CheekyQi

E=MC^2 was abstract for me until I read this description of an experiment: "When two particles collide with high energies, they generally break into pieces, but these pieces are not smaller than the original particles. They are again particles of the same kind and are created out of the energy of motion (kinetic energy) involved in the collision process...This way, we can divide matter again and again, but we never obtain smaller pieces because we just create particles out of the energy involved in the process."  - The Tao of Physics This made the concept more accessible! From here, it was easy to make the jump from particles colliding to the action of healing with energy. I could see how an experienced practitioner could direct intentional kinetic energy to another creature, and how that energy could affect the mass of the recipient. Moving from the quantum level (or level of intent) to the macro level.  Compare the 4 forces: Strong force: (strongest) Responsible fo...

Prompt:  "What evidence can you find for synchronicity Based on what you know, how would you explain connectivity?" This is such an interesting subject. It gets me tangled up and I don't know if I'm able to write about it. How to write a blog post on something I know to be true and real but don't have the vocabulary to describe it satisfactorily to another party.  Who's satisfaction?  Synchronicity depends wholly on the witness - who is viewing it?  A synchronistic event can't be untangled from its viewer(s). Should it be? Does synchronicity need to be recognized?  Any evidence I have for synchronicity is going to be subjective, and describing a subjective experience isn't evidence in a laboratory-objective-textbook way. And that's where I get stuck. I want to come across as very logical and full of right angles, and this subject is very irregularly-shaped.  This entanglement idea - that teeny tiny bits in me are unfathomably connected to...