Philippe Guillemant

Maat

Maat

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I am just curious : does Laura or Ark know personally Philippe Guillemant, a french CNRS researcher who cites them on his website ( _http://www.doublecause.net/index.php?page=TQE.htm or see here for an English translation of his text _https://sites.google.com/site/certanalyse/chroniques-de-la-certanalyse/latheoriequantiquedesevenementsparphilippeguillemantchercheuraucnrs )

Because I listened several of his conferences and read one of his books and I find it good to explain some concepts we find in the C's sessions like no time, no space, branching universe, double causality, information theory...

If ever my curiosity is misplaced, just don't' answer...
 
In fact, after a meeting between myself and myself ;) :lol: , my real question is not if you know him personally but if ever you know him (personally or not), are his explanations valuable and not some new agey salad. I don't think so but I know very well that I'm not a physicist genius too. In short, I find him very interesting but lack confidence in my judgment on these matters.

So, the question is open to other forumites too for any feedback.

It's a better way to express my curiosity. Sorry I'm often slooowwwwwww in this regards !
 
Yes, we have had some correspondence and I even tried to read one of his books (La Route du Temps). But I gave up, as it it was not scientific enough for my taste. For me it is philosophy, not science. Physics without nontrivial mathematics does not excite me!
 
Thanks a lot for your answer Ark. It gives me a lot to ponder, maybe more than you can imagine (or maybe not, don't want to prejuge of your wisdom).

A very complete answer in almost one single phrase !
 
P.G. wrote another book (La physique de la conscience) which is also much more philosophical than mathematical for scientists like Ark. But P.G. is writing for average people and he is into real scientific research... His last book will be translated in English and is worth reading IMO
 
Eos said:
P.G. wrote another book (La physique de la conscience) which is also much more philosophical than mathematical for scientists like Ark. But P.G. is writing for average people and he is into real scientific research... His last book will be translated in English and is worth reading IMO
Click to expand...

I would have to disagree, but I may be off, since I have only read a few of his articles here: _http://guillemant.net

I find it interesting, but lacking in depth (cannot comment on his "real scientific research", so I'm only saying this based on his philosophy). Even if his intentions may be good, it reminded me of Gurdjieff, and how he used to say that knowledge spread out too thin is not too. P.G. uses some "big words", tries to explain them in easier terms, but then, personally I feel that there is no real example that would show a serious understanding on his part. There are also some details that bother me, like his allusions to things we know are VERY important (like the mechanical nature of Man, and free Will, and how hard one must Work to start being conscious). Yet, he just mentions them (or sometimes you even have to infer that he is talking about that), without any in-depth explanation. It could all be in his books, of course. So, FWIW. But so far, I don't think it would be worth the time.
 
Chu said:
...
I find it interesting, but lacking in depth (cannot comment on his "real scientific research", so I'm only saying this based on his philosophy). Even if his intentions may be good, it reminded me of Gurdjieff, and how he used to say that knowledge spread out too thin is not too. P.G. uses some "big words", tries to explain them in easier terms, but then, personally I feel that there is no real example that would show a serious understanding on his part. There are also some details that bother me, like his allusions to things we know are VERY important (like the mechanical nature of Man, and free Will, and how hard one must Work to start being conscious). Yet, he just mentions them (or sometimes you even have to infer that he is talking about that), without any in-depth explanation. It could all be in his books, of course. So, FWIW. But so far, I don't think it would be worth the time.
Click to expand...

Free will is a main theme in his books, and the mechanical nature of Man or the work needed to start being conscious are into them too. The knowledge P.G. is spreading out isn't so thin for me, there is a lot to ponder with. I think he is into something of great interest...
 
ark said:
Yes, we have had some correspondence and I even tried to read one of his books (La Route du Temps). But I gave up, as it it was not scientific enough for my taste. For me it is philosophy, not science. Physics without nontrivial mathematics does not excite me!
Click to expand...
:)
I've read his last book (La physique de la conscience) a few days ago, a bunch of nice ideas, but well, that's not really physics but metaphysics (as he admits himself in the conclusion of the book).

Ark, what about this research paper from the same author ?
_http://arxiv.org/abs/1311.5349
 
From another recent topic https://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,45195.0.html :

Maat said:
Sow said:
Maat said:
Sow said:
Maat said:
Thanks for the session !

As for this part :

A: Matter as manifestation of consciousness as a function of algebra between dimensions
Click to expand...

It made me think of the work of Emmanuel Ransford. Just thought I should mention it even if I'm not in position to say if he's really onto something or off the mark. I just hope it could help and not be a waste of time. And if he's really off, I would be interested to know how, why and what. I read several of his books and found them very interesting, but I'm not a physicist ! Maybe I was just hooked by this "reconciliation" of consciousness/spirit and matter.
Click to expand...

Hi Maat,
I'm reading a book from E. Ransford and just asked a physicist-engineer friend about him. He told me that he is inventing words to talk about concepts not even related to physics, so that it is not serious.
It sounds to me pretty close to word salad, even if interesting anyway...
Click to expand...

Thanks for your anser Sow. Just one objection is that these new words he introcuces, he defines them. And some important question is, "how open" is your physicist-engineer friend ? Because it's could change all ! But all in all I thank you, because with your input, i put this in the same category of sci-ficition that I loved to read since my bearth it seems, BUT gived me a lot to ponder...
Click to expand...

Maat, here is a link to know "how open" is this physicist-engineer friend : www.doublecause.net/
Take care
Click to expand...

OK, now you're talking of Philippe Guillemant ! I've read several of his books too. And this is really funny (or not at all); the only things that comes to my mind here is "c'est l'hôpital qui se fout de la charité" ! ("that's the pot calling the kettle black." ?) I've asked about him several month ago https://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,39770.msg612219.html#msg612219 , and you know it, because I see you've answered in it. So, is it a battle of ego here (not you, I'm talking about PG) ?

Thanks for your answer anyway :)
Click to expand...

Hi Maat, it doesn't seem AFAIK like a battle of ego here.
This is a link to P.G. last publication in "Annals of Physics", for people who know mathematics : A discrete classical space–time could require 6 extra-dimensions https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S000349161730338X
And another one about it in French : http://www.doublecause.net/index.php?page=Fondements.htm
In this publication P. Guillemant leaves the Metaphysical field and fully enters Physics with nontrivial mathematics...
 
ark said:
Geometry gets you there, algebra sets you "free."
Click to expand...
Why was "free" put in quotes? Beacause it has to do with "free will"? Or because there are "free algebras" and they are important? Clifford algebras are constructed as particular cases of "free algebras"
Click to expand...

I think a good "hexagon" geometry to give you extra dimensions is Ark's use of the conformal group and a good information theory from which you can derive the conformal group is Clifford algebra.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom