The evidence is there inside us all, without it you and I would
not exist, it is the flame that burns within, it is the light that makes us
what we are, open your heart to it and experience it for yourself. OM
Does Chi exist ?
- Thread starter IndianCurry2010
- Start date
The evidence is there inside us all, without it you and I would
not exist, it is the flame that burns within, it is the light that makes us
what we are, open your heart to it and experience it for yourself. OM
Nice poetry, but neither proof nor evidence. :shrug:
OK, so if its not printed in the Scientific American you're not
going to believe it.
Those who recognize it have all the proof they need, for you
sadly it seems that is to be denied you, perhaps in the next lifetime,
but you probably don't believe in that either.
woo
Guess what your nom de plume means.
Look at mine. The opposite of skeptical is 'gullible'.
A skeptical person requires evidence before choosing to believe something. A gullible person is prepared to believe without evidence. That person is a con artist's dream.
Where do you fit?
Guess what your nom de plume means.
Look at mine. The opposite of skeptical is 'gullible'.
A skeptical person requires evidence before choosing to believe something. A gullible person is prepared to believe without evidence. That person is a con artist's dream.
Where do you fit?
Just because you can explain a thing in multiple ways doesn't mean that one of the explanations is wrong, or offers no insight that can't be obtained from the other. The classical electromagnetic field is an extremely useful concept which most people would agree is 'real', yet the more fundamental quantum description is very very different. The fact that we have the quantum theory doesn't mean we can no longer gain anything from considering the classical theory.
it means i don't take myself seriously.
personally i have all the evidence i need, but i admit its a mission to convince
nonbelievers.
I have a problem with it, because it's simply not true.
I am easy to convince. All you need is good data. Objectively derived, empirical, and credible. However, all I get from guys like you is subjective stuff that has no credibility.
Is this what you mean, "Most physicists today believe that quantum mechanics is correct, and that the EPR paradox is a "paradox" only because classical intuitions do not correspond to physical reality" wiki. so everything is fine except the way we understand reality?
There are other paradox issues relating to mathematics such as godel's theorem, i'm not sure how
that effects quantum theory but as it is essentially described by mathematics
(which i admit to not understanding) i would imagine there could be some
connection or knock on effect?
EPR paradox isn't a real paradox. It's a poor name for entanglement. A real paradox is a reality violation. For example, if you are 6 feet tall and 150 feet tall right now then that is a paradox. One thing that is clear from all branches of physics is that reality is consistent, persistent, and non-contradictory. In other words, paradoxes are not supported and if some model brings up a real paradox then the model has some incorrect component to it.
Consequently, QM doesn't ask anyone to "believe" anything. It is simply a model of how reality operates at small scales.
That *mission* will always fail until you know what "non-believers" are asking for. They want evidence. That is a demonstration that some idea in your mind matches actual reality. In other words, reality has to agree. If it doesn't then the idea is not true and truth is all the matters in the world of science... now how you feel.
This is the case for chi. It's an attractive and very human-satiating concept; however, it is not a real entity.
That's fine, i understand your frustration, some things must be experienced
to be understood, most of what we understand at the deep end of
the physical universe is what the High Priests of Science describe
in their scripture journals, and we believe it and swallow it whole because
there is no way we could personally verify it for ourselves, for that
we would need a particle accelerator in our basement, so we go along
with the consensus and it becomes part of our belief system, but it is
nonetheless second hand knowledge. If you are happy to believe that
and can see its positive benefits in your own life and the world
around you, that is absolutely fine, most of the time that is what i do
like everyone else. i marvel at technology, computers, space probes,
i am in fact a technician myself.
But there are some things we must experience for ourselves, a direct
first hand experience, Gnosis. There is no theory of consciousness
but that does not stop us from believing that we are aware, self
evident we say. There is a technology that describes our psychic world
but because we have no theory for it, it is outside the scientific paradigm
so not available to the majority of the populous who are blissfully ignorant
of it. There are a places where you could go and experience this Gnosis
for yourself with the help of a teacher, in fact there are many places
in many parts of the world, but first before anything else you need to
open up and admit to yourself there is actually some possibility that this
can happen.
well quantum theory certainly does not agree with most peoples sense
of reality.
I think i know what non believers are asking i've addressed that in my post to Skeptic.
Woo
Quantum physics is weird indeed. However, I believe it because it is supported by objectively derived, empirical, and credible evidence. I do not mind that most such evidence is second hand. We cannot all carry out multi-million dollar experiments, and so we accept what is written up in peer reviewed and reputable scientific journals.
Subjective evidence is not acceptable. To say that you believe in the whichness of the why because you have felt it deep in your heart is simply not good enough. Almost any subjective sensation can be produced by drugs, direct electrical stimulation of the brain, starvation, meditation, extreme fatigue etc. Subjective is usually not true.
I am aware that your strongly experienced, direct first hand personal gnosis fits the category of subjective sensation. Thus it cannot be accepted as indicating something real.
Quantum physics is weird indeed. However, I believe it because it is supported by objectively derived, empirical, and credible evidence. I do not mind that most such evidence is second hand. We cannot all carry out multi-million dollar experiments, and so we accept what is written up in peer reviewed and reputable scientific journals.
Subjective evidence is not acceptable. To say that you believe in the whichness of the why because you have felt it deep in your heart is simply not good enough. Almost any subjective sensation can be produced by drugs, direct electrical stimulation of the brain, starvation, meditation, extreme fatigue etc. Subjective is usually not true.
I am aware that your strongly experienced, direct first hand personal gnosis fits the category of subjective sensation. Thus it cannot be accepted as indicating something real.
It honestly doesn't matter if QM agrees with people's sense of reality. What matters is whether or not reality agrees with QM.
I am in agreement with Skeptical's response.
"Subjective is usually not true", are there then any circumstances when
it could be true? Buddhism asserts its all an illusion, maya, the trick
is to see through it. Is your truth a peer reviewed journal? There must
be plenty of holy men out who have been working on this a lifetime
who would surely appreciate a copy of you journal.
No there is no trick. The point is to find the truth using the best tools we have.
Last edited:
I think my point was missed here, I was using quantum electrodynamics as an example of a well-accepted deeper explanation for classical electromagnetism, not as something weird (i.e. as an analogy for western medicine). Just as all the predictions of classical electromagnetism are not true (it contains singularities etc.) neither are all the predictions or explanations for phenomena offered by classical chinese medicine and chi theory, however that doesn't mean that they don't have anything right and that there is nothing we can learn by studying them.