The Nature of Reality

[Murex]

@JamesShrugged

@Murex

I don’t.

The universe before it was what it is, was still something, so it was still the universe.

I agree with you.

How does Dr. Onkar’s view contradict your statement?

“…any alleged cause would have to exist apart from the universe, i.e., apart from the totality of what exists.”

Something not part of the universe affecting the universe would be part of the universe.

[Murex]

Just because we don’t know what was before the big bang, doesn’t mean there was nothing before it.

A solitairy black hole in deep space would seem like nothing to an observer who sees only the blackness of empty space. The fact is, is that that black hole possibly contains enough matter as a small galaxy.

[Dan1 (Dan~)]

@Joker

The nature of reality is beyond the measurement of men.

That would be “supernaturalist” in so far as it suggests much existence and reality far beyond human comprehention and human awareness.

This cosmos is a combination, as far as I know, and outside of it, it got its resource, and then combined.

Invisible circular light, void, and what one would call an “aether” are probably some of the original elements, which combined to make the more obvious elements.

If you took allot of nothing, gave it color, shape, and moved it around allot, they’d call it a “solid reality”, from the inside, because they’re inside of it.

[more_or_less]

@JamesShrugged

“Reality—that which exists—can have no cause or explanation: any alleged cause would itself have to exist, i.e., be a part of reality. Likewise, the universe—the totality of all that which exists—can have no cause or explanation: any alleged cause would have to exist apart from the universe, i.e., apart from the totality of what exists.” Onkar Ghate

I fully agree.

Look into the idea of the multiverse.

[north]

@faust

Nothing last forever. The cause of the Universe may no longer exist. Stuff like this is interesting as long as we restrict ourselves to only three dimensions.

energy/matter lasts forever since the extreme opposite " absolute nothing " has no ability to manifest something/anything at all , for infinity.

[north]

@JamesShrugged

I am surprised that none of the many supernaturalist’s on this board care to discuss this.

I’m here

the fundamental reality , galaxies , suns , planets , moons , etc. are necessary for the supernatural to become.

for the supernatural is dependant on a place to stand.

and by the way this should be a sepreate thread

[north]

@-i-

Nothing lasts forever. The cause of the Universe may no longer exist. Stuff like this is interesting as long as we restrict ourselves to only three dimensions.

The universe contains the planets and the stars, but it is itself the emptiness for this reality to BE. The universe is space, a void, nothingness, i see no beginning or end.

What was nothing before it was nothing, still nothing?
Nothing comes from nothing and goes to nothing.

Nothing lasts forever.

of course nothing lasts forever because nothing has no ability to change " into " anything/something at all . for infinity.

so this nothing " idea " is irrelevant to this thread.

[north]

@Satyr

@JamesShrugged

“Reality—that which exists—can have no cause or explanation: any alleged cause would itself have to exist, i.e., be a part of reality. Likewise, the universe—the totality of all that which exists—can have no cause or explanation: any alleged cause would have to exist apart from the universe, i.e., apart from the totality of what exists.” Onkar Ghate

I fully agree.

Reality: An ongoing process, constantly c0nstructed by the interplay of universal fluctuations and the pooling of energies we call unities.

Since consciousness is always lagging behind reality, in that the conscious interpretation of the phenomena that result from the flux demands a certain interpretation and abstraction, therefore all sense of reality is always too late or obsolete when it is attained.

Consciousness makes-up for this by using these simplified abstractions to extrapolate patterns and foretell future phenomena.

It does this by finding patterns repetitive consistency it calls laws or logic.

Of course these are only effective when what is perceived lacks the free-will to extricate itself from its essence.
Essence being its historical heritage and habitual behaviors derived by the path-of-least-resistance.

yes

but the unities are consistant as for example what makes up the stars. so invitably we will catch up. we’ve only been understanding the Universe for 500 yrs or so . we will understand the Universe fully , eventually.

[north]

@Joker

The nature of reality is beyond the measurement of men.

I disagree

in 1000 , 10,000 or 50,000 yrs it won't be.

we will catch up to the Universe.

[north]

@more or less

@JamesShrugged

“Reality—that which exists—can have no cause or explanation: any alleged cause would itself have to exist, i.e., be a part of reality. Likewise, the universe—the totality of all that which exists—can have no cause or explanation: any alleged cause would have to exist apart from the universe, i.e., apart from the totality of what exists.” Onkar Ghate

I fully agree.

Look into the idea of the multiverse.

how does the " multi-universe " idea solve the " cause " problem?

[Mr_Reasonable]

@north

@more or less

@JamesShrugged

“Reality—that which exists—can have no cause or explanation: any alleged cause would itself have to exist, i.e., be a part of reality. Likewise, the universe—the totality of all that which exists—can have no cause or explanation: any alleged cause would have to exist apart from the universe, i.e., apart from the totality of what exists.” Onkar Ghate

I fully agree.

Look into the idea of the multiverse.

how does the " multi-universe " idea solve the " cause " problem?

In David Lewis’s theory of possible worlds each possible world is causally isolated. I’ll have to read some more and see whether anything he says actually answers your question. Until then, disregard this post.

[Joker]

@north

@Joker

The nature of reality is beyond the measurement of men.

I disagree

in 1000 , 10,000 or 50,000 yrs it won't be.

we will catch up to the Universe.

That is blind faith and in all reality it amounts to nothing.

[Joker]

@JamesShrugged

@Joker

The nature of reality is beyond the measurement of men.

You speak only for yourself, and in that context, I agree with you. To those that have abandoned reason, the nature of reality is beyond their measure.

To you reason means the instrument of dicovering so called truths and absolutes but in my eyes it is nothing more than a futile group dynamic of insanity.

So in a sense you can see why I reject it.

I’ll leave you to your belief that humanity will somehow find it’s mystical destiny of universal salvation but what you should know is that this conviction of yours is nothing more then a metaphysical faith you put into the future or the various institutions that you support.

[Joker]

@Dan~

@Joker

The nature of reality is beyond the measurement of men.

That would be “supernaturalist” in so far as it suggests much existence and reality far beyond human comprehention and human awareness.

This cosmos is a combination, as far as I know, and outside of it, it got its resource, and then combined.

Invisible circular light, void, and what one would call an “aether” are probably some of the original elements, which combined to make the more obvious elements.

If you took allot of nothing, gave it color, shape, and moved it around allot, they’d call it a “solid reality”, from the inside, because they’re inside of it.

That would be “supernaturalist” in so far as it suggests much existence and reality far beyond human comprehention and human awareness.

I like to think of it as practical realism.

The only reason why human beings study reality is because they desire some closure in the absurd hoping that somehow the cosmos conforms to their perceptions built upon a million of constructed desires and assumptions.

If you took allot of nothing, gave it color, shape, and moved it around allot, they’d call it a “solid reality”, from the inside, because they’re inside of it.

Reality in terms of human consciousness is just interpretations and nothing more.

Ultimately it is the cosmic force of life that defines reality in all it’s entirety hence being beyond the measure of man.

[north]

@Joker

@north

@Joker

The nature of reality is beyond the measurement of men.

I disagree

in 1000 , 10,000 or 50,000 yrs it won't be.

we will catch up to the Universe.

That is blind faith and in all reality it amounts to nothing.

really and a thousand yrs ago one would could not have imaged where we are now.

[north]

@Joker

@JamesShrugged

@Joker

The nature of reality is beyond the measurement of men.

You speak only for yourself, and in that context, I agree with you. To those that have abandoned reason, the nature of reality is beyond their measure.

To you reason means the instrument of discovering so called truths and absolutes but in my eyes it is nothing more than a futile group dynamic of insanity.

So in a sense you can see why I reject it.

yes I see why you reject Reason because really you don’t understand the ability to Reason really.

is it not a truth that if I send you a thousand feet down right now , this instant , in the ocean that you will die ? for get about the pressure for now just hold your for two thousand feet Reason it out!!!

I’ll leave you to your belief that humanity will somehow find it’s mystical destiny of universal salvation but what you should know is that this conviction of yours is nothing more then a metaphysical faith you put into the future or the various institutions that you support.

well I’ll tell what , support space exploration so that you can find a planet where can live out your fantasies of your primitive world and where you are totally oblivious to the space outside your planet , so that you are unaware of the threat to your existence , by an asteroid and can do nothing about it , and you are obviated.

then the rest of us will see the lack of Reason applied by you and your planet and learn from it.

[north]

@Joker

@Dan~

@Joker

The nature of reality is beyond the measurement of men.

That would be “super-naturalist” in so far as it suggests much existence and reality far beyond human comprehension and human awareness.

This cosmos is a combination, as far as I know, and outside of it, it got its resource, and then combined.

Invisible circular light, void, and what one would call an “aether” are probably some of the original elements, which combined to make the more obvious elements.

If you took allot of nothing, gave it color, shape, and moved it around allot, they’d call it a “solid reality”, from the inside, because they’re inside of it.

That would be “super-naturalist” in so far as it suggests much existence and reality far beyond human comprehension and human awareness.

I like to think of it as practical realism.

The only reason why human beings study reality is because they desire some closure in the absurd hoping that somehow the cosmos conforms to their perceptions built upon a million of constructed desires and assumptions.

really

what conformed perceptions of the cosmos?

If you took allot of nothing, gave it color, shape, and moved it around allot, they’d call it a “solid reality”, from the inside, because they’re inside of it.

Reality in terms of human consciousness is just interpretations and nothing more.

 the Human consciousness is built from the cosmos its self , is it not?

Ultimately it is the cosmic force of life that defines reality in all it’s entirety hence being beyond the measure of man.

but because the cosmos is , not so much the force , but the platform on which life stands , and is consistent with its combinations of energy/matter , it is understandable.

[CharlieGadfly]

@JamesShrugged

“Reality—that which exists—can have no cause or explanation: any alleged cause would itself have to exist, i.e., be a part of reality. Likewise, the universe—the totality of all that which exists—can have no cause or explanation: any alleged cause would have to exist apart from the universe, i.e., apart from the totality of what exists.” Onkar Ghate

I fully agree.

I don’t. And I do.

As I said on another thread, “A” = “-A”.

Where “A” = “All”, then it must necessarily account for the absence of itself. If it did not, then, by definition, it would not be All. I think “All” exists, and not, and every possible and impossible combination thereof.

In fact, when I hear physicists saying they are trying to develop a theory of everything which brings together and harmonizes the quantum with the cosmic, and that they believe the ultimate rendition of the mathematical equation that proves it will be surprisingly simple, I think they will find that simple equation to be “A” = “-A”.

Just because I am not smart enough to explain or understand it, and just because they have not yet proven it, does not mean it is not true. And not.

I know it intuitively.

[JamesShrugged]

@north

@-i-

Nothing lasts forever. The cause of the Universe may no longer exist. Stuff like this is interesting as long as we restrict ourselves to only three dimensions.

The universe contains the planets and the stars, but it is itself the emptiness for this reality to BE. The universe is space, a void, nothingness, i see no beginning or end.

What was nothing before it was nothing, still nothing?
Nothing comes from nothing and goes to nothing.

Nothing lasts forever.

of course nothing lasts forever because nothing has no ability to change " into " anything/something at all . for infinity.

so this nothing " idea " is irrelevant to this thread.

Actually somethings do last forever. Matter can not be created or destroyed, it only changes form; thus it is eternal.

[JamesShrugged]

@Joker

@JamesShrugged

@Joker

The nature of reality is beyond the measurement of men.

You speak only for yourself, and in that context, I agree with you. To those that have abandoned reason, the nature of reality is beyond their measure.

To you reason means the instrument of dicovering so called truths and absolutes but in my eyes it is nothing more than a futile group dynamic of insanity.

So in a sense you can see why I reject it.

I’ll leave you to your belief that humanity will somehow find it’s mystical destiny of universal salvation but what you should know is that this conviction of yours is nothing more then a metaphysical faith you put into the future or the various institutions that you support.

Joker; always so prone to the straw man fallacy. Everything you have said bakes up my statement, that you can not know or even conceive of knowing the nature of reality, because you reject reason. Thank you for proving that those without reason lack this ability.

When have I ever said that “humanity will somehow find it’s mystical destiny of universal salvation”? When have I implied that man has a ‘destiny’? When have I stated that man is in need of salvation?