“There will be very few occasions when you are absolutely certain about anything. You will consistently be called upon to make decisions with limited information. That being the case, your goal should not be to eliminate uncertainty. Instead, you must develop the art of being clear in the face of uncertainty.” – Andy Stanley
Daily Nugget of Gold 1557
Knowing Makes the Difference
In our last session, we talked about how the mind can influence data that has already been produced in the past- in small, but measurable ways, but if we “know” what the data says in advance, mind has no ability to affect the outcome. If you’re having difficulty wrapping your brain around that, you’re not alone. This is both the sort of thing which thrills some scientists while driving others crazy. We would suggest that which category they fall under has more to do with the beliefs they harbor than the observations they make.
That caveat is the sort of thing that skeptics love. It’s certainly okay to be skeptical, and in science, it’s preferred that we have a healthy dose of skepticism as we look at the experiments we run and read about the work of others. The danger is in skepticism is that often we deny truth when it runs counter to our beliefs. If you don’t think that’s realistic, you might want to do a search on the internet for people who belief the earth is flat. We’re not talking about people hundreds of years ago, we’re talking about people who are still in denial today. No amount of scientific evidence is going to convince a flat-earth believer that they’re incorrect.
This whole discussion also opens up one of the biggest difficulties facing cutting edge scientists, yesterday, today, and forever into the future. Beliefs get in the way of understanding just what we see. There are taboos in science just as there are in any profession, and often the taboos aren’t based upon scientific evidence so much as they are “generally accepted beliefs”. Enough editorializing for now, lets get back to business…
How is it that knowing exactly what the data says renders it impossible to use intent to create tiny shifts in it? Werner Heisenberg, a theoretical quantum physicist, put forth such a notion in his “uncertainty principle.” For his work, on the quantum level, the more information which can be gained about one aspect of a quantum system, the less about it’s other attributes can be known. That’s sort of like, but not exactly, what we have here. When we become aware of what is contained in one subset of data, that then “fixes” the data to a certain number and only other data can be influenced. One aspect has become “quantified.”
Our quantity of pixels has been met for this piece and we will need to pick this up in the next to give a clearer understanding of what’s going on behind the scenes on this stuff. See you then!
Question of the Day to Ask Ourselves
“What uses of my intent constitute positive uses?”
Copyright 2016 Kevin Littleton, all rights reserved.