https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02776217
http://www.costa-de-beauregard.com/fr/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/OCB-1985-5.pdf
https://sci-hub.se/10.1007/BF02187352
The only adequate paradigm is one denying objectivity to space-time—but this, of course, is also required by the complementary of the x and the k pictures, which only “look” compatible at the macrolevel. Therefore, the classical “objectivity” must yield in favor of “intersubjectivity.” Only the macroscopic preparing and measuring devices have “factlike” objectivity; the “transition” of the “quantal system” takes place beyond both thex and thek 4-spaces. Then, the intrinsic symmetries between retarded and advanced waves, and statistical prediction and retrodiction, entails that the future has no less (but no more) existence than the past. It is the future that is significant in “creative process,” the “elementary” forms of which should be termed “precognition” or “psychokinesis”—respectively symmetric to the factlike taboos that “we can neither know into the future nor act into the past.”
https://sci-hub.se/10.1007/BF01855942
https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1986.tb12435.x
http://www.costa-de-beauregard.com/fr/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/OCB-1987-1.pdf
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-1-4615-2550-9_1
http://www.costa-de-beauregard.com/fr/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/OCB-1996-5.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment