Home » Mind, News » A different take on the God particle: Odd facts, maybe worth hearing

A different take on the God particle: Odd facts, maybe worth hearing

July 8, 2012 Posted by News under Mind, News
5 Comments

According to Vatican Insider (what the Pope reads at breakfast),

The Higgs boson became the rock star of nuclear physics, particularly thanks to the nickname given to it in a book published in 1993 by Nobel prize-winning physicist Leon M. Lederman: the “God particle”. The physicist had actually wanted to call it the “goddamn particle” but was forced to change the name by his editor.

But the name stuck. Well, what marketing, really!

Meanwhile, Here telepathy defender Dean Radin notes,

The combined 4.9 sigma result reported for the Higgs boson is hailed as a stunning achievement that took trillions of recorded events, billions of dollars, and thousands of scientists.

By contrast, several classes of combined psi effects already provide empirical results that are much, much greater than 5 sigma, with hardly any funding and a few handfuls of scientists working the problem.

Some future day when physical theories tackle the mysterious boundary between objective and subjective realities, they’ll start to predict psi effects (I believe that day is inevitable). When that happens psi data will suddenly make sense. Then I’ll have to change the image caption to “Say psi particle one more goddamn time.”

Thing is, there is no particular reason why psi phenomena should not make sense as a low level source of information. Most life forms would choose more targeted sources, but that doesn’t make psi phenomena false. The local atheist leagues’ crusade against them is just plain wrongheaded.

What if life forms normally send out probes for information, and senses are a refined way of seeking it? Yes, that assumes design but … Darwin was wrong, so what?

Doesn’t everybody already really know that Darwin was wrong?

Hat tip: Stephanie West Allen at Brains on Purpose

See The Spiritual Brain

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

5 Responses to A different take on the God particle: Odd facts, maybe worth hearing

  1. 1
    NickMatzke_UDJuly 8, 2012 at 6:59 pm

    I think UD should spend more time on telepathy and psi phenonmena, you’ll be even more revolutionary than before.

  2. 2
    tragic mishapJuly 9, 2012 at 1:59 am

    lol

    You WILL post more about psi effects.

  3. 3
    JoeCoderJuly 9, 2012 at 10:26 am

    > By contrast, several classes of combined psi effects already provide empirical results that are much, much greater than 5 sigma, with hardly any funding and a few handfuls of scientists working the problem.

    What studies? The linked blog doesn’t say either.

    If we keep leaving low-hanging fruit like this, Nick is going to keep coming around and eating it. We need higher standards in our science, unless there’s some remarkable psi study that I don’t know about and nobody has linked to?

  4. 4
    Prince of EternityJuly 9, 2012 at 2:28 pm

    The true founder of Intelligent Design theory, A. E. Wilder-Smith, who had three Ph.D.’s and was the key influence on William Dembski, insisted that telepathy and the paranormal were the best refutations of the stifling materialist paradigm. The proof of the existence of telepathy or ESP would Intelligence is a non-material substance, thus demolishing scientific materialism once and for all.

    Wilder-Smith wrote:

    “If the above generalized gropings have some substance behind them, they would help to explain other phenomena such as ESP and telepathy. It is, of course, perfectly plain that the very mention of these two subjects will be like the proverbial red flag to the bull in some quarters. I used to react in a similar way myself until some evidence came my way quite by accident, and indeed quite unsolicited and unwanted.

    …[I]t would be a brave man who would deny all the evidence which [parapsychologist] C. D. Broad and others cite to the effect that not everything concerning the behavior of the brain can be explained within this material spectrum. As we have tried to show elsewhere,9 the subject of consciousness lies within this area of the extramaterial attributes of the brain.” [A. E. Wilder-Smith, "Creation of Life: A Cybernetic Approach to Evolution" (1970), p.169-70].

    “S. G. Soale and F. Bateman have, allegedly, described “non-physical” interaction between two brains in telepathy.16 Lawden and many others believe that telepathic interaction between conscious brains is a fact beyond doubt today. Therefore, in order to elucidate the question of consciousness and psychic interaction between conscious brains, he suggests that, if telepathy can ever be brought under effective control in the laboratory which is not so at present, it might be shown that all brains are capable of interacting this way…

    The conclusion which Lawden draws and which may help us toward making our synthesis is that it would be reasonable to accept as a fact that telepathic interaction between two brains is evidence that the two brains are conscious.” [Ibid., p.214]

    A. E. Wilder-Smith had himself personally experienced telepathic power.

    “…I have often noticed telepathy between myself and persons to whom I am very close, yet I have little experience of the same phenomenon between myself and my adversaries!” [Ibid., p.214]

    Wilder-Smith returned to the subject in “The Natural Sciences Know Nothing of Evolution”, perhaps his most popular book:

    “[Wilder] Penfield came to the conclusion (as later did [Roger] Sperry) that the mind stands above the contents of the conscious. Thus the psyche or ego is as it were the legislative branch of the biological system, whereas the brain mechanics (wiring, etc.) represent the executive office. Executive and legislative powers, however, are hierarchically strictly divided in their respective functions… Yet the material brain is not the only source of concepts and ideas available to the mind. Penfield and Sperry are convinced that the mind can receive extrasensory perception. It can, under special circumstances, communicate with other minds, with their concepts and ideas, and this without the direct medium of material brain and its coupled five senses. It can contact other concept-producers and directly perceive their concepts.

    So the mind itself would seem to be nonmaterial. It is probably an immaterial concept that is an entity such as other concepts. It can establish connections with other concepts regardless of whether these are imprinted on matter or not. The modern human mind is a nonmaterial concept hierarchically imprinted on matter during life. At death it irreversibly separates itself from matter, but remains conscious and consists then only of legislative and no longer of executive powers.” [A. E. Wilder-Smith, "The Natural Sciences Know Nothing of Evolution", p.160-1]

  5. 5
    NewsJuly 10, 2012 at 12:12 am

    But JoeCoder, it is the only way we could be sure NickMatzkeUD was still alive. Every so often, we post something that yanks his chain. If it doesn’t happen, we shall investigate. ;) ;) ;)

Leave a Reply