scientist at harvard and princeton have been studying the realm of the quantum world and have determined through quantum mechanics it is controlled through the very act of observing " dual slit experiment " atoms act like particles instead of waves just by observing them in a conscience way, also quantum entanglement proves how everybody and everything is connected to one thing or source, this is when they started the Global Consciousness Project and showed results without a doubt that the very act of being conscious can have an impact on society through either negative energy or positive energy of the consciousness as a whole, please check the following links before posting an answer. i
didnt believe this till i saw the results of the test
http://p-i-a.com/Magazine/Issue13/Physics_13.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Consciousness_Project
here is the double slit experiment in laymens terms;
http://youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc
2007-01-18
07:59:46
·
9 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
im not trying to prove the existence of god
2007-01-18
08:05:53 ·
update #1
wrong brane they have done the experiment several ways to and the experiment was not getting in the way or reflecting on the atom or particle
2007-01-18
08:07:50 ·
update #2
they have places several things around the experiment to disprove your idea of things getting in the way its only when a conscience person is involved that changes the behavior of the atom
2007-01-18
08:09:47 ·
update #3
its not just atoms either brane
2007-01-18
08:12:20 ·
update #4
what the bleep? is this a movie
2007-01-18
08:13:58 ·
update #5
the two slit experiment disproves gods existence if anything - gods supposed to know everything but heisenberg has shown god cant know the position and velocity of a single particle let alone every particle in the universe.
How dare you use quantum mechanics to support your ignorant superstitious beliefs.
You idiot, dont you realise that observing something itself is a physical act? Its not magic - seeing something means bouncing photons on it and of course thats going to make a different to tiny subatomic particles.
2007-01-18 08:03:34
·
answer #1
·
answered by TRITHEMIUS 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
It gets especially interesting if you read up on the Holographic Paradigm as formulated by David Bohm and Karl Pribram. If you are interested in this stuff, do yourself a favour and read Brian Greene's books. He's one of the world's leading String theorists, but he's got a brilliant way of explaining the subject. You could also check out the documentary he hosted for PBS, which is available online at:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/
The direction theoretical physics is tending into is the strongest reason why I've become interested in spirituality again after turning away from religion in High-School
PS. THANK YOU! A question where the Religion and Spirituality section can actually live up to what it should be.
2007-01-18 08:14:09
·
answer #2
·
answered by dead_elves 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
great question! finally someone who asks a question that fires up the brain cells....what do you think of this: a large amount of people watching the nightly news channel, either local or national, especially local: they report a number of car accidents at a certain location, next thing you know, over the course of a month, the accidents increase, in and around that area....another one: lately it has been on our news, the amount of pedestrian deaths have gone up. last week a woman was hit by a van at a bus stop, two days ago ; a man and a 6yr child was hit at another bus stop, there is nothing left of the concrete bench.it seems to me. whatever our mindsets are, that energy could be positive or have negative effects on our daily lives...don't watch the news..that would be observing them in a conscience way...
2007-01-18 08:11:40
·
answer #3
·
answered by ka'iwi 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is just the way things work, to apply a conceptual category to the phenomenon will only reduce it's significance in your mind and your ability to understand the truth. If you think of it as a spiritual phenomenon then you will loose the ability to see it objectively. If you think of it as a purely physical phenomenon you will likewise loose the ability to see it objectively. It is much too premature to label it one way or another it could be beyond all categories of this kind. It seems much more likely that at this level we are getting down to the level where those type of distinctions just do not apply.
2007-01-18 08:29:53
·
answer #4
·
answered by Tamara S 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The idea that consciousness can affect matter isn't new. Quantum physicists have been exploring it for decades so if it's real it's a natural phenomenon that science is seeking to explain not a spiritual phenomenon.
2007-01-18 08:04:56
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
may i recommend a guy called Andy Thomas who writes about the impact of collective consciousness in this way
a wonderful guy
and yes i have heard about this
and as someone else suggested it was mentioned in what the bleep also xx
yes it is a movie/documentry on quantum theories etc ... wonderful it is
2007-01-18 08:10:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by Peace 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
also in the movie "what the bleep do we know" they showed a japanese scientist' work with water where he gave each different jar a name such as happy,sad,angry. and had people concentrate on the jars pertaining t their names. then he photographed the water at a molecular level and the patterns where amazing. the happy was very uniform and angry was all scattered. if anyone know the name of this scientist please list.***yes that is the actual title of the movie. check it out it is awsome it is all about exactly what you are talking about.
2007-01-18 08:08:59
·
answer #7
·
answered by therernonameleft 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well its interesting. But until there is a credible mechanism, I will remain skeptical.
2007-01-18 08:09:23
·
answer #8
·
answered by mullah robertson 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Waaaayy to scientific for me, but I will say it is all about the ENERGY.
2007-01-18 08:06:38
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋