If "everything is energy" then what does this mean?

[godnotgod]

Same thing, practically speaking.

No, they are not the same thing.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

So you admit you are saying nothing. OK.

We're both saying nothing. So will you shut up now?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

The relationship between what is seen and the apparatus of seeing is what makes them a single experience.

Nonsense. Try the blindfold experiment.

 

[godnotgod]

We're both saying nothing. So will you shut up now?

No. Don't include me in your delusion in your need for thumb sucking security and comfort.

 

[godnotgod]

Nonsense. Try the blindfold experiment.

Explain.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Explain.

I already did. I think you should slow down, stop point-scoring, and listen to what people are saying. Do the blindfold experiment, you will see where the boundary is. With the blindfold on there is no visual experience of "out there". A person who is deaf and blind will have a completely different experience, they make things up in the mind to compensate.

 

[godnotgod]

Do the blindfold experiment, you will see where the boundary is. With the blindfold on there is no visual experience of "out there". A person who is deaf and blind will have a completely different experience, they make things up in the mind to compensate.

If there is a detected boundary, then that is the link between what lies on either side. It is what connects, rather than separates.

I'm not going to buy your argument just because you say it's true, and mine is seen as 'new age poppycock'.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I assume when "all is energy" folks talk about energy they don't mean the energy of physics.

Jumi, your assumption is not correct (although you posted this a little more than 4 months ago). I am one of the folks who think that "all this energy" is energy as we take in physics. For me the Hindu Brahman is none other than "physical energy". And if they are virtual particles in Quantum space, That is no problem. Virtual, imaginary. That is as good as 'absolute nothing'. I do not think anybody said time is energy.

I left the topic at that time and am a litle surprised that it is still going on (there was no reference to my posts so I did not return to it. Now, I will go through the latest posts).

 

[`mud]

what the hell is the OP ?

What is supporting the platform of 'plasma', 'flux', 'inertia', and then, "momentum" that's called energy ?
Or....what are the 'optics' of it....
what was the question ?
what was the 'platform ?
~
'mud

 

[Aupmanyav]

A person who is deaf and blind will have a completely different experience, they make things up in the mind to compensate.

I am hard of hearing. So, my mind perceives voices created by it. I hear as if many people are discussing something heatedly, like in a bazaar. I think the problem will increase with age. Old people hear voices and reply to them. I have not done that till now, but I am sure, I am likely to do that a few years from now. Medical facts. Can beat everything else, but cannot beat time.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I am hard of hearing. So, my mind perceives voices created by it. I hear as if many people are discussing something heatedly, like in a bazaar. I think the problem will increase with age. Old people hear voices and reply to them. I have not done that till now, but I am sure, I am likely to do that a few years from now. Medical facts. Can beat everything else, but cannot beat time.

Yes, it's inevitable unfortunately. It's the same with the mind, memory fades, people make stuff up to fill in the gaps.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

If there is a detected boundary, then that is the link between what lies on either side. It is what connects, rather than separates.

Both connects and separates would be more accurate. I suppose you could say there is just the experience of seeing, but that experience always depends on where we are, our point of view.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

what the hell is the OP ?

It looks to me like a hippy version of "God", or something, like "It's all energy, man, we're just energy too, we're one with the universe, we are stardust, we are golden, right on, roll another one...."

People seem to invest a lot of energy in creating these imaginary alternate worlds, they mostly look like attempts to escape the realities of human existence....most religious belief is about that really.
Ironically this means they often miss the beauty and profoundness of the present moment.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

I've often heard people say that in some sense or another "everything" (whatever that is) is "energy". This confuses me, to put it bluntly. I often work with "energy" as it is "defined" (exists? described?) in modern physics, and this has not helped me understand the assertion that everything is energy. So if any members believe this and would be willing to describe what this belief means (or if any members are more knowledgeable about what this means than I) I would be grateful for an explanation as to what "everything is energy" means (e.g., what is the nature of this "energy"? why ought we to believe that everything is indeed a form of or made out of this "energy"? etc.). Thanks!

I suppose it would depend on the context, but essentially it's correct, in the sense that things which appear solid, are nothing but energy organized in ways to produce a superficial effect of solidity, weight, color etc

But it's not true in the sense- that this energy cannot take these forms without the inclusion of information, instructions, blueprints specifying exactly how to do it.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I suppose it would depend on the context, but essentially it's correct, in the sense that things which appear solid, are nothing but energy organized in ways to produce a superficial effect of solidity, weight, color etc

Sure, but in our everyday world we have no choice but to deal with the "superficial effect".

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Sure, but in our everyday world we have no choice but to deal with the "superficial effect".

True, superficial effects can be pretty painful! But it does shine some light on the nature of reality, an illusion of sorts, 'everything is information' may be just as applicable

 

[godnotgod]

....... "all this energy" is energy as we take in physics. For me the Hindu Brahman is none other than "physical energy". And if they are virtual particles in Quantum space, That is no problem. Virtual, imaginary. That is as good as 'absolute nothing'.

"Five years ago, I had a beautiful experience......
I was sitting by the ocean one late summer afternoon, watching the waves rolling in
and feeling the rhythm of my breathing, when I suddenly became aware of my
whole environment as being engaged in a giganticcosmic dance. Being a physicist, I knew that the sand, rocks, water and air around me were made of vibrating molecules and atoms, and that these consisted of particles which interacted with one another by
creating and destroying other particles. I knew also that the Earth’s atmosphere was continually bombarded by showers of ‘cosmic rays’, particles of high energy undergoing multiple collisions as they penetrated the air. All this was familiar to me from my research in high-energy physics, but until that moment I had only experienced it through graphs, diagrams and mathematical theories. As I sat on that beach my former experiences came to life; I ‘saw’ cascades of energy coming down from outer space, in which particles
were created and destroyed in rhythmic pulses; I ‘saw’ the atoms of the elements and those of my body participating in this cosmic dance of energy; I felt its rhythm and I ‘heard’ its sound, and at that moment I knew that this was the Dance of Shiva, the Lord of Dancers worshipped by the Hindus."

Frifjof Capra, The Tao of Physics

You can download the entire book for free in pdf format here:

http://selfdefinition.org/science/Frifjof-Capra-The-Tao-of-Physics.pdf

 

[Rick O'Shez]

"Five years ago, I had a beautiful experience......
I was sitting by the ocean one late summer afternoon, watching the waves rolling in
and feeling the rhythm of my breathing, when I suddenly became aware of my
whole environment as being engaged in a giganticcosmic dance...

It sounds like he experienced being fully in the present, which can be quite powerful if you've never experienced it before.

But how is this relevant to the topic?

 

[godnotgod]

[

It sounds like he experienced being fully in the present, which can be quite powerful if you've never experienced it before.

But how is this relevant to the topic?

Read the entire quote.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

[
Read the entire quote.

Obviously he has a good imagination. But again, how is a poetic description of an experience like this relevant to the recent discussion?