--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 23, 2006, at 1:52 PM, markmeredith2002 wrote:
Maybe his reputation within the theoretical physicists community has
been damaged, but is that such a big deal. Hagelin gets paid well,
gets lots of attention, esp
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Being a TMO celebrity would probably be more fun than being a
physicist...esp. with the groupies--young yoginis.
I wonder how much he gets paid?
In their public filings, nonprofits must list their 3
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 23, 2006, at 1:52 PM, markmeredith2002 wrote:
Maybe his reputation within the theoretical physicists
community has been
on 1/24/06 7:29 AM, markmeredith2002 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In their public filings, nonprofits must list their 3 highest paid
employees. In the last one I saw, Hagelin was listed at $120,000. In
addition he has his Institute which I think is another source of
donations-income. I
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 22, 2006, at 5:20 PM, authfriend wrote:
OK, I've listened to it, and I think you need to
listen to it again. The fallacy Wilber is talking
about doesn't have anything to do with TM's claims.
Perhaps you also
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Are you familiar with the movement's search for the
elusive
substance M and what M. said about it?
Is that the substance that was said to be found
in the bloodstream of TMers and suggested to be
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 22, 2006, at 4:46 PM, authfriend wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 22, 2006, at 2:36 PM, authfriend wrote:
Are you familiar with the movement's search for the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 22, 2006, at 5:20 PM, authfriend wrote:
OK, I've listened to it, and I think you need to
listen to it again. The fallacy Wilber is talking
about doesn't have anything to do with TM's claims.
Perhaps you also
On Jan 23, 2006, at 9:34 AM, authfriend wrote: Well, first, we'd need to know what MMY *actually* said, rather than your version of it. Second, what Wilber was debunking was the idea of creating *electrons* (by which I assume he meant elementary particles generally), not molecules. Molecules
On Jan 23, 2006, at 10:45 AM, authfriend wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 22, 2006, at 5:20 PM, authfriend wrote: OK, I've listened to it, and I think you need to listen to it again. The fallacy Wilber is talking about doesn't have anything to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 22, 2006, at 5:20 PM, authfriend wrote:
OK, I've listened to it, and I think you need to
listen to it again. The fallacy Wilber is
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 23, 2006, at 9:34 AM, authfriend wrote:
Well, first, we'd need to know what MMY *actually*
said, rather than your version of it.
Second, what Wilber was debunking was the idea of
creating *electrons* (by
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Most interesting to me is that this [Hagelin] is one of
the guys who led the charge in ffld in the mid 90s against
other teachers popular in town, writing an editorial in
the local paper saying MMY's teachings
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Most interesting to me is that this [Hagelin] is one of
the guys who led the charge in ffld in the mid 90s against
other teachers popular in town, writing an editorial in
the local paper saying MMY's teachings are
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 23, 2006, at 10:45 AM, authfriend wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 22, 2006, at 5:20 PM, authfriend wrote:
OK, I've listened to it, and I think you need to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
Well, again, we'd need to know what Hagelin actually
*said* in the film, and what Wilber means by *more or
less* every assertion.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Get it now?
We think so. You're still stalking Vaj, right? :-)
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
On Jan 23, 2006, at 11:19 AM, authfriend wrote: Again, we'd have to know exactly what MMY said, but it isn't inconceivable he meant the molecules were built from particles that were already available. Finally, at what point did MMY use this notion as a "sales ploy" for TM? Quantum physics is
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With response such as these, why should I waste my time?
A very good question. Ponder it further. :-)
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Get it now?
We think so. You're still stalking Vaj, right? :-)
Like I said earlier: You're delusional.
On Jan 23, 2006, at 11:16 AM, markmeredith2002 wrote:A few of the more respected, non-Ramtha scientists in the Bleep distanced themselves from the film after it opened saying their remarks were edited in such a way as to distort their true purport. Hagelin did not distanced himself, in fact he
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 23, 2006, at 11:19 AM, authfriend wrote:
Again, we'd have to know exactly what MMY said, but
it isn't inconceivable he meant the molecules were
built from particles that were already available.
Finally, at what
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With response such as these, why should I waste my time?
A very good question. Ponder it further. :-)
Translation: Barry doesn't like responding to
--- authfriend wrote:
Indeed. Be interesting to hear from him directly
as to why he did it [touring with the Bleep crowd].
It's surprising to me that
MMY didn't try to stop him from doing it.
A story about John Hagelin touring:
I'm trying to summon a memory of a conversation
with a
On Jan 23, 2006, at 11:44 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Get it now? We think so. You're still stalking Vaj, right? :-) Now be nice, it's still just typical game playing. She hasn't shown up at my house in months.
To
On Jan 23, 2006, at 12:40 PM, Patrick Gillam wrote:--- authfriend wrote: Indeed. Be interesting to hear from him directly as to why he did it [touring with the "Bleep" crowd]. It's surprising to me that MMY didn't try to stop him from doing it. A story about John Hagelin touring: I'm
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip Sad really--such incredible
potential Hagelin had. No guru should be allowed to destroy
someone's
career. snip
And let's please remember that John Hagelin is an adult, and as such,
responsible for his choices. It
On Jan 23, 2006, at 1:17 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Sad really--such incredible potential Hagelin had. No guru should be allowed to destroy someone's career. snip And let's please remember that John Hagelin is an adult,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip Sad really--such incredible
potential Hagelin had. No guru should be allowed to destroy
someone's career. snip
And let's please
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It would seem he sold his soul for proximity and access.
It certainly wasn't a career move :-).
The term I've heard around the spiritual smorgasbord
is 'attention whore' -- willing to do almost anything
to stay in the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 23, 2006, at 1:17 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip Sad really--such incredible
potential Hagelin had. No guru should be allowed to destroy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 23, 2006, at 1:17 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It would seem he sold his soul for proximity and access.
It certainly wasn't a career move :-).
The term I've heard around the spiritual
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 23, 2006, at 1:17 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip Sad really--such incredible
potential Hagelin had. No guru should be allowed to destroy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The lost potential that pisses me off is Doug Henning, a genuinely
gifted creative genius who was a bona fide celebrity influencing
millions of people with his wonderful shows on stage and TV. He
wasted all
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
It would seem he sold his soul for proximity and access.
It
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Yep, pretty silly stuff. Addicted to darshan.
Not so silly if you've been there, done that.
Harder to kick than heroin.
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--
Join modern day
Vaj wrote:
I wonder if your observation syncs with his
publication of Is Consciousness the Unified Field?
Seems to me that lecture came out some years later.
So, is it the sense of the meeting that consciousness
is *not* the unified field?
Yahoo! Groups
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Vaj wrote:
I wonder if your observation syncs with his
publication of Is Consciousness the Unified Field?
Seems to me that lecture came out some years later.
So, is it the sense of the meeting that
On Jan 23, 2006, at 4:20 PM, Patrick Gillam wrote:Vaj wrote: I wonder if your observation syncs with his publication of "Is Consciousness the Unified Field?" Seems to me that lecture came out some years later. So, is it the sense of the meeting that consciousness is *not* the unified
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 23, 2006, at 4:20 PM, Patrick Gillam wrote:
Vaj wrote:
I wonder if your observation syncs with his
publication of Is Consciousness the Unified Field?
Seems to me that lecture came out some years later.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Vaj wrote:
I wonder if your observation syncs with his
publication of Is Consciousness the Unified Field?
Seems to me
On Jan 23, 2006, at 5:35 PM, Patrick Gillam wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 23, 2006, at 4:20 PM, Patrick Gillam wrote: Vaj wrote: I wonder if your observation syncs with his publication of "Is Consciousness the Unified Field?" Seems to me
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Vaj wrote:
I wonder if your observation syncs
On Jan 23, 2006, at 1:52 PM, markmeredith2002 wrote:Maybe his reputation within the theoretical physicists community has been damaged, but is that such a big deal. Hagelin gets paid well, gets lots of attention, esp female, within the movt and now new age circles, gets into flaky films, had TBs
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Being a TMO celebrity would probably be more fun than being a
physicist...esp. with the groupies--young yoginis.
I wonder how much he gets paid?
Three gopis per day. :-)
Yahoo! Groups
A common story told to us on TM-courses - was about the meditator
that wished for an apple and suddenly the apple was in his hand. I
have never experienced such a thing, but I think from my mind it is
possible from the consciousness to create material things. Deepak
Chopra has explained it in
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ingegerd
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A common story told to us on TM-courses - was about the meditator
that wished for an apple and suddenly the apple was in his hand. I
have never experienced such a thing, but I think from my mind it
is possible from
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hoogeh snippeh
#2: Quantum vacuum potentials are not unmanifest Spirit.
OM AkAshastalliN^gAt.h OM
- BS I 22 :D
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--
Join modern day disciples
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hoogeh snippeh
#2: Quantum vacuum potentials are not unmanifest Spirit.
OM AkAshastalliN^gAt.h OM
Addenda corrigenda:
- BS I 1 22
On Jan 22, 2006, at 5:43 AM, cardemaister wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hoogeh snippeh #2: Quantum vacuum potentials are not unmanifest Spirit. OM AkAshastalliN^gAt.h OM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
File Under: TMO lies and marketing ploys;
I'm not sure the TMO has ever made the claims Wilber
debunks, actually.
Boomeritis Hinduism; Pseudo-
advaita
Answers from biologist and physicist Ken Wilber.
--- uns_tressor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
File Under: TMO lies and marketing ploys;
Boomeritis Hinduism; Pseudo- advaita
Ken goes on to suggest that what might be
influencing
quantum realities is not Suchness
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hoogeh snippeh
#2: Quantum vacuum potentials are not
I agree with Judy. The TMO is usually not that
excessive in its use of quantum physics metapohors,
but there are individuals with rather concrete
thinking that hvave blurred the metaphor/ experience
distinction.
--- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj
He only cites Chopra in the talk--which IMO means, by extension, the TMO.On Jan 22, 2006, at 9:35 AM, authfriend wrote:I'm not sure the TMO has ever made the claims Wilber debunks, actually.
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
On Jan 22, 2006, at 9:34 AM, Peter wrote:What do you mean by "works?" The goal of TM is self realization or is it relaxation? Seems like there has always been this public/private split in the teaching. TM is a great relaxation technique but of limited use for self-realization at least in the
On Jan 22, 2006, at 9:51 AM, Peter wrote:I agree with Judy. The TMO is usually not that excessive in its use of quantum physics metapohors, but there are individuals with rather concrete thinking that hvave blurred the metaphor/ experience distinction. Fromm a movement web site. There are entire
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
He only cites Chopra in the talk--which IMO means, by extension, the
TMO.
Does it? Chopra left the TMO quite a few years ago. What
works of Chopra does he cite, and when were they published?
On Jan 22, 2006, at 9:35
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 22, 2006, at 9:51 AM, Peter wrote:
I agree with Judy. The TMO is usually not that
excessive in its use of quantum physics metapohors,
but there are individuals with rather concrete
thinking that hvave blurred
On Jan 22, 2006, at 10:42 AM, authfriend wrote:Where do they make the claims that Wilber debunks? The claims listed in your previous post were: --Physics proves God; the Tao finds proof in quantum realities. --Your consciousness creates electrons. --Quantum vacuum potentials are unmanifest
I have experienced many odd coincidences, that could be also explained
as just coincidences. I however think I have too many of them and many
of those really don't feel like a coincidences, even if some I see as
such.
For a few years ago I was participating a vedic recitation weekend
course by
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 22, 2006, at 10:42 AM, authfriend wrote:
Where do they make the claims that Wilber debunks?
The claims listed in your previous post were:
--Physics proves God; the Tao finds proof in quantum
realities.
I have had the same experience many times - and without thinking
what it is, I have used it as a technique for many years. If I
really want something seriously, a job, need for money, whatever, I
wish and forget - and the wishes is fullfilled in some way or
another. I do not know the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about the technology of the Unified Field that TM and the
TMSP
is supposed to represent?
I tried and I tried.
I huffed and I
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
File Under: TMO lies and marketing ploys; Boomeritis Hinduism;
Pseudo-
advaita
Answers from biologist and physicist Ken Wilber.
http://www.tinyurl.com/cmay6
The first question has to do directly with the relation of
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
File Under: TMO lies and marketing ploys; Boomeritis Hinduism;
Pseudo-advaita
Answers from biologist and physicist Ken Wilber.
On Jan 22, 2006, at 12:37 PM, authfriend wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: File Under: TMO lies and marketing ploys; Boomeritis Hinduism; Pseudo-advaita Answers from
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 22, 2006, at 12:37 PM, authfriend wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
File Under: TMO
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you familiar with the movement's search for the elusive
substance M and what M. said about it?
Is that the substance that was said to be found
in the bloodstream of TMers and suggested to be Soma?
If so,
On Jan 22, 2006, at 2:36 PM, authfriend wrote:Are you familiar with the movement's search for the elusive "substance M" and what M. said about it? Is that the substance that was said to be found in the bloodstream of TMers and suggested to be Soma? If so, they were very excited about it at
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ingegerd
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have had the same experience many times - and without thinking
what it is, I have used it as a technique for many years. If I
really want something seriously, a job, need for money, whatever, I
wish and forget - and
It is nice when these things happens - in a very natural way. I saw
a perfect yantra in the gap between waking and dreaming state, with
all the deities. I have been looking for it since in all places that
sells yantras, but I have not found it yet.
Ingegerd
--- In
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 22, 2006, at 2:36 PM, authfriend wrote:
Are you familiar with the movement's search for the elusive
substance M and what M. said about it?
Is that the substance that was said to be found
in the bloodstream of
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 22, 2006, at 2:36 PM, authfriend wrote:
I'm still interested to learn the dates of the works
of Chopra that contained the premises you say Wilber
was debunking (and therefore that those premises were
automatically
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you familiar with the movement's search for the elusive
substance M and what M. said about it?
Is that the substance that
On Jan 22, 2006, at 4:46 PM, authfriend wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 22, 2006, at 2:36 PM, authfriend wrote: Are you familiar with the movement's search for the elusive "substance M" and what M. said about it? Is that the substance that was
On Jan 22, 2006, at 5:20 PM, authfriend wrote:OK, I've listened to it, and I think you need to listen to it again. The fallacy Wilber is talking about doesn't have anything to do with TM's claims. Perhaps you also need to review what TM claims, for that matter. No that's all right, it's pretty
Are you familiar with the movement's search for the elusive
substance M and what M. said about it?
Is that the substance that was said to be found
in the bloodstream of TMers and suggested to be Soma?
If so, they were very excited about it at one point,
but nothing ever
I always thought that the connection that the TMO made to quantum
physics was always just a cute little analogy and nothing more.
Never took it seriously and I always hoped no one else would either.
Beyond being an analogy and using the platform of quantum mechanics
to serve as an
What about the "technology of the Unified Field" that TM and the TMSP is supposed to represent? Are you saying all of that was just a razzle dazzle marketing spiel? Symbolic? Jungian archetypes of our collective unconsciousness? (LOL)Are you really telling me that TM and the TMSP is NOT a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about the technology of the Unified Field that TM and the
TMSP
is supposed to represent?
I tried and I tried.
I huffed and I puffed.
But I couldn't ever, never grasp what the f the TMO meant by the
technology of
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
I always thought that the connection that the TMO made to quantum
physics was always just a cute little analogy and nothing more.
Never took it seriously and I always hoped no one else would
either.
83 matches
Mail list logo
