Could this explian what Dark matter and Dark energy is?

[Blueyedlion]

He isn't the only one, maybe one of the latest?

Who else are you referring to?

But be clear, for all the spiritual talk of the scientist, if and when neutrino's are detected it will not help the ""God" cause in the least as they will be natural occurrences

I would say, that identifying god as other then natural states, would be to presume the significance of states that appear as unnatural are then evidence of god. But that reasoning is illogical. Because what ever the cosmos births into your personal experience of view, it can only ever be a from of what is natural. What ever the universe is in form, is a symptom of the universe, as the universe. You simply can't have the supernatural entangled in the natural because as soon as you integrate a supernatural property into a natural environment, it then must become natural. As soon as a thing is connected to another, it is then apart of it. There is no supernatural.

So this whole god of the gaps argument from an atheist perspective really doesn't serve any value of thinking, because if we want to talk about any reality of there being a god, we need to do so as a property that we already identify as properties of this cosmos. So when you talk about god of the gaps, there actually are no gaps because it's already of god. You're looking for supernatural states that never existed in the first place, but only states that were at a time unfamiliar, are now familiar and understood.

To present you with a perspective of how what we consider to be natural, may very well be a distorted view of what is truly the universe, what is truly natural. Imagine you are a hamster in a ball - this is your world, here are your parameters within the ball, but go explore the room because you can never feel the carpet, you can never touch the floor, you cannot tell the texture of the wall because you are in your world. Much like the human experience you are put in the ball of your limited senses, and here are your parameters. These limiting parameters shapes what you believe in, and when you design a shape in your belief system it then changes what you perceive in your reality. So your belief system does very much create the reality you experience around you. If you were to break beyond these parameters you would no longer be a hamster, you would no longer be a human.

So you may then ask, where does all of this come from because you’re stuck in the ball but why is there still a room and a rug and a wall. This is designed in my opinion by mass need, mass consciousness as well as mass fear. The way i see it, all energy is created by thought and emotion, it creates and it moves only as it is needed. So it is driven by what the human, the hamster, believes to be his own personal experience when it is not, it is driven by the combination of all thought of all living entities on the planet - that’s what creates reality. What you know is all an illusions but what you experience has truth. So the hamster, the human, bases what they know to be the truth to shape the belief to shape the reality, it provides inconsistencies.

[Alex K]

Alex KBy " irrespective of what he says" I meant not his scientific findings,

Well then you should have said that clearly. Never honestly allow another to interpret what you say as anything other then what you mean exactly. That's the most fundamental requirement of communication.

of which you don't cite anything, but his subjective and misleading harping on Neutrinos existing " in a different world " or such stuff .

You are correct in not citing his scientific findings, which i will look now look into. However, can you please answer me why you think a scientist working on such a high caliber field of science, would be misleading?

You seemed to be jumping on those bits to make some esoteric point - but maybe I'm being unfair, so this is why I asked what you want to tell us with your highlightet quotes

I understand from the mindset of an atheist, the words of spirituality and the belief in another universe that's only supported by the evidence he and only a handful of his other colleges are privileged to, can appear esoteric and that my familiarity with his perspective can also appear alien, in contrast to what you're scientifically familiar with. However, my point in highlighting what i have, is only to show there are perspectives outside the established scientific view of things, to which you and others here appear to be strongly resistant to.

Also, I'm emailing him right now in query of what his said in regard to the videos - if i can receive a direct response from him, i'll post it here for you all to read.
Unless you would like to email him yourself, can you please tell me what you'd like to ask him to which i can forward him?

Blu,
Sorry for being unclear then.

He's not privileged to secret scientific evidence that others don't understand and that points to some spiritual truth only he can understand - he's one of hundreds of people working in Neutrino physics, the questions and evidence they labor on are common knowledge in the scientific community.

He's misleading to you because hos way of poetically stating that there are these particles everywhere whoch scarecely interact with matter, is interpreted by you as evidence for the spiritual realm.

[Blueyedlion]

He's not privileged to secret scientific evidence that others don't understand

I'm beginning to weaken by belief that you're in fact a physicist (as been informed by another member) since you easily distort what I've said into something else, or you have a difficulty in listening to others, which makes me question how someone with such bad communicative skills could be a physicist in the professional arena. I don't mean to insult you, i'm just stating what is factually coming about between us.

"the belief in another universe that's only supported by the evidence he and only a handful of his other colleges are privileged to" Where did you get 'secret evidence' as well as 'evidence others done understand' out of that?

I never said the privileged scientific evidence only he and his colleagues are currently working can only be understood by him and his group. I only said only that they are privileged to it because they are the ones working on those specific experiments no one else is working, so no one else will have their hands on the data until Peter and his group have published them. I didn't speak of the larger scientific community not understanding Peter Gorham's group work. I spoke only within the confines of the experiments he and his group are conducting, those experiments will always be more up to date while in the forefront, then the larger scientific community because his group are directly involved in the thick of it. It is only when after many months, or some times years before results become published, for which the larger scientific community can then fact check and analyze. During the time of experimenting, that is the blind spot the rest of world has to wait for, that i am speaking of - that being in the thick of what is being researched, gives one a more credible insight.

and that points to some spiritual truth only he can understand

I would say, he has a spiritual perspective. He looks at the data and it agrees with how he feels. Nothing more. I believe that, if one was only to apply a rigid scientific view of the world with logic and reasoning as the main and if not only way to go about knowing what is, it would be a perspective that's harsh, cold, and without color. For when you go about your every day and you make choices based upon how you feel rather then how you think - how you feel is not a reason, it is a reaction that's not being filtered and processed, for that is the job of the brain. So when one talks of feeling, that is not something one can argue with another. Mind is conceptual and can be distorted by miss understandings, but the heart cant. That's science.

I talk about feeling, because we are now talking about the intuition Peter is basing his beliefs on. And if you don't apply your feelings of intuition to what you believe then i can tell you right now, you're missing out on a huge part of the experience of what it is to 'know.' So just think about what it is you're dismissing between you and another, because nor you or no one else can speculate with any accuracy why any body else believes what they do, while you're using only your mind to make sense of the world around you. Because for now, science is only interested in what it can think about, and not what it can feel.

[ignoramus]

While you use feelings to educate yourself, you can never learn anything.
The feelings you feel are your confirmation bias from your indoctrination.

You will always side with anything which doesn't go against your God. You have no control over this sadly. You are what they call a theological zombie.

[Little lunch]

Blueyedlion.
This bit.
Mind is conceptual and can be distorted by miss understandings, the heart can't. That's science.
Made me laugh and laugh. Thanks, I needed that.

[Alex K]

Blu,

You got me. I'm actually a retired truck driver from Trenton.

But - if you really mail him questions, ask him for me what his thoughts on the strange upwards shower in Anita are which they attribute to tau - does he think it is an indicator of BSM physics? That didn't become entirely clear to me when reading the paper.

[Alex K]

But joking aside (the question is serious though), I think it's great when people see poetry and find this kind of inspiration in nature, and physics in particular, and I would feel bad if I spoiled that. It's just - when you overdo it, if you eagerly interpret every poetic word someone speaks about it as a hint towards some transcendent world that you want to see, that's where you stop learning what's really there, and start spinning your own yarn. Nature is awe-inspiring, grand enough as it is. And yes, Neutrinos kind of live in their own world because they rarely interact, like a person is metaphorically said to live in their own world if they don't interact with society. I'm just a bit sensitive to overinterpretations of what that means.

[madog]

He isn't the only one, maybe one of the latest?

Who else are you referring to?

 

I watch tons of scientific stuff on Youtube/discovery style/etc and can't remember names .... I watched a full Youtube video on a neutrino detector very deep underground and they have been searching for decades ....

Neutrino detectors and underground neutrino detectors is nothing new quote "Neutrino detectors are often built underground" which infers there are more than one ..... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino_detector

You don't get nobel prizes for merely looking but for the discovery .... looking is looking, using spiritual and flowery terms to explain the search doesn't make it any more valuable to those already searching

[Alex K]

His baloon experiment ANITA may not be the biggest neutrino experiment, but it sure is very charming and a fascinating setup. Send a baloon in the upper atmosphere and use the polar ice to convert cosmic rays into radio. It's ingenious. ICE CUBE beats them all in coolness, of course.

[madog]

His baloon experiment ANITA may not be the biggest neutrino experiment, but it sure is very charming and a fascinating setup. Send a baloon in the upper atmosphere and use the polar ice to convert cosmic rays into radio. It's ingenious. ICE CUBE beats them all in coolness, of course.

Showing my ignorance. My understanding is that underground detectors are to filter out other particles that may interfere with any readings .... Using the ice sheet as a radio may increase the chance of detecting a neutrino, but won't that also increase the risk of detecting more interference from other particles?