View Full Version : Sometimes we just have to listen to our "Sixth Sense"
CarlosDJackal
07-20-12, 15:59
Whenever I help teach the NRA's "Refuse To Be a Victim" course, I make sure to mention the book: Gift of Fear by Gavin de Becker (http://www.amazon.com/Other-Survival-Signals-Protect-Violence/dp/0440508835/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1342817416&sr=8-1&keywords=gift+of+fear)
I know on many occasions I have received warnings from my "Guardian Angel" with good results. The result slight hesitation or a change in direction has resulted in me just missing getting in the middle of an accident.
Unfortunately, one of the victims of the Aurora, CO managed to avoid being one of the victims in a shooting just last month in Toronto (so much for gun control). Makes you wonder if she received the same type of warning and if so, she chose not to listen to it.
All I can say is this is such a waste and may she Rest in Peace:
Original Article (http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/07/20/movie-massacre-survivor-june-mall-shooting-killed-in-colorado-theater-report/)
Midnight Movie Massacre: Survivor of June mall shooting killed in Colorado theater
An aspiring sports reporter who escaped a deadly shooting in a Toronto mall last month was among the 12 killed in the massacre at a Dener-area movie theater where "Batman: The Dark Knight Rises" was playing early Friday.
KDVR reports that Jessica Ghawi, who interned in the FOX 31 Denver sports department, tweeted early Friday morning from the movie theater just before the shooting occurred about 20 minutes in to the midnight showing of “The Dark Night Rises” in Aurora.
Ghawi, who went by the name Jessica Redfield in her on-air role, narrowly escaped a June 2 shooting at a Toronto shopping mall that left one person dead and four others injured. Ghawi wrote a now-chilling post on her blog about how she left that scene just moments before that shooting took place.
“This empty, almost sickening feeling won’t go away,” she wrote. “I noticed this feeling when I was in the Eaton Center in Toronto just seconds before someone opened fire in the food court. An odd feeling which led me to go outside and unknowingly out of harm’s way. It’s hard for me to wrap my mind around how a weird feeling saved me from being in the middle of a deadly shooting.”
Zubin Mehenti, a former FOX31 Denver sports anchor who mentored Ghawi during her internship at the station, said he remembers Ghawi for her great personality.
“She loved the NHL, that’s what always stuck out,” Mehenti said. “She was an active blogger and wanted to be a host with an NHL team.
“She was pretty enterprising, and one of the few interns we had who came from out of state. Being an NHL broadcaster was her dream.”
Doc Safari
07-20-12, 16:06
Interesting article. That sixth sense is real. I have experienced it on occasion myself, and definitely regretted every time I did not listen to it.
Moose-Knuckle
07-20-12, 20:06
Oh it's real alright, thanks for the read.
Most folks will never allow themselves to listen to it however.
ThirdWatcher
07-20-12, 20:19
That sixth sense is real. I have experienced it on occasion myself, and definitely regretted every time I did not listen to it.
+1 I have made it a habit to rely on my instincts (although I was sometimes in denial when I was younger)... it's like anything else, the more you do it the better you get at it.
The brain subconsciously processes an incredible amount of information, only a small part of which registers with our conscious mind. Occasionally, and often by luck, the right neural pathways get bridged and these subconscious ideas flash into our minds at opportune times.
Training can ensure that new physical tissue bridges in the brain actually get created, leading to the consistent recollection and recognition of inputs, causes, and effects, like recognition of danger and "combat indicators," etc. This is what's actually meant by "muscle memory." It's actually a physical change in the brain. Without it, memory and correlation, cause and effect, etc, are dependent on a temporal chemical process similar to short term memory. So when people are not conditioned to recognize danger in a given scenario, but they do anyway despite a lack of overt indicators, they are extremely lucky that it came into their consciousness due to said chemical process or a primitive physical bridging.
The danger is when people start attributing this to some kind of magical power or think they have some kind of mysterious precognitive ability. Next time, one might not be so lucky.
The only problem I see is I know too many people who don't use intelligence and common sense at all. If they try and depend upon a sixth sense to save them, they don't stand a chance.
Also I don't think the sixth sense is anything more than all of your other senses, intelligence and previous experience coming together to give you an uneasy feeling that may or may not have merit.
I have seen just as many people claim their sixth sense is telling them something or they sense something terrible about this or that and absolutely nothing about anything happened as I have seen people saved by their feeling of some impending danger.
Certainly if something doesn't look or feel right and there is no valid reason to not avoid it, that is what you should do just in case. Usually there is a reason something doesn't look or feel right and it isn't because you are sorta psychic. And if something feels really bad, it's probably because there is something very wrong and you simply haven't processed all of the reasons why so you simply have a "feeling."
The other problem about notions of a sixth sense is people who think they actually have that sort of thing tend to depend upon them when they should be devoting more time to their other five senses to keep them from harm.
All that said, I don't want to poop on parades and if you read the above book with all that in mind you might learn a few useful things that can give you some advantage. Certainly anything that "might" save you in a situation such as the tragic shooting in CO is worth knowing.
I just wish more people were aware of things like the States of Awareness in the Cooper Color Codes and were able to see guys like James Holmes immediately as a "potential threat" and start responding accordingly. Sadly most in that theater seem to have been in condition white and thought it was all part of the show.
Anyway I hope this isn't coming across angry at a book or the OP, but like most the whole thing related to the shooting is pretty upsetting.
The brain subconsciously processes an incredible amount of information, only a small part of which registers with our conscious mind. Occasionally, and often by luck, the right neural pathways get bridged and these subconscious ideas flash into our minds at opportune times.
Training can ensure that new physical tissue bridges in the brain actually get created, leading to the consistent recollection and recognition of inputs, causes, and effects, like recognition of danger and "combat indicators," etc. This is what's actually meant by "muscle memory." It's actually a physical change in the brain. Without it, memory and correlation, cause and effect, etc, are dependent on a temporal chemical process similar to short term memory. So when people are not conditioned to recognize danger in a given scenario, but they do anyway despite a lack of overt indicators, they are extremely lucky that it came into their consciousness due to said chemical process or a primitive physical bridging.
The danger is when people start attributing this to some kind of magical power or think they have some kind of mysterious precognitive ability. Next time, one might not be so lucky.
That's pretty much what I was trying to get at, especially the last part.
CarlosDJackal
07-21-12, 09:07
I have to disagree with you guys on what our "Sixth Sense" (or whatever you might want to call it) is. If what you say is true then how do you explain the many well-documented instances when someone avoids an incident based solely on a feeling.
I cannot tell you how many times my friends has asked me how I knew to take a different route or course of action which allowed us to avoid getting involved in a incident. It's not like there was any type of visual or auditory indication that a car that is headed in our direction (and therefore out of our view prior to the incident) is going to cross into our lane.
Like it or not there are things in this world that is beyond explanation. I have experienced to many such incidents that do not fit the theory (and that's all it is) that every situation is in response to some input that my subconscious processed.
I do agree that people who only rely on their "Sixth Sense" and ignores their "Common Sense" are taking unecessary risks.
I have to disagree with you guys on what our "Sixth Sense" (or whatever you might want to call it) is. If what you say is true then how do you explain the many well-documented instances when someone avoids an incident based solely on a feeling.
Same way I explain the many well documented instances where somebody has been saved by Jesus, Buddha, Zues or ghosts of departed loved ones. People often don't understand what they experience and quite often misattribute the cause of that experience.
I have known several people who think they have psychic ability, but if there really were psychic they'd know I think they are a moron for believing they have psychic ability.
I cannot tell you how many times my friends has asked me how I knew to take a different route or course of action which allowed us to avoid getting involved in a incident. It's not like there was any type of visual or auditory indication that a car that is headed in our direction (and therefore out of our view prior to the incident) is going to cross into our lane.
Like it or not there are things in this world that is beyond explanation. I have experienced to many such incidents that do not fit the theory (and that's all it is) that every situation is in response to some input that my subconscious processed.
And we all have. It doesn't mean we have some kind of actual precognition. I have done it constantly, where I had a bad feeling and thus did B rather than A and it turns out I avoided something bad. But I think it is more of an ability to perceive a potentially bad situation that could exist or is developing than any psychic ability on my part.
And quite honestly how do we know it is "sixth sense" and not just Zues acting as our faithful guardian angel as he has done for people throughout recorded history?
I do agree that people who only rely on their "Sixth Sense" and ignores their "Common Sense" are taking unecessary risks.
And that is really the main point I was trying to express is do not put too much stock in it.
If you are getting ready to walk into taco bell and something doesn't feel right to you, maybe you should just eat lunch at burger king. What did that cost you? Almost nothing and you didn't have to eat a burrito surrounded by a sense of imposing dread. This is especially true if such instances are rare, you probably are processing things that your brain is recognizing as a potential threat buy you simply haven't seen it yet.
The problem is when you live your life according to that voice. I know a few people like that, including one guy who thinks God tells him things 40 to 50 times a day. I had to stop spending time with him socially because God would always inform him it wasn't safe to do 80% of the things we planned to do that day. Now I wouldn't have minded so much if he at least helped us avoid disaster once or twice, but in every instance where "God sent him a safety memo" nothing bad happened to anyone that day who did go there. Of course in his mind that is all the proof he needed that he was right all along...after all nothing bad happened BECAUSE he listened to God.
Good reply Steyr. Carlos, if you have few minutes to spare, you might find this 10 minute video interesting and enlightening. There are some parts of it that are only tangentially related to what we're talking about, but on the whole, it's relevant to this conversation. The "coincidence factor" should not be undersold.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98OTsYfTt-c
The lady that lived below james holmes went up to ask to turn the music off/down said she knocked nobody was home she put her hand on the knob and felt it could open but also felt something was wrong and decided not to open the door
The booby trap would have killed her !
Interesting to hear that this morning made me think of this thread
The "Sixth Sense" is real. In fact, we have more senses (Some posit near 360 of them total) that we have lost the need to utilize through our evolution; the muscles have atrophied just like any other not used.
I have experienced the non-local consciousness on several occassions, and not just times when I needed to be weary of a potentially harmful situation either. Not just a bad feeling in ones stomach...
Some describe it as being in the "Zone" or connected to the "Grid". My specific experiences have been quite out of this world, I don't want to derail the thread more than I already have, so if you are interested, PM me to discuss further.
Some here will vehemently disagree and envoke all sorts of this and that shit slinging, but non-local consciousness is real and there are several scientific tests that are starting to test this and the results are quite interesting. Quantum physics is really pushing in this direction; at least some physicists in the quantum field are really into this idea right now.
There is upward and downward causation; our brains aren't the mechanism of consciousness- consciousness is the mechanism of our brain.
There is a non-local reality we are all "Jacked" into and experiencing. Some can experience "more" so to speak than others.
These phenomena show the limits of the current mainstream (materialistic) understanding of consciousness and provide theoretical support for the nonlocal model of consciousness:
1) the epistemic gap in materialism
2) the absence of a neural correlate of consciousness
3) out-of-body experiences (OBEs)
4) near-death experiences (NDEs)
5) the measurement problem in quantum physics. (This one should bring about quite a "Deterministic" debate from someone here I am sure...) Think "Participatory Anthropic Principle"
Observations made on the sub-atomic level, and how reality works at this level is bringing us closer to an understaning of how reality works in general and non-local/local consciousness.
I do agree with the neuroscientists/materialists up to a point (See AoCkae & Styers responses..), but there are too many paradoxes that arise from a strict interpretation. I like how Dr. Goswami is utilizing theoretical quantum physics and simple experiments to show physical reality isn't the only thing "here".
http://www.amitgoswami.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience
Pseudoscience is a claim, belief, or practice which is presented as scientific, but does not adhere to a valid scientific method, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, cannot be reliably tested, or otherwise lacks scientific status.
Pseudoscience is often characterized by the use of vague, exaggerated or unprovable claims, an over-reliance on confirmation rather than rigorous attempts at refutation, a lack of openness to evaluation by other experts, and a general absence of systematic processes to rationally develop theories.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience
Pseudoscience is a claim, belief, or practice which is presented as scientific, but does not adhere to a valid scientific method, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, cannot be reliably tested, or otherwise lacks scientific status.
Pseudoscience is often characterized by the use of vague, exaggerated or unprovable claims, an over-reliance on confirmation rather than rigorous attempts at refutation, a lack of openness to evaluation by other experts, and a general absence of systematic processes to rationally develop theories.
Quantum physics isn't psuedoscinece. I do understand your reply however.
Quantum physics is opening up quite a plethora of holes into materialistis science.
Oh and by the way, lots of accepted scientific theories of today were once considered "psuedoscience", "magic", and "Zuess' will"...
An obvious example would be the earth is flat; those advocating the world was round were definitly peddlers of a kind of psuedoscience of its day. Later, they were proved correct.
A more recent example would be those who claimed the brain had an ability to adapt and talked of neuroplasticity. That was once considered silly, a pseudoscience; it's now clearly accepted and established science.
The germ theory behind desease was laughable when first posited; now it is accepted science.
Plate tectonics was an extremely controversial theory for decades - Alfred Wegener originally proposed the idea in 1912 but it wasn't generally accepted until the 1960s. Even Einstein was a famous skeptic.
Earth Vs. Sun as center of the Universe.
ETC, ETC, ETC, ETC...
"As we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know.
We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know."
Donald Rumsfeld of all blokes...
Judging anything and everything outside of the box as psuedoscience is naive.
VooDoo6Actual
07-23-12, 17:54
The "Sixth Sense" is real. In fact, we have more senses (Some posit near 360 of them total) that we have lost the need to utilize through our evolution.
Not just a bad feeling in ones stomach...
Some describe it as being in the "Zone" or connected to the "Grid".
Some here will vehemently disagree and envoke all sorts of this and that shit slinging. There are several scientific tests that are starting to test this and the results are quite interesting. Quantum physics is really pushing in this direction; at least some physicists in the quantum field are really into this idea right now.
There is upward and downward causation; our brains aren't the mechanism of consciousness- consciousness is the mechanism of our brain.
There is a non-local reality we are all "Jacked" into and experiencing. Some can experience "more" so to speak than others.
These phenomena show the limits of the current mainstream (materialistic) understanding of consciousness and provide theoretical support for the nonlocal model of consciousness:
1) the epistemic gap in materialism
2) the absence of a neural correlate of consciousness
3) out-of-body experiences (OBEs)
4) near-death experiences (NDEs)
5) the measurement problem in quantum physics. (This one should bring about quite a "Deterministic" debate from someone here I am sure...) Think "Participatory Anthropic Principle"
Observations made on the sub-atomic level, and how reality works at this level is bringing us closer to an understaning of how reality works in general and non-local/local consciousness.
I like how Dr. Goswami is utilizing theoretical quantum physics and simple experiments to show physical reality isn't the only thing "here".
http://www.amitgoswami.org/
I redacted some of it your post ONLY for my interpretation & comments on being able to succinctly relate.
I agree & have had some of those experiences/episodes etc. myself. Perhaps another thread sometime or PM's are more appropriate due to the shit slinging & pot stirring.
Some of mine have been In Extremis others have not. Profoundly & tangible real at that/those moment/s & I'm not always able to articulate or unravel the labyrinth of it's/their meaning BUT aware of it's/their existence. Did some research into different areas myself & still working on those conundrums.
Interesting stuff indeed.
THCDDM4,
As far as I know, it is still unclear what effect, if any, quantum-indeterminacy has on cognition. Even if the randomness of the quantum does play a role, it would still be something that is recognized after the fact. It would not give our minds agency to deliberately or proactively foresee future events. Let's say that it doesn't have any effect. In that case, a regressive chain of causes and effects, going back to the beginning of space-time, creates patterns that our subconscious minds are able to identify. This allows us to sense danger, even if the indicators are not overtly obvious. If there IS an element of randomness via the quantum, and our minds ARE affected on this level, we would still just be passively becoming aware of a random result. Either way, our experience of "becoming aware" is exactly the same, regardless of how it works.
And the fact is that NOBODY has EVER demonstrated pre-cognitive abilities. So if we discover that intuition is, at some level, us somehow recognizing quantum factors, why would that change?
I agree & have had some of those experiences/episodes etc. myself.
Nobody's saying that people don't have these kinds of experiences. Just that they are not the result of magic. There is something real that gives us non-obvious intuitions. But it's important to be mindful of all the intuitions we have that DON'T come to be, and how much more often this happens than not. Wrong intuitions are easily forgotten, while we often place too much significance on correct ones. With the massive amount of "feelings" we get every day, what would be weird is if at least some DIDN'T turn out to be true. There's nothing mystical about it.
Quantum physics isn't psuedoscinece. I do understand your reply however.
Of course quantum physics isn't psuedo science, but trying to use it as a basis to support ideas like precognition is.
I'm not going to call you any names, I'm not going to try and point out the many errors that exist, but I am going to urge you to get a read a college level textbook on Quantum Physics.
The stuff you are promoting is Deepak Chopra grade gobblygook.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience
Pseudoscience is a claim, belief, or practice which is presented as scientific, but does not adhere to a valid scientific method, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, cannot be reliably tested, or otherwise lacks scientific status.
Pseudoscience is often characterized by the use of vague, exaggerated or unprovable claims, an over-reliance on confirmation rather than rigorous attempts at refutation, a lack of openness to evaluation by other experts, and a general absence of systematic processes to rationally develop theories.
I'm still on the fence as to whether neuroscience falls into this category. Especially given the fascination some in the field have with attempting to answer philosophical questions using "science" and the recalcitrance they exhibit when their conclusions are questioned by scientists in related fields (namely neurology and physics), and their antipathy to questioning by those in the actual field of philosophy.
But in all honesty, neuroscience isn't even tangentially related to my field, isn't in my lane so to speak, but it has the sniff of modern "sciencified" phrenology.
ETA: I'm referring specifically to cultural and cognitive neuroscience.
Nobody's saying that people don't have these kinds of experiences. Just that they are not the result of magic. There is something real that gives us non-obvious intuitions. But it's important to be mindful of all the intuitions we have that DON'T come to be, and how much more often this happens than not. Wrong intuitions are easily forgotten, while we often place too much significance on correct ones. With the massive amount of "feelings" we get every day, what would be weird is if at least some DIDN'T turn out to be true. There's nothing mystical about it.
This is a phenomenon exploited by "psychic mediums" during cold readings.
CarlosDJackal
07-23-12, 21:49
Nobody's saying that people don't have these kinds of experiences. Just that they are not the result of magic. There is something real that gives us non-obvious intuitions. But it's important to be mindful of all the intuitions we have that DON'T come to be, and how much more often this happens than not. Wrong intuitions are easily forgotten, while we often place too much significance on correct ones. With the massive amount of "feelings" we get every day, what would be weird is if at least some DIDN'T turn out to be true. There's nothing mystical about it.
Except it seems tat the "feelings" that end up being correct seem to always save our lives. Whereas the ones that were wrong did not cause our death. Otherwise, this would all be a moot point.
Despite all the math and physics there are still things in this world that science cannot, and prrobably will never be able to explain. Otherwise, they would have come up with a mathematical formula that prove Bumblebees can fly. :rolleyes:
Some jackass in the 19th century failed to see how bees could fly - couldn't make the math work because he failed to take into account that their wings could bend, and now adult children who believe in magic offer it as proof that science sucks. Fuuuuuuck.
We've known how and why bumblebees can fly for decades.
Despite all the math and physics there are still things in this world that science cannot, and prrobably will never be able to explain. Otherwise, they would have come up with a mathematical formula that prove Bumblebees can fly. :rolleyes:
And I can accept that. Hell our current understanding of "gravity" is still mostly just a theory.
And I don't have a problem exploring unlikely ideas. And there were lots of things we certainly didn't expect when we discovered them and lots of things were were most certain had to be true turned out to be something completely different.
Probably the biggest example was the discovery of an expanding universe. Almost nobody even considered that one before it's discovery.
The problem I have is when science, especially aspects that most people only have a remote understanding of like Quantum Mechanics, is misrepresented to support all manner of ridiculous ideas.
And I have a problem when we rely on metaphysics over science with things like astrology, alchemy or other things. Like I said I have zero problem with somebody paying attention to their own intuition. In most cases it isn't supernatural but our subconscious observing warning signs that our conscious mind has notice yet.
I think we have all had these experiences, especially when we were younger and had fewer daily distractions like work and responsibilities and we had fewer reasons to discount them. When I was younger I actually practiced controller / receiver exercises. And we had quite a bit of repeatable success.
To some observers we were demonstrating psychic ability, and more than a handful of the participants believed they possessed and were developing psychic ability. There were guys I trained with so frequently that we seemed to be able to communicate without words and would know what the other would do before or as they did it. Again some thought they were using a psychic capacity when they did these things.
But I would later learn there were far more reliable explanations of what we were doing and why it worked. They weren't "tricks" but some of us were tricking ourselves into believing it was something more. And I came to realize that if you regularly train with somebody you do come to know physical indicators of what they are going to do and you know for past examples of what they are likely to do.
So while we actually were "sensing presence" it wasn't a supernatural observation, it was nothing more than an extremely well trained sense of observation that did more than just look. And while we did in fact "communicate without words" it's wasn't mind reading but just a case of strong familiarity with those we trained with and being able to read body language.
If you examine it closely, "sixth sense" abilities will be just as explainable and not quite as exciting as their usual esoteric representation.
Some jackass in the 19th century failed to see how bees could fly - couldn't make the math work because he failed to take into account that their wings could bend, and now adult children who believe in magic offer it as proof that science sucks. Fuuuuuuck.
We've known how and why bumblebees can fly for decades.
That too.
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1076/is-it-aerodynamically-impossible-for-bumblebees-to-fly
the incident in Aurora reminds of what my friends dad always says about late night excursions, "nothing good ever happens after midnight".
Heavy Metal
07-23-12, 22:45
Precognition.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=94459&highlight=precognition
Of course quantum physics isn't psuedo science, but trying to use it as a basis to support ideas like precognition is.
I'm not going to call you any names, I'm not going to try and point out the many errors that exist, but I am going to urge you to get a read a college level textbook on Quantum Physics.
The stuff you are promoting is Deepak Chopra grade gobblygook.
Thanks so much for not calling me names Steyr you're doing me such a favor;:rolleyes: whats with the condescending remark? Just discussing/debating perceptions of reality...
Please point out the errors, lets debate, that is what this thread is for; no?
What books do you suggest; I can tell you if I have read them before or not, and if I haven't read the ones you suggest I'll get started and we can get back to this discussion further once finished. FYI I have read several "College" level textbooks on quantum physics/mechanics. I am incredibly interested in the subject.
Just because "science" hasn't fully explained something in materilaistic terms, fitting perfectly into a Newtonian view; does not mean they don't exist, and doesn't instantly relegate them to a "Magical" realm of nonsense and the like.
I am not promoting "Deepak Chopra" gobblygook, I am merely stating and providing reference to the fact that quantum physics most likely will and currently is seeking to explain some interesting phenomena that newtonian/materialist science has yet to explain; included- and something I am very interested in is the debate of non-local consciousness VS. Local consciousness; if only one or both exist.
Have you looked at the tests being conducted/peer reviewed- or are you just writing me off completely without objectively viewing the information?
I have experienced some things that lead me to put stock into the non-local conssciousness being real and existing right along side local consciousness; I'm sure others here have as well (Hoplo & others mentioned he has for one...).
I appreciate your opinion, your views and your intelligence Steyr, if you really think my view-point is worthy of "calling me names" then by all means unload on me, I assure you, you won't be the first person to hurl names at me instead of getting down to the meat & potatos of the debate.
Thanks so much for not calling me names Steyr you're doing me such a favor;:rolleyes: whats with the condescending remark?
That comment was in NO WAY meant to be condescending or in any way talking down to you. I was specifically trying to avoid exactly this kind of non productive back and forth and was stressing that I had no desire to engage in it and I'm not taking the position of calling you some kind of moronic simpleton as I honestly do not believe that to be the case.
But I do believe, based upon your post, that you have less than a complete understanding of Quantum Mechanics and what it is and isn't. So I asked you to go find out for yourself as any college level textbook would clear up a lot of what you appear to believe.
Just discussing/debating perceptions of reality...
Please point out the errors, lets debate, that is what this thread is for; no?
What books do you suggest; I can tell you if I have read them before or not, and if I haven't read the ones you suggest I'll get started and we can get back to this discussion further once finished. FYI I have read several "College" level textbooks on quantum physics/mechanics. I am incredibly interested in the subject.
At risk of sounding condescending (and again that is not my intention) I simply don't have time to teach somebody Quantum Mechanics on the internet. And if you actually HAVE read the books you claim and you still persist with these beliefs than NOTHING I could tell you about Quantum Mechanics is likely to change your view.
I am going to leave the rest of your post unaddressed as that part of your post is subjective to belief and I don't think anything positive or productive can come from the two of us debating it.
Again, the ONLY thing I care about at this point is you understanding I was NOT being condescending and you very much took my remarks the wrong way, in fact you took them exactly the opposite way from which they were intended.
That comment was in NO WAY meant to be condescending or in any way talking down to you. I was specifically trying to avoid exactly this kind of non productive back and forth and was stressing that I had no desire to engage in it and I'm not taking the position of calling you some kind of moronic simpleton as I honestly do not believe that to be the case.
But I do believe, based upon your post, that you have less than a complete understanding of Quantum Mechanics and what it is and isn't. So I asked you to go find out for yourself as any college level textbook would clear up a lot of what you appear to believe.
At risk of sounding condescending (and again that is not my intention) I simply don't have time to teach somebody Quantum Mechanics on the internet. And if you actually HAVE read the books you claim and you still persist with these beliefs than NOTHING I could tell you about Quantum Mechanics is likely to change your view.
I am going to leave the rest of your post unaddressed as that part of your post is subjective to belief and I don't think anything positive or productive can come from the two of us debating it.
Again, the ONLY thing I care about at this point is you understanding I was NOT being condescending and you very much took my remarks the wrong way, in fact you took them exactly the opposite way from which they were intended.
Understood. Communication over the net can be complicated sometimes; c'est la vie...
Thanks Steyr, take care.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.