Stosh

That's entirely true, no argument here,, I just think its sensationalism to say that the universe HAS NO CENTER ,and is finite , but it all expanded from one singularity ,, just to confuse the casual person interested,, , make them think their puny minds cannot comprehend such mysteries ,, Steves premise is that his lackeys figured it out themselves that way , and so its all self evident that the conclusions are true. When the truth is ,IMO, that they have been predisposed to come to certain conclusions.

Draw and cut out two circles , one bigger than the other , each on a sheet of paper fold each twice so you can find the center of each , put a dot at each place where a fold is at the edge of the paper. Then ,as long as you keep the axes of the folds aligned, you can shift the small circle around anywhere within the large circle , and the trajectories of the dots at say 12oclock , 9 oclock and three oclock ,, always cross at SOME point - (the theoretical center of the universe based on trajectories) but the center of the big circle is still midway across the diameter of the big circle ! Yes, I am presuming regular shape for simplicity either a circle or a line , the principle is still the same. The center is midway between the edges. ( yes I know the universe has an amorphous shape right now , that just makes it more complicated , it can still be calculated though,, like the nominal center of the US. )

That's very expansive of you Karl, but .. if could you take one baby step at a time , I could at least understand your view , though perhaps not share it. ( In fact I know I dont , but thats not important) ,, Rather than going back to Plato, I have a beef with Hawking's show I saw last night , demonstrating to his confused underlings that since the universe was expanding , it must be concluded that the universe has no center . Frankly, I dont believe that -this is what the demonstrations suggest. ( because you have to shift the trajectory of every star in the universe ! in order to arrive at a different conclusion of where the nominate center of the universe would be. ) What they showed was just a quirk of perspective ,you have to distort the shape of the universe to make it work, and it doesnt negate that you can still find the center of an expanding circle by transecting from edge to edge. ( or if you use a simplified line of dots - you can still measure to that which is halfway from the ends ) It was like claiming the United states has no center because the earth is spinning.

Recently I reported two bird bands which I caught on camera, one of them was from Peru , the other from Brazil, I'm waiting for feedback as to whether they were netted or banded in the nest.

I am being serious , but since I know the confusion this issue provides , I'm sympathetic and therefore chuckle as well. My example of the electron hole is a simplification down to a single parameter of charge , electrons have other properties , but each of those also follow the same rule . According to what the universe defines as total homogeneity, anything that differs from that , is what we consider 'something'. The universe is trending back to total homogeneity which drives the processes , of,, for example ,, neutralization of charges.

Sure there are ! the donut hole , is the absence of the donut in that place , one has to expect donut there to consider there to be a dearth of donut. Same as there is the dearth of nothing where there is something. Envision a 'negative' ocean where there is a blob of water , and compare to the positive ocean where there is a bubble in the water , same deal.There are properties of the 'empty' bubble just as there are properties of the 'water blob'. The bubble , filled with the water blob , would cease to exist.. just as the empty space ocean would cease to be definable if empty space replaced the blob. Youre just stuck on the idea that there is nothing in empty space , while there is something real about full space.,, but it is space which defines that which may exist at any given spot. ( three things - something , nothing , space containing no thing.) Within that which we call the universe there is nothing in spots , but thats the absence properties which we consider empty space, beyond that boundary there is .. zippo ,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,none of our universe is there . Its really very simple, just ,, its just not how one ordinarily views things. But as an example , in electronics one can use the concept of electronholes, one can describe the procession of electrons which satisfy holes to neutrality , or one can follow the procession of the holes in the opposite direction. The holes are the absence of the neutral state provided by conjunction with the electrons, so the hole has properties and therefore is not nothing.

Nothing is the absence of everything, something is the absence of nothing. .. both require certain expectations and these are swappable.

Technically one cant 'detect' any energy of Any type , except by what that energy does. What we call 'energy' is adherence to the basic principles of the cosmos. The principle of expansion of space , ('dragging' material objects within it) , cant be approached without understanding the difference between space within the universe and PURE nothingness..( which is ..the lack of applied ' cosmotic principle' or presence of it. ) Its all in my new book coming out next year, I still have to put the final touches on it.

Boogie oogie oogie till ya just cant boogie no more.

Be the task big or small, do it right , or not at all.... Lao tzu.

That takes too much discipline.

Flaw is determined by context ,whereas, propensities may be predetermined. Propensities out of favorable context would constitute flaw.

Thats not fair, you said it was a FAULT.

What exactly is a Koori natal horoscope?

I have far too much humility.

We probably all have the faults she denied. Im sure I do and dont even know what they were !

Umm what are you confused about? ... precisely.

We each have our own brand of crazy. Because crazy is a divorce from concrete reality. Yes, some people are really messed up, but the difference is in degree of functionality ..operating in a concrete world .. rather than having a clear line of demarcation. Totems , horoscopes etc , reflect who it is we imagine ourselves to be , or want to be , or are... these totems avatars symbols , are a coping mechanism in themselves ,, because frankly the world is a difficult place to be in for such a fragile thing as an intelligent mind. Reminding myself of this makes it much easier to ummm , forgive and accept that others are just not in total sync with my brand. All the folks participating in this thread you started ,IMO, are really nice people , with ideas and emotions and motivations all their own. Allowing that to flourish , is a gift one can bestow ,, or try to hem in.

It strikes me as weird that your grass , looks just like our grass! .. but with a parrot on it.

Im thinking that normally we do have some say about what gets emphasized or played down but ! Torture victims may be entirely a different story precisely because they dont have physical control or mental wherewithal to do the selecting- they are simply overwhelmed or unprepared for the particular assault - which could be just as true for an elderly abused relative or any other person in a destructive situation,, even if its only minorly problematic. We may often be our own worst enemy, but that doesnt mean someone cant be worse, or that we have no other enemies. People who endure horrible situations usually have coping mechanisms that kick in , without them ... theyre probably as poorly off as everyone else that doesnt.

its called a flow chart.

You can stop wondering , the proper view is that demarcations and groupings are arbitrary.. and by arbitrary I dont mean that one cant come up with reasons they like to divide apples from cactus , I just mean arbitrary in that you can indeed lump cactus with apples or decide not to -since the divisions are artificial just as you seem to be relating. In other words "agreed".

Can we agree that the experience is simultaneous and complete, a full blown presentation? and move on from there?

Im still stuck on the idea of mental 'order' tho. Dont ideas just well up full blown with all the associations for you? You mention a perpetual motion machine and I think of one of those liquid filled glass bird things that tilt occasionally for some reason. I see a vague mental image and remember I dont like the glued on parts depicting a bird with a hat on, and yet can picture it without specific color assignment ,, the top-hat could be red or green, the sun reflects on the glass , but I dont know what direction its from and I dont know the principle by which its functioning. Its all there at the same time, a presentation of all the specific associations that I do and dont have. So I don't see any order to it , loose or otherwise. I know adults can build upon associations ,but this isn't childlike thought development , is it? So it wouldnt be exemplary the powerful Taoist treasure Mh referred to.

I'm thinking a horoscope can be an investigative tool , but frankly people just like hearing about themselves, from a perspective which infers that there is factual basis for what they choose, that faults may be excused as fate, and an actual destiny which they can fulfill.