Jakara

I just went to this site above and read this: Scientific Explanation: Technically, a black hole absorbs matter into a rotating vortex of magnetic energy (not all black holes are rotating and magnetic, only "kerr" black holes are). However, a black hole also emits waves and particles into space (black holes emit no radtiation by definition, thats why they are black). One can use this form of energy for his personal awakening. This form of radiation from the "black hole" is called ultraviolet-three (is this a new made up form of radiation?) and is only found in the depth of space, or in objects such as meteorites (meteorites don't emit radiation). This radiation does not travel through the earth because of the earth’s protective magnetic field will not allow ultraviolet-three to penetrate to the earth's surface (ultraviolet does get through, or we wouldn't get sun-tans, also satellite based instruments would pick it up, but have not). Therefore, by vibrant visualization of the rotating "black hole", one can learn to absorb this cosmos' energy. Benefits Through this practice, the valley in-between the lobes of the brain will start to resonate with the black hole radiation. This will combine the magnetic potentials and able to flow the energy into the body. This practice will empower one to a higher spiritual-magnetic potential. All of the aforementioned practices work holistically towards self-generated enlightenment. It is important for one to verify with the teacher whether this practice can be practice together with other forms of awakening. .... Someone might want to tell him to remove this part; it has no scientific basis. Ive added brackets to explain why in each part. Im not trying to be a party pooper :-) I just think its a little misleading.

I get pain in the dan tien whilst doing abdominal breathing if I do it the same day after intercourse. Sleeping it off usually works, 24 hours later im fine.

I was reading a post the other day that reminded me of so many recent articles using scientific terminology to explain religious practice. Most of us do not have an education in quantum physics (the new buzzword in explaining religious experience) and therefore I’d like to help shed some light on the matter as a physicist. So why do people use science to try to explain religious practice? Well since the decline of the religious institution as a powerful authority over society, we turn to science to explain events. Why? Because scientists can prove without a doubt those events studied with reproducible experiments or a set of mathematical formulae which cannot be flawed. From these proofs we have things like modern technology and medicine. The problem is that these proofs are sometimes out of reach of the average person, and therefore we are told to “believe” that science works just like we would any religion. This creates a multitude of problems. People can pass anything off under some fancy words like “quantum physics” and we buy it because we don’t know any better after “believing” in science. This is called “blinding with science”. The people that do this know the recipient knows nothing of the technical things they talk about and the recipient believes its true as to not look stupid. You may have noticed how shampoo and cosmetic advertisements do this, blasting us with scientific terminology and certain “proofs” to get us to buy their products. If you are a scientist and you do understand the terms they are putting forward, you can’t help but a) laugh at the ridiculous fluff they put forward for what is essentially liquid soap, and feel sorry for those who fall for it. They put forward this pseudo-science because we are taught it is flawless and therefore believe in it without question. So in a world where we believe what we are told, and we are told to believe in science, anyone affiliated with science will be given credit. But this is against the whole point of scientific investigation. Science is not a belief system. It is a set of tools used to prove what the truth is. It is heavily dependent on having “the right tools for the job”. Science does not yet have the necessary tools to investigate religious practices as a whole, hence, for example, we cannot “prove” god does or does not exist. However we can use repeatable experiment to prove the claims of some people. If a person publicly claims they can do something, they better be able to do it repeatedly and be able to prove it. If we don’t ask for proof we are just following like sheep because we are told to do so. If the person claims we should have faith that they can do it without proof, then we are following a belief and not a proven subject. This does not mean we should be rude in our pursuits giving discredit to anyone who does not wish to prove anything, by all means not everybody cares about proof, it does not mean they can’t do the things they claim. But we should be weary of such claims and accept that without proof we are following a belief, which may cost you your time and money if it is not true. Since quantum physics is used so much - here is what it is! Quantum physics is a set of tools used to explain the behaviour of very small, fundamental particles/waves in nature. It is necessary because at these levels, common sense (Newtonian Physics) does not apply coherently. The word “Quantum” or “Quanta” means “the smallest possible amount”. For example, a “photon” is one “quanta” of light, you cannot have a half, or indeed anything less than one quantum of anything. This non-divisibility gives rise to various behaviours in particles and waves which are modelled with quantum physics. Quantum physics therefore does not lend credit to any set of practices. The only thing it does do is create an interesting phenomenon called the “Heisenberg uncertainty principle”, (Wiki it if you’re interested) It also explains that a particle can be in two states at the same time, when classically it is impossible and should only be in one state or the other. It only decides to be in one state when someone measures or observes it. It’s like saying a person is both dead and alive at the same time, but they only are alive when we see them. Or saying the moon does not exist unless we look at it. These analogies are flawed due to them being a composite of many particles, which breaks down the quantum effect into classical mechanics. These philosophical interpretations however are relished by religions eager to jump on the science bandwagon. So, if you see scientific terms used to explain religious practice, don't be afriad to ask "how" they explain them, even if you can't understand the answer, you can check it later by asking someone who does, or watch as that person cannot infact justify using science as an explanation. Now, if you didn't get anything else from reading this, atleast you can now laugh at commercials claiming to have a “Quantum Leap” in performance, as that does denote the smallest possible leap forward in performance available. Thanks, Jak

Me too, there are large parallels between Taoism, Buddhism and science, science just doesn't have the right tools for the job (yet) to see if they are the same :-) I agree, Taoists and Buddhists are taught not to "believe" in stuff but to try the techniques for themselves and prove to themselves that it works. Could be the Higgs Boson? Its the final piece of the puzzle to the "standard model" of particles. Its the particle that "gives mass" to all other particles. It has been predicted but not yet observed. Im out of my field here though, so i'd have to look it up.

I really must say this again, that I was really talking in a specific context, not in generality. Im saying people who say their theory is definitely supported by quantum physics when it isn't, is misleading. Theres a huge difference is saying "this is similar to a concept in quantum physics" and saying "this is proven and supported by quantum physics". The first one is fine, it is interesting to compare religion and science, they are both meant to find the truth. The second one is simply a false statement aimed at lending credibility under the guise of scientific fact. Yes infact all scientists do accept quantum physics, its a proven and solid framework that is used day in and day out, it explains how the Sun works for example, its not a matter of opinion. Not all scientists accept string theory, but string theory is out of my field so I couldn't comment why. Some of the thought experiments that arise from quantum physics have similar context to religious doctrine, but they are not real experiments, they are designed to help the human brain understand. They are mostly just analogies. If a practitioner grasps at one of these analogies and says "See! this is just like our religion, and therefore quantum physics supports it!" its not correct. Its like saying "Whats Taoism?" - "Oh well its like Christianity except they worship Lao Tzu and the Tao Te Ching is their bible". Its just not correct, its interpreted from a Christian viewpoint. We can't just look for parallels in other systems and say "Thats the same as ours so yours supports ours!". They may have similar concepts but its inappropriate to say one supports the other. Perhaps its the fault of the scientists for not communicating modern science adequately to the general public. We are only left with crackpot internet conspiracy movies and the extreme opinions of some less than objective people (like Dawkins).

Scientific terminology is not "banned" by anyone. Saying that a specific scientific theory can prove something when there is no evidence to support that claim is a no-no in my opinion, and in the opinion of most people. Its pretty much outright lying, or just plain ignorance. Neither of which should be common practice for a master of mindfulness and meditation. Im not saying we cannot use scientific words to describe experience, thats not what i mean. Im saying we shouldnt claim that science supports our theory if it doesn't. I have seen many pracitioners do this. Not just use a few scientific words here and there, but actually say "Quantum physics supports this" when it clearly doesn't. Its a deceitful tactic used to gain the support of the gerenal public because most people do not have the scientific knowledge to challenge the statement. Im not having a go at religious people as I myself am religious. Im offering to help explain away any scientific terms that some teachers use that aren't understandable to anyone who hasn't studied physics at degree level. That way its easy to weed out any bogus claims and help show the way to safe and proven practices. It saves time and money for all.

Taoist dream practice is very similar to Tibetan dream yoga. Here is a good book on Tibetan dream yoga : http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tibetan-Yogas-Drea...3905&sr=8-1 One of the main points in the practice is to induce lucid dreaming, whereby the person dreaming realises they are dreaming, and can then utilise that time for whatever purposes they wish. For example, we can spend a good proportion of our 8 hours of sleep per day in meditation, whilst we are asleep, because we are concious in our dreams. Its also good fun, as any lucid dreamer will tell you, you can build your own world in your dreams and live in it. Though indulging in these fantasies goes against the point of the religious aspect of freeing the mind of fantasy. I once talked to a priest who was trained by other priests in his dreams as part of his daily training. He said that each moment can feel like a year has passed. In one night he was able to re-live two weeks of his past in full. The basic techniques are very easy, I have personally acheived lucid dreams on 3 or 4 nights of the first week of practice. These are however only moments (5 mins) of lucidness and more practice is required to have full lucid dreams. One of the first and most useful parts of the practice is to keep a dream journal, whereby you write down your dream(s) each night the second you wake up in the morning. Using this technique alone gives astonishing results that you might not expect. Other techniques, to name just a few, include extending the period of lucidity, falling asleep in a lucid state and how to induce lucidity whilst you are dreaming by watching for dream signs. There are other books available by modern psychologists which give the same results. These are mainly to acheive lucidity, it is then up to the practitioner to decide what to do with that dream.

I get the feeling that scientists are very popular. Im not sure why, its probably a media portrait, the majority of us want to help everyone and help better the world. If science wasn't around we would still be stuck under the rules and dogma of religion, burning or jailing people for having heretic opinions. Physicists don't want to poke holes in everything religious and sit there laughing at anything that can't be proven with equations - contrary to the modern view. True scientists prove what they can with the tools they have available and leave the rest alone. Think how many frauds and scams there would be if we couldn't prove anything with science. Ok there are some like Dawkins who perhaps go to far and unfortunately they are the ones that the media reports. Why? It sells stories! All we see is what sells stories and they are always going to be the most extreme of scientists with highly opinionated views. Its not an accurate representation of the other 99.9% of us. Anyway, non-existence of proof is not proof of non-existence. Scientists can't say that Taoist theory or any other religious theory is false. But at the same time those religions shouldn't try to use science to back their point of view when it is not appropriate to do so. Mundane reality? Have you looked up at the stars? :-)

On a very small scale our reality in terms of physics is already shaped by our perception. Small particles behave differently after they have been observed. This creates the whole Schrodinger's cat paradox. Wikipedia Schrodinger's cat, its a great mind experiment :-) Though in the end I get the feeling that this limitation is due to the limitations of the human senses. In order to observe very small particles we must reflect light off them so our eyes can receive the light to perceive them. The problem is once we hit them with light, they gain energy! So their state is not the same as when we first wanted to observe them. Observation therefore effects the outcome of the physical reality (on a very small scale!)

My point was that religious organizations are extremley quick to assert their religious dogma where there are currently gaps in scientific understanding, or where the average person has no means to verify their claim. For example, I once heard a qi gong master describe qi as the potential energy stored in the gap between electrons and nuclei in atoms. Which is absolute rubbish. I think the romantic notion of knowing something that goes against establishment and proving the skeptics wrong is a strong one. Einstein for example had to do this, but he had excellent mathematical proof, it was just at the time there were only a handful of people capable of understanding the proof. This is a long shot from some of the crackpots trying to put forward romantic theories today. Richard Dawkins is amusing, he had great arguements that debunk a lot of the fluff, but like all extremists (he is an extreme atheist) he takes his ideas and applies them so widely that they are applied out of proper context. For example one can dispute that god made the world 6000 years ago because there is undeniable evidence of things to the contrary, like dinosaurs to name just one. But Dawkins goes further to say "there is no god" which is inappropriate as there is no proper evidence to completely support this. True scientists can only goes on what is scientifically proven, otherwise its personal belief.

Yes so there was a guy who was clinically blind. His eyes were fine but that part of the brain that let him see the images was damaged. He couldnt see anything at all, but if you held a coloured book in front of him he could guess which colour it was every time correctly. So his brain was registering events, but he wasn't aware of it. I think the person knowing the correct answers to questions is true, but only if they know the answer without knowing that they know the answer (if that makes sense?!). You could pick up information without it registering in your concious mind and be able to give the answer without knowing you new it. Bit like subliminal messaging, you aren't aware of the influence, but you are being influenced. We need only look at animals to see that a smaller brain size makes us less "intelligent", its a direct relation. We do use all of our brains. Infact when one part become useless another can take over. The visual cortex that is used for sight is not needed by the blind, so it takes up the function of the other senses. Studies showed that the blind are able to use brail much more efficiently than those with full sight for this reason.

We do infact use all of our brains, although some people's actions give us reason to dispute that :-) The whole "We only use a certain percentage of our brains" is an old myth. Perhaps the increase in awareness and deeper level of understanding could come from the hugely increased efficiency of your concious mind from meditation practice?

Hi, Yes ive been on several of their weekend retreats, they are usually on meditation and daoist yoga and are all excellent. The main priest is called Shi Jing who if i remember correctly was a student of Gia-fu Feng before becoming a daoist priest in the dragon gate tradition. The best way to contact them is by email or post, i believe they have weekly meetings as well as about 4 weekend retreats per year. Thanks, Jak

There seems to be a number of different views on what happens after you die if you are a Daoist. If you are a wu-wei practitioner it is perhaps as said previously like a drop in the ocean. The alchemists/yoga practitioners strive to create an immortal body to live in the immortal realms. If you are a priest or part of a family lineage in orthodox Daoism you might join the rest of your ancestors in whichever realm they exist in. From what ive been told (by a priest) death in daoism is very similar to that in tibettan buddhism. They both have shamanistic roots and share many similar pratices. One extra piece of interesting information I was taught was about the existence of ghosts, in that if you die in a shocking manner and unprepared way, you may well become a ghost that is trapped by the compulsion from your life. You apparently relive a moment again and again or hover around a certain place or person unaware that you are dead. Saying that, no one state seems to be permanent (asides from the drop in the ocean one) and eventually you cease to be a that ghost.

Following the post on science used in religion (http://www.thetaobums.com/Science-and-Physics-in-Religion-t4256.html) Please use this thread to post any shady-sounding scientific terms you've found to explain religious experience! We can then debunk them with Physics to see if they are accurate or just mumbo-jumbo :-) Thanks, Jak

Absolutely, there is no justification for dragging some poor guy to a lab to be made to perfom like a circus monkey for the "interest of science". That would be the result of personal human desire from an ill-mannered scientist, not science itself. Science itself has no agenda, its just a toolkit for finding the truth. If however someone says "I can do this, and quantum physics supports it", then they should be able to explain how quantum physics supports it. Otherwise they are using scientific terminology to blind us from the truth.

"Scientific Method" is used by every person who practices religion, including taoists. It states that if you do something again and again you get the same results. This is essential for taoist practices, teachers and students rely on it. Each person practicing a technique wishes to get the same results as described by their teacher. This is how systems are passed down generation at a time, because they get the same results as their teachers and the associated lineage. Perhaps you mean quantifying the practice with scientific language? In which case I would agree, there is no need to explain proven practices with scientific language.

Excellent yes. Those who choose words like "magnetic", "quantum", "energy" should perhaps choose carefully before using them to explain experiences. In my opinion religious practice is amazing enough without the need to add pseudo-science to make it more palletable for the general public. Perhaps when science has the right tools for the job we can explain all religious experience, but until then we should probably refrain from throwing around physics terms. Infact ill start a new thread for debunking.... Thanks, Jak

Hello, Yes there is the BTA (British Taoist Association) in London/England. It is headed by 2 or 3 priests from the Long Men (Dragon Gate) sect. They have a website: http://www.taoists.co.uk/ Thanks, Jak

I'd say not. The ego-less mind is no longer subject to compulsive actions or tendencies; it is completely free. Those unfortunate to suffer from dementia do not match this criteria.

The 3 paths of daoism are not strict paths, they are traditional paths, we do not need to adhere to one path without a flavour for the others, this is just what was done traditionally. But its also important to not simply collect a bunch of daoist techniques from books to practice. If there are a set of practices you enjoy it might be best to find a teacher for those who has a good system with a proper lineage involving these teachniques. You may have heard of the various schools of daoism: Heavenly master, Dragon gate, Complete reality, Precious Jewel etc. These are the schools of traditional daoism and teachers should trace their lineage to one of these schools, or perhaps a well known family or hermit. These schools are still in existence today. Most of the stuff we read about is pop daoism (I like that phrase now) so its important to separate the fantasy from the facts. Here is a few books my daoist priest friend recommended to me: The Taoist Body - Kristofer Schipper Original Tao - Harold Roth Dao De Jing - Redpine Livia Kohn's works are also very good, though the book I have is out of print now. These books are authorative and although very scholarly, they provide a good insight into real daoism. He also said that it is important to practice according the the situation that we are in - We need not gallivant around the world in a heroic quest to find a teacher. I found this very frustrating when he told me, how can we learn without a teacher? There's no easy answer. There are perhaps more teachers around than you might expect though, or practitioners who do not advertise themselves as teachers. Simply obtaining advice from a respected teacher on a regular basis is often just as good, as long as you are clear on the practices. Daoist teachers often met with their students just once per year to discuss their method, practice and study text. They then sent them away again for another year to practice. We do not need to be in constant contact after we are clear on what we are doing. In the modern world this can be accomplished with the use of emails and yearly visits to our teacher if need be, so there is hope :-) I personally would avoid training with unorthodox teachers, and would do more research and investigation into what is available. If we need to make a trip somewhere then so be it, as long as we aren't entertaining our egos in a fantastical quest. We shouldn't settle for the best of what's convenient. In the meantime, practice some non-dualistic meditation every day. This meditation is used in every flavour of daoism, whichever path you choose or teacher you train with. There are many books on non-dualistic meditation, the best are perhaps written by Zen practitioners ("Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind" is a good example) as this is the very core of their practice. We simply sit, and pay attention to the moment without thoughts, but we do not suppress thoughts if they arise, we simply move our awareness back to the moment. I was told to sit for an hour a day, which is difficult at first, but the time is not so important as the quality. We dont want to create another fantasy by trying to beat our previous sitting times, then it simply becomes a game. Jak

Hi there, I would start by asking yourself the same question that a Daoist priest asked me when I told him I wanted to be daoist.. - What is it that you want to learn? There are many aspects to daoist practice: non-dualistic meditation; yoga (dao yin); qigong; ritual; astrology/geomancy; alchemy. The typical daoist practices most of these in differeing mixtures depending on which school they were trained by. Traditionally to be daoist meant you were trained as a priest, and if you went to a temple, ritual would be the first thing you were taught. There are also hermits who choose not to be priests but simply meditate and practice yogas and other techniques away from society. The same priest told me there are generally 3 paths available as daoists: 1 - The way of the shaman (daoism is heavily rooted in shamanism) 2 - The yogic practitioner 3 - The wu-wei practitioner The first way is generally what priests follow, they perform rituals for a congregation much like a catholic priest might perform for catholics. Their meditation practice and other techniques are practiced in solitude and are not the main emphasis of their official training. The second path is the way of the yogic practitioner, who through alchemy and yoga transform their body into a format that is acceptable to live in the immortal realms. These guys follow strict diets, alchemy and yogic practices with meditation. As far as I know they do little ritual in the sense that a priest would. The third path is a little harder to explain, it is the path of the wu-wei practitioner. Wu-wei is related to non-compulsive action. The main practice of wu-wei practitioners is non-dualistic meditation, which is also their daily ritual. Wu-wei practitioners are free from compulsion, they have no desires or fears to do this, that or the other. They go where the wind takes them, you may have heard of cloud wonderers. Wu-wei practitioners take on many roles, if they are needed to be a priest then they do so, if they are needed to be a teacher they do that. The difference is they do it with a completely free mind. They are never entranced by whichever activity they are participating in. This is one of the results of non-dualistic meditation. So what is it that you want to learn? I can recommend some books of real daoism if you like? Traditional teachers are hard to find, I would steer clear of the pop-daoism as you called it :-) Jak

I just found an old archive of Kosta Danaos' former website, its largely incomplete but theres a few interesting snippets on there including a small picture of John Chang lighting a paper on a table. Heres the link http://web.archive.org/web/20030830101157/...p;topic=Neikung If anyone is interested.

According to google, equipment does exist to measure infrasound because scientists use it to detect volcanos, earthquakes and to detect nuclear detonations. But I get the feeling this equipment will be pretty expensive so you might want to make your own. I wouldnt know how to make one but id start by thinking about what produces infrasound. Perhaps a subwoofer? You might be able to reverse a decent enough subwoofer to act as a microphone for the same frequencies. Then you'd only need to up the frequency into the audible range to listen to it.

Apologies for the previous response, I thought you wanted to build a heat sensor, which would use infrared. So do you want to build an ultrasonic (>20kiloHz) detector or an infrasonic (<20Hz) detector? Bats use ultrasound unless im mistaken, I cant see how they could produce infrasound. I cant see how qi would produce any sort of sound. I have seen thermal imaging cameras of people doing qi-gong that seem to work.