A Series of Questions, Musings and Comments
September 16th, 2009 | 
Author: Hi Joe,
Let me first off commend you on what you have attempted to do – to scientifically explain the phenomena of positive thinking and influencing the future with your thoughts. My hat goes of to and you deserve all the credit possible. The present market is awash with piles of junk books purporting to explain the subject matter. I was reading a popular science book “The Fabric of the Cosmos” and realized that most of the books that dealt with quantum physics were exaggerating or forming improper conclusions. At another junction is the attitude of these books towards science.
Generally speaking, when dealing with this type of subject matter (i.e ordaining reality, thoughts influencing future etc) there is an attitude of anti-science that abounds. People smugly tell you about “spirit blah blah” in all honesty I have no clue what that word mean. In contrast when I read the sample pages you provide from your book you painstakingly lay out your case and what it is that your attempting to do. You mentioned and I paraphrase “that there is a invisible world……..but you then go on to explain” All I can say is that I so much look forward to buying your book or books depending on what I find in the original.
………more to follow
Posted in 
Tags: 
Hi,
I just ordered the new book. It’s for sale at Amazon. I don’t know if it’s anywhere else. They say it should arrive Thursday. I would like to get it signed, but I’ll wait until it arrives first.
I’ve read a lot about the earlier versions, so I’m looking forward to this one. Please make a note that I am on record as one of the people who tried to order it several times meaning that I can get it signed just by sending it to you.
Brendan D.
H Brendan,
Thaks for the blog and for the purchase. I hope that you enjoy the book and that it changes your life in a positive way. I can be reached at Joe@OrdainingReality.com if you want to email me to discuss how to send the book to me so that I can sign it and return it to you.
Can’t find new book anywhere.
Can you post a date so I don’t keep looking for it (or am I doing something wrong)? I see all the earlier ones, so I don’t think so.
Thanks,
Simon
Hi Simon (and other kind folks who have blogged or emailed me),
First, let me apologize for your effort.
Second, let me thank you for your interest.
Third let me update the availability date: It should be out and available on November 9th. The delay is due to a miscommunication between the publisher and me…mainly my fault.
Fourth, let me again offer to readers who have spent time looking for the book thus far that I will sign their copies. If you are interested in having me sign your copy contact me via email (as many of you have already done) at Joe@OrdainingReality.com. I will give you the details there.
Again thanks for your patience and interest.
Joe Donlan
Ordered book based on blog and writeups. I’m looking forward to reading it.
I also wanted to add that many readers (perhaps most) do not care to or need to know the details behind the linkage between thought and future outcomes. Those who do will find that information in the original unabridged edition. Readers who want to know the general substance, but prefer to have it presented in a shorter, less scientific text, can opt for the simpler edition which came out in May. Readers who really only want a high-level overview of the scientific material and an explanation of how to apply this knowledge will be best suited for the very latest (coming out in mid-October) version called Ordaining Reality in Brief.
Hello Damian,
Thank you for your interest, and thank you especially for sharing your questions on the blog.
Let me attempt to respond to the first two portions of your question in sequence:
I appreciate that you appreciate that I have attempted to scientifically explain the phenomena of positive thinking and influencing the future with thoughts. This has been nearly a thirty year investigation and I have had the good fortune of access to physicists who don’t believe in the link but who indulged my ideas and helped shape them. In truth, they deserve a lot of the credit, but they did so clinging to the principles of the Standard Model which, as you may know, doesn’t support any linkage between thoughts of one person and actions of a distant other.
I also appreciate that you, as do many, many of my readers, recognize that the present market is, as you put it, “awash with piles of junk books purporting to explain the subject matter”. In contrast, you mentioned Brian Greene’s “The Fabric of the Cosmos”. That’s in my library and I have referenced that worthwhile book along with his earlier work: The Elegant Universe in my first unabridged edition. I like Greene’s ability to explain, and I like his writing style. I think he is too much buying into String Theory, though, but that’s my opinion. Many other books dealing with quantum physics are at odds with others in this genre and therefore, some, by definition, must be forming improper conclusions. That said, most have one thing in common: they all look at the idea of thoughts influencing future as either not possible or accomplished in some fanciful manner. That’s where I disagree and that’s where I tried to blaze a new trail.
What I did was start with a whiteboard and listed all the known problems facing physicist today (e.g., why does science observe matter and virtually no antimatter if we hold that there is symmetry between the two in the universe? Or, what is this thing we call “dark matter” that we can’t see, but which has visible gravitational effects in the cosmos? Same question with regards to “dark energy”. Are quarks and leptons the end of the shrinking matter chain, or are they made up of even more fundamental components? Or, for that matter, why are there precisely, three families of quarks and leptons? Why can’t the Standard Model predict a particle’s mass? What, fundamentally, is gravity, and how does it fit into the laws of nature? Along with these issues, consider that the Standard Model cannot explain why some particles even exist, or provide a viable explanation for particle masses, etc., etc.
In short, there are lots of unknowns. I came up with a list of 18 such issues, and added that the Standard Model doesn’t support that thoughts can influence events as my number 19. I then spent more than twenty years trying to understand Eastern thought and its explanation for nature. I then took the trend of science for the last 2600 years (which showed a concurrent progression of fewer and fewer separate forces, and smaller and smaller components).
Using the problems and the trends and combining the ideas of Western Physics with Eastern Metaphysics I simply “invented” a paradigm that extrapolated the trends, offered answers to the known problems, and merged the Western and Eastern views. When I was done…Voila…there was the Harmonic Theory.
I strongly felt that we needed to go beyond the Standard Model in the same way that Einstein’s Theory of Relativity (both Special and General) extended Newton’s laws of mechanics and Maxwell’s laws of Electromagnetism. These earlier laws are not wrong, per se, but they are restricted to normal speeds and normal gravities, etc. I felt that the trend needed to extend the Standard Model similarly to properly explain mass, gravity and other parapsychological phenomena. This explanation finally and necessarily defines the nebulous term “spirit”.
I look forward to your next round of questions and any response to tyhis answer.
Thank you for sharing them with others.
Regards,
Joe Donlan
Reply
Leave a Reply
Click here to cancel reply.
Logged in as Joe. Log out »
Search
Buy My Books
Visit My Publisher
ArchivesSeptember 2009
August 2009
December 2008
April 2008
AdminSite Admin
Log out
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
WordPress.org
Joe,
Thanks again for your very enlightening responses.
Agree completely that most readers will not care about the details behind the process.In fact I had jotted down some thoughts which was to be posted that sort of touched on the same thing:
“While the workings behind the process may be complex the application must be simple in order for it to work.After all if something works it works! This is regardless of what physicist and others may say. One does not have to be a computer engineer/scientist in order to derive great benefit from the computer or interent. Again one does not necessarily have to be an automechanic or know a car works internally in order to garner its great benefit.One should hope that solid principles are behind their operation.
This is why it is such a brilliant idea to divide your book into a trilogy format.”
Hi Damian,
Thank you. I agree that I most readers do not need the details and that I can reach many more with a shorter, cheaper, simpler book, and that is my goal. I could not have done that without creating the two more detailed predecessors as I can simply reference them to spare the readers a lot of the details and the physics.
In contrast, some readers want to see the substantiating material that backs up the claims; they are encouraged to do that by reading either of the two more scientific versions…sort of like the goldilocks porridge choices…
Thanks again; I look forward to your thoughts and comments when you start the book.