CB, this sounds good to me. What are your conjectures as to how we, as human beings relate, or can relate, to our 3D universe?

This will put great limits on your appreciation and understanding of why things are the way they are!

http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/13/11/9

Too much thinking.


There is no difference.


Like you said, all is an illusion, nothing is as it seems and it just is...

Something not meeting your own definitions with satisfaction?

"all is an illusion, nothing is as it seems, it just is"

If all is an illusion, why do you say it like you are right? To me that does not fit with my definition of satisfaction--what kind of answer is that...It just is...

I was answering Dianah's question with her own answer.
I didn't expect it to satisfy you.

Then answer the damn question that I asked you rather than avoiding it--if all is an illusion then why do you say it like you are right?

I feel left out of all this fun. Lindsay didn't rebutt.

Do you think it's not right?

Personally I think the statement is incomplete, but not untrue.

All I know are the rules of logic, A=A Chair=Chair. I will say that it is a possability that life is an illusion, just like I say it is a possability that what you see is what you get. I do not say that life IS an illusion like I know it is right. You're saying that my statement is incomplete, but not untrue indicates that you found my statement true, thus you just basically stated that you are full of shit in your previous statements~

Will you answer the damn question already? If all is an illusion why do you say it like you are right? Because you are insecure and fear the possability that you are not all knowing, and that everything you believe could be wrong?

Sounds like you know more than just what appears to you as logically correct.

Why would you when you don't have the experience.

So your saying the statement "life is an illusion" is your statement.

I said it is an incomplete statement (of life). Life exists. Perceptions of life are from projections of thoughts.
I never said I was full of shit, you are saying that. C'est la vie


I said it, you've interpreted how I have said it. Illusion is a word and it is used with intent to point toward a direction. A direction is neither incorrect nor correct it just is a direction. Interpretation often takes direction and distorts it. To say Life is an illusion is not incorrect, but if one assumes what they see and feel is not real without a greater experience of life beyond illusions of change then they mentally twist reality and deny all experience. This is not likely what was intended when the term was used by the first teacher to the first disciple.
If you take the passage from the bible
Mt 19:24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. You might think the eye of the needle meant a sewing needle, when it meant a place between villages, a place in the desert where the shortest passage between the two places was a rocky passage. That shortcut had in its way a mountain of rock that had a hole in it big enough to slip through if you were to remove everything from the camels back and had it get down on its knees and crawl through the passageway.
It symbolizes the path to clear perception of God. When man removes any conditions of personal beliefs and perception, God reveals itself to man.
Life is an illusion refers to suffering and fear. God is not fear, God is Love, the love that supports all perception whether it be clear or deluded by the choices one makes in diluting the senses of perception and of reality by attempting to place conditions of limitation onto the infinite.

I have a suspicion that reality is a creation of the mind. An easy to control illusion, once we figure out how to control it. I also suspect that we are very close to figuring it out by way of the Consciousness Singularity; a human evolutionary leap by simple term definition. This, I strongly suspect. Ergo my fear of time, our only true enemy.

See:

http://brainmeta.com/index.php?p=singularity

http://brainmeta.com/forum/index.php?showforum=13 and

http://mind-brain.org/forum/viewforum.php?...94c8aa0839c231a

CB, again I find my thinking congruent with yours.

IS IMAGINATION THE KEY?
Here is my thinking on the matter: Let us begin with me, as an individual. I know whether or not I am a moral, ethical, loving and light-giving human being (MELL). I may be able to fool you whether or not I am a MELL, but I can't fool myself.

"IMAGINATION IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN KNOWLEDGE" said Einstein.
I also know that I have an imagination which I have the power to use, for good, or ill, or for nothing--that is, I have the power to waste my imagination.
=============================================
I need to know: In what context do you use the word 'fear'. Do you mean "respect", which is the context in which is used in the King James Version of the Bible? In 1611, "fear of God" did not refer to terror of God. For example, when I say, "I am afraid of fire", I mean I respect what it can do if I do not take proper care.

May I say: I too "fear", that is, I respect time; but I do not think of it as an enemy. I think of it as a mystery, like space, to be explored.

Apology accepted.



I said this because the "flat" topics for this section have to do with philosophy, religion and theology, not with the hard sciences.

This was meant as a joke, I apologize if it appears to be personal and aimed at anyone.

First off let's make something clear: I am not a scientist nor a scholar. Take my words, therefore, at face value.

I believe so.

I hate time, Lindsay. Because I see it as the only thing seperating us from the CS. I want CS here and now. And I can't have it because of time. I see time the way economists do: Not enough of. Deep inside I fear what will happen if we don't reach CS. Ironically, time brought us to here and now. But that is past time, and I got no beef with that. I hope that answers your question.

My symbol for CS is GØD--all the good, order and design available, through the use of a moral, ethical, loving and lindsay(MELL) imagination, in the UNIVERSE.

Thanks to you, I know have a personal name for GØD. It is MELL--MELL GØD . Other individuals are free to add their own name. For example, for you, should you so choose, it would be MELCB GØD. You could add a vowel to make CB pronounceable

I feel, think, believe, hope, whatever, that all of us will be given all the time we need to reach CS. At this point, I feel I am very close.

Sorry about that, Ignorance!

You say that I, Lindsay, did not rebutt you.

Sorry, I can't remember: Did I? Or, didn't I?

BTW, because I believe that each of us has a bit of what is true, I prefer to dialogue about issues, not just debate about them.

I couldn't agree more--a fusion of horizons. I still enjoy a good debate on occasion though

What makes you think that you have what it takes to experience it (CS)? I honestly believe that, if/when we reach that point in time, many unsuspecting characters will find themselves without an invitation to the next level. Don't be talking so cockyngly thinking you're a shoo-in just because. Or because you live your life a certain way which is appealing to you. What if it turns out your vision has been blurred by some certain "glitch" in the machinery that is your brain, and you've been fooled all along?

Note what I said: "I feel I am very close."

BW, I feel that I am close because, I will and imagine it to be close. However, I will need to die before I take the final step.

As to how close death is, I do not know, yet. If I get fair warning. I will let you know.

The ego needs to surrender itself. Physical death is not a precurser to omniscience or omnipresence.
You just need to get over yourself, in a sense that is a kind of death.

As in E=MC2, I presume?
Realistically, we need at least twenty years, according to Shawn (allmighty Shawn). But he wrote that about 4 years ago, I think(where are those darn links when you need them?!). So that would make it 16 years. Will you be available then, Lindsay? I hope so. You are part of this special place (BraimMeta), for starters. You deserve a chance, as far I'm concerned.

Did you note, in another thread, where I added: E=MC2 + I (imagination, including faith, hope and love).
Do I repeat myself if I tell the story about the mother who asked Einstein: "What books should I read to my child to read to help him become a mature and intelligent adult?"

Einstein told her: "Read to him lots of books filled with enjoyable fairie tales."

As I recall, when the mother pressed him to give his reasons, he responded: "He will have so much fun using his imagination he will want to learn to read so he can read more on his own. This will help him develop his imagination. A healthy imagination will do the rest."

I read a similar story about the science and science fiction writer, Isaac Asimoff:
http://www.asimovonline.com/
His elderly father, paying his famous son a visit--on seeing all the books he had on his shelf, many of which he himself had written--made the admiring remark: "Isaac, where did you get all this knowledge you seem to have?"

"From you father." Isaac said.

"But" said the father, "I never taught you all this information."

"You taught me to love reading and learning, father, that was all that was necessary."

Interestingly,

BTW, based on the book, ASK AND IT IS GIVEN, here are some basic metaphysical teachings with which I find quite a bit of congruency. They are not presented as dogmas to be believed, without question; they are concepts to be explored.


===============================
In addition, we have information about the work of the physicist Alain Aspect:


FOR THE FULL ARTICLE READ
http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=778044#i
Also mentioned is the name of the great physicist, David Bohm. I heard him speak at Toronto University in the 1980's.

That was a great article! Thanks~

Apology accepted.



I sympathize with you in a way. I believe that each person's set of opinions about the unknown are creative guesses or theories. I find it all very beautiful that there can be so many different interpretations of what is and how it came about. At the moment, I look on at all religious beliefs as an outside source, critiquing and researching.

Interesting comment, IIE, expand on what you mean.

BTW, as you have probably noted, I am not wedded to any kind of religious dogma, including dogmas about the nature of material things. What is matter, anyway?

The following looks interesting:
http://www.godspy.com/culture/The-Miracle-...ll-Sullivan.cfmYour

I quote from an interview with the author This is not the route I would take, but I respect those who take it, sincerely.

I am an agnostic/atheistic boy. I was raised Lutheran for the first 14 years of my life. It seemed to me that I could never just accept that God had created the universe(s) and was the source of everything because I hadn't discovered it for myself. I did not find it to be true, I was told it was true. I am in the purgatory of belief and disbelief, basically, and mainly due to the rebellious nature of adolescence.



Yes, I don't understand how someone could have concrete faith in a specific God and especially Jesus Christ. I am everleaning towards the nameless force that created things. I feel that all religion is attempting to name that force. I have doubts about a devine benevolence, though.

Hi IIE,

You are obviously free in your mind of indoctrinated garbage.
Never cease to probe and try to comprehend the great mysteries of life and the universe!!! But, don't let it bog down your life.
Also, be prepared to accept that other people are free to come to their own conclusions about religion.

My current thoughts are along the lines of :-

The universe has always existed, and due to inbuilt forces we do not yet fully understand, has oscillatory modes which allow Big Bangs, after which 'it' all starts over after a wipeout.
I am also interested in obtaining a better understanding between information and the structures. Does the information fopr a structure precede or follow the stucture? For example, if you consider homo sapiens, we know that our bodies are created from 'rules' or information contained within our genes. But that information, which does precede the baby is itself carried in another structure; the sperm and ova.
Can information exist before a structure exists??
If you think of Ohm's law V=IR, could the law have applied before any electricity became generated, or were the information (law) and electricity 'created' simultaneously?

Sounds like a question who's answer lyes in the mechanics of time

Guess I missed it. Honestly, I stopped reading your posts throughly after I noticed they were 99% dogmatic blabbery and 1% substance. Can you balance them out a little more fairly?

The "purgatory of belief and disbelief". Again I say, please expand. As a teenager, I think I had the same experience. Fear not! In my opinion, out of this can come much that is good. You go on as follows: Will you be shocked when I say: I agree with you.

CB, what on earth is dogmatic blabbery? BTW, I ABHOR dogmatism, period!!!!!!!

Are you able to give me an example of what DB is?

Then you add: Are you really interested in my 1%? And do you have an example of the 1%.

Sorry, I meant to say purgatory between belief and disbelief, meaning I am not quite certain of either, because I am frankly too young to commit to either.


I am actually a bit shocked. So you do not believe in a divine benevolence? Do you rather believe that all matter keeps itself in check with surrounding matter?

Mmm mm, I enjoy hearing other people's opinions, especially when they relate to theoretical science.

Take it easy, Lindsay! Don't get offended. Just correct me if I'm wrong, please. Here's the dictionary definition of dogma:

Dogma: A doctrinal notion asserted without regard to evidence or truth; an arbitrary dictum.

Wouldn't you call Christianism a dogma by dictionary definition? So everywhere in your posts where you quote the bible and assert your Christian beliefs as undebatable truths would, by definition, fall under DB.

Yes, I'm interested.

No, I don't. I stopped reading your posts throughly a long time ago. But I'll keep looking and show you an example when I find one.

I have never read anything posted by Lindsay that claimed the bible to be an undebatable truth. Saint Thomas Aquinas maybe, but not Lindsay.

I would have to agree with Flex on this one. He isn't actually a Christian, and pretty highly dislikes Dogma. It might aid you to read his posts a bit more closely.

What might be linked to dogmatism is a belief that God is everywhere, and without any real understanding or appreciation for God everywhere, to believe that God is abhorrent.

We'll learn a lot when we can time travel.

Like I said, I stopped reading them carefully when I read this Christian philosophy nonsense. But, I'm willing to admit to the mistake. If Lindsay would clarify his position, one more time for me, it might help. Are you or are you not a Christian (A.K.A. Roman Catholic, Prostestant, Lutheran, etc), Lindsay?

Iggy...Do you mind if I call you "Iggy"?...if you are referring to "me"--the Rev. Lindsay G. King. a 76 year old male--allow me to describe myself as a non-dogmatic and cultural Christian. I believe that reaching out to all people of good will, everywhere, is what is important.

JESUS WAS NOT A CHRISTIAN; HE WAS A REFORM JEW
In my humble opinion, here is who I understand Jesus was and what he taught: In the first century of our common era, he taught us to love one another, including even those who choose to be our enemies.

In my opinion, had Jesus' fellow Jews, at that time, accepted his teaching; that we are here on earth simply to love one another, live at peace with one another, and do justice unto one another, most of the people in the world, today, would be Reform Jews, not Christians.

By the way, because names matter little to me--I prefer action to names--I would be content to be called a Reform Jew as a devout Christian.

In my opinion, we are here to give non-sentimental, respect, justice and peace to one another.

Simply speaking, we are here to live at peace with one another, and to give to one another good will and respect, regardless of race, creed or religion.

[More on this, to follow.]

He never considered himself as either.

I can't wait to hear: The Truth! about the Galilean.

Not at all.

Of course, there is a catch: If I can call you Lindy.

I wonder what you could call me? Don't answer!

I'd call you ~Hola~

Always out of the present moment.. You just heard the truth. Well actually you hear what you want to hear, truth being relative to beliefs, you could be standing in front of a mirror and see something different every time you look.

No problem! My wife calls me, "Lin" Some of my friends call me, "Linds". I'm easy!

BTW, have you heard of Michael Ignatief? His nick name is "Iggy".
Iggy is a Canadian, an academic, and he taught for many years at Harvard. Recently, he ran for the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada. He came second. Another Academic, Stephane Dion, won. Had he won, he was in line as the future Prime Minister of Canada. A very interesting personality. [Liberalism in Canada=Democratism in the USA]

http://www.michaelignatieff.ca/en/about_intro.aspx
http://www.michaelignatieff.ca/
http://stephanedion.ca/?q=en/Stephane-About

You know, you could just as easily call me Teddy, that being my real name. There are a bit similar, so I don't think it will be such a difficult adjustment.

Mr. Ignatieff has quite an astute past. 16 books is quite few. Brings to mind quantity and quality, though.