Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 10:40am PT
|
And given the definitive yield and the now declining returns of the first 2500 years of such thought, particularly theological thought, we should expect what from the next 50? I mean, exactly what is new and exciting on the theological front beyond evangelicals racing ISIS back to the future?
Let's see what have religion and philosophy done for us. Philosophical and theological notions yielded the enlightenment didn't they?... social concerns, actions based on those concerns from putting an end to the slave trade to universal health care. These are ideas that are born of a long history of evolving empathy the foundation of which is both religious and philosophical.
You're too ready to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Of course some religious ideas can be twisted into evil.
But then evil is just a human construct isn't it?
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 10:44am PT
|
theological notions yielded the enlightenment didn't they? -Paul
"theological"?
lol!
These are ideas that are born of a long history of evolving empathy the foundation of which is...
Evolution.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 10:59am PT
|
Still wrapped around an imaginary rhetorical axle I see.
If, in fact, singularities exist with 'no physical extant' - so what?
If, in fact, the workings of the universe may be converted to relationships between 'pure energy' - again, so what?
It is what it is, even if it's kind of weird.
One thing's for sure - there will be math.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 24, 2015 - 11:10am PT
|
If, in fact, singularities exist with 'no physical extant' - so what?
-
So what? Granted, as you insist, I don't really know anything, but what you are saying you grouchy old fart is totally heretical to all the fundamentalist materialists in all the land who's entire world view is based on the religion of stuff, things, and causes/sources that prompt the people, places, things and phenomenon of reality. When you take away the mass and the material and the "thingness" - the Dingus' of the world will show their teeth and scream for their stuff, lest no-thing will claim them like quicksand.
Lastly, the whole silly notion of grading us on wisdom, thereby placing yourself in a position of objective arbiter, is a move so ham-fisted and psychologicalpoy crude it is not even lost on my dog. And this from someone who shows some little promose beyond a jughead "stuff" platform. Like I said, we out to chain you down in the Zendo for a month till you your thoughts finally got clear. I believe your have something to say once all the static exhausts itself.
JL
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 24, 2015 - 11:34am PT
|
Dingus, what you’re are asking for is impossible because we can only get hold of energy when it takes a form or renders a specific effect. And as my ride share partners are always saying, “Energy comes in a hell of a lot of forms.” For example (to quote a source), when energy is released in an explosion (most explosions) that energy mostly takes the form of kinetic energy (things moving and heat). Light is about the closest to being pure energy, but in fact it’s one of the several kinds of energy that isn’t tied up in matter. It’s “matterless,” sure, but that doesn’t mean that electromagnetic fields (light) are any closer to being pure than, say, gravity fields (another, very different, massless form of energy). But some form of energy without matter: Yes, that happens. So, energy can change from one form into another into another into another, etc., but the question remains: what is energy? And if it’s not “pure energy’ that shape shifts, then what IS it?
Dick Feynman, way back in the day, said is important to realize that “we have no knowledge of what energy ‘is’. We do not have a picture that energy comes in little blobs of a definite amount. It is not that way. Energy itself is abstract in that it does not tell us the mechanism or the reason for the various formulas.”
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 12:47pm PT
|
Will I be clear of Thetans?
Grouchy I'm not (OK, after the 10th hour in a car I may drift into Angry Bum mode) but you'll have to take The Reverend's Word for it. If you care. Which you probably don't. Rest assured - I'm good.
My experiential challenge for the season will be to row from the US to Canada in an engineless race - the qualifying stage for the Race to Alaska. The ocean is a formidable teacher, my children. We will not be continuing on to Alaska, however. Work, girlfriends, and all that rot.
We can 'understand' most things we encounter through symbology/analogy, and that's no mean feat. Mathematics is the only language specific enough to describe the nitty gritty. The moment one attempts to depart from it and into 'layman's terms' (ie - what IS IT?), the brush becomes to broad for the job.
Flagrant rephrasing of what Moose just stated? Probably.
In the meantime, DMT can wrestle with the concept of 'rest mass' like a monkey trying to fuk a football. Conservation of energy calcs and the like often require the energy state of a given system to be split up by energy type in just such a manner - nothing new under the sun there. What is new under the sun is that mass is a relationship between a particle and a field. Does the particle have 'mass' without the field? Well, the field pervades the universe, so that question makes as much sense as determining the rest mass of a unicorn.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 01:07pm PT
|
Tvash -- "Nothing new under the sun"
Tvash -- Mathematics is the only language specific enough to describe the nitty gritty.
Translation -- Only "I" (Tvash) knows all
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 24, 2015 - 01:08pm PT
|
To recap. We evolved to survive in a macro world. We don't have the capacity to see or understand the micro world. Not through meditation, discursive mind, or whatever method you come up with.
--
Moose, by what empirical means did you arrive at this absolute pronouncement?
JL
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 01:16pm PT
|
Not true, really. When one's frame of reference travels with the particle, its relativistic energy state is equal to its rest mass from that frame of reference. Particles that change direction are momentarily at rest as well. Then there's heat death....
In the end though, rest mass energy is a necessary term for predicting and understanding particle interactions.
Sigh. What's a Newtonian to do?
It's not Moose's responsibility to disprove Largo's claim through empirical means, but Largo's responsibility to support his claim with use of same. And that's where things have fallen a bit short.
In the end, we're a most likely/least likely list of theories. The 'scientismalists'observe that the human brain is capable of a large number of mental states - it is also capable of believing falsehoods are true. Given those two known capabilities, the most likely theory is that the state of No Thing has nothing at all to do with the fundamental, physical nature of the universe - even if those experiencing it firmly believe that it does - and that its more likely one of many possible mental states.
Furthermore, it is observed that the no on can predict the future. Therefore, the most likely hypothesis is that the experientialist cannot know what will be within the reach of measurement in the future.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 24, 2015 - 01:16pm PT
|
And dingus, you said: No-thing? = nothing.
Here is where you are losing your way, IMO.
No-thing simply means that a phenomenon is not a thing (material, stuff, quantifiable form) in the normal sense of the word. That is, a thing, itself, seemingly has a form and a mass or some stuff - be that form a rock or a guitar or a rainbow. A photon has no mass and no form but "nothing" does not account for the light. Gravity is not a thing (that itself has a form and mass) in and of itself but "nothing" does not account for light bending and rocks falling.
No-thing simply means that the qualities we normally attribute to a thing like form, mass and shape and so forth, are entirely absent, and that we come to know these non-things only by the effect they have the energy they contain.
JL
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 01:17pm PT
|
Will I be clear of Thetans? (Tv)
"In Scientology, the concept of thetan (/ˈθeɪtən/) is similar to the concept of spirit or soul found in other belief systems. The term is derived from the Greek letter theta, which in Scientology represents "the source of life, or life itself."[1] In Scientology it is believed that it is the thetan, not the central nervous system, which commands the body through communication points.[2] This conception of the spirit in Scientology is represented by the Greek letter Θ, theta" (Wiki)
but the question remains: what is energy? (JL)
A good question, but unproductive. Better questions humans can come to grips with, How does it behave, What are its effects and measurable properties? I think your theological background sets the stage for these metaphysical inquiries and I must say they are a notch above Angels on the Head of a Pin.
But everything doesn't arise ultimately from the religiously inspired no-thing of the mind. Did the universe exist before humankind? Is there a universal infinite Mind? Perhaps a Mind-field. Careful where you step!
edit: Where do these polymaths learn so much physics? Impressive.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 01:39pm PT
|
It occurs to me that our ability to manipulate symbols affords us a sixth sense - the ability to see what our five senses cannot. The rest mass energy of a particle (through mathematics), as well as the distemper caused by same (through DMT's posts).
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 01:46pm PT
|
Rhetorical footballs have really tiny orifices.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 02:46pm PT
|
No-thing means not to conceptualize in your mind, free it from duality.
You keep thinking in your runaway fertile mind that you don't even have full control of that, No - Thing means nothing.
You don't read nor fully understand but only react thru your mind that is only accepting and rejecting.
You're NOT even in control of your own mind, it's controlling you with all that accumulated baggage in there accepting and rejecting.
All your posts are only a reflection of all the baggage you carry around in your mind.
Your mind is controlling you and not vice versa ie YOU should be in control of your own mind ....
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 03:13pm PT
|
One can see by studying his very own being the antimaterial particle as Largo describes as No-Thing.
Matter as it is constituted is subjected to annihilation, but antimatter is completely free from all annihilation.
So he is correct and you are in poor fund of knowledge ....
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 03:23pm PT
|
Have we just witnessed the dawning of the material/anti-material warped drive?
Is Largo's mind particle, wave, both, or 'other'?
Regarding 'the ancients', yup, folks have long sought to 'see' the fundamental nature of the world directly, without the insulation of symbols and all the painstaking work that requires.
All those thousands of years of effort and all we got were these damn equations practically nobody can read. And we still don't know what gravity is. Damn it!
Yes, I can see the source of the frustration very clearly now.
I'm still interested in making some gold, though.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 03:30pm PT
|
Matter itself has no creative power.
When matter is manipulated by the living energy (anti-matter) (Largo's No-Thing), material things are produced .....
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 04:58pm PT
|
Math is order and in this (the universe’s) case a very particular and inviolate order,
resultings in our existence.
If you say this order simply is, you become an advocate of the burning bush: “I am that I am” or it is that it is and that notion of order becomes a kind of final term, a deity.
The question becomes if and when that order (math) was imposed on material existence?
The structure (order/math) must be antecedent to the material as the material is subservient to the structure. The material can be manipulated but only within the specific requirements of the structure and the material must conform to the structure’s demands.
If you say that material and structure are one, then how is it that structure transcends the material nature of the universe? How is it that the Fibonacci sequence manifests itself in both living and non-living forms, for instance?
Material doesn’t exist without structure but structure as potential can and does exist without material in the form of mathematics and numerical relationships that exist outside the mind and are discovered by mathematicians. Those numerical relationships exist as unqualified potential structures of a limited and specific kind in relation to all matter.
I’m not advocating woo, I’m just pointing out the reasonable assumption that mind (mind/structure/order) is the predicate to material existence.
“The art of ship building is not in the wood.”
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2015 - 05:29pm PT
|
I’m not advocating woo, I’m just pointing out the reasonable assumption that mind (mind/structure/order) is the predicate to material existence. It may be a reasonable assumption, but, like time and space, order may have emerged along with existence.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!