Jul 17 2007
|
|
Dad, Where Do UFOs Come From?
In this excerpt from Michael Talbot’s seminal book The Holographic Universe, we find a clue to secrets about the UFO problem which mainstream Ufology has ignored. Talbot, looking at the work of physicists like Alain Aspect and David Bohm, posits that reality, the universe, and everything is akin to an infinite hologram, in which all things contain complete information about all other things.
What physicists call the “quantum field,” is also the “collective unconscious” of Jung, where archetypes arise, and where spontaneous and simultaneous events occur, independent of distance. Western occultists are convinced that this realm is where everything we experience (both in waking and dream states) resides, but we are only seeing and sensing a small piece of what it truly “is.” This “dimension” is not bound by time, space or our attempts to understand and more importantly, to explain it. Language traps us in a conceptual web of illusions, at least as far as this symbolic realm is concerned. We may imagine that our reality could be a sort of shadow or epiphenomenon of this holographic dimension, looked at through a mental web of expectations, sensory input, and our illusory flow through time.
I would like to suggest that this is where the intelligence behind the UFO phenomenon “resides.” Perhaps this intelligence is dependent on the observer for its form and appearance. Maybe the ufonauts are implicit in this realm or hologram or idea-space, and need only other sentient intelligences to bring them into being. The interaction becomes the existence. What I am trying to get across here is that at least part of the UFO “problem” may be in our heads. Most of us, through cultural conditioning and input from our senses look at the physical universe as parts or pieces of some sort of infinite “machine.”
Nuts-and-bolts types will say that all of this psychological junk is fine in theory, but how does it explain physical traces, effects on the immediate environment, implants, and marks on abductees’ bodies? It doesn’t, unless you open your thinking up and consider how a non-localized intelligence could interact with us on basic levels that as yet, we barely understand. Since there is really no incontrovertible evidence that we are being visited by aliens from other planets, other than what we expect and how things appear to us, we should be able to hypothesize without being wed to one idea.
So, have I finally gone completely nuts?
More to follow.
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, July 17th, 2007 at 10:10 pm and is filed under Abductions, Alien Encounters, Close Encounters, Evidence, Psychic Phenomena, UFO Sightings, UFOlogy, UFOmystic Exclusive, Wake Up Down There. You can follow responses via RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is not allowed.
del.icio.us Digg Reddit BlinkList Google Ma.gnolia StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Help
- Related News Stories:
- UFO Origins »
- Human Origins »
- Robo-Bird »
- Interview Tonight (June 6th) »
- Jesse Marcel Jr.’s Roswell Alien Symbols »
- Recent Alien Writing Examples »
- CARET And Symbolic Writing »
- Examples Of Alien Writing »
- “Human UFOs” »
- Alien Writing - Pt. 1 »
|
July 17th, 2007 at 10:32 pm
What’s wild about Talbot is his fiction. He’s one of the few fiction writers I like and readers of his fiction don’t know about the Holographic Universe! Vice versa of course. The Delicate Dependency is considered a top book in the vampire genre and sells for a pretty penny. The Bog and Night Things are both excellent and necessary additions to his classic vampire book.
What makes Talbot’s fiction a required addition to his nonfiction? Well obviously he’s trying to get the reader to step inside the paranormal reality that Talbot grew up in, having experienced poltergeists for the early part of his life. Talbot looked to science for the answers but then became convinced that scientists were secretly guided and even controlled by an ancient spirit-possession harkening back to Sumeria and continuing through the echelons of elite researchers.
Unfortunately Talbot never made the total leap from science back to the shamanic realm and he succombed to an early death that possibly could have been cured through alternative means. I guess he was a parapsychological martyr like The Dragon and the Disc dude: F.W. Holiday or Rene Guenon (whose legacy has been bludgeoned via association with those who mistakenly claimed to be his followers).
In other words “the final step” is to actually become a vampire as well.
July 18th, 2007 at 12:32 am
No,
You’re not crazy. But here’s something to think about: I the UFO phenomena is being generated from an individual or collective psyche, or from some hypothesized imaginal realm, and let us say that all of the known UFO phenomena has this cause, then does this then lead us to the conclusion that interstellar space travel through mechanical-technical means is not possible? That is, if all the UFO phenomena comes from the imaginal realm, then none of the evidence we have for UFO’s is caused by mechanical-technical means & therefore we have no evidence that interstellar travel is possible.
July 18th, 2007 at 6:05 am
Greg:
Another possibility is that all of the so-called “physical evidence” that the nuts and bolts types like to trot out is explainable, and they’re mixing apples with oranges.
Or, alternatively, and I’ll go out in left field here, assuming there are physical traces etc., compare that to ghosts etc. - if they exist, they are supposed to be able to have the ability to affect their physical environment.
Again, as i think you might be suggesting, it could all be part of the same mechanism.
Nothing wrong with thought experiments, either. Honestly, for all their hard work, where have the previous generations of ufologists gotten the study? The same place it was 60 years ago, basically, and no closer to winning the acceptance and support of mainstream science for a more thorough scientific study. Perhaps it’s time to start indulging in a few more “thought experiments”, instead of insisting it’s little grey men from Zeta Reticuli, because that’s the only thing that a 1950s-oriented mindset is willing to consider.
Paul
July 18th, 2007 at 10:32 am
I remember reading in Hawking’s A Brief History of Time the theory that the human brain was responsible for the sorting of our perspective of space-time. This would mean that there may actually be no order as such.
And with comminications now starting to experiment with quantum entanglement who knows what else may one day be ‘entangled’ to the other side of the galaxy.
All in all, if one considers infinity and all its different implications, we’re probably quite lucky not to have aliens swarming all over us
July 18th, 2007 at 11:02 am
Nope, not completely nuts.
Reality is relative. Each person’s reality is a bit different from everyone else’s. The flowers outside my window are pink, and you might agree that they’re pink, but what you’re seeing is a different shade of pink that I am. And if somebody else thinks the flowers are purple, are they wrong? Not really. Our eyes are unique, just like our fingerprints and our perceptions. What might appear as a UFO to one person could be a witch to another person; one person sees an angel, another a blond-haired Martian. It depends on our personal experience, our expectations, and perhaps some other unknown natural tendency.
It’s all very interesting, can’t wait for more.
~Y
July 18th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
I sometimes wonder if our physical reality isn’t something like a virtual world like “Second Life”, only much more advanced. The main difference is participants in our Universe have knowledge blocks so that knowledge of other realms is forgotten.
Eternity is a long long time, so perhaps we create things like our physical reality as a sort of game to pass the time.
Like any simulation we humans create, this universe may have back doors & secret codes created by the creators, so that they can pop in from time to time and fine tune things. This might explain aliens/ufos, how they are said to pop into and out of existance. While here, they are able to effect the physical environment.
I think this metaphor is very similar to Greg’s view, only using different terminology.
July 18th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
The Holographic Universe is not a university science textbook, it is just a book, written purely for your entertainment and not your education. So don’t go around getting any ideas that Michael’s book is actually going to explain anything about reality as we know it or even suspect it to be like.
It seems Michael Talbot can’t even get his science right anyway. A hologram is a recording of an object, not the object itself. Those are two separate an mutually exclusive concepts. A hologram cannot physically reproduce an actual object, it can only project an image of that object. Many non-scientific types often confuse actual objects with projected images of actual objects, but they are not the same thing.
Another concept Michael gets wrong or doesn’t even notice is entropy. Information in this Universe is not infinite and it degrades with time. Like a hologram, information is not the same thing as the thing it describes: There is an object and then there is the information about the object. Once again, those are two separate entities, not one. If everything was a recording medium for information about all objects, then there would be no room outside of that recording for any of the actual objects that the information describes to exist. It is a ludicrous and illogical idea.
So even from a speculative point of view, Michael fails, because his speculation is based on an inaccurate or incomplete understanding of science. Using one New Age pseudo-scientific fantasy to try and support the belief in yet another New Age pseudo-scientific belief is illogical.
July 18th, 2007 at 8:53 pm
misteranderson,
Imaginal UFO phenomena should not exclude the possibility of interstellar travel, unless we attach all UFO events to aliens from other planets. I think I might go into how this “imaginal” could leave the imprint of technology, or at least physicality in the next post.
July 18th, 2007 at 9:00 pm
Paul,
I’m not sure what you’re saying about explainable physical traces. Are you suggesting that physical evidence of UFOs might all be explainable in conventional terms?
The subjects in this post will not be acceptable to mainstream science until the scientists themselves begin to expand their horizons to include phenomena that are presently ignored. At that point, I think that we may begin to crack some more mysteries. I have mentioned in other posts that mainstream ufology is stuck in a 19th or early 20th century mindset as far as science is concerned.
July 18th, 2007 at 9:03 pm
uv777bk,
I would go one further and suggest that our brains essentially create space-time and therefore our perspective is dependent on this. Sort of like the idea that some things can’t come into existence until we “believe” or at least accept a possibility. It’s not there until we have the capacity to see it.
July 18th, 2007 at 9:29 pm
Yards,
I couldn’t in good conscience put up the post without qualifying it for those who are not prepared to accept that I am not nuts!
July 18th, 2007 at 10:26 pm
uth,
Maybe WE (all of us, everything) are the creators and have chosen to foist that responsibility on another. It seems that many of us must personify the intelligence inherent in the universe to make it comprehensible to us. Maybe I’m wrong.
P.S. This is from the “skeptic” who wrote Project Beta!
July 19th, 2007 at 8:07 pm
I appreciate your ability to entertain alternative hypothesis and very much enjoy your commentary. It really comes down to alternatives to “nuts and bolts” as you refer to it. In the end, we are all simply wondering what is it that is truly happening. And something is most definitely happening.
I am however, a proponent of the KISS system. Until the improbable becomes the impossible, then the simplest answer is usually the correct answer. Recent discoveries seem to bear out the N&B explanation. We now know that planets do indeed orbit other star system and we also know with certainty they are vast and varied. Recently, water (and therefore oxygen) was discovered on a gas giant HD 189733b orbiting a star only 63 light years away. As more discoveries are made supporting the possibility and probability of life elsewhere (and they will be made), it will simply become more difficult to espouse “holographic” ‘I think it therefore it exist’ theories. “Not that there’s anything wrong with that” but…
Historically, many native cultures incorporate stories of star visitors, the Dogon being the most notable example. Does this bear any weight on the matter as well re N&B’s?
I guess my point here is simply I won’t categorize you a nutter Greg for hypothesizing hyper dimensional multi verses with holographic possibilities, if you’ll do me the kindness of extending the same courtesy for considering “Nuts and Bolts” KISS theory as the simplest, most likely explanation…
What would Holmes do?
July 19th, 2007 at 11:41 pm
Sage,
I think you are confusing the map with the territory. It would seem that Talbot is using a metaphor in order to get a deeper concept across: reality is not a hologram it is like a hologram. The idea is that everything does not literally “record” information about everything else, it is merely a gate or access point to the rest.
Also, the scientists (Bohm at least) that Talbot interviewed don’t seem to have had any problem with the book. This would indicate that they agreed with his view of their work. From what you’re alleging, the scientists he talked to do not understand science properly, and are engaging in “New Age pseudo-scientific fantasy.”
Which “non-scientific types often confuse actual objects with projected images of actual objects”? Are you speaking metaphorically here, or do you believe that some people can’t tell when they’re looking up at stars or are in a planetarium, for example?
Some newer (some almost 80 years old) concepts in physics may seem “illogical.” Have you looked into this UFO business at all? The whole thing is illogical.
We’re having a discussion about possibilities here, not a pseudo-debate by fiat.
July 19th, 2007 at 11:56 pm
Jonah,
This is the sort of civilized discussion I was referring to when I wagged my finger at “The Sage.”
By “KISS” I believe you are referring to Keep It Simple, Stupid.” Yes, the ET theory of UFOs is probably the simplest one, but as I pointed out, this theory has not made any headway in the last 50 years, except as the most popular one. There is little (probably closer to no) objective evidence for it, so I think we are left to our personal taste as to which theory is the more valid.
The ET theory is also very anthropocentric, which when hypothesizing about non-humaness may close off many other possibilities.
Something I left open is that if there are ETs visiting us, they may use their knowledge of this holographic idea as a tool for examining and confusing us as well as a mechanism for keeping us in the dark as to their true nature.
Finally, I am just so tired of the ET explanation that I am eager (some might say too eager) to consider alternate theories. Perhaps the “aliens from Zeta Reticuli” people are right, but that territory is already settled, and I’m off looking over the next hill, even if it may be a garbage heap.
July 20th, 2007 at 11:38 am
Speaking of anthropocentric I’m reading Francis Huxley and Jeremy Narby’s anthology of field reports on shamans, going back to the 16th C. But seriously Greg that whole vampire comment was for real.
Talbot argues that vampire originates as a worm serpent — it’s the rainbow serpent in fact. But, a la Dr. Andrew Parker’s book “In the Blink of an Eye” the Cambrian Explosion on Earth was created by quantum diffraction gradients through asymmetrical resonance of pressurve waves in the biolumescent ocean.
Greg: Holography is still dependent on closed systems for analysis — even if it’s quantum chaos. The holographic paradigm resurrected by Susskind in cosmology and the new Bekenstein Bound, returns back to the Pythagorean or Vampire-Snake theorem.
Listening to sound relies on pure tone sine-waves that can not be contained as “frequency” of phase-shift using in holography. Nevertheless the resonance of sound, only measured by pure number and not technology, creates light through acoustoelectric energy.
This was the limitation of Talbot’s theory for when vowels were introduced into semitic language there was a shift from tonal-based knowledge using the right-brain to visual-based knowledge using the left-brain. For example when we combine a phase-shift in the sine-wave harmonics the visual Fourier analysis is qualitatively different but the auditory perception is of the same frequency.
July 21st, 2007 at 6:22 am
Just as a point of information, Michael Talbot passed away on May 27th of 1992 after developing leukemia.
July 25th, 2007 at 7:48 pm
Greg,
I never indicated that Micael’s holographic universe concept was an analogy or not, so there is no evidence that I could be confusing the map with the territory. But I like your misplaced analogy because that is exactly what I was talking about — people confusing an object with an image of an object. In scientific circles they call this hallucinations, illusions, delusions, or lies. Delusions are the most common.
So what if (read: pretend) a map of the universe existed and it was a like a hologram and it existed everywhere? That’s a lot of untested ifs. Those make believe premises would also require us to pretend that entropy doesn’t exist. Remember what I said about entropy? Information is degrading with time, so it is always incomplete (read: finite) information. And information does not exist everywhere to the same degree. If you want information about the Sun, you don’t point your telescope at the moon, you point your telescope towards the Sun because that is where the most information about the Sun is going to be found.
You are right about there are concepts in science that “seem” illogical, but there are no concepts in that are actually illogical. Not a one. Humans by nature are not logical beings, so it is no wonder that is why they need to be taught logic in university classes, and why so many scientifically logical ideas “seem” illogical to the average person. Logic is never wrong and it never fails; it is only people who do not understand how to properly apply logic that fail.
Back to the analogy. Have you ever seen a holographic film? It is full of “swirly” patterns and colors and those patterns and colors are not uniformly distributed. If every square inch of that holographic film contained all the information about the object it recorded, the film would look uniform instead of “swirly”. Cut off a corner of a holographic film the next time you see get one and see how much of the object can be reconstructed from that corner piece. You will clearly see degradation of the object in the recording.
Michael’s ideas do not just “seem” illogical, they are illogical. Michael proposes what amounts to “the universe is all map and no territory”. That is what “infinite information” implies. Furthermore, Micheal’s claims are not just illogical, they are pseudo-scientific because although they sound like science but they are not actually science. Michael’s book is not a science textbook. It is not a peer reviewed science journal. It is was made for your entertainment, not your education.
It doesn’t matter who agrees or disagrees with those facts or logic, because science is not a democracy. Scientists do not vote for what they believe to be truth or not. It doesn’t matter who or how many people endorse Michael or not. A thousand Frenchmen CAN be wrong. For example, the vast majority of scientists used to believe that light traveled through the luminiferous ether or that the Sun revolved around the Earth, but the vast majority were all wrong. Sometimes it is the other way around as well. All that matters isn’t who believes in a claim or how many believe in a claim, it is if the claim or reasoning or justification is flawed because then there is a just cause for rejecting it. The only proper thing to do when a claim is made in a complete vacuum of evidence is to reject that claim, therefore the only logically proper thing to with Michael’s claims is to reject them because they are made in the absence of evidence, they are logically flawed, and they are pseudo-scientific.
July 25th, 2007 at 11:12 pm
“Sage”
Your comments remind me of the mindset of Carl Sagan, who in his more stoned moments wondered if science could explain everything. Of course, no “logical scientific” evidence exists yet to explain what we now call the “paranormal,” but looking to the other end of the spectrum (i.e. “spiritual” philosophies and experiences of the mind) may give us clues in which direction we might proceed.
That is all I was trying to say, and although Talbot may be wrong and illogical, I feel that he has a useful model from which to extrapolate. It is one among many. If this means a descent into illogical thought and delusions, we’ll just have to trust our judgment and discernment. I’m willing to take that risk.