What is of the spirit is spirit; science is about matter

[Seawolf]

Originally Posted by Miss Hepburn

Oh my, how I love this clarity! And from a physicist!
Thank you.

Science describes and explains the physical world; the world of matter. No more and no less.

I understand what Katheryn is saying, it's right. Will it always be true though? If scientific understanding of the world around us progresses forward through time, it wouldn't be logical to say we can never understand spirit scientifically. The way I understand it is we don't actually know everything there is to know, we're far from it.

Maybe we have an attachment to spiritual things to where we don't ever want them to be ruined by cold hard science. ??

Originally Posted by Seawolf

I understand what Katheryn is saying, it's right. Will it always be true though? If scientific understanding of the world around us progresses forward through time, it wouldn't be logical to say we can never understand spirit scientifically. The way I understand it is we don't actually know everything there is to know, we're far from it.

Maybe we have an attachment to spiritual things to where we don't ever want them to be ruined by cold hard science. ??

I have been using science (the method of) to commune with spirit for many years now.

It was never cold, though can be hard and has not ruined anything.

:)

http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/sh...ad.php?t=54892

Originally Posted by Katheryn

Hi everyone,

As a qualified physicist who also has a belief in spirituality, I have always found it bewildering that people find a conflict between science and spirituality.

Science describes and explains the physical world; the world of matter. No more and no less. It has nothing to say about the stuff of the spirit. There is nothing in science which refutes God, the afterlife or many other spiritual issues.

There is also much that I have witnessed in my spiritual life that Science cannot explain; because it is not meant to: it simply does not extend to the spiritual world. A system of equations that describes the interaction of matter with matter (or matter and energy) is not meant to describe the spirit or if there is life after death or whether we have an aura. These things are matters of another kind of matter (if you will). Science is about the matter of the physical world, so let us as spiritualists not confuse the two or try to wed them. We do neither any honour if we do not see them as distinct.

Hi Katheryn,
I found it very healing for a physicist to take the position that science cannot explain the spiritual world. Although I kind of believe that the laws of physics wouldn't work if it wasn't for the existence of spirit. If you will allow me to share my view about how it's all put together.

The evidence of ghosts and spirits supports my view that "spirit" in an invisible substance that can be imprinted by a powerful consciousness, like that of the Creator. Quantum field theory talks about quantum fields and wave-functions. I think that quantum fields and wave-functions are one type of "spirit". In my view, God visualized the laws of physics, general relativity, the physics constants, Maxwell's equations, etc., and then spoke the affirmation "Let there be light". The result was that spirit was imprinted with the physics constants, GR, etc. And of course the result was the big bang.

[Seawolf]

Are there any publications or credible places that has peer-reviewed research on the 'spiritual' taboo side? The challenge is to come up with good experiments, and there should be a place for those to be found I would hope. If not then maybe the time isn't right. It's too soon, it intrudes too much into our spirituality/religion for the world to come up with experiments.

Hi Kathryn,
Reading about the Higgs field gave me the impression that nature allows invisible/undetectable things to exist. While scientists will insist that the Higgs field gives particles mass, it looks to me like the Higgs field allows standard model particles to exist, with the exception of photons (which don't have mass). It looks to me like the Creator sat down and for whatever reasons decided that the standard model particles would exist, that each one would have properties of spin, charge, mass-energy, isospin, etc. My impression is that the standard model particles were imprinted upon the Higgs field, and when enough energy is present, that energy excites one of the imprinted standard model particles. In my view, the Higgs field is a form of spirit that has been imprinted with the standard model particles. Their properties and lifetimes (stablity) appear arbitrary to me.

So that we don't clash to much, I consider myself a Theosophist. While I do believe in God, I am more open to God as a loving and creative power.

Originally Posted by Mazulu

Hi Kathryn,
Reading about the Higgs field gave me the impression that nature allows invisible/undetectable things to exist. While scientists will insist that the Higgs field gives particles mass, it looks to me like the Higgs field allows standard model particles to exist, with the exception of photons (which don't have mass). It looks to me like the Creator sat down and for whatever reasons decided that the standard model particles would exist, that each one would have properties of spin, charge, mass-energy, isospin, etc. My impression is that the standard model particles were imprinted upon the Higgs field, and when enough energy is present, that energy excites one of the imprinted standard model particles. In my view, the Higgs field is a form of spirit that has been imprinted with the standard model particles. Their properties and lifetimes (stablity) appear arbitrary to me.

The Higgs field is just one of many fields in Quantum Field Theory. There are fields for quarks, electrons and photons too. There are also other particles that travel at light speed, or have no mass, like gluons.
Higgs doesn't allow particles to exist it just slows some of them down to less than light speed. If there were no Higgs the particles would all be moving at c.

So if energy is added to any field then you get it's associated particle.
The closest thing to what you are describing would be space-time itself.

Originally Posted by Seawolf

Are there any publications or credible places that has peer-reviewed research on the 'spiritual' taboo side? The challenge is to come up with good experiments, and there should be a place for those to be found I would hope. If not then maybe the time isn't right. It's too soon, it intrudes too much into our spirituality/religion for the world to come up with experiments.

Check out William Tiller and the William Tiller Foundation.

Originally Posted by joelr

The Higgs field is just one of many fields in Quantum Field Theory. There are fields for quarks, electrons and photons too. There are also other particles that travel at light speed, or have no mass, like gluons.
Higgs doesn't allow particles to exist it just slows some of them down to less than light speed. If there were no Higgs the particles would all be moving at c.

So if energy is added to any field then you get it's associated particle.
The closest thing to what you are describing would be space-time itself.

What you are describing is how the physics community describes the Higgs field. However, without being able to remove the Higgs field, there is no way of knowing if all particles would move at the speed of light, or if the massive particles would decay into photons (which is what I think would happen). I still maintain that Higgs fields, gluon fields, photon fields etc., are all manifestations of spirit. But I do find the "no God" explanation of the physics constants, the laws of physics and the big bang to be awkward and confusing. I am also disturbed that the physics community regularly throws out evidence of ghosts.

It makes more sense to embrace spirit, and the possibility of a spiritual intelligence that created the laws of physics, the physics constants and the big bang by imprinting spirit. That way the big bang occurred as soon as the laws of general relativity were created, the physics constants are just imprints upon spirit, and quantum field theory is how physics experiments detect spirit.

Originally Posted by Mazulu

It makes more sense to embrace spirit, and the possibility of a spiritual intelligence that created the laws of physics.

I agree with this. But one can embrace spirit/God without believing that they are detectable by scientific means.
Faith is the key, IMHO

[r6r6]

Originally Posted by Mazulu

In my view, the Higgs field is a form of spirit

Finally, someone who shows the first signs of grasping how It Is, not how they would like it to be. imho

Physical / energy = fermionic matter, bosonic forces--- other than gravity --- and gravity aka space-time by some.

The Higgs field is in the bosonic forces catagory


All of the above is spirit-2. Simple not complex.

Katheryn uses the word "intangible" in association with word "spirit".

Spirit-1 intention ergo metaphysical-1 mind/intellect and and any concepts thereof, is also "intangible",

gravity is intangible,

the photon except when interacting with electron is intangible,

dark energy and dark matter are intangible,

virtual particles are intangible except of there indirect affects on other observed particles.

She also associates the word "consciousness" with her definition of "spirit". Consciouness = twoness and a relationship between any twoness and gravity is the minimal relattionship for any and all fermions or bosons of our finite occupied space Universe, consciousness--- neral network-- ergo awareness with the most complex consciousness being associated with most complex biologicals, humans.

Katheryn also appears to have more desire to connect some alledged afterlife with spirit that actual current life, and that mediation, prayer and contemplation is how to "perecive" spirit.

Prayer, mediation and contemplaction we all do to some degree in our lives and they are all associated with our physical neural systems.

Metaphysical-1 = mind/intellect and is resultant of consciousness / awareness that all neural system biologicals have.

So then the question becomes about degrees of consciousness i.e. degrees of consciousness that is less and less once we begin to consider biologicals without a nervous system.

Ex someone here saying that plants--- no nervous system ---have feelings. Well it is not feelings like a biological with neural system.

BUt again, teh minimal degree of consciousness is twoness with a ninmal gravitational relationship between. imho

r6