Friends,

Sir Popper envisioned the chasm we attempt to bridge.

A spiritual experience is totally subjective and
rarely 'happens' within a group setting, although
it does happen like that once in a while and we all know it.

How many witnesses need be necessary to justify
a factual event? Is the a specific number here? 27?

Religion may rightly be described as a solitary
practice between oneself and God. Of course, the
true character of a person is only known to God
because nothing can be hid or done secretly.

So we may as well be honest with one another.
You can see right through some people, some...not so easily.

Some hide their shining light under the pew lest
everyone see them for who they really are.

I don't think people are born sinners and I cannot believe
that I was born a sinner, lost from the beginning.
That's what I was taught from birth and a took a
'spiritual experience' to unleash me from that prison.

I was also taught to see and bring out the best in people,
so I always knew somebody good was 'in there'.

It's okay just to come to an understanding with a pair of ducks.
With a paradox, it's okay to say, "Ah...so..." this, too.

Dear DK,

I thought that explained the situation very well.

Fascinating that with all our advancement the universe still presents a mystery.

That "unified" theory seems so far away yet perhaps it is not, somehow all are blinded to it. Something in our choice of perception or the very foundation?

In fact as presented both theories don't really depict the all as one nature or the connectivity yet we can see the "effects" of this.

I have what could be a solution, I haven't seen anything else like it, it would still need many details filled in. It is yet to be published, I do not want to post it publicly till I get more feedback and do it formally. I did send it via email to you DK. Curious what you thought. Or perhaps it shouldn't be published, it might break what we call reality, and we wouldn't want to do that now would we? It is disturbing and liberating from the beings perspective.

Perhaps if we search for new observations and perceptions.

Here is one area for exploration. Perhaps we could start here.

If you could see all the photons in the universe, you might see a field of light. Of course it appears that we can only see (are aware of)photons that fall upon our retina. The rest of the photons in the universe are invisible. In fact science can't detect them with instruments either because the photon must interact with the instrument. We don't know if they are actually are there or not. We only know about the photons that arrive at a single point in space.

The other interesting observation is that the retinal detectors and visual network hardware consists of on/off cells the other factor is the rate of fire. Thats it. A particular pattern of this pure data we might label the signal an apple sends out. We can't find a physical location or device that summarizes the data.

Odd isn't it that light (photons) are invisible. So apparently is dark matter / energy.

Perhaps we are looking at things how they appear and not as they really are. What other way is there to look at them we might ask.

So we might ask:

It appears that we receive information, but what if the reality is that we are generating the information? So lets make that a theory and do an experiment to test it. I walk to the door and close it. I have just generated the data of the door being closed. It seems our first experiment proving this theory is a success.

There are so many things that don't make sense, is there a thing, a concept, that if added to the pot would allow everything to make sense?

Here is a link to 13 things that do not make sense, might be some clues.

space.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18524911.600 or click my name

Dear DK, (or anyone else)

Is there a Sanskrit word for synchronicity? Is this concept spoken of anywhere in ancient scriptures? Or is it new?

What about Deja Vu ? Does this word / experience exist anywhere?

Thanks

Ref. 4 & 5; very interesting 'stuff' Dr. Matai.

Thanks

Hi DK, Richard, I see Synchronicity as follows:

All events begin from spiritual realm(Mosc)
get related in virtual realm (Movc)
and get manifested in actual/physical realm(Mopc).

Similrly, as in universe, so in us

All events begin from our soul/basic consciousness
get related in mind
and get manifested in body and beyond

Seen from outside these events seem coincident
seen from mind these are synchronic
Seen from soul these are the same.

Here are a couple of related paragraphs from my book which show such events in an answer to Jacques Monod's question on chance:

**********
At my youth I would be forced to find a love-partner. Within this broad perimeter, it is up to me to select whom to have as my love-partner. And herein comes the role of chance. Naturally I would only select from among those girls who at the appropriate time happen to be around me by chance.

From the superficial side this phenomenon of ‘falling in love’ would seem to be a pure chance. Only to be slightly superimposable by selection. But seen from the depths this phenomenon had to happen, if not with this girl then with that.

Actually, however, even this much chance would have no chance. For, in fact, even the girl which would seem to be around by chance, and whom I would seem to have ‘selected,’ would be the one pre-determined by my evolutionary scheme as we would try to clear below.

For this we would comment upon what Jacques Monod had to say about chance, or in support of chance in his book Chance and Necessity. Writes he:

quote
But in other situations the idea of chance takes on an essential meaning...in what may be called "absolute coincidences," those, that is to say, which result from the intersection of two totally independent chains of events. Suppose that Dr. Brown sets out on an emergency call to a new patient. In the meantime Jones the contractor’s man has started making emergency repairs on the roof of a nearby building. As Dr. Brown walks past the building, Jones inadvertently lets go his hammer, whose (deterministic) trajectory happens to intercept that of the physician, who dies of a fractured skull. We say he was a victim of chance. What other term fits such an event, by its very nature unforeseeable?

Chance is obviously the essential thing here, inherent in the complete independence of two causal chains of events whose convergence produces the accident.
unquote

Now, we can offer two types of explanations for the above happening by chance.

The one is that what has essentially happened - remember what Bronowski said about the elaboration of behavior above - in the above case is the death of Dr. Brown. Just as in our love-affair case what had essentially happened was the love-affair and the other preliminaries - how I happened to come to the place where this happened or how the girl happened to come to that place - are not of much consequence, similarly, what has essentially happened - that is of real consequence - in the above case is the death of Dr. Brown and the other preliminaries - how Dr. Brown happened to pass the particular place at the particular time or how Jones, the contractor’s man, happened to come to that place just then and let the hammer fall - are only of superficial importance.

The fundamental point to be noted in both the cases is that, what was of real consequence in my case was that I had entered my youth and the love-affair had to happen one way or the other. And what was of real consequence in Dr. Brown’s case was that, though not himself conscious of the fact, Dr. brown had come to the end of a particular destination of his life and his death (fundamentally, a change in behavior) had to happen one way or the other.

The other explanation may be said to be an holistic one.

Just as everything, every happening inside me - my body - is interrelated, every happening in the Universe is interrelated. In me it is interrelated through the agency of my mind, in the Universe it is interrelated through the agency of the virtual world. Nothing in me happens by chance, nothing in the Universe happens by chance.

Just as I said in some previous chapter, the phenomenon of instant non-locality of the quantum theory shows that ultimately - or at the deepest - everything always knows everything else and everywhere. Which in other words means, is interrelated.

Beginning from Mosc the Universal process of life is displayed as Mopc through the agency of Movc or the virtual world. Whatever happens in the Mopc or physical world happens according to, or in correspondence with, the Movc or virtual world and vice versa.

It is becoming increasingly clear even to the scientists of today that the virtual transitions do effect the actual transitions. "....virtual transitions.. are often of the greatest importance, for a great many physical processes are the result of these so-called virtual transitions,’ said David Bohm, to quote only one.

So in the absence of our knowledge of what is going on in the virtual world, it is but natural for us to assume with Jacques Monod that what is happening in the actual world is happening by chance.

If one could but unveil what was happening in the virtual world for us, we would have known that every happening – patients call, Dr. Brown’s leaving for his place, contractors orders to his man Jones for the repair of the building etc. etc. - was getting directions from some fundamental unity - from Mosc; and was then first getting related at the virtual level, in the virtual realm, and was only then allowed to happen in the actual realm, in our ordinary world.

Same could be said of the girl who happened to be around me at a certain time in my life as discussed above, by chance.

If Dr. Brown had gone deep enough in his search for the ultimate reality - say, up to the level of the mystics - then his individual ‘I’ would have united with the all ‘I’, with the fundamental unity of all things, and perhaps then and only then he could have foreseen his death coming. Though by then he would have been least concerned with saving his life.

Those interested in examples in support of such a phenomenon may go through the life of Shri Ramana Maharshi of India.

*********

Harb

Friends,

There are a lot of ways to interpret an event.
If the virtual plane is real and we are but mirrors
then the mirror would not have the experience of
synchronicity.

It could be that 'once and a while' souls from the
higher levels interact or intervene on this material plane.

An event can have three players involved on this plane
and three active participants from another plane as well.

I have been graced with such an experience that
seemed to involve many players. There could not have been
a single cause unless a single entity is able to
communicate with more than one person at a time,
directing them to perform separate activities at a distance culminating in an experience that was
received by only one of the players here, me.

Short version: It involves myself, a lady in a town
30 miles from me and a radio d.j. from town.

Hermann Hesse is also involved, as far as I'm concerned. After having read most of his novels in order
I went to the library and checked out his last work.
I was new to classical music but that's what was on the radio
when I got into my car. An unrecognizable song came
through my speakers. After the song the d.j. announced
that it was a request from a lady in Crete, Ne.
He then named the song and the title was the same as the name
of the book that was sitting beside me in the chair.

It was an affirmation for me of intervention from somewhere 'out there'.
I was stupified and could do nothing but drive and laugh!
Hermann, you rascal! I know he was in on this charade.
"Not for Everybody", one of his favorite signs.

Just an attempt at giving an example. Gotta go,

Peace, Keith~

Dear DK,
I feel like you have echoed the words and thoughts in my mind. I could not agree with you more. What you said is indeed consistent with Vedanta. Thanks.

Dear DK: You're so so knowledgeable yet so humble. Dream man really. You present yourself so humbly like Newton who said "I just picked up a few pebbles from the sea shore" and also he said he was able to do his work by standing on the shoulders of the giants. What a man he must have been!! You also talk similarly about your teachers. so grateful and good at heart.

Dear DK.

I am currently reading a book by David R Hawkins, MD, PhD and he had the following to say regarding Truth: (This makes a lot of sense to me)

From a social-behavioral viewpoint, truth is a set of principles that people live by, regardless of what they might say they believe. There are different truths-subjective, operational, hypothetical, and intellectual-and then there is factual data. The legitimacy of any of these is
dependent upon the context of a given perceptual level. Truth isn't functional unless it's meaningful, and meaning, like value, relies on a unique perceptual field. Facts and data may be convincing at one level and irrelevant at another. Functional validity of information received also varies with the intellectual level and capacity for abstraction of the recipient.

To be operational, truth must not simply be "true but knowable; yet each level of truth is unknowable to the levels below it and has no validity beyond its own territory. Thus we can conclude that all levels of truth as we know it-within the dimension of ordinary human function- are examples of dependent truth, whose veracity is totally contingent on a given set of parameters. Even our revered "scientific truth" is also defined by conditions, and therefore subject to dispute and error. Statistical inference has become a propaganda tool, and the statistical distortions by which anything can be proven about anything have alienated our credence.
..........The only way to enhance one's power in the world is by increasing one's integrity, understanding and capacity for compassion........
Knowing our own-and everyone else's- human foibles give rise to forgiveness and then to compassion. Compassion is the doorway to grace, to the final realization of who we are and why we're here, and to the ultimate source of existence.

With love,

Bonnie

Big Crunch? I want to go to Moscow to find out what category they think. Wasc. (What a Silly Category)

Dear DK,

Thanks for the Pratitya-Samutpada info, I like the “interdependent co-origination” as well as your additional thoughts and insight.

Synchronicity plays an important role in the Infinite Play the Movie project. I think it is the best way that everyone can establish through direct experience at least subjective proof of an all pervading intelligence and a conductor for the symphony of life. Perhaps with math and a sampling of a large number of individuals it could provide objective proof.

In other words how would one (scientists) prove that all the flights coming into an airport were being orchestrated by a central controller if you had no access to the tower or the communications, these cannot be used in the proof? This would be a great challenge for a professor to give his students. Can they prove it? If so, I think the methods derived from this exercise could be used to establish a proof of “Oneness” / “Benevolent All Pervading Intelligence”.

PERHAPS FOR THIS HQR ENDEAVOR a new scientific method needs to be established, one that is not biased by the old materialistic view, perhaps substantiated and supported by Quantum Mechanics. How can we turn subjective proofs into objective proofs?

Another aspect is that all "the authors" have been instruments of a great author, and that there are correlations spread out through the works that are unknown to the individual authors and could not have been orchestrated by them individually but only by a great author working through them. In fact what may appear random or nonsense by itself takes on meaning when linked to other works. This unlike the Brass Monkey Mystery which brings to light exactly what I am talking about and is one path to the discovery of the Holy Grail.

I also find that observing and noting synchronicity heightens my own energy and the validation of that Mysterious Force operating behind the scenes directing the evolution of an expansion of life and experience.

It has been my observation when a group of people start talking about their shared and individual synchronicities it creates a very rapid increase in the vibration of the group.

Here is an interesting article SYNCHRONICITY
THE BRIDGE BETWEEN MATTER AND MIND
by F. DAVID PEAT PhD Physicist

Click my name.

Dear DK,
You said "One normally does not utilise Quantum mechanics to analyse a galaxy within the cosmos, and conversely one will not use General Relativity to analyse a semiconductor's behaviour within a microchip." Similarly, I would say that a computer science based model of the world, particularly such a model of life would explain the nature of mind and its "memory" and "thought" aspects better than any physics-based model because physics has not dealt with memory in any great detail. If at all, physisicists jump from matter to Consciousness right away.

Yeah, had a discussion about this,
qouted the age old, churchill, quote,
you know wich one, yep, '.the thruth is..

that, one, still, i know,
that's a highly subjective and relative thing,
that stuff,
called the truth..

A Belgium, antwerp, judge, recently, ruled,
you can put people under hypnoses, to testify,

heck, get 'em drunk you get the same effect..
is my polish,
;)

Attention, dear miss.. that's where the...
love, passion,

synchronicity..
great link,
Richard, but still women..
to get them in sync..?!.

that must be called, magic, i suppose,

Dear judge,
was it a crime, or a felony,
to not take women before or after their thirties,
seriously, when never married and or pregnant,
not mentioning..
;)
In the kitchen!~, where you you belong,
or pushing this, I still don't know the english name for it, this cool buggies, they make nowadays, off road, tires,
;)
love, passion,

Why don't we read more females,
quoted,
online, and all the guys, are like..

Osho did have some fun stuff to say about this,
why are men so excited about, this thing called
'enlightement' and, woman don't have the need to..

but, reading, his medical and later records..

love, passion

i'll get 'enlightend' when, and, or if, i get that, woman!

that clear? otherwise, that's called,
bad luck..

passion,
marek

It's a buddist thing, let me explain to this, girl..

Look,
you have, reality,
that's dived, into, the first to the, forth plane, also called, your imagination,

after that, comes the fifth, and that's beyond...mines, yours? grasps,

Than there was like, this, Dr. Chopra, was talking more, about.. I have no idea..

I was like thinking, a salsa dance? waltz?
that's the best,
i can imagine,
but I always could, like, quote,..

I'm not going to, do you read me getting, any more less, single? online? I don't.. so ltz,
there was this..
;)
buzka
love, passion

You may enjoy this, Keith, re Crete.

I've not gotten back to the previous glossary thread yet but read some comments in the margin where I think Harb was saying let us remember the great Masters like so and so and Socrates and then the margin preview ended.

Socrates and his idea they were so much better than us in philosophy made me laugh because I had just had a synchronicity.

Having had about 5 minutes to read, I had just opened a book to:

"Jurdain's calling card paradox is a varient of a paradox noted by the 14th-century Venetian philosopher, Jean Buridan. According to Buridan, Socrates makes the single statement "What Plato says is false." Similarly, Plato makes the statement "What Socrates says must be true."

"The combination of these two statements immediately leads to the conclusion that what Socrates says must be both true and false at the same time."

And for you, Keith ... "Both Jourdain's and Buridan's double-edged paradoxes are illustrations of the famous Liar, or Epimenides, a paradox report by Saint Paul in his epistle to Titus, which involves the Cretan Epimenides making the statement, "All Cretans are liars."

What's interesting about these Liar paradoxes is that the individual statements taken separately make perfectly good sense. But like mixing nitric acid and glycerin, things blow up in your face when the two statements are combined."

--John L. Casti, Complexification

So in one fell swoop we have synchronicity of Socrates, great minds contradicting one another, synchronicity of Crete, and even paradoxes.

Dear DK:

Great Post!! Provides real insights into QM vs. relativity, theory vs. reality or truth.

As always the best, valuable, and conclusive remarks are at the end. Sir Karl Popper is resounding what I have been saying all along regarding the roles of QM and relativity:

“Like Quantum mechanics and General Relativity. One normally does not utilise Quantum mechanics to analyse a galaxy within the cosmos, and conversely one will not use General Relativity to analyse a semiconductor's behaviour within a microchip. So, when anyone claims that their theory of modified Relativity eliminates the need for Quantum Mechanics, how do they explain the behaviour of a semiconductor and therefore a basic transistor? Equally, how does Quantum Mechanics step up to the grand cosmos to explain the behaviour of galaxies, when it clearly was never designed to do so and falsifies at that macro-level?”

Bringing the focus of IB back to the HQR project to merge science & spirituality, QM is great science for explaining or building semiconductors and transistors. However, spirituality (consciousness, love) is a universal or cosmological phenomenon more closely, appropriately, and accurately represented by relativity or better yet the Holistic Relativity.

Let us follow the good advice of Sir Karl Popper above and keep QM for our HDTVs, transistors, lasers, and other useful and wonderful materialistic gadgets. Why force or drag QM into explaining the universe of spirituality, consciousness, and love? Why introduce uncertainty into the certainty of the wholesome existence? Why fragment the unity to unify it again and fail, the sum of parts is never the whole.

Love

Avtar

Hello Tapestry!

Yes, I learned the Lies from a parafoxes dancing to N'Sync.

Why they would name a town surrounded by more corn than people
Crete, I do not know.

I learned of H. Hesse through C.G. Jung. He was a patient.
The mis-understood artist.

After writing "Steppenwolfe" he walled himself in with writer's blocks.
Mid-life crisis, basically.

"Siddhartha" was said to be one of the best from
the West in describing Eastern ways. (1922)

"The Glass Bead Game" is the name of the book to
which I first referred. He was awarded a Nobel for his works soon after. (1943)

Our sign says, "This, For Everybody", but we know it's not quite true.

Not yet, that is.

My sink fell in May of 2003.
The ties couldn't bind it.

Nice to meet you and thanks for speaking out! Keith~

I have two questions:

1. Are the boundaries between reliable prediction and falsifiability determined by scale (size...I.E. semiconductor behavior versus cosmos)?

2. Why are the exact boundaries themselves never discussed? The difference between a semi-conductor and the cosmos is pretty big. Why can't we narrow the discussion to a more exact boundary? I.E. that in which my mind is versus that which is in my mind?? Or bigger than a breadbox versus smaller than a breadbox.

Seems to me that the boundary itself would be the most interesting thing to talk about.

When it's all said and done, we'll probably note that all of this is about language.

Like that puzzle, if in a mirror left is right and right is left, why isn't up down and down up?

As wholesome Truth embraces Whole, it lies beyond the smallest of dimensions as much (to be explained by the quantum theory when completed by going to the level of what Bohm called Super Quantum Potential)as the biggest ones (to be explained by the relativity theory when completed).

The right course is to carry on both ways. More so as it has been the science's experience that deeper they go into the matter the more macro universe they cover in terms of its knowledge.

#22 Avtar: It took me only one post of yours to read and understand that point of yours. Where is the chaff and endless confusion, and how to sidetrack that for the aim of merging science and spirituality. I generally don't waste time on duds. You can Avtar. LOL!

Big Crunch Was funny! LOL!

Origin of Mosc:

Below is what I wrote in an inspiring way when I first coined/enunciated the term Mosc.
******
Lenin once said, "We materialists take matter as a philosophical category." That was, in fact, to incorporate in their materialistic interpretation of objective world the field concept of the quantum theory. The days are perhaps coming when going yet deeper into matter we shall not find even fields. To that potent void of the ancients, to that 'true vacuum' I shall give the name of MOSC, the matter of spiritual category.
*******

I don't think I am wide off the mark in explaining the spiritual dimension underpinning All There Is and in rebutting Lenin's assertion at the same time.

*******
Avtar: ...the sum of parts is never the whole.

Avtar, when 'God' (wholesome reality)is immanent in all things, even in a grain of sand to speak of as a representative of the smallest part, then why will we not find Him even in the smallest of part??

And if we will find Him, why we cannot see the things from there as well and as a scientist complete the quantum theory. Once you get unbiased you may be the best candidate to do it.

Harb

Syamala #as. I absolutely agree.

And in fact I know that the objective of the discovery of computer is to replace our brain/mind.

We made cars, aeroplanes to counter the effect of gravity - to help/replace our legs;

We made films, tvs to counter the effect of electromagnetic force - to help/replace our emotions or emotional body.

We made computers/communication gadgets/internet to counter the confining effects of strong interactions - to help/replace our mind/intellect.

Harb

Would someone explain the posts by Marek Dariusz Podsiadlo for me? Is he for real or is he just goofing off?

As we evolve our legs could be replaced. Interesting. LOL!

More films tv could replace our Emotions. Human emotions, yes. mm.

This is Classic Rajesh stuff! Rajesh, I never thought you could go like tantrics, your spirit entering the body/mind of others. LOL!!!

#30

Sorry, I was referring to Syamala's post #15.

I may also ask Avtar that zero-point energy - which is the be all and end all of his GNM - is the energy at the absolute zero of temperature. But we know that temperatures also go to minus values. How has he accounted for those minus values?

The fact is that like the minus values of temperature there are minus values of energy - in which the energy sort of represents the topsy turvy world (first anti and finally virtual world)and which is nothing but the world of our brain/minds. Inverted pyramids of some previous thread represented this topsy turvy world or the world of our minds. An other proof of mind's world being topsy turvy can be deduced from Soren Keirkgaard's saying " Live is lived forwards but understood backwards.

And in fact the quantum theory describes the world of our brain/minds, which is in no way less than the world out there, the world of bodies, the world through which in fact we know the outer world.

Transcending mind/ego is to transcend both the inner and outer worlds, by knowing fully both the quantum theory and relativity theory and not only by knowing the relativity theory but ignoring the quantum theory even if it is not yet complete. In fact the truth is that unless we have fully understood the quantum theory we cannot claim to fully understand the relativity theory. It will remain in Syamala's words "physicists jump from matter to Consciousness right away."

Remember, what I wrote at the very beginning: "I fully agree with Syamala and Todd that some very important part of the Whole is missing in Avtar Singh's Holistic Relativity thesis. To me, it restricts itself only to the physical (body) part, prematurely combines it with the spiritual part, and completely ignores the virtual (mind) part.

Avtar is unnecessarily identifying what I say about quantum theory with its present limited understanding. While what I say is that it should be understood fully. I have already admired Bohm for trying this in a thread, being repeated below:

Quote*****

For our present purposes, however, we intend to take up the latest on the line, and he is David Bohm of England – a theoretical physicist of repute, a never say die intellect of broadest possible sweep. Even though he is considered to be a follower of J. Krishnamurti, he doesn't invoke mysticism - Eastern or Western - to prove the interconnectedness of all phenomena on the Universal scale and to prove the whole as a living, throbbing, single life-process.

Rather, like a true scientist, he is trying to enter deeper and yet deeper into the heart of the matter - literally as well as metaphorically. He is not swayed off his feet by the antics of the capricious quanta but is trying to go beyond even that. No doubt consciousness in the guise of the observer has entered the picture with the advent of the quantum theory, but there are as yet layers of consciousness, the last being the undistinguishing consciousness of totality, of Mosc - which will not distinguish between the observer and the observed - that may be safely called the end, the time to rejoice.

In other words, he is after the sub-quantum level phenomena, after the hidden variables as they are called in scientific circles, which ultimately control the reins of the whimsical electrons and photons.

I am sure Einstein himself had intuited what lay beyond the quantum level when he said his famous words ‘God does not play dice with the world,’ though he could not live long enough to give his intuition a concrete shape.

Though Mosc can be said to be the ultimate ‘observer’ to create reality it will be the determined creation, from where God for once will not be playing dice, from where Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle for once will give way to the only one way certainty, that of irreversible creation, as I have already said while discussing the relationship between the quantum vacuum and true vacuum in a previous chapter.

I see Bohm on the same trail as Einstein though it is very very difficult to give concrete shape to intuitions at such micro-micro depths one must admit.

In his excellent book Wholeness and the Implicate Order he has made a strong case of the omnipresence of the life-principle. Writes he interalia...

*******

Isn't it clear enough that what I am really advocating is to push for the completion of the quantum theory rather than ignore it, for ignoring it will never satisfy us that we have really achieved Holistic Understanding of the World.

Ref#35: "I may also ask Avtar that zero-point energy - which is the be all and end all of his GNM - is the energy at the absolute zero of temperature. But we know that temperatures also go to minus values. How has he accounted for those minus values?"

I'm sure Avtar will laugh at this Gibber! He's already astounded by his ignorance.

Super brain waves are striking me too now of Rajesh! LOL! Meant #33. By reading all this, I'm going jumbling bumbling as he would say!

See Avtar, what cutting-edge scientists think about the role of the extra small - explained by quantum theory which you like to be ignored - in understanding the secrets of the universe.

"The watcher of science is much impressed by the very large and the VERY SMALL...Intuitvely we feel that the ultimate secrets of the universe must reside at the extremes of our scale of imagination..."

"The logical unity of the Universe demands a single invariance that remains unchanged in the face of all the complexity and transience we see about us from the SMALLEST SUB-ATOMIC SCALES to the farthest reaches of outer space. Identifying this over-arching symmetry ... may be the nearest thing we could get to discovering the “secret of the Universe”.

(John D.Barrow in Theories of Everything.)

Dear yellowrose and obro

Perhaps the comments of poetic and funny souls are intended to get y'all to lighten up. There are many faces here that have their noses so closely glued to their invidiual books that they cannot see the world as a whole, and laughter and poignancy at least causes the books to be put down for a second, so everyone can see the other participants' humanity.

Dear others

How is one supposed to develop a valid and acceptable theory of unity, if competing aspects of the universe aren't addressed with an egoless mind and heart?

I woke this morning with a sense that the in-fighting here is ego-driven, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with this project.

Is the intent to cause the project to fail?

When aliases come late into a cluster of threads that have been sincerely supported by dozens of others for a couple of months, my instinct tells me that a fox is amongst the grapes, and jealousy is the primary motive for the new activity. Otherwise, where are the constructive contributions of the new commenters?

love, Heath

Dear Heath,

Concerning a project statement, I think you are on the right track.

D.K. could be listed as moderator and instigator.
Harb, Avtar, and Syamala could be listed as outstanding contributors.

Richard and Mieke could be mentioned as contributing
visual effects for the strings pertaining to symbolism.

Todd Ingram, level seven, where are you?
Doodleman? Do you have more than one type-key name?

Intentbloggers covers the rest of us just fine, imho.

We cannot put ourselves forward with an untested theory.
There should be no promotion of a book that not even D.K. has read.

D.K., have you read either or are you having someone
with credentials take a look-see at them?

This feels like a study group as much as it is a project.

I don't think any Master would approve of some of the conduct
we have seen, I know you know what I mean.
Blogging is an art form played out in public and
it's easy to see who turns their cheeks and who slaps them.

I said in the beginning that how we treat each other will be
seen foremost and comments containing advice on
behavior
should be unnecessary, but welcome nonetheless.

If you walked into a temple and all you heard was
fighting, arguing and dissent would you stay?

If it was a college classroom, for sure we'd stay.

Where are we? Practicing walking the walk one post at a time.

Thank God, I have a car to get to work. Peace, Keith~

4th attempt to post, logged into typekey; which still says I need to register? lol
Heather, I disagree with your statement about latecomers to the HQR.. it would be wrong, to dismiss viewpoints, from any direction, it comes..

Does the sea command a north-wind not blow today; because it prefers a south-wind of convenience?

HOW can we justify a search/quest for truth; when even one "thought" is to be discarded?

IF I am not mistaken, you did not join the HQR immediately,,,either?

Recalling Syamala's words: "physicists jump from matter to Consciousness right away." Here is how Avtar has jumped it right away.

Avtar has based his GNM on zero point energy. Physics has yet not been able to go beyond exploring matter to the depth of 10(-33)cm [10 raised to the power - 33]. So it has identified zero point energy with this wave length. At such wave lengths space becomes foam-like. Now, the spiritual experience of spiritual masters goes beyond ANY type of physicality/space. It is this depth which Avtar has jumped to prematurely reach consciousness or spirit of spiritual masters.

If, by the way, he had had the experience of oneness of spiritual masters he would be seeing things right from consciousness rather than from 10(-33)cm of matter. He woud then be seeing the real whole picture. And that will comprise a topsy turvy world in which the universe gets wound up into four basic forces - described through and through by the quantum theory, and a 'straight' world in which the universe gets unwound from forces. With the basic Consciousness or Consciousness-as-such enveloping the whole.

BTW, Avtar, I am taking nothing from you. I am just giving new ideas to you, a scientist. I cannot come in competition with you by any stretch of imagination. So why are you so annoyed with me. Remember, if no one was there to challenge your GNM how you would have had the chance to explain it so many times?? And you have nothing to worry from my criticism, after all I am not a scientist and so my criticism does not have much value anyway.

Dear Heath,
Re #39. You are right about all in-fighting being ego-driven. Argument IS ego-driven and it is different from communication which is driven by the Unifying Love.

Dear North

I think you may have misread me. I did not question or dismiss anyone's contributions to HQR.

I questioned the motives of aliased commenters that only create or fan arguments, without contributing otherwise. I know for a fact that some of those motives have nothing to do with helping this project grow. The image their activity brings to mind is one of wolves that jump a horse that's been trudging along, because they think the horse is weak, when it's only tired.

If those same aliased commenters had also contributed to the project, I'd never have written #39.

love, Heath

All sciences, not only Relativity and QM, are all trying to understand their own piece of the infinite reality of the universe and trying to explain what they find in terms of their own language. No matter how many sciences and how many very good scientists, understanding of this infinite reality (not even the Absolute Truth, forget it) will never be over. My guess is that the Creator of the universe (Consciousness or Love) intended it that way because it is fun to explore. If the exploration comes to an end, there is no more fun. I would even go for expanding HQR to Hollistic Science by including other sciences. There may be inconsistencies or not-yet-explained observations within one science and inconsistencies between different sciences; that should not be a reason for any science to be unfit to be included in holistic science. All scientific knowledge as a whole is always changing and expanding but never complete because the reality it is trying to have a hold on is infinite.

Dear Harb,
RE #42. I did not mean that it is wrong to jump from matter to Consciousness. All I meant was that they overlook mind and that computer model is a better model to help understand the nature of mind versus Consciousness.

Dear Syamala,#46

It is what I have been saying all along. Not to overlook mind, the working of which to me is explained by the quantum theory. To me Mind and Man are almost synonemous. No doubt at the end we will need to go beyond mind but by fully understanding its working not by ignoring/overlooking it. Mind is in which we get entangled in forces/karma.

Great posts, all. But I was really hoping to get someone to take a stab at question 2 in post 25.

The article mentions "boundary conditions". For example, where general relativity would apply within one set of boundary conditions whereas quantum physics would work within another.

And my question is what is the exact boundary between the two? Where do they come really, really close to each other?

I have a friend of mine who's a hunter who says that natural boundaries are the most interesting of all places. Take for instance the boundary between land and the ocean. A lot of action takes place there!

When I crossed over from the USSR's Hungary into Austria, I was incredibly fascinated with the boundary and the amount of attention (and tension) was present. Probably the same thing holds true between South Korea and its northern neighbor.

Seems that there should be a field of study just for boundaries alone! Maybe you couldn't because it would wind up evolving into two fields of study. (tee hee)

All along I've been saying Big bang and big crunch! LOL! Through the tough criticism with the likes of thanga, alex, IV and skep, we can remove the plenty of chaff. Oh Avtar, he is the Best in removing the chaff. If you, like stubborn morons want to stick to your old patterns, you are welcome, like the big crunch concept. Without criticism there is no way you can remove the chaff from the human minds. In my view, Avtar is simply the Best and Clearest of all when it comes to merging of the two, science and spirituality.

danashields,

Hello again! Thanks for joining in on the conversation.

The way I see it, every time we go deeper, we really mean smaller.
Every time we talk of expansion, we mean further out or more encompassing.

If we speak of meditation, we imply going in.
When we discuss engagement or entanglement,
our awareness is directed outside of ourselves.

There is no boundary per se in the psyche or mind.
The "I am" is with you. It's existence depends not
on the world your senses bring to you nor the thoughts that come to one.

It cannot be limited or discarded or destroyed.

Your soul is awake 24/7. It is your psychic, sympathetic
(not)nervous system.
That is why it brings calm and peace when one remembers "who they are"
and focuses their complete attention on this one fact.

When you look at the 'spiritual plane' system
you will see a "VOID" somewhere close to the middle
no matter how many different planes are proposed.

If there is a boundary to be crossed on either side of 'the zone',
I would have to think it is still passable, else
no one would have came back to tell us about it.

The Masters implore us to overcome all obstacles
in the mind first.
How could anyone limit the extent of your imagination?

They say we do not so much gain wisdom, but rather we shed ignorance.

Like in sports, if you can't do it on the practice field,
you'll not likely pull it off at game time.

Unlock the chains in your mind and the shackles
around your ankles will slide off.

No fences! Gutters? Yes, gotta go bowl. See ya, Keith~

This a duplicate post under the two main posts from DK: HQR: Sir Karl Popper: Paradox of Science & Truth, and HQR Project: Glossary v0.4

Dear DK and Friends:

I would like to continue participating in this project if there is a clear path forward. I have posted earlier my recommendations for the path forward for this project to make an impact on science and to benefit common people.

Until then, I apologize and respectfully beg to say that this is my last post on this project. I need to keep moving on my original mission that I began six years ago and that is to dissolve all boundaries and conflicts between science and spirituality. And, continued demands from my professional commitments allow me only a limited time to spare.

Thank you all for sharing your thoughts, asking brilliant questions from which I learned a lot, and hope that some of you may have found a new perspective from my shared insights. I appreciate fully that many of the insights I am presenting are out-of-the-box and challenge the existing paradigm of the mainstream science, which remains almost entirely detached from spirituality or consciousness.

You have my contact information, in case you consider it worthwhile for me to contribute in future path forward. I intend to continue to contribute occasionally at IB via main-entry posts and would welcome all those interested to share their ideas and insights. Also, please feel free to contact me via e-mail at avsingh@alum.mit.edu.

I began my participation in IB at the invitation of Dr. Deepak Chopra, with a hope to form a coalition of leadership at IB and worldwide to lead the noble mission to bridge science and spirituality. I continue to hope that would happen some day.

I continue to share Dr. Chopra’s concern about the prevailing pseudoscience and metaphorism at IB. When, I joined IB about three months ago, I noticed an exotic exuberance built upon pseudo-scientific and metaphoric approaches defying not only science but the very spiritual teachings of the masters. I apologize if I have derailed the prevailing optimism and exuberance built upon pseudoscientific as well as pseudo-spiritual foundations. In any case, they can easily be restored back by ignoring whatever disruption my inputs may have caused. Hopefully, the natural forces of evolution would lead to the ultimate destination desired for this project.

Love
Avtar
avsingh@alum.mit.edu

Dear Avtar

Your presence and lucid thinking processes have been invaluable here, and have raised the bar for discussion of both science and spirituality significantly. That there is a lot of chatter does not negate your effect and power in this enviroment. I do hope you reconsider -- please stay.

love, Heath

danashields #45

So far as the relativity and quantum theories are understood presently, I think the speed of light represents the boundaries between them. In the world represented by the relativity theory the things cannot move beyond the speed of light. In the world represented by the quantum theory things (signals)cannot move below the speed of light. When they will be completed they both will describe both the worlds, which are really the worlds of universal Body and Mind.

Avtar #51:"I would like to continue participating in this project if there is a clear path forward."

Paths are made by people themselves. If at all, you can consider my pseudoscience to help you delineate your path better. Moreover, nobody forces you to read my posts.

"I have posted earlier my recommendations for the path forward for this project to make an impact on science and to benefit common people."

He who thinks that he is doing anything for common people (like politicians) is very far from understanding his own, real self, the final goal of spirituality. What one does, does for oneself. At the end of the day, there is no other in YOUR world. All are there to help YOU discover your own real SELF. If "others'" talk effects you it means you are still to learn from those others. Quitter here will be a quitters there and eventually everywhere. Would you leave just because of one person? Many who admire your input have no value in your eyes? Or that you know that that one person has truth in what he says and you do not want to face it??

If you want to avoid pseudoscience you should have restricted yourself to science magazines/blogs. But I know your science must be considered pseudoscience there.

#43 --but Heather, their presence is valuable and a contribution to the socratic dialogue.. they are merely the noise; which we must learn to diffuse; with abundant patience, compassion, and understanding of the right to bear "presence" of self.. anywhere.

A sour taste, has as much flavour, as a sweet taste... depending on the tasters choice though.. perhaps?

with loving kindness,
North

@Keith. nice 49..

@Harb.. a perfect 53..with a clear persepctive(wink)

@Avtar..you are brilliant, do not succumb to frustration(gentle smiles)

time is on times side.. not ours per se, and as such.. flow within the glowing of revealing truth, pebble by pebble... what is stopping us from going slow, in revealing the "Sacred Secrets" of man, science, and possibility? Considering the age of the planet, and human beings; how can we allow ourselves to believe truth-revealing would be easy, fast and precice?

with loving kindness,
North

Dear Avtar: I for sure have enjoyed reading your posts. Like I said before, you're too good for this site and people here, in my opinion. One has to learn to discern the small fish and the big fish in science or anyother field, then comes the patience and the right technique to deal with the Ignorant, slow coaches. I've taught for long enough to know how it all works. LOL! Patience to deal is the key. Dk has lot of it, the way he handles. But, I understand Subject is more important than all this. The bright ones will pick it up and acknowledge, the dimwits will keep defending and keep flashing like a tube light. If you feel, your energies have to be more focussed else where, I'm the first one to suggest you that. Where you're not understood and valued:you should never be in that place. However, I hope you stay on and write in your usual clear style, there are quite a few who definitely enjoy reading your posts.

To unify science and spirituality without one will first have to unify it within one's own self.

It can happen either through self-experience of unity, or, through surrender to a spiritual master.

Then one does not really unify science and spirituality, one already knows/sees it as unified, but only describes things from its (unification's) perspective.

It was what Rumi did while writing his poem "I Died as a Mineral."

It is what Harb is doing while describing all evolution in terms of one unified force. Or in terms of one unified force separating into four fundamental forces.

It is which some day mankind will come to know as design or intelligent design.

There is a Hindu saying: "To know God is to be God." Slightly changed it can also be and as true: "To begin from God is to be created by God."

Since the above what I call design or intelligent design begins from unified force, which means from God, it is in this ["To begin from God is to be created by God."] sense that spiritual masters of yore said and present so-called creationists say that it is created by God. So in the wholesome truth they too have a place.

Darwinian theories explain how we (all species) handle the effects of this design upon us (some un, some sub, some self and some superconsciously), in the process manifesting what is generally understood by evolution.

Dying as a mineral, to me; is to become one without labels of any "thing" because "IF", "IT" is all ONE united force and source of "creation" how can we attribute ourselves the power, to make "IT" unso? sigggggh when the "key" to unlock the paradox.. is nothing, in all "actuality?"

Dear Harb, save me.. did I make sense, or am I treading in deep water of my imagination here?

HOw can we have ALL, when we divide ALL--with lables such as sciene and/or spirituality? IN doing so, we have divided ALL.. what is constructive, to dis-empower, the source of ALL?

IS it human natures "ego?"

with loving kindness,
North

"Sometimes I "think" I know.. and just as fast,,,I did not.. because I "thought" I did"

IF that is not a coined phrase, which I doubt; it is herewith mine, from my mind this instant; though I will share it with minute due credit; should it become out of some miraculous, instantaneous combustion of possility.. a wealth-raking-in for my family...NEW wave-phrase
(giggles.)

OK< I am being silly.. it is a driven power within me, on this nocturnal night for me... to share something which was wonderful which happened for me, which in kind, touched the lives of 53 other people..

Giving, is intoxicating.. especially when the recievers do not expect it..

I wonder.. how profound really.. if this is "reality?"

The non, "suspecting" of IT?

and Harb, I am picking on you with my silliness questions.. from lack of sleep, and joy at something.. because I have known you long, and know your sense of good humour! lol and tonight, unfortunate perhaps for the ALL, I am too much of a chatterbox?

Dear North, for one, don't bother about any silliness or being chatterbox. Moreover, there is nothing silly about what you are saying. I can see it is a very deeply felt dichotomy and is fced alike by many many people.

The reality is at once one and many. Just imagine it in terms of you and your son, for, with him you have had the real experience of being one while as of now he can also be said to be separate from you.

Aren't your son and you one in two and two in one. Similarly, spiritual masters some times have the experience of being one with all and while they later apparently separate they at the same time go on feeling the same oneness with all.

Have I understood and answered your question correctly? Sorry for being late, my own son has come to see me from afar and is sitting and talking to me for the last about an hour. I just had the chance to browse through your post.

Resonating Harb.. and hello to your son, from across thousands of miles!! I hope you are having a good cup of tea and sweets together on your time of day.. for me right now, it is 5:00 morning.. my favorite time of the 24 hour period.. the translucent blue hue of twilight, seems to do magic to my spirit; at my age, I seldom pull a nocturnal night, unless insomiated(is that a word? lol)..

To the response... my son was adopted at birth.. so I can without any doubt Harb... and firmly confirm this same ONEness with my son.. of which you used a brillaint example, by the way!!

body/blood.. it is all just "minerals" anyway....

(smiles.)

with loving kindness, as you gently become exposed to evening.. my day begins... this is the paradox perhaps, which we may never conquer, as human beings quest to understand "nothing." lol

have a blissful sleep...

Dear North, I can see unmistakeable signs of Grace enveloping your words, being and environment.

Thanks you and All the Best, Harb

Shall surely let my son read your Hello! Mieke and Kate have already "talked" to him on this blog when he once wrote here on his previous visit.

Dear Avtar,
I enjoyed our exchange of questions and answers very much. I wish that you would stay on this project but you know what is best for you. Wishing Good luck in all your future endevours.

Thanks, Harb. I don't know much about physics, so it was good to get familiarized with the boundary.

What about behavior at exactly the speed of light?

When sailing close hauled, there's a "sweet spot" right between close-hauled and dead upwind, and in very heavy winds, it's a cool place to find so you don't have to make any adjustments to your mainsheet.

Just wondering if there's such a place in the world of physics?

ANyway, again, thanks, Harb, for attending to my question.

Thanks, also, Keith.

Dear North!#55

"time is on times side.. not ours per se, and as such.. flow within the glowing of revealing truth, pebble by pebble... what is stopping us from going slow, in revealing the "Sacred Secrets" of man, science, and possibility? Considering the age of the planet, and human beings; how can we allow ourselves to believe truth-revealing would be easy, fast and precise?"

Wisdom-filled words!

Love, Harb

Dear North!#55

"time is on times side.. not ours per se, and as such.. flow within the glowing of revealing truth, pebble by pebble... what is stopping us from going slow, in revealing the "Sacred Secrets" of man, science, and possibility? Considering the age of the planet, and human beings; how can we allow ourselves to believe truth-revealing would be easy, fast and precise?"

Wisdom-filled words!

Love, Harb

Dear North!#55

"time is on times side.. not ours per se, and as such.. flow within the glowing of revealing truth, pebble by pebble... what is stopping us from going slow, in revealing the "Sacred Secrets" of man, science, and possibility? Considering the age of the planet, and human beings; how can we allow ourselves to believe truth-revealing would be easy, fast and precise?"

Wisdom-filled words!

Love, Harb

Dear Harb... I hope you and your son had a most splendid visit together yesterday.. thanks for "catching" a glimpse of the wisdom, often obscured from my self... which inspiringly so, escapes the boundaries; at least, once in a while.. lol

with loving kindness,
North

Lol North, it is 9:40 PM TODAY here, that is the day we had our last talk! Of course I know about the time difference! Just wanted to surprise you!!

Love, Harb

Dear Harb.. I am/was surprised!! I am enroute now, to the post.. to mail surprises to people I love, and care about... worldwide; whom evoke a profound awakening within me, to be more "aware" of "things" in the world, besides solving the complexities of pandora's box, in regards to human relationship with the universe, the earth, both scientifically and spiritually... I am as giddy as a child.. in knowing.. my surprises will touch hearts, mend wounds, open doors... and instill eternal hope, as a beaconed icon of our human spirits!!

with loving kindness,
north

Wow, North, beautiful expressions...

Your TIME IS ON TIMES SIDE can be added to the axioms/sayings depicting timeless wisdom.

Love, Harb

Hmm. here we go, having to login3 time before I can post here.. my god, this is a nuicance. but alas.. also a lesson of patience? sigggh

ahh... Harb...at last; I have perhaps made a minute contribution, valuable to the HQR? Amazing, how it came from the "wild" self.. depraved of sleep--released of confines of box's.. labels and quests to define nothing... while it lasted. it was nice to BE.. and not have "need" to explain why I was "here" ... who sent me, and was internal or externally instigated?(smiles.)

Dear Avtar,

"for the path forward for this project to make an impact on science and to benefit common people." ~Atar

>This intention I think is in alignment with most others.

dissolve all boundaries and conflicts between science and spirituality. ~Atar

>I think this is the direction we are all headed as well

"And, continued demands from my professional commitments allow me only a limited time to spare."

>Me too I have really neglected a lot of things reading and posting here and I really need to focus on my income.

Avtar I think you have contributed a lot. I feel the same way you do sometimes, about both the promoters of "spritual context" and "scientific context".

Now you have this equation but one might wonder why isn't it (or is it?) showing up on blackboards everywhere resulting in amazing new revelation?

How are we going to translate it into something everyone can understand? So that everyone say wow that makes sense. Where is the warp drive and teleportation designs?

Is it really the missing piece of the puzzle, the grand connector, or is there more to the comprehensive understanding?

All this thought can become tiresome, it does for me, perhaps you just need a break, everything cycles, which is my interpretation of what Harb's stuff is all about cycles and functions but there is also what is it that is behind the cycles and functions of the universe? Where is the observer in the equations. Do we even have a symbol to represent the observer or it's function?

Everything happens at the right time, perfectly, so I am sure if you will be here to play whatever role your supposed to and perhaps place a few pieces in the puzzle.

Yes, I think sometimes the conversation goes off into tangents and fictions but there is probably a reason for this, we might not stumble upon something if not for this.

What is being searched for I think still eludes us, because it involves us.

Dear Avtar:

I am heartened to read you will still blog via main-entry posts.

I have seen this phenomenon everywhere. A personality needing group belonging has a force so strong that, indeed, the group praises them and falls in line behind them.

Meanwhile, others who may have valid ideas and even make more sense get seemingly insulted or brushed aside.

For example, I don't recall if I have ever commented on how interesting your posts are and how much I learn.

This prompts me to do so.

To me, it is an interplay.

The needy get instant gratification. The strong and wise go away.

That would make Deepak's observation of IB evolving to metaphorism and pseudoscience a self-propelling prophesy. He of all people should know better.

Lots of Love, Avtar. Your work has been appreciated.

Hi Keith,

I read Siddhartha years ago but I did not it as the ways of the East. I saw it as one man's spiritual transformation (who happened to be in the East) and was luckily guided through it by a religion professor. Very memorable.