What the Bleep do we know!?

[sincerely_helene]

Seen it yet?

Contemplations? Elaborations? Recommendations? Confrontations? All welcome.

www.whatthebleep.com

 

[Huckleman2000]

Nope. This is the first of heard of it.

It seems really interesting. I'd love to have a job like that, and I'm unemployed atm. I need a bleeping job!

 

[sincerely_helene]

Nope. This is the first of heard of it.

It seems really interesting. I'd love to have a job like that, and I'm unemployed atm. I need a bleeping job!

Here's to hoping for a "Dude, Where's my Bleeping Job?" sequel.

 

[sincerely_helene]

Here is the Wiki on it, for those who may be timid about clicking the link:

(Australian version) is a controversial 2004 film that combines both documentary interviews, fiction and animation to posit a connection between science and spirituality. The topics discussed include neurology, quantum physics, psychology, epistemology, ontology, metaphysics, magical thinking and spirituality. The film features interviews with individuals presented as experts in science and spirituality, interspersed with the story of a deaf photographer as she struggles with her situation. Computer animated graphics also feature in the film. The film has received widespread criticism from physicists. Physicists claim that the movie grossly misrepresents the meaning of quantum mechanics, and in fact is pseudoscience.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I'm sorry, but there's just something inherently cheesey about pop-mysticism, like taking Holy Communion from Carrot-top. Spiritual enlightenment and popcorn just don't go together.

Cosmic truths portrayed through animation? I think I'll pass.

 

[rgraham666]

I've heard of it. Might catch it on DVD some time.

Doc, I'll disagree that animation can't communicate grandeur.

Here in Toronto there's a place called the Ontario Science Centre. A musuem of interactive science displays.

One of them is a short movie. It starts looking at a man from one metre up and shows an area one metre square. The camera then pulls back so that every ten seconds the distance and area increase by a power of ten. It also has a clock that shows the viewer's time versus the subject's time. Eventually you can start to see the relativistic effects. When out near the edge of the universe (at ten to the 24th power as I recall) something like 10 million years passes on Earth for every ten seconds of the viewer's time.

When that's done, the camera zooms back to the starting point and then goes inwards by powers of ten, eventually ending up looking at the nucleus of a carbon atom.

It's hard to describe how much this affected me. More than anything I've ever seen, it gave an idea of how huge the universe is. And how special we are. Out of all that there's only one of each of us.

A wonderful piece of work.

 

[sincerely_helene]

I'm sorry, but there's just something inherently cheesey about pop-mysticism, like taking Holy Communion from Carrot-top. Spiritual enlightenment and popcorn just don't go together.

Cosmic truths portrayed through animation? I think I'll pass.

Inaccurate, in other words? Not a reliable "For Dummies" resource? Why not this?

Conclusion based on assumption? Seems unlike you, Doc.

 

[Guest]

I've watched the movie several times. It does have flaws. Like any documentary, it has an agenda. It has errors of science (the whole portion with the water is suspect. Even the quotation about the human body's proportion of water is verifiable as incorrect). It also has some interesting thoughts that will make some people uncomfortable and rejectionist, while others will rush perhaps too quickly to embrace them. The best I can say is it does point to other (more reliable) scienctific ideas I've read as well as touching on a number of philosophical and spirital ideas I've run across. It is not an answer in itself. It is best used as a starting point for further exploration.

Personally, it reminded me that science, too, is a faith (not a religion. I differentiate between faith and religion).

If the subject interests you, you might want to read some of the pre-Ramtha literature. Two books pop to mind

The Tao of Physics by Frijof Capra
The Dancing Wu Li Masters by Gary Zukov

 

[Guest]

I'm sorry, but there's just something inherently cheesey about pop-mysticism, like taking Holy Communion from Carrot-top. Spiritual enlightenment and popcorn just don't go together.

Cosmic truths portrayed through animation? I think I'll pass.

why can't my spirit like popcorn?
but if carrot-top is offering communion, you will probably taking magic mushrooms...
and they lead to spiritualism so either way, its a win win situation.

hey, it worked for L. Ron Hubbard.

 

[cloudy]

why can't my spirit like popcorn?
but if carrot-top is offering communion, you will probably taking magic mushrooms...
and they lead to spiritualism so either way, its a win win situation.

hey, it worked for L. Ron Hubbard.

Damn, I've missed your way of looking at things.

 

[Guest]

Damn, I've missed your way of looking at things.

its like standing on the railroad tracks with your foot stuck in the tie, unable to look away even though you know you are doomed.

 

[cloudy]

its like standing on the railroad tracks with your foot stuck in the tie, unable to look away even though you know you are doomed.

More like opening the door to your house, but finding disneyland inside instead.

 

[Guest]

More like opening the door to your house, but finding disneyland inside instead.

HEY! maybe i should make some spiritual tapes.
the zen of vella.
hrm... now, to find backers.

 

[sincerely_helene]

I've watched the movie several times. It does have flaws. Like any documentary, it has an agenda. It has errors of science (the whole portion with the water is suspect. Even the quotation about the human body's proportion of water is verifiable as incorrect). It also has some interesting thoughts that will make some people uncomfortable and rejectionist, while others will rush perhaps too quickly to embrace them. The best I can say is it does point to other (more reliable) scienctific ideas I've read as well as touching on a number of philosophical and spirital ideas I've run across. It is not an answer in itself. It is best used as a starting point for further exploration.

Personally, it reminded me that science, too, is a faith (not a religion. I differentiate between faith and religion).

If the subject interests you, you might want to read some of the pre-Ramtha literature. Two books pop to mind

The Tao of Physics by Frijof Capra
The Dancing Wu Li Masters by Gary Zukov

Thanks for the suggested reads. I appreciate the gesture.

Why is the water referance incorrect?

 

[sincerely_helene]

I've heard of it. Might catch it on DVD some time.

Doc, I'll disagree that animation can't communicate grandeur.

Here in Toronto there's a place called the Ontario Science Centre. A musuem of interactive science displays.

One of them is a short movie. It starts looking at a man from one metre up and shows an area one metre square. The camera then pulls back so that every ten seconds the distance and area increase by a power of ten. It also has a clock that shows the viewer's time versus the subject's time. Eventually you can start to see the relativistic effects. When out near the edge of the universe (at ten to the 24th power as I recall) something like 10 million years passes on Earth for every ten seconds of the viewer's time.

When that's done, the camera zooms back to the starting point and then goes inwards by powers of ten, eventually ending up looking at the nucleus of a carbon atom.

It's hard to describe how much this affected me. More than anything I've ever seen, it gave an idea of how huge the universe is. And how special we are. Out of all that there's only one of each of us.

A wonderful piece of work.

I wish I could see that!

On many levels.

 

[sincerely_helene]

its like standing on the railroad tracks with your foot stuck in the tie, unable to look away even though you know you are doomed.

Meaniehead.

 

[sincerely_helene]

More like opening the door to your house, but finding disneyland inside instead.

I have done that!

Wait... when you said "house," you really meant "skull," right?

 

[Guest]

Thanks for the suggested reads. I appreciate the gesture.

Why is the water referance incorrect?

First, the movie states the human body is 90% water. References indicate that on average the human body is about 50 to 70% water, depending on gender, size, age, etc.

Second, the "Messages in Water" experiments (seen in the train station exibition in the movie), while quite interesting, are not what is typically called "good science". The scientist in question did not publish some facts about his experiments. For example, the "patterned" water is frozen, while the "unpatterned" water is not -- frozen water will almost always produce crystaline patterns. Based on established data, the crystaline patterns would have little to do with the messages attached to the container or any words spoken over the water. The experiment has not been successfully replicated (one of the basic criteria of scientific study is the replication of results, given the same conditions, by other scientists). These three factors makes the results questionable and for some, dismissable.

I should state that I am interested in both science and spirituality, and that I liked the movie. Unlike others have stated, I see no disconnection between animations and teaching of cosmic truths. Jesus (among others) used parables and stories. The aborigines used paintings on rocks. More methods than formalized, culture approved words are available for the conveying of a truth.

However, this movie should only (in my oipinion) be a starting point for exploration. I do not think it is an ultimate statement in and of itself. At most, it proposes ideas for others to chose or not chose, according to their own thoughts and explorations.

Plus, I like Marlee Matlin

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Inaccurate, in other words? Not a reliable "For Dummies" resource? Why not this?

Conclusion based on assumption? Seems unlike you, Doc.

Well, I haven't seen it and don't know anything about it, but I'm assuming that this is a film about pop mysticism and how we're mystically connected to the universe and how this mystical connection is demonstrated by certain facts from quantum mechanics and cosmology.

If so, I'm going to make a wild guess that one of the things they talk about is a common misconception that's popular in this kind of scientific-mysticism involving quantum mechanics and Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. The misconception is that the act of observation actually infliences the nature of reality, which seems to mean that reality is actually a subjective experience and somehow under our control. This is just not true.

A lot of people who should know better--including a lot of Ph.D.'s--go around advocating this view, and it's a total misinterpretation of what quantum mechanics says, and I'll admit, it pisses me off because it's junk science and nonsense.

Outside of this, I suppose I'm just naturally prejudiced and old-fashioned. I believe that anything of value has to be earned and paid for, usually with blood, sweat, and tears, and that's especially true for spiritual growth.

On the other hand, I supose if the movie starts some people thinking, that can't be bad. I just hope they don't drag that quantum bullshit into it.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Of course they brought Quantum physics into it.

Science is not a faith.

Science is a process;
examine the evidence,
form a theory,
attempt to prove (or disprove) the theory,
revise it according to current findings,
accept it provisonally barring further evidence, or
throw it our if it can be conclusively disproven, and form a new theory,
and begin again.

Of course there are always individuals who just can't bring tehmselvs to discard a theory. You can, if you want, go on your entire life trying to prove something, long after it has been disproven. Individuals can do that. But science, as a method checks and balances such tendencies.

Many people have faith in something they think is science- but they have been taught that faith is as valid as knowledge.

The media confuses science with technology, wich, in it's simplest meaning is anything created by man- basket-weaving is a technology, as much as Intel chips are.


I watched what the bllep do we know, and I was fairly disgusted. It romanticises ignorance. It says "LOOK at all we don't know! All those scientists ADMIT they don't know stuff"
The inference is, "Don't be ashamed of yourself because YOU don't know stuff" - stuff which is learnable, in fact. Scientists say; "we don't know yet" and thta is a crucial difference.

Co-equating the blue-sky theories of physics with the beliefs of metaphysics does nobody any good. In fact I think it's very detrimental.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

Well, I haven't seen it and don't know anything about it, but I'm assuming that this is a film about pop mysticism and how we're mystically connected to the universe and how this mystical connection is demonstrated by certain facts from quantum mechanics and cosmology.

If so, I'm going to make a wild guess that one of the things they talk about is a common misconception that's popular in this kind of scientific-mysticism involving quantum mechanics and Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. The misconception is that the act of observation actually infliences the nature of reality, which seems to mean that reality is actually a subjective experience and somehow under our control. This is just not true.

A lot of people who should know better--including a lot of Ph.D.'s--go around advocating this view, and it's a total misinterpretation of what quantum mechanics says, and I'll admit, it pisses me off because it's junk science and nonsense.

Outside of this, I suppose I'm just naturally prejudiced and old-fashioned. I believe that anything of value has to be earned and paid for, usually with blood, sweat, and tears, and that's especially true for spiritual growth.

On the other hand, I supose if the movie starts some people thinking, that can't be bad. I just hope they don't drag that quantum bullshit into it.

*snerk*

For not seeing it, you did pretty damned well!

I did see it, but I wasn't impressed... I agree with the "if it gets people thinking" aspect... but that's all I think it was good for, really. I don't feel the need to give a scientific basis to spirituality... and frankly, I think it's kind of sad that we live in a culture where things have gone SO far into the realm of the scientific/rational that we feel the need to "prove" spirituality in the first place. I don't need evidence that life can be magical and inspirational... life IS those things. Have we let go of our connection so much?

I guess I do see spiritual growth as work, in some regard... but it's also simply a matter of opening up to the divine in the moment, in the here and now. We can all do that--we don't have to wait to do that.

oh, and on the "junk science" front: Dr Masaru Emoto, the guy who did the water experiments-- his PhD is from the Open International University of Alternative Medicine, for what it's worth. Not saying it's not a valid course of study... just saying, it's not "traditional" medicine.

 

[Stella_Omega]

"gets people thinking" is exactly what it doesn't do, IMO.

 

[NoJo]

Ignorance is necessary for science to proceed. I'm all in favour of increasing our ignorance.

The one thing I can't abide is when cranks, psychiatrists and other faith-healers pounce on currently incurable aliments (such as backache, alzheimers, osteoporosis, depression, kidneystones, and of course cancer) and offer (usually painless) cures, which involve a mild to severe loss of money.

I feel much happier knowing the limits of science and medicine than pretending we can know or fix everything.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

Ignorance is necessary for science to proceed. I'm all in favour of increasing our ignorance.

The one thing I can't abide is when cranks, psychiatrists and other faith-healers pounce on currently incurable aliments (such as backache, alzheimers, osteoporosis, depression, kidneystones, and of course cancer) and offer (usually painless) cures, which involve a mild to severe loss of money.

I feel much happier knowing the limits of science and medicine than pretending we can know or fix everything.

but as the daughter of a former Christian-Scientist... I've seen a lot of people heal themselves, or seem to... simply by believing. There have also been way too many studies done out there to discount the effects of belief when using a placebo. Not saying it works all the time... and perhaps there is a "scientific explanation" for it, when it does, that we're just not aware of...

or perhaps the scientific and the spiritual aren't really disconnected at all, like this movie tried to "prove."

 

[mismused]

delete