Demystifying Quantum Physics

[godnotgod]

Collapse of physics? You cant divide by zero because it is never really zero. There is always something, just some things are incredibly micro scale.

I tend to trust Kaku, a theoretical physicist and someone who has devoted his life to the study of Einsteinian physics, as regards his application of mathematics to this issue, more than I would someone posting on a religious forum. Kaku was also instrumental in the development of String Theory.

He has the humility and intelligence to come to the understanding that: "Nature is smarter than we are".

 

[idav]

I tend to trust Kaku, a theoretical physicist and someone who has devoted his life to the study of Einsteinian physics, as regards his application of mathematics to this issue, more than I would someone posting on a religious forum. Kaku was also instrumental in the development of String Theory.

He has the humility and intelligence to come to the understanding that: "Nature is smarter than we are".

If anyone wants to show that nothingness ever existed I am all ears. He says its physics all the way down.

 

[godnotgod]

If anyone wants to show that nothingness ever existed I am all ears. He says its physics all the way down.

What he does say is that: 'nature is smarter than we are', which means it is NOT physics 'all way down'.

Nothingness neither exists nor not-exists. It is non-dual, and is the background from which the manifested universe has emerged.

Q: can solids exist as solids without space?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

You're talking mechanics, and I'm talking essence. Dismantling the piano does not yield the music.

What we're finding out is that Reason has reached ineluctible limits both on the micro and macro scales. The mystics are telling us that it is time for the next leap in man's evolution, and that means a transformation of consciousness and the current paradigms.

You must define "essence" before we go any further.

 

[godnotgod]

You must define "essence" before we go any further.

Science is the nuts and bolts about the phenomenal world; essence is the invisible source from which it comes forth. Some call it Tao. Essentially, it is indefinable.

The Tao

"There was something formless and perfect
before the universe was born.
It is serene. Empty.
Solitary. Unchanging.
Infinite. Eternally present.
It is the mother of the universe.
For lack of a better name,
I call it the Tao.

"It flows through all things,
inside and outside, and returns
to the origin of all things.

"The Tao is great.
The universe is great.
Earth is great.
Man is great.
These are the four great powers.

"Man follows the earth.
Earth follows the universe.
The universe follows the Tao.
The Tao follows only itself."

--from Tao Chin, Pocket Edition, by Stephen
*****

Tao Te Ching - Lao Tzu - chapter 14

Look, it cannot be seen - it is beyond form.
Listen, it cannot be heard - it is beyond sound.
Grasp, it cannot be held - it is intangible.
These three are indefinable;
Therefore they are joined in one.

From above it is not bright;
From below it is not dark:
An unbroken thread beyond description.
It returns to nothingness.
The form of the formless,
The image of the imageless,
It is called indefinable and beyond imagination.

Stand before it and there is no beginning.
Follow it and there is no end.
Stay with the ancient Tao,
Move with the present.

Knowing the ancient beginning is the essence of Tao.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Science is the nuts and bolts about the phenomenal world; essence is the invisible source from which it comes forth. Some call it Tao. Essentially, it is indefinable.

Indefinable means that either it can't be supported ergo defined or we don't know what it is yet based on current evidence.

Which do you mean? Because so far it sounds to me like a whole lot of words without anything linking it to the real world.

 

[godnotgod]

Indefinable means that either it can't be supported ergo defined or we don't know what it is yet based on current evidence.

Which do you mean? Because so far it sounds to me like a whole lot of words without anything linking it to the real world.

It can only be 'defined' in negative terms, ie; that which it is not. Since it is incomprehensible via the rational mind, it cannot be defined, because to define it is to encapsulate it somehow. The Tao, being infinite and eternal, cannot be so encapsulated.

What you call 'the real world' is effervescent and temporal. It has no absolute existence, so how can you call it 'real'?

The word Tao has several meanings and many applications. Primarily, Tao refers to the eternal, life-giving force of the universe. Tao is the universe. It is also the process by which the universe governs itself. It is all-inclusive. There is nothing outside Tao. It is, in Lao Tzu’s words, “the mother of all things”. Everything that takes form is an expression of the Tao. All of us are the Tao - you, me, people on the other side of the world, Christians, Muslims, atheists, plants, animals, rocks, air, good guys, bad guys – all one, all part of one whole.

Beneath the apparent separateness of “the ten thousand things” of everyday life is a deeper underlying unity.

A more contemporary way of stating this is that all life is a never-ending net or sea of energy. Tao is that energy, life-giving and benevolent....

Mystery – The Art of Not-Knowing

The opening lines of the Tao Te Ching state, “The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao. The name that can be named is not the true name.” Names, while useful, can be limiting. We must go beyond names and see the Tao in all things. In the same opening chapter Lao Tzu writes that to fully experience Tao one must enter its mystery, a mystery shrouded in darkness, “darkness within darkness.” To do so we are required to go beyond our traditional ways of thinking and perceiving, and beyond a traditional understanding of knowing itself.

Conventional knowledge is based on making distinctions and determinations, on gathering information. It is the realm of our rationality. However, this level of mind simply cannot encompass the vastness of life. Rationality is limited in the way it perceives. Our intuitive understanding, on the other hand, is connected to universal wisdom, to the Tao, and speaks our deepest truths. This understanding is experiential rather than intellectual. We become that understanding.

Chuang Tzu encourages us let go into “not-knowing”. When we stand in awe of the sunset we are not analyzing how it “sets”. We simply take in the experience. Our mind is calm, quiet, and empty, and we are fully present. We can also learn to bring the same letting go, the same “simply being”, to all areas of life, including those involving change or conflict. We learn to trust that whatever information is necessary to bring balance to a given situation is present in the Tao. And as part of the Tao, that information is available to us if we are open and receptive. Our rational mind can then apply that information in a skillful manner.

Whether we are appreciating nature’s work or facing some challenge in the world of human affairs, we can allow ourselves to experience and appreciate the mystery. Not fearing the unknown, we can enter the mystery, and from that “darkness within darkness” will emerge the order and balance that is characteristic of the movement of the Tao.

Taoist Sanctuary: Ageless Wisdom for a Modern World

 

[Monk Of Reason]

It can only be 'defined' in negative terms, ie; that which it is not. Since it is incomprehensible via the rational mind, it cannot be defined, because to define it is to encapsulate it somehow. The Tao, being infinite and eternal, cannot be so encapsulated.

What you call 'the real world' is effervescent and temporal. It has no absolute existence, so how can you call it 'real'?

The word Tao has several meanings and many applications. Primarily, Tao refers to the eternal, life-giving force of the universe. Tao is the universe. It is also the process by which the universe governs itself. It is all-inclusive. There is nothing outside Tao. It is, in Lao Tzu’s words, “the mother of all things”. Everything that takes form is an expression of the Tao. All of us are the Tao - you, me, people on the other side of the world, Christians, Muslims, atheists, plants, animals, rocks, air, good guys, bad guys – all one, all part of one whole.

Beneath the apparent separateness of “the ten thousand things” of everyday life is a deeper underlying unity.

A more contemporary way of stating this is that all life is a never-ending net or sea of energy. Tao is that energy, life-giving and benevolent....

Mystery – The Art of Not-Knowing

The opening lines of the Tao Te Ching state, “The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao. The name that can be named is not the true name.” Names, while useful, can be limiting. We must go beyond names and see the Tao in all things. In the same opening chapter Lao Tzu writes that to fully experience Tao one must enter its mystery, a mystery shrouded in darkness, “darkness within darkness.” To do so we are required to go beyond our traditional ways of thinking and perceiving, and beyond a traditional understanding of knowing itself.

Conventional knowledge is based on making distinctions and determinations, on gathering information. It is the realm of our rationality. However, this level of mind simply cannot encompass the vastness of life. Rationality is limited in the way it perceives. Our intuitive understanding, on the other hand, is connected to universal wisdom, to the Tao, and speaks our deepest truths. This understanding is experiential rather than intellectual. We become that understanding.

Chuang Tzu encourages us let go into “not-knowing”. When we stand in awe of the sunset we are not analyzing how it “sets”. We simply take in the experience. Our mind is calm, quiet, and empty, and we are fully present. We can also learn to bring the same letting go, the same “simply being”, to all areas of life, including those involving change or conflict. We learn to trust that whatever information is necessary to bring balance to a given situation is present in the Tao. And as part of the Tao, that information is available to us if we are open and receptive. Our rational mind can then apply that information in a skillful manner.

Whether we are appreciating nature’s work or facing some challenge in the world of human affairs, we can allow ourselves to experience and appreciate the mystery. Not fearing the unknown, we can enter the mystery, and from that “darkness within darkness” will emerge the order and balance that is characteristic of the movement of the Tao.

Taoist Sanctuary: Ageless Wisdom for a Modern World

Your trying to string two very very very very different things into one here. And they are not. The Tao is a philosphy and spiritual path that is found in eastern Asia.

Quantum Mechanics is a scientific field of study in the sub atomic world and its properties.

Just because we have unanswered questions about QM doesn't mean that those answers lie in ancient philisophical arguments from asia no more than the philisophical argumetns from ancient Greece.

This "essence" that you cannot define that is "beyond the rational mind" seems more and more like irrational nonsense.

 

[godnotgod]

Your trying to string two very very very very different things into one here. And they are not. The Tao is a philosphy and spiritual path that is found in eastern Asia.

Quantum Mechanics is a scientific field of study in the sub atomic world and its properties.

Just because we have unanswered questions about QM doesn't mean that those answers lie in ancient philisophical arguments from asia no more than the philisophical argumetns from ancient Greece.

This "essence" that you cannot define that is "beyond the rational mind" seems more and more like irrational nonsense.

It's not anyone else's fault that it is a paradox to you.

Why are you attempting to understand something via the rational mind that is intrinsically non-rational in nature? The very implementation of the rational mind will ensure that paradox is the end result.

I never said nor implied that, just because science has unanswered questions this then means the answers lie in Eastern wisdom....but it just so happens that they do.

As you say, QM is a 'scientific field of study in the sub atomic world and its properties.' Being a scientific study, it is one that is highly controlled and structured in a particular way; IOW, it is an altered state of consciousness. It only sees in a way that is prescribed and dictated to via of the scientific method, that is to say, it sees Reality through a conceptual filter and gridwork. It is NOT seeing QM in a larger context, a context that is unstructured and uncontrolled. IOW, it is not seeing things as they actually are. It is calling facts, reality, when reality is larger than mere facts. It is what we call perceptual reality.

You say that QM and Tao are two very different things, but that is because you are seeing things via the conceptual mind. In reality, they are exactly the same Reality. The discriminating mind tends to fragment reality into divisions, as you are doing. But that is just a mental overlay onto reality itself. As it appears to the rational mind, QM seems to be something unique and separate because science has compartmentalized it, but in reality, it is just an outcropping of the Tao, 'Tao' being Everything, or the Universe, if you will.

You further want to confine what Taoism says to some historical and geographical paradigm, but what you are failing to see is that the Tao is outside of both. It is a universal, timeless truth. What is confined to paradigm is science, and its current view of QM, which will change over time. Tao will not change over time, and is, therefore, The Absolute. The Tao = The Universe = The Absolute, and so:

"The universe is [none other than] the Absolute as seen through the glass of Time, Space, and Causation" (brackets mine)
Vivikenanda

The view of Tao can contain the view of Science, but the view of Science cannot contain the view of Tao, and that is because the view of Science is limited, while that of Tao is limitless.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

It's not anyone else's fault that it is a paradox to you.

Well, unless it simply doesn't make sense and its a load of bull from the get go...

Why are you attempting to understand something via the rational mind that is intrinsically non-rational in nature? The very implementation of the rational mind will ensure that paradox is the end result.

Because there is no reason to believe that something can be "irrational" in the way you are describing? Why are you constantly against this idea that we're all in the matrix? It holds about as much water.

I never said nor implied that, just because science has unanswered questions this then means the answers lie in Eastern wisdom....but it just so happens that they do.

By your belief. Its not fact. You need to quit toting it around as if it were. It is your belief that doesn't seem to have any basis. At least not any comprehensable basis that you have been able to provide.

As you say, QM is a 'scientific field of study in the sub atomic world and its properties.' Being a scientific study, it is one that is highly controlled and structured in a particular way; IOW, it is an altered state of consciousness. It only sees in a way that is prescribed and dictated to via of the scientific method, that is to say, it sees Reality through a conceptual filter and gridwork. It is NOT seeing QM in a larger context, a context that is unstructured and uncontrolled. IOW, it is not seeing things as they actually are. It is calling facts, reality, when reality is larger than mere facts. It is what we call perceptual reality.

You can't view QM in a larger concept. I think you are assuming you know what QM is but I am afraid I must be the one to tell you that you are mistake. Do you know the first thing about QM? Do you know what a monopole is? Symetry? Super Symetry?

What you have is a very layman's understanding of what is quite possibly the most complex and least understood section of the sciences and have taken your beliefs and connected them in ways that don't follow. I'm not trying to be mean but I feel I need to shake you from this delusion.

You say that QM and Tao are two very different things, but that is because you are seeing things via the conceptual mind. In reality, they are exactly the same Reality. The discriminating mind tends to fragment reality into divisions, as you are doing. But that is just a mental overlay onto reality itself. As it appears to the rational mind, QM seems to be something unique and separate because science has compartmentalized it, but in reality, it is just an outcropping of the Tao, 'Tao' being Everything, or the Universe, if you will.

You misunderstand. I do not think that the Tao exists and it is a seperate "thing" than QM. QM isn't a thing to begin with. It is a study and a field of research on "things" that are very very very very small and the fundamental way they behave. Tao is a philisophical viewpoint created by ancient Chinese Philosphers. They are different things in the same way that Humanities: Ancient through Byzantine AZ4502 is different from veganism. One is a study the other is a "viewpoint".

You further want to confine what Taoism says to some historical and geographical paradigm, but what you are failing to see is that the Tao is outside of both. It is a universal, timeless truth. What is confined to paradigm is science, and its current view of QM, which will change over time. Tao will not change over time, and is, therefore, The Absolute. The Tao = The Universe = The Absolute, and so:

"The universe is [none other than] the Absolute as seen through the glass of Time, Space, and Causation" (brackets mine)
Vivikenanda

The view of Tao can contain the view of Science, but the view of Science cannot contain the view of Tao, and that is because the view of Science is limited, while that of Tao is limitless.

What evidence do you have that the Tao is a timeless truth? That statement alone without supporting evidence is much the same as "Jesus is the one true way" or "Allah is the one true god and Muhammad is his prophet" or "Little Cesars hot and ready".

You cannot simply present the Tao as "true" and have no supporting evidence. The fact that you calim there cannot be evidnece because it is "beyond understanding" or "rationality" does not exclude you from this duty. Otherwise its an empty assurtion.

 

[godnotgod]

Well, unless it simply doesn't make sense and its a load of bull from the get go...

You say that from the point of view that Reason and Fact are the criteria to determine what Reality is and is not, when it is Reason that created the criteria in the first place. Anything that does not meet Reason's criteria is automatically 'nonsense' to you. This is a very limited and ignorant view, presented as an enlightened one. I am not saying that Reason does not have its place, but as Kant said, it has ineluctible limits attached to it. The world of nature is beyond that of Reason, and so, according to your 'criteria', nature itself is just a 'load of bull'.

Because there is no reason to believe that something can be "irrational" in the way you are describing? Why are you constantly against this idea that we're all in the matrix? It holds about as much water.

The world of nature is not irrational. It is non-rational. So when Taoists and other mystics make statements based upon direct experience with nature, they seem paradoxical to you, because the rational mind sees nature through the filter of it's conceptual overlays, and is attempting to comprehend via the intellect. This is where the incongruity occurs between what one thinks is the case, and what actually is.

By your belief. Its not fact. You need to quit toting it around as if it were. It is your belief that doesn't seem to have any basis. At least not any comprehensable basis that you have been able to provide.

You demand black and white answers to something that does'nt speak your language.

The knowledge of Tao is not belief-based; it is based on direct experience. As such, it is not provable as demonstrable fact; at least not in rational, logical terms. It can, however, be demonstrated as valid via your direct experience, but it is one that is beyond Reason, beyond belief, beyond thought, and beyond all sensory awareness. That you think it is belief-based demonstrates that you have an outside misperception as to what it is. Belief is based on thought. The mystical experience is beyond the thinking mind. Let us make that clear from the get-go.

You need to not dictate what anyone 'totes around' or not totes around. Tao is not something one is attached to; it is something one is unattached to. The moment one clings to it; attempts to encapsulate it into concept or form, as Science does, it is no longer Tao; it is no longer Reality, but only an idea of Reality. Science, like belief, is a model of what it thinks Reality is. It is not Reality itself. Tao is Reality.

You can't view QM in a larger concept. I think you are assuming you know what QM is but I am afraid I must be the one to tell you that you are mistake. Do you know the first thing about QM? Do you know what a monopole is? Symetry? Super Symetry?

Are you saying that QM is not a behavior of the universe?

What you have is a very layman's understanding of what is quite possibly the most complex and least understood section of the sciences and have taken your beliefs and connected them in ways that don't follow. I'm not trying to be mean but I feel I need to shake you from this delusion.

It is unnecessary to understand all the intricate details of QM in order to understand that it is a function of the universe. At this point, that is all I am saying: that QM is not a separate phenomena from the universe. You seem to be saying that it is. Understand that Tao and universe are one and the same, but not as defined or seen via Science.

You misunderstand. I do not think that the Tao exists and it is a seperate "thing" than QM. QM isn't a thing to begin with. It is a study and a field of research on "things" that are very very very very small and the fundamental way they behave. Tao is a philisophical viewpoint created by ancient Chinese Philosphers. They are different things in the same way that Humanities: Ancient through Byzantine AZ4502 is different from veganism. One is a study the other is a "viewpoint".

While philosophical Taoism is a reality, the Tao itself is completely un-philosophical. It has nothing to do with philosophy. It is the universe itself, and has nothing to do with its study, whether philosophical or scientific. The direct experience of the Tao is non-intellectual. Ancient Chinese philosophers did not create the Tao; they created a philosophy about the Tao, just as humans have created a study about the universe called Science. The former looks into the nature of Reality that is beyond outward appearances such as form, while the latter looks at the behavior of the phenomenal world as an object. The problem is that the observer is attempting to create an artificial distinction between himself and the universe, when he himself is part of that which is being observed. On top of that, he is creating divisions where none actually exist, thinking that the universe is composed of separate 'things'.

Tao is not separate from the phenomenon of QM; QM is included by default in the Tao. That separation is completely artificial.

What evidence do you have that the Tao is a timeless truth? That statement alone without supporting evidence is much the same as "Jesus is the one true way" or "Allah is the one true god and Muhammad is his prophet" or "Little Cesars hot and ready".

While Jesus and Mohammed are historical figures that are now dead, the Tao is as close to you as your very next breath. In fact, it IS your very next breath. Jesus, Mohammed, and Allah are belief-based; Tao is experientially-based. You don't see it partly because you were born into it, just as a fish is unaware of the ocean it was born into, and partly because your social indoctrination since childhood has obscured it from your view. Right at infancy, your immediate focus is on the foreground of existence: food, shelter, attention, etc., but it is the Tao that is the background which nurtures you entirely, but does it in such a way as to not interfere with you, just as the sea supports the fish in its entirety, both from within and from without, without interference with its immediate focus on its foreground. It is even responsible for creating all of the ingredients found within Little Ceasar's pizza.

You cannot simply present the Tao as "true" and have no supporting evidence. The fact that you calim there cannot be evidnece because it is "beyond understanding" or "rationality" does not exclude you from this duty. Otherwise its an empty assurtion.

Ha ha ha....:biglaugh:what a thoroughly laughable point of view!

'Your papers please!'

Soon you will be demanding evidence from the universe itself to prove it exists.

Once again: knowledge of the Tao is beyond rational thought. The incessant chatter of the thinking mind, otherwise known as 'monkey mind', must first be quieted down so that universal mind can then come into play.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

I never said nor implied that, just because science has unanswered questions this then means the answers lie in Eastern wisdom....but it just so happens that they do.

"Eastern wisdom."

What Eastern masters have you studied from? How much of Eastern thought have you encountered from Eastern texts written in Eastern languages? How much of what you know of anything "Eastern" comes from your access to machines (computers) built based upon Western though and communicated through Western media (video) via channels (the internet) from Western innovation? How much of the remainder comes from your internet access to sources that are at best translations of Eastern thought into a Western language?


You knowledge of anything "Eastern" is as thoroughly informed as your knowledge of the sciences. You have no instruction in either but rely entirely (or nearly so) on the internet to understand both.

Your "Eastern wisdom" comes from websites and youtube. Talk about Western trivialization, appropriation, and despicable commercialization of Eastern culture.

 

[godnotgod]

"Eastern wisdom."

What Eastern masters have you studied from? How much of Eastern thought have you encountered from Eastern texts written in Eastern languages? How much of what you know of anything "Eastern" comes from your access to machines (computers) built based upon Western though and communicated through Western media (video) via channels (the internet) from Western innovation? How much of the remainder comes from your internet access to sources that are at best translations of Eastern thought into a Western language?


You knowledge of anything "Eastern" is as thoroughly informed as your knowledge of the sciences. You have no instruction in either but rely entirely (or nearly so) on the internet to understand both.

Your "Eastern wisdom" comes from websites and youtube. Talk about Western trivialization, appropriation, and despicable commercialization of Eastern culture.

Are you saying, sir, that I am not in possession of the very same 'don't know mind' that Bodhidharma pointed to?; the very same 'don't know mind' of the Buddhas of all time? Because if that is what you are saying, then you don't know what you are saying. If you had passed over the threshold in the presence of your QiGong master, you would instantly realize that everyone is already enlightened, but alas, you continue to wallow in the glittering quagmire of Holy Academia, your attention enslaved by those dancing shadows on the wall in Plato's Cave,:banghead3 salivating each and every time at the ringing of the Pavlovian bell. Grrrrrrrr! LOL!:biglaugh:

Lookie here: you continue your silly demands for knowledge about Eastern thought, as if it is something that is accumulated in the manner of Western knowledge.

IT IS EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE!

It consists of SUBTRACTION, not ACCUMULATION, as in BAGGAGE!

You continue to demonstrate your utter lack of understanding, focusing on academia rather than what academia is (supposed to be) about.

A sorely-needed visit to your QiGong instructor is long-overdue. Just remember to leave your intellectual baggage at the door.

I have pointed to the moon, but you knee-jerk fashion continue to lunge for my pointing finger.

You are welcome to address what the reference to 'Eastern wisdom' was about in the first place, or is that even of any importance to you?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

You say that from the point of view that Reason and Fact are the criteria to determine what Reality is and is not, when it is Reason that created the criteria in the first place. Anything that does not meet Reason's criteria is automatically 'nonsense' to you. This is a very limited and ignorant view, presented as an enlightened one. I am not saying that Reason does not have its place, but as Kant said, it has ineluctible limits attached to it. The world of nature is beyond that of Reason, and so, according to your 'criteria', nature itself is just a 'load of bull'.

I'm not saying things don't exist that we don't know about. I am saying that we can't have knoweldge of something that "doesn't make sense". Soon as you say its irrational that means its either
1) Wrong.
2) Nonsense
3) you don't know enough about it to explain it properly.

"Its all beyond your understanding Trust me. " is more or less the argument here. If you want to make claims then do so till your blue in the face. I'm fine with that. But I don't have to accept anything till you present evidence. If reason doesn't have its play then I have my sneaking suspicions that its a load of bull. Clear and correct is technically a very narrow way to view things.

The world of nature is not irrational. It is non-rational. So when Taoists and other mystics make statements based upon direct experience with nature, they seem paradoxical to you, because the rational mind sees nature through the filter of it's conceptual overlays, and is attempting to comprehend via the intellect. This is where the incongruity occurs between what one thinks is the case, and what actually is.

Its not paradoxal to me. I see and understand what you are saying clearly. I just think its a bunch of baseless claims and assurtions without any real weight behind it.

You demand black and white answers to something that does'nt speak your language.

Now your insurting "language" to this? I am not demanding black and white answers. I'm asking for a single shred, iota or bit of proof, evidence, reason, ect to back up your claims. Otherwise what makes your claims anything other than baseless assurtions?

The knowledge of Tao is not belief-based; it is based on direct experience. As such, it is not provable as demonstrable fact; at least not in rational, logical terms. It can, however, be demonstrated as valid via your direct experience, but it is one that is beyond Reason, beyond belief, beyond thought, and beyond all sensory awareness. That you think it is belief-based demonstrates that you have an outside misperception as to what it is. Belief is based on thought. The mystical experience is beyond the thinking mind. Let us make that clear from the get-go.

You need to not dictate what anyone 'totes around' or not totes around. Tao is not something one is attached to; it is something one is unattached to. The moment one clings to it; attempts to encapsulate it into concept or form, as Science does, it is no longer Tao; it is no longer Reality, but only an idea of Reality. Science, like belief, is a model of what it thinks Reality is. It is not Reality itself. Tao is Reality.

Here is where I get a little irritated. People fall back on this "direct experience" ********. I can take a boat load of acid right now and put all of those "direct experiences" to shame. Does that make it real? No. Hell no it doesn't. The mind as we KNOW from fact and scientific research, can produce some crazy crazy things. Direct experience is the WORST possible way to determine if something is real or correct. You can't trust it. That is what we have learned over and over and over. It is a belief in what you think you experienced. It is a belief that you are incapable of being fooled by your own brain.

In the real world its either put up or shut up. I can make any claim I want and it doesn't matter if I say its impossible to back up I still have that responsibility of creating a convincing argument for my case before I am given any real weight in a conversation.

And either your thinking of a different Tao than what I learned when I took a course in Eastern Philosophy. It seems somewhat similar but yet different. What I learned of the Tao was that it is your "path". That you can harmonize yourself with the universe to obtain your true self or purpose. And the reason why it cannot be defined is because it was ever changing or beyond words. That much I understand. However that doesn't make it a fact of the universe.

Are you saying that QM is not a behavior of the universe?

Exactly. QM isn't physically anything. It is the study of how certain things in the universe behave.

It is unnecessary to understand all the intricate details of QM in order to understand that it is a function of the universe. At this point, that is all I am saying: that QM is not a separate phenomena from the universe. You seem to be saying that it is. Understand that Tao and universe are one and the same, but not as defined or seen via Science.

No. You misunderstand. QM is the STUDY of how certain things in the universe behave. Just as ToR is the STUDY of how other things work in the universe.

And actually you do have to have a rudimentary understanding of what something is before you can lay claims about it. Why piece out QM? why not say the same things about ToR or Newtonian mechanics?

Yes I have an over abundance of understaning when it comes to your claim. What I lack is the critical necessity of evidence. You have to have a reason to believe such things. Your reason is direct experience. However you haven't proven or even demonstrated why direct experience should be taken seriously? We don't take schizo testimony seriously. We don't take the testimony of people high on shrooms seriously. Why should we take this seriously? How do we know it isnt' all in the head? Ect ect ect.

I understand EXACTLY what you are saying. It still doesn't make it fact.

While philosophical Taoism is a reality, the Tao itself is completely un-philosophical. It has nothing to do with philosophy. It is the universe itself, and has nothing to do with its study, whether philosophical or scientific. The direct experience of the Tao is non-intellectual. Ancient Chinese philosophers did not create the Tao; they created a philosophy about the Tao, just as humans have created a study about the universe called Science. The former looks into the nature of Reality that is beyond outward appearances such as form, while the latter looks at the behavior of the phenomenal world as an object. The problem is that the observer is attempting to create an artificial distinction between himself and the universe, when he himself is part of that which is being observed. On top of that, he is creating divisions where none actually exist, thinking that the universe is composed of separate 'things'.

Tao is not separate from the phenomenon of QM; QM is included by default in the Tao. That separation is completely artificial.

I don't recall making a seperation except QM is a study of something and Tao is a vauge concept that doesn't have any backing. I still don't think you get the difference between "something" and the "study of something". When you get that you'll see why QM and Tao are not the same thing, encompassed by or otherwise.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Lookie here: you continue your silly demands for knowledge about Eastern thought, as if it is something that is accumulated in the manner of Western knowledge.

How would you know? Your "Eastern wisdom" comes from a source so thoroughly Western there is none that equals it: Western speech you access from an internet designed and built via Western thought and technology accessed through logic and its instantiation produced by Western innovation and implementation.

You are to Eastern thought what a McDonald's in Japan is to Eastern culture.

You continue to demonstrate your utter lack of understanding, focusing on academia rather than what academia is (supposed to be) about.

Academia? I was lucky enough to study under one of the foremost masters of Eastern tradition, thought, and practice in the world. You had google. I studied under another master who's qualifications as such were recognized by the sole inheritor of an Eastern tradition dating back centuries. You misquote Einstein because you can't read German and you can't understand what he wrote when it's translated.

A sorely-needed visit to your QiGong instructor is long-overdue.

Your insultingly biased, borderline racist (if not actually racist) despicable trivialization of one of the world's foremost experts of Eastern practice doesn't change the fact that you have no experience with any such instructor you didn't get from a computer or something written in English.

I have pointed to the moon

You use Google to diminish the achievements of Eastern culture. You insult a specialist I trained under about things you know of because of the internet. You point to a commercialized version of trivializations of Eastern notions you have no contact with other than websites and youtube. Who are you to point to anything "Eastern" when virtually your entire experience of it is from sitting at a computer?

but you knee-jerk fashion continue to lunge for my pointing finger.

That's because racist, elitist trivializations of other cultures bothers me. You apparently don't care how completely your mischaracterizations of the cultural heritages to which you refer are distortions and misrepresentation of the traditions, thought, and practices you think representative of a notion ("the mystic East") that was born of racist elitism the practice of which you assist in sustaining.

You are welcome to address what the reference to 'Eastern wisdom' was about in the first place, or is that even of any importance to you?

For one, your repeated insults of my instructor who, unlike you, didn't learn "Eastern wisdom" from the internet but was born in the East, studied for decades in topics you know nothing of, taught for decades, and begat a worldwide network devoted to Eastern studies.

For another, your trivialization of Eastern masters, traditions, culture, etc., that you (like the racist forebears of today's cultural appropriators did) depict as "exotic" or "esoteric" or "mystic" (whence comes the notion of the racist "mystic orient") by trivializing the years and years of academic studies virtually all your exemplars have devoted themselves to. But you haven't.

Finally, for your depiction of the sciences, which you know as little of as your do Eastern traditions, as your depiction of both reflects a common source: google.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

While Jesus and Mohammed are historical figures that are now dead, the Tao is as close to you as your very next breath. In fact, it IS your very next breath. Jesus, Mohammed, and Allah are belief-based; Tao is experientially-based. You don't see it partly because you were born into it, just as a fish is unaware of the ocean it was born into, and partly because your social indoctrination since childhood has obscured it from your view. Right at infancy, your immediate focus is on the foreground of existence: food, shelter, attention, etc., but it is the Tao that is the background which nurtures you entirely, but does it in such a way as to not interfere with you, just as the sea supports the fish in its entirety, both from within and from without, without interference with its immediate focus on its foreground. It is even responsible for creating all of the ingredients found within Little Ceasar's pizza.

This is getting tiersome. I shall try once more to explain this to you.

It is not a lack of understanding. I have total understanding of what you are trying to say. What you don't understand is that its not fact. It is a belief that the tao exists. Unless you are simply substituting "universe" and "tao" as enterchangable terms then it is a belief that the Tao exists. Your belief is based on experiences you have had or experiences you believe others have had. We have learned that "experiences" outside of testable situations are terrible in terms of evidence.

Ha ha ha....:biglaugh:what a thoroughly laughable point of view!

'Your papers please!'

Soon you will be demanding evidence from the universe itself to prove it exists.

Once again: knowledge of the Tao is beyond rational thought. The incessant chatter of the thinking mind, otherwise known as 'monkey mind', must first be quieted down so that universal mind can then come into play.

If you wish to stay in your bubble then I can't pop it for you.

The fact the universe exists is demonstrable. There is no way for us to logically or resonably to deny its existence. However I can deny the existence of the Tao all I want and it conflicts with nothing. Yeah its possible it could exist. But there is no need for it to exist. There is no reason to believe it exists. Saying its not a belief doesn't make it so.

Saying it exists doesn't mean it exists.

 

[godnotgod]

I'm not saying things don't exist that we don't know about. I am saying that we can't have knoweldge of something that "doesn't make sense". Soon as you say its irrational that means its either
1) Wrong.
2) Nonsense
3) you don't know enough about it to explain it properly.

Repeat: I did not say it was 'irrational'; you did. I said that the nature of the universe is non-rational. That means it is neither rational nor irrational. Yes, you can say certain things about it based on rational thought, but those things do not tell us what the universe actually is. They merely describe behavior and then make predictions based on those observations. But we can indeed have knowledge of something that 'doesn't make sense'. You arbitrarily confine knowledge to things that only fit the conceptual models of the rational mind. Does it occur to you that there is another kind of knowledge that is outside the box, so to speak, of which you are currently unaware, due to the mind's preoccupation with itself? What I am ultimately suggesting to you is that this other kind of knowledge is the one which makes all scientific knowledge actually 'make sense'. You have it backwards.

"Its all beyond your understanding Trust me. " is more or less the argument here. If you want to make claims then do so till your blue in the face. I'm fine with that. But I don't have to accept anything till you present evidence. If reason doesn't have its play then I have my sneaking suspicions that its a load of bull. Clear and correct is technically a very narrow way to view things.

Let's return to Plato's Cave. The only way the other prisoners can verify that what the escaped prisoner who claims to have seen the Sun is true is for them to go see for themselves. The experience of seeing the Sun is completely unknown to them. In terms of our discussion, the experience of Higher Consciousness is completely unknown to the ordinary man. Actually, it is not unknown, but just not remembered. But the bottom line in terms of your point is that you can go 'see for yourself'.

Its not paradoxal to me. I see and understand what you are saying clearly. I just think its a bunch of baseless claims and assurtions without any real weight behind it.

But you've already demonstrated that it is indeed paradoxical to you, as you choose to label it all just so much 'bull' and 'irrational nonsense'. Really, the universe itself is a kind of 'irrational nonsense' just as it is, yet Science thinks it can make heads and tails of it via Logic, Analysis, and Reason. I mean, don't you think it rather odd that it is even here?; that YOU are even here?

Now your insurting "language" to this? I am not demanding black and white answers. I'm asking for a single shred, iota or bit of proof, evidence, reason, ect to back up your claims. Otherwise what makes your claims anything other than baseless assurtions?

Well, I really do sympathize with you, but really there is no trace whatsoever. That is the nature and the mystery of Tao. But though there is no trace; though the Tao is invisible, tasteless, odorless, silent, and formless, its presence is unmistakable. As I said to you, it is as close to you as your next breath, but the moment you decide to intellectualize about it, you will have lost it.

Looked for it cannot be seen; it is invisible.
Listened for it cannot be heard; it is inaudible.
Reached for it cannot be touched; it is intangible.
These three are beyond analysis; these three are one.

It rises like the sun, but does not illuminate.
It sets like the sun, but does not darken.
Without beginning, without end,
it is infinite, undefinable.

It is the form of the formless;
it is existence in non-existence;
it is the greatest mystery.
Meet it and it has no face;
follow it and it has no back.

Here is where I get a little irritated. People fall back on this "direct experience" ********. I can take a boat load of acid right now and put all of those "direct experiences" to shame. Does that make it real? No. Hell no it doesn't. The mind as we KNOW from fact and scientific research, can produce some crazy crazy things. Direct experience is the WORST possible way to determine if something is real or correct. You can't trust it. That is what we have learned over and over and over. It is a belief in what you think you experienced. It is a belief that you are incapable of being fooled by your own brain.

Ah, but who said the experience is via your brain?

YOUR BRAIN LIES!

I already told you: it is not an intellectual exercise, nor a belief system. What you cannot trust is the rational mind. So the experience of Reality lies beyond Reason. It is because of Reason that Delusion exists. There is a conscious experience beyond both that is called Awakening in which all Delusion evaporates, just as a dream vanishes upon awakening from sleep.

In the real world its either put up or shut up. I can make any claim I want and it doesn't matter if I say its impossible to back up I still have that responsibility of creating a convincing argument for my case before I am given any real weight in a conversation.

No one says you HAVE to leave the Cave.

And either your thinking of a different Tao than what I learned when I took a course in Eastern Philosophy. It seems somewhat similar but yet different. What I learned of the Tao was that it is your "path". That you can harmonize yourself with the universe to obtain your true self or purpose. And the reason why it cannot be defined is because it was ever changing or beyond words. That much I understand. However that doesn't make it a fact of the universe.

That's because you only developed an intellectual 'understanding' of the Tao, but if it cannot be defined because it is beyond words, then it is beyond explanation, and therefore, beyond rational thought.

Exactly. QM isn't physically anything. It is the study of how certain things in the universe behave.

Right, but that particular kind of behavior is Quantum behavior. It does not conform to the classic laws of physics. That Quantum behavior is the behavior of the universe, which are one and the same.

 

[godnotgod]

How would you know? Your "Eastern wisdom" comes from a source so thoroughly Western there is none that equals it: Western speech you access from an internet designed and built via Western thought and technology accessed through logic and its instantiation produced by Western innovation and implementation.

You are to Eastern thought what a McDonald's in Japan is to Eastern culture.

You still don't get it, do you? Eastern wisdom is not Eastern; it is universal. The source for Eastern wisdom is the same for everyone everywhere on the planet. It is the same single source that is found within.

You're just nibbling around the edges, as usual, LOM.

Academia? I was lucky enough to study under one of the foremost masters of Eastern tradition, thought, and practice in the world. You had google. I studied under another master who's qualifications as such were recognized by the sole inheritor of an Eastern tradition dating back centuries. You misquote Einstein because you can't read German and you can't understand what he wrote when it's translated.

Oh, here we go again with the same old song and dance. You continue to congratulate yourself on your learning but demonstrate that you have learned nothing.

This brings to mind the story about the Zen monk who lived out in the wild, who never sat zazen with the monks in the temple, who never read a single word about Zen, but who knew more about the essence of Zen than they.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

You still don't get it, do you? Eastern wisdom is not Eastern; it is universal.

The following excerpted from:

'Eastern Wisdom', by Alan Watts:

None of what you say as regards the mistreatment of women in the cultures/countries you point out has anything to do with the Eastern wisdom

Greece, part of the West, which has nothing to do with the East's focus on the feminine essence within.

I have followed your Western trivialization, distortions, elitist and at least borderline racist caricatures of Eastern wisdom for a long time in many different contexts. Your "universal wisdom" is simply the English websites and English narratives from youtube clips you are capable of recognizing as something like language rather than random symbols or noise.

You can pretend to reduce "Eastern wisdom" to Western trivializations and appropriations as long as such elitist and racist methods appeal to you. Why they would is a mystery, but then I don't really understand the motives behind such racist tendencies or cultural supremacy in general.

The source for Eastern wisdom is the same for everyone everywhere on the planet.

How would you know? You trivialize Eastern wisdom by reducing it to youtube and google results. What would you know of actual Eastern masters that you didn't get from the internet?

You're just nibbling around the edges, as usual, LOM.

Of what? The websites that inform the entirety of what you interpret as "Eastern wisdom"? I prefer actual Eastern masters rather than your commercialized, westernized, at least borderline racist sources. You are apparently content to make no such distinctions and could not even if you were so inclined.

You continue to congratulate yourself on your learning but demonstrate that you have learned nothing.

I'm not the one reducing eons of disparate cultures into a antiquated racist, elitist notion of the "mystic orient" I got from using google

 

[godnotgod]

This is getting tiersome. I shall try once more to explain this to you.

It is not a lack of understanding. I have total understanding of what you are trying to say. What you don't understand is that its not fact. It is a belief that the tao exists. Unless you are simply substituting "universe" and "tao" as enterchangable terms then it is a belief that the Tao exists. Your belief is based on experiences you have had or experiences you believe others have had. We have learned that "experiences" outside of testable situations are terrible in terms of evidence.

Yes, it is getting tiresome because you continue to ignore the fact that I am not making my point from that of factual knowledge.

No, it is not a belief that Tao exists. It is direct experience, without belief, just as the experience of the prisoner who escaped from Plato's Cave (which IS the world of Belief) experienced the Sun. His experience is not a fact that can be demonstrated to the other prisoners via evidence. It's reality can only be verified via direct experience.

Do you deny that you and the tangible universe you live in exist against some kind of background? Can solids exist without the space around them? Can fish exist without the sea they swim in, and which supports them 100%, without taking any kind of direct action to do so?



If you wish to stay in your bubble then I can't pop it for you.

The fact the universe exists is demonstrable. There is no way for us to logically or resonably to deny its existence. However I can deny the existence of the Tao all I want and it conflicts with nothing. Yeah its possible it could exist. But there is no need for it to exist. There is no reason to believe it exists. Saying its not a belief doesn't make it so.

Saying it exists doesn't mean it exists.[/QUOTE]

Try seeing it this way:

You think you live in the real world, but in reality, you are living in a dream, a dream in which everything around you SEEMS real, just as when sleeping and dreaming, everything seems real. It's just that the world you awaken to is just another level of a dream, one in which the illusion is of a higher order than those found in sleep-dreaming. And just as when you awaken from dream-sleep to realize the fact that you were only dreaming, there is another awakening from THIS reality that happens to some people wherein they realize even more clearly that they were just living in a dream world. Not just that, but the person they thought themselves to be, turns out to be a fiction, a dream-character who thinks himself fully awake, but in fact, is only dreaming the role he is acting out. It is from this higher state of awareness, called the Fourth Center of Consciousness, or Self-Transcendence, that one sees the illusion of the Third Level of Consciousness, or Waking Sleep, also known as Identification. The world you thought to be real, is real to you on the Third Level, but from the vantage point of the Fourth Level, it is an illusion.

So no. Saying the Fourth Level exists does not make it so, of course not. It must be experienced for one to know beyond a shadow of any doubt that it is real, and that what we only thought to be real, is but a Grand Illusion.

That is just the nature of things.

Surely, if I were able to communicate to you during one of your more vivid dreams while asleep, that the world you were dreaming was not real, you would object profusely,

I see you advertise yourself as an atheist. From the point of view of Higher Consciousness, you are God pretending not to believe in yourself, LOL.

Upon your awakening from your dream, you will realize your true nature as God, and will have a good laugh.

It's all part of the general deception, in which God is playing the supreme game of Hide and Seek with Itself.

Enjoy!