Jeff

Yes, with that level of attempted correction you think they would just start over with the model. When your correction factor is 75-80% of your entire model, your statistical significance goes down to basically zero and you should probably just try again.

Authenticity of "what" if there is not some shared teaching or discussion? But, yes, I would agree that all such teachings need to be dropped. Thanks.

If your statement of above was true in general, what would be the point of a lineage? Or shared models and teaching?

Dark energy and dark matter (and hot dark, cold dark, mixed dark, etc...) are theoretically "everywhere" and currently beyond our current perception and theoretically operate on WIMPs forces. Which is effectively the same as the tip of the iceberg approach described above as applied to matter. Also, i am not trying to defend the concept of stuff being created from nothing (only trying to show the logical inconsistencies of a existing fixed theory), but is there any experimental data at all supporting the concept of dark matter or dark energy? Basically, it is just a "plug" to fix existing models that don't work because none of the previous theories worked correctly. Basically, they said oops... We were so wrong with our existing theory that we had to make up a concept that said the universe had 3 x more stuff (only in certain observable places) in it to even get close to having the theory work.

Definitely agree on the absolutes and that we should all remain flexible as understanding tends to deepen as we go along. I think you will enjoy your research on quantum pairing, but it may effect your model somewhat. The cool thing is that it shows that such things like teleportation are theoretically possible. Glad I have brought a smile to your face. Thanks for the discussion.

Breaking down is the problem with all theories (which is basically my original point). Also, familiar with the concept of quantum pairing? We already know that time and space (speed of light) are kind of an illusion. Also, I am sure about Lao Tzu.

A little later in your quoted wikipedia section... In quantum mechanics, energy of a quantum system is described by a self-adjoint (or Hermitian) operator called the Hamiltonian, which acts on the Hilbert space (or a space of wave functions ) of the system. If the Hamiltonian is a time independent operator, emergence probability of the measurement result does not change in time over the evolution of the system. Thus the expectation value of energy is also time independent. The local energy conservation in quantum field theory is ensured by the quantum Noether's theorem for energy-momentum tensor operator. Note that due to the lack of the (universal) time operator in quantum theory, the uncertainty relations for time and energy are not fundamental in contrast to the position-momentum uncertainty principle, and merely holds in specific cases (see Uncertainty principle). Energy at each fixed time can in principle be exactly measured without any trade-off in precision forced by the time-energy uncertainty relations. Thus the conservation of energy in time is a well defined concept even in quantum mechanics. So as it says, just make sure that you measure at the correct "fixed times" and not in the present moment (otherwise that energy number can be all over the place).

Hard ball... These are slow pitches... I challenge you to find any physicist that supports your position regarding your "rules" that you believe in. Also, the only way that physicists even attempt to support such a energy conservation position is to assert that the universe has many (infinite) dimensions and realities that are currently beyond our perception. Hence, rather than a particle "growing" from nothing, it would be more that we only see a limited aspect of the particle in our dimensional reality (kind of like only seeing the tip of an iceberg). And, if one takes that multidimensional view, then is would logically also be true for relative mind/body and there would be a "place" for that soul (broader aspect) to hang outside of our currently perceived reality. This logical dilemma is why the Higg's particle is often called the "god particle".

What current understanding or laws of physics does it violate? I think that the position is commonly accepted by all physicists in the last 10-20 years. Your position seems to be like the previous belief that there is a force like "gravity" that causes the planets to rotate around the sun. All modern day physicists realize that it is more a "warping" of the space-time field. On the Higg's field, it seems to me that you are stating that your "realist" views are counter to what is actually found/experienced in reality. Have you gone fundamentalist on us? (Sorry, couldn't help the joke ) Best wishes, Jeff

Hi MH, Yes, good to have a topic to discuss again. Also, like you I am not trying to put it into any specific framework, but just logically discuss your statements/position. If you don't mind, some potential counter points to your above... First, on energy being eternal (or unchanging), I think there are a few problems with your position found in modern physics. If your position was correct, the universe in motion would be stable in energy terms. Currently, the universe is accelerating in its expansion. Such acceleration requires "energy" coming into the system. Also, if you are familar with a Higgs field (or Higgs particle), modern physics has now measured mass (and therefore also energy) being created from "nothing". Additionally, if you extend your unconscious mind concept to a shared (or universal) subconscious mind concept, the persona (or soul) would not necessarily die with the percieved body. While you may not personally feel energy from others, I think you can agree that a large number of forum members can/have. The "energy sharing method" could easily be defined as that shared subconscious framework. Thanks for the discussion, Jeff

How does that concept logically negate the repeatedly incarnated? Could a soul not just be a subset of the one that experiences different forms in the one?

Things have been quiet today. Going into chat for a while if anyone is interested...

Important point. But rather than just an increasing larger tank, one should come to realize that one is the water itself, then there is less need to worry about the size of the bucket...

Yes, that is exactly the point. Duality of the universe and nirvana (or whatever you want to call it) is all just a spectrum of perception.

It is not the lack of a feeling or sensation (or quiet mind). It is as the Heart sutra describes.. The realization that Form = Void and also Void = Form. With such, things like meditation are seen through and there is no one to feel. When mediation is exactly the same as normal daily life, one is closer. It more about "being" than "doing".

If you are feeling something, it is not emptiness. But that feeling can be mental clarity that many think of as emptiness.

If you truly love the person when you have sex with them, you will notice the difference. The shared energy flow takes you both higher and energizes.

So then you see no difference between an Arhat and a Buddha? Sutra is pretty clear on the differences.

What is your definition of a "normal enlightened person"? The range is pretty large in people's views.

Jesus described the correct path as like going through the eye of a needle, Buddha taught the middle way... In more modern terms, some focus on silence (or clarity of mind), others more on energy (and flows)... But both are really just two sides of the same coin, or, maybe better said, two ends of a spectrum. Some traditions also describe these polarities as male and female, fire and water, or transmission and reception. At the level of individual (or local mind), a lack of balance can deeply effect our view and perception. If we have too much clarity of mind, but not the energy to support it, one tends to become indifferent towards others and being more nihilistic in perspective. If one has too much energy, but not the mental clarity to handle it, they tend to translate the energy into all nature of (negative) perceptions becoming more eternalistic in perspective. Ultimately, mental clarity and energy/light are the same thing. As with everything, balance is the key. Best wishes.

As an excellent zen koan points out... First the mountain is there, then the mountain is gone, then the mountain is there again.

It is more like energy has various frequency ranges or levels of refinement. Each of these frequency ranges can be found (or percieved) at different depths (of levels) of consciousness. At the energy body level it is also sometimes called sheaths or layers. The deeper (or higher, depending on your perspective) one goes, the greater the range of one's energy perception. In your specific case, you have a very broad range and hence you are able percieve such light/energy that causes your heart to jump/carefree. But such light that you describe is in a frequency range that is beyond the (local) human mind level and very rare to be able to percieve.

I apologize if my questions have caused you some concern.

Thanks, that description is helpful. Sounds like we are describing different things regarding the silky sensations of the energy/light flow. In general, I would agree that it is possible to create any kind of sensation that you want at the (local) mind level. As an example, one can use mental level energy to build a local mind fantasy image that becomes so real that one then becomes "attached" to the image and essentially "derefines" (or builds a new energy structure stored in the energy body). But, when doing such, one rarely notices the energy flow as the mind is caught up in the scene/fantasy/emotions.

Then could you describe what it is a sign of? What is happening that creates the silky energy flow feeling? Thanks.