electromagnetism

stevenmu

Wicknight wrote:

my head hurts ...

Already ? You haven't even got to the good part yet

Our concept of size, distance, beginning and end all stem from Euclidian Geometry. It is thought that the universe could in fact exist as some form of Non-Euclidean Geometry such as hyperbolic, altough it would appear to us living with in it that it is in fact a euclidean universe. The way hyperbolic geometry works is probabl best illustrated by MC Escher's Circle Limit drawings, I think Circle Limit IV is probably appropriate. Looking at the drawing from our external euclidean perspective the angels seem to get smaller and closer together as they get towards the edge of their 'universe' tending towards an infinite number of angels, infinitly small and infinitly close together. From the angels perspective however they see themselves in a euclidean geometry just as we see ourselves. Each angel is the same size as the angel next to it, and the same distance away.

This allows us to have a finite bounded expanding universe which is infinite from within.

Zombrex

stevenmu wrote:

Already ? You haven't even got to the good part yet

Our concept of size, distance, beginning and end all stem from Euclidian Geometry. It is thought that the universe could in fact exist as some form of Non-Euclidean Geometry such as hyperbolic, altough it would appear to us living with in it that it is in fact a euclidean universe. The way hyperbolic geometry works is probabl best illustrated by MC Escher's Circle Limit drawings, I think Circle Limit IV is probably appropriate. Looking at the drawing from our external euclidean perspective the angels seem to get smaller and closer together as they get towards the edge of their 'universe' tending towards an infinite number of angels, infinitly small and infinitly close together. From the angels perspective however they see themselves in a euclidean geometry just as we see ourselves. Each angel is the same size as the angel next to it, and the same distance away.

This allows us to have a finite bounded expanding universe which is infinite from within.

Oh look, my brain is oozing out my ears ...

Zillah

stevenmu wrote:

Already ? You haven't even got to the good part yet

Our concept of size, distance, beginning and end all stem from Euclidian Geometry. It is thought that the universe could in fact exist as some form of Non-Euclidean Geometry such as hyperbolic, altough it would appear to us living with in it that it is in fact a euclidean universe. The way hyperbolic geometry works is probabl best illustrated by MC Escher's Circle Limit drawings, I think Circle Limit IV is probably appropriate. Looking at the drawing from our external euclidean perspective the angels seem to get smaller and closer together as they get towards the edge of their 'universe' tending towards an infinite number of angels, infinitly small and infinitly close together. From the angels perspective however they see themselves in a euclidean geometry just as we see ourselves. Each angel is the same size as the angel next to it, and the same distance away.

This allows us to have a finite bounded expanding universe which is infinite from within.

Gah...

I don't have time to go through all that at the moment but suffice to say I saw a documentary not long ago in which they ruled out the possibility of space being circular as there is insufficient matter(and therefore gravity) to do so. As for the rest of it, I'll take a look when I get home.

6th wrote:

Actually we dont have any idea weather space is infinate or not, we're guessing at best

I think a great many physicists would take a lot of offense having their life's work dismissed as "guessing". They can build mathematical models for the universe based on what we know, which is more than you might think.

EDIT:

Saruman wrote:

I thought it was accepted that space is not infinate.. after all you cant accept the big bang and the fact the universe is expanding (that one can be proved) without believing in the fact that the universe went from something very small to very big and is getting bigger

Well theres the question of matter expanding outwards, and the theres the space through which it travels. Im almost certain that space goes on indefinately as there isn't enough gravity to pull it back inwards. If someone could reference an answer either way that'd be cool. But there is a limit to how far the matter in the universe has gone.

6th

Zillah wrote:

.....I think a great many physicists would take a lot of offense having their life's work dismissed as "guessing". They can build mathematical models for the universe based on what we know, which is more than you might think.....

I might be the worlds best lego sculptor but if i put the knowledge of lego i have together with what we "know" about aliens - the 7 foot alien model i make isnt anymore likely just because i've applied something complicated to it?

Zillah

Do you mean to imply that Physicists like Stephen Hawking and Einstein know as much about the nature of the universe as you do about aliens? Because thats grossly insulting to some very hard working and intelligent people.

Zombrex

dublin6th wrote:

I might be the worlds best lego sculptor but if i put the knowledge of lego i have together with what we "know" about aliens - the 7 foot alien model i make isnt anymore likely just because i've applied something complicated to it?

No, but based on newtonian physics you can work out to a few millimeters what happens to a car when it hits a brick wall, with out having to drive a car into a brick wall. You don't have to "guess" what happens.

Same applies to models of the universe. You can apply princples to different methods to see what is likely and unlikely. There might be variables that you are unaware off (for example it is harder to work out the crash of a car if you don't know mass of certain parts of the car), but your model will still be more than a guess.

6th

Wicknight wrote:

No, but based on newtonian physics you can work out to a few millimeters what happens to a car when it hits a brick wall, with out having to drive a car into a brick wall. You don't have to "guess" what happens.

Same applies to models of the universe. You can apply princples to different methods to see what is likely and unlikely. There might be variables that you are unaware off (for example it is harder to work out the crash of a car if you don't know mass of certain parts of the car), but your model will still be more than a guess.

Ok was can work out what happens to a car lets say and apply the same logic, but its easy to base it on something we can touch and see, i'm not saying any of it is wrong all i am saying is that there are lots os things that science rules out ie spirits because they dont fit in with what we currently claim to "know".

And Zillah, I didnt say I knew about aliens .. i said i know about lego. Are you suggesting we take it that "everything" Eistein said is correct because he was smart?

Anyway this has really gone off the topic of electromagnetics ... sorry OP!

6th

Zombrex

dublin6th wrote:

Ok was can work out what happens to a car lets say and apply the same logic, but its easy to base it on something we can touch and see

Well things just build upon one another. People aren't just coming up with wild theories about the universe, it is all based on logic and maths that in turn is based on evidence and experiment. For example you can use the experiement of measuring the speed of a canon ball falling to earth to work out how galaxies rotate around each other.

You say you can't form a theory on aliens just because you build one out of lego. Thats very true. But you can form a theory about lego, the properties and nature of lego, and the likelyhood that an alien could exist or have evolved completely out of lego (I think we would agree, unlikely).

Replace "lego" with "biology" or "chemistry" and you can start to see how knowing about biology, physics and chemistry etc allow science to model the likelyhood or possibility of something like an alien, or a ghost.

dublin6th wrote:

I'm not saying any of it is wrong all i am saying is that there are lots os things that science rules out ie spirits because they dont fit in with what we currently claim to "know".

Well thats true. But then you seem to be implying it is misplaced arrogance or faith in the scientific method that does that. It isn't really. One of the requirements of science is that you don't assume or guess about something you know little about. Thats a good thing, not arrogance

I often get the sense from supporters of paranormal activity such as ghosts etc that they believe science is choosing what to accept and what not to accept, and that they are choosing unfairly. So science chooses to accept things like black holes which are tentative theories at best, but ignore or dismiss things like "ghosts" despite tons of eye witness accounts. Supports of ghosts would say their is far more evidence for ghosts than something like a black hole or the multiverse, so why won't science accept that they exist or at least acknowledge that there is something beyond our current understanding taking place that deserves serious exploration.

The problem with that view point is that it goes against some of the fundamentals of science and scientific theory. Science won't accept something just because we are told it is happening, be it a black hole, creationism, gravity or ghosts. Science didn't accept the theory of relativity just because Einstien told us it was happening. Likewise with paranormal events. Science isn't going to accept they are happening just because people say they are happening. And as such it isn't going to change its theories of what we do know just because they don't fit with concepts like ghosts. That would go against one of the fundamentals of science itself.

GuanYin

Ok guys. This has gone just a little too far off topic.

We're not here to debate the limitations of science or the use of science. Off to science/humanities etc with you for that.

Son Goku

Oh god, physics misconceptions galore. Let's start with the OP and electromagnetism.

So, how much do we know about electromagnetism?

A lot, in fact I would say our knowledge of it is perhaps the most complete of phenomena in science. Our current theory of electromagnetism, called Quantum Electrodynamics explains all observed electromagnetic phenomena to with at least a trillionth of a percent.

Do living beings emit electromagnetic waves?

Yes, very weak long-wave radio.

And moving on to the rest of the thread:

Let there be light.
^^ Amazing and fundamental description from the Old Testament which we are finding to have more and more significance with the founding of the universe. Truly, God was not playing dice.

No we aren't. Light didn't exist until several minutes after the Big Bang. Photons aren't capable of existing at certain temperatures.

As far as I’m concerned particles don’t care if we can measure their exact locations or not, the fact that we are unable to measure their exact location, does not mean they do not have one. I completely reject this aspect of quantum mechanics.

Then you'd be wrong. The uncertainty principle makes a statement about the complimentary nature of momentum and position.
A definite position cannot, in any way lead to a definite momentum and vice-versa. Not because we can't measure accurately enough but because of the way matter is a distribution at the atomic scale.

Actually we don’t have any idea weather space is infinite or not

The CMB has Octavian notes in its spectrum, this was the first piece of evidence that the universe connects back to itself. Although from the patterns we know it connects in a complex manner.
You have to understand that with 960 physics departments around the world doing both theoretical and experimental work in this regard for the last 100 years, there might be more known about it than you think.

It is thought that the universe could in fact exist as some form of Non-Euclidean Geometry such as hyperbolic

No, it's known that the universe can exist as some form of Non-Euclidean Geometry and is naturally hyperbolic. Gravity is a direct manifestation of Non-Euclidean Geometry.
(In fact that is all gravity is)

GuanYin

Ok. Can we PLEASE keep this on topic.

I appreciate the posts, I really do, but lets keep this in the realms of the paranormal.

No more warnings.

6th

I'm the first to admit that this has gone off topic and i've done it myself. However it is all relevant to the paranormal because I'm quite sure that in the end it is all explainable, not to say that everything fits into our current understanding.
The whole idea of this topic is to take a scientific look at what "ghosts" may be and how they interact with "this world".

I am reading a great book at the moment - "Will Storr vs The Supernatural". Here is a small section from it, obvious I cant type the whole thing out but there is alot in this book thats leads to this quote and follows on from it.

Physician Stuart Hameroff and his partner Dr Roger Penrose are world experts in the study of conscioiusness. And the work that they are doing now might end up changing the way we view existance forever. Because they do believe that the mind and the body are seperate things. Their research has led them to believ that our souls exist on the tiniest, most fundamental level of the universe - the quantum level........ There are things, I learned, called "microtubules". These minute contraption live in the base of our brains and act as on-board computers, containing the information and processes that are the very essence of ourselves - our souls, in other words. But thats not the really incredible thing. The truely tectonic-rocking break through that Hameroff and Penrose have made is this: when our system shuts down - when we pass away - the information thats held in our microtubules doesnt die. It cant, you see, because its part of the quantum level, which is the most basic level in existance. its the level on which the very fabric of the universe - matter, energy, space and time - exists. And, whats more, when they drift free of our microtubules, these little specks of soul dont seperate and float apart: a process called quantum entanglement keeps them bunched together. So, if its correct, this elegant nugget of extreme science does appear to show that the mind and the body are seperate things - and that they can exist independently. Our brains, these men claim, do not create consciousness. They just channel it, like a television picking up a station

If this is off topic, please just let me know before deleting it, as i dont want to have to type it out again!

6th

Son Goku

psi wrote:

Ok. Can we PLEASE keep this on topic.

I appreciate the posts, I really do, but lets keep this in the realms of the paranormal.

No more warnings.

The OP however is asking an almost directly scientific question.
I'm not being a smart-ass, but I actually don't see anyway of responding without using actual physics.

So, how much do we know about electromagnetism?
Is he suggesting the "Paranormal channel" referred to is a property of electromagnetism?
Do living beings emit electromagentic waves?
Is there evidence which supports the existance of gravitational waves (outside of lisa

Sorry for all the questions, I'm stupid at science
although I would like a reference point to start from on the topic of electromagnetism.

oops, basically are the properties of electromagnetism inconclusive at this stage?

Aside from the question in bold, everything else is a direct query about scientific knowledge. Even the question in bold is about what somebody is saying rather than the paranormal.

The actual question "basically are the properties of electromagnetism inconclusive at this stage?" is directly physical.

In essence, I don't understand any other way I can respond except to discuss electromagnetism.

Again I'm not being smart, but how should I respond?
I'm willing to discuss the paranormal, but we also have to discuss how well understood electromagnetism is and what it can do.

GuanYin

That fair enough Son Goku, except we're getting into a physics debate on a tangent issue.

I'm happy so long as its related to the orginal point and EM.

Son Goku

psi wrote:

That fair enough Son Goku, except we're getting into a physics debate on a tangent issue.

I'm happy so long as its related to the orginal point and EM.

Ah, okay, cool. Thanks.

Son Goku

So, how much do we know about electromagnetism?

Basically, we know more about it than any other phenomena in science. The current theory of electromagnetism is called Quantum Electrodynamics.

Do living beings emit electromagentic waves?

Very long wavelength ones, yes.
However these electromagentic waves have almost no energy what so ever.

Is there evidence which supports the existance of gravitational waves

No, there is only evidence from LISA and similar facilities world wide.

basically are the properties of electromagnetism inconclusive at this stage?

Not really, I pretty much think we've closed the book on the fundamentals of EM as a force in its own right.

Basically there is little room in EM for the unexplained.

Kernel

Son Goku wrote:

No we aren't. Light didn't exist until several minutes after the Big Bang. Photons aren't capable of existing at certain temperatures.

Isn't light simply electromagnetic radiation?

Zillah

EDIT: I misread something. Here's a fun link!

http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/

kernel wrote:

Isn't light simply electromagnetic radiation?

There is nothing simple about light. Light is one of the most fundamental and baffling things in the universe.

Kernel

Zillah wrote:

There is nothing simple about light. Light is one of the most fundamental and baffling things in the universe.

Indeed, I shouldn't have used the 'simple' adjective, but light is believed to be electromagnetic radiation in the spectrum visible to our eyes, a very important property of the universe and result of the big bang.

In fact, so much so, that the biblical passage 'Let there be light', is fundamental to the structure of the universe, so I defend my earlier statement Son Goku.

BTW, it's bugging me but has anyone watched that documentary on Light, and the history of the scientific knowledge of light? It was on recently on C4 I think? Anyone know the name?

EDIT: It wasn't Light Fantastic - the BBC documentary... it went from the early philosophers to the arab scientist Alhazen, and beyond to Einstein.....

stevenmu

Zillah wrote:

EDIT: I misread something. Here's a fun link!

http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/

Good link, thanks. I have Penrose's "Road To Reality" book, I've been meaning to read it for a while, I didn't think he'd be into that kind of thing.



Since I started the whole off-topic bit I better add something back in.

The Institute Of Noetic Sciences (IONS appropriatly enough) has a good site with an online magazine Shift. They do their own research and articles on lots of other stuff. The have a searchable Digital Library that you can search for keywords like 'EMF' or 'electromagnetic' and it'll turn up enough articles to keep anyone busy.

Some more miscellaneous links

Our Conscious Mind Could Be An Electromagnetic Field

The brain's electromagnetic field is not just an information sink; it can influence our actions, pushing some neurons towards firing and others away from firing. This influence, Professor McFadden proposes, is the physical manifestation of our conscious will.

The Cemi Field Theory

Can the cemi theory account for telepathy?

No, I'm afraid not. The em field outside the head is far too weak and it is highly unlikley that any other brain could detect it, and still more unlikely that the other brain could decode the em field information that was encoded by your brain (which i think is a good thing).

Awww

The Nature of Consciousness iUniverse online book, which is kind of an awkward format to read, by Susan Pockett. Looks kind of interesting though.

Son Goku

Kernel wrote:

Indeed, I shouldn't have used the 'simple' adjective, but light is believed to be electromagnetic radiation in the spectrum visible to our eyes, a very important property of the universe and result of the big bang.

A result in an indirect sense.

In fact, so much so, that the biblical passage 'Let there be light', is fundamental to the structure of the universe, so I defend my earlier statement Son Goku.

Light and indeed most electromagnetic phenomena are simple low energy excitations of the QED field.
Light isn't that important in the founding of the universe.

I think if you want to explain conciousness scientifically it's better to go with the software over hardware approach. That is nothing fundamental to counciousness arises based on what its physical foundation is, but rather how it acts as an information system.

Kernel

Son Goku wrote:

A result in an indirect sense.

The universe could not exist without light/electromagnetic radiation, yet another of God's fascinating building blocks - but surely you agree that it is a fundamental one? No doubt you know more about physics than me, and yet you still don't believe in an intelligent designer of the universe and the laws you study?

Seems to me the more I learn about the universe and physics, the more I believe.

Son Goku

Kernel wrote:

The universe could not exist without light/electromagnetic radiation, yet another of God's fascinating building blocks - but surely you agree that it is a fundamental one? No doubt you know more about physics than me, and yet you still don't believe in an intelligent designer of the universe and the laws you study?

Whoa, where did that come from? I said nothing about God or my beliefs.
Electromagnetism isn't a fundamental building block of the universe. It's certainly very important at our scale, but it technically didn't exist until a more fundamental symmetry in the early universe "broke".

(Sorry Psi, I know it's off-topic, but it's so hard to leave these kinds of discussions)

Kernel

Son Goku wrote:

Whoa, where did that come from? I said nothing about God or my beliefs.
Electromagnetism isn't a fundamental building block of the universe. It's certainly very important at our scale, but it technically didn't exist until a more fundamental symmetry in the early universe "broke".

(Sorry Psi, I know it's off-topic, but it's so hard to leave these kinds of discussions)

Sorry, I assumed you 'weren't a believer' due to searching your posts. Anyway, I don't know enough about physics to add anything very meaningful to the electromagnetism discussion, I'm more of a layman I'm afraid. But isn't electromagetism what holds atoms together? Wouldn't that make it a fundamental building block of the universe?

Despite my lack of academic expertise in physics, this has been an interesting thread for me. It shows how science and the paranormal can overlap, or at least not be fundamentally opposed to each other - from my understanding, theoretical quantum physics would have been looked upon as paranormal at one stage. I'm open to the scientific paradigm (although, of course, science is a sequential and cumulative method of knowledge, and far from complete), and glad to have those devotees involved in the discussion.

Son Goku

I'd have to say the idea of hidden EM channels is pretty unlikely.
If they existed you would be able to detect them in transit. If their energy was too low for detection then it would be too low for communication.

Kernel wrote:

Sorry, I assumed you 'weren't a believer' due to searching your posts.

I also never said I was a believer. It's best not to say, in my opinion, because it always effects how people react to your arguements.

But isn't electromagetism what holds atoms together? Wouldn't that make it a fundamental building block of the universe?

It is fundamental to chemistry and holding things like me and you together, but it isn't a fundamental component of the universe, in the sense that it was created a while after the big bang.
(Although it is up there with some of the most fundamental)

solas

Son Goku wrote:

The OP however is asking an almost directly scientific question.
I'm not being a smart-ass, but I actually don't see anyway of responding without using actual physics.


Aside from the question in bold, everything else is a direct query about scientific knowledge. Even the question in bold is about what somebody is saying rather than the paranormal.

The actual question "basically are the properties of electromagnetism inconclusive at this stage?" is directly physical.

In essence, I don't understand any other way I can respond except to discuss electromagnetism.

Again I'm not being smart, but how should I respond?
I'm willing to discuss the paranormal, but we also have to discuss how well understood electromagnetism is and what it can do.

apologies, haven't looked at this thread in ages. I did ask this question seeking more information on the science of electromagnetism so I do appreciate a scientific explanation. ( I explained at the beginning if it were more suited to a science forum than that was ok, but its often difficult to discuss the subject from the perspective of paranormal investigation there) I gather your stating the properties of electromagnetism are conclusive. I'm interested in reference to experiments which provide more information on biomagnetics to see how they can possibly be related to psychic or paranormal phenomena.

solas

Son Goku wrote:

Basically, we know more about it than any other phenomena in science. The current theory of electromagnetism is called Quantum Electrodynamics.


Very long wavelength ones, yes.
However these electromagentic waves have almost no energy what so ever.


No, there is only evidence from LISA and similar facilities world wide.


Not really, I pretty much think we've closed the book on the fundamentals of EM as a force in its own right.

Basically there is little room in EM for the unexplained.

sorry still catching up. I'm not sure if you read the information given in the initial experiement ("the transmission of death via the paranormal channel") linked in the op.
Its fairly old and there's a lot of dubious words in there but the idea is that these electromagnetic waves could transmit a "virtual cell pattern" (memory) which was transferred to independant cells in non contact.
Although biomagnetic waves emit very little energy is it possible they can travel like this and carry a signal in such ways?
[note: it was suggested that the quartz may have acted as an amplifier for this channel]

solas

san goku wrote:

Basically there is little room in EM for the unexplained.

I'll have to take that as conjecture and not scientific fact. There seems to be quite a few experiments which have shed some light on the relationship between electromagnetism and paranormal phenomena, as some one already illustrated here
I couldn't go through all the other links which also demonstrate the relationship between biomangetic (and electromagnetic) properties and human consciousness.

"The correlations between ghostly activity and magnetic variance were relatively large and tie in with laboratory findings that suggest varying magnetic fields have a measurable effect on human physiology," said Dr Paul Stevens, of the Koestler Parapsychology Unit at Edinburgh University, who obtained the magnetic field measurements at both sites.

I was hoping someone with scientific understanding might be able to shed some light on the topic but I feel I have to dismiss all San Goku's previous posts as personal opinion and not scientific understanding.

solas

san Goku wrote:

I'd have to say the idea of hidden EM channels is pretty unlikely.
If they existed you would be able to detect them in transit. If their energy was too low for detection then it would be too low for communication

thats incredulous. (love that word)
Perhaps science hasn't devised a way of detecting them and to describe them as being too low for communication doesn't subscribe to the laws of quantum mechanics, perhaps they just appear invisible

or perhaps electromagetism is divisible.

Son Goku

solas wrote:

I'll have to take that as conjecture and not scientific fact.

Electromagnetism has been shown to be a force that merges when electroweak symmetry breaks (specifically U(1) X SU(2)). As such we can practically account for almost anything it does. Since we know how it emerges, there is very little room for suprise in its fundamental properties.

I was hoping someone with scientific understanding might be able to shed some light on the topic but I feel I have to dismiss all San Goku's previous posts as personal opinion and not scientific understanding.

Why?
I'm dealing with fundamental EM first. The brain is a large and complex material whose physical properties are largely the domain of condensed matter physics. In this sense it is difficult to single out any specific phenomena and what its effects on it are.

Please point out where in my posts there is personal opinion?