Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Schrödinger’s hypothetical cat and the quantum idea that observation or measurement of an event alters the event can be used to explain why some people die of cancer and others do not.
Everyone, virtually everyone, has cancer in their bodies.
Once a cancer is observed (measured) or found and acknowledged it is altered by the finding (observation) and become active, in a detrimental way, just as Schrödinger’s cat is dead or alive once the box in which it was (figuratively) encased with a vial of radioactive poison is hypothetically broken.
It takes an observation of the cat in the box to determine if the cat is alive or dead after the radioactive vial is broken. Before the observation, one doesn’t know if the cat is alive or dead, and the cat is, according to quantum theory, neither alive nor dead until it is looked at – observed, measured.
Once a cancer is found – and, again, everyone has a cancer in their body – the observation of it will activate the cancer in a deleterious way.
Just as Schrödinger’s cat will surely be found to be dead, once it is observed, one’s cancer will surely become deadly once it is observed.
The idea that early detection stems cancer’s advance is a canard. Early detection merely shortens the life of those who have the detection.
There is, however, a quantum possibility that one can, just as Schrödinger’s cat could (hypothetically), collapse the observation – in quantum physics, it’s a “wave” that is collapsed – and not have a killer cancer.
Consciousness of a positive kind might deter further growth of a cancer or put it in remission.
Some people do this, and prayer, as a deliberate conscious act, might also be a positive element in keeping cancer contained.
But it is the detection of cancer and it’s measurement that brings on the deadly aspect of the cancer; that is, the cancerous growth is accelerated by its observation.
Those who don’t have a medical examination, but who have a cancer within, will not be affected by the cancer in an abnormal way. They will die naturally, late in life, with the ordinary malfunction of human organs and the vicissitudes of old age.
So if you think you should have an MRI, think again. Quantum theory is your out.
Monday, May 19, 2008
If UFOs are depicted in primitive petroglyphs and the stories in the Hebrew Bible are authentic [The Ezekiel vision and the Elias episode for instance], the message inherent to those early sightings remains cryptic.
AmerIndian myths and accounts of UFOs (or things similar to them) are still without clarity. The message, if there was one, was obscure and is still obscure.
The alleged Alexander [The Great] sighting(s) and Constantine’s “cross in the sky” epiphany, despite the accrued Christian context, were devoid of a clear message.
And the Middle Ages battles of UFOs seen in the skies left nothing to explain what that was all about.
In the modern era (of UFOs), starting with the airship occurrences of the 1890s up through the 1947 raft of flying saucer sightings and into the year 2008, UFOs (and their progenitors, if any) have provided no message to humankind, no decipherable message anyway.
The absence of any message – and UFOs have had ample opportunity to leave a message if the things wanted to – is significant.
Like God, after the Torah, and Jesus, in the New Testament, who spoke in parables, UFOs have been obscurant. Why?
If alien beings pilot UFOs (or some of them), they’ve had enough time to understand the human mind-structure, and ability to communicate or receive communication.
The hypotheses by some “ufologists” that UFOs have left messages, via symbols or symbolic behavior, is just flaky, unless UFOs, like God, are playing a game of some kind with humanity.
But because so many years have gone by, eons actually, the game of UFOs (and God) has worn thin, to the point that human beings don’t or shouldn’t care.
If there is a message being proffered by UFOs, we humans are either too stupid to get it or the message is a garbled mess, by insane creatures, a message that can’t be deciphered because it is totally irrational (like the message of the Creator).
Or there has been no message to be gleaned. UFOs just can’t communicate, or are as confounded by us we are of them, and choose to remain mute.
Either way, it’s a sum-zero situation, with no winners…..
Friday, May 16, 2008
A Canadian film-maker who likes UFOs takes umbrage with our idea that he and his cronies diminish the seriousness of UFOs by using them as a front for beer-drinking and womanizing.
Most ufologists think some UFO phenomena are serious matters, even going so far in some quarters to say they represent an apocalyptic omen.
Other UFO blokes (us included) think that UFOs are a benign (thus far), unknown intrusion of several phenomena, one of which may be serious (an alien presence of some kind).
Science eschews UFOs because the field has been, since day one, infected by crazies who have tried to use UFOs (sometimes successfully, as in the case of George Adamski) to augment their ego-needs.
Serious “ufologists” have distanced themselves form the crazies but there is a renewed effort, by the Canadian film-maker and his pals, to re-invigorate the nonsense element within the UFO community.
The recent release of some British government UFO files has created an environment that might generate a sensible interest by the public and media in the UFO phenomena.
But that sensible interest will be undercut by those who use UFOs as a pretext to act silly and be cavalier, all the time pretending to be investigating UFOs seriously.
The 1950s created an atmosphere of looniness about flying saucers, but with the alleged abduction of Betty and Barney Hill, UFOs took on a sinister aspect.
UFOs have a patina of eeriness about them that is more than subliminal, even though nothing untoward about UFOs has been proven, in the scientific or military sense.
But UFOs may contain a serious threat to humanity, or not. We just don’t know.
Yet, UFO aficionados who use the phenomena as an excuse to get wasted and traverse the world as playboys and playwomen do an injustice to those who want science and media, even the public, to give UFOs a bit more concern than has happened since the contactee days.
The party-people diminish UFO study as their ballyhooed shenanigans give continued credence to others that UFOs are the bailiwick of the fringe, and not anything that should be taken seriously.
So our plaint that the film-maker is subverting ufology, and the investigators he has shilled into his fun-loving approach to UFOs, is only that: a plaint.
The film-maker can have all the fun he wants, but let’s not use his tomfoolery as a template for ufology or UFO research.
Life is short, and partying is okay, if one is a hedonist or epicurean.
But for those who think there’s something serious going on, within the human condition, and that UFOs may be a part of that, then the UFO happy-crowd should be ignored or avoided.