| Author | Message | ||
    Edward Member Post Number: 1694 Registered: 05-2002 |
Hi All.... Very interesting insight you have there! Well, it is commonly known, that girls become more mature than boys, at a certain age. Which is very much in advantage of the females. [Did a posting on this in the past...] Girls, just seem to occupied with certain talents which differ from boys. And they both have their own achievements to attend to. So, they each contribute to a ceratin aspect, which they are talented for. But, we live in an age, that we both want Equality. And thus, girls/woman do attend the same or similar labor, as men do. Which is positive. If, they wish to evolve in that direction: so be it! Equality for BOTH! Here, in the country I live many woman do... 'fall-out' from their jobs due to the harsh working environments, and break-down. As this, occurs...minor to the male folk. Seen it with my own eyes. Male and female, are just built to conduct ceratin working jobs which 'fits their bill', so to speak. Not always Consciousness or Material Consciousnesses, related! But, we will one day encounter the TRUE...purpose of the Male and Female relationship, in all their doings: within the framework of Equilibrium, as intended, as we walk the path of Relegeon. We all LEARN through Experience..... Edward. | ||
Redbeard Member Post Number: 169 Registered: 04-2006 |
Hello All and Peace, Intelligence is the discussion in application of Natural Logic. With that in mind I do know some very intelligent men and women that are giving this planet and our survival a real challenge. Men have ego's that must be recognized and dealt with just as women have challenges of logic and reality cognition as well as men do. We must put aside focus on differences and recognize universal truths in order to climb out of this abyss of deception that is so rampant. I do see many people including myself searching for a purpose for all this struggle, and many of mankind's decisions are skewed by this underlying restlessness and lack of peace. Intelligence surely plays a role in a persons ability to process information and recall it but I think it's logical, based on my own observations, that intelligence frequently is an obstruction for many as they have the ability to self create realities with even greater self delusion. I do think that women are more sensitive and open to concepts good or bad and men tend to lock into a track of thinking and won't let it go. These are tendencies but we as humans seeking the truth and taking responsibility for and standing by our mistakes, can and will progress in the right direction. This, working in the right direction, I find to be rewarding but extremely challenging, and requires more of my strength and self management skills than I have ever before known or was capable of before this knowledge was available to me. I am thankful for all of Billy's, FIGU, and all of you fellow seekers for all the efforts to preserve, understand and apply the truths of Creation. I perceive my progress as noteworthy and amazing as I look back but at the same time glimpses of the vastness yet to be explored within my microcosm, is numbing. Peace, Matt | ||
Jonzie Member Post Number: 52 Registered: 04-2009 |
You've all taken a simple comment and turned it into a sexist issue; why? This entire threat is illogical. You are discussing people as animals, reviews their roles 'within the pack'. If you are going to be that base, then why make it so hard? Male animals of earth rape the females and roam on to the next area. Females stay together in packs and rear the young. Males are looking for the next fantasy, females are dealing with reality, as is, right now, in the space in which they dwell. This is true of all mammals on earth. Billy said the females are more 'realist' than the males. It's true, no matter what animal you are discussing. What is the big deal? I see a lot of egos on this thread. This is ridiculous. And I would remind some of you: we are not another planet, we are on Earth. To think that the males and females of this planet should follow the status pro quo of another planet is just plain stupid. Before you view yourself as 'other worldly', why not try mastering being an Earthling first? It might help your progression. Just my opinion. "The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth." | ||
Sitkaa Member Post Number: 227 Registered: 10-2004 |
Fear always has a storyline. Is there anything which earth-based humans have to fear from the Plejarens? Why or why not? Is that answer based in a reasoned understanding of the universal ‘law’ of loving creativity? Love is blissful, but only absolute bliss is loving. What is it? What good are the judgments of so many perspectives if not based in love? What is it? Love is alive and growing. What is it? Love is best expressed in this universe as light. What is it? What is love but truth, however rocky, for what is there to hold onto when even gentle nothing makes sense but love. What is it? What is it? What isit? Whatisit? Humanity is so far behind the curve. Even the propaganda is shallow. What happens when we die? Well I suppose I can’t answer for you, but for me I survived the experience, both figuratively and literally. I died so I utterly know that we all go on, and that love is always the way. What is love but perception of an external truth, while love itself always comes from within. What is it? Love is found at the core of everyone’s sense of self, even thru death of the ego itself. What is it? Love is always given. What is it? Love is always understood. What is it? Love is always the way. What is it? It is what it is, found thru an honest self-directed path. No can say what it is, because love is indefinable. What is it? lOVE is not conceptualizable. Why not? What is it? How can love only be intrinsic? What is it? What is life that loving would be interested in it? Why is it loving to be interested in life? What is it? Why is love found in creative harmony, and why does it feel blissful? What is it? Love always allows. What is it? Love is an endless horizon to be explored. What is it? Love has nothing to fear. What is it? Love is found in the answer to everything. What is it? Love is the most fundamental universal law. What is it? Love is in the potential of a moment, and in the momentum of the storyline. What is it? Love does not dominate where it is applied. What is it? What the perceptible desires, love provides. What is it? Love is. What is it? Love is always the way | ||
Thomas Member Post Number: 953 Registered: 03-2004 |
Maybe this has been discussed before but I would like to re-visit examining the spirit lessons from purely a logical point of view without any assumption that BEAM is correct. Obviously it will be necessary to start in bite-sized bits in order to avoid gross errors (at least hopefully). I want to start with the most basic idea I could come up with that I can prove with nothing more than logic: Time and of space are fundamentally infinite. In order to examine this statement, it is necessary to define the words used in it. Time, as used in my statement, does not refer to physical space-time but to pure duration. This need not be measured and the word does not refer to the common use, but only to pure duration. Space does not refer to space-time in the physical universe either, at least as I have used the word, but refers to only to locational extent, meaning the expanse of a given area. My proof for the statement is that, if space or time were definite and not infinite, there would be a boundary which, in turn, would have to have something more beyond that boundary. This could go on and on with boundaries outside of boundaries but no final boundary could exist because that in itself would necessitate something more beyond. It seems to me that it is quite certain that infinite expanse and duration are fundamental as mentioned in Genesis by BEAM. Can anyone point out any flaws in what I have said? I would like to continue on from here after discussion of this part is wrapped up (assuming there is any discussion to wrap up :-). patricksdadinfrance@yahoo.com | ||
Cpl Member Post Number: 527 Registered: 08-2004 |
Interesting idea, Thomas. I think time and space as duration and locality (assuming your definitions which I have no qualms with) are only apparently infinite. How can we say they definitely are infinite? Perhaps it comes down to whether evolution needs time and space to happen. Currently and for a great length of time we know they are prerequisites. But can we concretely say that in the most distant future after this Creation has evolved beyond the highest other Creation levels we are aware of that evolution will not be a "self" fulfilling process without the need for time or space. It seems to me that could be an assumption. One can argue there must be space for existence of any kind to be, but this may depend upon our concept of space, even as locality of any kind. A black hole has time as duration and space as location because it takes a certain duration for it to collapse on itself and then explode out again. But why couldn't there be something beyond or outside of all the space and time we know of and can theorize? Why shouldn't there be an end to time and space? It seems as logical a hypothesis as to argue there would be no end. Why couldn't there be a spaceless, timeless deep from which space and time suddenly erupt? To me it comes down to whether evolution needs location and duration to process. This seems logical. Now it does; but for that which lies beyond the highest Creation levels? Could that kind of evolution just become an absolute evolving essence without need for concepts like location or duration? If the Plejaren do not know all the secrets of time travel presumably, by extension, they and so we, do not know all the secrets of time itself either. It seems to me then that it is impossible to say whether time will absolutely end. I would tend to guess not, but that is, to me, an assumption. Our semantics are likely to become a problem again here, though. When Creation goes into its period of deep sleep e.g. is there still time and space? One might argue that in its essence there should be since there is some kind of process going on; but is there time and space then? If there is a process going on then there must be time as duration. Yet, if in a Creation deep sleep we seem to be looking at something like before a Big Bang, that would be before there was time and space as location or duration in any form that we know of; before all space and time, place and duration, were compressed into a singularity of inexpressibility. Perhaps there are many "times" and many "spaces" making it impossible to lump them all together under one time and one space concept. In a deep sleep maybe they are eventually born anew with a clean virgin slate just as galaxies and universes are dissolved and born anew. If our spirit has no literal beginning or end (it was born of Creation and evolves back to it) then time would have to be infinite for it to evolve -- if it retains its Creational essence for all time even beyond the highest Creation level we know. Just a few, hopefully logical, thoughts. BTW just because we think we are being logical, or are trying to be logical, doesn't mean we are. Many people (not necessarily here, though of course, it does happen here) say such and such "is logical or reasonable" that ...(fill in the blank) when what they say is not at all logical or reasonable, at least the way it is expressed. Still we can try. Chris Use to the full both your heart and your head; and never lose either. | ||
Thomas Member Post Number: 955 Registered: 03-2004 |
Hi Chris. I was saying that expanse and duration are fundamentally limitless because, even if they are limited at some point, there must be more beyond, thus they cannot be limited ultimately. If one says that they can be limited, then that is only locally true and what else would there be beyond the limit besides further expanse?!? See what I am getting at? It is illogical and impossible to have it otherwise if one talks about expanse and duration in their ultimate forms and not just limited to material space and time. Material factors certainly are limited but they are not fundamental either in the grand scheme of things. So as not to get too far off on a tangent, do you see a fault in this logic? Just to address your idea, spacelessness and timelessness, if they existed, would be non-real and only ideas. One could even argue that they wouldn't even be ideas really since they are undefinable in any existing positive terms. You could say "a lack of" but this isn't defining so much as saying what something is not. As far as being logical versus thinking one is, that is why I am asking if someone sees flaws in my statements :-) When you say "many times" etc it means you are not speaking in fundamental terms which is what I would like to stick to. In order to get to the place I am trying to get to logically, I need to start at the "beginning" and that means starting with the most fundamental factors we as humans can comprehend. Anything else is just not going to get me or us anywhere :-) Also it would be best to leave out "spirit" etc since I am trying to start from basic concepts before moving on. Your response/post was/is appreciated Chris. Thanks :-) patricksdadinfrance@yahoo.com | ||
Hector Member Post Number: 586 Registered: 04-2006 |
Hi Thomas, my question is, do space and time exist outside Creation's material belt? I had always imagined that they do not exist outside of the solid-state matter belt... http://www.theyfly.com/spiritual/creation/images/creation.gif | ||
Michael_horn Member Post Number: 268 Registered: 07-2009 |
Someone sent me a link to: http://mikeschuler.site.aplus.net/index.html ...which I've only glanced at but it seems to have some interesting pertaining to the universe, mathematics, etc. I'm not sure if it holds any direct correlation to the Meier material but... | ||
Thomas Member Post Number: 959 Registered: 03-2004 |
[According to BEAM, they do exist in higher values. patricksdadinfrance@yahoo.com | ||
J_rod7 Member Post Number: 1256 Registered: 10-2007 |
*** Aha - Logic tells us that for any 'fact' to be true, it must stand on it's own merits. This means it must be true irrespective of any observer, belief, measurement standard, or reference frame. Let us assume there is Zero and One as two basic numerical representations for the existence of some 'thing.' In other words, there is some 'thing,' or there is not some 'thing.' We could also define these polar opposites as One and OneNot. Definitions rest on semantics which rests on language which falls back on common perception (shared world-view), a means of interpretation of phenomena that is shared. In our classical (held-in-common) view of reality, it is always One or Zero, that is - either a 'thing' is there (exists) or it is not there (exists nowhere). The Quantum view of the world is that both states One and Zero exist simultaneously, and only appear in one or the other state when we attempt to sense, measure or observe. at this point reality will 'freeze' into the observed state. [ "Quantum mechanics is counterintuitive; in the words of Richard Feynman, it deals with "Nature as She is—absurd."... "Many fundamental parts of the universe, such as photons (discrete units of light), behave in some ways like particles and in other ways like waves"... "In 1924, Louis de Broglie proposed the idea that just as light has both wave-like and particle-like properties, matter also has wave-like properties.[18] The wavelength, λ, associated with a particle is related to its momentum"] (source---) Introduction to quantum mechanics --- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_quantum_mechanics [ "the Aristotelian philosophers did sometimes speak of the "accursed necessity for the identity of opposites"."] [ "In the interactions of photons with matter, present physics has largely (and erroneously) omitted from accountability the time-domain actions of the time increment carried by the photon. Therefore they fail to realize that photon absorption by a mass momentarily adds a time-tail to the mass, so that the mass turns into the entity masstime instead of mass. Masstime is as different from mass as impulse (Ft) is from force (F). Photon emission from masstime (never from mass!) then tears away that time-tail momentarily, turning the masstime entity back to mass momentarily. The sum total of all the photon interactions-both quantum and subquantum in size-with a mass generates the "bigger" changing of mass to masstime to mass, etc., which is the mechanism propelling that mass's "flow through time". At the same time, that "flow of time" is immensely structured by jillions of infolded, smaller "streams through time" of differential pieces of that mass."] (source---) http://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/meier/gaiaguys/BeardenGaia2.htm -- [Well worth reading the total paper for mutual understanding /Rod] I would ask: Is there ANY-where photon-energy does NOT exist? Stand in a room, do you see a black hole of nothingness in the room? Of course not. ALL of space is filled with photon Energy at some multiple or harmonic frequencies. Deep in the Earth, the masstime is interacting with Gamma rays, X-rays, Neutrino rays. No Space is without a continuous photon interaction. The photon then, at any/ all frequencies, carries the underlying Intelligence of Creation. This is the assured interaction of our Spirit in the Material timemass Universe directly with Creation. The Greatest Beauty and expression of Intelligence and Love of Creation is found in the Natural World (Life, Stars, fellow Humans, Earths and their Biospheres). Well then, which is the true reality of any 'thing' or 'not-thing'? Is it the masstime "object" or is it our perceived interaction with the photons which reflect into the electromagnetic juices of the mind. Do we see the shadows of imagination (whose?) moving in some past "time?" The more distant any such object, the further in the past is our perception. We never seem to catch reality "now," in-the-act of it's existence. So then, duration has no absolute value. Duration can only be expressed in relative terms. How long will this Universe Endure? "Time" is only relative to the measurement of motion within a frame-of-reference (space-time, masstime at some arbitrary measurement of spatial distance). We may say: "Time is so many X-numbers of the Chronon" OK define the number: which number base? Define the Chronon: relative to what specific frequency? Define the Frequency, relative to Zero-Frequency? This is 'Stasis' - Zero time, Zero masstime. The Void. The Universe is Real to us because we experience it to be. The Spirit stands outside of both mass and time, however anyone conceptualizes these dimensions. Mass, time, masstime must all pass away, and by the law of polar opposites, must all reappear renewed. When we have the expectation of the reincarnation of our Spirit, we also have an expectation of return to the same Universe/ World of mass, time, and masstime, with a similar perception of the 'objective reality.' This Universe (and so all others, including the DAL-Sister Universe) is given to be Seven Bands of Creation Energy in a continuous flow through all times, all dimensions, all worlds, all alive, and all masstimes. Out-side of the flow of Creation Energy is given to be the "Void," without Time or Dimension; only an 'endless expanse' of ultra-fine Energy without Intelligence. For us, all that occurs of any significance is within the Dual Universe: DERN-DAL. This is given to us by those which know this to be true. For my self, I know this is Truth, anyone else here must find for themselves if this is Truth (One) or NotTruth (Zero). For those on the side of Zero, we now have a point of discussion for the resolution of differences. For those on the side of One, let us continue to share what we each and all find to be Truth that we may add to what we have that will lead us to Wisdom. [(Thank You Michael; a lot of introspection to explore in the link you provided)] Peace in all respects -- Salome *** ~~ TRUTH finds WISDOM finds LOVE finds PEACE -- Find What You Seek ~ Rod | ||
Cpl Member Post Number: 529 Registered: 08-2004 |
Hi Thomas, " I was saying that expanse and duration are fundamentally limitless because, even if they are limited at some point, there must be more beyond, thus they cannot be limited ultimately. If one says that they can be limited, then that is only locally true and what else would there be beyond the limit besides further expanse?!? See what I am getting at?" I understand what you are saying. If an expanse of "something" stops then there can only be "nothing" after it. Absolutely nothing. IMO the only reason why there could be no "nothing" is that by definition nothing does not exist, so there can only ever be "something", even if it's just a field of subtle radiation, energy or frequency outside of Creation (I believe this is what Jrod is hinting at). It's a very convincing argument. All 3 dimensional things that exist, however, even in non-material or fine-material levels, have boundaries and so are limited in existence. The question arises, "Why should expanse and duration, at any fundamental and even non-material or fine-material level, be any different?" Perhaps they just end at the indescribable. I do not find flaws in any of your reasoning, merely questions. The problem with assuming logic alone can provide us with these answers is that in order to be absolutely accurate we may need a Logos mind in order to fully capture the whole field of "logic" involved. For example: You come across two people alone with no one else around. One is dead from a gunshot wound, and the other is standing over him with the gun that fired the bullet into him. It would be logical to assume that the one holding the gun had something to do with the others demise. It's a drama scenario we've all seen enacted out. The problem is there may or may not be a slew of extenuating or other circumstances that come into play effecting the truth of what actually happened. Unless we can recreate the entire scenario with every possible impacting factor included we cannot know for sure what happened, despite any claims of what must have logically happened. When we get to levels of "fundamental" duration and expanse how can we be so bold as to presume we know enough -- everything about all dimensional existence -- to say for sure? We, personally, only actually have proof and experience of this 3rd dimension we live in. Can we know for sure Creation will not evolve into something beyond the limitations of time and space? Something that obviously humankind cannot begin to fathom or imagine? Even if Billy or the Plejaren were to say that won't happen or is impossible, we cannot know it; we can only assume or believe it won't. It may be logical to assume there is always something, but maybe there is something missing from our scene just as in the above example (simplistic though it is). We can come to our own logical conclusions, but they are IMO ultimately at times, and maybe here, assumptions because we just cannot know enough of the entire field to absolutely know for sure. Ignoring our scientists findings for a moment, because we know they do not have a total and complete picture of the universe and could be wrong in many of their fundamental theories and "facts" concerning it. Do you think, Thomas, the universe just goes on forever infinitely, which is difficult to imagine if it all arose from a Big Bang point a measurable time ago; or does it gradually peter out into a nothingness? I'm not saying I believe the latter. I do not know, obviously. But in the latter case you would have the "nothing". It would just be immeasurable and timeless ("outside" time). Good discussing with you. Chris Use to the full both your heart and your head; and never lose either. | ||
Thomas Member Post Number: 968 Registered: 03-2004 |
Thanks for the response Chris but an expanse of nothing is still an expanse. You seem to assume that the expanse I speak of must contain something but I am starting at a much more fundamental and basic starting point :-) The same thing goes for dimensional arguments because I am only talking about pure duration and pure expanse, not about what may or may not exist within them. See the difference? If we start with the truth at its most basic level and simplicity, then moving upward in knowledge is less likely to lead us astray. I never assumed that logic without facts could answer all questions. I am only trying to take what we do have and work with it in as logical a manner as I am able. Once again that is why I welcome your input and anyone else who sticks to the tightly focused topic I am exploring... To respond to your last question to me Chris, again, I assume nothing about the universe as I am referring to the fundamentals here which far precede the/our universe or any other universes. And immeasurable nothing is exactly the right track for us to get our heads around to the extent possible. One of my friends who happens to be a FIGU Geisteslehre Passive member pointed out to me that trying to get our heads around infinity and to really grasp it isn't possible and that trying to do so could/would lead to insanity. I replied in all honesty that I thought that it might be impossible to understand it in same way completely but that I had a better grasp on it (infinity) just by letting go of the need to place human-created limitations on everything. We tend to not understand nor accept things we cannot grasp so I tried, and feel as if I succeeded, in letting go of that need to put everything within human terms in this case. It's almost as if one could say that infinity exists because WHY NOT?!? on the other hand, having ultimate limits seems not only very human-centric but also highly illogical as I pointed out because there would have to be an "exterior" to the limitation boundary that everything else was contained within. Even if outside the boundary nothing existed, the expanse and duration WOULD still continue on indefinitely! patricksdadinfrance@yahoo.com | ||
Cpl Member Post Number: 530 Registered: 08-2004 |
"...an expanse of nothing is still an expanse. You seem to assume that the expanse I speak of must contain something but I am starting at a much more fundamental and basic starting point :-)" Thomas. Well, you wouldn't know it was, or be able to measure it as, an expanse. Expanse itself would require space. Hypothetically, one wouldn't know whether one was or wasn't traveling within it. And you couldn't be in it for it to be nothing. If any of our billions of universes gradually peters out into nothing as the matter within it becomes more and more scarce we would be aware of the encroaching nothingness only through the observance of fewer and fewer things, radiation and energy etc. It could come down to whether it is possible for space at the outer extremes to lead into nothing. To me this is theoretically, philosophically, and logically unanswerable; and scientifically unknowable at present, since we cannot know the nature of all universes. The fundamentals you seek must answer or conform with all that exists in the multiverse, so I don't really see how you can avoid looking at all those possibilities. If you wish to ascertain whether duration and expanse are "infinite" I think you have a complete unknowable, simply because you can never reach infinity to prove it. There's no need to go insane; it's just a given impossible to know; it cannot possibly be experienced or reached. "why not" doesn't prove it exists. The counter is merely, "Why?" "...having ultimate limits seems not only very human-centric but also highly illogical as I pointed out because there would have to be an "exterior" to the limitation boundary that everything else was contained within. Even if outside the boundary nothing existed, the expanse and duration WOULD still continue on indefinitely!" As mentioned above there would be no way of measuring it so it could not be said to have any expanse or duration. It would be known to exist only through the absence of "things". Nothing more could be said about it. There would not have to be an exterior containing everything; everything could just peter out into nothing. That "nothing" would be incapable of being measured or registered in any way and so could not be said to go on indefinitely; no data, no readings, no thing at all, no conclusion. We could not say there was an expanse or a duration of it. Could we travel and be there? It would not then be nothing as something would be there. Your "fundamental" is not just a space with no thing there at all, however, but the absence of any space or expanse at all. More like a "dimensionless dimension" of nothing than something petering out into nothing, though the "nothing extent" would be the same. In looking at that fundamental issue: Did the Big Bang erupt into an absolute nothingness or a space? If space was extent, what happened to that space when the Big Bang exploded onto or into it? There should be recycled evidence? If we cannot answer this question how can we be sure there is no such thing as nothingness; yet how can we answer this question? Someone may think they can, but to me it is -- presently at least -- a complete unknowable. Theoretically, philosophically, and logically, either seems possible to my limited understanding of things or nothing before the birth of the universe itself. Could nothingness not be the immeasurable that is dispelled as things spring into existence when universes and their times and spaces are born? Best Chris Use to the full both your heart and your head; and never lose either. | ||
J_rod7 Member Post Number: 1263 Registered: 10-2007 |
* Only the Void is endless, timeless, and without dimension. This is the only real infinity. The Void is without limits, without intelligence. The Void is Endless. From the endless nothing of the Void comes all that-is. All that-is is bounded within it's Universes wherein there is time and dimensionality. Time has duration which is measured from a 'beginning' to an 'end'. "Outside" of Space-Bounded -Time-Duration, there is the immeasurable Void. Since there is no "time" in the Void, there is no "duration". Since there are no dimensions in the Void, there is no expanse, no up or down, no in or out, no forward or back. Beginingless - Endless - Timeless - Empty - Lifeless - Motionless - DEVOID * ~~ TRUTH finds WISDOM finds LOVE finds PEACE -- Find What You Seek ~ Rod | ||
Thomas Member Post Number: 970 Registered: 03-2004 |
EXACTLY Rod!=A0 That's exactly what I refer to :-) patricksdadinfrance@yahoo.com | ||
Thomas Member Post Number: 971 Registered: 03-2004 |
Chris I appreciate your posts but it seems apparent that you don't have a c= orrect definition of "space."=A0 How do you define it yourself without cons= ulting the dictionary please :-)=A0 Space is expanse and even a void takes = up space and thus expanse.=A0 if you refer to space-time in the physical se= nse, then you aren't getting what I am saying I think... patricksdadinfrance@yahoo.com | ||
Hector Member Post Number: 587 Registered: 04-2006 |
In the Q/A section Billy responded to Michael that outside of the Creation there exist some sort of "infinite space". That statement still sounds weird/shocking to me, and gives legitimacy to Thomas previous posts.....anyway Billy also says "it cannot be grasped or understood with our thinking/brains" which bring me some "intellectual" relief  http://forum.figu.org/us/messages/12/2685.html#POST5767 | ||
Bronzedesk Member Post Number: 114 Registered: 01-2009 |
Dearest J_Rod7 Sounds kind of empty out there doesn't it! ... Or is it? Mat First you forget names, then you forget faces. Next you forget to pull your zipper up and finally, you forget to pull it down. George Burns | ||
Indi Moderator Post Number: 476 Registered: 06-2006 |
With regard to what Hector mentioned: Creation gets its energy from the Absolute Absolutum. The Absolute Absolutum draws energy from 'Null Space' aka 'Absolute Nothingness'. There are a few references to this, one being from an article 'Was ist der universelle. Materiegürtel?' from Bulletin No.5. Re infinity: It is my thought that if there is a great void of nothingness from which all else sprang, then one main difference between this great void and all the other levels as given to Billy and written in his book 'Existentes Leben im Universum pps 194-204', back to the first level, would be that the great void itself is not evolutive, but rather nutritive or sustaining/maintaining. Whereas, the other levels eg., our Creation, the Central creation, the Ur-Creation etc..... are all evolving, being sustained indirectly by the energy from this great void. Robyn | ||
Thomas Member Post Number: 972 Registered: 03-2004 |
Thanks Hector and Robyn for the input =A0:-) patricksdadinfrance@yahoo.com | ||
J_rod7 Member Post Number: 1265 Registered: 10-2007 |
>^< Hola Hector, Truly, and it has been said before: Thinking for too long on the Void may lead into insanity. Yo Mat (Bronzedesk), Empty does define it quite well. Robyn, Thank you. Now we may speculate on the nature of the Energy in the Void. ... Void Energy ... Such Void Energy will have no polarity. Yet Creation will polarize this into Positive and Negative Energy Fields. The Polarized Energy fills the 3rd Belt and 5th Belt of Creation Universe on "inside and outside" of the Material Belt in their respective flavors. When these two forms of energy flow through the Material Universe (as "Dark Energy"), where they meet will combine to create Neutral Energy from which arise the Material Creation (a continuous process, then) as Energy 'condenses' into photons, mass, and masstime. Such Void Energy will have no Intelligence. Yet Creation does imbue the Energy with Intelligence by virtue of taking it up into it's Spirit. By This action does Creation continue to gain the Power to sustain the 7x7 Flow of counter-rotating streams throughout the entirety of it's Universes. By this means is the Universe(s) given life - to be totally alive through all duration of Creation-Time. By this are all new SpiritForms created in endless number. The Void Energy is Endless. A good thing too as This Creation, and All Creations, and all such Evolutive Creations are continually drawing on Void Energy. Everlasting Creation. Peace >^< ~~ TRUTH finds WISDOM finds LOVE finds PEACE -- Find What You Seek ~ Rod | ||
Bronzedesk Member Post Number: 115 Registered: 01-2009 |
Dear J_Rod7, This is an interesting little tidbit of information that I found hope that you enjoy it! It's about infinity and one man's view point! http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/09/the-hilbert-hotel/?tham=&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=a3} First you forget names, then you forget faces. Next you forget to pull your zipper up and finally, you forget to pull it down. George Burns |
