Exctracted infinites remain infinity. Important metaphysical thread.

If you extract from an infinite thing, what remains is still an infinite thing.

Time and space are infinite things, so your individualized extraction of them as "the here and now" can only be also infinite.

reply to post by smithjustinb


Time and space are ideas. There are no things. Things are thinks.

reply to post by Itisnowagain


H

reply to post by Itisnowagain


How is that relevant to my thread?

Originally posted by smithjustinb
If you extract from an infinite thing, what remains is still an infinite thing.

Time and space are infinite things, so your individualized extraction of them as "the here and now" can only be also infinite.

You speak of things. You speak of time and space.
Neither exist in reality.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Originally posted by smithjustinb
If you extract from an infinite thing, what remains is still an infinite thing.

Time and space are infinite things, so your individualized extraction of them as "the here and now" can only be also infinite.

You speak of things. You speak of time and space.
Neither exist in reality.

Who's reality?

Originally posted by smithjustinb

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Originally posted by smithjustinb
If you extract from an infinite thing, what remains is still an infinite thing.

Time and space are infinite things, so your individualized extraction of them as "the here and now" can only be also infinite.

You speak of things. You speak of time and space.
Neither exist in reality.

Who's reality?

Nobodies. Reality does not belong to anyone.
Reality is.

reply to post by Itisnowagain


What is it?

Originally posted by smithjustinb
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

What is it?

This.

reply to post by Itisnowagain


I see things.

Originally posted by smithjustinb
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

I see things.

Beyond conceptualization lies the truth.

Originally posted by smithjustinb
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

I see things.

Prior to words - there is just this. This is one. This 'one' image is then split into the 'many' with words.


The first chapter of S. Michells translation of the Tao Te Ching says this:

The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.

The unnamable is the eternally real.
Naming is the origin
of all particular things.

You see 'things' (manifestations) because you are caught in desire.

Free from desire, you realize the mystery.
Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Originally posted by smithjustinb
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

I see things.

Beyond conceptualization lies the truth.

edit on 20-1-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

You don't have to conceptualize to recognize the there is someTHING here. I never said I was making assumptions about what the things are, nor am I trying to define them/it, I was only pointing out that the world I see is not an inanimate darkness.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Originally posted by smithjustinb
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

What is it?

This.

This is seen as only I can see it. This is interacted with as only I can interact with it. Therefore, it is mine.

You're assuming the I'm caught in desire based on what?

Originally posted by smithjustinb

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Originally posted by smithjustinb
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

I see things.

Beyond conceptualization lies the truth.

edit on 20-1-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

You don't have to conceptualize to recognize the there is someTHING here. I never said I was making assumptions about what the things are, nor am I trying to define them/it, I was only pointing out that the world I see is not an inanimate darkness.

Yes, there is some 'thing'. However, you say you see 'things'. There is just one image of light.

It is the mind that imagines 'more' than one thing. The mind assumes there is more than one.

Originally posted by smithjustinb
You're assuming the I'm caught in desire based on what?

Free from desire, you realize the mystery.
Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations.

This above quote is from the Tao Te Ching, it states that if you see 'things' (manifestations) you are caught in desire. The mystery, when realized, is one.

Originally posted by smithjustinb

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Originally posted by smithjustinb
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

What is it?

This.

This is seen as only I can see it. This is interacted with as only I can interact with it. Therefore, it is mine.

You believe there is a 'you' that interacts with 'reality'. When really there is not a 'you' and 'reality' - there is just what is happening presently.
The 'you' that is assumed to interact with reality is acting in 'assumed time and space' (a holodeck in the imagination). 'Your' assumed life is lived in a dream in imagination (in the dream of separation). Whereas real life is happening now - it is one life, whole and complete now, it is God (timeless being).

I will leave you this illuminating video:
youtu.be...

Originally posted by smithjustinb
If you extract from an infinite thing, what remains is still an infinite thing.

Time and space are infinite things, so your individualized extraction of them as "the here and now" can only be also infinite.

The concept of "extracting" from an infinite thing to form two infinite things is flawed on the very basis of what the term extraction suggests. That being that an extraction is a finite portion of that which it was extracted from. - leaving both finite by definition. That said, what is it that could ever extract anything from that which is infinite? Not that it matters, since such a notion violates the conceptual premise of infinity itself.

"Here and now" has been proven - by quantum physics - to be an indivisible unit of action that is immediately replaced by the very next indivisible quantum unit of action, as each shows up to become the past once it's had its moment as Now. Again, the concept you propose is in direct violation of that which has been verified again and again, and successfully built upon for nearly 100 years. So, if you have an issue with what I'm stating, then you need to take it up with the generations of thinkers, inventors, and researchers that have been transforming the world around you since long before you were born.

reply to post by NorEaster


To start, I'm not talking about infinity. I'm talking about things that are infinite.

Conceptualize infinity. Even if it's not real. See it as an indivisible whole that can't be quantified. Infinity would be so infinite that no matter where you are in it, you will be in the center. (like space and time). Everything would be everything and anything.

Now apply the concept of infinity to known infinite things. Space and time to name a couple. Infinity is so unquantifiable that even if you were to be attempt to divide it, you would still have an infinite. But you could have the delusion of finite.

So what I was saying at the top was that even if you take a small portion out of the whole of time or space, you still have an infinite amount.

How far away things are depends on how big or small you are. How time passes depends on how active you are.