LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksA photon can be viewed as a dimensionless particle (a dimensionless particle is the same as a point-like particle). However, as I said above, I believe that this is simply an approximation.
A photon can be viewed as a dimensionless particle (a dimensionless particle is the same as a point-like particle). However, as I said above, I believe that this is simply an approximation.
~neutralino
If you haven't found something strange during the day, it hasn't been much of a day - John A. Wheeler.
Drifter, I too believe that all fermions and bosons have some degree of conscious awareness ergo some degree of consciousness, however, there distnctioins to be made.
All the physical stuff is "spirit". A biological/soul is one such distinction that I make and at is commonly taught in all deucational formats, that i'm aware of, barring the one-to-one association with "soul" that I make.
You also appear to believe there is somthing called "ensoulment" which I understand you too mean that there was something with no soul/biological life content and then all of sudden it does.
This is where you and I differ i.e. I think the trinity/triune that I've laid out is eternally existent or at mimimum there exists eternally a gravitational, spacetime mapping for such for all spirit and biollogicals/souls to become manifest physically.
In this latter sense spirit and biological/soul equate to gravitational spacetime as being( functioning as ) the quasi-physical buffer-zone, existent at ultra-micro-scales, and between the metaphysical and the physical.
1) metaphysical macro-infinite spatiality beyond the finite physical universe but also transposes( one-to-one ) as --i.e. has subcatagory therof-- asbstract concepts of mind.
2) spirit when patterned as biological/soul with access to metaphysical mind --to varying degrees-- transposes( one-to-one ) as the quasi-physical gravitational spacetime buffer-zone between physical and metaphysical.
3) physical fermions and bosons and any aggragates thereof.
As for your comments of "facts of truth" that you experineced first hand, I don't recall exactly what it is your talking about Drifter. Sorry.
Rybo
QUOTE=Drifter;44498]"Spirit " can be ensouled. As man can be ensouled. One is physical and one is metaphysical.
In seperation one has an affinity for physical/ephemeral/and mortality. [and an aversion to the other]
One has an affinity for for the metaphysical/etherical/immortality. [and an aversion to the other]
I believe even the single celled omeba is constructed of molecules and elements, which have a conscious [ness] aversion or affinity to others of the same plane, and a morphing, if you will into a new substance. Similar to but different from the former on the evolutionary ladder. Two but not two.
Experiences can also be mis-believed because the observing/listening to the explanation/storyformula/diagram has no direct knowledge of what is being related too.
as i said before i have experienced it first hand, you dismiss this "fact of truth" if you wish, but it will not influence me and and what I know from the experience.
some have eyes to see and ears to hear and,
some don't.[/QUOTE]
Hi Drifter;
I believe it was King Solomon who wrote those words and it wasn't meant to be sarcastic. Rather after searching for the meaning of life through wealth, love, wisdom, he finally came to the conclusion that to eat, drink and be merry, is the best one can achieve. Extremely wise Solomon.
[quote=Drifter;44496]... "and the sarcastic words of the initiate, Paul, "Let us eat and drink for tomorrow we die" characterize the attitude of the majority of men."
Ecclesiastes isn't tearing down human creativity out of spite. In fact, his ultimate message is "Don't worry, be happy" -- since you can't do anything new or significant, you might as well just enjoy yourself. "There is nothing better for a man," he advises, "than that he should eat and drink, and that he should make his soul enjoy good in his labour" (2: 24; compare 3: 13). And later: "a man hath no better thing under the sun, than to eat, and to drink, and to be merry" (8: 15). If you're tempted to add, "for tomorrow he dies," that part of the proverb is supplied by Isaiah (Isaiah 22: 13) in one of his merrier moods.
Best to you,
Pat
Once again thanks for your input Neutralino. Back to square one with Dipayankar and myself.
Best,
Pat
RY) ""Your three partially overlapping circles whether in 2D( quarks ) or 3D( proton ), do not define a spherical or at least not anything close to being likened to spherical.
The "closed neutron" is much closer to being likened to a spherical.""
PAT) You are right, Rybo, the quarks I view as flat 2D. My proton does look more like a turtle on it's back than a dome, however if you obtain 3 pipecleaners and superpose and interweave them you'll see how the proton partially closed is a geodesic dome. The totally closed neutron model the geodesic sphere.
Pat, I can see the pictures of both. I repeat, the closed system is closer to being most spherical, however, you appear to think that the angle of relationshipe between these three circles/planes doen't matter i.e. I've yet to hear or read any info in these regards to angular orientation of the three.
http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synerg...igs/f3511.html
PAT) Thank you for this site. It was perfect. Not only showing a geodesic sphere but also in lisear square format how the 8 points make up a Star of David. I like ancient symbols like the Tao etc.
Welcom, however, these three are the spherical octahedron and they all share a common center, like your "closed" neutron, however, the octahedral three are in 90 degree oirentation to each other.
Your have no specifications that I'm aware of. I'm trying to get this info from you. Do you know what I mean Pat?
Ry) Here is one such site, and I hope you will look at it. It is sort of hybrid cross between your "idea"and my ideas.
Pat) Could you give me the site location? I'd love to view it.
Again much thanks and I would love to view your patterns.
Oops, sure PAT. I must have forgot to post the hybrid model. Let me try again.
http://www.fieldstructure.org/
This model is not mine. It is very similar to mine and yours.
More on mine later.
Notice how this model has at least one very distinct polyehdral shape within its whole. This the kind of info I'm trying to get from you in regards to your "open" model of three circles in some sort of 3D orientation.
Rybo
The Transition to the Awakened Consciousness is a Copernican change
which not only transforms the essential level of the individual
involved, but alters his whole relationship to the subject-object world
as well. When Copernicus demonstrated the superior power unfolded by
regarding the sun, rather than the earth, as the center of the solar
system, the world was not destroyed as an empirical fact, but its
relationship and significance within the whole was radically changed.
This transformation, while affecting astronomy most immediately,
produced secondary effects with ramifications reaching far into
different phases of social life. This change has brought about
enormous clarification with respect to many vitally important problems
that had formerly been quite obscure. The Awakening involves such a
change, only in a much more radical sense. When It has come, the whole
life of the individual is affected, and part of the effect is a
profound clarification and simplification of a vast number of
obscurities. So much is this the case that if the Awakened Man chooses
to direct His force within the subject-object field, then in whatever
compartment He may focus His attention He has superior capacity as
compared to others who have not the advantage of His perspective. He
now looks down on things in their relationships, rather than being
involved in those relationships. The highest excellence in government,
business, engineering, science, religion, art, etc. are at His command,
restricted only by the limitations of his personal vehicle. But before
man can operate upon relationships from Above, he must first break his
bondage within those relationships, and in part this is represented by
unlearning what has been previously learned.
It does not follow that all previously acquired knowledge will be
found false. To a greater or lesser extent, the Realized Man may still
be able to judge it correct. Its Significance, however, will be
radically changed, and He will be enabled to tie together parts that
formerly had been irreconcilable. He stands outside and above the
'game', as it were, and so is enabled to play with a master's hand.
Even though from the highest standpoint relative or subject-object
knowledge has been completely Transcended and no longer affords a
field of function, it does therefore allow that it has not served a
useful purpose in its time. Man builds a certain integration while in
the subject-object field without which recognition, as a self-
conscious achievement, is impossible. The training in subject-object
knowledge serves something of the function of a scaffold in the
construction of a building, When the building is ready, the
scaffolding may be and should be abandoned, for it ceases to be, in
general, any longer valuable. The man may now enter the building
which, in this case, represents the Transcendent or Cosmic
Consciousness. However, a scaffolding should not be wrecked while
workmen are still standing upon it. So the Compassionate Man who has
found the Building to be ready and then enters into It will also leave
the scaffolding standing until all the others have likewise left it
and Entered In.
[/quote]Originally Posted by rybot
“It is easier to perceive error than to find truth,” wrote the poet Johann Wolfgang von Goethe,
“for the former lies on the surface and is easily seen, while the latter lies in the depth,
where few are willing to search for it.”
http://youtube.com/watch?v=hwyuQbIb0Xs
"Man is the sole being in the natural order who is not compelled to pursue
the same road invariably."
__Claude de St. Martin
__
__The Mundaka Upanishad provides the archetypal image of the spiritual
archer. His is the unremitting quest for divine wisdom, seeking complete
unison with Brahman, the ultimate Reality. In this quest there must be no
thoughtlessness. Lack of thought is a serious impediment to the cultivation
of skill in the art of creative action. At the same time, The Voice of the
Silence enjoins disciples to free themselves from all particular thoughts
and be attuned to All-Thought.
__Thou hast to reach that fixity of mind in which no breeze, however
strong, can waft an earthly thought within. Thus purified, the shrine must
of all action, sound, or earthly light be void; e'en as the butterfly,
o'ertaken by the frost, falls lifeless at the threshold - so must all
earthly thoughts fall dead before the fane.
__Wherein lies the difference between thoughtlessness and that state of
transcendence which is rooted in a serene identification with the Divine
Mind?
__There are myriad paradoxes in relation to the spiritual path, as everyone
knows who makes a strenuous attempt to incarnate in daily life the
immeasurable wisdom of Brahma Vach. These paradoxes are pertinent for anyone
who is in earnest, who is not merely ready to plunge into the stream, but
who has already entered the stream as a srotapatti and laved in its rushing
waters. There are those who delay this crucial step for lifetimes, even
after the privilege of contacting the presence of great Teachers from the
Lodge of Mahatmas. They are afraid to take the first step into the stream.
But those who have soaked in the struggle know that the recurring paradoxes
are far from being instantly resolved, especially by the ratiocinative mind
with its obsessive craving for certitude. Mystical paradoxes deepen as veil
upon veil lifts and one finds veil upon veil behind. This must be so, for
otherwise we would live in a static universe and Mahatmas would be but icons
to be worshipped, like the discarded archangels of the past, periodically
placated out of fear or the wish for favours. There is none of this in the
vast philosophical cosmogony of the Secret Doctrine. It postulates one
universal stream of consciousness which, at its source, is unconditioned and
beyond all forms, qualities, colours and representations, beyond every
finite locus in space-time. But equally, within this immense stream of
encompassing and transcending consciousness, everything counts. Every being
is significant and every single error has its consequence. It is difficult
to accommodate so awesome a conception within one's mind and to insert one's
own odyssey into the vaster odyssey of all. There is nothing in our
upbringing, nothing in the limiting language of common conversation and
trivial talk, that can sufficiently prepare one for the grandeur of the
enterprise, so that one may feel the authentic joy of comradeship with the
mightiest men of meditation. They are the immortal embodiments of universal
Mahat who can, with a casual, relaxed and joyful sense of proportionality,
hit the mark amidst the limitations of collective Karma. This means,
paradoxically, that they cannot hit the mark every single time either, and
this too is involved in hitting the mark.
__The root of these paradoxes in relation to thoughtfulness and
transcendence lies in the insuperable problem of formulating the aim. The
aim cannot be anything less than Brahman. That is the eternal hope. Every
single act can have that aim because each act focusses upon a specific
target in time and space which is Brahman. That is, at one level, the joy
and the absurdity of it. In every act of manifestation - bathing, walking,
mailing a message - the Logos is present. There is a sense in which the
aim - the transcendental Brahman - is present in each moment of time as well
as in every act at each point of space and in every thought. What, then,
obscures the aim of a manifold human being of becoming totally one and
remaining constantly attuned to Brahman? Why does a person need the sacred
OM as the bow and to be continually tuning all one's instruments? Can one
ever receive in a world of shadowy knowledge any real teaching concerning
the inward meaning of the Soundless Sound? Who will teach the true
intonation of the OM and everything to which it corresponds in thought,
motive, act and feeling? As the mystery deepens, one must come to recognize
that even in the largest perspectives of life, one can discern something
that is false and which obscures still greater realities.
__The correction that needs to be made in the lesser perspective is
archetypally related to the correction needed in the larger perspective.
Whenever one has a sense of self-encouraging exaggeration - not only
verbally or in terms of external expression, but in the feeling-content and
motivational coloration of particular thoughts - there is falsity and
distortion. Brahman could not be in everything if each single thing does not
appropriately mirror Brahman and, in an ever-changing universe, recede into
non-being. There is an intrinsic illusoriness in the shadowy self that
emerges like a smoky haze. In Platonic language, this temporary excess
necessarily implies temporal deficiency and therefore imbalance. This may
become obsessional - like infatuation - and all cognate thoughts are thereby
tainted. The condition is even worse for a person lacking in mental
steadiness. One discovers this speedily when one really wants to concentrate
on something and even more painfully when one sits down to meditation. The
moment one tries to meditate on that which is above and beyond and includes
all, one confronts limitations in one's conception of selfhood. There is no
way even to ponder the profoundest of vows, the holiest motive of the
Bodhisattvas, in relation to the ceaseless quest for the sake of every
sentient being. One will encounter a multitude of hindrances. Most thoughts
are premature, feeble and abortive. One is not truly awake, but is rather in
a dizzy phantasmagoria in which distorted shadows flit. Through an illusory
sense of self, one is attached to a misshapen bundle of memories and
identified with a form, an image and a name. Persisting thoughtlessness
means that one has fallen into a state of fragmented consciousness, and this
is not only owing to the imperfections shared with all other human beings,
but also through an irreverent attitude to the vestures brought over from
previous lives. Such are the scars of failures from former times of
opportunity to strengthen and perfect the spiritual will for the sake of
universal good. Myriad are the ways in which many souls have frequently
failed over an immense period of evolution.
Hermes, June 1978
Raghavan Iyer
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/15-32.htm
Ecclesiastes (ēklē'zēăs'tēz) , book of the Bible, the name of which is a latinized derivation of the Hebrew Qohelet [the Preacher]. Although traditionally ascribed to Solomon (who is identified as the author in the text), it was clearly written much later (c.300 B.C.). Like Job, the book takes issue, it would seem, with the confident assertions of the Wisdom tradition exemplified by Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) and Proverbs, both of which stress the possibility of leading a life in harmony with cosmic order. For the author of Ecclesiastes, life bears no order and no meaning. Omnipresent wickedness and death are realities which mock all effort to find meaning and purpose in life. Moreover, the purposes of God cannot be fathomed. It opens with the theme that, since “all is vanity,” life should be enjoyed. This is followed by passages in praise of wisdom and mercy, with increasing emphasis on the universality of death; there is a brief epilogue on the fear of God's judgment. Despite the devout and ill-fitting conclusion of the work, the apparent cynicism of the book as a whole is said to have distressed the ancient rabbis; some scholars ascribe to pious correctors a number of nonpessimistic observations. Ecclesiastes is one of the biblical examples of wisdom literature.
[quote=Profpat;44509]Hi Drifter;
I believe it was King Solomon who wrote those words and it wasn't meant to be sarcastic. Rather after searching for the meaning of life through wealth, love, wisdom, he finally came to the conclusion that to eat, drink and be merry, is the best one can achieve. Extremely wise Solomon.
Drifter, it appears to me that you are transposing your "ensouled" concept to an "awakened" concept.
Beyond that you have gone way off( out there ) on some tangent(?) that is getting farther and farther from the trinity/triune disscussion.
I'm not going there, partially cause I don't understand if there is an existen relationship to our disscussion. Sorry.
Pats "idea" has three main parts:
1) all the universe that is outside of it
2) all the universe inside of it
3) the little bit of universe that does the seprating
There are subcatgories of each of these three.
Rybo
RYbo
[/QUOTE]
Leave it to Paul to not understand wisdom.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions 
Reply With Quote