| Re: With all the erudition of a drunken 15 year old......
The problem with that horrible horrible movie is that it is absolutley bursting with non-sequitrs and bastardisations of physics which they are passing off as science.
I'm not insulting you, I respect your opinions but the problem I have with your particular philosophy is that it is completely arbitrary. For example, say that we actually didn't know ANYTHING about the neurology of consciousness (just for argument's sake), then that doesn't make your theory about different, vibrating levels of reality in which consciousness resides any more valid. I, in your beliefs, could feasibly argue that our consciousness is located inside tiny green balloons on a giant revolving trumpet in space and our thoughts are transmitted from this odd world to our heads by millions of invisible, undetectable teleporting pixies. Nobody forms arguments like this because it sounds ludicrous, but it's just as feasible as what you are suggesting, what you have done is to pick and choose little bits of science that sound nice and mysterious and arbitrarily apply them to phenomena to which they are fundamentally unrelated.
As for that god-awful movie, this guy reviewing it put my opinion across a lot more succinctly than I ever could;
"The reason the movie angers me is because it is portrayed as a movie about quantum physics. The movie has almost nothing to do with quantum physics. They get a bunch of "Scientists" and cult nuts to ramble on about stuff they have no clue about. A significant portion of the information given is incorrect yet it is implied to be true. If the movie was marketed as the new age/pseudoscientific film it really is then I wouldn't be bothered as much. However, to claim this is a science film is insulting to anyone who knows anything about science. "
My thoughts exactly. | 
