Dagon

That is pretty cool, thanks for sharing it with us!

Guided me for years, Were the trees, streams, thoughts and tears, Banishing my fears.

"anyone? none? time will tell!" Means you are pregnant, If you are superstitious, Why not just test it.

The image of the Cartesian Theater should elaborate on the title of the post, and it originally showed infinite regression. (This is more to do with Dennett and Hawking.) I'm not personally a fan of problem based psychology (Which usually leads to your parents) and prefer the solution based sort.

What does the arachnophobe fear even more than spiders? What is at the root of his/her fear? Exactly. Very true.

So soon, so soon done, Seemingly eternity, when you are so young.

To finish the line, I take time to make a rhyme, Slowly passing time.

Good point. Dwelling in the past usually does no good, unless you are releasing the karmic bonds from the past. Like considering the things you have done wrong and things that have been done wrong to you, and then forgiving all parties involved and resolving to not do those things again, or promising not too. (wisdom) I would agree, because reality is generally subjective, or what can be perceived, and there is much more than we can directly perceive, cool quote.

I din't see it here, can you take a pic for us?

No offence guys, but that is such a waste of time to even consider (imo). It's kinda like thinking how things could have been different if you changed something in the past. Fruitless. Like, what if I would have won the lottery . . . so what? It doesn't make any difference.

No need to ponder, Mindlessly, I just wonder, I'm over yonder.

Can't you hear him burp? Quick, Heimlich maneuver! All is well today.

Is an unnecessary fear of everything wise? http://phobialist.com/ If we say that arachnophobia is wise then we must also consider all the phobia's or needless fears wise. Maybe it is good in a certain rare circumstance, but certain rare circumstances aren't what constitutes a phobia. I personally don't think that it is necessary to fear something to use caution or common sense.

Exorcist's gourd burps, Out came a huge little twerp, Where is Wyatt Earp?

Sounds like a great deal, but unfortunately I have mygreenapple project to do that weekend, and I am the organizer so I can't really miss it =-/. http://www.mygreenapple.org/ http://www.myfootprint.org/en/visitor_information/

Haha! How silly! So much fun it is, really. Unpredictable.

Well, I think that is because you think you are the awareness/spirit, (instead of having a spirit, which is a subtle but important difference) rather than your thoughts or what people think of as you to build a residual self-image. You may have even already seen what the Buddhist are talking about, but are just saying it in a different way if that is so. The idea is to stop clinging to things and prevent suffering when those things are gone, or when you are gone. Like if you love someone, and feel pain because they leave you, it is likely because you considered them yours somehow, and made an attachment to them, and when they leave, the attachment that you created remains and snaps back at you causing pain and suffering. It's learning to love freely, like a mother would her only child, but without the biased attachment that a mother has for her only child.

I mean you can tell which area might fire, but you don't know which one is going to fire and where it will connect. You get a big circle and say it is somewhere in here.

Thanks for all the info.

lol. Same here! I took one electronics course for networking, so I could troubleshoot bad resistors/components.

Ok cool, thanks for the help. Yeah, I guess it acts as if it is a wave. It was Bohm that described it wasn't it?

I'm not sure about that.

Then why aren't they differentiated, when en masse verse not, why should we call the phenomena electrical in both instances? Especially considering they act completely different.

Neurons are kinda weird, I heard that they fire randomly, unlike electricity going through a circuit, which can be predicted. Is that true? Like trying to predict which neuron is going to fire next, is like predicting where lightning will strike. The randomness was determined by the Poisson distribution. (IIRC)

Maybe he means the energy composed in a circuit that will only operate when a continuous source of power is supplied to it, unlike a spark which is a sudden discharge? Thanks for furthering our understanding! The power supply is going to be steady rather than constant at +5/-5%, otherwise the output through resistance would vary too much, and we could fry components?