Could Nothingness Be Another Dimension In And Of Itself?

[mystic64]

I'm not suggesting that people should adhere to "my method" though, so there is no absolutism involved, certainly not in the traditional sense of the word. If you want to label, continued unlimited growth as an absolute you are welcome to, but growth implies that no such absolutes exist - only endless change and growth. My own thinking is that hijacking scientific theory to bolster mystical understanding is a slippery slope. It's best to avoid the connections. People are welcome to do so, but my guess is that they will succeed in impressing very few. Again, it is a weak attempt to play on people's ignorance of scientific theory by appealing to the quasi-intellectual nature of the discussion. It doesn't add depth and only muddies the discussion by pretending a scientific component exists.

I will agree that I am aggressively promoting my own views. That much is a given. At least I have the decency to keep to my own views and not pretend that others are saying what I am - for the most part. I think most people are on glue when it comes to describing inner reality attaching all kinds of mumbo jumbo from a bygone era that is no longer relevant if, in fact, it ever was relevant to begin with.

My battle flag is the white flag, your battle flag is Mighty Mouse, a small but mighty super hero . And now you are accusing me of not having any decency . So now I am not only "not sane", I am also "not decent". YmirGF, it is amazing how you can take the moral high ground when you are doing the samething that the others that you are criticizing are doing. YmirGF, you are an interesting study, I like you !

 

[mystic64]

Yeah, it doesn't sound like a very "spiritual" way of referring to other people.

Conflict sells news papers! Spiny Norman, you are an awesome gift to activity and viewer numbers and viewer numbers are what pays the bills!

 

[YmirGF]

My battle flag is the white flag, your battle flag is Mighty Mouse, a small but mighty super hero . And now you are accusing me of not having any decency . So now I am not only "not sane", I am also "not decent". YmirGF, it is amazing how you can take the moral high ground when you are doing the samething that the others that you are criticizing are doing. YmirGF, you are an interesting study, I like you !

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
You do understand that it is a figure of speech, right - and not necessarily meant literally.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Conflict sells news papers! Spiny Norman, you are an awesome gift to activity and viewer numbers and viewer numbers are what pays the bills!

Eh? I was observing that likening other members to pigs isn't very nice. If you're worried about conflict then raise this concern with the person who makes these disparaging and patronising comments.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Theoretical Physics has now come to the conclusion that we are/may never going to know truly in a scientific sense how and why matter exists. The force that is holding things together (Higgs field) is a very weak force (almost turned off) and the force that is tearing things apart (dark matter) is trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions times bigger than the force that is holding things together. The conclusion is that there is something going on that is outside of what we can measure (prove scientifically) and thus physics relative to true understanding can not go any farther. Ben d, it is going to take a mystic to solve their problem because only a mystic can approach things from a fresh perspective that comes from outside of the box.

It means that they will have to re-assess the mathematical models they have been working with. The idea that a mystic is going to sort it all out seems ridiculous to me.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

@ben d
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/two-most-dangerous-numbers-universe-194557366.html

Theoretical Physics has now come to the conclusion that we are/may never going to know truly in a scientific sense how and why matter exists. The force that is holding things together (Higgs field) is a very weak force (almost turned off) and the force that is tearing things apart (dark matter) is trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions times bigger than the force that is holding things together. The conclusion is that there is something going on that is outside of what we can measure (prove scientifically) and thus physics relative to true understanding can not go any farther. Ben d, it is going to take a mystic to solve their problem because only a mystic can approach things from a fresh perspective that comes from outside of the box.

mystic....Particle physics of itself will never understand the bigger picture, nor will Astronomy, or Quantum physics...they are like the blind men describing the elephant...they each interpret the universal aspect they are focused as the whole....and the three can't be reconciled as it stands. The Higgs Field is the ZPE is the Dark Energy.. Even if and when they can be reconciled, the real will still be forever on the other side of the conceptual explanation...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

After doing a simple search of Vishnu and YmirGF I found that I have written about this already on a good many occasions.

From Jan. 5, 2007... thread The Day of Judgment


From Sept. 23, 2007.. thread What is the deal with YmirGF? (an interview)

(dang... out of time... for the time being...)

I thank you YmirGF.....interesting....I see you say what all we mystics say....the Divine love is a subjective experience and can't be proven to another...atheists will call you out on that as selling snake oil..

C'mon Spiny Norman....tell us your opinion of YmirGF's vision of Vishnu and his experience of divine love......are they fact or beliefs being presented as facts?.

 

[YmirGF]

I thank you YmirGF.....interesting....I see you say what all we mystics say....the Divine love is a subjective experience and can't be proven to another...atheists will call you out on that as selling snake oil.. .

Unless they listen to my entire story. The entire story does not bode well for theists.

C'mon Spiny Norman....tell us your opinion of YmirGF's vision of Vishnu and his experience of divine love......are they fact or beliefs being presented as facts?.

From my perspective, it was literally meeting my own beliefs, at the time, fleshed out (pun intended) into a form I could relate to. What may confound the average theist is that it took this meeting to help go beyond my need, at the time, for a god concept. It was something I saw in his magnificent immense eyes...

 

[gnostic]

Theoretical Physics has now come to the conclusion that we are/may never going to know truly in a scientific sense how and why matter exists. The force that is holding things together (Higgs field) is a very weak force (almost turned off) and the force that is tearing things apart (dark matter) is trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions times bigger than the force that is holding things together. The conclusion is that there is something going on that is outside of what we can measure (prove scientifically) and thus physics relative to true understanding can not go any farther. Ben d, it is going to take a mystic to solve their problem because only a mystic can approach things from a fresh perspective that comes from outside of the box.

Then clearly, mystic64, you don't know or understand what theoretical physics is.

Theoretical physics is used when a physicist presented papers (hypothesis) that are not yet testable or it is not possible to test or find verifiable evidences.

Theoretical physics is about finding alternative possible solutions, through mathematical models or through complex equations.

This is how physicists "think outside of the box", by using theoretical physics instead of experimental (empirical) physics.

That you think mystics can solve theoretical physics is laughable and absurd.

Are you good at maths, mystic64? Is ben_q good at maths?

The best any mystic can do, is use numerology, and numerology isn't even mathematics, let alone advanced mathematics.

Numerology is very similar to pseudoscience, they are fake maths.

The day a mystic can solve theoretical physics, would be the day that I would believe in mysticism. And that's highly unlikely.

 

[AndromedaRXJ]

The day a mystic can solve theoretical physics, would be the day that I would believe in mysticism. And that's highly unlikely.

The day mysticism it self solves any scientific problem would be the day mysticism would be deemed a method of science. And it probably wouldn't be called mysticism anymore either. Anything that we can come to know and understand, is automatically demystified (if it were mystified to begin with). If telepathy was legitimately discovered and understood, it would be demystified and be considered natural (not supernatural). It wouldn't be mystical anymore. Mysticism it self is just a concept in people's heads. Things are mystical simply because people see it as mystical in their mind. The word it self really has no meaning, intrinsically.

These insufferable mystics don't understand that science is about figuring out stuff by any means and method possible. If a certain method isn't proven to work, it's not deemed science. So I find it funny when mystics try to claim that there are non-scientific ways of figuring out stuff. There isn't, by definition. Any method that works is considered scientific.

If sitting in a meditative posture and entering a deep meditative state or deep concentration of thought, somehow unlocked secrets of the Universe (that could be tested and show consistency), then it would be considered a method of science. It wouldn't be some other method exclusive to science that also works.

If it's not science, it doesn't work. Period.

 

[gnostic]

The day mysticism it self solves any scientific problem would be the day mysticism would be deemed a method of science. And it probably wouldn't be called mysticism anymore either. Anything that we can come to know and understand, is automatically demystified (if it were mystified to begin with). If telepathy was legitimately discovered and understood, it would be demystified and be considered natural (not supernatural). It wouldn't be mystical anymore. Mysticism it self is just a concept in people's heads. Things are mystical simply because people see it as mystical in their mind. The word it self really has no meaning, intrinsically.

True.

Science is generally evidence-based acquired knowledge, except for theoretical physics, of course.

I highly doubt that mysticism will ever be evidence-based.

 

[AndromedaRXJ]

True.

Science is generally evidence-based acquired knowledge, except for theoretical physics, of course.

And math too. I would consider math a science, it's just not a natural science.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Unless they listen to my entire story. The entire story does not bode well for theists.

From my perspective, it was literally meeting my own beliefs, at the time, fleshed out (pun intended) into a form I could relate to. What may confound the average theist is that it took this meeting to help go beyond my need, at the time, for a god concept. It was something I saw in his magnificent immense eyes...

It matters not to the theists what you think of theism....and it should not matter to you what theists think of you.... so try not frame your belief system around attacking those whom you consider wrong or bad.....else karmic entanglement will follow...the law of cause and effect....

 

[gnostic]

And math too. I would consider math a science, it's just not a natural science.

Yes it is.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yes it is.

...and so is language and literature...

 

[Rick O'Shez]

If sitting in a meditative posture and entering a deep meditative state or deep concentration of thought, somehow unlocked secrets of the Universe (that could be tested and show consistency), then it would be considered a method of science. It wouldn't be some other method exclusive to science that also works.

I think that meditative practices can add something to our understanding of psychology and brain-function, but I fail to see how they have anything useful to say about the fundamental properties of the universe.

 

[mystic64]

Then clearly, mystic64, you don't know or understand what theoretical physics is.

Theoretical physics is used when a physicist presented papers (hypothesis) that are not yet testable or it is not possible to test or find verifiable evidences.

Theoretical physics is about finding alternative possible solutions, through mathematical models or through complex equations.

This is how physicists "think outside of the box", by using theoretical physics instead of experimental (empirical) physics.

That you think mystics can solve theoretical physics is laughable and absurd.

Are you good at maths, mystic64? Is ben_q good at maths?

The best any mystic can do, is use numerology, and numerology isn't even mathematics, let alone advanced mathematics.

Numerology is very similar to pseudoscience, they are fake maths.

The day a mystic can solve theoretical physics, would be the day that I would believe in mysticism. And that's highly unlikely.

Gnostic that was well said, but you missed my point ! Yes theoritical physics thinks outside the box, but they are coming to the conclusion that experimental physics is not going to be able to prove their hypothesis' because there are dimensions outside of our dimension and things that are outside of our dimension can not be measured (proven to exist or be real). Yes stating that a mystic could help is laughable because you are in the "Know" (Gnostic) and what you know is set in stone (can be the only thing that is correct). So anything that I might say that does not follow what you believe has to be rejected by you and others like you. Otherwise your version of an orderly world falls apart. And lets face it, "am" I actually just a "savant" when it comes to certain things and I just call it being a mystic? As a mystic I claim that I can interact with more advanced minds than mine "in a mind to mind way", but even though I can prove that the information works (which I have and experimental phyics has proved it, but that stuff is considered classified), I can not prove that these minds actually exist. Which makes me at best a "savant" at certain things.

And Gnostic (one who knows), I don't know anything about numerology and in my opinion if it was actually real it would be making a significant contribution to theoretically physics and to my knowledge it is not making any contribution. And Gnostic, just because a person who claims to be a mystic ( someone who claims to be able access information from something that is not them) is able to help theoretical physics does not mean that mysticism is real. So Gnostic, there would be absolutely no reason for you to believe in "mysticism". And until science can measure the "emf" that one's mind generates durring the thought processes and where any given "emf" source that is generated by the thought processes is orginating from, mysticism can not be proven to be real. In the meantime those of us that are mystics can use our abilities against those who do not have these abilities and not be cheating ! Because, everybody know that it can not be real.

 

[gnostic]

Gnostic that was well said, but you missed my point ! Yes theoritical physics thinks outside the box, but they are coming to the conclusion that experimental physics is not going to be able to prove their hypothesis' because there are dimensions outside of our dimension and things that are outside of our dimension can not be measured (proven to exist or be real).

Do you even understand the difference between "proof" and "evidence", mystic64?

They are not the same things in the world of science.

And from what I reading you are confusing the two.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

As a mystic I claim that I can interact with more advanced minds than mine "in a mind to mind way", but even though I can prove that the information works (which I have and experimental phyics has proved it, but that stuff is considered classified), I can not prove that these minds actually exist.

Don't be coy, tell us what proof you have.

 

[mystic64]

Do you even understand the difference between "proof" and "evidence", mystic64?

They are not the same things in the world of science.

And from what I reading you are confusing the two.

Gnostic, I am, not that it matters , impressed. That was very well said! Humm? Gnostic what if I didn't understand? How can you help me so that I don't make that mistake in the future?