THE HOLOGRAPHIC UNIVERSE.

by Blueblades 12 Replies latest jw friends

  • Blueblades
    Blueblades

    Just bought this book, has anyone else read it yet, if so, what are your thoughts?

    Blueblades

  • Quotes
    Quotes

    Haven't read it, but is certainly sounds interesting.

    From Amazon:

    ======================================
    Editorial Reviews

    From Library Journal
    Author Talbot writes that ". . . there is evidence to suggest that our world and everything in it. . . are also only ghostly images, projections from a level of reality so beyond our own it is literally beyond both space and time." Hence, the title of his book. Beginning with the work of physicist David Bohm and neurophysiologist Karl Pribram, both of whom independently arrived at holographic theories or models of the universe, Talbot explains in clear terms the theory and physics of holography and its application, both in science and in explanation of the paranormal and psychic. His theory of reality accommodates this latest thinking in physics as well as many unresolved mind-body questions. This well-written and fascinating study is recommended for science collections.
    - Hilary D. Burton, Lawrence Livermore National Lab., Livermore, Cal.
    Copyright 1991 Reed Business Information, Inc.

    From Book News, Inc.
    Talbot explains the theory advanced by U. of London physicist David Bohm and Stanford U. neurophysiologist Karl Pribram that despite its apparent tangible reality, the universe is actually a kind of three- dimensional projection and is ultimately no more real than a hologram, a three-dimensional image projected into space. Annotation copyright Book News, Inc. Portland, Or.
    ======================================

    Uh oh, this sound like APOSTASY!!!

    ~Quotes, of the "I like to read" class

    Edited to add:

    One reviewer didn't like it:

    In the end, however, he clearly veers towards his own assumptions and uncritically accepts much of the dubious superstitions and supernatural claims of less enlightened historical times. He does not actually present any real evidence for his argument or hypothesis, but descends into personal anecdotes (i.e. unverified claims) about his own bizzare "experiences"(hallucinations?). The book is interesting up to a point, but quickly degenerates into yet another "New Age" attempt to elevate magical-spiritual-supernatural nonsense to the level of legitimate and testable science. Very unfortunate indeed.

  • Quotes
    Quotes

    Another reviewer at Amazon was even less impressed:
    =============================
    One story in particular just blew my mind. On page 150 (soft cover), it talks about this guy, Sai Baba. The book claims Sai Baba could actually create any object he wanted and it would flow from his hands. It spent 4 pages on stuff Sai Baba has done, and how it's been confirmed. This intrigued me so much, I did a simple Google on "Sai Baba". After maybe 5 minutes of research, I found a website that had videos of Sai Baba producing random objects, and the videos were SOLID PROOF that Sai Baba is a fake. Not only a magician, but a terriable magician!
    =============================

  • outbutnotdown
    outbutnotdown

    I think, therefore I am. Or is it I am, therefore I think? Bottom line is: Who cares, we just are, and wasting time making theories that all come back to that very same, simple conclusion seem pointless to me. But that's just my opinion.

    B.

  • ezekiel3
    ezekiel3

    I have it and I love it. The book isn't afraid to think outside the box and includes an interesting chapter about to hynotists who hypnotized each other into a shared reality! (pg 144-145) While jeapordyzing its credibility with mentions of Sai Baba and the like, it still stretches your mind to consider what is really real.

    Maybe we do live in The Matrix.

  • frankiespeakin
    frankiespeakin

    Out,

    I think, therefore I am. Or is it I am, therefore I think? Bottom line is: Who cares, we just are, and wasting time making theories that all come back to that very same, simple conclusion seem pointless to me. But that's just my opinion.

    I think you are right if you mean the conclusion that we can not know intellectually what the universe is and that all we have are speculations. I like a good mystery,,maybe that's fun for me. Maybe the mind can experience peace when it knows it can't know, and so gives up beleiveing in all its concepts,, that what I think happens anyway.

  • Sirona
    Sirona

    I really enjoyed the book.

    He presents some interesting FACTS and then comes up with his own theory. The facts are the thing that impressed me (e.g. to do with quantum physics etc and what certain things COULD mean)

    However, I think he goes far beyond presenting his own theory as just that a "theory" and thereby loses credibility. If he had presented more scientific facts and shown how they fit with his theory then he would have had an amazing book, but he peppered it with outlandish ideas and unprovable assertions, and we all know how the skeptics feel about that!

    Overall, worth a read, if you can cut the wheat from the chaff.

    Sirona

  • myauntfanny
    myauntfanny

    I really enjoyed it, although he drove me a little crazy with his "and if you think that's amazing, this next thing is even more mind-boggling!". Towards the end of the book he was running out of breathless adjectives and had to repeat himself a lot.

    If you like it you should try Zero Point Field by Lynne McTaggart. It's good too, slightly harder going but a bit more substantial on the science side.

  • Sirona
    Sirona

    Thanks Auntfanny

    I think I'll try that book. and LOL at the breathless adjectives!

    Sirona

  • frankiespeakin
    frankiespeakin

    Maf,

    I really enjoyed it, although he drove me a little crazy with his "and if you think that's amazing, this next thing is even more mind-boggling!". Towards the end of the book he was running out of breathless adjectives and had to repeat himself a lot.

    I haven't read the book but I kinda felt it would do that because so many do. It sounds like the writer is in love with his theory and has as equally fallen out of objectivity. I think it would be a good book to read because it opens the mind to outside the box possiblities,,but I wouldn't think it would be that scientific because he is using only selected facts,,and no doubt omitting others that cause doubt.

    I read a book by a science writer I think it was called The edge of nothing,,and every since I read that book I have felt the world around us is just a clever manipulation of nothing.

    Think about it Matter cancels out Anti matter + cancels out - in electric charge,, every pole has its opposite,, everything adds up to 0. So maybe nothing is really what we are experiencing but this nothing appears as something in space and time. Aaawwww,, who knows I sure don't.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit