Nothing by Nobody Nowhere (No Where = Now Here)

[N0B0DY]

Let it hang. It'll come to you...deceptive mayic illusion.

[Drifter]

Can an illusion have intent?
Or are you speaking of the law of attraction?

Let it hang. It'll come to you...deceptive mayic illusion.

[N0B0DY]

"The idea that something can be both a wave and a particle defies imagination, but the existence of this wave-particle 'duality' is not in doubt. It is impossible to visualize a wave-particle, so don't try. The notion of a particle being 'everywhere at once' is impossible to imagine." (Paul Davies, Superforce)

Special note in honor of Felix: the "particle" is not a particle when unobserved, which implicably translates into the concretely-particular reality being based upon an abstractive process; the "particle" is the everywhere which is nowhere in particular.

[Drifter]

"Nowhere", now were gettin somewhere.
Is a "notion" a thing or a no thing?
I mean I know it's neither here nor there, but what exactly is it?
And what is "real". Electro-chemical interpretations by the brain of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasteing and touching? Are we the seeing, hearing, smelling, tasteing, and touching, the interpretating brain, or the electro-chemical "current" that allows those "things" to transpire? hummm? Are we the ethereal or the ephemeral? The temporal or the constant, the "everlasting" as we've been told or has been suggested?.
If this "Current" that we are as our essential Isness is a wave, i.e. vibration, could the omnipresence of the wave be everywhere since there's no where that 'it' as vibration[frequency] isn't?
You can tune a guitar but you can't tuna fish.

"The idea that something can be both a wave and a particle defies imagination, but the existence of this wave-particle 'duality' is not in doubt. It is impossible to visualize a wave-particle, so don't try. The notion of a particle being 'everywhere at once' is impossible to imagine." (Paul Davies, Superforce)

Special note in honor of Felix: the "particle" is not a particle when unobserved, which implicably translates into the concretely-particular reality being based upon an abstractive process; the "particle" is the everywhere which is nowhere in particular.

[N0B0DY]

Can an illusion have intent?
Or are you speaking of the law of attraction?

"People say to me, 'Are you looking for the ultimate laws of physics?' No, I'm not... If it turns out there is a simple ultimate law which explains everything, so be it— that would be very nice to discover. If it turns out it's like an onion with millions of layers...then that's the way it is." (Richard Feynman)

"The more you see how strangely Nature behaves, the harder it is to make a model that explains how even the simplest phenomena actually work. So theoretical physics has given up on that. What I am going to tell you about is what we teach our physics students in the third or fourth year of graduate school. It is my task to convince you not to turn away because you don't understand it. You see my physics students don't understand it. That is because I don't understand it. Nobody does." (Richard Feynman)

[Drifter]

You can tune a piano but you can't tuna fish.

[N0B0DY]

"Nowhere", now were gettin somewhere. Is a "notion" a thing or a no thing?

As Michael might agree, the answer lies within. "Notion" is not an ion. It is not a thing. It is a time-dependent abstraction.

[N0B0DY]

You can tune a piano but you can't tuna fish.

When we merge the TOE and TON, we set the proper TONE in order to tune the tuna so that the fish and the piano are realized to be identical.

[mkirkpatrick]

As Michael might agree, the answer lies within. "Notion" is not an ion. It is not a thing. It is a time-dependent abstraction.

You are correct there Nobody,I do think the answer lies within,from where else could it
hail from?


regards michael.

[Drifter]

There's a certain Creative Flow to your post.

"It" happens. ~Forest Gump

When we merge the TOE and TON, we set the proper TONE in order to tune the tuna so that the fish and the piano are realized to be identical.