| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
09 Jul 2005 12:45:24 PM |
| Object: |
ghosts |
Just out of curiosity, is there anything in the laws of physics that
can account for the phenomenon whereby a ghost may be visible to one
onlooker yet invisible to another? (besides schizophrenia)
.
|
|
| User: "richard miller" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
10 Jul 2005 03:50:18 PM |
|
|
<bob@coolgroups.com> wrote in message
news:1120931124.483291.27660@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Just out of curiosity, is there anything in the laws of physics that
can account for the phenomenon whereby a ghost may be visible to one
onlooker yet invisible to another? (besides schizophrenia)
When you have a dream, tell me, how real does it seem?
Is it real?
When you are hypnotised, how real is that?
You should know better that the human brain can play a multitude of tricks.
In answer to your question, physics doesn't concern itself with unreliable
witnesses on a macroscopic scale. No.
Fo ghosts, read hallucinations. Now don't tell, 'yes but I a granny who is
very honest and has seen thousands of ghosts'. No, she is mad.
Ghosts have no place on sci.physics.
RJM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Autymn D. C." |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
15 Jul 2005 08:00:07 PM |
|
|
"Unreliability" is standard scientistic handwaving bigotry. Give
specific means for making millions of people from the beginning of
recorded history hallucinate seethru, distinct, moving, and interactive
shapes of people with as much frequency as to make up more similar
terms for the idea than any other idea? EVP (Electronic Voice
Phenomena) are reliable, repeatable, and obvious. Look them up, and
don't filter out the best cases. The How Stuff Works site picked it up
as their cover story some months back.
wave tunnelling, spin nodes, diffractive surface interference, broken
interaction summetries, foton-axion couplings, polarised filters,
Fresnel-Mie suspensions
(http://advancedphysics.org/viewthread.php?tid=53&page=2#pid7227),
specular emissions, lenticular media, etc. <-> ghosts
A few people can see and be bothered by fluorescent flickering in the
hundreds to thousands of hertz, and then do poorly at tasks at work and
school, to the [irrelevant] disbelief of most people. Going from a
slowly- to quickly-refreshing monitor only helps a little. Ye've been
owned.
-Aut
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Ghost In The Machine" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
10 Jul 2005 06:00:02 PM |
|
|
In sci.physics, richard miller
<richard@microscitech.freeserve.co.uk>
wrote
on Sun, 10 Jul 2005 21:50:18 +0100
<das1kl$sqj$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk>:
<bob@coolgroups.com> wrote in message
news:1120931124.483291.27660@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Just out of curiosity, is there anything in the laws of physics that
can account for the phenomenon whereby a ghost may be visible to one
onlooker yet invisible to another? (besides schizophrenia)
When you have a dream, tell me, how real does it seem?
Is it real?
When you are hypnotised, how real is that?
You should know better that the human brain can play a multitude of tricks.
In answer to your question, physics doesn't concern itself with unreliable
witnesses on a macroscopic scale. No.
Fo ghosts, read hallucinations. Now don't tell, 'yes but I a granny who is
very honest and has seen thousands of ghosts'. No, she is mad.
Ghosts have no place on sci.physics.
Hey.... :-P :-)
Then again, you're right in the sense that if it can't be measured it's
not in the physics realm.
(In any event, my two grandmothers are quite dead. I can't say I've
seen their ghosts, either.)
RJM
--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "p6" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
12 Jul 2005 09:15:58 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Just out of curiosity, is there anything in the laws of physics that
can account for the phenomenon whereby a ghost may be visible to one
onlooker yet invisible to another? (besides schizophrenia)
Ah. We qi healers specialize in this. Ghosts are just
something rudimentary...
As detailed here:
http://www.islandnet.com/~global/pranic.html
We treat the biofield of a living person. When a person
dies. The biofield gets separated and depending on the
emotional and mental state of the dying person dictate
the behavior of the biofield. Of course in the dead,
the holofield is way much less dynamic than when alive.
If the dead is cremated, we detected the least trace of
it. In the dead with strong emotions that is buried,
the biofield can become apparition seen at graveyards
or haunted house (where they frequent due to strong
memory).
Note that the biofield or ghosts is most often a
recording or automaton, the will of the victim is no
longer there because the purpose of the brain is the
creation of will power.
Now what made ghosts available to one and not another.
In pranic or qi healing schools, we are taught how to
develope scalar field vision. That is. The Biofield
is composed of scalar field. Photons or EM wave are
vectors because they have direction. But there is
another hidden aspect of em whereby scalar
nondirectional field exist. Our brain pineal gland has
a scalar sensor potential and this is clairvoyants
were developed.
So in the case where a ghost is visible to an onlooker
but not to another, it is because there can exist a
temporary clairvoyancy in the witness due to some
brain effect that affects the scalar hyperfunctions of the
pineal gland (temporarily).
In qi haunted house excursions, some seers can see ghosts
already touching the person next to him and yet invisible
to that person. He can only feel hair standing up.
In the following is directory of 500 qi healing branches
worldwide. They are good in ghost busting works. We can
emit high vibration violet qi that can send ghosts running.
This is because they can't stand the high vibrations.
http://www.pranichealing.org/directory/headquarters.htm
Warning. Some ghosts can be possessed by sinister
independent entities. This is when haunting can become
so physical like the Amytiville Horror movie.
You must learn some shielding before ghost hunting because
they love to stick to your chakras and love to absorb
your sexual energy (which is composed of very concentrated
qi).
p6
.
|
|
|
| User: "Autymn D. C." |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
15 Jul 2005 07:20:52 PM |
|
|
How can they (or aliens) not stand higher vibrations when the sun is
already putting them out?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
09 Jul 2005 01:38:04 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Just out of curiosity, is there anything in the laws of physics that
can account for the phenomenon whereby a ghost may be visible to one
onlooker yet invisible to another? (besides schizophrenia)
Drugs, alcohol.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
11 Jul 2005 02:54:00 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Just out of curiosity, is there anything in the laws of physics that
can account for the phenomenon whereby a ghost may be visible to one
onlooker yet invisible to another? (besides schizophrenia)
Hidden order parameters that enable the recoalescence of the
information structures comprising human and animal brains into cohesive
macroscopic forms with significant non-zero probability.
Technically, it's already possible but under the Grand Canonical
Distribution the probability of any kind of recohesion of a macroscopic
state is negligible.
.
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts Not visible |
12 Jul 2005 09:16:45 AM |
|
|
Light dont care what you think .
No ghost could be visible to anything.
Ghost dont exsist.
Carbon atoms exsist .
The best one could do is re-play some one elses carbon atom.
.
|
|
|
| User: "CrankHater" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts Not visible |
12 Jul 2005 09:42:16 AM |
|
|
tj Frazir wrote:
Light dont care what you think .
No ghost could be visible to anything.
Ghost dont exsist.
Carbon atoms exsist .
The best one could do is re-play some one elses carbon atom.
what the ***** would you know fool.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
11 Jul 2005 04:04:16 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Just out of curiosity, is there anything in the laws of physics that
can account for the phenomenon whereby a ghost may be visible to one
onlooker yet invisible to another? (besides schizophrenia)
Yeah one of them could be using an axial gauge, the other a covariant
gauge.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=faddeev-popov
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
09 Jul 2005 01:45:15 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Just out of curiosity, is there anything in the laws of physics that
can account for the phenomenon whereby a ghost may be visible to one
onlooker yet invisible to another? (besides schizophrenia)
e
Stats of sleep
.
|
|
|
| User: "paranormal" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
09 Jul 2005 01:57:46 PM |
|
|
Quantum mechanics?
"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> escribió en el mensaje
news:%WUze.140763$_o.71699@attbi_s71...
bob@coolgroups.com wrote:
Just out of curiosity, is there anything in the laws of physics that
can account for the phenomenon whereby a ghost may be visible to one
onlooker yet invisible to another? (besides schizophrenia)
e
Stats of sleep
.
|
|
|
| User: "paranormal" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
09 Jul 2005 02:00:43 PM |
|
|
By the way is, I just saw the movie White noise with Michael Keaton.It deals
with EVP(Electronic voice phenomenon) science is studying why and how the
deceased communicate through electrical/electronic equipment.
"paranormal" <k@s.cke> escribió en el mensaje
news:dap6nb$ddq$1@hefestos.uned.es...
Quantum mechanics?
"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> escribió en el mensaje
news:%WUze.140763$_o.71699@attbi_s71...
bob@coolgroups.com wrote:
Just out of curiosity, is there anything in the laws of physics that
can account for the phenomenon whereby a ghost may be visible to one
onlooker yet invisible to another? (besides schizophrenia)
e
Stats of sleep
.
|
|
|
| User: "richard miller" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
11 Jul 2005 03:53:51 PM |
|
|
"paranormal" <k@s.cke> wrote in message
news:dap6st$dh7$1@hefestos.uned.es...
By the way is, I just saw the movie White noise with Michael Keaton.It
deals
with EVP(Electronic voice phenomenon) science is studying why and how the
deceased communicate through electrical/electronic equipment.
Yes, I think you'll find this is what is known as a movie
A 'movie' is usually based upon a work of fiction. Not necessarily, but the
moive itself if the fiction.
For example, 'Far From The Madding Crowd', is a novel by Thomas Hardy. It is
also available on film. Then there is science fiction, ... do I need
continue. Yes, I probably do.
Its not real, that thing with Mulder and Scully, the X-files, it was
fiction, not a documentary. There was no sandman.. ('tallica are a rock
group, not a research institute)
Just give us a voltmeter, an oscilloscope, we (Micro SciTech) will find your
ghosts.
Parabolic perhaps
paranormal ?
Non!
"paranormal" <k@s.cke> escribió en el mensaje
news:dap6nb$ddq$1@hefestos.uned.es...
Quantum mechanics?
"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> escribió en el mensaje
news:%WUze.140763$_o.71699@attbi_s71...
bob@coolgroups.com wrote:
Just out of curiosity, is there anything in the laws of physics that
can account for the phenomenon whereby a ghost may be visible to one
onlooker yet invisible to another? (besides schizophrenia)
e
Stats of sleep
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
09 Jul 2005 03:32:10 PM |
|
|
"paranormal" <k@s.cke> wrote in message
news:dap6st$dh7$1@hefestos.uned.es...
By the way is, I just saw the movie White noise with Michael Keaton.It
deals
with EVP(Electronic voice phenomenon) science is studying why and how the
deceased communicate through electrical/electronic equipment.
Is science truly investigating "how the deceased" communicate?
The mind boggles at trying to set up a testable experiment. What sort of
control group would you use?
.
|
|
|
| User: "paranormal" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
09 Jul 2005 05:02:41 PM |
|
|
I am not an expert in this field but famous scientists
such as Hooke have conducted experiments that defied physical laws.
"T Wake" <taswakeAt@hotmail.com> escribió en el mensaje
news:C4adnVOblrzWqU3fRVnyig@pipex.net...
"paranormal" <k@s.cke> wrote in message
news:dap6st$dh7$1@hefestos.uned.es...
By the way is, I just saw the movie White noise with Michael Keaton.It
deals
with EVP(Electronic voice phenomenon) science is studying why and how
the
deceased communicate through electrical/electronic equipment.
Is science truly investigating "how the deceased" communicate?
The mind boggles at trying to set up a testable experiment. What sort of
control group would you use?
.
|
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
09 Jul 2005 05:27:36 PM |
|
|
"paranormal" <k@s.cke> wrote in message
news:daphig$ln0$1@hefestos.uned.es...
I am not an expert in this field but famous scientists
such as Hooke have conducted experiments that defied physical laws.
Are they reproducible? Generally speaking if someone has created an
experiment that defies the "laws of physics" then the laws need re-writing
and someone is probably in line for a Nobel.
.
|
|
|
| User: "paranormal" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
09 Jul 2005 05:59:19 PM |
|
|
Sure, anyone can reproduce them, we couldn´t give the Nobel to
everyone.Could we?
"T Wake" <taswakeAt@hotmail.com> escribió en el mensaje
news:7aSdnaUKQdnE0k3fRVnytg@pipex.net...
"paranormal" <k@s.cke> wrote in message
news:daphig$ln0$1@hefestos.uned.es...
I am not an expert in this field but famous scientists
such as Hooke have conducted experiments that defied physical laws.
Are they reproducible? Generally speaking if someone has created an
experiment that defies the "laws of physics" then the laws need re-writing
and someone is probably in line for a Nobel.
.
|
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
10 Jul 2005 04:31:05 AM |
|
|
"paranormal" <k@s.cke> wrote in message
news:dapks8$o3s$1@hefestos.uned.es...
Sure, anyone can reproduce them, we couldn´t give the Nobel to
everyone.Could we?
Well, if they can be reproduced they Noble prize would go to the person who
thought of it first. If they cant be reproduced, they aren't science.
Tell you what, I have lots of friends who still work in research posts. If
you can detail an experiment to scientifically detect communications from
beyond the grave I will get them to conduct a few trials.
.
|
|
|
| User: "paranormal" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
10 Jul 2005 05:57:33 AM |
|
|
Some day acience will explain , my intuition is
E=mc2 has something to do with this, there are plenty of experiments you can
do(search the net), make sure these people know what they are doing or else
you could get undesired/unexpected results.
"T Wake" <taswakeAt@hotmail.com> escribió en el mensaje
news:kdmdnd2q5rpGd03fRVnyrA@pipex.net...
"paranormal" <k@s.cke> wrote in message
news:dapks8$o3s$1@hefestos.uned.es...
Sure, anyone can reproduce them, we couldn´t give the Nobel to
everyone.Could we?
Well, if they can be reproduced they Noble prize would go to the person
who
thought of it first. If they cant be reproduced, they aren't science.
Tell you what, I have lots of friends who still work in research posts. If
you can detail an experiment to scientifically detect communications from
beyond the grave I will get them to conduct a few trials.
.
|
|
|
| User: "CrankHater" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
12 Jul 2005 09:43:59 AM |
|
|
paranormal wrote:
Some day acience will explain , my intuition is
E=mc2 has something to do with this, there are plenty of experiments you can
do(search the net), make sure these people know what they are doing or else
you could get undesired/unexpected results.
you do know your intuition is way off base dont you?
e=mc2 has nothing to do with it.
ghosts are the product of over active fantasy / imaginations. they
arent real. no one speaks with the dead. its a myth. discussing it is
about as scientific as hammond and tj frazir.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "paranormal" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
10 Jul 2005 08:59:43 AM |
|
|
I wanted to correct this, it was Sir William Crookes (1832-1919) cathode ray
investigator, who did these experiments not Robert Hooke.
"paranormal" <k@s.cke> escribió en el mensaje
news:daphig$ln0$1@hefestos.uned.es...
I am not an expert in this field but famous scientists
such as Hooke have conducted experiments that defied physical laws.
"T Wake" <taswakeAt@hotmail.com> escribió en el mensaje
news:C4adnVOblrzWqU3fRVnyig@pipex.net...
"paranormal" <k@s.cke> wrote in message
news:dap6st$dh7$1@hefestos.uned.es...
By the way is, I just saw the movie White noise with Michael Keaton.It
deals
with EVP(Electronic voice phenomenon) science is studying why and how
the
deceased communicate through electrical/electronic equipment.
Is science truly investigating "how the deceased" communicate?
The mind boggles at trying to set up a testable experiment. What sort of
control group would you use?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andy Resnick" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
11 Jul 2005 07:57:14 AM |
|
|
paranormal wrote:
I wanted to correct this, it was Sir William Crookes (1832-1919) cathode ray
investigator, who did these experiments not Robert Hooke.
Name one. Unsubstantiated claims may be the norm of cargo-cult science,
but not actual science.
And it's one thing to "conduct an experiment", another entirely to
conduct a reproducible experiment.
--
Andrew Resnick, Ph.D.
Department of Physiology and Biophysics
Case Western Reserve University
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
11 Jul 2005 06:28:27 AM |
|
|
In article <datqb2$f9d$3@eeyore.INS.cwru.edu>,
Andy Resnick <andy.resnick@op.case.edu> wrote:
paranormal wrote:
I wanted to correct this, it was Sir William Crookes (1832-1919) cathode
ray
investigator, who did these experiments not Robert Hooke.
Name one. Unsubstantiated claims may be the norm of cargo-cult science,
but not actual science.
And it's one thing to "conduct an experiment", another entirely to
conduct a reproducible experiment.
Art Bell plays tape recordings of ghosts talking.
This is how it works:
He plays the recording; I can only hear static. Then
he makes a big deal about it and repeats what is on
the tape. Yaks a little bit more. Then he plays the
tape again. By golly. There is somebody saying exactly
what Art said he said; now I can hear it.
This is really interesting but I can't figure out how
I can cure myself of being suggestion-prone. I'm
trying to recognize when I morph the sounds but haven't
figured out a sanity check.
/BAH
Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andy Resnick" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
11 Jul 2005 01:42:18 PM |
|
|
wrote:
<snip>
Art Bell plays tape recordings of ghosts talking.
This is how it works:
<snip>
Art's still around? I wondered if he was called back to the mother
ship..... :) I hope he's not taking himself too seriously.
--
Andrew Resnick, Ph.D.
Department of Physiology and Biophysics
Case Western Reserve University
.
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
11 Jul 2005 08:56:32 PM |
|
|
A bird gives part of its memory to the egg and the chick has part of
the hens memory .
But humans play thier own shape.
You have a copie of the carbon dna copies but your brain only plays its
own shape.
I got blood from a yin yang and have the eurge to beet the rice
out of tall plants .
.
|
|
|
| User: "CrankHater" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
12 Jul 2005 09:51:46 AM |
|
|
tj Frazir wrote:
A bird gives part of its memory to the egg and the chick has part of
the hens memory .
But humans play thier own shape.
You have a copie of the carbon dna copies but your brain only plays its
own shape.
I got blood from a yin yang and have the eurge to beet the rice
out of tall plants .
wow, your brain must have a layoff this season then.
you speak gibberish as usual. why not talk about travelling 186 million
light years at two thousandths the speed of light.
.
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
12 Jul 2005 08:05:00 PM |
|
|
Your a fucking dumbass .
Boooo
You dont know what I was talking about because your a ignorant dumbass.
Hay dumbass ,,how did anything get 10 billion light years away at
0.013c ???????????
thats 186 million light years any star could go in 14 billion years
dumbass.
WE are 186 million light years from the BB .
But so is the star 10 billion light years away.
YOUR a dumbass .
.
|
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
13 Jul 2005 01:38:43 PM |
|
|
"tj Frazir" <GravityPhysics@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:1221-42D468BC-1104@storefull-3212.bay.webtv.net...
Your a fucking dumbass .
Boooo
You dont know what I was talking about because your a ignorant dumbass.
Hay dumbass ,,how did anything get 10 billion light years away at
0.013c ???????????
thats 186 million light years any star could go in 14 billion years
dumbass.
WE are 186 million light years from the BB .
But so is the star 10 billion light years away.
YOUR a dumbass .
Stop talking gibberish.
You don't understand the basics of BB theory so there is no point debating
your insanity with you. Learn about BB and the inflation before you carry on
with this.
Where did you get the figure 0.013c from? I seem to remember you used to
think the speed "everything went" was "0002C."
Oh my God. Does this mean you have actually learned something from me.
How fast is a large scale structure approx 1.4x10^10 lightyears away from us
actually moving? What does the H_0 value for it imply?
.
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: ghosts |
13 Jul 2005 06:07:21 PM |
|
|
BGR when photons turn around at the eg of the universe to remain the
same speed.
How fast does the universe ege get pushed out DUMBASS ???
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
