The Time Has Arrived to Practice Quantum Physics, My Friends...

Okay, well, this is one of those sad situations we run into where there are two very different opposing camps.

Camp #1: Goes off the official scientific agreed upon standard of what qualifies as "Quantum Physics" and is willing to cite sources and references to that effect, and are generally somewhat or quite knowledgeable on the subject. This is the camp that should really just bow out of this thread right now and designate it as a lost cause.

Camp #2: Has tagged a personal belief system with a catchphrase they have no real comprehension of the true meaning of, and should someone even remotely question the use of said phrase, they are immediately tagged as a non-believer, a thread-ruiner, and a waste of energy.

I happen to fall into Camp #1, and am about to follow my own advice, but first, I am going to make one last attempt at trying to communicate with some of Camp #2 rationally, to see if any of you exhibit logical thought and reasoning ability beyond that of a parrot that's learned to mimic what it is told by someone else.

Quantum Physics is not what you are talking about.

What you are thinking of is called Quantum Consciousness and there is a HUGE difference between the two. For the love of god and the English Language, please learn it.

www.quantumconsciousness.org...

Quantum Physics is not a belief system, and is not about mind-power. It is about math. MATH MATH MATH, and yet more MATH. There's nothing remotely close to "think happy thoughts to make it happen" that you will find in any publication, college course, professor, or anywhere that people are going to take you seriously. If you intend on continuing in the misuse of this phrase, no matter how much you believe you're right, people are going to laugh at you your whole life and just consider you ignorant. They will continue to try and correct you, and when you still absolutely refuse to acknowledge the truth, they will brand you not just ignorant, but an ignoramus as well.

Now this is not intended as an insult though it can certainly be perceived that way. What it is intended as is a wake up call to save you some teasing and humiliation later in life.

Please, take this as a firm but gentle admonishment by someone probably old enough to be your father, and whom has been around the block many many many times with paranormal stuff. And believe me when I say I wholeheartedly believe in the power of positive thinking, I even believe in magic, and have practiced both to great lengths over the course of my life. This, however, is not Quantum Physics, has nothing to do with Quantum Physics, and no amount of willful ignorance is going to change that, it's only going to make you look progressively more stupid to people who actually know what they are talking about.

So please, please, don't go trashing the thoughts and respect of your peers who actually know what they're talking about, and instead call it what it is. Quantum Consciousness, not Quantum Physics.

hey fellow degree holder in science nice to meet you,

I also am older libra being a pisces and the oldest and wisest of the zodiac, though that truly is just in camp 2.

In truth when I was last chatting last week to my mechanics and mathematics Ph.D holding lecturers on this very topic we all came to the conclusion that mmm...,,,, mmmm....,,, mmmm...,,, lets just say for the conveniance of labbeling the sub atomic realm is very very complex and we are probably about equal to our understanding of it as the early map makers were when describing the earth as flat.... think gallileo etc.

also libra I didnt know that Shrodinger was in camp 2? please explain that to me.... are you positing that truly his experiments and the many since did not show that quantum processes were effected by the observer? I keenly and with great expectation look forward to your paper on the subject.

In my years of studying science and being paid by major corperations since for my take on it I also fell into the trap of compartmentalising all things, though as MOST people with any knowledge of this area at the top of their proffession are now stating the quantum realm is not like that, or rather for the sake of your labelling and classification needs (an anal tendency of both myself and most "scientists" lol) "the subatomic realm" is proving more and more bizarre in (and this is the important bit) PRACTISE AND OBSERVATION rather than JUST THEORY.

I am not slating or belittling anyones posts here I respect you all and especially some of the information and arguments put forward by the camp 2 types, just I see so much similarity in this field with the early research proving global warming (being induced or added to by mans presence) in the late 80's and all of the 90's and the reaction to it then....this field will truly be gallileo territory for many years to come i am afraid. This is such a shame as truly within this field lies the face of whatever god you may be looking for, or yours is. But therein lies the ultimate paradox not what function form that God (call it zero point energy whatever) will take when you look but ultimately is it just a reflection or mirror?

I was convinced for soo much of my life on many differant topics and like you libra experiance, time and observation has proven me wrong on many of my belief systems. However the sub atomic realm being affected by consciousness or observation IS NOT A BELIEF SYSTEM as it has been shown time and time again.

This is very interesting some of the responces here as like in the global warming debate most of the scientific community were agreeing with it for many years before it became a "fact" and accepted, just like the now subatomic or quantum world. Just some thoughts or should I saw wave functions?

Regards elf

MischeviouslydefendingHisEducationExperianceKnowledgeandInsight



[edit on 22-8-2006 by MischeviousElf]

Oh goodie.

Originally posted by MischeviousElf
lets just say for the conveniance of labbeling the sub atomic realm is very very complex and we are probably about equal to our understanding of it as the early map makers were when describing the earth as flat.... think gallileo etc.

Yep. I never said that wasn't the case.

Originally posted by MischeviousElf
also libra I didnt know that Shrodinger was in camp 2?

Alright, the fact you're bringing...ahem Schrödinger (hope all those colleagues you spoke of don't mind you not even being able to spell his name) into this only further underscores my suspicion that most of what you are saying is either inapplicable or BS.

Schrödinger said nothing about sending happy thoughts out to change the universe or collective consciousness. What he said was that the act of observing something affects it. That's it. Read a damned book, man.

Originally posted by MischeviousElf
In my years of studying science and being paid by major corperations since for my take on it

Right. Do go on... So far you've got me utterly convinced. Did I mention I've got a bazillion PhD's, the Pentagon thinks I'm a god, and that Bush calls me for advice? (/sarcasm)

Originally posted by MischeviousElf
I also fell into the trap of compartmentalising all things, though as MOST people with any knowledge of this area at the top of their proffession are now stating the quantum realm is not like that, or rather for the sake of your labelling and classification needs (an anal tendency of both myself and most "scientists" lol) "the subatomic realm" is proving more and more bizarre in (and this is the important bit) PRACTISE AND OBSERVATION rather than JUST THEORY.

I agree, and that's all well and good. And while compartmentalization has its place, it's good to think outside the box. Yes, I fully agree. I have no argument against that.

BUT THAT DOES NOTHING TO SUPPORT THE IDEA THAT QUANTUM PHYSICS IS ABOUT THINKING HAPPY THOUGHTS AT THE UNIVERSE!!!

Observing something is not the same as thinking happy thoughts at it.

Originally posted by MischeviousElf
I was convinced for soo much of my life on many differant topics and like you libra experiance, time and observation has proven me wrong on many of my belief systems. However the sub atomic realm being affected by consciousness or observation IS NOT A BELIEF SYSTEM as it has been shown time and time again.

Oh to hell with it. Fine. Quantum Physics is about thinking happy thoughts at the universe. I was wrong. My college professors were wrong. My father (who is a physicist) is wrong. His colleagues (all top men in their field for very real companies doing very very wierd stuff with Quantum Physics) are wrong. Every book I have ever read is wrong. Every web page, every dictionary, every encyclopedia, is wrong.

How could the whole world have been so blind to see that Quantum Physics is really just about thinking happy thoughts at the universe. My god, how is it that the scientific community could be so incredibly and utterly wrong? I'll go tell them right now.

Better yet.

YOU go let them know how wrong they are. And when the definitions are changed across the board, or even the majority of the board, then you can say you are right. Until then, I'm sorry, but you are officially wrong.



[edit on 8/22/2006 by thelibra]

Originally posted by MischeviousElf

also libra I didnt know that Shrodinger was in camp 2? please explain that to me.... are you positing that truly his experiments and the many since did not show that quantum processes were effected by the observer? I keenly and with great expectation look forward to your paper on the subject.

However the sub atomic realm being affected by consciousness or observation IS NOT A BELIEF SYSTEM as it has been shown time and time again.

[edit on 22-8-2006 by MischeviousElf]

This is exactly the part that 'messed' me up when posters here seemed to claim that consciousness has nothing to do with Quantum Physics. I read about Schrodinger and his cat example, and what you wrote above is what I took away from it; that the observer has an effect on that which is being observed. Hence my posting a link to that new book "Quantum Enigma", (written by Bruce Rosenblum and Fred Kuttner), which seems to be dealing with this connection, and not any religious/spiritual aspects of it. If they are not qualified to author a book such as this, I would be very open to information that would clarify this position. They are both currently Physics Professors (yes, I realize there are different fields of Physics) at the University of California, Santa Cruz. I have yet to read the book, so before I spend the money, I'd like to hear good arguments as to why anyone thinks I would be throwing that money away.

EDIT: I am actively looking for reviews of the book, to see what other professionals might think of it. As an aside, I am not a supporter of connecting QP with religion/faith at this point. Like most interested in the subject, I just want to learn more.

(Byrd, give me a couple of hours to read those links you presented. I'll be going through them. )

EDIT #2. O.K. NOW I see where this is going! So far I've realized something important. The belief is that Observation has nothing to do with Consciousness, and THAT is the confusion here. I'll keep reading.



[edit on 22-8-2006 by 2manyquestions]

[edit on 22-8-2006 by 2manyquestions]

This seems to be easy enough to rectify. Henceforth and forthwith, if it's posted in "Paranormal Studies" and refers to "quantum", we know it's "quantum consciousness". If it's in the "Science & Tech" forum, it's quantum physics. If it's in the "End of the World" forum, you're on the wrong site, because we don't have one. Now that I've settled that, bring on the Middle East while I'm on a roll.

...and are we still thinking happy thoughts??? I know I am, but c'mon I can't be expected to do it by myself.

And to at least attempt to bring a semblance of value, I'd humbly recommend a reading of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. See, it's on line for free, but I'd suggest snagging the book. It's a classic, and much better digested in an overstuffed chair, kicked back and relaxed, than huddled over a screen.

Originally posted by MischeviousElf
Father,

hey how about this then?

reputable source

Well if you point me to some of the peer reviewed reviewed papers they have produced I will have a look at them. Though if they produce proper research on quantum theory I'm sure the maths will be impossible for me to understand.

I also couldn't find a defintion of quantum physics, which was what I asked for. Can you point me to the page?

monotheistic are we father lol?

Atheist actually. I don't see what this has got to do with the definition of quantum physics though, as that is a purely secular discipline.

love and sharing elf
[edit on 22-8-2006 by MischeviousElf]

Bless you my son

thelibra
This is the camp that should really just bow out of this thread right now and designate it as a lost cause.

You're right of course, but I just can't stand to see language misused in such a way. People can believe all the new age guff they want, but they should at least have the decency to invent thier own terminology for it, instead of stealing a phrase from science which means something completely different. It just causes confusion if nothing else.

Anyway, you couldn't follow your own advice

It's a shame that such a good-intentioned thread has turned into a 'I know more than you do' boffin debate.

Can't we just continue with the positive vibe of the original post? Does the whole idea of 'reaching for the positive' scare some of you guys that much?

With respect,
Easy

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke

monotheistic are we father lol?

Atheist actually. I don't see what this has got to do with the definition of quantum physics though, as that is a purely secular discipline.

love and sharing elf
[edit on 22-8-2006 by MischeviousElf]

Bless you my son

thelibra
This is the camp that should really just bow out of this thread right now and designate it as a lost cause.

I just can't stand to see language misused in such a way. they should at least have the decency to invent thier own terminology for it, instead of stealing a phrase from science which means something completely different. It just causes confusion if nothing else.

By stealing terminology, and misusing terms, do you mean such as calling one self a member of the clergy, but professing athiesm? which is something entirely different than being a "father" in the clergy...

Causes confusion, maybe of the sort, where someone would think that you were monotheistic?
especially after you give them a blessing...
In your own words and definition father, you are a confusing sort...

and BTW the connectedness of everything is a very concrete part of QP... which is what this test of positive thinking is about...

posture, and speak all you want, but you actually learn by listening...

There is just so much to cover here, it is unbelievable.

Here is one of the links I found usefull: Wikipedia: Quantum Mind

Broadly, the arguments against the possibility are:

First, comparatively large and high temperature items like neurons just do not exist in persisting states of linear superposition capable of exhibiting interference effects, and quantum mechanics offers no reason to think they should. All brain scale systems spend their time in well defined classical states; their behavior, even after interaction with thoroughly quantum systems like a decaying atom, can be described perfectly well with ordinary probability calculus. It turns out that effective classicality extends, under almost all conditions, far below the neural level to that of medium-sized molecules, covering the relatively large neurons.

Second, the truth of decoherence is that, regardless of whether there are any conscious observers around or not, objects which would be expected to behave in an essentially classical manner do exactly that. Interaction between objects and their environments, both external and internal, does the job of 'observation' erroneously accorded only to conscious observers, effecting a process which is experimentally indistinguishable from state vector reduction. However, the "truth of decoherence" depends upon the chosen preferred basis. There is no doubt that measurements and the evolution of quantum states continues without observers; the problem raised by Quantum Mind theories is which of these states is accompanied by your observing mind.

Good thread dgtempe!

[edit on 22-8-2006 by 2manyquestions]

from the journal of scientific exploration...
the exact thing all the "know it alls" have sought answer to... and it took me about 5 seconds...

QP and positive thinking connected

Quantum theory is open to different interpretations, and this paper reviews some of the points of contention. The standard interpretation of quantum physics assumes that the quantum world is characterized by absolute indeterminism and that quantum systems exist objectively only when they are being measured or observed. David Bohm's ontological interpretation of quantum theory rejects both these assumptions. Bohm's theory that quantum events are party determined by subtler forces operating at deeper levels of reality ties in with John Eccles' theory that our minds exist outside the material world and interact with our brains at the quantum level. Paranormal phenomena indicate that our minds can communicate with other minds and affect distant physical systems by nonordinary means. Whether such phenomena can be adequately explained in terms of nonlocality and the quantum vacuum or whether they involve superphysical forces and states of matter as yet unknown to science is still an open question, and one which merits further experimental study.

so there...

read the rest, it shows that the worlds leading QP researchers are asking themselves the very same questions brought up here...

Quantum theory is generally regarded as one of the most successful scientific theories ever formulated. But while the mathematical description of the quantum world allows the probabilities of experimental results to be calculated with a high degree of accuracy, there is no consensus on what it means in conceptual terms. Some of the issues involved are explored below.

so I guess this discussion is all very timely...
as the big guys are asking the same questions, it would be good for us to do so as well... but how about in another thread...

this thread wasn't about debating the meaning of a word, but using a scientific principle to develop a positive vibe the world would feel.


[edit on 22-8-2006 by LazarusTheLong]

Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid
You're entitled to believe whatever you want, just as Byrd already stated...

Originally posted by Byrd
I just wish everyone understood the difference between "powerful thinking" and "quantum mechanics."

That's all I'm trying to get across here. I know that ignorance is bliss, and you can just remain blissful then. I was just trying to help. I'll leave you all be then.

No kidding! As an employee of a company that employs quantum physicists, invents and develops quantum systems, and operates a quantum communication network, I must say.....

I find the content of this thread completely hilarious!

Who knew that in order to create a quantum computer all we had to do is think positively! I gotta break the news to the department head....

I gotta tell ya...
Byrd gave rational replies,
Nygdan gave innocent ignorant comment
even Luke was just trying to be funny

You Pyros, are just being an ignorant bother

No one ever said that positive thinking will make a quantum computer, or any lame ignoramous statement such as that...

But it is a well known tool here on the board, for knowitalls to use to show how truly ignorant they are... by trying to portray something being said that wasn't ever mentioned...

read the Scientific journal commentary above...
if you dont start to see the relevance, then you should ask yourself if you truly understand ALL the elements of QP regardless if you work In QM,
Or if your daddy is a super secret scientist who makes neat missles and stuff... (we really dont give much credence to that kind of claim...)

By stealing terminology, and misusing terms, do you mean such as calling one self a member of the clergy, but professing athiesm?

LOL. I am no more a vicar than you are LazarusTheLong - "thorn in the side of corruptio" and your location is "the dark tower". Excuse me if all these things are actually true. It's an online avata and a bit of a laugh.

The name actually comes from the fantastic Irish sitcom Father Ted. His housekeeper is trying to guess the name of a mysterious visiting priest - this takes her several hours guessing including such names as "Father Billy Ferry, Father Chewy Louie, Father John Hoop, Father Hairy Cakelinum, Father Ebula Conundrum, Father Peewee Stairmaster..."

Causes confusion, maybe of the sort, where someone would think that you were monotheistic?

Only if they take online avatars literally, which would be silly. Anyway, as I said, my religion, or lack of it, is simply not relevant to what quantum physics is.

and BTW the connectedness of everything is a very concrete part of QP

Perhaps you should read up a little on the subject of quantum physics before making such statements.

... which is what this test of positive thinking is about...

The only test here is to see how much guff dressed up with scientific words people will swallow. I think the answer might be "lots".

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
read the Scientific journal commentary above...
if you dont start to see the relevance, then you should ask yourself if you truly understand ALL the elements of QP regardless if you work In QM,

Wow, golly gee, you were able to quote a scientific sounding rag.
Let me give you a quote in answer to that.

from en.wikipedia.org...

The Journal of Scientific Exploration (JSE) is a quarterly publication of the Society for Scientific Exploration (founded in 1982). According to its mission statement, this publication was established in 1987 to provide a professional forum for the presentation, scrutiny and criticism of scientific research on topics outside the established disciplines of mainstream science.

The Journal publishes scholarly papers on topics such as alternative medicine, astrology, consciousness, paranormal phenomena, reincarnation and UFOs.[1][2] Its "Instructions for Authors" states that papers are subjected to peer review "at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief".[3] The policy of the magazine is to maintain a critical view by presenting both sides of an argument so as not to advocate for or against any of the published topics.[4][5][citation needed] Some regard the publication as a legitimate attempt to explore the frontiers of science,[6][7][8] others view it as a forum for scientifically objectionable ideas.[9]

In other words, it's a place for crackpots to publish their theories about Bat Boy being found in a cave. (edit--an unfair assessment, perhaps, but you get my point)

Now, once again. The ACCEPTED definition of Quantum Physics by the scientific community at large is NOT thinking happy thoughts at the universe to change things. You may be able to find a couple of crackpots to agree with whatever viewpoint you want, in some obscure crackpot rag. There may even be some legit scientists out there who really honest to god are on to something about mental powers and just get a bad rep by the scientific community.

This does not mean you have the right OR the knowledge to be able to adopt these claims for yourself or indeed to try and adopt the very meaning of the phrase "Quantum Physics" to match your (edit) distorted view of what it is.

In point of fact, if you honestly knew and respected the work being done in Quantum Physics, you wouldn't be misusing the phrase, because every time someone spouts a load of half-understood bullsh-t about QP that they are parroting from someone else, it only makes the popular perception of the science that much weaker.

That's right. Weaker. You're not changing anyone's mind. You're not expanding people's horizons. Your accomplishing two things. Making yourself look like willfully ignorant fools, and damaging the VERY FRAGILE respect that Quantum Physics has very carefully built for itself amongst its peers.

Now, to address one more problem with your assumed connection to Quantum Physics... You have taken A that MIGHT relate to B, and turned it around and said B = A. That is not the case. (edit) Just because something may happen as a result of Quantum Mechanics/Physics, does not make Quantum Physics about what happened.

Thus, I can even admit the possibility that, yes, power of the mind exists, and that yes, perhaps it happens BECAUSE of micro and macro transactions of energy between the brain and the end result of whatever happens. That does not mean Quantum Physics is about mind power. It means that Quantum physics is a vehicle for yet one more thing we don't understand. Those are not the same thing.

I microwaved my lunch today. The transactions of energy taking place in heating the food up via microwave radiation can be described using math and quantum equations. That does not mean Quantum Physics is about the Microwaving of Food.

Please god, someone tell me I'm making sense to someone...

(edit) Fixed spelling and grammatical errors. I was so mad I could hardly type.


[edit on 8/22/2006 by thelibra]

Originally posted by Pyros
No kidding! As an employee of a company that employs quantum physicists, invents and develops quantum systems, and operates a quantum communication network, I must say.....

I find the content of this thread completely hilarious!

Who knew that in order to create a quantum computer all we had to do is think positively! I gotta break the news to the department head....

O.K. This might be a terrible stretch,.... and I won't even try to pretend I know much about QP,.... BUT,..... here's a potentially bad type of analogy; We all know what a screwdriver was designed to do,... yet,...... just because it is designed and used by professionals to do a specific job, does that mean that it cannot be used as an effective tool to perform other functions? There are a few examples of things that were designed for a specific purpose, that now have spread to other areas where they are equally useful.
Is it impossible to assume that QP might explain more than just what it was intended to explain? I can fully understand why no respectable scientist/researcher in the field would want to connect his/her research to paranormal phenomenon such as apparitions/ghosts/God/religion/spirituality, but what if in the end (and this is NOT in defense of people like "Ramtha") it ends up making perfect sense? Will the connection be denied even then?

This is the way I see it; Picture a giant circle broken up into thousands of pieces, some nearly complete, others only as long as a few millimeters. These big and small pieces represent all the sciences in the world. As of now, only a few have made a connection with each other in this long process of finally completing the giant circle. Many of them remain broken off from the others, but in the end they will connect with the other branches of science to complete the circle, the answer to everything. To me, compartmentalizing and keeping everything separated seems counterproductive in the search for answers/solutions. Trying to figure out how certain theories and discoveries in one field might help another field would make sense,...... connecting the pieces.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is; While QP is great for developing systems and running communication networks, is it not possible that it might be of great use (now or someday) in other fields also, including helping explaining the "Paranormal"?

Am I making any sense at all? I'm not sure that I am, so I hope you can forgive me if I'm way out there. Sometimes I have a way of confusing even myself.

EDIT: thelibra Yes, you're making sense.

[edit on 22-8-2006 by 2manyquestions]

Only if they take online avatars literally, which would be silly.

I don't know about you, but I take mine very seriously.


Now back to the original purpose of the thread.

I am continuing my positive thoughts, and have taken up some extra exercises in it, with have also helped with my meditation. I am just pushing as many extra positive vibes out there as I can, and wishing everyone well. This can still be a great experiment for us, without worrying about fighting all of those that felt the need to play semantics to death and continue beating the dead horse.

Mine are going for affirmation that everything will end up being ok in the world, with an emphasis that no area along the coastal US will encounter any hurricanes this year. I am confidant that this will be.

Please, spare me.

The Journal of Scietific Exploration? Your kidding, right? Your trying to pass this organization and source off as credible science? Why not throw in The Star and The National Equirer while you are at it. Its fringe science concerned with UFO's, holistic healing, parapsychology, and mind powers. It is not legitimate or generally accepted.

What some people are suggesting in this thread is nonsense. No different then lycanthropy or turning lead into gold. A lot of people may believe in it, and some may even pretend to understand it, but that doesn't make it true.

Originally posted by 2manyquestions
O.K. This might be a terrible stretch,.... and I won't even try to pretend I know much about QP,.... BUT,..... here's a potentially bad type of analogy; We all know what a screwdriver was designed to do,... yet,...... just because it is designed and used by professionals to do a specific job, does that mean that it cannot be used as an effective tool to perform other functions?

(snip)

So I guess what I'm trying to say is; While QP is great for developing systems and running communication networks, is it not possible that it might be of great use (now or someday) in other fields also, including helping explaining the "Paranormal"?

Okay, I'm seeing logic and reason used here. A very good sign that means maybe I'm making progress.

In answer to your question, you may want to see my microwave food analogy, however, I'll re-iterate for your benefit because you honestly seem to be trying to understand and accept a middle ground.

In answer to your question, Yes, it is ENTIRELY possible that paranormal things such as mind control, ghost, energy orbs, etc, all can be explained through Quantum Physics...eventually...

However, Quantum Physics isn't a physical tool, it isn't a belief system, it isn't a place, or a state of mind. It's a still-developing field of math and symbology to represent a standard of that which is observed or theoretical differences from normal physics on the very micro or very macro scale.

That doesn't mean "Energy Vampires" will now be explained, nor does it mean that people can grab ahold of Quantum Physics and use it to shoot bad guys or zap Good Things into reality.

It's much more dull than that. It's more like "gravity between fragments of leptops exhibits a scale that is completely out of synch with that of objects on Earth, around Earth, the Galaxy, etc, and here's a formula that might help to compensate for it until we know exactly why that is the case."

That's it. Throw out all the ideas of glowing balls of plasma, laser beams, psychics, and reincarnation. While they may, some day, be able to be described in terms of energy micro and macro transactions and mathematical equations, that still wouldn't make Quantum Physics ABOUT the paranormal. It just means that the paranormal might be able to finally be described in terms of Quantum Mechanics.

Do you see why I'm so vehement on the subject yet? It's not that I don't believe in the other stuff, it's that a horrible breach of semantics has diminished the value of both ideas.

[edit on 8/22/2006 by thelibra]

Father luke...I take your avatar very seriously... I have previously devoted a temple to Saint luke duke, in your honor...
but i hope you got my context...

Originally posted by thelibra
Now, to address one more problem with your assumed connection to Quantum Physics... You have taken A that MIGHT relate to B, and turned it around and said B = A. That is not the case. (edit) Just because something may happen as a result of Quantum Mechanics/Physics, does not make Quantum Physics about what happened.

That does not mean Quantum Physics is about mind power. It means that Quantum physics is a vehicle for yet one more thing we don't understand. Those are not the same thing.

[edit on 8/22/2006 by thelibra]

Yes, libra, you are making sense...

now see if we can relate something to you from the other side...
I like your "A and B" analogy...
so lets use that...

If A relates to B in relation to C
then A is related to C
so therefore Positive Thinking is merely a concept that is proven by the relationshop of A, B, and C

It isn't QP per say, rather it is proven by it in context... and i can see why that difference is touchy, since scientists always seem to get very "in a tizzy" about it...

but how about we let the brainy guys debate the finer points... while we allow those that want to manifest a positive outcome for today to do so...

QP defines that we are all connected on an atomic level, and that particles that are even smaller than atoms can exist in two places at once...
also that the observer makes a very profound difference on whatever is being measured or tested...
so by that very base understanding, we can see that our presence alone, can affect the outcome of a crucial event... imagine how much more powerful our expectation of a positive outcome would make that manifestation?

Nevermind not even worth it.


I'll just work this with other members via u2u. The meaning of this thread is slipping by faster and faster.
[edit on 8/22/06 by niteboy82]

[edit on 8/22/06 by niteboy82]