St Clair County, Alabama Warrants, Articles W

What the Bleep Do We Know!? To date, Dr Emoto has not taken up the challenge. That movie started its life as a small documentary about Spirit and Science, but grew in scope (and budget) and became What the BLEEP Do We Know!? It was an interesting idea aiming to solve the hierachy problem, as announced. A disproportionate amount of time was given in voice and film to Ramtha, Dr. Joe dispenza, and Miceal Ledwith. Krauss discussed his criteria ln our interview last week. There are also controlled, double-blind prayer studies out there much more interesting than the D.C. crime study cited in the film, though not necessarily more convincing. ), is hooked on prescription pills, and mopes about while her chirpy roommate spatters paint around their apartment. The quantum mechanical correlations, the spooky action at a distance that quantum mechanics brings up, is true only for very specially prepared systems that are isolated from the rest of the world, completely. If we don't understand classical consciousness, how can we understand quantum consciousness? The film was also discussed in a letter published in Physics Today that challenges how physics is taught, saying teaching fails to "expose the mysteries physics has encountered [and] reveal the limits of our understanding". It was clearly time to check the facts for myself. [12], Richard Dawkins stated that "the authors seem undecided whether their theme is quantum theory or consciousness. If you have questions about your account, please With researchers and theoretical scientists leading the way, it takes the reader through the looking glass of quantum physics into a universe that is more bizarre and alive than ever imagined. Andrew B Newberg, (MD, Radiologist), in What the Bleep Do We Know? They don't go anywhere, Fred. What the Bleep Do We Know draws heavily on the role of the observer in quantum physics. This will be revisited if anyone else tries to circumvent a channel ban in future.PLEASE READ CAREFULLY:I'm citing \"Fair Use\" under US Copyright Act, Title 17 512 (g)(f), specifically those clauses covering Comment and Criticism, as well as the DMCA.http://www.aclunc.org/issues/technology/blog/asset_upload_file939_6218.pdfAlso \"Fair Dealing\" under UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 c.48, Part 1(Copyright) Section 79.4ahttp://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/ukpga_19880048_en_4Censorship is NOT a valid argument.This is the first part of my critical analysis of \"What The Bleep Do We Know?! "Quantum physics calculates only possibilities Who/what chooses among these possibilities to bring the actual event of experience? For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser. This message will appear once per week 7. Certainly, our attitudes and brain chemistry affect how we see the world and get through life. And it certainly doesn't depend on an observer to make this happen. But she is right about us not seeing things in front of our eyes if we're not looking for them. Science Monitor has expired. Filmed in Portland, Oregon, What the Bleep Do We Know!? Where were we now? Q. That's not the case. But sounding like magic and being magic are two different things. Particles Popping Into & Out of Existence. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/faith (accessed: April 20, 2009)A note about Fred Wolf's qualifications: He has a Ph.D in Theoretical Physics from UCLA in 1963, although he has not worked in laboratory endeavours since that time. Do We (K)now!? There was some sort of plot involving a woman photographer (played by Marlee Matlin), who wanders around and has anxiety attacks. At the end of this article, Dr Simons invites readers to explore the limitations of their own brains. Within several weeks, the film had appeared in a dozen or more theaters (mostly in the western United States), and within six months it had made its way into 200 theaters across the US. Around 650 million people watched the moment on television. Staff meetings are tedious enough give me a conscious mind with a decent filter device any day. The observer effect of quantum physics isn't about people or reality. Then comes "Carl Sagan Meets Madame Blavatsky." HCI president Peter Vegso stated that in regard to this book, "What the Bleep is the quantum leap in the New Age world," and "by marrying science and spirituality, it is the foundation of future thought."[5]. The Effect of Meditation on Violent Crime in Washington, DC. Magician and skeptic James Randi, famous for debunking performers like Uri Geller, has offered his standard prize of $1 million cash money to Dr Emoto if he can get the same results when doing the water study this way. Skeptic James Randi described the film as "a fantasy docudrama" and "[a] rampant example of abuse by charlatans and cults". And there's the matter of scale the brain lights up in scans much more brightly when you're seeing something than when you're reminiscing. Even followers of spiritual traditions that believe in worldly illusion will have problems with "Bleep." Viewers instead are fed a nauseating stream of nonsense that traces back to the teaching of a woman who claims to channel a 35,000-year-old deity. "[10], What the Bleep Do We Know!? Once anything goes, you can have anything you want. (2005)", "Cult Science Dressing Up Mysticism as Quantum Physics", "The New Age Spiritualist and the Old School Scholars", https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=What_the_Bleep_Do_We_Know!%3F&oldid=1139210194, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 3.0, That the universe is best seen as constructed from thoughts and ideas rather than from. This has led to accusations, both formal and informal, directed towards the film's proponents, of spamming online message boards and forums with many thinly veiled promotional posts. We believe news can and should expand a sense of identity and possibility beyond narrow conventional expectations. The sub-atomic particles that make up the atoms that make up the rock are there too." He says he is "profoundly unsympathetic to attempts at linking quantum mechanics with consciousness".[1]. ", "What the Bleep Do We Know!? DO WE KNOW? Hagelin was a grad student at Harvard when I was an undergrad and I met him when we were in the same quantum field theory class. To date, there has been no response as to where the information which lead to the story about the indians not being able to see the ships of Columbus originated from. That's one of the very strange properties of quantum mechanics. Everyone knows quantum mechanics is weird, so why not use that to justify it? The plot follows the fictional story of a photographer, using documentary-style interviews and computer-animated graphics, as she encounters emotional and existential obstacles in her life and begins to consider the idea that individual and group consciousness can influence the material world. Im not personally familiar with any of Hagelins work but Im sure theres some good physics in there. And wait-the human body is mostly water! We're always being told we don't use our brain to its full capacity. If it's true, no one's been able to measure it or see the effects. 2. Do We Know!? The reason you should be suspicious is because we don't even understand classical consciousness. We'd like to be able to influence things just by thinking about them, we'd like to transport ourselves elsewhere without getting on an airplane. But that still doesn't mean that, at a global level, the weirdness of quantum mechanics is manifest. Everyone said that you have to see this movie! So I did. With Marlee Matlin, Elaine Hendrix, Barry Newman, Armin Shimerman. Columbus certainly didn't speak the language, and the locals didn't keep written records. It presents itself as the thinking rebel's alternative to Hollywood pabulum: a heady stew of drama and documentary, starring Oscar-winning actress Marlee Matlin as a Xanax-addled photographer who. Your session to The Christian Invariably only about half the people tested ever notice a woman in a gorilla suit walking across the middle of the screen during the game. The host of the show said this was done because it was negative You can't bring good things to you by thinking about them. But Hagelin's use of the term "achieved" for the drop in crime is a bit strong. There are also phrases plagiarized entire from "The Matrix," a far superior film treatment of the notion that reality isn't what it seems. was heavily criticised for being "a documentary aimed at the totally gullible". With Alejandro Jodorowsky, Horacio Salinas, Zamira Saunders, Juan Ferrara. The sub-atomic particles that make up the atoms that make up the rock are there too. Prominent if you go by citations that is. ", "The movie is saying that somehow we can all get together and, with our collective thought processes, we can influence the outcome" of physical events - be they life experiences or scientific experiments, notes Bruce Schumm, a particle physicist at the University of California at Santa Cruz. document.getElementById( "ak_js_1" ).setAttribute( "value", ( new Date() ).getTime() ); document.getElementById( "ak_js_2" ).setAttribute( "value", ( new Date() ).getTime() ); WatchDocumentaries.com | Games | Quizzes | Contact |Privacy & Terms | Manage Cookies |Advertise | DMCA, Aleister Crowley: The Wickedest Man in the World. Initially, the film was released in only two theaters: one in Yelm, Washington (the home of the producers, which is also the home of Ramtha), and the other the Bagdad Theater in Portland, Oregon, where it was filmed. 1. We're also connected to the universe by gravity, and we're connected to the planets by gravity. Joe Dispenza That would be, very hard to quantify:). A moment in which 'the mathematical formalisms of quantum mechanics [] are stripped of all empirical content and reduced to a set of syrupy nostrums'. But when animated, jive-talkin' human cells start dancing around in what appears to be the heroine's frontal lobe, all questions of spirituality pale before the sheer dreadfulness of this movie. The film's central point--that reality is a construct of our own brains--seems rife with intriguing cinematic possibilities. Is this a hoax to promote positivity? Professor Clive Greated wrote that "thinking on neurology and addiction are covered in some detail but, unfortunately, early references in the film to quantum physics are not followed through, leading to a confused message". The point is, with quantum mechanics, everything doesn't go. "[5] The same article quotes Bill Pfau, Advertising Manager of Inner Traditions, as saying "More and more ideas from the New Age community have become accepted into the mainstream. 8. Mark was born in Johannesburg, South Africa . 5.Miceal Ledwith a clergyman with a rather dubious past (see http://unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=36&si=770458&issue_id=7565) is the one chosen by the film makers to be the theological spokesman. . subscription. Some lost their entire life savings. "The theory can't predict with precision what will happen, but it knows everything that can happen and it will tell you the probability of all these things happening.". The whole thing is really moronic beyond belief. And we are certainly not isolated from the rest of the world. (Source: iStockphoto). to someone you know: Short Range Tests of Newtons Inverse-Square Law. He even called in to a radio program the director was on to discuss this and was cut off. It took a while, but the comparison finally came through on the association of strings, as a quantum mechanical perspective, and the relationship to that movie. Its true that Hagelin stopped doing physics in the mid-nineties to concentrate on his other nonsense, but I can vouch for the fact that as early as 1978-9 he was heavily involved in TM and thought it had a lot to do with QFT. It'd be like being the CEO of a massive company and having to listen to what every single employee was doing every minute of every day. It comes from the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, and it's about the limitations of trying to measure the position and momentum of subatomic particles this only applies to sub-atomic particlesa rock doesn't need you to bump into it to exist. Krauss worries that a lot of people can be fooled by appeals to the admittedly weird world of quantum physics a world in which particles are said to take every possible path from point A to point B, in which the position and velocity of particles are necessarily cloaked in uncertainty, in which the mere act of observation changes the thing being observed. Well, people are able to undergo various transformations. And most thoughtful members of the "spiritual but not religious" camp would take issue if you chopped off their big toes and then responded to their complaints with a lofty "it's all in your mind." Blech. As the Amanda plot zooms here and there, a host of dubious evidence is marshaled to convince us that life is all about mind over matter. When they use the word 'observe', they actually mean 'interact with', not look at or think about.). Many people are dubious that Penrose's suggestions are reasonable, because the brain is not an isolated quantum-mechanical system. Perhaps that is why they couldnt see them. Some credible researchers appear, including neurologist Andrew Newberg and physicist David Albert (Albert has since disassociated himself from the film, saying his views were misrepresented). The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle argues that its impossible to track the momentum and position of a subatomic particle. Whether you're religious, spiritual, or none of the above, you can say one thing for this movie: it's an equal-opportunity offender. Everything from the possibility of disappearing and reappearing, to the possibility of having strange new forms of communication. With Marlee Matlin, Elaine Hendrix, John Ross Bowie, Robert Bailey Jr.. A fictional photographer's quest to spiritually rediscover herself is interspersed with documentary footage of scientists and theologians discussing the philosophical aspects of quantum physics. We don't know which way it's going to go. 3. So what better thing to have than something that gives you everything you want? As he told ABC's "This Week" the day after the debate: "When it . John Hagelin, PhD, describes a study he did in Washington in 1992. Pingback: yeago works Blog Archive Jesus, Buddha, Ken Wilber?? There's also much to be said for the idea that divine is not so much a separate entity but is found in the interconnectedness of the universe, something both traditional religious believers and "spiritual but not" people often agree on, though semantics can get in the way. [12][13] Lisa Randall refers to the film as "the bane of scientists". It is my task to convince you not to turn away because you don't understand it. On this Wikipedia the language links are at the top of the page across from the article title. Yet, the battle still ranges, and we now know where we can class the distinctions of LQG and String theorists? It's certainly not. asks nothing but . Now I don't have an automatic prejudice against 35,000-year-old warriors from Atlantis or the women who channel them. In addition to the films three directors, there were actors and others involved in the production who are long time students of Ramthas School of enlightenment. But we're certainly using them at the Large Hadron Collider, which we couldn't even operate if we didn't have superconducting magnets. I am glad that someone else thought that that movie was a bunch of garbage. But are there new, weird applications that people might see that have an impact on everyday life, beyond the woo-woo? But whenever one is dealing with highly speculative ideas that have no connection with experiment, theres a danger of becoming delusional and thinking that youre doing real science when youre not. Hambling says it is likely that both the Hughes account and the story told by Pert were exaggerations of the records left by Captain Cook and the botanist Joseph Banks. These photos may well be art they're sure as hell not science. A: Absolutely. The film "What the Bleep Do We Know?!" "I begin the book with a quote from Feynman that says, 'Reality takes precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled,'" he told me. Fred Alan Wolf, PhD in What the Bleep Do We Know? and published a study guide. List of films featuring the deaf and hard of hearing, "How the NXIVM Sex Cult Defended Trump from Media Attacks", "Cinefex article detailing the visual effects for the film", "New Age: What the Bleep? Occasionally recalling a physics lesson, an acid trip, and a lost afternoon at a New Age bookstore, What The BLEEP Do We Know?! [5] Foreign gross added another $5 million for a worldwide gross of nearly $16 million. If you want to affect something in the external world, you have to do something to it. Check my single page unpublishable http://dftuz.unizar.es/~rivero/research/simple.pdf. All those things can be attributed to quantum mechanics first of all, because it's so poorly understood by the public, and especially because it's so verifiably weird. Intercut with these metaphysical ponderings is a soapy fictional narrative starring Marlee Matlin as a broken-hearted photographer. Your subscription to But how are ordinary mortals to judge its assertions about the nature of matter, mind, and the universe? the film What The Bleep Do We Know It was an information that really left me speechless and I ordered his books at once techhose.d-webhost.orphans.co.uk 2 / 11. "[15], Bernie Hobbs, a science writer with ABC Science Online, explains why the film is incorrect about quantum physics and reality: "The observer effect of quantum physics isn't about people or reality. And quantum mechanics is often used as the explanation for that. What the Bleep Do We Know!? is god-awful. On the other hand, one finds 3+1, or more concretely inverse square law, to be mathematically peculiar when it refers to gravity, ie when mass is the source of the force. What the Bleep Do We Know was directed and produced by Betsy Chasse, Mark Vicente and William Arntz, all of whom were students of Ramthas School of Enlightenment. (It's all to do with photons of light from your measuring instrument hitting the poor electron and knocking it for six). last of a series of columns written for Scientific American, Why great minds can't grasp consciousness. But quantum mechanics, for better or worse, doesn't bring any more spiritual benefits than gravity does. https://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2005/06/30/2839498.htm? No, that wasnt intended specifically as an attack on supersymmetric models; the fact that Hagelin worked on them isnt an argument for or against them. Whether or not you buy into its "you are God in the making" philosophy, "What the Bleep Do We Know?" ?, never before seen DVD programming features, 20 minutes of new animation, new interviews, along with 5 hours of uncut interviews and a filmmakers Q&A, the Quantum Edition contains over 15 hours of material on 6 DVD sides. In reality, science is completely incidental to the film's conclusions. You can't just hope for the best. Tags: science-and-technology, neuroscience, physics. Everyone is still talking about the movie What the Bleep Do We Know!? I remember Hagelin wanting to discuss how quantum field theory could explain how TMers were able to levitate, something about how they did this by changing the position of the pole in the propagator. It's certainly not. They were spreading their methods of meditation but that was not the main thing that impressed me.