[RascalPuff]

http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/precognition

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff Particles give me a headache." - Ibid

Einstein could have ease his headache if he thought in unit circle of quantum time of consciousness.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao Einstein could have ease his headache if he thought in unit circle of quantum time of consciousness.

Prehaps Einstein was ahead of his time because he preconcieved?


regards michael.

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick Prehaps Einstein was ahead of his time because he preconcieved

Yes. But he could have lived to be 100 years old if only he allowed doctors to operate on his heart condition of expansion.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao Yes. But he could have lived to be 100 years old if only he allowed doctors to operate on his heart condition of expansion.

Prehaps he knew something they did not?He could possibly see his next life coming up,
and wanted to get going?



regards michael.

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick wanted to get going?

He really refused to be a victim of fool stool tool.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao He really refused to be a victim of fool stool tool.

Yes absolutely,he was a wise man indeed!


regards michael.

[G_burnett]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/precognition

Ty Puff for the link

I heard some years back in 97 there were euro tests to particle beam behavior duplication where one beam influenced had the other beam seem to react in the same manner of influence ... thus disputing nothing is faster then light ... after this there was more spec then on precognition as the event tends to act that fast ??? can you link me to the research if it rings a bell?

Peace Graham

[RascalPuff]

Originally Posted by G_burnett Ty Puff for the link I heard some years back in 97 there were euro tests to particle beam behavior duplication where one beam influenced had the other beam seem to react in the same manner of influence ... thus disputing nothing is faster then light ... after this there was more spec then on precognition as the event tends to act that fast ??? can you link me to the research if it rings a bell? Peace Graham

Hi GB:
Been snooping around google for FTL (faster than light) and 'superluminal' information.
The issue evokes a raft of pro and con perspectives, some scientific and some not.

So far the best I can do is refer you to those subjects via Google - there's some articles that entail the issue at hand, though, I've had no luck with finding any specific link that fulfills your inquiry. There is an advancing school of thought, as it were, that proposes that some manifestations of consciousness are instantaneous, but as far as I know, this controversial subject has yet to be nailed down (Whereas, some forms of precognition are documented).

Best regards,
- RP

[G_burnett]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff Hi GB: Been snooping around google for FTL (faster than light) and 'superluminal' information. The issue evokes a raft of pro and con perspectives, some scientific and some not. So far the best I can do is refer you to those subjects via Google - there's some articles that entail the issue at hand, though, I've had no luck with finding any specific link that fulfills your inquiry. There is an advancing school of thought, as it were, that proposes that some manifestations of consciousness are instantaneous, but as far as I know, this controversial subject has yet to be nailed down (Whereas, some forms of precognition are documented). Best regards, - RP

ty very much Puff and i enclose a link i am reading and following through on for at least it gives the persons in the field of research ... and the pro and cons theorems as i would think in the bending of light by gravity influence does it stay the same speed? its frequencies of particle form broken down into the visible spectrum of reception i think point toward the event of distant viewing as a key where it is not seeing more then the receptors of the secondary are seeing and the secondary registering the viewer on receptors as if they were seeing a ghost but only a form of empathy on the receptors being sensed by the viewer ... even i have a hard time following this beyond the experiences and self proving and the quest is to just understand the process knowing the result before hand .. maybe its a factor of evolution where to survive it was in the ability of the first cellular structures to know what the distant ones were sensing to move out of the way and now latent talent in us similar to the magnetic field sense ability in catfish or other sea life location of food uses ... so many questions and so many either not wanting to go there so to speak ... interesting.
http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archi...17/322206.aspx
Graham.