I found this to be a revealing post about how Doug and I differ concerning information and contrasting POV's here on FFL
---In [email protected], <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote : Dear 4U, I appreciate your taking the time to post this here. There are a number of contributors here who often cut off discussion of this but it is nice to have this point of view available to listen to. Me: Only moderators have the ability to "cut off discussion" here. What you are mislabeling as "cutting off" is when writers like myself point out that using physics terms as poetry outside their legitimate context is a transparent attempt to misappropriates the rigor of physics to a field of speculation. You and I seem to go through a very different process when we see information that is contrary to the one we hold. I love articles like this one. It is a great writing prompt to see where my own intellectual edges lie. I welcome them and if I had the godlike powers you sought out and now possess, I would never want to interfere with anyone posting what I consider to be a cockamamie view of physics and consciousness. When you see a person's opposing view you react as if they had "cut off" your conversation. I guess that is a lot easier than just making your case. I asked Larry Domash if Maharishi meant to equate the vacuum state with consciousness or just use it as a metaphor? He giggled nervously and revealed that this area was one of disagreement for him. What was the first thing Hagelin did when he took over the "I am a physicist AND play one on TV for my master" routine? He equated the Unified Field with consciousness following his masters lead on lack of intellectual integrity. Doug: I liked the video of Hagelin for the perspective it gives to the larger conversation. That was helpful for insight in to what has become the usual abbreviated put-down here when the subject of consciousness and physics generally comes up. Thanks, -JaiGuruYou Me: I have written much about this topic and it is far from an "abbreviated put-down." Equating consciousness which is the product of a macro process with the mathematical formula dependent technical physics concept of a unified field at a completely different level of nature is intellectually dishonest (tip of the hat to Judy) from an actual physicist like Hegelin. He knows it is bogus but it that was the price for his movement position, his intellectual integrity. When movement types spout physics poetry as if they understand this level of physics I just have chalk it up to them never having the intellectual horsepower to actually go deep enough into a field to understand that there such a thing as expertise in a field like physics and we non physicists don't have it. Your post sounds suspiciously like something Buck would say. I wonder... ---In [email protected], <mikemail4you@...> wrote : Consciousness and The Unified Field http://themindunleashed.org/2015/03/consciousness-and-the-unified-field-and-why-this-information-is-important.html http://themindunleashed.org/2015/03/consciousness-and-the-unified-field-and-why-this-information-is-important.html Consciousness and The Unified Field http://themindunleashed.org/2015/03/consciousness-and-the-unified-field-and-why-this-information-is-important.html Consciousness – The Unified Field What follows is a theoretical explanation of how energies interact in our universe to create what we… View on themindunleashed.org http://themindunleashed.org/2015/03/consciousness-and-the-unified-field-and-why-this-information-is-important.html Preview by Yahoo http://themindunleashed.org/2015/03/consciousness-and-the-unified-field-and-why-this-information-is-important.html http://themindunleashed.org/2015/03/consciousness-and-the-unified-field-and-why-this-information-is-important.html
