Zero-Point Field

christian prayer actually works

lol

  On 9/30/2009 at 1:08 AM, 42Orange said:

How is this different from telling people "keep your chin up and everything will be a-ok!" Sure its a great habit, but most people just cant feel "genuinely appreciative" all the time or even some of the time. If it were just as easy as flipping your mental switch into happy mode, i seriously doubt people would be as disgruntled. I totally agree that you can turn your life around simply through your mentality, but there's reasons most people feel the way they do. some of it is habit, but so much of is is inescapable circumstances very little of which can be transformed through positive thinking.

I dislike the phrase "positive thinking". To me, it elicits trying to disregard your current situation and pushing against what you genuinely feel.. which is the most common mistake in field theory or whatever you want to call it.. -thinking- alone doesn't solve shit. if you don't genuinely feel good about a particular area, you can't think yourself out of that. and that's sort of the point, you have to go deeper than "cheer up, son".

i truly believe part of the reason people end up in inescepable circumstances is because they believe they cannot change their circumstances. and i don't mean that out of spite, I say it with the most empathy.

Believe me i've hit rock bottom alot of times and it's not "positive" thinking that gets you out of it.. the best way to help yourself out, in those situations.. is exploring what and how you really feel about it and acknowledging those feelings. Because once you stop keeping secrets from yourself, you can see directly into the core of your motivations to think and feel the way you do.

It's also important to recognize the value of a specific issue, because I believe you -can- recognize a value in everything, even if it's a completely destitute situation. If anything, it offers you information about yourself in a very prominent manner. Acknowledging your feelings and your situation helps you relieve tension, and that in itself is a potential to change.

feeling good about something doesn't have to be feeling "up-beat", it may be as simple as being relaxed about yourself.

the decisions that come about as a part of that are more than likely to be positive, and then it doesn't really matter if it's magic or not.

And that's probably the biggest change that I've experienced, that when I feel a particular way, I know it's for a very specific reason, and once I change the way I percieve a difficulty or problem, I can change the problem into something different. When I solve a problem, I feel happier about myself, and when I build upon that rather than receding into seeing all the problems, despite how real they may be, fantastic shit begins to unfold itself.

  On 9/30/2009 at 1:39 AM, JohnTqs said:

christian prayer actually works

lol

My mom is besides from being a doctor also a devout christian and has been cured from both cancer and severe disc hernia overnight. Both cases really fucked with the doctor's heads. It's not really something you share with others in the medical community, if they weren't there they don't believe it and you get ridiculed.

  On 9/30/2009 at 1:52 AM, chimera slot mom said:

  On 9/30/2009 at 1:39 AM, JohnTqs said:

christian prayer actually works

lol

 

My mom is besides from being a doctor also a devout christian and has been cured from both cancer and severe disc hernia overnight. Both cases really fucked with the doctor's heads. It's not really something you share with others in the medical community, if they weren't there they don't believe it and you get ridiculed.

it's a christmas miracle

  On 9/29/2009 at 10:08 PM, gaarg said:

The feminine side of our awareness would say there's more to nature than meets the science...

 

something about this i love

this is on the same level as perpetual motion machines and cold fusion.

  On 9/29/2009 at 4:20 PM, mafted said:

Science does not prove anything, only disproves. If a bunch of scientists get together to test a hypothesis which comes out like they planned, you won't hear about it. You only hear about it when things don't go as planned.

Wat? scientfic knowledge is pretty much made from confirmed hypothesis.

  On 9/29/2009 at 11:36 PM, chimera slot mom said:

i believe the human consciousness is a source of infinite energy that follows it's own premises. it operates within structures of conscious and subconscious belief and perception in order to create an experience outside of itself.

Would you care to explain what you understand by energy?

  Quote

ask any physicist worth his salt and they will assure you the anticipation and observation of an experiment will affect the result of the experiment itself. i'm not saying that alone validates my beliefs, i have no intention of that either, but this mechanism can only be plainly observable on a particle level.

uh... NO! NO! NO! a thousand times no! you are dead wrong, one key element of experimentation is that the results have to be reproducible. So no matter how much anticipation or observation or what not the results will be the same. no sane physicist will assure such thing, you are insane.

  On 9/30/2009 at 1:52 AM, chimera slot mom said:

  On 9/30/2009 at 1:39 AM, JohnTqs said:

christian prayer actually works

lol

 

My mom is besides from being a doctor also a devout christian and has been cured from both cancer and severe disc hernia overnight. Both cases really fucked with the doctor's heads. It's not really something you share with others in the medical community, if they weren't there they don't believe it and you get ridiculed.

As I pointed out before there have actually been experiments to test whether prayer works or not. the result? a resounding 'it doesn't do SHIT'. in fact, people that were informed that they were being prayed for recovered worse!, that also goes to show you how much happy thinking can help you. I can get you the references of the study if you like.

  On 9/30/2009 at 1:30 AM, inteeliguntdesign said:

A person who somehow manages to think happy thoughts, or see life through a happier perspective if you will, ends up happier. It's hard to disagree with that. But it does annoy me when people try to back that up with pseudo science to make it more valid. It stands quite well on its own. Pseudo science may make something more culturally accepted in the West initially to the uncritical, but it eventually damages it when you realise, and others point out, the science is bunk. It's just a good social observation, one which can be backed up by common sense, observation and logic. There's no need to bring in quantum physics and atoms into the equation. It just makes you look like you've got a few screws loose. And there's no need for it.

This.

because in you last posts you've pretty much said, "oh isn't it weird and mystical that people that apply themselves end up getting better outcomes in what they do?, this must be a consequence of the infinite energy of our awareness!!" WTF?? so you discovered that focused people get things done and somehow thing this is related to some quack interpretation of zero-point field and the collapse of reality through consciousness? get real, read some classic greek philosophy instead, they tought all of these things long ago without the need of quantum theory. I won't say anything else, I just hope you will grow out of this phase one day or that at least you try to get informed about the things (and "facts") you use to describe your thoughts or else you will always sounds like a nutbag.

Here is some more specifics:

Since ZPE (Zero Point Energy) is due to virtual particle flux and high electric field gradients cause the flux to increase, it is reasonable to assume that near the surface of an electron, the ZPE virtual particle flux would be very high, like a bunch of flies buzzing around it.

Science News reports (2/8/97), "Since the 1930's, theorists have proposed that...virtual particles cloak the electron, in effect reducing the charge and electromagnetic force observed at a distance." Therefore, for the first time, Dr. Koltick (Phys. Rev. Ltrs. 1/20/97) performed an experiment designed to penetrate the virtual particle cloud surrounding the electron with a particle accelerator at energies of 58 gigaelectronvolts without creating other particles. From his data, the newly obtained value of the fine structure constant is 1/128.5 instead of the smaller 1/137 that is traditionally observed for a fully screened electron. The fine structure constant equals the electron charge squared divided by Planck's constant and the speed of light.

As to the concept of free energy from ZPE, one of the first journal articles to investigate the possibility is "The extracting of electrical energy from the vacuum by cohesion of charge foliated conductors" (Phys. Rev. B 30, 4, 84). Dr. Forward describes this "parking ramp" style corkscrew or spring as a ZPE battery that will tap electrical energy from the vacuum and allow charge to be stored. The spring tends to be compressed from the Casimir force but the like charge from the electrons stored will cause a repulsion force to balance the spring separation distance. It tends to compress upon dissipation and usage but expand physically with charge storage. It is similar to the multilayer mirror in the article, "The Casimir force for passive mirrors" (Phys. Lett. A, 225, 1997, 188) or the "Casimir forces between beads on strings and membranes" (Phys. Lett. B, 347, 1995, 56) where virtual particle exchange between the beads is analyzed. It seems that any closely spaced matter in the submicron range will invoke the Casimir force. The last article could be useful for ZPE experimentalists since the Casimir force equations provided for the N "beads" allow for them to be stuck on a membrane or freely placed, with a variable D for the spatial dimension of interest.

Since the ground-breaking work on the "one-atom micromaser" (Phys. Lett. A, 217, 1996, 219), such concepts as "virtual photon tunnel effect" and "virtual photon quantum noise" are being explored. Further work is also suggested by the finding that "pressing zero point energy out of a spatial region can be used to temporarily increase the Casimir force" (Weigert, Phys. Lett. A, 214, 1996, 215). This article describes the process of squeezing energy states in quantized electromagnetic fields to distribute the uncertainty over position and momentum at will. In fact, a future job market may be opening for the quantum mechanic or the vacuum engineer with such precision in ZPE emerging.

Dr. Forward subscribes to the classical notion that there is no known limit

to the electromagnetic wavelength or frequency in the vacuum. What we see from Dr. Puthoff's approach to this is that he supports the majority view of a cutoff, which is based on Sakharov's work. The cutoff frequency (perhaps considering hf=mc2) is called the Planck frequency which is around 1043 Hertz. This opposes what we see as far as Moray King (in the book, Tapping the Zero Point Energy) and Dr. Forward saying that there is an infinite amount of energy available. In a later section we will see that Dr. Puthoff's theory derives gravity, inertia, heat, and also electricity directly from ZPE considerations. In Dr. Forward's paper, he suggests using micro-fabricated sandwiches of ultrafine metal dielectric layers. He also points out that ZPE seems to have a definite potential as an energy source.

Another possible experiment for ZPE is the "Casimir Effect at Macroscopic Distances" (Phys. Rev. A 48,1,93) which proposes observing the Casimir force at a distance of a few centimeters using confocal optical resonators within the sensitivity of laboratory instruments.

To summarize, the experimental evidence for the existence of ZPE is:

1) the Casimir Effect, 2) the Lamb shift, 3) Van der Waal's forces, 4) diamagnetism, 5) spontaneous emission, 6) microdegree liquid Helium, 7) quantum noise and most recently, 8) cosmological antigravity. Awaiting experimental verification is that inertia and gravity are also proof of ZPE

http://users.erols.com/iri/ZPEpaper.html

plus

lol

  On 9/30/2009 at 6:48 AM, GORDO said:

  On 9/29/2009 at 4:20 PM, mafted said:

Science does not prove anything, only disproves. If a bunch of scientists get together to test a hypothesis which comes out like they planned, you won't hear about it. You only hear about it when things don't go as planned.

 

Wat? scientfic knowledge is pretty much made from confirmed hypothesis.

The thing is that's how it works.. scientists do not share controversial results because they won't be taken seriously.

  Quote

Would you care to explain what you understand by energy?

Movement.

  Quote

uh... NO! NO! NO! a thousand times no! you are dead wrong, one key element of experimentation is that the results have to be reproducible. So no matter how much anticipation or observation or what not the results will be the same. no sane physicist will assure such thing, you are insane.

Absolutely. Look, Gordo.. You read Scientific American. I've spoken with a few physicists. You might not be referring to the same field of physics as I was, I referred to particle and quantum experiments. The results have to be reproducible to be verified, but that's the difficult part, they vary.

  Quote

As I pointed out before there have actually been experiments to test whether prayer works or not. the result? a resounding 'it doesn't do SHIT'. in fact, people that were informed that they were being prayed for recovered worse!, that also goes to show you how much happy thinking can help you. I can get you the references of the study if you like.

No big news. Yet it still happens, just not in your backyard or within the narrow confines of double proof tests. The very basis of these occurances, that they are incredibly random and virtually impossible to reproduce, make them less than compatible with the scientific model.

Like someone pointed out earlier on this forum, musical prowess such as playing Rachmaninoff by reading the score goes against most of the established theories of neurological science. It goes on and on. Some things just don't fit. As much of a problem it may be to you, it isn't to alot of people.

  Quote

This.

 

because in you last posts you've pretty much said, "oh isn't it weird and mystical that people that apply themselves end up getting better outcomes in what they do?, this must be a consequence of the infinite energy of our awareness!!" WTF?? so you discovered that focused people get things done and somehow thing this is related to some quack interpretation of zero-point field and the collapse of reality through consciousness? get real, read some classic greek philosophy instead, they tought all of these things long ago without the need of quantum theory. I won't say anything else, I just hope you will grow out of this phase one day or that at least you try to get informed about the things (and "facts") you use to describe your thoughts or else you will always sounds like a nutbag.

You're drawing a pretty funny conclusion of what I'm saying. I have demonstrated some of the reasoning of my beliefs, not the reasons, and I have neither the time or need to do that right now.

Greek philosophy? Are you serious? I'm sure you enjoy being a postpubescent knowitall, so I'm going to leave you to it. But conclusions can not always be drawn the way -you- are used to, and the way life twists and turns to most people is difficult to cram into a single hypothesis.

POST 69, and NOT ONE PERSON HERE HAS ASKED:

WHAT DOES GERALD DONALD THINK ABOUT ALL THIS???

lol

  On 9/30/2009 at 8:07 PM, sneaksta303 said:

POST 69, and NOT ONE PERSON HERE HAS ASKED:

 

WHAT DOES GERALD DONALD THINK ABOUT ALL THIS???

doesn't give a shit because it's crap

Damn i can't resist.

  On 9/30/2009 at 8:03 PM, chimera slot mom said:

  On 9/30/2009 at 6:48 AM, GORDO said:

  On 9/29/2009 at 4:20 PM, mafted said:

Science does not prove anything, only disproves. If a bunch of scientists get together to test a hypothesis which comes out like they planned, you won't hear about it. You only hear about it when things don't go as planned.

 

Wat? scientfic knowledge is pretty much made from confirmed hypothesis.

 

The thing is that's how it works.. scientists do not share controversial results because they won't be taken seriously.

False, if they are sure they set the experiment properly they will share it and then other people will make the same one. Also if they get a controversial result from solving an equation they will certainly share it. And then science was made.

  Quote

  Quote

Would you care to explain what you understand by energy?

 

Movement.

OK then when you say the infinite energy of awareness you mean that awareness can move stuff infinitely? that awareness can move anything?

  Quote

  Quote

uh... NO! NO! NO! a thousand times no! you are dead wrong, one key element of experimentation is that the results have to be reproducible. So no matter how much anticipation or observation or what not the results will be the same. no sane physicist will assure such thing, you are insane.

 

Absolutely. Look, Gordo.. You read Scientific American. I've spoken with a few physicists. You might not be referring to the same field of physics as I was, I referred to particle and quantum experiments. The results have to be reproducible to be verified, but that's the difficult part, they vary.

Uh look... I can't remember the last time i held a scientific american in my hands. I am a mathematician, and i speak to physicists every day. Results on particle (not just particle really) physics vary because measurement is not accurate, that what things like statistical models exists for and they tell us if results deviate significantly or not. I think you are misinterpreting the principle of uncertainty, while it is true that mere observation seems to affect reality, that doesn't mean that anticipation does. or that two different observers will conclude different things.

  Quote

  Quote

As I pointed out before there have actually been experiments to test whether prayer works or not. the result? a resounding 'it doesn't do SHIT'. in fact, people that were informed that they were being prayed for recovered worse!, that also goes to show you how much happy thinking can help you. I can get you the references of the study if you like.

 

No big news. Yet it still happens, just not in your backyard or within the narrow confines of double proof tests. The very basis of these occurances, that they are incredibly random and virtually impossible to reproduce, make them less than compatible with the scientific model.

You have to come to terms with a little thing called probability. A known result in mathematical probability (BTW mathematical probability models reality pretty good so far) is that if something is possible then it will happen at some time (given enough time and opportunity). So unlikely events WILL happen and that is pretty normal once you understand, so "miracles" happen by mere repetition of chance.

  Quote

Like someone pointed out earlier on this forum, musical prowess such as playing Rachmaninoff by reading the score goes against most of the established theories of neurological science. It goes on and on. Some things just don't fit. As much of a problem it may be to you, it isn't to alot of people.

What where do you get your info? i remember that thread, that's not what was said. And what was said was actually heavily questioned.

  Quote

  Quote

This.

 

because in you last posts you've pretty much said, "oh isn't it weird and mystical that people that apply themselves end up getting better outcomes in what they do?, this must be a consequence of the infinite energy of our awareness!!" WTF?? so you discovered that focused people get things done and somehow think this is related to some quack interpretation of zero-point field and the collapse of reality through consciousness? get real, read some classic greek philosophy instead, they tought all of these things long ago without the need of quantum theory. I won't say anything else, I just hope you will grow out of this phase one day or that at least you try to get informed about the things (and "facts") you use to describe your thoughts or else you will always sounds like a nutbag.

 

You're drawing a pretty funny conclusion of what I'm saying. I have demonstrated some of the reasoning of my beliefs, not the reasons, and I have neither the time or need to do that right now.

I am merely exaggerating what you said. To show you how ridiculous it sounds.

  Quote

Greek philosophy? Are you serious? I'm sure you enjoy being a postpubescent knowitall, so I'm going to leave you to it. But conclusions can not always be drawn the way -you- are used to, and the way life twists and turns to most people is difficult to cram into a single hypothesis.

pretty much what you're doing. You put all these things that you can't understand (which have been explained and described already by people who know stuff) into this ZPF nonsense.

last post :p

this is really good..

The Physics of Interstellar Travel

http://mkaku.org/home/?page_id=250

Kaku is the man.

GORDO

he does have a point

  On 10/1/2009 at 2:53 PM, GORDO said:

Damn i can't resist.

 

  On 9/30/2009 at 8:03 PM, chimera slot mom said:

  On 9/30/2009 at 6:48 AM, GORDO said:

  On 9/29/2009 at 4:20 PM, mafted said:

Science does not prove anything, only disproves. If a bunch of scientists get together to test a hypothesis which comes out like they planned, you won't hear about it. You only hear about it when things don't go as planned.

 

Wat? scientfic knowledge is pretty much made from confirmed hypothesis.

 

The thing is that's how it works.. scientists do not share controversial results because they won't be taken seriously.

 

False, if they are sure they set the experiment properly they will share it and then other people will make the same one. Also if they get a controversial result from solving an equation they will certainly share it. And then science was made.

I meant in cases where previous theories and stances are tested.. like when they test Einstein's theories on the space shuttle and stuff. If it turns out to be accurate you won't hear about it nearly as much as when it's not. But then, that wouldn't mean they proved anything, only disproved the theory.

  On 10/1/2009 at 4:09 PM, mafted said:

this is really good..

 

The Physics of Interstellar Travel

 

http://mkaku.org/home/?page_id=250

 

Kaku is the man.

that's a good read. This part:

"The problem is well-defined. Unfortunately, even though the leading scientists on the planet are working on the theory, no one on earth is smart enough to solve the superstring equations."

makes me think we need to develop mental steroids, so that just like in the physical arena, we can surpass our natural limitations. Flowers for Algernon etc.

  On 10/1/2009 at 2:53 PM, GORDO said:

False, if they are sure they set the experiment properly they will share it and then other people will make the same one. Also if they get a controversial result from solving an equation they will certainly share it. And then science was made.

And the lesser probability of less accepted theories or occurances will disqualify it automatically. That's what I dislike about the scientific model, the notion that if it doesn't happen all the time and isn't readily available within any form or structure of observation, it doesn't exist.

  Quote

OK then when you say the infinite energy of awareness you mean that awareness can move stuff infinitely? that awareness can move anything?

No, I meant that consciousness creates infinite movement, which materializes into matter.

  Quote

Uh look... I can't remember the last time i held a scientific american in my hands. I am a mathematician, and i speak to physicists every day. Results on particle (not just particle really) physics vary because measurement is not accurate, that what things like statistical models exists for and they tell us if results deviate significantly or not. I think you are misinterpreting the principle of uncertainty, while it is true that mere observation seems to affect reality, that doesn't mean that anticipation does. or that two different observers will conclude different things.

Okay, thanks for enlightening me. I made that statement because that's the impression I got from your "grow up" comment. Why did you get into mathematics?

I don't distinguish anticipation from observation, I don't see them as separate in the human mind process.

  Quote

You have to come to terms with a little thing called probability. A known result in mathematical probability (BTW mathematical probability models reality pretty good so far) is that if something is possible then it will happen at some time (given enough time and opportunity). So unlikely events WILL happen and that is pretty normal once you understand, so "miracles" happen by mere repetition of chance.

See? We're already on the same terms.

  Quote

What where do you get your info? i remember that thread, that's not what was said. And what was said was actually heavily questioned.

What info? I base it on life experience. I don't remember the exact words, but that was what was said. The split-second coordination of that type of performance. Heavily questioned by who?

  On 10/1/2009 at 2:56 PM, GORDO said:

I am merely exaggerating what you said. To show you how ridiculous it sounds.

Everything sounds ridiculous when exaggerated. I understand it sounds ridiculous on your terms already, but still.

  Quote

pretty much what you're doing. You put all these things that you can't understand (which have been explained and described already by people who know stuff) into this ZPF nonsense.

 

last post :p

I don't think the purpose of this conversation is for either one of us to be more valid than the other. My model works for me, and that's as far as I want to go. I just enjoy talking to you, you know. You seem certain of your thing, I find that fascinating.

The most valuable piece of information I've gathered from delving into scientific masterminds is the notion that we can't really be sure of anything.