--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Jan 14, 2008, at 7:11 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 14, 2008, at 4:23 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > <snip> > > > > > From what I have seen Vaj write, it looks like he is > > > > > familiar with this "stuff." > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > Also check out: > > > > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mysticism > > > > > > > > It's a very good synopsis. > > > > > > Quoting Vaj from an earlier post: > > > > > > What are you proposing Off, that the > > > > observer's consciousness emits some sort of signal that travels > > > > back through time and then tells the measuring apparatus what > > > > it's supposed to indicate when the particle interacts with the > > > > machine? What about when there is no human observer and some > > > > automatic recording machine does the "observing"? Does the > > > > machine travel back through time? > > > > > > > > I think you've merely uncritically accepted a good number of false > > > > propositions which were sold to you by a pseudo-master and his > > > > physicists-marketeers. > > > > > > See: > > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler's_delayed_choice_experiment > > > > I don't know if Vaj knows that the delayed choice experiment does > > not require a human participant. However, we have to be careful > > when drawing conclusions like "travel back in time" from his > > experiment and other related experiments as "time travel" is not > > necessary to develop a theory to account for the experiment. > > Interesting stuff though. Shows how elusive answers can be when you > > are out there on the cutting edge. > > Be careful of "Judy's Golem", a peculiar form of strawman fallacy > where our Dear Editor distorts or misrepresents an others thoughts, > and then based on that distorted "monster" attempts to show who that > misleading idea is wrong. The ideas she attributes to me have actually > zero to do with my personal thoughts and a certainly not even close to > what I was thinking of. Hang around here long enough and you'll see > this often enough. It's just a common technique she uses to lure > people into arguments. When you ignore her, she'll try to beg others > on to further entice with her latest Golem.
<snicker> Vaj's mantra when he's caught at it.
