How to spot quantum quackery

[Grat3fulh3ad]

I admit I am an oddity

I am a intellectual and spiritual

let me explain in regards to modern medicine

PHds is a common level of education in my family with 3 generation of surgeon (no im not a rich privileged or a trusty i abandoned the paradigm of standard education)

I have been afforded the best in medical care including a year inpatient and decades of pharmaceuticals

and I am still intelligent to understand the dynamics of modern medicine

But at the base of my being, below my operational intellect I felt the differential in my being when i used marijuana opposed to american pharmaceuticals

my spirituality was expressed in a non-intellectual internal observation that trumped the physiological, social and intellectual paradigms that were built and were :enslaving: my potential

this spirituality lead me to build a relationship with a plant that led to believing in what I sense balanced against the intellectual

in this manner I have found it easier to disseminate someone who is lying to you for their own benefit, because often my "gut" reveals an "instinct" or "feel" that betrays my intellect

i have found that my intellect is no match for the magnificence of the whole of my being, that i cannot comprehend life better than it is represented in the grand design of the human body

this said I feel that I can "understand" at a higher level than I can express with my intellect

its the understanding of this phenomenon that normally forces me to interact in debates like this

I can agree with the phenomenon you express, but I can also see explanation for the cause and effect that is not spiritual, and simply a different form of intellect than the intellect you use to communicate... Kind of like how a horse is born knowing how to walk, but probably couldn't communicate walking (in whatever capacity horse communicate)

not that quantum mechanics cant exonerate some of the alternative healing philosophies teachings, but the article was written from an presented IMHO as a piece that dismisses the whole of alternative non-scientific mainstream medicine and I think that while there is a benefit to knowing what is real or not, the way it is being presented frowns upon people looking outside the corrupt mainstream for solutions

not at all where the article was coming from.

there is nothing fundamentally wrong with science or spirituality just the application there of

and that application as seen in the buddhist perspective might be considered karma

that is my contention, not with the intellectual of IC mag, but with the presentation of information that would alienate a segment of our diverse community

my name is weird, I hope that sets the expectations I have for everyone

really i bring no judgement i just wish for harmony among us as we celebrate our differences because that is where you build strength in community

The article is simply saying that trying to use quantum physics to support all manner of spiritual 'build your own universe' scenarios is a misapplication and wholly unsupported nonscience.

 

[Weird]

I can agree with the phenomenon you express, but I can also see explanation for the cause and effect that is not spiritual, and simply a different form of intellect than the intellect you use to communicate... Kind of like how a horse is born knowing how to walk, but probably couldn't communicate walking (in whatever capacity horse communicate)not at all where the article was coming from.

i do not want to go off in a protracted explanation of my sense of gut betraying my senses since it could be part of a neurological defect or perhaps part of a bigger yet unrelated aspect of conversation

like but not like because I don't think a horse betrays its own sense due to higher level thoughts

i think its a phenomenon unique to humans

The article is simply saying that trying to use quantum physics to support all manner of spiritual 'build your own universe' scenarios is a misapplication and wholly unsupported nonscience.

i disagree because they did not cite particular source, but painted many with the broad stroke of the brush

the concept of us effecting the current reality is a real one

doing it by inspiring thoughts that motivate behaviors is a real method for people to utilize

creating mass with your mind is preposterous

creating inspiration thoughts that effect peoples actions is not

creating inspiration that effects your own actions using ideology is not

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

the concept of us effecting the current reality is a real one

doing it by inspiring thoughts that motivate behaviors is a real method for people to utilize

creating mass with your mind is preposterous

creating inspiration thoughts that effect peoples actions is not

creating inspiration that effects your own actions using ideology is not

That has nothing to do with anything the article said.
Nobody ever denied that people can communicate thoughts, which other people sometimes act upon. That's kind of a no brainer, and there is nothing quantum about it.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

The article is simply saying that trying to use quantum physics to support all manner of spiritual 'build your own universe' scenarios is a misapplication and wholly unsupported nonscience.

perhaps it would be easier for you to see that if you re-read the article in it's original format:

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/09/20/5144889-how-to-spot-quantum-quackery

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

I tawt I taw a puddy tat!

I tawt I taw an alias.

 

[Weird]

http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS383&q=Alan+Boyle+writes:+Can+the+weirdness+of+quantum+mechanics+make+you+well,+or+make+you+wealthy%3F+Presentations+ranging+from+%22The+Secret%22+to+%22What+the+Bleep+Do+We+Know%3F%22+suggest+that+science+allows+you+to+capitalize+on+quantum+possibilities,+but+theoretical+physicist+Lawrence+Krauss+says+it's+just+a+load+of+bleep.+&btnG=Google+Search

im not trying to argue or be conflicting but i did read the article and thats how i formed my opinions

notice the circles it drew attention from look at the places it had an impact

i truly feel its a diversion from the truth (not from you but the author)

the profit generated from all of the new age movement is infinitesimal compared to the monies generated by "science" of psychiatric pharmacology

most of the medicines endorsed by science have no known direct cause and effect YET so how is this different than the what the article claims the new age movement is doing?

seems like a big diversion of a greater flaw in our world that no one wants to address

the grave implications of american pharmaceuticals on the minds and perceptions of Americans and the massive wealth a select few are making due to the chemical slavery and manipulation of generations

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Well you're entitled to your opinion, but I don't see any evidence of your allegations in the article anywhere, it's message is pretty straightforward. Applying Quantum Physics to New Age principles is an insupportable unscientific misrepresentation.

No need to post up google search links, I linked you to the original source.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

An article by the subject of the interview.

Last September I wrote my first column for Scientific American, and this September marks my last one. In writing on science issues relevant to our culture and society, there is an inevitable tension between sticking just to science issues and commenting on potentially hot-button social issues. I have tried during the past 12 months to strike some balance, but without fail those issues that stir the greatest outrage also stir the greatest interest.

Nothing seems to stir more discussion than pieces about science and religion, an observation that reminds me of the comment that Henry Kissinger reputedly made about academic disputes: they are so vicious because the stakes are so small. After all, science will continue irrespective of religious opinions, and I expect organized religion will continue to be a part of the cultural landscape, too, largely unaffected by the ongoing march of human knowledge, as it has been for centuries.

Probably my greatest surprise came from the column on my favorite elementary particles, neutrinos. Several notes of thanks came from scientists who have devoted their lives to studying neutrinos’ properties; perhaps they feel underappreciated, even by their colleagues, for studying such ephemeral objects.

Among topics I didn’t get a chance to write about, one stands out, so I will take advantage of this last opportunity to elicit hate mail (and to shamelessly plug my new book about the late physicist Richard Feynman, which is relevant because of its title, Quantum Man).

No area of physics stimulates more nonsense in the public arena than quantum mechanics—and with good reason. No one intuitively understands quantum mechanics because all of our experience involves a world of classical phenomena where, for example, a baseball thrown from pitcher to catcher seems to take just one path, the one described by Newton’s laws of motion. Yet at a microscopic level, the universe behaves quite differently. Electrons traveling from one place to another do not take any single path but instead, as Feynman first demonstrated, take every possible path at the same time.

Moreover, although the underlying laws of quantum mechanics are completely deterministic—I need to repeat this, they are completely deterministic—the results of measurements can only be described probabilistically. This inherent uncertainty, enshrined most in the famous Heisenberg uncertainty principle, implies that various combinations of physical quantities can never be measured with absolute accuracy at the same time. Associated with that fact, but in no way equivalent to it, is the dilemma that when we measure a quantum system, we often change it in the process, so that the observer may not always be separated from that which is observed.

When science becomes this strange, it inevitably generates possibilities for confusion, and with confusion comes the opportunity for profit. I hereby wish to bestow my Worst Abusers of Quantum Mechanics for Fun and Profit (but Mostly Profit) award on the following:

Deepak Chopra: I have read numerous pieces by him on why quantum mechanics provides rationales for everything from the existence of God to the possibility of changing the past. Nothing I have ever read, however, suggests he has enough understanding of quantum mechanics to pass an undergraduate course I might teach on the subject.

The Secret: This best-selling book, which spawned a self-help industry, seems to be built in part on the claim that quantum physics implies a “law of attraction” that suggests good thoughts will make good things happen. It doesn’t.

Transcendental meditation: TMers argue that they can fly by achieving a “lower quantum-mechanical ground state” and that the more people who practice TM, the less violent the world will become. This last idea at least is in accord with quantum mechanics, to the extent that if everyone on the planet did nothing but meditate there wouldn’t be time for violence (or acts of kindness, either).

For the record: Quantum mechanics does not deny the existence of objective reality. Nor does it imply that mere thoughts can change external events. Effects still require causes, so if you want to change the universe, you need to act on it.

Feynman once said, “Science is imagination in a strait jacket.” It is ironic that in the case of quantum mech anics, the people without the straitjackets are generally the nuts.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS383&q=Alan+Boyle+writes:+Can+the+weirdness+of+quantum+mechanics+make+you+well,+or+make+you+wealthy%3F+Presentations+ranging+from+%22The+Secret%22+to+%22What+the+Bleep+Do+We+Know%3F%22+suggest+that+science+allows+you+to+capitalize+on+quantum+possibilities,+but+theoretical+physicist+Lawrence+Krauss+says+it's+just+a+load+of+bleep.+&btnG=Google+Search

im not trying to argue or be conflicting but i did read the article and thats how i formed my opinions

notice the circles it drew attention from look at the places it had an impact

i truly feel its a diversion from the truth (not from you but the author)

the profit generated from all of the new age movement is infinitesimal compared to the monies generated by "science" of psychiatric pharmacology

most of the medicines endorsed by science have no known direct cause and effect YET so how is this different than the what the article claims the new age movement is doing?

seems like a big diversion of a greater flaw in our world that no one wants to address

the grave implications of american pharmaceuticals on the minds and perceptions of Americans and the massive wealth a select few are making due to the chemical slavery and manipulation of generations

Most medicines....

If your speaking of the recent spate of designer drugs, you might have hit the nail. As far as vaccines, treatments and or cures for diseases such polio, small-pox etc, lives have been saved in the millions. "Most medicines" might be generalization.

Places of impact may indicate propensity rather than politics. I'm not speaking of politics of governance.

I agree that profit may motivate greed and you're correct in being wary of greedsters. Scientists, researches and or university-level scholars are often referred to as "elite". But these higher educates in general are paupers in the monetary sense. Grants are often seen as exclusive, even though the benefit is mutual.

 

[Weird]

m speaking in particular of drugs that deal with the same type of healing that these alternative healing propose to do

the human psyche

 

[sac beh]

If your speaking of the recent spate of designer drugs, you might have hit the nail. As far as vaccines, treatments and or cures for diseases such polio, small-pox etc, lives have been saved in the millions. "Most medicines" might be generalization.

The success of vaccination programs in the United States and Europe inspired the 20th-century concept of "disease eradication"—the idea that a selected disease can be eradicated from all human populations through global cooperation. In 1977, after a decade-long campaign involving 33 countries, smallpox was eradicated worldwide. Polio caused by wild virus has been eradicated from the Western Hemisphere; childhood vaccination levels in the United States are at an all-time high; and disease and death from diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, measles, mumps, rubella and Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) are at or near record lows. In 2005, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control issued parent's guide with some interesting statistics about the impact of vaccination on childhood diseases.

* Diphtheria
Cases per year (average) before vaccines: 175,885
Cases in 2003: 1
Decrease in cases per year: 99.9%

* Hib (<5 yrs old)
Cases per year (average) before vaccines: 20,000 (estimate)
Cases in 2003: 259
Decrease in cases per year: 98.8%

* Measles
Cases per year (average) before vaccines: 503,282
Cases in 2003: 56
Decrease in cases per year: 99.9%

* Mumps
Cases per year (average) before vaccines: 152,209
Cases in 2003: 231
Decrease in cases per year: 99.9%

* Pertussis (whooping cough)
Cases per year (average) before vaccines: 147,271
Cases in 2003: 11,647
Decrease in cases per year: 92.1%

* Polio (paralytic)
Cases per year (average) before vaccines: 16,316
Cases in 2003: 0
Decrease in cases per year: 100.0%

* Rubella
Cases per year (average) before vaccines: 47,745
Cases in 2003: 7
Decrease in cases per year: 99.9%

* Smallpox
Cases per year (average) before vaccines: 48,164
Cases in 2003: 0
Decrease in cases per year: 100.0%

* Tetanus
Cases per year (average) before vaccines: 1,314
Cases in 2003: 20
Decrease in cases per year: 98.5%

http://www.quackwatch.org/03HealthPromotion/immu/immu00.html

 

[GMT]

I suspect that weird is refering to the antidepressant and anti psychotic range of medications rather than the treatment of deseases. Which in reality should be the topic of an entirely different thread.

 

[sac beh]

I imagine that he was also. But it still goes to proving the point that the usefulness of science is separate from the pop culture abuses of science. None of these diseases have been eradicated by hopefulness or spiritual fantasies. The false needs and fantasies created by the marketing of many new pharma drugs are like those of the new age gurus. Science and research help us discern their real effectiveness.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

I suspect that weird is refering to the antidepressant and anti psychotic range of medications rather than the treatment of deseases. Which in reality should be the topic of an entirely different thread.

Yes it should, and it would be a thread where weird and I mostly agree. I have been around enough mentally troubled people who seemed to be being treated more like guinea pigs than patients. That entire branch of medicine is questionable, in my eyes. Throwing random chemicals at people until something makes them seem more like everyone else for a time is quite often counterproductive.


There is still a big difference in the scientists who discovers some attribute of a chemical compound, and the quack who misuses that discovery.

 

[guest456mpy]

That would be 1.0e-25 grams in actual scientific notation BTW!

 

[SpasticGramps]

M-Theory, String Theory, p-branes, etc has provided up us great insight into the origins of our universe and how it works on the tiniest of levels. As far as quantum physics explaining our consciousness, I don't believe so. Or for one person being able to tap into quantum physics to change their own universe, not IMO. You have to get off your butt and do something about it to change your own world. Positive thinking helps, but without action it's useless.

I think you can draw metaphoric parallels, but in the end that's all they are, metaphors.

 

[guest456mpy]

M-Theory, String Theory, p-branes, etc has provided up us great insight into the origins of our universe and how it works on the tiniest of levels. As far as quantum physics explaining our consciousness, I don't believe so. Or for one person being able to tap into quantum physics to change their own universe, not IMO. You have to get off your butt and do something about it to change your own world. Positive thinking helps, but without action it's useless.

I think you can draw metaphoric parallels, but in the end that's all they are, metaphors.

Well said Spastic Gramps.
Neither Scientific nor "New Age" thinking alone will do anything period.
You have to put things into action. That doesn't mean arguing on an internet forum either. If you have strong convictions on the matter it is far better to put them into practical use. If there is no practical use it is simply academic in either case!

H.G.

 

[HUGE]

I had a friend reallybig into this. He was a millionair by 25 by simply willing himself to it. It's more than positive thinking. I liken it to how snooki or octo mom are famous. They believes so fully in what they were doing that it became Thier reality and no they are "famous" . Sort of like creating a persona and living it. If you believe you are a sailor and you act like a sailor people will start to believe you are a sailor and eventually you wil be. We create these artificial limitations in our minds. This is a really deep subject an I have seen the principle work first hand. But I don't know how well it really translates to quantum mechanics.

 

[sac beh]

Positive thinking helps, but without action it's useless.

I think you can draw metaphoric parallels, but in the end that's all they are, metaphors.

I agree here

Well said Spastic Gramps.
Neither Scientific nor "New Age" thinking alone will do anything period.
You have to put things into action. That doesn't mean arguing on an internet forum either. If you have strong convictions on the matter it is far better to put them into practical use. If there is no practical use it is simply academic in either case!

H.G.

Don't make the mistake of tossing out the mental just because it alone doesn't make the changes. The first step is always a change in mind or increase in knowledge, so we make accurate decisions about our actions. If someone believed, for example, that magical fairies were the key to solving climate change problems, and that the more people who knew about the fairies the sooner they would come and fix the problems, their actions in this case would be much worse than sitting on a forum and discussing solutions to climate change. What if they refused to listen to other opinions about the matter, and no one felt it worth while to give them better information? They could spend their whole life spreading the knowledge of fairies to save the world and never know that they are in fact acting against the solutions that would actually save the world.

Anyone with convictions, strong or weak, should spend just as much time opening their convictions up to the scrutiny of others as acting on them.

That's how science and democracy are supposed to work anyway

 

[guest456mpy]

Don't make the mistake of tossing out the mental just because it alone doesn't make the changes. The first step is always a change in mind or increase in knowledge, so we make accurate decisions about our actions. If someone believed, for example, that magical fairies were the key to solving climate change problems, and that the more people who knew about the fairies the sooner they would come and fix the problems, their actions in this case would be much worse than sitting on a forum and discussing solutions to climate change. What if they refused to listen to other opinions about the matter, and no one felt it worth while to give them better information? They could spend their whole life spreading the knowledge of fairies to save the world and never know that they are in fact acting against the solutions that would actually save the world.

Anyone with convictions, strong or weak, should spend just as much time opening their convictions up to the scrutiny of others as acting on them.

That's how science and democracy are supposed to work anyway

Don't worry sac, I won't.