Quantum Mind - "Minds Eye"

Message from discussion Quantum Mind

Pat

More options Jul 24, 2:58 am

From: Pat <PatrickDHarring...@hotmail.com>

Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 11:58:32 -0700 (PDT)

Local: Thurs, Jul 24 2008 2:58 am

Subject: Re: Quantum Mind

  Reply to author
  |
  Forward
  | Print
  | View thread
  | Show original
  | Report this message
  | Find messages by this author
  

On Jul 23, 5:57 pm, Pottsie <pottsie...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> What? Do you think I'm a physicist or something? I'm just a wandering pilgrim looking for a bit of shade! ;)

> Is McTaggart's book written in lay terms?

Absolutely. If it weren't, I wouldn't have mentioned it. In
fact, that's one of it's big selling points.

>I seem to have misplaced my handy dandy physics lingo dictionary, >and my math is limited to sophomore algebra. Trig was the class >in which I wrote letters to my girlfriend, and my Calculus prof >was straight off the boat from Taiwan, and couldn't even be >understood when he said "Herrow!" :D

The ideas behind calculus are really quite simple. For example,
integral calculus takes countless n-dimensional (4-D, for example)
objects and integrates them into one n+1-dimensional (5-D, in this
example) object. Differential calculus does the opposite and takes a
n-dimensional object and cuts it up into 'n-1 dimensional' objects.
The rest is the 'how-to' bit. Conceptually, you use integral calculus
to get a loaf out of slices and differential calculus to get slices
from a loaf. Easy as pie...well, maybe easy as bread. ;-)
You'd have absolutely no problems with "The Field". I only
remember one bit of math coming out of it and that was the reference
to F=MA (Force=Mass*Acceleration). Have a quick look at her website:
http://www.livingthefield.com/

> Namaste

> Pottsie

> Pat <PatrickDHarring...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On 23 Jul, 12:39, Pottsie

> wrote:
> > Pat,

> > I think I just thought of something that may help (hinder) your quest
> > to find out what connects quanta, albeit it a philosophical point
> > rather than a physical one.
> ><snip>
> > appear until the Observer shows up! :D

> > Namaste

> > Pottsie

> Have you not heard of the Zero-Point Field? If not, grab a copy
> of Lynne McTaggart's book "The Field". It describes the fabric of
> space time AS a medium through which energy moves. The ZPF is the YIN
> to the active YANG of energy. While also a field of energy, per se,
> it is passive energy. That is, it (the ZPF) is a single singularity
> that stretches throughout space-time and forms the Planck-length
> pointed gridiron through which energy acts. It is, as Molly says, the
> up-to-date scientific version of 'ether'. As to how it applies in a
> string theory paradigm, have a look at this link:http://www.superstringtheory.fanspace.com/guest_book.html
> Note: although his theory is not the same as mine, the ZPF aspect of
> it is compatible with mine.
> You can also look at wikipedia for the ZPF:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-point_field
> and its corresponding, Einstein-proposed zero-point energy:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-point_energy.

> In McTaggart's book, she describes many experiments which rely on
> the ZPF. The most important one being that, if you assume a ZPF, you
> can derive F=MA and no longer have it as an axiom but as a proven
> fact. Newton, of course, had to assume it. But, the ZPF also lays
> the foundation for homeopathy and mind-over-matter effects. It's a
> great book, Potts; one well worth getting.

> "You can't smell the roses while holding your nose!" - Pottsie

Reply to author Forward