Posted on 01/15/2006 6:04:17 PM PST by 101st-Eagle
...Bohm showed that Einstein was partly right in that Bohr's view was incomplete. One must keep both the particles and force fields of the old physics in addition to the new quantum wave function. Contrary to Bohr, we can picture the motion of particles in space at the quantum level , but there is a new kind of quantum force in addition to the classical forces of electromagnetism, gravity and even the strong and weak forces of modern high energy physics.
This new quantum force or "connection" is like The Force in George Lucas's Star Wars. Unlike ordinary forces the quantum force does not get weaker as the distance between quantum-connected particles increases. It is very private in that it connects specific particles. Although the quantum force can be disrupted, it cannot be shielded. Furthermore, the quantum force depends on a wholistic pattern of information that is literally beyond space and time which can be described as "organic" or "mental". Finally, Bohm showed that our modern quantum technology found in our computers can be explained on the basis of an approximation in which the quantum force guides its particles, but its particles do not directly back-react on their own quantum force. In other words, the quantum force is the "unmoved mover" which changes matter but is not changed by matter. Indeed, the quantum force violates Newton's idea that for every action there must be a reaction. This is the key idea of Bohm's theory which cannot even be formulated in Bohr's theory.
http://www.qedcorp.com/pcr/pcr/godphys.html
(Excerpt) Read more at qedcorp.com ...
*Ontological in search for truth *ping*
Just so you know, despite having actual advanced physics degrees from real universities, Sarfatti is one of the more famous cranks from USEnet. He's basically gone "off the reservation" like Richard Hoagland.
Is it science or religion?
Are the articles appearing in peer-reviewed scientific journals or in creationist pamphlets and websites?
Answer these two questions and you may have discovered the answer to your question.
Was Bell's Theorem proven?
Are there data supporting this assertion?
I think there is ample peer-review concerning reality concepts and observational aspects surrounding quantam field theory and it can throw in to question the validity of empiricism. That can come across as heresy, with the oh-so-predictable "you must be a creationist."
I think the degree to which we think we have knowledge is not too palatable.
Yes, Here's one proof-bad link. American Journal of Physics 50, 811 - 816 (1982).. Here's a statement made by the professor doing the proof:
Einstein died many years ago, and so is not here to defend himself against claims of what he would or would not do today. Nonetheless, I tend to think that if he were alive today, Bell's theorem would force him to accept Quantum Mechanics.
AUTHOR This document was written in February 1999 by David M. Harrison, Department of Physics, University of Toronto,
I think there is ample peer-review concerning reality concepts and observational aspects surrounding quantam field theory and it can throw in to question the validity of empiricism. That can come across as heresy, with the oh-so-predictable "you must be a creationist."
I think the degree to which we think we have knowledge is not too palatable.
I simply asked a couple of simple questions. You seem to have come across articles in peer-reviewed journals, so that sounds like science.
(I have not reviewed anything in this field, so have no idea of the accuracy of the claims; I am a simple bone man.)
lol, . Guess I'm jumpy. Didn't necessarily mean you. Just meant got that impression in general.
Whether it violates anything at all is an unanswerable question. On the other hand, Einstein's "Spooky Action At a Distance" is real, more or less, and probably serves as the basis for communication systems between and among vast advanced civilizations in the far reaches of the universe.
I read Bohm's 'Wholeness and the Implicate Order'. A first rate work, in fact his aquarium analogy and holography is remarkable, but it seems to indicate that Reality has a great deal of things going on of which we currently are unaware. Kinda like how the garbage always gets picked up on time and there's always beer in the beer case. So much is going on behind the scenes that we don't yet know about and it just gets done. IMHO he's got it, but proving it requires knowledge of the Hidden Variables, which we don't have yet. Just like Dark Matter and Dark Energy.
Einstein believed in God, didn't he?
Thanks for the link--It's late and I'm flaggin'. I'll get back after reading it tomorrow.
Thanks. That's a lot to contemplate. I'm retiring for the night. I'll get back to you tomorrow.
Eintein attributed divinity to the universe itself, in a pantheistic sense. He didn't believe in a personal deity that concerned itself with the affairs of humanity, or even an afterlife.
In an anthropological sense his writings and interviews say he didn't. But given today's physicists feel the proof of Bell's theorem would have forced him to accept Quantum Mechanics, and that fact he held imagination in such a high regard, who's to say what ideas he might entertain now?
"Anyone not shocked by Quantum Mechanics doesn't understand it."-Niels Bohr...
I was just wondering whether this Jack Sarfatti guy and Deepak Chopra have ever been photographed together.
The old "philospher in a box" conudrum :-)
Cheers!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.