1 min readThe universal gravitational constant isn’t really a constant

The statistics used in scientific studies was designed to ensure objectivity. But why do we remove deviant data points when we interpret data collected in scientific researches? What if these data points actually point to a much larger pattern that can only be discerned in the long term?

In this article by Rupert Sheldrake he shows us how the declared universal gravitational constant (often referred to as the Big G) changes every year based on best values collected by various international laboratories. Sheldrake asks the important question: what if the Big G really does change due to the earth’s astronomical movement, or because there are inherent fluctuations in G values? Sheldrake says that important patterns in Big G fluctuation cannot be discerned at this time because the data has been disregarded. 

Implications for AI

This article shows us how scientific researches collect their data, as well as how this data is interpreted. Because of the use of averaging, important data fluctuations and long-term patterns cannot be seen. What if the “data anomalies” that were so easily disregarded were actually meaningful? What if these were the data points which actually prove the existence of morphogenetic fields [read about Sheldrake’s idea of a self-organizing universe in the article Morphic Fields, Animals, And Humans].

Read Original Article

Read Online

Click the button below if you wish to read the article on the website where it was originally published.

Read Offline

Click the button below if you wish to read the original article offline.

close

Oh hi there 👋
It’s nice to meet you.

Sign up to receive awesome content in your inbox, every week.

Your e-mail address is only used to send you our newsletter and information about the activities of Fully Human.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *