what is an anti-TOE?

[AntonioLao]

We are all ranked 0 (me at least, lol)

In vector and tensor analysis, rank zero are scalars. rank one are vectors. An example of scalars are the undetected scalar Higgs boson which just sit there gaining more mass until it become a black hole, while the vector bosons: photon, W, Z, gluon, and graviton move around making the universe a lively place.

[AntonioLao]

no study can.

At the present scientific knowledge. Maybe tomorrow. But tomorrow never comes.

There are psycologists, philosophers of mind, anthropolgists, neurobiologists...

They are just talks and talk is cheap. Can these groups explain telekinesis? teleportation? astral projection? precognition? mental healing? Power of the mind over the body?

And aren't phi, sqrt 2, sqrt 3, sqrt 5, sqrt 7, e... Also irrational numbers?

They are. But they have nothing to do with the circumference of a circle although they are inside the circle.

but what's contained in the movie?

2D celluloid fantasies.

[Guille]

At the present scientific knowledge. Maybe tomorrow. But tomorrow never comes.

They are just talks and talk is cheap. Can these groups explain telekinesis? teleportation? astral projection? precognition? mental healing? Power of the mind over the body?

They are. But they have nothing to do with the circumference of a circle although they are inside the circle.

Essence is more important than presence.

Tomorrow always will come, and we will 'be at it' but not that we are at the tomorrow this is impossible.

Can physicist, the unification of the forces, the structure of spacetime, the laws of energy... Explain the mind? Of course we can explain the brain and locate the mind in it. But the discourse about th emind is different to all this. It is about a higher state of discussion, no that reductionist or fundamentalist. Physicist have not reached the TOE, but I don't say they are all just cheap talk. But as you call philosophers, psycologists and anthropologists cheap talkers, I might as well call that Einstein, Heisenberg and Feynman?

[AntonioLao]

but I don't say they are all just cheap talk.

Cheap as in free, no money exchanges. Experiments cost time and money and human efforts hence to prove what is said needs a lot of money as it is costly. Einstein, Heisenberg, Feynman did not spent much money to form their theories but to prove them, a lot of money have been spent and their ideas advance technology making some lucky people to make even more money.

[Guille]

Cheap as in free, no money exchanges. Experiments cost time and money and human efforts hence to prove what is said needs a lot of money as it is costly. Einstein, Heisenberg, Feynman did not spent much money to form their theories but to prove them, a lot of money have been spent and their ideas advance technology making some lucky people to make even more money.

I know it is cheap as in free-from-empirical-verification. But can physicist make universes in the labs? Or can geographers collide continental plates to investigate? Or can chemists create a new atom and make it have a stable life? Or can biologists create a new species and cause it's evolution? No, noen of them can. Just as well, sociologists have very controlled experiments, and psicologists very well-backgrounded theories, and philosophers are always based on natural principles...

[mkirkpatrick]

Good question Antonio,what are the distinctionsv if any between a natural
being,and a supernatural being?I would suggest that the only distinction
would be in the degree of manifest consiousness,the greater the degree then
the more supernormal the being would appear,I use the word supernormal
rather that supernatural because the latter word suggests a bending or maybe
a partial suspension of natural law,and we all know that ,that does not happen.



kind regards michael.

[harmonygirl]

I guess I am not comfortable with the word normal (I don't think I fit!). It depends on what your definition of a supranatural/supranormal being is. does this affect degrees of freedom?

[mkirkpatrick]

I guess I am not comfortable with the word normal (I don't think I fit!). It depends on what your definition of a supranatural/supranormal being is. does this affect degrees of freedom?

No it most certainly does not!I do not like the word normal either,butused itin this post because,theword supernatural to me implies that
there is some sort of suspension of natural law,ie,a miracle,whichI think cannot happen,


kind regards michael.

[AntonioLao]

But can physicist make universes in the labs?

It was accomplished partially.

what are the distinctionsv if any between a natural
being,and a supernatural being?

The mind as square of energy.