Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Cynique

words from the source

Recommended Posts

Hmmm, at the quantum level perhaps, but the the macro level--the stuff we can actually see,  I doubt this is true.  It sounds all new agey stuff, but I think this is one of those instances of people trying to shoe horn quantum physics into some form of spirituality. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet ANOTHER White man trying to tell us how to think and what to think.....lol.

Even with all of these White men being caught lying, indicted for conspiracy, sexual assault and yet we STILL put credence into their opinions and quirky ass philosophies.

It seems every 5 years some White man in a dress shirt and no tie comes before the world with a "new" philosophy that supposedly answers all the worlds problems and he charges people hundreds and thousands of dollars to attend his boring ass lectures and workshops in hopes of getting some "enlightenment".

Until he's busted and sent to jail for molesting or sexual assault.
Then the show is over.
 

What's it gonna take?????

Seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 @Troy and @Pioneer1I think quantum physics is an exact science.  Its experiments have proven that your eyes integrate an image that disintegrates when the eyes look away.  i have no problem at all with believing that people are subjective when it comes to what they see. That's why eye witness accounts are so unreliable.  Do either of you know whether what i call the color "blue" is what you call the color "blue".  Quantum physics has also proven that something can be 2 places at once.  Quantum physics is the stuff of the universe along with mathematics.  Since i  believe that reality is in the eye of the beholder, i am very compatible with this  meme which is why i posted it.  Your scoffs don't count as credible rebuttals.   

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True you have a blindspot but you're brain fills I  the missing bit. There's no objective reality. Elon Musk believes that we are living in a computer simulation 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cynique
 

My problem isn't necessarily the idea.....
We've known for millenia that people interpret the same sensory information differently, this is nothing new.

It's the source.

Why is it that WHITE MEN seem to be the only one's coming up with all this?

Why didn't an Asian woman come up withthe idea of quantum physics?

Why not an Aboriginal man?

White men make up less than 15% of the global population but seems to come up with over 90% of the so-called "science" and "innovative philosopies" that no one else seems to be able to do.

You mean to tell me for 100,000 years people were sitting around twiddling their thumbs waiting on THIS man to come along and pull this type of philosophy out of his ass?

No one else thought of it before?

Come on Cynique.....stop going for this shit.

See, THIS is one of the reason Harvey Weinstein was so successful with his victims.....they let their guard down around him because those women just thought that man was "soooo profound".

That man don't know any more about "the truth" than anyone else and there is no hard proof that he does.

Has that man's philosophy cured cancer, AIDS, or any major illness that we should take it as useful?

For all we know, him and Donald Trump could be in alignment with eachother back in some secret chamber...lol.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Cynique, I too have come to enjoy watching videos on Quantum Physics and have even read a couple of books on the subject, but I have never read anything written by a scientist that says, "...Its experiments have proven that your eyes integrate an image that disintegrates when the eyes look away."  If you can share a source of this idea it would be interesting to check out.

 

Of course I'm familiar with the famed double slit experiment which demonstrates how the location of an electron can only be determined when it is observed (it's wave function collapses).  But again this is true at the quantum level.  Your refrigerator however is still there whether you or anyone else is looking at it.

 

@Del, this is completely different that the blind spot we have or the optical illusions we previously discussed; which reveal flaws in the how our eyes and brain perceive reality, not the nature of it.

 

@Pioneer1, you give white folks too much credit.  Western civilization is founded on ideas learned from Africa.  The ancient Greeks did not hide this.  In fact, we know Black Africans built the Pyramids, and know one is even sure how it was done--even with today's technology.  So reluctant are are white people today willing to give credit to the Black people, they rather say aliens built them?!

 

I was unaware of ancient Africa's contribution to civilization or quantum physics until I began reading books on my own; largely promoted by creating this site. Nother subject was taught to me in school.  I think both subjects would have had me riveted. 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does the meme i posted which was not written by a scientist, conflict with any of the responses to it? 

 

i got my information about the quantum physics relevancy to this subject from watching the Science channel.

 

@TroyMy refrigerator and everything that exists are all matter in a state of flux.  Our eyes draw order from chaos.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Del, our brain works on a purely subjective manner.  Even our own memories can be influenced to such an extend we can remember things that have never happened. 

 

Science forces us to be objective which is something most of us fight because, I suspect, it is against our nature. People are motivated by emotions not facts. 

 

@Cynique, I not surprised the meme was not written by a scientist.  I just never heard a scientist assert such a thing.  I have heard people like Deepak Chopra twist science in a similar matter.  I wish he and others would not do this because it confuses people about the science which is already confusing.

 

I took issue with this statement from the meme:

 

"Quantum Physics tell us that nothing observed is unaffected by the observer"

 

Again I described why this my be true at he quantum level but the statement implied that every thing is effected by the observer.  I never heard scientist make this statement.  I don't believe it to be true.  Now your statement, which follows would be a reasonable it the above statement is true. 

 

"Its experiments have proven that your eyes integrate an image that disintegrates when the eyes look away."

 

Now I definitely know very little about Quantum physics, which is why I asked for a source where a scientist said anything related to what you wrote or what was in the meme.

 

But hey who knows you maybe you're right. 

 

Or perhaps you are just a fiction created by my own conscientious, no more real that a dream.  Or, as some believe, the results of a science project for some 5th grader in a super-advanced alien culture.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Troy  https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/02/980227055013.htm

 

Do they qualify as scientists? 

 

"In a study reported in the February 26 issue of Nature (Vol. 391, pp. 871-874), researchers at the Weizmann Institute of Science have now conducted a highly controlled experiment demonstrating how a beam of electrons is affected by the act of being observed. The experiment revealed that the greater the amount of "watching," the greater the observer's influence on what actually takes place."

 

I think they call the phenomenon "observer effect" 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not look at the article but based upon your description I'm familiar with the effect.  Indeed I described a variation of this with the double slit experiment I described above. I described it as "famed," but I guess it really is not that well known because I doubt most people have much interest or knowledge of quantum physics.

 

But again electrons are quantum particles and the objects that we can see do not behave the same way--at least no one has proven this.  Of course this does not stop the new agey folks from suggest this to be true...

 

We know for example that electrons can be in two places at the same time.  Some even believe there other universes for this reason!  But this is not something we can observe.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Troy said:

I doubt most people have much interest or knowledge of quantum physics.

 

Actually Quantum Mechanics  is pretty popular - that's how it made it into mainstream.  The first time I heard of the observer effect was in What the bleep do we know. (2004) ... I already knew it was possible but to hear scientist validate what I already knew was fascinating.  

 

 

Still that movie made  QM popular and folks such as me actually started following and reading what physicists were researching and writing about... Again, I'd been writing about this QM stuff since the 90s... but for me it was the stuff "dreams" were made of. I guess I was "New Age-y"   

 

By the time Angels and Demons was made into a movie - the audience was educated enough to follow along. It made it even easier for them to follow  CERN's developments ... "Particle Fever" - was a highly rated and watched documentary - that wouldn't have happened without all the "new age-y" folks making science "cool" again.  

 Neale Donald Walsch is not a scientist, but he echoed physicists in that meme.   You mentioned you never heard a scientist say it - so, I was sharing with you that they did say it. 

 

New Age-y people as you call them may not be able to prove what they know but they don't have to.   That's left to folks who get the fancy equipment like the LHC -to prove what someone "saw" years before in their mind's eye.    For  Us New Age-y folks - nothing is "unknowable"... 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not so sure quantum mechanics is popular Mel.  Sure I saw Particle Fever---in the theater, but is was not highly watched, earning less than $900K at the box office in limited release. Outside of this forum I don't talk to anyone else about it.  Though whenever I teach young people I usually bring it up.  Because the subject is a 100+ years old and I was never introduced to it in school

 

I did subsequently read the report there was nothing it to substantiate Neale's statement. 

 

@Mel Hopkins you nailed the difference between scientists and what I called new agey folk.  New Agey folk are perfectly comfortable relating what they know.  Scientist relate what they can prove.  Obviously there is a big difference.

 

When a scientist believes something that is later proven wrong, they will dispense with the discredited idea and move on with the new one.  For example, a scientist would not embrace astrology as scientific fact, because it has not been proven (it may have even been disproven), but an astrologer will believe in it because it is what they "know," scientific proof is irrelevant.  Christian fundamentalist refuse to believe in evolution or the age of the universe, despite their world view being proven wrong.. Again facts don't matter.

 

Again the problem I have with new agey folks is their misappropriation of science to further their means--especially the ones who do this to enrich themselves at the expense of others.

 

I'm trying to learn not to waste time arguing with people about what they think they know (believe) once I tell them what has been proven.

 

Now if people want to speculate about things that are unknowable (impossible to prove), like what was before the creation of our universe then I'm game :)

 

Now I could very easily see a 45 supporter using Neale's statement to support "alternative facts."  Science tells us that we all see a "different truth," and of course some truths (facts) are better than others.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Troy said:

I did subsequently read the report there was nothing it to substantiate Neale's statement. 

 

@Troy now you're just being contrary for no reason.  You wrote you never  "heard" a scientist say the same thing as Neale.  

Neale quote:  "Quantum Physics tells us that nothing that is observed is unaffected by the observer."

 

 

From the article  "Thus, (as in conclusion)  the mere act of observation affects the experimental findings"

 

 

Neale quoted the findings of physicists .  and goes on to say "that statement from SCIENCE holds powerful insight."  

You make it clear that you have a bias against New Age-y folks but  it shouldn't cloud your reading comprehension ability, right?  

 

Of course we all have opinions,  so I'd understand if you disagree with Neale's summation.   

 

But even by disagreeing you make his statement valid.   

 

We see different "truths" based on our creations. 

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK I'll concede the point; for I have no way of proving your fridge is in your kitchen if you are not looking at it, for the very act of making the observation is what places it there...

 

At any rate, the are those who play fast and lose with science to delude people for the purposes of taking their money from their money.  I'm not saying Neale is one of these people--I never heard of him.  But this is really the foundation of my point..

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Troy said:

But this is really the foundation of my point..

 

And here is where we agree... 

I HATE that people sell "Jesus"...and to me they are no different than folks who sell quasi-quantum physics.      It really boils my blood.  And like the  Amazon  cult, once a person is a devotee there's not getting through to them...

I'm definitely a mystic  and yes I share my esoteric beliefs... but I will say, "It's been my experience"....when I find that people are looking for a guru.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I guess it is a matter of how we use specific words like "know." 

 

Some religious people say they know things to be true, as if they are indistinguishable from fact, when it can be proven not to be true.  When presented with the information it is considered heresy and  punishable by death (depending upon the place and time).  The only "proof" required, is faith.  As I said trying to convince these people otherwise is a waste of time.

 

One of the best selling books on the list I'm working on now is, Adam! Where Are You?: Why Most Black Men Don't Go to Church.  I believe that is one reason why (my opinion I have not read the book) brother don;t go to church.

 

Now this is not to say there is no God.  I science can never prove the existence of God despite what people believe.

 

Merriam-Webster define "know" as the following:

Definition of know

knew play \ˈnü also ˈnyü\; known play \ˈnōn\; knowing

transitive verb
1a (1) :to perceive directly :have direct cognition of 

(2) :to have understanding of 

  • importance of knowing oneself

 

(3) :to recognize the nature of :discern
b (1) :to recognize as being the same as something previously known 
(2) :to be acquainted or familiar with 
(3) :to have experience of

 

It seems my use of the word "Know" was not exactly correct based upon the definition of the word.  There is no implication that what one knows has to be factual or true.  You can know things that can't be proven, or that are even patently false.

 

So some people can know God exists, other can know God does not exist, and many of have probably never really thought very deeply on the subject...

 

One's beliefs are what they know. Mine are always open to change as I acquire more information. Too often I assume other people are open to change in the same way--most are not... In fact they will take science and twist it for their own purposes.

 

Some Christians believe that climate change and the extreme weather events it creates, the raise of 45, and the strife in the Middle East are signs that the End Times are upon us.... hmm maybe they are onto something.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A very interesting and enlightening exchange.

 

i would concede that i can loosely be described as being a "new-ager".  My interest in the quest for enlightenment began in the early sixties with "Chariot of the Gods" a book  about extra-terrestrial aliens,  and then "Celestine Prophecy" a novel about recognizing the obvious. I was also into the properties of pyramid power and chanting.  i found it plausible that pyramid receptacles could generate an atmosphere that rearranged molecules and atoms in bodies and objects, and  that the repetitive sounds and vibrations of chanting mantras could have an impact of your hopes.  I was also into the books of anthropologist, Carlos Castanedo, who wrote best sellers about  "separate realities" conjured up by Mexican  shamans. Later i  read "the Secret" a book about imaging and mind power. All of this stuff has always fascinated me. It's just the way my brain is wired. And from time to time i would actually reap results from planting these ideas in my psyche. Believing was seeing. Organized religion was never my thing, but spirituality and meta-physics were a fulfilling alternative for me because they opened my mind, instead of closing it.

 

Below is a 2-minute video about quantum physics claim to discovering what is referred to as the "god particle".  

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I find all of that stuff interesting too.  I forgot all about the Chariots of the Gods.  I've been told you open your mind and that is went the devil walks in. Helluva thing to tell a kid huh? 

 

I've heard a number of people in the field say that they wish the phrase "God Particle" was not used.  Again, it just confused people.  The religious right gets riled up to the point they are fighting to eliminate scientific research. 

 

CNN does the public a disservice when they say things like, "Scientists confirm 'God Particle' Exists."  Scientist have done no such thing, nor have they said such a thing.  This is sloppy reporting and even the description they provided for the Higgs Boson was pretty weak too.  

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm somewhere in the middle.  Exact science can be dry, but unproven scientific theories are interesting to ponder, and imagine what their being eventually proven would bring about.  Whether the god particle/gene has been discovered or not, the possibility of this coming into fruition one day is mind-blowing.  My attitude has something to do with being a curious person.  

 

Here's another short, "controversial"  video on the subject.  

 

Maybe-shouldn-t-looking-quite-hard-God-particle-destroy-universe-warns-Stephen-Hawking.html   1410083904547_wps_9_Television_Programme

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm... @Cynique, if I get a chance I really need to find what Hawking actually said, in context.  If you have a source please share it.  I skimmed the article and did not see anything but I may have missed it.

 

People have suggested that LHC could create a Black hole, but every physicist I've heard when presented with the question said it was preposterous.

 

@Delano, what does "New Age: mean to you?  When I wrote "New Agey" I was not being technical as was using more of les as a catch all for all the spiritual pursuits that emerged in the last 100 years and are outside traditional religions--you know from crystal gazers to tree huggers :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if they create a little Big Bang. So they want to  create a  singularity . That replicates the moment space and time were created. So if it goes critics and expands what can they do to stop  it.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shiva's_statue_at_CERN_engaging_in_the_Nataraja_dance.jpg

 

Wikipedia 

In 2004, a 2m statue of the dancing Shiva was unveiled at CERN, the European Center for Research in Particle Physics in Geneva. The statue, symbolizing Shiva's cosmic dance of creation and destruction, was given to CERN by the Indian government to celebrate the research center's long association with India.[47] A special plaque next to the Shiva statue explains the significance of the metaphor of Shiva's cosmic dance with quotations from Fritjof Capra:

Hundreds of years ago, Indian artists created visual images of dancing Shivas in a beautiful series of bronzes. In our time, physicists have used the most advanced technology to portray the patterns of the cosmic dance. The metaphor of the cosmic dance thus unifies ancient mythology, religious art and modern physics.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Del I'm not sure what you mean by your statement: 
 

18 hours ago, Delano said:

So if they create a little Big Bang. So they want to  create a  singularity . That replicates the moment space and time were created. So if it goes critics and expands what can they do to stop  it.

 

The notion that the activities at CERN are an attempt to unify religions and mythology with physics, and by extension, with each other is false.   I think that is just wishful thinking.  I don't think spirituality can be discovered with science.  I don't think science can prove or disprove religious belief.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if they create a little Big Bang, it's asingularity . That replicates the moment space and time were created. So if it goes critical and expands what can they do to stop  it.

 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×