Jump to content

Tom Erdenay

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Tom Erdenay

  1. Re: Tom's Comedy Corner [All Things Comedy] Not sure how much of people are aware of these, but this is pure genius, so... I'm not really good with words - so... Here they are ( ): IYnsfV5N2n8&feature=relmfu tKB4h9gvmm0&feature=relmfu oY6tCnu-1Do&feature=relmfu cYNdUM2gRsg&feature=relmfu
  2. Re: !Revival of the SMEL! Would be interested to see this revived and I'd probably keep an eye every now and then, but since it's game world, I can definitely say that I'd have no chance of any involvement. I honestly do consider Mark's idea to be something more than just an idea for gameworld and I'd be involved, but as it sadly happened, I realized I really didn't have enough time to completely take care of it and I really doubt it will ever be revived in its original format, which is a damn shame. Whatever course this will end up taking - good luck with it, Phil: I'm hoping you'll be able to get something going here.
  3. Re: Right now i'm listening to... (no football themed songs) A bit ironic that my only post in the last few months is going to be in this section, but oh well... Odder stuff has happened. The Killers - Losing Touch EieA3KIykjg
  4. Re: The Drafting League With SMEL dead (Sadly), I'm very glad that at least something of the same degree has been done. I really wish it wouldn't have turned out the way it did, but... (In the end, should someone undertake the rejuvenation projection, it could still work, but I don't really expect that to happen). This looks fairly good and I can only wish for the best to all of you, guys. Also got to say.... Nice picks from the jerk of Portugal - very impressive.
  5. Re: The Official Valencia C.F. Thread Haven't been here for a while, but I'm not sleepy and just finished watching the replay off Atletico and Valencia, some might as well do player ratings. Valencia Guaita - 7.5 Didn't have that much to do for most of the match, but he made 2 incredible saves and was very solid when catching the balls and coming off his line. Not a single bad thing can be said about his performance. Jérémy Mathieu - 7.0 Day and night for his performance - absolutely unstoppable both in defence and offence in first half and start of the 2nd, but struggled quite badly with Turan and Diego on. Adil Rami - 6.5 Was generally quite solid, although 2 glaring mistakes took out from his good match - going forward alone, losing out the ball (possibly a foul) and not coming back for the longest time and a push against Diego, which probably should have been a penalty. Víctor Ruiz - 6.5 Very shaky at the start of the match, but grew on and was solid afterwards. A solid debut and can only be expected to build upon that. Miguel Brito - 6.0 The only reason he got a 6 is because of the wonderful assist for Soldado. Otherwise, consistently losing out balls in attack, misplacing passes, failing to come back to defence. Still better than Bruno, though. Pablo Piatti - 7.0 Very lively and a consistent thorn for Atletico defenders, but his end product was lacking. Scored a goal which was incorrectly ruled out for offside. Albelda - 7.0 The best performance in a long while for the captain of Los Che - not the most skillful, not the most flashy, but very effective and breaking down attacks in an achoring role. Jonas - 5.5 Barring 2 chances within 30 seconds, he was invisible. Participated in build up and has shown his talents, but he is much more effective as a substitute. Tino Costa - 7.0 All out action performance for the Argentine who worked hard in both ends of the pitch. After his removal, Valencia struggled badly to keep the ball and completely lost out on possession. Pablo Hernández - 6.0 Offencively, didn't do much, but he was running all over the pitch putting in a lot of effort to keep the ball for Valencia. Roberto Soldado - 6.5 Looks like he can't stop scoring at the moment, but he should have had more than one. In the end, the hero of the day shouldn't be bashed, so we'll leave it there. Worked hard in defence. Substitutes Mehmet Topal - 5.5 Not quite what Valencia got used to from the Turk last season - he worked hard and helped Valencia keep the clean sheet, though. Canales - 5.0 Didn't do anything, but shouldn't be blamed - he came on as Valencia just couldn't keep the ball for more than 5 seconds and he wasn't given a chance. Jordi Alba - 6.0 A decent performance for the hard working Spaniard, even though he was caught out of position a few times. Atletico Thibaut Courtois - 7.0 Extremely solid - and didn't have a chance against Soldado's cross. On loan Chelsea man looks to be a great loan signing for Atletico. Filipe Luis - 7.0 By far the best defender of Atletico for the night - work hard in defence and contributed well to attack, although it has to be said that the assist came from his side. Álvaro Domínguez - 6.0 Not the best, nor the worst night for the Spanish international: he did make a few good tackles and interceptions, but also got caught out of position quite a few times. Doesn't work too well with Miranda. Miranda - 6.0 Slightly better than his partner, but not too solid either. Silvio - 5.5 Didn't do anything offencively and got beat consistently by Valencia's player. Doesn't look to be ready for 1st team just yet. Tiago - 6.5 Was the only Atletico center midfielder tonight who looked like capable of anything before introduction of Diego. Created a few brilliant chances for his teammates and work hard, although gets minus points for his extremely rash challenge on Piatti (which probably should have had him sent off). Mario Suárez - 5.5 Worked hard, but not much came off for him. Much, much worse than last weekend. Gabi - 4.5 Was Gabi even playing? Struggled to contain Tino Costa and failed in his role as a defencive midfielder. A night to forget. José Antonio Reyes - 6.0 Can't complain about his workrate - it's just wasn't his night. End product was a bit poor, but still by far the biggest threat in the 1st half for Atletico. Radamel Falcao - 4.0 40 million man has struggled... Badly. He was starved out of support, but his normally superb movement off the ball was quite lacking and he never looked like threatening. Not quite the dream debut. Adrián - 4.5 Got into some good positions, but with the amount of chances he was presented, he really should have done much better. Better of the two forwards as at least he got a few chances, but one can't help but think that most of others forwards would have scored. Substitutes Diego Ribas - 7.0 Looked like Diego of old - full of flashy tricks, superb passes and wonderful awareness. He completely changed the match and kept beating Valencia's player and creating chances. By the little evidence seen, looks set to be a key piece of Atletico this season. Arda Turan - 6.5 Along with Diego, he changed the game. Worked hard, created chances and while probably should have done better on some occasions, looks quite promising. Juanfran - 6.0 Got very little to do anything, but looked threatening and made some good passes.
  6. Re: The Official Valencia C.F. Thread *After watching Spanish U-19 matches* *Droools* I just hope that just as rumoured, Parejo is going to take Banega's position, Mata will play at left flank while Isco will be our attacking playmaker - seems like a perfect combo. I highly doubt that Isco will be sold for the 7 million that have been flowing around (I'd not sell him for anything less than 20M) and it would make sense if he'd not be loaned out, but rather play for our first team. Assuming that we do indeed will get Gameiro and possibly another defender to partner Rami, I think we'll have a very strong and competitive team for the next season.
  7. Re: Right now i'm listening to... (no football themed songs) 3DDZEdkoaY4 Glorious...
  8. Re: Does anyone respect Barcelona anymore?
  9. Re: Official Liverpool Thread Wow... All I can say is wow... What happened to football lately? This winter has been absolutely crazy with the influx of prices and massive moves... I'm sad... and disappointed. It's now actually rather funny that Barcelona got Afellay for 3m or Milan bought Cassano for 5 million.. When I first turned on the news, I couldn't believe it, then I thought it was money laundrying, now... I am just confused and sad. To be honest, my love for this sport was a bit shaken during the past year and half. I just hope the things that are happening now are temporary and not a destination that football is headed to.
  10. Re: EC Anno Domini - General Discussion, Banter etc Fairly happy with my West Ham team - replaced all of the original players and got some decent acquisitions. Barring Casemiro (whose bid was already accepted when I got into the setup) and Hummels (where I lost the bidding war against Manchester City), I got every player I wanted and bidded for. GK's: Valdes (92), Kaminski (76) Defence: Botia (87), AlDo (88), Gonzalo (89), Forlin (88) Midfield: L. Diarra (92), Hernanes (90), Pizarro (92), Poli (88), T. Costa (88), Micael (88), Valbuena (90), Reyes (89), A. Herrera (87) Attack: Bojan (88), N. Valdez (88), F. Llorente (90) Youngsters: Strasser, Kolodziejczak, Bruno Uvini, Verratti, Cardona, Kroos, Alan Patrick, Verdi, Sarabia, Alcacer, Alaba.
  11. Re: EC Anno Domini - BC BAH! You skip a few days and basically get lost
  12. Re: The Intercourse, General Banter Thread. Ah, not individual score after Week 7, but rather of the whole season. Got it - sorry for miscommunication.
  13. Re: The Intercourse, General Banter Thread. Sorry to ask, but how is East Bengal winning 4-1 worth -2 points?
  14. Re: SMEL - An actual game world? Yes, I would participate, although I'd still rather that the original project would be resumed
  15. Re: Right now i'm listening to... Great Northern - Driveway oirT62lM1Hw
  16. Re: SM Elite League - Discussion Thread/Sign Up sheet - Negociations/Trading thread. Yes, quite a coup by the looks of it now. Have to say that I'm completely shocked by how he performed for Madrid this season - what on Earth happened there? Great deal for you there... Then again, how I got Iniesta for an 8th pick is quite a mystery as well
  17. Re: The Official Valencia C.F. Thread Why am I not too surprised that no one has posted while I was away? Tsk tsk, bad bad followers As far as the season goes, I'm fairly happy so far and as long as Valencia get 4th, I'll be extremely happy. With the losses of two by far the best players, the club is still hanging on and finally it looks like all of the debts and problems are being sorted out. I hope that after another 5 years or so, the club will be pretty much without any debts and then... world, hold on!
  18. Re: SM Elite League - Discussion Thread/Sign Up sheet - Negociations/Trading thread. Eh, it's a shame really about this project - really had lots of potential and possibly the best idea I've ever seen in SM forums. Just as Lassana Diarra, VDV, Afellay are finally getting their big breaks again too
  19. Re: The reality... does not exist? Great post, Philippe! When I first read, I was completely out of my head. I had to read it again in order to fully understand what it meant... and what it could change. It's really hard to at first to realize that you're not the only one special in you universe, but the more you think about it, the more sense it makes. This theory explains a lot of things that have before been unexplainable by science. This theory could also, in a way confirm the existence of the Supernatural Subject, but not in the traditional sense we like to think. God still would be in all of us, but we could also say that everyone of us is a Omniscient being as everyone is a vital part of universe which wouldn't be the same if we'd be taken out. Furthermore, this could also be a bit related to Materialism theory and that we don't have free will as everything has been determined. If this would ever be scientifically confirmed, I think this could change the world as we know it. What's is also really interesting, we might be able to see the projections of the future and past and maybe even influence that. However, maybe that was also pre-determined and that is what caused that future... and... This could be a really paradoxical world to live in. To be honest, I think I'm probably more excited about this project than the Large Hadron Collider...
  20. Does Objective Reality Exist, or is the Universe a Phantasm? In 1982 a remarkable event took place. At the University of Paris a research team led by physicist Alain Aspect performed what may turn out to be one of the most important experiments of the 20th century. You did not hear about it on the evening news. In fact, unless you are in the habit of reading scientific journals you probably have never even heard Aspect's name, though there are some who believe his discovery may change the face of science. Aspect and his team discovered that under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them. It doesn't matter whether they are 10 feet or 10 billion miles apart. Somehow each particle always seems to know what the other is doing. The problem with this feat is that it violates Einstein's long-held tenet that no communication can travel faster than the speed of light. Since traveling faster than the speed of light is tantamount to breaking the time barrier, this daunting prospect has caused some physicists to try to come up with elaborate ways to explain away Aspect's findings. But it has inspired others to offer even more radical explanations. University of London physicist David Bohm, for example, believes Aspect's findings imply that objective reality does not exist, that despite its apparent solidity the universe is at heart a phantasm, a gigantic and splendidly detailed hologram. To understand why Bohm makes this startling assertion, one must first understand a little about holograms. A hologram is a three- dimensional photograph made with the aid of a laser. To make a hologram, the object to be photographed is first bathed in the light of a laser beam. Then a second laser beam is bounced off the reflected light of the first and the resulting interference pattern (the area where the two laser beams commingle) is captured on film. When the film is developed, it looks like a meaningless swirl of light and dark lines. But as soon as the developed film is illuminated by another laser beam, a three-dimensional image of the original object appears. The three-dimensionality of such images is not the only remarkable characteristic of holograms. If a hologram of a rose is cut in half and then illuminated by a laser, each half will still be found to contain the entire image of the rose. Indeed, even if the halves are divided again, each snippet of film will always be found to contain a smaller but intact version of the original image. Unlike normal photographs, every part of a hologram contains all the information possessed by the whole. The "whole in every part" nature of a hologram provides us with an entirely new way of understanding organization and order. For most of its history, Western science has labored under the bias that the best way to understand a physical phenomenon, whether a frog or an atom, is to dissect it and study its respective parts. A hologram teaches us that some things in the universe may not lend themselves to this approach. If we try to take apart something constructed holographically, we will not get the pieces of which it is made, we will only get smaller wholes. This insight suggested to Bohm another way of understanding Aspect's discovery. Bohm believes the reason subatomic particles are able to remain in contact with one another regardless of the distance separating them is not because they are sending some sort of mysterious signal back and forth, but because their separateness is an illusion. He argues that at some deeper level of reality such particles are not individual entities, but are actually extensions of the same fundamental something. To enable people to better visualize what he means, Bohm offers the following illustration. Imagine an aquarium containing a fish. Imagine also that you are unable to see the aquarium directly and your knowledge about it and what it contains comes from two television cameras, one directed at the aquarium's front and the other directed at its side. As you stare at the two television monitors, you might assume that the fish on each of the screens are separate entities. After all, because the cameras are set at different angles, each of the images will be slightly different. But as you continue to watch the two fish, you will eventually become aware that there is a certain relationship between them. When one turns, the other also makes a slightly different but corresponding turn; when one faces the front, the other always faces toward the side. If you remain unaware of the full scope of the situation, you might even conclude that the fish must be instantaneously communicating with one another, but this is clearly not the case. This, says Bohm, is precisely what is going on between the subatomic particles in Aspect's experiment. According to Bohm, the apparent faster-than-light connection between subatomic particles is really telling us that there is a deeper level of reality we are not privy to, a more complex dimension beyond our own that is analogous to the aquarium. And, he adds, we view objects such as subatomic particles as separate from one another because we are seeing only a portion of their reality. Such particles are not separate "parts", but facets of a deeper and more underlying unity that is ultimately as holographic and indivisible as the previously mentioned rose. And since everything in physical reality is comprised of these "eidolons", the universe is itself a projection, a hologram. In addition to its phantomlike nature, such a universe would possess other rather startling features. If the apparent separateness of subatomic particles is illusory, it means that at a deeper level of reality all things in the universe are infinitely interconnected.The electrons in a carbon atom in the human brain are connected to the subatomic particles that comprise every salmon that swims, every heart that beats, and every star that shimmers in the sky. Everything interpenetrates everything, and although human nature may seek to categorize and pigeonhole and subdivide, the various phenomena of the universe, all apportionments are of necessity artificial and all of nature is ultimately a seamless web. In a holographic universe, even time and space could no longer be viewed as fundamentals. Because concepts such as location break down in a universe in which nothing is truly separate from anything else, time and three-dimensional space, like the images of the fish on the TV monitors, would also have to be viewed as projections of this deeper order. At its deeper level reality is a sort of superhologram in which the past, present, and future all exist simultaneously. This suggests that given the proper tools it might even be possible to someday reach into the superholographic level of reality and pluck out scenes from the long-forgotten past. What else the superhologram contains is an open-ended question. Allowing, for the sake of argument, that the superhologram is the matrix that has given birth to everything in our universe, at the very least it contains every subatomic particle that has been or will be -- every configuration of matter and energy that is possible, from snowflakes to quasars, from blue whales to gamma rays. It must be seen as a sort of cosmic storehouse of "All That Is." Although Bohm concedes that we have no way of knowing what else might lie hidden in the superhologram, he does venture to say that we have no reason to assume it does not contain more. Or as he puts it, perhaps the superholographic level of reality is a "mere stage" beyond which lies "an infinity of further development". Bohm is not the only researcher who has found evidence that the universe is a hologram. Working independently in the field of brain research, Standford neurophysiologist Karl Pribram has also become persuaded of the holographic nature of reality. Pribram was drawn to the holographic model by the puzzle of how and where memories are stored in the brain. For decades numerous studies have shown that rather than being confined to a specific location, memories are dispersed throughout the brain. In a series of landmark experiments in the 1920s, brain scientist Karl Lashley found that no matter what portion of a rat's brain he removed he was unable to eradicate its memory of how to perform complex tasks it had learned prior to surgery. The only problem was that no one was able to come up with a mechanism that might explain this curious "whole in every part" nature of memory storage. Then in the 1960s Pribram encountered the concept of holography and realized he had found the explanation brain scientists had been looking for. Pribram believes memories are encoded not in neurons, or small groupings of neurons, but in patterns of nerve impulses that crisscross the entire brain in the same way that patterns of laser light interference crisscross the entire area of a piece of film containing a holographic image. In other words, Pribram believes the brain is itself a hologram. Pribram's theory also explains how the human brain can store so many memories in so little space. It has been estimated that the human brain has the capacity to memorize something on the order of 10 billion bits of information during the average human lifetime (or roughly the same amount of information contained in five sets of the Encyclopaedia Britannica). Similarly, it has been discovered that in addition to their other capabilities, holograms possess an astounding capacity for information storage--simply by changing the angle at which the two lasers strike a piece of photographic film, it is possible to record many different images on the same surface. It has been demonstrated that one cubic centimeter of film can hold as many as 10 billion bits of information. Our uncanny ability to quickly retrieve whatever information we need from the enormous store of our memories becomes more understandable if the brain functions according to holographic principles. If a friend asks you to tell him what comes to mind when he says the word "zebra", you do not have to clumsily sort back through some gigantic and cerebral alphabetic file to arrive at an answer. Instead, associations like "striped", "horselike", and "animal native to Africa" all pop into your head instantly. Indeed, one of the most amazing things about the human thinking process is that every piece of information seems instantly cross- correlated with every other piece of information--another feature intrinsic to the hologram. Because every portion of a hologram is infinitely interconnected with every other portion, it is perhaps nature's supreme example of a cross-correlated system. The storage of memory is not the only neurophysiological puzzle that becomes more tractable in light of Pribram's holographic model of the brain. Another is how the brain is able to translate the avalanche of frequencies it receives via the senses (light frequencies, sound frequencies, and so on) into the concrete world of our perceptions. Encoding and decoding frequencies is precisely what a hologram does best. Just as a hologram functions as a sort of lens, a translating device able to convert an apparently meaningless blur of frequencies into a coherent image, Pribram believes the brain also comprises a lens and uses holographic principles to mathematically convert the frequencies it receives through the senses into the inner world of our perceptions. An impressive body of evidence suggests that the brain uses holographic principles to perform its operations. Pribram's theory, in fact, has gained increasing support among neurophysiologists. Argentinian-Italian researcher Hugo Zucarelli recently extended the holographic model into the world of acoustic phenomena. Puzzled by the fact that humans can locate the source of sounds without moving their heads, even if they only possess hearing in one ear, Zucarelli discovered that holographic principles can explain this ability. Zucarelli has also developed the technology of holophonic sound, a recording technique able to reproduce acoustic situations with an almost uncanny realism. Pribram's belief that our brains mathematically construct "hard" reality by relying on input from a frequency domain has also received a good deal of experimental support. It has been found that each of our senses is sensitive to a much broader range of frequencies than was previously suspected. Researchers have discovered, for instance, that our visual systems are sensitive to sound frequencies, that our sense of smellisin part dependent on what are now called "osmic frequencies", and that even the cells in our bodies are sensitive to a broad range of frequencies. Such findings suggest that it is only in the holographic domain of consciousness that such frequencies are sorted out and divided up into conventional perceptions. But the most mind-boggling aspect of Pribram's holographic model of the brain is what happens when it is put together with Bohm's theory. For if the concreteness of the world is but a secondary reality and what is "there" is actually a holographic blur of frequencies, and if the brain is also a hologram and only selects some of the frequencies out of this blur and mathematically transforms them into sensory perceptions, what becomes of objective reality? Put quite simply, it ceases to exist. As the religions of the East have long upheld, the material world is Maya, an illusion, and although we may think we are physical beings moving through a physical world, this too is an illusion. We are really "receivers" floating through a kaleidoscopic sea of frequency, and what we extract from this sea and transmogrify into physical reality is but one channel from many extracted out of the superhologram. This striking new picture of reality, the synthesis of Bohm and Pribram's views, has come to be called the-holographic paradigm, and although many scientists have greeted it with skepticism, it has galvanized others. A small but growing group of researchers believe it may be the most accurate model of reality science has arrived at thus far. More than that, some believe it may solve some mysteries that have never before been explainable by science and even establish the paranormal as a part of nature. Numerous researchers, including Bohm and Pribram, have noted that many para-psychological phenomena become much more understandable in terms of the holographic paradigm. In a universe in which individual brains are actually indivisible portions of the greater hologram and everything is infinitely interconnected, telepathy may merely be the accessing of the holographic level. It is obviously much easier to understand how information can travel from the mind of individual 'A' to that of individual 'B' at a far distance point and helps to understand a number of unsolvedpuzzles in psychology. In particular, Stanislav Grof feels the holographic paradigm offers a model for understanding many of the baffling phenomena experienced by individuals during altered states of consciousness. In the 1950s, while conducting research into the beliefs of LSD as a psychotherapeutic tool, Grof had one female patient who suddenly became convinced she had assumed the identity of a female of a species of prehistoric reptile. During the course of her hallucination, she not only gave a richly detailed description of what it felt like to be encapsuled in such a form, but noted that the portion of the male of the species's anatomy was a patch of colored scales on the side of its head. What was startling to Grof was that although the woman had no prior knowledge about such things, a conversation with a zoologist later confirmed that in certain species of reptiles colored areas on the head do indeed play an important role as triggers of sexual arousal. The woman's experience was not unique. During the course of his research, Grof encountered examples of patients regressing and identifying with virtually every species on the evolutionary tree (research findings which helped influence the man-into-ape scene in the movie Altered States). Moreover, he found that such experiences frequently contained obscure zoological details which turned out to be accurate. Regressions into the animal kingdom were not the only puzzling psychological phenomena Grof encountered. He also had patients who appeared to tap into some sort of collective or racial unconscious. Individuals with little or no education suddenly gave detailed descriptions of Zoroastrian funerary practices and scenes from Hindu mythology. In other categories of experience, individuals gave persuasive accounts of out-of-body journeys, of precognitive glimpses of the future, of regressions into apparent past-life incarnations. In later research, Grof found the same range of phenomena manifested in therapy sessions which did not involve the use of drugs. Because the common element in such experiences appeared to be the transcending of an individual's consciousness beyond the usual boundaries of ego and/or limitations of space and time, Grof called such manifestations "transpersonal experiences", and in the late '60s he helped found a branch of psychology called "transpersonal psychology" devoted entirely to their study. Although Grof's newly founded Association of Transpersonal Psychology garnered a rapidly growing group of like-minded professionals and has become a respected branch of psychology, for years neither Grof or any of his colleagues were able to offer a mechanism for explaining the bizarre psychological phenomena they were witnessing. But that has changed with the advent of the holographic paradigm. As Grof recently noted, if the mind is actually part of a continuum, a labyrinth that is connected not only to every other mind that exists or has existed, but to every atom, organism, and region in the vastness of space and time itself, the fact that it is able to occasionally make forays into the labyrinth and have transpersonal experiences no longer seems so strange. The holographic paradigm also has implications for so-called hard sciences like biology. Keith Floyd, a psychologist at Virginia Intermont College, has pointed out that if the concreteness of reality is but a holographic illusion, it would no longer be true to say the brain produces consciousness. Rather, it is consciousness that creates the appearance of the brain -- as well as the body and everything else around us we interpret as physical. Such a turnabout in the way we view biological structures has caused researchers to point out that medicine and our understanding of the healing process could also be transformed by the holographic paradigm. If the apparent physical structure of the body is but a holographic projection of consciousness, it becomes clear that each of us is much more responsible for our health than current medical wisdom allows. What we now view as miraculous remissions of disease may actually be due to changes in consciousness which in turn effect changes in the hologram of the body. Similarly, controversial new healing techniques such as visualization may work so well because, in the holographic domain of thought, images are ultimately as real as "reality". Even visions and experiences involving "non-ordinary" reality become explainable under the holographic paradigm. In his book "Gifts of Unknown Things," biologist Lyall Watson describes his encounter with an Indonesian shaman woman who, by performing a ritual dance, was able to make an entire grove of trees instantly vanish into thin air. Watson relates that as he and another astonished onlooker continued to watch the woman, she caused the trees to reappear, then "click" off again and on again several times in succession. Although current scientific understanding is incapable of explaining such events, experiences like this become more tenable if "hard" reality is only a holographic projection. Perhaps we agree on what is "there" or "not there" because what we call consensus reality is formulated and ratified at the level of the human unconscious at which all minds are infinitely interconnected. If this is true, it is the most profound implication of the holographic paradigm of all, for it means that experiences such as Watson's are not commonplace only because we have not programmed our minds with the beliefs that would make them so. In a holographic universe there are no limits to the extent to which we can alter the fabric of reality. What we perceive as reality is only a canvas waiting for us to draw upon it any picture we want. Anything is possible, from bending spoons with the power of the mind to the phantasmagoric events experienced by Castaneda during his encounters with the Yaqui brujo don Juan, for magic is our birthright, no more or less miraculous than our ability to compute the reality we want when we are in our dreams. Indeed, even our most fundamental notions about reality become suspect, for in a holographic universe, as Pribram has pointed out, even random events would have to be seen as based on holographic principles and therefore determined. Synchronicities or meaningful coincidences suddenly makes sense, and everything in reality would have to be seen as a metaphor, for even the most haphazard events would express some underlying symmetry. Whether Bohm and Pribram's holographic paradigm becomes accepted in science or dies an ignoble death remains to be seen, but it is safe to say that it has already had an influence on the thinking of many scientists. And even if it is found that the holographic model does not provide the best explanation for the instantaneous communications that seem to be passing back and forth between subatomic particles, at the very least, as noted by Basil Hiley, a physicist at Birbeck College in London, Aspect's findings "indicate that we must be prepared to consider radically new views of reality". Courtesy of Michael Talbot ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is being researched at this moment in Fermilab. Personally, this was mind blowing, but it also could explain quite a few things that can't be explained. Amazing.
  21. Re: Official Real Madrid Thread Err, Pazanno, where did I say anything about in you in my quote?
  • Create New...