I appreciate your perspective, Jonathan. It is always great to read your pieces.
I think it's a good idea (this is to some commenters, in particular) to be cautious about calling out a scientist simply because you don't understand what they're suggesting. Thinking outside the box is what science is about. We'd still be using leeches if nobody questioned what was thought to be "the truth."
Here's one of about 4 million examples:
Ludwig Boltzmann developed equations and formulas which explain the properties of atoms and how they determine the physical nature of matter. Now it transpires that proposing a theory that disproves other laws of physics (and scientists) thought to be correct at the time does not make you particularly popular or appreciated. After years of fighting for atom theory to be accepted, Boltzmann committed suicide. This was only 3 years before Ernest Rutherford discovered the nucleus of an atom, proving Boltzmann’s theory.
I grew up with scientists as parents - Charles Tanford and Jacqueline Reynolds. They were biochemists/physiologists. I can't tell you how many times I found myself in absolutist-view conversations with them.
As for Deepak and other's theories, time will tell. It always does.
Disclaimer: I have spent the past two years studying in person and via Zoom with Deepak Chopra and a few other quantum/meta scientists. I've spent 30+ years reading and learning about metaphysics and quantum theories. I've also personally experienced no time or space - not being constrained by my physical body (not via mescaline or anything substance-induced). It was pretty awesome. I believe we'll be able to explain this in our lifetime. We're all just various frequencies; even physics scholars agree on that. In fact, some suggest we are, each of us, "God."
Boltzmann had equations. Scientists use extremely precise language, even when speculating. Maybe especially when speculating. We want to know as precisely as possible what you mean. When Deepak says *the* quantum field, I don’t know even vaguely what he means. Next time you talk to him, would you ask him what he means? If he knows precisely what he means, he’ll have an equation. I’d honestly love to see that.
You can develop a chemical and mathematical model of how a baby smells, but there’s no equation for how it makes you feel. There are things for which there will never be equations, and thank God for that.
Mmm. I suppose that on one level, hormones are chemistry and chemistry is physics. But even if we did find an equation for emotional response, or awe, or transcendence as we understand those things now, it seems to me that there will always be more. There will always be deeper, and higher, and greater, and finer, because the Universe or God or Love or whatever you want to call it is infinitely fractal. Or that's the mood I'm in now, anyway.
I used to be like that a bit, until I started reading up on science like physics & brain chemistry. I consider myself a pantheist, but I am fascinated with the structure of the universe ^_^
This is another excellent article from Jonathan Byrd. I agee with him that words count, and should be used honestly, which Chopra certainly does not do. One further thought: quantim mechanics and quantum theory apply at the atomic and subatomic level.....our atoms obey those laws which are not exactly Newtonian....but at the level that we and Deepak Chopra are talking about, Newtonian mechnics are correct. BS such as that Chopra is using is also used to undermine trust in subjects the facts tell us we should trust, such as vaccines and most medical diagnoses when made by a competent professional. Indeed, "take your medicine as you doctor tells you to." The absurdities and dishonesty of our American system of payment for health care are there, but they are different than the empirical facts that a good doctor works with. Thanks, Jonathan
Thanks for this much needed, grounded and rational discussion of this subject. You remind me how very much i miss Carl Sagan's wisdom and intellect, and how we all need to help fill that void today. Thank you so much.
Ref: "The Demon-Haunted World" by Ann Druyan and Carl Sagan
Never thought I would hear Jonathan Byrd say "buckwheat enema". I think you should put the songwriter hat on and come up a song about that.
I’m my own worst enema.
I appreciate your perspective, Jonathan. It is always great to read your pieces.
I think it's a good idea (this is to some commenters, in particular) to be cautious about calling out a scientist simply because you don't understand what they're suggesting. Thinking outside the box is what science is about. We'd still be using leeches if nobody questioned what was thought to be "the truth."
Here's one of about 4 million examples:
Ludwig Boltzmann developed equations and formulas which explain the properties of atoms and how they determine the physical nature of matter. Now it transpires that proposing a theory that disproves other laws of physics (and scientists) thought to be correct at the time does not make you particularly popular or appreciated. After years of fighting for atom theory to be accepted, Boltzmann committed suicide. This was only 3 years before Ernest Rutherford discovered the nucleus of an atom, proving Boltzmann’s theory.
I grew up with scientists as parents - Charles Tanford and Jacqueline Reynolds. They were biochemists/physiologists. I can't tell you how many times I found myself in absolutist-view conversations with them.
As for Deepak and other's theories, time will tell. It always does.
Disclaimer: I have spent the past two years studying in person and via Zoom with Deepak Chopra and a few other quantum/meta scientists. I've spent 30+ years reading and learning about metaphysics and quantum theories. I've also personally experienced no time or space - not being constrained by my physical body (not via mescaline or anything substance-induced). It was pretty awesome. I believe we'll be able to explain this in our lifetime. We're all just various frequencies; even physics scholars agree on that. In fact, some suggest we are, each of us, "God."
But of course we still use leeches for some good purposes. https://www.uhhospitals.org/blog/articles/2020/03/how-leeches-can-save-lives-and-limbs-for-some-patients
And loony purposes. https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/321336
Boltzmann had equations. Scientists use extremely precise language, even when speculating. Maybe especially when speculating. We want to know as precisely as possible what you mean. When Deepak says *the* quantum field, I don’t know even vaguely what he means. Next time you talk to him, would you ask him what he means? If he knows precisely what he means, he’ll have an equation. I’d honestly love to see that.
And to be precise, I believe that spiritual and mystical experiences are real. They’re not scientific.
I like to think they are not scientific yet. There's something going on that we haven't got an equation for yet, but we might some day.
You can develop a chemical and mathematical model of how a baby smells, but there’s no equation for how it makes you feel. There are things for which there will never be equations, and thank God for that.
Mmm. I suppose that on one level, hormones are chemistry and chemistry is physics. But even if we did find an equation for emotional response, or awe, or transcendence as we understand those things now, it seems to me that there will always be more. There will always be deeper, and higher, and greater, and finer, because the Universe or God or Love or whatever you want to call it is infinitely fractal. Or that's the mood I'm in now, anyway.
Fair enough and will do!
I used to be like that a bit, until I started reading up on science like physics & brain chemistry. I consider myself a pantheist, but I am fascinated with the structure of the universe ^_^
This is another excellent article from Jonathan Byrd. I agee with him that words count, and should be used honestly, which Chopra certainly does not do. One further thought: quantim mechanics and quantum theory apply at the atomic and subatomic level.....our atoms obey those laws which are not exactly Newtonian....but at the level that we and Deepak Chopra are talking about, Newtonian mechnics are correct. BS such as that Chopra is using is also used to undermine trust in subjects the facts tell us we should trust, such as vaccines and most medical diagnoses when made by a competent professional. Indeed, "take your medicine as you doctor tells you to." The absurdities and dishonesty of our American system of payment for health care are there, but they are different than the empirical facts that a good doctor works with. Thanks, Jonathan
Good points, James. Thanks for reading.
Thanks for this much needed, grounded and rational discussion of this subject. You remind me how very much i miss Carl Sagan's wisdom and intellect, and how we all need to help fill that void today. Thank you so much.
Ref: "The Demon-Haunted World" by Ann Druyan and Carl Sagan
I love that book. Thank you, Kevin.