Questions for the scientists in our midst

[manitou]

I would argue that the mental causes the physical, as in physical malady.

Ok yeah ,I can agree that sometimes, phantom limbs, stress headaches, and yes sometimes even inexplicable conditions as well can be addressed from that angle ,, but in saying that , I still hold that if I were to get in a car accident , I could really get injured ,even if I wasnt mentally prepared ( since I was texting at the time).

If the Shaman methodology brings relief from what defies normal medical care thats just fine too, so long as someone doesnt seriously endanger the welfare of dependents because they want to be defiant about western medicine.

 

I've still got my hammer with me.

 

We are talking apples and oranges and will always be, and so can never come to concurrence. I am coming from the perspective of the I Am, wherein all is the Absolute. There is no separation between objects, people, anything. Anything, even your texting accident, is created from the inside to the outside; as a manifestation of the Absolute. That would imply that there was a reason for your texting accident, which in my view there would have been. All thoughts, from my perspective, are not yours. They bubble up from the Absolute, and you are right where you are supposed to be at any one time - the thoughts you have are those that have been manifested for a purpose. And that this stage we are on is but a learning ground, a stage for the Absolute to manifest into some sort of physical and mental perfection, regardless of how many circuits or physical manifestations it has to make.

 

This may not be as counterintuitive as it sounds. Look back over your own life and see the times that you first interpreted something as a horrible accident - a horrible mistake - and how that very event caused a dramatic change in your own life which turned out to be the best thing that ever happened to you. You can look back and see how the dramatic event was the catalyst for the needed change.

 

It is this theory, that all is the Absolute (or Mind) that is at the basis of the type of healing I'm referring to. It does work, I do have success with it - getting better all the time, depending on my own ability to get out of my own way both mentally, psychologically, and emotionally at the time of the healing. The Absolute must be accessed from a place of inner clarity, which takes a lifetime of work and focused attention to our own motives.

 

This is very far removed from much we talk about here on TTB's - but there are those on this forum who understand this perfectly. If you're interested in finding out more about this mindset (specifically as to healing), I would really recommend the works of Mary Baker Eddy - just sidestep her occasional mention of the Savior, as I mentioned previously. You would be able to grasp the context and framework of it in short order. Helena Blavatsky will take you to pretty much the same place, as will Manly Hall or most Science of Mind readings.

[Marblehead]

Wow I never took you to be alchemist. Are we agreeing that the electrical emmissions of brain and muscle are the energies you are referring to and the source of it is chemically mediated by way of metabolism? Or are you in disagreement with the thermodynamic laws here.

Well, I wouldn't call myself an alchemist but you can call me that if you wish as I wouldn't take it as an insult.

 

Yes, we are in agreement although I have never studied it; what I believe is based on personal experience and tidbits of information more by accident than anything else.

[Marblehead]

The dark matter thing I'm not convinced on yet because the only support for it I have read is the inexplicable mass imbalance of a theoretically expanding universe. I neither know what significant implications it would have nor do I have much faith that there cannot be unknown factors other than it to explain the disparity. My jury is still sequestered on that idea. That being said I see no reason to invoke dark stuff as a significant explanation for anything yet....but sure it could be significant somehow someday. The practical matters of every day life have enough explainable unpredictability that I can wait till there is a more thorough framework before trying to employ knowlege we collectively don't have yet.

True that Dark Matter and Dark Energy do not directly effect us in any way. Science needs Dark Matter to be present to explain how spiral galaxies hold together. They need Dark Energy to explain why the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate, faster than the speed of light.

 

A Black Hole would be a problem if it got too close to us. That would be "End of Days". (and nights too.)

[manitou]

Do you ever wonder if Science and Philosophy are walking up the same hill but on different sides? Do you ever wonder if dark matter is analogous to our subconscious mind, that which affects us in our daily behavior but cannot be viewed or measured? Theoretically dark matter affects the workings of the stellar bodies, but is not visible to our current state of technology. Isn't it speculated that dark matter take up about 85% of the universe? I wonder what the ratio of subconscious mind to conscious mind is used in determining the movement of our own bodies and our own behavior? Any chance it is 85% as well?

 

This goes back to all of manifestation being a living thing. I honestly think that although it appear we're having two separate conversations on this thread, that we're actually having the same conversation but wearing two different lab coats. there is a bridge, a meeting place between the two conversations -

[xor]

According to this NASA webpage on astrophysics ca. 68%(edit: oops, corrected numbers) of the universe is dark matter, ca. 27% is dark energy, that would give us around 5% ordinary matter. This is what mainstream astrophysics says.

Edited November 28, 2013 by xor

[Marblehead]

Do you ever wonder if Science and Philosophy are walking up the same hill but on different sides?

If you changed that question into a statement I would agree with the statement. Both are searching for the answers of life.

 

Do you ever wonder if dark matter is analogous to our subconscious mind, that which affects us in our daily behavior but cannot be viewed or measured?

No, I have never wondered about that. However, since you have asked, it has been said that most of us know how to effeciently use only a small portion of our brain's capabilities. I don't know how true this might be.

 

Theoretically dark matter affects the workings of the stellar bodies, but is not visible to our current state of technology.

The is my present understanding.

 

Isn't it speculated that dark matter take up about 85% of the universe?

The current estimates (NASA) are:

Dark Energy - 68% of the universal totality

Dark Matter - 27%

Observable universe- 5%

 

So if we could look out and see everything we can possibly see we would still be seeing only 5% of everything that exists.

 

I wonder what the ratio of subconscious mind to conscious mind is used in determining the movement of our own bodies and our own behavior? Any chance it is 85% as well?

I think that 85% subconscious would be a good figure. Most of everything that happens during our life is a result of subconcsious interactions of our mind/body. (I wanted to say brain/body but the brain is a physical part of the body.)

 

This goes back to all of manifestation being a living thing. I honestly think that although it appear we're having two separate conversations on this thread, that we're actually having the same conversation but wearing two different lab coats. there is a bridge, a meeting place between the two conversations -

Yes, there are two conversations but both have roots in the same concepts.

[Marblehead]

According to this NASA webpage on astrophysics ca. 66% of the universe is dark matter, ca. 27% is dark energy, that would give us around 6-7% ordinary matter. This is what mainstream astrophysics says.

Yeah, the numbers vary slightly depending on who's source one is using.

[xor]

Yeah, the numbers vary slightly depending on who's source one is using.

 

Corrected my numbers, they were actually the same on that page as you posted. But you're right these numbers keep changing. I think the origin of the dark matter theory was that there seemed to be 399/400 parts of mass missing in a galaxy cluster. It now seems to astrophysicists "consensus" that 95% is "missing", it might be more or less depending on how equations work out.

Edited November 28, 2013 by xor

[Marblehead]

I don't get that deep into it to know how they do the calculations but yes, the missing mass that allows the (spiral) galaxies to function as they do is what they call Dark Matter.

 

A recent program I watched suggested that there may be Dark Matter between the Galaxies as well. If this can be established it might reduce the percentage of Dark Energy in the universe. But for now it's all math and yet to be established as varifiable fact.

[Stosh]

I've still got my hammer with me. We are talking apples and oranges and will always be, and so can never come to concurrence. I am coming from the perspective of the I Am, wherein all is the Absolute. There is no separation between objects, people, anything. Anything, even your texting accident, is created from the inside to the outside; as a manifestation of the Absolute. That would imply that there was a reason for your texting accident, which in my view there would have been. All thoughts, from my perspective, are not yours. They bubble up from the Absolute, and you are right where you are supposed to be at any one time - the thoughts you have are those that have been manifested for a purpose. And that this stage we are on is but a learning ground, a stage for the Absolute to manifest into some sort of physical and mental perfection, regardless of how many circuits or physical manifestations it has to make. This may not be as counterintuitive as it sounds. Look back over your own life and see the times that you first interpreted something as a horrible accident - a horrible mistake - and how that very event caused a dramatic change in your own life which turned out to be the best thing that ever happened to you. You can look back and see how the dramatic event was the catalyst for the needed change. It is this theory, that all is the Absolute (or Mind) that is at the basis of the type of healing I'm referring to. It does work, I do have success with it - getting better all the time, depending on my own ability to get out of my own way both mentally, psychologically, and emotionally at the time of the healing. The Absolute must be accessed from a place of inner clarity, which takes a lifetime of work and focused attention to our own motives. This is very far removed from much we talk about here on TTB's - but there are those on this forum who understand this perfectly. If you're interested in finding out more about this mindset (specifically as to healing), I would really recommend the works of Mary Baker Eddy - just sidestep her occasional mention of the Savior, as I mentioned previously. You would be able to grasp the context and framework of it in short order. Helena Blavatsky will take you to pretty much the same place, as will Manly Hall or most Science of Mind readings.

keep the hammer as long as you wish. It keeps things on track. Yep sweetie we are certainly on opposite sides of the coin! Which is fine too.

Savior , Absolute, Greater purpose, are all the same to me in that they anchor the reason for behavior in a thing which removes responsibility virtue significance from people themselves and plops it in the hands of some inexplicable mystery thing somewhere else somewhen else. Yes it can be a functional mindset, creating the context for giving up the idea of self righteousness, but it simultaneously creates aplatform FOR self righteousness. If I get this correct...the wrathful deities undermine the malfunctioning thought structures with fire and sword so that the better can be built ex:. Kali is both a destroyer and source. Similarly cutting the feet out from under all platforms for externally based meaning -such as supplied by gods- puts responsibility virtue purpose back on the shoulders of those who actually enact manifest embody them.

[Stosh]

I suspect Manitou is toying with the idea that the universe is a big giant brain perhaps like the one called Deep Thought. The answer is 42 , I think. But as far as I can tell I'm using all the brain I've got already .

[Stosh]

I just read that God sent bears to maul 42 of the teenagers that mocked Elisha for his baldness.

[manitou]

keep the hammer as long as you wish. It keeps things on track. Yep sweetie we are certainly on opposite sides of the coin! Which is fine too. Savior , Absolute, Greater purpose, are all the same to me in that they anchor the reason for behavior in a thing which removes responsibility virtue significance from people themselves and plops it in the hands of some inexplicable mystery thing somewhere else somewhen else. Yes it can be a functional mindset, creating the context for giving up the idea of self righteousness, but it simultaneously creates aplatform FOR self righteousness. If I get this correct...the wrathful deities undermine the malfunctioning thought structures with fire and sword so that the better can be built ex:. Kali is both a destroyer and source. Similarly cutting the feet out from under all platforms for externally based meaning -such as supplied by gods- puts responsibility virtue purpose back on the shoulders of those who actually enact manifest embody them.

 

 

Just the opposite. It throws all the impetus for phenomena back onto us. Don't forget, I'm talking about an Absolute Entity that we are attached to and a part of - which is not separate from us. We are the creator. The separate 'savior' that you are alluding to, that would be a cop-out, is the one that most religions 'worship' - something out there in the air that they implore to, beg to, ask forgiveness of, and give a shopping list to. there is a huge difference - a bipolar opposite difference - and it throws the responsibility for the manifestations in our life on nobody but us. When we are in alignment with this creative force (in Awareness, and in intentional alignment) we have every expectation that things will align within our life. As the Sage does - which is why no harm comes to him. He knows how to access the alignment, and he knows that the only thing whacking that out of alignment is him own getting in his own way - usually an ego dynamic. Things get out of alignment when we force the issue by 'trying to be the first' (if you broaden this concept, you'll see that it goes directly to our egos pushing us onward and upward) or trying to 'take too much' (i.e. getting out of balance because we are hoarding and fearful that we will not have enough for ourselves - the bottom of that fear being the fear of death in the long run).

 

To speak of the oneness of everything (which would include this discussion of Us being the One as well) is well illustrated in Ken Wilber's discussion of the opposites of everything (in a sense of relativity); Joe and I happened to grab this book this morning as we were going out for breakfast and having our usual morning metaphysical discussion. The book is "No Boundary", and it's on page 23 and I arbitrarily turned to it:

 

In just the same way, all of the opposites share an implicit identity. that is, however vividly the differences between these opposites may strike us, they nevertheless remain completely inseparable and mutually interdependent, and for thesimple reason that the one could not exist without the other. Looked at in this way, there is obviously no inside without an outside, no up without down, no win without loss, no pleasure without pain, no life without death. Says the old Chinese sage Lao Tzu:

 

"Is there a difference between yes and no?

Is there a difference between good and evil?

Must I fear what others fear? What nonsense!

Having and not having arise together

Difficult an easy complement each other

Long and short contrast each other

High and low rest upon each other

Front and back follow one another".

 

Chang Tzu elaborates:

 

"Thus, those who say they would have right without its correlate, wrong; or good government without its correlate, misrule, do not apprehend the great principles of the universe, nor the nature of all creation. One might as well talk of the existence of Heaven without that of Earth, or of the negative principle without the positive, which is clearly impossible. Yet people keep on discussing it without stop; such people must be either fools or knaves."

 

 

Ken Wilbur then continues:

 

"The inner unity of opposites is hardly an idea confined to mystics, Eastern or Western. If we look to modern-day physics, the field in which the Western intellect has made its greatest advances, what we find is another version of reality as a union of opposites. In relativity theory, for example, the old opposites of rest vs. motion have become totally indistinguishable, that is, "each is both." An object which appears at rest for on observer is, at the same time, in motion for a different observer. Likewise, the split between wave and particle vanishes into "wavicles," and the contrast of structure vs. function evaporates.

Even the age-old separation of mass from energy has fallen to Einstein's E=mc(2), and these ancient "opposites" are not viewed as merely two aspects of one reality, a reality to which Hiroshima so violently bore witness.

 

"Likewise, such opposites as subject vs. object and time vs. space are now seen as being so mutually interdependent that they form an interwoven continuum, a single unified pattern. what we call "subject" and "object" are, like buying and selling, just two different ways of approaching one single process. And because the same holds true for time and space, we can no longer speak of an object being located in space or happening in time, but only of a spacetime occurrence...."

 

 

Stosh - this is where I see your thinking as limited. You are still assuming that I am seeing the Absolute as something other than Us, something to blame life's occurrences upon; something which keeps us as 'victims'. My point is that at some point in one's metaphysical understanding one sees that there is no separation at all between the Absolute and Us. Your seeing the separation will not include my theory of inclusion, where my theory of inclusion does include your theory of separation. the next step in the reversion from separation is to Unity. The only way to get past this insistence on separation (and a reliance on a rather Newtonian way of looking at things) is to crack your inner egg, a very weird concept, I agree. But for some reason it seems to be set up that way, who the heck knows why? The bully at the gate, preventing us from doing this, is usually Ego - or the fear that perhaps we aren't the ones with all the answers after all. That perhaps there are people who have understanding of something we are clueless about. The answer is to examine our own motivations, going through each and every tendency, to arrive at our pure nature and a clarified inner lens.

Edited November 28, 2013 by manitou

[Stosh]

My nature is ,whatever it actually is.

And partly, it is to have learned some behaviors and attitudes , tools which often serve me well....but not always. Apart from homogenaity I don't know what pure is. Apart from accuracy I don't know what clarity is.

One will always end up having to abandon unity concepts to function in a world where there is nonhomogenaity. Thats why if someone tells me my mind sets the stage of existance, I can confidently say it is not the case. Surprise alone is enough to disprove that relationship. Just as confidence relies on predictability.