Tuesday, August 25, 2009

The Law of Attraction

Do I believe in the Law of Attraction?

Hell, yes!

The Univeral Gravitational Constant, Big G, is one of the core constants of our universe and is part and parcel of the Newtonian Law of Universal Gravitation.

I can even write the Law of Attraction from memory:


Where F is the attractive force, G is "Big G," m1 is one mass, m2 is the other, and r is the distance between them.

Interestingly, Big G is very difficult to measure with precision but it is, nonetheless, very real and universally applicable.

Doesn't matter whether you *believe* in it or not. It is a scientific fact. I LOVE the Law of Attraction. See this page for a pretty good description.

Oh, you were talking about something else? Well, then, channelling Emily Litella, let me say... That's very different. Never mind.


  1. And I was hoping you were gonna use it to get us to Seattle. Damn.

  2. Laura says: Hmm. Something deep, promoting understanding, something humorous, drawing parallels and connections -- nah, it's been a long day!

    Underneath it all, it's just people, trying to explain the unexplainable, my way's right, your way's wrong. It really doesn't matter, though, the pushing against. That's surface stuff. It's the coming together that matters. What connects us lies beneath, deeper than philosophies. Is that a Law of Attraction? :)

  3. I think "like attracts like" is a big part of any "law" of attraction. I prefer to attract people who think and act, over those who wish and conjure.

    Another bit of ancient lore is "you can attract more flies with honey than with vinegar," but there are two problems with that:
    1) I don't *want* to attract flies.
    2) Flies much prefer bullshit to honey.

  4. You know how when movies do that slow motion thing, it seems like things get misty or blurry and all that? Here's something: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20327183.800-eclipse-sparks-hunt-for-gravity-oddity.html

    I know. I know. YOU guys were talking about the law of attraction. Sorry. :)

    Queen of the non-sequitor

  5. I think it's deeper than explaining the unexplainable though. If something is just a bunch of happy BS, to make people feel good it's worth examining in my opinion. I don't much care for wishy-washy philisophical ideas. Especially when they try to make it sound like an actual scientific principle. Which it isn't.

    I DO however, believe that changing your thinking, changes a lot of things...including the opportunities that you will SEE. Just because people sit around and think stuff doesn't change the world though..it's the one's getting out and DOing. The opportunities are always there if we're willing to be open to them. That's just simple reality, don't need a whole "law of anything" to know that.

    Just think Frank, if the LOA thing really worked we would have opposing thoughts creating scenarios magically which would then cancel each other out. Ooh...all sorts of paradoxes there. Who wins when people have opposing LOA thoughts? The best LOAer? ha!!

  6. What bothers me about it most is that it totally negates random factors, or luck, or the willing assistance of other people.

    If I help someone, LOA would say that the other person drew or caused my help. If a child is in an abuse situation, some metaphysical explanations say that it was something pre-destined by the karma of both people (not necessarily that terminology, but the idea that they came into this life with a plan to be abused.

    Some see health and money as proof of "goodness" and illness and poverty as evidence of some vague-to-specific spiritual deficiency, or lack of correct thinking.

    Blah blah blah it sounds like, when I say it, and it sounds like that when believers say it too. It's not good for their children to be very vaguely responsible for outcomes in magical ways. Better to just be happy and cheery and communicative.

  7. I finally blogged about it. Not the actual scientific principle, but the new agey, wispy thing: http://radicalunschooling.blogspot.com/2009/08/law-of-attraction.html

  8. Edward Litors8/26/2009 1:55 PM

    Even though LOA is a deep scientific theory, it's really fairly simple. And here it is: TFAR (Thoughts, Feelings, Action = Results). You will not have an absolute perfect journey, but it's designed that way because of free will. And not to mention the thoughts that were already planted in your subconscious before you found out about LOA. But if you arm yourself, like with thisArticle, and something like this audio product http://www.prosperable.com/loa, you can turn your life around. The audio is only $7, but it's worth it!


  9. Despite the fact that Ed's comment is a blatant piece of spam, I'm gonna leave it. It prompts me toward a new post about the distinction between philosophy and religion.

    Hint: Ya don't see people selling DVDs about how to implement Hegel in your life or pimping books about the Seven Ways to a Better "You" with Kant.

  10. He left a comment at my blog too. I wonder how many blogs he hits?

  11. Ha! He's got a spider/'bot/zombie/whatever dropping his spam automatically whenever it finds the phrase "LOA" or variants.