Connecting the opposites... What could that mean?

[Nungali]

I know Mh doesn't like criticism, and I never intend to criticize him. We're all friends here

 

Really ?   I thought he thrived on it and used it to develop his ideas ( even though he says he never changes     ) 

 

Hmmm ... or that could be 'projection'  .....  

 

. Funny though, how swimming against the current is more difficult than flowing with it. 

 

One can swim in any direction .... but the one direction opposite the current does seem the most difficult. 

 

 

On the other hand, I think we all need to find our own currents rather than flowing with the one we're told to.

 

And yet, if we're really centered in our own current, there tends to be less resistance from other people's currents.

 

I like the idea that, when we are all in our 'true current' ..... we all flow together,  flowing, swirling in together, whirlpooling, dissipating   ;

 

" ....  thus we gather up all the threads of human passion and interest, and weave them into an harmonious tapestry, subtly and diligently with great art, that our Order may seem an ornament even to the Stars that are in the Heavens at Night. In our rainbow-coloured texture we set forth the glory of the whole Universe— See thou to it, brother Magician, that thine own thread be strong, and pure, and of a colour brilliant in itself, yet ready to mingle in all beauty with those of thy brethren!  "

[Brian]

Really ? I thought he thrived on it and used it to develop his ideas ( even though he says he never changes )

 

Hmmm ... or that could be 'projection' .....

 

 

One can swim in any direction .... but the one direction opposite the current does seem the most difficult.

 

 

 

I like the idea that, when we are all in our 'true current' ..... we all flow together, flowing, swirling in together, whirlpooling, dissipating ;

 

" .... thus we gather up all the threads of human passion and interest, and weave them into an harmonious tapestry, subtly and diligently with great art, that our Order may seem an ornament even to the Stars that are in the Heavens at Night. In our rainbow-coloured texture we set forth the glory of the whole Universe— See thou to it, brother Magician, that thine own thread be strong, and pure, and of a colour brilliant in itself, yet ready to mingle in all beauty with those of thy brethren! "

Oooo... Very nice.

[Michael Sternbach]

Oh no! 

 

I know little of daoism ... remember. 

 

But I know how 'nature' works.   

 

[  I can even tell you a few Aboriginal myths that would reflect  Ch 42.  ....  also something about a giant snake asleep underneath Australia ... producing 'myriad forms' that are the original (or perhaps 'Platonic' forms )  that create further myriad things of that form  ... but best not to mention giant dreaming snakes , it seems to upset some people ... as does finding the common theme within the myriad forms in their specific fields ;   "You cant compare what Plato says, with Daoism , Greek  and Roman Mythology, psychology, Aboriginal superstition  and  ....      "               ] 

 

A good cook knows how to combine various ingredients (as does a good Alchemist )

 

https://sw.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nungunungu    -

 

 

https://tonyintanzania.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/1.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

   (Swahili ... I might be a bit spikey but   {that was a joke, the other time }  )

 

 

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ngali       ( we, us,  together      ... shared mother lingo >  proto (mother) Bundjalung >  Gumbaynggirr >  'Old man in Mountain' ;

 

http://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/things-to-do/Lookouts/Skywalk-lookout

 

http://www.timaickin.com.au/gallery/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=17115&g2_serialNumber=2

 

( He is looking straight at my cabin,  front garden / paddock     ) 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nungali_language     >    to proto central NSW  from  north  - displacement from sea level rise, end of last ice age.  

 

 

...  So Nungali encapsulates all that - but not 'porcupines'  (echidna)    ... which are also very good to eat   

 

.. but not when they are a mere 'puggle' .. too cute ! 

 

 

 

But this guy definitely wouldn't be on my menu card, at no age. Thanks for reminding me once again why I became a vegetarian when I was four...

[Michael Sternbach]

although they are 'one thing'  that  manifests a myriad things

 

 

 

 

Nungunungugali,

 

This is a beautiful analogy (and a better use of this fellow, may I say).

 

Bugglebear for this.

[Nungali]

When ' opposites  '  meet  ;

 

Aboriginal Elder friend takes the young boys out bush for 3 months ... 3 months living in the bush, like they used to, no contact with or using anything from 'civilisation'.  They did well, he brings them back and says "Good Boys  ... now you get a reward ... and get to see and play in the 'other side'."

 

He got some money together and takes them up to Seaworld ...   @ the Gold Coast  ... the 'best destination in Australia'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

They get to Seaworld ... where there are numerous animal enclosures , as well as aquatic ones , like the echidna enclosure .  'Uncle' buys them all a ticket at the entrance and "Now you kids, dont muck up, I want you to all stick ....  "

 

He turns around and ....  gone ! 

 

So he goes looking ... after a bit he hears screams ...   hmmm , I suppose ......  

 

When he gets there, there is a bunch of horrified onlookers  , in shock,  an animal attendant  having a panic attack and one of the 'lads' with a lump of wood from the enclosure in one hand and holding up an echidna with the other ;

 

"Hey Uncle ! Lookit ... a real fat one ! "  

[Nungali]

... I should finish it off . 

 

Uncle spends a lot of time explaining things and apologising.   They are good kids, they haven't really done wrong, its a misunderstanding, its probably my fault , etc ... 

 

Just as it gets smoothed over ... the guy from the   shop comes running out "Hey!   Those are the kids that stole stuff from the shop! "

 

Well, eventually, after a police escort to the border and a hand over to this state's police, they eventually get home.

 

While I am being told this story, the lads ... now adults in their 30s... are present ... smiling and grinning. 

 

Me;  "  So ... those porcupines in captivity ... they get pretty fat eh ? "

 

"Oh yeah!  That one, he taste good too ! "

 

"What ! ? ! "

 

"Oh yeah ... we got to keep him ... what else they gonna do with him. "

 

"And  you bought it all the way back from Queensland in a police car ? "

 

"Yeah ... and the stuff from the shop ."

 

Uncle;  " Well, I had to pay for that , not the porcupine though .  I said, 'Look, they only kids , they thought that tourist stuff was gold  ... they never seen a little gold kangaroo before' .  They said  "No ... you gotta pay for that , thats not hunting, thats stealing ! " 

 

Nephew; " Yeah, still got him ."

 

Me; "What, the golden kangaroo ?"

 

"Sure ! Still sits on my bedside table ... thats my 'souvenir' from the trip .  "

 

 

 

 

When worlds collide ....   

 

 

 

 

[Marblehead]

I guess because , if you push something, in one direction   it 'pushes back' in the other direction (not another direction ) ....  if you throw something up ( i.e. in one direction )  it comes back down in the opposite direction ( not in a direction or any direction, the opposite direction, unless there is wind, or another force. 

 

Mass/Energy has a 'static stability ' holding 'opposite' forces , like   0 ( static M/E)  =  n^- + n+  . 

Okay.  Good try.  But, ... no cigar.

 

If you push something and it has no resistance it will not push back but rather go exactly in the direction it is being pushed.

 

If you throw something up at a great enough velocity it will never return but continue its journey eternally unless it collides with another object.

 

Energy/Mass is dynamic, not static.  There is constant change throughout the universe.

 

Even Yin/Yang are complimentary, not opposites.  As is Mystery/Manifest.

 

Opposites exist only in the mind of man.  Lao Tzu even told us that in Chapter 2 of the TTC.

[Marblehead]

 Mh just rejected Newton's third law simply because he doesn't like it -- despite nearly 400 years of experiential evidence supporting it -- and I suggested he might want to look into that a bit.

Naw.  Mh knew what he was doing when he said that.

[Brian]

Okay. Good try. But, ... no cigar.

 

If you push something and it has no resistance it will not push back but rather go exactly in the direction it is being pushed.

 

If you throw something up at a great enough velocity it will never return but continue its journey eternally unless it collides with another object.

 

Energy/Mass is dynamic, not static. There is constant change throughout the universe.

 

Even Yin/Yang are complimentary, not opposites. As is Mystery/Manifest.

 

Opposites exist only in the mind of man. Lao Tzu even told us that in Chapter 2 of the TTC.

Your two examples (which are really the same example, twice) precisely conforming to Newton's laws of motion. Your action of pushing on the object results in the reaction of the object moving because the object pushes back. (Third law) If it didn't push back, your hands would move right through it. The object's motion as a result of that reaction is described by Newton's second law). The motion after you stop pushing is described by the first law.

[Stosh]

Youre imagining a force into being, guys. Like the imaginary centripetal force, its a concoction to simplify the math, thats all. Slam a door and the energy is dissipated as noise, heat ,stressed bonds, etc. The sum is referred to as an opposing force , but the door jamb was in an energetically neutral state when the thing slammed. All the force added was the slammer's. Conservation says no new force is being called upon to resist things from moving around.

Youre essentially implying that a new force occurs to exceed the initial neutral state in order to provide some unspecified amount of energy to oppose an action.

Edited November 28, 2015 by Stosh

[Wu Ming Jen]

Please don't slam the door only use the amount of  force necessary.

 

O in motion we can not be pulled or pushed, when striking there is force in the opposite directions, when lifting there is a downward force. to move forward we push of the back leg. if forward is life and backward death these things can not be separated because they give birth to each other. Neutralizing force so it is uneffective.

 

now if you go to push open the door and it just swings open that force will continue because of non resistance. but what if there is a state of balance that can not be interrupted I am thinking newton was concerned with inanimate objects and not a master of movement that can apply and transcend Newtons law. I am always neutralizing newton's laws but maybe it is part of his equations. 

[Brian]

Youre imagining a force into being, guys. Like the imaginary centripetal force, its a concoction to simplify the math, thats all. Slam a door and the energy is dissipated as noise, heat ,stressed bonds, etc. The sum is referred to as an opposing force , but the door jamb was in an energetically neutral state when the thing slammed. All the force added was the slammer's. Conservation says no new force is being called upon to resist things from moving around.

Youre essentially implying that a new force occurs to exceed the initial neutral state in order to provide some unspecified amount of energy to oppose an action.

Nope, very real. Don't take my word for it, though. Draw the vector diagrams and do the math for yourself. Or, better yet, go outside, put your car in neutral and thump it. Then back up 10 yards and hit it at full speed. Tell us whether it hits you back...

 

[Stosh]

When does a weight become heavy? If it becomes heavy, why can it be moved? If it is always heavy who is always trying to move it? If it is never heavy, why is it difficult to move? If its weight is precisely neutralized by all the forces applied, can it be moved?

[Brian]

When does a weight become heavy? If it becomes heavy, why can it be moved? If it is always heavy who is always trying to move it? If it is never heavy, why is it difficult to move? If its weight is precisely neutralized by all the forces applied, can it be moved?

Are these metaphysical/rhetorical questions or rectory interested in the answers?

[Stosh]

Nope, very real. Don't take my word for it, though. Draw the vector diagrams and do the math for yourself. Or, better yet, go outside, put your car in neutral and thump it. Then back up 10 yards and hit it at full speed. Tell us whether it hits you back...

Oh sure my car can store energy, and I can exhibit inertia and momentum, ,but the resistance to its forward motion doesnt incur any new force to drive it forward or back and without gas it will come to a halt. One fuel tank, no imaginary anti fuel tank.

[Stosh]

Are these metaphysical/rhetorical questions or rectory interested in the answers?

You can pick a pair , but ,Theyre supposed to be self explanatory taken together.

[Brian]

When does a weight become heavy? If it becomes heavy, why can it be moved? If it is always heavy who is always trying to move it? If it is never heavy, why is it difficult to move? If its weight is precisely neutralized by all the forces applied, can it be moved?

I suspect you mean "massive" rather than "heavy" but let's start there anyhow.

 

Heavy refers to force due to acceleration and we typically use it in reference to gravity. Gravitational force between to masses has a magnitude proportional to the product of the masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance separating them. Both bodies feel the exact same force, acting directly towards the other. Equal and opposite.

 

On the same page so far?

[Stosh]

Fine, I said heavy, because I was referring to Wu and 'lifting' ... but Im not sure on gravity, as a force two things acting on one another, Its a curvature of spacetime effected somehow by certain particles en masse, one space curvature,= no two forces. ... but I can live with gravity as a basis for this. Ok equal forces occurring... But the greater mass effecting more diversion of the lesser mass from a trajectory.

Next step?

[Brian]

Now, let's push against an immovable object, like an enormous block of stone.

 

You push against the stone with both hands with 5 pounds of force and the stone pushes back against you with 5 pounds of force. Equal and opposite.

 

To take it a step further, let's assume you are standing barefoot on a concrete slab poured over gravel layered over the ground. Your feet exert a five-pound force against the concrete and the concrete pushed back with five pounds. The concrete pushes against the gravel and the gravel pushes back. The gravel pushes against the ground and the ground pushes back. Five pounds of force, paired off on couplets. Equal and opposite.

 

Now, put a strain-gauge between your hands and the stone and push as hard as you can. The gauge measures how much force you are able to generate and also how much the stone pushes back against you. Feet<->concrete, concrete<->gravel, gravel<->ground, etc. Equal and opposite.

 

Still with me?

[Brian]

We'll be throwing things next but it may have to wait until tomorrow (the Florida v Florida State game is winding down and then it's bedtime...)

[Nungali]

Nope, very real. Don't take my word for it, though. Draw the vector diagrams and do the math for yourself. Or, better yet, go outside, put your car in neutral and thump it. Then back up 10 yards and hit it at full speed. Tell us whether it hits you back...

 

 

When tired of arguing with a philosopher on a similar point Nasruddin punched him on the nose . 

 

But we cant do that here  

 

(Aside from the 'magical taoists' that can , apparently, transcend  Newton's laws of motion   

 

Ha ha ha .... owwwww ! 

 

[Nungali]

When does a weight become heavy?

 

as soon as you used the word 'weight' . 

 

If it becomes heavy, why can it be moved?

 

because more force than the 'force' of its weight of heaviness can be  applied .

 

If it is always heavy who is always trying to move it?

 

Anyone that wants to .

 

If it is never heavy, why is it difficult to move?

 

If it isnt heavy, it isnt difficult to move, you just need something ' potentially heavier'  to anchor to whatever you use to push the other thing.

 

Thats why we  come down after jumping up ... unless, as Marbles pointed out, your 'jump' contains more energy than the planet's 'mass attraction' . 

 

 

If its weight is precisely neutralized by all the forces applied, can it be moved?

 

Sure ...  but now by adding the tiniest of forces  .

 

 

Edited November 29, 2015 by Nungali

[Marblehead]

Your two examples (which are really the same example, twice) precisely conforming to Newton's laws of motion. Your action of pushing on the object results in the reaction of the object moving because the object pushes back. (Third law) If it didn't push back, your hands would move right through it. The object's motion as a result of that reaction is described by Newton's second law). The motion after you stop pushing is described by the first law.

But you are speaking at a different level than what I was speaking at.

 

I realize that walking through walls doesn't work.  I have tried it and have personal experience.

 

But what you said supports my understanding that all the Ten Thousand Things are thing in and of themselves.  I cannot walk into a wall and become a part of the wall.  We will always be separate "things".

 

So, if we consider myself and the wall to be opposites we can never connect the opposites.  This is because we are separate "things". 

 

I can never be Brian and Brian can never be me (not that he would want to be).

[Marblehead]

Are these metaphysical/rhetorical questions or rectory interested in the answers?

Yes.

[Marblehead]

Oh sure my car can store energy, and I can exhibit inertia and momentum, ,but the resistance to its forward motion doesnt incur any new force to drive it forward or back and without gas it will come to a halt. One fuel tank, no imaginary anti fuel tank.

And if the engine has been removed it ain't goin' nowhere.