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.
Originally posted by 12.21.12
Now what is most interesting about this set is it's relationship to the year 2012.
www.egnogra.com...
Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
Yeah, this is true. I see people attempt to create "groups of individuals" but all they're really doing is creating an individual group that will then be among other individual groups consisting of individuals.
In fact, light's chameleon-like ability to behave as either a particle or a wave, depending on the experimental setup, has long stymied scientists. Danish physicist Niels Bohr explained this wave-particle duality by doing away with the concept of a reality separate from one's observations. In his "Copenhagen interpretation", Bohr argued that the very act of measurement affects what we observe.
One controversial experiment recently challenged this either/or scenario of light by apparently detecting evidence of both wave- and particle-like behaviour simultaneously. The work suggests there may be no such thing as photons - light appears quantised only because of the way it interacts with matter.
In Brhadaranyaka Upanishad, god is questioned by his students to describe God. He states "The Divine is not this and it is not that" (neti, neti).
Thus, the Divine is not real as we are real, nor is it unreal. The divine is not living in the sense humans live, nor is it dead. The Divine is not compassionate as we use the term, nor is it uncompassionate. And so on. We can never truly define God in words. All we can say, in effect, is that "It isn't this, but also, it isn't that either". In the end, the student must transcend words to understand the nature of the Divine.
In this sense, neti-neti is not a denial. Rather, it is an assertion that whatever the Divine may be, when we attempt to capture it in human words, we must inevitably fall short, because we are limited in understanding, and words are limited in ability to express the transcendent.
Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
.....that we are all truly united whether our minds accept it or not, we all effect one another through the physical.
Originally posted by TheBarrelMan
starred and flagged
Fractals have always amazed me. The last time i turend off tuned in and dropped out, i saw fractals in everything. The first hour or two there were fractals on everything i looked at but there was only 200+ of them in my vision. By the 6th hour there were 500+? fractals in my vision. Its like they just kept zooming in and multiplyin. By the 16th hour there were probably 1000's. I started to think that we were light beings of some sort and that infinty was just around the corner for me to understand spiritually.
I havent understood it but hopefully next time i turn off, tune in and drop out i will
Originally posted by TravelerintheDark
Isn't it obvious that minds are dissimilar? How else could we be having a discussion of such?
Originally posted by TravelerintheDark
The opposite exists by nature, not through any specific creation.
Originally posted by TravelerintheDark
And while from a particular point of view opposition is an illusion, it is the interpretation of the illusion that we live in. Which is the point of view I'm speaking from right now.
Originally posted by TravelerintheDark
If I were a completely self-sufficient organism, with no need of any outside assistance, then simply being would be practical. I wouldn't need to concern myself with the doing, thinking, being of others. As it is, I am not. And don't know anyone who is. So it is in my best interests to seek out those who are willing to work with me.
Originally posted by TravelerintheDark
I understand and believe the philosophy, but I see it as useless if we can't translate it into practical existence.
Originally posted by TravelerintheDark
And I would say these were truly minds dissimilar from mine, as I have never considered such an act, and never will.
you and I are not "WE," but "ONE." Thus every one of us is Avatar, in the sense that everyone and everything is everyone and everything, at the same time, and for all time.
Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
I dont look in the mirror to see a dissimilar other, I look in the mirror to see views and aspects of myself I cannot see from inside myself.
Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
If we see them as opposite it is because we are only able to view the whole from one angle.
Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
I do not think that the "fractal" view of reality would suggest that you isolate one "bit" of the fractal completely from the entire set. That would be beside the point. It would ask more that you recognize as "you" the entire set.
Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
I believe that you believe that your mind is truly dissimilar, and I do believe that you would probably never act in that way, but I do not think any one has a truly dissimilar mind. It seems to me that the degree to which the potential we all carry is expressed or made manifest is the only "difference."
Denying it, is like planting the seed. It gives it a warm dark place to sprout and begin to grow. What makes some "harmless" is that they have awareness of the potential for violence within them and they do not give it the soil in which to sprout.
Originally posted by IllusionsaregranderI would argue that the very misunderstanding that "we are separate" from each other and from God, is that seed.
Originally posted by TravelerintheDark
I don't think so either. I understand that there is no true separation, but it isn't always the convenient perspective. Again, it's the reality we exist within. If I'm starving, it does little good to know that I am also a loaf of bread.
Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
Originally posted by TravelerintheDark
I don't think so either. I understand that there is no true separation, but it isn't always the convenient perspective. Again, it's the reality we exist within. If I'm starving, it does little good to know that I am also a loaf of bread.
Lol, that was fantastic.
Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
No, it certainly doesnt. All it can do is make starving to death less of a "problem" by realizing that life/death would also be two "views" of something fundamentally indivisible.