View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Is it "woo" or something worthwhile?

Discuss General Topics.

Is it "woo" or something worthwhile?

Postby Alexander1304 » 11 Apr 2012, 01:00

Hello all,
I think I already had discussion about Stephen M Phillips,who claims to find correlation between superstring theory,kaballah and theosophy.You know my deep dislike about the notion of "shadow matter" and "subtle bodies",especially where 2 goes together.This is what Phillips try to reconcile.The reason I opened the new thread is that I don't want to put your attention to WHOLE article(which was the point of previous article).I'll post just one piece of the article,that bothers me right now,and then will post how I try to deal with it,hoping for your help.So,please,don't read the whole article,read only the part 6 is named "The UPA as a 11-brane".
http://www.smphillips.8m.com/article-2.html

I must honeslty say that I don't understand much of what he say,because to I'm not so godo in neither superstring theory nor in kaballah/theosophy.But I tried to find some points in what he say,that are clearly speculatuive or not scientific.I will mark in bold the points that bother me and how I try to deal with it

So,let me start:
"Up till now, theorists have had to define ordinary and shadow matter as singlet representations of the other’s unified gauge symmetry group because they could not explain why the gauge symmetry group E8 appears twice in the symmetry group describing superstring forces free of quantum anomalies. My theory provides a natural explanation of why these two kinds of matter appear in superstring theory: an 11-brane can wrap around either ten or five curled-up dimensions of the higher, 15-dimensional space. The former creates an ordinary matter superstring; this is the UPA with its ten whorls. The latter creates a shadow matter superstring, which is predicted to comprise five whorls."

Problem: seems just assertion.Can his claim about "an 11-brane can wrap around either ten or five curled-up dimensions of the higher, 15-dimensional space." be proven? Doesn't it seem as just assertion without evidence?

Then he goes into long talk about how "ultimate physical atom" corresponds to the "tree of life " of kaballah,but let focus on this:

"If this correlation between whorls of the UPA and tree levels is correct, then equations 3 and 9 indicate that the shadow matter superstring with five whorls created by the alternative wrapping of a 11-brane around the curled-up dimensions of S×C should have two, not three, major whorls. The significance of this may be that the three major whorls of the UPA correspond to the Supernal Triad of Kether, Chokmah and Binah, or what Theosophists call the three ‘Logoi’ (in Christian parlance — but not in Christian interpretation — the ‘Holy Trinity’ or ‘Three Persons of the Godhead’). This means that the second major whorl corresponds to the Second Logos, the so-called ‘Outpouring’ from which is the life-force that Hindus call ‘prana,’ whilst the interpretation in Section 10 of shadow matter as etheric matter means that the superstring predicted to have five whorls is the basic unit of etheric matter, the pranic energy contained within which may be one of the energy-fields of the shadow matter superstring. Lacking a third major whorl corresponding to the Third Logos, whose Outpouring is Fohat, the shadow matter superstring builds up only the subtle vehicle of physical consciousness — the etheric body, not its outer shell, which is assembled from superstrings of ordinary matter by means of the form-building forces that have their source in Fohat."

1.If this correlation between whorls of the UPA and tree levels is correct - big if indeed

2.Lacking a third major whorl corresponding to the Third Logos, whose Outpouring is Fohat, the shadow matter superstring builds up only the subtle vehicle of physical consciousness — the etheric body, not its outer shell

How can he know that?Doesn't seem that just assertion without solid foundation?

Also,we can claim that all these claims are unfalsifiable.

This is how I try to deal with it,trying to find reasons not to take it as something serious and true.

I know it sounds strange,but it seems like this guy "forces" me to accept what he is writing but I try to "counter" him...

So,any thoughts?
Any help will be appreciated
Thank you
Alexander1304
 
Posts: 43
Joined: 06 May 2011, 23:51






Re: Is it "woo" or something worthwhile?

Postby Craig Browning » 11 Apr 2012, 19:40

I won't even attempt to claim understanding of what you've posted (there is a thing called "Spell Check" that can fix a chunk of your posted material btw).

While I both, understand and have seen Rabbinical correlations tied to Kabalah & aspects of both, common Physics as well as Quantum Physics, String Theory, etc. I'm not understanding where "Theosophy" comes into play other than someone not knowing what a huge chunk of that niche has been proven more fantasiful and even admittedly "invented" (actually denounced by Blavatsky, one of the icons within the field). So yes, there is a Hermetic connection in that all of Metaphysics parallels physical science; it is after all, the science of mind & spirit.

The famed Tree tied to the Kabalah can be found in numerous cultures while related to differently, one of the better known examples comes through the known traditions of the ancient Druids but some researchers believe there is a logical reason for this connection and why it mirrors traditional Kabalah so much; it has to do with the journey taken by one of Noah's children who, after the whole getting settled after the flood, went to the northern lands of present day Europe. Most claim this was Ireland but regardless, many ancient Jewish traditions and beliefs can be found within the folds of the anthropological Druid, INCLUDING a passion for learning and better understanding nature/science and as such, better explaining the divine and all things magickle. Let's face it, having a superior understanding of just basic physics over the common human being in remote times would certainly make one come off as a Wizard . . . even today we refer to genius actions and theories as a kind of Wizardry or Magick, so the parallels seem "typical" we're just learning to see and understand the hidden (the occult) in more rational terms. This is why I state that PSI (for example) is very real, we've just not reached that stage in analytical ability, to understand it -- it's elusive. Unfortunately, humankind has a terrible habit of convincing itself that anything elusive doesn't exist which is where the famed Water Weeny example comes into play; saturate a water weeny in oil and then try to hold onto it with your bare hands -- the more you squeeze and attempt to control it, the likely it is to escape and allude you; you know it exists but you can't control it. . .but that's another story altogether.
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Is it "woo" or something worthwhile?

Postby Alexander1304 » 12 Apr 2012, 00:08

I just got e-mail from Alan Gauld about his impression of this stuff.He stated: "The chap is off his trolley.Don't waste good time on him"
Alexander1304
 
Posts: 43
Joined: 06 May 2011, 23:51

Re: Is it "woo" or something worthwhile?

Postby Arouet » 12 Apr 2012, 00:49

Alex, I don't pretend to understand this stuff but from what I can see you've been chasing this shadow-matter hypothesis for a long time now, almost begging someone to give it an ounce of credence and it seems that you still haven't found anyone. What exactly are you looking for here? What if one physicist said: sure, that makes sense! You would still have the vast majority thinking it nonsense. So where does that leave you? It doesn't look like this hypothesis has too many champions! That doesn't in itself make it wrong, but it doesn't help have confidence in the hypothesis!
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Is it "woo" or something worthwhile?

Postby Alexander1304 » 12 Apr 2012, 01:19

Arouet,I just try to figure out if "shadow -matter" has any relevanse to our "subtle body".So far I found 2,Wassermann and above,Phillips,though they came to this conclusion from absolutely different perspectives.One was materialist,and Phillips is Theosophist,who thinks he found how the string theory of "ultimate physical atom"(sub-quark) represents Tree Of Life of Kaballah as the univeersal blueprint.I'm impressed by that,but could we just rgard this as "one-man-opinion" and nothing else?Could this connection between superstring theories-shadow matter-kaballah be made up thing? Otherwice we are force to accept that kaballah is God-given/created thing..
Alexander1304
 
Posts: 43
Joined: 06 May 2011, 23:51


Return to General Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron