Learning about crossovers helped convert me from atheist to a believer in God
Let’s see if this one survives.
I have been an atheist for 50 years. Recently I became a believer. One factor that helped tip the scales is the “fine tuned universe” argument - the idea that the physics constants, e.g. the mass of an electron, are so finely “selected” that if they weren’t very close to what they are, life wouldn’t exist. This is an argument for a creator. The best counter argument seems to be that there are an infinite number of universes and we got lucky.
When I got into audio, and started learning about crossovers, I was ASTOUNDED at how well the pieces fit together. Octaves are exact doubles of frequency. 3dB describes so many seemingly unrelated phenomena. But the one that really got me was the magic of capacitors and inductors. They share no parts, other than wires sticking out at each end (usually), one acts due to voltage, one acts due to electromagnetism, one resists AC, one resists DC. And yet, somehow, they are mirror images of each other, using almost exactly the same equations, behaving perfectly orthogonal to each other, even to the extent of how powerfully they perform their function (3dB again). How is this possible? Could this have happened due to random chance? I smell a creator.
Law 3. A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses. Cipolla laws of stupidity
I guess that with your ten posts on audiogon bashing all people writing in this thread with no reason and no benefit for you make you a candidate... |
I think that you are right... Sometimes discussing we forgot the essential in life... The essential is in details...Not in great books... But i like too much books to sometimes catch the "avocado taste" ...God is there not in my books...but perhaps in my books too and i miss him because of my big ego ?
😊
|
When I first saw the title of this thread, I kept my distance, knowing what I'd say. I tried to read through it but my eyes glazed over halfway through the first page but I have to say something without leaving. I've found more "god' in my discovery of avocado toast (image and all) than in all that I've read about religion. That, and it has to have that sunny side up egg on it. It's those little epiphanies that'll do it to you. All the best, |
I read a story one time that let a mark in me:
It was a disciple of Vishnu praying all day, "all is Vishnu"... Someday an elephant going amok was running against him , the cornac cries with a loud voice to go away...but the disciple immersed in his prayer stay there , and almost died crushed by the big animal... Then he asked why hurting me O Vishnu ? But he received soon the answer , the cornac hearing him said i am Vishnu too and i cry to you to go out of the road and you did not listened... deep joke ! |
I am only familiar with Vipassana. Perhaps I misunderstand you but abstract thought is most certainly not a means of emancipation in this tradition. It is the capacity for non-identification with any thought. that allows space for meeting life directly, in the present moment, absent interpretations, projections, narratives, etc. Yes; we need the "gate-keeper" aspect of mind to watch the breath and identify the mental states/qualities that arise but this is not "abstract". |
About the difficulty to spoke in non dual and dual term at the same time we need to think about language NOT ONLY as a vehicle for thought content but as the tought content itself ...Language is an autonomous spirit of his own with a body , the prosaic mode and a soul, the poetical mode level...
The Hebrew noun ruacḥ ( רוח) can refer to "breath", "wind", or some invisible moving force ("spirit").
Here We must think about what appear to us "modern mind" as two separate functions of language , because we observe language at a moment in time and not over all his history...
The prosaic meaning "wind" and the so called poetic meaning "spirit" we SEPARATE them after Cartesian dualism...
But cartesian bifurcation as called it Whitehead , is a dead end road... A tree with no fruits ... A moment in the history of consciousness..
now we come to a new moment in time when speaking will became more conscious... The two separated level must be consciously reunited and distinguished , yes, but not separated...And we must not call one primitive and uninformed and subjective and untruthfull , and we must not call the other as objective and informed and trustworthy OVER the other...We must choose the prosaic mode in an engineering speech and the poetical mode sometimes in a more deep matter... Some truths cannot be said out of the poetical mode of language and deep questions cannot even be asked in the prosaic mode alone...
Speaking is a sacred act... Not divisible in two estranged parts... Language already speak with itself , us humans are way less more wise than our own speaking power... Speech come from the source... Silence too....
Then to speak truth we must navigate by two modes of speaking between duality and non duality perspective because we live in these two dimensions at once and we must use language in all his potentialities without negating any of them ... ...
The act inspired by the higher consciousness are unconditional love and the act inspired by ego is ignorance and fear....
How responsible are we for being "given" a separate identity?
We are totally responsible and totally forgiven... The problem is to learn how to forgave ourself to be able to forgive others ...
We are not given a separate identity , it appears so to us, our own unity with God cannot be impeded because it is perfection , there is only one maya : the ego ignorance of this fact... The ego must learn what our higher self knows already... We must learn how to receive forgiveness from our higher self to ourself... It is very difficult... It takes time...
|
About the design argument:
Here we are free in our interpretation...
If we take mathematic itself , is a circle a specified complex design born from chance ? Yes and no...
We can compute the value of pi by a random throwing of needdles : "To calculate pi from the needle drops, one must take the number of drops, multiply this by two, then divide by the number of times it crosses the line. This only works so simply when the distance between the lines is equal to the length of the needle."
Is it not miraculously surpising in a way , and in another way a trivial fact ?
We can always interpret facts in the world or design as random or as designed...Because we can always choose one perspective over the other... But there is a SOURCE for all these possible choices and interpretation, a limit to randomness and a sterility of pure order and to level of orderliness ...
Why ?
Take the prime numbers distribution is it random ?
Not at all if we look at it from one side of the lens ... It is an increasing rythmed sequence ..But if we look on the other side of the lens by reversing it , they appear in a way random...
"Prime numbers, of course, are not really random at all — they are completely determined. Yet in many respects, they seem to behave like a list of random numbers, governed by just one overarching rule: The approximate density of primes near any number is inversely proportional to how many digits the number has."
now read this :
« Two mathematicians have uncovered a simple, previously unnoticed property of prime numbers — those numbers that are divisible only by 1 and themselves. Prime numbers, it seems, have decided preferences about the final digits of the primes that immediately follow them.
Among the first billion prime numbers, for instance, a prime ending in 9 is almost 65 percent more likely to be followed by a prime ending in 1 than another prime ending in 9. In a paper posted online today, Kannan Soundararajan and Robert Lemke Oliver of Stanford University present both numerical and theoretical evidence that prime numbers repel other would-be primes that end in the same digit, and have varied predilections for being followed by primes ending in the other possible final digits. “We’ve been studying primes for a long time, and no one spotted this before,” said Andrew Granville, a number theorist at the University of Montreal and University College London. “It’s crazy.” The discovery is the exact opposite of what most mathematicians would have predicted, said Ken Ono, a number theorist at Emory University in Atlanta. When he first heard the news, he said, “I was floored. I thought, ‘For sure, your program’s not working.’” This conspiracy among prime numbers seems, at first glance, to violate a longstanding assumption in number theory: that prime numbers behave much like random numbers. Most mathematicians would have assumed, Granville and Ono agreed, that a prime should have an equal chance of being followed by a prime ending in 1, 3, 7 or 9 (the four possible endings for all prime numbers except 2 and 5). “I can’t believe anyone in the world would have guessed this,” Granville said. Even after having seen Lemke Oliver and Soundararajan’s analysis of their phenomenon, he said, “it still seems like a strange thing.” Yet the pair’s work doesn’t upend the notion that primes behave randomly so much as point to how subtle their particular mix of randomness and order is. “Can we redefine what ‘random’ means in this context so that once again, [this phenomenon] looks like it might be random?” Soundararajan said. “That’s what we think we’ve done.” » Read all this article here : https://www.quantamagazine.org/mathematicians-discover-prime-conspiracy-20160313/ What means this discovery to me ?
It means primes are resembling music more than perfect order or perfect randomness... Primes distribution is an ABSOLUTE not created by anyone but DISCOVERED like a tree at a crossroad, an absolute increasing rythm beyond determined order or beyond randomness.. no one ever designed or created the primes , they are discovered or not... Any extraterrestrials or any angels cannot do anything save discovering them... not only they are the most complex symbolic object of the universe , but also the simplest one....
I call the primes a potential specified complex information set undesigned by any finite mind but reflecting the universal knowledge body...It is my free choice and free will interpretation... There will be no proof or disproof of this interpreted fact which is for me an evidence... Living Cosmic memory .... Now i can be wrong, but it is my belief and experience...
We dont need logical proof for design nor for god existence... Because there exist a musical line encompassing and relating all phenomena of the universe... It cannot be randomness and it cannot be determined order... It can only be a growing infinite melody... As Peirce said truth is in the fecondity of the consequences... A Pragmatic Theory of Truth holds (roughly) that a proposition is true if it is useful to believe. Peirce and James were its principal advocates. Utility is the essential mark of truth.
Then as Christ said we are free to choose , but beware, we recognize the tree as his fruits can give...
|
"Given" a separate identify, our awareness of our own unitive nature is impeded. This is the inherent function of Maya, no? If we are not aware that we have access to Consciousness, how can we choose "freely" between acts impelled by awareness of Consciousness and acts impelled by the ego? How responsible are we for being "given" separate identity? I must admit that I find such inquiry very confusing because, in terms of language, it is very difficult to speak in both dualistic and non-dualistic terms at once. |
| Post removed |
You misunderstood me... I said that i prefer the Nos one in one case the other in another case... All dac are different... but their embeddings matter for the evaluation of our impression... if i had money i could upgrade to a R2R architecture and be more happy.. but the results i already have is so good that upgrading is less appealing because listening music i can forgot the sound... There is not always a simple answer for all evils... 😉 Silent listening of music is now my answer to the dac problem , because in my actual system all sound right... can it be better ? always...But i dont need the upgrade...
|
They are like the apple from the forbidden fruit in paradise , a temptation... But if you are agnostic , they are a pile of dust at the end...😊 My last dac was a NOS one TDA 1543... My new one is dual ESS9218P DAC chips.. there is a difference....But the implementation in the system is as critical as the difference of the design... I am happy with the two... but the NOS one please me better with my Sansui AU 7700 and speakers... The other please me way better with the Sansui alpha and the headphone...
|
There is no easy answer to this question...
And i had my beliefs but i dont know all answers.. I dont even know if i know the begining of an answer...But i think....
First there is not a distance between God and us, this distance exist for our ego not for the part of us united with God...
Then God dont give us free will as something external to consciousness, he gives us consciousness which implicated free will...
This consciousness is the polarity between the finite and the infinite , between being out of God , the ego, or being with God, unconditional love...
The free will is the ability to create our action motive in our consciousness as a content who draw us away from love toward our ego or away from our ego toward the source ... ( the ego is good as a tool, evil as a king )
When someone commit evil he does it to himself first and last ....But he does not know it because he was drown in his ego away from the source in his consciousness...
Then the existence of evil dont prove there is a creator as you said because God dont gives us free will as a permit to do anything, he gives us consciousness...ABSOLUTE consciousness with all knowledge there is ...he gives us also an ego, a separated identity who will learn how to manage absolute knowledege... We must think to create our consciousness content... The conscious content is not given without our own co- creating thinking process...
Then if someone commit evil , a part of himself must reject the other part.... This is true hell... There is no judge here save our own consciousness...We are torn apart if not now comitting evil , tomorrow in this life or after , when we will know everything... Justice is absolute because we are justice.... As we are love...
Now is my reasonning and arguments or opinions will console a mother seeing the death of his children ?
No not at all...
It is the reason why we must pray in silence and goes through the suffering learning school, which we choose when we were near God...Between two lifes...
The life succession is a necessary reality and also illusion....One part of ourself created perfect is with God , the other part of ourself learn by himself... the two part together are consciousness free will... A process by which Man create his own freedom by choosing freedom over slavery , unconditional love over the ego tool in this body...
If i could not think the thoughts i partake here with you i would be devastated and without hope as we all are reading the news...
The only reason i thought them , is my own experience of stillness, and the intuitive knowing that all there is is never lost definitely....
i studied set theory , younger, and apart from his mystical roots, i discovered in it the real mystery of the infinite... Mathematics was my hope to understand and believe in light ...
Cantor see through it....Nothing could be lost....No love wasted.... No sufferings useless for those who suffers... Without this certainty i will be desesperate...
Then read my words as an invitation to think anew... Not as a mere set of words , who could be only useless anyway if they are written to console a mother who just lost a child in a "useless" accident or crime.... There is no word to say here , no thought to give , no opinion will do, only silent prayer and our loving presence...
|
I also don’t get the “Free Will” argument. I’ve been an Atheist ever since I could think about theWorld at large, largely because of the unrequited evil argument. The counter to this, as I (perhaps mis)understand this, is: 1) The Creator gave Man Free Will. 2) Man uses this free will to do awful things to mankind 3) therefore the existence of evil proves that there is a Creator. We have to accept the evil that Man does because it reflects the Greatness of God in allowing us to make these choices. Sorry, don’t buy it. What kind of “Free Will” do Ukrainian Villagers have when they are are tortured and mudered? Or a housewife in Hiroshima trying to buy groceries when her skin gets flayed off?
I prefer to accept the Homo Sapiens are an accidental, and probably temporary, phenomenon in this Universe. Sure, we can make good capacitors, all kinds of technological wonders, including the bomb and gas chambers. I prefer to believe that none of this is by intelligent design |
Just a word to say that i spoke my mind to my friends here... It is just my intimate conviction and intuition... Dont receive it as truth... Receive it as a matter for discussion... Sound experience or numbers or love or dogs or politics or linguistics or God ... All is related... I am interested by this relation... Nature is the only book to read.... I forgot it lost in my paper books ... Be kind to a lunatic...😊 |
The centered ego is like an astronaut suit consciousness inhabit...it is useful and a mere tool...It is the only veil between me and God as source... Even the ego is not lost at the end...But we are not the ego... The true self is united with the Source and does not incarnate... The ultimate goal is not liberation from illusion of permanence so much as the liberation from our self imposed limitations about permanence and impermanence ... Nothing in the universe can disapear...No information ever can be lost...All is stored in the infinite cosmic memory field...Because all is loved unconditionally... We are here to transmit the universal unconditional love informative field...A mother cannot forget his child...The source dont forgot anything... Religions, buddhism or christianism are mythical constructs... Spirituality is the experience of the infinite consciousness.. No religion here... Death dont exist.... Sufferings is created by our free choices...Freedom is ABSOLUTE... Reincarnation is a fact but all reincarnations exist all at once at the same time...We felt them successively because our love is condioned and conditional by our own free choices.. The goal is to live ONLY by unconditional love in eternity but this goal is already attained, we dont know it yet by our own loving choices... Our body is in the flow of time , our spirit already liberated in eternity, our soul breath between the two , our soul is the breathing spirit/ body ...The soul exist because breathing exist... All that is my intuition... You decided what is your truth... Decide well... Because what we imagine is what become real... There is only ONE perfect infinite consciousness manifested on many different intelligence levels... There is only ONE perfect infinite intelligence manifested on many different consciousness levels... This ONE conciousness and this One intelligence make only ONE perfect infinite love... This is my trinity whose source is love and whose expression is love, unconditional/conditional , hence on all levels.. ... The complex specified complexity chain of these trinities is reflected in the sieve pattern of the primes distribution modulo six... This sieve is the static shadow of the universal informative field... The cosmic memory/imaginative field... The dynamical source of love... Nothing is lost... Life is the opposite of the thermodynamical process; soul , which is consciousness, intelligence and love work as a balance between life and thermodynamical process in this physical cosmos ...
|
All organisms seek to persist; they want not to perish. Homo Sapiens are no different than any other organism in this regard. They are different, however, in two important ways; they possess self awareness and the capacity for abstract thought. In combination, these two capabilities have, in addition to many positive manifestations, served to manifest within humans two deeply-rooted psychological needs: self-preservation and self-protection. For self- preservation, humans have created the notion of a soul, something with permanence that will continue to exist after the death of the body. Buddhism stands unique in the history of human thought in that it denies the existence of a soul. According to the teaching of the Buddha, the idea of a soul is rooted in the false notion that the mortal self has some permanence and that it is not what it truly is, an aggregate of atoms; where the atoms have permanence, but the aggregate does not. This false belief in a permanent self produces harmful thoughts of me, mine, selfishness, desire, craving, attachment, hatred, ill-will, conceit, pride, egoism and other defilements, impurities and problems. It is the source of all the troubles in the world, from personal conflicts to wars between nations. In short, to this false view can be traced all the evil in the world. For self-protection and out of the necessary conjugate of the concept of a permanent self, humans created the notion of God, an entity to adjudicate the disposition of this imaginary permanent self and to therefore, instill in humans a subjugational role to an imaginary entity in the living of their Lives. For these humans, the imaginary protection provided by this imaginary entity of their imaginary permanent self after the death of their bodies is worth subjugating the truth of their impermanence and the joy that comes from that truth in order to not be afraid in Life. Truth is traded for a feeling of safety; a safety from a threat that doesn’t exist. Homo Sapiens, then, are again unique among organisms: due their capacities for self awareness and abstract thought they can be afraid outside of the presence of an actual threat. No other organism has this unfortunate capacity. It is upon this human capacity to be afraid for the disposition of one’s imaginary permanent self that all religions are founded and all of the delusion and mental enslavement that they proffer is empowered. What the Buddha realized was the truth of impermanence of all organisms, Homo Sapiens included, and through that realization, he realized liberation from baseless, irrational and imaginary fear. This is the essence of his enlightenment. This same enlightenment is available to all Homo Sapiens. The beautiful thing about such enlightenment is that the same capacity for abstract thought that serves to enslave the human mind with irrational fear over the disposition of one’s imaginary permanent self becomes the means of it’s emancipation through knowledge of the truth of one’s impermanence; and in that enlightenment, the mind that was previously one’s jailor becomes one’s liberator. Having stated all of that, I offer to you the words of the Buddha on the subject of religious belief: “If religious belief inspires righteous conduct in one, then it is good for the individual and good for the community within which the individual lives, therefore it should be encouraged.” He also said: “Not all are ready in their current human life to comprehend truth.” However, if one is ready to comprehend the truth of impermanence, one must also necessarily also recognizes that religions have no basis in reality; they are merely human constructs, designed to offer succor to those who find the truth of impermance even more fearsome than the truth of death. |
I am myself in awe by the OP intuition that are very deep... It make me think... And we think together here... Thanks for your kind patience with my obsessive need to discuss... My job before retirement was discussing ... 😊
Some claim that this thread has nothing to do with audio... It is not true... Beside electricity and crossover... There is the sound enigma... Are sound only mere illusions coming from the waves in the air medium reflecting our own sense limitation, or is sound a reality which can be perceived directly with an informative qualitative content more meaningful than just subjective illusions ? I will not go there for the moment... But suffice to say beyond the division between the "computing" Kantian brain and the inaccessible "thing in itself" , beyond cartesianism, sound perceived qualities put us in deep relation to reality and seeing put us in a real world....( i am inspired by the visual ecological theory of perception of J.J. Gibson here ) Then what electricity created in the intuition of the OP about the necessary existence of an INFORMED and FORMATIVE SOURCE field; acoustic, music and numbers, created the same intuition in me about the presence of a SOURCE... What i call a formative /informative universal field...Number theory is only a static apparently silent shadow of this field ... See Alain Connes video about the music of primes...
|
The principle that you shoudnt do to others what you dont want to be done on you , is universal and is in China as it is in Semitic writing...Or in Germany... But how this principle can be conceived and justified is very important and very different in each comtext ... This principle can be derived from or abstracted from religious dogma or social demands.... In this case the unfree spirit receive it as a command to act ...Moral principle are posed then as universal and categorical imperatives... duty EXTERNAL to any free subject ... This moral principle is then INDEPENDANT of the thinking activity of each subject... For an unfree spirit the link between a concept and a percept is given in advance, without his own thinking participation , the moral motives is imposed to the thinking process as a moral absraction... A duty... In contrast a free subject can relate by his own intuitive and imaginative activity the concept and the percept , and here the motivation to act arise not as a duty , but as a free choice... Kant inherited from the Cartesian dualism and introduced in science the distinction between the thing in itself and appearance...In a way Kant morality reflected the unfree nature of this imposed dualism...For Kant we dont know reality, we impose on it something... Qualities dont reflect reality but our own limitations.. In a non Kantian integral unitive perspective, which refuse dualism , it is moral imagination of EACH subject who create the motive to act...Not an external imposed category inherited from history , religions, or science... Here each free subject decide by his own activity what to do...The result of his action come from a free choice in his own thinking ability...There is no more any duty...Here free subject can know reality directly ... Qualities are real not illusions.. It is why there is a big difference when the same principle, do not do to others, is conceived as a social duty a categorical imperative inherited OUT OF REALITY by Kant and Confucius or conceived as an individual free choice by an awaken free thinker as Christ or Buddha created IN REALITY ...
I never postulated or claim that the private sphere will be abolished, it is the frontier between the private and the public which is disturbed by modern communication...This perturbation is not created by random process but deliberately acted upon and used by entities that are immoral... To be free man must be educated and trained to think by himself...This is this education for freedom which disapear ...Not the private sphere ....The private sphere is under CONTROL... If we study the economical history, the pedagogical history and the medical history, we can observe a regression of the common goods in the name of profit and the complete control of man as a consumer, and the reduction of the free link between the doctor and his patient to an unfree "duty" programmed by external economical forces over the doctor freedom and over the patient freedom ... Democracy is in complete regression...it is now a symbolic existence under the spell of ploutocratic lobbies... That is plain for all to see...
|
At its most basic Kant stipulates that you shouldn’t do to others what you don’t want to be done to you: some exterior motive imposed on the thinking process! And as to your postulated abolition of a private sphere: that is clearly each individual’s choice. Just the fact that some people are indiscriminate doesn’t warrant the abolition of one of the most fundamental human freedoms. Yes, there are corporations abusing the gullible, that however is a matter for regulation. |
Moral imperatives are an EXTERIOR motives IMPOSED on the thinking process... Moral free imagination of a free individual dont OBEY to an external law but create his own moral motives to act then way more powerfully toward truth ... I am not Kantian in moral matter because of this fact...
You completely misread my post... I spoke about the suppression for the first time in european modern history of private life sphere and public life sphere...Internet suppress this CLEAR separating frontier that existed between these two in the past... 7 years old student transport the "political" problem of their school in their kitchen and in their dreams... "generally accepted truths" or consensus are not identical with the public life sphere... Anyway consensus are more programmed at will by corporations now in a short changing time span as it was by religions in the past but religions could not and would not change their consensus program`; corporations change it at will as they need and fast...Corporate powers may become more powerful than churchs of the past if we do not stop them ... Brainwashing is more powerful than ever ...The good news is that we can became conscious more easily too with all the tools around us ... Humanity divide then in two groups : sleepwalkers and spiritually awake people....
|
Never mind: What I was getting at is that personal beliefs are an insufficient base for meeting Kant‘s moral imperative and as such are incapable of forming the basis for general legislation, i.e. politics. And for the record: I do not concur with your assertion that there is no more border between private belief and generally accepted truth (lest we accept ‘alternative truths’ |
I dont believe and i dont need to believe in my nose nor in the Tao , the Tao as my nose had no smell of his own ...😊 I apologize for the correction....
“We join spokes together in a wheel, We shape clay into a pot, We hammer wood for a house, We work with being, Tao to Ching |
In the end, it does not matter what any of us think. Believe in what you believe and live your life accordingly. Music is a big part of my life. I am thankful for everything I have and I lean on a higher power to drive me to being a better person every day. Science is not black and white and can be misleading. |
Sorry; you had indeed referenced the prime number sequence; it was others who invoked harmonic sequence and 3dB and so much else that is beautiful and elegant but which nonetheless COULD NOT BE OTHERWISE. OP notes that "multiple universes" conjectures are still around: yes, but not to denote "randomness" as the supposed only alternative to supernaturae. |
I never try to convince people... I gave them recommendations , books, links, articles, my own thoughts as if each one of these recommendations was a point in a children drawing ...My job was teaching reading analysis for adults...Not grammar but stimulating imagination and relation between fields... I cannot linked all the points of the drawing i wanted to suggest here... it will take more than one page to do so...😊 The complete drawing is the most simple thing in the world , as said Lao Tse speaking of the Tao ... It is also the most complex thing in all universes as number theory is...Or we can pick the drawing of a plant or of a mammal in our own mind after seeing it , and inspect his potential form variations...Then we will see miracles... I dont want to persuade people and act on their free will, i want to suggest deep writers and deep video as the one above i recommended... Anyway those who understand are ready to understand , for those we are not ready the time will come... To answer your question , I will use an argument from the late greatest american genius , Charles Sanders Pierce, a thought content is sterile seed or fertile seed if he is planted at the right location and at the right time... Pierce created pragmatism which is the same doctrine as Christ : you will recognise the good tree by his numerous good fruits... Truth then is not a nominalist abstraction... It is a real process in the world... We really see the world, we dont compute an image... In the same way The Source is not an abstraction over the sea of probability, it is the sea of probability itself , moved by the most improbable wave there is... The prime number distribution which transcend even the statistics methods which men had devised to study it...No man has ever probe the bottom of the sea of the primes ... You want a miracle to touch , and plant and mammals wont do it, try number theory or music... It is almost the same ... 😊 I forgot to say that my thought is not a "cogent argument" nor for or against any particular proposition... It is an IMAGINAL motives pervading all geniuses over all history... Perceived meaning dont need to be proven right...It is a non discursive real experience and real perception... For mystic God is not an abstraction... For a mathematician prime numbers are more real than their own body... For Bach music is God himself walking and speaking .... Who need an argument? We need reality...
|
@mahgister Your erudition on this topic as others is impressive, yet (as ever) incondensable to a cogent argument for or against any particular proposition. Please try this one: why should the wildest of all conceivable explanations -- a supernatural cause, something outside nature, hence unknowable to natural beings -- ever arise to a level of probability worthy of mention by homo logicus contemporaneous? Surely the line connecting the harmonic sequence to "god" is anything but a straight one. |
All of what you said ring true and is right for me... But just let do not forgot what is free will and a free act... It is an act of thinking motivated by a higher motives way over torture and thirst... This higher motive , uncondional love , as the maternal instinct is an image for, is precisely what set us free... But we must THINK and IMAGINE this higher value and motive FIRST to begin with... Here if we think about was is thinking , it is an act where the produced content, the thought , is completely mine as his creator... Think about beauty, goodness, Truth and musical perceived meaning which we participate from for example... In thinking we are ABSOLUTELY FREE....We create a content of thought and we perceive it as created... In this thought creation there is an horizontal process from me to my thought content.. But there is also a vertical moment out of time, an inspiration , an intuition , an act of will deeply connected to our past life and future life OUT OF TIME... We can observe this in the mathematical process of thinking itself.. We can observe it among the great mystic thoughts of Christian pseudo-Dyonisos or in Rumi or Suhrawardi or in Raimon Lulle the mystic who is the creator of cybernetics ( said Weiner) in Ramakrishna , or in the advaita vedanta , in Christ as in Buddha ... We are free... But think about that , this means we are responsible of everything, and everything concern us... Who want to face this ? The source create us free as it is, but we dont want this gift... 😊 We humans we look for excuse we dont want what we have : absolute freedom... We become aware of consciousness in each thought creation by us each moment, but we refuse to see it...Then we awake a micro second just the time to go back in deep sleep... A genius is only someone very attentive to the phenomena and to his thought process and to nothing else... They tought all the same at the end .... Aristotle , Archimedes, Leonardo Da Vinci, or Goethe, i can pick these four and reduce all their thinking to the same method mastering the creation of concepts to match the phenomena succession EXACTLY (Goethe call it exact imagination by the way ) .... These four are almost the same mind... I cannot demonstrate it here by lack of space... But think about them and what they have in common ... What the OP thought about is very deep... People who mock him simply dont understand at all what he allude to... Those who understand a bit of science and dont understand the OP must listen this deep master class : "the music of shapes" by Alain Connes Youtube ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z52ZAPrRbqE&t=527s It is very long and difficult but after that "illumination " is certain... 😊 Anyway it proves why the OP is right in his intuition but at the highest level of maths and physics...
|
These discussions have titles. The purpose of these titles, in part, is to guide you in selecting which discussions you should invest in. When you see a title that promises to be tedious, but you then decide to read through it anyway, confirm that it was, in fact, tedious, and then post to the participants no contribution other than your finding that you found it tedious, that seems like a very ineffective use of time. |
Why do some people feel they need to police discussions? If it doesn’t interest, you just don’t read it. Personally, I think this is one of the best threads in recent audio gone history. If you think it’s off-topic, then you must also think that music is not universal. There is lots of erudition here, kudos to all of the contributors! |
Hmmm. . . I find this a bit more complicated. We are simultaneously "free" and "not free", no? As Consciousness, we are free. As incarnated humans, we are bound not only by maya and the fact that our memories of past incarnations are wiped clean each time we reincarnate but also by the culture and times/Yuga into which we are born. So, the "freedom" of Consciousness is only "real" if we are aware of it. Otherwise, it might as well not exist. Indeed, without awareness of Consciousness, this is exactly how we behave --as if Consciousness does not exist. Furthermore, we can be aware of Consciousness and still make choices that are based upon habitual identification with the body, ego, etc. As humans, temporarily identified with our bodies, sense impressions and thoughts, we are given lots of room to stumble around within the boundaries imposed by our our limitations ("enough rope to hang ourselves"). As I see it, this "freedom to act ignorantly" seems more accurately described as bondage. Are we "free" to become aware of consciousness? I'm not sure. Is someone who has not engaged in spiritual practice in previous incarnations and who is born into circumstances that do not nurture/support such exploration, "free" to discover Consciousness? Perhaps only an avatar can such a question. Your thoughts? |
Belief in an external objective matter independant of any consciousness is pure metaphysic proven false after quantum mechanics revolution... Belief in number theory as a manifestation of a higher order pervaded all history as a MOTOR to higher science and conasciousness... Beliefs are no more private matter anymore since the internet...There is no more private life on one side and public life on the other and the monstruous evil corporate powers use it against humanity and democracy... We must pick our beliefs after well thought deep process, because our beliefs will come true... |
I had them sorted by increasing commitment and fervour. You are obviously free to use your own criteria. Any attempt to prove the existence of a however fashioned higher order requires belief rather than science, hence my answer was meant to highlight the private nature of belief as a socially insufficient basis for political decisions. Hence my comments about the Constitution‘s outlook on the issue. |
Sniff, thank you also for addressing my post directly. Sadly I’m not smart enough to understand your major point. Perhaps you could re-phrase it in simpler language. I don’t understand what the misunderstanding you refer to is, and how this means that the finely tuned universe argument gets the causality backwards. One innovation, from the history of religion, that Western (Judeo-Christian) religion offered was the compound idea that a) the universe is intelligible, b) that humans are equipped to understand it, and c) that it is good to pursue this understanding. On that basis the Scientific Revolution happened in the West. Math and physics were developed, not as human confections, but as the byproduct of observation and experimentation. So, while I understand that one sees what one looks for, that to a hammer everything is a nail, etc., to then extrapolate that physics, as it stands, is a human language that shapes and distorts our observations of reality may be true but it isn’t really useful. It’s all we have to make sense of the physical world. |
Master Eckhardt takes his idea from his own experience of the Source but also was inspired by Dyonisos the Areopagite , the greatest of all mystic in the christian church, for catholics as for Orthodox... he lives in the sixth century... He is so deep that Georg Cantor takes all his ideas and method about infinities hierarchical relations from him , from his three methods : silent contemplation in non discursive intuitive consciousness, apophantic and cataphatic discursive methods...Nicolas the Cues the mathemathical genius in the 15 century takes also his ideas from Dyonysos and gives after Archimedes the first description of actual infinity.. Without this mystic , i doubt that Cantor who taught also theology and was a mystic too, would have been able to create transfinite set theory... You can read Michael Hallett " Set theory and the principle of limitation of size" to verify it if you study Dyonisos too ... Then question : How in the world could a mystic be at the origin of the ONLY mathematical modern foundation of the most fundamental of science ? The only contender of set theory as a foundation was created by another mystic who wrote a one thousand pages book about his dialogue with God in his dreams , in french "la clef des songes".. I read it...Alexander Grothendieck is the genius who created modern algebraic geometry ALONE ... he is the master of Alain Connes among many other genius and also the master of Shinichi Mochizuki the controversial genius from Japan ...
|
The answers the OP look for about his statement :
The answer about this is complex but completely described in this video by one of the greatest mathematician always living , and i cannot resume this answer in a few words : Alain Connes , "the music of shapes" conference ... |
Hickamore, thank you for taking my OP seriously enough to respond to it in kind. I appreciate that. Your point seems to be that matter and energy exist, therefore, how surprising is it that we find harmony in the mathematics (for example) that we use to understand this existence. My response is that you are starting at the endpoint, that matter and energy exist, That appears to be just as much a religious statement as is the suggestion of a creator. BTW, I think you will find that the idea of multiple universes is not a dismissed straw man, as you say, but it is currently an active theory which is offered to explain the “finely tuned universe” argument, which is based on the idea that many of the physical constants of the universe, [e.g. gravitational constant, Planck constant, elementary charge], have very little wiggle room in their range for life to exist.
zasouswing, I also thank you for addressing my post directly. Your point seems to be that it’s not surprising that we find harmony and beauty in the way, for example that the capacitor and the inductor seem to mirror each other so perfectly because we set up the measuring system to achieve that exact result. While I agree that we set up a very clean measurement system (metric and physics), I don’t see how that explains, for example, that an inductor’s low-pass cutoff frequency rolloff has the exact same slope as as that of a capacitor’s high-pass at the opposite end, using a different mechanism of operation, and using no common parts. It just seems too good to be true. But I could be wrong. |
The OP evidently means to invoke the “anthropic principle” when he mentions the “fine tuned universe argument.” Many believers in God appeal to this principle, as it seems to support the “argument from design,” perhaps the most intuitively appealing of any of the arguments for the existence of God. However, this involves a misunderstanding. The anthropic principle only states the tautological truism that, were it not for us as observers, the observed features of the universe would not be. That is, the construal of this principle as support for some kind of Supreme Designer gets the causality backward. The principle is just an extension of Kant’s fundamental insight: that “reality” is necessarily relative to the observer who experiences, and so defines, it. Space and time are not independently real, they are features of the observer; thus, all the spatio-temporal features of the universe determined by physics—our physics—are extrapolations of features of our own minds. This is NOT to say that the very existence of some unknowable reality depends on us. But the knowability of that, or any, reality does, tautologically, depend on the knower (and the cognitive and bodily structures of the knower).
For what it’s worth, it seems to me the wisest thing to “say” about God is what Meister Eckhart—a 13th century German Catholic (Dominican) mystical theologian—wrote: “Now notice this. God is nameless, for no one can know or articulate anything about God. A pagan teacher [Aristotle] speaks to this point in saying that what we can know or express about the First Cause is more than anything else what we are than anything that the First Cause is or might be, for it is beyond all human expression and understanding. If I were to say that God is good, I would be wrong; it is more correct to say that I am good and God is not good…. And because God cannot become better he cannot become best, for all three of these terms—good, better, and best—are far from God’s reality…. If I go on to say that God is wise, it is not true—I am wiser than God. If I further say that God is a being [that he exists], that is not true. God is a being beyond being and a nothingness beyond being…. So be silent and do not flap your gums about God, for to the extent that you flap your gums about God, you lie and you commit sin.” |
