RE: The Memory of Water: Pseudoscience or not?
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
Well, it is of course a pseudoscience, but I think that doesn't sounds too crazy what he wants to proove. Everything is energy, vibrations, particles, etc. If you can modify somehow that "internal energy" you could get some particular effects.
But I'm not a physicist, so I don't know if what I'm saying its right.
And our thoughs may have a similar effect on the body. I don't know if it is a pseudoscience too, but more and more I hear that most of the diseases are of emotional or mental origin.
0
0
0.000
I agree. Some parts are pseudoscience, but it is peculiar in a sense that it talks about energy, vibration, and consciousness. I think it is bound with quantum concept.
I think you have a point about internal energy. If we go my einstiens famous equation, we can some how relate energy and mass of an object. Also, considering each object has its owb natural frequency. If thought has mass, it could be possible. But it still borderline Pseudoscience.
I have also read that consciousness could be another state of matter. And quantum physics could also play a role in all this.
I agree. We are still discovering quantum to date. We have not fully understood it. Quantum physics may answer some of this peculiar science.
Yes, quantum theory could bring new discoverys. I think thoughs might be more related to quantum theory than a mass itself. Now that I think about it, Einstein equation is peculiar, I could calculate my energy using my weight.
Perhaps you all might want to bring @lemouth into this.
@gentleshaid. that is a good idea.
Quantum mechanics and the role of consciousness (in fact of the observers) are topics that are still debated today, so that alternative (i.e. not mainstream) interpretations of quantum mechanics are still viable (many of them are now discarded, but others are still not contradicted by data). I have wrote a bit about this in my book (that is being now translated in English).
I am not sure to be full straight into the discussion... So sorry about that. I unfortunately have not much time to read any post and thread those days... Feel free to make a short summary (@gentleshaid or @juecoree) and I will answer (please mention me!).
@lemouth, appreciate your response. It just came up with our discussion that some of the pseudoscience may have some validity unless it relates with quantum concepts. Its about topic on matter and consciousness.
Nothing much to worry about this:
@getleshaid suggested that you may have some insight on quantum physics, matter and consciousness. We just have a discussion on pseudoscience and how quantum can explain these claims.
Haha OK I see. My insights are more or less explained above. I would say "observer" rather than consciouness in fact. However, many experiments are now operated without any real human interaction (i.e. the computer does it all). Anyways, all of this belong to the quite questionable (and questioned) part of quantum mechanics, even today. I hope this clarifies at least my point!
Thank you for the response, @lemouth.