EFTA00843467.pdf

From: Deepak Chopra To: Karla Galdamez ‹ > CC: KLEIN" INOD KUMAR SEHGAL Asin 2384 , Paul Werbos •, SISIr roy , Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal T APJ , Vivekanand Pande Vimal , Murty Hari , Alex Hanke "Vasavada, Kashyap V" Robert Boyer fried Bleher john.kineman Dean Radin Randi Gerl Brian Josephson Joseph McCard Subject: Re: [MoM] Re: [Sadhu Sanga] Paper - A New Photon Model Resolves Current Physics & Cosmology Paradoxes Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2018 16:17:51 +0000 Karla Appreciate your comment that scientific formulations concepts and facts are symbolic representations of an unbounded reality with inseparability of all existence That which we call mind brain body universe are human constructs for our species specific mode of knowing and experience . The species as a biological organism is also a human construct . We are not a biological organism but a species of consciousness . Would you agree ? Deepak Chopra MD Chopra Foundation Jiyo Chopra Center for Wellbeing www.discoveringyourcosmicself.com ;'1,1486494082887 email-signature-orderjpg On Apr 3, 2018, at 12:41 AM, Karla Galdamez < > wrote: Dear Stan, George, Avtar and particularly Vinod, Thank you very much for your kindest correspondence regarding the concept of energy. Indeed energy can mean several different concepts within physics, all relating to the physical accepted concepts of nature and its interactions. In relativistic physics we encounter E = mc^2, in quantum theory, E = h*nu, in classical mechanics, we think of potential and kinetic energy etc., and in chemical physics we can allude to the idea of zero point energy; in condensed matter, zero point motion and forth come coherent states or matter as a representation basis; in cosmology extensions can be made for the energy of the vacuum, false vacuum EFTA00843467 (depending on meta-stability), the idea of a cosmological constant (in the Einstein Field Equations, EFE ) as a representation of the energy density of the vacuum and its association of zero point energy in matter fields (via harmonic representation etc. ). The main point is that we have many different descriptions for the 'concept' of energy, and similarly speaking for zero point energy, its regime of operability and discrepancies between observed and theoretical values. We seem to 'feel' comforted by the various existing definitions because those have provided great success in our day to day living from riding our cars to work, riding airplanes from one continent to another, as well as carrying operational vehicles in space, needless to mention the day to day technology with which we live from cell phones, televisions to computers etc.. At the same time, believing that we have neared a conclusive or even comprehensive understanding of energy would ultimately be quite a false premise and stand. Such stance could mean that, in a large scale, we have solved our problem between quantum mechanics and general relativity, that we can easily traverse from the EFE back to the Schrodinger equation by shrinking scales (disregarding specialized stress energy tensors..), that force fields and our understanding of localizable points of matter are always simple mathematical extensions of one another. The point is that conclusively speaking, the concept of energy is far from being a well established constant, but varies from scale to scale from which a universal frame only exists as an epistemic understanding and not ontological in nature. I believe that it is worth going back to Bohr's argument of inseparability as a source for understanding that observations are not ascribed to the objects of measurement or the devices of measurement but to the interaction between the agency of observation along with the above. Thus, maybe we can take a look at energy as an interaction term, not just with the object of observation, the measurement of observation but also make an inclusive point of including the observer. Maybe, the reason why we have, otherwise known as 'deterministic' laws in physics (i.e. apparently observer independent), is because 'somehow' the observer cancels out, within certain yet un-parametrized equations, or that in some long range unknown limit, the observer for all practical purposes, corresponds to higher orders of accuracy, and our 'current laws' are only a first order approximation to a greater, more encompassing theory where 'process' and 'interaction' take the place of our current object oriented science which, by its formalism, accentuates the apparent divide between object - subject. Therefore, concepts of PK, of associated altered states of consciousness whereby matter can be affected, or through which sequences of events can be influenced correspond to a deeper interaction between the 'Mind' of the observer, and a primary constituent of matter, or matter fields. Possibly, such interaction takes place at the level of zero point energy, zpe, which is also a vastly complex and varying subject within the various scales of operation - from cosmology, to condensed matter systems, to physical chemistry. Just one water molecule is believed to contain above 20 *K_bT of energy at room temperature, there are in the order of 10^25 molecules of water in just one liter, gather just a few liters of water and there is close approximation of a solar flare in a portion of your house swimming pool - only if we could access it! The ample and inaccessible aspect of zpe has created a association, within spiritual traditions, between ordinary states of perception and altered states of mind. ZPE has been utilized to depict or point at heightened states of awareness, which, contrary to the word 'heightened' only occur when physically the meditator enters a deeply relaxed state. The sensation is as if 'falling deeper within', relaxing within to a place intensely quiet and incredibly active - (a concept nearly foreign in the west 'deeply relaxed while deeply aware, awake'). At the same time, it is also not be confused with the fuzz, and buzz of the city, but metaphorically speaking, the meditator's state is to be more correctly associated with the underlying field upon which all the fuzz and buzz reside. Within this deeper state, much of PK and other related paranormal phenomena can be accessed, operated, and, to a degree manipulated at will by the adept practioner. But, so it is, that in wisdom traditions, these states are highly 'hidden' and deeply dwelling within the EFTA00843468 consciousness of the individual; in part for protection of the one practicing and for those around. Once, accessed, the initiate holds a great deal of responsibility and a powerful, surrendering aspect, of a great expansive sense of a Unified Self or expansive awareness ; which stands in opposition, or as a contrary existence, to what is generally experienced (in western traditions) as the contracting phenomena of deep self identification or ego. As in so far as physics, chemistry and mathematics hold within their intrinsic primary object of formulation, dynamics or manipulation as explanatory models for 'what is observed' in the natural world, the existence of Platonic forms; and, as in so, far those Platonic forms have their origins in the metaphysical; one can arrive at an understanding whereby all concepts, and formulations currently existent within the natural sciences are ultimately but symbols and pointers to a greater reality, one that is most easily accessed within the subjective experience of the Self, of the ultimate union between Spirit and Universal Energy or the Divine. With much affection and gratitude to All, Best, Karla On Mon, A r 2, 2018 at 10:13 AM, 'George Weissmann' via Matters Of Mind wrote: n p c t e practitioner oes not impart energy to the system, at least in the most common cases, but imparts information; the energy comes from the environment Sent from my iPhone On Apr 2, 2018, at 03:26, Stanley A. KLEIN wrote: Vinod, thanks for your response to my comment about conservation of energy. However, your last comment included PK. You said: "lt is at this subtle astral ontological levels that Psi and PKs originate". I'm especially concerned about PK. How does one do PK in a manner that doesn't create kinetic energy? Could you give an example? On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 1:19 AM, VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL > wrote: What I was trying to highlight and bring to the notice of Dr. Avtar Singh was that the physical energy, which comes from the conversion of mass (m) following E—mcA2 is not the Zero Point State or Cosmic Consciousness (CC) as he refers to. In between the stage of the Zero Pint State and Physical energy, as quite well understood by the contemporary physical sciences, there does exist a vast subtle astral ontology of nature, which though unknown to the contemporary science, but it is vividly observable in the reproducible Samaadhi state experiences. It is at this subtle astral ontological levels that Psi and PKs originate On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 11:45 AM, Stanley A. KLEIN wrote: Vinod, I think you may be interested in something other than what is dealt with by the word "energy". The word "energy" is very, very well understood by standard physics. I'm not at all saying that you are wrong in your quest for something important, but you should be using a different word for that purpose. The physics energy is quite clear in meaning and it is a quantity that is totally conserved. It can not be destroyed or created. It is even possible that the total energy of the universe is zero (negative potential energy balancing all that mass and kinetic energy). Stan On Sun, Apr I, 2018 at 10:09 PM, VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL < > wrote: I Respected Dr. Avtarji, EFTA00843469 My request to you is that kindly don't be in a hurry to jump to conclusions. Vinod: "...how do you relate Zero Point state or CC to the e.m energy and what are the intermediate stages of conversion from Zero Point State till e.m energy?" Avtar: Please remove the prejudiced e.m. characterization of energy. Energy is just a definition of physical state of an entity. When m kgm of mass converts to E joules of energy, it follows E=mCm'2 law. E could be in the form of any energy - kinetic, thermal, chemical, nuclear, or e.m. etc. My view has been that kinetic, thermal, chemical, nuclear and e.m are not the energies in itself but these are effects of some energy on the matter which we detect and sense thru our senses and physical instruments. So what is energy and what is its ontological reality? What is the "substance" which constitutes the energy itself? I think these are the questions which don't have an easy answer in Modern Physics. So instead of using the word e.m energy, which you say is prejudiced towards e.m energy, I use the word physical energy. The word physical energy will encompass all sort of energies- as enlisted by you viz -- thermal, kinetic, chemical, nuclear or e.m etc. So I rephrase my query to you as in the following manner i) Is physical energy ( thermal, chemical, nuclear, kinetic, e.m ) and Zero Point State or CC one and same things or distinct? ii) If the physical energy and CC are distinct, how physical energy is related to CC and what are the different intermediate stages from the manifestation of CC as physical energy? I have made above quite clear and pinpointed queries and I I expect your response accordingly. E=mC**2 applies at all scales including infinite orders of magnitude of mass/energy below Planck's scale or infinite orders of magnitudes above the visible universe scales including the defined Zero Point state of Cosmic Consciousness as well as the — ".... trans-physical realm of nature which is indicated as the Astral Realm of nature and also as vividly visible to yogis in the reproducible Samaadhi state experiences If E-mC62 is applicable to all the realms of nature including dark matter and below the plancian level astral realm of nature, this means there is the presence of some e.m field/physical light in the realms of dark matter and astral realm also. A direct corollary of this is that by now scientists should have made an empirical detection of the Dark Matter and the Astral world below the Planck level by sensing/detecting some signal of e.m energy from these realms. But this has not happened, This proves that still there is no empirical evidence that if E-mcA2 is universally applicable in all the realms of nature including the realm of dark matter and the astral realm. so what you say is your intelligent guess. Yesterday, Dr. Paul Werbos made a query to me if dark matter has the mass. I indicated quite clearly that I don't know. And how can I know when there has been empirical detection and studies of the dark matter? Even if there is some mass of dark matter, what sort of mass it is? What is the mechanism by which mass is conferred to dark matter? Unless there is no clear and convincing solution to these issues along with empirical evidence, it will be too early, naive and premature to conclude that E-mCA2 is universally applicable to the entire realm of nature including that of the dark matter, below Planck level astral realm of nature. ." Also, please remember that the Zero Point State entails all possible states of existence —' zero to infinity, all mass/energy/space/time, astral/Samadhi. mind/matter/consciousness. etc" Yes, I agree that Zero-point state or CC entails all the possible states of existence. But that Zero Point state is not synonymous with the physical energy whose effects in form of thermal, chemical, e.m, nuclear, kinetic are visible to us in the physical; world. Hence, your following statement is invalid — "My knowledge and understanding dictate me that between the Zero Point state and e.m energy, there does exist a vast ontology of nature which can't be defined in terms of the known physical fields and elementary particles as known to the contemporary science. This is this trans-physical realm of nature which is indicated as the Astral Realm of nature and also as vividly visible to yogis in the reproducible Samaadhi state experiences." Since the physical energy which manifests as kinetic, chemical, thermal, nuclear and e.m effects is NOT synonymous with the zero point state or CC, therefore, it is in between CC and physical energy that there exists a vast ontology of nature, which though quite vividly observable in the reproducible 1pp Samaadhi state experiences but still beyond the empirical detection of the contemporary science. As you are well aware that contemporary investigative technology of science is not capable of going deeper than 10A-16M, leave alone Planck level 10^-36 M or below Planck level Such statements are made in scriptures and theological literature because of a lack of scientific knowledge in those times when these were written, these are obsolete in modern times. EFTA00843470 My above statement is not based on the knowledge of obsolete scriptures but based on the reproducible Samaadhi state experiences of Yogis in our own contemporary period and age. The contemporary science needs to learn a lot from the findings of these Samaadhis state experiences as well as from old scriptures. Regards Vinod Sehgal On Sun, Apr I, 2018 at 10:40 PM, Asingh2384 < > wrote: Hi Stan: Agree, you said correctly that - " Sorry, but that one can't have an observer in WC frame. That would take infinite energy to go that fast." At WC, observer and observed are merged into ONE wholesome Zero Point State entailing all existence. It would take infinite energy to accelerate to C if observer mass is maintained. The only way the observer could attain C if he/she coverts its own mass into kinetic energy as per the new photon model described my paper I sent in my earlier e-mail. Best Regards Avtar ----Original Message From: Stanley A. KLEIN To: Joseph McCard < Cc: Asin h2384 >; Paul Werbos < ; Deepak Chopra >: VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL >; sisir roy >, Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal BT APJ >; Vivekanand Pandey Vimal < >; Murty Hari ; Alex Hankey >: cc: Vasavada, Kash ap V Robert Boyer <]♦ >: to: ; Siegfried Bleher john.kineman Dean Ra in ■; Randi Gerl Dan Ghiocel Sent: Fri, Mar 30, 2018 2:42 pm Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] Paper - A New Photon Model Resolves Current Physics & Cosmology Paradoxes Avtar, you said: " an observer in WC frame will experience Heaven-like conditions (Eternity, bliss, zero entropy), all within ONE universe." Sorry, but that one can't have an observer in WC frame. That would take infinite energy to go that fast. Paul, you said: "But the two experiments 1 have proposed, to discriminate between KQED versus MQED, would ALSO re-open the question of (new types) of classical model. " How expensive would it be to do the cheaper of your two experiments? If you were a betting person what do you think the odds are for getting your revolutionary MQED to be valid thus displacing incredibly beautiful KQED with its Born rule. Stan On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 2:07 PM, Joseph McCard <IMIE > wrote: Avtar, joe wrote: So, WRT consciousness, you have no comment. Avtar wrote: Yes, law of entropy applies. The Zero Point state is the zero entropy state. Entropy increases with higher mass states. EFTA00843471 joe wrote: When mass is re-converted back to energy, is the quality of the energy restored? That is, back to zero entropy? So, as long as there is inter-converion, the universe will never die? Avtar wrote: One physical universe; no hell/heaven but feels like one depending upon the state of being and its entropy. joe wrote: Although the next to sentences are out of order, they fit here I think. Avtar wrote: One Cosmic Consciousness energy appearing in many different relativistic forms depending upon the awareness of the observer (V/C). joe wrote: That I can understand. perhaps dependent on what you (Avtar) is aware of? Not aware of ghosts, future events, events occurring elsewhere...So, for you, there is only the One Universe. joe wrote: I agree with most of what you say, but I have trouble buying into this. There is a long theological tradition that espouses a separate inner reality. Why do you deny it? There are many personal experiences which I have had, ands of course many others, that would disagree with you. I guess you have never had an experience that you cannot explain using your model. For example, how would I know, the day before, that there would be an assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan? Did I guess? Am I lying? Am I confused or psychopathic, as Paul seems to have implied? Perhaps you might say that past, present, and future of this universe exist simultaneously in the present? Or, perhaps you simply pay no attention to such claims,. discard them like bad data, fake news , because they do not fit into your framework. I asked you in the previous post about consciousness, and you did not say anything. is that because you are not interested? Avtar wrote: One Cosmic Consciousness energy appearing in many different relativistic forms depending upon the awareness of the observer (V/C). joe wrote: That I can understand. perhaps dependent on what you (Avtar) is aware of? Not aware of ghosts, future events, events occurring elsewhere...So, for you, there is only the One Universe. Avtar wrote: An Observer in V=0 (black hole) frame of reference will experience hell-like conditions (maximum entropy) and an observer in V=C frame will experience Heaven-like conditions (Eternity, bliss, zero entropy), all within ONE universe. joe wrote: Do you say this from your own personal experience of heaven and hell-like conditions? joe On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 4:26 PM, Asingh2384 wrote: Hi Joe: An Observer in V=0 (black hole) frame of reference will experience hell-like conditions (maximum entropy) and an observer in V=C frame will experience Heaven-like conditions (Eternity, bliss, zero entropy), all within ONE universe. Regards Avtar ----Original Message---- From: Joseph McCard To: Asingh2384 < Cc: Paul Werbos ; Stanley A. KLEIN Dee•ak Chopra ; VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL , sisir 10 >; Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal BT APJ >; Vivekanand Pande Vimal < >; Murty Hari >; Alex Hankey >: cc: Vasavada, Kash ap V Robert Boyer < >; to: Siegfried Bleher < >: john.kineman EFTA00843472  Dean Radin Randi Gerl • Dan Ghiocel < Sent: Fri, Mar 30, 2018 12:14 pm Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sangaj Paper -A New Photon Model Resolves Current Physics & Cosmology Paradoxes Avtar, Thank-you. You wrote: The net energy of the universe consisting of relativistic mass-energy, gravitational energy, and relativistic kinetic energy always remains constant as described in my paper. joe wrote: Does the Law of Entropy apply? Although the total mass and energy remain constant, it is my understanding that energy is constantly leaving the universe and being re-freshed and returned back into it. So, for example, a baby born 10,000 years ago is just as energetic as one born today. Do you suggest there just this one physical universe, the one currently familiar to us? Is there room for a heaven, inner reality, or other possible worlds? Is mass simply concentrated energy? So, they don't really become something else, they just change form? So this dissolving is simply rarefaction and compression of an unknown and unknowable pure energy? What are you saying consciousness is, and what role, if any does consciousness play, as you see it? The universe model predicts universe expansion velocities as a function of size that determine the transformation of mass to energy or vice versa allowing the net energy to remain constant while the amounts of mass, gravity, and kinetic energies change. No, this is not like honey in tea, this relativistic physics with proper mass-energy transformation physics included. Best Regards Avtar ----Original Message---- From: Joseph McCard < To: Asingh2384 Cc: Paul Werbos < >; Stanley A. KLEIN ak ea Chopra < >; VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL < >; sisir roy < >; Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal BT APJ ; Vivekanand Pande Vimal >; Murty Hari >; Alex Hankey < cc: Vasavada, Kash ap V obert Boyer to: Siegfried Bleher >; john.kineman Dean Radin Randi Gerl Dan Ghiocel < Sent: Fri, Mar 30, 2018 11:39 am Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sangaj Paper - A New Photon Model Resolves Current Physics & Cosmology Paradoxes Avtar, You wrote:... mass dissolves to energy joe askes: Yes, and vice versa, energy becoming mass. So, O.K., how do you see it as what dissolving, and becoming what? : "It is important to realize that in physics today, we have no knowledge of what energy is. We do not have a picture that energy comes in little blobs of a definite amount." joe asks: what motivates the dissolving and un-dissolving? Is it like honey into hot tea? EFTA00843473  ( I will not ask about the math, because I think all maths are artificial constructs trying to impose people's own ideas of order and predictability. which of course it is ) joe r.t You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Matters Of Mind" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to matters-of- mind+unsubscribe®goglegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to matters-of-mind®googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://grsiips.google.corn/d/msgid/matters-of-mind/2D50A892- 811C-4F8E-9815-8ADF270088B8V040aol.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. Karla Maria Galdamez, Ph.D. Theoretical Physics. Research Consultant. EFTA00843474