How to spot quantum quackery

[GMT]

well I both agree and dissagree crumple zone. To apply quantum theory to the world governed by classical physics is where magical thinking comes into play. However quantum theory when applied to the quantum world is merely a usefull tool. To give a very poor metaphore, we can blow up a balloon with the power of our lungs, therefore we can inflate rubber with the power of our breath, but try blowing up your car tyres that way. This is where the confussion comes in. Then as IB points out, when we continue up the size scale, we reach black holes, and then we get lost.

 

[Honkytonk]

The 2 most likely candidates for a 'theory of everything' as of now.

In the history of science we have discovered a sequence of better and better theories or models, from Plato to the classical theory of Newton to modern quantum theories. It is natural to ask: Will this sequence eventually reach an end point, an ultimate theory of the universe, that will include all forces and predict every observation we can make, or will we continue forever finding better theories, but never one that cannot be improved upon? We do not yet have a definitive answer to this question, but we now have a candidate for the ultimate theory of everything, if indeed one exists, called M-theory.

and then there's Petr Horava at Berkeley who

wants to rip apart the fabric of space-time and set time and space free from another in order to come up with a unified theory that reconciles the disparate worlds of quantum mechanics and gravity... and lead us to a theory of everything."

Exciting times we're living in!

 

[Weird]

Still, don't confuse 'science' with 'the people who would use or misuse science to accomplish their own ends'.

Science supports medical marijuana.

Any 'alternative medicine' that has any real effect can be considered to be scientific.
Someone observed some effects, figured out what caused the effects, and duplicated the effects experimentally.

psychosomatic effect is scientifically verifiable, as well.

Science is science, whether mainstream or alternative.
what is is, and what works works.


What is, simply is.
Just because you might not like what is, or just because someone uses what is toward nefarious ends, does not change that what is is.

Those who try to misapply science toward spiritual ends, and those who distort science to suggest that your mind can capitalize on the quantum possibilities to change your reality, are just as guilty of fucking people as those who misapply science to persecute marijuana users or who misuse science to keep the masses addicted to pharma poisons.

To equate science itself to the human greed misusing science is to miss the mark and miss the point.

see I have to disagree

there is a cause and effect to all medicine, alternative or otherwise

let alone psychological medicine and therapies

now if this were a drug trial they would REGARDLESS of the detrimental side effects state the benefit of the treatment

like this typical add type

we have no idea how zypreka works and it will kill your organs but many people benefit so buy our product

so here, science admonishes IDEATION applied to change a paradigm of thought while it cannot even unravel the workings of the mind accurately enough to understand the full biological cause and effect

thats the bias that is occurring here

because I dont see the same scientific mind doing a comparison of effective results

and just because you disdain spirituality does not mean that its not something others dont benefit from or that there is not an underlying science to spirituality or the need for it

there is for love, and this I know you are aware of, so have you considered that there might be a core component that many people desire to fulfill

this is how pot worked for me, it fed me in a way nothing else did regardless of the "facts" science had to offer

now lets dig deeper

this is the same guy who talked about the reality of star trek science

do you think dissemination of the truth of star trek physics disappointed those who watched it for the entertainment value?

does the reality of a story or fable have to be accurate if it fed the need it was created for?


its does not seem to lend at all to harmony to believe that because the real and exact interpretation of things works for you that the same point of view is the only one that is held or offers benefit

there is a science to many of the feelings that are evoked in our beings including love so I wouldn't be so quick to you micro proofs of the macro concept of spirituality just because you are bereft of any.

not that a science minded mind is bad but its not infallible or perfect and it a great way to marginalize the growth of conscience and compassion in others when you think its the only "right way to live"

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

see I have to disagree

there is a cause and effect to all medicine, alternative or otherwise

let alone psychological medicine and therapies

now if this were a drug trial they would REGARDLESS of the detrimental side effects state the benefit of the treatment

like this typical add type

we have no idea how zypreka works and it will kill your organs but many people benefit so buy our product

so here, science admonishes IDEATION applied to change a paradigm of thought while it cannot even unravel the workings of the mind accurately enough to understand the full biological cause and effect

thats the bias that is occurring here

because I dont see the same scientific mind doing a comparison of effective results

If there is a cause and effect, which I agreed there is, then it can be looked at scientifically.


What "they" do with science is irrelevant to the science's validity. You still seem to be confusing 'science' with 'people's actions regarding science.'

Maybe it is that you don't get what I'm saying.

What exactly did I say that you disagree with?

and just because you disdain spirituality does not mean that its not something others dont benefit from or that there is not an underlying science to spirituality or the need for it

there is for love, and this I know you are aware of, so have you considered that there might be a core component that many people desire to fulfill

this is how pot worked for me, it fed me in a way nothing else did regardless of the "facts" science had to offer

now lets dig deeper

this is the same guy who talked about the reality of star trek science

do you think dissemination of the truth of star trek physics disappointed those who watched it for the entertainment value?

does the reality of a story or fable have to be accurate if it fed the need it was created for?


its does not seem to lend at all to harmony to believe that because the real and exact interpretation of things works for you that the same point of view is the only one that is held or offers benefit

there is a science to many of the feelings that are evoked in our beings including love so I wouldn't be so quick to you micro proofs of the macro concept of spirituality just because you are bereft of any.

not that a science minded mind is bad but its not infallible or perfect and it a great way to marginalize the growth of conscience and compassion in others when you think its the only "right way to live"

first off, My disdain for religion has nothing to do with anything I've said.
I'm sure you're aware I have an extensive background in spiritual seeking.

secondly... like I already said... Anyone who needs to wrap themselves or their reality in an imagination is free to do so, with my blessing even... Regardless, what is still is what is.

and regardless... there is no scientific basis for any of the "use quantum probability to affect your reality via your thoughts" tripe.

 

[Weird]

well I both agree and dissagree crumple zone. To apply quantum theory to the world governed by classical physics is where magical thinking comes into play. However quantum theory when applied to the quantum world is merely a usefull tool. To give a very poor metaphore, we can blow up a balloon with the power of our lungs, therefore we can inflate rubber with the power of our breath, but try blowing up your car tyres that way. This is where the confussion comes in. Then as IB points out, when we continue up the size scale, we reach black holes, and then we get lost.

which would boil down to the relativity of our physics in our universe and the relative application of scientific views

using the star trek example

did the inaccuracy of science take away from the entertainment value at the time it was produced?

did it in fact produce extraneous benefits and lead to further ideation and in fact scientific proof?

did the total sum of accuracies vs inaccuracies reduce the overall value as intended?

 

[sac beh]

Still, don't confuse 'science' with 'the people who would use or misuse science to accomplish their own ends'.

This is the key, making this distinction. Its a hard distinction to make for some people, but it makes all the difference in the world.

see I have to disagree

there is a cause and effect to all medicine, alternative or otherwise

let alone psychological medicine and therapies

now if this were a drug trial they would REGARDLESS of the detrimental side effects state the benefit of the treatment

like this typical add type

we have no idea how zypreka works and it will kill your organs but many people benefit so buy our product

so here, science admonishes IDEATION applied to change a paradigm of thought while it cannot even unravel the workings of the mind accurately enough to understand the full biological cause and effect

I'm not confident I understand you here, but if you're conflating science and drug companies or drug companies' drugs, then it comes down to H3ad's distinction above.

science is the task and method of predicting how our world works based on all the physical observables. Scientists who do science are fallible humans as all, and they as well as third-parties can do whatever they wish with the results of science: stay true to them or betray them for other ends. But the validity of the science remains either way.

does the reality of a story or fable have to be accurate if it fed the need it was created for?

This is called fantasy. Fantasies are fine in the bedroom, but when they are used to transform public opinion and lead people to certain actions, they are dangerous.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

using the star trek example

did the inaccuracy of science take away from the entertainment value at the time it was produced?

did it in fact produce extraneous benefits and lead to further ideation and in fact scientific proof?

did the total sum of accuracies vs inaccuracies reduce the overall value as intended?

No.
Yes.
No.


If people were trying to present 'star trek science' as a secret spiritual path to health and wealth, or use 'star trek science' to build a warp capable starship, would the inaccuracies take away from the validity of their efforts?

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Fantasies are fine in the bedroom, but when they are used to transform public opinion and lead people to certain actions, they are dangerous.

That is a quote worthy phrase.

 

[sac beh]

does the reality of a story or fable have to be accurate if it fed the need it was created for?

One more thing on this. Needs can be created and destroyed by the individual and by external forces. We make judgments all the time about what others tell us our needs are and whether they are really what we need. This might sound like an extreme view, but it seems true nonetheless and relevant talking about the needs drug companies and pop literature feed on:

We may distinguish both true and false needs. “False” are those which are superimposed upon the individual by particular social interests in his repression: the needs which perpetuate toil, aggressiveness, misery, and injustice. Their satisfaction might be most gratifying to the individual, but this happiness is not a condition which has to be maintained and protected if it serves to arrest the development of the ability (his own and others) to recognize the disease of the whole and grasp the chances of curing the disease. The result then is euphoria in unhappiness. Most of the prevailing needs to relax, to have fun, to behave and consume in accordance with the advertisements, to love and hate what others love and hate, belong to this category of false needs.

Such needs have a societal content and function which are determined by external powers over which the individual has no control; the development and satisfaction of these needs is heteronomous. No matter how much such needs may have become the individual's own, reproduced and fortified by the conditions of his existence; no matter how much he identifies himself with them and finds himself in their satisfaction, they continue to be what they were from the beginning - products of a society whose dominant interest demands repression.

Science and facts thus really are a tool for liberation, because they serve as an objective judge of our needs, real or imagined.

 

[Weird]

If there is a cause and effect, which I agreed there is, then it can be looked at scientifically.

agreed

What "they" do with science is irrelevant to the science's validity. You still seem to be confusing 'science' with 'people's actions regarding science.'

sciences validity is only important to the beings that created it

humans, every other being or object atom or molecule simply behaves accordingly to science

so the actions regarding our creations are part of the overall scheme of cause and effect

Maybe it is that you don't get what I'm saying.

What exactly did I say that you disagree with?

im not disagreeing with your view of science as a tool to quantify or qualify absolute reality

NOW any other subject i would be loath to argue and yeah there is a underlying abuse of science and representation of such but i think there is a proclivity for the evolving intellect (not just yours) to focus on one spectrum of perception people use to solve problems and thats all good but imho not at the expense of over all cause and effect

first off, My disdain for religion has nothing to do with anything I've said.
I'm sure you're aware I have an extensive background in spiritual seeking.

see this is about new age healing using "quantum concepts" that are not even congruent with traditional religions but there was no mention of religion that was born of your own accord

and yes i understand your background and my take is that it speaks volumes about your care and concern for those around you regardless of whether you believe any longer in what motivated you to "enlighten" people

funny it seems that the same evangelical spirit lives except it shares a alternate testimony of truth, but honestly this is why i appreciate you, you are as critical with your own thinking as you are to others

secondly... like I already said... Anyone who needs to wrap themselves or their reality in an imagination is free to do so, with my blessing even... Regardless, what is still is what is.

see this is where i say that there may be the same underlying dynamics to spirituality as there is to love for which you are very familiar

and regardless... there is no scientific basis for any of the "use quantum probability to affect your reality via your thoughts" tripe.

and regardless it does not negate cause and effect but perhaps it does influence it

if you are going to focus on the science of quantum mechanics in an equation that includes social psychology expect that the obvious bias of its presentation with an underlying motive (to establish firm YOUR perception of the world) that the varying perceptions will respond

 

[ambition]

Great post. People misusing science-sounding words in an effort to appear profound is a really alarming trend at my university amongst faculty. The en vogue term at the moment is "metaphysical," used randomly, yet often in the same sentence as a vague reference to "particles" and "black holes," complete with a knowing smirk.

Mini Deepak Chopra's run my university.

 

[Weird]

I'm not confident I understand you here, but if you're conflating science and drug companies or drug companies' drugs, then it comes down to H3ad's distinction above.

I am making the statement that science is in a state of constant refinement and its application such as in this case can be convoluted with personal motive

science is the task and method of predicting how our world works based on all the physical observables.

ok

scientists who do science are fallible humans as all, and they as well as third-parties can do whatever they wish with the results of science: stay true to them or betray them for other ends. But the validity of the science remains either way.

and the subject of study being attacked (one i haven't read or could care about really) is not a doctoral of science yet its getting judged as one

yet the scientific community that does effect our reality, they aren't being examined at all

This is called fantasy. Fantasies are fine in the bedroom, but when they are used to transform public opinion and lead people to certain actions, they are dangerous.

i am willing to bet that big pharma has had a far bigger impact on the physical and biological welfare of man than have new age healer

see lets make this easy for you to understand, not everyone has the capacity to intellectualize the same way

do you talk in verbose scientific expression when interacting with a 3 year old in expectation to :reveal: science in its entirty because after all

it is what it is ?

your all lack relativity and reverence in the understand that those that posses the capacity to intellectualize in such "perfection" are a segment and not a whole and there for admonishing others who still live in those realities is a bias that i reflects a even deeper disdain

if someone is belligerent or ignorant thats one thing

but who the fuck are any of you to say you've solved the worlds problems when your still waiting for science to feed you truth of how the universe works?

being fair, real and reasonable to the capacities of others is a science

its the science of compassionate humanity

when you have learned that you will find "enlightening" people to the truth is far easier

other wise its really nothing more than imposed will disguised as self righteousness behind the science of man opposed to the spirituality of man


its all made of man and thus only relative to us since the rest of the universe simply abides to the laws we uncover

and as you should know truth and relativity are very potent

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

agreed



sciences validity is only important to the beings that created it

humans, every other being or object atom or molecule simply behaves accordingly to science

so the actions regarding our creations are part of the overall scheme of cause and effect

Things do not 'behave according to science', science is the observation of how things behave.

im not disagreeing with your view of science as a tool to quantify or qualify absolute reality

NOW any other subject i would be loath to argue and yeah there is a underlying abuse of science and representation of such but i think there is a proclivity for the evolving intellect (not just yours) to focus on one spectrum of perception people use to solve problems and thats all good but imho not at the expense of over all cause and effect

Science is a tool with with to observe effect and determine a most probable cause.

see this is about new age healing using "quantum concepts" that are not even congruent with traditional religions but there was no mention of religion that was born of your own accord

and yes i understand your background and my take is that it speaks volumes about your care and concern for those around you regardless of whether you believe any longer in what motivated you to "enlighten" people

funny it seems that the same evangelical spirit lives except it shares a alternate testimony of truth, but honestly this is why i appreciate you, you are as critical with your own thinking as you are to others

It is always a joy to me to share what I learn with like minded fellows, and gathering of differing perspectives is usually a most welcome refinery of thought and concept.

see this is where i say that there may be the same underlying dynamics to spirituality as there is to love for which you are very familiar

Of course... the difference is that I say that the underlying commonality of dynamic is the probably result of evolved mechanism.



and regardless it does not negate cause and effect but perhaps it does influence it

if you are going to focus on the science of quantum mechanics in an equation that includes social psychology expect that the obvious bias of its presentation with an underlying motive (to establish firm YOUR perception of the world) that the varying perceptions will respond[/QUOTE]


Demonstrate cause and effect supporting the concept of 'affecting your reality via thought manipulation of the quantum'.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Great post. People misusing science-sounding words in an effort to appear profound is a really alarming trend at my university amongst faculty. The en vogue term at the moment is "metaphysical," used randomly, yet often in the same sentence as a vague reference to "particles" and "black holes," complete with a knowing smirk.

Mini Deepak Chopra's run my university.

Deepak is the same type of con man that gurus have always been, he just uses psuedo-scientific language in lieu of fake levitations and bed of nail stunts.

 

[sac beh]

i am willing to bet that big pharma has had a far bigger impact on the physical and biological welfare of man than have new age healer

You're probably right. Certainly the new age movement has routed large sums of money into a few new age pockets out away from people who might have had better uses for it.

see lets make this easy for you to understand, not everyone has the capacity to intellectualize the same way

do you talk in verbose scientific expression when interacting with a 3 year old in expectation to :reveal: science in its entirty because after all

it is what it is ?

your all lack relativity and reverence in the understand that those that posses the capacity to intellectualize in such "perfection" are a segment and not a whole and there for admonishing others who still live in those realities is a bias that i reflects a even deeper disdain

if someone is belligerent or ignorant thats one thing

but who the fuck are any of you to say you've solved the worlds problems when your still waiting for science to feed you truth of how the universe works?

being fair, real and reasonable to the capacities of others is a science

its the science of compassionate humanity

when you have learned that you will find "enlightening" people to the truth is far easier

other wise its really nothing more than imposed will disguised as self righteousness behind the science of man opposed to the spirituality of man


its all made of man and thus only relative to us since the rest of the universe simply abides to the laws we uncover

and as you should know truth and relativity are very potent

Where does the anger come from, bro? I'm not bashing spirituality here, nor saying I have the world's problems solved, nor promoting any kind of high-minded intellectualism. Where does all this come from?

I agree with most of what you say, except for the idea that fantasies are harmless to individuals and others around them, especially when others are benefiting from their belief and they receive no net benefit from the whole exchange.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

the scientific community is constantly being examined

the whole field is built on figuring out where your colleagues are wrong, so you can gloat about being righter than they, and making the new discovery or solving the problem that is as of yet unsolvable.

 

[sac beh]

being fair, real and reasonable to the capacities of others is a science

its the science of compassionate humanity

when you have learned that you will find "enlightening" people to the truth is far easier

One of the problems is that spirituality, and especially new age versions recently, think they have a monopoly on compassion and humanism. But that's just a disguise to hide what they're really doing. I try to be compassionate to other living things and the world as I can.

But I don't see anything compassionate about, for example something brought up in another thread, a self-proclaimed guru convincing people that the Maya believed in white, flying bearded men, and that believing in them will make the world more peaceful. Rather I see a lot of injustice here:

1) Spreading lies about what the Maya actually believed and the science behind their discoveries

2) Duping people into following a program of enlightenment based on the above lies

What's compassionate about these types of movements?

 

[sac beh]

Here's something right up this thread's alley:

Seven Warning Signs of Bogus Science

1. The discoverer pitches the claim directly to the media.

The integrity of science rests on the willingness of scientists to expose new ideas and findings to the scrutiny of other scientists. Thus, scientists expect their colleagues to reveal new findings to them initially. An attempt to bypass peer review by taking a new result directly to the media, and thence to the public, suggests that the work is unlikely to stand up to close examination by other scientists.

One notorious example is the claim made in 1989 by two chemists from the University of Utah, B. Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann, that they had discovered cold fusion—a way to produce nuclear fusion without expensive equipment. Scientists did not learn of the claim until they read reports of a news conference. Moreover, the announcement dealt largely with the economic potential of the discovery and was devoid of the sort of details that might have enabled other scientists to judge the strength of the claim or to repeat the experiment. (Ian Wilmut's announcement that he had successfully cloned a sheep was just as public as Pons and Fleischmann's claim, but in the case of cloning, abundant scientific details allowed scientists to judge the work's validity.)

Some scientific claims avoid even the scrutiny of reporters by appearing in paid commercial advertisements. A health-food company marketed a dietary supplement called Vitamin O in full-page newspaper ads. Vitamin O turned out to be ordinary saltwater.

2. The discoverer says that a powerful establishment is trying to suppress his or her work.

The idea is that the establishment will presumably stop at nothing to suppress discoveries that might shift the balance of wealth and power in society. Often, the discoverer describes mainstream science as part of a larger conspiracy that includes industry and government. Claims that the oil companies are frustrating the invention of an automobile that runs on water, for instance, are a sure sign that the idea of such a car is baloney. In the case of cold fusion, Pons and Fleischmann blamed their cold reception on physicists who were protecting their own research in hot fusion.

3. The scientific effect involved is always at the very limit of detection.

Alas, there is never a clear photograph of a flying saucer, or the Loch Ness monster. All scientific measurements must contend with some level of background noise or statistical fluctuation. But if the signal-to-noise ratio cannot be improved, even in principle, the effect is probably not real and the work is not science.

Thousands of published papers in para-psychology, for example, claim to report verified instances of telepathy, psychokinesis, or precognition. But those effects show up only in tortured analyses of statistics. The researchers can find no way to boost the signal, which suggests that it isn't really there.

4. Evidence for a discovery is anecdotal.

If modern science has learned anything in the past century, it is to distrust anecdotal evidence. Because anecdotes have a very strong emotional impact, they serve to keep superstitious beliefs alive in an age of science. The most important discovery of modern medicine is not vaccines or antibiotics, it is the randomized double-blind test, by means of which we know what works and what doesn't. Contrary to the saying, "data" is not the plural of "anecdote."

5. The discoverer says a belief is credible because it has endured for centuries.

There is a persistent myth that hundreds or even thousands of years ago, long before anyone knew that blood circulates throughout the body, or that germs cause disease, our ancestors possessed miraculous remedies that modern science cannot understand. Much of what is termed "alternative medicine" is part of that myth.

Ancient folk wisdom, rediscovered or repackaged, is unlikely to match the output of modern scientific laboratories.

6. The discoverer has worked in isolation.

The image of a lone genius who struggles in secrecy in an attic laboratory and ends up making a revolutionary breakthrough is a staple of Hollywood's science-fiction films, but it is hard to find examples in real life. Scientific breakthroughs nowadays are almost always syntheses of the work of many scientists.

7. The discoverer must propose new laws of nature to explain an observation.

A new law of nature, invoked to explain some extraordinary result, must not conflict with what is already known. If we must change existing laws of nature or propose new laws to account for an observation, it is almost certainly wrong.

I began this list of warning signs to help federal judges detect scientific nonsense. But as I finished the list, I realized that in our increasingly technological society, spotting voodoo science is a skill that every citizen should develop.

I can't vouch for the reliability of the site, as I just came across it. But the list is fun nonetheless.

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/signs.html

 

[Weird]

Where does the anger come from, bro? I'm not bashing spirituality here, nor saying I have the world's problems solved, nor promoting any kind of high-minded intellectualism. Where does all this come from?

I agree with most of what you say, except for the idea that fantasies are harmless to individuals and others around them, especially when others are benefiting from their belief and they receive no net benefit from the whole exchange.

i apologize if i came off angry and judgmental

its merely the frustration at the totalitarian view that we will all perceive truth from the same perspective

I do not see it as a plot or a conspiracy but as a byproduct of people trying to put into action belief and thought

and this is a good thing

its only when the search for truth offers nothing but that i become skeptical of the benefit of the analysis

and please understand there is a restricting dynamic to intellectualism, let me put it in real world context.

take a highly specialized doctor who spends all day refining the constants and application of his science, this focus is normally at the expense of other resources, and thus can really bias the capacity of said doctor to take in and apply various data that exists outside of said doctors field of study

highly focused people suffer from the paradigm of being highly focused

this is how I feel this thread presented itself and in the big scheme of things its analogous with some of the lack of relativity science used in measuring the benefit of marijuana

dont misunderstand me, I understand how difficult it is for the organized mind to appreciate the disorganized one but it reminds me of the odd couple, there can be learning synergies if the experince is approached with an open mind

does it mean science shouldn't be applied to these theories > No

does it mean that the examination and resulting data in a microcosm of a larger equation defines the sum of the whole of the equation > No

One of the problems is that spirituality, and especially new age versions recently, think they have a monopoly on compassion and humanism. But that's just a disguise to hide what they're really doing. I try to be compassionate to other living things and the world as I can.

But I don't see anything compassionate about, for example something brought up in another thread, a self-proclaimed guru convincing people that the Maya believed in white, flying bearded men, and that believing in them will make the world more peaceful. Rather I see a lot of injustice here:

1) Spreading lies about what the Maya actually believed and the science behind their discoveries

2) Duping people into following a program of enlightenment based on the above lies

What's compassionate about these types of movements?

ok and here my friend is the crux of what I feel to be what divides us all

the rational of imperfection in our beings both individually and in a group

our lives here and now are expressed statically but our beings are dynamic and relative to the time and space place and our interpretation and resulting actions based on it

the abandonment of the potential need to fulfill our spiritual selves because people misrepresent doesn't seem to be sound logic as does exonerating scientific fact because of how you feel spiritually

my feeling is that there is a balance that is achieved as we live in the here and now.

if we can learn to appreciate that while we can't change things that exist in this exact time and space place that exists now we can effect the impact the past has and impact the future we can use relative truth and the dynamics of humanity (compassion, faith, love) to bring the influence we desire

you cant expect to have a perfect perception in a dynamic changing world when you are in the body of a being with a intellect that is build upon the bias of ones environment

the body of scientific knowledge was built through trial and error and observation of measurable results why can't our spirituality

and this is why i think most especially our community needs to focus on unity because we are the people who found cause and effect to be more potent than popular science and to try to limit ones discovery of the world around them and application of concepts that do so cloistering if nothing else

ill leave you with the wonderful experience i had reading the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy as a kid

pure fantasy but it did through fantastic example and story telling add a dimension of understanding to physics to me

like the universe at the end of the universe, I initially thought at the outward boundaries but instead the end was a measure of time

at my young age it brought forth the concept of boundless universe and relativity of time

but it was after all pure fantasy

 

[Weird]

curiously though on thoughts of quantum mechanics

were does sound come into play

where in the definition of quantum mechanics does sound energy measure

it may be off the original source but i wonder if quantum mechanics cant be used as a proof behind some physical alternative treatments such as sound therapies