I've read about it, but still don't understand. Can anyone help me out?
http://www.psychicsahar.com/artman/p...icle_487.shtml
Well, I'm not sure this helps me.
Dr Jude Currivan, Masters degree in quantum physics, PhD in Archaeology
You ARE the Cosmos
Evening Talk to SSPR at the University of Glasgow
Lecture takes place on: Thursday 2nd October 2008
In these momentous times, a new vision of the Cosmos is emerging that is reconciling leading-edge science, pioneering research into consciousness and the perennial wisdom of all ages in a more profound and personally empowering way than ever before. These latest discoveries are revealing that all that we term reality is essentially integral and that the whole-world may be described as a cosmic hologram. This vision of a wholly inter-related and conscious Cosmos has revolutionary implications for every one of us, for it asks us to re-member that we are cosmic co-creators. Jude’s talk will share the emerging vision of integral reality and how we are now able to directly access our highest co-creative potential through the portal of the universal heart. Dr Jude Currivan PhD, author of The Wave, The 8 th Chakra and The 13 th Step, is a healer and scientist who works worldwide empowering others and facilitating wholeness on personal and collective levels. Her fourth book, co-authored with Ervin Laszlo CosMos – a co-creator’s guide to the whole-world is published August 2008 by Hay House. www.judecurrivan.com
Last edited by bindeweede; 22nd June 2008 at 12:33 AM.
Is this an adaptation of the theory that we create the universe around us, using the power of our minds? That we create our own reality etc? Oh the ego
Seems like someone's grabbed hold of the holographic principle and... well... done the usual woo thing with it.
Actually there maybe a few grains of wisdom worthy of consideration in this woo-tastic statement. Surely in terms of "the universe" there is no such thing as individual objects, in truly cosmic terms theres nothing really seperating me from the keyboard im now typing on, except my human perception.
Wether we can change the cosmos as a whole by changing one tiny particle of it is another matter, i think this guy i sthinking along the terms of fractals, i.e you change one iteration an the entire thing changes, but assuming the universe is a giant all encompassing fractal is a bit of a leap of faith.
Oh boy.
I am re-ordering the cosmos as we speak.
not a concept i would wholly dismiss, think about it, how much of what you actually see and hear around you is actually a product of your own mind?Originally Posted by bobdezon
Is this an adaptation of the theory that we create the universe around us, using the power of our minds? That we create our own reality etc? Oh the ego
If a tree falls in the woods with no-one to hear it does it actually make a sound?
We certainly create our own internal subjective versions of the universe. Whether the objective universe even notices what we think is up for debate.
I'd like to know how Jude Currivan "...directly experienced multidimensional realities and guidance from an early age."
An interesting philosophical problem, and one I've been trying to get my head around recently ( hey, it passes the time! ) - how can I rationally/logically prove to myself that the universe really does exist outside of my own, limited and flawed, perception of it? Here's where I've got to...
If I start from the assumption that the world outside of me is merely a product of my own consciousness, then this defines the universe as imaginary; an hallucination of my mind. If this is the case, then there is no way that I can be considered a rational being, as my values, opinions and ideas would be based on hallucinations. If I am not a rational, sane being, then no value can be placed on my conclusion that the universe is subjective and intangible, as this idea would itself be the product of an irrational, perhaps insane, mind.
Clearly this is not a objection if the universe really does tangibly exist, and that I assume a materialist point of view.
I don't think I've explored the question fully yet ( probably not by any means! ), but that's where I'm up to at the moment.
ETA - how accurately my consciousness perceives whatever's going on 'out there' is a different question entirely - not sure how to start with that one!
Last edited by SimonC; 3rd July 2008 at 03:25 PM.
If Jude Currivan is deriving her ideas for her 'experiences of multidimensional realities' I think they should be examined first, before getting philosophical. If the experiences turn out to be entirely subjective, they may not require any rethink of the universe after all.
You're absolutely right, Mulder, although I'm not sure it takes a huge amount of deep-thinkery to figure out where Jude Currivan is coming from. Take a peek at the blurb for her book 'The 13th Step' -
http://www.judecurrivan.com/products/
'Soular heroes'?
Oh dear...
What she's doing sounds just like Psychic Questing. Or more likely re-inventing it.
Well unless my mind continuously processing all of the physics, chemistry, geology, biology and weather equations simultaneously 24\7... then yes. If you think otherwise then you may as well chuck the entire scientific process out of the window. A tree falling in the forest without anyone listening will still propagate sound waves, unless it's magically enclosed in a vacuum or suddenly in a reduced gravity environmentnot a concept i would wholly dismiss, think about it, how much of what you actually see and hear around you is actually a product of your own mind?
If a tree falls in the woods with no-one to hear it does it actually make a sound?
What we see and hear is our interpretation of physical phenomena which are fixed and, mostly*, immutable. They do not change because we're not around
*Big Bangs, Singularities and Quantum particles notwithstanding
It's not exactly unususal. Reality is multidimensional, and most people experience it from an early age.
But sound waves are not the sensation of sound are they? it might make vibrations in the air but it wont make "a noise" because "a noise" is an abstract thing that only exists in your mind, a reflection provoked by a stimulus.
The contemplation of this question perhaps belongs more to the philospher than to the scientist, so yeah, i suppose sometimes it is ok to throw the scientific process out the window every now and again.
Last edited by VoodooJoe; 5th July 2008 at 12:14 AM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks