One Verse = 4 aspects

[Rybo]

}{....Macro-micro infinite non-occupied space outside( meta/beyond ) the finite Universe.

}0{...Finite occupied space aka our finite physical Universe also inclusive of any alledged multi-bubble-like universes, that cannot be dissconnected to our locally observed universe.

{O}....Ultra-micro( ultra-thin convex surface ) occupied space as ultra-micro, gravitational spacetime buffer-zone between physical occupied space and metaphysical non-occupied space.

}oo{...Observer is the human access to metaphysical mind and the unique ability to conceptually place one's self outside of a conceptually physical and quasi-physical Universe, and look back in upon that finite Universe as if a God( es ) holding such conceptually whole and finite U niverese in their hands.

These above four aspects are the "U"niverse i.e. inclusive in four distinct ways of viewing universe.

Any questions or arguments regarding this relatively and farily simple outline of "U"niverse?

}{...infinite
}0{....finite
{O}....finite convex(?) membrane
}oo{....metaphysical observer

Rybo

[mkirkpatrick]

Thanks rybo for your one verse=4 aspects four aspects to me would be spirit,light,energy,consciousness, which are really all the same thing,so four into one go one.the universe to me is just one expression of absolute intention,the rest is semantics and could be called mental masturbation,just a thought though.

regards michael.

[Rybo]

Thanks rybo for your one verse=4 aspects four aspects to me would be spirit,light,energy,consciousness, which are really all the same thing,so four into one go one.the universe to me is just one expression of absolute intention,the rest is semantics and could be called mental masturbation,just a thought though.regards michael.

Yeah us humans know how to mentally masturbate with the best of em'. ha ha!

What was it father Guducci on said on Sat. Night live.....if sins could be paid for with money, masturbation would cost about 25 cents....

And then there is that Yogi that ask the pizza guy to make him 'one with everything', then pays for pizza but doesn't get any change in return and the pizza dude reminded him that 'change comes from within'.

That made me wonder if you ever worked in a pizza parlor..ha..

Anyway Michael, the rumor is, that a true yogi only has to change a light bulb once and then it 'shines forever'.....I don't believe that rumor.

Oh well, better stop typing before I have one of those mental orgasims, again.....

Rybo

[Graybeard]

}oo{...Observer is the human access to metaphysical mind and the unique ability to conceptually place one's self outside of a conceptually physical and quasi-physical Universe, and look back in upon that finite Universe as if a God( es ) holding such conceptually whole and finite U niverese in their hands.

Why is the ability to do this so special ... so unique ? All else being equal this is a fairly mundane accomplishment ?

cool bananas ... greg

[mkirkpatrick]

Thanks for you reply rybo,yes indeed change can only occur from within,no i have never worked in a pizza place! I like the idea of one verse reminds me of a tune,a note,a harmony which of course this universe really is a musical harmony called the dance of life! we are now the conscious partners in the Waltz of expression and unfoldment.It is indeed one verse united within the law of cosmic consciousness.Many things cause confusion thereby when the soul awakens to the inner reality it realizes that all is one and one is all,there is but one "thing" in this whole universe,not two or three or fifty billion,just ONE!You can call this "one" thing "anything" you like,the aether or ether,universal consciousness,universal energy,universal electricity,or whatever other name suits you it matters not one jot what you call it,the important thing is that you understand there is but one force evident within this universe and all "arise" from within IT

regards michael.

[Rybo]

Why is the ability to do this so special ... so unique ? All else being equal this is a fairly mundane accomplishment ?cool bananas ... greg

Hi Greg, first( 1 ) of "all else" is not "equal" as you suggest, infer, imply or state. More on this further below tho.

I believe the degree of access to mind --ergo intellectual masturbation potentials---- is more/greater in content/complexity in humans, than the access to mind/intellect than by any other known animals on Earth. imho

Cetaceans are next on my list of intellectual abilities. Then the other primates. If my conclusions are incorrect here I don't see the logic of why they would be so. In dictionary "mundane" means not interesting.

I personally find humans and there access to be interesting biologicals, however, I do understand how something that is very common may appear to be not interesting than something that is rarely observed, even if this superifical characteristic, becuase of common everyday exposure.

Now as to "all else beiing equal" type comments I am reminded of how I give and example of how man and woman are exactly equal in some metaphysical/intellectually pure or abstract contruction, yet the way the operate can be at 90 degrees to reach their maximal stability of operation in universe.

Here is the link and I think it contains further explaination of this scenario when two can be equal yet be differrent.

Gender Tetrahedron

Rybo

[Graybeard]

Hi Greg, first( 1 ) of "all else" is not "equal" as you suggest, infer, imply or state. More on this further below tho.

I believe the degree of access to mind --ergo intellectual masturbation potentials---- is more/greater in content/complexity in humans, than the access to mind/intellect than by any other known animals on Earth. imho

Hi Rybo ..... If your starting or departure point is anthropic then of course you will see mankind as having the greater access to 'mind/intellect'.

From an anthropic viewpoint the Universe is arranged just as it should be, allowing you the observer to 'Observe metaphysical mind and the unique ability to conceptually place one's self outside of a conceptually physical and quasi-physical Universe, and look back in upon that finite Universe as if a God( es ) holding such conceptually whole and finite Universe in their hands.'

In other words, the assumption is that we (humans) are viewing the Universe from a privileged position. But the Anthropic Principle is pre-copernician.

In physics and cosmology, the anthropic principle is the philosophical argument that observations of the physical universe must be compatible with the conscious life that observes it.

Both Newton and Einstein have shown that we do not view the universe from a privileged position.

In physics and cosmology, the Copernican principle, named after Nicolaus Copernicus, states that the Earth is not in a central, specially favored position. More recently, the principle has been generalized to the relativistic concept that humans are not privileged observers of the universe.

The philosophy of science finds that there is nothing very unusual about the evolution of our solar system, the Earth, any one nation, or humans. It is a philosophical statement about the place of humanity. We should look for general explanatory principles first, and only then pursue the exceptional details.

Cetaceans are next on my list of intellectual abilities. Then the other primates. If my conclusions are incorrect here I don't see the logic of why they would be so. In dictionary "mundane" means not interesting.

The idea is to assume mediocrity (mundane), rather than starting with the assumption that a phenomenon is special or has somehow violated the laws of the universe, such as standing outside it in imagination.

Hi Greg, first( 1 ) of "all else" is not "equal" as you suggest, infer, imply or state.

Post Copernican philosophy states that life on Earth depends on just a few basic molecules, the elements that make up these molecules are, to a greater or lesser extent, common to all stars, and the laws of physics we know apply to the entire universe. There is no reason to assume that they do not. This is what I meant by 'all else being equal'


greg

[Rybo]

Hi Rybo ..... If your starting or departure point is anthropic then of course you will see mankind as having the greater access to 'mind/intellect'.

Hi Greg, well it looks like you in agreement with my four comments as stated then. Great!

From an anthropic viewpoint the Universe is arranged just as it should be, allowing you the observer to 'Observe metaphysical mind and the unique ability to conceptually place one's self outside of a conceptually physical and quasi-physical Universe, and look back in upon that finite Universe as if a God( es ) holding such conceptually whole and finite Universe in their hands.'

Uh, yeah, again it appears your are complete agreemetn with my comments as stated you quote here above.. Great!

In other words, the assumption is that we (humans) are viewing the Universe from a privileged position. But the Anthropic Principle is pre-copernician. Both Newton and Einstein have shown that we do not view the universe from a privileged position.

I don't know about this "privileged position" of yours and that is certainly not what I stated.
I was speaking from position of a specific human with all the circumstances surrounding my existence the last 57 yrs.

The philosophy of science finds that there is nothing very unusual about the evolution of our solar system, the Earth, any one nation, or humans. It is a philosophical statement about the place of humanity. We should look for general explanatory principles first, and only then pursue the exceptional details.

Uh, ok but I didn't make any comments about "philosophy of science" or "evolution of solar system." What appears "exceptional" i.e. unique to me is what I stated about the degree of access to mind/intellect.

The idea is to assume mediocrity (mundane), rather than starting with the assumption that a phenomenon is special or has somehow violated the laws of the universe, such as standing outside it in imagination.

I have not suggested any violation of cosmic laws, so Greg, I think you have misread or misunderstand some of my comments. Please reread and you will see your commments are misplaced.

I gave 4 starting points in my outline( catagorizing ) of "U"niverse and that word infers a conceptual wholeness that is all inclusive ergo nothing ---no conceptual metaphysical things or physical things ) are left out, when all four of my aspects are considered togther as one beginning set, from which wave only subcatagories thereof.

The next step in this catagorizing is to list more and more special-case phenomena. I think this kind of outlinning is calle a heirachal organization. Not sure.

Post Copernican philosophy states that life on Earth depends on just a few basic molecules, the elements that make up these molecules are, to a greater or lesser extent, common to all stars, and the laws of physics we know apply to the entire universe. There is no reason to assume that they do not. This is what I meant by 'all else being equal' greg.

I'm sorry Greg, I still do not know how this above explains "all else being equal". All else besides human access to mind is not equal. Molecules, elements and even stars are not created equal.

Did I send you the link to how to differrent things male and female can conceptually be exactly equal to each other, yet the way their direction of operation can be at 90 degrees to each other? This is very similar to the way electro-magnetic radiation functions.

Here it is again, if I did not. Gender Tetrahedron

Male and female are the two most complex entities we know to exist in Universe. This is not to say 100 humans, or a whole solar system or galaxy filled with humans would not be more complex, just within certain parameters, humans are the most complex.

Rybo

[Graybeard]

Hi Rybo ...... I also am 57 ........ appears we are a pair of ol' farts ... lol.

Yes... I did check your link ... but I couldn't understand it. Also it appears that you have published it as a graphic ... forcing me to type references and excerpts rather than being able to copy and paste.

Your link says that, 'Precession is the physical effect of bodies in motion upon other bodies in motion.'

This is true of systems large enough to have observable gravitational effects upon each other but is hardly true of a man and a woman who are bound to a single gravitational system of the planet Earth. The Electromagnetic force so eclipses the Gravitational force in such a situation as to render its effect as nil.

However, I take your point .... And, if as it appears, you view the universe from an anthropic belief then we must agree to disagree.

Here are three principles ....

The Anthropic Principle

The Copernician Principle

The Mediocrity Principle

The Mediocrity principle is an extension of the Copernician Principle to further apply to the Cosmos.

From my view it is the only one of the three that supports the evidence available from Scientific investigation.

Which principle do you support and which do you reject ?

cool bananas ... greg

[Rybo]

Hi Rybo ...... I also am 57 ........ appears we are a pair of ol' farts ... lol.

Cool! Eyes began going in late 40's. Also rotor cuff took me out for 6 months. Lower back gets worse each time it goes out. Currently doing 30 days IB Profin for rotor cuff returning pain.

Yes... I did check your link ... but I couldn't understand it. Also it appears that you have published it as a graphic ... forcing me to type references and excerpts rather than being able to copy and paste.

I gave that page for you visual on the bisected tetrahedron, not the precession quote. Did you not see the two chefs hats? "Chefs hats" are English words in English dictionary. So you do not understand what 90 degrees means? The two chefs hats can be at 90 degrees to each other and that is a tetrahedron. Do you know what a triangle is Greg? I forget what grad in school I had geometry. The two chefs had triangle, square and trapazoid but even if you do not know the words for each shape, the picture does not require to you to know what each shape is called.

Your link says that, 'Precession is the physical effect of bodies in motion upon other bodies in motion.' This is true of systems large enough to have observable gravitational effects upon each other but is hardly true of a man and a woman who are bound to a single gravitational system of the planet Earth. The Electromagnetic force so eclipses the Gravitational force in such a situation as to render its effect as nil.

Differrent issue and not what my comments were in regards too. The two halves are equal was my point. You maybe need glassess to see the visual clearly. The two equal halves, at 90 degrees to each other, define a tetrahedron and when spun on specific axis defines a two great circles that are 90 degrees to each other.

Maybe you never had math and don't understand the number 90 is or how it relates to the word degrees, a right angle or perpendicular? I've done carpentry for yrs so I guess understanding what 90 degrees is difficult for some people.

Have you ever heard of the Electro-magnetic sine-waves, or how they are at 90 degrees to each other?

However, I take your point .... And, if as it appears, you view the universe from an anthropic belief then we must agree to disagree.

I gave several points so, I dunno which point you refering too.

Here are three principles .... The Anthropic Principle
The Copernician PrincipleThe Mediocrity Principle
The Mediocrity principle is an extension of the Copernician Principle to further apply to the Cosmos. From my view it is the only one of the three that supports the evidence available from Scientific investigation.

Again Greg, if these are meant to reference my original outline with specific 4 comments I don't see what the reference is or how they would altar or correct my comments as stated. Do you?

Which principle do you support and which do you reject ?
cool bananas ... greg

I really don't know enough about any of them or how they relate to each to offer a confirmation, rejection and certainly not how the reference my outline with top of the "U"niverse hierarchy.

You appear to be suggesting that one or all of those some how are related to my comments as stated and maybe even should cause me to altar my comments as stated. If that is what intention is, then you will have to be more specific with your explanation.

}{...infinite---meta/beyond space

}0{....finite---physical space

{O}....finite convex(?) membrane---quasi-physical mea/beyond but connected space

}oo{....meta/beyond non-space observer and concepts of space ergo }{, }0{, {O}, }oo{.

Rybo