A dangerous idea

It's powerful because it's infinitys twin. Yin and Yang, equal opposite. Equally paradoxical and troubling. The biggest questions in science and religion are about are about nothingness and eternity, the void the infinate, zero and infinity.The clashes over zero are the battles that shake the foundations of philosophy, science, mathematics, and religion.Underneath every revolution lies a zero - and an infinity. this is a battle that has defeated all that opposed it

The Door's Rider's on a storm - a classic

www.youtube.com...

Lets discuss

Live in the now. Screw everything else. What happens, happens. Make the most of what you got.

From 53 years of experience living on this world.

Trust me, your time is limited.

originally posted by: Groot

Trust me, your time is limited.

According to the OP that is only one side of it. We are also timeless and immortal. Even though we will shed this mortal coil eventually, we will live on for eternity.



No need to sweat it, we will have innumerable chances to experience this wheel of life. But if we knew of this infinity, this reality wouldn't hold the sweetness it does.

What a great construct.

a reply to: DpatC


In religion yin/yang are realities closer to the idea of the material world and at conflict in it. In the heavenly realm, say in the Israle oracle teachings, histories and prophesies, they have unequal positions. Yin and yang is two dimensional and black and white, two sides of coin ect giving both an equal space. In most religion there is not a symbiotic Yin/Yang but one tolerated by the other and the other with not so equal standing.

Lucifer booted out of heaven, never had any equal standing there anyway. Was allowed to seduce Eve without interference but then promised to have his head crushed by her seed. And its never Ying/Yang when the Boss steps in and puts the smack down.

a reply to: ClovenSky

You missed my point.

Live in the now.

a reply to: DpatC

biggest questions in science and religion are about are about nothingness and eternity

Define Science
Define Religion
Define Nothingness
Define Eternity

Then let's discuss

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

How about:

Science and religeon as thoughtforms, egregores.

Nothingness is to have no self, selflessness.

Eternity to be a state where one has no motion, timelessness.

originally posted by: Groot
a reply to: ClovenSky

You missed my point.

Live in the now.

There’s no such thing as now.

Embrace the moment is better way of putting it.

a reply to: Whatsthisthen

Science and religeon as thoughtforms, egregores.

Yeah - I have a lot of respect for your threads. I'm working on a perpetual ice-cream replicator. Bring peace to the world.
F"ck the egregores and all god creations of man

originally posted by: Whatsthisthen
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

How about:

Science and religeon as thoughtforms, egregores.

Nothingness is to have no self, selflessness.

Eternity to be a state where one has no motion, timelessness.

But everything ('all') has to be in motion and there may no such thing as nothingness.

a reply to: InTheLight

Just for fun exploration.

But everything ('all') has to be in motion and there may no such thing as nothingness.

"has to be in motion"?

If I stand still, motionless, I am still in motion. For I have the earth's momentum.

If I step off the earth and stand still, I am still in motion. For I have the sun's momentum, the solar system itself.

What if we step off the Universe itself?

Would we not stand utterly still while all else in motion disappears?

----------------

Nothingness. If we loose our self what is left?

originally posted by: Whatsthisthen
a reply to: InTheLight

Just for fun exploration.

But everything ('all') has to be in motion and there may no such thing as nothingness.

"has to be in motion"?

If I stand still, motionless, I am still in motion. For I have the earth's momentum.

If I step off the earth and stand still, I am still in motion. For I have the sun's momentum, the solar system itself.

What if we step off the Universe itself?

Would we not stand utterly still while all else in motion disappears?

----------------

Nothingness. If we loose our self what is left?

If you believe that energy is never lost, only transforms, then your energy will still be in motion, in a transformed state. Do we have the ability to lose ourself, our consciousness, once transformed? Is that a choice?

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight


have one on me.

a reply to: InTheLight

If you believe that energy is never lost, only transforms, then your energy will still be in motion, in a transformed state.

I've never thought of energy never being lost nor transformation as the only option.

If the basis of time is motion, then there is inherited motion (time) and then there is our own intrinsic motion (time). IF we still ourselves we are still in motion. If we could discard the inherited motion (time) we would be left with only our own motion (time). Then it follows that if we could still ourselves, then motion (time) would cease for us.

Issac Newton considered time as behaving like water, I would tend to agree with that. I spose that is the direction from which I am thinking.

Do we have the ability to lose ourself, our consciousness, once transformed? Is that a choice?

Non-existence? transformation aside, I understand we do have the ability subject to the condition that we can move far enough out, beyond the Sea of Chaos.

Transformation is a difficult concept for me for I can see growth and becoming. If becoming is synonymous with transform as in a caterpillar becoming a butterfly I understand. But I find the context in which your using transform difficult to comprehend.

a reply to: Whatsthisthen

It is difficult for me too because I am theorizing energy transformation within the spooky action that seems to be our reality.

a reply to: Logarock

And its never Ying/Yang when the Boss steps in and puts the smack down.

That's right, no choice in the matter for us.

a reply to: InTheLight

Ahh, I get you now.

Wind blowing over the lake creates waves. Yet is that transformation?

Transform definition:
1. to change in form, appearance, or structure; metamorphose.
2. to change in condition, nature, or character; convert.
3. to change into another substance; transmute.

I would suggest that there should be alternatives to transformation.

The first law of thermodynamics is held as an absolute truth, but personally I wonder . . . .

originally posted by: Whatsthisthen
a reply to: InTheLight

Ahh, I get you now.

Wind blowing over the lake creates waves. Yet is that transformation?

Transform definition:
1. to change in form, appearance, or structure; metamorphose.
2. to change in condition, nature, or character; convert.
3. to change into another substance; transmute.

I would suggest that there should be alternatives to transformation.

The first law of thermodynamics is held as an absolute truth, but personally I wonder . . . .

Newton's second law of motion pertains to the behavior of objects for which all existing forces are not balanced. The second law states that the acceleration of an object is dependent upon two variables - the net force acting upon the object and the mass of the object.

And so here we are back with 'balance' of which we know nothing of dark matter/energy's force; in the dark.

a reply to: InTheLight

Now you got me InTheLight,

Newton's second law of motion pertains to the behavior of objects for which all existing forces are not balanced. The second law states that the acceleration of an object is dependent upon two variables - the net force acting upon the object and the mass of the object.

------------

And so here we are back with 'balance' of which we know nothing of black matter/energy's force; in the dark.

Mass and density are two concepts that are somewhat foreign to me - I don't get them. And dark matter, hmmm.

originally posted by: ClovenSky

originally posted by: Groot

Trust me, your time is limited.

According to the OP that is only one side of it. We are also timeless and immortal. Even though we will shed this mortal coil eventually, we will live on for eternity.

No need to sweat it, we will have innumerable chances to experience this wheel of life. But if we knew of this infinity, this reality wouldn't hold the sweetness it does.

What a great construct.

You got it, But in answer to other topics brought up on this thread lets do a little maths by adding a little LIGHT into an equation -something I learnt a while ago- Lets destroy Logic

Let a and b each be equal to 1. Since a and b are equal

Im am going to use ~(sq) to denote squared

b(sq) = ab equation 1

Since a equals itself, it is obvious that

a(sq) = a(sq) equation 2

Substract equation 1 from equation 2. This yields

a(sq) - b(sq) = a(sq)-ab equation 3

We can factor both sides of the equation; a(sq) - ab equals a(a-b). Likewise a(sq) - b(sq) equals (a+b)(a-b) - nothing strange going on here - plug in numerics and see for yourself. This statement is perfectly true. Substituting into equation 3 we get

(a+b)(a-b)=a(a-b) equation 4

So far so good now lets take a little break and watch the procession from the Wickerman

www.youtube.com...

You know the Fool next to the Sun in many Tarot readings means something unexpected will bring comfort and order.
I will come back to that at a later date but for now im going to divide both sides of the equation by (a-b) and we get

a + b = a equation 5

Subtract a from both sides and we get

b = 0 equation 6

But we set b to 1 at the very beginning of this proof, so this means that

1 = 0 equation 7

This is a very important result. Now im going to prove that the Pontiff is not really the head of a major religious organisation but is really a carrot - yes a vegtable that grows in the ground. Something loved by buggs bunny.
Im not singleing out the Pope here I am just using him as an exsample. I could apply this to any religious leader group or anything for that matter
We know that the Pope has one head. But one equals zero by equation 7, so that means the Pope has no Head. Likewise the Pope has zero leafy tops , therefore he has one leafy top. Multiplying both sides of equation 7 by 2, we see that

2 = 0 equation 8

The Pope has two legs, therefore he has no Legs. The Pope has 2 arms, therefore he has no arms. Now Multiply equation 7 by the Popes waist size in inches. This means that

(the Popes waist size) = 0 equation 10

The LIGHT bit

This means that the Pope tapers to a point. Now for the really exciting bit. What Color is the Pope? Take any beam of LIGHT that comes from him and select a photon. Multiple equation 7 by the wavelength, and we see that

(The Popes photon's wavelength) = 0 Equation 10

Would now be the right time to play this tune

www.youtube.com...

By multiplying equation 7 by 640 Nanometers, we see that

640 = 0 Equation 11

Combining equations 10 and 11, we see that

(The Popes Phoyon's wavelength ) = 640 Nanometers

This means that this Photon ie Light or any other Photon that comes from the Pope - is Orange. Therefore the Pope is a bright shade of Orange.
To sum up we have proved that the Pope has no arms and no Legs, instead of a head he has a leafy top, he tapers to a point and he is bright orange. Clearly the Pope is a carrot (adding 1 to equation 7 gives the equation

In this equation there is only one step that is flawed, and that is the one from where we go9 from equation 4 yo equation 5. We get statement that 1=0

Ahit I think Ive just trashed the vatican - opps

Used unwisely using zero and light it has the power to destroy all current logic!!!

I hope this answers questions