source file: mills2.txt Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 18:17:37 -0800 Subject: Organizing fields, 1 From: Gary Morrison I shall assume, perhaps falsely, that this author is presenting this document in the expectation that it will be evaluated scientifically, so that's the approach I shall take to it. If it is to be viewed metaphysically, then harkening to well-understood physical and biophysical processes is irrelevant to any sort of mystical expose', and seems more likely to be an attempt to make the document appear on the surface more scientific than it is. > The first is very near the skin and appears to be a > dark color (its true color is a flourescent red). ... > The first field is simply the radiation of body > heat, i.e., infrared. " There appears to be some sort of color-coding scheme involved here. Obviously "infared" (lower frequency than red light) radiation cannot directly appear as "flourescent red" to our eyes. If the author is claiming that he can see infared with his eyes, then he is imagining things. > Therefore, we can no longer regard the physical > chemical organism as more "real" than the non-physical electric organism. > (Here is strong support for the old metaphysical view that the human > complex is more electric than chemical, more "spiritual" than physical.) What is this author's basis for suggesting that electrical phenomena are not governed by physical laws and are thereby spiritual in nature? There is nothing spiritual, metaphysical, or aphysical about electricity. The laws that govern electric and magnetic phenomena have been known, and have gone mostly unmodified, since the late 1800s. They are known as Maxwell's Equations. > While > traditional science adequately describes the process of metabolism and the > function of the endocrines, we must accept the possibility that these > glands are governed by forces outside the human organism: solar rythms. Phrases like "traditional science" strike me as a warning sign: He could be preparing his readers for a later suggestion that "traditional scientists" ignore or ridicule him for no reason other than that they just inexplicably hate him. More likely, it's because he hasn't convinced them of the scientific validity of his findings. Or perhaps it's because he doesn't understand the conservative nature of science: An alternative explanation of well-understood phenomena is rarely interesting to scientists. What IS interesting when it comes to alternative explanations of well-understood phenomena is when they present new and unequivocally accurate evidence that the previously-accepted cannot possibly explain, but the alternative explanation can. But different just because of novelty rarely leads to new scientific models. That being said though, I seriously doubt if many medical scientists would disagree that the sun affects biochemistry and psychology. > There is every reason to believe that the energy fields are the source of > life and may have the potential of surviving the death of the physical > organism. Uhmmm... What reason(s) in particular is the author refering to? > they are representative of a more refined cosmic body which requires > electromagnetic (not chemical) nourishment directly from the source of all > life, the sun. The energy fields, I suspect, would therefore affect the > biophysical organism. Comments on terms: "Cosmic body" has not been defined (at least not in this fragment) and seems to be an oxymoron. "Nourishment" here is metaphorical at best. He has not presented evidence (again at least not in this fragment) of essential nutrients being gleaned directly from any form of electromagnetic radiation. "Energy field" has a very wide variety of possible meanings, so that last sentence is almost certainly true be default. Thank you Bruce for taking the time to type this up for us. My best guess, from what little I've read of this document is that the author intends it to be evaluated mystically. If indeed that is the case, I would recommend that he avoid scientific principles, since they are uninteresting to mysticism, and since, unless he's prepared to pursue them with true scientific rigor, it constitutes poor science. Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Wed, 26 Mar 1997 12:39 +0100 Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA17948; Wed, 26 Mar 1997 12:39:05 +0100 Received: from ella.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA17975 Received: from by ella.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI) id DAA24496; Wed, 26 Mar 1997 03:37:26 -0800 Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1997 03:37:26 -0800 Message-Id: <336406c8.2227516398@kcbbs.gen.nz> Errors-To: madole@mills.edu Reply-To: tuning@ella.mills.edu Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Sender: tuning@ella.mills.edu