"William Tucker" <wmftucker@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<QGTqb.1411$6c3.1147@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
Hello,
replied twice and had trouble with my mailer
I agree with some of what you say, but the
points I was making are different than you interpret them as
"Old Coyote" <OldCoyote@webmail.co.za> wrote in message
news:bacaf0e0.0311052307.233b066e@posting.google.com...> "William Tucker"
<wmftucker@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:<3jaqb.1506$Z25.1124@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
other examples: approaching absolute zero and approaching the
speed of light
No good. Light approaches the speed of light just fine thanks,
it's about transitions
it's also about boundary conditions
it's also about the container being made of what
it contains...
Sort of
That everything exists in relationship...allthe time
it has no meaning outside of relationship
there is a piece of the whole in the small...a key,
aseed
I remember telling someone, that if a person was smart enough
they could figure out what was happening anywhere from looking
at anything. If they were really smart they could tell the future.
Damn I wish I could do those things. :)
and absolute zero is an idea. Just how close can you get to
an idea anyway?
literally:
on top of it....if you can see thought forms,
even better if you can see a thought form enter someone
and the idea take shape...be read/heard/manifest
Possesed by an idea. That's nearly what I would term a
spirit. When it happens to an entire community at once,
then it's a spirit I guess.
But in any case I used the wrong word. Should have been
ideal. I am habitually cagey and consequently use general
terms in favour of specific far too often to really be
excusable.
but the map is not the territory..model...blah blah
absolute zero being only theoretical...indicates that
one can't isolate any piece of reality from any other piece
completely
aside:
the world of forms....intersects this dimension
You mean, informs?
the resultis that there is no such thing as a straight line,
only approximations and so forth so on
But again, a straight line is an ideal. (not idea) The basic
problem with ideals is that they are static. Reality on the
other hand is in motion.
and that as in the hologram
the little piece....us
contains less information than is actually available in the whole
because the cup can't hold the ocean
That's the ticket for sure.
ps. it's already dropped into place but no one knows it
they're all caught up in quoting
insert large piece that has relevance:
....what I am most interested in,
the seeing or realization that something is happening
or repeating itself - that's what the word pattern implies,
before the perceive pattern gets dragged back into the labyrinth
of the dreaded abstract mind, where it is dismembered, still
screaming and made to fit our precious models.
What if
we proceeded as if a comparison to
reality were the ultimate judge or test of veracity rather than
a comparison to accepted theory, if we know how to think rather
than parrot, if the accepted body of knowledge is treated as
reliable information rather than the gospel. Suppose...
Dude, reality is 3/4 planning, being interactive & all...
Suppose the truth is an animal..abeing.
Suppose this "being"
existed in more dimensions than our normal 3+ dimensions.
Suppose the truth left behind trails that we name "patterns",
then much like the flatlanders in Goedel's example we
would perceive only fractions of the truth at a time.
Suppose we called these little traces TRUTH without knowing
what a whole truth was. If we hold our mind's open to the
possibility that the truth is perceivable only in it's
entirety......It
is only by the assimilation of all the
patterns into a single group at one time that we could perceive
this truth.
ok.
But I've already said that that was impossible by
definition, we could at most build a pattern perceiver, a tool of
perception, not a model and using it glance along the body of the
truth, pass truth through the tool to get an understanding, a feeling -
all the while using patterns in reality as tuning forks, to maintain
our objectivity. Picking up and trying different views, forgetting
that one was math based, one psychology based, one religion based.
Suppose this tool was called a lens - suppose this particular lens
was called something snappy like:
"the point at which all things converge, where there is
no thing(yet) and all things(beginning)."
Suppose this tool was alive.
Also the eye that sees? Sure but consider congruence. Alignment
of patterns if you will. Surely the purpose of ritual is to represent
(or achieve) the movement of icons.
Please forgive my brief response. Seems what I have to say requires few
words.
.
