The first experimental measurement of God; to a 2-decimal point accuracy

[exchemist]

Stop guessing. Perhaps try reading the opening post, for starters.

We're not talking about IQ here.

No, we certainly aren't.

 

[exchemist]

[George E Hammond MS physics]
...
... So stick around Write4u, the subject of microtubules is about to become big-time news !

Oh goody, popcorn time.

 

[billvon]

Oh goody, popcorn time.

It would be fun to see these two go at it.

I recall MagicalRealist going on and on about ghosts and UFO. Then when someone said (paraphrased) "right but that's the Holy Ghost" he replied "well, no, that's nuts!"

 

[foghorn]

It would be fun to see these two go at it.
I recall MagicalRealist going on and on about ghosts and UFO. Then when someone said (paraphrased) "right but that's the Holy Ghost" he replied "well, no, that's nuts!"

Magical Realist and nuts:

referring to those here who believe in ufos or uaps as "ufo nuts." Are you denying you said this.

But it's okay for MR to call people nuts:

Religious nuts caught on tape:

 

[George E Hammond]

A 2 minute google search tends to suggest that "GFP" actually stands for "General Factor of Personality". [Strange that Mr Hammond, being the Big Expert on this, gets the basic terminology wrong.] The idea is that in common psychological models that measure personality traits - in particular the Big Five model - correlations tend to be observed among the scores on various dimensions. This has led some researchers to propose that a higher-level scale could be used, incorporating one or two dimensions to "simplify" the usual 5 (or 6).

The mention of "eigenvectors" is probably a reference to statistical factor analysis methods.

A "GFP" - if it is valid - would be a one-number (or perhaps two-number) indicator that would point towards a set of "lower-order" personality traits. There is some debate as to what the GFP might indicate. Suggestions include things like a general kind of "emotional intelligence".

No serious researcher suggests that the GFP has anything to do with religion or God, let alone the bible of one particular religion.

Hammond's arguments, such as they are, appear to me to be a classic pseudoscience hodge-podge.

Stop guessing. Perhaps try reading the opening post, for starters.

We're not talking about IQ here.

[George E Hammond MS physics]
Dear James R:
... Apparently you are the moderating authority here. Originally I posted this thread under "FRINGE –ALTERNATIVE THEORIES" and you subsequently moved to to "PSEUDOSCIENCE".
... My CV is posted here:
https://independent.academia.edu/GeorgeHammond/CurriculumVitae
and as you can see I have 2 degrees in physics and have published a major paper in the academic peer – reviewed literature in a prominent journal published by Elsevier Scientific Ltd. the world's largest scientific publisher. These are not the qualifications of an incompetent crank!
... Could I please prevail upon you to move this thread, once again, to: "PHILOSOPHEY – subforum RELIGION". All things considered, I think this is the most appropriate location for this thread. It is obviously not "pseudoscience" and Matt Faunce from the philosophy sector has spoken approvingly of the theory and moreover it is entirely in line with the historical work of Prof. William James of Harvard, America's foremost philosophy figure.
Thank you for your consideration, George E Hammond MS physics, Hyannis MA

 

[Beer w/Straw]

[George E Hammond MS physics]
Dear James R:
... Apparently you are the moderating authority here. Originally I posted this thread under "FRINGE –ALTERNATIVE THEORIES" and you subsequently moved to to "PSEUDOSCIENCE".
... My CV is posted here:
https://independent.academia.edu/GeorgeHammond/CurriculumVitae
and as you can see I have 2 degrees in physics and have published a major paper in the academic peer – reviewed literature in a prominent journal published by Elsevier Scientific Ltd. the world's largest scientific publisher. These are not the qualifications of an incompetent crank!
... Could I please prevail upon you to move this thread, once again, to: "PHILOSOPHEY – subforum RELIGION". All things considered, I think this is the most appropriate location for this thread. It is obviously not "pseudoscience" and Matt Faunce from the philosophy sector has spoken approvingly of the theory and moreover it is entirely in line with the historical work of Prof. William James of Harvard, America's foremost philosophy figure.
Thank you for your consideration, George E Hammond MS physics, Hyannis MA

"Your account was flagged as suspicious by an automated system. If this was an error, please accept our apologies. Request Unflagging"

Was the link response.

Do I give to pay for something?

 

[George E Hammond]

"Your account was flagged as suspicious by an automated system. If this was an error, please accept our apologies. Request Unflagging"
Was the link response.
Do I give to pay for something?

[George E Hammond MS physics]
Are you telling me that you are a Sciforums staff member?

 

[George E Hammond]

Then what ARE we talking about? Physics or Psychology?

[George E Hammond MS physics]

We are talking about: "the physics OF psychology"!

 

[origin]

We are talking about: "the physics OF psychology"

So the 'physics of psychology' is how you measure how tall God is? Do you use the 'chemistry of philosophy' to measure his weight?

 

[Write4U]

We are talking about: "the physics OF psychology"!

I think you are talking about the abstract mathematics of psychology.
Psychology by definition is not a physical science.

Psychology is the scientific study of mind and behavior. Psychology includes the study of conscious and unconscious phenomena, including feelings and thoughts.

It is an academic discipline of immense scope, crossing the boundaries between the natural and social sciences.

Psychologists seek an understanding of the emergent properties of brains, linking the discipline to neuroscience.

Enter the microtubule!

As a social science, psychologists aim to understand the behavior of individuals and groups.[1][2]Ψ (or psi) is a Greek letter which is commonly associated with the science of psychology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology

 

[George E Hammond]

I think you are talking about the abstract mathematics of psychology.
Psychology by definition is not a physical science.
Enter the microtubule!

[George E Hammond MS physics]
Wrong, dead wrong! Between 1970 and 2020, a 1000 man experimental army of research psychologists in 20 foreign countries and languages using desktop computers, tested millions of people using Personality and IQ tests and peer published the experimental results sufficient to fill a major library! That is not "abstract mathematics", that is massive "experimental measurement" !

As for my statement that "microtubules cause life after death", you can see this thrilling event take place before your eyes right here:

https://www.academia.edu/44527322/A_simple_airbag_theory_of_Life_After_Death

George

 

[Beer w/Straw]

A simple "airbag" theory of Life After Death?

Can you just post a real thesis?

 

[Michael 345]

As for my statement that "microtubules cause life after death", you can see this thrilling event take place before your eyes right here:

https://www.academia.edu/44527322/A_simple_airbag_theory_of_Life_After_Death

George

Interesting. See you can pique my interest. I read your airbag theory

Problem is, like the reality airbag the activity you are proposing taking place AFTER death to me does not occur, simply because you are dead

If you are meaning a incredible short time period when Mr Brain appears to realise it, and the body housing it is about to become deceased, I would equate that as being akin to "my life flashed before my eyes". I doubt this takes place either

I would put this "life before my eyes" as being a false memory constructed well after the "NEAR DEATH" event

Again with the airbag. You do realise the airbag PREVENTS you dying, NOT lets you die and revives you

Still thanks for piqueing my interest at 5:20am on a Sunday morning long before I can enjoy my coffee, a self imposed delay

 

[George E Hammond]

A simple "airbag" theory of Life After Death?
Can you just post a real thesis?

[George E Hammond MS physics]
...THAT IS A REAL THESIS – Texas ! You may not think so, but the world's leading authority on microtubules Stuart Hameroff sent me a personal email with a carbon copy to another world renowned physicist (Frank Tipler) SAYING THAT IT IS:

Date: Sat, 05 Dec 2009 09:43:23 -0700From:
Stuart Hameroff, U. Arizona
Subject: Re: (fwd) A Scientifically Competent Religious Question for Stuart Hameroff
To: George Hammond
Cc: Frank Tipler, Tulane U.

Dear George Hammond:
I believe downloading and Afterlife are possible.
Stuart Hameroff

... So you better go back and read it again because the world's leading authority on microtubules, Stuart Hameroff, just told you it is!

George

 

[George E Hammond]

="Michael 345, post: 3692130, member: 285342"]Interesting. See you can pique my interest. I read your airbag theory
Problem is, like the reality airbag the activity you are proposing taking place AFTER death to me does not occur, simply because you are dead

[George E Hammond MS physics]
... It happens EXACTLY AT THE MOMENT OF DEATH, not before death, and not after death – exactly at the moment of death!

...The one microsecond ultraviolet–microtubule/flash downloads the entire afterlife dream in a few microseconds, but because the "ultra fast microtubule system" is the OBSERVER of this microsecond afterlife download, it EXPERIENCES the afterlife dream in "real clock on the wall time" (proper time).
... Try to realize that I have a graduate degree in Einstein's relativity, and you can't even spell relativity for chrissakes!

George

 

[Michael 345]

... It happens EXACTLY AT THE MOMENT OF DEATH, not before death, and not after death – exactly at the moment of death

No such animal

Just as there is no such animal between days. Midnight on Monday goes to past midnight on Tuesday with no time (moment) between

I could also be more pedantic and state some cells in the body remain alive as in can be harvested and grown in petri dishes but death in the context of the brain/ body combo is world's away from individual cells

Try to realize that I have a graduate degree in Einstein's relativity, and you can't even spell relativity for chrissakes

Nope not impressed

Did I try to use relativity in post number 173?

and you can't even spell relativity for chrissakes

Is he interested in my spelling ability?

 

[origin]

Dear George Hammond:
I believe downloading and Afterlife are possible.
Stuart Hameroff

I actually have downloaded stuff on my computer so that part is true, not so much on the afterlife.

 

[Beer w/Straw]

[George E Hammond MS physics]
...THAT IS A REAL THESIS – Texas ! You may not think so, but the world's leading authority on microtubules Stuart Hameroff sent me a personal email with a carbon copy to another world renowned physicist (Frank Tipler) SAYING THAT IT IS:

Date: Sat, 05 Dec 2009 09:43:23 -0700From:
Stuart Hameroff, U. Arizona
Subject: Re: (fwd) A Scientifically Competent Religious Question for Stuart Hameroff
To: George Hammond
Cc: Frank Tipler, Tulane U.

Dear George Hammond:
I believe downloading and Afterlife are possible.
Stuart Hameroff

... So you better go back and read it again because the world's leading authority on microtubules, Stuart Hameroff, just told you it is!

George

Well you did indicate "simple."

And I'm ignorant.

Entice me!

 

[George E Hammond]

Well you did indicate "simple."

And I'm ignorant.

Entice me!

 

[George E Hammond]

I actually have downloaded stuff on my computer so that part is true, not so much on the afterlife.

[George E Hammond MS physics]
...No one knows if there is life after death. I have proposed a scientific mechanism based on the existing scientific facts that shows that it is: SCIENTIFICALLY POSSIBLE !
... What the scientific PROBABILITY is, is a matter of opinion. In my opinion, the probability is better than 1 chance in 3 !
... Stuart Hameroff believes that it is possible also, what he thinks the probability is I don't know, but he did say that he thought it was possible !
.... Meanwhile your opinion, is worthless, unless you have scientific credentials to back it up? Do you?

George