David Bohm, Physicist, 2 of 8
Loading...
Loading...
961
views
Loading...
9:59
David Bohm, Physicist, 3 of 8by MrCropper742 views- 9:58
David Bohm, Physicist, 1 of 8by MrCropper4,676 views
- 9:50
David Bohm, Physicist, 4 of 8by MrCropper506 views
- 9:23
David Bohm, Physicist, 8 of 8by MrCropper534 views
- 9:34
Interview with Physicist David Bohm (Part 1/5)by Roubiere45,685 views
- 7:11
David Bohm, Wholistic Universe, quantum physicsby tgozel9,730 views
- 5:05
David Bohm on perceptionby nanotuber71,200 views
- 7:33
Jiddu Krishnamurti (JK-2), David Bohm and David Shainberg, third conversation, Brockwood Park, 18th May 1976by domhnallo8,148 views
- 2:33
David Bohmby elmercuriodeinternet54,910 views
- 9:47
Interview with Physicist David Bohm (Part 3/5)by Roubiere14,237 views
- 9:16
Interview with Physicist David Bohm (Part 4/5)by Roubiere12,057 views
- 9:01
David Bohm: Observing Thoughtby Professoranton6,161 views
- 10:04
Interview with Physicist David Bohm (Part 5/5)by Roubiere11,497 views
- 10:45
DAVID BOHM CHANNELED BY NAHUby Nahulanham907 views
- 9:56
David Bohm, Physicist, 5 of 8by MrCropper471 views
- 9:45
Robert Anton Wilson 11 - How to Operate Your Brainby nubient59,924 views
- 5:23
Quantum Entanglement - The Weirdness Of Quantum Mechanicsby Best0fScience178,668 views
- 0:16
Aharonov-Bohm Effectby wolframmathematica2,430 views
- 9:58
Jiddu Krishnamurti dialog with prof David Bohmby adorianvlad469 views
- 12:12
Physics of the Hidden Worldby JohananRaatz8,288 views
Hi mrCopper. You know, David Bohm as many other modern thinkers has been deeply influensed by Alfred Korzybski and his book science and sanity He is famus for saying "The map is not the territory" to really understand David Bohms view on theories, It's best to look up Korzybski and who he was on wikimedia or something? Good luck!
sahaja66 1 year ago
where are your playlists?
MrEido08 1 year ago
I think the point Bohm is trying to make is that the whole is composed of parts. The parts receive their essential character from their relation to the whole. If we try to comprehend the parts in isolation, we perceive them as fragments.
I think Cropper's explanation confuses this point somewhat. There are not parts on the one hand and fragments on the other. The fragments are a part of the whole but are not comprehended as such and therefore are misunderstood.
boneyard1125 2 years ago
cool
Sam26100 2 years ago
8.00 - The Insane man - Cropper - you disagree with bohm - however - what you fail to realise is that the 'evidence' which leads to the insane man's formulation of his hypothesis is sound in his subjective perception. That is, what constitutes evidence to the insane man, and what constitutes evidence to the sane man, will be wholly different. This isbohm's very point.
introversio 2 years ago
What the BLEEP do we know? is such a bad movie that is obviously false. Seriously search around the internet for some criticisms of the flick. It is basically a (not so)clever mind play on peoples misunderstanding of the science and philosophy presented. I am surprised an educated person like yourself would not seriously have to question the first like 20 minutes.
loktkey 3 years ago
Good explanation.
qtronman 3 years ago
Everything is explained by the math. The math provides a solid framework based on simple postulates. The math framework gives tools that tell us how to analyse physical situation, and therefore it leads to prediction of empirical data. The math also gives some insight into what is going on in the quantum world, and it will help you build an intuition and understand that the weirdness of QM is not very weird.
sicjd 3 years ago
Brian Greene didn't make What the Bleep do We know, that movie was made by some NewAgean students, and David Albert a friend of Brian Greene and philosopher of science, who appears in the movie later says that he was edited to look like he was supporting the thesis of the movie, which he ultimately disagrees with.
Schopenhauer14 3 years ago