posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 05:04 PM
reply to post by Skyfloating
Well, for one thing, the material used in "The Holographic Universe" should have been better organised and edited. Many instances and anecdotes
don't really lead anywhere, creating an impression of non sequitur
and thereby easily "discrediting" (in the eyes of those who look for
flaws) the concept itself.
Also, I think Talbot - may he rest in peace - should have displayed much more healthy skepticism when needed. It would have only furthered his
purpose. Instead, he just "swallowed" certain stories without going into them - not in depth, anyway. (A story about Sai Baba illustrates this well.
I'll gladly discuss it at some later time if anyone is interested.)
Furthermore, there are factual mistakes in it. Right now I can remember one in particular: his description of the famous Versailles "time slip"
(Moberly & Jourdain). He keeps referring to the Tuileries
- which is in Paris, i.e. some 20 kilometres from Versailles. It's not a typo; and
it is not totally irrelevant either - I naturally started thinking about other possible errors, unknown to me.
None of this means - not in my opinion, anyway - that the idea, the concept itself is in any way compromised. But it certainly doesn't add to the
credibility of his presentation. He sets himself as a very easy target.
Still, for those who already subscribe to the main concept (of the universe working as a "hologram") it is a very entertaining read.
And I do believe it made a lasting impact on the popular perception of contemporary "cosmology", so to speak.
[edit on 19-6-2008 by Vanitas]