> I wonder if you read stuff like Kryon, Robert Monroe and Paleidian info.
> Even Michael Rhodes, down your way.

No.

> Concepts like ... various

Almost all of these rather stretch even my mental filters :-)

> And my opinion is that most of science is flawed [abbreviation restored
:-)] in trying to suss out the
> universe because they're trying to apply narrow local laws to non-local
> scenarios, even excluding local parameters that do not fit.

I think that quite a few people very close to orthodoxy in Physics would
agree to the general sense of that. I can't start to establish if they are
correct or not. If they are correct then nothing is correct :-). Within
mainstream Science many of the putative string theories, quantum theory
variants and various other theories which I don't even recognise the name of
variants, perceive reality as we see it as an illusion. Occult magic is
verboten yet we believe in something every bit as bizarre "just because it
works" - if you took the core precepts of Quatum Mechanics and described
them appropriately they would sound like most religions. QM does have the
advantage of being able to be made to jump through hopps on demand even
though it appears to be so ludicrous - religion for scientists :-)

Some of this has got as far as the edge of popular consciousness:

    If dark matter exists then there is an unknown anti-gravitational force
which we don't know of playing games with the universe in a manner that we
don't understand. If dark matter doesn't exist then we can't even yet put
names on what it is that we don't undersatnd that's playing games with the
universe. Scientists invoke this new force to explain eg the behaviour of
star system halos when such behaviour needs explaining. Yet the solidity of
classical Physics doesn't seem to be questioned. Antigravity will still get
you thrown out of the patent office, but if you could utilise this newly
observed effect ... :-). (The resultant 'machine' may be many orders of
magnitude too large to fit on the planet alas).

    The speed of light may or may not be falling or rising or have fallen or
risen or ... .
The current debate is as to whether this HAS happened. The question as to
whether this COULD happen has long since been unexciting. At one stage a few
decades ago people were labelled fanatics for simply suggesting that it was
a possibility.

> anyway, this topic is too huge, even for OT.

Concur



        RM

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu