It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Law of attraction VS Quantum Theory

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 03:04 AM
link   

The phrase Law of Attraction, although used widely by New Thought writers, has a variety of definitions. Turn-of-the-20th-century references conceptualized the law of attraction as relating to physical structure and to how matter develops.[1] A more modern consensus among New Thought thinkers is that the Law of Attraction says people's thoughts (both conscious and unconscious) dictate the reality of their lives, whether or not they're aware of it. Essentially "if you really want something and truly believe it's possible, you'll get it", but putting a lot of attention and thought onto something you don't want means you'll probably get that too.


This is the law of attraction as quoted by wikipedia.


In physics, the term observer effect refers to changes that the act of observation will make on the phenomenon being observed. This is often the result of instruments that, by necessity, alter the state of what they measure in some manner. This effect can be observed in many domains of physics.


The observer effect in quantum mechanics, also stated by wikipedia.

It would seem to me there is a striking resemblance between the two. On that wikipedia sitte about the law of attraction there is actually a quote that says some claim this law has roots in quatum mechanics but that it is dismissed as pseudoscience.

Now if one person says to believe something and it will come true. And another person says that reality is altered at a quantum level just by observing it, does it not seem that the two do almost the same thing? One is a positive outlook and one is simply a scientific outlook.




posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 03:08 AM
link   
the difference is that with quantum,your thinking affects your cells mostly,causing you to be more beautifull or something,a yea and the world around you i guess,but law of attraction is attractng things not changing.



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 03:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Stillalive
 


There is a fine line though. Attracting things would require a change of some sort. Positive thinking changes your electromagnetic/auric output which attracts positive things. And changing something at the quantum level is electromagnetic in nature anyways. So the concepts would be almost identical realistically



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 03:42 AM
link   
There are innumerable threads about this on ATS already, all based on the misrepresentation of quantum theory popularized by the film 'What the Bleep Do We Know?'

I won't repeat here what I have posted in those other threads, which a simple search will throw up. Suffice to say that quantum mechanics provides no justification for the belief that, if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 04:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


www.abovetopsecret.com...



Hope that helps



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 08:07 AM
link   
My search did not pull up anything about a comparison of the 2. My mistake if I was blind.



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mr. Toodles
My search did not pull up anything about a comparison of the 2. My mistake if I was blind.


There are probably a lot of reasons why the two ought not to be related, but it is a tantalizing thought, just the same.

After some 5 decades of consciously questioning the strange stuff in our world, I have finally reduced it to a minimalist observation...that one day we will assemble a Unified Weirdness Theory that encompasses much of our unexplained phenomena. Issues of UFOs, raining fish, yeti, ghosts, SHC, where single sox go in the wash, etc...are inter-related, likely through some mechanism of what we call quantum physics.

There...does that give me a place in history? In any dimension?



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 12:33 PM
link   
I've heard that experiments are being created which will prove that quantum effects are equally applicable at the macro scale.

Most certainly Bell's Theorem proving non-locality is extremely interesting.

THe only question that remains is if quantum effects are foundational to reality at all levels. If so, the implications would be astounding, and the materialist reductionists will be screwed.



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr. Toodles
reply to post by Stillalive
 


And changing something at the quantum level is electromagnetic in nature anyways.



Maybe not. Using primitive physics in a cosmos that man doesn't even have the capacity to conceptualize, seems to be a little arrogant don't you think?

You humans crack me up..........



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 12:59 PM
link   
law of attraction and quantum are both 'wrong', at least partly

they do not understand energy

energy, what is it ?
where is movement involved ?

what does it mean ?
is movement more important then energy then ?
but how does movement start ?
so what is space and time ?

what is belief ?
and when it is true
is it also a belief ?



[edit on 21-8-2009 by pasttheclouds]



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 05:01 PM
link   
in my limited understanding. Energy can be classified as two things. That which drives production (at micro or macro scales) and That which exists when nothing material exists. 99.99999 percent of everything is just energy. There is no such thing as empty space



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by whaaa

Originally posted by Mr. Toodles
reply to post by Stillalive
 


And changing something at the quantum level is electromagnetic in nature anyways.



Maybe not. Using primitive physics in a cosmos that man doesn't even have the capacity to conceptualize, seems to be a little arrogant don't you think?

You humans crack me up..........


we may not be able to fully comprehend the magnitude of our universe. But we can easily assess that WE are part of it. Therefore, what we observe within ourselves and OUR environment must be at least PARTLY true for the rest of the cosmos



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join