It is fortuitous you should post that, I was just writing a tome on a similar subject, excerpts here:
The Principle of metaphysical ambiguity I've been trying to formulate a metaphysical principle concisely for some time that I call the "Principle of Metaphysical Ambiguity". Someone else that I heard speak had another name for it which was better, but I can't remember what it was or who said it :-( . Based on that principle I think Steorn should not do a public demo , nor seek press coverage (but should do a demo to supporters), rather they should quietly secure their intellectual property rights and assist in getting a few products out that will minimally disturb the status quo. As satisfying it may be to say "I told you so", That'll just irritate people and I hope to elucidate the reasons below. In my opinion, Steorn should pursue a strategy of having a few products developed such as AA batteries, cell phone batteries, home generators etc. without making any extraordinary claims about them (even include the fuel tank in the generator :-) ). Maybe have Walmart and Harrod's carry the lines without much fanfare. Gradually users will come to realize that these products work better than they expected. I think demonstrations of LENR also are subject to this principle There's a related effect also, called the "Experimenter Effect" ( and there have been several experiments to verify it (isn't that ironic -- using the scientific method to invalidate the scientific method :-)? ) -- See Marilyn Schlitz) -- experiments turn out according to the expectations of the experimenter, even if they are performed exactly the same in the same physical location . The reasoning and analogy: For the moment, imagine us in physical reality as a game with certain rules that we all play by. We'll call it "Earth 3D 21st century space-time". There are lots of other games on the shelf, but this one is the most fun and really quite popular, plus each player can hack his own instance of it at will. Normally the rules of the game don't change much, and when they do, it is by agreement of all the players (each player has root privileges). Occasionally there is a disturbance. A few players want to change the rules in the middle of the game without the agreement of the remainder. A little cell breaks off from the game that mass consciousness is playing. As long as the two groups don't interact there's no problem -- two groups playing slightly different games. Occasionally, the two groups with different rules (and views of physical reality) intersect. The universe is remarkably clever at resolving such situations by the path of least resistance. You can see many examples of this happening if you look around with this principle in mind. There are also experiments that show the principle in action. Circumstances and events will occur that can be interpreted as supporting both sides. One example is James Randi vs. remote viewing ( or James Randi vs. lots of things ). There are hundreds of experiments proving remote viewing works, but when trying to prove it to Randi, there's always some circumstance that precludes it or the results are ambiguous, so Randi can stay happy, and so can the RV group. If someone is determined to force a conflict (interaction between disparate groups), the universe is infinitely clever at resolving the clash, even going so far as to use retro-causality, and as a last resort, forking off an entirely new reality ( I liked the TV series Sliders, which dramatized that sort of thing ). (see some papers by Dean Radin, for example, but that's a whole 'nother discussion ). (There are other groups playing games with very substantial differences from ours such that we could hardly fathom them, but it is quite rare for there to be interactions in that case, although there is occasionally some intersection, as when we see a UFO, or an East Indian swami levitating, for example.) In Steorn's case, bearing failure appears to be a resolution. Some of us are confident and continuing on with the experiments whereas the folks playing the petroleum game may continue to do so quite happily and unimpeded. It doesn't take any conspiracy or men-in-black to cause these kinds of things to occur although they may be employed if that is the path of least resistance. Have you ever noticed how people react when certain subjects are brought up such as over unity, cold fusion, conspiracy theories, remote viewing, UFO's, crop circles ...? Notice it's not just disinterest or disbelief that's projected, rather it is active, sometimes hostile, or strong avoidance of the subject as if they're saying "This is the game I'm playing, please don't try to change my game -- it's rude". "Their eyes glaze over" is a phrase used often. It *IS* rude and actually not appropriate to try to convince other people of something they aren't asking for and don't want. In conclusion, I think if Steorn holds another public demonstration, the results must be ambiguous. Knowing this, and deciding to go ahead, at least they could decide how it's to be ambiguous rather than letting the universe work it out for them. P.S I think SVJ you are right, every person has his own instance of a virtual reality game, modified by himself to suit (there are experiments to show that too). Hoyt Stearns Scottsdale, Arizona -----Original Message----- From: OrionWorks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 13, 2007 11:58 AM To: vortex-l Subject: [Vo]:The Twilight Experience Oh, what the hell, it's Friday. Lemme see if I can outdo Mr. Beene this time around. There is no specific definition for "Twilight Experiences" as described in the holy grail of all on-line depositories, Wikipedia. However, Wiki's near-hits hint of tantalizing concepts. I suspect Rod Serling would have been amused. The phrase, "Twilight Experiences", make me personally ponder how malleable is the universe we live in. For example, I would argue: aren't we all generating the phenomenon called mind-over-matter without realizing it? Aren't we all guilty of moving our bodies about, walking, talking, eating, sleeping, without a clue as to how the I-ness we believe is ourselves executes the command? WHO actually is it and where does it reside that is issuing all these commands to move the body? I often feel as if I had signed the lease on rental property where the warranty expired approximately fifteen years ago. The lease didn't come with an instruction or maintenance manual either. My only defense is to change the oil and oil filter religiously every 3000 miles. Mileage varies from individual to individual. If this concept seems too obtuse for most let me wander into a more controversial area: Maybe there is more than one version of the universe in which we are constantly negotiating our rental properties through. How many? Maybe there are as many versions of the universe as there are people on the planet - EXACTLY as many. All of god's critters are probably contributing their versions as well, but I will restrict this discussion strictly to the human versions. A more mundane interpretation of this concept revolves around how "collective reality" manifests - specifically what are the rules that govern the malleability of collective realities. I have occasionally entertained the fantasy, one that I actually outlined in a storyline years ago, that certain fundamental laws of physics may not be as hard-coded or constant as most of us assume. Of course the consequences of such a possibility suggest a far more chaotic universe. However, when you really get down to it the theory pretty much describes major aspects of Quantum Mechanics. Maybe that malleability occurs just as much on the macro scale as it does on the quantum scale. We just don't realize it because the physics of malleability is built into our biological system in such an ingenious way that it goes mostly unnoticed...mostly. Wasn't I just holding onto a pen with red ink? But the ink is blue. My mind is playing tricks on me! Another brain fart. And where was the "I"nes of me when this trick of the mind occurred? It makes me wonder if in the current STEORN situation we are witnessing two struggling collective realities where one is appreciably more dominant than the other. Nevertheless, the events have not yet fully collapsed into a single wave. For those who might be curious there is a delightful book that explores aspects of this concept by the award winning author, David Brin, titled "The Practice Effect." Happy practicing! As for me, it often feels as if all I can do personally is to clap my hands and hope...and believe that maybe, just maybe Tinkerbelle will fly again. With apologies to Mr. Beene. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com
