But as you say, other books still to read.
You know, all I can think when I hear such theories, attractive ones, not so attractive ones, is that really 'we', this earth, and all that dwells upon it, does seem to be just such a tiny piece of ALL that Is.
This does not make 'us' significant. Smile. Maybe that is just me being 'human' and hoping!
It's a personal thing. when I read matrix, I feel cold. Maybe due to the connentations of the Matrix movie.
BUT, when I read 'web' I feel warmer.
The Web of existence. 'We' are but a speck on that web, yet what difference might there be if we were no longer around? Any?
Are 'we' actually quite an achievement of the Source's? The Pure Source of ethereal Consciousness and Energy evolving more and more and is 'now' able to become low density pliable physical matter?
Should we be amazingly in awe od what we are? If we are but to remember we are here?
Did we lose our way? or was it the plan all the time to give us free will and choice and see what this new little idea would bring?
Did it all go horribly wrong?
Ah, the possibilities! Makes me tingle and lust for all I can get!
Ta Mondo, bro, This site I have seen before and read some of. I remember reading some of the refs within. Like this one:
Particles Have Free Will
Everything in the universe has some degree of free will. Even quantum particles. An elemental particle "decides" which way to spin. A cosmic ray decides when to decay. Not consciously, but choose they do. A new paper co-authored by mathematician John Conway, inventor of a cellular automata demonstration known as the Game of Life, argues that you can't explain the spin or decay of particles by randomness, nor are they determined, so free will is the only option left.
The Strong Free Will Theorem (PDF) is a technical paper, but they insert a few passages in English:
It asserts, roughly, that if indeed we humans have free will, then elementary particles already have their own small share of this valuable commodity. More precisely, if the experimenter can freely choose the directions in which to orient his apparatus in a certain measurement, then the particles response (to be pedanticthe universes response near the particle) is not determined by the entire previous history of the universe.
Some readers may object to our use of the term free will to describe the indeterminism of particle responses. Our provocative ascription of free will to elementary particles is deliberate, since our theorem asserts that if experimenters have a certain freedom, then particles have exactly the same kind of freedom. Indeed, it is natural to suppose that this latter freedom is the ultimate explanation of our own.
I just looked at the techincal paper - and left pretty niftily!
Just got a glimpse of wisdom :
"Richard Feynman once said that If someone
tells you they understand quantum mechanics,
then all youve learned is that youve met a liar.
Made me feel better.
Good site, thks brother dearest