Foundation #1 - Happenstance or Intellegent Design
This foundation module ask if the universe of matter is an arbitrary fluke or whether it is the…See More
The mixing of religious and non-religious beliefs in an individual.
Possible evidence that humans do see the future.
I've always held that it's quite obvious that humans can see the future (you couldn't very well even plan your day tomorrow if you couldn't) but here is a look at some recent experiments that go even deeper into the matter with surprising results.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19712-evidence-that-we-can-se...
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19712-evidence-that-we-can-se...
Views: 34
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Roman Kozlowski on -
As the Wave Structure of Matter explains (incorporating Feynman's QED), it is this false assumption that light must be a 'photon particle', rather than simply being a discrete energy exchange between standing waves, which leads to much of the strangeness and contradiction of modern quantum theory. This then means that the observer priciple inevitably draws from the future, which I think may have something to do with this.
-
Permalink Reply by Kernel John on -
I am told that the future repeats itself identically. How does this assumption, or working premise, place within a larger schemata? Roman, tell us what a teacher would not. This I would like to know. Go on.
-
Permalink Reply by Khem the Is Real-ite on -
Time in itself does not exist, so the proposition that human beings can see the future is non-sensical.
On the other hand...
http://khemtherevelator.blogspot.com/2009/07/discourse-on-prophecy....
-
Permalink Reply by Kernel John on
-
Khem, the essence of time is movement through space.
If the universe was static (no movement), there would be not time. As we are not in a static, state we experience and can measure it in terms of past, present and future. This is the proposition I wish to submit. Khem can you be more specific in terms of what you you wish to say. Bring your Blogspot logic here. Be specific, be precise - if you can. Thanks.
-
Permalink Reply by Khem the Is Real-ite on
-
skip-doodily-bump bump
-
Permalink Reply by James Germiquet on -
I always wonder how much of prophecy is people simply choosing to fufill it not the prophet seeing the future, but causing it to happen.
-
Permalink Reply by Roman Kozlowski on
-
Correctly carried out replications providing similar results will certainly reinforce this proposition, spooky though it is.
-
Permalink Reply by Khem the Is Real-ite on
-
Perhaps you should replicate that reply in English. Jargon and high-sounding syntax are generally signs that one feels intellectually inferior.
-
Permalink Reply by Roman Kozlowski on
-
Khem. If you had read the actual article MS had referenced, you would have clearly understood my equally similarly jargoned explanation. But for you I'll explain in simple English... If others carry out the same experiments correctly and as close as possible to the original, and come up with similar results, then there is a greater possibility of these supportive evidences to establish this proof to be seriously then considered as an aspect of accepted mainstream science. I hope this helps.
Jargon is useful in that it can short-cut a meaninful reply (as I did in reply to the referenced scientific paper) without having to write a paragraph in more conventional simple English, as I did for you. If you had refered to the scientific article in question in the first place, you would have understood my more shorter jargoned reply.
Do you have difficulty with poetry as well?
-
Permalink Reply by James Germiquet on
-
The observer principle brings us this problem. The closer you get to the observed particle the closer you get to the PRESENT, not to the future. We live in the past in terms of being the observer. The time it takes for the light to reach us and be defined is all relative to the distance of the obect being detected. If we manage to see an object in present tense it mean we have surpassed the speed of light which is impossible even if you were to be launched from a vehicle travelling at the speed of light. The problem is the creation of the particle IS the beginning of ones observance of it. That is why particles seem to come and go out of existence at the sub atomic level. Because that is where they are created. You cannot travel into a future which has not yet been created nor even look into it. You at that point can only watch the present being created, instead of seeing it happen nano seconds later,
-
Permalink Reply by James Germiquet on
-
You cannot measure a future which has not yet been created. You can measure a past in terms of the time it takes for the light of the created object to reach your eye and be defined. Even IF you could travel faster than the speed of light you cannot travel beyond the creation of that light.
-
Permalink Reply by James Germiquet on
-
the bible puts it thus quite correctly. these three remain, faith, hope and love and the greatest of these is love.
faith simply put is the belief or trust that what we NOW remember of a past that no longer exists is true or accurate.
hope simply put is what we NOW wish to become of a future that does not yet exist.
love or life of living is what we are doing in the NOW , it is our immediate, current actions. we cannot life in the past or the future. We can only ive in the now but we can use the information we now have that was gathered in the past that exists only as memories now, to commit actions now that will be the future we hope that will come to past due to the actions we are doing right now.
Just mention Open Source Religion, Proprietary Religion, Belief Genome, Belief Modules, or Prerequisite Beliefs in a tweet to appear in this twitter feed.
Latest Activity
Sidian M.S. Jones replied to Sidian M.S. Jones's discussion Belief Genome Update"You'll be the first Kernel."
Kernel John replied to Sidian M.S. Jones's discussion Belief Genome Update"Looking forward to it Sid. Let me know when testing begins."
Khem the Is Real-ite replied to Sidian M.S. Jones's discussion It Matters Whether You Believe in Will Power"ibid.
"
Khem the Is Real-ite replied to Sidian M.S. Jones's discussion It Matters Whether You Believe in Will Power"ibid.
"
Sidian M.S. Jones's discussion was featuredBelief Genome Update
Just a short message here to let everyone know that code work on the Belief Genome is coming right…See More
Kernel John replied to Sidian M.S. Jones's discussion It Matters Whether You Believe in Will Power"Sid, I read the article. Thanks for sharing it.
Yes, willpower is the name that we give…"
Kernel John replied to Sidian M.S. Jones's discussion It Matters Whether You Believe in Will Power"Khem,
Ibid? An lame way to deepen or expand discussion. . . or perhaps that's as deep as…"
Khem the Is Real-ite replied to Sidian M.S. Jones's discussion It Matters Whether You Believe in Will Power"ibid.
"
Kernel John replied to Sidian M.S. Jones's discussion It Matters Whether You Believe in Will Power"The Occult Law of Gravity that you refer to sounds like it is based on myth and superstition. …"
Khem the Is Real-ite replied to Sidian M.S. Jones's discussion It Matters Whether You Believe in Will Power"The non-entity who knows not, and knows not that he knows not, is a fool; shun him.
"
© 2012 Created by Sidian M.S. Jones.
