 |
 |
Hello Joy, > hi chris, all > > I see, I see > > I'm coming in from the "hard right" here. I had no idea that the song was catching on. No wonder I was bemused. > > You are talking about the quantum wave. > > so chris, have you the answer to Schroedinger's paradox? You really expect me to answer that question ? You tell me your answer first, maybe I'll tell you mine ;-) Collapse of quantum wave supports my argument, I believe, but what I actually had in mind was the implications of Frieden's discoveries as described in New Scientist http://www.newscientist.com/ns/19990130/iisthelaw.html As I understand it, the scientific project over the last couple of centuries, has circulated around a notion of 'objectivity'. I think that the philosophical foundations for that approach have always been somewhat dubious. >From what I gather from QM, the subjective experimenter is intimately involved in the experiment and in the result. Hence, the notion of an objective, unattached observer seems to be nonsensical. IMO it is equally nonsensical throughout science. Experiments are done by people. To leave that fact out of the equation, seems to me to be, erm, frankly unscientific. I believe we have to have a bit of a rethink, and recognise that all science is contained within consciousness. Chris. http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~chrislees/tao.index.html %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%