungpersistedinpursuingthephysicaland meditative experiments of the alchemists and in perusing the findings of contemporary scientists. Throughout his career, Jung argued that his work would carry the gravitas of the relevant and enduring only if it had both a placeinthehistoryofthoughtandacontextinthemoderndisciplines. This collection of letters between Jung and Pauli offers insightful infor- mationaboutarelationshipthatwasvaluableforbothanalyticalpsychology andquantumphysics,tworealmsofinvestigationthatatfirstseemtohave nopointofcontact.Historically,physicalscienceandreligionhavefocused, from different perspectives, on the sources of the universe and its inhabi- tants. Religion and psychology, in a similar fashion, have had overlapping concernsaboutthenatureofexistence.Sciencetraditionallyseeksthemost fundamental, objective, and universal facts by confirming and measuring external reality through experiments. Psychology, however, while presum- ing both norms and anomalies in its dynamic descriptions and differential Revisedfromtheoriginal,“JungandPauli:ASubtleAsymmetry,”TheJournalofAnalytical Psychology40(1995):531–53. xxvii INTRODUCTION diagnoses,isconcernedprimarilywithsubjectiveexperienceandindividual apprehension. As psychology describes psychic contents with psychic means, psyche is subjectandobject,mediumandmessage,sourceandgoal;thereisnopoint ofobservationoutsidethehumanpsyche.Physics,bycontrast,pursuesma- terial reality both via and, to the greatest degree possible, beyond the humanexperience,butitalsousesthementalmediuminbothitsconcep- tions and inventions. While it utilizes impersonal and unvalenced mea- sures,thequestionsandthustheproofsoriginateinandaredependenton the human mind. In this sense, our grasp of the universe is essentially an- thropic. Also, as a contemporary Nobel laureate, the particle physicistSte- ven Weinberg, reminds us,“we cannotrequire thatallexperiments should givesensibleresults,”because“bydefinitionthereisnoobserveroutsidethe universewhocanexperimentonit.”1 ThelettersbetweenPauliandJungrevealtwolargemindsinatwenty-six- year correspondence about fields of expertise that,it could be argued, saw themostextensivedevelopmentsintheWesternintellectinthetwentieth century. Each scholar was intent on moving the boundaries between the knownandunknowninhisowntradition.Eachhadtheimaginationtocross thelineswithin,beyond,andbetweentheirdisciplinesinordertosearchfor the links between the observable and the unknowable. Each, too, had the humilityessentialtolookforprecedentsinthepast,aswellasthearrogance necessarytoriskspeculationaboutthefuture. Eachthinkerwasconcernedwiththeeffectoftheparticularandspecific ontheuniversal.Jung’sconcernwasindividualexperience:thepsyche’sper- ception and conception, emotion, and imagination regarding inner and outer realities. He focused on the individual’s psychic development as it interrelated with recurring, and thus collective, predispositions and repre- sentations of human experience. He was especially curious about the ways in which images produced by the psyche become unprovable butassumed beliefs.Paulisoughttoprovetheoriesaboutthenatureofthetiniestparti- cles in the ever-extending energy patterns of the material universe and to find the formulas and means of measurement that would reveal the uni- verse’s past, present, andfuture.Whilefocusingonthemostfundamental elementsintheworld’smakeup,asaquantumtheoristPauliwas alsoalert totheeffectoftheparticularpresenceoftheobserveronwhatisobserved. COMPLEMENTARITIES Jung(1875–1961)and Pauli(1900–1958)metin1930,whenPauli,inlifedis- tress and psychic despair, sought out Jung for direction in attendingto his emotional and psychological pain. While never Pauli’s analyst, Jung re- 1Weinberg1994a,p.48. xxviii JUNG ANDPAULI viewedthirteenhundredofPauli’sdreamsandstudiedaselectionfromthe firstfourhundredofthese.Overyearsofcontact,theyoungerman’sknowl- edgepenetratedandinfluencedJung’sthought. In 1952, Jung and Pauli published a juxtaposition of their ideas in The InterpretationofNatureandthePsyche.Intheirwork,theycrossedpathson complementaryvectors. Asthephenomenalworldisanaggregateoftheprocessesofatomicmag- nitude,itisnaturallyofthegreatestimportancetofindoutwhether,and if so how, the photons (shallwe say) enable us to gaina definite knowl- edge of the reality underlying the mediative energy processes.... Light and matter both behave like separate particles and also like waves. This ... obliged us to abandon, on the plane of atomicmagnitudes, a causal description of nature inthe ordinary space-timesystem, andin itsplace tosetupinvisiblefieldsofprobabilityinmultidimensionalspaces.2 Pauli?No,Jung. Division and reduction of symmetry, this then the kernel of the brute! Theformerisanancientattributeofthedevil....Ifonlythetwodivine contenders—Christandthedevil—couldnoticethattheyhavegrownso muchmoresymmetrical!3 Jung?No,Pauli,inaletterwrittenayearbeforehisdeathtoWernerHeisen- berg,alifelongfriendandcolleague. By the time that Jung met Pauli, he had been deeply affected and “tre- mendously impressed” for nearlythree decadesby WilliamJames. In Prin- ciples of Psychology, James posited coexisting and possibly split modes of consciousness—the “upper self” and the “under self”—which even while mutually unaware of and ignoring each other have complementary effects on each other. In The Varieties of Religious Experience, James wrote of the “field”that,despite theindeterminacyofitsmargins,guidesattentionand behavior.4 Jung adopted the Jamesian notion of psychic fields and the lan- guage regarding the complementary nature of the constituents of the psy- che.WhenhewasapsychiatristattheBurghölzliclinic,tryingtograspthe importofthestrikingimagesproducedbydisturbedpatients,Jungbeganto find precedents for them in mythology, philosophy, religion, alchemy, and thehistoricalnotionsofthenaturalsciences.Atfirstcompelledbythecon- tents of these images, Jung became consistently more concerned with the process in and for which the psyche produced them. He postulated that dreams and autonomous fantasies were the complementary conceits by whichthepsycheattemptstoretrieveorcompleteitsknowledgeinpursuit ofgreaterconsciousnessand,incasesofimbalanceordamage,toreestablish equilibriumandhealinternalsplits. 2Jung1947,par.438. 3Heisenberg1971,p.234. 4Card1991b,pp.52–53. xxix INTRODUCTION James also perceived and named the complementarity between physical anddepth-psychologicalfields,and drew attention to the correspondence of the concept of field in physics withthenewlyformulatedpsychologicalconceptofthesubconscious.It is thought that physicist Niels Bohr also borrowed from James the term complementarity, with which Bohr formulatedthe Principle of Comple- mentaritythatcharacterizedhisphilosophyofnature.5 AsaprofessoratZurich’sEidgenossischeTechnischeHochschole(ETH), aleadinguniversityinthesciences,Jungwasexposedtocurrenttheory.He sawpsychologyasanempiricalscienceofobservation,exploration,andon- going reformulation. Throughout his life, he remained convincedthatjust as matter is in a constant process of redefinition, so too must psyche and spirit be continuously redefined. The development of Jung’s thought and that of physics in the first half of the twentieth century are both comple- mentaryandsymmetrical.Inthestudiesontheassociationexperimentthat Jungpublishedin1904to1906withFranzRiklin,hedescribedpsychological complexesasknotsofpsychicenergy,eachwithitsownagenda,charge,and resonance.Theexistenceofthesefieldsinthepersonalunconsciousrelativ- izedtheconsciousnessandautonomyoftheego. In 1905, Albert Einstein’s annus mirabilis, “while also working out the quantum theory of light and a theory of the motion of small particles in fluid, Einstein developed a new theory of space and time, now called the special theory of relativity.”6 Jung recalled thathe had met Einstein in the “very early days when [he] was developing his first theory of relativity.... His genius as a thinker ... exerted a lasting influence on my own intellec- tual work.”7 In the Tavistock lectures, Jung remembered, “I pumped him abouthisrelativitytheory.Iamnotgiftedinmathematics....Iwentfour- teen feet deep into the floor and felt quite small.”8 In 1928, when Jung received the German translation of a Chinese alchemical treatise called “The Secret of the Golden Flower” from Richard Wilhelm, he felt imme- diate sympathy with the Chinese notion of time as a continuumin which certain qualities manifest relatively simultaneously in different places. In his1929essayonthe“GoldenFlower”andhis1930Wilhelmmemorial,Jung made reference to what he would call synchronicity as a parallelism of events that cannot be explained causally. Jung’s reading of alchemy took him into a deep study of “all kinds of opposites” and, as he wrote twenty- five years later,ledeventuallytohisunderstandingoftheunconsciousasa process. InDreams ofaFinalTheory, Weinbergobserves thatEinstein’s1915spe- cialtheory ofrelativity“fitinwellwithadualisticviewofnature:thereare 5Ibid. 6Weinberg1994,p.98. 7Jung1974,p.109. 8Jung1968,par.140. xxx JUNG ANDPAULI particles, like the electrons, protons, and neutrons in ordinary atoms, and therearefields,likethegravitationalortheelectromagneticfield.”9Justfive yearslater,thetwenty-one-year-oldPauli,ratherthanfeeling“fourteenfeet deepintothefloor,”publishedhisowncritiqueofthisrelativitythesis.Ein- steinwrote: No one studying thismature, grandlyconceivedwork could believe that theauthorisamanof21.Onewonderswhattoadmiremost,thepsycho- logicalunderstandingforthedevelopmentofideas,thesurenessofmath- ematicaldeduction,theprofoundphysicalinsight,thecapacityforlucid systematicpresentation,thecompletetreatmentofthesubjectmatter,or thesurenessofcriticalappraisal.10 In 1926, using his classmate Heisenberg’s matrix mechanics, Pauli pro- duced a quantum-mechanicalcalculationof hydrogen energy levels.It was an “exhibition of mathematical brilliance, a sage-like use of Heisenberg’s rules and the special symmetries of the hydrogen atom.... No physicist alive was more clever.”11 Pauli thus validated quantum mechanics, most simplydescribedas“thestudyofthebehaviorofatomsandtheirconstitu- ents.Quantumis theLatinword forso muchor bundle,andmechanicsis the old term for the study of motion. Quantum mechanicsis the study of themotionofthingsthatcomeinlittlebundles”—incontrasttoarelativity theorybasedontheassumptionofpointparticles.12 Byagetwenty-eight,PauliheldthechairoftheoreticalphysicsinZurich. With Bohr and Heisenberg, he arrived at a new philosophy for subatomic matter. In 1929, Pauli and Heisenberg presented a field theory of physics thatelidedthe distinctionbetween matterandforce.Theydescribedboth particlesandforcesasmanifestationsofadeeperlevelofquantumfieldsin which “not only photons but all particles are bundles of energy in various fields...electronsarebundlesoftheenergyoftheelectronfield;neutrinos arebundlesoftheenergyoftheneutrinofield;andsoon.”13 Meanwhile early in his career during his short but intense relationship with Freud, Jung had struggled with a sexually based drive theory. By the time he spoke at Harvard in 1932, Jung had identified at least five kinds of drives:hunger,activity,sexuality,creativity,andreflection.Buthegradually cametoconceiveof“libidoasapsychicanalogueofphysicalenergy,amore or less quantitative concept, which should not be defined in qualitative terms ... [nor in] the prevailing concretism of the libido theory.” He later recalled to Aniela Jaffé: “I wished no longer to speak of the instincts of hunger, aggression, and sex, but to regard all these phenomena as expres- sionsofpsychicenergy.”Hesaid: 9Weinberg1994,p.141. 10Peat1991,p.15. 11Weinberg1994,p.69. 12HazenandTrefil1992,pp.65–66. 13Weinberg1994,pp.171–72. xxxi INTRODUCTION Inphysics,too,wespeakofenergyanditsvariousmanifestations....The situationinpsychologyispreciselythesame....Wearedealingprimarily with energy, with measures of intensity, with greater or lesser quantities ... in various guises. If we conceive of libido as energy, we can take a comprehensive and unified view ... such as is provided in the physical sciencesbythetheoryofenergetics....Iseeman’sdrivesasvariousman- ifestationsofenergicprocesses...forcesanalogoustoheat,light,etc.14 Jung’snotionofthearchetypesofthecollectiveunconsciousimplied,so to speak, a supercharge, an “overplus,” of energy emerging from those “fields”ofinterrelatedexperiencethatthehumanpsycheispredisposedto find significant. For Jung, archetypes are not structures but “habitual cur- rents of psychic energy,” “systems of readiness for action.” Pauli refers to themas“statisticallawswithprimaryprobabilities.”Theseexistbeforeand beyondtheonlypersonaldataoftheindividualtime-and-space-boundego andsofurtherrelativizeit.Lateinhislife,Jungremarkedinafilmedinter- viewthatEinstein“firststartedmeoffthinkingaboutapossiblerelativityof timeaswellasspaceandtheirpsychicconditionality.Morethanthirtyyears later, this stimulus led to my relation with the physicist Professor W. Pauli andtomythesisofpsychicsynchronicity.”15 PAULIANDJUNGIANANALYSIS In his physics, Paulisought aunifiedfield. Buthis personal lifewas one of fragmentationanddissociation.Withinoneyear,hismotherpoisonedher- self in reaction to his father’s involvement in an affair, and Pauli plunged intoa brief marriagewithacabaretperformer. At thirty,heturnedtoJung forhelp. Jung,inhis 1935lecturesattheTavistock,offeredthefollowingexample ofdreamseffectingchange: I had a case, a university man, a very one-sided intellectual. His uncon- scioushadbecometroubledandactivated;soitprojecteditselfintoother menwho appearedtobehisenemies,andhefeltterriblylonelybecause everybodyseemedtobeagainsthim.Thenhebegantodrinkinorderto forgethistroubles,buthegotexceedinglyirritableandinthesemoodshe began to quarrel with other men... and once he was thrown out of a restaurantandgotbeatenup.16 Jung saw that “he was chock-full of archaic material, and I said to myself: ‘Now I am going to make an interesting experiment to get that material absolutely pure, without any influence from myself, and therefore I won’t touchit.’”Hereferred PaulitoDr.ErnaRosenbaum,“whowasthenjusta 14Jaffé1965,pp.208–9. 15Jung1974,p.109. 16Jung1968,par.402. xxxii JUNG ANDPAULI beginner....Iwasabsolutelysureshewouldnottamper.”Pauliappliedthe same passionate brilliance to his unconscious as to his physics. In a five- month Jungian analysis, Pauli recorded and spontaneously illustrated hun- dreds of his dreams. “He even inventedactiveimaginationfor himself.... Heworkedouttheproblemoftheperpetuummobile,notinacrazywaybut ina symbolic way. Heworked onalltheproblems whichmedievalphiloso- phy was so keen on.”17 For three months, “he was doing the work all by himself, ... for about two months, he had a number of interviews with me.... I did not have to explain much.” Jung believed Pauli “became a perfectly normal and reasonable person. He did not drink any more, he becamecompletelyadaptedandineveryrespectnormal....Hehadanew centerofinterest.”JunghadthirteenhundredofPauli’sdreamsasthebasis forhisresearchintoalchemicalsymbolisminamodernpsyche.“Attheend of the year I am going to publish a selection from his first four hundred dreams,whereIshowthedevelopmentofonemotifonly.”18 The physicist F. David Peat believes Jung’s assessment of Pauli’s state afterhisterminationwithDr.Rosenbaumwastoopositive.Pauli’snew“rea- sonableness”didn’tlast,andlaterheagaindrankexcessively. WhilePauli’sworkaimedtowarda“psychophysicalmonism,”hisintense inner tensions seemed to manifest physically in the so-called Pauli Effect, when his mere presence caused laboratory equipment to explode or fall apart.19 His internal “monotheism” and his sharp critical acumen and tongueearnedhimthetitles“scourgeofGod,”“thewhipofGod,”and“the terrible Pauli.”Eveninthemidstofpersonaldisarray,Paulikepthisstance as a scientist of such rigor that he was called “the conscience of physics.” Askedwhetherhethoughtaparticularphysicspaper waswrong,hereplied thatwastookind—thepaperwas“notevenwrong.”20Heisenberg’saccount ofa1927conversationrevealsthat,inhisyouth,Pauliwasconcernedabout thedistinctionsbetweenknowledgeandfaith.21Heisenbergsawthatbehind Pauli’s outward display of criticism and skepticism lay concealed a deep philo- sophical interest, even in those dark areas of reality or the human soul whicheludethegraspofreason.Andwhilethepoweroffascinationema- nating from Pauli’s analyses of physical problems was due in some mea- sure to the clarity of his formulations, the rest was derived from a con- stant contact with the field of the creative and spiritual processes for whichnorationalformulationasyetexists.22 For Pauli, the creativity of science included considerations of the psy- che. In science, he subscribed to the quantumuncertaintytheory thatthe 17Ibid.,par.403 18Ibid.,pars.404–6. 19vanErkelens1991,p.41. 20Weinberg1994,p.257. 21Heisenberg1971,pp.82–91. 22Heisenberg1974,p.30. xxxiii INTRODUCTION positionandpresenceoftheobserverchangestheperceptionandrealityof whatisobserved.Tothatthesis—thatonecannotmeasurethewaveandthe particle at the same time—he added a psychological dimension, observing that insofar as the scientist must opt to know “which aspect of nature we wanttomakevisible...wesimultaneouslymakeasacrifice,...[a]coupling ofchoiceandsacrifice.”23 Pauli demonstrated the value of intuition to science’s empiricism. As Weinbergrecounted, physicistsintheearly1930’swere worried aboutanapparentviolationof the law of conservation of energy when a radioactive nucleus undergoes the process known as beta decay. In 1932, Wolfgang Pauli proposed the existence of a convenientparticle he calledthe neutrino, in order to ac- count for the energy that was observed to be lost in this process. The elusive neutrino was eventually discovered experimentally over two de- cades later. Proposing the existence of something that has not yet been observedisariskybusiness,butitsometimesworks.24 In a metaphysical leap, Paulireferred as well to “forms belonging to the unconscious region of the human soul” and stated that “the relation be- tween a sense perception and Idea remains a consequence of the factthat boththesoulandwhatisknowninperceptionaresubjecttoanorderobjec- tively conceived.”25 He acknowledged thathe had realized in a dream that the quantum-mechanical conception of nature lacked the second dimen- sion,whichhefoundprovidedbythearchetypesoftheunconscious. It seems, however, thathecouldnotfind hiswaytotheuncertainty,the “choiceandsacrifice”thatallowsforreparationwithinanalysis.WhilePauli knew “that a truly unified view must include the feeling function, since withoutfeelingthereisnomeaningorvalueinlife,andnoproperacknowl- edgment of the phenomenon of synchronicity,” M.-L. von Franz said that helatersoughtonlya“philosophicaldiscussionofdreams”: He wrote to me ... [and] made it clear that he did not want analysis; there was to be no payment. I saw that he was in despair, so I said we could try. The difficulties began when I asked him for the associations which referred to physics. He said, “Do you think I’m going to give you unpaidlessonsinphysics?”...Hewantedsomething,buthedidn’twant tocommithimself.Hewassplit.26 VanErkelens speculates thatPauliwould havehadto submitto atransfer- enceandtoadeeperErosthan“hisinnerurgetodevelopaunifiedviewof matterandspirit.”Forwhateverreasons,vonFranzandPauliwerenotable 23Heisenberg1974,pp.35–36. 24Weinberg1994,pp.196–97. 25Heisenberg1974,pp.31–32. 26Sieg1991,p.56. xxxiv JUNG ANDPAULI toachievetherelationalbondthatholdsandcontainsexplosiveemotional material and so allows surrender to one’s unconscious and to a suffered analyticrelationship. Jung and Pauli corresponded and later met, not for analysis but for a comparison of ideas—Pauli pursuing Jung’s synchronicity thesis and Jung fostering Pauli’s understanding of the archetypal and collective factors in the psyche. Through their contact, William James’s two fields, to which both Jung and Bohr had been attracted, come together again. Von Franz writesthatthe notionof complementarityintroducedbyNielsBohr toprovide abetter explanationfortheparadoxicalrelationshipbetweenwavesandparticles innuclearphysicscanalsobeappliedtotherelationshipofconsciousand unconsciousstatesofapsychiccontent.ThisfactwasdiscoveredbyJung, butitwasparticularlyelaboratedbyWolfgangPauli.27 QUANTUMSCIENCEANDALCHEMY “Quantummechanicsandspecialrelativityarenearlyincompatible,”writes Weinberg,“andtheirreconciliationinquantumfieldtheoryimposedpow- erfulrestrictions on thewaysthatparticlescaninteractwitheachother.”28 In Peat’s view, Pauli’sinsightwas “that,at thequantumlevel, allof nature engagesinanabstractdance”andisdividedintotwogroups,“accordingto whether theyengageinanantisymmetricor asymmetricdance.”Thiswas thebasisforamajortheoreticalcontribution,thePauliexclusionprinciple, indicatingthestrongest taboosandmostpowerful restrictionson theways particles behave, His “notions of symmetry within the quantum domain” explainwhyparticleswiththesameenergyarealwaysapartfromeachother. “This exclusion of particles from each other’s energy space ... arises out of ... the abstract movement of the particles as a whole.” It is then “the underlying pattern of the whole dance[that]has a profound effecton the behaviorofeachindividualparticle.”29Simplyput,twoelectronsinanatom canneverhavethesamesetofquantumnumbers.Oneelectron’spresence keeps another electron with the same quantumnumbers from getting too close,causeselectronsinanatomtostackupinaseriesofenergylevels,and prevents electron stacks from collapsing into the lowest-energy quantum state. Only so many electrons fit into a single orbit before quantumnum- bers duplicate.So thePaulirule requires thatifthere isone more electron than can be accommodated in an atomic orbit, thatelectron must be in a separateorbit.Thisbreakthroughintechnicalunderstandingloopsbackto alchemy, as the exclusion principle offers the basis for the structure of the 27vonFranz1992,pp.245–46. 28Weinberg1994,p.142. 29Peat1987,p.16. xxxv INTRODUCTION periodictableofchemicalelements.Thisinitsturninformsscience’sreali- zationofthealchemicalgoal. ItwasnotuntiltheTwentiethCenturyandtheatomicagethatmenwere enabledtochangetheelementsintooneanother.Suchprocessesofme- tallic transmutation consist in changing the number of protons in the atomicnucleusof thebasicelements.Ifiron isto bechangedintogold, 53protonsmustbeaddedtoitsnucleusof26protons,ifitistobetrans- formedintotheelementofgoldwhichcarries79protonsinitsnucleus.30 SYMMETRY There is another subtle and profound link between the intuitiveif clumsy probingsofalchemyandPauli’swork,basedonhisuseofsymmetryandits effects.Symmetryisarovingandvariableconcept,usedandapplieddiffer- entlyto objects, categories,andlaws invariousfields, includingaesthetics, mathematics, and physics. It may describe symmetries of things—faces, crystals,cubesofsalt—aswellasinternalsymmetryprinciplesthat“impose a kind of family structure on the menu of possible particles,”31 and “the symmetries that are really important in nature ... the symmetries of laws which state ‘thatwhen we make certainchangesinthe point of view from whichweobservenaturalphenomena,thelawsofnaturewediscoverdonot change.’ So the “symmetry principle is simply a statementthatsomething looks the same from certain different points of view.”32 But in the mathe- maticsrelevanttoPauli,“asymmetryisn’tathing;it’satransformation.Not anyoldtransformation,though,asymmetryofanobjectisatransformation that leaves it apparently unchanged.”33 Symmetry also states that all ele- mentsofasystemcanundergotransformations—rotationorreflectionina mirror—withoutbeingfundamentallyalteredandso“hasbecometheepit- ome of truth and beauty.”34 Symmetry is implicit in such alchemical dic- tumsas“Forthereisonestone,onemedicine,towhichnothingfromout- sideisadded,norisitdiminished,savethatthesuperfluitiesareremoved.” Itismoreexplicitinthemotto“asabove,sobelow;aswithin,sowithout.” Thealchemistsimaginallyandphysicallyaimedtowardsucceedingstages ofconjunctionsbetweenpairs,couplings,andasymmetricsymmetries,both in physical experiments and in psychic attempts to achieve inner balance. Theirintentwastoprovidethepurest,perfect,mostinclusivephysicalsub- stances,aswellasinternalintegration.Theirmotivewastoreplicateorimi- tatetheoriginaloneness,whenallwaspotentialinthemindofthecreator, before it dispersed into the four directions, four elements, and discrete forms. 30Fabricius1989,p.8. 31Weinberg1994,p.154. 32Ibid.,pp.136–37. 33StewartandGolubitsky1992,p.28. 34Horgan1994,p.99. xxxvi