Comments on: Ottawa Skeptics gets it close

By: George

George — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 07:28:55 +0000

I’m also an SFU Skeptic. Am I going to be dragged into this feud?

I don’t think I’ve ever even SEEN a musket.

]]>

By: Dave Green

Dave Green — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 11:55:09 +0000

So, does this mean we’re in a feud now? I’ve got overalls and can find a big old-fashioned black powder musket and straw hat, if needed!

Dave, Ottawa Skeptics….

]]>

By: Barry Green

Barry Green — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 03:37:55 +0000

Ian:

We have certain club rules in Ottawa Skeptics to deal with big egos – (1) always criticize Pat, (2) never compliment Jon, and (3) praise Barry whenever possible. You passed (1) and contravened (2), so go for (3) and we’ll call it square.

Barry

]]>

By: Ian

Ian — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 01:44:04 +0000

Notice that I start and end the post praising the OS and the work you do. I didn’t intend to respond to your entire article since I agree with most of it, I just wanted to comment on the bit that I think needed to be expressed differently. I agree that my explanation is more technical and will likely lose some people. I aim not to belittle, and my speciality is physics so I’m more likely to introduce jargon.

Again, thanks for the work Pat, and I should say that I really liked your article (I just think the wording needed adjustment in one spot).

]]>

By: Pat Roach

Pat Roach — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 00:35:40 +0000

“How does it work? Via an invisible life force that flows through us and connects us all. ”

I think you misinterpret my point and put emphasis where I had no intention for emphasis. You are correct in pointing out that my statement might be misinterpreted and I may have set myself up.

“…lend themselves very well to the suggestion that…” was, in my mind, the key to that full thought. That is to say – the strangeness of quantum physics lends itself to the following leaps in logic:

1)everything is made of atomic material therefore;
2) instantaneous action at a distance on the macro scale is real therefore;
3) It works via an invisible life force that flows through us and connects us all.

The very point of this article was to look at the error in that reasoning and the idea that there is a life force. I would point out the following from within the article:

-”No test using our highly advanced medical equipment has ever detected any life force, chakra, or chi”
-”Nothing requires that quantum mechanics plays a central role in human consciousness or provides instantaneous, energy connections in order to explain our world”
-”This is more simply explained by you subconsciously picking up on body language or non verbal cues rather than some energy-psychic connection”

Lastly, you state:

“Every particle has a de Broglie wavelength. This number relates its momentum (or mass times velocity) to an energy and then to a length that it will interact quantum mechanically. If a particle is trapped in a box of the size of its deBroglie wavelength…”

With all due respect to your understanding of quantum mechanics, you just lost 97% of people. My goal (which was stated quite clearly) was to write a simple paper that the average person could read. My hope was that they might find some rational based clarity. As I stated on our forums: ” I wanted to write an article my mother might read.” If I have missed the technical details in doing so, I have linked to a number of more technical papers.

I realize we are on the same team here but I still felt that you had taken the article out of context and it warranted a response.

]]>