[JAK]

Originally Posted by futrethink

Mohan.c.
---I am trying to show a difference between the description of the diMEMsions of length, width, thickness, time, etc and the description of alternate DAmensions/realities.
---Scientist have the hypothesis called M-theory and use that to refer to the 11 hypothesized dimensions, that include the known ones of length, width, thickness and time.
---I have a tendency to bring differing/alternative frequencies/realities into discussions and have begun showing the difference between the two using the above wordings.
---It all depends on how you look at something. Something can be one/physical, the other/an idea, both or neither. Part of that is the inclusion of time: in the past an airplane was an idea, in the present a plane is an actual physical object, to someone who looks at both as being truths, it is both at the same time, because even if we have the physical object, it doesn't destroy the idea that once existed in the past. As to how it can be neither, take away the descriptions of 'idea' and 'physical object' or any description of any kind and it is neither of those things, on one level of perception.
---I can see how something physical can be one dimensional, two dimensional, three dimensional, four dimensional or even more. The problems lie in my attempting to describe how it can be all of them and none of them, without what I am saying seeming to be a play on words or a bad pun. In trying to describe these things, I do my best to keep things as objective as possible and it is usually and immediately taken by the reader as a pun, without them taking the time to carefully think about what I am saying.
---I also called you a believer in numbers and by your next statement of , you have proven me to be right. You are a follower of binary logic. Something is either black or white, true or false and etc.
---Reality doesn’t follow binary logic. Reality is black, white and grey. It is everything in between and none of them. It is also a couple of other colours, that don’t fit into the spectrum of black and white.
---Reality, itself, is only perceived by the things that exist within reality, so to the things that exist and perceive existence, it exists. There is nothing outside of reality to prove that reality exists, so since there is no outside proof that reality exist, to an objective thinker it doesn't exist. Both of those conditions are occurring at the same time and are both truths.

Originally Posted by Mohan.C

An idea is not lost only if it is recorded. An idea is not lost if it is still being passed on as an idea, then it exists in the persons memory who has received it from a predecessor, or it is recorded in a paper or anything which can be used for recording. In both cases it is physical(an object or brain which also has a physical existence). If it stays and dies with the originator then it is lost with his death. So any thing to have an existence should be present in the present either in the brain or on paper. It may have existed in the past but "Past is past". If another person gets the idea he becomes the owner of the idea.

An outside of reality concept comes if we consider anything more to reality since anything more to reality is considered an illusion it is not reality.

According to me reality is everything may not be what all we see or believe there may be more to it. What all there is to it is all there is. I'm including everything not just in our universe if there is another universe then it is also a reality. It is also a reality not an illusion because if it exists it exists.

Slow down, guys. Futrethink, you have 8 ideas in your last post. Mohan.C, you have at least 3. Progress is not usually effective if we all do a brain-dump in each post. Please select a single point you think is critical at the moment, and let's work through it. The order should start with a foundation upon which we can build together. Which of your ideas are "foundational"?