Just don’t start me on the quotation box thingie.Or i’ll whip you.
OKay i think i’ve given you a hard enough time as it is.
So, I’m slightly curious, do you live the complete yogic lifesyle, follow all the limbs and practice a complete full classical practice–incl pranayam.meditation & asana and anything else? I’m always interested in people’s practice.
Did the vegtariansim emerge within a yogic practice,as part & parcel of purification, or originate separately perhaps?
Don…oh…
Ju
Jus
[B]
Core Says[/B]
Just dont start me on quotation box thingie. Or I’ll whip you.
I just hope its with vegetarian cream.:eek:
Oh…lots & lots of cream, lashings in fact. You can always tell the fat greedy cats , they get it all over their whiskers.
Here Kitty Kitty.
Kitty elopes back to her dungeon. But Keeper has kindly left out a plate.
Vegetarian cream? - I am really having to think hard about that one Kitty.You’ve made me think. I wonder how that would work. That rules out alot of cream. Are you sure?
hahahaha THERE ARE CLAWSES !!
Kitty Kitty , Hahahah… yes must watch out for those clawses.
Miaaaoowww…
It’s okay Kitty, here’s your vege-cream. It’s not quite the real stuff, the white stuff, but it’ll do.Real cream is better. All great kitties say so.
I love kats myself. :eek: xx
<<<<Still left pondering… >>>>>>;)
I think this qualifies as Quantum…dont think Kitty has strayed too far!
Yes , another valid perspective on this. Have i strayed … And is there such a thing as vege-cream Kitty? What’s wrong with normal cream. I’m insulted.
Yes A-tom-mic, there is such a thing as vege-cream, Kitty loves it in the Quantum Realm:D
Good to hear Kitty loves her cream absolutely .I knew she would.
If Kitty’s happy this Atomic Kat is very happy also…
.Mmmmmmm …Sluurrrppp…Finger-licking good.
A satsified Katty is a happy Kitty.
Prrrr…Miaooow.
…And Happy to oblige…
[QUOTE=Pawel;42679]Statistics is CRUCIAL in reporting experimental results. I need to know what is probability that reported effects are chance. Without statistics I don’t know and can’t judge whether effects are real or not.
When you design experiment you need to address issues of phenomena variability and measurement errors and set “sample size” so that you end up with results that can be interpreted as positive. This guy didn’t do any of that. So I don’t know whether those results show something or not. But my intuition tells me they don’t because author didn’t present statistical analysis. As scientist he knows how important it is. So if he omitted that it may mean there was no statistically significant difference between groups and he just wanted to write paper anyway to support his theory.
Ps. This is not a rare phenomena according to this paper. Everyone is supposed to be able to affect DNA structure.
Ps2. It doesn’t matter if he is a member of science academies and there are reports on validity of his research. There are rules of scientific research and reporting. Even Stephen Hawking has to follow those. And if someone doesn’t, its not a science but probably an attempt to convince people that a theory has scientific foundations.[/QUOTE]
A simple question: how many scientifical reports have you authored ?
[QUOTE=oak333;42707]A simple question: how many scientifical reports have you authored ?[/QUOTE]
I’m author of 7 peer reviewed papers and 1 book chapter, co-author of 22 papers and 2 book chapters so far. In science you use term “peer reviewed” to denote it was judged by your peers as valid research. I’m not sure what you mean by report. You mean peer reviewed paper or sort of summary of research?
I thought I will add: I’m not questioning those effects, but rather the way they are described. This paper is stylized too look like scientific paper but its just horrible. If I would write something like that my boss would fire me next day.
After some thought I have to add that in fact I do question effects described in this paper. I wanted to write more specifically what I don’t agree with but I can’t grasp terminology in this paper. For example this coherence in ECG signal. Its not defined and just introduced by one figure (fig.1). By the way, those “coherent” peaks in ECG spectrum are harmonics and not measures of how coherent heart activity is. So what exactly is affecting DNA structure?
I try to have open mind, but I think its extremely unlikely that electromagnetic field generated by heart may affect DNA conformation. Mainly because of different wavelengths. If you would treat heart as oscillator generating wave with frequency 1 per second (around), wavelength would be speed of light*1sec. Huge. And for wave to interact with an object it has to have comparable size. DNA is very small so this “heart wave” wouldn’t even notice that there is anything on the way.
The scientific studies for the truths of spirituality - reincarnation, soul, psychic powers, mystical states, yoga/meditation have already been done and all these things proven in the last century itself. What we are going through now in science is the acceptance phase, which may take a few more decades. Suffice it to say in the 22nd century all of these things wll be scientific facts.
[QUOTE=kareng;42677]I can outrank that…easy…
I can make a mean vegetarian superb curry, hand fed if necessary , served with an ice cold beer, followed by grapes suspended just above head for ease of eating, aiding the person to continue typing or reading Quantum physics books[/QUOTE]
ahhh but I am a very good cook of both Chinese and Japanese food 
hahaha Ahh yes Yulaw but are your plate portions Planck size!
[QUOTE=kareng;42765]hahaha Ahh yes Yulaw but are your plate portions Planck size![/QUOTE]
Curses…foiled again
It is not easy to understand the complexity of this DNA biocomputers. Probably the best thing is to go to the original reports.
Fortunately I could find a good report, which decribes in detail the theory, experiments, and conclusions:
http://www.rexresearch.com/gajarev/gajarev.htm
This report needs a thorough study. However, if you go to the section DNA Wave Biocomputer, you see the experiments validated by several research institutes in Russia,
United Kingdom, Germany, and Canada. Moreover, you see a few patents based on this research.
This is a premise for seriosity and validity of the research. To go in more detail, you have to study the paper yourself…or to adress questions to these institutes. Their e-mails
are listed in the report.
Wow, thats lot of info. Unfortunately I’m bit behind with work and no time to go through it in detail.
Maybe those effects are for real, I don’t know. What I know, is that those guys don’t present full results and no statistical analysis (I don’t have to read in detail to find it out). Without that, its impossible to assess their claims and theories. And they know it. Presenting results properly (clear methodology, plots with error bars, assessment of statistical significance) is like scientific kindergarten. Anyone doing proper research will tell you that without elements like that (and few others) its not scientific paper/report but just speculation/idea.
Ps. Very fascinating speculations/ideas. No doubt about that. If its true, there is a new type of medicine waiting to be discovered.
The whole issue of quantum mechanics vs. consciousness came from the ideas of R.Penrose in the Emperor’s new mind, where he suggested that long threads of tubulin in the axons of the neurons might contain qbits and function as a quantum computer. This is a mere hypothesis without any tangible proof. In his book “I of the Vortex”, R.LLinas comes much closer to presenting a plausible theory for the origin of consciousness, where he discusses the concerted timing and binding principle of the oscillations in neurons. Even this does not go far enough for me: It does not explain how brainwaves lead to an experience. My guess (not substantiated by verifiable facts either) I posted in an ealier post this evening: Brahma’s holodeck in the general forum. The whole theory about DNA itself linked to consciousness is a couple of aggregation levels too far fetched for me; let’s first try to understand it at organ and cell level, before we jump into the molecular business.
Greetz, another scientist among the samadhi aspirers…
[QUOTE=Awwware;42946]The whole issue of quantum mechanics vs. consciousness came from the ideas of R.Penrose in the Emperor’s new mind, where he suggested that long threads of tubulin in the axons of the neurons might contain qbits and function as a quantum computer. This is a mere hypothesis without any tangible proof. In his book “I of the Vortex”, R.LLinas comes much closer to presenting a plausible theory for the origin of consciousness, where he discusses the concerted timing and binding principle of the oscillations in neurons. Even this does not go far enough for me: It does not explain how brainwaves lead to an experience. My guess (not substantiated by verifiable facts either) I posted in an ealier post this evening: Brahma’s holodeck in the general forum. The whole theory about DNA itself linked to consciousness is a couple of aggregation levels too far fetched for me; let’s first try to understand it at organ and cell level, before we jump into the molecular business.
Greetz, another scientist among the samadhi aspirers…[/QUOTE]
Interesting post. Perhaps I will be able to read about it.