Could Nothingness Be Another Dimension In And Of Itself?

[Runewolf1973]

No. It is what things do, but not necessarily their driving force. Why do you make that assumption? IOW, interaction is the Outcome, not the Source. You are confused.

The Fundamental Interactions are the "driving forces" of the universe. That is a fact.

 

[Runewolf1973]

Sure, not mystical but which energy and matter interact complexly to come to "awareness/consciousness." It's definitely not ordinary energy and matter.

"Complex interactions" are very vague.

Atoms, molecules, proteins, etc...

 

[godnotgod]

Is interaction confined to brains only? No, interaction is present everywhere in the universe.

Emergent Theory is called a "theory" because it is beyond being a mere hypothesis.

Consciousness is not a hard question or problem. The hard problem is getting people to realize that consciousness is not some mystical property. It is the result of complex interactions.

No, Emergent Theory is a misnomer. It is not a bona fide scientific theory as defined by science.

If it is not a hard question, then explain how the electro-chemical interactions of the brain create consciousness. If you can do this, you are deserving of the Nobel Prize, as no one to date has been able to do so.

Consciousness itself is not mystical; it is the merging of subject to object. It is what mystics refer to as 'yoga' or 'divine union'. Consciousness is that state that is already One, but many times not realized as such. Hence, the subject/object split in the mind.

 

[Runewolf1973]

The term "interaction" is vague.

"Interaction" describes actual Fundamental Forces of nature. It is quite descriptive...the action occurring between objects..

Consciousness is more vague, hence why mystics love to reify the term to suit their spiritual beliefs.

 

[Runewolf1973]

No, Emergent Theory is a misnomer. It is not a bona fide scientific theory as defined by science.

If it is not a hard question, then explain how the electro-chemical interactions of the brain create consciousness. If you can do this, you are deserving of the Nobel Prize, as no one to date has been able to do so.

Consciousness itself is not mystical; it is the merging of subject to object. It is what mystics refer to as 'yoga' or 'divine union'. Consciousness is that state that is already One, but many times not realized as such. Hence, the subject/object split in the mind.

The electrochemical interactions in the brain do not "create" consciousness. Nothing is created. Those complex interactions give us the illuson of being conscious. Nothing (no matter or energy) is truly conscious or living. Everything is interactive.


"Divine Union" is not mystical? Haha...hahaha! Good one.

 

[Unification]

No, it cannot, due to the fact that the observer is part and parcel of Everything. Everything is The Absolute, and therefore, there is no 'other' to which it can be compared. IOW, the reality is that there is no subject/object. That is simply a concoction of Mind.

What is called consciousness could be a radiating electromagnetic field of energy. We receive light and give off light. Light travels. Light carries a message. From source to source. We are interacting right now due to the source that rests within me and the source that rests within you. That source is the same medium/intercessor to the larger Source. Is that source "Pure consciousness" or "pure energy" or spirit? Are they all the same thing?

Light and energy (along with the rest of the 'material' Universe) are what Consciousness is manifesting.

Spirit, consciousness, and nothingness are all one and the same.

Because there is Nothing, there is Everything.



If the human is conscious and the Universe is not, where does human consciousness leave off and the unconsciousness of the Universe begin?

Dawkins states that things IN the Universe can be conscious, but the Universe itself cannot be. However 'things IN the Universe' are what constitute the Universe itself; the Universe is not a vessel that contains 'things'; it is those very things, along with the space between them.

I know exactly what you mean and are trying to say but...

My point exactly expect removing the perceived "consciousness"......

Because there is no-thing(energy/light) there is every-thing(matter).

I can just as easily relatively show that all matter came into being by light being slowed down. That the Absolute/Source is Light/energy and that every object and thing is the Absolute/Source slowed down.

All of the those "things" and "objects" (matter) are the Absolute (Light) slowing itself down. They are very real.

They are what pure light/energy are manifesting.

Never stated that the universe wasn't aware, in fact, we agree there.

I like a lot of things Dawkins says, but I don't rely on any man to teach me.

 

[Runewolf1973]

I like a lot of things Dawkins says, but I don't rely on any man to teach me.

Cheers to that!

 

[Unification]

No, Emergent Theory is a misnomer. It is not a bona fide scientific theory as defined by science.

If it is not a hard question, then explain how the electro-chemical interactions of the brain create consciousness. If you can do this, you are deserving of the Nobel Prize, as no one to date has been able to do so.

Consciousness itself is not mystical; it is the merging of subject to object. It is what mystics refer to as 'yoga' or 'divine union'. Consciousness is that state that is already One, but many times not realized as such. Hence, the subject/object split in the mind.

It could also be seeing the Light, or en-LIGHT-ening.

Or what one can refer to as "divine marriage" would be the same thing as pure Light ionically bonding(marrying) particles and energy into a state of united equilibrium. The destruction and transformation of certain imbalanced bonded(married) particles and energy by the resurrection and ascension of this pure light/energy through the bloodstream of the brain and body.

 

[godnotgod]

"Interaction" describes actual Fundamental Forces of nature. It is quite descriptive...the action occurring between objects..

Consciousness is more vague, hence why mystics love to reify the term to suit their spiritual beliefs.

Now you're just making crap up, like Spiny. Use your head: consciousness is a state of awareness; it exists prior to thinking. Beliefs are the product of thinking. Therefore the mystical experience via consciousness cannot be one of spiritual beliefs. There are no spiritual beliefs; there are religious beliefs. Spirituality is an experience, without thought, and therefore, without belief or doctrine attached to it.

Consciousness is not vague. It is present at all times. What is vague is your mental idea of it. You are seeing consciousness as a mental concept, rather than experiencing it directly. Since your scientifically-oriented thinking, which is basically that of dissection, does not know how to approach consciousness as a living reality, you attempt to conceptualize it, and in doing so, attempt to match it with your methodology, which, of course, doesn't work, because consciousness, quite simply, is beyond the reach of your methodology.

Interaction does not describe the Fundamental Forces of nature; it describes their behavior. That is quite different than telling us what the nature of Fundamental Forces actually is. You don't know, so stop trying to equate the two as the same thing.

 

[godnotgod]

It could also be seeing the Light, or en-LIGHT-ening.

Or what one can refer to as "divine marriage" would be the same thing as pure Light ionically bonding(marrying) particles and energy into a state of united equilibrium. The destruction and transformation of certain imbalanced bonded(married) particles and energy by the resurrection and ascension of this pure light/energy through the bloodstream of the brain and body.

'Seeing the light' equates to Realization. It is a transformation of consciousness, not that of the kind of light we know as energy-based. Light has a directing force behind it, and that is Pure Consciousness. Think of it this way: Gold can be fashioned into gold chain. So while the chain is gold, gold is not necessarily chain. It can take on many forms. Gold (ie 'consciousness') can take on many forms (ie; mindviews; material form) while all the time remaining gold (consciousness). But the original state is formless gold.

Energy-based light has consciousness behind it, just as gold chain has gold as its basis.

 

[godnotgod]

They are what pure light/energy are manifesting.

OK, but what is manifesting pure light/energy?

 

[Runewolf1973]

Now you're just making crap up, like Spiny. Use your head: consciousness is a state of awareness; it exists prior to thinking. Beliefs are the product of thinking. Therefore the mystical experience via consciousness cannot be one of spiritual beliefs. There are no spiritual beliefs; there are religious beliefs. Spirituality is an experience, without thought, and therefore, without belief or doctrine attached to it.

Consciousness is not vague. It is present at all times. What is vague is your mental idea of it. You are seeing consciousness as a mental concept, rather than experiencing it directly. Since your scientifically-oriented thinking, which is basically that of dissection, does not know how to approach consciousness as a living reality, you attempt to conceptualize it, and in doing so, attempt to match it with your methodology, which, of course, doesn't work, because consciousness, quite simply, is beyond the reach of your methodology.

Interaction does not describe the Fundamental Forces of nature; it describes their behavior. That is quite different than telling us what the nature of Fundamental Forces actually is. You don't know, so stop trying to equate the two as the same thing.

It is really uneccesary to write in so many words because ultimately crap is crap.

Interaction describes like I said: the action occurring between objects. The Fundamental Forces are the actions (forces) occurring or present between pysical objects. So yes, interaction does describe the Fundamental Forces of nature, hence why they are also called Fundamental Interactions.

The nature of the Fundamental Forces is to interact. Consciousness is a state which is only apparent due to complex interactions.

 

[godnotgod]

It is really uneccesary to write in so many words because ultimately crap is crap.

Interaction describes like I said: the action occurring between objects. The Fundamental Forces are the actions (forces) occurring or present between pysical objects. So yes, interaction does describe the Fundamental Forces of nature, hence why they are also called Fundamental Interactions.

The nature of the Fundamental Forces is to interact. Consciousness is a state which is only apparent due to complex interactions.

As you said, crap is crap, and what you posted here is Pure Crap!

All you are saying is: 'interaction is interaction', and 'what makes the FF interact is interaction'. WTF does that mean? NADA! You have described nothing! It's all just Pure Fluff, Runewolf.

What is the source of the FF? From whence do they arise? If you say 'interaction' one more time, you will hear my scream. IOW, if the forces you are referring to are fundamental, then there are no other interacting forces causing them to be what they are. They 'arise' apart from any action, and that source is The Changeless, giving the APPEARANCE of arising.

 

[Unification]

'Seeing the light' equates to Realization. It is a transformation of consciousness, not that of the kind of light we know as energy-based. Light has a directing force behind it, and that is Pure Consciousness. Think of it this way: Gold can be fashioned into gold chain. So while the chain is gold, gold is not necessarily chain. It can take on many forms. Gold (ie 'consciousness') can take on many forms (ie; mindviews; material form) while all the time remaining gold (consciousness). But the original state is formless gold.

Energy-based light has consciousness behind it, just as gold chain has gold as its basis.

Seeing the light would be seeing the light, not seeing consciousness. It is light that makes aware. More complex light, as in different frequency, waves, rays than the norm. Knowing/direct experience of that pure/formless energy. Getting down to the quantum of the quantumest particles of light/energy would equate to pure light/energy without particles. Pure light/energy being aware, knowing.

All the various frequencies, waves, and rays of light energy and power can take on different forms also and the original state is formless light/energy.

That formless light/energy, when slowed down creates matter. But it never was created, it was just formed/hardened in and of itself making it just as real. Protons, neutrons, and electrons interacting with all of the energy.

Light energy and power is all that there is.

I like conscious models, but the three types of conscious(conscious, subconscious, and ego/unconscious) are differing types of bonded cells/atoms and differing types of energy residing in those cells/atoms in separate locations of the brain all interacting together. Granted, extraordinarily very quantum particles and very quantum energy.

If you want to use pure consciousness, that is fine with me... but it won't be with science. I can relate to Spirit, Pure Consciousness, or Pure Light/Energy depending on who I'm reasoning with, as well as mystic/religious terminology or scientific terminology. All the same things and no need to argue or create division over semantics of words or models. The exoteric "knowledge of" to me is relatively useless, it's the "knowing/experience" that is wonderful.

 

[Unification]

As you said, crap is crap, and what you posted here is Pure Crap!

All you are saying is: 'interaction is interaction', and 'what makes the FF interact is interaction'. WTF does that mean? NADA! You have described nothing! It's all just Pure Fluff, Runewolf.

What is the source of the FF? From whence do they arise? If you say 'interaction' one more time, you will hear my scream. IOW, if the forces you are referring to are fundamental, then there are no other interacting forces causing them to be what they are. They 'arise' apart from any action, and that source is The Changeless, giving the APPEARANCE of arising.

I think a lot of fluff has been used, with "consciousness" and "interaction." We are all gradually getting deeper through reasoning. A lot of wise minds here, which is good.

 

[godnotgod]

I think a lot of fluff has been used, with "consciousness" and "interaction." We are all gradually getting deeper through reasoning. A lot of wise minds here, which is good.

Ultimately, true Enlightenment lies beyond reasoning.

 

[godnotgod]

Seeing the light would be seeing the light, not seeing consciousness. It is light that makes aware. More complex light, as in different frequency, waves, rays than the norm. Knowing/direct experience of that pure/formless energy. Getting down to the quantum of the quantumest particles of light/energy would equate to pure light/energy without particles. Pure light/energy being aware, knowing.

All the various frequencies, waves, and rays of light energy and power can take on different forms also and the original state is formless light/energy.

That formless light/energy, when slowed down creates matter. But it never was created, it was just formed/hardened in and of itself making it just as real. Protons, neutrons, and electrons interacting with all of the energy.

Light energy and power is all that there is.

I like conscious models, but the three types of conscious(conscious, subconscious, and ego/unconscious) are differing types of bonded cells/atoms and differing types of energy residing in those cells/atoms in separate locations of the brain all interacting together. Granted, extraordinarily very quantum particles and very quantum energy.

If you want to use pure consciousness, that is fine with me... but it won't be with science. I can relate to Spirit, Pure Consciousness, or Pure Light/Energy depending on who I'm reasoning with, as well as mystic/religious terminology or scientific terminology. All the same things and no need to argue or create division over semantics of words or models. The exoteric "knowledge of" to me is relatively useless, it's the "knowing/experience" that is wonderful.

Which is why the distinction of 'Higher Consciousness' is made, as compared to ordinary conditioned awareness.

 

[Unification]

Ultimately, true Enlightenment lies beyond reasoning.

Surely is. Knowledge of it and explaining it is rather an unknown language. Knowing/experiencing it is beyond the reasoning/explanation.

If it's any consolation, I understand everything that you've been saying.

That's why all this spatter we all say does no justice outside of personal interest and interaction of thoughts and reasoning amongst fellow human beings.

 

[Unification]

Which is why the distinction of 'Higher Consciousness' is made, as compared to ordinary conditioned awareness.

Agreed, higher/pure consciousness and awareness is made.

Doesn't really matter how it's accomplished, whether energy or consciousness or our own personal name for it.

 

[Runewolf1973]

As you said, crap is crap, and what you posted here is Pure Crap!

All you are saying is: 'interaction is interaction', and 'what makes the FF interact is interaction'. WTF does that mean? NADA! You have described nothing! It's all just Pure Fluff, Runewolf.

What is the source of the FF? From whence do they arise? If you say 'interaction' one more time, you will hear my scream. IOW, if the forces you are referring to are fundamental, then there are no other interacting forces causing them to be what they are. They 'arise' apart from any action, and that source is The Changeless, giving the APPEARANCE of arising.

Here, read this...

http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr162/lect/cosmology/forces.html

As you can see the property of, or in other words the "nature" of the Four Fundamental forces is as follows...

• The strong interaction is very strong, but very short-ranged. It acts only over ranges of order 10-13 centimeters and is responsible for holding the nuclei of atoms together. It is basically attractive, but can be effectively repulsive in some circumstances.
• The electromagnetic force causes electric and magnetic effects such as the repulsion between like electrical charges or the interaction of bar magnets. It is long-ranged, but much weaker than the strong force. It can be attractive or repulsive, and acts only between pieces of matter carrying electrical charge.
• The weak force is responsible for radioactive decay and neutrino interactions. It has a very short range and, as its name indicates, it is very weak.
• The gravitational force is weak, but very long ranged. Furthermore, it is always attractive, and acts between any two pieces of matter in the Universe since mass is its source.

Perhaps you mean to ask something different, like where the Four Fundamental forces come from? Is that what you are asking?



---