I don't know whether I want to add it to my list of recreational beliefs or
not--it seems there could be dire consequences if there is nothing to it and
people take it seriously. I would hate to contribute to a public health hazard.
(The truth or falsity of the Big Bang theory doesn't affect anybody's daily
life--except mine. It's merely a random obsession I have blundered into).
But the article below *is* fascinating. Nobel Prize winner Luc Montagnier, the
man who discovered the HIV virus, has published experiments that seem to support
the ideas of homeopathy.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dana-ullman/luc-montagnier-homeopathy-taken-seriously_b_814619.html
Moreover some of his work suggests that DNA leaves a "quantum imprint" in the
water in which it has been suspended.
I believe the author of the article is a practicing homeopathic healer, and
moreover appears in the Huffington Post. Huffington Post is a good source of
political opinion and an excellent source of fascinating gossip, but I fear they
are a tad lacking in discrimination with respect to some New Age and alternative
medicine views.
The article also brings in support from a couple of other Nobel Prize winners,
namely Jacques Benveniste and Brian Josephson. I believe James Randi's
"exposure" of Jacques Benveniste was a set-up. Josephson has a well-protected
academic position but he is also subjected to quite a bit of professional
ostracism.
Of course, Nobel Science laureates are not the last word in truth. William
Shockley, the transistor guy was a notorious racist--but he was speaking out of
his field. There is another Nobel science laureate, whose name I don't know,
who is a vehement climate change denier.
Turning to Paola Zizzi and her "Big Wow" theory. She is a theoretical physicist
who thinks that at some point during the "inflation" of the Universe, the
Universe became conscious and, if I understand her correctly (which I may not),
"decided" to stop inflating so fast. She bases this on some calculations
involving the number of certain particles that were in play as compared to the
number of certain fluctuations that are possible in the human brain. Or
something like that.
http://quantum.ibiocat.eu/eng/index.php?pagina=42
I like Zizzi's theory insofar as it seems compatible with Alfred North
Whitehead's "panpsychism" or "panexperientialism"--but she seems to assume the
truth of the Big Bang theory. (If I understand correctly, she arrived at her
position in pursuit of a theory of "quantum loop gravity." So there.
Lastly, recently I rather vehemently denied that all of the Marfa lights could
be explained as refractions of headlights on a distant highway. I didn't recall
why I was so sure so I checked--contrary to what Wikipedia says, astronomers
from MacDonald observatory some years ago did a study, with videos & controls
and everything and found that indeed, they cannot be explained completely as car
headlights.
In July 1989, scientists from McDonald Observatory on Mount Locke outside Fort
Davis, and from Sul Ross University, decided to conduct another investigation
into the lights. Included in the group were a professor of chemistry, Dr.
Avinash Rangra, and an astronomer, Dr. Edwin Barker. Doctor Rangra confirmed
that something of natural origin was occurring over Mitchell Flats outside
Marfa, but he did not know what. All he could say for certain was that it was
not man-made.
Also, the Wiki article, if I remember correctly stated that there had been no
sightings during world war II when there was an active air base nearby.
"Unsolved Mysteries" ran a segment a few days ago that contradicted the Wiki
article.
No comments:
Post a Comment