How may a mythical dance of consciousness, as a discreet-discrete two step between its holistic field and its particular expressions, be conceptualized or faithfully analogized as creating substance, signified in a way that is artifactual of the dance? "Answer": Via a wanding quality of meta magic, that unfolds the quantum decoherence of the potentiality of universe.
Each new conceptualization for discovery and insight alters the potential for consciousness to apprehend new discoveries and insights. There is something magical in its infinity and in its circulating-yet-expanding feedback about the unfolding capacity of the path of Consciousness. That we, from our particular points of view, think our experience of beingness is more scientific than magical is more an artifact in respect of our having been meta-shaped to share a frame for conscious reference (however vast that frame may appear), than in respect of any limitation on the holistic potentiality of conscious beingness Itself. Thus, consciousness ever pursues a receding pot of gold at the end of beingness. Like a ghost rider, mortal consciousness pursues that which it has no means to grasp, except in imperfect, surrogate apprehension. Pure consciousness apprehends, but does not directly “hold” or “cause,” any measurable “thing.” At the end of what we can measure, the “first cause” is something that has no causative substance.
If a "real" referent for something like a “God Particle” exists, its quality of reality for mortals exists only in meta-math, beyond the powers of Godel, not in substance that is empirically measurable to mankind. In a quantum universe, the observer effect not only clouds and affects the unfolding of that which we particularly measure; it also affects the unfolding of the universal frame we share, within which we generally share our measure of it.
That holistic, synchronizing effect that is applied to our space-time is not something we can scientifically replicate (unless, oxymoronically, we could acquire capacity to backtrack in time). Until then, that holistic effect is something we may NOT quantitatively correlate to empirical testing, but only qualitatively appreciate via intuitive adducement. One who, for his holistic FAITH or philosophy, declines the path of intuitive adducement can continue to his heart’s content to pursue the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow for replicating the scientific-law-that-models-everything. Along his odyssey, numerous, wondrous, temporal phantoms will unfold and astonish all apprehensions and expectations.
Regardless, the myths or stepping off points that one chooses in digital alternation for pursuing principled philosophy for reconciling the quantitative with the qualitative, whether along the path of hopeful empiricism or along the path of reconciling intuition, are not what will deliver one either to madness or to contentment. What will deliver one to madness or to contentment abides with the general disposition of one’s attitude of apprehension (the unfolding and ever-developing character of one’s soul). Prayer, to the extent efficacious, may abide in a dance or quality of intuitive apprehension and appreciation of feedback between a particular Perspective of consciousness and the Field of consciousness. That quality of efficacy, much like centering meditation, may avail intuitive and spiritual growth, but will not be of quantitatively scientific demonstration.
When applied in selfish lack of good faith, prayer reduces to a superstitious effort merely to recruit the cosmos against one's competitors in narcissism, as a child might wish to become a vengeful god. However, the quality of appreciation or apprehension that abides with each of our perspectives is what feeds the synchronizing that is availed by the Reconciler, which unfolds before us, in sequences of holistic yet discrete feedback. In our Reconciler’s house are infinity of rooms.
On Earth, one of those rooms may compass a city of freedom and dignity, on a hill. That is a vision for decent civilization. It is a myth in respect of which independent-minded persons and Americans could aspire (regardless of whether they may sometimes prefer applications for more secular seeming metaphors or models for measure). It is an assimilating myth that compasses truth enough to foster celebration among most familiar folk religions and civic metaphors. However, no single person's belief in the communication of freedom, dignity, decency, and empathy will validate a myth. If Americans continue to will the unraveling of all sustaining myths, then multi-cultural diversity in desires will sink rather than sustain America. Truth be known, the myth that science, if it blots out all alternatives, can substitute to save us is not a sustaining myth.