224 replies to this topic

[canuck]

feusurlaneige, on Feb 24 2007, 08:44 PM, said:

I think the big breakthrough will come with Quantum physics. I read somewhere that scientists studying in this department are on on the verge of a big breakthrough in proving scientifically that there are many more dimensions than the ones we know. They say it is only a couple of years away and if this is so then maybe that will be all we need. If they can prove these dimensions exist then ghosts will be the next thing.

The thing to keep in mind is that the "dimensions" referred to in Quantam Physics are purely mathematical constucts. They do not represent a physical entity.

It is kinda like saying: "If we had cubic chickens, then we would have cubic eggs".

Well, yes, but since we don't have cubic chickens, and we don't have cubic eggs, so it doesn't really matter very much.

The same applies to Quantam Physics. The math is very complex, and in order to solve some of the equations, some creativity is needed. Ie: cubic chickens are invented in order to make the math work. Except in physics, they aren't called cubic chickens, they are called "dimensions".

On the other hand, cosmologists are saying that the universe is mainly composed of "dark matter".

They don't know what it is, where it is, what it looks like, or what it does or how to tell if it is standing right next to them. But they say it is out there somewhere, and there is lots of it.

So what's the difference between "dark matter" and a ghost?

[MoonChild]

Well, what connection do you see between dark matter and ghosts? How are they related, if at all?


As I always believe, a believer collects information so as to support their stance, and an unbeliever collects information so as to support their views. In effect it is all about whatever they choose to believe.

[thesameones]

feusurlaneige, on Feb 24 2007, 08:44 PM, said:

I think the big breakthrough will come with Quantum physics. I read somewhere that scientists studying in this department are on on the verge of a big breakthrough in proving scientifically that there are many more dimensions than the ones we know. They say it is only a couple of years away and if this is so then maybe that will be all we need. If they can prove these dimensions exist then ghosts will be the next thing.

I think so too.

[thesameones]

MoonChild, on Feb 25 2007, 02:03 AM, said:

Well, what connection do you see between dark matter and ghosts? How are they related, if at all?


As I always believe, a believer collects information so as to support their stance, and an unbeliever collects information so as to support their views. In effect it is all about whatever they choose to believe.

For sure sceince is not my strong suite. I'm more of a creative typed person. There were several things I have read about atom smashing where hypothisis lean toward proof/existence of other dimensions.

[canuck]

[quote name='MoonChild' date='Feb 25 2007, 02:03 AM' post='381548']
Well, what connection do you see between dark matter and ghosts? How are they related, if at all?

"Dark Matter" is apparently a major constituent of the universe. However, nobody knows enough about it to be able to charcterise it, measure it or manipulate it. Nobody has seen any, nobody has touched any, nobody has collected any. Despite this, most mainstream physicists/scientists accept it's existence.

"Ghosts" and "supernatural phenomena" exist. Millions of people have seen them, thousands have taken pictures of them, they have been detected using standard measuring instruments, their physical manifestations have been voluminously documented. Despite this, most mainstream physicists/scientists ridicule them and deny their existence.

Clearly, the "scientific" community is highly selective in what they will believe or not. Despite available evidence, in the case of supernatural phenomena; or lack of it, as in the case of dark matter.

To go one more step, if we accept that "dark matter" does exist, might anything that is made of this stuff constitute a "parallel universe"? Maybe "ghosts" and "supernatural phenomena" are merely manifestations of this parallel universe that somehow leak into ours?

[evad_83647]

Parrellel universes, alternate dimisions, sounds like sci fiction. lol

Yes there is a lot of theories covering these areas. But bottom line they are all theories.

People are doing the math investigating the theories, but to date nothing has been proven or disproven. Same as for ghosts. lol

Science = 0
Ghosthunter = 0

I disagree with the statements that science is not taking paranormal seriously. They have studied in the open ESP, Mystics, Hauntings etc. They have just never found any way to replicate their findings on a consistent basis. We know more of the ESP research and they found that nothing occured more than chance would dictate. For example they would show somene a card say a queen of clubs, they would ask them to send the image to another person in another room with their thoughts. Hooray the person in the other room got it right. Then they show the first subject the same card again and tell them to send the image again, oops the receptor missed it, over and over and over...

We have some of the most sophisticated listening equipment in the world, Why isn't SETI or American Submarines picking up EVP's? I'm sure there are a lot of people in Davy Jones locker with something to say. lol

Science has investigated this stuff and has not been able to come up with sound theories to work from. I'm sure if you could give them something they can measure and put their mathmetical minds on they will try harder.

Just my opinion
Dave

[evad_83647]

As a side note science used to discount that you could hypnotize anyone, dismissing it as a parlor trick. Hypnotism is still not accepted as mainstream but it is gaining strength. Now a child under hynosis following a hypnotists suggestions can recall sexual advances they could not recall previously and people are being convicted using the repressed memories.

[canuck]

evad_83647, on Feb 26 2007, 01:46 AM, said:

As a side note science used to discount that you could hypnotize anyone, dismissing it as a parlor trick. Hypnotism is still not accepted as mainstream but it is gaining strength. Now a child under hynosis following a hypnotists suggestions can recall sexual advances they could not recall previously and people are being convicted using the repressed memories.

Gee Evad, you were doing so well until you brought up the repressed memories thing.

Unfortunately, too many of these "repressed memories" have been demonstrated to be false, and too many innocent people have had their lives destroyed by these manufactured "memories".

Similarly, a number of "therapists" have been sued to within an inch of their lives for their part in creating these false memories.

Hypnosis is still an evolving art/science. It has been demonstrated to be useful in many situations. It has also been demonstrated to be very a potent and dangerous tool when used on the susceptible and unwary.

People who are emotionally vulnerable and unstable are particularly susceptible to have fake "memories" implanted. It is often these kind of emotionally fragile people who make the accusation of abuse, usually after having undergone intensive therapy, which may involve hypnotherapy.

The therapist, while exploring the possible reasons for the person's fragile state, often plants the seeds which may then grow into the accusations of abuse and "repressed memory". It is probably not a coincidence that most often, these "repressed memories" are of a sexual nature.

On the other hand, I have personal experience with people who have experienced absolutely mind numbingly awful things.

They have lived through things that make Hollywood's worst nightmares seem pretty tame; yet not one of them has "suppressed" the memory. They remember every moment in vivid, blood curdling, explicit detail.

So this leads me to question the whole concept of the "repressed" memory; is it real, or is it just something created by less than expert therapists?

From my experience, people who really have experienced horrible things, do not suppress the memory. They certainly compartmentalise it, and put it aside; but they never forget.

[thesameones]

With human chiping perhaps one day science will be able to measure and replicate a thought, a feeling, our deepest personal attributes. Maybe one day this will lead to replication of the human connection to one another and to the higher being many of us connect with. Maybe the soul will be understood under lab conditions. That would be the time when science would be walking the path of discovery to spiritual. As there is always a human to manipulate to their will, maybe that would be a good thing, maybe not........................

[evad_83647]

I brought up the repressed memories as an example, I don't think they should be allowed in court. My feelings are much the same as your about them Canuck.

My point was we are not aruguing wether someone can be hypnotized, a few years ago we would have been.

While we are on the repressed memory thing. Why can five people experience the same unusual event and only two of them recall the event years later? (Seeing a flying saucer at low altitude and moving slowly is not something people would tend to forget.)

It's kinda interesting to have conversations about joint experiences in the past and see how differently everyone remembers everything. lol

[plindboe]

canuck, on Feb 25 2007, 06:51 AM, said:

So what's the difference between "dark matter" and a ghost?

The effect of dark matter is measurable, while ghosts are not. Dark matter stands up to Occam's razor, ghosts do not. Dark matter is science, ghosts are not. Plenty of differences.

Edited by plindboe, 21 April 2007 - 10:01 AM.

[plindboe]

Grim Undertakings, on Feb 17 2007, 11:46 PM, said:

I know we seldom agree on anything, but in this case, very well said, Plindboe!

Thanks, Grimster.

[Grim Undertakings]

[canuck]

Dark matter is speculation, not fact.

"Ghosts" are a commonly observed phenomena, for which science has not yet developed either a theoretical framework, or the tools with which to quantify or qualify it.

Even a cursory study of the history of science will generate an embarassingly long list of things which have been taken to be "fact" by the scientific community, but subsequently proven to be idiocy.

Similarly, an equally long list can be generated of things which once were ridiculed, but have since become part of the foundation of science, and accepted wisdom. Until they are also disproven.

So, until such time as the phenomena of "ghosts" has been definitively explained, it would demonstrate wisdom to keep in mind the embarrasing track record of "science", and withhold ridicule.

[plindboe]

canuck, on Apr 23 2007, 02:49 AM, said:

Dark matter is speculation, not fact.

We can see the effect it has on matter and light. It's not speculation when we can measure it's effects. We know of planets around other stars, we know of the Kuiper belt and Oort cloud, we know that there are vast amounts of particles throughout the Universe adding up to significant mass. We also know that a sphere must be at least 10 Jupiter masses before fusion can begin, and it will become easier to observe directly. That there is lots of matter out there that we can't see directly(aka. dark matter) follows logically, and through measurements and calculations we can see approximately how much there is of it.

canuck, on Apr 23 2007, 02:49 AM, said:

"Ghosts" are a commonly observed phenomena, for which science has not yet developed either a theoretical framework, or the tools with which to quantify or qualify it.

Hallucinations, misidentifications and the effect of bias on anecdotes are commonly observed phenonema, especially when strong beliefs are involved. If you consider anecdotal evidence to be good evidence, you will suddenly gain thousands of religions, and hundreds of thousands of supersticious beliefs to adhere to. So make your choice; (1) are all beliefs true, or (2) have humans an amazing ability to fool themselves into false beliefs?

canuck, on Apr 23 2007, 02:49 AM, said:

Even a cursory study of the history of science will generate an embarassingly long list of things which have been taken to be "fact" by the scientific community, but subsequently proven to be idiocy.

I'd like to hear that long list of embarrassing idiocy. For each entry, I'd like you to explain exactly what the embarrassing idiocy of it was.

canuck, on Apr 23 2007, 02:49 AM, said:

Similarly, an equally long list can be generated of things which once were ridiculed, but have since become part of the foundation of science, and accepted wisdom. Until they are also disproven.

Agreed. However that doesn't make any non-accepted claims out there any more valid.