Proof that we exist on both the physical and the non-physical.

Originally posted by Shema
reply to post by Kashai

 

I was taken on a journey once through our galaxy and making it possible was achieved by closing down my body. It took some time but eventually my breathing stopped completely and my heart ceased to beat. The only connection to my body that remained was, the nearest I can describe it, a narrow band of heated energy that circled my forehead. Its hard to gauge exactly how long in Earth time I was 'away' but I'm pretty sure it was at least an hour.

I can remember perfectly well what I saw and experienced on that journey.

edit on 5-2-2013 by Shema because: (no reason given)

That sound very much like an out of body experience. Friend you could have saved yourself a lot of grief by posting this in the Philosophy and Metaphysics Forum. People have experiences like this one can even research such experiences in relation to history. In most cases the person walks away as having the feeling they have developed a "truth". My tendency is to respond that perhaps these types of experiences are a truth to them. Essentially that each of us are akin to pieces in a puzzle and so in perspective we each have a way to understand truth from our individual point of view. But I also feel that if one decides to investigate these experiences further, one will reach a point where words simply cannot define the experience.

Hence the reference in ancient and current beliefs of a "Silence."


In a similar experience to yours I once tried to look into the future with the purpose of observing any physical continuity. My interpretation of the experience was that I observed Bose- Einstein Condensates. All things considered it was a very strange experience and I am still having trouble wrapping my mind around the idea of how temperature relates, to a physical nature, to the future.

However...



Which I find fascinating though, in the context of scientific investigation? Indicative only, that time can be slowed with a BEC for individual photons at present. Though it could be construed that the light is reacting to an inherent aspect of nature at some other level.

reply to post by Kashai


It never pays to presume anything, surely you have learnt that by now.
I didn't have an out of body experience. I was not alone, I had a host who took me on the journey. You could never accept or understand it because you see everything from the aspect of scientific logic. I developed no 'truth' from the journey, no more so than if I took a trip to another country.

I have witnessed things that if I could present them in solid form to science's scrutiny all their logic and theories would be blown out of the water, back to square one.

Science has its place in working out the things of this world that can be seen be it macro or micro .
but when it comes to guessing and theorizing about what cannot be seen it is treading on very thin ice indeed. Science in its arrogance wants to explain what lies beyond it so it makes stuff up, its theories , then wants everyone to bow before their genius and if anyone dares to doubt them they are cast as religious loonies or worse.

The 'silence' you speak of? Well, friend, there are plenty of us who suffer the nonsense that issues from some of the sciences in silence.

I think of science some equivalent to a really nice tool kit. Scientist are trained to use it but beyond what the tools they have can do, they need better tools. Consciousness and what its potential really is is well out of the range of modern science to discern.

Today neuroscientist are working with insect brains and finding all kind of really interesting things.

Originally posted by Kashai
I think of science some equivalent to a really nice tool kit. Scientist are trained to use it but beyond what the tools they have can do, they need better tools. Consciousness and what its potential really is is well out of the range of modern science to discern.

Today neuroscientist are working with insect brains and finding all kind of really interesting things.

Science is deserving of accolades for what it has achieved, no question of that, and it is admirable in that it reaches out for the apparently unreachable. But it doesn't have an all-seeing eye, in fact it is in its own way as blinkered as the religious fundamentalists are. It theorizes around what it can't see and is too quick to say this is how it must be. Because of this it comes across as being presumptuous and arrogant, especially to us who are not so blinkered.

reply to post by Shema


From my perspective you are discussing scientist not science. Keep in mind that the first time Albert Einstein presented this conclusions, he was laughed out of Oxfords main room for such discussions.

I mean he presented math that today, is absolutely accepted and despite that? Scientist of the day, treated him as if he needed psychiatric care.

Take it or leave it that is science.

reply to post by Arbitrageur

You said everything has an opposite. The opposite of matter is antimatter, except the problem is, most matter doesn't have an antimatter opposite. The universe is mostly matter.

To say The universe is mostly matter is a bit premature in our understanding of universe. Much more is unknown than is known.

About 73% of the universe is dark energy. Dark matter makes up about 25% and every thing we can observe all "normal matter" makes up the rest of the universe.

The big question is what is this dark energy. One explanation comes from the quantum theory of matter. In short this theory says that "empty space" is actually full of temporary "virtual" particles that continually form and then disappear. The problem is when tying to calculate how much energy this would give empty space, the answer came out wrong by 10 to the 120 times too big. That's a 1 with 120 zeros after it.

This brings me to the OP and opposites. There is yet another explanation for dark energy, that it's a new kind of dynamical energy fluid or field, something that fills all of space but something whose effect on the expansion of the Universe is the opposite of that of matter and normal energy. This new form of dark energy is called quintessence. But.. still the mystery continues, we still do not know what it is like, what it interacts with, or why it exists.

Link

There is also Leonard Susskind argument in relation to Steven Hawkins in respect to Black Holes. This being where he presents that each of us are represented 2 dimensionally at the edge of the Universe.

reply to post by Kashai


Thanks for the link, Kashai, I found it interesting. From my own experience and observation I have no doubt that our own brains unscramble the hologram that comes to us from the cosmos. I can't get over the fact that the Professor remains an ardent evolutionist. His hairy ape comment at the end makes him sound silly.

reply to post by Shema


Its not amything ground breaking or anything of that nature.
Just look at a Rubiks cube and it will become clear to you

The question you should ask yourself, is the lack of something actually its opposite? Think about this for a second...

Now, if something physically exists, you can touch or feel it. Do you agree with that? You can feel the wind, rain, earth, air, fire, etc. However, the opposites of these are nothing. Just like the opposite of physical existance is nothing.

Not existing.

Originally posted by secret titan
The question you should ask yourself, is the lack of something actually its opposite? Think about this for a second...

Now, if something physically exists, you can touch or feel it. Do you agree with that? You can feel the wind, rain, earth, air, fire, etc. However, the opposites of these are nothing. Just like the opposite of physical existance is nothing.

Not existing.

Does a positive pole contain what the negative pole lacks? And vise-versa? The Q you pose sounds absurd initially but you did suggest I that I think for a second so....you know, you might have hit onto something there. I'm sure that the Professor in the above link from Kashai would find it intriguing too. Have you watched it yet?

You seem to affirming your atheistic beliefs in your following paragraph. The professor did too, in his own words, at the end of his lecture . Its unfortunate because what he and maybe you actually pronounce to the world is: ' I will search for the truth and bring forward the facts only to the point where evolution holds firm but when it begins to shake and shatter I go no further'.

reply to post by Shema


Yeah he is an atheist and I think sometime he feels an need to over compensate. I consider his response to Hawkins from the heart and more consistent with science fundamentally. The idea of an edge to the Universe with regard to more than 3 dimensions can take on a different meaning, one can look for example at the present and see it as a kind of edge.

Originally posted by Kashai
reply to post by Shema

 

Yeah he is an atheist and I think sometime he feels an need to over compensate.

I consider his response to Hawkins from the heart and more consistent with science fundamentally. The idea of an edge to the Universe with regard to more than 3 dimensions can take on a different meaning, one can look for example at the present and see it as a kind of edge.

edit on 8-2-2013 by Kashai because: modifed content

I see the good Professor and others of his inclination hovering near the edge but hesitant to go too close in case they see something they don't want to see. That won't stop them from eventually going closer because their curiosity will get the better of them and that can only be good. Until they do they will continue to speculate. They need to overcome the Hawkins syndrome, break free of his influence. IMHO

reply to post by Shema



Actually included in my upbringing was that of an Indigenous culture. My training was based upon what I remembered of a past life.

The Taino were brought to near extinction but we survived.

I have a PhD in Psychology and have a substantive comprehension of Physics. When it comes to minors that would include Religion and International Relations

Originally posted by Kashai
reply to post by Shema

 

Actually included in my upbringing was that of an Indigenous culture.

My training was based upon what I remembered of a past life.

The Taino were brought to near extinction but we survived.

I have a PhD in Psychology and have a substantive comprehension of Physics. When it comes to minors that would include Religion and International Relations

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

That is impressive Kashai.. Me I am a nobody. Never knew my father or anything about him so no idea of my lineage. No schooling to speak of, I was autistic and back in those days I was considered stupid. Kicked out of school the day I turned 15, they would have done it sooner if it had been legal. Tough going initially but I became a student of life, still am, the best schooling of all for someone like me. No diplomas or certificates though, no graduation ceremony, nothing to pin up on the wall in a frame to say what I've learnt , Not that I care but I respect someone such as yourself who has put in all the study to become someone with letters after their name. We are a world apart, I'm grateful to have met you albeit briefly. Thanks for contributing to the thread.

edit on 8-2-2013 by Kashai because: Added content