The Universe is Mental, God is the All in Everything

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Oh i can handle the truth just fine even though it unequivocally remains to be seen.

You can't answer, because once you do I'm sure you are aware of the implications. LoL

I can handle science and mathematics to some degree, you cant handle basic axioms, which is why you refuse or are unable to address the question.

Will i start?

"Im talking to YOU"

Can you reciprocate?

Your answer is right there if you think about it. LoL

ME or to YOURSELF???

a reply to: Itisnowagain

"you cannot handle the truth."

I missed it for a second there so it is me your talking to after all. Cheers. LoL

Spat out that operative "You" word after all

Look at that progress!!!

Hat and a balloon for you Itisnowagain, Hat and a balloon.

a reply to: andy06shake

Yeah.......
You win.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

No we both win, it's not a competition, just debate.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Itisnowagain

No we both win, it's not a competition, just debate.

It is not even a debate...it is a discussion thread........about God and mind.

But you want to talk about maths and science.

Reality is what is real.................isn't this real??

at present we simply dont have enough evidence to determine whether we are all one and our thoughts are not ours but a singular consciousness in fractals divided among the living bio field of humanity !

we cant say that there is nothing talking to nothing !
clearly something is going on , whether its our own thoughts or something elses thoughts being sampled through our receiving brains !
or if its simply a result of light and matter interacting in the 3rd dimension who knows !

thing is its mental is what it is , its all thought
what is trippy is that we can determine "self " from thought alone

or is that just because we suffer ego ?

david bohm has a pretty interesting theory on wholeness and the implicate order

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Where i hail from a debate is indeed a form of discussion.

I imagine you would argue that black is white though.

It's all maths, the golden ratio, and the Fibonacci sequence is in just about everything.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

God , time , mind , maths , science

its all the same thing really its all derived from thought

we as humans divide everything into smaller chunks to digest and understand and put them back together to get a better picture
instead of looking at the whole system as one
one which is all derived from thought alone

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: Itisnowagain

God , time , mind , maths , science

its all the same thing really its all derived from thought

we as humans divide everything into smaller chunks to digest and understand and put them back together to get a better picture
instead of looking at the whole system as one
one which is all derived from thought alone

David Bohm spent much time with Kristnamurti and they spoke of what is prior to thought.
Like right now if there was no thought..................there would be nothing (no past no future image) but it is still full of what actually is................isn't there an alive intelligence beyond thought?

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Possibly, but i tend to hedge my bet and think otherwise.

Further studies are most certainly required before any unequivocal answer materializes, that's a given.

a reply to: andy06shake

So what thoughts appear on reading this?

But this here and now is clearly known, it cannot be denied. It does not need the concept of time, it does not need thoughts and memories, it just is. The play of life is an appearance. Images on the movie screen appear to be real, but there is nothing substantial to them. The only thing that is, is the screen. Now is that screen. Knowing is the screen. What is appearing now, including ideas of past and future, is an insubstantial image, appearing, like a movie, now. Like the movie, it appears and dissolves now, not coming from anywhere and not going anywhere.

www.liberationis.com...

a reply to: Itisnowagain

My thought would be that the body of text requires a paragraph or two.

Or

“The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.”

Repetition is my thought on the matter i suppose or that ideas are built on ideas.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

Some of its Interesting, some of it borders on tripe with no understanding of physics nor mathematics.

A lot of it seems like hocus pocus because thats what it is.

Opinions are one thing, but an opinion with no basis in reality nor supported by anything other than a person's obvious lack of education and understanding pertaining to the subject equates to nothing more than superstition.

Fear of the unknown really.

Reality may appear complex but its built around and functions down to a very select set of laws, Phi, Pi, and G to date.

Whats real CornishCeltGuy, is what we experience, for all intents and purpose.

That post is full of claims, beliefs, opinions, concepts, etc...
No observeable truth to be found therin, sorry.

Under examination: they are exposed.

Can you not look at what is below, deeper than physics and mathematics?
If the universe is mado of math, as you have claimed elsewhere, where does math come from?
Did someone, or something create math, physics, phi, or whatever you believe is true, so that they could then create a universe based on it?

Have we not occasionally tweaked these supposed laws?
If so: they are exposed as being untrue. Just our best guess.
Our best guess is not truth.

Do bees use math and physics?
Or on another level: do bees bee, and bears bear?

We change opinions, beliefs, concepts, claims, concepts sometimes, don't we?
Is it not delusion to then call any of those truth?

Look deeper, for what never changes.
If one is looking for truth, why bring anything potentially false on the journey?

If we're exchanging with opinions, beliefs, concepts, claims, concepts and such,
are we not clinging to falsehoods?

Is anything that is even 0.0000000001% false: true?

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Nothin

"Am not at such a deep level, but somehow, somewhere in between."

Me too, believe it or not, plenty of unanswered queries and questions pertaining to reality, but you have to work with the tools available.

Of which science is the only one we have that offers up any kind of hope as to answering some of the larger questions possed.

Won't answer or address them all, but you cant know everything as the universe would be rather boring.

Why do we have to work with any tools?
Tools are things.
What if we let-go of things, and look deeper.

a reply to: Nothin

"Can you not look at what is below, deeper than physics and mathematics?"

We can indeed and call it the quantum realm. Physical laws and mathematical logic break down at that level.

"If the universe is mado of math, as you have claimed elsewhere, where does math come from?"

Again possibly down amongst the quantum foam. From chaos, order emerges.

"Did someone, or something create math, physics, phi, or whatever you believe is true, so that they could then create a universe based on it?"

Possibly if the holographic principle holds weight.

"Have we not occasionally tweaked these supposed laws?"

That's how science works, theories are refined and replace as better more reasonable assumptions based on better information materializes.

"Do bees use math and physics?"

Yes they can count and may possibly understand the concept of zero.

"Or on another level: do bees bee, and bears bear?"

Don't understand that one. I know that they crap in the woods.

"We change opinions, beliefs, concepts, claims, concepts sometimes, don't we?
Is it not delusion to then call any of those truth?"

Depends on the beliefs and evidence to support such or change for that matter.

"If we're exchanging with opinions, beliefs, concepts, claims, concepts and such,
are we not clinging to falsehoods?"

I would call it more an exchange of ideas, what you take from such is generally down to you.

"Is anything that is even 0.0000000001% false: true?"

Yes.

a reply to: Nothin

"Why do we have to work with any tools?"

Do you like having fingers and opposable thumbs?

Those are tools.

Tools and complex ideologies and systems of thought are what separates us from most of the rest of the animals on the planet.

Without such Humanity in its present condition simply could not exist, nor could you possibly communicate in the manner that you are now doing.

"Tools are things."

So are we.

"What if we let-go of things, and look deeper."

Kind of hard to do without to tools, but to answer your question the stagnation of our race would ensure if we simply let things go.

Humans are only intelligent because we are taught to be, without education and love, nurture and empathy we are not even a very good apex predator.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Nothin

"Can you not look at what is below, deeper than physics and mathematics?"

We can indeed and call it the quantum realm. Physical laws and mathematical logic break down at that level.

"If the universe is mado of math, as you have claimed elsewhere, where does math come from?"

Again possibly down amongst the quantum foam. From chaos, order emerges.

"Did someone, or something create math, physics, phi, or whatever you believe is true, so that they could then create a universe based on it?"

Possibly if the holographic principle holds weight.

"Have we not occasionally tweaked these supposed laws?"

That's how science works, theories are refined and replace as better more reasonable assumptions based on better information materializes.

"Do bees use math and physics?"

Yes they can count and may possibly understand the concept of zero.

"Or on another level: do bees bee, and bears bear?"

Don't understand that one. I know that they crap in the woods.

"We change opinions, beliefs, concepts, claims, concepts sometimes, don't we?
Is it not delusion to then call any of those truth?"

Depends on the beliefs and evidence to support such or change for that matter.

"If we're exchanging with opinions, beliefs, concepts, claims, concepts and such,
are we not clinging to falsehoods?"

I would call it more an exchange of ideas, what you take from such is generally down to you.

"Is anything that is even 0.0000000001% false: true?"

Yes.

Can see how QM was a good answer to that question.
Was trying to have you look in a different direction, outside of science, but can see now how my question led you to answer that.

Would you like to look at that question again, below and beyond the realm of science and QM, or do you think the question could be better formulated?

And speaking of QM: has that not thrown a monkey-wrench into the standard classical models?

How could one whom has investigated QM, still stand on a soapbox and proclaim that classical models are truth?

Are you suggesting that through the holographic principle, is the only way in which our now QM challenged classical math and physics models, could be true?
If so, or not: are we not getting farther away from your previous claims that everything is math? Or not?

How could the universe have been created by math, if we are tweaking the supposed laws some 7 supposed billion years later?

Are you holding a belief of some type of creator, holographic principle or not?

The expression: 'bees bee, and bears bear', attempts to point how nature just happens, without all of our silly intellectual overlaying of concepts.
For example: no matter how we attempt to anthropomorphize, or explain animal behavior: they just do what they do, and our viewpoint doesn't alter that.

..."..."Is anything that is even 0.0000000001% false: true?" "Yes"".
Uh oh!
We seem to have not yet agreed on what is truth, and what is false.

How much falseness needs to be shown, until you begin to question what is true?

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Nothin

"Why do we have to work with any tools?"

Do you like having fingers and opposable thumbs?

Those are tools.

Tools and complex ideologies and systems of thought are what separates us from most of the rest of the animals on the planet.

Without such Humanity in its present condition simply could not exist, nor could you possibly communicate in the manner that you are now doing.

"Tools are things."

So are we.

"What if we let-go of things, and look deeper."

Kind of hard to do without to tools, but to answer your question the stagnation of our race would ensure if we simply let things go.

Humans are only intelligent because we are taught to be, without education and love, nurture and empathy we are not even a very good apex predator.

These tools of which you speak are not eternal things. Fingers and thumbs may be here, now, and mostly funtional, but that's it.
They just are here, now, and perhaps yes: they are appreciated.

Tools come, and tools go. What tool is eternal? What is eternal?

OK: still with tools ..."...Without such Humanity in its present condition simply could not exist..."...
What might humanity be without said tools?
That is part what you are asked to look at.

Peel-away the layers of tools, opinions, beliefs and concepts, and all that is not pure truth.
What is left?

If a thing is found: examine it until said thing dissipates.
Once you have tried this: you may find that it is stunning to observe more and more things, concepts, and such, crumble into nothingness.

It's not for everyone nor anyone, and it is very threatening to our ego.
But since you have stuck-around so long in this thread, perhaps you may be interested.

originally posted by: toysforadults
Then reductionist came along with their "science" or magic as I know it

You call science 'magic'? To you the entire field of study which has brought you almost everything you use and depend on in your daily life is 'magic'?

This explains your OP