We see what we see infront of us. We see what is reflected off a window, or shown through a camera because that is what we perceive. What happens to the things we can't see by any means? Without a video camera, reflection off any object or anything like that then how do we know what happens to the world we cannot see? In an attempt to think up of a lag proof video game, i came up with a solution to show the scenerio only when your character in the game is pointing towards it. Of course this is a first person view. the scenerio that the character does not see, dissapears and is replaced with a simple code. When the characters eyes passes over the scenerio that dissapeared, that scenerio is brought back meanwhile all other scenerios are turned into the simple code. Lets say this is processed into our vision. what we see is there but what we don't see is blackness. What do you think?

We see what we see infront of us. We see what is reflected off a window, or shown through a camera because that is what we perceive. What happens to the things we can't see by any means? Without a video camera, reflection off any object or anything like that then how do we know what happens to the world we cannot see? In an attempt to think up of a lag proof video game, i came up with a solution to show the scenerio only when your character in the game is pointing towards it. Of course this is a first person view. the scenerio that the character does not see, dissapears and is replaced with a simple code. When the characters eyes passes over the scenerio that dissapeared, that scenerio is brought back meanwhile all other scenerios are turned into the simple code. Lets say this is processed into our vision. what we see is there but what we don't see is blackness. What do you think?Could be, I thought about that too, but I guess that everything is physical but we give it meaning, cause that can't be created by the universe itself. May be. Or do the universe really seem meaningless to you? If everything was meaningless could we even stand living?

I've never seen anything

Or do the universe really seem meaningless to you? If everything was meaningless could we even stand living?


Why would you think this? I believe everything in the universe has some kind of meaning. Because if there was no meaning, then it wouldn't be there, which sparks up another interest to me. I think the reason for animals and people to die is because it has lost it's meaning. The same things applies to inamite objects. For instance we lose things for an ultimate purpose. It puts us through a period of time in which we need to withstand to continue through out our lives. But the object going missing doesn't neceserilly mean it lost it's meaning but rather it is furfilling it's meaning. And once we find this object once again it obtains and/or loses its meaning.

I think the reason for animals and people to die is not because they have lost their meanings, but rather, they nolonger need their body to fullfill their purpose, or their body nolonger serve them.
I agree with the rest, objects lost and found gives us the experience of lost and found - one of the purpose for the object to exist.

I have a little twister for you.

As you look outwards you see as you would a tv set when looking at it from the front.

Now take that tv set and turn it side on so that you can't see the picture but you know it's on.
Now imagine that the picture in the TV set is a three dimensional reality.

As seen from the this vantage point the picture is two dimensional in other words can't be seen. However no matter which way you look the three dimensional picture ( reality) is always side on and can never be seen,

Like comparing a line with a dot. ---------- . The dot being the line side on.

What do you think?

The Holographic Universe



The Universe as a Hologram
Author Unknown

In 1982 a remarkable event took place. At the University of Paris a research team led by physicist Alain Aspect performed what may turn out to be one of the most important experiments of the 20th century. You did not hear about it on the evening news. In fact, unless you are in the habit of reading scientific journals you probably have never even heard Aspect's name, though there are some who believe his discovery may change the face of science.

Aspect and his team discovered that under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them. It doesn't matter whether they are 10 feet or 10 billion miles apart.

Somehow each particle always seems to know what the other is doing. The problem with this feat is that it violates Einstein's long-held tenet that no communication can travel faster than the speed of light. Since traveling faster than the speed of light is tantamount to breaking the time barrier, this daunting prospect has caused some physicists to try to come up with elaborate ways to explain away Aspect's findings. But it has inspired others to offer even more radical explanations.

University of London physicist David Bohm, for example, believes Aspect's findings imply that objective reality does not exist, that despite its apparent solidity the universe is at heart a phantasm, a gigantic and splendidly detailed hologram.

To understand why Bohm makes this startling assertion, one must first understand a little about holograms. A hologram is a three- dimensional photograph made with the aid of a laser.

To make a hologram, the object to be photographed is first bathed in the light of a laser beam. Then a second laser beam is bounced off the reflected light of the first and the resulting interference pattern (the area where the two laser beams commingle) is captured on film.

When the film is developed, it looks like a meaningless swirl of light and dark lines. But as soon as the developed film is illuminated by another laser beam, a three-dimensional image of the original object appears.

The three-dimensionality of such images is not the only remarkable characteristic of holograms. If a hologram of a rose is cut in half and then illuminated by a laser, each half will still be found to contain the entire image of the rose.

Indeed, even if the halves are divided again, each snippet of film will always be found to contain a smaller but intact version of the original image. Unlike normal photographs, every part of a hologram contains all the information possessed by the whole.

The "whole in every part" nature of a hologram provides us with an entirely new way of understanding organization and order. For most of its history, Western science has labored under the bias that the best way to understand a physical phenomenon, whether a frog or an atom, is to dissect it and study its respective parts.

A hologram teaches us that some things in the universe may not lend themselves to this approach. If we try to take apart something constructed holographically, we will not get the pieces of which it is made, we will only get smaller wholes.

This insight suggested to Bohm another way of understanding Aspect's discovery. Bohm believes the reason subatomic particles are able to remain in contact with one another regardless of the distance separating them is not because they are sending some sort of mysterious signal back and forth, but because their separateness is an illusion. He argues that at some deeper level of reality such particles are not individual entities, but are actually extensions of the same fundamental something.

To enable people to better visualize what he means, Bohm offers the following illustration.

Imagine an aquarium containing a fish. Imagine also that you are unable to see the aquarium directly and your knowledge about it and what it contains comes from two television cameras, one directed at the aquarium's front and the other directed at its side.

As you stare at the two television monitors, you might assume that the fish on each of the screens are separate entities. After all, because the cameras are set at different angles, each of the images will be slightly different. But as you continue to watch the two fish, you will eventually become aware that there is a certain relationship between them.

When one turns, the other also makes a slightly different but corresponding turn; when one faces the front, the other always faces toward the side. If you remain unaware of the full scope of the situation, you might even conclude that the fish must be instantaneously communicating with one another, but this is clearly not the case.

This, says Bohm, is precisely what is going on between the subatomic particles in Aspect's experiment.

According to Bohm, the apparent faster-than-light connection between subatomic particles is really telling us that there is a deeper level of reality we are not privy to, a more complex dimension beyond our own that is analogous to the aquarium. And, he adds, we view objects such as subatomic particles as separate from one another because we are seeing only a portion of their reality.

Such particles are not separate "parts", but facets of a deeper and more underlying unity that is ultimately as holographic and indivisible as the previously mentioned rose. And since everything in physical reality is comprised of these "eidolons", the universe is itself a projection, a hologram.

In addition to its phantomlike nature, such a universe would possess other rather startling features. If the apparent separateness of subatomic particles is illusory, it means that at a deeper level of reality all things in the universe are infinitely interconnected.

The electrons in a carbon atom in the human brain are connected to the subatomic particles that comprise every salmon that swims, every heart that beats, and every star that shimmers in the sky.

Everything interpenetrates everything, and although human nature may seek to categorize and pigeonhole and subdivide, the various phenomena of the universe, all apportionments are of necessity artificial and all of nature is ultimately a seamless web.

In a holographic universe, even time and space could no longer be viewed as fundamentals. Because concepts such as location break down in a universe in which nothing is truly separate from anything else, time and three-dimensional space, like the images of the fish on the TV monitors, would also have to be viewed as projections of this deeper order.

At its deeper level reality is a sort of superhologram in which the past, present, and future all exist simultaneously. This suggests that given the proper tools it might even be possible to someday reach into the superholographic level of reality and pluck out scenes from the long-forgotten past.

What else the superhologram contains is an open-ended question. Allowing, for the sake of argument, that the superhologram is the matrix that has given birth to everything in our universe, at the very least it contains every subatomic particle that has been or will be -- every configuration of matter and energy that is possible, from snowflakes to quasars, from bluü whales to gamma rays. It must be seen as a sort of cosmic storehouse of "All That Is."

Although Bohm concedes that we have no way of knowing what else might lie hidden in the superhologram, he does venture to say that we have no reason to assume it does not contain more. Or as he puts it, perhaps the superholographic level of reality is a "mere stage" beyond which lies "an infinity of further development".

Bohm is not the only researcher who has found evidence that the universe is a hologram. Working independently in the field of brain research, Standford neurophysiologist Karl Pribram has also become persuaded of the holographic nature of reality.

Pribram was drawn to the holographic model by the puzzle of how and where memories are stored in the brain. For decades numerous studies have shown that rather than being confined to a specific location, memories are dispersed throughout the brain.

In a series of landmark experiments in the 1920s, brain scientist Karl Lashley found that no matter what portion of a rat's brain he removed he was unable to eradicate its memory of how to perform complex tasks it had learned prior to surgery. The only problem was that no one was able to come up with a mechanism that might explain this curious "whole in every part" nature of memory storage.

Then in the 1960s Pribram encountered the concept of holography and realized he had found the explanation brain scientists had been looking for. Pribram believes memories are encoded not in neurons, or small groupings of neurons, but in patterns of nerve impulses that crisscross the entire brain in the same way that patterns of laser light interference crisscross the entire area of a piece of film containing a holographic image. In other words, Pribram believes the brain is itself a hologram.

Pribram's theory also explains how the human brain can store so many memories in so little space. It has been estimated that the human brain has the capacity to memorize something on the order of 10 billion bits of information during the average human lifetime (or roughly the same amount of information contained in five sets of the Encyclopaedia Britannica).

Similarly, it has been discovered that in addition to their other capabilities, holograms possess an astounding capacity for information storage--simply by changing the angle at which the two lasers strike a piece of photographic film, it is possible to record many different images on the same surface. It has been demonstrated that one cubic centimeter of film can hold as many as 10 billion bits of information.

Our uncanny ability to quickly retrieve whatever information we need from the enormous store of our memories becomes more understandable if the brain functions according to holographic principles. If a friend asks you to tell him what comes to mind when he says the word "zebra", you do not have to clumsily sort back through ome gigantic and cerebral alphabetic file to arrive at an answer. Instead, associations like "striped", "horselike", and "animal native to Africa" all pop into your head instantly.

Indeed, one of the most amazing things about the human thinking process is that every piece of information seems instantly cross- correlated with every other piece of information--another feature intrinsic to the hologram. Because every portion of a hologram is infinitely interconnected with ever other portion, it is perhaps nature's supreme example of a cross-correlated system.

The storage of memory is not the only neurophysiological puzzle that becomes more tractable in light of Pribram's holographic model of the brain. Another is how the brain is able to translate the avalanche of frequencies it receives via the senses (light frequencies, sound frequencies, and so on) into the concrete world of our perceptions. Encoding and decoding frequencies is precisely what a hologram does best. Just as a hologram functions as a sort of lens, a translating device able to convert an apparently meaningless blur of frequencies into a coherent image, Pribram believes the brain also comprises a lens and uses holographic principles to mathematically convert the frequencies it receives through he senses into the inner world of our perceptions.

An impressive body of evidence suggests that the brain uses holographic principles to perform its operations. Pribram's theory, in fact, has gained increasing support among neurophysiologists.

Argentinian-Italian researcher Hugo Zucarelli recently extended the holographic model into the world of acoustic phenomena. Puzzled by the fact that humans can locate the source of sounds without moving their heads, even if they only possess hearing in one ear, Zucarelli discovered that holographic principles can explain this ability.

Zucarelli has also developed the technology of holophonic sound, a recording technique able to reproduce acoustic situations with an almost uncanny realism.

Pribram's belief that our brains mathematically construct "hard" reality by relying on input from a frequency domain has also received a good deal of experimental support.

It has been found that each of our senses is sensitive to a much broader range of frequencies than was previously suspected.

Researchers have discovered, for instance, that our visual systems are sensitive to sound frequencies, that our sense of smell is in part dependent on what are now called "osmic frequencies", and that even the cells in our bodies are sensitive to a broad range of frequencies. Such findings suggest that it is only in the holographic domain of consciousness that such frequencies are sorted out and divided up into conventional perceptions.

But the most mind-boggling aspect of Pribram's holographic model of the brain is what happens when it is put together with Bohm's theory. For if the concreteness of the world is but a secondary reality and what is "there" is actually a holographic blur of frequencies, and if the brain is also a hologram and only selects some of the frequencies out of this blur and mathematically transforms them into sensory perceptions, what becomes of objective reality?

Put quite simply, it ceases to exist. As the religions of the East have long upheld, the material world is Maya, an illusion, and although we may think we are physical beings moving through a physical world, this too is an illusion.

We are really "receivers" floating through a kaleidoscopic sea of frequency, and what we extract from this sea and transmogrify into physical reality is but one channel from many extracted out of the superhologram.

This striking new picture of reality, the synthesis of Bohm and Pribram's views, has come to be called the holographic paradigm, and although many scientists have greeted it with skepticism, it has galvanized others. A small but growing group of researchers believe it may be the most accurate model of reality science has arrived at thus far. More than that, some believe it may solve some mysteries that have never before been explainable by science and even establish the paranormal as a part of nature.

Numerous researchers, including Bohm and Pribram, have noted that many para-psychological phenomena become much more understandable in terms of the holographic paradigm.

In a universe in which individual brains are actually indivisible portions of the greater hologram and everything is infinitely interconnected, telepathy may merely be the accessing of the holographic level.

It is obviously much easier to understand how information can travel from the mind of individual 'A' to that of individual 'B' at a far distance point and helps to understand a number of unsolved puzzles in psychology. In particular, Grof feels the holographic paradigm offers a model for understanding many of the baffling phenomena experienced by individuals during altered states of consciousness.




CONTINUED







CREATION INDEX

ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF ALL FILES

CRYSTALINKS MAIN PAGE

I also believe that there is some kind of meaning to everything, so don't take me wrong, I just think that we have to find it. Or maybe it's enough knowing that it's there even though we don't know exactly what it is.

But the meaning can't be clearly seen, so if we didn't give objects meaning, then they would appear meaningless. Seems like whatever meaning we give objects around us it must be less true, cause it would be really hard to find the meaning that God Himself has given things as a step of His grander plan.

I think we fool ourselves because we know it has meaning - this we know, but we can't figure it out, so to give ourselves the feeling of meaning (that is so entirely beyond our comprehension), we have to create some plastic copy of the meaning, merely to give ourselves hope.

Imagine this scenario, you have seen the truth about everything, the only problem is that you can't explain anything you have seen (there's just no words to describe it), but you are left with a feeling of astonishment. Even though you can't explain exactly what you have seen, you can try to explain the feeling of astonishment to the degree that it kind of resembles what you had seen.

We feel that there are meaning, but we can't describe it, so thus we create something that resembles the feeling but isn't the truth.

That is how I see it.

Vortox, I have re-read your original post and I want to confirm that I understand it.

What I think you are suggesting is the old " if I shut my eyes the universe disappears routine" But you refer to it as converting to a code until you open your eyes again.

I feel that in some ways there is truth in the proposition in that at any time for instance, nearly half the worlds population is asleep and unconscious whilst the other half is awake and conscious. Are the conscous ones keeping reality going whilthe others sleep?

The same could be said universally.

I wonder what would happen if all were asleep at the the same time, would the universe continue to exist?

Unfortunetly Quantum Quack, that would be impossible. That theory can never be tested and never will be found out to be true or not. Humans are not the only thing that sleep and perceive their surrodings. Organelles and other animals also do this. Plus the possiblity of extraterrestrial life on other planets also play a part. There is no way to do this unless you anniliate the universe and kill every living thing in the universe, but then the universe would be dystroyed either way. Unless of course you apply my big bang theory.

As for you riddle Quantum, I give you my own. Look a a person any person, or look at an object any object you want no matter what position it is in. What is giving this object 3 dimensions? If you really think about it, and concentrate on your enviroment you will see that there is no depth. Concentrate enough and you will see that evertyhing is flat for nothing is transparent. A transparent cube shows 3 dimensions but our vision shows only 1 dimension.

I think the reason for animals and people to die is not because they have lost their meanings, but rather, they nolonger need their body to fullfill their purpose, or their body nolonger serve them.
I agree with the rest, objects lost and found gives us the experience of lost and found - one of the purpose for the object to exist.


Think about this. We lose our body because our body has lost its meaning.

Machaon, please deleate your post and put a link. It is taking up to much room.

As for you riddle Quantum, I give you my own. Look a a person any person, or look at an object any object you want no matter what position it is in. What is giving this object 3 dimensions? If you really think about it, and concentrate on your enviroment you will see that there is no depth. Concentrate enough and you will see that evertyhing is flat for nothing is transparent. [QUOTE]

Vortox, Could you expand on this a little.
"Transperancy" and "one dimension" need a little elaborating.

[QUOTE]A transparent cube shows 3 dimensions but our vision shows only 1 dimension.

Are you refering to an actual transperent cube or a drawn one on a piece of paper or monitor sceen.

One dimension being? ( two possibly )

I have often thought that reality is actually a three dimensional interpretation of two dimensionality.

edit: Part of my reply ended up in the quote sorry!

Votorx: Think about this. We lose our body because our body has lost its meaning.
It nolonger serves us = lost it's meaning (for me). I still believe we are more than just a body.

Votorx: Think about this. We lose our body because our body has lost its meaning.
It nolonger serves us = lost it's meaning (for me). I still believe we are more than just a body.That's a good point Hevene.

Votorx: Think about this. We lose our body because our body has lost its meaning.
It nolonger serves us = lost it's meaning (for me). I still believe we are more than just a body.

Of course WE are more than just a body. But our body no longer has it's meaning for us, so we lose our body but WE are not lost, atleast not yet. Something happens when we lose our body, what happens we do not know and cannot possibly conceive, i am just given my reason to why we die, not what happens after death. That is something that we will only know when the time comes.

Machaon - a hologram doesn't need to be illuminated with a laser to be seen. They put them on credit cards. You should recheck your article.

EDIT: Also, it has never been shown that there is no information loss when a hologram has been subdivided, although I would have to look into this.

[QUOTE]
Vortox, Could you expand on this a little.
"Transperancy" and "one dimension" need a little elaborating.

Are you refering to an actual transperent cube or a drawn one on a piece of paper or monitor sceen.

One dimension being? ( two possibly )

I have often thought that reality is actually a three dimensional interpretation of two dimensionality.

Correct me if im wrong but 3 dimensions = Length Width and Height right?

I made a mistake when i said there was only 1 dimension, for there are 2, but not 3. There is length and height, yet no width. Now when you look at your enviroment in general, do you SEE any depth? I mean really concentrate on your enviroment and you will see that our eyes perceive this picture as flat, not containing any depth whatsoever. The curves and vast shapes of the objects present gives us the illusion that there is depth, our senses also give us this idea, yet once you get the idea that this is the enviroment around you is actually flat with no depth you will see that it really does seem like this. There is no depth.


Now try and apply this idea to my earlier post, i cannot do it right now because i need some time to think O.o. unfortunetly I'm thinking of this as I go, and i fear i do not have the time for me to explain myself right now. I will post here again asap.

Votorx: We still have a perception of depth because of parallax. Our perception of the universe is not strictly two-dimensional, even if it is close.

It's close enough to me.

Machaon - a hologram doesn't need to be illuminated with a laser to be seen. They put them on credit cards. You should recheck your article.


But it DOES take a laser to create them. And I did not post the article for scientific dissection, I merely wanted to plant the idea like a seed to see what conclusions would sprout from your mind and to offer what could be a potentially useful perspective for you to build on.

Machaon - a hologram doesn't need to be illuminated with a laser to be seen. They put them on credit cards. You should recheck your article.


But it DOES take a laser to create them. And I did not post the article for scientific dissection, I merely wanted to plant the idea like a seed to see what conclusions would sprout from your mind and to offer what could be a potentially useful perspective for you to build on.Actually a laser isn't needed, but is used because we don't really understand how the interference works, someone could if he really understood it, write a interference pattern by the use of tools (thus without laser), or maybe a computer program could print these patterns.

Now, I don't know if we understand how they work, or if we don't, but at least I know it's possible to create a interference pattern without a laser, it would be possible simply by trial and error.

Of course WE are more than just a body. But our body no longer has it's meaning for us, so we lose our body but WE are not lost, atleast not yet. Something happens when we lose our body, what happens we do not know and cannot possibly conceive, i am just given my reason to why we die, not what happens after death. That is something that we will only know when the time comes.

I should correct what I just said. After we die, we don't loose our bodies, but it is transformed into something less dense. We are always a three part being: body-mind-spirit. (this is what I believe in)

I should correct what I just said. After we die, we don't loose our bodies, but it is transformed into something less dense. We are always a three part being: body-mind-spirit. (this is what I believe in)

But it can't be that way since our body is always left behind to decay and feed the earth. Which also leads to something else. The reason the body hasn't dissapeared like other objects once is loses it's meaning is because the Earth has found a meaning for this body, and that is to feed the worms and help the soil.

This is all up to your belief system. For me, we are always a body-mind-spirit being. When we die (more correctly, change form, we don't die), we leave behind the dense part of our body, some energy from our physical body will always be with us.

The way I see it, anyone claiming that one will have anymore awareness after they die than they possessed before they were born are grasping at straws. I believe that the sooner someone deals with the fact that life is sandwiched between two impenetrable voids, the sooner they really start living. Vision belongs to the living and is nontransferable. No refunds. No exchanges. Batteries not included.

That's not true. When you live with such belief, you will be living with constant fear - do it now, or never. Knowing life is never ending, provides you with a sense of peace, this will allow you to live in joy and peace.

Hevene - do you fear the time before you were born?

Why should you fear the time after you die?

I would like to live forever, but I'm not going to make plans for after my death...

MACHAON WROTE: The way I see it, anyone claiming that one will have anymore awareness after they die than they possessed before they were born are grasping at straws. I believe that the sooner someone deals with the fact that life is sandwiched between two impenetrable voids, the sooner they really start living. Vision belongs to the living and is nontransferable. No refunds. No exchanges. Batteries not included.

And, just how do you know that there was no awareness before this life? I agree to some degree with Hevene. First, I believe I was before I came, and I believe I will be after I am gone. I believe that when this body is left behind I will still be. This body, to me, is simply something to travel in while we are here, once we leave this life/world, we will have no use for it, right?

PMT

Hevene - do you fear the time before you were born?

Why should you fear the time after you die?


No greater words have ever been uttered. I cast a shadow in your presence BigBlueHead.

I think you missed Hevene's point entirely.

Hevene - do you fear the time before you were born?

Why should you fear the time after you die?

I would like to live forever, but I'm not going to make plans for after my death...

WELL SAID! Couldn't have put it better myself, but I believe an Epicurean could and has...


That's that whole symmetry argument by the Epicurean poet Lucretius. He stated that "the past infinity of pre-natal non-existence is like the future infinity of post-mortem non-existence; it is as though nature has put up a mirror to let us see what our future non-existence will be like. But we do not consider not having existed for an eternity before our births to be a terrible thing; therefore, neither should we think not existing for an eternity after our deaths to be evil."

epicurus link (http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/e/epicur.htm)

Well put, BigBlueHead.

And, just how do you know that there was no awareness before this life? I agree to some degree with Hevene. First, I believe I was before I came, and I believe I will be after I am gone. I believe that when this body is left behind I will still be. This body, to me, is simply something to travel in while we are here, once we leave this life/world, we will have no use for it, right?

PMT

do your parents know you're this smart?

P. M. Thorne
I agree with you.

machaon and BigBlueHead
I don't fear the time before I was born, nor I fear the time after I die. There is no need, we never die. Living with fear will greatly reduce your ability to create who you are. It simply does not work to create the next grandest version you ever held about yourself. This is what I meant. I don't really know what you guys thought I meant.

Love and Peace

PM Thorne - Hevene's point was that believing in death would make you a fearful person and lessen your creativity. My point was that you can believe that death is real and still not fear it.

Death may not be a cessation of all experience... even if it were, you couldn't experience it.

Machaon & Chalaco

I'd love to take credit for those words, but they're David Hume's. He said them when he was dying, I understand.

The most important things in life are invisible to the eye.......love for an example.

Cosmic - what about food?

that's true, BigBlueHead.

Cosmic, perhaps you should've put SOME :bugeye:

Nice insight Machaon, it'll give me some food for thought.

CHALACO wrote: do your parents know you're this smart?

I have no idea. Now, I could ask if your parents had any children, but I do not know you well enought to jest in such a manner. Be nice.

FROM BIG BLUE HEAD: "PM Thorne - Hevene's point was that believing in death would make you a fearful person and lessen your creativity. My point was that you can believe that death is real and still not fear it."

Sorry, I did not get that particular point from the quote from her that you gave with your answer. Of course, you can believe that when you are dead all is over, and not necessarily fear it. One can also believe in eternal life and fear death.

Thank you for setting me straight, I guess, but I still have a strong inclination that her words were not taken as she meant them. Anyway, people believe what they believe, and some do not know what they believe. Go for it. PMT

HEVENE: I do not know much, but there is one thing I know: God is. I also have many beliefs and a lot of questions. However, if Socrates and Apostle Paul felt they had a lot to learn, even as they faced their end on this earth, none of these big smart guys are going to intimidate me too much.

Take this light-heartedly. I have no anamosity toward them, but they do sometimes sound like the search for truth has ended, and maybe it has for some, but I can tell you, I am very enthusiastic about life. I love my fellowman, and I do my best to follow Christ's teachings. It matters more who I am than what people think about how smart I am, or am not!!! PMT

Sorry, I have no idea who this Socrates and Apostle Paul is. (If they are part of some religion, I don't study them) However, I do agree with you that "God is". All I was trying to say is that there is nothing to fear, death is not the end (there is no death, we are an enternal being).
One can also believe in eternal life and fear death.
Knowing all is well (that you cannot get hurt), why would you fear an end to your physical body? You can always create another one if that suits your purpose later. Living without fears gives you peace that brings love and joy.

Hevene writes: Sorry, I have no idea who this Socrates and Apostle Paul is. (If they are part of some religion, I don't study them) However, I do agree with you that "God is". All I was trying to say is that there is nothing to fear, death is not the end (there is no death, we are an enternal being).

I will try this again. Sometimes my messaging do not submit and I lose them. Very annoying, but cannot seem to get an answer on what is causing the problem, because sometimes they take. Maybe it is my computer having a problem.??

As for Socrates. He was a well respected Greek philosopher, who was put to death because of his teachings. Apostle Paul was also put to death because of his teachings. Both men made it clear that they were aware that there was much they did not know. There would be no particular reason that one would need to "study religion" to know about these remarkable men.

Hevene writes: Knowing all is well (that you cannot get hurt), why would you fear an end to your physical body? You can always create another one if that suits your purpose later. Living without fears gives you peace that brings love and joy.

I was not referring to me, or to you, but to those who support the notion of heaven and hell, and believe they are headed for the latter, thus my comment: One can also believe in eternal life and fear death.

Thank you for responding, and giving me the opportunity to clarify. PMT



Quote:
One can also believe in eternal life and fear death.

Knowing all is well (that you cannot get hurt), why would you fear an end to your physical body? You can always create another one if that suits your purpose later. Living without fears gives you peace that brings love and joy.

Plato's version of how Socrates died may not have been entirely as it happened, but I haven't studied the history of the time to know how easily it could be corroborated.

However

In Plato's version, Socrates was accused of "corrupting the youth of Athens". Now, in the Apologia, which I believe was the Plato's description of his trial, the jury had only two choices. They could either side with Meletus, the accuser, and have Socrates put to death, or they could side with Socrates, who was asking for a permanent pension from the city of Athens. Faced with two silly choices, the jury chose to put Socrates to death, possibly believing (as Socrates' friends did in Phaedo) that Socrates would choose to escape and exile himself instead of dying. Socrates did not, though the chance was offered him.

This was not quite the same as being dragged down and knifed in the street as happened to some other intellectuals in their days... although the implication of the Plato's Cave analogy is that he was killed by other people who "could not accept his ideas", it could easily be argued that Socrates committed suicide.

Hevene writes: Sorry, I have no idea who this Socrates and Apostle Paul is. (If they are part of some religion, I don't study them) However, I do agree with you that "God is". All I was trying to say is that there is nothing to fear, death is not the end (there is no death, we are an enternal being).

I will try this again. Sometimes my messaging do not submit and I lose them. Very annoying, but cannot seem to get an answer on what is causing the problem, because sometimes they take. Maybe it is my computer having a problem.??

As for Socrates. He was a well respected Greek philosopher, who was put to death because of his teachings. Apostle Paul was also put to death because of his teachings. Both men made it clear that they were aware that there was much they did not know. There would be no particular reason that one would need to "study religion" to know about these remarkable men.

Hevene writes: Knowing all is well (that you cannot get hurt), why would you fear an end to your physical body? You can always create another one if that suits your purpose later. Living without fears gives you peace that brings love and joy.

I was not referring to me, or to you, but to those who support the notion of heaven and hell, and believe they are headed for the latter, thus my comment: One can also believe in eternal life and fear death.

Thank you for responding, and giving me the opportunity to clarify. PMT


Quote:
One can also believe in eternal life and fear death.

Knowing all is well (that you cannot get hurt), why would you fear an end to your physical body? You can always create another one if that suits your purpose later. Living without fears gives you peace that brings love and joy.

I perssonality don't believe in hell. I think it's a concept created to induce fear into everyone's life, a limitation, a way to hold on to believers. Why would God do that if God is all loving? What is the purpose for it? We are here to evolve and during that process, we will do things that slow down our evolution, but that's the whole purpose - "learn" throught "mistakes" - ( remember through experiences)

And it is no surprise to me, these men were put to death, just like every other wise people giving their love through their teachings.

BIG BLUE HEAD WRITES:it could easily be argued that Socrates committed suicide.

I see, then the Christians who were fed to the lions could be said to have committed suicide, as many of them could have escaped had they been willing to deny their faith. So, would then that anyone in war who has an opportunity to surrender and a failing to do so gets him shot....hmm. Did he then commit suicide.

As for Socrates, the general consensus is that he was accused of corrupting the youth of Athens. I have read The Apology as well, and several other accountings. If he had not drunk the poison that was given him, they would have killed him anyway. I did not go into all I had read about the man, because it was quite beside the point. But thank you for the different slant, but the suicide things sounds like college minds in high gear. PMT

HEVENE WRITES: I perssonality don't believe in hell. I think it's a concept created to induce fear into everyone's life, a limitation, a way to hold on to believers. Why would God do that if God is all loving? What is the purpose for it? We are here to evolve and during that process, we will do things that slow down our evolution, but that's the whole purpose - "learn" throught "mistakes" - ( remember through experiences)

I AGREE.

And it is no surprise to me, these men were put to death, just like every other wise people giving their love through their teachings.

WELL, SOCRATES HAS HIS FAULTS, BUT HE LEFT QUITE A MARK ON MANY WHO CAME AFTER HIM, AND WAS AS OUR FRIEND MORE OR LESS POINTED OUT AN IMPORTANT PERSON IN PLATO'S LIFE. Sometimes, just provoking people to go through a thought process, before seating themselves in a idea is a good thing in itself, whether anyone agrees with anyone else or not. I like to encourage young people to think, even if they are only three. When people do not think much about anything they rather remind me of someone who bumps into everything all the time. Thinking is then, one way of our watching where we are going! How's that? :p

I did quite a study on hell, and I agree with you so much on how that got started. Aside from that, it is not beyond me to consider it a possibility that people tried to maneuver some of Christ's teaching as well. My mom tried making the devil her baby sitter, by telling me that he picked bad children with his pitchfork and put them in a pot of fire and hot coals situated in a big cast iron pot on his head. I was six, and a bit concerned about my mother's over active imagination. She finally made a joke of it, but warned me not to get too smart for my britches. But, can you imagine telling a child something like that. She believed in hell, but it just never made sense to me.

Well enough of that. Thank you for your thoughts, Hevene. You say, you know nothing about Paul. May I say, without offending you in any way, that it made wonder how you came to believe in God, if you have no religion in your background. Not that it matters to me. Catch you later, PMT

I was always a science person, until recently, from reading afew books. (Conversations with God, The New Revelations, by Neale Donald Walsch. They talked about science and how science and spirituality can co-exist and ET and all sorts of things.). Reading these books were like zapping me with electric current, I suddenly are more aware other possibilities and started exploring these possiblities and how they can help me get ahead in my life. And they works!! (That's the most important part. We are here discussing what's right and what's wrong, but those doesn't really matter, only what works can produce a positive result in this world)
And since many ideas often overlap no matter when those ideas were formed, I don't need to do extensive studies to access different ideas. I got most of them from those books and is currently satisfied by my new understandings. (only need to apply them in life now)

If he had not drunk the poison that was given him, they would have killed him anyway.

Would the Christians or the prisoner of war have refused rescue? Socrates did, though it was offered more than once in Phaedo according to Plato.

Furthermore, if he had left Athens as his friends urged him, it is unlikely that the Athenians would have hunted him down; they wouldn't have particularly cared what happened to him once he left city limits, as long as he stayed away.

Big Blue Head,

I was not talking about prisoners of war. I was talking about people who go to war.
As far as Socrates goes, I think we have a basic disagreement, and as I am no expert, I scarcely wish to debate the issue, but I do respect your opinions, even though you said that Plato's accountings were not necessarily reliable, and now use them as your basis, or so it seems to me. Just because someone cares not to be "rescued" as you put it, means little. I would probably do better in Finland, and perhaps live longer, but this is where I want to be. Now, if the terrorists or the weather and pollution kill me, is that suicide. My brother, I think you are reaching, but I am really glad that you know something about history. This in itself makes you an interesting person, whether we agree or not. Okay? PMT

K, I'll not hassle. Apologies.

They cannot see what lies ahead when the sun has failed and the moon is dead


that's my opinion about this post...those who can read will now what's my point