Notices
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Do you think its possible that when people say the same things....?

  1. #1 Do you think its possible that when people say the same things....? 
    Forum Freshman Fmp2491's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    92
    This is strictly a hypothetical question out of my own curiosity and maybe one day I will try and figure out how to prove it... but I have a feeling that when people say the same things "Coincidentally" that it has nothing to do with coincidence at all... Does anyone else feel that thoughts of similar intention gravitate to a similar idea or experience?

    Ok lets say for example that you have a person or group of people who have all seen the same movie as you. Now in that movie something happens that is say a funny part or a monumental part worth remembering. So this part sticks in all of your minds now all of you may or may not have seen the movie together that makes no difference; but hypothetically lets say something happens where someone say something that is absolutely nothing like what happened in the movie but somehow you and all of your friends quote the same part of that movie. Or song, or any other feasible example i can come up with.

    Obviously this isnt the exact scenario that i want to prove this is just the only way I can get everyone to visualize a simple scene where this happens. Now this happens on a daily basis if not daily then at least regular enough where almost all of us have experienced this type of situation. My real curiosity lies in the fact that how do 2 people out of the blue think the same exact thing or say the exact same thing? I have heard that in the Noetic science field people are trying to prove that every thought has mass... and that like any other object with mass, it has the ability to exert the force of gravity. Thus this means that if enough people think the same things they will gravitate to one another. This is one of my many curiosities involving thoughts but my main reason for asking this question is to just get people to respond and maybe get a discussion going on personal opinions.


    What do you guys think? Do you think that this is something on the plate to be proved within the next 50 years or 100 year or maybe sooner?


    I would love to hear peoples reactions so feel free to post any thoughts!


    ‎"What are we doing tomorrow night?
    Same thing we do every-night Pinky - try to take over the world!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    3,380
    Excluding the following: Do you think the fact that no one has responded thus far is helping to prove your point?


    All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman Fmp2491's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    92
    Lol do you think that the fact that it was a hypothetical question says anything about your statement whatsoever? Or is it more along the lines of the fact that their is an entire University and more dedicated to proving such types of questions?.... Can't really differentiate between ignorance on this forum, or just sheer close mindedness.... EXCLUDING YOUR PREVIOUS STATEMENT... lol

    Its funny how people will post the most ridiculously outlandish questions on this forum for example.... "Is the Iron Man suit possible?" and that will have 100 responses meanwhile an actual question which requires no information research or anything. Well... anything shy of just thought, those types of questions that should get peoples thoughts and curiosity going spark no intrest whatsoever. I have been observing this on this forum for quite some time now. Obviously I like this forum since I am subscribed to it, but im actually getting sick of the egos. If you didn't want to answer my question or think about it whatsoever (in a constructive manner) then the response is not necessary. Like your Quotes says, "Unappreciated Sarcasm", its neither wanted nor appreciated from me at any given moment especially not in a context where something is intended to be mentally engaging. If YOU, in YOUR opinion think this is a stupid question... Then thank you very much for stopping by have a great day. Let the thread die if it is that ignorant of a question/statement/discussion. Your unwanted, unneeded and close-minded responses acting, condescending online does nothing more then to make people angry.


    So I appreciate the response because when I post a question I like that people stop by... but id have appreciated it if you would let the question die next time; especially if you do think it is a stupid question. Because trust me I have seen many questions on this forum that are a lot less intelligent questions then the ones i've posted on here.. and those spark discussions.

    Incase you would like to expand your horizons next time this is the institute it offers free information ENJOY =) Institute of Noetic Sciences | Consciousness | Science | Spirituality | Wisdom
    ‎"What are we doing tomorrow night?
    Same thing we do every-night Pinky - try to take over the world!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    3,380
    LOL...You can look at it both ways. Either people remained silent because they collectively pooled their thoughts together to not reply or you are responding to me the way everybody is thinking. On the other hand I chose to break the silence even though I may have been thinking like everyone else. Excluding my question should be a clue that I did not wish to say anything on the topic either. But I did provide some fodder for an experiment to test the hypothesis. Did readers' thoughts gravitate towards your mind and result in your retort? Unfortunately my signature could influence how I am perceived, no? Was I sarcastic or honestly gauging your hypothesis?

    I guess all we need is for the membership to write in and agree their thoughts are in line with your rebuttal. If they don't then is it because they agree with you and find it unnecessary to respond or is it just complete indifference? We could end up right back where we started.
    All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Administrator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,849
    Noetic science. Smells like pseudoscience to me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Freshman Fmp2491's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    92
    quantum physics - observer interference - double slit - 2nd dimension - YouTube 5:00 minutes is the end of the lecture.

    Ignorance is bliss my friends ignorance is bliss lol.... expand your horizons
    Last edited by Fmp2491; August 2nd, 2011 at 11:01 PM.
    ‎"What are we doing tomorrow night?
    Same thing we do every-night Pinky - try to take over the world!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman Fmp2491's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    92
    The point of that post incase you dont understand its relevance is that things change when being observed. So therefore thought MUST at some level have an effect on the physical world. "talk to your plants it will help them grow", "Believe and anything is possible".... So on and so forth, things in the physical world time and time again have been proven to be effected by thought. Weather or not you realize it or not or are just to stubborn to accept it, thought changes things. Believe and you will succeed, all these phrases are sighs that untapped potential. Read the book The Genius in all of us, it talks about the ability to train yourself and the way that genetics actually work. GxE is the new model G+E is no longer existant Nature/ Nurture is a thing of the past. If you had read this book you would understand, if you had read anything about Noetic science you would understand. Calling Noetic Science pseudoscience is sheer ignorance, and excuse my harsh criticism but the egos on this forum are really pissing me off... the close-mindedness on this forum is just absurd lol. Read a book of some substance for a generation thats said to "thrive on the hypotheticals" this forum sure proves that statement false entirely.


    The kingdom of God is within you, said Jesus Christ.
    Know thyself, said Pythagoras.
    Know ye not that ye are gods, said Hermes Trismegistus.
    Don't you know that you yourselves are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you? Corinthians 3:16

    If you recall the soft patch on your skull, that is referred to as your what? It would be a, Temple if I recall correctly right? Might want to consult your nearby anatomy textbook. Located on your Temporal bone/ lobe of the skull. =)


    Read something next time before you make an ignorant response to a hypothetical question because like they said in step brothers, "your just coming off stupid"

    Have a nice day my friends thanks for stoping by!
    ‎"What are we doing tomorrow night?
    Same thing we do every-night Pinky - try to take over the world!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,247
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Noetic science. Smells like pseudoscience to me.
    I concur. Moved.
    --
    Fmp2491 The Youtube link had nothing to do with this thread and Youtube isn't a credible independent scientific source though it might rarely point to some.
    Last edited by Lynx_Fox; August 3rd, 2011 at 04:12 AM.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,227
    Fmp2491:

    How about we stop with the long winded posts telling us how closed-minded we are and let's discuss what you are actually talking about. This thread has been moved to pseudoscience and while you might not like it, it is exactly where it is classified at the moment. It most certainly is not mainstream science, but there is nothing stopping us from discussing it here.


    So, the site you linked to talks about much more that your OP and seems to have taken the whole "observation affects the quantum world" thing (which is based in proper science) and run with it. Would you care to maybe give us a short rundown of what it all encompasses? I it basically an extended version of "The Secret"? How much of it do you actually subscribe to?
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Freshman Fmp2491's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    92
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Noetic science. Smells like pseudoscience to me.
    I concur. Moved.
    --
    Fmp2491 The Youtube link had nothing to do with this thread and Youtube isn't a credible independent scientific source though it might rarely point to some.
    I understand this had nothing to do with my original post if you read that long winded explanation Essentially what I was saying was things changed when being observed. So that means either their is something going on with the simple art of observation... ok wait let me explain my position again for Kalster. So my apologies for the anger towards my posters i was just getting sick of.... either way thats neither here nor there.


    My position is strictly hypothetical, but it is this. When people think the same things is it possible in anyone else's opinions that something more happens then just coincidence. But not only think the same things, like randomly blurt out a phrase/ word/ song or anything at the same time. I feel like the best metafor for this would be verbal mall dancing. So is it possible hypothetically that our thoughts can at some point be proven to have mass? Thus have the ability (let me tie it to the video) to like in quantum mechanics, alter the physical world? If the simple art of observation changes scientific data. With no more variables then just observation vs no observation... then hypothetically like I said does anyone else think that this is possible for thoughts to have mass. Obviously this is no where in the neer future but im just stating clearly hypothetical!

    My apologies everyone who may or may not have been aggravated by my comments just trying to prove a reoccurring point. Im trying to put my best foot forward start over. Well anyway ponder my idea if you want...
    ‎"What are we doing tomorrow night?
    Same thing we do every-night Pinky - try to take over the world!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    37
    Thought doesn't have a physical mass, which seems to be the point you are trying to get across.
    The neurochemical process behind thought has mass, because it is physical and quantifiable. But thought itself, the concept, is not physical and does not have mass.

    The idea of two people saying something at the same time is not that strange. It happens when you are talking about a set subject, or as you said if you went and watched a film with a quotable part, and then you and your friends all said it a bunch for a while. I'm sure everyone can relate to both of those. I'm surprised you can't find your answer in basic psychology though. I mean even probability can give you an answer. X number of words spoken by each person in a closed topic + knowledge of the topic + knowledge of other person + many other factors/something = probability that you will say the same thing.

    Lets not overcomplicate stuff when it doesn't have to be, eh? Lex parsimoniae.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Freshman Fmp2491's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    92
    Quote Originally Posted by iainmacb View Post
    Thought doesn't have a physical mass, which seems to be the point you are trying to get across.
    The neurochemical process behind thought has mass, because it is physical and quantifiable. But thought itself, the concept, is not physical and does not have mass.

    The idea of two people saying something at the same time is not that strange. It happens when you are talking about a set subject, or as you said if you went and watched a film with a quotable part, and then you and your friends all said it a bunch for a while. I'm sure everyone can relate to both of those. I'm surprised you can't find your answer in basic psychology though. I mean even probability can give you an answer. X number of words spoken by each person in a closed topic + knowledge of the topic + knowledge of other person + many other factors/something = probability that you will say the same thing.

    Lets not overcomplicate stuff when it doesn't have to be, eh? Lex parsimoniae.

    I mean this is a not rude way but I think chalking this idea up to probability is nieve. Or maybe a better way to say it might be taking the easy way out. I obviously undesrstand their might be a simple way to explain this but obviously like I said this is an idea. Not a theory yet tested, not a law (obviously), not anything of the sort. Just grounds for curiosity. If thoughts dont contain mass then how do they actually physically have the ability to effect your body. Seeing as though its only a hypothetical situation I can understand your skepticism and quite frankly it is duly noted, trust me. But curiosity kills the cat here. I want to know because im a believer that thoughts may one day prove to have mass. I also believe with the idea of thoughts having mass I believe the density of the the thought depends on the training your brain has in that area. If you train your brain you can increase the mass (slightly) of each thought. Thus the trained mind is stronger then the untrained.

    MAYBE MAYBE-NOT, who knows!?!!??!
    ‎"What are we doing tomorrow night?
    Same thing we do every-night Pinky - try to take over the world!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

Tags for this Thread

View Tag Cloud

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •