Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

What does make the world turn?
User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4855
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby gorgeous » Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:33 pm

“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.”
― Albert Einstein ------------------------------------- “If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration.”
― Nikola Tesla -------------------------------------------------"If quantum mechanics hasn’t profoundly shocked you, you haven’t understood it yet. Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real.” -― Niels Bohr, Essays 1932-1957 on Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge ------------------------------------------------------Scientist Max Planck----------------“As a physicist, that is, a man who had devoted his whole life to a wholly prosaic science, the exploration of matter, no one would surely suspect me of being a fantast. And so, having studied the atom, I am telling you that there is no matter as such! All matter arises and persists only due to a force that causes the atomic particles to vibrate, holding them together in the tiniest of solar systems, the atom.

Yet in the whole of the universe there is no force that is either intelligent or eternal, and we must therefore assume that behind this force there is a conscious, intelligent Mind or Spirit. This is the very origin of all matter.” (Planck, as cited in Eggenstein 1984, Part I; see “Materialistic Science on the Wrong Track”).
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11542
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Thu Jan 22, 2015 2:40 am

Not solid, but not an illusion either. Everything that can be measured is real. The only things that are unreal are those things that are conjured up between the ears. Like gods, spirits, afterlife, ghosts, flying saucers, Bigfoot, Nessie,and other illusions.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Jan 22, 2015 3:23 am

May I first suggest that you are trying to "shoe horn" concepts of modern physics into a 500 year old word "solid" that was never intended to describe physics. The problem is with the use of that word, not physics itself.

gorgeous wrote: Yet in the whole of the universe there is no force that is either intelligent or eternal, and we must therefore assume that behind this force there is a conscious, intelligent Mind or Spirit.
No. Why on earth would we assume that physics has a "human like" mind and spirit.

13.2 billion years ago there were only hydrogen and photons.

Please explain your claim in detail. Please read a Christian making a similar argument to this claim for "God" in this thread before you reply.


Yrreg's claim of evidence for God using English words.
viewtopic.php?f=83&t=24560

User avatar
digress
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1692
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 2:11 am
Custom Title: doomer
Contact:

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby digress » Thu Jan 22, 2015 3:36 am

gorgeous wrote:“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.”
― Albert Einstein

“If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration.”
― Nikola Tesla


What is energy?
  God is an idea.  

"For now, I am going to err on the side of freedom of speech..." -Pyrrho
"Every instance that has always existed is a piece of evidence that God is not needed." -yrreg
"I am not a concept..." -Confidencia

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23404
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby scrmbldggs » Thu Jan 22, 2015 3:40 am

What's the matter?
.

Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Monster
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5331
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:57 pm
Location: Tarrytown, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Monster » Thu Jan 22, 2015 3:49 am

gorgeous wrote: Yet in the whole of the universe there is no force that is either intelligent or eternal, and we must therefore assume that behind this force there is a conscious, intelligent Mind or Spirit. This is the very origin of all matter.” (Planck, as cited in Eggenstein 1984, Part I; see “Materialistic Science on the Wrong Track”).

Planck was wrong. There is no reason to assume that.
Listening twice as much as you speak is a sign of wisdom.

User avatar
Flash
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6001
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:09 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Flash » Thu Jan 22, 2015 6:20 am

No matter? Never mind.
No mind? Doesn't matter.
When I feel like exercising, I just lie down until the feeling goes away. Paul Terry

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Poodle » Thu Jan 22, 2015 10:10 am

gorgeous wrote:“Yet in the whole of the universe there is no force that is either intelligent or eternal, and we must therefore assume that behind this force there is a conscious, intelligent Mind or Spirit. This is the very origin of all matter.” (Planck, as cited in Eggenstein 1984, Part I; see “Materialistic Science on the Wrong Track”).


(My bold).

And right there, again and yet again, is the straightforward non sequitur which is constantly snuck in to such arguments. It's pap. There's no must about it.

Just before Planck said that, he also said “As a physicist, that is, a man who had devoted his whole life to a wholly prosaic science, the exploration of matter, no one would surely suspect me of being a fantast. "

Well, wrong again, Max. You overstepped the mark.

EDIT: Sorry Monster - I didn't see you'd got there before me.

nmblum88
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7815
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 6:28 pm

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby nmblum88 » Thu Jan 22, 2015 4:41 pm

::Yawn::
Planck "as cited by Eggenstein" is not Planck.

But no matter.

NMB
P.S. Is it possible, Scientists, that "gorgeous" the poster of a thousand faces (none of them resembling Einstein) having awakened of a morning, stretched, scratched his manly belly, made his way to his computer out of habit, and desperate for something, anything , to respond to, decided on pulling your collective leg?
And so successful an effort that he might at this very moment be dreaming that the Planck Institute (s) will be remanned "GORGEOUS SAYS."
And in honor of one of his dupes, another scientific Institute will go up in an abandoned H & R. Block office.

But not today.
Today is for fun, (and for laughing' in his bee-yah) not serious commentary about the nature of the universe.


NMB

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Poodle » Thu Jan 22, 2015 5:26 pm

After a brief search on the net ...


"Legendary physicist Max Planck is attributed to saying in a lecture that was given in Florence the following:

“As a physicist, that is, a man who had devoted his whole life to a wholly prosaic science, the exploration of matter, no one would surely suspect me of being a fantast. And so, having studied the atom, I am telling you that there is no matter as such. All matter arises and persists only due to a force that causes the atomic particles to vibrate, holding them together in the tiniest of solar systems, the atom. Yet in the whole of the universe there is no force that is either intelligent or eternal, and we must therefore assume that behind this force there is a conscious, intelligent mind or spirit. This is the very origin of all matter.”

Source of this quote is from the following:

Pauli, Wolfgang: THE INFLUENCE OF ARCHETYPICAL PRESENTATIONS ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NATURAL SCIENCE THEORY BY KEPPLER in: Jung Pauli: NATURAL EXPLANATION AND PSYCHE, Zuerich 1952, p. 163"

I wonder if Planck as cited by Pauli carries a little more weight with whomever wrote the comment attributed to Norma by the forum software.

nmblum88
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7815
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 6:28 pm

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby nmblum88 » Thu Jan 22, 2015 5:49 pm

Poodle wrote:After a brief search on the net ...


"Legendary physicist Max Planck is attributed to saying in a lecture that was given in Florence the following:

“As a physicist, that is, a man who had devoted his whole life to a wholly prosaic science, the exploration of matter, no one would surely suspect me of being a fantast. And so, having studied the atom, I am telling you that there is no matter as such. All matter arises and persists only due to a force that causes the atomic particles to vibrate, holding them together in the tiniest of solar systems, the atom. Yet in the whole of the universe there is no force that is either intelligent or eternal, and we must therefore assume that behind this force there is a conscious, intelligent mind or spirit. This is the very origin of all matter.”

Source of this quote is from the following:

Pauli, Wolfgang: THE INFLUENCE OF ARCHETYPICAL PRESENTATIONS ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NATURAL SCIENCE THEORY BY KEPPLER in: Jung Pauli: NATURAL EXPLANATION AND PSYCHE, Zuerich 1952, p. 163"

I wonder if Planck as cited by Pauli carries a little more weight with whomever wrote the comment attributed to Norma by the forum software.


Norma stands by Norma's comment.
"Attributed to…" is not a valid citation.
It is the academic equivalent of gossip… as in "Wikipedia /"
And Wolfgang Paul, is not Planck.

I would certainly acknowledge that scientists are, in the heat of competition for covet, as prone to quoting out of context (i.e. making things up) as are any other internet sources…

So if you've got something, anything that is certifiably (as within book covers, or a verifiable published paper, or an "on record" public utterance that I can look at to see how compete or how unedited it is ) with PLANCK's name on it?
By all means enter it here.

And do I think Planck is god? Or even infallible?
No.. but it would be totally irrelevant ; science itself gets short shrift here.
NMB

P.S. lol:: And I don't think "gorgeous" is god either,… but at least he's funny, instead of insistent about being a god.
Or even a reliable reporter.


NMB
Last edited by nmblum88 on Thu Jan 22, 2015 6:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Poodle » Thu Jan 22, 2015 6:27 pm

Then I can only assume, Norma, that you believe that all attributions are legitimately questionable. It makes for a very repetitive world.

nmblum88
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7815
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 6:28 pm

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby nmblum88 » Thu Jan 22, 2015 7:08 pm

Poodle wrote:Then I can only assume, Norma, that you believe that all attributions are legitimately questionable. It makes for a very repetitive world.


Yes, I absolutely believe that all attributions are legitimately questionable.
I also believe that all theses, unproven, including my own are legitimately questionable;


And the world, Poodle, is just that: repetitive.
That's why and how scientific inquiry eventually pays off, producing the more than occasional verity.

(Scholarship (questioning everything) is just hard, plodding labor.)

Are you suggesting that making "stuff" up to suit oneself, just for the entertainment value, is preferable to reality?
Are you bored with the earth revolving around the sun, day in, day out, in its boring repetitive way?

Or rotating on its axis? So pedestrian compared to your own flights of fancy??

NMB

nmblum88
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7815
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 6:28 pm

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby nmblum88 » Thu Jan 22, 2015 7:23 pm

And just a reminder, British style:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6b041JF4d4

NMB

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Poodle » Thu Jan 22, 2015 8:08 pm

nmblum wrote:Yes, I absolutely believe that all attributions are legitimately questionable.
I also believe that all theses, unproven, including my own are legitimately questionable;


And the world, Poodle, is just that: repetitive.
That's why and how scientific inquiry eventually pays off, producing the more than occasional verity.

(Scholarship (questioning everything) is just hard, plodding labor.)

Are you suggesting that making "stuff" up to suit oneself, just for the entertainment value, is preferable to reality?
Are you bored with the earth revolving around the sun, day in, day out, in its boring repetitive way?

Or rotating on its axis? So pedestrian compared to your own flights of fancy??

NMB


"Legitimately questionable " does not - cannot - entail pointless and eternal repetition. Question once, certainly. Asking the same question to discover the same answer is foolish. No, scholarship is not merely hard, plodding labour. It certainly begins like that but, thank goodness, soon enough becomes something else entirely, and none of it entails making stuff up.

I believe that Planck was quoted accurately by Pauli because a) he had no reason to do otherwise and b) my not believing it would drag me into precisely the ongoing drudgery you seem to think represents scholarship. But that way lies paranoia. How does anyone know what Newton said? We obviously must not trust the Principia, as anyone could have written that. How do we know what Galileo did or did not do without asking him directly?

But thanks for the G&S - always, as you know, some of my favourite stuff.

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4855
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby gorgeous » Thu Jan 22, 2015 11:03 pm

I am very female....ty.....who are any of us to say Planck's awareness of a great Spirit/mind behind all matter is wrong? He may be right. I think he was. Is a table really solid, or is it a mass of energy when seen under an electron microscope....Bohr seemed to have been shocked to find out everything is really just energy, not solids as we think they are....
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
Monster
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5331
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:57 pm
Location: Tarrytown, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Monster » Thu Jan 22, 2015 11:23 pm

gorgeous wrote:I am very female....ty.....who are any of us to say Planck's awareness of a great Spirit/mind behind all matter is wrong? He may be right. I think he was. Is a table really solid, or is it a mass of energy when seen under an electron microscope....Bohr seemed to have been shocked to find out everything is really just energy, not solids as we think they are....

Well, gorgeous, you're talking about two things here. You're talking about the nature of matter and also about a spirit/mind behind all matter. I'm not going to dispute the energy nature of matter, because I don't know enough about it to talk about it. However, there's no reason to believe that a spirit/mind is behind all matter.
Listening twice as much as you speak is a sign of wisdom.

User avatar
Cadmusteeth
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1167
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: Colorado, USA

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Cadmusteeth » Thu Jan 22, 2015 11:31 pm

gorgeous wrote: I am very female....ty.....who are any of us to say Planck's awareness of a great Spirit/mind behind all matter is wrong?

We can say he isn't right as well, seeing as how it can not be demonstrated.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Jan 22, 2015 11:35 pm

Wolfgang Pauli wins the prize for the best "one liner" in physics, ever.. After listening to an explanation of the standard model of the atom, he quips "that it is indeed very clever, but of course has nothing to do with reality"

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Poodle » Thu Jan 22, 2015 11:39 pm

Absolutely true - we cannot say if there is or is not. The point here is that Planck (reportedly) said "must be". He was in the same position that we are. Such a statement is for theologists. And, in any case, his logic was very wobbly.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23404
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby scrmbldggs » Thu Jan 22, 2015 11:47 pm

Wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey?
.

Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Poodle » Thu Jan 22, 2015 11:54 pm

That's what it said in the bookey-wookey.

User avatar
Flash
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6001
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:09 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Flash » Fri Jan 23, 2015 5:32 am

I just read on the Internet, of course, that late in his life, Einstein had denied that the relativity theory makes any sense. After a lengthy session at the local bar he said, and I quote, "It's all cwap". Yes "cwap" on account of his problem with pronouncing an American "r".
The same night he managed to get converted to mormonism and baptized in a paddle just outside the bar. (He fell into it).
You want facts, you can always get it on the Internet.
When I feel like exercising, I just lie down until the feeling goes away. Paul Terry

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 12360
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Major Malfunction » Fri Jan 23, 2015 6:15 am

Plenty of great scientists are a bit batty. It's part of the job description, methinks. Genius is a kind of insanity, walking a razor's edge.

But yes, there are no particles, only harmonics.

At first you learn electrons have orbits and shells, then you learn they have probability clouds, then you learn it's actually a resonance pattern.

And no-one yet knows what the vibrations are "in". No-one can yet explain the medium of space. We can describe it fairly accurately, but we still don't know exactly what the {!#%@} it is.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

clarsct
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1429
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 10:56 pm
Location: The Cultural Desert

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby clarsct » Fri Jan 23, 2015 6:29 am

Ok, the real point that no one has touched upon is that quantum physics functions at either:
Very small scales, because the bounded waveforms that are large, like say a baseball, may have quantum effects, but they are so small as to be negligible. The quantum effect of gaining mass may add an electron's weight to a baseball(Which would be a huge amount, and I seriously doubt it's even a close order of magnitude), but the total effect on momentum is so tiny as to be disregarded.

The other place we find it useful is at very extreme energies, like close to the speed of light or absolute zero. At these extremes of speed and energy, the basic fabric of the universe begins to degrade. Waveforms elongate into one another, in the case of Bose-Einstein condensates. Waveforms contract near the speed of light, giving things the 'squeezed' appearance.

I could show the math, but it would take pages of the forum, and, frankly, I have better things to do. But I encourage anyone to go look up the math for yourself. It can be rather enlightening.

But to try to apply quantum effects to our macro world is a tragic waste, and leads one to insane conclusions.
When Religion becomes State, and breaking the Law becomes a Sin, then Dissenters will become Heretics.

clarsct
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1429
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 10:56 pm
Location: The Cultural Desert

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby clarsct » Fri Jan 23, 2015 6:33 am

Major Malfunction wrote:Plenty of great scientists are a bit batty. It's part of the job description, methinks. Genius is a kind of insanity, walking a razor's edge.

But yes, there are no particles, only harmonics.

At first you learn electrons have orbits and shells, then you learn they have probability clouds, then you learn it's actually a resonance pattern.

And no-one yet knows what the vibrations are "in". No-one can yet explain the medium of space. We can describe it fairly accurately, but we still don't know exactly what the {!#%@} it is.


A bounded waveform, of course... ;)

These things are particles, as well. They can transmit force just fine on their own. The 'fields' are simply a mathematical construct by which we describe the bounds of the wave/particle. A photon needs nothing to transmit it, because it is a particle. Except when it is a wave. Et cetera.

Perhaps, one day, some bright fellow/gal will put the wave/particle paradox to rest. If so, I hope I am still around to wonder in awe at his/her brilliance.
When Religion becomes State, and breaking the Law becomes a Sin, then Dissenters will become Heretics.

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 12360
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Major Malfunction » Fri Jan 23, 2015 6:41 am

It's just waves, dude. Bathe in my brilliance.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 31627
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Gord » Fri Jan 23, 2015 7:42 am

Poodle wrote:“All matter arises and persists only due to a force....[I]n the whole of the universe there is no force that is either intelligent or eternal...we must therefore assume that behind this force there is a conscious, intelligent mind or spirit....”

"No force is intelligent, so behind a force there is an intelligence."

What do these thoughts even mean? How does one follow from the other?
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

clarsct
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1429
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 10:56 pm
Location: The Cultural Desert

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby clarsct » Fri Jan 23, 2015 7:44 am

We're back to 'Prime Mover' territory and the Cosmological Argument. Replace 'God' with 'intelligence', 'mind' or 'spirit'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_argument
When Religion becomes State, and breaking the Law becomes a Sin, then Dissenters will become Heretics.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Poodle » Fri Jan 23, 2015 11:27 am

Gord wrote:
Poodle wrote:“All matter arises and persists only due to a force....[I]n the whole of the universe there is no force that is either intelligent or eternal...we must therefore assume that behind this force there is a conscious, intelligent mind or spirit....”

"No force is intelligent, so behind a force there is an intelligence."

What do these thoughts even mean? How does one follow from the other?


Precisely the point, Gord.

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4855
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby gorgeous » Fri Jan 23, 2015 5:20 pm

"For almost a hundred years science has been haunted by a dark secret: that there might be mysterious hidden worlds beyond our human senses. Mystics had long claimed there were such places. They were, they said, full of ghosts and spirits. The last thing science wanted was to be associated with superstition but ever since the 1920s physicists have been trying to make sense of an uncomfortable discovery. When they tried to pinpoint the exact location of atomic particles like electrons they found it was utterly impossible. They had no single location.

The only explanation which anyone could come up with is that the particles don’t just exist in our universe. They flit into existence in other universes too and there are an infinite number of these parallel universes, all of them slightly different. In effect, there’s a parallel universe in which Napoleon won the battle of Waterloo. In another the British Empire held onto its American colony. In one you were never even born. "------- BBC Horizon Documentary
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4855
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby gorgeous » Fri Jan 23, 2015 5:26 pm

Below is from an article attributed to Dr. Wolf concerning his perception of this most-interesting issue at hand.

"Quantum physics has thus brought about a radical new understanding both of the particles and the void. In subatomic physics, mass is no longer seen as a material substance but is recognized as a form of energy. "



When a piece of seemingly solid matter - a rock or a human hand or the limb of a tree - is placed under a powerful electronic microscope, the electron-scanning microscope, with the power to magnify several thousand times, takes us down into a realm that has the look of the sea about it…
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4855
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby gorgeous » Fri Jan 23, 2015 5:28 pm

seth by Jane Roberts--------------Seth on the Vibratory Nature of Existence-----

"Now the behavior of atoms and molecules is involved here, for again

these are only present within your universe during certain stages.

Their activity is perceived only during the range of particular

vibratory rhythms.

When your scientists examine them for example, they do not examine the

nature, say, of an atom.

They only explore the characteristics of an atom as it acts or shows

itself within your

system.

Its greater reality completely escapes them.

You understand that there are spectrums of light.

So are there spectrums of matter.

Your system of physical reality is not dense in comparison with some

others.

The dimensions that you give to physical matter barely begin to hint at

the varieties of dimensions possible.

Some systems are far heavier or lighter than your own, though this may

not involve weight in the terms with which you are familiar.

Probable actions emerge, then, into matter systems quite as valid as

your own, and quite as consistent.

You are used to thinking in single line thoughts, so you think of events

that you know as complete things or actions, not realizing that what you

perceive is but a

fraction of their entire multidimensional existence.

In greater terms, it is impossible to separate one physical event from

the probable events, for these are all dimensions of one action.

It is basically impossible to separate the "you" that you know from the

probable you's of which you are unaware, for the same reasons.

There are always inner pathways, however, leading between probable

events;

since all of them are manifestations of an act in its becoming, then the

dimensions between these are illusions.

The physical brain alone cannot pick up these connections with any great

success.

The mind, which is the inner counterpart of the brain, can at times

perceive the far greater dimensions of any given event

through a burst of sudden intuition or comprehension that cannot be

adequately described on a verbal level.

As I have said frequently, time as you think of it does not exist, yet

in your terms, time's true nature could be understood if the basic

nature of the atom was ever made known to you.

In one way, an atom could be compared to a microsecond.

It seems as if an atom "exists" steadily for a certain amount of time.

Instead it phases in and out, so to speak.

It fluctuates in a highly predictable pattern and rhythm.

It can be perceived within your system only at certain points in this

fluctuation, so it seems to scientists that the atom is steadily

present.

They are not aware of any gaps of absence as far as the atom is

concerned.

In those periods of nonphysical projection, the off periods of

fluctuation, the atoms "appear" in another system of reality.

In that system they are perceived in what are "on" points of

fluctuation, and in that system also then the atoms (seem to) appear

steadily.

There are many such points of fluctuation, but your system of course is

not aware of them, nor of the ultimate actions, universes, and systems

that exist within them.

Now the same sort of behavior occurs on a deep, basic, secret, and

unexplored psychological level.

The physically oriented consciousness, responding to one phase of the

atom's activity, comes alive and awake to its particular existence, but

in between are other fluctuations in which consciousness is focused upon

entirely different systems of reality; each of these coming awake and

responding, and each one having no sense of absence, and memory only

of those particular fluctuations to which they respond."

Seth, session 567
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Poodle » Fri Jan 23, 2015 5:35 pm

Gorgeous, Jane Roberts didn't start writing her Seth material until 1963, by which time quantum theory and the many worlds interpretation (having its sixth birthday) was well-established. You are becoming hopelessly confused between scientific theory and creative fiction.

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4855
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby gorgeous » Fri Jan 23, 2015 5:55 pm

nope....it sounds to me like Seth knew what he was talking about...
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Poodle » Fri Jan 23, 2015 6:11 pm

I could give you large list of fiction in which various characters were made to sound as if they knew what they were talking about. That's one of the points of fiction.

Seth is the product of Jane Roberts' imagination. Gulliver's Travels is the product of Jonathon Swift's imagination and introduces the reader to several alternate worlds which exhibit internal logical consistency. Why not choose that one instead?

(I'll answer that for you - it's because Swift didn't invent a lot of pseudoscientific buzz-phrases to captivate the limited imaginations of those of his readers who couldn't be bothered to think for themselves).

I sincerely hope that you haven't actually paid any money for Seth books.
Last edited by Poodle on Fri Jan 23, 2015 6:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4855
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby gorgeous » Fri Jan 23, 2015 6:13 pm

do you have proof it was her imagination?
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 12360
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Major Malfunction » Fri Jan 23, 2015 6:15 pm

Doc Smith rocks.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Poodle » Fri Jan 23, 2015 6:15 pm

:lol: Always this question.

I cannot prove that your morning bowl of porridge is not swimming with miniature whales which you have bred in your aquarium over the last decade. But I'll argue that it isn't.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Is anything really solid or just an illusion?

Postby Poodle » Fri Jan 23, 2015 6:20 pm

Major Malfunction wrote:Doc Smith rocks.


Yeah - there's another one. The Lensmen knew anything that some old spirit knew and then some.


Return to “Science, Technology, and Mathematics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests