Truth is Timeless

[SteveA]

Hi SteveA,


The Pipe



"You are about to begin an adventure of the
People, the Plains Indian People. You probably
have known of these People only by their
whiteman names, as the Cheyenne, the Crow
and the Sioux. Here you will learn to know of
them as they were truly known among the
People, as the Painted Arrow, the Little Black
Eagle, and the Brother People.

The story of these People has at its center and
all around it the story of the Medicine Wheel.
The Medicine Wheel is the very Way of Life of
the People. It is an understanding of the Uni-
verse. It is the Way given to the Peace Chiefs,
our Teachers, and by them to us. The Medicine
Wheel is everything of the People.

The Medicine Wheel is the Living Flame of
the Lodges, and the Great Shield of Truth
written in the Sign of the Water. It is the Heart
and Mind. It is the Song of the Earth. It is the
Star-Fire and the Painted Drum seen only in the
Eyes of Children. It is the Red Pipe of the
Buffalo Gift smoked in the Sacred Mountains,
and it is the Four Arrows of the People's Lodge.
It is our Sun Dance.

The Medicine Wheel Way begins with the
Touching of our Brothers and Sisters. Next it
speaks to us of the Touching of the world
around us, the animals, trees, grasses, and all
other living things. Finally it Teaches us to Sing
the Song of the World, and in this Way to
become Whole People.

Come sit with me, and let us smoke the Pipe
of Peace in understanding. Let us Touch. Let
us, each to the other, be a Gift as is the Buffalo.
Let us be Meat to Nourish each other, that we
all may Grow. Sit here with me, each of you as
you are in your own Perceiving of yourself, as
Mouse, Wolf, Coyote, Weasel, Fox, or Prairie
Bird. Let me See through your Eyes. Let us
Teach each other here in this Great Lodge of the
People, this Sun Dance, of each of the Ways on
this Great Medicine Wheel, our Earth."

from SEVEN ARROWS by Hyemeyohsts Storm

jag

What a beautiful invitation for a visit. How can I say no to that?

*opens the gate to the neighbors house*

I only keep the gate shut for the unwelcome visitors (generally spotted carrying a gun and in someone elses backyard against the desires of those living there).

... my apologies for getting distracted ... yes, the pipe and the wheel - they both appearing interesting subjects and I would enjoy sharing with you so that we can see further and know of things beyond that which we currently are.

[jag]

Hi SteveA,

I am a Professional Land Surveyor by trade
and I totally agree that good fences make good
neighbors but I also think private land ownership
is a symptom of mankinds crystalization of
the Medicine Wheel. It remindes me of a cartoon
I saw once--Two fleas on a dogs back arguing
over who owns the dog.

jag

[thinking]

Originally Posted by thinking
should not truths though be based on fact in the first place ?

yes

Hi thinking,

It is fact that the Tree exists but the Truth is The Tree.

All of the Facts about the Tree just describe the Truth.

We did not create the Tree with or facts.

jag

but the fact is , is that , the combination of the atoms and then molecules that produce the tree will only produce a tree

hence the tree and nothing else

[SteveA]

Hi SteveA,

I am a Professional Land Surveyor by trade
and I totally agree that good fences make good
neighbors but I also think private land ownership
is a symptom of mankinds crystalization of
the Medicine Wheel. It remindes me of a cartoon
I saw once--Two fleas on a dogs back arguing
over who owns the dog.

jag

I think claims of ownership should be determined along the lines of whether or not some prior vested interest in it is harmed (though of course there are always some gray areas, but this seems like a good starting metric for resolving disputes).

In the case of the fleas, if one had already made a home on the back of the dog and the dog, for some reason, was sick enough that a second flea could jepordize its life, then I could understand the concern of the first flea over having a second one move in. (for two real fleas and a real dog I can't picture the fleas having problems unless one built some sort of nest - can't picture fleas building nests though )

But let's say for example, that two people are walking across a desert and spot an oasis - one guy runs ahead and claims its his property. In this case there's really nothing legitimate to the claim as he had nothing invested in it and assuming there's enough water for both to get their fill and continue on, there's no harm done to the "first" if the second takes some water.

On the other hand, let's say that someone leaves their town and head out into the desert to find a new place to live and an oasis is discovered. If he then decides to live there, I see this as having some vested interests in the water from the oasis, but it's not enough to deny someone else drinking there as long as it has little of any influence on the person living there.

But let's say that someone else comes and brings others as well to the point where the water, though possibly still sufficient, now lowers the quality of life that the initial person had while living there.

I do consider that the original person has a valid claim to compensation for this.

Or similarly, if there had been just enough water for him and a horse that he had, if a couple people came and stayed to where there wasn't enough water for the horse and it died, they'd owe him compensation for this lose.

Now someone may say that the oasis was created by nature and that no single person owns it and so anyone should be free to use these resources, but that's too simplistic a view and it causes problems - for example, if someone else is holding an apple, can someone else take this apple from them because it was grown by trees and nature? Obviously this would lead to a problem, because the person taking it has no specific claim to the apple either and so who can eat the apple? The tree and the Sun because they grew it? Well the tree and the Sun appeared to be very giving and do not fight with people over who eats their apples and it can be the case that someone specifically nurtured a tree in order to grow food and the existence of that tree was dependent upon someones labor to create the value of it.

Anyway, in the case of the oasis, it wasn't created by anyone, but its value to someone is something that is created - the fact that someone moved or stayed living at it is evidence of this and if someone else desires something similar, they can also create such a value, though they need to similarly find (or build) their own oasis if the resources are limited.

Many disputes are not entirely clear cut and hopefully those involved can find a workable compromise, but there are also many conflicts that arise simply because people don't desire to consider what interests others might already have in a resource ... they simply want it and don't want the inconvenience of working in voluntary relationships with others - it can appear easier to just take what they desire (but ultimately this doesn't resolve the problem and the "cancer" spreads until people find a way to stop it from spreading such as cutting it out or dying from it - and it always end because nature doesn't sustain it).

[jag]

but the fact is , is that , the combination of the atoms and then molecules that produce the tree will only produce a tree

hence the tree and nothing else

Hi thinking,

All of the facts that we know about the tree amount
to about 4% of the tree, from what I hear. The other
96% of the tree is Stuff We Don't Know What It Is (SWDKWII)

What is the Truth?

Until we have a better understanding of what Gravity
is and how it works we won't be able to see.

Vortexes are the key.

jag

[SteveA]

Hi thinking,

All of the facts that we know about the tree amount
to about 4% of the tree, from what I hear. The other
96% of the tree is Stuff We Don't Know What It Is (SWDKWII)

What is the Truth?

Until we have a better understanding of what Gravity
is and how it works we won't be able to see.

Vortexes are the key.

jag

Yes, regarding gravity, I very much agree. The first three forces that have been detected are just the tip of the iceberg. Gravity "sucks" (yes, pun intended) only because other physical forces operate in more complex manners and so we just have statistical equations for gravity that show the net influence of the aggregate (hence why gravity appears as such an exceedingly weak force in physics, because it's a cancellation/superposition of many stronger forces that haven't been untangled yet).

And I'd agree that if we could get a better handle on the chaos of vortices we'd likely find better ways of untangling those other forces.

[austintorn@aol.com]

Gravity "sucks" (yes, pun intended) only because other physical forces operate in more complex manners and so we just have statistical equations for gravity that show the net influence of the aggregate (hence why gravity appears as such an exceedingly weak force in physics, because it's a cancellation/superposition of many stronger forces that haven't been untangled yet).

Gravity Explained

The Strength of Gravity, The Feeble Apparent

Gravity is a universal force—for any body:
The force felt by a body is mass proportional;
Yet, the acceleration that’s felt is the inverse!
This coincidence removes all mass dependence.

(Einstein transcended this amazing ‘coincidental’ race
By bodies going straight through curved space.)

Gravity might be derived from the fundamentals,
The byproduct of a small residual after cancelations
Of opposite electric or color charges, and more.
Why then is gravity universal, for its sources are not?

Perhaps the appearance of feebleness is deceptive
Since protons and neutrons are but lightweights.
But why are they so light? Their mass is a compromise
Between a disturbance energy and its cancellation.

The quarks’ color charge disturbs gluons around them,
Small at first, but larger growing farther from the quark.
These disturbances cost energy, but how to cancel them?
With an anti-quark or 2 complementarily colored quarks.

But the qualifying quarks can’t sit atop the originals,
For quarks have no definite position, just a wave function,
And they can’t be localized to a small spread of position,
For this requires a larger energy—so forget nullification.

The compromise is that some residual energy amounts
From the not-completely-canceled gluon field disturbances
And from the not-completely-canceled quark positionings,
Thus the proton mass, m=E/cc, with this tricky element
Of how the gluon disturbance field grows with distance.

(The residual strong energy from color charge also binds
The protons and neutrons in the atomic nucleus;
The electromagnetic electron/nuclei charge residuals
Bind atoms into molecules and molecules into materials.)

Asymptotic freedom is a subtle feedback effect
From virtual particles antiscreening the color charge.
This antiscreening builds up gradually, especially at first,
Then proceeds more quickly, building upon each building.

(But screening happens for electrically charged particles,
As a positive charge attracts a negative virtual cloud.)

Thus, at first, since it’s so slow to build, the pressure
To localize the nullifying quarks is quite mild as well.
Thus, there’s no need to very strictly localize and so
The energies are small—and so then is the proton mass.

(Ideas herein were gathered from readings of Frank Wilczek)

[jag]

Yes, regarding gravity, I very much agree. The first three forces that have been detected are just the tip of the iceberg. Gravity "sucks" (yes, pun intended) only because other physical forces operate in more complex manners and so we just have statistical equations for gravity that show the net influence of the aggregate (hence why gravity appears as such an exceedingly weak force in physics, because it's a cancellation/superposition of many stronger forces that haven't been untangled yet).

And I'd agree that if we could get a better handle on the chaos of vortices we'd likely find better ways of untangling those other forces.

Hi SteveA,

Gravity is God is Energy

Does anyone have a definition of Energy, God, or Gravity (EGG)
I don't think we Know what any of them are.

Finally an answer to the old question Which came first the
Chicken or the EGG

jag

[jag]

Yes, regarding gravity, I very much agree. The first three forces that have been detected are just the tip of the iceberg. Gravity "sucks" (yes, pun intended) only because other physical forces operate in more complex manners and so we just have statistical equations for gravity that show the net influence of the aggregate (hence why gravity appears as such an exceedingly weak force in physics, because it's a cancellation/superposition of many stronger forces that haven't been untangled yet).

And I'd agree that if we could get a better handle on the chaos of vortices we'd likely find better ways of untangling those other forces.

Hi SteveA,

Earths gravity pushes on us as it moves toward and into
the earth. It is what all of the atomic forces are made
of and come from.

There is no chaos in the beautiful simplicity of a true
vortex.

Sorry about my lame attemt at humor but seriously,
what is Energy? Could it be that all things are just
patterns of Energy?

jag

[jag]

What if Truth came down on Golden Wings
and scooped us up into Her Boosom and
told us we had but to ask and she would Tell
All. That would be A Grand Day.

The first thing I would ask Her is what is
Gravity? If I had a follow up Is there an easy
way to overcome Earth's Gravity and move around
easier and cheaper.

What would you ask for First?

jag