Physicists prove we are one

Talk about anything Tolle-related here.
sikuliataq
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 4:10 am
Contact:

Post by sikuliataq » Mon May 21, 2007 4:31 pm

there are alot of people who write about this questtion of oneness
just like they explain in what the bleep.down the rabbit whole

nice books about this field are writen by Ervin Lazslo , jude currivan lynn mctaggert

they write about an field who connect us all from out off this field matter arise and resolve to. form is emptiness and emptiness is form
there is no real matter at all
just waves off potential

Sander

lucy
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 10:09 pm

Post by lucy » Tue May 22, 2007 7:20 pm

Hi Intel.

I had a similar thing happen to me. What I found is that it is very difficult to explain the absolute in the relative. These people who are demanding proof, live in a world of conceptual thought. Even when they think they are stepping out and challenging existing ideas, they are usally doing it within the limited framework of the relative. If you tell them the mind can't grasp it, they think you're copping out. My mind also used to demand proof, until I summoned up the courage to be comfortable with "not knowing". The minute I did that, slowly, the light started to creep in. Now I tell those who ask me for proof, that you cannot learn to swim by clinging to the edge. You have to jump in with both feet and then see what happens.

Sorry if I am repeating the obvious.


I had to read PON a few times before it really "clicked"

User avatar
yougarksooo
Posts: 338
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 7:14 pm
Location: Indiana

Post by yougarksooo » Tue May 22, 2007 10:11 pm

Even when they think they are stepping out and challenging existing ideas, they are usally doing it within the limited framework of the relative. If you tell them the mind can't grasp it, they think you're copping out. My mind also used to demand proof, until I summoned up the courage to be comfortable with "not knowing". The minute I did that, slowly, the light started to creep in. Now I tell those who ask me for proof, that you cannot learn to swim by clinging to the edge. You have to jump in with both feet and then see what happens.

Sorry if I am repeating the obvious.
You aren't repeating the obvious. It is always fresh to hear someone describe waking up.
"When people ask me who they are or who God is, I smile inside and whisper to the light: there you go again . . . pretending."

Adya

User avatar
kiki
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4561
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 8:55 pm
Location: Wherever "here" happens to be

Post by kiki » Tue May 22, 2007 11:24 pm

My mind also used to demand proof, until I summoned up the courage to be comfortable with "not knowing". The minute I did that, slowly, the light started to creep in. Now I tell those who ask me for proof, that you cannot learn to swim by clinging to the edge. You have to jump in with both feet and then see what happens.
That's right. Then those insights that others had begin to make sense. The greatest insight has little value until you can directly experience it within yourself. Otherwise it's just more food for the mind.

Vikings are Nice
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 10:45 am
Location: Brisbane

Post by Vikings are Nice » Sun May 27, 2007 7:33 am

Is the universe material or full of space? Here are some things to consider:

- The universe is mostly made up of space - a vacuum with no matter in it at all (though there is a newish theory suggesting that matter pops in and out of existence everywhere in the universe spontaneously). Sometimes a photon whips by, or there is a conglemeration of particles, such as in a star or planet.
- Within the small part of the universe containing matter, distances between atoms within that matter is very large, much larger than the atoms themselves. So if an atom was the size of a basket ball, its neighbouring atom would be somewhere near the moon.
- Atoms are not in themselves solid things in any case. They contain subatomic particals, the distance between subatomic particles is very great (I think even greater than between atoms).
- They have found the first species of subatomic particles (which they thought was the ultimate grain size of the universe) are actually made up of smaller particles. In fact, physists don't know what the smallest sized particles will end up being, there could be an ultimate granuality (particle size) to the universe, or it might just be tortoises all the way down.
- But this isn't even the weirdest aspect. The weirdest aspect is that the smallest particles sometimes seem to behave like particles, but at other times seem to act like waves of probability (like a 'crime wave' or a 'chance it will happen'). Quantum physics will have it that, it is not until a concious observer actually tries to observe matter that it goes from being a mere probability to turn into something more solid (matter). One interpretation of this is the universe if full of neither matter or space, but some sort of potentiallity.
- To get really weird though, you have to leave physics and venture into philosophy. Where all we can know of reality is what is presented to us in the internal movie screen inside our heads. Touch, site, sound, taste, smell are mere sensations - qualatative experiences - subjective feelings, and yet these are the only things we have to experience reality with. So we can not know what reality is really like through our limited senses.

What all this means for the nature of reality is up for grabs. Some believe that science should no longer try to put the facts into an explanation of reality (why should the universe be explainable by humans after all). Others believe there will be a perfectly good explanation - and maybe we just need some more facts and a better theory to explain the observations will emerge.

Newagists take advantage of the mystery to make up all sorts of claims. Just because there is a mystery shouldn't mean we can just make up explanations to suit ourselves though.

Those of us who are into the teachings of ET know that while the mind may never be able to explain the nature of reality, we can leave the mind behind to feel a deep connection with it.
Vikings are Nice

eseward
Posts: 830
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 7:27 pm
Location: New York
Contact:

Post by eseward » Sun May 27, 2007 1:47 pm

Vikings are Nice wrote:Those of us who are into the teachings of ET know that while the mind may never be able to explain the nature of reality, we can leave the mind behind to feel a deep connection with it.
Exactly. Beautiful. :)

Larryfroot
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 304
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 9:49 pm
Location: Devon, United Kingdom

Post by Larryfroot » Wed Jun 06, 2007 11:03 pm

intel asked
Can you provide me with a link to anything that backs this statement up? Thanks
I haven't got a link, but hey! I have an opinion!
Many a mickle muches a markle.

Vpopov81
Posts: 185
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 1:41 am
Contact:

What the Bleep

Post by Vpopov81 » Thu Jun 14, 2007 3:04 am

This is the link to part 1 of 10 the rest you can find on google. This program has quentum physicits that discuss what you are asking about.

too haht tzay

Post by too haht tzay » Wed Jun 20, 2007 2:23 am

...
Last edited by too haht tzay on Tue Jun 26, 2007 6:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
kiki
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4561
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 8:55 pm
Location: Wherever "here" happens to be

Post by kiki » Wed Jun 20, 2007 2:34 am

The physical universe is an illusion and is not real.
Even so, I'd get off the railroad tracks when that train comes - that 0.01 % of matter that makes it up will wreak havoc on your 0.01% matter :wink:

Post Reply