Reality: Fact or Fiction
- Thread starter Cliffy
- Start date
lol, river??, it's a boxing sim.
I could probably get past the toe stub thing, why let it ruin the rest of the day. lol a punch that equals Mike's is going to ruin th rest of the week.
Amazing how you can always find some fringe character who knows no more than you do to support your claims.
Yeah.
I'm just saying that reality is simply reality, but what makes the difference between people is how they perceive reality.
OK As long as I know it's me I'm shaving in the morning when I look in the mirror....;-)
Thomas Smid (M.Sc. Physics, Ph.D. Astronomy) You are desperate indeed to characterize that man as the fringe, I would guess he has a very decent mind and never makes unsupportable claims, something you will never tire of it seems. The entire universe is electric, you should accept that, it would be helpful on your spiritual quest.
You are simply wrong again, that isn't amazing at all, it is good basic science complete with the math and the experimental confirmation and the observation and the predictive powers so lacking in relativity that you are unable to understand. You are simply lost when it comes to physics Dexter. It's not hard to find someone who knows more than I do about any subject. It is very rare that I find someone like you who knows less.:smile:
The article in Physics Letters A was written by Tom Van Flandern, a research associate in the physics department at the University of Maryland. He also publishes Meta Research Bulletin, which supports "promising but unpopular alternative ideas in astronomy." In the 1990's, he worked as a special consultant to the Global Positioning System (GPS), a set of satellites whose atomic clocks allow ground observers to determine their position to within about a foot. Van Flandern reports that an intriguing controversy arose before GPS was even launched. Special relativity gave Einsteinians reason to doubt whether it would work at all. In fact, it works fine. (But more on that later.)file:///E:/teusdaymay11th/Tom%20Van%20Flandern%20Articles.htm
Last edited:
Yeah? And who is he? I was unable to find any real information about him and what he thinks except on his own web site. He appears not to be employed anywhere, to have no professional affiliations, I couldn't find out anything about him, and if he were really a reputable physicist, it should have been easy.
Yeah, and who are you to you too?:smile:
It's those professional affiliations that have retarded astrophysics these last hundred years Dexter, it's why you are so backward and why the rest of us, with an interest, have had to struggle through all the roadblocks set up by those affiliations of power and position for some better understanding of cosmology and physics. Your selection criteria is flawed, you want to use professional reputation instead of the science you claim to champion. The professional skeptics web sites won't help you. You have to think for yourself sometimes. The evidence for the electric model of the universe is overwhelmingly favourable, it has no worthy competition.
CV of Thomas Smid
Curriculum Vitae
It's those professional affiliations that have retarded astrophysics these last hundred years Dexter, it's why you are so backward and why the rest of us, with an interest, have had to struggle through all the roadblocks set up by those affiliations of power and position for some better understanding of cosmology and physics. Your selection criteria is flawed, you want to use professional reputation instead of the science you claim to champion. The professional skeptics web sites won't help you. You have to think for yourself sometimes. The evidence for the electric model of the universe is overwhelmingly favourable, it has no worthy competition.
CV of Thomas Smid
Curriculum Vitae
And if I looked in your mirror at the right angle, I would probably agree with you. lol
Apparently he is a bit more well-known than you think.
I found this:Please check this website out [Archive] - Physics Forums
So it seems there are quite a few people who don't think he's quite kosher.
Yes, but he's not known as a reputable physicist, as you saw. :smile:
I found half a dozen sites like that fairly quickly, but nothing to indicate he has any credibility. But the Beave thinks the scientific enterprise is irremediably corrupt and only the cranks have it right, so those are the people he cites.
I found half a dozen sites like that fairly quickly, but nothing to indicate he has any credibility. But the Beave thinks the scientific enterprise is irremediably corrupt and only the cranks have it right, so those are the people he cites.
[FONT="]Reality could very well be a figment of our imagination.[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Scientists have found that the results of experiments that were done by someone in the past do not always hold true in the present. When conducted by someone new, even under the same conditions, the results could be radically different. Einstein discovered that reality is influenced by the beliefs and mindset of the observer. [/FONT]
[FONT="]After repeating experiments dozens of times in different locations on the planet and receiving the same results, scientists would express their results as universal laws. Today, however, our views of reality are changing. Our ever expanding database of information is rendering those laws, long held to be true, extinct. Even if the experiments are repeated in exactly the same way the results will differ.[/FONT]
[FONT="]The discovery that reality is relative to the beholder is a major breakthrough in how we perceive life. It opens a door to an infinite number of possibilities that has been unavailable to past generations and may be the gateway to the next millennium - “to boldly go where no one has gone before”![/FONT]
[FONT="]The problem that faced European colonizers all over the world was they could not accept there could be views of reality that differed from their own. They came in contact with aboriginal peoples who’s beliefs about reality were so foreign to them they felt obliged to purge them of their “evil”. The colonists had to convert them to their way of thinking or destroy them for to allow another reality to co-exist with theirs would put their own existence into question. Since they possessed greater powers of persuasion, in the form of artillery, they were able to suppress these “primitive” beliefs.[/FONT]
Of course their success was limited - guns cannot kill spirit. What is real to a ‘natural’ person is not recognizable to a ‘civilized’ suburbanite living in the artificial environment of the industrial state. For people living in harmony with their environment the spirit indwelling in all things, animate or inanimate, is as real as the object. To civilized man the object is all. Spirits are external forces acting upon life not an integral part of it.
[FONT="]Civilized man sees a tree as just a wooden trunk with branches, roots and leaves - an object to be exploited for profit. Natural people see the life force pulsing through it, its spiritual essence, and its integral connection to their own lives and all that surrounds it. Different beliefs alter the perception of what a tree is as well as all other aspects of reality. [/FONT]
[FONT="]If there are ten witnesses at an event they will give ten different accounts of it. Almost all details will vary from colour, sex, size and order according to each person’s way of seeing. A classic example is the four Gospels of the Bible. Each story is quite different according to what was important and of interest to the author. [/FONT]
[FONT="]When you tell a story to someone you can expect that, by the time it gets back to you, it will be so altered as to be barely recognizable. This is because our experience of life colours our perception. Our beliefs, what is important, interesting and our mood all affect which details we notice and remembered. [/FONT]
[FONT="]Perception varies from person to person and culture to culture. Life may be a bed of roses to one or violence and horror to another. It may be purely material or pure energy (spirit), rigid or flexible, microscopic or macrocosmic. The variables are as endless as the human imagination.
[/FONT]
Excerpt from The Freedom of Responsibility
[FONT="][/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Scientists have found that the results of experiments that were done by someone in the past do not always hold true in the present. When conducted by someone new, even under the same conditions, the results could be radically different. Einstein discovered that reality is influenced by the beliefs and mindset of the observer. [/FONT]
[FONT="]After repeating experiments dozens of times in different locations on the planet and receiving the same results, scientists would express their results as universal laws. Today, however, our views of reality are changing. Our ever expanding database of information is rendering those laws, long held to be true, extinct. Even if the experiments are repeated in exactly the same way the results will differ.[/FONT]
[FONT="]The discovery that reality is relative to the beholder is a major breakthrough in how we perceive life. It opens a door to an infinite number of possibilities that has been unavailable to past generations and may be the gateway to the next millennium - “to boldly go where no one has gone before”![/FONT]
[FONT="]The problem that faced European colonizers all over the world was they could not accept there could be views of reality that differed from their own. They came in contact with aboriginal peoples who’s beliefs about reality were so foreign to them they felt obliged to purge them of their “evil”. The colonists had to convert them to their way of thinking or destroy them for to allow another reality to co-exist with theirs would put their own existence into question. Since they possessed greater powers of persuasion, in the form of artillery, they were able to suppress these “primitive” beliefs.[/FONT]
Of course their success was limited - guns cannot kill spirit. What is real to a ‘natural’ person is not recognizable to a ‘civilized’ suburbanite living in the artificial environment of the industrial state. For people living in harmony with their environment the spirit indwelling in all things, animate or inanimate, is as real as the object. To civilized man the object is all. Spirits are external forces acting upon life not an integral part of it.
[FONT="]Civilized man sees a tree as just a wooden trunk with branches, roots and leaves - an object to be exploited for profit. Natural people see the life force pulsing through it, its spiritual essence, and its integral connection to their own lives and all that surrounds it. Different beliefs alter the perception of what a tree is as well as all other aspects of reality. [/FONT]
[FONT="]If there are ten witnesses at an event they will give ten different accounts of it. Almost all details will vary from colour, sex, size and order according to each person’s way of seeing. A classic example is the four Gospels of the Bible. Each story is quite different according to what was important and of interest to the author. [/FONT]
[FONT="]When you tell a story to someone you can expect that, by the time it gets back to you, it will be so altered as to be barely recognizable. This is because our experience of life colours our perception. Our beliefs, what is important, interesting and our mood all affect which details we notice and remembered. [/FONT]
[FONT="]Perception varies from person to person and culture to culture. Life may be a bed of roses to one or violence and horror to another. It may be purely material or pure energy (spirit), rigid or flexible, microscopic or macrocosmic. The variables are as endless as the human imagination.
[/FONT]
Excerpt from The Freedom of Responsibility
[FONT="][/FONT]
Sorry. I wrote that twenty five years ago and I don't have that data anymore. I do know that the mind set of the observer can have an effect on the outcome. I believe Einstein made that observation. As views change so do the results. The only recent info I have come across has been in quantum physics and mechanics. Although Dex poo poos What the Bleep do We Know? the scientists interviewed in that movie are the top in their field. But I can see how some would have difficulty with their conclusions. They question the very basic fabric of our views of reality.
The interviews were selectively edited to make it appear the scientists support the movie's contentions when they don't, and at least one of them, David Albert, has reacted to it with contempt and scorn. The movie is mostly pseudoscientific BS, completely misrepresents what quantum theory actually says. If you want some real information, try Nick Herbert's book Quantum Reality.
One reviewers perspective.
Our brain is a fascinating machine constantly encoding and embedding imprints of memories, inherited memories, and past experiences in us forever altering our perception of life and ourselves. Whether or not it's a promotional film for the RSE, it does in fact offer alternate perspectives into our universe and minds that will scare many whom cling to their own beliefs. Is it so wrong to explore other views of life? Are we forever doomed to be content in our own world without exploring other's views of the world we live in? Regardless of how we view this world, we still live in it together, and promoting RSE or Ramtha didn't truly alter my expectations or viewing experience. We, as humans, have the ability to alter reality itself, yet we're still just insignificant dots, more of a microcosm for the bigger picture. And no, I'm not talking about god. But reality. So many million particles make up our very being, our very reality, it's utterly defeating to just subject ourselves to one thought process when so many possibilities await us. It's utterly defeating to sit down and not attempt to explore an event or significant occurrence and just pass it off as an act of god. Groucho Marx once said "I, not events, have the power to make me happy or unhappy today. I can choose which it shall be. Yesterday is dead, tomorrow hasn't arrived yet. I have just one day, today, and I'm going to be happy in it." "What the..." examines human responsibility and our ability to discover our surroundings and how we as dominant objects in this world have the chance to alter our reality and our surroundings without the help of an outside mysterious force. While some would view this as a spiritual film, I tended to view it more as an argument for reason and logic. And it's an engrossing look at such a concept.
The point is the exploration of ideas. Reality is not rigid. I discovered this quite by accident while sharing a different culture, the native American spiritual practices, and experienced many events and phenomenon that were outside the acceptable norms of my catholic upbringing. That is when I realized that reality is dependent, to a great extent, on your perspective and belief systems.
Our brain is a fascinating machine constantly encoding and embedding imprints of memories, inherited memories, and past experiences in us forever altering our perception of life and ourselves. Whether or not it's a promotional film for the RSE, it does in fact offer alternate perspectives into our universe and minds that will scare many whom cling to their own beliefs. Is it so wrong to explore other views of life? Are we forever doomed to be content in our own world without exploring other's views of the world we live in? Regardless of how we view this world, we still live in it together, and promoting RSE or Ramtha didn't truly alter my expectations or viewing experience. We, as humans, have the ability to alter reality itself, yet we're still just insignificant dots, more of a microcosm for the bigger picture. And no, I'm not talking about god. But reality. So many million particles make up our very being, our very reality, it's utterly defeating to just subject ourselves to one thought process when so many possibilities await us. It's utterly defeating to sit down and not attempt to explore an event or significant occurrence and just pass it off as an act of god. Groucho Marx once said "I, not events, have the power to make me happy or unhappy today. I can choose which it shall be. Yesterday is dead, tomorrow hasn't arrived yet. I have just one day, today, and I'm going to be happy in it." "What the..." examines human responsibility and our ability to discover our surroundings and how we as dominant objects in this world have the chance to alter our reality and our surroundings without the help of an outside mysterious force. While some would view this as a spiritual film, I tended to view it more as an argument for reason and logic. And it's an engrossing look at such a concept.
The point is the exploration of ideas. Reality is not rigid. I discovered this quite by accident while sharing a different culture, the native American spiritual practices, and experienced many events and phenomenon that were outside the acceptable norms of my catholic upbringing. That is when I realized that reality is dependent, to a great extent, on your perspective and belief systems.
Last edited: