QM: Does Time exist? |
Post Reply | Page <1 4567> |
Author | ||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21112 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
^ Please define either "scalar energy" or "scalar wave" in scientific terms.
EDIT: Here's some varied opinions about the topic. Some of them are hilarious, some are serious. I'm quoting one of the posts for sh*ts and giggles:
Edited by MikeEnRegalia - Yesterday at 01:03 |
||
Atavachron
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: September 30 2006 Location: Pearland Status: Offline Points: 65239 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
^ It was all fine until the Biblical nonsense at the end.
|
||
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy
|
||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21112 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
^ Yes, that was unnecessary. Also he spelled "seamlessly" wrong
Edited by MikeEnRegalia - Yesterday at 01:22 |
||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21112 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
|
Another nice physics resource I came across: The "Crackpot Index"
|
||
Starshiper
Forum Senior Member Joined: September 08 2024 Location: Englantic Status: Offline Points: 398 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Professor Dr. Konstantin Meyl, a German electronics and energy
engineer, here gives an interesting and instructive lecture about the
science of scalar energy and its applications in medicine: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAZRconRsLw
|
||
Starshiper
Forum Senior Member Joined: September 08 2024 Location: Englantic Status: Offline Points: 398 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
|
||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21112 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
^ Yes, he scores many points on the Crackpot Index. Most importantly, his theories contradict Quantum Field Theory and Special Relativity. Translation for non-scientific people:
His theories are wrong. Incorrect. Worse than imaginary (since a nimaginary theory might still turn out to be correct). Debunked.
Edited by MikeEnRegalia - Yesterday at 01:58 |
||
siLLy puPPy
Special Collaborator PSIKE, JRF/Canterbury, P Metal, Eclectic Joined: October 05 2013 Location: SFcaUsA Status: Offline Points: 15239 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
^ You can post all those trash you want from the
internet but that doesn't take away personal experience (i have plenty
of it). Have you never been to a Traditional Chinese medicine doctor?
Have you never received acupuncture? Even modern medical science accepts
it as a legit practice and they have no idea why it works. You don't
get it. You made that quite clear. Many of these videos are purposefully
constructed to make it look impossible. Unless you have researched this
for at least a decade, you're not even remotely qualified to have a
discussion really. No offense.
|
||
https://rateyourmusic.com/~siLLy_puPPy |
||
siLLy puPPy
Special Collaborator PSIKE, JRF/Canterbury, P Metal, Eclectic Joined: October 05 2013 Location: SFcaUsA Status: Offline Points: 15239 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
BTW there is NO controversy in advanced physics that scalar waves exist. It is unknown exactly how they are generated but that is also true of gravity and other forces. Here's just one synopsis you can find that explains it in a more scientific fashion. If you catch DARPA lectures and the like you can sit in on entire presentations. Given that it's so nebulous and advanced very few are up to the task. |
||
https://rateyourmusic.com/~siLLy_puPPy |
||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21112 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
^ You have no idea how science works. Science is just not for you. What you call "science" is actually the opposite. You have read a lot of papers and watched a lot of videos which make bold assertions but conflict with experiments which actual scientists have done over and over again around the globe. These actual scientists have imagined theories and laws which make precise predictions that have not only been validated by other scientists, but no attempt to falsify them has ever been successful.
Like I said above, scalar energy theory contradicts special relativity. Do you use GPS navigation? If you do, you might be surprised to learn that it relies, among other things, on special relativity. So does your GPS navigation work? By all means give it a try, conduct an experiment. If it does work, then congratulations, you have just verified that scalar energy theory is wrong.
Edited by MikeEnRegalia - 19 hours 27 minutes ago at 09:33 |
||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21112 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Yes, that "David Publishing" paper is the one that turns up when one does their "google research"
|
||
progaardvark
Collaborator Crossover/Symphonic/RPI Teams Joined: June 14 2007 Location: Sea of Peas Status: Offline Points: 50894 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I sometimes like to fall into these rabbit holes and wander around a bit to see what's going on. I have to say that Bahman Zohuri is quite a character. Retracted books at Springer (granted, not all of them). Seems to have disappeared from the University of New Mexico because of these retracted books (not entirely sure, but the timing is right; academic institutions like to keep this stuff quiet) and is now at a business school at Golden Gate University writing on all kinds of subjects unrelated to a business school, often in disreputable journals published by predatory publishers (i.e., probably not peer reviewed or peer reviewed by some bloke off the street). He's the CEO of an engineering consulting firm which doesn't appear to have updated its website since 2009. Very curious fellow.
I find this article to be absolutely hilarious: The title is stating that these things are true science and not pseudoscience or fiction, but the bulk of the memorandum in a roundabout way states the opposite. It's a big WTF written in pseudo-science-ese. No peer reviewed journal would have ever published this. And I'm saying this with an inkling of experience in that I have been published twice in a library science journal. Granted that's not the same field, but I knew I was dealing with really good peer reviewers that made my articles so much better than they were when I submitted them.
|
||
----------
i'm shopping for a new oil-cured sinus bag that's a happy bag of lettuce this car smells like cartilage nothing beats a good video about fractions |
||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21112 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
^ I also dug a little into Konstantin Meyl. He was a professor at a German university, but they distanced themselves from his pseudoscientific theories and he was not permitted to mention them in his capacity as professor.
|
||
Atavachron
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: September 30 2006 Location: Pearland Status: Offline Points: 65239 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I have and it did indeed work, which is another way of saying I felt better the next day and have no real proof it was the acupuncture. This specialist also applied glass suction bowls to my back. Was it the bowls? Was it the needles? Was it the herbs he gave me which I took for several weeks that were unrelated to my having the flu? Was it his advice that I never eat anything raw or uncooked which is questionable considering raw fruits & vegetables are an important part of a person's diet? Or maybe his insistence I not eat sweets only for me to notice a quart of ice cream in his freezer? Hard to say.
Yeah I don't know... here on the forums we all discuss/debate things we haven't necessarily (or at all) researched for a decade. I've been looking into UFOs for about 45 years and am only reasonably informed. On the other hand I've been thoroughly researching the JFK assassination for about 25 years and consider myself a foremost expert in the field, far more knowledgeable than most "experts" whose books I've read, films I've seen, or see & hear on social media. Most of them are under-qualified buffoons who make so many errors and bad calls it is painfully embarrassing to someone with even ten years of solid research. Which is to say it seems that proper, serious, extended and relentless work of re-reading, re-watching, re-thinking, and over-researching even after you've come to an 'ultimate conclusion' rather than chronologic time is what matters the most. Edited by Atavachron - 11 hours 12 minutes ago at 17:48 |
||
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy
|
||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Offline Points: 35696 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Often people who research and research and research just ending up going deeper and deeper down rabbitholes only paying "serious" attention to that which already confirms their biases. Years and years of research is not always helpful in getting to the truth (not all research has the same merit) and can lead to a bunch of other questionable beliefs, pseudo-scientific views and general crackpottery.
|
||
Atavachron
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: September 30 2006 Location: Pearland Status: Offline Points: 65239 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
^ I profoundly disagree. It gives one a true overview of where and what the crackpottery is, what to avoid, and give you finer skills in researching and discernment. I firmly recommend that everyone re-read and re-research as much as possible. It is more than important, it is crucial to understand what you already believe you understand. And frankly the information that is not retained when reading/watching content is astounding.
|
||
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy
|
||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Offline Points: 35696 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
^ I think it depends on the "researcher". For some it helps, for others it just reinforces questionable beliefs and can led to more many questionable beliefs. I would think that the "tinfoil hat", conspiracy-minded type of researcher commonly is less likely to be doing good research than others. Some people latch on a to cobwebberry of ideas that reinforce their own biases. I do very much doubt that, say, Silly Puppy's years and years of research has given him the truth as much as he seems to believe on a host of issues.
Edited by Logan - 10 hours 33 minutes ago at 18:27 |
||
Atavachron
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: September 30 2006 Location: Pearland Status: Offline Points: 65239 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
^ Which is why it's so important to keep investigating not just new information but especially what you already have looked at. Over and over and over and over and over and over again. Further, in that time one's perspective, opinions, and character change. It may not necessarily make you more informed, but it certainly makes you more intelligent and more exposed.
Reevaluation is one of the most under-recognized avenues and underutilized tools. Maybe the most, and that only becomes clear once you star doing it. It is annoying and painful, but those who have not taken it upon themselves to do so are the ones who I trust the least and whose opinions I value the least. |
||
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy
|
||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Offline Points: 35696 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Yes, but I was thinking of confirmation bias where people who think they are special, and know the truth that others don't (and that TPTB are trying to hide it from you) often doesn't casts their nets wide enough (dismiss some things immediately as propaganda that they should not) and end up researching from the kinds of sources that support their dubious views and think that other sources are compromised somehow. I am for research, but some researchers take a better approach than others. Reevaluation is indeed very important.
|
||
Nogbad_The_Bad
Forum & Site Admin Group RIO/Avant/Zeuhl & Eclectic Team Joined: March 16 2007 Location: Boston Status: Offline Points: 20834 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Am I going to have to close this thread too?
|
||
Ian
Host of the Post-Avant Jazzcore Happy Hour on Progrock.com https://podcasts.progrock.com/post-avant-jazzcore-happy-hour/ |
||
Post Reply | Page <1 4567> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |