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 sprocket2cog
yes, and i think its even possible to meet ourselves in the same time and place
some people ask if we are all the same god in different bodies, why dont we know each other and what we are going to do next etc.
i say because we choose to forget, so we may experience things like they are the first time..
other wise it would get very boring rather quickly.
peace
Originally posted by smithjustinb
The fact that some people get it supports my claim.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Originally posted by smithjustinb
The fact that some people get it supports my claim.
No, it doesn't.
People in Heaven's Gate cult "got it" when Marshall claimed they had to die to ride the Hale-Bopp comet. Their "getting it" didn't make it true.
Originally posted by smithjustinb
This is NOT a cult. This is a philosophical (scientific pending) view of reality. That was a delusion based on nothing substantial, not even philosophy. My claims are based on philosophy and experience which are substantial. This is not something that I tell people and they believe what I say. This is something that anyone can look within themselves and know w/o having ever heard about it anywhere else. In fact, this is exactly how it is learned.
Originally posted by smithjustinb
And still the fact remains that because you don't get it and you think it's absurd, does not mean it is not true.
If you don't believe me, and you want to post on my thread, then you need to prove it untrue.
Don't come on here giving me negative opinions because they are just opinions. If you give me some facts that disprove it, I'll listen to what you got to say.
Originally posted by smithjustinb
By posting in this forum I don't have to prove anything.
Originally posted by smithjustinb
Also, I'm sorry if I am confusing you with the jumbledness of my thoughts.
Originally posted by onequestion
reply to post by NorEaster
Do you remember being a baby? When was your first memory? Where did that memory come from and how did it get there?
Originally posted by NorEaster
That said, I do have a few questions.
- If this is what creation was (is) all about, then at what point did it (does it) all initiate?
To get around this, Gisin and colleagues performed their experiment many times over a 12-hour period. The rotation of the Earth throughout this time means that the researchers could put a limit on the duration of the time gap for any reference frame. They found that even for a reference frame that would produce the biggest gap — one moving relative to the Earth at close to the speed of light — the signal itself would have to travel more than 10 times the speed of light. For more realistic reference frames — say, one moving at a thousandth the speed of light relative to Earth — the signal would have to travel even faster, at more than 10,000 times the speed of light (Nature 454 861)
How did it (does it) initiate?
What was (is) there that was (is) lacking what it was (is) that initiated, forcing that initiation to occur?
Originally posted by bsbray11
Just following along here, offering ideas along with everyone else.
Originally posted by NorEaster
That said, I do have a few questions.
- If this is what creation was (is) all about, then at what point did it (does it) all initiate?
There is no evidence that time is a universal constant. In fact, Einstein's theory of relativity seems to refute the idea pretty explicitly, in that it shows that the flow of time as perceived by an individual, is dependent upon that individual's velocity.
Then you get to things like entanglement, which demonstrate an exchange of "information" or whatever you'd like to call it, that appears, from the best measurements so far, to occur at least 10,000x the speed of light, if not instantly...
To get around this, Gisin and colleagues performed their experiment many times over a 12-hour period. The rotation of the Earth throughout this time means that the researchers could put a limit on the duration of the time gap for any reference frame. They found that even for a reference frame that would produce the biggest gap — one moving relative to the Earth at close to the speed of light — the signal itself would have to travel more than 10 times the speed of light. For more realistic reference frames — say, one moving at a thousandth the speed of light relative to Earth — the signal would have to travel even faster, at more than 10,000 times the speed of light (Nature 454 861)
physicsworld.com...
What all this amounts to, is that even time is arbitrary and the appearance of time depends on variables.
At what point does it "all" initiate? To answer your question, there is obviously no way to answer that scientifically since even the "big bang" is a theory and is pretty lacking even at that. But what you would probably be looking for, is a frame of reference in which every other space-time that exists, is equi-distant, like the center of a circle from which all points along the circumference are at an equal distance. The fact that this center-point is a center-point, is what would seem to lend it a special quality of being central to all other space-times in existence, though the idea of "beginning" or "ending" may seem meaningless at that point since time itself is not constant or necessarily even linear.
How did it (does it) initiate?
This is another question of time, so it ties in to what I said above. Time is not universally constant, so any question about when it "all" started is going to result in an arbitrary answer.
What was (is) there that was (is) lacking what it was (is) that initiated, forcing that initiation to occur?
This is also dependent upon time, so you would get different answers depending on different frames of reference. It's like asking "how far away is the Eiffel Tower?" It depends on who you're asking. There is no single definitive answer to such a question.
You exist as a physical manifestation, and whether you agree to that fact or not, it's still a fact. Since you are a physical manifestation, the obvious implication is that physical existence is not a myth of perception. In fact, in order to impact what exists as either perceived or as real, the active affecting agent must share physical state with what it is affecting. So, if you are a bit of god, and affecting other bits of god, then there is a shared physical state that is allowing you to achieve that effect. The direct implication is that regardless of what you believe to be true, you exist as physical, and with that established, your premise that you are god requires that god is physical, and that requires that your god have a physical genesis of some sort.