--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> , "Hugo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> , off_world_beings <no_reply@> > wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> > > <mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> > , "Hugo" <richardhughes103@> > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> > > <mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> > , bob_brigante <no_reply@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> > > <mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> > , "Hugo" <richardhughes103@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > It MAY be due to quantum interaction, that in itself is big > news. > > > > > But affecting people at a distance? Very big news indeed. > > > > > > > > > > I find any nonchalance about breakthroughs like this puzzling. > > > > > You do realise this is highly important and paradigm shifting, > > > > > if true? Of course you do. > > > > > > > > > > > > > ********** > > > > > > > > It's not surprising about quantum interaction at a distance: > > > > > > > > "If two particles are entangled, they act in some respects as if > > > they > > > > were a single object," said Wootters. Everything that happens to > > > one > > > > of the entangled pairs instantly affects the other, no matter > how > > > far > > > > apart each of the entangled particles is from the other. > > > > > > > > Braunstein likens entanglement to "a pair of ideal lovers who > know > > > > each other so well that they could answer for their lover even > if > > > > separated by long distances." > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/561c <http://tinyurl.com/561c> <http://tinyurl.com/561c <http://tinyurl.com/561c> > > > > > > > All very clever but it doesn't have anything to do > > > with the brain. Particles in your mind don't become > > > entangled and then seperate to different parts of > > > space. This referes to laboratory experiments not > > > to the general run of events in nature. > > > > > > > > > Incorrect Hugo, physicists believe that every particle has an > entangled > > twin somewhere in the universe. All particles. > > Yes but it's the bits that make up the bits that make up particles > that are connected, and seperating them can only be done in a > laboratory. It isn't an explanation for anything mystical.
Its not mystical. Its scientifically obvious that 1. a superconductor is more invincible than its incoherent surroundings, and 2. That any energy in nature could act like a super-conductor. 3. Scientists teleported particle information ( a particle) across the Danube river a couple of years ago. 4. If research published in peer-reviewed scientific journals is to be thrown out the window, en masse, and on a whim, then yes, you could say that there is no ME. But that research shows clearly that there is an ME. Travis' research in the International Journal of Neuroscience showed that people in one room using a mental technique would affect the brain and body of people in another room. Therefore, a mental technique (ie. thought or some kind of energy from the brain and body) can survive beyond a few millimetres and have dramatic effects at a distance. He showed this twice. Other studies showed related results. Throwing science out the window is what fundamentalist nutcases do. Recap: 1. Superconductors exist. 2. Most scientists believe that any energy can take on the quality of a superconductor. 3. Information (power) can be teleported, and most scientists believe it is routine in the universe. 4. Mental activity (thought) can have action at a distance. OffWorld
