Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dark Mind
I think I'm just more confused, I don't fully understand what it has to do with shadows being a part of "other" dimensions and therefore being an interaction of light across these dimensions. I understand shadows to be a lack of light, and if there is a lack of light there is also a source of light. A shadow is merely caused from some object blocking and reflecting the light away from it's prior course, causing the area that was in the light's path to become dark. The light doesn't disappear, it is just reflected and scattered so we can't tell where it goes unless it is reflected into another shady area.
|
Dear Group,
i appreciate the responses..and do apologize for any confusion..being at best a curious type and not a 'scientist' ...
I am trying in my limited way to get a grasp of the fundamentals and to apply metaphors in ways that might help us view the problem form an 'outside of the box' perspective.
Call it a reality check.
See...we all agree that shadows are 'real' since we see them every day. But what is the 'reality' of a shadow..it has no mass..indeed, it is only the negative or polar mirror to something which is much more substantial..the light source.
Then again, a bumble bee passing through a field doppled by light and shadow might not see bright white light and dark zones..but yellow and purple ones..or some other chromatic scaling in the light.
So in that way I agree with the poster who says even a shadow is a freqeuncy of light..not just the absence of it.
The idea that the mass equivalent of any space should be affected by the light or shadow passing through it is ..well...I leave it quantum theorists and string theorists to posit but I can't see why the mass would change..unless someone posits the weight and density of a photon and not just speed and direction within tolerable uncertainties [a la Heisenberg]
Indeed, go measure the mass of a shadow...
But ..you ask...if that's how you feel..why ask the question? I do so becuase I am trying to wrap my head around the concepts of string theories, parallel universes and above all the Zero Point Field. How would one go about measuring the zero point field..and is the ZPF the ether from which thought takes form as some physicists are now postulating [bringing them ever closer to a buddhist perspective rather than a judeo-christian cosmology].
In the buddhist perspective all 'reality' is a self-created illusion..a trick of light..just like the illusion of shadows..light projected on to a neutral field, or a void, out of which come manifestations. One can only determine light from shadow when give a surface or a field through which the distinguishing freqeuncies can pass and be observed.
If Heisenberg is right and the observer affects the experiment then aren't we in effect, the experiment?
If parallel dimensions exist in harmony..or at least in sync..as part of one greater REALITY..then wouldn't that explain ghosts, out of body experiences and all the other observed, recorded and verified events which defy conventional [orthodox] theories about the nature of life or being which were previously reduced to being called the 'figments of ones imagination..'. .hallucinations..etc? Theoretically, under new models these spirits not only could exist, they'd almost certainly have to exist. So that means , even though they appear as shadows, phantoms, plasma coils and such to us..they are in fact real..despite not having verifiable mass.
Is that why some scientists dare not go anywhwere near an experiment that might prove the probability of quantum life after material death, give credence to the immortality of the soul..or validate the claims of some tested 'psychics and NDE survivors of 'having contact with dead relatives and alien intelligences who are locked in other dimensions intersecting with our own? Are they afraid that doing so would bring them or their theories into disrepute? Are they afraid of violat ing a deal they made with the vatican a couple hundred years ago to not investigate paranormal phenomena and leave all the soul stuff to the Church?
Maybe it sounds too abstract and weird..new age or old-school [and 'gnostic'] to go around giving thought and theoretical credibility to the notions of ghosts and spirits exisiting on a parallel but bridgeable plane to our reality.. and in finding such existence being fully consistent with current physics theory..but no more abstract and weird to me than the arguments, once upon a time, about how many angels could dance on the head of a pin...or the idea that you and i may be real but that our[interdimensional] shadows are just illusions..
