--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "anatol_zinc" <anatol_z...@...> wrote: > > > OK, Hugo, > > You are entitled to your POV, just like the rest of us. If it makes you > happy, more power to you. If not, maybe go outside your fixed POV and > explore a little; that's what real scientist do; get a hug from > Amma or whatever.
It does make me happy old chap, but I still like to get out of my POV which is why I joined the TMO as a live-in psyche explorer, I still meditate but wasn't convinced that MMY had the answers I was looking for. For many reasons that I'd be happy to explain, I see the TMO as dogmatic rather than open minded and definitely not scientifc in any meaningful way. But it was great fun finding that out and fun is what life is fundamentally all about if you're doing it properly. > > Maharishi encouraged physicists in the 70's and 80's that it > should be possible to fulfill Einstein's dream of formulating > Unified Field theories. And they did come up with what are called string > theories, if I remember correctly. Actually I don't think any one ever came up with a theory because MMY asked them to. Interestingly the string theories are about as much use as theology because they are unprovable, there are as many different versions as there are atoms in the universe making which one you're in tricky to pin down experimentally. And they aren't fundamental as they require a background to operate in and so aren't UF theories at all. In fact it was the hubris of string theorists with their belief that the universe could be explained mathematically that held back physics, no experiments = no certainty = no Nobel prizes. The LHC at CERN is more a kind of "hit and hope" machine than a way of testing a particluar thoery. Fun to see what it comes up with though.... And it's interesting that the > attributes of the Unified Field string theories basically was/is the > same as the attributes of the God of the mystics or even that of the > core essence of religions if you know where to look ~ a field of seeming > unmanifest nothingness with attributes of > omnipresence-omniscience-omnipotence in which and from which all > manifest creation arises. I think you muddy the waters here with this "same as the mystics" argument, that the universe may have started with a unified field isn't the same as MMYs field of intelligence as that is supposed to still be active in the world in an actually intelligent way, but no one ever explains why the quantum world appears essentially random which it surely wouldn't there was a god controlling it, epecially as that makes gods job of intervening in the world a tricky business. Add to that the conceit that we can affect the world at this level by meditating and it's clear they are two totally seperate concepts and that the quantum mystics are mis- appropriating the lingo to make everyone think they are the same thing and that TM "science" has a parralel at CERN. > Or as many current teachers say, "by giving up all definitions, all > preconceptions, self-realize the awareness which may seem initially as > total emptiness/nothingness and then observe that it contains > everything." In other words, don't juts rely on science and > scientist external to yourself, become a real scientist yourself and > experience truth rather that try to define it, which of course you can > always do later for the fun of communicating. > > Observe, record, reason, take a break, allow thoughts to stop, allow > intuition, have confidence in your own intuition, observe without > thoughts, repeat, have fun, be happy, get a hug once a year; this is my > science. Mine too actually, except for the hug part, sounds like fun though..
