In the beginning, define a wall...

reply to post by dzonatas


Maybe it's so difficult to define the Wall because in reality there is no wall - only your /our perception of the Wall...or how the Wall should be.
After all, we are all thinking in human terms.

The only reason we understand a wall to be a wall is because we have been told that's it is.
So we apply that logic in a metaphorical sense - which I don't think we can do.

The Many and the One/Source are the same...like a rope that has frayed.
There's only a separation or a decision to separate because we are applying human thinking to it.
The only other analogy I can think of (which probably only look right in my head) is -

Imagine the Source as an insect. That insect possesses 'feelers' to enable it to experience or interact with it's environment...to enhance its experience if you will.
Maybe we are those 'feelers', directly connected to the insect/Source, in order to enhance the experience.
There is a direct connection - no gaps in the information...ie - no Wall.

Going back to topic - we only think a Wall exists or should exist only because we perceive it to.

Sorry if that was rambling...!

Much love...

Originally posted by zosomike

Very warm and excellent post!

Let me apply some 'listening skills" to reiterate what was written so we can see the same page no matter what page we want to look at it from.

Maybe it's so difficult to define the Wall because in reality there is no wall - only your /our perception of the Wall...or how the Wall should be.
After all, we are all thinking in human terms.

The wall is nothing because nothing can pass through the wall. This is stated in pure english.

The only reason we understand a wall to be a wall is because we have been told that's it is.

In "plain" English, however, we can knock on the wall and it sounds solid.

So we apply that logic in a metaphorical sense - which I don't think we can do.

Some think virtual reality is fake, yet it is metaphoricals that are meant to be fake made out of something else. Perhaps, some only sense that something else instead of the metaphor.

The Many and the One/Source are the same...like a rope that has frayed.
There's only a separation or a decision to separate because we are applying human thinking to it.

Despite distinction, difference, and individualism, we still wonder if Thinking is in the same dimension as Life itself or if they can exist without each other. The mere act or desire of attraction to share and rebuild may have been the real reason life exists, a motherly instinct.

Personally, I call the instinct to pheal and phix, or a beautiful evil.

If the entire world, reality, and existence of everything gets destroyed, what's one thing left that is gonna save us. Nothing except the will to live.

The only other analogy I can think of (which probably only look right in my head) is -

Imagine the Source as an insect. That insect possesses 'feelers' to enable it to experience or interact with it's environment...to enhance its experience if you will.
Maybe we are those 'feelers', directly connected to the insect/Source, in order to enhance the experience.
There is a direct connection - no gaps in the information...ie - no Wall.

That was so damn beautiful how you said that. It wouldn't be right for me to try to put into words here to describe the beauty of such an instinct every baby knows and that you have described that gets so often overlooked and forgotten as people grow up that this is how you know we don't have the words, yet we can still share the feelings.

Going back to topic - we only think a Wall exists or should exist only because we perceive it to.

Sorry if that was rambling...!

Much love...

reply to post by dzonatas


Let me apply some 'listening skills" -
Why do I get some sense of being slightly patronised by the above????
Maybe that's just me incorrectly inferring your words...apologies of that is the case.

"The wall is nothing because nothing can pass through the wall" -
I had neglected to comment on that earlier. You are absoultely right and I see we are on the same page.

"Newborns need a place to make their first babystep. Any REAL motherly instinct knows it better be babysafe before that step is ever made." -
So what you're saying there, is that the addition of, or added constriction of a Wall, is there for the 'constricted' mind as a 'fail-safe'.
Therefore...once our 'mental stabilizers' (as it were) are cast aside or no longer needed - ie we can handle more of what is Truth, we realise that "...The wall is nothing because nothing can pass through the wall...".

I hope I have understood you correctly from what you have written, because feel a resonance with what you're trying to convey.
Ha...I only hope I have conveyed my concurrance to you!!
But sure...if I haven't, we can still share the feelings...!

Much love...

from the point of your expression you know this to be impossible as in doing so you will have full knowledge of everything including but limited to what i will become in doing such; a wall.

good try trickster. kinda like the time you riddled me about heru em ankh et.

reply to post by Ausar


The trickster is only of nature and only there to protect natural beauty in ways we try not to share. The trickster is represented by the Happy-Sad masks famously shown by actors or theaters.

If a wall puts itself next to a wall, then the light that reflected off nothing that is the wall suddenly has no where else to go. A wall next to a wall is still a wall.

The element of nothing.

Originally posted by zosomike
reply to post by dzonatas

 

Let me apply some 'listening skills" -
Why do I get some sense of being slightly patronised by the above????
Maybe that's just me incorrectly inferring your words...apologies of that is the case.

If you did then claim it truly happened that you got that sense. You don't know what you got until it is gone.

Some of us were born cradle to grave, or actually never born but are natural bearth. The difference being those that are born into innocence for every birth and rebirth they ever experience and those have found it impossible to ever have that luxury everyone else shares, and thus having to prove innocence rather then being born with it.

I can only ask you to accept my infinite mind that won't deny the possibility that it is true whatever you think I possible could have thought. Yes, I can think it, and I will never let go of the infinite mind. Maybe I hold its last thread of existence, so that others may share the senses and feelings that are of the infinite mind. Are you absolutely positive that what you sense came from me, as a direction of a sense, or is that actually two separate senses.

Patronized.

I thought you are special.

... with love

EDIT: special, as in a unique beauty, shown expressed in conveyance

[edit on 10-2-2010 by dzonatas]

Originally posted by dzonatas
We as this LIFE needed to somehow separate each of ourselves from this SINGLE DIMENSION of LIFE into individualism of WE....

The challenge: Define a wall.

Interesting question! After a little thought it occurred to me that basically the barrier that you're musing about can very likely be seen as infinity. For instance,

[0] (a - b) - c = (a - b) / c, where (a - b) = c^2 implies that c = 0 and c = 2.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4ee3e8670a06.gif[/atsimg]

Why bother with this bizarre notation rather than just saying c^2 / c = c^2 - c? Because,

[1] a + b = a - b, where b is the additive identity
[2] b = (a - a) - b, or seen another way [3] b = 0 = (a - a) / 2
[4] 2 = (a - a) / b

And since b ≈ (a - a / ((a - a) / ((a - a) / ...))) ≈ 2 we can say b ≈ 2 (proof). Thus allowing us to construct,

[5] (a - a) - b ≈ (a - a) / b, which if you notice is similar in form to (a - b) - c = (a - b) / c from step [0].

This basically suggests that we're dealing with an infinite series of points to bridge this gap from the 0-dim object 2 to the 0-dim point 0. If we structure those points as a continuous sequence we basically see our 0-dim objects are connected to a 1-dim line.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/74760efadc87.png[/atsimg]

How? Define that wall...

So I'm inclined to say infinity. Just makes me wonder how we can bridge the gap to the next world if we have to overcome infinity.

[edit on 11-2-2010 by Xtraeme]

Originally posted by dzonatas
The challenge: Define a wall.

Before you think that is too scientifically simple, try it this way.... in the beginning...

There is only LIFE.

LIFE is a single dimension.

Some may think all is connected, no WE are all ONE DIMENSION of LIFE. That being a simply truth that WE EXIST. And, that being the ONLY fact you have and only thing you could prove because you can think to yourself that WE EXIST as LIFE. (etc).... LIFE EXISTS.

In the beginning, LIFE created a wall...

We as this LIFE needed to somehow separate each of ourselves from this SINGLE DIMENSION of LIFE into individualism of WE....

How? Define that wall...

If you can do that, then define a solid physical wall.

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall, pinky and floyd had waters field the call, china and Mongolia have a great one between, 89 saw the end of the soviet regime the ones who divided the German Machine, mortising a wall through the heart of Berlin. Information took a leap, up over the wall, and created a web on which we all crawl. The very first wall, as you have said, is the one that surrounds your heart health and head.....

Peace

reply to post by letthereaderunderstand


if only berlin rhymed with machine. haha just kidding that was surprisingly good. not really in an artistic way but more like in a "gee i wasn't excepting this to make sense" kind of way,

i'm not so sure about all this metaphysical stuff. i'm gonna have to agree with olivia on this one.

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by Coolstorybro
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand

 

if only berlin rhymed with machine. haha just kidding that was surprisingly good. not really in an artistic way but more like in a "gee i wasn't excepting this to make sense" kind of way,

i'm not so sure about all this metaphysical stuff. i'm gonna have to agree with olivia on this one.

www.youtube.com...

Dividing the line between bondsman and kin...Berlin....forgot that...thanks

reply to post by Coolstorybro


Wow....Olivia....Wow...Jazzersize...Jane Fonda workout...wow....memories.

Peace

reply to post by dzonatas


That 'sense' was just from me dzonatas.
Further reading of your post showed me that
My 26 years on this planet sometimes inhibit me somewhat.

We are both on the same page.

Much love...

Originally posted by Xtraeme
This basically suggests that we're dealing with an infinite series of points to bridge this gap from the 0-dim object 2 to the 0-dim point 0. If we structure those points as a continuous sequence we basically see our 0-dim objects are connected to a 1-dim line.

You definitely have something there. I think if you worked at it more you could express it fully (as you did with scarcity) with this simplicity. I would only suggest to avoid reference to any quantum physics, yet note I consider quantum mechanics and quantum physics separate fields even if physicist don't.

Quantum physics obviously requires some sense of intelligence, and if we start in a world with nothing then we could obviously show there were mechanics that occurred before any realization of intelligence was organized, even it was to organize that physical intelligence first.

Obviously, you are thinking beyond fractals. We need more people with your skills to think this way. Here is some of my recent posts on perfect spheres:
#1 #2

... which may inspire you to see "an infinite series of points to bridge this gap" a bit differently.

reply to post by dzonatas


Deep , very deep. So deep I'didn't really find a deffinition.

But here goes.

It's the moment it became self aware. The quest for knowing it's self has lead up to us al. If you mean someting else

the wall, could be the golden path Dorothy walks on to The Emerald City of Oz.



[edit on 19-2-2010 by telfyr]

reply to post by Sinter Klaas


That's what I would consider "hardened" or the process to feel something hard. Would you agree in your view of it?

It also begs the questions if we started all soft or started all hard.

reply to post by telfyr


If those yellow bricks in the the road are actually alive and being there to make the path for Dorothy, oh my!

How would it feel to be stepped on by a woman? Is it worth it? For a first babystep?

reply to post by dzonatas


I would chose for visualizing as soft does not really has what it takes IMO

If I hear hardening it makes me think about something else to. It doesn't work for me

[edit on 19/2/10 by Sinter Klaas]

[edit on 19/2/10 by Sinter Klaas]

reply to post by Sinter Klaas


Hard in the sense of diamonds. Diamonds become organized which gives them strength.

Sometimes when I look at a diamond I hold, it's like time is meaningless in my hand for the moment.

reply to post by dzonatas


Diamonds Yes ! I could live with those.

I must say, this subject is a little out om leage