Posted in reply to the post by skynelson:
Hi there,
To fill you in more on the theory I presented regarding synchronicity, you can join our discussion group this Tuesday, Feb 24, in Santa Rosa. Please RSVP for directions if you'd like to come (707)-217-8595. Also, visit
www.expectingsynchronicity.com
The theory I presented at Coffeecatz is an interpretation of special relativity that should have been made long ago, and I think has by some people. But I think others have not grasped the far-reaching consequences of it that bring together various diverse theories, including Feynman's ideas on light, holographic theory, quantum mechanics, wave mechanics, and some aspects of string theory, not to mention spirituality.
My particular work in this discussion group focuses on applying quantum principles to daily life, leading to a description of synchronicity. My ideas are firmly backed up with education and research, and I emphasize the importance of EXPERIENCING and LIVING these principles. This is NOT ONLY a place to discuss theory, but one where we look at the way life works for us, and try to make better use of synchronicity.
I completely agree with most scientists about the misuse of pseudoscience. For example, I think people use the word 'energy' to describe many things that may or may not actually be associated with energy. People like to use words and analogies (i.e. like saying the law of attraction is like a 'magnetic pull' of events to us) to help them understand concepts, but they end up cluttering up our knowledge base with poorly defined language, and this pisses off scientists.
As enthusiasts, I think people should be careful to define their language well, and not infringe on areas already claimed by science.
As a heavily trained scientist, my writing and ideas focus on science, on well-defined words and axioms and postulates, on stable logic. In the time since the presentation two weeks ago, I haven't heard one correct argument against my theory or presentation. I have heard one INCORRECT criticism, and I have heard other criticism that is just based on the fact that the ideas are new. As far as I am concerned, people with such an approach treat science as a religion, and we have a responsibility to challenge them in a responsible way.
So I do think it's important for people to take science seriously, and not believe most of what they hear. I am a careful scientist and thinker, and I take that responsibility highly.
Cheers,
Sky
theskyband [at] gmail.com