Pseudo-scientific discourses
In this step, we will analyze the main terms used by these "Quantum Coaches", and provide the reader with critical thinking, knowing whether to question whether the source from which you are informed is scientific or not. We are going to list the terms in which they appear with a certain frequency in science and the terms in which pseudoscience also makes use. Such scientific terms that are taken from serious knowledge and their meanings that leave to be understood from these same definitions. Remembering that pseudoscience is not science! They are completely different things. For terms that do not have a direct association with another, we will use the acronym (Nc - not compatible).
Scientific Terms
Pseudoscientific Terms
-
Quantum
(phenomena smaller than or equal to the scale of atoms).
-
Energy
(Kinetic, Potential [gravitational, electrical, elastic, magnetic], Mechanical).
-
Force
(contact, field; ex: Weight Force, Gravitational Force).
-
dimensions
(related to properties of physical space and its degrees of freedom of movement).
-
Resonance
🇧🇷Resonance is a physical phenomenon in which the frequency of oscillation of an emitting source equals the fundamental frequency of oscillation of a receiver.🇧🇷
-
Channel/Embed
Nc (?????)
-
Angels / Archangels
No 🇧🇷
-
dark beings
Nc (??????)
🇧🇷
-
Quantum
(mystical, complex phenomena, comes from vibrations of thought, from universal consciousness).
-
Energy
(spiritual, vital, thought).
-
Force
(will, existence, mind, thought, spiritual).
-
dimensions
(plans where there are enlightened, evolved beings, protective spirits, guides).
-
Resonance
(compatibility in goals, desires, mission in life).
-
Channel/ Embed
(internalize an energy, invoke knowledge, an entity, a greater being).
-
Angels / Archangels
(celestial beings with specific purposes, protect, guide, fight, etc).
-
dark beings
(They are all the spirits of people who die and who are linked to crime, robberies of stores, banks and people, kidnapping, pedophilia, cruelties in the lowest levels, pass to the Spiritual Dimension, which starts right here and start to pursue the people, acting inmental field, since he no longer has a physical body, causing disturbances, remorse, feelings of guilt, nightmares, etc.).
🇧🇷
And there are an infinity of more absurd terms that this group of people use to justify false credibility in what they say and base their speeches on a certain "Science". Note that in the words listed above, there are many equally used by science and pseudoscience and their definitions look nothing like one another. In other words, the most in which only pseudoscience is used and complemented, in which science does not have a definition.
The first thing to ask yourself when someone says: "This has been scientifically proven!" , "This is not a theory, scientists have already tested this", and similar phrases, the first question you should ask yourself is!
-
Where is the source of this proof scientific?
When this is asked, what do we want to find? Well, we want to find some important data that MUST be shown if it is a serious scientific research.
-
The name of the laboratory or institution where the research was done.
Knowing the name of the institution or laboratory says a lot about the seriousness of the research, as laboratories e renowned academic institutions would never put their reputation on the line if it weren't for something extremely revolutionary or with a huge impact on the scientific community or even humanity as a whole.
Reflecting biased or biased information related to financial, philosophical or even belief gains is reputation assassination institution and for os scientists who carry out the research, and may lose the prestige of the scientific community due to the seriousness of the research in which total is neededtransparency. And in these institutions there are also a number of specialists able to explain, analyze, question the methods used and validate the results obtained. And believe me, creating a reputation in the scientific community is far from easy. It is necessary for some many scientists or institutions themselves practically a lifetime of dedication or many decades to prove to the scientific community itself and society in general that science worked seriously has the power to change course and bring_cc781905-5cde-3194 -bb3b-136bad5cf58d_benefits to all mankind.
Therefore, knowing how to identify institutions that already have a wide reputation in serious research, which brought_cc781905-4cde-bbb-5cde -136bad5cf58d_innovations for science and/or society is essential. Know the history, searches already done, areas of action and application, is also important information to determine that the research may not only be influenced by economic factors (aimed at profit), but also in innovations and future applications.
-
The name of the members who took part in the investigation.
Knowing the name of the members, one can easily find their curriculum on the internet, with all their academic accomplishments (works, lectures, seminars, symposiums, defenses [undergraduate, master's, doctorate, postdoctoral], etc.). _cc781905-5cde-3194-bb3b-136bad5cf58d research number such as experience, application of the professional in his career as a scientist, the size of his contribution to the scientific community as a whole, among several other criteria. This data is usually found on the platform Lattes.
Find out if this same researcher has published works, books, handouts, articles in scientific journals _cc7819051-9051-9051- bb3b-136bad5cf58d_serious and also determining the publishers in which they publish, also says a lot about the veracity and renown of the scientist.
Looking at the first criterion above, the sources from which all the basis of the research came and who are the members who participated in it, if defined as reliable sources, that is, it comes from serious institutions, renowned scientists, we can then give credibility to the research done, but now what should I look for?
2. What is the purpose of the research?
This is where the importance of Scientific Methodology comes in. Knowing the method by which the scientist or researcher used to arrive at their results shows us exactly what their objective was. Was your goal to quantize a phenomenon? to analyze? to rank? justify? explain? propose a new hypothesis? This all depends exactly on the nature of the research carried out, as we mentioned earlier in the topic on Scientific Methodology.
Clearly, scientific articles are likely to have specific terms about the field. What to do then if you do not understand these terms? Well, look in the literature (mainly) for books that are related to the topic. First, avoid searching for online sources, because nowadays you can find everything on the internet, and especially for those who are laypersons on the subject, and it will be difficult to discern serious content from not so serious content. If you are having a lot of difficulty understanding the terms even with the specific material at hand, or if you managed to find good material, look for a professional who understands the subject. (Teachers, relatives (who work in the area), etc.)
3. Analyze the results, along with the conclusion made by the researchers
As with the methodology, a more elaborate and complex survey for those who are new to the subject, the results will not make much sense, nor if you want maybe you will be able to evaluate what they mean. That's why every scientific work at the end there is a section calledconclusion, in which the researchers themselves summarize everything that was said in the research from the beginning, closing with the results and giving their own interpretations of the results, thus being able to help those who read, if the researchers managed to reach the objectives with the research, or simply their own conclusions regarding the final results.
4. Analyze the terminology used during the research-related article or video
This last step is a tip so that you can discard the search before applying even the first three tips made as serious or not.
And the list I made above with some scientific and other pseudoscientific words was not for nothing. If during your reading or watching a video claiming to be validated by scientific evidence and start mixing scientific terms with terms pseudoscientific,suspect!As the famous phrase goes "Something wrong is not right!"
The words used in science are not created simply by chance, or without a specific reason at least. Practically everything in science has exactly one criterion and a very well-established definition. For example the wordEnergyin Physics, it has a very specific meaning and is classified by mathematical relationships well known to you so far, for example:
Kinetic energy
Elastic Potential Energy
Gravitational Potential Energy
Electric Potential Energy
Energy is a measurable concept, it has no mystical relationship or_cc781905-94cf5bd_3bd68etheria related to it in Physics. We measure energy in the laboratory with equipment, quantify and analyze it. Differently from the energy mentioned recurrently in pseudoscience, energy of thought, energy of the universe, energy of love, energy of feeling. Understand well, what defines thought energy? How is thought quantified? the universe? what universe???? Feeling! How do you define feeling in a non-subjective sieve? My liking for something is different from yours, how do you standardize that? What means of measurement can be done to ensure that I am measuring just a feeling or a thought and not something else? HOW DO YOU MEASURE THOUGHT AND FEELING? What criteria define and discern feeling, thought and love?
It is evident the lack of criteria and rigor in the words spoken by these people, they do not define, do not specify terms, do not cite sources, when they cite sources they are people who have little to do with the area in which Quantum Physics is studied! They simply quote randomly within a context that stops or a listener who understands little too, seem to make sense. They cite scientific terms and don't even know the definition of words, they are thrown randomly in their speeches to try to sell something minimally logical, such as:
This isn't Magic, it's "Science"!
There are books by very important people from the area talking about ...
This is not our imagination, it has already been proven by "scientists"!
In order to analyze in depth some videos released on the internet, more specifically on YouTube, of "Quanto" Coaches or sympathizers, the videos will be edited, voice modification and identity concealment of these people involved here, the intention is not to expose or want to denigrate their image or integrity, if they take or disseminate courses for financial purposes and in bad faith it is something they themselves will answer for themselves and if not for justice too! We just want to refute the false knowledge that scientific sayings pass on and explain or at least logically question that their arguments have no basis in science!