Home | Community | Message Board


Vaposhop
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Amazon Shop for: Scales

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]
Anonymous

the tao of physics
    #2196963 - 12/23/03 01:40 AM (12 years, 11 months ago)

i'm reading this book. i think it's pretty good. has anyone else here read it?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAldous
enthusiast
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/20/99
Posts: 894
Loc: inside my skull
Last seen: 21 hours, 19 minutes
Re: the tao of physics [Re: ]
    #2197207 - 12/23/03 06:57 AM (12 years, 11 months ago)

It's on my shelf, as are a few others I still have to read.
I'm currently reading something vaguely similar, I guess, titled 'The holographic universe', about David Bohm's and Karl Pribram's theories on the nature of reality, and how they could explain phenomena deemed 'paranormal'. Some of it also hints at Eastern philosophies. Mind-warping stuff.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinelucid
Jack's AlteredConsciousness

Registered: 03/29/03
Posts: 6,319
Loc: up on the bidet
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
Re: the tao of physics [Re: Aldous]
    #2197309 - 12/23/03 09:23 AM (12 years, 11 months ago)

might be better if they first set out to prove
the existance of this "paranormal" stuff before
trying to conjure up theories for explaining it.


--------------------
"no-mind un-thinks no-thought..."


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePHARMAKOS
addict
Registered: 09/13/02
Posts: 573
Last seen: 12 years, 5 months
Re: the tao of physics [Re: lucid]
    #2197579 - 12/23/03 12:41 PM (12 years, 11 months ago)

whats the differance between proving something and providing a theory for it? thats HOW you explain it. Gravity si proven once a theory that works is invented to explain observed effects, like the tendency of things to fall.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinelucid
Jack's AlteredConsciousness

Registered: 03/29/03
Posts: 6,319
Loc: up on the bidet
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
Re: the tao of physics [Re: PHARMAKOS]
    #2197698 - 12/23/03 01:54 PM (12 years, 11 months ago)

um...I mean prove that someone has actually observed
it under repeatable conditions ?
like Gravity.


--------------------
"no-mind un-thinks no-thought..."


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePedM
Interested In Your Brain
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/31/99
Posts: 5,494
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 18 days, 21 hours
Re: the tao of physics [Re: ]
    #2197733 - 12/23/03 02:16 PM (12 years, 11 months ago)

As is my recollection, nothing paranormal is discussed in Tao of Physics.

Capra's discourse is amazing, and convincing. I found that Tao of Physics made a pretty huge impact on the way I view the world.

It was definitely an excellent book which expertly linked the realizations of the ancient to the discoveries of the modern. Tao of Physics reconciles a lot of the conflict between the rigidity of science, and the subtlety of mysticism, while simultaneously revealing the direction we are heading with our research and discovery.

Inspiring. I especially loved the chapter where he explains in quantum physical terms the Buddhist notion of emptiness.


--------------------


:poison: Dark Triangles - New Psychedelic Techno Single - Listen on Soundcloud :poison:
Gyroscope full album available SoundCloud or MySpace


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAldous
enthusiast
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/20/99
Posts: 894
Loc: inside my skull
Last seen: 21 hours, 19 minutes
Re: the tao of physics [Re: lucid]
    #2198195 - 12/23/03 06:20 PM (12 years, 11 months ago)

Well, sorry to deflect the thread toward another book ('The Holographic Universe', by Michael Talbot, which has been discussed a few times on this board), but this just begs for a reply.

The fact is that it has been done, over and again, not by just another nutcase, but by Robert Jahn, a Princeton researcher who wasn't a believer to begin with. His research center has documented the power of mind over matter under controlled and repeatable conditions, and repeated it has been, thousands of times.

I used to be a hardcore materialist as well, but am now starting to open my eyes on the broader picture. Not being a materialist doesn't mean rejecting rationalism, it only means acceptance that science as yet only offers a partial view of reality, and matter might just not be the ultimate base of reality. After all, the above mentioned experiment is just one example of a myriad documented cases, spontaneously occuring or experimental, in which current science just has no answer. Strangely, these instances are simply ignored by many established scientists. And again, this has nothing to do with magic, it's just a question of humility, of being able to admit reality might be slightly more complex than Newton or even Einstein described it. As Saint Augustine put it, "Miracles happen, not in opposition to nature, but in opposition to what we know of nature".


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDoctorJ
Stranger
 Arcade Champion: Frogger

Registered: 06/30/03
Posts: 8,451
Loc: space
Re: the tao of physics [Re: ]
    #2198412 - 12/23/03 08:16 PM (12 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

i'm reading this book. i think it's pretty good. has anyone else here read it?





My dad made me read it when I was 13.

re-read it when I was 19.

good book.


--------------------
peace, pot, and microdot!


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: the tao of physics [Re: Aldous]
    #2199098 - 12/24/03 04:29 AM (12 years, 11 months ago)

not by just another nutcase, but by Robert Jahn, a Princeton researcher who wasn't a believer to begin with. His research center has documented the power of mind over matter under controlled and repeatable conditions, and repeated it has been, thousands of times.
*Yawn* His work is totally questionable, not just by Swami, but by other university researchers unable to replicate his results. *Looks outside window* yup! They are building yet another casino based on the TOTAL INABILITY to control matter with the mind.

Strangely, these instances are simply ignored by many established scientists.
The greatest fallacy of all. It is USUALLY scientists researching these things, but the esoteric claims do not stand up to scrutiny. It has little to do with mindset.

And again, this has nothing to do with magic, it's just a question of humility, of being able to admit reality might be slightly more complex than Newton or even Einstein described it.
Where is your in-depth psychological testing on millions of individuals to back up this B.S. assertment? (Let me guess - you have no facts and no research.)


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAldous
enthusiast
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/20/99
Posts: 894
Loc: inside my skull
Last seen: 21 hours, 19 minutes
Re: the tao of physics [Re: Swami]
    #2200930 - 12/25/03 02:50 PM (12 years, 11 months ago)

Welcome to this thread, Chief Skeptic, you were expected.
Ready to apply your own standards to yourself?
Quote:

Swami said:
*Yawn* His work is totally questionable, not just by Swami, but by other university researchers unable to replicate his results.


OK, I'd like at least one name, credentials, and a decent summary of their research, in a word about as much information as I gave about Jahn.
Quote:

*Looks outside window* yup! They are building yet another casino based on the TOTAL INABILITY to control matter with the mind.


Oh, c'mon, don't be unfair, Jahn is not claiming you can force a chosen number on a roulette wheel, just that you can influence the course of a few balls (out of 9.000!) through a vertical maze. A few out of 9.000 might seem exceedingly poor, but we're not debating quality here, just the statistical and replicable fact (according to Jahn) that this influence occurs.
Quote:

It is USUALLY scientists researching these things, but the esoteric claims do not stand up to scrutiny. It has little to do with mindset.


Wrong, read what Jahn says on his website:
"In many instances, the effects appear to be operator-specific in their details and the results of given operators on widely different machines frequently tend to be similar in character and scale. Pairs of operators with shared intentions are found to induce further anomalies in the experimental outputs, especially when the two individuals share an emotional bond. The data also display significant disparities between female and male operator performances, and consistent series position effects are observed in individual and collective results. [...] These random devices also respond to group activities of larger numbers of people, even when they are unaware of the machine's presence. "FieldREG" data produced in environments fostering relatively intense or profound subjective resonance show larger deviations than those generated in more pragmatic assemblies. Venues that appear to be particularly conducive to such field anomalies include small intimate groups, group rituals, sacred sites, musical and theatrical performances, and charismatic events. In contrast, data generated during academic conferences or business meetings show no deviations from chance."
I know what you might say, Swami: this is no science anymore, and the guy was smart enough to anticipate criticism or failure to replicate the results.
I know, that question has been debated here many times, and we're not gonna solve the problem here. Consider just one thing: the response to psychedelics is also highly dependent on the mindset of the subject and the setting of the experiment. That's why 'serious' scientists tended to elicit bad trips in their sujects with their medical scrutiny and research lab environments. It led them to think psychedelics were merely a psychotomimetic. We all know they've been proved wrong.
Quote:

Where is your in-depth psychological testing on millions of individuals to back up this B.S. assertment? (Let me guess - you have no facts and no research.)


I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean here. Who are you talking about, who are the millions? Clarity required.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: the tao of physics [Re: Aldous]
    #2201069 - 12/25/03 05:16 PM (12 years, 11 months ago)

Welcome to this thread, Chief Skeptic, you were expected.
Welcome also fellow skeptic (as is everyone else on this board).

OK, I'd like at least one name, credentials, and a decent summary of their research, in a word about as much information as I gave about Jahn.
It is up to you to show back-up from other sources. People that fail don;t usually make a hullabaloo and publish their negative results. We have ONE questionable study done decades ago. Apprently you don;t find it unusual that with all the pople studying this no one can replicate the Princeton research?

just the statistical and replicable fact (according to Jahn) that this influence occurs.
Where, oh where, is the replicable part?

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Where is your in-depth psychological testing on millions of individuals to back up this B.S. assertment? (Let me guess - you have no facts and no research.)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean here. Who are you talking about, who are the millions? Clarity required.

You don't even read your own posts?!

Strangely, these instances are simply ignored by many established scientists. And again, this has nothing to do with magic, it's just a question of humility, of being able to admit reality might be slightly more complex than Newton or even Einstein described it.
Where is your study of what established scientists do and do not think? Where is your psychological testing on the humility level of millions of unrelated individuals?

If your statement made even the slightest bit of sense, then science would hardly ever progress. But as scientists frequently question the status quo, we are moving forward at ever-increasing speed.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: the tao of physics [Re: Swami]
    #2201762 - 12/26/03 08:28 AM (12 years, 11 months ago)

Could someone produce a summary of these threads when they are finished? Like Cliff notes or something?

It would save a lot of time over reading the bickering.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAldous
enthusiast
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/20/99
Posts: 894
Loc: inside my skull
Last seen: 21 hours, 19 minutes
Re: the tao of physics [Re: Swami]
    #2201984 - 12/26/03 12:42 PM (12 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

Swami said:It is up to you to show back-up from other sources. People that fail don;t usually make a hullabaloo and publish their negative results. We have ONE questionable study done decades ago. Apprently you don;t find it unusual that with all the pople studying this no one can replicate the Princeton research?


Remember what I said about submitting to your own standards? You just failed the test.

First, it is not up to me to back up your claims. You're the one who claims some people actually tried to replicate and failed. I'm not going to back up a claim I never made in the first place.

Second, stop making insinuations such as:" We have ONE questionable study done decades ago". There have been numerous studies going on in the PEAR project. Questionable in what way? "Decades ago" should in fact read: "over the course of the last 25 years". And even if it was decades ago, what would it change? Michelson's experiment disproved the existence of ether in 1883. That was more than a century ago, but ether still doesn't exist.
Stop it, it harms your arguments.

Third, unlike you, I do think that someone who would fail to replicate this would "make a hullabaloo"; skeptics love to disprove studies that don't fit their worldview.

End of argument as far as I'm concerned, except if you come up with something convincing.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhluck
Carpal Tunnel
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/11/99
Posts: 11,393
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 10 months, 9 days
Re: the tao of physics [Re: Aldous]
    #2201999 - 12/26/03 12:47 PM (12 years, 11 months ago)

"skeptics love to disprove studies that don't fit their worldview."

Also, believers do the exact same thing.

More skeptics tend to have a background in science, and a secure grasp of what things like "double blind" and "control group" mean than believers, and thus end up being able to point out when studies glaringly lack these things.


--------------------
"I have no valid complaint against hustlers. No rational bitch. But the act of selling is repulsive to me. I harbor a secret urge to whack a salesman in the face, crack his teeth and put red bumps around his eyes." -Hunter S Thompson
http://phluck.is-after.us


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: the tao of physics [Re: Aldous]
    #2202006 - 12/26/03 12:51 PM (12 years, 11 months ago)

Princeton Research = statistical anomaly and researcher bias and selective data reporting.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhluck
Carpal Tunnel
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/11/99
Posts: 11,393
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 10 months, 9 days
Re: the tao of physics [Re: Phluck]
    #2202015 - 12/26/03 12:56 PM (12 years, 11 months ago)

Scientists discover new things all the time. Old and well founded theories are constantly being shattered by new discoveries. Scientists are often forced to change their worldview.

Unless, of course, you listen to someone who believes in ESP or aliens or the like. They claim scientists are a very closed minded bunch. That they ignore actual scientific results.

A scientist's defense to these accusations is usually a demand to see some well done studies other than the handful of poorly conducted or inconclusive studies that the believers have to offer. Any decent evidence to back up their claims. The believers, not being familiar with what constitutes a well conducted study, believe they have provided this and conclude that the scientists are being closed minded.

There are bad scientists out there who are closed minded, and there are bad scientists who conduct bad studies. But once you can get some good scientists to conduct some good studies, that come up with solid evidence of... any of this paranormal supernatural stuff... you WILL get the interest of the mainstream scientific community.


--------------------
"I have no valid complaint against hustlers. No rational bitch. But the act of selling is repulsive to me. I harbor a secret urge to whack a salesman in the face, crack his teeth and put red bumps around his eyes." -Hunter S Thompson
http://phluck.is-after.us


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAldous
enthusiast
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/20/99
Posts: 894
Loc: inside my skull
Last seen: 21 hours, 19 minutes
Re: the tao of physics [Re: Phluck]
    #2202020 - 12/26/03 12:58 PM (12 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

Phluck said:
"skeptics love to disprove studies that don't fit their worldview."

Also, believers do the exact same thing.


Agreed, I should have written: "people love to disprove...". But it doesn't change much to my statement.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: the tao of physics [Re: Aldous]
    #2202027 - 12/26/03 01:07 PM (12 years, 11 months ago)

Bottom line: real science eventually leads to real-world technology.

When is PEAR going to market a mental "clapper", a device to turn lights on and off with your mind?


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhluck
Carpal Tunnel
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/11/99
Posts: 11,393
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 10 months, 9 days
Re: the tao of physics [Re: Aldous]
    #2202029 - 12/26/03 01:09 PM (12 years, 11 months ago)

It should be noted that there are a lot of flawed and poorly done studies out there, so a lot of discrediting is done for perfectly valid reasons.


--------------------
"I have no valid complaint against hustlers. No rational bitch. But the act of selling is repulsive to me. I harbor a secret urge to whack a salesman in the face, crack his teeth and put red bumps around his eyes." -Hunter S Thompson
http://phluck.is-after.us


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhluck
Carpal Tunnel
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/11/99
Posts: 11,393
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 10 months, 9 days
Re: the tao of physics [Re: Swami]
    #2202036 - 12/26/03 01:15 PM (12 years, 11 months ago)

I can make the room dark by sending signals from my brain... to my eyelids.


--------------------
"I have no valid complaint against hustlers. No rational bitch. But the act of selling is repulsive to me. I harbor a secret urge to whack a salesman in the face, crack his teeth and put red bumps around his eyes." -Hunter S Thompson
http://phluck.is-after.us


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]

Amazon Shop for: Scales

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Skeptics mushiemountain 1,213 10 03/30/07 08:45 AM
by redgreenvines
* Skepticism is self-destructive
( 1 2 all )
exclusive58 2,317 36 05/11/05 05:30 PM
by Phluck
* Consciousness, Physics, and Spirituality. Reggaejunkiejew 1,265 4 10/28/02 04:47 PM
by Strumpling
* the Tao and the workings of the ego the_phoenix 680 8 04/02/05 10:46 PM
by SkorpivoMusterion
* The fallacy of skepticism
( 1 2 3 all )
Economist 3,322 43 07/20/07 05:52 PM
by figgusfiddus
* A word on skeptics Buddha1 653 9 10/08/05 09:41 PM
by orechron
* Physicalism: A False View of the World
( 1 2 3 4 ... 10 11 all )
deranger 6,037 206 09/14/08 04:32 PM
by ExplosiveMango
* The REAL Skeptic Swami 474 4 08/11/05 05:43 PM
by OldWoodSpecter

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, CosmicJoke, Diploid, DividedQuantum
1,160 topic views. 1 members, 5 guests and 8 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
RVF Garden Supply
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.105 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 16 queries.