Theory: Universal Node

For discussing anything related to physics, biology, chemistry, mathematics, and their practical applications.

Moderator: Flannel Jesus

Re: Theory: Universal Node

Postby Form and Void » Wed Apr 01, 2009 1:29 am

Mr Shambles wrote:
Andrej wrote:It makes pretty much sense to me now, though I am curious; how did you come up with this theory? What led to this thought?

:banana-stoner:

Great thread. It's quite long at this point, but I think I'm interested enough to hunker down. From what I've gathered so far, it is completely compatible with my perspective on things, though I have not ever pictured it quite in this way. Forgive me if any of this has been said.

It occurs to me that as we're propagating this swirling attractor kind of geometry unto deeper dimensions and further levels of things, it should be clear that there is no demonstrable 'end' to the system. From this we might be tempted to take this as proof that there are infinite dimensions, that whether you keep on digging down to Planck scale or build a Hubble the size of the sun it just keeps going on forever. However, in both we discern distinct endpoints.

It is here that I prefer the probings of the mind to those of science. The mind is a well-suited instrument for investigating reality. It is my belief that the purpose of the universe is self-examination. All things are conscious, and are engines of epiphany. For much of that reality, the 'dead' matter that is not conventionally thought of as conscious does not experience the separation between investigation of 'self' as opposed to 'other'. There is no fundamental separation of these things, in the experience of, say, a hydrogen atom. The universe of the hydrogen atom is one of pure information. It senses the tugs and pushes of the 'other' concomitant with the reaction it makes. It does not 'feel' a thing, it becomes it.

This is a more fundamental kind of perspective than ours. It is more true to the reality of things. Way down. Way deep.

This solipsism is irrefutable. That was the real meaning behind cogito ergo sum. It was not that Descartes proved that thought proves existence. It was that he proved that it is the only thing that can be proven.. This is the first cause. The prime mover. The Form and Void.

To wit, as regards the picture you have painted, the 'endpoint' lies in every direction. In another way, it is the only thing. This is all contained in a singularity. We are part of it. It is us. More appropriately, it is me. My consciousness is the 10-dimensional fractal, or one branch of it. Both/and. I go not with quantum physics on this one, but rather on a very simple explanation of why '10' is the logical point of recursion of the cycle that is implied by solipsism. (http://www.tenthdimension.com/medialinks.php) QP happens to agree, which I find to be very encouraging.

Infinity and singularity are one. It is only by comparison to itself that reality complexifies, differentiates, and 'expands'. This all sound about right to you F&V et al?

Your response is a work of true genius; I believe you actively-voice the first implication of what I am supposing here.

The only method the human mind has of discovering "The Universe" is the differentiation between Self and Non-self (as Other).

This is the basis for all possible & probable Identification: The Law of Identity.
Philosophers trade & deal in water, you know? ~ The Universe. Everybody drinks water. Sophists choke on water.

If I have learned of anything in life thus far, then I have learned of the absolute existence of Good & Evil ~ Good & Evil exist absolutely. Some men are born to do Good. Some men are born to do Evil. These two forces reassemble & represent the Primal Movement of the Human Spirit, Human Drama, and Human Trauma. Those who pay homage to God are the Good. Those who resist this tribute are Evil. And only the godless are powerless to choose their Fate & Destiny at all.

So come now and let us crucify this Evil! Let us crucify Jesus Christ of Nazareth once again! Let us watch Rome burn to the ground!
User avatar
Form and Void
BANNED
 
Posts: 400
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 12:24 am

Re: Theory: Universal Node

Postby Form and Void » Wed Apr 01, 2009 2:26 am

Mr Shambles wrote:
Form and Void wrote:It turns out you flew right past the galaxy! And no matter how much you attempt to pinpoint the galaxy and fly toward it, you keep flying the wrong direction.

This is a great picture. It is a very scientific description of why science ultimately fails. I have little faith left in Science's decision-making skills or understanding of cause-and-effect. Science is essentially a 'beat the world' process. We are defeating it with our tools and microscopes, measurements and equations, inventions and technology. Understanding it is the process of feeding upon the world, taking the information we can out of it and stuffing it into our brains. Your model shows this kind of exploration to be self-defeating. Our consciousness is the Ourobouros, the world-snake. We devour ourselves with science. This is the form of our love for existence.

So maybe my single consciousness is all there is. That the 10 dimensional fractal, this universal node of yours, is the whole of all being does not in any way devalue our experience of consciousness. There is an established model you should research which presents our universe as a holographic projection from a prime singularity. This is the logical endpoint of Plato's 'forms', of Kant's noumena. Descartes', Witty, and The Nietz would all concur. We are literally inside a planetarium of the consciousness, the stars projected upon the inside of the cave from some unknowable light 'behind' us. That light is consciousness, that pesty is-ness that we can never quite get at and wrap words around.

We are the cave, the wall, the stars, and the light. We and I are synonymous. I can see where someone might be tempted to stew and despair over the loneliness of it all. This would be a mistake. Personally I find this to be inspiring and enriching. It means that I am given the opportunity to experience myself with the full will and attention and investigation that my mind is capable of, which is no insignificant amount of consciousness to bear. In the next life I will be naught but an atom, but in this one I can really stretch my legs. It's a pretty good time.

This is the real source of the golden rule. If I am the only thing, then treating the 'other' poorly is only treating myself poorly. It is rather better to choose the tack of relentless self-and-world improvement. Enrich your spirit, that which you perceive as 'inside', just as much as you do the world 'outside' through positive intent. In this is absolute assurance of a good life, and happiness.

I see what you say as essentially-true here.

I enjoy your analogy of the cave reference. What I am literally-seeing and exposing is the Human Condition. How does the mind work? How does sight work? How does sleep work? How are dreams made into reality? These are questions that Scientology (the ontology of science) cannot hope to ever answer, due to their more 'metaphysical' implications. The world & universe as we know it passes a barrier of human ignorance from what is unknown into what is known: unknown -> known. And this process actually-wavers: unknown -> known -> unknown -> known -> unknown -> known -> ... This is the actual process of Life & Death, surviving, living, learning, thriving, and then death. I view the image of a flower blooming into life a good portrayal of the Human Condition. We call this flower 'beautiful' because it represents the same evolution that we-ourselves take part in. And all Human Knowledge is representation of how well any singular person can witness and behold this event, what it means, and its full implications to itself and myself, as participants in Life-itself.

Science studies Botany but what can Science-alone tell us about the flower? It can tell us a great deal of 'facts', but none of these facts will come close to "describing" the event of a flower blooming. We can see a flower blooming in high-definition, time-lapsed photography. But is this the same experience as gardening flowers, learning them, growing them, and being the Creator of a garden? The gardener and the botanist are responsible for the human experience; they can describe to us the process better than any scientist can. Thus the gardener and the botanist know more about their craft more than any scientist ever will. The 'facts' are sub-sequential to the experience. All scientists are first philosophers indeed, copying what is already seen & experienced with a new language programmed to enhance the already-profound sensual-experience of life...


Mr Shambles wrote:
Form and Void wrote:What led me to this thought was the black hole sitting inside my Ego; it destroys Everything. And it is very, very heavy & super-massive.

Mushrooms are the cure for ego. I have a sneaking suspicion you are already aware of this. Hmm?

Science is ego. Meditation (epiphany) is its opposite. Philosophy is the bond that binds them.

Most mushrooms I have ingested were not spiked if that is your implication here. My psychedelic experiences of life are constrained to very few moments where emotional stress was nigh-unbearable to me. I have experienced an out-of-body episode without any drug manipulation. I have hallucinated in fevers. I have seen my visual scope elongate and shorten due to anxiety and self-inflicted fight-or-flight episodes without any physical cause. Most of them were emotionally-instigated due to stress. The mind is a very powerful tool. There are methods to instigate profound experiences on yourself without any chemical inebriation at all.

Science has inappropriately-become the ego, but the ego is more than words can describe. People will always refuse to listen to or understand the power of Philosophy, because this kind of knowledge is too abstract, and too painful. What is the "Id" and who really-cares to know unless there is a paycheck involved? Sophistry ruins everything from my point-of-view. The individual goes from self-discovery to social-discovery, and the two are not the same. Philosophy has a way of bonding and disconnecting Everything...


Mr Shambles wrote:
Form and Void wrote:What common people believe to be 'light' and 'dreams' are quite the opposite; light is 'darkness' and dreams are 'reality'. And the reasoning for this opposition, and confusion, is due to a misinterpretation of what constitutes Reality and Actuality apart from one-another.

Your demarcation of opposites still presupposes a directionality in causation. I would think that given the rest of your worldview you would rather take the yin/yang approach. Everything is defined by its opposite. There is no 'first' cause. This is a both/and universe we're in, not an either/or.

You think so???

I did not imagine my position and their descriptions to entail any directionality because directionality implies that your mind is moving in one direction as opposed to another. This movement of mind will then see the world, and Universe, as 'changing'. If you can resist this change, attempt to form Id-as-Ego into thyself, then your resistance becomes your reality, your inter-personal reality. But position, location, and stagnation are all essentially-impossible due to the Theory of Relativity as I brought it up. What is relative to what?

When we investigate the logic of "both/and" opposed to "either/or", what this signifies is differentiation, and to what direction.

I attempt to destroy "either", and will knowingly-fail in advance. My resistance to "the flow" is myself, what I will present to you and others.


Mr Shambles wrote:BOTH:
Form and Void wrote:Metaphysically-speaking, yes it does. It is Death, face-to-face, looking me in the eye. A black hole destroys Everything; Nothing is Sacred.

AND:
Life is staring you in the face, and you are gazing back, and the black hole creates everything, and you are the black hole, and EVERYTHING IS SACRED!! Taking either perspective is a choice. Both are foundless, without merit or basis. Therefore, the sacred perspective wins out simply because it is at the very least pleasurable. Even if it has no basis, its opposite is simply a useless conclusion.

I think what you are talking about here is life-affirmation as opposed to death-affirmation, is that correct???

However, I cannot traverse toward life-affirmation without realizing how & why life or death has come-to-be at all.

That is the direction of Philosophy, as I see it, reversing everything: from knowing everything to knowing nothing.


Mr Shambles wrote:A thing and its opposite. A thing and its opposite. It's all about representation and juxtaposition of a thing and its opposite. There's no such thing as thinking unless there is such a thing as not-thinking.

I believe the very process of thought/thinking at all presupposes self-as-thing (position) against self-as-nothing (negation).

This is the more metaphysical approach that precedes Self v Other.


Mr Shambles wrote:
Form and Void wrote:If it is possible that there is something outside of our known universe, then there is reason to believe what we live in is a Multiverse rather than a Universe. And if in fact a Universal Node does exist, then there is reason to believe that another Universal Node may or may not exist in some kind of alternative dimension or way-of-being, a thing-in-itself, a thing-unto-itself.

The final to-which-and-from-which hub of reality has swirling around it all the potential forms of being, every universe, every reality, every scale and dimension and measure. The timelines are its galaxies, and it is their black hole. Sound about right?

That sounds about right to me, well-put! =D>

Here is the Essence of my Theory here...

Presumption: Universal Node = Thing. (the smallest possible singular existence that is knowable to Mankind)

Evolution Theory mixed with my "Theory of Nodality" (that's the first phrase that came to mind), then supposes further that it is not until Mankind-himself evolves that we shall know about the functionality of the scientific/objective universe. My brain needs to evolve to understand more. I need to imagine what and/or how Humanity will exist 1000+ years from now, skip ahead in time, view where evolution has taken things, and reevaluate myself from there. How much of the Universe, or Multiverse, will I "know" at that point-in-time as opposed to right now. Right now I am ignorant. I know nothing. I want to know some more in fact. So I will continue to search myself, and others, with relation to The Universe (as a consistency), not-nothingness.


Mr Shambles wrote:
Form and Void wrote:If there were separate Universal Nodes, then how could the human mind ever determine the truth of that when all we see & observe, everywhere we look with our eyes and telescopes/microscopes, is the self-confining Universe that we already-live in? It seems to me the only way to find out is to fly a spaceship out past our own solar system, and past our own galaxy, to find out. And that is the direction Humanity is heading in as we speak.

Well, what it would really mean is that you haven't really gotten to the endpoint. What you perceive as separate universal nodes are also swirling around some other, greater drain. Fwoosh. Down the toilet.

That is true! And the drain spirals downward as you-yourself have put it. I want to get to the bottom of this, no matter where it leads! :D


Mr Shambles wrote:I would rather say that it is the consciousness which uses the eye as its seeing-tool that is deficient. It is not capable of perception at that level. This is not really a deficiency though either.

It is important to realize that perception and consciousness exist upon inversely-related sliding scales. We have a grand consciousness, but the trade off is that our perception is very weak. 'Digging' reality, via meditation or science, leads ultimately to becoming the universe itself. Both are methods of pulling the world into your mind. It is not difficult to see how both are the process of becoming god, though one seems to be much more destructive than the other.

I agree with this.

For god-knows how many millenniums, we humans, as animals, have developed our eyes to be wary of tigers in the jungle and lions on the plain. Now, all-of-a-sudden, we do not need these eyes to see anymore. We need them to spot that flashlight in the sky, in a distant solar system, in a distant galaxy, in some other place, time, and reality. We need our eyes to get there, wherever in the hell that may be. When I look up into the sky, I see the flashlight, I just do not perceive it nor do I understand it. It is all a blur to my mind. I see the light of stars and galaxies, unable to pinpoint that flashlight.

Science works in this manner: it magnifies what already-exists. That flashlight, somewhere out there, is being seen right now, but we need a more powerful telescope, because evolution of my iris is too slow for my liking. I want to project myself upon the future, right now. So I will use my Science as a tool for the purpose & end. I will use a telescope to see the flashlight, aiding what I expect to be there or not be there.


Mr Shambles wrote:The physical brain is nothing more than a substrate for consciousness. Our particular brand of consciousness is so complex because its home, this brain, is complex. But the brain is not the consciousness, only its clothing. This is also, however, what limits us. We cannot experience anything beyond the bounds of what our brains are equipped to handle. Our investigations will always fall short. To know reality is to become it, but way way down deep, where this universal node resides, being reality is a much simpler way to be. All it is, is 'being.' It cannot think or ponder. God is enslaved to its own simplicity. It has no free will or self-awareness. It is all and it is one. These things are synonymous. To know is to become.

Yes, furthermore, I would go on to state that this consciousness is a manifestation of Form, an interpretation of what-is compared to what-is-not, Void.


Mr Shambles wrote:
Form and Void wrote:6. Either the Universe is expanding or the collective Human Consciousness is expanding, but not both and not neither!

Wait, why not both? I like both. I would like an explanation please.

This is a difficult explanation. If the Universe is expanding, then how can anybody know except to understand our Human Consciousness as still & stagnant? It could be a possibility so let us consider it. On the other hand, let us assume there is a possibility that Human Consciousness is expanding, which seems more probable to me. If I choose both, then how can I explain either or neither? This is where Einstein's Theory of Relativity directly-comes into play. What he supposed was that there is some kind of reference point to which base either comparison off of. We need some sort of foundation. If we presuppose this foundation to be based on Objectivity or Subjectivity, then the resulting world-view will change dramatically, a phenomenon which people (falsely) assume to be Duality ~ the direct cause of all Duality.

...so what I attempt to do with my theory is presuppose "either/or" from the beginning, that perhaps the Universe is unchanging, or perhaps human consciousness (mine or others or collective) is unchanging. Then I must gauge to myself, somehow, which is more likely. And the problem with judging a theory or conclusion to this end is via Human Knowledge. How does a person know anything to begin with??? That is where the Philosophy begins and Science ends up. Without going into great detail, what I will say is that the end result of my investigation leads me to believe that it is the Human Consciousness which is changing, and probably-not the Universe, at all. But this does not rule out possibilities of what is or is not "wrong". It merely-tells me that one route can be indicative of certain kinds of knowledge while the other route is useful toward different ends.

And if I want to make it to the next galaxy beyond the Milky Way, then best-be-advised, I will choose the path that gets me there. Therefore, I will presuppose one-over-the-other, but not both, and not neither. Because if I do not choose and discriminate based on this logic, then I do not even have a hope for pinpointing a path, a navigation, to get me there. And so I will say that rather than the Universe changing, it is probably our collective human consciousness that changes, not the Universe-itself, not both, and not neither. If it were both, then I would be left wondering about the truth, again, to begin with.
Philosophers trade & deal in water, you know? ~ The Universe. Everybody drinks water. Sophists choke on water.

If I have learned of anything in life thus far, then I have learned of the absolute existence of Good & Evil ~ Good & Evil exist absolutely. Some men are born to do Good. Some men are born to do Evil. These two forces reassemble & represent the Primal Movement of the Human Spirit, Human Drama, and Human Trauma. Those who pay homage to God are the Good. Those who resist this tribute are Evil. And only the godless are powerless to choose their Fate & Destiny at all.

So come now and let us crucify this Evil! Let us crucify Jesus Christ of Nazareth once again! Let us watch Rome burn to the ground!
User avatar
Form and Void
BANNED
 
Posts: 400
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 12:24 am

Re: Theory: Universal Node

Postby Jakob » Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:50 pm

Form and Void wrote:[
Now imagine if one Super-Galaxy began to accumulate more & more & more & more & more galaxies, adding to the mass of its center, its supermassive black hole at the center and containing dozens, or hundreds, or even trillions of other galaxies.

This is what I would call a "Universal Node".

It could then continue to pull all matter in the cosmos into it's direct orbit. Because of the increasing momentum of the whole the universe will not remain in orbit for ever but eventually spiral inward into the black hole at it's center, into a Big Crunch.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7497
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: Theory: Universal Node

Postby Form and Void » Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:06 pm

That is a possibility Jakob, wow! ~ very impressive analysis!!!

Do you know what this means!? That means that the Earth may or may not be swirling toward the gravitation of the Sun! If Earth's orbit were perfectly-circular, then that would mean Earth will never "fall" into the Sun. However, if Earth's orbit is declining toward or revolving away, then Earth will either collapse into the Sun or be shot away from it. Personally-speaking, I suppose it to be neither based on my own observations. Though, if in-fact Earth is gradually-collapsing into the center of our solar system, and its imminent demise, then the sun would merely-appear to grow into a Red Giant, although no physical change of the Sun is actually-taking place. So when Science tells us the Sun will become a Red Giant someday, this could mean one-of-two things: 1) the Earth's gravitation toward the Sun is constant and the Sun is growing in physical size, or 2) the Earth is spiraling towards the Sun and the Sun is not changing its actual size ~ the shortened distance is the cause for the appearance of the Red Giant.

These are just some possibilities that could be the case by the logic you have demonstrated.
Philosophers trade & deal in water, you know? ~ The Universe. Everybody drinks water. Sophists choke on water.

If I have learned of anything in life thus far, then I have learned of the absolute existence of Good & Evil ~ Good & Evil exist absolutely. Some men are born to do Good. Some men are born to do Evil. These two forces reassemble & represent the Primal Movement of the Human Spirit, Human Drama, and Human Trauma. Those who pay homage to God are the Good. Those who resist this tribute are Evil. And only the godless are powerless to choose their Fate & Destiny at all.

So come now and let us crucify this Evil! Let us crucify Jesus Christ of Nazareth once again! Let us watch Rome burn to the ground!
User avatar
Form and Void
BANNED
 
Posts: 400
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 12:24 am

Re: Theory: Universal Node

Postby Form and Void » Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:34 am

If anybody wants to know the source of my little theory here, then take a look at this human iris I have as my new icon.

That is where I got the idea from, the human eye, the separation between: self-as-object, self-as-subject, darkness, and lightness.
Philosophers trade & deal in water, you know? ~ The Universe. Everybody drinks water. Sophists choke on water.

If I have learned of anything in life thus far, then I have learned of the absolute existence of Good & Evil ~ Good & Evil exist absolutely. Some men are born to do Good. Some men are born to do Evil. These two forces reassemble & represent the Primal Movement of the Human Spirit, Human Drama, and Human Trauma. Those who pay homage to God are the Good. Those who resist this tribute are Evil. And only the godless are powerless to choose their Fate & Destiny at all.

So come now and let us crucify this Evil! Let us crucify Jesus Christ of Nazareth once again! Let us watch Rome burn to the ground!
User avatar
Form and Void
BANNED
 
Posts: 400
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 12:24 am

Re: Theory: Universal Node

Postby Andrej » Sat Apr 04, 2009 12:01 am

Form and Void wrote:If anybody wants to know the source of my little theory here, then take a look at this human iris I have as my new icon.

That is where I got the idea from, the human eye, the separation between: self-as-object, self-as-subject, darkness, and lightness.


How would you interpret the movement in the iris?
User avatar
Andrej
 
Posts: 449
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 12:30 am

Re: Theory: Universal Node

Postby Form and Void » Sat Apr 04, 2009 12:47 am

Andrej wrote:How would you interpret the movement in the iris?

The pupil dilates and contracts according to the physical principle between a light source and the human mind focusing via light refraction.

Furthermore, the human eye "covets what it seeks" so-to-speak, which theoretically-means the human eye looks after its own life, its own mortality, and not toward death. Have you ever heard the phrase "DON'T LOOK DOWN!!!"? The literal translation is "ignore the death around you". Using an analogy, light-as-life and dark-as-death, the human eye then goes on to discriminate all visual interpretations possible. The human eye has perfect resolution. No matter how much technology increases the resolution of a video screen; it will never match the qualitative notion of perfection. So the dilation & contraction of the pupil changes according to two factors: 1) light intensity, and 2) conscious perception. The world is seen in the human mind as a reflection of itself.

There is a reason why sleep and sensory-deprivation chambers are devoid of light and why blackness/blindness is seen as a state of death and non-movement. Think about the handicap of a blind man. He cannot utilize his sense of sight and must rely on other senses for his survival. But he is "handicapped" because of how sight plays a crucial role in general-survival. The human species depends on sight & sound for a vast majority of its evolutionary successes. In fact, we depend on all of our senses to different degrees, of course. But the human eye is a paramount one, able to see the past, present, and future through the scope of how light-itself becomes absorbed by the mind-itself. I believe I already-presumed in this thread that the human mind undergoes a physical process very akin to photosynthesis in plant-life for the development of its conscious-ego.

All movement of the human eye is infinitely-significant. I see therefore I know.
Philosophers trade & deal in water, you know? ~ The Universe. Everybody drinks water. Sophists choke on water.

If I have learned of anything in life thus far, then I have learned of the absolute existence of Good & Evil ~ Good & Evil exist absolutely. Some men are born to do Good. Some men are born to do Evil. These two forces reassemble & represent the Primal Movement of the Human Spirit, Human Drama, and Human Trauma. Those who pay homage to God are the Good. Those who resist this tribute are Evil. And only the godless are powerless to choose their Fate & Destiny at all.

So come now and let us crucify this Evil! Let us crucify Jesus Christ of Nazareth once again! Let us watch Rome burn to the ground!
User avatar
Form and Void
BANNED
 
Posts: 400
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 12:24 am

Re: Theory: Universal Node

Postby Jakob » Sun Apr 05, 2009 10:37 pm

Form and Void wrote:These are just some possibilities that could be the case by the logic you have demonstrated.

I believe I was following yours, with all this galaxy-eating.
If there is a singular axis of gravity around which the revolving matter is changing gravitational structure, how do you explain the constancy of the orbit? When you have all this counterparallel activity? You have to make that plausible if gravity is the hub of your model.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7497
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: Theory: Universal Node

Postby Form and Void » Tue Apr 07, 2009 4:44 am

Image

Theory: Celestial objects stay perfectly-unchanged in orbit.

Proof: The moon does not fall into Earth or shoot away from Earth.

If Gravitational Forces were inconsistent, then the Moon would either crash into Earth or be flung out into deep space. Neither of these things happen by all accounts. What I mean to say is: The Moon is not going anywhere anytime soon. The reason for this is due to how physical objects move through physical dimensions of the Universe: space (location), time (position), and reality (perspective). Under my theory here, if the collective human consciousness perceives the Moon to be getting smaller, and thus, is being flung into deep space, then this substantiates an unchanging Perspective (which assumes the human mind does not err). On the other hand, if the Moon is getting larger & larger, and thus, is being sucked up by Earth's gravity, then this substantiates another unchanging human Perspective. Now, finally, if the human Perspective is assumed to be changing, then we cannot possibly-know whether the Moon is stationary or not, in constant orbit.

However, in response to this later inquiry, we can furthermore assume that it is only Human Perspective, our collective consciousness that is changing, and the Moon is staying in perfect orbit. I actually-do assume this as true. And it does not actually-matter if I am correct or not, because my Perspective assumes a universal consistency to which I can base Scientific Theory. Thus, my proof becomes Scientifically & Empirically valuable and necessary despite its accuracy or inaccuracy.

Conclusion: If the Moon is in perfect orbit with the Earth, then I can map & track localities based on assumed consistency. Any mistake that occurs then must be attributed to either human error or Universal error, but not both, and not neither. Thus, such a situation would require either a minor adjustment in calculations, or, a severe Paradigm shift in the whole of Western Philosophy, Science, and Religion ... either/or.

...but not both, and not neither.
Philosophers trade & deal in water, you know? ~ The Universe. Everybody drinks water. Sophists choke on water.

If I have learned of anything in life thus far, then I have learned of the absolute existence of Good & Evil ~ Good & Evil exist absolutely. Some men are born to do Good. Some men are born to do Evil. These two forces reassemble & represent the Primal Movement of the Human Spirit, Human Drama, and Human Trauma. Those who pay homage to God are the Good. Those who resist this tribute are Evil. And only the godless are powerless to choose their Fate & Destiny at all.

So come now and let us crucify this Evil! Let us crucify Jesus Christ of Nazareth once again! Let us watch Rome burn to the ground!
User avatar
Form and Void
BANNED
 
Posts: 400
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 12:24 am

Re: Theory: Universal Node

Postby Jakob » Tue Apr 07, 2009 4:24 pm

Yes, in our stable solar sytem the orbits are stable.
If, however, the moon would collide with some other object which it would absorb, given that it would not break and splinter into fragments, which is likely because it is a hard cold ball of stone and not a dynamic mass of nuclear fusion, but absorb the object like in the model you propose, it would either fall down on earth or be flung away into space.

Our solar system is a precarious balance, not a similar model to your system where galaxies are absorbing others and not only increasing in mass and momentum, but also being altered in their course by collisions.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7497
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: Theory: Universal Node

Postby Form and Void » Tue Apr 07, 2009 4:40 pm

Well you must be careful about what my theory states and does not state.

In my working model, I assume that galaxies collide, and celestial objects collide. However, what you are not taking into account is my concept of 'absorption'. If a meteor were to crash into the moon, then there is very little Science can tell us what will happen until we directly-test & observe such hypotheses. By my predictions and theory, a large set of cases would be probable depending on how violent the impact or disruption of orbit is.

By your own words, our solar system is in a "delicate balance". What makes you believe something will disrupt this balance except the mass of another whole colliding solar system? Chances are high, so-it-seems, that if a very large meteor impacted the Moon, say the size of a smaller moon, then I believe Earth will gravitize both of these moons into its orbit without serious disruption to Earth's rotation around the Sun. There may be vast changes in seasons, or weather, but other than that I do not know the affects. The same applies to Super Galaxy collisions by my estimates.

When thinking about these celestial relations, we much necessarily-consider where celestial objects originate from. Within the solar system, nothing is going to occur so suddenly and violently. A good metaphor to think about this is your own human body. It would be like assuming you are just going to blow-up and your body explodes in the next hour just because you drank some milk. It does not make sense. Just the same, it does not make sense to say that Earth, or our solar system, is going to randomly-end tomorrow without a violent change in its physical nature. And it also just so happens that a predominant cause for the death of the human body is violence from the outside-directed-inside, much like a murderer kills a victim.
Philosophers trade & deal in water, you know? ~ The Universe. Everybody drinks water. Sophists choke on water.

If I have learned of anything in life thus far, then I have learned of the absolute existence of Good & Evil ~ Good & Evil exist absolutely. Some men are born to do Good. Some men are born to do Evil. These two forces reassemble & represent the Primal Movement of the Human Spirit, Human Drama, and Human Trauma. Those who pay homage to God are the Good. Those who resist this tribute are Evil. And only the godless are powerless to choose their Fate & Destiny at all.

So come now and let us crucify this Evil! Let us crucify Jesus Christ of Nazareth once again! Let us watch Rome burn to the ground!
User avatar
Form and Void
BANNED
 
Posts: 400
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 12:24 am

Re: Theory: Universal Node

Postby Jakob » Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:12 pm

Of course it all depends on the masses of the two objects involved combined with their direction and speed.
If a rock a tenth the size of our moon would collide with our moon head on, assuming the moon would not break, it would certainy decrease the moons speed enough for the Earths gravity to pull it out of its orbit. Thats all I mean with precarious.

Im not suggestion a breakdown of the balance out of nothing. But thats not what your model describes. It speaks of fusions. I dont klnow the physics to that, how the accumulation of power relates to kinetic energy, maybe the orbit automatically increases in speed when mass is added on these temperatures. But thats just a wild suggestion.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7497
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: Theory: Universal Node

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Fri Nov 19, 2021 10:18 am

Bump
Urwrongx1000
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7941
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Theory: Universal Node

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Mon Jan 03, 2022 5:02 am

Bump for 2022
Urwrongx1000
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7941
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Theory: Universal Node

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Mon Jan 03, 2022 5:09 am

The Mayan Prophesy was fulfilled in 2012

The "End of Time" has been reached.


But Humans need to understand exactly what "Time" is, and why time has "Ended". What did the Mayans predict exactly, why and how? What is the End of that calendar?

The end of that calendar is the end of knowing 'Time' as the relationship between Earth and the Sun. What humanity calls Day, Week, Month, Year, Decade, Century, Millennia, Eons, etc. is based on the rotations and direction between the Earth and Sun. However, when the Human specie soon begins Space-exploration, travel, and colonization... this idea of 'Time' will radically differ and alter. Because 'Time' cannot be relative between only the Earth and Sun, as future humans travel through dead-space.

A new measure of 'Time' will be needed.


And this is exactly what the Mayan Calendar's End represented. This is also the Symbolism and Meaning of the Christian and Abrahamic "End of Time" Era, which we are now in.

The Prophesies have been fulfilled.
Urwrongx1000
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7941
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Theory: Universal Node

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Mon Jan 03, 2022 5:12 am

Jakob wrote:Of course it all depends on the masses of the two objects involved combined with their direction and speed.
If a rock a tenth the size of our moon would collide with our moon head on, assuming the moon would not break, it would certainy decrease the moons speed enough for the Earths gravity to pull it out of its orbit. Thats all I mean with precarious.

Im not suggestion a breakdown of the balance out of nothing. But thats not what your model describes. It speaks of fusions. I dont klnow the physics to that, how the accumulation of power relates to kinetic energy, maybe the orbit automatically increases in speed when mass is added on these temperatures. But thats just a wild suggestion.

I'd been thinking about that a lot.

Consider a set of planets and asteroids, Universal mass, as a 'Net' of gravity. Gravity is a relationship between sets of these planets and suns. We cannot know much about these 'Nets' until we explore them and measure them.
Urwrongx1000
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7941
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Previous

Return to Science, Technology, and Math



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron