Nothing is real.....

Holographic Universe or Computer Simulation? Big Bang or God?

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Re: Nothing is real.....

Postby simp » Thu Oct 21, 2010 9:54 pm

On the discussion of the soul Dan starts off by denying the soul as real. He writes
I agree with most pantheists that the soul is an illusion.

But then he launches into a spectacular schizophrenic paradoxical rebuttal of his opening statement. He writes
Only humans have personal souls, which are the vehicles of our power of reason, moral and otherwise, and of our personal, more or less, eidetic memories.

Further he reiterates that the soul is real and discusses the space brothers souls, he writes
"So, what about our 'space' brothers? There may be a few, with individual souls, but mostly not, IMHO


If "our" souls are vehicles of our reason and morality then just what dictates the reason and morality of many of the supposed space visitors [ ie the benevolent evolved space brother that many contactees report ] If they do not possess a soul are they more like robots?

Why should "we" have souls and other highly evolved sentient beings in the multiverse not?

Dan again
You Pantheists are saying that the best possible world would have an infinity of souls, so that every soul could hold onto its anonymity, like a stranger in a big city. Us, theists, we're just small-town hicks!

Incorrect Padre. The Pantheist denies the soul as it is merely a concept. The Pantheist asks Whos' Soul? If Dan Smith possesses or contains a soul then whos' soul is it when Dan Smith dies? Who does the soul belong to? Itself? But then what is it 'self' but pure spirit - a relation relating to itself or that in the relation which is relating to itself. And that is the great I AM! That is a Pantheists position.

More examples of Sman Diths schizophrenia
But, us theists, like our God to be up close and personal.


Here he clearly draws a line between an Objective God as separate and apart and then himself also as real, separate and apart.But again in spectacular paradox and spoken like a true Panteist Dan surmises

The ultimate Omega convergence of reality, of the Shining Present, is just the cosmic self-Presence.


Yep! That's it! You got it in one Padre!

Dan your philosophy is an absolute confusing mish mash of paradoxical and contradictory babble, a quintillion words in search of an editor. You need to work out what in fact you really are!

The Simp
simp
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 1:31 am


Re: Nothing is real.....

Postby dan » Fri Oct 22, 2010 2:42 pm

Simp,

The starting premise of the BPWH is that everything is a mental construct, with the possible exception of the Constructor/conductor or virtual/potential cosmic-Self, which is the Buckle of the cosmic Bootstrap. All of us humans are mini-buckles, being partial reflections of the Mama buckle. It is just a knot or seed-crystal in the primordial, phenomenological chaos.

The cosmic Self is self-realizing, through the 'development' of us, reflected mini-selves, that constitute the rest of the bootstrap.

It is cosmic love/agape that holds the whole shooting-match together. You could say that the cosmic Self is a topological love-knot, which may take the form of a love-triangle or a zodiacal mobius, etc. Recall that any number longitudinal slicing of a mobius just results in a geometric multiplication of the basic knot, all connected. (The electron/fermion, like the (simple) mobius, has to be rotated twice, to return to its original state.)

Agape replaces the Ether? Does that make it objective? It is difficult to eliminate all ground of being, especially when employing any sort of spacial intuition.

All the subsidiary ego-knots, dissolve back into the cosmic-mobius, from our worm's-eye PoV, but from the bird's-eye perspective, the ouroboric mobius contains the ego-knots in-perpetuity. Play it again, Sam? Yes, in a sense. There may never have been an original playing.

10:10---------- So, gosh, it just struck me that there need only be one soul, as there is only one electron. There is only one soul that is recirculating in the ouroboric time-loop. Each time around, it is meeting itself, for the first time. All we need is that initial mobius twist in the agape. All the rest is just getting our knickers in a knot. With 10^10 souls, there are 10^10 loops of the over-soul. We just keep on looping until peak-oil. P/O is not the cause of the limit; it is just one of many symptoms of the foundational self-limitation.

Are you following this, Simp? Is anyone else?

If "our" souls are vehicles of our reason and morality then just what dictates the reason and morality of many of the supposed space visitors [ ie the benevolent evolved space brother that many contactees report ] If they do not possess a soul are they more like robots?

Why should "we" have souls and other highly evolved sentient beings in the multiverse not?

Simp, I believe in Many Mansions, with a Grand Central Station. We, obviously, are the cosmic Grand Central Station (GCS). We are the Restaurant at the End of the multiverse, if you will. I don't believe in a multiverse because Monism is the only thing that can be coherent, both to us and to God, and keep in mind, now, from the 10:10 intuition, that you and I are not merely the reflections of God, that we are the re-circulations of God. You and I only go around once. God goes around, 10^10 times! Poor guy, don't you feel sorry for him?

The other species only participate in group souls. They do not engage in our egocentric/eidetic/linguistic ratiocinations, now do they?

How do we know that we are the cosmic GCS? Why did God deceive us, by making it appear that we were lost in space&time? Why shouldn't we believe Copernicus? Have you ever heard of Saving the Appearances, Simp? That is what science does, and so especially did our buddy, Nico! Now, we are only trying to look behind that holographic veil, which is about to be parted for us, in any case.

Incorrect Padre. The Pantheist denies the soul as it is merely a concept. The Pantheist asks Whos' Soul? If Dan Smith possesses or contains a soul then whos' soul is it when Dan Smith dies? Who does the soul belong to? Itself? But then what is it 'self' but pure spirit - a relation relating to itself or that in the relation which is relating to itself. And that is the great I AM! That is a Pantheists position.

Now I lay me down to sleep, I pray the Lord my soul to keep.
If I die before I wake, I pray the Lord my soul to take!

Does this completely answer your question, Simp?

me: But, us theists, like our God to be up close and personal.

Simp: Here he clearly draws a line between an Objective God as separate and apart and then himself also as real, separate and apart. But again in spectacular paradox and spoken like a true Pantheist, Dan surmises.

Separate from God, or does God just like to play with his food? Yes, Simp, Communion is a two-way street. Are we not all cosmic cannon-fodder?

Any more questions.......?
---------------------------------


Also, rather than Tegmark's Multiverse, I prefer Jesus' many mansions, wherein the Earth is both the cosmic Grand Central Station (GCS) and the Restaurant at the End of the Universe. We are the high-rent district. Be here, or be square! Hey, if it's too hot, here, then get out of the (cosmic) Kitchen.

Does everybody get this?

Why in heaven's name would God construct a Multiverse w/o a GCS? What would be the point, pray tell? Otherwise, you would just have an infinitude of multiverses swerving in the dark.

Yes? No?

The only question, as I stated above, is why would God go to such lengths just to keep most of us, and especially the intellectuals & scientists, in the dark about the true cosmic purpose of the Earth?

Well, for about the same reason that he would go to such lengths to conceal the real purpose of the Visitors.

Let's face it, sports fans, God is a cosmic Drama Queen. The God of the Prophetic Tradition is just the Self-revealing God. But what's there to reveal, if nothing has been concealed?

So, the only question is whether we are now going to have the Dance of the Seven Veils, or if we are going to have the Full (cosmic) Monty? Shock&Awe!

Almost everyone, except me, wants the Dance of the Seven Veils. I want the Full Monty!

And, hey, I've already gotten my marching orders.

That's just how it is with a coherent/holographic cosmos. It's all about the Flower in the crannied wall. And, yes, I was the (cosmic?) wall-flower, until Sophia so rudely plucked me from my little cranny. I used to be just a drip, but now I'm an ex-spurt! And Sophia did not outfit me with seven veils. Hey, I only got one Speedo, without so much as an autograph! Not even a 'been there, done that, t-shirt!'

Yes, this little revelation is strictly WYSIWYG! And this is just what the living truth is about. It's about Everyman and gal. We just get to meet our Self for the first time. Say, Howdy, we're on Candid Camera! We are God, about to start curing his Multiple Personality Disorder. Does that mean he's gonna come down and eat our lunch, or have us for dinner? It's a bit more like the latter. It's about the Hieros Gamos/Apocatastasis/Wedding-feast in the sky.
-----------------------------

Hey, Ray, have you seen this.........

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLNmkW02KK4

I can go with this, except that individual souls cannot beget or clone other souls, arbitrarily, e.g. the 10^10 limit is overriding.

The Tiferet is referred to as the heart of the TOL. I would equate that with the Earth/GCS, within the cosmos. Isn't that why the SoG would come here to be sacrificed?



(cont.)
dan
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 10:41 am
Location: maryland

Re: Nothing is real.....

Postby simp » Fri Oct 22, 2010 11:19 pm

The starting premise of the BPWH is that everything is a mental construct, with the possible exception of the Constructor/conductor or virtual/potential cosmic-Self

If the Constructor / Conductor is not Mind_stuff what else could it possibly be? There is ONLY Mind stuff. It is ALL Mind Stuff. Continual Change against a Changeless background. Pure Consciousness. The Void of Brahman divides and reflects upon itself infinitely creating space/time and becomes the eternal I AM


So, gosh, it just struck me that there need only be one soul, as there is only one electron


An infinite point reflecting upon itself endlessly creating all Maya and changing form, looking at and enjoying itself endlessly

Are you following this, Simp? Is anyone else?



Yes of course Im following it. This is classic pantheism Padre. Your problem is you veer from classic Vedanta and then deny it. Your continual inebriated babbling of God as an Objective Other is mere folly.

What you do is state that its all one thing, a monism, then start babbling on about yourself and God and souls and Heaven and Christ ad finitum? Are you not exhausted? ,

Yours is a cookie-cutter philosophy of believing the conceptual to be absolutely real. Remain with The binding force that holds the conceptiual together, the changeless background, the space between the thoughts and cease your chattering mind.

Enjoy the silence
simp
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 1:31 am

Re: Nothing is real.....

Postby You Can Call Me Ray » Sat Oct 23, 2010 1:43 am

Simp,

Your explanations and words flow in such a way as to remind me of a gentleman I learned a lot from when I worked with him at the front desk of a hotel in Claremont, California, when I was in college. He was a student of many religious traditions, was well-versed in sanskrit, and was outwardly a practitioner of Buddhism. Is that you, Dennis?

:D

Thank you for your efforts here. I learn much from people like you and Dennis. But then again, we are all One.
Ray
The Universe is an Integrated System. Operational, Functional, and Physical.
User avatar
You Can Call Me Ray
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:49 pm
Location: Huntington Beach, CA, USA

Re: Nothing is real.....

Postby You Can Call Me Ray » Sat Oct 23, 2010 2:09 am

Dan,

First, let me reiterate that I do not buy into your BPWH because of its complexity. And what I DO ultimately buy into is the Pantheist philosophies as related by Simp.

But since I am also a systems engineer, I believe existence unfolds systemically, and that means there are layers of existence. And my goals to understand those layers of existence, as part of my journey to achieve them (and expand beyond them) is based on understanding the relationships inherent in this relative existence. Having said that, I am now ready to address one of the things you mentioned in this post:

dan wrote:Hey, Ray, have you seen this.........

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLNmkW02KK4

I can go with this, except that individual souls cannot beget or clone other souls, arbitrarily, e.g. the 10^10 limit is overriding.


The only comment I shall make on that video is he talks too fast, and uses words he not only does not define, but does not even relate them to other things he talks about. I imagine that as fast as he talks is how you would appear to me as you spew your endless diatribes about all the various "key aspects" of your BPWH, which cannot ever seem to be simply related to each other. But none of this means I shy away from trying to engage with you on these issues. It only means that I shant give in to your desires for me to submit to your BPWH. Rather, I look for opportunities to find mutual understandings. And some small aspects of that video that you offered present such an opportunity.

Until now I have avoided describing to you how I rationalize (relate to) the concept of a soul. But now that you have offered this video, which speaks primarily of Tiphareth, I see a narrow slit which gives me hope that we can find some common ground on how SOUL relates to both conscious mind ("below" soul) and spirit ("above" soul). And because I am an engineer, I talk and relate more with pictures than I do with words (and you are a man of many words). So let me offer to you two pictures (schematics, if you will) to help you understand how I see the relationships of the levels of being (I AM). I believe I have presented these to you in the past, and you have ignored them. But I am not beneath trying again. So here goes:

ImageImage
Note: By using the word "Mind" in the above diagram, I am referring to "Conscious Mind"

I hope you can see the allegory, the parallel, the relationships I am suggesting. In short, I believe Tiphareth represents the central, mediating aspects of that which I know to be the soul. It is but one level of our Being. Whereas the level of the Conscious Mind is known to us as "Ray" or "Dan" or "Simp", I understand that the level of soul is known only to us as "I"...as in Individuality or Indivisibility.

I tend to think of our soul as the "I" in "I AM". So with that, can you guess what I think is the "AM" in "I AM"? It is pretty simple, really.

Ray
The Universe is an Integrated System. Operational, Functional, and Physical.
User avatar
You Can Call Me Ray
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:49 pm
Location: Huntington Beach, CA, USA

Re: Nothing is real.....

Postby simp » Sat Oct 23, 2010 1:08 pm

Ray writes
I believe existence unfolds systemically, and that means there are layers of existence.


Correct. Brahman - the Great Void which is full, potent, supreme knowledge and ultimate bliss allows itself to experience itself at every conceivable and possible gradient , with each gradient transcending the level beneath it.

So, for example, a rock is conscious, but asleep, the tree more conscious than the rock , the worm , more conscious than the tree, the pig, more conscious than the worm, homo spaien more conscious than the pig and onwards to our ultradimensional visitors which are more conscious than us here [ using a wider spectrum of consciousness such as telepathic contact ]

Higher levels of consciousness are egoless levels and begin thus resembling Christ nature or Buddha nature - which appears to be the template of Brahman [ supreme knowledge, ultimate bliss, perfec tion ] that must by necessity reside in all changing forms.

Why does Brahman [ which is perfection ] require the creation of the multiverse of maya and endless changing form? Because Brahman is unmanifested potential and requires fulfillment to ultimately be All that can possibly be. [ Unmanifested potential is not All but only half ]
simp
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 1:31 am

Re: Nothing is real.....

Postby dan » Sat Oct 23, 2010 8:42 pm

Ray and Simp,

IMHO, the BPWH provides connecting links to all the spiritual traditions.

Within the pantheist traditions, there are strong theistic strains, among the masses of practitioners. Yes, the intellectuals, of all stripes, look down their noses at these popular notions, wanting to maintain their metaphysical austerity. This is not unlike the puritanical strains of protestantism looking down their noses at the idolatry and emotionalism of all the other sects. This puritanical tendency is also found in the contrast of deism as compared to theism.

Intellectuals are strongly attracted to the abstract and impersonal, as opposed to the emotional and personal. It is definitely an uphill battle for me, in trying to reverse this historical trend. And why should I want to, in the first place?

IMHO, personalism and and interpersonalism are the only way forward for humanity. Personalism is the only kind of truth that can ever make sense to humans. It is the only kind of truth than can motivate us.

So, am I merely being a pragmatist? It certainly does not feel that way to me.

Why should persons be special? Why are we, persons, of any special significance in a cosmos that appears to be overwhelmingly impersonal. Why aren't we just the exceptions that prove the Rule of the Impersonal? Aren't we just like the flea floating down the river, demanding that the draw-bridge be opened? What makes us the measure of all things?

Well, are there any other measurers, besides Persons? Ironically, it is modern physics that speaks especially to the personal aspect of the cosmos, but most intellectuals are still stuck in the mechanical world of Descartes and Newton.

And, here's another point, for my pantheist friends: is not Pantheism a lot more personal than Deism? I don't think there can be the slightest doubt about that. Pantheists recognize that person-hood/Buddha-hood lies atop the Chain of Being. Insect souls need not apply for Nirvana. It is only that final step that is touted to be impersonal. This does seem self-contradictory. No? If the ultimate reality were truly impersonal, then should not souls be evolving downward on that chain of being?!

In this regard, I could do much worse that to quote our resident Buddhist, Simp,.....
So, for example, a rock is conscious, but asleep, the tree more conscious than the rock , the worm , more conscious than the tree, the pig, more conscious than the worm, homo spaien more conscious than the pig and onwards to our ultradimensional visitors which are more conscious than us here [ using a wider spectrum of consciousness such as telepathic contact ]

Higher levels of consciousness are egoless levels and begin thus resembling Christ nature or Buddha nature - which appears to be the template of Brahman [ supreme knowledge, ultimate bliss, perfec tion ] that must by necessity reside in all changing forms.

Why does Brahman [ which is perfection ] require the creation of the multiverse of maya and endless changing form? Because Brahman is unmanifested potential and requires fulfillment to ultimately be All that can possibly be. [ Unmanifested potential is not All but only half ]

Every form of spiritualism is founded on the realm of the mental. Is there anything impersonal about the mind? Is there anything truly impersonal about the Spirit? Yes, there are many latter-day pantheists who have attempted to transcend the material sphere with the notion of a neutral, impersonal monism, with mathematics being the poster-boy for this alleged Impersonal ground of all being.

But how impersonal is mathematics? In what sense can mathematics be said to exist, in the absence of mathematicians? Does the nerdiness mathematicians count as proof that mathematics is impersonal?!

Most mathematicians are Platonists or Pythagoreans. Was there anything impersonal about Plato, Pythagoras or, say, Spinoza, their latter-day champion?
-------------------------------

Simp reminds us, above, that the mind is known to us only through consciousness. Is there anything impersonal about consciousness? Is it not the most personal thing we can know? What is awareness without self-awareness.... I AM THAT I AM?!

I just don't see any insurmountable distinctions between the Personal, the inter-Personal and the trans-Personal. Do you?

Yes, our world-class meditators strive to surmount the self/ego. Of course! But do they attempt to surmount the cosmic I AM that I AM?

And, yes, it does seem that Simp and Ray find much in common, wrt the Tree of Live (ToL). But do take a look at the ToL, presented in Ray's last post. Do you see anything familiar there? Will Ray dismiss the Anthropos as being merely a mnemonic device? Well, he can try! What about the Adam Kadmon, Ray? Where does that fit?

Esotericism, of all kinds, never strays more than a few sentences beyond the trans-Personal. Esotericism/gnosticism is the primary link between theism and pantheism. Scratch the surface of any scientist, besides the professional atheists in the mold of Dawkins&Hitchens, and you will find a pantheist. Between Pantheism, Deism, Dualism and/or 'neutral'-monism, there is a very slippery slope from materialism into trans-Personalism, not to be confused with trans-humanism, but not all that different, epistemologically.

Yes, the only Ontos beyond the person is the I AM THAT I AM. IOW, there is no being but BEING! Please show me a non-being!

Show me your Bliss, and I'll show you the I AM THAT I AM! It is passing strange that the I AM has somehow been transmogrified into that Master of petty vengefulness, YAHWEH! But not to fear, I'm never lacking for historical explanations. You cannot fault YAHWEH for ever being absent.

Being is all about being-here-now, in the ultimate Shining Presence. What is the Present w/o Presence? Is Bliss to be found in Absence? What is Absence other than that which is potentially Present? Consider the Tree on the Quad, at 3am, vs. the Tree falling in the Forest. Neither one is absolutely absent. Both are integral/essential parts of the Gaian Ecosystem.
--------------------

Have you ever heard a pantheist or atheist say anything derogatory about Jesus, or about the Christ? I sure haven't.

It's only when you try to connect the two that the pantheists get queasy. But, it is strange, nonetheless, that pantheism is replete with Avatars. If Buddha was not an avatar, then what the heck was he?

So what is the problem? Perhaps the pantheists are concerned that there will be a personality clash between Buddha, Mohammed and Jesus. Well, quite frankly, I'm not aware that there ever was a contest. There is only one extant personality cult in the world. Tell me I'm wrong!

In terms of charismatic personality, who comes in second to Jesus? Elvis?

And what is this about the Charism?



(cont.)
Last edited by dan on Sun Oct 24, 2010 12:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
dan
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 10:41 am
Location: maryland

Re: Nothing is real.....

Postby simp » Sat Oct 23, 2010 11:42 pm

Dan writes
Pantheists recognize that person-hood/Buddha-hood lies atop the Chain of Being.


Buddha-hood - Christ-hood necessarily presupposes an egoless state. It transcends the ego. Thus I AM DAN SMITH transcends to I AM.

Re-action becomes pure action. This is the promise of the Eastern religions and certainly what Christ taught which has been misinterpreted by the many fundamental Christians and certain Illuminate Satanic Church Power structures such as The Vatican into a Master/Slave paradigm of punishment and reward [ "You" as a separate objective thing will go to Hell and burn for ever or "You" as a separate objective thing will "go to" Heaven and be rewarded in Paradise ]

There is only consciousness experiencing itself eternally [ no time ] as a self reflecting fractal from every conceivable position.
simp
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 1:31 am

Re: Nothing is real.....

Postby dan » Sun Oct 24, 2010 12:36 am

Simp,
Buddha-hood - Christ-hood necessarily presupposes an egoless state. It transcends the ego. Thus I AM DAN SMITH transcends to I AM.

Re-action becomes pure action. This is the promise of the Eastern religions and certainly what Christ taught which has been misinterpreted by the many fundamental Christians and certain Illuminate Satanic Church Power structures such as The Vatican into a Master/Slave paradigm of punishment and reward [ "You" as a separate objective thing will go to Hell and burn for ever or "You" as a separate objective thing will "go to" Heaven and be rewarded in Paradise ]

There is only consciousness experiencing itself eternally [ no time ] as a self reflecting fractal from every conceivable position.

We both agree that egoism is doomed, in favor of I AM THAT I AM.

My only contention here is that Jesus Christ represents the primary historical/cosmic link between the ego and the I AM.

Do you have a problem with this?
------------------

The logical corollary is that the creatures are an essential part of the I AM. This comes back to the bootstrapping of the I AM.

If the I AM existed apart from all other being, what would it be? Would it be the tree falling in the forest? What is the tree without the forest?

God fell. The trees resurrect the fallen God of the forest. We are then the Risen Christ. We are not the risen Elvis or Buddha, except inasmuch as they represent the Christ.

Problemo?
------------------------

Is there anyone who does not believe that Jesus re-presents the cosmic Heart chakra? Is this not the Sacred Heart or Tiferet? Where would the cosmos be without its Tiferet? Is the Earth not the Planet of Choice? Is the Earth not the Tiferet? Where would the cosmos be without its Tiferet?

Nolo Contendere?

OR, are you going to tell us that Jesus played Santa Claus, jumping down every chimney in the cosmos?

If that were the case, then why has the Cosmos beat a path to our doorstep? What are the Visitors after, if they are not after the Pearl of Great Price?

What are they after, if they are not after a Truth that has been tested by Fire? And what is that Truth if is is not a living truth. Have you ever heard of the Living Word? Have you ever heard of the Word that was made Flesh? Is this a Blaspheme, or is this the epitome of everything that is Sublime?

Still just wondering........
------------------

About Hell.......

TBMK, despite the most extreme provocation, Jesus never condemned anyone to Hell.

BUT, he did say that you cannot get to the I AM, other than through me. Based on what we have been discussing about the historical link between the ego and the I AM, Jesus may not have been far off the mark. Did Buddha get to the I AM, w/o Jesus? Perhaps, but does not the exception prove the rule? Buddha was about the Hinayana, Jesus is about the Mahayana. Show us otherwise. Buddha was about the intellect/psyche. Jesus is about the Heart/Tiferet. Which is the wider path? Which is the straighter path? Make straight the way for the coming of the I AM. No?

Do you not want the I AM to come down here? Do you wish the I AM to remain remote and Impersonal, only accessible through the narrow path or Hinayana?

Why do you wish the I AM to remain so inaccessible? Don't tell us that you are jealous!!



(cont.)
dan
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 10:41 am
Location: maryland

Re: Nothing is real.....

Postby Access Denied » Sun Oct 24, 2010 1:56 am

dan wrote:My only contention here is that Jesus Christ represents the primary historical/cosmic link between the ego and the I AM.

Do you have a problem with this?

I do, it’s off topic in this forum unless you have some evidence to support that contention, otherwise it falls into the realm of religion, not science or philosophy. The topic of this thread is “Nothing is real” which is a statement you made about immaterialism and the range of discussion appropriate for this forum can be found in the description…

“Holographic Universe or Computer Simulation, Big Bang or God”

You are of course welcome to discuss your religious beliefs in the S&P forum.

Cool?

Tom
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: Nothing is real.....

Postby Access Denied » Sun Oct 24, 2010 2:52 am

AussieMike wrote:
Dan wrote: less real, less dense, dimensions

Could you please expand on which dimension/s you refer to and why you think souls would not exist in them.

If you refer to the video i posted in regards to visualising the 10 dimensions that would be helpful

IE: in the 6th dimension you dont have a soul because..........

Well, I watched your video and I have to say, in my opinion, it represents pretty much every naïve New Age misconception there is about modern theoretical physics and the hypothesized extra dimensions (3+1+6) of string “theory” in particular…

Searching for Extra Dimensions
http://d0server1.fnal.gov/users/gll/public/edpublic.htm

[select quotes]

The idea of additional spatial dimensions comes from string theory, the only self-consistent quantum theory of gravity so far.

The reason we do not feel these additional spatial dimensions in our everyday life (if they exist) is because they are very different from the three dimensions we are familiar with.

These extra spatial dimensions, if they really exist, are thought to be curled-up, or “compactified”.

According to string theory then, we live in a universe where our three familiar dimensions of space are “flat”, but there are additional dimensions which are curled-up very tightly so that they have an extremely small radius: 10^-30 cm or less.

So why would it matter to us if the universe has more than 3 spatial dimensions, if we can not feel them?

The answer of course is it really does not, it really only matters on the Planck scale where our current theory of gravity starts to breaks down…

[but still works perfectly well in the world we live in]

Image
Levels of magnification:
1. Macroscopic level - Matter
2. Molecular level
3. Atomic level -- Protons, neutrons, and electrons
4. Subatomic level -- Electron
5. Subatomic level - Quarks
6. String level


I see also see there appears to be a huge misconception around here about the nature of the hypothesized “Multiverse” and what if anything it means to us. Said Tegmark for example…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse

The only difference between Level I [Universes with different physical constants] and Level III [Many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics] is where your doppelgängers reside. In Level I they live elsewhere in good old three-dimensional space. In Level III they live on another quantum branch in infinite-dimensional Hilbert space.

Now someone like Gary might interpret this to mean “Ah ha, doppelgangers exist!” or someone like Vallee might think “Ah ha, interdimensional beings exist!” or someone like Dan might think “Ah ha, Sophia exists!” but unfortunately what this really means is even if these other hypothetical Universes actually exist as anything other than mathematical constructs, never the twain shall meet.

There is no causal connection between these “parallel universes” or “alternate realities” or whatever you want to call them. They are by definition unobservable by us and can’t physically interact with our world… with the possible exception of through gravity but at scales so small you would have to look at the Universe as whole to meausre any significant effects or at very high energies like at CERN’s LHC.

[which I expect will prove string theory incorrect]

In short, if the Multiverse and/or Multiple Dimensions exist, it’s irrelevant in the sense it can’t be used to explain the “visitors” or other paranormal claims…
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: Nothing is real.....

Postby dan » Sun Oct 24, 2010 3:59 am

Access Denied wrote:
dan wrote:My only contention here is that Jesus Christ represents the primary historical/cosmic link between the ego and the I AM.

Do you have a problem with this?

I do, it’s off topic in this forum unless you have some evidence to support that contention, otherwise it falls into the realm of religion, not science or philosophy. The topic of this thread is “Nothing is real” which is a statement you made about immaterialism and the range of discussion appropriate for this forum can be found in the description…

“Holographic Universe or Computer Simulation, Big Bang or God

You are of course welcome to discuss your religious beliefs in the S&P forum.

S&P is Spirituality and the Paranormal.

What? And God is not a religious issue? Are you chopping logic, here, or what?

If you own this Forum, then you are God with respect to it. But, if I may ask, who owns your soul? Is it the Big Bang or God?

Are you a meat-machine or do you have a soul? Is that not a scientific/ontological question? Is the mind/brain problem not a scientific problem?

And what about the Anthropic Principle? Is that not a scientific issue?

And what about the Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics? Is that not a scientific issue.

Is Creation not a scientific issue? Has Science proved that there was no creation?

Unless you arbitrarily declare Cartesian Dualism to be the law of the land, there is no way to draw a bright line between Science and Spirit.

I maintain that Jesus is the most influential personality in history. Is that an historical question or a spiritual question?

If we are not meat-machines, then it stands to scientific reason that there is a Source of our Being or of our ontological Personhood. It stands as an historical issue that the Source of our Personhood may have been represented in history.

Is the world more like a Great Thought or a Great Machine? Are the Visitors ET's or UT's?

If you force us to switch venues every time that you declare that we have crossed your bright-line between science and spirit, then, as the owner of this forum, you will have rendered this discussion, and every ontological discussion, to be incoherent.

That is you prerogative.

.
dan
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 10:41 am
Location: maryland

Re: Nothing is real.....

Postby Access Denied » Sun Oct 24, 2010 5:12 am

Dan, there are many people who believe in God (either 'a' or 'the' deity) but don't believe in Jesus so clearly that's a religious issue. Point of fact, only 25 to 33% of the world's population are Christians.

However, you are certainly free to argue for the existence of God on whatever scientific or philosophical basis you wish in this forum and even discuss Spirituality since that's (or it should be) a non-denominational issue as well. Same with the UTH/ETH issue... it's predicated on the nature of the Universe.

If you can’t argue for the existence God without the presupposition of Jesus then I would suggest you don’t have a very compelling argument…

It’a a cart before the horse thing.
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: Nothing is real.....

Postby Gary » Sun Oct 24, 2010 3:14 pm

AD, you confused Level I and Level II here:

The only difference between Level I [Universes with different physical constants] and Level III [Many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics] is where your doppelgängers reside. In Level I they live elsewhere in good old three-dimensional space. In Level III they live on another quantum branch in infinite-dimensional Hilbert space.

Level I multiverse are same physics with different initial conditions.

Level II are bubbles with different laws of physics.

Also, ten (or eleven) dimensional string theories led to the membrane solutions (brane worlds) ... in some versions of brane world theory, our universe is a flat infinite sheet embedded in a higher dimensional bulk space (like a slice of bread).

In the braneworld scenario, the 'universe next door' is less than a millimeter away, and in some versions is another flat infinite dimensional sheet of spacetime. We are connected to the universe next door by gravity; the diffusion of gravity into the bulk explains why the force appears to be so weak in our universe.

Braneworlds should NOT be confused with quantum parallel worlds; Tegmark's appeal to Occam's razor is simply that modern cosmology predicts infinitely repeating classical universes (Level I) and bubbles with different laws of physics (Level II) -- Level I and II already explore all possible worlds; therefore the quantum parallel worlds add nothing new not already predicted by modern cosmology, which follows from observational evidence.

Thus, one reasonably assumes the existence of parallel worlds, which are a natural prediction of the known laws of physics.
Gary
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 845
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:28 am

Re: Nothing is real.....

Postby Gary » Sun Oct 24, 2010 3:19 pm

This "flat infinite dimensional sheet of spacetime" should be: "flat infinite sheet of spacetime."
Gary
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 845
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:28 am

PreviousNext

Google

Return to Reality

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron