Caltech: The Mechanical Universe

Many Internet forums have carried discussion of the Electric Universe hypothesis. Much of that discussion has added more confusion than clarity, due to common misunderstandings of the electrical principles. Here we invite participants to discuss their experiences and to summarize questions that have yet to be answered.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Caltech: The Mechanical Universe

Unread postby allynh » Fri Jul 14, 2017 10:46 pm

When I watched:

Wallace Thornhill: The Long Path to Understanding Gravity | EU2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkWiBxWieQU

He mentioned the Christmas Lectures from 1974 with Eric Laithwaite.

http://richannel.org/christmas-lectures ... laithwaite

These Lectures will burn your brain. You will need to watch them over and over to get the full impact. The importance of these lectures are profound on many levels. I just wish there was a way for me to harvest the videos rather than depend on some website.

Notice in episode 3, there are film clips of Velikovsky, but never mentioned.

Episode 4 has the stuff about the gyroscope that is in Thornhill's video. Deeply disturbing.

Episode 5 hits to the heart, the power of "analogies".
allynh
 
Posts: 874
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: Caltech: The Mechanical Universe

Unread postby allynh » Wed Jan 10, 2018 9:27 pm

I just watched the NOVA episode:

Black Hole Apocalypse
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/blac ... lypse.html

This is what they beLIEve to be true. How, sad.

If the Team gets the chance, they should have one of the guys take the video apart.
allynh
 
Posts: 874
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: Caltech: The Mechanical Universe

Unread postby allynh » Sun Jun 24, 2018 3:18 pm

Over the years I have tried to get people to see many different things, and I would find it impossible to get them to even read books or watch video on the topics.

- The more I would push them to see what I was saying, the more bizarre the pushback. HA!

I found the book Factfulness that comes close to what I'm talking about.

Factfulness
by Hans Rosling

Rosling gave lecture after lecture and found that the more educated, the more informed, his audience was the less able they were to realize that they were wrong and learn what was right.

This is a YouTube series discussing Factfulness.

Hans Rosling on factfulness (2015)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6iAhU2 ... LD4k8aXZfE

I do not see a solution to this problem. The more facts and information you present, the more people resist changing their mind.

It is a clear example of the Zen concept of the need for The Beginner's Mind. Most people are not willing to start from the beginning to actually learn something that contradicts everything that they already think that they know.

From wiki:
Shoshin is a word from Zen Buddhism meaning "beginner's mind." It refers to having an attitude of openness, eagerness, and lack of preconceptions when studying a subject, even when studying at an advanced level, just as a beginner would. The term is especially used in the study of Zen Buddhism and Japanese martial arts.

The phrase is also discussed in the book Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind by Shunryu Suzuki, a Zen teacher. Suzuki outlines the framework behind shoshin, noting "in the beginner's mind there are many possibilities, in the expert's mind there are few."

I'm sure you guys have come across this many times. Watch the YouTube series and maybe read the book just to realize that it happens all the time and not just with "Fringe" stuff. HA!
allynh
 
Posts: 874
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: Caltech: The Mechanical Universe

Unread postby allynh » Mon Jun 25, 2018 11:06 am

I love the synchronicity.

This is a book review by Michael Shermer about a book by Alan Lightman. You have Alan Lightman as the blindfolded man trying to describe an elephant, and Michael Shermer saying what a good job Lightman has done. HA!

Both authors walk around with a "full cup". Neither is able to come at something with "Beginner's Mind" and see what's really there.

Must Science Conflict With Spirituality?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/25/book ... maine.html
By Michael Shermer
June 25, 2018
Nonfiction

Chloé Poizat
SEARCHING FOR STARS ON AN ISLAND IN MAINE

By Alan Lightman
226 pp. Pantheon Books. $24.95.

In 1801, Samuel Taylor Coleridge calculated the impact ratio of scientists to poets like this: “The souls of 500 Sir Isaac Newtons would go to the making up of a Shakespeare or a Milton.” Defending his 1820 poem “Lamia,” John Keats growled that Isaac Newton had “destroyed the poetry of the rainbow by reducing it to a prism,” lamenting that natural philosophy (in other words, science) will, as his poem put it, “unweave a rainbow.”

Does a scientific understanding of the world erase its emotional impact or spiritual power? Of course not. Science and spirituality are complementary, not conflicting. The physicist Richard Feynman reflected on this in a 1981 BBC interview, “The Pleasure of Finding Things Out,” recalling a conversation with an artist about appreciating a flower: “The beauty that he sees is available to other people and to me too, I believe. … At the same time, I see much more about the flower than he sees. I could imagine the cells in there, the complicated actions inside, which also have a beauty. … The fact that the colors in the flower evolved in order to attract insects to pollinate it is interesting; it means that insects can see the color. It adds a question: Does this aesthetic sense also exist in the lower forms? Why is it aesthetic? All kinds of interesting questions which the science knowledge only adds to the excitement, the mystery and the awe of a flower.”

Spirituality is a way of being in the world, a sense of one’s place in the cosmos, a relationship to that which extends beyond ourselves. I call this sciencuality, a neologism that echoes the sensuality of discovery. “Our contemplations of the cosmos stir us,” the astronomer Carl Sagan declared, waxing poetic in the opening scene of his documentary series “Cosmos,” one of the most spiritual expressions of science ever produced. “There is a tingling in the spine, a catch in the voice, a faint sensation as if a distant memory of falling from a great height. We know we are approaching the grandest of mysteries.”

Science needs its poets, and Alan Lightman is the perfect amalgam of scientist (an astrophysicist) and humanist (a novelist who’s also a professor of the practice of humanities at M.I.T.), and his latest book, “Searching for Stars on an Island in Maine,” is an elegant and moving paean to our spiritual quest for meaning in an age of science. The book consists of 20 tightly composed essays on a variety of topics (stars, atoms, truth, transcendence, death, certainty, origins and so on) with a single narrative thread running through them: the search for something deeper in the materialist worldview of the scientist.

Take death. “For a materialist,” Lightman writes, “death is the name that we give to a collection of atoms that once had the special arrangement of a functioning neuronal network and now no longer does so.” But this is unsatisfying. Of his parents, Lightman wonders: “Where are they now, my deceased mother and father? I know the materialist explanation, but that does nothing to relieve my longing for them, or the impossible truth that they do not exist.” Lightman doesn’t fear death. “Despite my belief that I am only a collection of atoms, that my awareness is passing away neuron by neuron, I am content with the illusion of life. I’ll take it. And I find a pleasure in knowing that a hundred years from now, even a thousand years from now, some of my atoms will remain on Lute Island.”

Lute Island, Maine, is where Lightman’s journey begins. On a clear moonless night in a tiny motorboat on his way to this summer retreat, sensing something special about the moment, he turned off the running lights and engine, lay down on his back to take in the ocean of stars, and let himself go. “The boat disappeared. My body disappeared. And I found myself falling into infinity. A feeling came over me I’d not experienced before.” Mystics and meditators aim for this sense of oneness with the universe, but Lightman’s just happened. “I felt an overwhelming connection to the stars, as if I were part of them. And the vast expanse of time — extending from the far distant past long before I was born and then into the far distant future long after I will die — seemed compressed to a dot. I felt connected not only to the stars but to all of nature, and to the entire cosmos. I felt a merging with something far larger than myself, a grand and eternal unity, a hint of something absolute.” When he returned to an awareness of his body and boat, he “had no idea how long I’d been lying there.”

What is a scientist to make of such mystical experiences? Lightman begins with absolutes, “ethereal things that are all-encompassing, unchangeable, eternal, sacred.” Absolutes “refer to an enduring and fixed reference point that can anchor and guide us through our temporary lives.” Absolutes go beyond science and are “rooted in personal experience, but they involve beliefs beyond that experience.” The problem, he admits, is that “the tenets of the absolutes” can’t be proved, “certainly not in the way that science has proven the existence of atoms,” so we are left with internal truths, those that are by definition out of the realm of science, to be understood solely through experience.

And then there’s faith. What Lightman calls the central doctrine of science — that “all properties and events in the physical universe are governed by laws, and those laws hold true at every time and place in the universe” — is an article of faith because “it cannot be proved.” It “must simply be accepted.” In support of this, he cites no less a luminary than Albert Einstein, who “believed in a beautiful and mysterious order underlying the world.”

Ultimately, scientists must convince other scientists that their theory of the absolute is true (or at least not false), and to do so they must leave the mystical realm of personal experience and return to the lab. But Lightman’s aim in this insightful and provocative musing is to remind us of the centrality of subjectivity in all human endeavors, including those of science.

Michael Shermer is the publisher of Skeptic magazine, a monthly columnist for Scientific American and a presidential fellow at Chapman University. His latest book is “Heavens on Earth: The Scientific Search for the Afterlife, Immortality, and Utopia.”

Follow New York Times Books on Facebook and Twitter, sign up for our newsletter or our literary calendar. And listen to us on the Book Review podcast.
allynh
 
Posts: 874
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:51 pm

Previous

Return to Electric Universe - Net Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests