--- In [email protected], "Llundrub" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <snip> > In the case of consciousness however, people are born and dying, people are moving in and out of a place, so no 'particle' requirement has been met to reproduce an experiment with controlled conditions. > > Therefore there can't be coherence in the closed sytem, as based upon the thermodynamics analogy. > > So can there be coherence in an open system? Not according to the thermodynamics models. <snip> whether we understand it or are aware of its > direct influence, changes us. There is not much thought or ego > involved in the process. It just happens. > > ----I like this idea, and it is a good counter to my whole argument. Of course it posits the mysterious and paraphysical dynamics of magical operations as its basis, which is fine, but you must understand that it is the thinking of religion or magic or mysticism and not of duplicable science. So what? Of course, so what? Especially if it works. > > I would have preferred if the TMO had instead of thermodynamic analogies, utilized some other analogy which would have made a case for a superfluid energizing of the environment through soma production. <snip>
My real point still is, is TM the key and the rest of the TMO just window dressing to provide a more closed system for reproduction of ideal test conditions? Produced either conventionally, or intuitively, or unconsciously? I gess we'll know Thursday night whether Sat Yuga says Woohaa, or whether Kali Yuga says, Got you too Hah Hah. > This is a thorny question and one impossible to solve. The question being, how do we build a scientifically verifiable bridge beween what is commonly accepted as scientific rigor, based on physical natural laws, and a metaphysical event, whose dynamics are impossible to contain and control? Using commonly accepted science we must use a closed system. Obviously flawed. Or as you say, put a crazy guy in a bubble with a bunch of Sidhas. Not universal enough; probably can't be reproduced. And the world of consciousness isn't a closed system anyway. So the only way to prove the scientific truth of a means to enlighten the world is to, as Nike says, "just do it". It is analogous to trying to look around the corner and see what the experience of death of the body is like. How would you prove that scientifically? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
