The Watchmaker Revisited

[Audie]

Um, no? They are NOT real. That's what it means to be a dream.



Yes, we do know it isn't just another level of dream *because* we can test and do predictions.



And perhaps not. In fact, most certainly not.

Come now. All nonsense needs to make it
deep and like totally awesome is to be "Eastern".

 

[exchemist]

Come now. All nonsense needs to make it
deep and like totally awesome is to be "Eastern".

Chopra's USP, perhaps?

 

[Audie]

Chopra's USP, perhaps?

?

 

[exchemist]

?

Sorry, marketing-speak. Unique Selling Proposition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unique_selling_proposition

You can blame my career in filthy commerce.

 

[Polymath257]

Quantum Physics says that what we call 'the material world' is, in reality, 'a superposition of possibilities'. 'Possibilities' are many, and not yet materialized. They exist only in POTENTIAL. So Chopra's allusion to a 'Quantum soup' makes perfect sense.

Unless, that is, you actually understand what QM is saying here.

re: 'energy fields', I already pointed out the reality of that phenomenon.

See how easy Quantum Physics is? You uptight science types want to claim exclusive rights to it, and you use your math and other tools to put up a barrier to ensure those 'rights'. But what you guys fail to realize is that mystics have known what you guys are just beginning to scratch the surface of for centuries. Now, at last, with the discovery of fields being the source of 'particles', which do not exist, we are beginning to see where these two disciplines come together. But that still won't be sufficient. The mystical view is the big picture, which includes the scientific view, but the scientific view cannot, as it currently exists, contain the mystical view. And so, with your noses pressed up against the window pane, you only see 'woo' through the filter of the conditioned mind. A pity, really.

Except that mysticism *isn't* saying the same things as QM. The fields aren't the 'source' of particles. ALL quantum particles behave, in ways like BOTH classical waves and particles. The field is just the wave description. But neither has priority.

And yes, in order to understand QM, you have to do some math and learn some other things about reality. That is not a 'barrier' any more than *any* training is a barrier. In other words, it is only a barrier to those who don't want to do the requisite work. It isn't a matter of 'exclusive rights'. In fact, you are perfectly free to pick up a book on QM and read it and gain the necessary understanding.

And no, mysticism hasn't been here before, except in the spin of a few hucksters who just want to sell you their books. The mystical view isn't the 'big picture'. It is another picture that is ALSO limited by experiences and interpretation, however much you want to protest that you see the 'real picture', you can only claim such, not demonstrate it.

One of the primary reason you outsiders haven't a clue about geniuses like Chopra, who sound to you like cranks, is because the mystical experience cannot be found within the confines of Logic, Reason, and Analysis. Those are the tools of the thinking mind. But behind the thinking mind is pure consciousness, which does not think, but only SEES, what is the case. But you guys are all wound up in the chatter of the discursive mind, and are unable to hold the mind perfectly still so that you CAN see things as they actually are, rather than how the discursive mind (ie 'monkey mind') only THINKS they are with your conceptual frameworks superimposed over Reality.

Yes, mystical experiences are illogical, unreasonable, and not subject to analysis. That means, simply, that they can be dismissed as a source of knowledge.

You have no idea what my avatar signifies. Stop the incessant mind chatter and you may get a glimpse.

Funny that you glommed onto just Chopra, and ignored the countless others, many of whom are highly esteemed scientists. You have a thing about Chopra, do you? And yes, that's 'Sir' Roger Penrose to you.

Penrose has some rather strange ideas, yes. But they are at least testable and he is willing to admit it when he is wrong. At this point, his ideas about consciousness are not supported by either the physics or the biology.

 

[atanu]

I have done it quite often. In most dreams I am also a director and often I say "cut cut" and "redo".

Ha ha.

 

[ecco]

What do you mean 'followers of mysticism'? The mystical experience is not a doctrine or belief system one 'follows'. As the great yogi tells us in his Yoga Sutras: "divine union is the cessation of all of the activities of the mind".

The mystical experience is indeed a doctrine or belief system one 'follows'. People like you and Chopra and your aforementioned Yogi are 'followers of mysticism' just like Thomas Aquinas and Martin Luther were followers of Christianity.

It is labeled as "woo" because it is "woo". Your above listed practitioners are labeled as cranks because they are cranks.

​

Right, and the Bible is the word of God because the Bible says it is the word of God.

Yeah. Exactly the same. Chopra and company say it is so and you believe it is so.

No. That is NOT what he said. He said:
"There are no particles in the world. The basic fundamental building blocks of our Universe, are these fluid-like substances that we call 'fields'." (21:07 to 21:35)
I watched the video three times already!

The video titled:

Quantum Fields: The Real Building Blocks of the Universe - with David Tong
Do you understand the term "Building Blocks"?

Somehow, while you watched the video three times you missed the entire part (32:10) where he discusses in detail and at length the three (12) basic types of particles "we are made of" and "the fields that underlie them". He refers to quantum fields" as "the building blocks of the universe". As you yourself wrote: "There are no particles in the world. The basic fundamental building blocks of our Universe, are these fluid-like substances that we call 'fields'."

Do try to understand context. What does "basic fundamental building blocks" mean? What are they the building blocks of? PARTICLES!

Talking about the energy fields mentioned in the video, you stated...

This energy appearing as form is consciousness. Get it?

​

-and-

I never said the video was about consciousness, did I?

​

Then what did you mean by the two above comments?

The 'material' world is only thought to be composed of 'particles' because we verify it's 'realness' as being 'material' via our senses, which are fooling us.

Her you go, delving deep into woo based on a twisted interpretation of science.

So where have I or any 'woomeister' deviated from the facts? All we are doing is to put the facts into the correct context of Reality...

See above.

I am saying: 'there is no material reality'.
The video is saying: 'there are no [material] particles.

Only if taken out of context. In context he clearly states that the energy fields are the building blocks of particles and goes into detail describing the particles. These building blocks (quarks, etc) are, in turn, the building blocks of atoms. Atoms, in turn, are the building blocks of you and your computer and every other material thing.

The view of science is via dissection and clinical analysis; the mystic's view is simply to see things as they are, without the conceptual mind deciding what it is seeing.

Thank you. That's a pretty good description of science vs. woo.

What we think of as 'material reality' is (was) thought to be made up of particles. It isn't. It is none other than the field, or collection of fields, appearing as material reality. It's all about energy.

Energy as a more fundamental building block:

• You
• Atoms
• Quarks
• Energy Fields

Oh, really? So you think yourself clever, do you? You're not paying attention. Watch the video again and pay strict attention this time, and get the woo out of your brain. It's muddling up your thinking.

Oh, really? So you think yourself clever, do you? You're not paying attention. Watch the video for the fourth time and pay strict attention this time, and get the woo out of your brain. It's muddling up your thinking.

• If you had been paying attention you would have noticed the lengthy, detailed discussion of particles.
• If you had been paying attention you would have heard him state "Quantum Fields are the building blocks of the universe.
• If you had been paying attention you would have noticed the title of the video is: The Real Building Blocks of the Universe

 

[ecco]

Where I do think there is an interesting discussion to be had is about the nature of fields in physics, in view of the fact that current theories of matter are largely field-based. What they are - or what they represent - and the degree to which they can be said to be "material", strikes me as a worthwhile topic.

Actually the video of David Tong at Cambridge that godnotgod linked is really good. The fact that godnotgod took parts completely out of context just attests to his woo mindset.

 

[ecco]

ecco's idiotic rumblings

You can hear my stomach rumbling? WOW, I'm impressed. I guess there really is some truth to your consciousness being everywhere.

Let me know when you can hear my colon rumbling.

 

[Ostronomos]

It is not a blanket label applied to godnotgod that dismisses his credibility. It is that he is considering different sides of the debate that break down the fundamentals. To the unified field.

 

[ecco]

Think about it. I am with John Hagelin on this one,

John Hagelin? This John Hagelin?

John Samuel Hagelin is the leader of the Transcendental Meditation movement in the United States. He is president of the Maharishi University of Management in Fairfield, Iowa, and honorary chair of its board of trustees.
​

WOW! I can't believe that old fraud is still around. I thought it died out after the Beatles split up.

 

[exchemist]

John Hagelin? This John Hagelin?

John Samuel Hagelin is the leader of the Transcendental Meditation movement in the United States. He is president of the Maharishi University of Management in Fairfield, Iowa, and honorary chair of its board of trustees.
​

WOW! I can't believe that old fraud is still around. I thought it died out after the Beatles split up.

Hagelin is a member of the Natural Law Party, who once in the 90s put a party political broadcast out on the BBC. I remember this and was gratified to find that some kind soul has made it available on YouTube. Here it is: click where it says you have to watch on YouTube and look out for the "yogic flying" - do try to watch it with a straight face:

 

[godnotgod]

Um, no? They are NOT real. That's what it means to be a dream.

You're not getting what I am saying to you: when on the dream level of consciousness, they ARE real, even if they are not on the next higher level.

Yes, we do know it isn't just another level of dream *because* we can test and do predictions.

So what? That does not mean it isn't just another level of the dream. On the sleep-dream level, you can test and predict as well.

And perhaps not. In fact, most certainly not.

You don't know that. Just as you detect the illusory quality of the dream via awakening to the next higher level, you would only know if that next higher level were also a dream only via awakening to an even higher level of consciousness. Until you awaken, you would be convinced that the dream level is absolutely real, especially because your senses and scientific analysis' confirm' it's 'realness', and because, unlike the sleep-dream which vanishes upon awakening, the 'awakened' level does NOT vanish.

 

[godnotgod]

Hagelin is a member of the Natural Law Party, who once in the 90s put a party political broadcast out on the BBC. I remember this and was gratified to find that some kind soul has made it available on YouTube. Here it is: click where it says you have to watch on YouTube and look out for the "yogic flying" - do try to watch it with a straight face:

hmmmm....gee, I guess you think you have a 'got'cha' here, don'cha?

I cannot personally vouch for the efficacy of yogic 'flying' (I don't think it is really 'flying' perse, of course - that's just a name given to the technique), but I can confirm beyond any shadow of a doubt, via of my own direct inner experience, everything he says about meditation and it's effect on stress and the brain, which is directly related to crime, violence, and war. It is a testable scientific technique. Hagelin is both Quantum physicist and practitioner of proven ancient Vedic techniques, and makes clear how the two interface in the following short video:

EDIT: As I understand it, it was the Aryans who came down from the North into India some 4000 years ago and brought with them yoga and the healing arts, which became part of Theravada Buddhism. These are healers, and brought their knowledge into Egypt and Greece where their members became the Essene Therapeutae, also healers, from which Yeshua most likely learned his healing arts, as his Nazorean Essene monastery near Nazareth was connected to the Therapeutae monasteries. The Buddha himself practiced yoga, and praised the Aryans as 'noble and high-minded'. (No, not the stereotype of the racist skinhead idea of Aryans as racially superior, a twisted idea.)

 

[godnotgod]

John Hagelin? This John Hagelin?

John Samuel Hagelin is the leader of the Transcendental Meditation movement in the United States. He is president of the Maharishi University of Management in Fairfield, Iowa, and honorary chair of its board of trustees.
​

WOW! I can't believe that old fraud is still around. I thought it died out after the Beatles split up.

What do you mean by 'fraud'?

 

[godnotgod]

Come now. All nonsense needs to make it
deep and like totally awesome is to be "Eastern".

Silliness abounds, especially among the pedantic.

 

[godnotgod]

You can hear my stomach rumbling? WOW, I'm impressed. I guess there really is some truth to your consciousness being everywhere.

Let me know when you can hear my colon rumbling.

Now that's deep, no pun. But I can hear your brain rumbling and mumbling along, loud and clear. What's that you say? It's out of control? Careful. Any moves you make to get it under control will only result in more and more chaotic thoughts. Just sit and allow things to settle of their own accord. Then, at some point, you will be able to hear what your colon is trying to say.

 

[ecco]

Hagelin is a member of the Natural Law Party, who once in the 90s put a party political broadcast out on the BBC. I remember this and was gratified to find that some kind soul has made it available on YouTube. Here it is: click where it says you have to watch on YouTube and look out for the "yogic flying" - do try to watch it with a straight face:

I made the mistake of taking a mouthful of iced tea just as he started talking about 7000 experts in TM to help save the world. Then they started hopping from bed to bed.

YOU OWE ME A NEW KEYBOARD!

ETA: Yes, you warned me.

 

[Polymath257]

You're not getting what I am saying to you: when on the dream level of consciousness, they ARE real, even if they are not on the next higher level.

I understand your *claim*. But I deny it is correct. No, in the dream, the events are NOT REAL.

So what? That does not mean it isn't just another level of the dream. On the sleep-dream level, you can test and predict as well.

I have *never* found that to be the case. In fact, one of the characteristics of dreams is precisely that they are NOT logical and *cannot* be predicted, even internally. That is what distinguishes dreams from reality.

You don't know that. Just as you detect the illusory quality of the dream via awakening to the next higher level, you would only know if that next higher level were also a dream only via awakening to an even higher level of consciousness. Until you awaken, you would be convinced that the dream level is absolutely real, especially because your senses and scientific analysis' confirm' it's 'realness', and because, unlike the sleep-dream which vanishes upon awakening, the 'awakened' level does NOT vanish.

First, I do NOT just detect the illusory quality of a dream by waking up. It is clear *within* the dream because of *internal* inconsistencies.

Second, all you is replacing one set of perceptions by what you *claim* is a 'higher' (whatever that means) set of perceptions. Your claim that the new set is 'higher' isn't justified: any argument you make about 'waking life' can equally well be made about 'mystical existence'. It may just be another dream state that 'feels' more real to you and other mystics. And, until you wake from *that* mystical state, you will be convinced *it* is real.

My claim is that reality is *defined* by internal predictability. This is precisely what dreams lack and what waking life has. And, it turns out, this is also what the mystical perceptions lack. That is why I believe in waking life and NOT dreams or mysticism.

 

[Polymath257]

What do you mean by 'fraud'?

Deliberate misrepresentation of events with the goal of getting money or other things of value from people.