--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff
[EMAIL
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin
[EMAIL
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Very nice. I saw the same thing, only purely in terms of attention
creating and recreating our quantum reality, our quantum totality,
moment by moment.
So that in the gap between instantaneous creation, and in
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Very nice. I saw the same thing, only purely in terms of
attention
creating and recreating our quantum reality, our quantum
totality,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff
[EMAIL
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff
[EMAIL
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin
[EMAIL
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Ah, but if God is well read, and has delved into the
The average physicist today would say that there is no such
entity,
nor can there be. Basically, predicting the future with 100%
precision is out of the question.
All knowing may not be the same as predicting the future.
Think of God as the observer-state of the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
What I was attempting to express was the apparent contradiction
between a featureless Absolute Reality, and the expression of same.
How can it be expressed if it has never been observed? How can it
be named if
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
What I was attempting to express was the apparent contradiction
between a featureless Absolute Reality, and the expression of
same.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The average physicist today would say that there is no
such
entity,
nor can there be. Basically, predicting the future with
100%
precision is out of the question.
All knowing may not be
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, qntmpkt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
[...]
The average physicist today would say that there is no such
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Ah, but if God is well read, and has delved into the
Heisenberg Principle, He'd know that to observe is to
influence, so out of fairness
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], qntmpkt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
The average physicist today would say that there is no such
entity,
nor can there be. Basically, predicting the future with 100%
precision is out of the question.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, but if God is well read, and has delved into the
Heisenberg Principle, He'd know that to observe is to
influence, so out of fairness He wouldn't be watching. :-)
Ah, but if S/H/We weren't watching, nothing would
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, qntmpkt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
[...]
The average physicist today would say that there is no such
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Ah, but if God is well read, and has delved into the
Heisenberg Principle, He'd know that to observe is to
influence, so out of fairness
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity with New Intelligent
Falling
Theory
http://www.theonion.com/news/index.php?issue=4133n=2
Funny stuff.
But I find it
shempmcgurk wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity with New Intelligent Falling
Theory
http://www.theonion.com/news/index.php?issue=4133n=2
Funny stuff.
But I find it ironic that all of us here on this TM forum
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity with New Intelligent Falling
Theory
http://www.theonion.com/news/index.php?issue=4133n=2
Funny stuff.
But I find it ironic that all of us here on this TM forum are
joining in the jibes.
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Patrick Gillam
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
shempmcgurk wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity with New Intelligent
Falling
Theory
http://www.theonion.com/news/index.php?issue=4133n=2
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Evangelical Scientists
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
But, of course, the SCI high school course presented pure
consciousness and the absolute as...absolutes! You could replace
those two terms with the term God and it would have sounded like
a religious text book.
Keep it
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED],
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
But, of course, the SCI high school course presented pure
consciousness and the absolute as...absolutes! You could
replace
those two terms with the term
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED],
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
But, of course, the SCI high school course presented pure
consciousness and the
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED],
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
But, of course,
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
SCI, as I noted, simply sees evolution,
with all its apparent randomness, as an expression of
creative intelligence; randomness is part of the
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED],
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
(My response to Einstein: God *does* play dice with
the universe, but He can calculate the odds to
infinity.)
But that doesn't matter with Quantum Mechanics, because past a
certainpoint you CANNOT calculatethe odds. It is purely
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
SCI, as I noted, simply sees evolution,
with all its apparent randomness, as an
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED],
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
(My response to Einstein: God *does* play dice with
the universe, but He can calculate the odds to
infinity.)
But that doesn't matter with Quantum Mechanics, because
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], qntmpkt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
The average physicist today would say that there is no such entity,
nor can there be. Basically, predicting the future with 100%
precision is out of the question.
All knowing may not be the same as predicting the future.
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(My response to Einstein: God *does* play dice with
the universe, but He can calculate the odds to
infinity.)
Regarding that famous Einstein quotation, have you seen this?
http://tinyurl.com/c4yn2
(May require a pass to
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Patrick Gillam
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
(My response to Einstein: God *does* play dice with
the universe, but He can calculate the odds to
infinity.)
Regarding that famous Einstein quotation,
41 matches
Mail list logo
