Enlightenment: Just tell what it is.

Originally posted by Serdgiam

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by Serdgiam

 

Because the cardiac muscle is myogenic, meaning it has the property of being able to contract rhythmically independent of any nerve supply. So the autonomic nervous system modifies the speed of the heart beat but the heart can actually be removed from an animal and continue beating. Isotonic solution/saline is basically sodium chloride that is isotonic to body fluids, and is therefore able to maintain living tissue temporarily. It contains the same concentration of ios as blood and the cells of the body.
Source(s):
Cardiac Nurse

Do you have an actual source? I would love to see a test where the heart was able to beat an infinite amount of time outside of the source of its oscillations!

I have never denied the heart will continue beating. In fact, that is expected according to capacitance

Just to clarify, your "cardiac nurse" and myself are saying the same thing. Just like a capacitor in a stereo system will continue to hold a charge when the power source is cut. At least, for a time.

edit on 11-2-2013 by Serdgiam because: (no reason given)

Some good info on the heart-head connection here!

www.heartmath.org...

reply to post by 1nf1del


That is definitely an interesting site and I think makes a point that I didnt mention; that while the heart is not independent, neither are the systems that are connected to it!

The heart cant survive without the brain any more than the brain can survive without the heart. The co-dependence and balance within our bodies is a truly impressive thing. They can last for a brief time apart, but it sure doesnt last long. If any of it was truly independent, the individual systems would be able to operate without flaw and indefinitely with zero external stimuli (which I have never seen).

Again, completely willing to admit I am wrong if there has been a case where the heart (or brain!) was able to function without its supporting systems, for more than even a week much less months or years.

Glad to see the clash didnt carry over

edit: BLAST!!! off topic again!!! I just cant fight the flow!!!

Originally posted by Serdgiam
reply to post by 1nf1del

 

That is definitely an interesting site and I think makes a point that I didnt mention; that while the heart is not independent, neither are the systems that are connected to it!

The heart cant survive without the brain any more than the brain can survive without the heart. The co-dependence and balance within our bodies is a truly impressive thing. They can last for a brief time apart, but it sure doesnt last long. If any of it was truly independent, the individual systems would be able to operate without flaw and indefinitely with zero external stimuli (which I have never seen).

Again, completely willing to admit I am wrong if there has been a case where the heart (or brain!) was able to function without its supporting systems, for more than even a week much less months or years.

Glad to see the clash didnt carry over

edit: BLAST!!! off topic again!!! I just cant fight the flow!!!

edit on 11-2-2013 by Serdgiam because: (no reason given)

I don't know about that long, I saw a video of a deer that got hit by a truck and it's heart was laying on the ground next to it, it beat for about ten seconds. If you research heart transplant patients they don't live very long after receiving an artificial heart, I think the longest was eleven years, but don't quote me on that! But there is some other connection between the two that they cannot survive without each other for very long!

Originally posted by Serdgiam


edit: BLAST!!! off topic again!!! I just cant fight the flow!!!

edit on 11-2-2013 by Serdgiam because: (no reason given)

Eh, we are bumping his thread, if OP asks me to stay on topic I will respect his wishes!

Originally posted by Serdgiam

The heart cant survive without the brain any more than the brain can survive without the heart. The co-dependence and balance within our bodies is a truly impressive thing. They can last for a brief time apart, but it sure doesnt last long. If any of it was truly independent, the individual systems would be able to operate without flaw and indefinitely with zero external stimuli (which I have never seen).

Again, completely willing to admit I am wrong if there has been a case where the heart (or brain!) was able to function without its supporting systems, for more than even a week much less months or years.

Glad to see the clash didnt carry over

edit: BLAST!!! off topic again!!! I just cant fight the flow!!!

edit on 11-2-2013 by Serdgiam because: (no reason given)

I did not say the heart can survive without a system. I am and have been saying that the heart beats itself. The brain is not making the heart beat. I have provided information for you to view in accordance with this.


The hearts beats, it pulses, it occillates - it is waving.
The universe is waving, pulsing, in and out - the breath like the sea.
The energy, the heart, is pulsing is happening now and no one is doing it.
It is just happening.

reply to post by Itisnowagain


And where are you in all of this?

To meditate on the past is to have an enlightened future.

What do you think of that? I found it myself, but where I found it, Must be a place where I was one with something.. (sufficate)

, much better now let's take off to.... uhmn.............................................................................

Haha!

Enlightenment shifts from human being to human being, not? For us to be in harmony with eachother enlightenment must come from one to the other and opposite. Hyve goat you fewled wright their didn't yaa.

'Dropping dead'.

I think I can't reply in the next few days, at least with decent comments.

I enjoy reading every reply, I hope you people don't get to harrassed by words to often. (For me, I put my heart in conversations and a lot I open it reading replys, when the messy ones come up, it's always heartbreak to me.)

I don't know how you look like. B's mart, B smart, Be smart.

reply to post by Angle


Not that I'm an expert on the subject, but I'm fairly certain that enlightenment isn't as simple as finding clever quotes on the internet. I begin to suspect you are nothing short of a dreamy fool. I am one too, but more dreamy and less fool.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


What should I say, you're definetly not an expert on the subject? You're definetly not an expert on the subject..


May the fire reach your guilt AfterInfinity. You owe me a $1000 if you don't get what I mean within 3 days. Thx a lot for the money..

reply to post by Angle

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Angle

 

Not that I'm an expert on the subject, but I'm fairly certain that enlightenment isn't as simple as finding clever quotes on the internet. I begin to suspect you are nothing short of a dreamy fool. I am one too, but more dreamy and less fool.

May the fire reach your guilt AfterInfinity. You owe me a $1000 if you don't get what I mean within 3 days. Thx a lot for the money..

I rest my case.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
I did not say the heart can survive without a system. I am and have been saying that the heart beats itself. The brain is not making the heart beat. I have provided information for you to view in accordance with this.

I knew what you have been saying all along You specifically used the word "independent" though, which nothing truly is. The heart beats itself in much the same way a CD player utilizes the energy from the power source. It does not do it independently though. If that power source is never connected, the CD/heart will never play.. I would guess that you have heard the word co-dependence in this field of matters (enlightenment, religion, etc). Usually "arising" works its way in there too.

In much the same way as 1nf1del and I have been interacting in another thread, you made a point with specific words that do not necessarily apply in my perspective (which, no matter your beliefs, is just as valid as anyone elses) even though the overall concept was reasonably sound. I just clarified according to my own perspective, which was then turned into a battle. This was done to show the discrepancies than can arise from two different fingers pointing to the same moon. Even when they are pointing to the same thing, our perspectives can outright disagree. This is the same for enlightenment (and every conversation or sharing of perspectives). It isnt a matter of which perspective is right, it is a matter of them both inherently co-existing.

1nf1del, do you see what I have been pointing to for the entire time in our other conversation? It may perhaps be clearer when it happens in a conversation which you are not necessarily taking part.

Originally posted by Serdgiam

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
I did not say the heart can survive without a system. I am and have been saying that the heart beats itself. The brain is not making the heart beat. I have provided information for you to view in accordance with this.

I knew what you have been saying all along

You specifically used the word "independent" though, which nothing truly is. The heart beats itself in much the same way a CD player utilizes the energy from the power source. It does not do it independently though. If that power source is never connected, the CD/heart will never play.. I would guess that you have heard the word co-dependence in this field of matters (enlightenment, religion, etc). Usually "arising" works its way in there too.

In much the same way as 1nf1del and I have been interacting in another thread, you made a point with specific words that do not necessarily apply in my perspective (which, no matter your beliefs, is just as valid as anyone elses) even though the overall concept was reasonably sound. I just clarified according to my own perspective, which was then turned into a battle. This was done to show the discrepancies than can arise from two different fingers pointing to the same moon. Even when they are pointing to the same thing, our perspectives can outright disagree. This is the same for enlightenment (and every conversation or sharing of perspectives). It isnt a matter of which perspective is right, it is a matter of them both inherently co-existing.

1nf1del, do you see what I have been pointing to for the entire time in our other conversation? It may perhaps be clearer when it happens in a conversation which you are not necessarily taking part.

edit on 12-2-2013 by Serdgiam because: (no reason given)

You are correct in that they don't act independently, but please don't bring the discussion from that thread here, please respond to that issue in that thread or PM if you wish!

reply to post by 1nf1del


It is an overarching point that applies to both threads, and applies to both you and Itisnowagain equally (as well as myself).

I do not see the desire for growth in Itisnowagain like I see in you though. The possibility for us all to learn from each other on the same topic is there to be had, as long as we understand we are all coming at it from our own perspective.

In the differences and the discrepancies, we start to see how large the canvas we are all painting on truly is. In that, we start to realize our own innate limitations that are there regardless of perspective. And in co-existing, we find that enlightenment whether we realize it or not (as it has always been there).

Originally posted by Serdgiam
reply to post by 1nf1del

 

It is an overarching point that applies to both threads, and applies to both you and Itisnowagain equally (as well as myself).

I do not see the desire for growth in Itisnowagain like I see in you though. The possibility for us all to learn from each other on the same topic is there to be had, as long as we understand we are all coming at it from our own perspective.

In the differences and the discrepancies, we start to see how large the canvas we are all painting on truly is.

edit on 12-2-2013 by Serdgiam because: (no reason given)

That is kind of you to say, I respect you as well for keeping it civil, and I apologize if I came off as an ass last night as I've got issues going on in my personal life that I try not to let carry over to forums but sometimes it happens!

Originally posted by 1nf1del
That is kind of you to say, I respect you as well for keeping it civil, and I apologize if I came off as an ass last night as I've got issues going on in my personal life that I try not to let carry over to forums but sometimes it happens!

As a great.. uh.. man.. thing.. once said "Do or do not. There is no try."

I understand the pervasive nature of the difficulties of life. I promise you that.

Dont take any of it too seriously, none of us are getting out of here alive!

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Angle

 

Not that I'm an expert on the subject, but I'm fairly certain that enlightenment isn't as simple as finding clever quotes on the internet. I begin to suspect you are nothing short of a dreamy fool. I am one too, but more dreamy and less fool.

Now I am sorry AfterInfitiny, I thought you were labeling me a dreamy fool, but rereading (sorry, I'm having trouble sometimes with the natural english language, you guys are so easy at it) I suddenly think (and because of your following reply) you weren't trying to hurt me at all.

Now I am still confused. Meaning you can say whatever you want now leaving me with the thought you weren't tough you were..

AAAAA :s

Originally posted by Serdgiam

In much the same way as 1nf1del and I have been interacting in another thread, you made a point with specific words that do not necessarily apply in my perspective (which, no matter your beliefs, is just as valid as anyone elses) even though the overall concept was reasonably sound. I just clarified according to my own perspective, which was then turned into a battle. This was done to show the discrepancies than can arise from two different fingers pointing to the same moon. Even when they are pointing to the same thing, our perspectives can outright disagree. This is the same for enlightenment (and every conversation or sharing of perspectives). It isnt a matter of which perspective is right, it is a matter of them both inherently co-existing.

Seeing what is not there causes so much unnecessary suffering.
Mountains and molehills.

reply to post by Itisnowagain


Squares and rectangles.

Beaver damns!

Licorice and lollipops.

*pause*

and a good measure of googly eyes.

There-in lies the answer.

*strokes beard*

We need an introduction here..

Originally posted by Angle
We need an introduction here..

Hi I'm 1nf1del, I like long walks on the beach, I love dogs, dirt bikes and drums!