Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by nebel, Dec 8, 2017.
And if I disagree with god , what then ? Or any body .
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Can you disagree with Potential ?
Therein lies an important perspective leading to understanding of reality. The Implicate Order.
The Implicate becomes Explicated via mathematical functions.
No I'm asking for something Bohm wrote that speaks about "infinite potential."
I've looked on the web and can't find anything. I'm wondering whether you have made it up, as you did with that stuff about "pure energy", which Bohm never said.
Depends on your definition of Potential. I have a feeling you view the term from a limited perspective.
(can you come up with a verbatim quote of Einstein saying: "Energy equals mass times the speed of light squared" or did he just write E = Mc^2 on a blackboard and everyone went "oooooohhhhhhhhh"!)?
Doesn't really matter how I present my perspective, does it? I'll let te video speak for itself. But if you refuse to watch my evidence then we are forever doomed to misinterpretation based on a "perceived" use of "misnomers".....Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The Implicate Order is just another description of Universal Potential.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
He wrote a book about it; "Wholeness and the Implicate Order". If you are truly interested in science, please do watch this video. It will open windows on the still "unresolved" conflict between "quantum" and "relativity".
So Infinite Potential is mentioned , discussed , in this book . Highlighted .
OK so quote me a passage from the book, as I'm sure you will have read it, in which Bohm speaks of "infinite potential".
I've asked you this three times now and you still have not given me any instance of Bohm using these words.
You don't want to watch my links, why should I bother to provide you them?
Maybe posting it would entice one to watch those links?
I have been accused of posting too many links in support of my narratives. I do that because of my limited knowledge of quantum physics and I use the references to show a more scientific narrative (with maths) which I believe supports my perspective. But some people here deign this approach beneath their "professional status" and simply ignore what I believe to be pertinent information.
In this case I linked to a biography of David Bohm and his contributions to science. I doubt that many bothered to download this book, and which a gain in popularity is due to "rediscovery" of Bohmian Mechanics.
I posted a link to the entire book "Wholeness and the Implicate Order" available for free as .pdf.
AFAIK, this is a "must read" for serious scientists.
Einstein and Oppenheimer seemed to have been impressed with Bohm's work and every review speaks very positively about his "deep" understanding of quantum physics. But I am not obligated to cite chapter and verse of every link or "term" used by the author.
Should we cite the laws of "entanglement" every time we speak of "spooky action at a distance"?
Because you made a claim and you should be willing to support it in writing, in line with the forum rules. Referring people to long videos, or whole books, won't do. You need to be able to provide a reference that supports your claim that Bohm spoke about a concept called "infinite potential".
But you won't, so I am going to conclude you can't and you have made it up, just as you seem to have made up the (absurd) claim that Bohm spoke of "pure energy".
The Energy of a Trillion Atomic Bombs in Every Cubic Centimeter of Space!
Michael Talbot and David Bohm (in quotes) in Talbot's The Holographic Universe, Chapter 2: The Cosmos as Hologram, p.51
So the Bohm quote is: "This excitation pattern is relatively autonomous and gives rise to approximately recurrent, stable and separable projections into a three-dimensional explicate order of manifestation,"
Nothing about "infinite potential", then. The rest is by somebody called Talbot, apparently, and not even that refers to "infinite potential".
The Two Kinds of Order, David Bohm
Everything Forever: Learning To See Timelessness
Author: Gevin Giorbran
"Seeing Beyond Time into the Realm of All Possibilities"
Thanks for at least getting away from videos and onto the written word. Now we're getting somewhere.
But these are the words of some guy called Giorbran who seems to have no science qualifications and has written a number of woo-like books, of which this appears to be one.
I've look into Bohm's "holomovement" idea but I can't see any notion of infinite seas of energy or potential. Bohm did come up with the concept of the quantum potential, but that's an expression derived from Schrodinger's equation so is obviously something else.
I wonder if Giorbran has bolted together holomovement and vacuum zero point energy and made this up, or something.
No, the idea is old.
Bohm refined the holographic concept from the perspective of Bohmian Mechanics.
Holonomic brain theory
This seems to link with Hameroff and Penrose, ORCH OR.
The Holonomy concept is a result of Bohm's "Holomovement"
OK, let's drop the "infinity", it just complicates matters.
Bohm definitely did use the phrase; "Pure Potential" as the plenum in which the Implicate forms, prior to Explication in reality.
Separate names with a comma.