• Thank you to Carol and Steve Bowman, the forum owners, for our new upgrade!

Stalking the Wild Pendulum - pdf link & invitation to read with me

Mere Dreamer

Mere Dreamer

Senior Registered
Even though this book is not focused on reincarnation the concept is foundational to the world view of the author. I'm only 116 pages in, and have already found a lot of interesting ideas that really resonate with me. He skims through science, then weaves those concepts into a fascinating theory of how the universe exists as it does.

So, naturally, I thought it would be fun to discuss these ideas and see whether anyone finds them useful or flawed ... or both.

Find the pdf of the book here.

I stumbled onto this download completely randomly, and I'm surprised how valuable it seems now that I'm reading it. I wasn't even looking for a book or thinking about these topics at the time.
 
I'm on the page 72, and here are some of my observations on what I have already read.

You cannot describe a macroscopic object with quantum mechanics - they are too big, so the wave packets of probability amplitudes corresponding to infinite velocities and all similar atrocities, are all the time contracting themselves, their innumerable components mutually cancelling themselves through destructive interference, so that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle effectively no longer works for macroscopic objects. That's why biological life does not appear on a microscopic level - it is incompatible with Heisenberg, so, even a pendulum (though not a biological object) has no freaky behaviour in the rest points (in any points) - it is quite OK to describe it with classical mechanics, where position & velocity can be very nicely determined simultanuously at any moment, so no infinite velocities appear.

There is no need to identify oscilators or human consciousnes or whatever with tachyons, as, following from my previous obsevation, there will be no ultra-light velocities. It's ridiculous to consider relativistic time dilation in the same manner as a drugged man's sensations. And relativistic time dilation does NOT legalize travels in time. You can become older than your twin brother who just returned from an interstellar trip, but none of you will ever be able to become younger than both of you were before that trip began. In this way, travels in time might be possible (or not, who knows), but Einstein has nothing to do with them.

I'm rather dissapointed with this book. But, on the other hand, I'm not sure we need some explanation to phenomena we discuss on this forum (re-incarnation etc.). Those explanations might be too complex for our weak minds to understand them. Credo, quia absurdum est, as they used to say in the Middle Ages. I remember having discussed such a topic with a very religious Mexican teenage boy, from a rich family, a lot of years ago, and I vaguely remember him always referring me to St.Augustine for details on this. I never followed his advice, but I remember well enough his argumentation.
 
Last edited:
I found the science ... opaque. After reading the whole thing the section of the book that seemed most useful to me functioned more as an illustration. On page 87 there is a discussion of split beam, one being a baseline reference and the other containing "experience" that alters the beam. Together they create a contrast that he uses as an illustration of how tangible reality exists. Thinking of the baseline as spirit and the "experienced beam" as incarnate existence was pretty interesting for a while.

Since before reading this book I have thought that when light travels through empty space, space continues to seem dark to the viewer. To experience the existence of the light visually one must set an obstacle into that space. However, along with the obstacle comes a shadow that now contains less light due to the object that verifies the light's existence. I'm still unwrapping the threads from this base concept in order to see where it takes me, but it seems useful for exploration.
 
Mere Dreamer said:
Even though this book is not focused on reincarnation the concept is foundational to the world view of the author. I'm only 116 pages in, and have already found a lot of interesting ideas that really resonate with me. He skims through science, then weaves those concepts into a fascinating theory of how the universe exists as it does.

So, naturally, I thought it would be fun to discuss these ideas and see whether anyone finds them useful or flawed ... or both.

Find the pdf of the book here.

I stumbled onto this download completely randomly, and I'm surprised how valuable it seems now that I'm reading it. I wasn't even looking for a book or thinking about these topics at the time.
Click to expand...

I just finished reading the book. Thanks for bring it to our attention.

I found it captivating. The book isn't a scientific treatise, but an essay. It is nicely written, and ties together a lot of information.

I believe it is worth reading.
 
baro-san said:
I just finished reading the book. Thanks for bring it to our attention.

I found it captivating. The book isn't a scientific treatise, but an essay. It is nicely written, and ties together a lot of information.

I believe it is worth reading.
Click to expand...


I'd like to know what is it worth reading for.

Does it show that it can be scientifically proved that reincarnation exists? Or that we have an immortal soul.

Just to begin with...
 
Science changes and evolves, so something invalidated by science today might be validated tomorrow.

As I wrote, the book isn't a scientific treatise, but a thought provoking essay. It is nicely written, and ties together a lot of information.

The author subscribed to the ideas of reincarnation, and of soul surviving death, but that wasn't his main focus.
 
baro-san said:
Science changes and evolves, so something invalidated by science today might be validated tomorrow.

As I wrote, the book isn't a scientific treatise, but a thought provoking essay. It is nicely written, and ties together a lot of information.

The author subscribed to the ideas of reincarnation, and of soul surviving death, but that wasn't his main focus.
Click to expand...


Got it.
Just an essay, for if somebody wants to know what the stuff like holography is about.

Thank you, baro-san.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top