In the music of the multiverse there can be experts as if master jazz players who have explored all the fractal (and quasic) classifications of riffs and melody long before the theory comes to show they have exhausted the possibilities. We need the musicians as much as we need the dreamers. Let no one apologize for their faith in spirit (mind) or science that the real world is there and has some sense of order over the chaos. But as to why there is so much resistance and so much clinging to muddled ideas I cannot say- nor anyone in a superconductive flow of truth and will to enquiry. I only know that this sets science back centuries with which we could have used in our time to the benefit of humanity, those near us in space and time to which we claim such identities and uniqueness are important.
There are still ideas to which even the metaphysics is not worked out- but for anyone to be convinced of some theory because they first thought of it or think they did should be suspected an error- and intellectually not a complete theory anyway. All we really should have as a scientific method or philosophy is basic honesty.
Metaphysically, within the life force -perhaps in the eyes of science and the world a lesser science- that we share in our explorations- such complexity of the organic world so divided in its descent into emotionless progress and assent into improbable futures of disembodied dreams might be diverse enough that from some reference frame of this world some unique and special theory could be an absolute truth and not just from one theoreticians perspective. We are part of a wider multiverse- which somehow is in the here and now, never and forever... I find it intolerable that we waste the genius of such as Pitkanen for in many ways our shared thoughts and times and brains are a working and vital theory of the multiverse as perhaps an echo of a theory of everything that can exist without us.
The question, Ulla, is what in our dialog may we glean of your insights and offer you for you research and motivation in a world where enquiry is possible?
* * *
The very first thing you need to do is to inform Matti about your plans. Maybe he would like to participate?
ReplyDeleteThis feels a bit uncomfortable.
Ulla,
ReplyDeleteGood point, thought some about it yesterday as we owe a living author respect and unlike my analysis of Tulku who invites shared comment explicitly in his book My suggestion to Pitkanen was not answered for any possible collaboration.
So, I decided to shift gears until maybe some domains or forums are up next year. The problem with the mysteries of physics and how we communicate it seems to be a shared problem.
Thank you for your comments.
The PeSla
* * * Oh I forgot to sign in to post this comment so went to dashboard and as TGD is a blog I follow I see that Matti is synchronously right on my topic post of today "Beyond the Field Communique" I notice his article ends with the search for mechanisms of consciousness which is where our ideas differ in preferred concerns- I am somewhere between Tulku and Pitkanen- but doesn't the synchronicity of all this strike you as an interesting thing?
Some established are very helpful and communicate to me, some do not in their arrogance. The way Matti was treated after should deep thinking and good work- I would not blame him if he hid away his insights from the world and kept his work to himself.
What I think I understand is that some ideas are defended and others called names because from a consciousness view a fundamental theory so challenged shows up who are the real crackpots. How very uncomfortable it was for me to see M theory like this for awhile lately.
PeSla at Solstice
Ulla,
ReplyDeleteYou say you area of expertise is biology. I and to my surprise others on line have held that in some view physics is a branch of biology (I do not conclude the biology of mind or mind only necessarily for that issue of philosophy).
Thus I question if you are not a physicist as well. In any case, what do you think of the four way blood cell symmetry- if our dialog can find a common language?
Not knowing better, and after reading some of Pitkanen from the links you mentioned- whenever I have mentioned some current idea- such as OBE to chancellors and admissions offices or to physicists- or the value of the Qi even with Leibniz the father in 1600's of computers after reading the Confucian version of I Ching- I was not taken seriously and told it was not an appropriate topic for an academic setting. Yet later it was the hot topic on the universities own public radio stations and the scientist guests defended my positions and questions as interesting and serious.
It seems that after the Hippie era and flirting with eastern philosophy by my generation, and these issues taken seriously by Liberal ivy league universities- that any mention of trying to deal with such concepts brands work as less than serious. This true for others well established who dared to think about these areas. It is no longer considered correct to relate quantum stuff to say ESP as it once was.
From my view I am a product of the era when in the schools the National Science Foundation promoted science (thank you Sputnik) due again to the GI Bill. That science funding is so shoddy today and the USA losing ground I hold to the fact that my era of veterans had their GI Bill more or less sabotaged- perhaps for the same of more social equality sacrificing merit.
The PeSla
No,I am only a biologist, MSc, not even PhD, and I study these things from my horisont, with the quantum biology in sight. It is a fascinating journey.
ReplyDeleteI Ching and others (the Platonic solides is my favourite) are very fascinating too, and they have been chrystallized by reality, by experiencies. They had the Einsteinian view (also Mattinian) that experiencies should be taken for real and the surroundings would be interpreted by experiencies. Today they are interpreted many times as illusions or anomalies, GIVING problems. I cannot see why that would give a lesser worthy result than double-testing. And the lack of understanding what exactly is tested, and why + the use of wrong tools can give really horrifying results. Today many such tests are done, all wasted money.
Eastern, or old ancient medicine was built on function only, not structure. The study of the inner anatomy is a late tradition. Some had said it was a tragedy the microscope was invented, and there are a little truth. Structure is no reason, it is a consequence. Instead we should more ask why it looks the way it does.
Common people know the philosophy too badly. They have heard something fluffy, do their math in a fluffy way, and out comes something fluffy. And they are surprised!
And they doesn't even care about this old heritage, the treasure.
Not even today in the medical TCM University, TCM-doctors care so much about the anatomy. Or the anatomy can be used in many different ways for fast results. There are a very fast growing knowkedge today in the TCM know-how. When we talk of ancient medicine this is only a truth with very strong modifications.
And if you read the ancient scripts carefully, you see they actually describe the quantum world. Take 'the eightfold way' as instance. It is I Ching, and it could as well be the interplay of mesons. How the heck did they do it? Qi is the Higgs mechanism.
Because of the ignorance of common people we should be extremely careful what we do. Not for anything else.
Matti is not so cautious, himself. As he said; why should I bother? They never understand me anyhow. Penrose is the same type. But he wants the discussion with collegues, and peace with himself.
In Finland he has suffered something like the witchies trial. Everything he could possibly say was against him.
You know, when I saw Apollon and the moonlanding I was so fascinated I had to draw a picture of it in a secret place, the walls of my wardrobe. They are still there.
ReplyDeleteUlla,
ReplyDeleteI was in a derelict hotel lobby and it was full and CBS put up a simulation. Everyone cheered then left the room- then I got a better view of the actual one step for man...
We should be doing lectures and conferences on Mars by now... But I can see the point that space can wait while we work out our differences on this world.
Keep up your lifelong interest in the sciences.
The PeSla
Actually space is very important for these our small differencies, too. Everything is relative. :)
ReplyDelete