T.o.N. (Theory of Nothing)

[MJA]

Simplify!

=
MJA

[rybot]

Embracement is fine, Rybo. I'm happy to see we at least understand each other, instead of the usual thinking that "nothingness" can exist.
As long as it is held that "nothingness" does not exist, we can all be happy campers.
Picking uranus is fine, btw. It's just another planet.

Nobody, metaphysical existence is jsut that metaphysical.

There are however, subcatogorzations of the metaphysical.

"Uranus" may also be brown hole emitting "dark matter".

What goes in must come out may apply to universe i.e. what involutes( infold ) must evolute( out-fold/unfold ).

Rybo

[melanie]

Would like to share this beautiful piece of writing with you all.

* * *
When we wake up in the morning, there is this magical moment when we are awake without realizing yet who or what we are. When we just relax into observing the environment, we let the world come in without reaching out with our eyes to focus on any object or any point in the visual field. We may say that the eyes are focused on nothing in particular; we just let ourselves become aware of the entire visual field, giving no part of it any more importance than any other part. Before our mind starts to interfere with what we perceive, we are inextricably connected to our environment, be it the walls of our bedroom or the face of our lover.

There are moments in our life when we realize that some concepts we took for real are not so certain and obvious at all. There were many such moments especially in our childhood, when we were totally absorbed in what was happening. These borderline moments are those times, for instance, when we are carefree, sitting in the sun, just like that. We are without thought, completely absorbed by our environment: the grass, the trees, the wind, our arms, our legs, it is all connected, it is all one field of awareness. These are experiences we have at the edge of our thinking and feeling capacities.

Even as grown-ups, we may have similar moments of being absorbed, moments of blind faith in what is going on: for example when we stare into an open fire, when we are hypnotized on the beach by the sounds and colors of the surf. When we devote ourselves completely to a game, when we admire a sunset, or when playing a musical instrument, we can truly lose ourselves. Afterwards, when we reflect on the moment, we say, 'Oh, I wasn't with it' or 'I just wasn't there.' Without realizing it at that moment, we were absorbed in an endless space where everything seemed to happen without effort. Our thinking process slowed down and we limited ourselves to a bland observing, a watching without judging.

What is more important here is that we have to confess that each time we were really happy, truly fulfilled, there was no thinking process going on. There is just 'what is.' The thinking mind only pops up afterwards. When there is no thinking process going on, there is no hope and no fear, no complaining, no desire and no guilt. Or in other words, there is no 'me.' Isn't that amazing, to see that each time there is real happiness, that there is in fact nobody there? No separation, no self-image, just pure joy. There is only pure 'Is-ness' which is not disturbed by any concept or thought about our little me.

When we realize the importance of penetrating behind our continuous stream of mental images, when we rediscover the Awareness in which this world is appearing, we can encounter life more consciously and directly. Just letting the speed of our mental train slow down, we discover a new dimension; for example, we put into perspective our continuous craving for ever new sensations. During such moments, life goes on by itself. We do not expect anything, we do not have to put labels on anything and inside, peace reigns.

This is a preview of what it must be like to be in contact with our Essence, to come Home. All the daily worries that keep us going are moved to the Background. And the Background itself is moved to the fore. When going beyond the turbulence of our internal dialogue, when going beyond the habit of identifying with our personality, we may get connected with the infinite. This is often combined with a purity and openness we have not known since our early youth.

Jan kersschot 2007

[Drifter]

"I Am That I Am", expressing as the one known as Drifter nowHere.

I know I am Real, I am Tao, I am Truly One.
Are You?

=
MJA

[Drifter]

Very nice Mel, if I might add:
Michael Polanyi wrote of the metanoia changing a student into a true physicist. A brilliant array of facts, proofs, laws, theories, and an impressive body of empirical work as evidence, will not in themselves create a science, Polanyi claimed. Only as all this is given meaning and purpose through the intellectual passion of a true believer does the real science emerge. A belief in the basic tenets determines the criteria by which an investigator works. Science, states Polanyi, can provide no procedure for deciding issues by systematic and dispassionate empirical investigation.

The scientific audience is won over to a new system by intellectual sympathy. A hostile audience may deliberately refuse to entertain novel conceptions for fear of being led to conclusions they abhor, rightly or wrongly. Sympathetic listening allows one to discover what cannot be understood in any other way. This kind of openness, which alone can lead us into true agreement and "hearing," Polanyi notes, is a self-modifying act. To elaborate on Polanyi a bit, I would explain this self-modifying by saying each of us has an autistic openness for unlimited synthesis, but agreement on another's synthesis then limits our openness. It defines a specific area that can no longer be open for us.

Hardness of heart, the refusal to listen sympathetically and open-mindedly, with its corollary, unbelief, is the stumbling block which no theoretical system can overcome.

Polanyi claims that "intellectual passions" affirm the scientific interest and value of certain facts as against lack of such interest and value in others could not be defined at all. Without this selective function science could not be defined at all. A "vision of reality" serves as the scientific guide to enquiry. Passion and vision are the "mainsprings of originality." A new idea may impel a scientist to abandon an accepted framework of interpretation and commit himself, by the leaping of a logical gap, to the use of a new framework. -Joseph C. Pearce from his classical work; "The Crack In The Cosmic Egg"

Would like to share this beautiful piece of writing with you all.

* * *
When we wake up in the morning, there is this magical moment when we are awake without realizing yet who or what we are. When we just relax into observing the environment, we let the world come in without reaching out with our eyes to focus on any object or any point in the visual field. We may say that the eyes are focused on nothing in particular; we just let ourselves become aware of the entire visual field, giving no part of it any more importance than any other part. Before our mind starts to interfere with what we perceive, we are inextricably connected to our environment, be it the walls of our bedroom or the face of our lover.

There are moments in our life when we realize that some concepts we took for real are not so certain and obvious at all. There were many such moments especially in our childhood, when we were totally absorbed in what was happening. These borderline moments are those times, for instance, when we are carefree, sitting in the sun, just like that. We are without thought, completely absorbed by our environment: the grass, the trees, the wind, our arms, our legs, it is all connected, it is all one field of awareness. These are experiences we have at the edge of our thinking and feeling capacities.

Even as grown-ups, we may have similar moments of being absorbed, moments of blind faith in what is going on: for example when we stare into an open fire, when we are hypnotized on the beach by the sounds and colors of the surf. When we devote ourselves completely to a game, when we admire a sunset, or when playing a musical instrument, we can truly lose ourselves. Afterwards, when we reflect on the moment, we say, 'Oh, I wasn't with it' or 'I just wasn't there.' Without realizing it at that moment, we were absorbed in an endless space where everything seemed to happen without effort. Our thinking process slowed down and we limited ourselves to a bland observing, a watching without judging.

What is more important here is that we have to confess that each time we were really happy, truly fulfilled, there was no thinking process going on. There is just 'what is.' The thinking mind only pops up afterwards. When there is no thinking process going on, there is no hope and no fear, no complaining, no desire and no guilt. Or in other words, there is no 'me.' Isn't that amazing, to see that each time there is real happiness, that there is in fact nobody there? No separation, no self-image, just pure joy. There is only pure 'Is-ness' which is not disturbed by any concept or thought about our little me.

When we realize the importance of penetrating behind our continuous stream of mental images, when we rediscover the Awareness in which this world is appearing, we can encounter life more consciously and directly. Just letting the speed of our mental train slow down, we discover a new dimension; for example, we put into perspective our continuous craving for ever new sensations. During such moments, life goes on by itself. We do not expect anything, we do not have to put labels on anything and inside, peace reigns.

This is a preview of what it must be like to be in contact with our Essence, to come Home. All the daily worries that keep us going are moved to the Background. And the Background itself is moved to the fore. When going beyond the turbulence of our internal dialogue, when going beyond the habit of identifying with our personality, we may get connected with the infinite. This is often combined with a purity and openness we have not known since our early youth.

Jan kersschot 2007

[Drifter]

For an overview of Michael Polanyi's "Personal Knowledge":

http://www.giffordlectures.org/Brows...N&Summary=True

[N0B0DY]

Nobody, metaphysical existence is jsut that metaphysical.

There are however, subcatogorzations of the metaphysical.

"Uranus" may also be brown hole emitting "dark matter".

What goes in must come out may apply to universe i.e. what involutes( infold ) must evolute( out-fold/unfold ).

Rybo

I've been following the implications of Kirchoff's Law for quite sometime, as a basis for relativity, but what neither goes in nor comes out is absolute which is categorically different than infinite. I would not categorize metaphysical as existent, and further only use Aristotle's definition of metaphysics to extend inverse laws to the absolute extent.

This latter extension involves proving to ourselves that what is observed is non-existent, instead of not being able to prove that there is existence beyond what is observed. It is realized by understanding that in order for there to be an observed relative dimensional framework, regardless of scale, there must be a non-existent center - not an infinitesimal point mass - to allow for such an extension.

It is the only means of deduction possible without requiring verification because any other means requires quantitative and qualitative measures to verify each existence. Perhaps a useful analogy to depict the point is the imaginary equator and meridian which divides the Earth to allow direction. It is simple enough to realize that in order for there to be such concepts as this way and that way, there must be an absolute center point which is neither this way nor that way; and if neither this way nor that way, then as counter-intuitive as it may be, it is nevertheless non-existent because if it were to be existent it would have to have its own infinitesimal sense of direction.

This all leads to the operative word "sense" as being relevant to what is discerned as reality, without such sensorially-discerned reality there is none. So we can posit a correlation between consciousness with finite observations; subconsciousness with subatomic extensions to infinite proportions; and unconsciousness with the absolute state of the universe, which doesn't exist.

[Drifter]

This begs the question then, "Who, is the 'Law-Giver'?"

http://www.sikhspectrum.com/112004/eliot.htm

[rybot]

Hey Nobody, I'me not familiar with Kirchoff.

My infold unfold comments were not meant to relate to infinity, only the brown hole joke. Sorry I was not clear.

THere is physical and metaphysical existence.

Physical is related to the *senses* i.e. sensorial, either directly, or indirectly via some instumentation( meter ).

E.g. eyeball harvests light or some instrument detects a quanta particle and we see or here click of the metering instrument.

Metaphysical subcatagorizations are related via abstract concepts of mind, or as mind.

E.g. the metaphysical, macro-infinite nothingness spatiality, that exists beyond the finite physical universe, is concieved of by humans via their experiences of something( e.g two houses ) and seemingly nothing( empty space ) inbetween.

E.g, humans know what a triangle shape is, because they have experienced triangles as associated with the physical, wheter it was carboard, plactic, crayon color and papers etc...but an abstract conceptual triangle does not neccessarily need an associtated medium to exist in metaphysical mind, wherein the metaphsycal triangle of mind has no size, weight smell, etc...

There is more at bottom of page.

I've been following the implications of Kirchoff's Law for quite sometime, as a basis for relativity, but what neither goes in nor comes out is absolute which is categorically different than infinite. I would not categorize metaphysical as existent, and further only use Aristotle's definition of metaphysics to extend inverse laws to the absolute extent.

This latter extension involves proving to ourselves that what is observed is non-existent, instead of not being able to prove that there is existence beyond what is observed. It is realized by understanding that in order for there to be an observed relative dimensional framework, regardless of scale, there must be a non-existent center - not an infinitesimal point mass - to allow for such an extension.

It is the only means of deduction possible without requiring verification because any other means requires quantitative and qualitative measures to verify each existence. Perhaps a useful analogy to depict the point is the imaginary equator and meridian which divides the Earth to allow direction. It is simple enough to realize that in order for there to be such concepts as this way and that way, there must be an absolute center point which is neither this way nor that way; and if neither this way nor that way, then as counter-intuitive as it may be, it is nevertheless non-existent because if it were to be existent it would have to have its own infinitesimal sense of direction.

This all leads to the operative word "sense" as being relevant to what is discerned as reality, without such sensorially-discerned reality there is none. So we can posit a correlation between consciousness with finite observations; subconsciousness with subatomic extensions to infinite proportions; and unconsciousness with the absolute state of the universe, which doesn't exist.

Im not sure about your center point or meridian examples.

I do see that your ideas regarding "sense" have some correlation to what I stated above i.e. we appear to be on the same page, to some degree. As we have been from our first meesages.

Allow me to, kind of quote your latter above, and add in my thoughts

Physical-consciousness( brain/sensorial tuned-in relevant ) = energetically finite observations( macro )

Physical-subconsciousness( partially tuned-out less relevant reality ) = energetically subatomic quanta extended ( mirco-infinity presumed )

Physical-unconsciousness( most tuned-out least relevant reality ) = energetic sleep.

Absolute/exactitude = metaphysical, untainted, non-aberrated, energyless, pure metaphysical.

Nobody, this latter statement is geatly borrowed from Bucky Fullers words and should get 99.9% of the credit

Rybo

[N0B0DY]

"Where self exists, God is not; where God exists, self is not." - Sacred Writings (Rag Maru), verse 44, p. 106.

Good reference, Drifter. I think nothing more can really be said about it.