Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 01:07pm PT
|
Tvash -- "Nothing new under the sun"
Tvash -- Mathematics is the only language specific enough to describe the nitty gritty.
Translation -- Only "I" (Tvash) knows all
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 24, 2015 - 01:08pm PT
|
To recap. We evolved to survive in a macro world. We don't have the capacity to see or understand the micro world. Not through meditation, discursive mind, or whatever method you come up with.
--
Moose, by what empirical means did you arrive at this absolute pronouncement?
JL
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 01:16pm PT
|
Not true, really. When one's frame of reference travels with the particle, its relativistic energy state is equal to its rest mass from that frame of reference. Particles that change direction are momentarily at rest as well. Then there's heat death....
In the end though, rest mass energy is a necessary term for predicting and understanding particle interactions.
Sigh. What's a Newtonian to do?
It's not Moose's responsibility to disprove Largo's claim through empirical means, but Largo's responsibility to support his claim with use of same. And that's where things have fallen a bit short.
In the end, we're a most likely/least likely list of theories. The 'scientismalists'observe that the human brain is capable of a large number of mental states - it is also capable of believing falsehoods are true. Given those two known capabilities, the most likely theory is that the state of No Thing has nothing at all to do with the fundamental, physical nature of the universe - even if those experiencing it firmly believe that it does - and that its more likely one of many possible mental states.
Furthermore, it is observed that the no on can predict the future. Therefore, the most likely hypothesis is that the experientialist cannot know what will be within the reach of measurement in the future.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 24, 2015 - 01:16pm PT
|
And dingus, you said: No-thing? = nothing.
Here is where you are losing your way, IMO.
No-thing simply means that a phenomenon is not a thing (material, stuff, quantifiable form) in the normal sense of the word. That is, a thing, itself, seemingly has a form and a mass or some stuff - be that form a rock or a guitar or a rainbow. A photon has no mass and no form but "nothing" does not account for the light. Gravity is not a thing (that itself has a form and mass) in and of itself but "nothing" does not account for light bending and rocks falling.
No-thing simply means that the qualities we normally attribute to a thing like form, mass and shape and so forth, are entirely absent, and that we come to know these non-things only by the effect they have the energy they contain.
JL
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 01:17pm PT
|
Will I be clear of Thetans? (Tv)
"In Scientology, the concept of thetan (/ˈθeɪtən/) is similar to the concept of spirit or soul found in other belief systems. The term is derived from the Greek letter theta, which in Scientology represents "the source of life, or life itself."[1] In Scientology it is believed that it is the thetan, not the central nervous system, which commands the body through communication points.[2] This conception of the spirit in Scientology is represented by the Greek letter Θ, theta" (Wiki)
but the question remains: what is energy? (JL)
A good question, but unproductive. Better questions humans can come to grips with, How does it behave, What are its effects and measurable properties? I think your theological background sets the stage for these metaphysical inquiries and I must say they are a notch above Angels on the Head of a Pin.
But everything doesn't arise ultimately from the religiously inspired no-thing of the mind. Did the universe exist before humankind? Is there a universal infinite Mind? Perhaps a Mind-field. Careful where you step!
edit: Where do these polymaths learn so much physics? Impressive.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 01:39pm PT
|
It occurs to me that our ability to manipulate symbols affords us a sixth sense - the ability to see what our five senses cannot. The rest mass energy of a particle (through mathematics), as well as the distemper caused by same (through DMT's posts).
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 01:46pm PT
|
Rhetorical footballs have really tiny orifices.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 02:46pm PT
|
No-thing means not to conceptualize in your mind, free it from duality.
You keep thinking in your runaway fertile mind that you don't even have full control of that, No - Thing means nothing.
You don't read nor fully understand but only react thru your mind that is only accepting and rejecting.
You're NOT even in control of your own mind, it's controlling you with all that accumulated baggage in there accepting and rejecting.
All your posts are only a reflection of all the baggage you carry around in your mind.
Your mind is controlling you and not vice versa ie YOU should be in control of your own mind ....
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 03:13pm PT
|
One can see by studying his very own being the antimaterial particle as Largo describes as No-Thing.
Matter as it is constituted is subjected to annihilation, but antimatter is completely free from all annihilation.
So he is correct and you are in poor fund of knowledge ....
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 03:23pm PT
|
Have we just witnessed the dawning of the material/anti-material warped drive?
Is Largo's mind particle, wave, both, or 'other'?
Regarding 'the ancients', yup, folks have long sought to 'see' the fundamental nature of the world directly, without the insulation of symbols and all the painstaking work that requires.
All those thousands of years of effort and all we got were these damn equations practically nobody can read. And we still don't know what gravity is. Damn it!
Yes, I can see the source of the frustration very clearly now.
I'm still interested in making some gold, though.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 03:30pm PT
|
Matter itself has no creative power.
When matter is manipulated by the living energy (anti-matter) (Largo's No-Thing), material things are produced .....
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 04:58pm PT
|
Math is order and in this (the universe’s) case a very particular and inviolate order,
resultings in our existence.
If you say this order simply is, you become an advocate of the burning bush: “I am that I am” or it is that it is and that notion of order becomes a kind of final term, a deity.
The question becomes if and when that order (math) was imposed on material existence?
The structure (order/math) must be antecedent to the material as the material is subservient to the structure. The material can be manipulated but only within the specific requirements of the structure and the material must conform to the structure’s demands.
If you say that material and structure are one, then how is it that structure transcends the material nature of the universe? How is it that the Fibonacci sequence manifests itself in both living and non-living forms, for instance?
Material doesn’t exist without structure but structure as potential can and does exist without material in the form of mathematics and numerical relationships that exist outside the mind and are discovered by mathematicians. Those numerical relationships exist as unqualified potential structures of a limited and specific kind in relation to all matter.
I’m not advocating woo, I’m just pointing out the reasonable assumption that mind (mind/structure/order) is the predicate to material existence.
“The art of ship building is not in the wood.”
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 05:29pm PT
|
I’m not advocating woo, I’m just pointing out the reasonable assumption that mind (mind/structure/order) is the predicate to material existence. It may be a reasonable assumption, but, like time and space, order may have emerged along with existence.
|
|
cintune
climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 05:31pm PT
|
I feel the urge to go read a Dr. Bronner's bottle.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 07:46pm PT
|
I’m not advocating woo, I’m just pointing out the reasonable assumption that mind (mind; structure;order) is the predicate to material existence
I don't think I would call it "mind", but the mathematical matrix of natural relationships or physical laws may have been there just shy of the emergence of matter. My guess would be both matter and physical law came into existence simultaneously. But at the point of origin of the universe (if it does indeed have an origin) time and space may have appeared but with the chronology strangely distorted and incomprehensible now. "Cause and effect" as we now observe it may have come about in this primordial mix, but may have been scrambled as well. Backward causation might have occurred and the "past" may have been subject to the "present."
To speculate about an all-encompassing "mind" regulating the universe is to speculate about some sort of god existing beyond time and space.
Matter as it is constituted is subjected to annihilation, but antimatter is completely free from all annihilation (Duck)
"Antimatter cannot be stored in a container made of ordinary matter because antimatter reacts with any matter it touches, annihilating itself and an equal amount of the container" (Wiki)
You are funny but . . . (I can't find a word to describe you)
;>\
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 08:08pm PT
|
^^^eternal?
;d
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 08:25pm PT
|
antimatter reacts with any matter it touches, annihilating itself and an equal amount of the container
No
Antimatter can never be annihilated.
It is non material.
Your material body will be annihilated, but you will not.
Even Schrodinger confirmed that from the Mundaka Upanishad.
He knew and understood the soul (antimatter) can never be annihilated .....
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 09:15pm PT
|
I am left speechless in the presence of such an abundance of arcane knowledge.
Sullly, if you read this can you come up with a figure from literature who is comparable to Mr. Werner Duck?
;>0
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 09:40pm PT
|
To speculate about an all-encompassing "mind" regulating the universe is to speculate about some sort of god existing beyond time and space.
Wouldn't do that... but that logical matrix is intriguing. Not because it implies woo, but because it implies a curiously organized human mind in relationship to a curiously organized universe.
And it just leaves you wondering.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 09:49pm PT
|
No-thing simply means that the qualities we normally attribute to a thing like form, mass and shape and so forth, are entirely absent, and that we come to know these non-things only by the effect they have the energy they contain. Well, by that definition one could certainly state that, when we meditate, one can pigeonhole what is experienced into thoughts, the "effects" of things including bodily sensations, and no-thing else. The challenge then remains the same sort of 'framing' question Paul is asking relative to order before the beginning of material existence: what is the experience / perception after shutting down discursive thought and just hanging out in that 'being' state?
Largo appears to continually and tangentially almost imply - with a certain in-the-know wink-and-a-nod innuendo - that there is a rumor which might lead one to infer that a very particular state of no-thingness is, by loose definition: rich and fertile territory. I on the other hand, beyond a certain point, consider it more a matter of lingering at an impenetrable event horizon of experience / consciousness which cannot be breached anymore than you can breach death. An interesting experience and practice for sure, but with regard to insight, for me, one with diminishing returns compared to moment-to-moment mindfulness. I liken it to LSD in that aspect - much to be gained in the beginning, less so over the stretch of time.
That's not to say meditating over a lifetime can't contribute to perceptions of self, life, mind and body, but rather that at a certain point the "exploration" hits a wall for me personally. Largo will say I'm framing this all wrong and ask from what experience I make these claims; but to that I say broad and deep experience with meditation and long-duration experiences in isolation tanks. To that he'll say I lacked a proper teacher and I went about it all wrong or that I lost my way. To that I say some of us desperately need 'a' way or method, for the path to be well-worn before we take our first steps, and require guides for the journey; others not. Each of our journeys, driving prerequisites and needs along the way are our own. He is welcome to judge me and my explorations however he pleases.
But personally I'd prefer it if he just came out and said what he means which is something he seems almost pathologically unwilling to do. Sure, meditation is a DIY deal by definition, but if it were as incommunicable as he makes it out to be there would be no need or use for Zen masters. The fact there are Zen masters and that Largo stresses their utility utterly belies his entire discourse on this thread as far as I'm concerned. If his Zen masters can find the words for the experience, journey and exploration then I can only assume it's either a matter of poor training or unwillingness that he cannot.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!