It's Time To Forget Time.

[jag]

Every 'naked belief' is defeasible to logical impossibility...

'Naked beliefs' = All those with zero physical evidence...

Experientially 'knowing' our honest feelings is excluded...

With all due respect, I have all the physical evidence that you do...I'm just looking at it from a different perspective. Instead of all energy coming from a big bang, all energy comes from God...that's all...not a big deal. All of the great advances of science are golden. 3D is contained within 4D. Very little change except perspective. Actually I think that the notion that God is the source of all energy is much more logical and can explain dark energy and dark matter more easily. Creation, evolution...It's all just happening. It didn't happen a long time ago.

jag

[SteveA]

Hiya, Jag. I've got say that I've swung a long way around and have come to see a lot of sense in your statements. There is more than simply what we can physically measure and communicate about and the names of this "phenomenon" appear to be quite diverse, but it all refers to basically the same thing (though I tend to assume it's layered and the less specific, the further inward/outward it is though at least logically it's still just a single chain of continually nested structures in higher and higher dimensions of complexity, much like the structure of the brain itself, but it's nothing that can be physically shown).

The only thing I'd suggest is looking at the idea that change/time is similar to a single growing quantity/dimension and that this is layered or folded back on itself, similar to a sewn fabric using a single thread and that creates the second dimension, which can be seen inherited by many structures but a good analogy is the surfaces of physical perception - vision and touch are 2 dimensional surfaces. The mind learns 3 dimensional structures and higher, so we could see this source of energy/time as constructing physical and then mental properties of greater complexity and there's source of a Yin/Yang duality as a formless energy and growth of structure form on the other side (with an unknown infinite "beyond" in time).

I assume we have free will in the manner in which these structures are created, though the fundamental "source" is just something beyond explanation, though this same energy/source can also be similar to a shared quanta and create common spaces in which many things exist. Why specific qualities of conscious perception exist versus others also appear inexplicable, though these could be individual capabilities along with an ability to perceive/interact with/in time (it would seem that things must be at the positions in which they're influencial (how can something exist somewhere that it was unconnected/unrelated/uninfluencial?) and so consciousness of time implies an interaction with time, just as our perceptions of space arise with our ability to alter the properties of that space that we witness).

Anyway, it all appears to be quite a complex though quite interesting picture and I can better appreciate why it appears many people have simply had to say "God did it" or it's Brahma or the mind or Big Bang or energy etc. There doesn't appear to be a specific limit on complexity ... for example, look at the complexity of a personal computer and consider that it could be interpreted as a "physical particle" in a sense (though we wouldn't consider it fundamental, but then again, it's difficult to deny that even a physical quanta may not be the "real bottom level" of things, but simply the lowest level unit of a subset of spaces ... anyway quite an interesting picture, though it makes sense that there would be a common quanta shared by everything at some level in order that everything can interact in a persistent manner over time and with common units of space).

... all quantities share a common divisor of one and in that sense, we could see all forms as arising from a common source, though in terms of the qualities (and not quantities or forms) in which things are experienced, it's a bit more difficult to say that those arise from a common source, but they could be individually determined and in that sense, there's a potential aspect of free will also (even if it's still effectively predetermined, it could be individual predetermination which is ironically quite similar to free will - what should free will do other than (at least optionally) construct a (pre)determined set of events?)

[melanie]

The invisibility is simply a fabrication of mind and sensation, with umpteen more layers added on by other human mammals out of their perceived self-importance. All likely stories to protect the imaginings of the invisible during the mythical ages (which still continues).

Fantasy can be fun… but…

I think your getting your wires crossed here Austin.

No-one is talking about invisibles. You keep taking things completely out of context.

We're talking about the TOE .....not invisibles.


Why do keep referring to invisibles? what are you referring to?

[Lloyd Gillespie]

With all due respect, I have all the physical evidence that you do...I'm just looking at it from a different perspective. Instead of all energy coming from a big bang, all energy comes from God...that's all...not a big deal. All of the great advances of science are golden. 3D is contained within 4D. Very little change except perspective. Actually I think that the notion that God is the source of all energy is much more logical and can explain dark energy and dark matter more easily. Creation, evolution...It's all just happening. It didn't happen a long time ago.

jag

Since you are not up on the most recent discoveries in logical consistency, let me inform you...

Every 'naked belief' is defeasible to logical impossibility... This means Every 'naked belief' is divisible to logical inconsistency and impossibility...

'Naked beliefs' = All those with 'zero physical evidence...' All 'naked beliefs' in 'god' are divisible to logical inconsistency through the defeasibility of possibility to absolute impossibility__by way of 'Creation' being absolutely impossible, due to the fact 'invisibles' are impossible of producing 'visibles'__thus 'god' is unemployed...

Experientially 'knowing' our honest feelings is excluded... Honest childhood soulful feelings of true memories and honest story-telling are un-affected__only the impossible exaggerated impossible invisibles are deleted, by the defeasible/divisible logic of necessity__to absolute impossibility, i.e., false beliefs are no longer logically defensible__due to their gross logical inconsistencies, of impossible possibilities...

Sorry Jag, but this is the Universe's natural state of logical necessity__not a human opinion__but 'The Universal Facts of The Combinatoric Progression of Pure Logical Mechanical Necessity...'

It is the modal deflation and defeasibility of 'All False Belief-Egos...'

It is the logical consistency of possibility inconsistency...

It happens to be a 'Self-Defeasibility Quantification Proof', by necessity over possibility...

'All False Belief' is divisible to logical impossibility...

'All False Beliefs' divide to 'Zero Possibility...'

There exists no logical consistencies in logical impossibilities, except the absolute impossibility of that particular possibility...

The highest possibility of impossibility is absolute impossibility__at the logical limit of all possible sound thinking__The division of possibility apex...

The 4th modal state of logic is 'Defeasibility to Absolute Limits', leaving only that which is necessarily possible...

Necessity constrains exaggerated belief, through the logical consistency of defeasibility of possibility...

'Self-Logical Necessity Quantification'__'All Spiritual Creationism' Is Absolutely Defeasible To Logical Impossibility__By Pure Universal Logical Mechanics...

[melanie]

'Naked beliefs' = All those with 'zero physical evidence...' All 'naked beliefs' in 'god' are divisible to logical inconsistency through the defeasibility of possibility to absolute impossibility__by way of 'Creation' being absolutely impossible, due to the fact

'invisibles' are impossible of producing 'visibles'__thus 'god' is unemployed...

Hi Lloyd.

You say invisibles are impossible of producing visibles.

What do you mean by that statement please...?

Would appreciate a short understandable answer, thanks.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Hi Lloyd.

You say invisibles are impossible of producing visibles.

What do you mean by that statement please...?

Would appreciate a short understandable answer, thanks.

'invisibles' are impossible of producing 'visibles' = Any idea or thought not physically measurable, by some physical means or sensors...

Even all subjective feelings are physically measurable as non-action fields_negative action fields_or positive action fields of such actions__They just aren't mathematically, accurately quantifiable__due to any individual being tested as to his/her possible faking abilities, i.e., can not be trusted...

[SteveA]

A comment I made on some other threads is related to this and there is actually a legitimate informational value to empty space itself and an analogy I gave is with regard to language.

The precision of what a thing is, is inversely related to knowledge of everything it is not. The things that do not exist at a moment are just mental possibilities - a vocabulary is just a mental structure of language and not something immediately visible in a conversation, yet knowledge of a language and possible words or expressions that can be used, versus those specifically selected allows for something like the word "sky" to refer to the sky specifically and not the Earth or a tree etc.

It's the same with the "void" or volume in general - the number 1 only has a specific meaning with relationship to the fact that it is not 0 and not 2, nor 3 nor pi etc. and in this sense we can see that the "invisible"/unspoken/void/mental context etc. is actually where information is created.

For example, on a DVD player, we can see a movie as described by a string of binary digits, but these could mean anything including a genetic sequence for DNA or an audio file in some format. What actually allows these binary strings to be interpreted as specifically movies and not other things are the preexisting hardware outside of this binary string that interpretes this information and places it into various qualities for us to experience it as a movie.

A single number could potentially describe the entire timeline of the universe, if we had the correct manner to decode it ... that manner of interpretation is nothing we can physical show though, just as we can't measure energy from the vaccum of space or can we hear the unspoken words in a vocabulary etc.

These are all real and very concrete examples of the "void" at work and these are fundamentally mental contexts.

[melanie]

These are all real and very concrete examples of the "void" at work and these are fundamentally mental contexts.

Hi Steve.

As you know we live in a conceptual universe, so everything is therefore constructed 'via' mental activity
ie: (labeled) so as to make sense.

First, to call the manifesting energy consciousness may work for some, but it may also be confusing when consciousness is seen as a function of the brain.

What consciousness is, cannot be said. I might come up with a few labels but it explains nothing.
This does not mean that it is something difficult.
I can also not say how an orange tastes.

Some metaphors may 'click' or not, but let's compare consciousness to electricity.
When electricity enters a fridge it manifests as coldness,
when it enters a lamp it manifests as light and through a stove it manifests as heat.

In a similar fashion, when consciousness/life goes 'via' a rose it emerges as perfume, when it goes through a brain, it manifests as mind.
To assert that consciousness emerges in a brain sounds to me as saying that music has it's source in the radio.

[melanie]

'invisibles' are impossible of producing 'visibles' = Any idea or thought not physically measurable, by some physical means or sensors...

Even all subjective feelings are physically measurable as non-action fields_negative action fields_or positive action fields of such actions__They just aren't mathematically, accurately quantifiable__due to any individual being tested as to his/her possible faking abilities, i.e., can not be trusted...

We are not talking about physically measuring non physicals.

We're talking about this.....

At this moment there is 'something/no-thing' aware of the words appearing on this computer screen.
It cannot be localized, captured or described, yet it is clear and obvious.
If it is denied, there is awareness of the denial.
This 'some-thing' this 'intelligence-energy' you might say has no quality that can describe it, yet it appears as each and every quality.

This is not about physically measuring stuff, and besides who would do that, who's measuring?

[melanie]

'invisibles' are impossible of producing 'visibles' = Any idea or thought not physically measurable, by some physical means or sensors...

An idea / thought cannot be physically measured because physicality is none other than an idea / thought.

Consciousness, in man's nervous system, is able to produce in the individual the sensation that he has a specific,
factual "knowledge of himself,"
a knowledge which is sorely incomplete, and distorted;composed of little more than a hodge-podge of wishful thinking,
half truths, and out-right self deceptions.



Mechanics 101

'' I propose that you consider this model: It is as though there are certain inherent aspects of each person that the person is programmed to find so unacceptable that they are unwilling, or else unable, to face and admit. It's as though man is a creature with consciousness who is destined to employ a sizeable portion of that consciousness in the denial of what he is.

Yet another way to describe the apparent goal of activity such as this would be to go beyond calling it the attempt to "understand the nature of the mind," or the attempt to "know yourself," and move on to the purpose of comprehending the nature of the mechanics in us that produces a sense of there being a "self"....a self which has a mind....a self which we seek to know.

One minute "we" (our "self") is our digestion--is what we ate--and the next minute "we" (our "self") is based on some momentary neural response to a fright just experienced--while at yet another instant, our sense of ourself is tied to a passing memory, or arises from the flu we've just contracted.

Nervous system consciousness seems constructed not only to help direct our responses to our external and internal environments and thus, at least indirectly, help us define to ourselves "who we are"--as distinct from our environment. In addition, the nervous system also seems to use consciousness as a means to keep certain inherent aspects of ourselves from ourselves. It employs the mind (the function by which we "know") to keep us from fully knowing--what we are.

Further note (still considering this model), as regards the idea of changing your state of conciousness: What we have historically referred to as "being asleep" is a condition in which your mind wanders from you--which lessens the chance of it focusing on you--and thus reduces the possibility of you gaining any real knowledge of what you are. Ergo, from an ordinary view, the more you "sleep," the greater is your level of comfort with ordinary life.

Or: The Less You Know About You, The Better. ''