Just updated my entry at earthpages.ca about the controversial idea of Remote Viewing. Perhaps not a literary masterpiece, I do think my entry is more balanced than the Wikipedia entry. The Wikipedia entry reads like an airplane repair manual or something. But those sympathetic to psi say that the “subtle science” of these alleged phenomena doesn’t work that way. So who knows.
Today I focused on updating an old article at earthpages.ca about a Hindu school of philosophy called Samkhya. My update turned toward a partial exposition of my thoughts about how insight and intuition might somehow be integrated with emerging ideas in physics, especially those concerning the relativity of space and time.
One thing absent in the update is the old theological notion that God knows the past and future, and accordingly gives us insight through some kind of direct revelation (i.e. not from the past or future, per se, but from the mind of God). I think this is entirely possible. But today I just emphasized the possibility of intuitive connections through space-time. My entry was already getting complicated enough and I didn’t want to make it worse!
I’ve been blogging about this topic throughout earthpages for at least a decade. But most people, imo, are too constrained by their particular religious or secular world views to really give it much thought. To them, it’s just irrelevant theorizing. Fair enough. This is probably another one of those “we have to get there” issues that humanity won’t really care about for at least another century. But I’m interested now. So I write about it. After all, someone has to be first. But then again, if space-time is somewhat omnidirectional, would that person really be first? :)
The day after I did my spoken piece about Carl Jung, it just so happened that “synchronicity” was the next topic for updating at earthpages.ca. I wouldn’t call that a synchronicity because the podcast also dealt with Jung’s views on UFOs. But heck, it was convenient. I was totally primed to update the entry because I’d been talking about it the day before, browsing through my PhD thesis, and so on.
I like the way the written entry came out (tweeted above). The podcast, however, sounded a bit rambly the next day. However, I won’t let that stop me. Practice makes perfect and I’ll keep extemporizing until I get good at it. One thing’s for certain, talking into a mic live has given me a whole new appreciation for people like Don Lemon, Nancy Grace, and many others. We don’t realize how good they are until we try it ourselves!
For the past few years, the idea of quantum physics has mostly been within the purview of research scientists and New Age pundits. But more recently, we’re seeing a practical application where the conventional “bit” in computing is surpassed by the quantum “qubit,” which isn’t bound by the traditional laws of binary processing.
Yet another view of the quantum world. Finally, some scientists are realizing that we’ll may never know how it “really” looks. The shift seems to be moving toward, “what’s the latest picture we have?” I think that’s a far healthier approach than that of some researchers who, rather arrogantly, make sweeping claims on the basis on the latest observations and resultant theories.