Interconnectedness of all things ?

[Cane_Toad]

As "Cane_Toad" said .. we should first change the way people think by offering scientific and logical bases

Heh, that's not what I said, though I agree with it in part. I think it's a much more complex and intractible social problem, and I honestly don't have a clue what might work. We already offer "scientific and logical bases", but they don't fill the emotional needs of people, and the theologies that fill those needs are deeply entrenched.

Science offers no deity to pray to and hold your hand. Regardless of the splender that can be found in science, it doesn't comfort you when the chips are down, quite the contrary. Until people can look to themselves and each other for security, standing in the harsh light of science can be bleak; it tells you that you aren't particularly special, and the universe can snuff you out with supreme indifference. Even though our lives here are ridiculously safer than our ancestry, we still feel the spectre of nature's cycles implicit all around us.

The search for interconnectedness can be viewed as a reaction to the isolation we feel as individual self conscious creatures, as well as instinctual primate social reflexes.

 

[hadeka]

Well ...

now, i have an important question ..

I guess that something like the Chaos theory, and the Butterfly effect, can somehow explain the interconnectedness of everything .. as here, everything is affecting everything ... am i right ?!

Also, there the science of BioGeometry: http://www.biogeometry.com/english/index.php
do you think that this describes a lot about the interconnectedness ??!

Also the achievment of dr. Masaru Emoto:
"is an author known for his controversial claim that if human thoughts are directed at water before it is frozen, images of the resulting water crystals will be beautiful or ugly depending upon whether the thoughts were positive or negative. Emoto claims this can be achieved through prayer, music or by attaching written words to a container of water.

Since 1999 Emoto has published several volumes of a work titled Messages from Water, which contains photographs of water crystals next to essays and "words of intent"."

From Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masaru_Emoto

and his findings, pictured in:
http://www.wellnessgoods.com/messages.asp

and he wrote a book about this.


So, i would like to know from you if this all pseudoscience, or real science... and why ?!

Thank you.

 

[ZapperZ]

Well ...

now, i have an important question ..

I guess that something like the Chaos theory, and the Butterfly effect, can somehow explain the interconnectedness of everything .. as here, everything is affecting everything ... am i right ?!

Then you have just illustrate my point very clearly here where people are using words without understanding the underlying physics.

The interconnectedness in QM has NOTHING to do with what you are describing here. In QM, it is the quantum entanglement. What you just describe above are nothing more than classical dynamics! To say that such phenomena is exhibit interconnectedness is similar to saying that when you play pool or billiards, all those balls are "interconnected" when you break them in the beginning. That makes no sense, and it certainly isn't quantum mechanics.

Zz.

 

[loseyourname]

Come on guys, don't flood the thread with crap. Biogeometry and old Cartestian rational science?!

The Butterfly Effect deals with how small perturbations in a system can result in large changes later on, and really, isn't much different from a plain old Domino Effect. A single base mutation results in the CCR-5 gene encoding a defective protein, surface receptor lipids on white blood cells don't work right, and hey, a certain segment of the English countryside is suddenly immune to plague and the entire country doesn't die off, all because of one little base-pair replication error that quantum effects could very well have randomized. A few hundred years later, England has the most powerful empire in the history of the planet and changes the course of events on six continents.

It's profound when you think about it, but there is nothing mystical going on here. Everything within a single system is connected, but we're not part of the same experiential field and we're not going to effect change in the universe through thinking about it. Let us not turn this forum into an ad for the Natural Law Party.

 

[hadeka]

Guys ...

im not saying that i believe in these stuff, I am just asking you because i know that you have more knowledge than me ... that's the point ..

the idea of BioGeometry, is related to the idea of pyramid effect, which talks about that if you put some food under a pyramid, it will take a long time to become rotten ... more than any normal condition the food will put in.

My basic question, is that mystic people says that everything in the universe is connected to each other through energy ... because everything is energy .. so everything is affecting everything ...
the world is just like a swimming pool of energy ... so everything is connected .. and affecting everything ... that's the point of biogeometry also ..
so what do you think about this ??!

im ensuring that i ask you here cause you have scientific knowledge more than me ,, so that's why i want help from you ..

Thank you

 

[ZapperZ]

Guys ... My basic question, is that mystic people says that everything in the universe is connected to each other through energy ... because everything is energy .. so everything is affecting everything ...
the world is just like a swimming pool of energy ... so everything is connected .. and affecting everything ... that's the point of biogeometry also ..
so what do you think about this ??!

They can say anything they like using anything they wish, because they are never asked to show scientific rigor the way the rest of us have to.

What is being objected to, and something you seem to keep missing, is that they have no leg to stand on if they invoke quantum mechanics as the justification for what they claim.

Is that clear enough to put this to rest already?

Zz.

 

[hadeka]

They can say anything they like using anything they wish, because they are never asked to show scientific rigor the way the rest of us have to.

What is being objected to, and something you seem to keep missing, is that they have no leg to stand on if they invoke quantum mechanics as the justification for what they claim.

Is that clear enough to put this to rest already?

Zz.

I agree ...

My final question (hopefully), is what about the pyramid effect, and the effects of shapes in general , according to BioGeometry ... ??!

And i remember i read an article few years ago , claiming that there is an explanation for Out of Body Experience in QM.
Which is that an electron in the brain forming consciousness, can exist in many places at once .. so that's why people can feel and see separated things ...
Offcourse, that stupid explanation made me laugh till death ... but what do you think ??!? i mean it is not scientific, but i have no criticism for it ..
sounds contradicted .. isn't it ?!
lol ..

waiting for your answers ...

thank you


**Edit** >> And what about that everything is energy, so everything is affecting everything ?! this important

and sorry for my many questions .. maybe you got bored from me .. but excuse me please

 

[hadeka]

Then you have just illustrate my point very clearly here where people are using words without understanding the underlying physics.

The interconnectedness in QM has NOTHING to do with what you are describing here. In QM, it is the quantum entanglement. What you just describe above are nothing more than classical dynamics! To say that such phenomena is exhibit interconnectedness is similar to saying that when you play pool or billiards, all those balls are "interconnected" when you break them in the beginning. That makes no sense, and it certainly isn't quantum mechanics.

Zz.

Ok it is not QM.

but is it related to any scientific field by any sort ??!

What i mean, is what they are saying here, really true or just bull sh** ??!

 

[Cane_Toad]

Hadeka, here is the sad truth. If a claim about any phenomena is not being discussed in reputable news and science journals, you can be 99.9% sure that it's a load of bunk, and probably for monetary gain. With the internet, you've got a great tool to find out the facts for yourself.

If such claims could actually be replicated in a lab, you can be sure the whole science community would jump on it like flies on a dung beetle's breakfast. It would be the headlines of all the newpapers across the country.

You have to train yourself to recognize the sneaky ways that people use to mix fact with fabrication to present something that looks real. Remember that the best lie is mixed with truth.


As to

My basic question, is that mystic people says that everything in the universe is connected to each other through energy ... because everything is energy .. so everything is affecting everything ...
the world is just like a swimming pool of energy ... so everything is connected .. and affecting everything ... that's the point of biogeometry also ..
so what do you think about this ??!

Now, to the question of mystical experience. The human mind/brain is capable of incredible feats of invention in altered states of consciousness. If you've ever experienced such things, you would be absolutely conviced of it's reality, and fully believe that you're in contact with God, aliens, the universe, whatever your preference. In these various levels of consciousness, it's pretty common to have reduced critical and judgement facilities, similar to dream states, but since you're still partially awake, you don't realize that the dream-like mental mechanisms are at work.

The problem will be that the outside world will refuse to cooperate and verify the experience in any scientific way.

However, if you are so inclined you can convince other people that you are sincere. A nice smile helps. Drama classes might be a good idea also. You can even help others to achieve their own experiences, sometimes by suggestion alone.

There is a very small category of things in the grey area. Lucid dreaming is an example of this. For a long time it was associated without of body experiences, and so received no scientific credibility or attention. Out of body research has still to show any valid results, but lucid dreaming research has begun to show interesting neuropsychology stuff, though there are few working on it. Not only that, you can try it for yourself.


It's not a hopeless situation, though. Everything *IS* connected in amazing and fascinating ways. Earth's biosphere is a truly amazing web of too many things to begin to list, as are nature's various ecosystems. Ecomonics, sociology, politics, etc. are more examples of complex and subtle interconnected systems. And, don't forget QM. You are going to have to put some work into it, however, if you want to really appreciate the deeper wonders of the quantum world, and the same goes for Chaos, complex systems, etc.

I'm still holding out hope that somebody will invent a timed-release Enlightment pill, and we can all share consciousness in a universal group mind. I hate that God won't show himself. Heck, I'd be satisfied if somebody would just bend a spoon for me. Meanwhile, I'm just going to spend my time appreciating the endless wonders of the world that are free of delusion.

 

[Cane_Toad]

Since you said it was "important":

**Edit** >> And what about that everything is energy, so everything is affecting everything ?! this important

As ZapperZ responds,

Originally Posted by ZapperZ View Post
Then you have just illustrate my point very clearly here where people are using words without understanding the underlying physics.

Sure enough everything *IS* energy. E=mc^2. So, I hope that's enough to explain why saying "everything is energy" is at once true, but is being used in a completely misleading way. The same with how the "observer creates events" in QM. If you make a statement like this in a context where nobody knows what "observer", "creates", or "events" means in the original context, it sure sounds like humans are creating reality by virtue of their consciousness, doesn't it?

If you're in the mood for something inspiring, try something like,

“I dreamed I was a butterfly, flitting around in the sky; then I awoke. Now I wonder: Am I a man who dreamt of being a butterfly, or am I a butterfly dreaming that I am a man?”

Chuang Tzu quotes (The most significant of China's early interpreters of Taoism, 389-286 BC)

It's beautiful, thought provoking, and you can use it as a way to feel about life and illusion without taking it literally.

 

[sneez]

On the contrary, there is no reason why to think that something is disconnected. Everything is inter-connected. There is a strong school of thought in today's science which is very usefull in providing practical answers in some limiting cases, however, it has nothing to say about philosophy since it denies its own assumptions that its based on. (Thats why so many contradictions arise as the field advances ...)

Ask most physicists and they will have well very predicted answer. (I am physicist as welll)

Ask biologists and they will have tend to have slightly different one in more cases (of cause since the reductionists technique which is based on this philosophy has pervaded western science this becomes harder).

Ask psychologists and they will probably more different answer.

The obvious fact is everything which at some point exists is interconnected to everything else.

it sure sounds like humans are creating reality by virtue of their consciousness, doesn't it?

That already was shown to be true. (Thats how the contradiction arise which I talk about)

If a claim about any phenomena is not being discussed in reputable news and science journals, you can be 99.9% sure that it's a load of bunk, and probably for monetary gain.

the reality is that its vice versa. As a person living daily in this market-advertisement approach to science I can give you numerous examples. Ppl who compete for grants if any here, are not going to even discuss how much good science is killed for political and other than objective reasons, its embarrassing

Modern science does not have answers to mystical experience. There are phenomena which these ppl exhibit which modern medicine ( neuroscience) cannot even approach since its philosophy does not permit it to ask those question. For some reference Shannon Moffett, the three pound enigma, book. Also, Will the God go away, book. But more importantly their "surfaces" of applicability do not intersect.
Mystisc do not know how to do science right and scientists have nothing close to mystical experiences to say anything of denial of it.

 

[hadeka]

Sneez .. i don't agree with you ..

The different between real science, and pseudoscience, is very clear.
The first, is proved to exist and you can make whatever experiements on it, and there is no skeptics to refute it.
The second, still exist as controversies .. till now, no one could ensure the existence of such phenomenas ..

I'm one of the most people that is interested in strange phenomenas .. and i had many .. such as out of body experiences ... so I am the one who should fight for proving its truth ..
But that's not me ..
I'm searching for every explanation that could explain these phenomenas ..

There is a base:
Anything that is perceived in the material world, has material causes.

This is a logical and scientific base.


It is just a matter of knowledge, to know or not know the real causes ..
Or it is a matter of time, to know them.

Materialism is the belief in reality...
Othen than that, is believing in temporor illusions.


**EDIT** >>> Mystics, and paranormal ,, are given that name, because the lack of our knowledge to explain them ... Once we get explanations, they will not longer be mysterious or paranormal ... It is the same idea of god of the gaps ..

So, these phenomenas, only exist because the lack of our explanation for them.

There is no god, and the world is matter.

 

[sneez]

Sneez .. i don't agree with you ..

The different between real science, and pseudoscience, is very clear.

Thats strange I did not argue for validity of pseudo science..., nor as a scientist would I think of it.

The first, is proved to exist and you can make whatever experiements on it, and there is no skeptics to refute it.

This is not true as you imply.

The second, still exist as controversies .. till now, no one could ensure the existence of such phenomenas

Im not arguing for any phenomena, I am saying that it depends on philosphical approach. There is much to be said on this which I do not have time to...

Anything that is perceived in the material world, has material causes.

This is a logical and scientific base.

absolutelly not true (and I don't even believe in absolutes ) (..but seriously this is just a philosophical stance about cause and effect. There are many other relationships between "entities/processes" than this simple one that ppl tend to.)

Materialism is the belief in reality...
Othen than that, is believing in temporor illusions.

Materialism is a philosophy which can be very well analyzed and shown to be wanting. You encourage you to study the history of these "scientific" atitudes to see for yourself.

Mystics, and paranormal ,, are given that name, because the lack of our knowledge to explain them ... Once we get explanations, they will not longer be mysterious or paranormal ... It is the same idea of god of the gaps ..

If that's how you define it fine. I am not forcing you to belief in them. I am tryingto direct over thinking process. There are as many philosophies as there are breaths right now on this planet.

There is no god, and the world is matter

Fine with me, as long as person who utters this realizes that its a philosophy.

 

[Mike2]

On the contrary, there is no reason why to think that something is disconnected. Everything is inter-connected. There is a strong school of thought in today's science which is very usefull in providing practical answers in some limiting cases, however, it has nothing to say about philosophy since it denies its own assumptions that its based on. (Thats why so many contradictions arise as the field advances ...

Even if there were a way to prove from logic alone that the consistency of all facts leads directly to quantum mechanics, would this really be a theory? Or would this just be an interpretation that only gives us all a warm and fuzzy feeling that there are reasons for everything? Such an thesis would not predict anything new or contradict already established theory.

 

[PIT2]

Thousands of years ago, people thought that earthquakes are caused because of god's anger.
Now, it will be extremely stupid to think of such explanation.

This kind of reasoning can also go the other way around: ball lightning and also meteors used to be dismissed by science, even though people saw them with their own eyes. Now they are well accepted phenomena, and it is silly to deny their existence. But the successes of science should not be extrapolated religiously into the future, and its failures should not be reason to abandon science.

The interconnectedness in QM has NOTHING to do with what you are describing here. In QM, it is the quantum entanglement. What you just describe above are nothing more than classical dynamics!

So there is interconnectedness in qm? Is the proposed interconnectedness of the universe a claim that can be investigated through physics?

The search for interconnectedness can be viewed as a reaction to the isolation we feel as individual self conscious creatures, as well as instinctual primate social reflexes.

Ur last statement may be true for some people, but it is also true that many mystics have been experiencing interconnectedness for thousands of years, so the very reason this is part of mysticism, is because of those experiences (they also used logic).

 

[Cane_Toad]

On the contrary, there is no reason why to think that something is disconnected. Everything is inter-connected. There is a strong school of thought in today's science which is very usefull in providing practical answers in some limiting cases, however,

You can make all sorts of statements like this. Sure everything is interconnected, we all exist in spacetime, therefore we are all interconnected.

The point is whether there is any *meaningful* interconnections in the way that people are describing it. The answer is no. The interconnections that science shows are such that their influence approaches zero in the human domain. QM is an example of this. The interconnectedness ends in the sub-atomic world for all intents and purposes. It could be we learn more someday, but for now, extending QM concepts into the macro world at the human level is pseudoscience at best, and science fiction in most cases.

it has nothing to say about philosophy since it denies its own assumptions that its based on. (Thats why so many contradictions arise as the field advances ...)

What denies... science. This is unclear.

it sure sounds like humans are creating reality by virtue of their consciousness, doesn't it?

That already was shown to be true. (Thats how the contradiction arise which I talk about)

Shown to be true by who, and how? I can find nothing in the QM process that shows any direct correlation or influence between consciousness and phenomena. The only indirect relationship is that a human sets up some lab equipment. Please show me any evidence whether any experiment is different when a human is present vs when a machine does the recording.

If a claim about any phenomena is not being discussed in reputable news and science journals, you can be 99.9% sure that it's a load of bunk, and probably for monetary gain.

the reality is that its vice versa. As a person living daily in this market-advertisement approach to science I can give you numerous examples. Ppl who compete for grants if any here, are not going to even discuss how much good science is killed for political and other than objective reasons, its embarrassing

We are not talking about good science that didn't get its funding. We are talking about claims about "the power of wishing has been confirmed by quantum physics", and stuff like that. Are you actually saying that somebody who is denied funding for the study of how prayer benefits childbirth, is good science? (In fact, this guy did get his funding. Think about that!)

Modern science does not have answers to mystical experience. There are phenomena which these ppl exhibit which modern medicine ( neuroscience) cannot even approach since its philosophy does not permit it to ask those question.

Like what? All the phenomena that I know of which fall into this category are anecdotal, i.e. the people "exhibit" it because they say so. The only thing I've heard of even remotely close is the way hard core meditators can control heart rate and such, but there is nothing paranormal about that.

There is a reason that Randi's $1 million dollar reward for any evidence of the paranormal has gone unclaimed for decades.

For some reference Shannon Moffett, the three pound enigma, book. Also, Will the God go away, book. But more importantly their "surfaces" of applicability do not intersect.

Both these books deal with advances in neuroscience, as far as I can tell by reading the reviews. They do look like they might be making some pretty stupid claims, like "we found a single neuron that exhibits conscious behavior", but that's only book jacket quotes.

Just because somebody with credentials writes a book doesn't make it true, and all too often, it isn't. Sensationalism sells. There are exceptions, like Oliver Sacks, who has written about truly amazing capabilities and problems people have had, but at no point does he depart from an objective viewpoint, and depart into speculation.

If you can show me one example of a guy levitating, bending a spoon, or reading a mind in a controlled setting, I'll gladly change my mind. Until then, I'll go along with the assertion that all known mystical experiences are completely subjective internal neurological phenomena, from all literature on the matter, and personal experience.

Mystisc do not know how to do science right and scientists have nothing close to mystical experiences to say anything of denial of it.

"Scientists have nothing close to mystical experiences", because not a single one in recorded history has stood up to the rigor of replication. Of those that had some basis in reality, i.e. every myth has a kernel of truth, science has explained it and given us a much deeper understanding.

Science doesn't study them, not because their philosophy doesn't allow it, but because when you get it into a lab, it invariably falls apart. There's nothing to study, with the exception of new advanced in medical brain scanning, but that's just revealing how the brain is fabricating mystical experiences. Cool stuff, but it has nothing to do with objective reality.

 

[Cane_Toad]

This kind of reasoning can also go the other way around: ball lightning and also meteors used to be dismissed by science, even though people saw them with their own eyes. Now they are well accepted phenomena, and it is silly to deny their existence. But the successes of science should not be extrapolated religiously into the future, and its failures should not be reason to abandon science.

Ball lightning and such were dismissed for good reason: they are extremely rare and difficult to produce. Science was correct in dismissing them until actual evidence was found. This is not a refutation of the scientific process. New and wonderous things are continually found. This doesn't mean the science of the past was somehow faulty because it didn't know about it.

So there is interconnectedness in qm? Is the proposed interconnectedness of the universe a claim that can be investigated through physics?

If you can find such a thing, let us know. I haven't found it anywhere.

Ur last statement may be true for some people, but it is also true that many mystics have been experiencing interconnectedness for thousands of years, so the very reason this is part of mysticism, is because of those experiences (they also used logic).

People have experienced sleep and dreams for thousands of years. No operational difference.

 

[loseyourname]

So there is interconnectedness in qm? Is the proposed interconnectedness of the universe a claim that can be investigated through physics?

The causal mechanisms at work are vastly different. The interconnectedness in QM occurs non-locally. Entangled particles exert some influence on each other without exerting any force we can detect, at a distance. The kind of interconnectedness we're talking about with things like the Butterfly Effect - a single mutation in the 1200s in England could conceivable have led to almost all parts of the world speaking English today - relies entirely upon well-understood, efficient causation, the old billiard ball physics. One thing happens, another thing happens, and so on and so forth like so many dominos until the effect is eventually much, much larger than the cause. A single stroke of luck 5 billion years ago, some kind of lightning bolt hitting the primordial soup, may very well have catalyzed the assembly of the first organic polymers and led to all life as we know.

In this latter way, it is events that are all connected. If you go far back enough through the causal world-line that is the personal identity of all existing objects, including yourself, they eventually all converge. We all come from the same stardust. This does not, however, mean that all macroscopic objects experience quantum entanglement. It also does not mean that the mystical thesis about interconnectedness is correct, if I take that thesis correctly to mean that all objects are still really one object, or one substance, connected in the sense that we all have access to a common field of experience. There is nothing in QM that would lead one to rationally conclude that the theory of the boundedness of conscious entities is wrong. Just as importantly, if the theory actually is wrong, and mystical experience is correct, there is no reason to believe that anything from QM explains why the theory is wrong. Postulating that quantum entanglement explains the existence of an unbounded field of common conscious experience can be appealing, because to the outsider is just says "all things are connected," which is exactly what many mystics say, and it's mysterious and spooky. Mysterious and spooky ideas are always popular explanations for unexplained phenomena, but this is simply a huge reach. In fact, quantum entanglement does not say that all things are connected. That's just a misrepresentation by people with a mystical agenda, or people who misunderstand what is actually being said. It only proposes that entangled subatomic particles are connected through some kind of spooky-sounding, possibly non-local form of causation. It says nothing whatsoever about the larger objects made up of these particles.

 

[Cane_Toad]

There is no god, and the world is matter.

Well...just as long as you recognize that we don't know that is true either. All we know is that we can't find any scientific evidence for any such deity.

There might be a God. It's not disprovable. The universe may already have blown up, but we just haven't received the light from the explosion. That isn't disprovable either, but why should we act as if either were valid?

The point is that a savvy human knows the extend of his knowledge. When you make a statement like the above, just be sure to say quietly to yourself, "As far as I know". That's just a personal preference, though. Use anything you like to keep your mind open, but vigilant.

 

[Cane_Toad]

It's not just entanglement that suggests connectedness at the QM level, to me. It's also the way that everything exists and interacts through probability, superposition, etc. Everything is packaged into quanta, but at the same time flits about as amorphous waves that can ghost through walls. Matter that condenses into a single state (virtual particles now too).

The strangeness of it all just breaks open the boundaries of expectation that I have about what's possible.

 

[hadeka]

so ,, as large objects are formed by smaller ogjects (electrons, and sub-atomic particles in general) ,, how they don't have the same behaviour of the sub-atomic particles ??!
How ??!

Can gravity be the explanation ??! just an idea ...

as it affects large objects, and can not let them to exist in many places at once ...
But it cannot control small (sub-atomic) particles .. so they behave randomly ...
just an idea ..

But the main question, is how do the big objects don't get affected (and have the same behaviour of sub-atomic) by the behaviour of sub-atomic ??!

Thank you for your patience and your nice replies Cane_Toad.

 

[hadeka]

**EDIT** >>> And what do you think about the effects of shapes ??1 such as pyramids for example ... ?!

 

[PIT2]

Ball lightning and such were dismissed for good reason: they are extremely rare and difficult to produce.

Obviously not, ball lightning and meteors existed regardless of them being rare and hard to reproduce.

People have experienced sleep and dreams for thousands of years. No operational difference.

Speaking of dreams:

The three most common criteria given for judging what is real are (1) the subjective vivid sense of reality, (2) duration through time, and (3) agreement intersubjectively as to what is real. Each of these can be related to specific brain functions. But it may be demonstrated that all three of these criteria determining what is real can be reduced to the first—the vivid sense of reality.

If we conclude that reality is ultimately reducible to the vivid sense of reality, what are we to make of religious and spiritual states that appear to the experiencing subject to be more real than baseline reality, even when they are recalled from within baseline reality? If we take baseline reality as our point of reference, it seems that there are some states that appear to be inferior to baseline reality and some states that appear to be superior when these states are recalled in baseline reality. And this is the crucial point. These different experiences of reality appear more real than baseline reality when recalled from baseline reality. Thus, individuals almost always refer to dreams as inferior to baseline reality when they are recalled and discussed within baseline reality. The same is true of psychotic hallucinations—after they are cured by phenothiazines or other psychotropic medications. A person having emerged from such a psychotic state will recall it as psychotic. The same cannot be said of many religious and spiritual states, which appear to be more real than baseline reality and are vividly described as such by experiencers after they return to baseline reality.

This is true of a number of such states including ABSOLUTE UNITARY STATES (Newberg, d’Aquili, and Rause 2001), “cosmic consciousness” as described by R. M. Bucke (1961), certain trance states, hyperlucid visions (usually of religious figures, religious symbols, and dead persons), and near-death experiences (Newberg and d’Aquili 1994). So real do these experiences appear when recalled in baseline reality that they often alter the way the experiencers live their lives.
http://www.andrewnewberg.com/pdfs/2005/NeuroscienceReligionReview.pdf

 

[Cane_Toad]

so ,, as large objects are formed by smaller ogjects (electrons, and sub-atomic particles in general) ,, how they don't have the same behaviour of the sub-atomic particles ??!
How ??!

They do have the same behavior. However, what happens is that when you get a lot of them, you start to get averaged behavior. It's a little like what happens with air pressure. A single a molecule only has the ability to bounce around, but once you get a whole bunch of them, then suddenly, you have an air mass that can exert pressure, have currents, whirlpools, etc. Another analogy is an orchestra. Once you add up all the sounds of the instruments, you have a piece of music which supercedes any single instrument.

Atoms, and some small molecules have been shown to have wave functions and interference just like sub-atomic particles. However, the bigger the object, the smaller the fringe distance, so finally you just can't detect the quantum effects any more. Look into "decoherence", which is this process of the quantum effects disappearing as we approach the macro level.

Can gravity be the explanation ??! just an idea ...

Gravity is a ball of wax I haven't cracked open yet. The theories aren't fully worked out on the quantum level anyway.

It isn't the main player in your question, though.

Thank you for your patience and your nice replies Cane_Toad.

 

[sneez]

You can make all sorts of statements like this. Sure everything is interconnected, we all exist in spacetime, therefore we are all interconnected.

The point is whether there is any *meaningful* interconnections in the way that people are describing it. The answer is no. The interconnections that science shows are such that their influence approaches zero in the human domain. QM is an example of this. The interconnectedness ends in the sub-atomic world for all intents and purposes. It could be we learn more someday, but for now, extending QM concepts into the macro world at the human level is pseudoscience at best, and science fiction in most cases.

You must not fully understand QM. QM and GR explicitly show that we cannot talk about independentness. EXPLICITLY!

Shown to be true by who, and how?

Read arxiv physics paper concerning QM. There are many papers showing the contradicion of the theory. One that comes to my mind is "is moon there when no one is looking" where it is acknowledged with note to "contradiction" that moon (yes macroscopic moon) is not there when no one is looking.

We are not talking about good science that didn't get its funding. We are talking about claims about "the power of wishing has been confirmed by quantum physics", and stuff like that. Are you actually saying that somebody who is denied funding for the study of how prayer benefits childbirth, is good science? (In fact, this guy did get his funding. Think about that!)

I did not say anything of that junk. I am working at top of reasearch and I know how funding is working. I don't know how you twist my comments...

Like what? All the phenomena that I know of which fall into this category are anecdotal, i.e. the people "exhibit" it because they say so. The only thing I've heard of even remotely close is the way hard core meditators can control heart rate and such, but there is nothing paranormal about that.

You have no idea what I am talking about. You think you read some comments to book you know what is "mysticism" ? (Those were examples of books that came to my mind.) You already have preconcieved conclusions and judgements on this topic so don't ask. Since one of my favorite books is the frindge watcher by Gardner and I am very big fan of his debunking nonsense I would never subscribe to this nonsense you imply I am arguig for. Mysticims and spirituality is not about bending spoons and bull**** like that.

 

[Cane_Toad]

**EDIT** >>> And what do you think about the effects of shapes ??1 such as pyramids for example ... ?!

Well, I think you know the answer to pyramid power by now. Have you found any controlled studies that show results? Do the claims follow from proven principles? Are the results measurable, and to what accuracy and precision, or are they open to the interpretation of the individual (i.e. "placebo effect")?

As a bigger question, geometry has great influence on almost all disciplines, architecture, optics, molecular biology, biological structures (fractals, golden ratio), etc. etc.

It's hard to say where the whole pyramid thing really started, though there's an argument that it grew out of people's desire to make big piles of dirt to memorialize their dead. As time went on, it was found that various height to base ratios didn't collapse as much. Eventually, you had rich kings/pharoahs who wanted a really, really big thing to memorialize themselves, and of course the only thing that fit the bill was a pyramid, given the building materials that they had. Then the kings assigned their religion to the structure, since of course it was going to house them in their afterlife, and of course, as kings they were "living gods", and presto, pyramids become magical.

 

[metacristi]

Hi all ..

I have a question please.

Poeple that believe and practice mystical, and paranormal experiences,, claim that there is a scientific evidence that support their experiences.
This evidence, is that according to quantum physics, everything in the universe is interconnected, and according to that sub-atomic particles can exist in many places at once .. and that everything in the universe is interconnected by the universal energy ...

So, is that all real ??! yes or no ??! and why ?!

thank you ... and waiting for your reply ...


Hadeka.

Well there is clearly a huge leap from quantum entanglement till the idea that all minds are interconnected (Bohm's holographic hypothesis for example is very 'far' from experiment) so the answer can be only no, those claims of epistemological privilege are unfounded, at this time at least (not to mention that there are still enough debates regarding the meaning of quantum entanglement and even energy).

But I would certainly not rally to the view that 'there is no place for metaphysics in science, other than as something to be explained away' the mark of scientism...metaphysics could be of help sometimes...indeed as Popper showed well the so called 'metaphysical research programs' had their importance in the shaping of modern science (he even went to say that without some of them certain breakthroughs would have not been possible at the time when they were made)...

Science needs indeed some weak authoritarianism but certainly not dogmatism...some metaphysical ideas (including religious ones) may indeed become part of an extended science of tomorrow (there is no necessity in this of course), seemingly 'metaphysical' assumptions can become very well at least partially justified 'at their time' when other 'background' assumptions are sufficiently prepared for this...Since there is, really, nothing at this time against the idea of universal interconnections I think we should refrain from deriving too strong conclusions, some 'no go' theorems* here and at this time could only hamper scientific progress...

The fundamental error of these new age people (holding that all minds are interconnected) is not the fact that they venture far from the existing scientific methodologies but their dogmatism (they firmly believe that their interpretation - based on their subjective experiences I agree - is the only correct one and that all rational people should hold the same)...or is clear that they should have used their hypothesis as being merely a research program which could be, potentially, promising in the future (that is openly recognizing that it has no epistemological privilege at the moment, preserving a healthy dose of fallibilism)...as Bohm, for example, did...


* automatically I am reminded here by the problem of strong emergence, 'decrees' of some physicists like ''By definition, there are no emergent properties. ‘Emergent’ properties can only appear if interactions are approximated or neglected. The idea of ‘emergent’ properties is a product of minds with restricted horizons, unable to see or admit the richness of consequences that general principles can produce.'' (MotionMountain course pg. 692) cannot, certainly, be of help...(or Motl's cheap rejection of Bohmian mechanics mainly ''because it tries to change physics'' and so on)