Of The Universe and Us....

ATSers: As this is my first "real" post, please be gentle Your feedback is welcome.



The biggest thought on my mind today was of substance and energy. I was thinking of the entirety of things that I have read, studied, heard, and spoke as I was trying desperately to put my life, my journey, my troubles, my hopes, and my fears into perspective.

The fundamental truth that every thinking person on this planet knows is that all the Universe, and therefore we, are made of mostly empty space. This is really the fundamental axiom and elegant principle which unifies everything--and the one place where every disparate cogent philosophy finds its center and common bond.

Creation and Genesis say the Universe started when God said "Let there Be Light." From emptiness burst a brilliance of energy and light which gradually evolved in "7 Days" to the emergence of Adam and Eve or the first of Man. From Nothing the breath of God spoke the Word and the material world and Universe was eventually born. A material universe that is still 99.9% empty of matter. Including us.

Science says that all matter in the Universe was once compressed into a point that was invisible to the naked eye. This point burst forth with immeasurable energy and expanded rapidly, bathing the young Universe in a a brilliance of energy and light. The Universe kept expanding to our present observable Universe. This led to the forming of all matter including man. All still 99.9% empty space. Including us.

So it looks like we can all agree then!

So what is the point of all of this? The beauty of our existence is that it is truly an illusion. We are empty space with a few pinpoints of matter like protons and neutrons in constant flux, infinite changes of state, and energy levels. Physicists will tell you that it is impossible to push two pieces of matter together; they will never touch and their organic energies will always slightly repel each other. Interesting, no? How many times have we had experiences that seem to argue against this point. What? I am never truly touching my dog when I pet its fur, I am not actually touching the lips of my lover? Yes. And no.

Energy is what was created in that first millisecond after God's First Spoken Word, or if you prefer, The Big Bang. The overwhelmingly majority of the Universe is still the child of that initial brilliance and energy that eventually flooded the Universe. We are still that energy. We are mostly energy. Most of what we are is not what we see, smell, feel, taste. We are mostly energy and energy that is the progeny of the first Spoken Word, the first explosion of that pinpoint piece of infinitely dense matter that was blown apart in the Big Bang. We really are as it has been said so many times, the children of the stars as well as the First Spoken Word. We are energy. We touch everything with this energy because there is no boundaries in energy. Just one continuous field that exists everywhere at once. We are mere bumps in that everywhere. And we are connected to all of much firmer than if we were physically tethered and wired.

Funny isn't it that we spend so much of our time, in many people's cases all of it, living our lives and worrying about that which is an illusion, that is such a small part of who we are that it is almost immeasurable. It is astounding to me that 99.9% of my 230lbs is empty space. And I worry about my love handles.

Thanks for your thread.

Some nice words there and a lot of truth.

If only we could all sit and muse on the beauty and elegance of this creation infinitely whilst bathed in light and love. This is the Utopian ideal, the Garden of Eden, the connection with the true essence.

Somehow, stuff got in the way and we have to work and experience many emotions, we have all sorts of relationships and interactions, we construct and learn, we are beings in a physical world where interactions are essential.

Though in this physical existence there can and should be love and light and connection to the true essence. We have to know the balance and to insist on this. The way society is currently ran for most is not a balanced way.

There should be the balance of the physical with the love, light and 'spiritual' as this is the way of nature and the way which is meant to be.

Thank you for sharing this with us. It really does boggle the mind, doesn't it?

QuantumKat

Energy is what was created in that first millisecond after God's First Spoken Word, or if you prefer, The Big Bang.

How is energy created?

QuantumKat
ATSers: As this is my first "real" post, please be gentle

Your feedback is welcome.


Funny isn't it that we spend so much of our time, in many people's cases all of it, living our lives and worrying about that which is an illusion, that is such a small part of who we are that it is almost immeasurable.

That is a wonderful first post

It is most certainly does not speak well of us that we seem to spend so much time arguing and fretting about things, that in the end are meaningless to our lives; while we spend to little just taking in the wonder of it all.

PhotonEffect

QuantumKat

Energy is what was created in that first millisecond after God's First Spoken Word, or if you prefer, The Big Bang.

How is energy created?

A very excellent question.

If the Big Bang is gospel (pun intended) then all matter was compressed into a single infinitesimally tiny point, than energy was created from that initial point. According to E=MC2 if all the matter in the universe was initially energy in the first milliseconds after 'The Event' than the Universe was chock full of massive amounts of energy.

Anything prior to The Event cannot be described by our current models of quantum physics. The rules break down. It is not understood.

On the religious side, nothing is spoken of except a void prior to God's first "spoken words". According to Genesis, God said "Let There Be Light" (energy).

A collision with a neighboring multiverse? An inverse black hole? A Creator's Voice? Some higher intelligence writing the code for the matrix?

No science or system of belief knows. We may never. That's what makes it beautiful.

I believe the more one looks, the more one realizes that the pursuers of science and the pursuers of spiritually might be describing the same thing...and have the same level of ignorance as to how or why it started......kinda one of my main points of the post

reply to post by QuantumKat


We are the universe looking at itself. What is more beautiful?

AfterInfinity
reply to post by QuantumKat

 

We are the universe looking at itself. What is more beautiful?

Incredibly elegant way to put it.

reply to post by QuantumKat


Atoms are modelled as spheres, but they actually don't have a definitive boundary. Anything that does not have a definitive boundary can not be full of anything because there is nothing to fill. Therefor, atoms are not full of empty space, only our models of them are.

QuantumKat

Science says that all matter in the Universe was once compressed into a point that was invisible to the naked eye. This point burst forth with immeasurable energy and expanded rapidly, bathing the young Universe in a a brilliance of energy and light. The Universe kept expanding to our present observable Universe. This led to the forming of all matter including man. All still 99.9% empty space. Including us.

So it looks like we can all agree then!

Err, not really.

I am of the belief that the big bang was possibly a collision and not a singularity event. Two or more already powerful things moving through space that collided causing a huge event.

Because "scientists say" doesn't mean there are no other possibilities. Were they there at the time they claim the big bang happened?

reply to post by QuantumKat


Suzane Segals Enlightenment Experience..........

thetruthaboutlifeip.com...

Margot Ridler Enlightenment Experience.............

thetruthaboutlifeip.com...

QUOTES Susan Segal...................... The continued operation of all the functions in the state of freedom is an awesome way to live. It bears no resemblance to the stark emptiness that fear might paint to be. People who tell me they don't want to give up the personal because they believe they would be giving up love or joy or deep feeling don't understand that the personal never existed. Nothing is given up. Love that appears to be personal is based on a mind-constructed sense of being separate. Love in this separate state involves a longing to merge with an other in order to be fulfilled. From the perspective of the vastness, the other does not exist. When the vastness sees everything out of itself to be made of itself, this is the ultimate intimacy. The moment-to-moment flavor of the vastness undulating within itself as it perceives itself through every particle of itself everywhere brings a love that is limitless, far surpassing anything the mind could construct as the ideal love it seeks.

Joy and pleasure are also awesome in their non-personal appearances. To live in the vastness of the naturally occurring state is to bathe in the ocean on non-personal pleasure and joy. This joy and pleasure, which belong to no one, are unlike any joy or pleasure that appear to refer or belong to a someone. The emptiness is so full, so total, so infinitely blissful to itself. These eyes see the incredible benevolence of the universe, which is completely trustworthy in all respects. There is nothing to fear. Everything in each moment is so well taken care of - and always has been. Realization of the infinite is outside the sphere of the mind. The infinite realizes itself out of itself. This raises the question about the value of performing spiritual practices, studying ancient texts, or even living a "spiritual" life. Most practices imply the existence of a "me" who can do the practice and eventually accomplish a particular goal.

But if the practice is undertaken by such a "me" in order to attain the non-locatable vastness of no personal self, then a conundrum or paradox presents itself: A personal doer is presumed to exist who must do the practices properly in order to achieve the realization that there is no personal doer. But this reference to a personal doer runs totally counter to how the infinite exists. In this life, it has been clear ever since the experience at the bus stop that there never is, nor has there ever been, a personal doer anywhere. Prescribed techniques and lifestyles that insinuate an "I" who must "do" in order for awakening to occur presuppose a cause-and-effect relationship that simply does not exist. How can a personal "I" who doesn't exist be the one who must do something in order for awakening to occur?

The purpose of human life has been revealed. The vastness created these human circuitries in order to have an experience of itself out of itself that it could not have without them. Through this humanness, the substance we are all made of has an opportunity to love itself - and the love of the infinite for itself is awesome. The words "love", "bliss" and "ecstasy" only begin to describe the hugeness of the infinite's appreciation of itself that occurs through these circuitries (bodies).

Margot Ridler…… By selling all of my furniture and my car I was able to raise around $6,000. That was all I had left to my name. At age 44 that sum would be considered by most standards pretty dire. What I did not know was that eventually all of that would be gone, too and that I would have to stand in those foreign countries not only with no I and not knowing anything - but also, absolutely penniless. The message that I had to learn was of course: you don't need to know anything, you don't need any money, you don't need to be in charge - Life will provide every step of the way. And that is how it was!

Life provided in spite of mind continually falling into insane angst, the most unimaginable, magical and miraculous time which the the un-deconstructed Margot Ridler character could have never, ever fathomed possible in her wildest dreams. What comfort, what grace, what delight and what gratitude. All questions were answered and in that instant, peace and calm set in that are now experienced daily in regards to all survival fears. Even though still today, at age 48, am penniless and homeless and possess absolutely nothing that in worldly terms would supply safety, protection and security, I feel safe and protected by Life and know I will always be taken care of in the best possible way.

Aphorism
reply to post by QuantumKat

 

Atoms are modelled as spheres, but they actually don't have a definitive boundary. Anything that does not have a definitive boundary can not be full of anything because there is nothing to fill. Therefor, atoms are not full of empty space, only our models of them are.

Understand, and I was trying to keep my post more metaphorical than in the weeds. However, the spherical model is irrelevant.... if you mean average radius of the outermost electron orbital and the volume of space the total "point" particles of a given atom occupy, it's still a very accurate statement.

I realize "empty space" is a bit of a misnomer depending on how technical you want to get. But there is a huge amount of "non point particle space" in every atom and therefore any singular mass object. Well more than 99.9%. Again, being metaphorical a tad.

Thanks for your post.

nerbot

QuantumKat

Science says that all matter in the Universe was once compressed into a point that was invisible to the naked eye. This point burst forth with immeasurable energy and expanded rapidly, bathing the young Universe in a a brilliance of energy and light. The Universe kept expanding to our present observable Universe. This led to the forming of all matter including man. All still 99.9% empty space. Including us.

So it looks like we can all agree then!

Err, not really.

I am of the belief that the big bang was possibly a collision and not a singularity event. Two or more already powerful things moving through space that collided causing a huge event.

Because "scientists say" doesn't mean there are no other possibilities. Were they there at the time they claim the big bang happened?

Again, trying to keep this on the metaphorical level, but I agree with your point.

To be more precise, there was a time using backward analysis that general relativity shows the universe consisted of infinite density and temperature.

The singularity happened, the cause of that singularity is completely speculative since general relativity breaks down at the Planck Epoch.

Planck Epock

You're correct, there was no human observer at that point. And our understanding breaks down right before the creation or singularity happened. Kinda supports my OP's main point.

Thanks for your post.

reply to post by QuantumKat


Out of curiosity, what sort of picture are you trying to paint with your metaphor that we are mostly empty space?

If we were to say that a solar system's boundary is the orbit of its furthermost heavenly body, and that the solar system is composed of mostly empty space, it would seem correct. But when we talk about solar systems, are we speaking of the space between the planets, or are we speaking about the planets themselves?

reply to post by QuantumKat

QuantumKat

I believe the more one looks, the more one realizes that the pursuers of science and the pursuers of spiritually might be describing the same thing...and have the same level of ignorance as to how or why it started......kinda one of my main points of the post

Well, yes, it's always been two sides of the same coin, so to speak. I don't take for literal, nor do I agree with, the details by which the Bible describes how things came to be, although as an agnostic I'm completely okay with it being one interpretation as to how things came to be. To me it's allegory.

We simply don't have enough information to know. And our interpretations of what the universe is, whether scientific or religious, mean nothing really. Our words, our vocabulary, are all we have, along with the meanings we ascribe to them. We make it up as we go along basically. Another intelligent species on the other side of our galaxy, or in a completely different galaxy will have a completely different notion of what the universe is. Heck, their so called ideas are probably not anything like what we call ideas. So what might their perception of the universe be? I would say it's completely different and unintelligible to us. But is it wrong?

The so called natural laws as we have made them up pertain only to us and our planet in this neck of the woods contrived from the perceptions allowed by our 5 senses. I do not think they will apply the same way elsewhere outside of our solar system.

We're conditioned to view and think about the universe based on our semantics, through our prism. Naturally....Now strip the universe completely of our words and meanings. Try to imagine it through the universal prism... Objectively then, what the hell is it? And what the hell are we, really? We are not "humans". We don't live on a "planet" called "Earth". None of these words mean anything outside of our bubble.

Point is, any arguments between both camps are pointless. Why? Because these notions about what our existence is, are both correct and incorrect at the same time. Or in other words, they represent 2 different sides of the same coin. Although there might be an infinite number of coins and sides..

Aphorism
reply to post by QuantumKat

 

Out of curiosity, what sort of picture are you trying to paint with your metaphor that we are mostly empty space?

If we were to say that a solar system's boundary is the orbit of its furthermost heavenly body, and that the solar system is composed of mostly empty space, it would seem correct. But when we talk about solar systems, are we speaking of the space between the planets, or are we speaking about the planets themselves?

The space between point particles, I guess to put it crudely. In a volume occupied by the "boundaries" of those pieces of mass, or in your analogy, the outermost orbiting planet in the solar system, the vast amount of space defined by that volume is empty.

reply to post by DrunkYogi


thank you for posting this, brother

peace