Rupert Sheldrake proposes that order and complexity in the universe is controlled by "morphic fields", which are akin to magnetic or electric fields. They control everything from biological systems, to ant colonies to the formation of galaxies.
For instance, there is a morphic field that regulates the movements of flocks of birds. Studies have shown that the movements of flocks of birds are up to three times faster than an individual bird's reaction time.
http://earthsky.org/earth/how-do-flocki … -in-unison
I think this suggests that there is some kind of higher ordering system in place that guides the bird flocks.
Many of Sheldrake's ideas are considered pseudoscience, but since you are clearly interested in science, have you considered taking some of the free open online courses offered by MIT?
You don't have to register or anything. They're basically just lecture notes of MIT courses made available for free to the public. You can even download the reading materials for some of them. Seems like something you might like.
I know a lot of his ideas are considered pseudoscience. But he does point out some interesting mysteries, like the fact that birds will move in flocks three times faster than their normal reaction time. Since bird flock behavior can be simulated on a computer with field equations, I don't know why an actual field like a magnetic field can't be seriously considered.
It might even be part of the magnetic field itself, as birds have magnetic sensors in their eyes or beaks.
http://www.nature.com/news/pigeons-may- … ds-1.10540
?? That birds may anticipate the actions of their neighbor in a flock does not seem to indicate a force field controlling the cosmic all. It may show that birds are more aware of their surroundings than we realize, but that's all.
I find the morphic field idea interesting but ultimately unconvincing. I think the actions of individiuals can create these effects (shoaling etc) without an explicit force molding the group.
I do find Sheldrake's data on dogs who know when their owners are coming home rather more difficult to explain though. IMHO the data is what matters, and in that area it is quite strong.
And most scientists won't touch anything that's even slightly paranormal, so it doesn't really get investigated much.
Of course not. Until the person claiming knowledge about the paranormal can define what they know, and provide test results (that can be duplicated) there is nothing to investigate except claims. And god knows there are enough of those without any basis in fact already.
It is up to the claimant to provide proof of their claims, not an independent scientist. Their task is to duplicate the data and verify those claims.
Regular people are expected to provide proof from scientific experiments? Really?
That's a total double standard. Scientific research is done every day based on theories with zero evidence. What evidence was there of the Higgs boson before billlions of dollars was put into finding it?
The problem is, people lose their jobs and careers over WHAT they research. If it's not part of what "acceptable", they don't get grants,and they get blacklisted for doing any research on anything paranormal, metaphysical, or outside the norm.
Scientists even get blacklisted simply from publishing abnormal results of regular research.
It's a TOTAL double standard.
To some degree, yes it is a double standard. But would you like to pay for thousands of experiments from crackpots that have no more reason to believe than that they want to and will become famous if it proves true? Or pay only for experiments that have a pretty solid reason to believe they are true?
Of course not. But people shouldn't lose their careers over unusual ideas, or unusual results.
Most scientific breakthroughs have been the result of "unusual" results.
Look at quantum mechanics. There isn't anything more unusual that that. Relativity. Quantum entanglement. Quantum tunneling. These have all been very contested ideas. But we wouldn't have computers or most of our technology if some unusual ideas were banned from being explored.
But none of those things had just an idea. All had some event they would explain or extensive math to back them up. And none of them were simply thrown out with the expectation that someone else would prove them true.
Relativity, for instance, was "proven" mathematically with math that agreed with other events long before it was shown to be true. Einstein did not have the ability or tools to show time contractions - that came much later. Nevertheless the math he came up with showed time contractions along with many other things - things that could be tested and shown.
Dark matter and energy have nothing to back them up, yet they are touted as being true to the public.
Uh, not quite. They are touted as a viable answer to the question of an accelerating, expanding universe. Viable enough to search thoroughly for both. "True" will be when they are found and defined.
Still, they are just a "guess" that fits somewhat into an already unproven theory. There are only a few actual facts. Inflation isn't proven. Even the Big Bang isn't an absolutely proven fact. The cosmic background radiation etc. evidence fit the recycling Torus universe just as easily as it fits a Big Bang universe.
Sheldrake does that pretty well on some subjects.
I am an atheist and reductionist but I respect good data, and I know parapsychologists demonstrated pigeons could home and dogs could smell cancer 30 years before the mainstream would take either seriously. They had good data and got ignored because the mainstream scientists were letting their prejudice stop them from taking it seriously.
It is not about special treatment, it is about applying the same standards across the board.
Shared, non-genetic rules of development:
https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2015/04/12447 … an-predict
The study uses experimental results in avians and comparative analysis of more than 1,200 mammal, avian and reptile species to offer potential insight into a universal design principle.
“In all these species, very different parts of the skeleton, such as fingers, teeth, limbs or vertebrae, evolve variations in size proportions in the same way – even with clearly different genes involved,” Kavanagh said. “This essential similarity among diverse structures seems to be a result of species using a similar style of developing skeletal segments in sequence as an embryo.”
The results suggest that skeletons of different animals may use common self-organizing principles independent of specific genetic underpinnings.
Or that they have a common ancestor and face similar environmental needs. Hard to assign a cause when we know so little about how it all works.
Humans bone structure will evolve to flesh weight. Obesity will make us giants
You may be interested to see this new discovery. These plasma tubes have been depicted and illustrated in 'spiritual' circles for a long long time but disregarded because they were not scientifically proven to exist. http://www.news.com.au/technology/scien … 7379756018
Science has a long way to go in measuring that which is physically tangible in subtle layers of the human body - metaphysical phenomena. At this time it's impossible to measure metaphysics with only physical measuring devices. Of course physics use mathematics which is fine but there is so much theory and not much proof that is tangible to the human eye.
There is a body of knowledge on subtle bodies which uses the fourfold model that originated from Steiner's work. Written by Dr Samuel Sagan, there is a depth of knowledge on life force - the etheric layer. Etheric sensing and life force has a knowledge of its own. Animals have a heightened sense of the etheric layer. Humans also have this but because we are now more interested in figuring things out with our heads, over time we have lost much of our acute abilities with our own life force to feel and sense. We only use a quarter of what we could.
Flocks of birds flying in unison as they do is to do with this etheric layer. For science to prove this however will be like waiting for the rapture!! The scientific discovery by the young female scientist is heading into an interesting direction. I dare say it will take a lot more time before there is a bridge between physical and metaphysics.
Meantime I'll be content to have my experiences using my own subtle bodies to see these phenomena. I'm not wasting time waiting.
...how many "subtle bodies' are there? Are they layers?
what is "etheric sensing"?
what are plasma tubes?
what holds stars in their place?
we are flying through space and we can't even tell.
how did we figure out how fast we are moving within the galaxy?
and how fast the galaxy is moving
we know a lot, but not enough!
why do we doubt a "creator" of all this?
There are many subtle bodies, for example the third eye tunnel is a tangibly felt structure - subtle at times, nonetheless it's tangible. The column above the head is a subtle body, not visible, but something you can feel, I can feel mine as if it was an appendage with muscles. There are many within and around the body that have functions.
Etheric sensing - is tuning into the layers of life force - a tangible feeling. From this feeling you can feel other external objects, you can feel/see their life force. Also knowing the abilities of the etheric by going into them, mapping layers, mapping consciousness.
Very interesting. Thank you for sharing, Jewels
What do you think of Dark Matter?
What creates these subtle structures and force fields?
As Jane asked once, is it energy? certain arrangements of lifetronic "particles?"
Is extraordinary that when meditating the black space is not blank, it's not nothing, it's actually full (spaces and presence). I'm not a scientist so don't use their language but I feel there is a lot to discover in the darkness. I think NASA have discovered that Dark Matter is very significant in space exploration.
Subtle structures of the body are already there, it's not magic or imagination. Think of the subtle bodies as atrophied muscles. Once you start using them they take form. It takes practice of course, it's not simply going to appear without effort.
I like Quantum Field Theory, where everything is made of fields,and particles and forces are just excitations of the fields, which is the "stuff" of existence. It doesn't take much of a leap for me to suggest fields are "organizing principles" of the functions of life and everything else.
I agree with you, QFT gives a language to forces, fields and particles. I work with forces a lot, it's my field (excuse the pun). We are swayed by forces, moulded and manipulated. A fascinating experience I had was with Quantum Mechanics models a long time ago, where for a few minutes I could follow that model and align it to meditation and subtle body experiences. They align wonderfully. It was not easy for me to hold the two side by side, one is experience, one is mostly theory. I would have to spend a lot of time learning the language of the theory - something I won't do in this lifetime.
I suppose controlling the organs such as heart and lungs and maybe even stomach would be a possibility and an advantage. Therefore the same would hold true for being able to control subtle bodies and perhaps use them for sensing the metaphysical.
Absolutely. Self healing at high levels is determined by subtle layers or subtle structures, and the ability to be conscious of what they do is phenomenal. It's all internal sensing at a high level, sensing/feeling. This is an avenue for expanding consciousness. In my vision, it is THE avenue for expanding consciousness. We are only limited by our small minds because of the grasping nature of trying to fathom what is happening.
I know a lot of his ideas are considered pseudoscience. But he does point out some interesting mysteries, like the fact that birds will move in flocks fast times faster than their normal reaction time. Since bird flock behavior can be simulated on a computer with field equations, I don't know why an actual field like a magnetic field can't be seriously considered. http://www.escortriyadelhi.
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.