Is motion time travel?

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: onequestion

How does that work for a moth or a tree?

Well that depends because that depends on what the moth and the tree actually are doesn't it?

Do they exist or are they symbols?

a reply to: Tuomptonite

Oh don't get into the 4+ dimension nonsense we have no idea what the 4th dimension is yet.

a reply to: onequestion

They exist, as does Jupiter, which was here before your perception and will be after.

a reply to: onequestion

Perception is a factor... take an atom kind of like a little solar system...

The entire Universe could be a single strand of DNA for an incredible entity...made complete by billions of universes...

We can only see so much of the spectrum...
it is possible spirits exists beyond our ability to perceive them naturally...

Or where our universe ends it's laws are suspended and another Universe with opposite characteristics begins and holds ours together and vice versa...

a reply to: Tuomptonite

First, I have an issue with the term "higher dimensions." What makes one dimension better than another? Some say length is most important, others say something else.

But no, there is no experimental evidence which demonstrates that there are more than three spatial dimensions (and one temporal).

a reply to: zazzafrazz

Nah I'm not so convinced of that.

Sounds great but not a chance in hell its just that simple.

Our life form awareness level of consciousness exist in everything in the universe and life oozes out of nothing and has even been found on meteors and meteorites.

a reply to: onequestion

The 4th dimension is believed to be time...
Well the 4th dimension of space that is...

a reply to: onequestion
Oh ok, so the 4th dimension is still up for debate? I won't be offended if you all don't feel like teaching a random dummy on the Internet on a Saturday night. Super fascinated by these types of discussions and appreciate any feedback.

a reply to: 5StarOracle

I think the observer is what all dimensions exist within so spend your time not trying to figure out what those dimensions are and try to understand who and what the observer is and many of these questions will be answered.

How's that sound?

a reply to: Tuomptonite

Yes it's up for debate as is everything at all times that's allegedly what science is really suppose to be about, if the ego in academia would go away.

a reply to: onequestion

Sometimes it is that simple. But keep asking questions, it takes you from a static state to creating patterns.

a reply to: onequestion

But the observer would be a part of all dimensions...

a reply to: zazzafrazz

I don't see that perspective at all I see a mor deeply connected and alive universe. The same life force that's alive in me is alive in everything.

a reply to: 5StarOracle

Maybe the observer is be space within which we create.

a reply to: onequestion


how does that explain time in motion though
?

a reply to: zazzafrazz
Does time move?

How far?

a reply to: Phage

I dunno, it was his question not mine

a reply to: [post=20423929]onequestion[/pos
I think this is kinda what I was trying to express in my first post but you said it much better. Some of these concepts just feel artificial to me. I know how lame that sounds and I wish I could express myself better.

a reply to: Tuomptonite

Here's an idea for you to throw around.

Science may not be as reliable as we believe it to be because of our ability to manifest ideas into reality. Science may actually be a manifestation instead of a discovery.

Imagine that for a minute and go back and review what we've done.

My theory is that it's an alchemical process or magical process we are accidentally taking advantage of it in ways we don't understand that have to do with mental focus and energy input collectively or with a strong enough focus.

a reply to: Tuomptonite

And why wouldn't they seem that way they are beyond normal perception.
But also this dimension could be artifical as well...
Because we could be existing on a higher level making this reality possible...