welt-verstehen/Sheldrake, stw1915S
Unsere Welt zu verstehen: Sheldrake
Beitrag 0-Sheldrake
Dear Dr. Sheldrake,
Whenever I read some of your books I find them quite stimulating and your arguments free of logical errors. As a person with 11 years of scientific training (as a mathematician and computer scientist — not a biologist) I see you as a scientist in the best sense and not — as some of my academic friends seem to assume — an esoteric.
Physicians with whom I tried to discuss your work, but also some other people see you as an esoteric because you speak about "mysterious" fields, you call "morphic fields". Everyone I speak to jumps to the conclusion that you are suggesting the morphic field is something not yet found.
For quite a long time I made this mistake myself. But then it became clear to me that your theory ist not a theory about unknown fields but a theory about the existence of possibly existing morphic resonance in the "well known" field of all the physical forces (as far as we know these are gravitation, the strong and the weak interaction and, most important, the electromagnetic force).
Quantum physics, especially quantum field theory (QFT), have shown us that everything consisting of elementary particles in the sense of the Standard Model can be seen as a wave package in the field of the four physical forces.
So it seems save to assume that if there is morphic resonance in some field, this field is the "well known" field of the — four or more — basic physical forces (some of them might not yet be detected by humans).
Note: The now confirmed Higgs boson can be seen as representing a 5-th force, and the concept of dark matter ist a good example of a subfield of the field of all physical forces which definitly seems to exist but is still unknown to us with reagard of its true nature.
So it is now clear to me, that your theory boils down to a theory about "morphic resonance" which is nothing else than what Simon Conway Morris calls "convergent evolution". Please read about his theory which certainly cannot be called less "esoteric" than yours.
Richard Dawkins seems not yet aware of the fact that your theory (which he fiercely rejects) is nothing else than Conway's theory (which he seems to find interesting).
Sincerely yours,
Gebhard Greiter (a fan of your theory, Dr. rer. nat)
Here is Conway Morris' book: Life's Solution — Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe (2003)
B
G
E
— hmsgnr00z
Whenever I read some of your books I find them quite stimulating and your arguments free of logical errors. As a person with 11 years of scientific training (as a mathematician and computer scientist — not a biologist) I see you as a scientist in the best sense and not — as some of my academic friends seem to assume — an esoteric.
Physicians with whom I tried to discuss your work, but also some other people see you as an esoteric because you speak about "mysterious" fields, you call "morphic fields". Everyone I speak to jumps to the conclusion that you are suggesting the morphic field is something not yet found.
For quite a long time I made this mistake myself. But then it became clear to me that your theory ist not a theory about unknown fields but a theory about the existence of possibly existing morphic resonance in the "well known" field of all the physical forces (as far as we know these are gravitation, the strong and the weak interaction and, most important, the electromagnetic force).
Quantum physics, especially quantum field theory (QFT), have shown us that everything consisting of elementary particles in the sense of the Standard Model can be seen as a wave package in the field of the four physical forces.
So it seems save to assume that if there is morphic resonance in some field, this field is the "well known" field of the — four or more — basic physical forces (some of them might not yet be detected by humans).
Note: The now confirmed Higgs boson can be seen as representing a 5-th force, and the concept of dark matter ist a good example of a subfield of the field of all physical forces which definitly seems to exist but is still unknown to us with reagard of its true nature.
So it is now clear to me, that your theory boils down to a theory about "morphic resonance" which is nothing else than what Simon Conway Morris calls "convergent evolution". Please read about his theory which certainly cannot be called less "esoteric" than yours.
Richard Dawkins seems not yet aware of the fact that your theory (which he fiercely rejects) is nothing else than Conway's theory (which he seems to find interesting).
Sincerely yours,
Gebhard Greiter (a fan of your theory, Dr. rer. nat)