Which approach is best suited to end Origins debate?

Let me be again blunt with you @Meerkat_SK5there is no “universal proto-consciousness theory”. In fact there is virtually no mention of “universal proto-consciousness” in the scientific literature – and the majority of it is from Gregory L. Matloff, who is not a quantum physicist, and uses the term speculatively, e.g.:

To begin my research effort in preparation for the Stapledon symposium, it was first necessary to consider some means that a universal proto-consciousness field could interact with a star.[1]

Looking back to see where you got the phrase “universal proto-consciousness” from, I came across this piece you cited here. I would point out that this piece is under the heading of “Buddhist Wisdom for Our Time” – so its viewpoint is religious not scientific.

The reason we generally don’t bother to read your sources is:

  1. You are frequently caught out (as @Roy noted) not having read them yourself.

  2. Your sources very frequently don’t support the claim you cite them for.

  3. Your sources are very frequently of poor quality (like the one I referenced above).

  4. You cite too many sources to have a reasonable expectation that anybody would read them all.

I therefore would suggest that your garbled quantum woo has no “science” to it, and no chance of getting published in any respectable publication. You yourself have repeatedly demonstrated that you have no understanding of quantum physics, so I see no point in discussing anything to do with this field further with you.

4 Likes