Theos-Talk Archives (June 2009 Message tt00181)

On Jun 3, 2009, at 6/3/096:31 PM, tom9401 wrote:

> But everything in the universe exists at one time, simultaneously,  
> contrary to what your senses tell you. It is only that the physical  
> senses are limited. There is no past, present, and future. As a  
> result, there is no cause and effect. These is only what is  
> significant to you, and from your significances you determine what  
> is real and what is not.

Nevertheless, there always is change.  As the Earth turns on its axis  
each day, what was here yesterday is not the same as what is here  
now, and is changing, through every present moment as it continues  
turning today...  Whether or not we are observing it either  
individually or collectively.

Thus, whatever conditions exist today is the result of the changes  
that occurred between now and yesterday.   So time, like space,  
exists in actuality in each present moment, and every effect has a  
corresponding cause that preceded it both in space and time.

This apples to the motion of any object that changes its position  
continuously from place to place and moment to moment.  The "now" of  
each successive position being relative to each observing  
consciousness.  Therefore, the entire birth, life and death of the  
universe, and everything in it (each in their own lifetime cycle) is  
based on periodical cause and effect, beginning with the cyclic  
vibration of the initial triune hyperspherical field of cosmic  
spacetime. See: 1st Logos at:
http://leonmaurer.info/ABCimages/Chakrafield-spherical-col_3.jpg
All else follows in logical fractal geometric progression, until  
physical spacetime appears at the 3rd Logos -- to continue on  
analogously, ad infinitum, until the first quantum particles appear  
after symmetry breaks on the 4th lowest (frequency/energy) physical/ 
material level. See:
http://leonmaurer.info/ABCimages/Cyclic-paths-cosmogenesis.jpg

If there were no time, coupled with causative change, we could not  
experience motion pictures, whose frames pass before our eyes in a  
time-based regular sequence to simulate continuous motion through  
both space and time... Nor could we understand spoken words --which  
are also time dependent and follow in sequence to generate mental  
images and ideas.  In fact, there can be no separation between space  
and time -- which are inexorably linked together from the first  
moment of cosmogenesis... And, nothing substantial could exist in  
present time and space without a causative series of involutional and  
evolutionary changes proceeding from the zero-point singularity of  
the primal beginning, and continuing in every relative inertial frame  
of reference governed by the same time-dependent laws of  
electrodynamics -- on every level of descent from the highest supreme  
spiritual spacetime condition (one step away from unconditioned  
absolute space), to the lowest physical/material condition of our  
visible/metric spacetime.

Thus, time is relative, and our experience of it varies in accord  
with the level of our altered state of consciousness.-- e.g., when  
our alpha rhythms are low and our consciousness is on the higher  
frequency order astral level (such as when in an OOB or NDE) -- all  
time seems to slow down proportionately.  But, nevertheless, all the  
laws of electrodynamics, relativity, cycles and causation, still  
apply. The only change is in their empirical measurements of both  
time and space, as well as their level of energetic force.

As for the "physical senses"... Their limitation is that they can  
only function on the eighth lowest (sidereal light frequency "c")  
order material plane, within the 4th lowest (spiritual light  
frequency "c^8") order physical plane, which is within the highest  
order overall Cosmic field (whose light frequency is "c^<infinite).

That limitation, like experimental physics itself, is such a  
miniscule part of overall reality, as to be beyond normal human  
comprehension...  And is why, under the present eliminative  
materialist scientific paradigm, none of the hard problems of  
consciousness and mind can ever be solved.  (Having actually been on  
the highest humanly attainable altered state of consciousness more  
than once, and seen how it all began, as well as the way the universe  
actually works -- I'm willing to stake my life on that.;-)

Sp, other than those "scientific" details -- our overall view of a  
panpsychic and even pantheistic reality, seems to be pretty much the  
same as both Jonathan Powell's, and Greg Nixon's, among others.

Best wishes,
Leon
http://dzyanmaster.wordpress.com/ (New)

-----------Original Message-----------

> Just to let you know, the quote was misattributed to me. It was  
> from Jonathan Powell. I understand, given the nature of these forum  
> exchanges, how easy it is to do. On the other hand, I happen to  
> agree with it.
>
>> Tom Mandel wrote: 'Obviously, any action has a cause unless one  
>> believes in magic.'
>
> From within the metaphysical framework of science, that statement  
> makes sense. Your statement provides the perfect opportunity to  
> suggest a different way to see it. Current science focuses on  
> exterior events. What results is a mechanistic view like your  
> description of written sentence construction below. I happen to  
> believe that the inner psychological dimension, which I discuss in  
> my lab#3 experiment, is different, it is a different reality, with  
> different dynamics,  connected with but distinct from this physical  
> one. You may recognize it if I describe it as Leibnitz's possible  
> worlds, also identified by David Lewis, the philosopher, and two  
> physicists, Hugh Everett and Max Tegmark. It would also resemble  
> Kant's noumena, Plato's world of Forms. As an example, dreams are a  
> part of that inside dimension. You may have experienced that the  
> time and space of dreams is not the same as physical time and  
> space. Lab#3 may help to create the conditions that make it  
> possible to view that inner world while awake.  It's an experiment.
>
> The philosophy of time is an active discipline with no agreed upon  
> concensus. So you could understand if I have my own beliefs about  
> it. That is, time as you experience it is an illusion caused by  
> your own physical senses. You may have experienced time feel as  
> though it is slowing down, dragging. I have even felt time stop,  
> all movement stop, and so experiences like that have contributed to  
> my belief.  In that way, you may understand what I am saying.Your  
> physical senses force you to perceive action in certain terms, but  
> that is not the nature of action. The physical senses can only  
> percive reality a little bit at a time, and so it seems to you that  
> one moment exists and is gone forever,and the next moment comes and  
> like the one before also disappears.
>
> But everything in the universe exists at one time, simultaneously,  
> contrary to what your senses tell you. It is only that the physical  
> senses are limited. There is no past, present, and future. As a  
> result, there is no cause and effect. These is only what is  
> significant to you, and from your significances you determine what  
> is real and what is not.
>
> -Tom
>
>   --- In jcs-online@yahoogroups.com, Thommandel@... wrote:
>>
>> In a message dated 6/2/2009 8:26:59 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
>> otmar.pokorny@... writes:
>>
>>> Emergentists (generally systems folk, often neuroscientists) believe
>>> that  non-conscious 'stuff' gets together in particular  
>>> arrangements and
>>> consciousness 'emerges' as a higher-order property of such  
>>> arrangements.
>>>
>>> As Panpsychists (of any bent) we must show this  it to be false  
>>> or at
>>> least (my preferred approach) deny the legitimacy of this move.
>>>
>> As a systems folk, I would like to take exception to all of the  
>> above.
>> Obviously, any action has a cause unless one believes in magic. I  
>> am not sure
>> of  what this writer believes emergence to be, but notice how he  
>> takes marks
>> and  makes letters and then takes the letters and makes words and  
>> then takes
>> the  words and makes sentences. This is emergence.
>>
>> And if it is magic, why are we trying to figure it out?
>>
>> tom



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]