UFOs, Extraterrestrial Contact, Conspiracy, Exopolitics, Geopolitics, Paranormal, Crypto-zoology, Ancient History, Cutting-Edge Science & Special Guests.

Latest topics

» Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2
Yesterday at 10:31 pm by Bubbles

» New Members & Returning Members, Welcome to OM
Sat Aug 12, 2017 3:30 pm by Cyrellys

» What Music Are You Listening To ?
Mon Aug 07, 2017 10:20 am by drwu23

» MIND MIX RADIO 2017
Mon Jul 24, 2017 10:24 am by dan

» Getting too Close
Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:11 pm by Earthling

» Morgellons and Nanotechnology
Sun Jun 25, 2017 11:02 pm by Summers

» Dan Smith - "Just the Facts Ma'am"
Tue Jun 20, 2017 2:36 pm by dan

» space travel
Thu May 18, 2017 4:26 pm by jizba

» Uncommon Thoughts on Common Things - Cyrellys
Thu May 18, 2017 12:19 am by Cyrellys

September 2017

SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Calendar Calendar

MIND MIX RADIO joins OMF

Fri May 06, 2016 6:27 pm by Admin



Mind Mix Radio hosted by Manticore Group joins the Open Minds Forum May of 2016. Featuring talk on a wide variety of subjects ranging from research to current events, it is expected to add a new dimension to the materials featured at OMF.


Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Share
avatar
Jake Reason
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1008
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Canada

Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by Jake Reason on Wed Mar 13, 2013 12:41 pm

First topic message reminder :

2:40pm EST

White Smoke 30 min ago.... Watching it live... awaiting the New Pope to walk out on the balcony. Vatican Guards and Italian Naval Soldiers marching on the steps of St.Peters Basilica, to the music of the Marching Band.




--------------------------

edit notice: This thread is the Part Two continuation from the original thread - last post here -

http://openmindsforum.forumotion.com/t6p990-hello-cy-hello-omf-ii#2215




Last edited by Jake Reason on Fri Mar 29, 2013 2:59 pm; edited 3 times in total
avatar
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 581
Join date : 2012-03-15
Location : West Rising

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by Admin on Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:33 am

G'morning Dan! Safe travels and a good time.

Cy


_________________
"This is an indeterminite problem. How shall I solve it? Pessimistically? Or optimistically? Or a range of probabilities expressed as a curve, or several curves?..........Well.....we're Loonies. Loonies bet. Hell, we have to! They shipped us up and bet us we couldn't stay alive. We fooled 'em. We'll fool 'em again!" Robert Heinlein, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress.
avatar
Jake Reason
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1008
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Canada

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by Jake Reason on Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:05 am

Watching Obama Live, addressing students at the Jerusalem Convention Center

edit:
11:05am EST

Obama says peace can only be assured through an "Independent and Viable Palestine"
Standing Ovation and roars of approval by student audience

edit:
It was a great speech. Surprising to me in many ways. Especially the enthusiastic reception from the predominately Jewish students.

I'm sure their parents and grand parents would have a differing opinion to many of the points and proposals that Obama made. He has the youth, they are prepared to embrace the Palestinians right to a country and liberty. Now he has to try and sway their ruling Politicians, the most complexing task.

It will be up to the baby boomer politicians to make or break Armageddon. While it remains obvious their children, Generation Y, is willing to sacrifice the fullness of Zionism, to avoid it.

avatar
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 581
Join date : 2012-03-15
Location : West Rising

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by Admin on Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:47 pm

considering the things Obama has been doing over here, I'm not sure those students should be trusting him. Wolf in sheeps clothing.


_________________
"This is an indeterminite problem. How shall I solve it? Pessimistically? Or optimistically? Or a range of probabilities expressed as a curve, or several curves?..........Well.....we're Loonies. Loonies bet. Hell, we have to! They shipped us up and bet us we couldn't stay alive. We fooled 'em. We'll fool 'em again!" Robert Heinlein, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress.
avatar
Jake Reason
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1008
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Canada

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by Jake Reason on Thu Mar 21, 2013 1:46 pm

Admin wrote:considering the things Obama has been doing over here, I'm not sure those students should be trusting him. Wolf in sheeps clothing.
Well yes, but I don't think Obama is a wolf.

Bill Clinton said in an interview that a President can only hope to effect 2% of his desired policies. Which of course means that 98% of what a President does is decided by others.

JFK told us what was going on. He called it repugnant.

And so with regards to what Obama is doing in America, he has been puppetized. America's greatest enemies are within.

Israel is quite different however. They have their internal struggles like any other nation, but Their Greatest enemies are their neighbors.

Obama spoke to them - Israel and their neighbors. And it was the best, most realistic and candid speech I have ever heard concerning any hope for peace in Israel. I think they should listen to what he had to say.

I agree with the reasons why the students roared in applause. It's their only hope. Either that, or move to a safer country after they graduate.



Mur
Full Member
Full Member

Posts : 43
Join date : 2012-06-22

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by Mur on Thu Mar 21, 2013 6:06 pm

Obama and Bush...very little difference on anything that matters.

And they both serve the same masters

http://www.oftwominds.com/blogmar13/cyprus3-13.html

excerpt...
==========================
Divide and conquer is the propaganda order of the day. The Power Elites are attempting to set the serfs of the periphery against the serfs of the core, the goal being to keep both sets of serfs from realizing they are equally indentured to the core's pathological political-financial Aristocracy.
===================
avatar
Jake Reason
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1008
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Canada

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by Jake Reason on Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:24 pm

The Bush administration would already have bombed Iran by now.

True, there appear few differences in many of their policies. But its a different world now. History is changing at the speed of light. There are now 3+ billion people with internet access. What could be done in Bush' era is increasingly difficult to do now. The rules of diplomacy, engagement and public engineering have changed.


Mur
Full Member
Full Member

Posts : 43
Join date : 2012-06-22

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by Mur on Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:37 pm

We are already at war.....I'm losing count.

Who exactly is the enemy?

Which war is being won?

I notice Iran has no Central Bank... coincidence?

Yes..more war will pay us a visit.

Anything to distract.
avatar
Jake Reason
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1008
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Canada

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by Jake Reason on Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:10 pm

Mur, these questions implore you to answer them yourself. Can you direct others to potential solutions? Criticizing is easy, even popular, while positive redirection remains rare.

Everyone who has ever lived, has lived at a time wherein their people were at war against some perceived foe. But never has their been a generation of people who have lived in as much abundance and safety as today's North Americans. Spoiled we are, like none others before us.

-------------

I just checked, and see, that Obama's Full Speech in Jerusalem today, has not yet been uploaded to youtube. Only snippets are available.

Strange... yet perhaps not so strange....

I think it is most probable that it has been uploaded by many people. But somehow not availed by standard youtube search. Not yet approved for general public viewing?

I guess it would be best that most Americans don't view his full speech in Jerusalem. Perhaps it is best the rest of the world is also limited from watching and hearing it in its entirety.

It would be easier to control the perceptions of Americans if the Full Speech is diverted from general public view for an extended time.

Because diversionary voices that only point out the wrong, but never offer potential solutions, are more useful to sociopolitical engineers....as long as they remain uneducated and truly uninformed of what they self righteously complain about. As it helps the engineers (as you say, Mur) "...to distract".

So often, when a voice of possibility arises in the midst of the storm... the ones who long for it most, are the first to quell it, divert attention away, toward remembrance of past faults as seemingly more important, diminishing the spark of light that arose amoung them, and thus inadvertently closing their own windows of opportunity, from those they wish to influence the most.


sigh





Last edited by Jake Reason on Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:53 pm; edited 3 times in total
avatar
dan
Special Guest
Special Guest

Posts : 2545
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Baltimore

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by dan on Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:44 pm

From: Dan
Date: March 22, 2013, 1:30:11 AM EDT
To: JACK SARFATTI
Cc: Larry, Chris, Kim, David, Paul, Ronald
Subject: email to the putative go-team....

Report on the recent road trip..........

Thur 3/7/13 Larry returns my call, while at Razorbacks. We talk for about an hour, this being our first convo. I invite myself to his place near Philly. We continue talking at his place and then at his brother's office, until 4am. It is mostly me, presenting with the whiteboard.

3/8 I get regressed back at his place, by Candace. No hypnosis, just relaxation and visualizations. Only the two of us, for 2+ hours. Go back to a Pueblo princess, etc....... Larry's brother arrives afterwards. Back to motel.

3/9 Head back to Baltimore, but then decide to continue on to Ron's. Am then inducted to two hours of rough yard work, clearing brush, during which Aliyah continues asking me about the Princess. I call Larry, and he talks to Aliyah for a half hour. I will call him after GFC/SFA.

3/10 SfA.... Fazale Rana will be coming to GFC, on 3/17. Bill finishes with the OEH vs YEH, while I keep unusually quiet. Out in the parking lot, I call Larry. He is waking up, and eventually agrees to meet in Wilmington. At the restaurant, he is perturbed when I suggest bringing a video camera to KC/MO. But then he arranges for our flights on Monday.

3/11 Larry, Chris, his wife and I arrive at the a/p hotel at ~6pm. We have dinner, and head for our small conference room. I present for about four hours, on the w/b.

3/12 Ron calls, waking me at 8am, asking if I have seen any cows yet. No, I haven't. Emphatically asks same question, and get same answer. Larry and Chris don't come downstairs until almost noon. I am annoyed that I had to wait so long, and that Chris is offering no constructive comments. I suggest that Larry and I head onto SF. Larry takes us to best hotel in KC, for lunch. There we agree that Chris will answer my questions about the CTMU, while his answers are recorded on the video camera that is obtained by the ofc personel. The Q&A goes for another 2+hrs, while Gina, per Ron's instructions, emails him a photos of the w/b, as we progress. We have dinner at the best restaurant. It is later said that I used my plastic to impress the lady. But, back at the motel conf room, Chris and I have a serious disagreement concerning our relationship with the Trinity. Larry sides with Chris, and it is decided that I will continue on to SF, unaccompanied. Did I forget to mention that there was a life-size Nascow in the office lobby?

3/13 Arr SF at 6pm. Jack had planned a large dinner, on Larry's nickel. With only my plastic, it was scaled back to Kim, Jack and me.

Videos started the next day, that being Thur? The days then begin to run together......... I will therefore switch to a more conceptual mode....... and maybe not chronological, either.......

But, btw, enroute, and in first class, thanks to Larry, my seat mate was a KC newlywed enroute to Australia, with her groom, who had given her the single upgrade, into Larry's unoccupied seat. Suffice it to say that I was afforded my best ever audience. I did myself proud, IMHO, and with only the help of steady light beer.

Up until David brought Paul Z into the picture, it was mostly Jack leading the ganging up of Kim and David against Chicken Little. Nonetheless, Jack did give me vastly more rope with which to hang myself, than he had given me last August. But, then, at David's urging, Paul showed up for the last hour of taping, yesterday. The balance began to shift......

By this morning, Jack was being put on the defensive, but with the understanding that I am vastly oversimplifying a complex dynamic.

We are now descending into Baltimore.........


(cont.)

avatar
Jake Reason
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1008
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Canada

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by Jake Reason on Fri Mar 22, 2013 9:56 am

Thanks for the review, Dan. Your call came in late, the phone was sleeping. Thought I'd await until you resurfaced.

I see that Kim hasn't uploaded anything as yet.

Watching now...



Russell Targ, Jack Sarfatti & Fred Alan Wolf on Central Intelligence Agency Research in Post-Quantum Physics of Remote Viewing by America's PSI Spies

Published on Nov 26, 2012
avatar
dan
Special Guest
Special Guest

Posts : 2545
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Baltimore

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by dan on Fri Mar 22, 2013 4:41 pm

Hi, Jake,

Well, it is nice to be back on terra-firma, in Baltimore, and with my new mini-toy-pad, with a real keyboard. I have to get used to an actual keyboard, all over again. And the spell checker is much weaker, for some reason.

Sam and I had a four-hour lunch, so I got to debrief my stuff, and catch up on his stuff, with the monthly BGF meeting coming up on Sunday, where the HT Odum grandson will defend the Prosperous Way Down.

Paul Chefurka has been holding forth on the Salmony list, in my absence. Paul is combining Odum with Swenson(?) and cultural materialism, which I will have to look up.

David G is a big time conspiracy buff........ later......



(cont.)

avatar
dan
Special Guest
Special Guest

Posts : 2545
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Baltimore

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by dan on Sat Mar 23, 2013 7:39 am

From: Dan
Date: March 23, 2013, 9:34:26 AM EDT
To: Jack Sarfatti
Cc: Larry, Chris, Kim, David and Paul
Subject: Re: email to the putative go-team....

Jack et al,

The question I put to myself is what to report back to Ron, concerning the success of this preliminary road-trip.......

Well, when I started out, heading up to Larry's, way back, on 3/7, I freely admit that I had in mind that this would be the first and last road-trip for the Aquarium. In my mind, this was to be based on Ken Kesey's Merry Prankster's road-tip, back in '64, from California to the East coast, on which, of course, I would be Ken.

As I told the folks, my older sister had missed the bus in NYC, by two hours, and if we didn't get this bus rolling soon, we'd all be missing it. Well, we got as far as KC/MO, where the putative bus driver got his little self thrown under the bus. Not a very auspicious beginning to what was to have been a round the world excursion.

Nonetheless, most everyone agreed that the MoAPS world tour will be fully underway within two years, whether or not any of us are on the jet. I still have no intention of missing out........


(cont......)
From: Dan
Date: March 23, 2013, 11:02:32 AM EDT
To: Jack Sarfatti
Cc: Larry, Chris, Kim, David and Paul

Subject: Re: email to the putative go-team....

(cont.......)

Here is an historical update from my sister, Deborah.......

In the summer of '64, she drove down from Boston to NYC to meet up with her Stanford friend, Anita Esberg, who was traveling on the bus with her then husband, Ken Babbs, KK's long-time best friend. Deborah just met up with the party for one night in NY, and then drove back to Boston.

Suffice it to say, Deborah, back in the fifties, was rather more of a free-spirit, out at Stanford, than was I, the physics grind, 7 years later.

Anyway, IMHO, the BPWH/CTMU is almost ready for Prime time......

Well, we are waiting for Chris to make available preprints of his book, sometime in September. Before then, he does not wish to go public. Nonetheless, he sees no incompatibility between our two systems, his CTMU providing a logical foundation for the BPWH.

I will attempt to review these newfound KC/SF connections, in what follows, but, in the meantime, I am not dismissing the possibility that Larry and I might still wish to join up with Jack in London, for the last week in April.

There has also been some thought about a meet-up in SF in June, which I would not want to miss.


(cont.......2)
From: Dan
Date: March 23, 2013, 11:32:32 AM EDT
To: Jack Sarfatti
Cc: Larry, Chris, Kim, David and Paul

Subject: Re: email to the putative go-team....

(cont.....2)


So, we are looking at April, June and September as possible times for a continuation of the road-trip. All by my lonesome, I'm not going anywhere.

Between KC and SF, several major points came together, in my own little mind, and this was mainly the result of a stimulating road-trip. That is why it would be important to get this show back on the road, ASAP, IMHO, to spread the good news. The internet, in these earliest and complex stages, is no substitute for face to face.

It is becoming increasingly clear to me that David Bohm provides the most direct link between the old and new paradigms. And guess what...... Jack is the primary inheritor of the Bohmian legacy, if not the Bohemian one as well. I just hope that Jack is up for saving physics one more time. If Jack can save physics, again, then, surely, Chicken Little can finish the saving of the world. No?

I think what I will do is continue this letter on the forum........ http://openmindsforum.forumotion.com/t6p1020-hello-cy-hello-omf-ii#2350 .......


But there is a fly in this ointment, and the fly is none other than our old buddy, Albert, Einstein that is, as I am beginning to understand from Jack's friend Paul Z, who David introduced to me, for the first time, this last week. And the fly is not actually Al, himself, but rather the iconology of Einsteinism that has grown up around him. When Albert attempted to refute the Einsteinians, in the mid '20's, he was quickly silenced. I can take care of my enemies, but Lord protect me from my friends!!

So, what was the story behind the story........?

Paul is supposed to be sending the links...... Prior to that, I will attempt to reconstruct it from my own porous memory........

But, in short, the Ether has made a comeback, but now disguised as dark energy and the quantum vacuum, if I'm not putting words in Paul's mouth, and with the God particle playing a rather ambiguous role.

So what does this have to do with the price of gas in KC/MO?

The story goes back at least to Kant and his attempt to reconcile Humean positivism/skepticism with the then nascent science. Kant posited the noumenon, which I/we suspect is not unrelated to the Ether, Implicate order and the quantum vacuum. Here is the further deal, as emphasized by Paul. The ether was never intended to be physicalized, but that is what happened to it, by the time that Michelson got around to proving that it didn't 'physically' exist!

Another important name, here, is Ernst Mach, and his Mach's principle, which may also bring us back to the Higgs.........

But first, back to Jack...... There is a possibly developing view that Jack may be functioning as a gate-keeper, somewhat in conjunction with Ron&Co. So, Jack did not actually throw himself under the bus, back in '75, but, rather, became the Conductor. He maintains order on the bus and, also, punches your ticket. My ticket may not yet have been punched. We're working on it.

Ernst and I have a lot in common, in that we both disbelieve in atoms. Where we differ is in the stars. Ernst took the distant stars more seriously than does Chicken Little. It was the stars that provided the mass, down here, a role that has now been subsumed by the Higgs.

That leaves us with the implicate order and Chris' CTMU/Logos. In KC, we were talking about transubstantiation, and this is on film, with photos of the w/b being emailed to Ron. And what does X-sub'n have to do with the Implicate order?

Here's the deal, I think....... this has to do with the connection between blood and spirit, particularly as in the Apocalypse/Revelation. You know...... 'blood up to the bridles'. According to danianity, that Armageddon will be the MoAPS. It will be the outpouring of the spirit that was also codified as Noah's flood. Hey, sports fans, I kid you not, or would I kid you?!!

Now I'm gonna have to cheat, thanks to Ron. He was sufficiently sober, at work, to request Gina to send him the photos, which he then forwarded back to me, graciously refering to them as 'drunken scribbles'.



(cont.)



Last edited by dan on Sat Mar 23, 2013 12:03 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Jake Reason
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1008
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Canada

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by Jake Reason on Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:57 am


There is a possibly developing view that Jack may be functioning as a gate-keeper

Doc Shadow knows Cool

avatar
Jake Reason
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1008
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Canada

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by Jake Reason on Sat Mar 23, 2013 12:09 pm

Doc Shadow on The Holgraphic Universe



73% of the universe is Dark Energy.

Ether? - Etherial

Why so many stars.....
avatar
dan
Special Guest
Special Guest

Posts : 2545
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Baltimore

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by dan on Sat Mar 23, 2013 12:16 pm

Jake,

Yes, only Jack knows for sure.........

4:45---------

On Mar 23, 2013, at 1:50 PM, Paul Z wrote:

Dan wrote:

[DTS] "But there is a fly in this ointment, and the fly is none other than our old buddy, Albert, Einstein that is, as I am beginning to understand from Jack's friend Paul Z, who David introduced to me, for the first time, this last week. And the fly is not actually Al, himself, but rather the iconology of Einsteinism that has grown up around him. When Albert attempted to refute the Einsteinians, in the mid '20's, he was quickly silenced. I can take care of my enemies, but Lord protect me from my friends!!

So, what was the story behind the story........?

Paul is supposed to be sending the links...... Prior to that, I will attempt to reconstruct it from my own porous memory........ "

[PZ] The 1926 conversation with Einstein in Berlin as recounted in Heisenberg's "Encounters with Einstein":

// For the first time, therefore, I now had the opportunity to talk with Einstein himself. On the way home, he questioned me about my background, my studies with Sommerfeld. But on arrival, he at once began with a central question about the philosophical foundation of the new quantum mechanics. He pointed out to me that in my mathematical description the notion of "electron path" did not occur at all, but that in a cloud chamber the track of the electron can of course be observed directly. It seemed to him absurd to claim that there was indeed an electron path in the cloud chamber, but none in the interior of the atom. The notion of a path could not be dependent, after all, on the size of the space in which the electron's movements were occurring. I defended myself to begin with by justifying in detail the necessity for abandoning the path concept within the interior of the atom. I pointed out that we cannot, in fact, observe such a path; what we actually record are frequencies of the light radiated by the atom, intensities and transition probabilities, but no actual path. And since it is but rational to introduce into a theory only such quantities as can be directly observed, the concept of electron paths ought not, in fact, to figure in the theory.

To my astonishment, Einstein was not at all satisfied with this argument. He thought that every theory in fact contains unobservable quantities. The principle of employing only observable quantities simply cannot be consistently carried out. And when I objected that in this I had merely been applying the type of philosophy that he, too, has made the basis of his special theory of relativity, he answered simply: "Perhaps I did use such philosophy earlier, and also wrote of it, but it is nonsense ["Unsinn"] all the same."... ...He pointed out to me that the very concept of observation was itself already problematic. Every observation, so he argued, presupposes that there is an unambiguous connection known to us, between the phenomenon to be observed and the sensation which eventually penetrates into our consciousness. But we can only be sure of this connection, if we know the natural laws by which it is determined. If, however, as is obviously the case in modern atomic physics, these laws have to be called into question, then even the concept of "observation" loses its clear meaning. In that case, it is the theory which first determines what can be observed.//
[PZ] And here for example is Gerald Holton's account of the 1926 meeting between Einstein and Heisenberg in Berlin:

// In April, Heisenberg gave a two-hour lecture on his matrix mechanics before von Laue's famous physics colloquium at the University of Berlin. In the audience, with a whole group of potentates, was Einstein. It was their second meeting. Einstein, interested and no doubt disturbed by the lecture, asked Heisenberg to walk home with him--there is that walk again--and thus ensued a remarkable discussion, which Heisenberg later reconstructed and reported in many places, from 1969 on.
At that encounter, Heisenberg once more tried to draw attention to having not dealt with unobservable electron orbits inside atoms, but with observable radiation. He reports having said to Einstein: "Since it is acceptable to allow into a theory only directly observable magnitudes, I thought it more natural to restrict myself to these, bringing them in, as it were, as representatives of electron orbits." To this Einstein is said to have responded, "But you don't seriously believe that only observable magnitudes must go into a physical theory?" Heisenberg goes on, "In astonishment, I said: I thought that it was exactly you who had made this thought the foundation of your relativity theory....Einstein replied: Perhaps I used this sort of philosophy; but it is nevertheless nonsense (Unsinn)." And then came Einstein's famous sentence: "Only the theory decides what one can observe."

All this must have come to Heisenberg as a scathing attack on what he regarded as his fundamental orientation, derived from reading Einstein's early works, and being guided by them from the start, right through his most recent triumph. But now, in this meeting, Einstein, whose development away from positivistic instrumentalism to a rational realism had escaped Heisenberg's notice, went on to explain at length how complicated any observation is in general, how it involves assumptions about phenomena which in turn are based on theories. For example, one almost unconsciously uses Maxwell's theory when dealing with a light beam that conveys experimental readings.

Perhaps this discussion helped Heisenberg eventually to embark on his own epistemological pilgrimage, ending later with a kind of neo-Platonism in the description of nature through the contemplation of symmetries. But in 1927, just before starting on his next breakthrough, later called the uncertainty principle paper, Heisenberg suddenly remembered Einstein's terrifying sentence, "Only the theory decides what one can observe." It was a key to Heisenberg's advance. As he put it in one of his interviews, "I just tried to turn around the question according to the example of Einstein."

But exactly at this point I should pause to return briefly to the unfinished story of my own encounter with Heisenberg in 1965 in Paris. For after giving his lecture, Heisenberg came over to tell me in detail about that meeting with Einstein in 1926, and what it had meant for him--all this long before he published anything about it. Indeed, as if to make sure I had it straight, Heisenberg followed up by sending me a letter in January 1966, in which he repeated the story, and added a rather striking conclusion: While the theory determines what can be observed, the uncertainty principle showed him that a theory also determines what cannot be observed. Thus, ironically, Einstein, through his 1926 conversation, had provided Heisenberg with some genetic material in the creation of the uncertainty principle article of 1927. //
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~sanders/214/other/news/Holton.html
[DTS} "But, in short, the Ether has made a comeback, but now disguised as dark energy and the quantum vacuum, if I'm not putting words in Paul's mouth, and with the God particle playing a rather ambiguous role."
[PZ] In 1920 Einstein gave a speech at the University of Leiden titled "Ether and the Theory of Relatvity". Here is an an excerpt:

// The space-time theory and the kinematics of the special theory of relativity were modelled on the Maxwell-Lorentz theory of the electromagnetic field. This theory therefore satisfies the conditions of the special theory of relativity, but when viewed from the latter it acquires a novel aspect. For if K be a system of co-ordinates relatively to which the Lorentzian ether is at rest, the Maxwell-Lorentz equations are valid primarily with reference to K. But by the special theory of relativity the same equations without any change of meaning also hold in relation to any new system of co-ordinates K' which is moving in uniform translation relatively to K. Now comes the anxious question: Why must I in the theory distinguish the K system above all K' systems, which are physically equivalent to it in all respects, by assuming that the ether is at rest relatively to the K system? For the theoretician such an asymmetry in the theoretical structure, with no corresponding asymmetry in the system of experience, is intolerable. If we assume the ether to be at rest relatively to K, but in motion relatively to K', the physical equivalence of K and K' seems to me from the logical standpoint, not indeed downright incorrect, but nevertheless inacceptable.
The next position which it was possible to take up in face of this state of things appeared to be the following. The ether does not exist at all. The electromagnetic fields are not states of a medium, and are not bound down to any bearer, but they are independent realities which are not reducible to anything else, exactly like the atoms of ponderable matter. This conception suggests itself the more readily as, according to Lorentz's theory, electromagnetic radiation, like ponderable matter, brings impulse and energy with it, and as, according to the special theory of relativity, both matter and radiation are but special forms of distributed energy, ponderable mass losing its isolation and appearing as a special form of energy.

More careful reflection teaches us, however, that the special theory of relativity does not compel us to deny ether. We may assume the existence of an ether,; only we must give up ascribing a definite state of motion to it, i.e. we must by abstraction take from it the last mechanical characteristic which Lorentz had still left it. We shall see later that this point of view, the conceivability of which shall at once endeavour to make more intelligible by a somewhat halting comparison, is justified by the results of the general theory of relativity.//


Here is a link for the full text of Einstein's 1920 Leiden speech:

https://www.tuhh.de/rzt/rzt/it/Ether.html

Ludwik Kostro has written a book about this topic titled "Einstein and the Ether":

http://www.amazon.com/Einstein-Ether-Ludwik-Kostro/dp/0968368948


[DTS] "So what does this have to do with the price of gas in KC/MO?

The story goes back at least to Kant and his attempt to reconcile Humean positivism/skepticism with the then nascent science. Kant posited the noumenon, which I/we suspect is not unrelated to the Ether, Implicate order and the quantum vacuum. Here is the further deal, as emphasized by Paul. The ether was never intended to be physicalized, but that is what happened to it, by the time that Michelson got around to proving that it didn't 'physically' exist!"

Not intended to be materialized. The essential point here is that you have have physical objectivity without materiality. The new ether (like the classic ether) is pre-material, not material.
It is physical, but not material.


[DTS] "Another important name, here, is Ernst Mach, and his Mach's principle, which may also bring us back to the Higgs......... "

Mach's principle is opposed to a local vacuum interaction model for inertia, attributing inertia instead to lomg range interactions with remote matter. The whole point of Mach's
objections to absolute space aka the ether was that it posited an invisible entity that was not directly observable, and there was no empirical basis for this as opposed to
attributing inertial reaction to motion with respect to the fixed stars, which latter can be directly observed. The Higgs mechanism may provide a physical basis for the anti-Machian
locl interaction model for inertia.

[DTS] But first, back to Jack...... There is a possibly developing view that Jack may be functioning as a gate-keeper, somewhat in conjunction with Ron&Co. So, Jack did not actually throw himself under the bus, back in '75, but merely became the Conductor. He maintains order on the bus and, also, punches your ticket. My ticket may not yet have been punched. We're working on it.

[PZ] Finally, here is a link to John Norton's paper "What was Einstein's principle of equivalance?" that you might want to have a look at:

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/ProfE_re-set.pdf

Regards,
Paul
From: JACK SARFATTI
Date: March 23, 2013, 2:21:59 PM EDT
To: Paul Z
Subject: Re: email to the putative go-team....

The Christian movie financed it seems by Eric Roberts (Julia's brother) has Dan's Eschaton in gory detail. Jesus is clearly a UFO ET in the Evangelical Paradigm. Second Coming Rapture is shown - the chosen ones are pulverized to ash in blinding light and their souls (orbs of light) zoom up to the big Mother Ship!

All the major human religions are UFO Sky Cults in origin.

We are property of the ET Raj it seems. ;-)

No time to read Zielinski's information below yet.

Revelation Road: Beginning of the End - Official Trailer - YouTube
► 2:35► 2:35
www.youtube.com/watch?v=osp-Z35eZrw
Jan 10, 2013 - Uploaded by PureFlixEnt
From: Paul
Date: March 23, 2013, 2:53:33 PM EDT
To: Dan
Cc: Jack Sarfatti, Larry, Chris, Kim,
Subject: Re: email to the putative go-team....

Here is a short article by Kostro on Einstein's "new" relativistic ether:

http://www.mathem.pub.ro/proc/bsgp-10/0KOSTRO.PDF

Einstein's concept of a "relativistic ether" was almost identical to Poincaré's relativistic ether, which latter was a prominent feature of Poincaré's 1905 theory of relativity,
except that Einstein's ether did not support a preferred inertial frame, unlike Poincaré's, which did. However both theories conformed to the relativity principle
as first stated by Poincare and then later by Einstein in his 1905 paper.

Interestingly, Einstein doesn't mention Poincaré even once in his Leiden talk, even though his own 1905 relativity paper recited Poincaré's prior formulation of the
relativity principle almost verbatim, and Poincaré's 1905 theory already fully conformed to the principle exactly as stated by Einstein.


(cont.)
avatar
dan
Special Guest
Special Guest

Posts : 2545
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Baltimore

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by dan on Sat Mar 23, 2013 8:35 pm

Yes, Paul makes a sharp distinction between physicality and materiality. I am somewhat less sanguine about making such a distinction, or making it stick. What he refers to as objective, I am wont to refer to as intersubjective. Is there a difference? I believe that there should be such a difference. Well, at least to the extent that unobservable objects are oxymoronic, as per Wheeler.

What then of the Ether and relativity wrt it.......?

Can there be non-localized objects? Is the ether localizable? Anything that is uniform, physical or otherwise, is non-localizable. It also has no mass and no velocity. So why do we still appeal the ether and its modern, and not so modern, cousins? If for anything, it is for conceptual coherence. Does that make it objective, or merely cognitively functional?

The ether then does correspond to a Kantian noumenon, and Paul is a Kantian.

So what.....?

Well, in the BPWH, the ultimate noumenon is love, or agape. But it could also be the unconscious or the archetypes, which are only controversially inferable.

What of mathematics? To what extent might it be classed as noumenal? It is incontrovertible that mathematical existence is controvertible, and so is the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics.

Must there be something behind the phenomena? And so what?

Well, I am partial to saving the appearances, as any coherentist must be. Why, then, coherence? Whither coherence? Where else but Apocatastasis?

Can one draw a line between coherence and agape? I sincerely doubt it. That is also the Logos, is it not?

If the ether exists, then so does the Logos, and vice-versa.

Check out the Wiki...... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_theories


The implicate order and quintessence also relate to the aether. I wonder what Leibniz made of it?



(cont.)


Last edited by dan on Sat Mar 23, 2013 10:36 pm; edited 2 times in total
avatar
Jake Reason
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1008
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Canada

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by Jake Reason on Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:22 pm

Is the ether localizable?
Yes. Whereas an observable Galaxy is the nucleus of a cell. The boundary of the galactic cell, is the horizonal shell of the local Ether.

The Ether is also a non-local entanglement. Active both within the Galactic cell and extending throughout the Lattice of the Interconnecting Universal All. Energy, Matter, Mind. Embodying the sum of all information. Big Bang to Future Event Horizon. Alpha - Omega. The collective sum of all information composing the symphony of God's projection.

Musings
avatar
dan
Special Guest
Special Guest

Posts : 2545
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Baltimore

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by dan on Sat Mar 23, 2013 10:38 pm

Jake,

Yes, these, too, must figure into the aether. Paul may not be willing to trespass into that uncharted territory.
avatar
dan
Special Guest
Special Guest

Posts : 2545
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Baltimore

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by dan on Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:14 pm

The empyrean and pleroma are two other ancient words that overlap in meaning with the Aether. Both of those words also can be used in relation to heaven. And, yes, pantheism and panpsychism express notions similar to the noumena. And consider pneuma for soul. In Christian terms, this would be the kingdom within. And, yes, it would also be the Logos!

It was Descartes who reified the void with his coordinates, and then excised the pneuma from nature, these actions being complementary. But, perhaps, it will turn out that nature abhors a vacuum, after all. The jury may still be out.

Paul Z tells us that the Aether is physical, without being material. If so, it may provide a conceptual bridge between the physical and the metaphysical. Or it will, at least, significantly expand our notion of the physical.


9:40--------------

I'm thinking that the ether might be needed....... just to be a noumenon. It is the ground of every foreground..... inviting confusion with the nous and the numinous. Or how about the potentia? Which may also be the apeiron. If there were many worlds, what would hold then together, or allow them to split?

In special relativity, it seems that space and time are almost made otiose, by being overly relativised or subjectified. But in GR, space and time become the ground of gravitation. in fact, as Paul emphasized to me, Eistein wanted to bring back the Ether for this purpose, but his colleagues had already politicized the banishment of the ether.

So why is the ether so important, or so political? IMHO, it is the last vestige of the ancien regime...... the last vestige of objective truth.


11:40---------

But what is truth? Or what is objectivity? As with Bohm, it may be something holistic or, at least, non-localizable. It could even be the ground of truth.

Can the aether be all things to all people? It may come as close as necessary. It could be the proto-logos, as in the CTMU. It is the nous, out of which the bootstrap or the SCSRL emerges. From whence come the quantum probabilities? What is their ground? Certainly not the void. This is why there must be something rather than nothing. The heart of the matter. Space is nothing but naked relations. Internal ones, at that.


(cont.)



Last edited by dan on Sun Mar 24, 2013 10:03 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Jake Reason
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1008
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Canada

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by Jake Reason on Sun Mar 24, 2013 9:53 pm

I could have mediated Chris and Larry to San Fransisco. I am the only one who could.

And all precedent substantiation for such, has been presented to you, in depth. Yet you listened not.

It would have been an enjoyable meeting for all. And productive for the extended many.

You let everyone down, Dan. Without any cause, but your own ego. It is all your fault.

You listened not.

C'est La Vie... Que Sera Sera



The Fools Grave awaits his last glass of wine.

avatar
dan
Special Guest
Special Guest

Posts : 2545
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Baltimore

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by dan on Sun Mar 24, 2013 10:06 pm

Your turn may yet come, Jake. Only a little more patience, for all of us........


There can only be nothing or the Plenum, which is the CTMU/BPWH. The glass cannot be half full.
avatar
Jake Reason
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1008
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Canada

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by Jake Reason on Sun Mar 24, 2013 10:47 pm

dan wrote:Your turn may yet come, Jake. Only a little more patience, for all of us........
Appreciated, but not my point.

You had it availed, but didn't use it.

And other hearts suffered despair which were not their intended course.

These were resolvable. sigh


There can only be nothing or the Plenum, which is the CTMU/BPWH. The glass cannot be half full.
The Prophets will teach the Academics.

They give the Academics their curriculum.


.

avatar
dan
Special Guest
Special Guest

Posts : 2545
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Baltimore

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by dan on Mon Mar 25, 2013 5:36 am

Jake,

It might be beneficial to undertake a postmortem of the first, and possibly last, aquarium road-trip. I have already given some of the highlights. There were sticking points both in KC and in SF, which I have already touched upon. I can attemp to elaborate......


(cont.)

avatar
Bard
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 588
Join date : 2012-04-29

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by Bard on Mon Mar 25, 2013 5:53 am

Spend any time at HHMI, Dan?

Are they on the Rockefeller dime?

Wrong Billionaire.


_________________
"It is not in the stars to hold our destiny but in ourselves."
William Shakespeare
avatar
dan
Special Guest
Special Guest

Posts : 2545
Join date : 2012-04-25
Location : Baltimore

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by dan on Mon Mar 25, 2013 8:27 am

MD02,

This is the first I've heard of the HHMI. Is it part of the conspiracy?

And, in regard to your tag line, the name of our progect is now alleged to be Preserve Destiny. A prefer, however, a more proactive moniker: Embrace Destiny.


Apropos of our recent trip to Costa Rica, here is a BBC documentary on the leaf-cutters that figured prominently....... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n0SkIGARuo&feature=youtube_gdata_player .


Near the beginning of the recent roadtrip, I was reminded of my bargain with the devil or the PtB. Should I be surprised? Does the good cop fail to fraternize with the bad cop? Who would benefit thereby?

This bargain would not be so effective, had it not extended well into the past. Recall that I was born into the family of a 'tax collector', and things only have gone down hill, since. In '91, I was merely jumping from the frying pan into the fire, as commemorated by Jack Anderson. These are my protection and my gate keepers. The pearly gates of Omega are locked for a good reason, and the firery angel guards the way back to the Alpha.

As we near the Omega, we return to the dreamtime, wherein the collective/cosmic consciousness regains its former affect. The aviary/aquarium is just a somewhat prescient form of that imminent Cs. The gatekeepers do need to display their feathers. That shadow can be temporarily disorienting to the novice. One then gets over it. There was some of that on this trip.

Should I have been more conciliatory in KC? Perhaps, but I'm not prone to cry over spilt milk. I look forward. Chris is focusing on his book, which is due at the printer in September. Before then, he will be mainly incommunicado. It was only with some persistence that Larry persuaded him to participate in my brief interview........ short but sweet!

In SF, Jack, another gatekeeper of mine, readily obliged to participate in my six hour video roast, and then I was introduced to Paul who introduced me to the other side of the logos/ether.

Could I, should I, have asked for more? I might have been spooked. No? Will the roadtrip extend to London? I'm only being mildly hesitant. So is Jack.


11:10----------

In the meantime, I would like to get a little better grasp of the aether, by seeing how it fits into the larger picture. It could be a very important conceptual bridge........

In one hour of the video with Jack, he presented the standard calculations concerning the dimension of the holograph vs. the hologram, i.e. the surface elements vs the volume elements. Supposing the future lightcone extends 50 billion years, and supposing the pixels to have the dimension of a planck length, the voxels would then be on the order of a fermi. Is this supposed to be suggestive of something? That's not clear to me.

What would be the corresponding dimensions in a geo-/anthropo-centric pperspective?

Well, what is the smallest perceptible object? This is alleged to be 0.1mm, or the size of a large single-celled creature. A significant ratio in science, if not in nature, is 10^10. The internal length of our time-bottle is, say, 6k yrs, which is 3x10^9 min. That brings us to within an order of magnitude. And the dimension of the Earth is 12k km or 10^10mm. Not bad. Our brains are made up of 10^11 neurons, and our population is approaching 10^10.

What does this have to do with the logos or the ether? Neither has a scale. One is reminded of the Marxian maxim that quantity transforms into quality, as also taken up by Pirsig, in regards to the soul of the machine. Is this not just art and alchemy?



(cont.)



Last edited by dan on Mon Mar 25, 2013 10:13 am; edited 1 time in total

Sponsored content

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

Post by Sponsored content


    Current date/time is Mon Sep 25, 2017 1:48 am