It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Circles - Nothing but Circles

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 18 2018 @ 12:37 AM
Humanity is caught in the circle of life. It is only by understanding the circles which make us up that we can figure out how we work.

The universe has been conceptualized as one big ouroboros. But I detest the gratuitous association of this image with a serpent: no doubt a frill added by people who've come to romanticize "not caring".

If love is everything - and I believe it is, even though I can be pulled into the attractors of other people's beliefs that "there is no reason", it is too immense a fact, too powerful a force, too useful a capacity, for it to not be the key to the human cosmos.

Yet, we can take things slowly. We needn't say anything more than 'love is essential'.

But how essential? Is the circle a symbol for this utter simplicity? Is the dynamical meeting up of the cells processes into a reconstruction of an earlier morphology, not in itself a circular process - a refueling of the structure of the cell? Imagine, if you can, that running out of gas meant running out of car. It is this self-recreation which makes the computer analogy of the mind so horrendous: computers don't fall apart, and they certainly do not reconstruct their bits after they have dissipated out of existence. There is something circular and spiritual that moves through the molecules which make up a cell. It doesn't do it itself; and the logic - the canalization - this seeming awareness of orderliness, or coordinating what appears to be thousands upon thousands of elements, dissipating, moving, generating, structuring; how can the same stuff manage to do this, again and again?

But this is a single cell. A cell which, somehow, is composed of molecules which are composed of atoms which are being dynamically forced into being by protons, electrons and the quarks of matter (pun intended). When you realize what a cell is, how much more significant is a creature like us? With not one cell, but 10-100 trillion cells!

These cells, also, have seemingly become coopted by other circles - circle forming between other circles! What is cell-cell relatedness based upon? Cell Adhesion Molecules (CAM's) and Substrate Adhesion Molecules (SAM's). These are molecules which seem to serve as 'signposts' for other molecules to read off. The circles are not just structuring things: but they literally mean to make things make sense. The specialized protein embedded in the membrane (CAMs) tell the cell that a particular process is in play. The process is the meaning; it is the "it" which the protein is dynamically emergent to "know". It exists for this process, although, indeed, it can be coopted into another process if its "understanding" proves useful to another process. SAM's are those molecules in between cells - they are the 'stuff' of the intercellular space. It is around this stuff - these SAM's - that the circles of the cells, with CAMs built in to sense the 'meaning' going on, dance around, and again, in circular, spiral like ways.

This is cell-cell relation, and it is ubiquitous to all organisms. But this is within organisms; soon, in various different ways, the organism becomes looped into a relation with various electromagnetic frequencies; light, the earths magnetic field, and perhaps still others. But we can be sure that whatever else exists will be a loop, and will be compatible with existing loops.

See ourselves, and see how many 'spiritual' loops there are. It would be naive to think these loops don't loop into the loops of our cells. Or that are our cells, subject to entropy and dissipation, wont exert a primary bottom-up force on our consciousness.

Your body is itself a symbol of its functionality. Structure and function our 'looped' together. A fat person can be assumed to eat, and if its 'genetic', then it must be assumed that an immediate ancestor liked to eat. A short person implies a history of experiencing your height being a target of ridicule: the culture, the competitiveness, and the obvious weakness of being short in a society that prioritizes individual exceptionality, means that a short person is a person vulnerable to having his height exploited, and so, vulnerable to feeling weak, when they may very much want to be strong.

Is this perhaps what is meant by the term 'napolean' syndrome? It's a weird thing how often short men 'ascend' the ranks, as if they have a greater motivation to 'prove' something - something which, because of the loopiness of things, actually refers back to a personal pain - a source of suffering, which, quite pathetically, is being dissociated from and projected upon the world. This sort of short man, with a loopiness that comes behind the back, is unconsciously motivatec by threat-based brain processes to act in a way that has massive consequences for the social reality of millions of others. Stalin (5'6), Hitler (5'8), Napolean (5'6), and you can add to the list. Simple things like this - relating back to 'primitive' embodied meanings, become the actual, biosemiotic foundation for mass genocide. Talk about loopiness!

And yes. Recognizing the self in the other, the equivalence between self and others, means that our emotions are 'spread' like wildfire simply by observing them; in vision - I "know" what a face or body movement means without thinking. My feelings REPRESENT the truth of the others experience. Similarly, in my head, I have to deal with the fact that I am feeling and sensing the other. What If I can't handle feelings of shame when I observe them in others, or in myself? The self-self image is a consequence; a higher level property relating to self-awareness. I know that state. That statement fails to capture the fact that a knowing state is itself an entity: a higher level, neurologically based, 'form' that responds to 'forms' out there - in the social world. It is from these units - real units called "self and other", that self-awareness emerges, and thinking derives. Your mind becomes 'looped' with the images - the feelings - which reflexively represent the 'other'. Why is, according to neuroimaging as well as neuroanatomy, our right hemisphere larger at the frontal pole and larger in the back? That is, why is the part of the brain dedicated to reading affective cues in other faces (frontal pole) and the visual modality it works through (back of the head) larger? It likely refers back to the facts of symmetry and the logic of semiosis in human interactions. If I feel, but do not communicate that to the other, I will never know it, or respond to it, as if it had any adaptive significance: the left hemisphere will be smaller, because it doesn't recognize an obvious advantage that comes from correlating to the truth of what causes what.

The final loop - the final 'frontier', cannot and should not be touched without the basics and basis of your existence being understood. But alas; our world is steeped in magic and occultism and mysticisms which, because they loop more powerfully than other, take over the mind, and with it, the sanity and simplicity that comes with understanding the basis and basics of things.

It is all looped. We are looped into one another; and in trying to squirt away, and in saying "individualism" is good, we destroy more and more, and with it, the experience of being will no longer be so exploitable. It will be lost, because the human being, in effect, got lost in the circle of life.

posted on May, 18 2018 @ 12:42 AM

posted on May, 18 2018 @ 01:04 AM
To be a bit more clear about my views on individualism: since things are so loopy, its not surprising that individualism has a core value to it - just not to the extent that its accorded in contemporary liberal societies.

Instead of a 55% to 45% ratio between socialism and individualism (the only two options), we've been given the reverse, and if contemporary tends persist, 'society' will be accorded far less than 45% value.

The individuals feelings are too important to ignore; and so, the 'individual' must be trusted to be smart enough to discover on his own the truth of scientific premises, methodologies and conclusions; that it 'makes sense' is not peculier to me or anyone else. It makes sense as a function of an interpersonal convergence upon the same sets of reasoning processes which work from the same values.

Suffering will wear a person down. In today's world, pleasure is easy to come by, and hence, some people don't even care that their beliefs about 'what is real' are wrong, and that their purveyance of such ideas is destructive. Pleasure - and the principle of 'the path of least resistance', always makes immediate pleasure preferable to anything else - especially accepting ideas from people who irritate you and make you feel dumb and confused.

In anycase, a truly tolerant person is tolerant because he actually understands, via science, what the probable consequences of his patience and forebearance will be. This dynamic - this understanding - is also, as well, a 'symmetry' process, and so operates much more efficiently in dissipating threatening emotions, relative to the 'patience' that comes with sadomasochistic qualities; a 'patience' which does not come from understanding is a feckless patience.

Hence, I cannot stand militant scientists like Richard Dawkins who think its a good idea to bash and mock other peoples views, and worse, attack God, as if science were in any necessary conflict with God (it isn't).

posted on May, 18 2018 @ 02:02 AM
a reply to: Astrocyte
Like a dog chasing its own tail, ever going in circles. Maybe that should have been the symbol for time and eternity instead of a serpent eating its own tail, a dog chasing its own tail. Now put that in your pipe and smoke it. Endless cycles, going ever in circles.

Round and round we all go.

posted on May, 18 2018 @ 02:09 AM
a reply to: Astrocyte

When you think about these loops, consider the beginning and non ending processes of Stars.

Stars form from the processes of other stars that may be in stages of morphing- changing physically and or chemically generating Nebula...

As some stars from a human perception begin to decay these stars can take on various processes that can potentially end life or start life.

The loop here universally potentially is, as various types of Stars that also started from previous stars activities are created and perceived to be destroyed from aging/decaying processes, new types of Stars, planets, moons and asteroid belts as well as life is formed.
Potential life and energy/mineral associated with the chemical compounds of the star that made them.

So for example did the star or stars through whatever process it or they went through, that made life on EA*RTH and the Sun as well as the planets, the planets moons and asteroid belts as well as other potential life & celestial objects associated with the SOL System actually end? If the star made life and or even some, what currently are perceived lifeless planets or moons during its processes.
Basically those cells react to the electromagnetic enegy and radiation from the nearest star because that frequency and the cells are related to the star or stars that made this region.

ALL* is 1...

Or was life caused by what seems intelligent and intentional looped processes as various star types generate different life sequences throughout EXISTENCE as the stars are born, destroyed or ascended through the NU life they created?


posted on May, 18 2018 @ 02:21 AM
Since humans are made from stars is it possible there are processes that go on with humans similar to star processes?

posted on May, 18 2018 @ 03:35 AM

originally posted by: Astrocyte

The universe has been conceptualized as one big [y]. But I detest the gratuitous association of this image with [xyz]: no doubt a frill added by people who've come to romanticize "not caring".

What country is this language spoken in? Or are you making 5 leaps ahead in something you're trying to get across? I'm not sure I get it, but that's okay.
edit on 18-5-2018 by Ohthewey778 because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 18 2018 @ 05:50 AM
Oh yeah, just looking at your post, I skimmed through it, I think you might have an ideation with wishing others would feel like you but that's just a guess. You say shame a lot. Who do you think feels shame? I don't know, sounds like you. Who do you think is concerned with weakness? You, maybe. You might just be sensitive. Somebody told you that was wrong. Big deal. You also might be needy. Someone in your family told you you were needy. Big deal. It through you for a loop. Again just a guess.

Kids in school are mean, I assume it's because you were bullied or neglected. Well guess what. That's you. And it's something we all call bad luck.

In this world full of teeming folks, some of whom don't even know you exist, there are far more things than you. Reasons for avoiding you talking about or thinking about you that have nothing at all to do with shortness, weakness, or your sense of abandonment. Or being in a cult or wishing you were because it's far more easy than just being alone.. Hey guy! We love you! You're not a funny odd dude! Just remember it!!

Sometimes someone literally doesn't know they offended you. Geez guy! I doubt it's because you make them feel dumb!!

Think of it this way, you hurt (YOU, not others silly!!
) you hate and you go online with an amalgamation sorta of folks, many you've never seen, some who maybe didn't hang out with you when you were young, some of whom had no time, people on the bus who you feel left ya hangin.. Maybe you were born extra needy. Your mind seems split or addled, I can't even tell you what it is. Just some balls floating around up there.. It's okay we all have those. And you're accepted

posted on May, 18 2018 @ 09:12 AM
reading this was like eating a bag of flour
either that or i have had stroke

posted on May, 18 2018 @ 11:25 AM
We are all just dogs chasing cars...we don't know what to do with it when we catch one.

I think you found yours hows a long time ago, your just still looking for the whys, when it just simply is. What about God and religion alway being articulated with suffering to elude things Job was said to be righteous and yet Satan was allowed to challenge him. While Buddhism defines that birth is trauma, and that the living creates it own troubles and dealings?

Work is karma, no need to be a square about it.

edit on 18-5-2018 by Specimen because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 18 2018 @ 12:08 PM
a reply to: Astrocyte

The final loop - the final 'frontier', cannot and should not be touched without the basics and basis of your existence being understood.

Aye Aye. Message received in "dream" last night:

You farted, Ted, in "time."

Yulitha picks. (Not sure if I spelled her name right.)

posted on May, 18 2018 @ 12:25 PM
It remind me of Borges "the fearful sphere of pascal"

posted on May, 18 2018 @ 01:03 PM
This is an example of what it means to worship idols in high places. The thinking faculties of the cerebral cortex can be a frickin' merry-go-round. Get some exercise and serve/help others, it will help with grounding and allow you to convey your ideas more concisely.

posted on May, 18 2018 @ 04:29 PM
Squares are deadly imitation circles.

new topics

top topics


log in