by unsure 8 Replies latest social current
"If I understand what you just declared, you just asserted that CERN, the European Center for Nuclear Research, disproved the existence of ghosts."
"Yes," Cox replied.
--
What do you think about this relating to
all metaphysical occurrences said to
occur by beleivers in our physical world?
I`m inclined to agree with Boss Vegas comments ,but then what do I know about such things.
Well those selected quotes proves nothing of the kind.
For the record, I do NOT believe in ghosts, but Cox' line of reasoning (as presented in the linked article) contains at least two flaws that cannot lead to the conclusion promised in the title of this thread or in the linked article:
I kind of hate it when non-scientists report on things they don't understand. They so rarely get it right because they don't know what to include and what to leave out. The result is usually provocative sound-bites that are incomplete at best and mid-leading or just plain wrong at worst.
In other words, Ross Pomeroy, I happen to agree with you, but you explained it badly and made Mr. Cox sound like a dogmatic prig.
Because we can't currently detect or measure something is absolutely NOT proof it doesn't exist. The history of science is rife with many examples of things we didn't know about until we discovered or invented new ways of "seeing" or understanding. The change from the Ptolemaic geocentric universe to the Copernican heliocentric view is one notable example. Lavoisier's discovery of oxygen another. Both involved major paradigm shifts and a willingness to see what had always been there, but not understood because of the limitations of the current popular belief systems of how reality is and the limitations of current technology at the times to measure the phenomena under investigation.
That is what makes science so exciting!
But one must have an open mind. This is why almost all new scientific discoveries have been made by someone young or new to the particular field.
@jp1692
I agree with what you've said.
Cox's absolutist comments seem misguided.
I don't know what I believe but I do know there is currently no objective, verifiable proof of the paranormal.
How could the Large Hadron Collider Disprove the Existence of Ghosts?
I don't follow you.
@Nathan Natas
I made no statements in my OP.
I merely quoted and linked an article and asked what forum members thought of it.
So that's why the built the Hadron Collider.
I thought it was for a totally different reason ?
The aim of the LHC is to allow physicists to test the predictions of different theories of particle physics, including measuring the properties of the Higgs boson and searching for the large family of new particles predicted by supersymmetric theories, as well as other unsolved questions of physics.
I did an experiment in my kitchen and I proved the existence of chocolate. You will be able to see my research when I have it published. I am sure that by extension it will demonstrate that the earth is flat.
Quote: "- carries information about our living cells to persist then we must specify precisely what medium carries that pattern and how it interacts with the matter particles out of which our bodies are made. We must, in other words, invent an extension to the Standard Model of Particle Physics that has escaped detection at the Large Hadron Collider. That's almost inconceivable at the energy scale
unsure: the key word might be "persist", like a ghostlike exoplasm, or "Samuel's apparition"
It is nonsense to link a machine that replicates the energy levels of the big bang with whispy smoke and mirrors. he is latching on to something big for attention. agree with jp.
