Ed Lantz

James: “I think there is a danger of personal prejudices, judgments and opinions being presented as if there is data to back them up…. It is fine to have all kinds of discussions, such as this one, but it should not be mistaken for a scientific discussion which it is not. I would recommend not using terms from science which have specific…[Read more]

Ursula writes: “Ed wrote: “I cannot build a living, reproducing being from scratch. There are missing ingredients.” This isn’t the case. Craig Venter’s team almost achieved this in 2010 http://www.theguardian.com/science/2010/may/20/craig-venter-synthetic-life-form, though they cheated a little, and they are working away at doing it without…[Read more]

Ursula writes: “Ed wrote: “I cannot build a living, reproducing being from scratch. There are missing ingredients.” This isn’t the case. Craig Venter’s team almost achieved this in 2010 http://www.theguardian.com/science/2010/may/20/craig-venter-synthetic-life-form, though they cheated a little, and they are working away at doing it without…[Read more]

<p>Karen wrote: “Okay, I see–the percentage of scientists who are good story tellers is the same as the percentage of people in general then–it’s not some characteristic of scientists that makes them bad story tellers?”</p><p> </p><p>No, not any more than a car mechanic or a store clerk would be a good or bad storyteller… Storytelling (inclu…[Read more]

Ursula Wrote: “I would say that the reduction of biological life to mechanical systems is not a faith-based belief but rather an already-accomplished project, where there are still many many things to learn that will further expand and deepen these understandings.” Fundamental assumptions can be very difficult to recognize. Like wearing r…[Read more]

Karen: “Why do we need to describe the universe as living (according do some arbitrary man-made definition of such) to find it connected, beyond our current understanding and to find the Earth worthy of our stewardship?” Agreed. Karen: “I believe a bacteria is reducible to the physics and chemistry of its components.” You certainly have a right to…[Read more]

Karen: “Why do we need to describe the universe as living (according do some arbitrary man-made definition of such) to find it connected, beyond our current understanding and to find the Earth worthy of our stewardship?”

Agreed.

Karen: “I believe a bacteria is reducible to the physics and chemistry of its components.”

You certainly have a…[Read more]

Thanks for sharing, Elisabet!   Jon, I do think that scientists make some of the assumptions that Elisabet posits:   >1) the universe exists objectively (not subjectively) as matter located in three-dimensional space and linear time The subjective domain of experience has been almost completely dismissed by mainstream science until fairly r…[Read more]

Hi All. Rather than co-opt Duane’s discussion of a living universe with quantum consciousness theories I’ve launched a new thread entitled Quantum Consciousness: Is The Universe Intelligent?http://wptaverncommunity.wefoster-platform.co/forums/topic/quantum-consciousness-is-the-universe-intelligent/ I've been trying to get Elisabet Sahtouris to…[Read more]

Hi Duane, Yes, fascinating stuff indeed!  Keeps me up at night.  Perhaps I’ll spin it into another discussion thread 🙂

Hi Davidson, Yes, that’s me. There are only a small handful of arts & entertainment digital domes in the world currently (including our Vortex Dome in LA, SAT in Montreal, and the Catalyst Dome in Vegas), however there are over 50 digital planetariums in Texas that can run the same content: http://lochnessproductions.com/lfco/lfco.html.  There a…[Read more]

Thoughts on Quantum Consciousness and its ImplicationsEd Lantz There are an increasing number of serious theories from biologists and physicists alike postulating that quantum information processes are fundamental to consciousness. Now in all fairness, quantum theories of consciousness are still somewhat speculative. There is limited research…[Read more]

Thanks for taking the time to explain. Perhaps I should read your book “The Living Universe” before commenting further 🙂 “…I definitely do not see the universe as “alive” in the same way that biological organisms are alive.  However, I do see the universe as a unique kind of unified and living system nested within the unique aliveness o…[Read more]

<p>I have to agree with Ursula and James here (and I also agree with James’ framing of the “extraordinary claims” quote – what is extraordinary to one scientist may be routine observation for another). Unless there is additional evidence to support this claim, it would seem to be an uphill battle to convince mainstream scientists that the u…[Read more]

Happy Earth Day!

Thanks for the background info, Davidson.  It’s great that we’re such a multidisciplinary group!   I have a Master’s degree in Electrical Engineering with an emphasis in quantum physics, plasma physics and electromagnetics (my professor was a physicist). Prior to that I studied digital and analog circuit design. For 7 years I led optical signal pr…[Read more]

Hi Duane. Thank you for sharing your motivations here. So what I hear you saying is that you would like to foster a shift in human consciousness towards greater reverence, sensitivity and respect for our biosphere and, in fact, all of creation. I believe you are making the assumption that humans have greater reverence and respect for life (i.e.…[Read more]

Jon – I see no reason why we cannot have parallel conversations as long as we are not distracted from addressing the points you are making. You say: “Martin Gardner looked for evidence for claims, and rejected those that did not have it.  That is being “evidence based”, and that’s what it means to be a scientific field.  Being that you called…[Read more]

I think it needs to be said that, when I claim that the macroscopic model of a galaxy is governed by relatively simple equations, it is because I am making a differentiation between macroscopic and microscopic scales. Scientists love to divide things into bits. The macroscopic view ignores the many smaller features of galaxies – including us. The…[Read more]