Originally posted by kauskau
reply to post by NorEaster
my god i wished we could discuss this in my language..
You're doing fine. I didn't know that this is a 2nd language for you. I'm a typical American who is stranded in just this one language. That said, I'm
illiterate in many languages, but I digress...
the core concept is this..
Likewise, you don't have to create the reality you desire, because it already exists - among the infinite probable realities all simultaneously
co-existing. All you have to do is make yourself an effective "antenna", so that by similarity of vibrations, you can receive that reality. And this
makes it physiologically "real" for you."
I'm afraid that while you are still anchored to the material realm, this is never going to be true. You can imagine this to be true, but it will only
ever be psychologically "real" for you, since all you can affect is the strength of your illusory perceptions and the impact on your physiology they
can have - which is not making a reality construct any more real than merely a crippling illusion.
The question is not if i can MAKE relations in my mind. Of course everything i perceive consists of dependent patterns because you can not
perceive a singularity..Everything you "perceive" is an interpretation of reality consisting of uncountable elements wich are infinite..(the big bang
is only a simplification for the linear mind) . You never perceived reality itself because reality itself is not an object. Reality itself is not
differentiable so every perception is a simplification of reality . There is NO THING we perceive which is
self-reliant. So of course i did not say: "The "past" as a construct of "linear relationship" has no connection to the things i perceive. (even the
keyboard i am writing on has a connection to what you would call "Past)...
Your inaccuracies concerning the existence of a "singularity"
or "elements which are infinite"
aside, you're right that nothing exists
without a contextual relationship with everything else that exists. What you need to do is realize that reality is not an object. It's what physicists
refer to as an emergent system
; in its case, the result of the contextual relationship between everything that exists. It's like traffic in
that sense, and completely unlike any of the myriad of systems that come together in confluence to bring it into existence.
The question is not if you CAN make that relation..the quesion is: what is time..what is the past? How do we definite it..and my theory is: we
are wrong..and thats why i say: the way we THINK we experience past in an illusion. We never experienced the past..we allways experience the "Now"
from another perspective..
Quantum Physics has proven that reality is literally quantized as identical, indivisible units of "now" that exist until they are replaced by the next
identical unit of "now", with each "now" triggering the emergence of residual information quanta configuration clusters that permanently exist in
place of each quantum unit of "now" that did, at one time, exist. These residual information clusters are actually what create reality as the emergent
system that it is, and provide the contextual relationship structure that ultimately can be leveraged (by sentient being like us) as "natural law".
Which is exactly what has happened within our own tiny slice of reality, with that computer you're looking at right now representing a really good
example of the leveraging of natural law by sentient beings.
Without the rock solid precedence foundation of reality's gathering contextual structure as real and definitive, then nothing at all would be
buildable or capable of being progressively developed. Not even memories.
Couldnt be the fact that we always experience "NOW" be a hint to something???? I can not give you any evidence or physical formular..i can
just ask you: watch the video and ask your intuition if you can at least "wonder about" our concept of time.
You seem to think that I've never examined the issue of linear time.
Okay, did you know that it's been proven that you don't actually ever
experience "now" as it happens? It's true. If you have a few bucks for the pdf download, I suggest that you take a look at this study -
- and see what I'm referring to when I say that it's been proven that you consciously
experience "now" between 500 ms to a full 7 seconds after it's already occurred. I would have to suggest that this means that you're always
experiencing the past, without actually knowing it. Now that
should have your intuition "wondering about" your own concept of time, and about
the actual research that some of the folks who pop together Youtube videos bother themselves with.
A movie for example is really a very long strip of film. Per second, there are manye frames. Each frame is a separate piece of action. But
in each frame, nothing is moving. Everything is completely still. What would happen if you would not only watch a few frames per second that are on
the screen but could step back and see the frames that will come and were already passing through the lens....you would see that the past and the
future are happening at the same time: NOW!..you would stop defining the "Past" as something which "happened"...past would just be a "location"....and
i think the greatest analogy the nature gives us for that fact is: That the past only happened NOW .....so that means in a physical way there got to
be a way to travel to that "OTHER NOW" in which i am a child..because..it still was NOW!!!!..you understand?..so ...what is the difference between the
past you remember and this now? Its not "time"....because "Back than" was still "NOW"....the only difference is the "frequency or the "objects in the
now"...so something which you can define.
You can't watch a movie that you are integral to. In other words, if you want to view the progression of time within your own reality confine as being
a movie, then you will have to deal with the fact that you only exist as a image within that movie, and that as an image, you can't exist beyond the
film material of the movie itself.If you feel that you are entitled to project yourself outside of the movie, then you'll have to contend with the
logical requirements of existential identity, and agree to become non-existent (within all the frames of said movie) as the price of stepping outside
of the movie to view it as a film strip. But then, since reality (as the movie you have presented it as being) is the emergent system that exists as a
result of the contextual relationship between all that exists within the system that it is, then your elimination from that confluence of contextual
relationship (in all "frames" of that movie) completely obliterates the identity of that specific reality as the emergent system that it is. The truth
is that it isn't the same reality without you that it would be with you included. So you actually can't "step out" from the film material of this
movie, but even if you could, your elimination would completely alter every aspect of the reality whole itself, saying nothing of the mayhem that
would ensue if you were to actually be capable of shoehorning yourself back into the mess again after upending the entire structure by leaving.
You kids and your imaginations. It's great fun and all, but lately there have been too many folks embracing this silliness as real, and isn't that the
kind of thing that got us into all this trouble with religions and superstitions centuries ago?
.ah snap my language is not helping here..
It's not your command of the English language that's not helping here, trust me.
The question is: DID THE PAST EVER HAPPEN???? DID WE EVER PERCEIVE A PAST? or are we just seeing an interpretation of another reality and we
could have DOZENS of possibilites to "change that interpretation" and therefor even change the reality we are in..in that case "the past" would only
be an interpretation of the relationships i perceive...
Your memory is just an interpretation of the relationships you perceive. The past is represented by residual fact clusters of physical information,
and as I said, these residual fact clusters are permanent. They are responsible for things like gravity, electromagnetism, centrifugal force, math,
and the fact that I can't fart butterflies even if I want to. They are literally responsible for every aspect of reality that you like, love, hate,
and wish could be different than it is. They aren't responsible for time, but then time is the most pervasive contextual unifier within any reality
confine, and even information itself submits to it. That's what the quantum of "now" is based on, and what separates "now" from "not now". A very
specific and stable rate of change. Just simple physics, and not mysterious at all.
When you a wake up from a dream and think about your dream: you would see that the "now" is more real than the "dream"...but still the dream
was happening now..my theory is : we can not see this because we have logic..and we have seemingly a system which is based on causality and logic..but
the quesion is: is this only fooling us ? How do we know that this is the only reality and that we are not constantly shifting through "stills" which
are just so similar to each other that we have the interpretation of a linear flow...
Those "stills" are the quanta of now as they happen, only to become the past as soon as the unit rate of change expires. You exist only because of the
stability and quantization of time's linear progressive development trajectory, and the ongoing impact on the contextual relationship confluence that
each residual fact cluster has as it emerges to accurately represent each quantum of now that has just been replaced by the next quantum of now. You
can't affect any of it. You are a result of it. And it's just that simple.
edit on 1/31/2013 by NorEaster because: an experiment in overloading
a single post