People relate to the term cycle , cause Life and death are words like active and non active but what if those two words were the same thing and are not the opposite of each other . ITS A LIVING CYCLE ..Take shrooms and understand the whole oneness oft he universe and how belief is making people crazy. for example christians.
"oh yes i conclude that energy is living, here's what i base this on..." and then you don't give any explanation you explain what an atom is and that it's made of energy for like the 10th time. once again your just stumbling through words and not really explaining things. also you think, you have this all figured out but please sir look up Neutrinos they are a subatomic particle that don't abide to your understandings. dark matter and dark energy also contradict your theories.
In fact neutrinos ,as well as both dark matter and energy support what i am saying. Life is not dependant upon biology-rather ,living consciousness forms the world and everything in it!
Did you even look up neutrinos just now? Tell me how do they support your theory? and for once in your fucking life give some evidence other than the fact that matter is a form of stored energy. Please I'd like a detailed explanation with mathematical concepts explained. I bet you can't do it. Everything can be broken down into maths, it's a simple fact. and i bet you can't do the maths.
@tomandjj are you kidding me? I can't do the math to any of these physics experiments, but that doesn't mean I cannot understand them when explained. Are you telling me that I cannot have an opinion or understanding of anything until I am able to physically pick apart the technicalities and maths of it? Lol, u fail tomandjj.
@dtdynd Actually that is what I was saying. If you honestly believe that you can sufficiently understand quantam theory and astrophysics without maths then you have obviously never studied them. If you honestly think you can have a relevant opinion in comparison to the scientists who devote their lives to studying these topics then you are just an idiot who is upstream without a paddle.
@tomandjj The wise man said,"It can't be done." The fool came and did it. - Zen saying Often too much 'structered' learning interferes with true insight!
@JamesJTraitz Well I can tell you certainly haven't done much learning of any kind if that's how you think the word structured is spelt. Why don't you contribute something to humanity instead of using BS to make money? you just mislead people away from understanding of the universe that scientists have worked so hard to continually refine. You are spitting on academics and educators who are actually educated on this topic. This is why I dislike you.
don't you get it? your way of understanding life isn't achieving things that help people. science is. therefore even if science does turn out to be wrong, at least it's working. arguably we don;t need to understand the universe and consciousness at all, because, what's relevant is what happens on Earth and what happens to people. And if you disagree that people aren't important because they are just energy then you are so cold. You think you've got the world figured out, but you don't.
His way of understanding life? You have no understanding of his understanding of life. You're like a blind person trying to lecture the Seeing about Light.
Open your eyes, there is a world out here, for you to enjoy. The light is so beautiful here. And with no books, no research, no intellectual workings, we bathe in Knowledge and intuition.
The only thing that prevents you from following the Path is your belief-system that science is the only thing through which you can gain understanding.
yep sure so I'll go up to someone who's dying of cancer and say to them: "sorry we won't treating you in anyway we are going to let you die because you should be fine you can bathe in intuition and knowledge" I agree perhaps science isn't the only thing that helps understand the world... but, it has the most evidence backing it up and it actually achieves things. Using science that person with cancer might actually live. If you're ever dying of something we will see how you'd like to be treated?
However 'cogito ergo sum' relies on the idea that we are at all significant. It could be possible that our thoughts are just patterns existing as a part of some vast external mechanism which doesn't actually exist.(i.e. it could be manufactured from anything, a dream, a butterfly whatever)
"I think therefore I am" works from my perspective, but to anyone viewing the system of human existance it is irrelavent. If you believe in fate our thoughts are not ours but only random predesigned patterns.
I will look into that book. But couldn't you extend that argument, making my mind just a manifestation of your own or vice versa, your mind the manifestation of somebodys dreams... its hard to draw the line between logical thought wild and imaginative speculation.
The main issue I do have though is that you say you will define 'what is mind'. How though, can this be achieved without have a way to find it relative to anything else? i.e. explaining from within with no frame of reference?
The way is to explore the contents of your own mind.Check out my videos on Gurdjieff and Castenada(more coming each week on both).They both teach achieving realization
What you are referring to here is what Rene Descartes wrestled with when he came up with his (now quite famous) theorem: I think, therefor I am. The problem is, what is anything? How do I know that I am not a butterfly dreaming of being a man, or that your posting is not mine own, through another aspect of my own supreme personality. Heh.
Descartes goes like this: WHAT DO I KNOW? I mean KNOW? If all else is an illusion, there remains me to perceive it. Therefor, I think, and so I must be. I am.
Rene Descartes conclusion was that you can only prove that you(your consciousness)exists and that God exists.Like Berkeley's proof that you can only know that your soul exists and that God exists.You exist because you can feel and think,however everything you perceive could be an illusion or dream-you the dreamer would nevertheless exist/ God exists because you did not bring yourself into existance,therefore you were created-by definition-you were created by a creator!
okay... Cogito ergo sum. The trouble is,by suggesting our only ability to explain is within our mind you are eliminating all interactions with, or the input of the external reality. This seems a bit of a bold suggestion without much proof.
Through your reasoning defining the mind would be impossible. To define anything you must observe it from a different perspective.Since all things outside conciousness are "un-knowable and speculative" there would be no platform to make this study possible.
But that's the point! One of the great debates in classical philosophy involves: objective realism vs. subjective idealism-Is man the observer of a real external reality or is he the source of all things-is there no reality outside of the mind of mankind?! You' ve got to read George Berkeley's classic : A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge
P2. Seeing as human beings are simply the sum of an arrangement of protons, neutrons and electrons they can be seen to make independent choices so why would it be any more illogical for the particles which compose us to behave in the same way. The fact is if we were to remove the idea of religious connections, (i.e. the soul.) I do not see why this consciousness has to be seen as any more supernatural than our own. Where The conscience originates is the real question that needs to be addressed.
I agree. Years ago I began a search for answers and concluded that everything we know or can know is within consciousness.Zen and quantum physics suggest that we-as the observer-is an essential part of all events that can occur or be scientifically measured. What exists beyond mind is both un-knowable and speculative;therefore the entire 'universe' of reality is within 'mind' The question becomes:What is Mind?! It is to this inquiry that I direct myself.
p1.Sorry for my sarcasm. It sort of threw me into a rash judgement of you when you said that so confidently.
yes it is true that energy behaves like matter, waves can appear like particles, and the random nature of quantum physics has brought about the suggestion that some sort of sub atomic consciousness is in existence. What I find most interesting about this is the idea of defining when consciousness and free will are acceptable to define behaviour.
Sorry you obviously do not know what you are talking about "Carbon 12... 12 electrons" my little brother knows that aint true. And you say everything is composed of energy not matter! That is irrelevant if you knew the most basic of principles behind modern physics e=mc2 the two are interconvertable. This is absurd.
I do not claim to be an expert in chemistry.I will ignore your sarcasm and try to answer your comment. What we call "matter" is actually energy in 'packets' or arangements that 'assemble' in resonance with our beliefs and expectations.The energy itself emerges into expression out of consciousness which is the true source of everything you perceive in 'physical' existance. The experience of objects existing in space results from the perception of our consciousness-we create the objects!
More pseudo-scientific bullshit blegh.
DontMindWrongPerson 1 year ago
@DontMindWrongPerson You are 23 years young and you already have a closed mind. Hey man, wake up.
rovingdesertfox 4 months ago
@rovingdesertfox Remember, if you open your mind too much, your brain will fall out
DontMindWrongPerson 4 months ago
@DontMindWrongPerson A fantastic and meaningless reply, of course totally avoiding the point, which you are probably an expert at.
rovingdesertfox 4 months ago
@rovingdesertfox no it was a reference to Tim Minchins song Take My Wife: bBUc_kATGgg
DontMindWrongPerson 4 months ago
@DontMindWrongPerson I give up. We are on two drastically different wave lengths.
rovingdesertfox 4 months ago
People relate to the term cycle , cause Life and death are words like active and non active but what if those two words were the same thing and are not the opposite of each other . ITS A LIVING CYCLE ..Take shrooms and understand the whole oneness oft he universe and how belief is making people crazy. for example christians.
k1ll3rl0rd 1 year ago
People are stupid hes a genious , people should start seeing the world through there eyes instead of their mind.
k1ll3rl0rd 1 year ago
so what created cells? conciousness?
and again thank you for all your great work
MrGolfman7 2 years ago
"oh yes i conclude that energy is living, here's what i base this on..." and then you don't give any explanation you explain what an atom is and that it's made of energy for like the 10th time. once again your just stumbling through words and not really explaining things. also you think, you have this all figured out but please sir look up Neutrinos they are a subatomic particle that don't abide to your understandings. dark matter and dark energy also contradict your theories.
tomandjj 3 years ago
In fact neutrinos ,as well as both dark matter and energy support what i am saying. Life is not dependant upon biology-rather ,living consciousness forms the world and everything in it!
JamesJTraitz 3 years ago
Did you even look up neutrinos just now? Tell me how do they support your theory? and for once in your fucking life give some evidence other than the fact that matter is a form of stored energy. Please I'd like a detailed explanation with mathematical concepts explained. I bet you can't do it. Everything can be broken down into maths, it's a simple fact. and i bet you can't do the maths.
tomandjj 3 years ago
I can't do the maths
JamesJTraitz 3 years ago
@tomandjj are you kidding me? I can't do the math to any of these physics experiments, but that doesn't mean I cannot understand them when explained. Are you telling me that I cannot have an opinion or understanding of anything until I am able to physically pick apart the technicalities and maths of it? Lol, u fail tomandjj.
dtdynd 1 year ago
@dtdynd Actually that is what I was saying. If you honestly believe that you can sufficiently understand quantam theory and astrophysics without maths then you have obviously never studied them. If you honestly think you can have a relevant opinion in comparison to the scientists who devote their lives to studying these topics then you are just an idiot who is upstream without a paddle.
tomandjj 1 year ago
@tomandjj The wise man said,"It can't be done." The fool came and did it. - Zen saying Often too much 'structered' learning interferes with true insight!
JamesJTraitz 1 year ago
@JamesJTraitz Well I can tell you certainly haven't done much learning of any kind if that's how you think the word structured is spelt. Why don't you contribute something to humanity instead of using BS to make money? you just mislead people away from understanding of the universe that scientists have worked so hard to continually refine. You are spitting on academics and educators who are actually educated on this topic. This is why I dislike you.
tomandjj 1 year ago
don't you get it? your way of understanding life isn't achieving things that help people. science is. therefore even if science does turn out to be wrong, at least it's working. arguably we don;t need to understand the universe and consciousness at all, because, what's relevant is what happens on Earth and what happens to people. And if you disagree that people aren't important because they are just energy then you are so cold. You think you've got the world figured out, but you don't.
tomandjj 3 years ago
His way of understanding life? You have no understanding of his understanding of life. You're like a blind person trying to lecture the Seeing about Light.
Open your eyes, there is a world out here, for you to enjoy. The light is so beautiful here. And with no books, no research, no intellectual workings, we bathe in Knowledge and intuition.
The only thing that prevents you from following the Path is your belief-system that science is the only thing through which you can gain understanding.
Beatnuk 3 years ago
yep sure so I'll go up to someone who's dying of cancer and say to them: "sorry we won't treating you in anyway we are going to let you die because you should be fine you can bathe in intuition and knowledge" I agree perhaps science isn't the only thing that helps understand the world... but, it has the most evidence backing it up and it actually achieves things. Using science that person with cancer might actually live. If you're ever dying of something we will see how you'd like to be treated?
tomandjj 3 years ago
However 'cogito ergo sum' relies on the idea that we are at all significant. It could be possible that our thoughts are just patterns existing as a part of some vast external mechanism which doesn't actually exist.(i.e. it could be manufactured from anything, a dream, a butterfly whatever)
"I think therefore I am" works from my perspective, but to anyone viewing the system of human existance it is irrelavent. If you believe in fate our thoughts are not ours but only random predesigned patterns.
patrick7737 3 years ago
I will look into that book. But couldn't you extend that argument, making my mind just a manifestation of your own or vice versa, your mind the manifestation of somebodys dreams... its hard to draw the line between logical thought wild and imaginative speculation.
The main issue I do have though is that you say you will define 'what is mind'. How though, can this be achieved without have a way to find it relative to anything else? i.e. explaining from within with no frame of reference?
patrick7737 3 years ago
The way is to explore the contents of your own mind.Check out my videos on Gurdjieff and Castenada(more coming each week on both).They both teach achieving realization
JamesJTraitz 3 years ago
What you are referring to here is what Rene Descartes wrestled with when he came up with his (now quite famous) theorem: I think, therefor I am. The problem is, what is anything? How do I know that I am not a butterfly dreaming of being a man, or that your posting is not mine own, through another aspect of my own supreme personality. Heh.
Descartes goes like this: WHAT DO I KNOW? I mean KNOW? If all else is an illusion, there remains me to perceive it. Therefor, I think, and so I must be. I am.
SplendidImaginings 3 years ago
Rene Descartes conclusion was that you can only prove that you(your consciousness)exists and that God exists.Like Berkeley's proof that you can only know that your soul exists and that God exists.You exist because you can feel and think,however everything you perceive could be an illusion or dream-you the dreamer would nevertheless exist/ God exists because you did not bring yourself into existance,therefore you were created-by definition-you were created by a creator!
JamesJTraitz 3 years ago
okay... Cogito ergo sum. The trouble is,by suggesting our only ability to explain is within our mind you are eliminating all interactions with, or the input of the external reality. This seems a bit of a bold suggestion without much proof.
Through your reasoning defining the mind would be impossible. To define anything you must observe it from a different perspective.Since all things outside conciousness are "un-knowable and speculative" there would be no platform to make this study possible.
patrick7737 3 years ago
But that's the point! One of the great debates in classical philosophy involves: objective realism vs. subjective idealism-Is man the observer of a real external reality or is he the source of all things-is there no reality outside of the mind of mankind?! You' ve got to read George Berkeley's classic : A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge
JamesJTraitz 3 years ago
P2. Seeing as human beings are simply the sum of an arrangement of protons, neutrons and electrons they can be seen to make independent choices so why would it be any more illogical for the particles which compose us to behave in the same way. The fact is if we were to remove the idea of religious connections, (i.e. the soul.) I do not see why this consciousness has to be seen as any more supernatural than our own. Where The conscience originates is the real question that needs to be addressed.
patrick7737 3 years ago
I agree. Years ago I began a search for answers and concluded that everything we know or can know is within consciousness.Zen and quantum physics suggest that we-as the observer-is an essential part of all events that can occur or be scientifically measured. What exists beyond mind is both un-knowable and speculative;therefore the entire 'universe' of reality is within 'mind' The question becomes:What is Mind?! It is to this inquiry that I direct myself.
JamesJTraitz 3 years ago
p1.Sorry for my sarcasm. It sort of threw me into a rash judgement of you when you said that so confidently.
yes it is true that energy behaves like matter, waves can appear like particles, and the random nature of quantum physics has brought about the suggestion that some sort of sub atomic consciousness is in existence. What I find most interesting about this is the idea of defining when consciousness and free will are acceptable to define behaviour.
patrick7737 3 years ago
Sorry you obviously do not know what you are talking about "Carbon 12... 12 electrons" my little brother knows that aint true. And you say everything is composed of energy not matter! That is irrelevant if you knew the most basic of principles behind modern physics e=mc2 the two are interconvertable. This is absurd.
patrick7737 3 years ago
I do not claim to be an expert in chemistry.I will ignore your sarcasm and try to answer your comment. What we call "matter" is actually energy in 'packets' or arangements that 'assemble' in resonance with our beliefs and expectations.The energy itself emerges into expression out of consciousness which is the true source of everything you perceive in 'physical' existance. The experience of objects existing in space results from the perception of our consciousness-we create the objects!
JamesJTraitz 3 years ago
carbon - 12 has 6 protons, 6 neutrons and 6 electrons. not 12 electrons.
mnmirth1 4 years ago
you are ,of course correct. An equal number of electrons and protons to maintain a neutral charge.
JamesJTraitz 4 years ago
im halfway through grade 9 and i caught that
joca63 4 years ago