The Debate of God.

[godnotgod]

The fact that the present changes indicates that Time exists. However it's internally perceived, it still exists as part of the continuum.

However, the background to existence that is the present does'nt change. It is static. What seems to change is what goes on in the foreground, which is the phenomenal world. It is these events which we measure with clocks, and call the result 'Time', all of which is illusory.

 

[godnotgod]

Show me how I can prove this for myself.

In any case, I can absolutely prove to you that I am right. I have a proof so astounding that it will stun you to the very core of your being, a proof that will change the way you look at the entire universe.

I'll post it tomorrow.

Can you not think a single thought for at least 30 seconds? If you can, sit still, and during that thoughtless period, make a simple movement, such as waving your hand back and forth. Without thought as an overlay to the event, you will not see any Time pass during which the event is occurring. The entire event will occur in the timeless Now, which is what is actually occurring. It is only when you think about Time, that it is a factor, but the factor is a conceptual overlay, as your exercise should show you. You are seeing reality directly, exactly as it is, not as thought tells you it is.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

However, the background to existence that is the present does'nt change. It is static. What seems to change is what goes on in the foreground, which is the phenomenal world. It is these events which we measure with clocks, and call the result 'Time', all of which is illusory.

This is just a deepity. The present does change. Your eyes dragging across these words is change. it is not static. Time is passing for you. It's not illusory, it's exactly what it appears. How you process it and consider it is irrelevant. Occurrence requires Time. Even if you wish to imagine your life is an illusion, for you to perceive that illusion requires cycles of Time for your consciousness, whatever form you think it takes, to perceive.

 

[godnotgod]

This is just a deepity. The present does change. Your eyes dragging across these words is change. it is not static. Time is passing for you. It's not illusory, it's exactly what it appears. How you process it and consider it is irrelevant. Occurrence requires Time. Even if you wish to imagine your life is an illusion, for you to perceive that illusion requires cycles of Time for your consciousness, whatever form you think it takes, to perceive.

How do you determine that Time has passed?

Thinking requires time, and a thinker, but consciousness does not.

It is with your consciousness that one sees, without thought, that Time, existence, and the self, are illusory. You are seeing it from the point of view of the changeless, infinite, indivisible background that is the Absolute. But if you are still attached to the concept of the self, that you are an individual ego called "I", then you think that life is real; that there is change. Now you are using ordinary thinking, and you are living by the clock, so Time is real for you, just as the rope you imagined was a snake for a brief moment, was real.

 

[godnotgod]

Past and Future – Time disappears (by Osho)


There is no need to bother about the past.
As you become aware, the first thing to disappear from your mind is the past, and the past is one third of the mind. It is the very base of the mind, the foundation. Once it disappears, then the whole building starts collapsing.

The 2nd to go is tomorrow.
When there is no yesterday, you cannot conceive of the tomorrow. The tomorrow is nothing but a projection of yesterday. You would like to live the joys of yesterday again tomorrow and you would like to avoid the miseries of yesterday. That’s what your tomorrow is. If yesterday is gone, tomorrow is finished; soon it will disappear.

And when yesterdays are gone and tomorrows are gone, where is today?
It exists between the two. If both the banks have disappeared, the river itself will disappear.
If both the banks have disappeared, the bridge will disappear. Chunk by chunk in three pieces, time dissolves: First the past, then the future, and finally the present. Then you are left with no time, a state of timelessness. And this, Buddha calls nirvana.

To experience timelessness is to experience deathlessness. *
To experience timelessness is to experience that which really is. It is neither past nor present nor future; it simply is. It cannot be confined into any compartment, into any category; it cannot be categorized. You simply experience each moment with tremendous peace and silence and joy.

And each moment becomes so fragrant, so alive!
Each moment becomes such a benediction that it is impossible to imagine it, it is impossible to describe it. One has to know it to know it; there is no other way. Nobody can explain it to you. It is not expressible, it is not explainable. It is the greatest mystery.

When time disappears, mind disappears, what is left?
That which is left, that vastness…that’s your real being – in Buddha’s words, your non-being, your no-self.
[The mind is a self-created principle; when this is realized, there is no-mind; you are sunyatta, the void itself]

(Osho)
*****

* This is the meaning of Yeshua's saying that: 'Before Abraham was, I AM". Yeshua is beyond birth and death. His consciousness emerges out of the eternal living Present Moment, where there is no memory of things past, no history. To live fully in the Present is to live in Reality itself.

 

[Tiberius]

A whole lot of nonsense. When I post my proof tomorrow, you'll understand how mistaken you were.

 

[PolyHedral]

Past and Future – Time disappears (by Osho)


There is no need to bother about the past.
As you become aware, the first thing to disappear from your mind is the past, and the past is one third of the mind. It is the very base of the mind, the foundation. Once it disappears, then the whole building starts collapsing.

The 2nd to go is tomorrow.
When there is no yesterday, you cannot conceive of the tomorrow. The tomorrow is nothing but a projection of yesterday. You would like to live the joys of yesterday again tomorrow and you would like to avoid the miseries of yesterday. That’s what your tomorrow is. If yesterday is gone, tomorrow is finished; soon it will disappear.

And when yesterdays are gone and tomorrows are gone, where is today?
It exists between the two. If both the banks have disappeared, the river itself will disappear.
If both the banks have disappeared, the bridge will disappear. Chunk by chunk in three pieces, time dissolves: First the past, then the future, and finally the present. Then you are left with no time, a state of timelessness. And this, Buddha calls nirvana.

To experience timelessness is to experience deathlessness. *
To experience timelessness is to experience that which really is. It is neither past nor present nor future; it simply is. It cannot be confined into any compartment, into any category; it cannot be categorized. You simply experience each moment with tremendous peace and silence and joy.

And each moment becomes so fragrant, so alive!
Each moment becomes such a benediction that it is impossible to imagine it, it is impossible to describe it. One has to know it to know it; there is no other way. Nobody can explain it to you. It is not expressible, it is not explainable. It is the greatest mystery.

When time disappears, mind disappears, what is left?
That which is left, that vastness…that’s your real being – in Buddha’s words, your non-being, your no-self.
[The mind is a self-created principle; when this is realized, there is no-mind; you are sunyatta, the void itself]

(Osho)
*****

* This is the meaning of Yeshua's saying that: 'Before Abraham was, I AM". Yeshua is beyond birth and death. His consciousness emerges out of the eternal living Present Moment, where there is no memory of things past, no history. To live fully in the Present is to live in Reality itself.

None of this explains why the clocks on the GPS satellites tick very slightly faster than the ones on Earth. In contrast, Relativity explains it perfectly.

 

[9Westy9]

Can you both shut up already? Jesus, you are agreeing with each other! One is saying to-MAH-to, the other to-MAY-to. Godnotgod, you are giving a different philisophical perspective on how time works. You are saying that things like riding a bike are in the present. But it is a new present, and now another past event is made. Once the person stops, the stop is the new present, and from it, the actual riding is turned into the past.

But we are still talking about the same TIME. Thank you.

Sorry, but I couldn't resist

[youtube]YPIsTKpAoE4[/youtube]
Calm Down - YouTube

 

[godnotgod]

None of this explains why the clocks on the GPS satellites tick very slightly faster than the ones on Earth. In contrast, Relativity explains it perfectly.

Osho is talking about a direct experience of the present moment's timelessness, like say, you accidentally fall into a cold mountain lake, you immediately KNOW that the water is cold.

So what do the GPS clocks behavior have to do with what he is saying?

 

[godnotgod]

"In simplest terms [a] paradox arises because of how relativity and quantum physics treat time and space. In relativity, time and space are relative to the observer. Einstein's equations allow one to accurately transform position data from one reference frame to another.

Quantum mechanics treats time and space as a rigid, fixed, four dimensional coordinate system, however it shows that it is impossible to place any object in this coordinate system with absolute precision. So either time and space are flexible and relative to the observer, or they are fixed and the observer's position as well as what he is observing can only be stated as a probability.

Solving this paradox is the Holy Grail of modern physics. There are many theories: Super-Symmetry (SUSY), super-string, Higg's Field, and various subsets of these and others, each competing to be heralded as the GUT (Grand Unified Theory) or TOE (Theory of Everything). Physicist Julian Barbour has introduced one unique theory that might solve the paradox. Barbour suggests that it might be possible to throw time out altogether. After all, what is time? It isn't a substance, field, or particle that physics can measure. Is it simply a fundamental property of the universe? Barbour says no.

Barbour's universe consists of an infinite number of "eternal nows" stretching from the Big Bang to the end of the universe (either by heat death, or super contraction, sometimes called the Big Crunch). Time is merely an illusion created by the human consciousness, which only sees one "now" at a time, as it moves along through all of the "nows" that make up its life. Somewhere in Barbour's universe, which he calls Platonia, you are being born, attending your first day of school, going on your first date, and lying on your deathbed. However right now you are only aware of the you which is reading this essay and probably saying to yourself: "This guy has flipped his cork!"

Possibly I have. But according to Barbour, eliminating time as a fundamental property of the universe would remove much of the difficulty in uniting relativity with quantum physics and thereby slay the final dragon of science. Do other scientists agree? Surprisingly, many physicists and cosmologists think time will have to be left out of the final unified theory, and many suspect the concept of space may have to go as well."

C.D. Rollins - How quantum physics is validating near-death experiences
*****

Not only have mystics been saying that time is an illusion for centuries, but that applies to space and causation as well, and the example above of you existing in different time dimensions goes as well: there is no individual ego called "I" that can be found to exist. In addition, Quantum Physics suggests that reality is an illusion, that it is created via consciousness, and that would, of course, include Time, which is what I have been saying all along.

With that in mind, now re-read the following statement once more:

"The Universe IS the Absolute as seen through the glass of Time, Space, and Causation"
Vivekananda

Take a giant leap into Higher Consciousness. Relativity and Quantum Theory are still just nibbling around the edges.

 

[Tiberius]

godnotgod, you do realise, don't you, that merely REPEATING your claims isn't going to make them more plausible?

Like I said, when I publish my proof that you are wrong, you are going to feel like you're seeing the universe through new eyes.

 

[godnotgod]

godnotgod, you do realise, don't you, that merely REPEATING your claims isn't going to make them more plausible?

Like I said, when I publish my proof that you are wrong, you are going to feel like you're seeing the universe through new eyes.

I repeat them not because they are plausible, but because they are an accurate reflection of reality. Plausibility is a feature of thought; reflection is a feature of seeing, without thought.

You must have information that no other physicist or astronomer has, as they continue to debate amongst themselves as to whether time exists or not, amongst the current crop of theories about the universe. But the fact that they do indicates that science is not so exact and reliable as you imply it to be.

I prefer to see the universe through its own eyes.

 

[godnotgod]

[youtube]LJThU1jDT2o[/youtube]
Measurement Problem - Reality is an Illusion - YouTube

In this video on Quantum Mechanics, we see how mystics and scientists both agree that what we know of as reality is but an illusion of consciousness; that what we think we see as real, is not so:

"Everything we know about the everyday world dissolves. There are no objects anymore. There are only relationships. There's no locality anymore. There's no time anymore. The more you look at something in detail in what we think of as solid matter the less and less solid it begins to look."

Essentially, what is being described here is what we call an illusion, and that is exactly and precisely what mystics have said for over 2000 years: that the world we live in and think of as 'reality' is only an appearance. Appearances can take the form of dreams. Mystics also tell us that most of us are not actually awake, though we think we are. They call this state of awareness that of 'Waking Sleep', which is life on the Third Level of Consciousness, wherein we are only dreaming that we are real, that our lives are real. It is only upon Awakening and entering the Fourth Level of Consciousness, that of Self-Transcendence, that we begin to see the illusion we are living, and begin to understand the true nature of reality, which is Timeless, Causeless, and Undivided.

That reality, or the universe, is an appearance explains how it can have come from nothing, which is what cutting edge theoretical physicists are now telling us. In other words, there is no 'creation' of anything at all, but merely a projection, or manifestation of an illusion that only seems real. Once again, we return to the rope/snake metaphor, in which the rope (The Absolute) appears as a snake. We see the Absolute as the Relative world because we are seeing it through the conditioned mentality of Time, Space, and Causation.

"The universe IS the Absolute as seen through the glass of Time, Space, and Causation."
Vivikenanda

 

[Tiberius]

I repeat them not because they are plausible, but because they are an accurate reflection of reality.

You have yet to demonstrate this. All I have is your claims.

Plausibility is a feature of thought; reflection is a feature of seeing, without thought.

Wrong. Thought is a feature of plausibility. You have it the wrong way around, my friend. A thought must be plausible if we are to think it. If it is implausible, then it is not a thought we can think.

You must have information that no other physicist or astronomer has, as they continue to debate amongst themselves as to whether time exists or not, amongst the current crop of theories about the universe.

Source please.

But the fact that they do indicates that science is not so exact and reliable as you imply it to be.

So the best and brightest minds disagree with you, therefore they are wrong?

Truly you humble yourself before nature.

I prefer to see the universe through its own eyes.

Trouble is that your are looking through the eyes of the universe with YOUR own eyes!

Like I've said, I will provide proof that I am correct tomorrow. And when I do, you will fall to the ground in awe, because the secrets of the universe will be opened up before you.

 

[godnotgod]

You have yet to demonstrate this. All I have is your claims.

Regardless of what science or anyone conceptualizes about reality, reality is what it is. If you know what it is without concepts, then your reflection of it is an accurate one. The best way to achieve this is via direct access. You would first need to see the validity of this approach before you can make your approach. In other words, the approach must be that of an empty mind. When you approach reality with a methodology in mind, such as the scientific method, religious doctrine, etc., your results will be be seen through those filters. That is exactly why quantum physicists, while they can tell you what their experiments DO, cannot interpret their data. They are perplexed by what they see, because what they see is outside of science's methodology.

Wrong. Thought is a feature of plausibility. You have it the wrong way around, my friend. A thought must be plausible if we are to think it. If it is implausible, then it is not a thought we can think.

You determine what is plausible via of the thought process; until you do, it is neither plausible, nor not-plausible. You can only come to a conclusion that something is either via of thought.

Reflection is similar; it does not exist until you see it.

Source please.

So the best and brightest minds disagree with you, therefore they are wrong?

Truly you humble yourself before nature.

No. The best and brightest minds disagree with each other.

Trouble is that your are looking through the eyes of the universe with YOUR own eyes!

All of our eyes are those of the universe, since all of us are 100% part of the universe, but some of us have 'scientific', religious, or atheist lenses on which distort our view. Those lenses come from our social indoctrination and our heredity, which teaches us that these views are the authoritative ones. It teaches us, for example, that Time is real, that we must live by the clock, both of which we then mistakenly interpret as reality itself. Most of us look at the events of the world brought about by such thinking, and call it 'reality' when they are actually the result of delusive thought. But we have conditioned ourselves to believe it to be so. When things go wrong, we then take actions based on even more delusive thought, and on and on. We call this approach being karma-driven.

To say that Time, Space, and Causation are real is to see the universe through the distorting lens of the rational mind and its conceptual overlays. To understand that it is Timeless, Undivided, and Causeless is to see it exactly the way it actually is.

Like I've said, I will provide proof that I am correct tomorrow. And when I do, you will fall to the ground in awe, because the secrets of the universe will be opened up before you.

Oooooooooooooh!:faint::thud::woohoo::tribal:

As I said, you must have info that no scientist has, since the question about 'secrets of the universe' are still in hot debate. In fact, just the fact that you are claiming that the universe has 'secrets' indicates to me that you still see the rope as a snake. But that's OK. Most of us do, as most still are caught in Enslaved Attention, their minds transfixed in hypnotic trance by those dancing cave wall shadows we all think represent Reality.

 

[Tiberius]

Regardless of what science or anyone conceptualizes about reality, reality is what it is.

That's right. Regardless of what YOU conceptualize.

On the other hand, scientists have measured and come up with theories that allow them to accurately predict what is going on. But yeah, you probably know better than them...

If you know what it is without concepts, then your reflection of it is an accurate one. The best way to achieve this is via direct access. You would first need to see the validity of this approach before you can make your approach. In other words, the approach must be that of an empty mind. When you approach reality with a methodology in mind, such as the scientific method, religious doctrine, etc., your results will be be seen through those filters. That is exactly why quantum physicists, while they can tell you what their experiments DO, cannot interpret their data. They are perplexed by what they see, because what they see is outside of science's methodology.

An empty mind? Geez, why does everyone need to start from scratch? Scientists have figured out a lot of stuff, y'know. Why must we ignore what they have done? Oh! It's because they disagree with you, therefore they must be wrong!

You determine what is plausible via of the thought process; until you do, it is neither plausible, nor not-plausible. You can only come to a conclusion that something is either via of thought.

Reflection is similar; it does not exist until you see it.

This is a case where effect can precede cause, and the plausibility of thoughts is but a reflection on ourselves.

No. The best and brightest minds disagree with each other.

But they don't agree with you. Therefore you are not among the best and brightest minds. Therefore, when you tell me one thing, and the best and brightest minds tell me another (and provide evidence to support their claims), I will believe the best and brightest minds and not you.

All of our eyes are those of the universe, since all of us are 100% part of the universe, but some of us have 'scientific', religious, or atheist lenses on which distort our view.

Trouble is that your eyes are much less than the entirety if the universe, so your own preconceptions and biases are providing you with a false image.

Those lenses come from our social indoctrination and our heredity, which teaches us that these views are the authoritative ones. It teaches us, for example, that Time is real, that we must live by the clock, both of which we then mistakenly interpret as reality itself. Most of us look at the events of the world brought about by such thinking, and call it 'reality' when they are actually the result of delusive thought. But we have conditioned ourselves to believe it to be so. When things go wrong, we then take actions based on even more delusive thought, and on and on. We call this approach being karma-driven.

Which is why scientists are willing to let go of what they think is true if they are provided with a good reason to do so.

You, however, have provided us with squat. You make claims, and then repeat those claims again and again, insisting that they are true, yet you provide absolutely ZERO evidence and ZERO support for your claims.

To say that Time, Space, and Causation are real is to see the universe through the distorting lens of the rational mind and its conceptual overlays. To understand that it is Timeless, Undivided, and Causeless is to see it exactly the way it actually is.

See? Here's some more of your unsupported claims.

Oooooooooooooh!:faint::thud::woohoo::tribal:

That last one reminds me of you.

As I said, you must have info that no scientist has, since the question about 'secrets of the universe' are still in hot debate. In fact, just the fact that you are claiming that the universe has 'secrets' indicates to me that you still see the rope as a snake. But that's OK. Most of us do, as most still are caught in Enslaved Attention, their minds transfixed in hypnotic trance by those dancing cave wall shadows we all think represent Reality.

Lol, you think I'm just being silly? I'm not. When I post my proof tomorrow, you'll see how wrong you are.

 

[PolyHedral]

Osho is talking about a direct experience of the present moment's timelessness, like say, you accidentally fall into a cold mountain lake, you immediately KNOW that the water is cold.

So what do the GPS clocks behavior have to do with what he is saying?

The GPS clocks are part of reality. An idea that doesn't explain reality is worthless, regardless of how elegant it is or how nice it would be if it were true.

 

[godnotgod]

That's right. Regardless of what YOU conceptualize.

That is correct. Why should I exclude myself? I stated it as a general principle, or did'nt you get that? Now show me exactly which concepts you think I have advanced in this discussion.

Seeing does not involve conceptualizations. Only thought does. Thought is what produces concepts such as Time, Space, and Causation. Go ahead. Deny that. Or maybe you need to consult a scientist first for 'evidence', eh?

On the other hand, scientists have measured and come up with theories that allow them to accurately predict what is going on.

That is what I have been telling YOU: that science can only tell us about the behavior of phenomena, based on the past. It cannot tell us what the nature of reality is, and as long as it pursues the path of analysis, logic, and reason, it will never do so. That I can predict with 100% accuracy. Only a mind which lets go of this kind of approach will be able to see correctly. I am not saying that science's facts are inaccurate, but that facts are not reality. Reality is something far greater than mere 'facts'. A universe built on a purely factual model is a dead universe. Science is wonderful, but it has it backwards. The facts will only make sense when the nature of the universe is seen and understood via of the intuitive path. It's what we call Illumination.

But yeah, you probably know better than them...

They may possess more factual knowledge than I, but yes, I probably know better than them.

An empty mind? Geez, why does everyone need to start from scratch? Scientists have figured out a lot of stuff, y'know. Why must we ignore what they have done? Oh! It's because they disagree with you, therefore they must be wrong!

Did I suggest ignoring them? Did I not give them full credit for their knowledge?

You may recall a song by the Beatles, I believe it was titled, 'A Day in the Life'. Some of the lyrics went like this:

"I read the news today oh boy
Four thousand holes in Blackburn, Lancashire
And though the holes were rather small
They had to count them all
Now they know how many holes it takes to fill the Albert Hall."

It's not that they are wrong because they disagree with me, it's that they disagree with reality. Quantum physics is now showing them exactly that, but they haven't a clue as to why.

This is a case where effect can precede cause, and the plausibility of thoughts is but a reflection on ourselves.

Yeah, sure....too bad you don't exist to begin with.

But they don't agree with you. Therefore you are not among the best and brightest minds. Therefore, when you tell me one thing, and the best and brightest minds tell me another (and provide evidence to support their claims), I will believe the best and brightest minds and not you.

Ah, but they DO agree with me, as the most recent video I provided demonstrates.

I never asked you to believe what I say; only that you go and see for yourself. Now run along with your bag of beliefs and concepts. They will only lead you to more confusion. But that's a good thing.

'Little doubt, little enlightenment;
great doubt, great Enlightenment'

Trouble is that your eyes are much less than the entirety if the universe, so your own preconceptions and biases are providing you with a false image.

I'm not the one superimposing conceptual ovelays onto Reality, such as Time, Space, and Causation, as you and your scientists are.

This is not a matter of more or less; it is a matter of seeing correctly, or not.

Which is why scientists are willing to let go of what they think is true if they are provided with a good reason to do so.

Heh...heh...heh....someday they will learn to let go completely. It's all in the wrist, you know.

You, however, have provided us with squat. You make claims, and then repeat those claims again and again, insisting that they are true, yet you provide absolutely ZERO evidence and ZERO support for your claims.

You know, you just keep that up, and you may actually get someplace. You see, true understanding does not consist of acquiring facts, data, and knowledge, but involves subtraction, day by day, until you reach ZERO. When you reach ZERO, your vision will at last be clear as a bell. Zero baggage = Zero distortion.

See? Here's some more of your unsupported claims.

See? Nothing for you to attach to which would only add to your confusion, and we would'nt want any of that nonsense, would we?

That last one reminds me of you.

A little entertainment can be a good thing

Lol, you think I'm just being silly? I'm not. When I post my proof tomorrow, you'll see how wrong you are.

Well, bring it, already! You've been smoldering for 3 days now! opcorn:

 

[Tiberius]

That is correct. Why should I exclude myself? I stated it as a general principle, or did'nt you get that? Now show me exactly which concepts you think I have advanced in this discussion.

The whole, "Time is an illusion" nonsense springs to mind.

Seeing does not involve conceptualizations. Only thought does. Thought is what produces concepts such as Time, Space, and Causation. Go ahead. Deny that. Or maybe you need to consult a scientist first for 'evidence', eh?

More claism which you provide ZERO evidence to support.

Show me proof that thought creates space.

That is what I have been telling YOU: that science can only tell us about the behavior of phenomena, based on the past. It cannot tell us what the nature of reality is, and as long as it pursues the path of analysis, logic, and reason, it will never do so. That I can predict with 100% accuracy. Only a mind which lets go of this kind of approach will be able to see correctly. I am not saying that science's facts are inaccurate, but that facts are not reality. Reality is something far greater than mere 'facts'. A universe built on a purely factual model is a dead universe. Science is wonderful, but it has it backwards. The facts will only make sense when the nature of the universe is seen and understood via of the intuitive path. It's what we call Illumination.

More unsupported claims...

They may possess more factual knowledge than I, but yes, I probably know better than them.

Geez, are you arrogant or what?

Did I suggest ignoring them? Did I not give them full credit for their knowledge?

You may recall a song by the Beatles, I believe it was titled, 'A Day in the Life'. Some of the lyrics went like this:

"I read the news today oh boy
Four thousand holes in Blackburn, Lancashire
And though the holes were rather small
They had to count them all
Now they know how many holes it takes to fill the Albert Hall."

It's not that they are wrong because they disagree with me, it's that they disagree with reality. Quantum physics is now showing them exactly that, but they haven't a clue as to why.

How do you explain general relativity then?

Yeah, sure....too bad you don't exist to begin with.

You just keep getting sillier and sillier...

Ah, but they DO agree with me, as the most recent video I provided demonstrates.

Haven't had a chance to watch it yet.

I never asked you to believe what I say; only that you go and see for yourself. Now run along with your bag of beliefs and concepts. They will only lead you to more confusion. But that's a good thing.

'Little doubt, little enlightenment;
great doubt, great Enlightenment'

What you are asking me to do is to abandon the best fact finding tool available and instead rely on gut feeling and intuition. I;ve tried it before, y'know. It doesn't work.

I'm not the one superimposing conceptual ovelays onto Reality, such as Time, Space, and Causation, as you and your scientists are.

This is not a matter of more or less; it is a matter of seeing correctly, or not.

You need to show why these "conceptual overlays" are a false representation of reality then.

You know, you just keep that up, and you may actually get someplace. You see, true understanding does not consist of acquiring facts, data, and knowledge, but involves subtraction, day by day, until you reach ZERO. When you reach ZERO, your vision will at last be clear as a bell. Zero baggage = Zero distortion.

Then you are lucky, because don't have ANY facts, data or knowledge. You are speaking nonsense.

A little entertainment can be a good thing

If all you are doing in here is providing entertainment, then you aren't doing it right.

Well, bring it, already! You've been smoldering for 3 days now! opcorn:

Excuse me? I said I'd provide it TOMORROW. Not NOW.

Honestly, I'm surprised to see you backtrack and betray your views like this. When I first said I had proof, it was NOW. The second time I said I had proof, it was also NOW. Like you said, all of time is one instant, which means that I first made the claim this very instant.

You see, I have taken your arguments on board. I do indeed have proof, but while I wait for tomorrow, I find that everytime I think it gets to tomorrow it suddenly becomes today. TOMORROW is in the future, and as such we can never reach it. A shame too, because it was a really nice proof.

But rest assured, if we ever get to a point in time where it is not NOW but is indeed TOMORROW, I will post it.

 

[Daviso452]

I have no ******* clue what's going on at this point...