23 Aug 05
it's a film. last semester i did a course on quamtum phenomena so i understand the subject to an extent. however, from the film i got "quantum phenomena exists, therefore God doesn't". i'm not sure if it explained it or not, but whatever-it made no sense and...yeah, words don't do this film justice. but i'll try.
it was made as much sense as a haggis with four legs, all of the same length.
23 Aug 05
Originally posted by geniusI seemed to me to be saying that quantum phenomina is God, or great evidence for his/her/its existance.
it's a film. last semester i did a course on quamtum phenomena so i understand the subject to an extent. however, from the film i got "quantum phenomena exists, therefore God doesn't". i'm not sure if it explained it or not, but whatever-it made no sense and...yeah, words don't do this film justice. but i'll try.
it was made as much sense as a haggis with four legs, all of the same length.
Either way it made my head hurt.
23 Aug 05
Originally posted by Canadaguyso you got that quantum phenomena was evidence for his existence, and i understood it that it wasn't. that's quite a nice way of summing up the film, IMO...
I seemed to me to be saying that quantum phenomina is God, or great evidence for his/her/its existance.
Either way it made my head hurt.
23 Aug 05
Originally posted by geniusWasn't saying you were wrong or anything. This stuff is WAY over my head, I just want my daily cola fix, whist chowing down on a BigMac. I usually try not to think too deeply on my existence.
so you got that quantum phenomena was evidence for his existence, and i understood it that it wasn't. that's quite a nice way of summing up the film, IMO...
Beside I was looking for opinions, and you gave one, good stuff.
23 Aug 05
Originally posted by Canadaguyi wasn't saying you were wring either-i was meerly saying that neither of us know who is wrong, if that makes sense...
Wasn't saying you were wrong or anything. This stuff is WAY over my head, I just want my daily cola fix, whist chowing down on a BigMac. I usually try not to think too deeply on my existence.
Beside I was looking for opinions, and you gave one, good stuff.
23 Aug 05
Originally posted by geniusAlso The film makes me question who is in control of my behavior. That was scary stuff. I would like to believe I'M in control, but now I'm not sure. Its like being on the Titanic with no one at the helm. Disaster in the making.
i wasn't saying you were wring either-i was meerly saying that neither of us know who is wrong, if that makes sense...
23 Aug 05
Originally posted by CanadaguyAnd the Titanic went down even with someone at the helm. This is a good metaphor for the understanding that the universe runs essentially on cause and effect, a principle that can seem cold and heartless, because it is rooted in something far beyond our ideas of "who is in control" and related notions of justice and fairness.
Also The film makes me question who is in control of my behavior. That was scary stuff. I would like to believe I'M in control, but now I'm not sure. Its like being on the Titanic with no one at the helm. Disaster in the making.
I saw "What The Bleep", by the way, but I didn't like it very much. I think it was a good door opener and useful for provoking discussion, but the underlying premise of a connection between quantum theory and mysticism is problematic. The reason being, that science and mysticism are two fundamentally different approaches to reality. The former is concerned entirely with the dualism (subject-object split) that is essential to the process of obervation and experimentation. The latter is concerned with experientially bridging the gulf between consciousness and matter.
Put more simply, scientists, including quantum theorists, study matter, with a view toward understanding it and defining it via equations and categories. A mystic is really not interested in the properties of matter, he is interested in the underlying relationship of his own consciousness to matter, and dissolving the gap between the two. So the scientist and the mystic seek entirely different things, and any attempt to "mystify" science or to make mysticism "scientific" usually results in a muddying of the waters.
For more on this, read Ken Wilber's "Quantum Questions". He clarifies many of the problems with popular science/mysticism books like Capra's "Tao of Physics" or Zukav's "Dancing Wu Li Masters".
24 Aug 05
Originally posted by MetamorphosisJust the man I wanted to hear from. I had hoped you had seen this film and was interested in your thoughts on the "matter"(no pun intended). Thanks
And the Titanic went down even with someone at the helm. This is a good metaphor for the understanding that the universe runs essentially on cause and effect, a principle that can seem cold and heartless, because it is rooted in something far beyond our ideas of "who is in control" and related notions of justice and fairness.
I saw "What T ...[text shortened]... science/mysticism books like Capra's "Tao of Physics" or Zukav's "Dancing Wu Li Masters".
