[RascalPuff]

http://physicsmathforums.com/showthread.php?t=64

[mkirkpatrick]

We can all argue RP,until three weeks after were dead,will we than be any wiser?The 3
pages you have kindly linked for us all,can be united within the realm of consciousness
expressed as intangible tangibilities?



regards michael.

[RascalPuff]

You're right as usual Michael. What's particularly interesting about the cited rhubarb (which is actually four pages duration) is the rank and plumage of the admittedly well informed contenders. The name calling and the name dropping along with the professionally endorsed cognitive departures from reality. Rully hot. Gotta admit I have a soft spot for a front row seat at any gravity fight. Do you see any winners here? Something tells me they won't have time to check out my work in progress. (Gasp)

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff You're right as usual Michael. What's particularly interesting about the cited rhubarb (which is actually four pages duration) is the rank and plumage of the admittedly well informed contenders. The name calling and the name dropping along with the professionally endorsed cognitive departures from reality. Rully hot. Gotta admit I have a soft spot for a front row seat at any gravity fight. Do you see any winners here? Something tells me they won't have time to check out my work in progress. (Gasp)

Don't know about winners RP,but cold fusion will become realizable soon I feel,and gravity,well if you understand the vortex,then you will understand gravity,because gravity
cannot exist without one being present!



regards michael.

[RascalPuff]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick Don't know about winners RP,but cold fusion will become realizable soon I feel,and gravity,well if you understand the vortex,then you will understand gravity,because gravity cannot exist without one being present! regards michael.

Michael:
Are you of the school that says there can't be and is not a universe without a sentient consciousness to behold and experience it?

[dleviwing]

Kent;
I do hope you are not basing your knowledge and intellect on such sites.

[RascalPuff]

Originally Posted by dleviwing Kent; I do hope you are not basing your knowledge and intellect on such sites.

David: Certainly I'm not basing my facilities on such sites, on the other hand, such sources of information are alternatives to jack in the box thinking. I am persuaded that Miles Mathis, for example, is among the most perceptive of expeditionary thinkers - all the more so because he is contemporary. Please recall that 'amateur' translates to 'he or she who loves his or her work'. Much of the evolution of science has emerged from that underestimated, too often condescended sector.

Please bear in mind also that I - like many others - learn from apparent mistakes and misunderstandings. There are several arguments transpiring between yourself and others for example - arguments which I could - and do - alternately take either side of. This is not to imply that I do not have some 'prejudices' that 'hold these (given) truths to be self evident'. I am learning from yourself and others on this forum, what questions to ask and how to ask them. Of course I think I have some answers also. I am basically 'old school', which is not to be wisely underestimated. The times, they are a'changin'...
(The only thing that is permanent is change <Heraclitus> is also a profile of the physically expanding - 4-D space-time - universe; about which I have much to learn, and to say. I have qualified disagreements with those who say 'gravity is not a force'.)

I respect your scientific zeal, Mr. dleviwing. We apparently agree on the primary issue of Matter first, with the rest in subsequence, though I have a slightly revised listing:
Matter, motion, mass (inertia), energy, dimensions (space-time).

"There is always larger than large, and smaller than small." - Anon

I am also a Steady State (No beginning, no ending) advocate. I respectfully submit that the Steady State is well on its way to recognized reinstatement. The big bang is ever more entangled with collapsation, as it were. It has neither a leg to stand on or a stool to fall from. There is much to be revealed.


Regards
- RP

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff Michael: Are you of the school that says there can't be and is not a universe without a sentient consciousness to behold and experience it?

The school I adhere to is an ancient one,and would suggest that all is consciousness,and
this is expressed by intelligent energy motioned by wilful intent.




regards michael.

[austintorn@aol.com]

If Consciousness Were All

I’m open to exploring any avenue that may lead to the TOE, so let’s take a look…

If consciousness were all that is, then all reality is constructed from it, for there would be nothing else out there but it. Even bodies and brains would be made of it. “We” are like localized lumps of consciousness in this all-pervading field of experience and gain our individuality, but the spaces among us are consciously experiential and maintain reality as we know it and left it.

Well, what’s so hard about all that? Nothing, for our nightdreams do it for us every night—and we would swear it’s reality, except when we are lucid, and even then, upon inspecting it minutely observe that it is identical to waking reality, although not always as stable.

This is what ours dreams tell us right under our nose—that reality if modeled the same exact way as when we’re awake. Or perhaps it is that there’s no model, that it is just there as it is. It’s not the dream content that’s so revealing—it’s that we have dreams and probably must have them, what with all that consciousness underling dispositions formerly thought of as physical.

What keeps waking reality intact when we’re not attending to it—well, it must be everyone’s collective consciousness that collects together in the spaces between us.

So, there are no atoms, molecules, waves, interference patterns, forces or any kind of other stuff out there but experiential stuff. We are living a stable dream.

How is everything maintained in this all-over consciousness field? Well, our experiments on “reality” seem to show that everything is connected to everything as entanglement, and so that’s what produces the “perception” of consciousness.

We are the Cosmos. We are it. There is nothing more to it.

As somebody once said, “I was an atheist until I realized I was God.”

Soon we may grow to the point where our group consciousness can do more than just cause the fall of communism all over the world, but may do things like mind-melding and/or reading of other’s minds.

(Just exploring various TOE ideas.)

[RascalPuff]

IMHO you're a very good arbiter Mr. Austintorn. Anyone who reads you oughtta celebrate yer circumstantial presence. There probly won't ever be enough alternative - out of the box - thinkers, either. Thank you for being, here and there.

- RP