--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> , "Hugo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> , "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> , "Hugo" <richardhughes103@> > wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> , "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> , "Hugo" > <richardhughes103@> > > > wrote: > > [...] > > > > > But why would he stop doing the experiments, if there is > anything > > > > > to it at all it's the most amazing breakthrough in scientific > > > > > undertsnding ever! I'm serious. The only abstract I could find > > > > > in the Journal of Neuroscience claims to have found evidence > of > > > > > a field effect, if true it's massive. > > > > > > > > Because the ceiling effect made the resutls unpredictable/not- > > > replicable? > > > > > > They wouldn't be non-replicable and that's the only thing > > > that would lift the research out of obscurity. If nothing > > > else, James Randi would give them a million bucks. > > > > OK, let me puut it another way: the results haven't been replicated > lately, > > or so I surmise. The reason for that is...? > > > > And no, you have no idea WHAT they haven't been replicated: the most > > you can do is speculate. > > No, I can speculate and I can look around for evidence. So far, no > evidence. > > > > > > It MAY be due to quantum interaction, that in itself is big news. > > > But affecting people at a distance? Very big news indeed. > > > > > > > If it IS QM effects at body temperature at macro-distances within > the brain, > > what possible reason would have to assume that it wouldn't show > > action at larger distances? What theoretical difference is there > > between 5 inches and 5,000 miles in this context? > > They don't survive the interference with other quantum states is the > problem. Any coherent waveform is localized and remains so because > it's like running into a wall of noise once "out" in the world > and away from whatever it is pulled them together in the first place.>>
Which random quantum states are you talking about that are exhibiting wave coherence in te general environment? You are trying to say that one tiny wave on its own, can stop a host of coherent waves acting in tandem and exponentially magnifying their power wit eac new addition of a fluctuation that joins their flow. One, or two, or even a million random, scattered wave functions cannot stand againt a coherent super-conductor-like formation. This is your fallacy. You are reading about microtubules in the brain that interact weakly with the quantum field, but people like Penrose don't understand yet that there can exist an array of neuronal activity that functions as one 'army', coherent and powerful. Travis already proved this twice in the International Journal of Neuroscience. OffWorld
