The Infinite Spongy Universe and my ATS disclaimer

page: 10
5
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 19 2012 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by swan001

Er, I think it was Shrodinger's cat or some related principle. You know, where something is all possibilities until you observe it.


In that case, Einstein's criticism would be accepted by mainstream quantum physicists today. Schrodinger's cat is an outdated thought experiment.




posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by CLPrime


In that case, Einstein's criticism would be accepted by mainstream quantum physicists today. Schrodinger's cat is an outdated thought experiment.


Cool.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 08:24 AM
link   
reply to post by BogieSmiles
 


Okay. Well, that aether theory is still interresting. You're not the first one, thought, I met another guy who thought about the same thing. He thought photons could be compression of aether.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by swan001
reply to post by BogieSmiles
 


Okay. Well, that aether theory is still interresting. You're not the first one, thought, I met another guy who thought about the same thing. He thought photons could be compression of aether.
Quantum compression units

Swan001 mentioned that he knew someone who thought photons were compressions of aether. That was said in response to my reply to ImaFungi that the waves traversing the foundational medium are compression waves. My view of a foundational medium would be that the collision of two spherical waves in the medium would produce a subsequent spherical wave that would transmit the concussion of the collision of the parent waves outward from the point of intersection and overlap, causing a new wave. The proportions of the new wave relative to the sum of the two parent waves that I use is that half of the wave energy of each parent is transferred to the new wave, and half of the wave energy of the two parents proceeds in the initial spherical expansion. It could be any smaller proportion depending on number of inflowing waves that converge at the point of intersection.

My view of the presence of a particle is that billions of tiny waves are traversing every point in the medium at all points in time, and it takes synchronization of the inflowing waves to produce a standing wave pattern that contains billions of high density spots within the disturbed particle space. The particle presence would be maintained as long as there are inflowing waves to refresh the spherical out flow. The direction of the net highest density of wave energy inflow to the pattern would determine the motion of the pattern across the medium, since the out flow is always spherical. Very deluded, I think.

I don't have any science to back that up, but there are some simulations that can convey the concept of spherical transmission of concussion waves:

www3.wooster.edu...



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 07:13 AM
link   
reply to post by swan001
 


Quantum Units Wild Guess

“In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete.” ― Richard Buckminster Fuller

In my model, which is not likely to have anything to do with a change in paradigm, lol, the proton’s presence (three quarks if you like) is literally composed of the high density spots that form at the overlap of the multiple quantum standing waves within the proton. 

They are spherical waves that are bursting out of high density spots (HDSs), expanding spherically, overlapping, and forming new HDSs within the proton. It is a continual process where the wave energy out flow that escapes the proton from the surface spherically (equal in all directions) is replaced by wave energy arriving at the surface (directionally) from the out flow of wave energy from other particles. Thus the presence of the proton is maintained by the inflowing and out flowing standing wave action. 

Let’s say that we can freeze the quantum action process that has established the presence of a proton. That freeze frame will contain a finite number of spherical quantum waves in overlap positions within the proton. Each overlap is a high density spot in my jargon. There are a finite number of high density spots within the particle space where the spherical waves have overlapped at the moment of the freeze frame. That close configuration of high density spots (lattice-like) has stability because there is no niche on the surface for any additional surface quanta or high density spots, i.e. the surface wave energy out flow is equal to the wave energy inflow in a stable energy density environment, like at rest. (Increase the energy of the environment and there are more surface quanta, hypothetically.)

The question is, from what we know about the proton at rest, and from what I speculate about the process of quantum action at the foundational level, can we derive a ball park figure or even a wild guess of the number of high density spots (or shall we say quantum compression units) within a proton lattice?

In this exercise you might point out that the units of measure don’t work unless we define the whole exercise in terms of a new unit, i.e. a speculative “quantum compression unit” that occupies an average amount of space per quanta in the freeze frame or lattice view inside a proton. We are not talking about energy in joules for example because the units of measure wouldn’t work. Each quantum unit is a quantum of wave energy, not only the individual spherical waves, but the high density spots that accumulate a full quantum and burst into new spherical waves. So the number of quantum units would be the total number of spherical wave intersections that are present as hypothetically represented by the high density spots that form and burst into quantum waves. Supposedly we could count the HDSs in a freeze frame of the proton, and if we could we would know the total energy in quantum compression units of a proton at rest.

Wouldn't it be nice to have such a freeze frame and the ability to look inside the proton and see if it is composed of a vast number of quanta and count the high density spots?

This hypothetical exercise is to put some perspective on the number of energy quanta in a proton and an electron at rest to quantify my idea of the composition of a lattice of quantum units within a stable particle. For simplicity we will call these “average quantum compression units” which simply occupy the space within the proton; a quantum unit would consist of one high density spot at the overlap of multiple spherical quantum waves. This can also be thought of as the wave energy in quanta in a volume of space occupied by the proton accounted for unit by unit in a whole number. I am proposing the following widely speculative guess at the number of these quantum units within the space occupied by a proton.

I am using the approximate ratio of the rest energy of an electron vs. a proton, which is 1/1836, to equate the number of quantum units in the proton to the number of units in the electron and to give me some basis or connection to mainstream science.

In addition, I am supposing that the number of quantum units in an electron is equal to the number of quanta at the surface of the proton for various reasons, but for this exercise that is just to have a relationship to allow us to do the calculations. That relationship is simply the result of brainstorming with others the idea of doing this exercise in the past.

Area/Volume = (4 pi r^2)/(4/3 pi r^3) = 3/r = 1/1836,
therefore r=3*1836 = 5508, thus the radius of the proton is equal to 5508 quantum units.

4 pi r^2 = surface area of a sphere
4/3 pi r^3 = volume of a sphere
pi = 3.14159265

Quantum units in an electron = 381,239,356
Quantum units in a proton = 699,955,457,517 

I'll just call it 400 million and 700 billion respectively, or even just hundreds of millions and hundreds of billions respectively :shrug:.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by BogieSmiles

do you state that they may collide and interact with ours? 
I responded, "Our arena is the result of such an intersection and overlap. "Collide" is not the best operative word because though galaxies do collide in the process, in my model arenas rendezvous, lol. They rendezvous into a swirling accretion at the center of gravity of the overlap of the parent arenas."

I don't think people follow threads like mine post by post and certainly no one hangs on every word, so I want to acknowledge that as the discussion with you has unfolded, you have helped me reveal that the nature of wave energy in the foundational medium is compression waves resulting from the "collision" of converging energy waves. I want to go back and correct and clarify my previous incomplete answer about the use of the word "collide".

I don't know if this will be clear to anyone, but arenas do collide, and as they do, their constituent galaxies engage each other in a swirling rendezvous of accretion into a big crunch at the arena level. Also, at the quantum level, quantum waves that are expanding "collide" as they expand into the same space; i.e. when they intersect and overlap that is a collision within the standing wave pattern from the perspective of the effect within the foundational medium. As they collide, the waves intersect and overlap and out of the overlap space a new spherical wave emerges that expands through the medium from the point of collision. It is an effect characteristic of the spongy nature of the universe that seems to justify my naming it the Infinite Spongy Universe
.

I call the origin point of the new wave at the quantum level a high density spot that bursts into an expanding spherical wave. At the arena landscape level I call the origin point of the new arena wave a big crunch that collapses and bangs into spherical expansion. At both levels there is a resulting concussion wave or spherical burst of wave energy out of the space where the collision, aka the intersection and overlap occurs.

Hopefully this explanation makes some sense to someone because as the model unfolds and the discussion gets more detailed, it will be necessary to make clarifications, some of which will be clear as mud, lol.



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 04:16 AM
link   
reply to post by BogieSmiles
 


You can't be more clear! Good job. I am going to send you a U2U to tell you the name of the other guy which was thinking about aether compression.

Your last post... It was very specific! I am going to think about it.



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   
CMBR in my model
My threads are often characterized some initial discussion, and then by silence. Maybe someone is reading my posts but except for an occasional comment or star, I wouldn't know it, lol. However, in the lulls I find opportunity to add to the confusion with another delusion.

Like the CMBR; has it ever bothered you, I mean the explanation for the source of the background radiation? What is it really and how did it get here? Given the fact that my model invokes changes to all of the preconditions of the standard cosmology and the particle model, what could I possibly say about the CMBR that would comply with current theory? Not much really, except for its observed characteristics of isotropy with slight anisotropy, and homogeneity. 

Mainstream views are that the photon energy released at the instant of the Big Bang event was contained in the inflating universe through a period of faster-than-light inflation until the opacity of the universe declined enough for it to be released. The mainstream scenario is that the release didn't occur until the distant reaches of the universe were so great that the CMBR we observe has been coming from all directions out of those far reaches for 14 billion years and we have no reason to suspect it will stop coming any time soon.

By way of disclaimer, that view of the mainstream explanation for the CMB is my deluded layman understanding of one of the scenarios, and not definite science at all. I only mention it to set the stage for the explanation of the CMB from the perspective of my model.

In my model the background we observe is not coming from the contained radiation of the popular Big Bang event, and has not cooled as a result of inflation of the "soup" that made up our universe in the first moment, but instead has been out there all the time and we are intruding into space that already contained it. 

Our big crunch, which might have been billions of light years across at the moment of collapse, would have inwardly stretched the wave energy in the background surrounding the big crunch and thereby cooled it a bit for the brief duration of the collapse which was at the instant that our ball of dense state wave energy was born. The collapse of the big crunch resulted in a what I call a "bounce" or "pass through" as the collapse of the particles in the crunch turned into dense-state wave and entered into expansion. I like to say that the collapse compressed the wave energy to nature's maximum allowed wave energy density, the dense-state, and then the wave energy passed through itself greeting the in-rushing background wave energy with the whip lash of the "bounce" of our dense state energy as it emerged out of the collapse and into expansion. It is the grandaddy of concussion waves intruding on the low wave energy density of the surrounding space; space which is characterized by the always present CMBR of the greater universe.  

As the stretched and cooled low energy density light (microwave radiation) of the surrounding and inflowing background began merging with the dense state wave energy that emerged from our arena's initial event, I have my model's alternative explanation for the source of our observed background. It is pre-existing cosmic microwave background radiation that is coming from all directions at the speed of light. It is what our dense state wave energy ball is intruding into and was inflated with.

That makes the source of the CMB observed in our arena the corridors of the greater universe, and it will keep coming from all directions for much more that 14 billion years; forever in fact, because in my model the background energy has always filled the corridors of deep space between arenas from a potentially infinite history of arena formation and light radiation from all directions at all times. 

Also, if the source is external and independent of our "Big Bang" event, then some of the uncomfortable complications of Big Bang Theory and Inflationary Theory can be removed. The whole "opacity" scenario, and the photon release after a few hundred thousand years wouldn't have to be invoked at all. All those initial photons from the big event could be allowed therefore to speed freely away out into space like the light from a big flash would be expected to do. 

In my model we can account for the CMBR's isotropy and homogeneity because those would be characteristics of a cosmic background that had always been "thermalized" to ~3K across infinite space. This means that none of the CMBR is coming form our collapse/bang, but instead it is diffused over an eternity of crossing the expanses of space between arenas, and by being swept in and out of active arenas across the arena landscape of the greater universe.
edit on 23-9-2012 by BogieSmiles because: spelling



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by swan001
reply to post by BogieSmiles
 


You can't be more clear! Good job. I am going to send you a U2U to tell you the name of the other guy which was thinking about aether compression.

Your last post... It was very specific! I am going to think about it.
In the mean time ...


My opening post addressed spacetime vs. wave energy traversing a foundational medium. Whether you are a science professional or a science enthusiast, you are familiar with how current theory explains that the presence of matter and energy can cause a curvature of spacetime; a curvature that accounts for gravity. Though the effects are described mathematically, there is no physical explanation or mechanics, or at least no consensus as to how space curves or warps in the presence of matter.

That is why I started to hypothesize about an undetectable foundational medium that would cause the same effects that we observe as gravity. 

Experiments had pretty conclusively falsified the luminiferous aether theory by the time that Einstein came up with the Theory of General Relativity, and the spacetime mathematics of Einstein's field equations (EFE) are extremely accurate at describing the observed and predicted motion of objects in space. And they are very accurate in general relativity for the same reason that they are very accurate in my model; wave energy density has almost the same effect on the motion of objects as the mathematical spacetime effect. 

Any hypothesis about quantum level mechanics that would physically describe how gravity might work has to also describe gravity at every level of particle accumulation from the quantum realm right up to the macro realm of observable objects including planets, stars, and galaxies, i.e. one set of rules that apply everywhere. We cannot have two sets where one set applies to the quantum realm and one set applies to the macro realm as we have in current theory, i.e. quantum mechanics and General Relativity. My model attributes gravity to the directional imbalance of the inflowing wave energy component of a standing wave pattern vs. the spherical out flowing component; objects move toward the highest net wave energy inflow.

My initial hypothetical starting point is that there is a foundational medium that fills all space, and thus would affect all levels of order from the quantum realm to the macro realm. It is a simple starting point, but such a medium must not be our great granddaddy's fixed luminiferous aether which objects in motion were supposed to pass through. My view of a foundational medium fixes that problem by hypothesizing that wave energy traverses the foundational medium, and by hypothesizing that particles at the quantum level are patches of disturbed space that contain and maintain the presence of standing wave energy in quantum increments, i.e. standing wave energy with two components, inflowing and out flowing waves that are traversing that foundational medium. Particles are all composed of wave energy in quantum increments, and objects right on up to galaxies are composed of particles, so the quantum action that sustains the presence of a particle also sustains the presence of particles in aggregate.

It isn't hard to envision waves in the foundational medium, or to consider them the basic form of energy of the universe; energy that is imparted to everything else because everything is composed of that foundational wave energy.

But to think of the convergence of those waves as concussions, now that may be not be the first thing that comes to mind. But the way I think about it, if we have nothing to compare the perfect fluid to except that which can prescribed as the singular most necessary component of the hypothetical realm into which we cannot observe, then we should not be surprised if that fluid has characteristics that allow it to function as it must. It then also is not an impossible concept that waves in the medium are all there is, that those wave must have a means to interact with each other, and so when they intersect and overlap, they are colliding.

But still it is hard to think of a concussion wave emerging from such an ethereal collision of almost no energy in almost no space in almost no time. But that is the basis for my argument that they are collisions. They do involve the clash of energy from opposing directions, the collisions cause a spongy overlap in the smallest of spaces, and the duration of the collision is a finite amount of time. The concussion emerges as the overlap compression is resisted and reversed by the medium at the point of intersection, reversing the directional flow of energy from the converging waves into a single spherical expanding wave of energy. Wave energy is conserved. 



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 04:12 PM
link   
Spherical equalization of wave energy density through photon energy relocation:

In my model a photon is a particle composed of standing wave energy that traverses the medium at the invariant speed of light. The medium is filled with wave energy in all directions, so you might think they would be slowed down by those repeated and continual collisions, and their advance would be limited to one tiny spherical wave increment after another. Am I saying that photons can still travel at the speed of light in spite of the time delay caused by repeated concussion waves emerging from those continual collisions as they advance?

Yes, they are slowed down to the invariant speed of light from what would otherwise be a potentially instantaneous transmission across empty space if it weren't for the fact that the foundational medium governs the speed of light between particles and objects. The medium only permits wave transmission to take place at one invariant speed relative to the specific wave energy density of the surrounding energy density environment. For example, in my model a perfect vacuum is a waveless medium, and I am saying that in a waveless medium a photon would travel at the maximum invariant velocity which would be almost precisely equal to current measurements in vacua, the difference being that a perfect vacuum is a virtual impossibility in my model and so no current measurements exist of light traversing a perfect vacuum.

Futher discussion:

Within particles and objects, the waves that make up the standing wave patterns that establish the presence of particles are traversing the medium at the local speed of light, but the time delay associated with the process of collision and concussion wave transmission in the particle space involves a time delay much greater than the time delay in open space, regardless of the energy density of the environment.

All waves originate from collisions and the point of collision establishes the center point from which the concussion sphere's radius expands at the speed of light. Within a particle the frequency of the collisions is so extreme, trillions and trillions more collisions occur every instant within the particle space than would occur within the open space between particles and objects. Of course the wave energy density of the open space is a factor in determining the relative velocity of light across that space, but even in the densest energy environment, particles are much more dense than the space between them.

Addressing the seemingly obvious contradiction:

But isn't it an obvious contradiction to say that photons are particles and yet they traverse the medium at the speed of light like unquantized waves would traverse the vacuum? Isn't it part of the rule of particle motion that particles need inflow from every direction and if they are moving at the speed of light, no inflow can catch them from behind? Doesn't that screw up all of the internal consistency of your model?

No, photons don't violate the particle motion rule, they maximize the directional rule. The rule is that particles move in the direction of the highest net directional inflowing wave energy. All wave energy entering a photon standing wave comes from the direction of emission, so the rule is not violated. In other words the time delay is at a minimum because the collisions and concussion wave advances are limited to one direction instead of from all spherical directions.

Describe the physical nature of a photon and the means of transmission:

Photons are produced by atoms and molecules that function as oscillating dipoles and always consist of a whole number of energy quanta equal to the number of quanta given up by the electron that emits them.

Electrons in those dipoles have a theoretical rest energy, and they have the capacity to absorb additional energy quanta from photons upon contact. The absorption of photons increases the energy of the electron and as a result, the energized electron occupies more orbital space around the nucleus. The function being performed, in my model, is referred to as the spherical equalization of energy density across an energy density environment, or simply photon energy relocation.

The number of quanta added to the electron can be released in increments by the electron, and the release is in packets of quanta equal to the number of quanta given up by the electron release. There is an ebb and flow of quanta between electrons which is the means of photon energy relocation throughout the given energy density environment.

The photon itself, a packet of quanta, is a standing wave whose inflow is perfectly one directional, and that means that all of the inflowing wave energy component is from the direction of motion. The photon therefore moves at the maximum rate allowed by the foundational medium, i.e. the speed of light. 

edit on 30-9-2012 by BogieSmiles because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by BogieSmiles


Describe the physical nature of a photon and the means of transmission:

Photons are produced by atoms and molecules that function as oscillating dipoles and always consist of a whole number of energy quanta equal to the number of quanta given up by the electron that emits them.

Electrons in those dipoles have a theoretical rest energy, and they have the capacity to absorb additional energy quanta from photons upon contact. The absorption of photons increases the energy of the electron and as a result, the energized electron occupies more orbital space around the nucleus. The function being performed, in my model, is referred to as the spherical equalization of energy density across an energy density environment, or simply photon energy relocation.

The number of quanta added to the electron can be released in increments by the electron, and the release is in packets of quanta equal to the number of quanta given up by the electron release. There is an ebb and flow of quanta between electrons which is the means of photon energy relocation throughout the given energy density environment.

The photon itself, a packet of quanta, is a standing wave whose inflow is perfectly one directional, and that means that all of the inflowing wave energy component is from the direction of motion. The photon therefore moves at the maximum rate allowed by the foundational medium, i.e. the speed of light. 

edit on 30-9-2012 by BogieSmiles because: (no reason given)
I attempted a little graphic of the process of photon emission and transmission. This is the first effort to depict the concept and it may have a few bugs, so if you think it could be improved let me know:


#1 represents an oscillating dipole with an energized electron shown as a cloud in its orbital space around the nucleus.
#2 is a depiction of the emission of a photon as the electron orbit contracts toward the nucleus, giving up space and a corresponding amount of energy. See the photon being ejected.
#3 depicts the first collision of the photon with the inflowing wave energy. Since the photon traverses the medium at the speed of light, all of the wave energy that it encounters is coming from the direction of motion. The photon energy is refreshed from the inflowing wave energy and emits a spherical out flowing wave of energy (see off set 3a). The refreshed quanta of the photon move toward the direction of the inflowing wave energy and ...
#4 depicts the refreshed photon quanta relocated along the path of the directional inflowing wave energy.
#3 and #4 repeat themselves as a continuous sequence of collisions and concussion waves as the photon moves in increments along its path at the speed of light.
edit on 2-10-2012 by BogieSmiles because: (no reason given)
edit on 2-10-2012 by BogieSmiles because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 09:18 AM
link   
reply to post by BogieSmiles
 

Work from quantum units

In the graphic I have depicted the collapse of the electron orbital cloud and the corresponding emission of a photon, one photon that has a specific amount of energy, and no frequency. We need a beam of photons to measure frequency, and if a light source emits a beam of light, and if the light is of a constant photon emission frequency, then the beam produced is a sequence of individual photons like the photon I depict in the graphic.

If true, then the values for frequency and wavelength can be measured from the beam. We know that energy of the photon can be calculated using h (Planck's constant) * frequency. That gives us the amount of work in joules per second that can be expected from a photon beam.

We do not yet know how many of the quantum units described in my model are required to make up that amount of photon energy in joules per second, but if we did we could determine the amount of work we could expect from one quantum compression unit assuming the internal quantum composition of the photon standing wave.

I believe that I could figure out a pretty good ball park figure just by knowing that it is roughly quantifiable, given my Quantum Units Wild Guess as to the quanta in an electron (~400 million quanta at rest), the concept of the oscillating dipole/photon emission of my model (i.e. the mechanical relationship between the photon and the change in energy state of an electron), and known science related to the change in energy of electrons that emit photons and the work that can be performed in joules per second for electrons and photons.

It will take me awhile to refresh my memory on the science involved and I don't know if it matters that much given the deluded model, but I am open to estimates from the community
. Who wants to take a stab at it, lol?

In the mean time, I'll just use 1 * 10^-50 joules per quanta for the fun of it. That has to be off by many zeros one way or the other but this is not science.
edit on 4-10-2012 by BogieSmiles because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 12:55 PM
link   
Motion of Objects in the Medium  

Just like I am modeling gravity differently from the curvature of spacetime in conventional models, I am describing light transmission differently from the standard self-propagating transverse electric and magnetic fields of electromagnetism. Conveniently though, I am modeling gravity and the propagation of light using the same principle of motion; motion is in the direction of highest net wave energy, which for the photon was depicted in the last graphic.

We have the relocation of the photon, one increment at a time, in the direction of the inflowing wave energy; essentially a one directional motion in response to a one directional inflow. 

None of the other particles traverse the medium in a straight line at the speed of light. All other particles and objects in relative motion always follow curved paths due to the time delay of gravity. The greater the distance between objects, the greater the time delay.



Time delay is simply a reference to the fact that out flowing wave energy from distant objects traverses the medium at the speed of light in ever increasing spheres until it reaches the local object. In that time, the distant objects have moved. However, the directional inflow points back to the location in the medium where the distant object was back in time, equal to the time delay. The incremental motion of the local object is in the direction of the net inflow, and that points to a place in the medium that is no longer occupied by the original source of wave energy. Never-the-less, our local object sets out in that historic direction as it utilizes the inflowing wave to refresh its own location by one increment per quantum period.

Naturally enough, the next wave to become the inflow of our local object was emitted from a slightly different location since the path of the distant object was playing out back in time. This slight change in the directional inflow allows the local object to make a slight course change, again directing it to a new, but still out of date location due to the time delay of gravity. Plot out a few of these tiny course corrections and you notice that your local object is following a curved path, even though each increment was in a straight line toward where the distant object was, if you play back the time delay.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 07:35 AM
link   
Overview of the Generative and Evolvative Forces of Life

Arena action of my model defeats entropy and perpetually produces galaxy filled expanding arenas throughout the universe where it is natural for stars with solar systems to host habitable planets and where the conditions are conducive to the generation of life.

Given the right mix of chemistry and environment, my model assures that physical iterations of all the finite possible combinations occur and the combinations for reproductive life inevitably arise.  Life is adaptive and evolvative, meaning that as early life takes hold, and as evolution occurs, life forms take full advantage of the hospitable environments across the host planet.

As evolution proceeds, natural characteristics that are the mark of advanced life forms develop, bringing them consciousness, self awareness, and individually developed consciences.

All highly evolved contemplative life forms across the Infinite Spongy Universe (my name for the universe - ISU), given sufficient duration to experience it, will share an inevitable course from their origin of natural generation to the culmination of high evolution, and with that comes the realization that all life is causally connected by the same Eternal Intent.



posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   
That brings up the topic of Eternal Intent, which is what I call the philosophy that I derive from the model. In the early years of my contemplations I considered the various explanations for the existence of the universe and always seemed to narrow it down to three basic ideas: 1) God did it, 2) It came from nothing, or 3) It has alway existed.

There is no clear right or wrong answer and so it comes down to an individual view point, and having such a view point comes down to the conscious intention of the individual to actually define it for themselves.

I have done that for myself over the years and have shared the journey in my threads to some extent, and so if you care, you know my views. But I don't often elaborate on the details of Eternal Intent because one's personal views of life and living is not a popular internet topic by any means. I don't care that it is not, because I do this as much or more for myself than I do it for the community, but from time to time I like to post about it, and this is one of those times.

Let me state the nutshell version of EI so that I can philosophize a little about it in a few future posts. EI is the simple philosophy that the universe has always existed and is governed by invariant natural laws, many of which are as yet unknown. The first principle that I like to derive is that maybe God and the universe are one and the same, and that principle then lays before me the science of the known natural laws, and the mystery of the unknown natural laws.Within that mystery there is the possibility that if the universe has any characteristic of God to it, it is not only in the eternal nature of a universe that has always existed, but it is in the connection of the conscious, contemplative, free-willed, conscientious, highly evolved life forms with whatever God aspect of the universe there is; a connection that is made through the as yet unknown natural laws.

For me that connection takes the form of the possibility of seeking and receiving acknowledgements from beyond the boundary of known science and into the realm of the as yet unknown natural laws. Said simply, the faith and hope is that there is a connection that can be activated by the individual to experience acknowledgements. If it exists, Eternal Intent is there for intelligent beings to discover and use, seemingly derived from sound reason and logic that would be required to get you there. There is nothing to keep you from that faith and hope accept a fear of being deluded, lol, and you know I'm not afraid of that.

Eternal Intent is the natural common ground between all contemplative individuals.  It is the highest standard for setting the correct rules of free and conscientious interaction.  It is a characteristic of the universe, compatible with the natural laws of the ISU and with the concept that maybe God and the universe are one and the same. It is there for all of us as a source of hope and council throughout our lives, and for faith that the future can unfold as we would have it.  It is there for us for free if we choose to use it.

The concept of Eternal Intent is the stimulus for highly evolved beings (humans in our case, human-like I suppose elsewhere) seeking acknowledgements from beyond the boundary of known science and expecting a response in accord with as yet unknown invariant natural laws.

I'll close this post with the thought that anything that seems supernatural has natural causes that we don't yet understand.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by BogieSmiles
 


It took me a while to figure out your last two diagrams, but I think I've finally got it. Assuming I have, then your model is definitely and intriguing one. I haven't had much time lately to get too deep into what you've been posting, but I have been reading as you post..just so you know you're not talking to thin air.



posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 12:55 AM
link   
reply to post by CLPrime
 

Thanks for the acknowledgement. I'm off on a project of my own for a week or so and can appreciate what you say about finding time.

It certainly isn't easy to see the similarities between the two drawings since one is a depiction of quantum action at the micro level and the other is the depiction of aggregate quanta and combined action at the macro level. The similarity is in how the same mechanics are in play in the motion at both levels. At the quantum level the photon travels at the speed of light using inflowing wave energy coming from one direction only, and at the macro level the speed of the aggregate local object is the net of inflowing wave energy coming from all directions.



posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 01:03 AM
link   
sorry, but this post just made me think SPONGE BOB SQUARE UNIVERSE



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 08:23 AM
link   
reply to post by BogieSmiles
 

With the groundwork laid in the last post, what I wanted to discuss was a philosophy of what causes us to interact with each other and what determines our form of interaction.

First, I suggest that there is the spectrum of individual self values. There is no clear right and wrong in any given set of circumstances aside from what we have learned through life, and so the individual often has to choose a course without clear agreement of others, or often with clear disagreement for that matter, and it is the individual's set of values that most often leads to their actions. So how different can those values be and how can we discuss them in generalized terms?

One way is define the spectrum of individual values with high spiritual values like helping others or following a religion on one end and high physical values like enjoying drugs/stimulants and promiscuity on the other; our options are phenomenal, lol. There is no absolute right or wrong set of values unless you have some connection to the Supernatural that I don't have, and so any set of values has equal merit from the perspective of any given individual; why wouldn't my views be as good for me as yours are for you? I equate it to conscience; this is not about societal imposition, this is about our self image, freewill, and conscience and where we fall on the spectrum.

The distinction between spiritual vs. physical is individually determined, and is quantified as those views that one holds as the self-image they strive for. Does the individual aspire to have high spiritual satisfaction or do they aspire to have high physical satisfaction, or some combination; we all float somewhere along that spectrum and each important action can be seen as a pushpin that defines us. Our set of pushpins is how others see us, and our conscience that is at work as we place those pins throughout our lives defines how we see ourselves.

Second, there is also a sphere of tolerance that can be supposed to characterize every individual even though many will not be able to define their precise tolerance levels because they are so subjective and their full range is rarely tested. We tolerate things from some that we wouldn't tolerate from others. The act of intolerance is very different form individual to individual, not only in regard to what we allow without objection, but also in how we react when someone crosses our line of tolerance. Our line of tolerance defines our sphere which encompasses what we allow others to act out as they express their freewill. When that line is crossed, perhaps by someone doing careless harm to us or others during their exercise of freewill, our tolerance is tested. How much careless harm can someone else cause to us or to others before we inject ourselves into the fray? That is determined by what I call the individuals sphere of tolerance.

I have defined the two spheres of action: our individual sphere of values on the spectrum from high spiritual to high physical values of conscience that determines our actions, and our individual sphere that determines our personal line of tolerance that causes us to react when others cross it. These are generalizations of the determinants of interactions between individuals.

When applying Eternal Intent we are applying faith and hoping for guidance and favorable outcomes to requests for acknowledgements from beyond the boundary of science and into the realm of the possibilities afforded us by the mystery of the as yet unknown invariant natural laws. The success of our individual approach to applying Eternal Intent in our lives certainly could be determined by the extent that our two spheres of action are in accord with equations that define the as yet unknown natural laws. 



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 08:28 AM
link   
Is it possible to be alone in the ISU?
Taking the last paragraph:
"When applying Eternal Intent we are applying faith and hoping for guidance and favorable outcomes to requests for acknowledgements from beyond the boundary of science and into the realm of the possibilities afforded us by the mystery of the as yet unknown invariant natural laws. The success of our individual approach to applying Eternal Intent in our lives certainly could be determined by the extent that our two spheres of action are in accord with equations that define the as yet unknown natural laws."

The talk of EI as faith based does not invoke the Supernatural because the faith is in the idea that within the invariant natural laws there are laws that govern consciousness and thought that we do not yet understand. If we understood those laws and the equations that could be derived from that understanding we would not be dealing with mysticism, so instead of invoking the Supernatural we would be saying that anything that appears Supernatural has natural causes that we don't yet understand.

What I called faith and hope in that quote could also be stated as a suspicion that there are forces at work that could produce outcomes in our lives based on thoughts instead of actions, and that those outcomes could be invariant natural effects of consciousness and thought via the wave energy of quantum action connecting the coherent aggregate wave energy presence of individuals within the foundational medium.

Invoking those natural laws without understanding them might be the same as an exercise in trial and error, and the feedback loop leaves much to be desired since any actual acknowledgement in the form of guidance and favorable outcomes to requests is so subjective that it is of value only to the individual experiencing it, and carries value for others only to the extent that they are willing to have faith in an individual instead of in the idea of there being invariant natural laws that can be put to use for our individual purposes. The faith in any individuals who might relate their success in applying EI is a completely different matter from faith in EI, and my philosophy shrugs at simply believing someone else on matters of EI; you must apply EI and experience the results for yourself to determine if it works for you given your set of spheres of action. And taking a position of faith or suspicion that EI may work seems that it would be one motivation for trying it.

It seems entirely reasonable to me to assume that there are invariant equations that all play together in an internally consistent interaction of natural laws that represent the interconnectedness of all events including conscious thought, and if so then it is safe to assume that our ability to invoke any existent Eternal Intent would be dependent on the compatibility of our sphere of values and our sphere of tolerance with those equations, but maybe that conclusion is an individual delusion on top of the undaunted delusions of my model.

But no, we are not alone in the ISU. In my philosophy we are all connected by the wave energy that emanates from us as we exist and think. Universal togetherness, whether agreeable or disagreeable, is in the effect our thoughts have on one another and on anyone and everyone within the speed of light sphere of our wave energy emanations through the foundational medium.





new topics
top topics
 
5
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join