It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Before The Beginning There Was...

page: 6
8
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2016 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Oh, and one more point. If you combine the above oddities with the concept of a preordained "block universe," where (as Einstein believed) past, present and future are all equally real and exist simultaneously, you end up with another possibility entirely: Perhaps, the only things that exist are the things that some conscious observer will encounter at some point during the life of the universe.

It is mind blowing to consider.

I have not vetted everything at this link, but the Mankowski stuff is accurate: www.informationphilosopher.com...




posted on Nov, 19 2017 @ 06:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: MissSmartypants
Before the Beginning there was only Chaos. And this perpetual Chaos, always changing...always random, prohibited the formation of any "things". .

In the beginning was the word.
Before 'the word' there was nothing.
The 'word' means concept.

What do you think was the 'first concept' that got it all started?

The word beginning has an opposite - the belief in beginning gives rise to the belief in the end. All 'things' have a beginning and end. Prior to the 'word' there was no beginning or end. No thing ever forms - no thing was ever created.
Words just make believe that there is something.


edit on 19-11-2017 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2017 @ 07:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Barcs
I'd say everything exists regardless if it is observed or not. If it didn't, it couldn't be observed in the first place. We aren't that special and observation is not a special act.

It is not about humans being special.
You might believe that you are a human, seeing this text that is appearing here but even what you believe is 'you' - the body and thoughts which you are aware of, are just part of the appearance.

What if the observer and the observed arise as one seamless happening?



posted on Nov, 19 2017 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: MissSmartypants

If all universes are infinite, then there was no beginning and it has no end. Probably a loop.



Chaos and fractals are indeed interesting. Not sure if this universe fits their description. I think it's an open question.




Chaos in the Real World In the real world, there are three very good examples of instability: disease, political unrest, and family and community dysfunction. Disease is unstable because at any moment there could be an outbreak of some deadly disease for which there is no cure. This would cause terror and chaos. Political unrest is very unstable because people can revolt, throw over the government and create a vast war. A war is another type of a chaotic system. Family and community dysfunction is also unstable because if you have a very tiny problem with a few people or a huge problem with many people, the outcome will be huge with many people involved and many people's lives in ruin. Chaos is also found in systems as complex as electric circuits, measles outbreaks, lasers, clashing gears, heart rhythms, electrical brain activity, circadian rhythms, fluids, animal populations, and chemical reactions, and in systems as simple as the pendulum. It also has been thought possibly to occur in the stock market. Populations are instable Populations are chaotic, constantly fluctuating, and their graphs can turn out to resemble fractals.


www.tnellen.com...

Go to the link - there's an animation under "Chaos in the Real World" which is what you're describing in your post.

Further down, there's a section on Benoit Mandelbrot and Serpinski triangles.



As to awareness, my opinion is that consciousness is a natural part of the evolutionary cycle. We are not the only conscious beings in this universe. Consciousness may just be relativistic, occurring in different forms and levels. Just my own opinion without doing any research on the subject.

Nice post though. Thanks



posted on Dec, 1 2017 @ 08:25 PM
link   
Beginning of what? Earth? Then it was a void and nothing.



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 08:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
Where did the chaos come from?





posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 01:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: introvert
Where did the chaos come from?


Existence is based on opposites and comparisons. For example there can be no "good" if there isn't "bad" to compare it with. One does not exist without the other.
Now by "chaos" I mean without form or structure or pattern...but this concept does not exist without a concept of structure and form to compare it with, so...."formlessness" makes "form" necessary which makes "formlessness" necessary which makes "form"... well anyway they both had to come into existance at the same time. Which means they just always were.
You see, at one point there obviously must have been nothing, nothing at all, which couldn't exist without it's opposite "something" so...they both had to exist at the same point in time...they just always were.
edit on 12/7/2017 by MissSmartypants because: edit



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: MissSmartypants


Existence is based on opposites and comparisons.



at one point there obviously must have been nothing, nothing at all, [...]they both had to exist at the same point in time...they just always were.


Exactly. "Before" the distinction of duality, there was timeless nonduality.

So, what if there was no 'beginning?" What if everything always "was," or rather, "is" nondually and outside "time." Only awareness (bound in time and space) allowed for distinction.

How did that occur though?
edit on 7-12-2017 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 03:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: MissSmartypants

Existence is based on opposites and comparisons.


at one point there obviously must have been nothing, nothing at all, [...]they both had to exist at the same point in time...they just always were.

Exactly. "Before" the distinction of duality, there was timeless nonduality.

So, what if there was no 'beginning?" What if everything always "was," or rather, "is" nondually and outside "time." Only awareness (bound in time and space) allowed for distinction.

How did that occur though?


Another perplexing (and non-answerable) pholosophical question is this:

"Why does anything exist to begin with?"

Not "how?" but "why?"

Whether existence has always been around forever (in some form or another), or just since the Big Bang -- or something in between -- why should that existence even exist in the first place? Why isn't there nothing instead of something?

I realize that "nothing" is difficukt to define, but just because we can't fathom what "nothingness" could possibly mean, that doesn't mean that "something" must automatically exist instead.


edit on 7/12/2017 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 03:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: MissSmartypants


Existence is based on opposites and comparisons.



at one point there obviously must have been nothing, nothing at all, [...]they both had to exist at the same point in time...they just always were.


Exactly. "Before" the distinction of duality, there was timeless nonduality.

So, what if there was no 'beginning?" What if everything always "was," or rather, "is" nondually and outside "time." Only awareness (bound in time and space) allowed for distinction.

How did that occur though?
I fully expect to know the answer to your question at any moment now and as soon as I do I will pass it along. Your welcome.
Knowledge is like driving down an unfamiliar road and there's a 7/11 ahead but you can't even know about it's existence until you get within sight of it. I'm slowly but surely getting there, where ever "there" is.



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 03:48 PM
link   
a reply to: MissSmartypants

I fully expect to know the answer to your question at any moment now and as soon as I do I will pass it along. Your welcome.


You'll be waiting in expectation for a while.

(Btw: You're welcome.)


Knowledge is like driving down an unfamiliar road and there's a 7/11 ahead but you can't even know about it's existence until you get within sight of it. I'm slowly but surely getting there, where ever "there" is.


One can never know everything, so one will never really get "there," only closer and closer to "something" one doesn't and never will know. But when you get "there" I fully expect you to enlighten us. Thanks.

(Btw: *its)



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 03:53 PM
link   

edit on 12/7/2017 by MissSmartypants because: edit



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 03:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People


"Why does anything exist to begin with?"


Great question. Another is: What is it?" and "Why did this even happen?" If it even did happen.


I realize that "nothing" is difficukt to define, but just because we can't fathom what "nothingness" could possibly mean, that doesn't mean that "something" must automatically exist instead.


That's the thing: there are many things we can't fathom, because of the nature of the temporal mind. Just because we can't fathom them doesn't mean they don't or can't exist. And we may never know, at least as long as we are beings bound in and by time.


Whether existence has always been around forever (in some form or another), or just since the Big Bang -- or something in between -- why should that existence even exist in the first place?


Why must there be a reason?


Why isn't there nothing instead of something?


Both nothing and something could simultaneously exist timelessly (eternally) at the same time, and could always have.

Who knows.



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 03:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: MissSmartypants

Existence is based on opposites and comparisons.


at one point there obviously must have been nothing, nothing at all, [...]they both had to exist at the same point in time...they just always were.

Exactly. "Before" the distinction of duality, there was timeless nonduality.

So, what if there was no 'beginning?" What if everything always "was," or rather, "is" nondually and outside "time." Only awareness (bound in time and space) allowed for distinction.

How did that occur though?


Another perplexing (and non-answerable) pholosophical question is this:

"Why does anything exist to begin with?"

Not "how?" but "why?"

Whether existence has always been around forever (in some form or another), or just since the Big Bang -- or something in between -- why should that existence even exist in the first place? Why isn't there nothing instead of something?

I realize that "nothing" is difficukt to define, but just because we can't fathom what "nothingness" could possibly mean, that doesn't mean that "something" must automatically exist instead.

Now that's what I call a question. You made my brain hurt with that one...but unanswerable? No. Our Creator knows and I suggest you ask our Creator. That's what I'm doing.



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 04:05 PM
link   

edit on 7-12-2017 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 04:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
Sorry, I don't watch posted videos unless they're reruns of the Psych tv show. Love me some Shawn and Gus.



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 04:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: MissSmartypants

Existence is based on opposites and comparisons.


at one point there obviously must have been nothing, nothing at all, [...]they both had to exist at the same point in time...they just always were.

Exactly. "Before" the distinction of duality, there was timeless nonduality.

So, what if there was no 'beginning?" What if everything always "was," or rather, "is" nondually and outside "time." Only awareness (bound in time and space) allowed for distinction.

How did that occur though?


Another perplexing (and non-answerable) pholosophical question is this:

"Why does anything exist to begin with?"

Not "how?" but "why?"

Whether existence has always been around forever (in some form or another), or just since the Big Bang -- or something in between -- why should that existence even exist in the first place? Why isn't there nothing instead of something?

I realize that "nothing" is difficukt to define, but just because we can't fathom what "nothingness" could possibly mean, that doesn't mean that "something" must automatically exist instead.


This is by far the most interesting post I've ever seen on this site.

I have pondered this too.
If you really think about it, existence is weird. It really shouldn't kind of happen, if you get my meaning.
It's messy, uses up energy. "Things" would be easier if there was nothing.
Hard to express it...



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 04:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: MissSmartypants

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
Sorry, I don't watch posted videos unless they're reruns of the Psych tv show. Love me some Shawn and Gus.

Funny you should mention "Psych". A new Psych TV movie is on tonight (I think the first new Psych since the series ended). 8:00 EST on USA Network.



edit on 7/12/2017 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 04:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: MissSmartypants

Existence is based on opposites and comparisons.


at one point there obviously must have been nothing, nothing at all, [...]they both had to exist at the same point in time...they just always were.

Exactly. "Before" the distinction of duality, there was timeless nonduality.

So, what if there was no 'beginning?" What if everything always "was," or rather, "is" nondually and outside "time." Only awareness (bound in time and space) allowed for distinction.

How did that occur though?


Another perplexing (and non-answerable) pholosophical question is this:

"Why does anything exist to begin with?"

Not "how?" but "why?"

Whether existence has always been around forever (in some form or another), or just since the Big Bang -- or something in between -- why should that existence even exist in the first place? Why isn't there nothing instead of something?

I realize that "nothing" is difficukt to define, but just because we can't fathom what "nothingness" could possibly mean, that doesn't mean that "something" must automatically exist instead.


This is by far the most interesting post I've ever seen on this site.

I have pondered this too.
If you really think about it, existence is weird. It really shouldn't kind of happen, if you get my meaning.
It's messy, uses up energy. "Things" would be easier if there was nothing.
Hard to express it...


Thanks. The question is hard to express.

And "Why?" may not be the right word, because "why?" seems to be asking for a purpose, and I don't think existence needs to exist for a purpose. A better question might be "Why does existence even bother to exist in the first place?"

Like you said, it seems like a messy prospect.



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 06:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: MissSmartypants

Existence is based on opposites and comparisons.


at one point there obviously must have been nothing, nothing at all, [...]they both had to exist at the same point in time...they just always were.

Exactly. "Before" the distinction of duality, there was timeless nonduality.

So, what if there was no 'beginning?" What if everything always "was," or rather, "is" nondually and outside "time." Only awareness (bound in time and space) allowed for distinction.

How did that occur though?


Another perplexing (and non-answerable) pholosophical question is this:

"Why does anything exist to begin with?"

Not "how?" but "why?"

Whether existence has always been around forever (in some form or another), or just since the Big Bang -- or something in between -- why should that existence even exist in the first place? Why isn't there nothing instead of something?

I realize that "nothing" is difficukt to define, but just because we can't fathom what "nothingness" could possibly mean, that doesn't mean that "something" must automatically exist instead.


This is by far the most interesting post I've ever seen on this site.

I have pondered this too.
If you really think about it, existence is weird. It really shouldn't kind of happen, if you get my meaning.
It's messy, uses up energy. "Things" would be easier if there was nothing.
Hard to express it...


Thanks. The question is hard to express.

And "Why?" may not be the right word, because "why?" seems to be asking for a purpose, and I don't think existence needs to exist for a purpose. A better question might be "Why does existence even bother to exist in the first place?"

Like you said, it seems like a messy prospect.


I just had a kind of answer. As I was typing it out my mind completely unravelled, gah!
Fundamentallly it's a ridiculously simple answer to do with nothing /non-existence by definition cannot be a state, so existence just simply has to be.
I just can't express it properly without falling into a thought loop.
It's as if it's so simple that the dial suddenly flips to the other end of scale to extreme complexity.

It just has to be, and always has been, always will be.
There's no such thing as nothing. Non-existence doesn't exist.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join