Found this the other day
Just wondering how other people feel about it ?
Is quantum physics real or not ....there seem to be differing opinions on it.
Anyways heres the site

www.cfpf.org.uk

I have 3 books on Quantum mechanics, seems real to me. What do you mean is it real or not..

hmm

Going to look at that site now..... if it loads.

Well i've heard that some mainstrean scientists consider it bunkum.
Whats your take on it whoa...does it have anything to offer ?
Have you formulated any opinions on the afterlife after reading the three books ?
Thanks

Could you give me a brief synopsis, I cannot access the site.

And what exactly is the relationship between quantum physics/mechanics and a spiritual afterlife?
Help me, I'm diffused.

Quantum physics is real. Converting energy to matter is done in particle accelerators. Basically, the more energy you put into a particle that's smashed, the more sub-atomics you get out. It's called the "particle zoo" effect.

As for that site.... I wouldn't spend too much time there. I checked out a couple articles. It seems to be seeped in anti-Christian Greek-classicism, with just a hint of Schitzophrenia.

Try this link in
http://www.cfpf.org.uk/

Rakarin02
what do you thing quantum physics proves ...if anything ?

never checked it out before.... but thanks

I remember when Quantum was new a scientist(sorry forget name) said 'it proved the existance of God'. I think what they meant was, it proved that at the basis of all reality is a power/energy that was conscious in it's own right because it responded to the minds of the scientists.

This is what happens in magick, you send your desire and intention out into the realm of quantum and the four basic elements (particles) respond. Here's a site that might be helpful: http://www.ecauldron.com/quantummagick.php
Hope it's not too complicated


This is an interesting little video to watch, it zooms in from outer space and shows the four elements at the centre of a leaf. Notice the pictures that are the same

http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/sc...csu/powersof10/

Good links TA....tnx
Universe to Leaf is excellent

From THE SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF SURVIVAL AFTER DEATH
Hello B-man.

What's applicable to you that proves the "afterlife" from this article. That is, the author, Michael Roll, makes what points that you find compelling?

Well almost every point made on the site is evidential of an afterlife.....i suppose that is a better word than proof.
The point is ,is it all BS or does it have substance ?For anyone that understands Quantum Physics ...does it indeed strenghten the argument for proof of an afterlife ?
Personally i dont know because i dont know enough about the subject....but the arguments do seem to be made in a matter of fact way....so i spose i'm asking rather than stating !!!!!
I suppose here
http://www.cfpf.org.uk/articles/background...ificproof1.html

is a good place to start

What point, is the most compelling from all his points. Can you give me a shred?

Well, I browsed the article further and see very little scientific notation or even how quantum theory is supposed to confirm the existence of a soul.

However, it seems more like an appeal to authority, as long as the authority agrees with the author and if you don't agree with the author, well, prepared to have you're personhood or your opinins discussed and not your theories, or math.

I have to wonder why this site is called "Campaign for Philosophy" and not Campaign for Science" or something as equally jingoistic.

I am not a quantum scientist, and I really doubt if few, if any, lay-people can really understand the theory and its mathematics. It's highly esoteric and counter-intuitive according to those that engage in this research.

Hi all

The only scientists that think quantum mechanics is false, are the ones that are terrified that life after death or god might be proven as fact, because they know it would contradict much of what is in there text books. It makes them feel very uncomfortable to say the least.

All the best
Faeden

Really Faeden? Sometimes you surprise me.

Anyway Faeden, how do you know that these "scientists" in question are in fact really terrified?

What you suggesting is that these "scientists" are purposely committing a fraud by engaging in something that isn't science.

But your ticked because these scaredie-cat scientists reject your belief in Cartesian Dualism.

Just a thought, but maybe you might be interested in watching " Elegant Universe " http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/program.html

Free to watch and its brilliant !

I wouldn't put too much stock in that place. Be wary of anyone who starts claiming that they have special scientific knowledge that is being suppressed or censored.

Hi there



Oh I’m full of surprises believe me.



I do not know for a fact no, but I am going on what I have observed in the folks that dismiss it without even giving it a chance, they say there theory of right and that is that, they do not even debate it, to me that sounds like someone sticking there head in the sand, ostredges (excuse spelling) do that when they are scared of something. Can you image what it would do to some scientists, if the after life and "magic" was proven as scientific fact? It would cause them great embarrassment, as they have been calling people that believe in magic and the after life as crazy for so long, it would be a hard pill to swallow.



What ?? Sorry I do not quite understand the question, but ill answer it on what I think your saying. I do not think that someone is not a scientists just because they do not believe the quantum or string theory, nor do I think just because someone believes in it is not a scientist. I am simply saying there are many scientists that would rather say its hokum than actually consider it, because it would be proof that other dimensions are possible, which would force them to have to admit that the after life might well be a fact.

I do not think by ignoring something they are committing fraud no, just missing out on something that could hold the key to questions we have about the universe(s).




LOL I’m not ticked, I do not want science to prove other dimensions fact, because I like the fact I know something many people do not, and I think the mystery of these things are what keeps it interesting.

All the best
Faeden

(quotes=Faeden,Apr 14 2005, 04:50 PM)

Well, if you must know, I surprised to read such a objection. You usually put much more care and thought into your posts and that all I really read was hyperbole.


Again, more hyperbole.

You said you observed this in these folks? Faeden are you a scientist yourself? If so what field? Also, can you tell me what the attached graphic is trying to represent? Please.

And if that is too difficult, please explain who wrote this "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" and the significance of it.

If magic or the afterlife was in the realm of science, that is describable by scientific laws that (very important here----->) describe the laws of nature, then yes I do think that scientists would be very excited.

However, the supernatural is not in the providence of science. Supernaturalism is by very definition outside of the context of our very natural, materialist existence. If the afterlife was in the context of nature, then it will have to subscribe to all the natural laws that all things must and therefor would not be super/extranatural.

I did not see any argument from that website that propositionally associated quanta as specified information like a series of boolean logic statements. (And for those that ever used a computer, you might know what I mean.)

"Personally, I would be delighted if there were a life after death, especially if it permitted me to continue to learn about this world and others, if it gave me a chance to discover how history turns out." Dr. Carl Sagan.

Wow. Sounds sure like he's got his head in the sand. And I actually agree with Dr. Sagan. But we live in the context of nature, anything outside nature is outside the context in which we can learn about it.


Simply, science works by observing phenomena in the natural world (sometimes by indirect observation) and then ascribing a theory to that observation, followed by testing, observation, testing and then describing the phenomena and then presenting that data to peer reviewed professionals. All scientific laws are falsifiable. Most times the theory fails. But if a new theory, based upon my brief description of method above, and refutes previous or expands theories, passes the acid test of falsifiably, it is then incorporated as a new scientific law which we use to understand the laws of nature.

Open-end inquiry in other words. Retroactive viruses were once thought as impossible, well science proved that wrong too, because of that open-end inquiry.

Basically, your indicting the whole institution of our human endeavor, which has verifiable results as fraudulent from the time of Galieao. In of itself, it is a reasonable proposition to follow – is the scientific method false? but what is hyperbole is to state that somehow "because they know it would contradict much of what is in there text books."


Glad you're not ticked. That's my mind reading or hyperbole (not really) on my part.

Hi Quicksand

I take it you are a scientists, going on the nature or your last post, or have very scientific beliefs, which is why you seem so ticked off I’m not a scientist no, but I know some, and talk with them, I have been on investigations with them, and often talk about these theories.


I put as much care as I always put into my post, I think I have just hit a nerve lol.

I have nothing against science, I mean id be a hypocrite if I was, I am using something now that was invented by science, science does no end of good, but I do not understand why some refuse to look at evidence that is staring them in the face.

I dont know what that attachment means LOL what has that got to do with science ignoring quantum physics?

I just think science can cause some people to see in tunnel vision.

All the best
Faeden

Faeden

Your kidding aside, no I am not a scientist. But I don't presume to understand these concepts when my training clearly disallows me from trying to establish a theory that "propositionally associated quanta as specified information like a series of boolean logic statements."

But, what I do understand is sophistry when I see it. I do understand logic pretty good and analyzing arguments. I understand the scientific theory and the context of what it can accomplish.

I am a student of a kind of materialistic epistomology.

That's what I understand.

However, I don't pretend to understand what I don't know by taking any propropistion on blind faith alone and call that knowledge.

That's all man.

It's a representation of the five superstring theories, and M-theory, which is supposed to unite them. Einstein wrote the paper quicksand refers to. It accomodated James Maxwell's equations governing electromagnitism with Newtonian mechanics and formed the basis of his special theory of relativity.

I don't see what any of this has to do with the possibility of an afterlife.

Nothing of course.

I was attempting to have Faeden establish his credentials, just in case, that he did in fact, observe this behavior of those in the scientific institution first hand.

And demonstrate his knowledge of said principles.

Hi again.



I never said you did. Who said that? Ill slap them for you You seem a very educated person.

I wish I could make you have the experiences I have had, and let you see what I have seen, most of what I understand now is based on my personal experiences, if only I could lend you my brain for a day, you would soon changed your mind (quite literally) but you would see why it is I believe in the paranormal so strongly. Numbers and measurements are not the answer to everything, sometimes things are staring us in the face, it just take something extraordinary to make us see it.

Maybe your experience something one day, that will cause you to have no doubts about the supernatural world, I hope you do to its a blessing

All the best
Faeden

Thank you Faeden. I feel you are reasonable person, perhaps while we differ on some things, I feel I can at least have an intelligent conversation about these things with you.

Okay. I don't feel like going back and forth to much on this (not with Turtle peering over my shoulder) so I will say one thing only about personal experiences and leave it at that. You may reply, but I won't. (See that Zandor, I cooling my stubborness te'heee.)

Personal experiences, are by there very nature subjective.

Science can't measure subjective experiences, the qualia if you will. Subjective experiences can not be tested under lab and under control conditions. (Although Steven Pinker thinks that someday that maybe possible.)

I realize that your experience are very profound to you of course. And I do respect that, however, when I pick through these posts and raise these problems, it is not an attack on your subjective experiences. I am merely explaning that yours (and others) demands or expectations of what science can achieve is not realistic or even tenable when the things you believe simply not possible to prove by science as science is a materialistic investigation as it is the product of a materialistic universe so to speak.