What good is religion?

RE: What good is religion?
SUBTOPIC: Metaphysics on the concepts of Wicca and Witchcraft.
※→ Kokomojojo, et al,

My apologies for taking so long.

This rings true as a simple thumbnail explanation. But in reality, Metaphysics looks past any religious baggage. All forms of science really operate (ideally) in a realm where the concepts of "secularism" and "non-secularism" even exist. Metaphysics is not bound by any traditional scientific protocols → in which scientific protocols necessarily come first in examination explaining the unknown under test (UUT).

(COMMENT)

All science is supposed to be an assessment of the laws driving the universe, uncorrupted by religious convictions or an unrestricted imagination.

“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”
................................................................................................................Arthur C. Clarke
​

In a Metaphysical study of a UUT is only considered if the natural explanations have been rigorously considered (Occam's Razor). You do not complicate the assessment by immediately jumping to the supernatural. IF there is a UUT (for instance the claim of a soul) is credibly reported (unexplained manifestation), THEN there must be energy involved. Metaphysics dictates that whatever was seen by the human eye → has an energy signature (footprint). The examination will include the use of (but certainly not limited to) a Spectrum Analyzer (with both RF Amplifiers and SSD Emission Detectors) to determine if the UUT has any Electromagnetic Signature. This is about as free from religious contamination as can be, as it is scientific and technical intelligence information obtained by quantitative and qualitative analysis of data. The first idea is that IF there was something visible to the human eye, THEN (the simplest assumption) the event is someplace in the 300 to 800 THz range or something that generates harmonics (even chemical activity at the molecular level involves energy) that falls in that range.

Before you start to explore that which is beyond scientific explanation, you must first rule out the scientific explanations. Although you never really rule out NEW epiphanies scientific that come along the way.


Most Respectfully,
R

 

Sort of reminds me of the little pixie/pi that I play with. So the accepted conclusion is that these things are all vibratory in nature, (I know chemical is), and that the human brain can somehow pick up this light energy that I assume is slightly outside our normal visual range, and decode or assign some sort of rational meaning to it? People often meditate and see things as well with their eyes closed, I presume we have no real way of digging into that much deeper outside brain activity areas? Ive never really dug into this, but admittedly its fascinating. So if I read your post correctly you are saying we can scientifically detect something versus nohting?

 

RE: What good is religion?
SUBTOPIC: The practical Science for Metaphysics
※→ Kokomojojo, et al,

BLUF; Generally speaking, I don't like the term "vibrations." I prefer to think of these detection methods in two principal groups:

◈ Spectroscopic Techniques (like that associated with nuclear magnetic resonance)

◈ Spectrometry Techniques. (like that associated with molecular structure determination)​

COMMENT)

In the assessment protocols, you might want to give some consideration to the breakup of the examination of the (unknown under test) UUT into two factions.

◈ Eigenfrequency profiling (the natural resonant frequencies of a system).

◈ Elemental emission and atomic absorption characteristics; and in some cases the way in which the UUT dissipates kinetic energy.​

There are common harmonic inducers used quite frequently where the mathematical profiles cannot accurately describe (your decoding) the modulated properties (information content) observed in some of these systems. These must not generate an obstacle to further examinations.

COMMENT)

When your eyes are "resting" (or on a rest state) there is still brain activity of a bio-electric nature. Assuming that there are neither an eye injury nor a brain injury. Pressure on the eyes can cause minute electrical charges that are transmitted from the retina of the eye in its “resting state." It is also associated with byproducts induced by movement or sound (your vibrations). This is not an unknown condition. It is called Phosphenes.

pharmacokinetics, pharmacogenetics,

(COMMENT)

Let's look at some actual physical questions under examination:

◈ String Theory

◈ Dark Energy

◈ Dark Matter​

In the traditional sciences, there is no way currently to detect these unknown. What we think we detect is an observable effect of something that cannot be explained in any other hypothesis. My personal feeling is that String Theory will never be understood to the degree that it can be subjected to the rigors of the Scientific Method. And there is no real test that can eliminate either dark energy or dark matter. While there is some very interesting arguments and observations - the current teaching is that dark energy makes up ≈ 70% of the detectable energy. And Dark Matter accounts for ≈ 26% of the detectable matter in the universe. The amount of matter that is detectable is maybe about 5% or less.

That means that these three issues are just over the line for being cognitive thought governed by or acting according to some measure of scientific reasoning.

(COMMENT)

There are such reported occurrences as (for example) near-death experiences (NDEs) and out-of-body experiences (OBEs). They both produce the characteristic of a vivid memory that some portion of their consciousness was involved in a recognizable departure from the physical world and then the return.





Most Respectfully,
R

 

Yes, I am in the same boat regarding string theory, and for dark matter and dark energy that is where I jump ship.

While I would agree that for instance there has to be some sort of medium for anything to be capable of setting up a traveling wave but to assume as the science has that this can conveniently be pounded into some form of relativity model is too much of a leap for my agnostic 'prove it or lose it' mindset.

That said it seems reasonable to consider this afaik yet to be identified medium also allows for biological communication dare I say electrically for lack of better term between people for sure and possibly anything considered living. Seems to me Tesla has some theory about that too.

 

RE: What good is religion?
SUBTOPIC: Science for Metaphysical
※→ Kokomojojo, et al,

Maybe we should consider narrowing our focus to one set of anomalies at a time. These might expand by themselves and demonstrate how many UUT are examinations phenomena that are not recognized to exist physically (not capable of being experimentally scrutinized through the scientific method). I will follow your lead.

(COMMENT)

When I say that a hypothesis is "sound and valid," it is really may short hand for → "soundness" being the presentation of the content within the hypothesis is both "logical" in the traditional sense and considered "true." But "validity" is about the "presentation" (syntax, construction, and form).

(COMMENT)

I think we are of one mind. And I do not think the answers are counterintuitive. I am always amazed that scientists keep trying to improve on the original Michelson-Morley Experiment in the search for the medium (the "ether" or something similar) for energy (example: light) with negative results. Of course, each improved experiment came to the same outcome. The wave effect is a wave of what? I do not understand how (for instance) light can act like a particle in some cases and a wave in other cases. Just how does that happen? (RHETORICAL)

(∑ Ω)

I only bring up the examples (dark energy, dark matter, and string theory) to demonstrate that the exploration into the Neotic Science arena and the use of Metaphysics is not quite as ludicrous as it sounds at first hearing. Neither of the three examples, supra, are NOT what the traditional scientific community would label as “pseudoscientific;" but rather they do have a similarity to topics of a para-scientific nature.


Most Respectfully,
R

 

For the MM experiment and the ether I think you may want to check out Ron Hatch. Initially GPS was set up using relativity. Hatch worked for John Deere on auto driving tractors using the GPS. I think it started around 10f, then 3ft until Hatch was hired to work on it. Now its so accurate you can write your name on an 8x11 sheet of paper! Interestingly he claimed that he had to use newton to accomplish it because relativity simply did not produce real accuracy. I think he called it a cosmic drag or something like that. Well he is dead now but I think his published work if it still exists is behind paywalls unfortunately. I guesstimated he was probably using that term as a sort of ether. Oddly enough light still travels through a vacuum bell as far as we can pump down I forget the exact number 29...something. Otherwise I have not really dug into UUT other than a brief drive by and would find it difficult to have a fluent discussion about it.

 

The Torah doesn't specify punishments for other violations of its dietary laws, but the Talmud, which was written at least a millennium later, declares that anyone who fails to keep kosher in any way should be subject to makkot, or 39 lashes.

I would still be very interested in knowing how not eating pork, halal, can be considered religious?

Why can't Muslims wear gold?

Some says ,It was Islam's prophet Mohammed that forbade Muslim men to wear gold jewelry.

Why do Muslims not use toilet paper?
Millions of Muslims and Hindus around the world were bowled over by this need to buy toilet paper since they typically wash their backsides with water. ... “Muslims are required to clean themselves well with water before offering prayers. Cleanliness is half of the faith, according to the teachings of Prophet Mohammad.”

Can Muslims have girlfriends?
Muslims cannot have by law of Islam girlfriends. Islam views girlfriend culture as exploitation of women.

Are Muslims allowed to dance?
A majority of scholars who cite that hadith say it permits dancing under certain conditions: no alcohol, no gender mixing, no effeminate moves, and don't do it excessively. ... Other scholars said dancing is forbidden only if it leads to indecent touching or movements.


what am I missing, I dont see any connection to a deity?