Will the 21st century therapy be quantum, metaphysical or simply logic? (No. 2 : Probability)

Will the 21st century therapy be quantum, metaphysical or simply logic? (No. 2 : Probability)

Will the 21st century therapy be quantum, metaphysical or simply logic? (No. 2)

So we continue the examination of the quantum designs of Dr. Robert Anthony. I said in my # 1 that my great (and good) surprise about this doctor, was that he was considering the quantum field as the cause of the physical universe in contrast to the general view that wants it to be a side effect. But then, very soon after one encounters mythology.

« The quantum field is unlimited energy »

Two bad news after each other. The energy is limited to being simply energy: it is not a geometric volume, like a sphere, for example, since geometry relates to motionless concepts, which do not require energy, neither as a possibility nor once they exist. Speaking of unlimited energy, shows that neither the word energy, nor the word unlimited have a correct meaning for the brave Dr. Anthony!

I’ll come back on the concept of energy that would not be so inappropriate, if we did not qualify it as unlimited.

The concept of infinity or limitlessness is not peculiar to our doctor who has been mesmerized by it by mathematicians (another of the sources he did not verify yet…).

Indeed, for the latter, there are as many infinites as desired, the infinity of each of which is just limited by the fact that others exist…

Their « smaller infinity » is the integers! For the sake of the consistency of their inconsistency, they did not put in it seals or staphylococcus aureus which allows them not to put fish and antibiotics in it too!

According to our doctor we may be hypnotized by our past, but that did not stop us to examine the words we use ourselves, which our doctor was careful not to do before using them.

Even imagining that his quantum field is unlimited, as you can distinguish it from the rest of the universe, it shows it is far from being infinite as something else exists outside of it!

He would do well not to make fun of metaphysics and its nonsense, because he shows that he is a good specialist of it (nonsense, not metaphysics…).

However, without me trying to grant him the slightest comprehension of it, the word energy attributed to the quantum field is rather wise since it signifies « what can produce a movement », which seems to correspond to a potential source of a world characterized by change, if not even movement itself.

What makes me doubt of Anthony’s understanding is that physicists themselves seem not to understand what I just wrote!

But let’s examine his « Law of Attraction »

« Similar attracts similar »

We could see here a reason for marriage for all, if it were a universal law, but alas…

For someone polarized on electromagnetism, it is indeed a big flaw!

In electricity, the positive is attracted by the negative! And yet not in all cases: the negative electrons are, apparently, attracted by the positive nucleus, but the latter is an agglutination of positive protons possibly isolated by neutrons without electric load). Only this nucleus seems to obey the doctor!

In magnetism, anyway, north poles are attracted to south poles!

The foolish metaphysics considers the universal law is the so-called Law of Affinity that considers a compatibility off nature and avoids improbabilities as to imagine that if we want to be rich, because unlimited quantum energy gives the possibility of infinite wealth, it is jealous of our little confidence in it and it will take its revenge by making us poor!

If the wealth from the energy is unlimited, why not its poverty?

It would thus be enough to want to be poor to become billionaire or better…

Although this skidding only happens once at Anthony´s.

Then he only considers that only the fear of being poor is enough for not getting rich.

In other words if we want to be rich while our real thought is to escape poverty, the Law of Attraction will bring us to our true thought. And we will be broke!

Metaphysics which the dear doctor despises is fundamentally logical, something to which Anthony can hardly claim.

In other words, whether metaphysically or logically, to be wanting to avoid something, we would still need that thing to exist.

What I translate as « What we fear, we becomes  » without involving any assumption of any unobservable universal law!

And the confusion between probability and possibility?

Recalling the definition of probability calculus as given by my teacher in statistics: it is an « attempt of assessment of our ignorance. » Anthony’s evaluation of ignorance needs no calculation. It is equal to that of physicists and mathematicians together…

In fact, he should just talk about possibilities, but that would make him leave his cherished scientists who spend their lives trying to assess their ignorance, or uncertainty, as we have seen, to use the heartbreaking vocabulary of metaphysics!

A possibility is only a promise that some event may or may not exist. You could be in the next room, but you are not there. And when you get there, the opportunity to be in this room will no longer be produced (or manifested, to use the language of the doctor, this time borrowed from that metaphysics which he hates so much…)

By the way, a possibility is also a principle, which we have seen that Anthony had not a clue about.

And considered as a cause, we have seen that a possibility is not required to produce an effect, otherwise there would be no difference between cause and effect, but merely « the capability together with its production » as a single thing.

This is contrary to the peremptory statement of Dr. Anthony: « If there is a cause there is an effect! » The truth is the opposite: if we SEE an effect, we KNOW that there is a cause, but we do not necessarily KNOW which it is!

But we’ll have to take many other looks at many misty notions of our hero, do not leave the blog!

Les commentaires sont clos.