|
Post by sammy on Jun 14, 2010 15:46:56 GMT
So i happened to catch something about this on TV and tried my best to do some follow up on the net (not easy). The basics of this design is showing the interaction of molecules on a universal level, which until this theory did NOT include gravitons. it resembles a giant doughnut comprised of circles (molecules) with a pole through the hole. The circles are similair to strings in the sense they intertwine with each other to make the whole. The diagram that the theorist created was so layered that they couldn't recreate it with computers, they could only give an example which is what I'm trying to do at my very best. The creator of this theory was saying it still doesnt apply to religion or spiritual sense,but I do feel it is a step closer. In a small way, people work similairly to gravity, and how dark energy effects gravitons. Gravity is the force allowing molecules to merge, and dark energy is the force of two large masses opposing each other, making them seperate. Something I found interesting in this diagram was the pole in the center. If the entire diagram consists of circles the pole would have no choice but to work as a cycle as well. So I then started thinking about how a pole could be a circle.
Ill try with perception to explain this possibility. Let's say this pole is a persons perception representing a solid unbreakable will for the reasons of maintaining the weave of circles. Since this pole would be your body/life it would also apply to the same laws as us- if what's on one side went to the other side of a pole that is a circle, it would switch everything equally. Let's say for a second that this pole- being the core and foundation of everything- was the beginning on one side and the end on the other side, but the laws of forces don't allow you to perceieve the transfer or (middle). So you're standing where you are and you look down to your body/life and forced only to see an amazing place filled with not just the people you know but objects surrounding them taking up close to his whole field of vision. So he takes himself there -similair to gravity he had more weight on one side. So now he is in that place with objects at the end and again is forced to look back to the beginning and sees himself still standing there in the darkness with the weave of circles around his old body, the pole. Let's say that maybe the more we expand the longer this pole gets, making this journey from one side to the other longer and longer until eventually it just isnt worth the time unless its quite infact "THE TIME". to me this would also explain angels/demons being in the weave themselves but still having to make larger and larger trips to do "work". i've also spun the thought that maybe the physical appearance of these people is what we percieve as demons/devils- restricting them to reach us spiritually and not physically, similair to the laws of physics: even if you were able to use existing molecules to form a body and give it a will, you would have to give it a will (gravity). if you take this will from yourself and put it on the other side it's not like copy/paste its just not on that side anymore and added to the other, so i ask you would you want to cut out anything that makes you a good person? i think were forced to know the good and bad for a reason, and the choice we make on what side we stand on is what makes us balanced. or rather not just doing the right thing but knowing why your doing the right thing and for who. hope you find this as interesting as i did.
|
|
|
Post by Zita on Jun 15, 2010 0:48:11 GMT
The pole through the hole of the galaxy.. The point withing the circle - represents the plumbline set amidst my people.. "Behold, the Lord stood upon a wall, with a plumb line in his hand. He said: "Amos, what seeth thou?" Amos replied, "A plumb line." The Lord said, "Behold, I will set a plumb line amidst my people Israel, and I will pass by them nevermore." Maybe we have to stop running round in circles and get straight to the point.
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Jun 15, 2010 13:07:17 GMT
makes sense to me , if you have one person on each hand that refuse to be together and regardless of whether or not if he can oblige he can only hold his arms apart as far as they go and no more. Do we realy need to put god through this? we fight evil thoughts as easily as eating breakfast and on the other side we fear men who wont have any control of us in death, other then what we give them. we didn't learn all these techniques to have them get us through our days, we learn these to do it for ourselves. similair to a star you would want the energy source to be internal like thermal nuclear (self sufficient)
|
|
|
Post by Zita on Jun 16, 2010 0:17:04 GMT
Thinking outside the square... if we fight something we strengthen separation and that which we fight. RE evil thoughts - in the short term if we choose to ignore them as much as possible. One can also choose to take seriously that which Freemasonry and other such organisations engender - love, understanding and empathy with our fellow man. Eventually the 'evil thoughts etc' will lose their grip on us, they will occur less often. (And I hold the opinion that all evil thoughts are not necessarily our own.. our brains are hardware, whose software is running?)
When choosing to love, understand and empathize with one's fellow man one is also taught by both Freemasonry and Christianity to use discrimination. Cast not your pearls before swine. Deciding when to stand up and block and when to walk away is the difficult decision.
Masonic ceremonies indicate to me that when we work together, or with good intentions, we are naturally drawn towards the centre. The manner of advancing towards the East might give you some clues as to how this happens.
HGW
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Jun 16, 2010 13:50:52 GMT
zita wrote:
"When choosing to love, understand and empathize with one's fellow man one is also taught by both Freemasonry and Christianity to use discrimination. Cast not your pearls before swine. Deciding when to stand up and block and when to walk away is the difficult decision."
Well stated, Zita.
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Jun 17, 2010 13:05:16 GMT
well as much as id like to say that evil thoughts aren't our's alone, it would be impossible for me to do so. We let the software in because its simply survival, we know we have weaknessess and we also know people will abuse those if they are open. knowing that someone could do something is what prepares you for the unknown when it actualy happens. The happy thoughts are used to be happy, and the evil thoughts to maintain the that level of happy if its threatened. somebody running of purely evil thoughts would use these for personal advancement regardless of the outcome and even though they might succeed in their goal they deffinitely won't win the race.
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Jun 17, 2010 14:44:12 GMT
There are many factors involved in our makeup. Genes, diet, environment, &c. I wouldn't say that we are evil or that we create evil. I don't think evil is a quantifiable idea, but largely a way of separating what benefits us from what does not.
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Jun 17, 2010 18:17:32 GMT
i think you worded it much better then i did knos but that is basicly what im saying. evil in the sense of a entity/astral form would need to be created and supported by the governing laws similair to gravity it has to flow in the main stream of things. even if evil goes beyond a thought and enters an entire being there is a underlyning purpose there. why would a totaly evil person be allowed to manifest if not to serve some over-all good purpose like being evil to those who harbor those thoughts as what life should be like. again this would mirror thoughts we struggle with, none of us want to be mean or do something that someone might consider evil, but we will do whats nescassary to protect our loved ones. i think when this flies off the handle is when people arent prepared for it, meaning what to do in bad situations, and it leaves them to a type of subcontious rage that most explain to me as "blacking out". during these blackout's the people usualy are horrified about how far they took the end result, but their argument still stands as to what brought it out in the first place as being the right thing to do. i do believe every thought has a better purpose if its just applied in the right sense, the problem is figuring out what goes where and who is gonna disagree. I recall as a kid when i was being bad to my parents it wasnt because i didnt know the difference between right and wrong, because that is told to you repeatetly, it was because i knew what they said and what they did didnt coinside. so i had to deduce my boundries as far as what they will tolerate. for example in acting this way i deduced somebody tolerating you and somebody enjoying you are two very different playing fields, and luckily for my parents eventualy grew up.
|
|
|
Post by Zita on Jun 18, 2010 0:14:47 GMT
There are many factors involved in our makeup. Genes, diet, environment, &c. I wouldn't say that we are evil or that we create evil. I don't think evil is a quantifiable idea, but largely a way of separating what benefits us from what does not. One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist - what would happen if we concentrated on what benefits the whole rather than the individual? In discussing a new unified theory of anything, maybe we should start with taking down fences that separate. Maybe Freemasonry itself could show the way.
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Jun 18, 2010 0:56:02 GMT
i think anything supporting those thoughts is a step in the right direction. i will say i have made more mentally stimulating connections browsing this site then any other. but i think mostly that is because people think im talking crazy when i quote physics and religion in the same sentance. i feel i have a safe home here for my thoughts atleast, even though im not a member of the freemasons. from what i have read about so far is the majority are scholars and in some cases on multiple levels, and these kind of things intimidate me seeing as how i was expelled halfway through my freshman year of high school and only did allitle followup at a local community college wich i ran away from at the age of 17. learning i find is easier for me at my own pace anyway in spite of all that, and use the philosophy that there is allways more to learn and hope to continue this as long as possible. P.S. physics are fun
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Jun 18, 2010 14:01:38 GMT
There are many factors involved in our makeup. Genes, diet, environment, &c. I wouldn't say that we are evil or that we create evil. I don't think evil is a quantifiable idea, but largely a way of separating what benefits us from what does not. One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist - what would happen if we concentrated on what benefits the whole rather than the individual? In discussing a new unified theory of anything, maybe we should start with taking down fences that separate. Maybe Freemasonry itself could show the way. A million people's freedom fighters is another million people's terrorists. Concentrating on what benefits the individual IS concentrating on what benefits the whole. The two are not mutually-exclusive. The concentration of the whole is made up of individuals. The whole can act as poorly as the one or as beneficially as the one, yet they can do great damage or create great things together. Each part is indispensable to the whole, as the whole is a single entity made from individual parts. To act as part of something larger is a conscious and willful act of the individual when it is at its best. T.O.E.s govern without dictating. + =
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Jun 20, 2010 0:44:06 GMT
Since this thread started i have been just considering different perspectives on what we've been discussing. I'm not sure if you remember Knos but we were talking about the old man with the beard, wich made me think in that context how would the beard apply to analogy. Let's also consider this with the pole that is a circle, and even to include the problem of having everything switch when you try to move sides. So with this scenario you would need your head where your feet are, in a sense anyway. So the problem is now, how do i get my head to my feet. Over time you realize your head is growing fibers toward your feet. Would it not seem to you that these events would leave you with little option on what you are to do to achieve your goal, of getting your head to your feet? Now the real question is... can you make an anology out of why we as people need our heads to touch our feet?
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Jun 20, 2010 13:19:52 GMT
I;m not certain about analogy right now, but getting one's feet to touch one's head isn't impossible. I'm not as limber as a Cirque de Soliel performer, yet even I can get somewhere close through stretching. You can achieve this through Yoga, for example. I know that is perhaps a too literal translation of the thought experiment. I knew a girl who could clip her toes with her teeth. With practice, she might be able to clip her T.O.E.s too. ;D
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Jun 20, 2010 14:45:58 GMT
it's funny i knew a girl that did that too ( kinda gross BTW ) they wont win any kissing contests ill tell ya that! perhaps this pole knows its supposed to be a circle, but is too crowded to expand to a cycle. hence the universal expansion. Again all just speculation, but i see no other option for getting people to change who we are and keep our religious/cultural/personal core intact. In the sense of changing certain practises but in a way they feal comfertable and will be able to contiousely do in the same name as before. This task is not only daunting but frustrating beyond belief, but we never stop. We never stop because it's our friends, our family, and even if we dont know them, we know they have to share the same planet with these loved ones. Even though the consequence is share we do this for the purpose of helping the other person find a place in themselves to be stable, not because were afraid of what they will do in the future to people we love. Alone 0 is what it says... nothing, a zero. But when you add or subtract something to this, it means the same thing as deffinition. It has a new purpose however, it marks the beggining.
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Jun 20, 2010 18:28:43 GMT
"Again all just speculation, but i see no other option for getting people to change who we are and keep our religious/cultural/personal core intact." If Kant can't, who can? I do not see how anybody ever remains the same. It is a virtual and actual impossibility. They may not think they change, but that's just impossible without freezing the outer and inner stimuli. No man is an island, and none can survive in a vacuum. It comes back to Rumi's assertion; 'you can't step in a river twice'. If someone could stay the same, that would be a real change in the world. ;,) H.G. Wells says, "Slow and belated judgments are sometimes the best judgments." I borrow that idea to say that slow and belated change is sometime the best change. When we say 'a point in a centerless-and-circumferenceless circle', it is important to remember that a point is an abstract concept. It likewise has no center or circumference.
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Jun 20, 2010 23:39:22 GMT
i dont mean our personal core, but the religous core of people, or rather something that makes sense when connected to any religous path. Trying to put one religion above all others leaves out many minds in this thought, because who can say wich is more right then the next. so im not saying leave OUR core intact but the core of what the religion was founded upon, so the task would be to find one thing to connect all these on the same level. the same core but with a new purpose.
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Jun 20, 2010 23:59:45 GMT
new thought on this train, to me religion is a structure used to protect the body and mind of the people involved and to continue on any level of life. People have adapted obviousely to their surroundings like everything and it changes them physicaly and mentaly I.E. skin/eye color, options for survival, etc.. All of this is dependant upon what area your from, as far as what you get for all of this. It seems in my face that religion did the exact same thing, along with the people it all depends on what you need at the time to survive. The mere fact of "no your possible person isnt real, mine is" is beyond rediculous. The possiblity of their existance is more then plausible, do we really need to say your going to hell because you feal your possible person of great honor, and morale heritage isnt my person of great honor and morale heritage. Does any of this make sense? It almost seems like the very first argument ended with a bloody fight and it has never stopped, and all because the two original sides of the argument were forever lost. I'm sorry for most of what i have put you all through mentaly speaking, but i have faced religion for as long as i can remember and all i REALLY want out of all of this is something... one thing people as a whole will say "This is good". Maybe too much to ask but it hurts too bad to not try.
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Jun 21, 2010 1:08:17 GMT
Odd... me and my wife increasingly got more frustrated as we COULD NOT come up with one thing that everyone would like, and i mean everyone as a whole. We debated this thought for atleast an hour, and were starting to lose hope and atleast dropped it for the time being. I was honestly grasping at scraps, just looking at things around my house to try and come up with something. I was telling myself the rediculouselness of considering wood in this equation when i happened to look at the mason jar i use for a water cup (i like them because their big and come free with spaghetti ) anyway so i thought "cup" even natives use types of bowls for food and water. Is this possibly what jesus caught on to? If any of you come up with something that everyone would say "That would be nice to have!" other then a cup PLEASE let me know. If you have reasons as to why there would be a situation someone wouldnt find a cup handy, also let me know.
|
|
|
Post by Zita on Jun 21, 2010 1:15:02 GMT
Concentrating on what benefits the individual IS concentrating on what benefits the whole. The two are not mutually-exclusive. A hospital has $750,000 to spend. It can spend it all on saving one patient or it can purchase a machine that will save hundreds or thousands. Many a lodge has one particular person who bullies, ridicules, alienates new members to the point that they leave. Best to be loyal to the Brother or loyal to Freemasonic values? Oftentimes we need to make very difficult and painful decisions.
|
|
|
Post by Zita on Jun 21, 2010 1:23:25 GMT
i dont mean our personal core, but the religous core of people, or rather something that makes sense when connected to any religous path. Trying to put one religion above all others leaves out many minds in this thought, because who can say wich is more right then the next. so im not saying leave OUR core intact but the core of what the religion was founded upon, so the task would be to find one thing to connect all these on the same level. the same core but with a new purpose. Religions tend to look for God without. Freemasons are taught to recognise God within. It usually happens that one looks without before venturing within. Sammy, you are very talented, I am sure you will enjoy your journey .. I am enjoying that part of your journey you are sharing with us. Thank you.
|
|