Science and Mysticism was once inseparable. Thinking outside what seems possible by our western scientific views has been something that has interested me for some time. Here is several videos having to do with science from a completely different view point. Some will push you and others will, I hope, delight you and make you think.
First up is a PBS documentary about Chinese Medicine and Chi. Chi is the vital life force of the body. It is not well understood by Western Science but understood for thousands of years in Eastern Medicine.
Next up is a Google Talk on the Taboos of Science when it comes to Psi phenomena. Believe it or not, there are many many scientific papers on the phenomena that shows something interesting is going on but not many people in the western science community takes it seriously. Why?
Finally, a more mystical take on science from a way different view point. This goes way out there into philosophy about what existence is and what time is. It really isnāt a science video by western standards at all. But it is a brilliantly visual and stunning video and may rub western scientists completely the wrong way. But I like it, so here it is ā¦
Actually, alchemy is more about inner transformation rather than literally making gold from lead. It was codified to prevent persecution by many religions. There is much more to alchemy than making literal gold but a transformation of your own inner dead weight into spiritual gold.
I see links to videos. Not papers. Certainly not peer reviewed papers.
Herein lies the problem. They are now very much seperable. Weāve learned a LOT since your premise was true. Most of that we learned from the scientific method.
I hope not either ā¦ I totally agree with this. Science is not about woowoo or pseudoscience ā¦ however there are aspects that are often ignored not because of scientific reasons but because of taboos. See video #2
Here are some selected scientific quotes ā¦
āTo optimally understand what Iām going to tell you tonight is going to require two things of you. You need to be open minded and you need to be skeptical. Both are very important. Open-minded because the big picture that Iām going present tonight will require you to transcend old paradigms, to leap over cultural beliefs and personal beliefs because thatās the nature of breakthrough. Skeptical because without skepticism you cannot convert belief into knowledge. Believing what I tell you does not create a fundamental knowing that itās true. Only experience can do that.ā - Dr Thomas Campbell
āIf we think of the field as being removed, there is no āspaceā which remains, since space does not have an independent existence.ā - Albert Einstein
āReality is merely an illusion. albeit a very persistent one.ā - Albert Einstein
āHence it is clear that the space of physics is not, in the last analysis, anything give in nature or independent of human thought. It is a function of our conceptual scheme [mind]. Space as conceived by Newton proved to be an illusion, although for practical purposes a very fruitful illusion.ā - Albert Einstein
āTo meet the challenge before us our notions of cosmology and of the general nature of reality must have room in them to permit a consistent account of consciousness. Vice-versa, our notions of consciousness must have room in them to understand what it means for its content to be āreality as a whole.ā The two sets of notions together should then be such as to allow for an understanding as to how consciousness and reality are related.ā - David Bohm from the introduction to āWholeness and the Implicate Orderā
āOne has to find a possibility to avoid the continuum (together with space and time) altogether. But I have not the slightest idea what kind of elementary concepts could be used in such a theory.ā - Letter from Albert Einstein to David Bohm October 28, 1954
āIt will remain remarkable. in what ever way our future concepts may develop, that the very study of the external world led to the scientific conclusion that the content of the consciousness is the ultimate universal reality.ā - Eugene P. Wigner (a Nobel Prize winner and one of the leading physicists of the twentieth century)
Try reading the emerald tablet and study hermetic philosophy then one will know the lead and gold wasnāt really the mundane metals.
But that aside; actual nuclear transmutation of bismuth to gold is possible:
Just costs about 12k for an ounce of gold. and $GLD the base metal is worth about 78.50 at this point but with the dollarās inflation Gold to USD is worth about $1.2K. So thatās a 1:10 ratio of loss.
Religious or not the history of science has origins in ancient times and is filled with biasies from their era just as much as our scientific discoveries of ours and those of our great grand childrenās era.
Now, cutting through the pseudo-mystical hype of neo-wave new age hippies and profitters. Hereās a playlist of well more āseriousā study to the topic. Obviously a lot of modern scientific study stems from these origins and is still practiced with a more grounded mindset and backed not only by the scientific method but also reason, peer review, and Occamās razor.
Homunculi
mythical
modern
Philosopherās stone (aka ormus)
ā open for debate and study
Sacred Geometry
mythical
modern
Astronomy and astrology
mythical
modern
Art of Chem
mythical
modern
disclamer: Iām neither pro or con for any views shown in the videos theyāre only posted here for discussion and education. As always use oneās head and observations in oneās study.
Also note that if one reads the original texts with the context of historical meanings and connotations than surface level assumptions then they really just read as cryptic tech manuals for metallurgy, herbal based medicine, masonry (the art of building from stones not the pseudo-religious secret society that borrows from it), language/cryptographics, cultural history, and commerce.
Which makes sense considering the Roman Catholic church at the time of their writing was on a historical purge. And yes most alchemical text as we commonly thing where originating in the 1200ās ce with arabic scholars between 300 and 1100 ce keeping much of the original knowledge.
I think scientists donāt take these topics seriously because they just are not very conducive to experiment and hard data. I used to be fascinated by psi but it lost its luster for me for lack of concrete evidence. I got tired of defending phenomenon in the noise. Having said that, Iām not a materialist either.
