I have just watched my recording of the latest edition of the BBC TV programme Horizon. The subject matter (ironic use of word) was "Reality".
This was singularly the most interesting and frustrating TV programme that I have ever watched.
It was ITLAD without the neurology. It was a series of dots that nobody seemed to draw together. We had lots of talking heads, all of them my intellectual heroes (how many times have I mentioned Max Tegmark and Anton Zeilinger in my books, articles, interviews, lectures and on Forum?) but they failed to see the thing staring them in the face.
They discussed the mysteries of the Twin Slit Experiment (was it only me that spotted the amazing similarities between their graphics and the ones used by "Captain Quantum" (Fred Allan Wolf) in the much maligned movie, What The Bleep
. So why is the enigma of the twin-slit experiment accepted if presented in a "hard science" programme like Horizon but dismissed totally when presented in a "New Age" movie like "What the Bleep"? Indeed the description of the enigma was almost word for word lifted from the movie. If I was a producer of WTB I would consider suing for plagiarism
), they discussed the holographic model, Black Holes, event horizons, reality as information (why did they not talk to Dr. Tom Campbell about this. He has already done the work on this?).
If I was in any way suspicious I would focus into the fact that on two occasions I have been approached by the producers of Horizon asking for more information about my hypothesis. I sent a large amount of information to them and that was it. I heard nothing back. And now we have a programme that links the Copenhagen Interpretation, The Many-Worlds Interpretation and the holographic universe model. This is the first time I have seen such a link made on television (indeed, anywhere) .
This is a link I made ten years ago. And most of it was not original. I owe a great deal to Michael Talbot (not mentioned in the Horizon programme, Professor Karl Pribram (ditto) and Professor David Bohm (ditto). However these guys did not draw parallels with the latest research in neurology. They made much play upon "the act of observation" effecting the behaviour of particles such as photons, atoms and even molecules (such as buckyballs) without then concluding that consciousness has something fundamental with regard to this model of reality.
Not one mention was given to the Hamerhoff-Penrose Model (ORCH - OR). Indeed the Laszlo model of the Zero Point Field was hinted at but not followed up (you may recall the section on quantum computing and how it works at a degree or so above Absolute Zero. What was not explained is that by definition there is no energy available at these temperatures. What is happening is energy is been drawn up from the quantum vacuum aka Zero-Point Energy). Why can they not see the obvious?
I know that this may sound like the rantings of somebody who is an outsider ..... but they really need to know about what I am writing about. I may not have a PhD in quantum physics, or a PhD in neurology, or a PhD in Philosophy, or a PhD in Transpersonal Psychology .... but then again I am sure that there is not one person on the planet who has PhD's in all these subjects .... but I am pulling information from all these fields and suggesting a model that seems to have an inner logic to it.
I just feel like the little guy jumping up and down and saying .... "please listen to what I have to say!"
I really need help on getting my crazy little hypothesis better known ...........
The programme can be watched at http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00xxgbn/Horizon_20102011_What_Is_Reality/
I am interested in your opinions .....