From: Farrokh & Ruffina Anklesaria <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 08:28:37 -0600
To: Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Latest from Farrokh - NOT SO
Dear Rick:
There has been some misunderstanding in the following post and we would appreciate your clarifying the matter. Farrokh is NOT the author of the email attributed to him below or any of the theories put forward. This was a forward from a European Governor, whose name we cannot use as we have not requested his permission to do so.
Would you kindly post a correction on this?
With very best wishes for the Season to one and all,
Farrokh & Ruffina
At 06:24 PM 12/4/2005, you wrote:
Post from FairfieldLife you might want to comment on:Farrokh & Ruffina Anklesaria
on 12/4/05 5:27 PM, at_man_and_brahman at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> I respect Farrokh's stand. I'm a little curious,
> though, about some of his remarks here.
>
> First, he is apparently of the Brigante school,
> thinking that the tomfoolery in the Movement
> is purely the fault of its administrators and not
> of the founder.
>
> I have an undergraduate background in physics
> and math, from MIU during the Hagelin years,
> and I am a long way from being able to touch
> Hagelin's level of math. It's unclear which works
> of Hagelin's Farrokh is criticizing: his two TM
> monographs ("Is Consciousness the Unified Field?"
> and "Restructuring Physics from Its Foundation in
> Light of Maharishi's Vedic Science") or his published
> high-energy physics papers.
>
> The former are not particularly mathematics-based,
> so a series of courses in math is not really the right
> foundation to critique them; a long series of
> graduate-level courses in high-energy physics,
> for which the math would be a prerequisite, would
> be, however. It doesn't sound as though Farrokh
> has taken such classes. Even if he had, the
> monographs do not attempt to construct a
> finite unified field theory, a central point in
> Farrokh's critique.
>
> Hagelin's published physics papers, similarly, do
> not attempt to construct a finite unified theory,
> nor do they discuss Vedic science. Hagelin's most
> celebrated mainstream work was in grand unified
> theory and superstrings.
>
> Maharishi has an undergrad background in physics,
> at least a working knowledge of "Maharishi's Vedic
> Science," and the experience of discussing physics
> with Hagelin for decades. If Farrokh is correct that
> Maharishi is an intellectual superstar, wouldn't
> Maharishi himself be the best judge of whether
> Hagelin is using his theories correctly?
>
> What does Farrokh think of Schanbacher's work?
> Clements'?
>
> Most notably, given that Farrokh has constructed
> "wonderfully elegant solutions" to the problems
> of "the dimensionality of space and the origin
> of the symmetries of the Standard Model," it's
> just a matter of time until he wins multiple
> Nobel prizes.
>
> That's pretty cool. You get on with your bad
> self, Farrokh!
>
> In this battle of crap vs crap, I think that
> Farrokh still has the upper hand, 'cause he
> makes sense in just about every other way.
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tmforlife108" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> My own approach is somewhat different. I applaud those who take a stand
>> against the crap and the nonsense we all have to endure within the
>> movement but I have chosen to take a stand against a different type of
>> crap and the nonsense. I realised some time ago that the supposed
>> scientific analysis of the relationships between modern science and
>> Vedic science was in fact pseudo-scientific rubbish. Rather than turn
>> around and walk away in disgust I resolved to do something about it. So
>> I put myself through a series of courses in mathematics so that I could
>> acquire the skills required. My reasoning being that although the
>> present analysis is total nonsense, if the insights of Vedic science as
>> proposed by Maharishi are true then it ought to be possible to use those
>> insights to guide one to solutions to the deepest problems of modern
>> physics. I've discovered that this inspiration is correct. But in a very
>> unexpected way, or rather perhaps in a way that should have been
>> expected for anyone who has had any contact with Maharishi's knowledge.
>> When cast in mathematical terms the insight that the ultimate reality is
>> of transcendental nature suggests that there can be no finite Unified
>> Field Theory. Also the insight that this transcendental reality can be
>> experienced as if it were a sequence of experiences happening one after
>> the other, as expressed in the Apurusheya Bhashya, has very interesting
>> mathematical consequences. Taking this point of view, then some of the
>> deepest problems of modern physics such as the dimensionality of space
>> and the origin of the symmetries of the Standard Model have wonderfully
>> elegant solutions. I recently presented a paper outlining these ideas at
>> a conference in Europe, (where I took prize for best lecture), and this
>> initial paper will be published next year. Though it's nice to get some
>> appreciation from experts who are utterly disdainful of John Hagelin,
>> much remains to be done. So it will be some time yet before a complete
>> analysis will be possible.
>>
>> The interesting thing is that one can use use Maharishi's knowledge to
>> solve these problems and hence give the knowledge true scientific
>> credibility while at the same time demolishing just about everything
>> John Hagelin has done. One wonders at the intellectual ineptitude that
>> has allowed his ideas to gain credence within the movement. The more I
>> study this field the more I find that his ideas are packed solid with
>> errors of reasoning and elementary maths. I know of many intelligent
>> people within the movement who have their doubts about John Hagelin's
>> ideas and even more doubts about Tony Nader's ideas but fail to speak
>> out for fear of punishment. However I do not think that he and people
>> like him are in any way inherently bad people, it's just that the
>> organisational structure of the movement discourages intelligent
>> thought. It is the culture of fear within the movement that is inimical
>> to genuine scientific enquiry and ultimately that culture of fear has
>> its basis in Maharishi himself.
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To subscribe, send a message to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Or go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> and click 'Join This Group!'
> Yahoo! Groups Links
TESP Directors
TESP Administrative Office
202 Tiffin Ave
Ferguson, MO 63135
Tel: 314 521 4390
Visit our website: www.tesp.org
<http://www.tesp.org/>
------ End of Forwarded Message
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
