|
One definition of reality could be this:
Matter and energy distributed in various combinations across a finite
space. Within these confines we have the natural. Anything outside
of this is unnatural, or supernatural.
Reality only feels real because we have five
senses, composed of sensors which are also made of matter and energy, that feed
our conscious mind (whatever that is), and allows us to be aware of the
reality.
Science investigates specific aspects and details
of this interaction of matter and energy to give us better understanding of our
surroundings. With this understanding we are then better able to
manipiulate our surroundings to make our existence more enjoyable and perhaps
more meaningful. Technology is then a measure of our ability to manipulate
our surroundings.
A.C. Clarke once said that "technology,
sufficiently advanced, will always be mistaken for magic." If this is
true, then even the most amazing observations we make in our reality should have
a foundation based on scientific principles that can ultimately be
understood. But, is there real magic that goes beyond the confines of our
"matter and energy" reality?
Consider the term: magic trick
It is an oxymoron. A trick is not magic, and
magic is no trick. A trick is the manipulation of matter and energy, in an
artful manner, so as to fool the senses of observers, and convince them that the
event falls outside the boundaries of reality. This is routinely done by
skilled practitioners with some very basic technology.
Real magic, if it exists, by definition eminates
from beyond our "matter and energy" reality. Real magic could include
anything from miracles down to evil spells. Are these things beyond
science, or is the problem merely that present scientific tools are just
too primitive to deal with these incidents? Do we ignore these intrusions
on our comfortable reality because we are not up to the task of investigating
them, or do we face it head on? Do we say that we are going to do our
science in our comfortable little corner of reality, and turn our backs on the
big picture? Do we say, "This is too tough for me to face. I'm not
going to deal with it."?
I have seen responses of fear and denial on this
forum. Should our discussions be controlled by either of those? We
are all considered lunatics anyway for contemplating the existence of hydrinos,
among other things. Let us keep open minds on anything that can affect the
path of alternate energy development, even if it seems off topic to
some. Perhaps we could have a set of spam codes more
specific than "off topic" to protect the fearful, the scoffers, and the
thoroughly annoyed.
Jeff
P.S. I have responded to many religious
threads on this forum, but avoided starting any. This is the brightest
group of people I have ever corresponded with. The diversity of beliefs
and opinions voiced here is absolutely astounding. I am having a really
good time with some of these discussions.
|
