Taoist Texts

It is not clear "There are those who have completed Ming, but not yet Xing, so they are not able to slough off the illusory bodies , and they keep their frames to reside in the world. " Yes. The Father Time. No.

are getting somewhere.

no yes

The common mistake you guys make is to equate '" martial/energetic things" with "any discipline". The latter produce ordinary results, while true M/E is supposed to produce extraordinary results. One can try and study M/E without a teacher but that would be only a pretend study, which will produce only ordinary results, or more precisely no results at all. Hence when asking one needs to specify the results you are expecting. If you are expecting ordinary results a teacher is not important at all. But if you want to get extraordinary results then a true teacher is a must.

Its a good question, but needs to be asked with a complete sentence. Why is a teacher so important for what?

correct

anytime. here it is in chinese https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/达摩流浪者

In 1991 Capra co-authored Belonging to the Universe with David Steindl-Rast, a Benedictine monk. Using Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutionsas a stepping stone, the book explores parallels between new paradigm thinking in science and in religion; the authors posit that, together, these new paradigms offer remarkably compatible views about the universe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritjof_Capra compatible yes. Same things are compatible. Lets pray.

Upanishads - Ancient History EncyclopediaThe Upanishads are a collection of texts of religious oh look, religion again. What ya gonna do it just keeps cropping up.

this shows how totalitarian and hence corrupt the GR was even at that early stage: no career advancement unless allowed by the capo di tutti capi. Of course the rot is much worse now spot on

bums is 露宿者又稱流浪漢、遊民、街友、野宿族 the forum name is a hommage to a once famous hippy novel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dharma_Bums

Same distinction is made by DDJ: dao which can be dao-ed is not a permanent dao.

If you noticed, above Tesla makes a distinction between properties and attributes.

Sigh. Before you can or can not use the classical equations, there is something else you most certainly can not do: scale to relativistic speeds.

Absolutely. But thats exactly the thing. It can not both to have properties and to originate them.

Tesla on Einstein's relativity , '.a mass of error and deceptive ideas violently opposed to the teachings of great men of science of the past and even to common sense. The theory wraps all these errors and fallacies magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king...., its exponents are brilliant men but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists...', (New York Times, 11 July 1935, p23, c.8). ... 'I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties. He has not, but only attributes and these are of our own making. Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view.', (New York Herald Tribune, 11 September 1932) Tesla as in Nicola Tesla. I do disagree with him thou, the relativity math is shoddy BS.

to wit

and who can blame him? With terminology like this The God Particle - Wikipedia what else could it be? Actually i have nothing against quantum phys, because, right or wrong, it belongs to the realm of experience, while GR is not. There can never be an experiment to establish whether gravitational lensing is caused by relativity, Newtonian or space dust effect. While the stars in the sky are observable, they will forever remain incomprehensible https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olbers'_paradox .

must be japanese gangs

its the voodoo that we doodoo

Thanks. i vaguely remember something like this in WLP writings, wanted to make sure.

I am not sure that is the case. Once a particle enters an orbit, it stays there absent any energy causing it to leave. Also this problems is explained by the Newtonian gravity, and was in fact posited by him back in 1704 , nothing relative is needed. Of course it is a purely mental exercise, not subject to experiment, akin to asking if an omnipotent god can create a stone which he cant lift. Purely mental exercises belong to the realm of ideas and hence religion. In fact GRT was hoisted on the world by a true believer, a missionary The hilarious irony is of course that GRT was immediately used by the atheists to combat and replace the very same religion which gave rise to GRT.

what would cause it to leave?

they say it does have momentum. but its a magical momentum, without a mass https://courses.lumenlearning.com/physics/chapter/29-4-photon-momentum/