Re: [Mind and Brain] Re: [astro] Towards observable signatures of other bubble universes
Jun 01, 2007 02:08 PM
In a message dated 5/20/07 2:02:07 PM, firstname.lastname@example.org writes:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: MindBrain@yahoogroups.com [mailto:MindBrain@yahoogroups.com] On
> > Behalf Of email@example.com
> > Sent: Monday, 21 May 2007 12:47 AM
> > To: MindBrain@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Mind and Brain] Re: [astro] Towards observable signatures of
> > other bubble universes
> > The concept of a multiverse comes from the physics of M theory (string
> > physics) and also various inflationary models of the Big Bang. It is not a
> > matter of opinion but a consequence of physics.
> No. It is speculation and is to physics what intelligent design is to
> evolution. No evidence, all belief. The point with mathematics is that it
> can represent the imagined as it can the real. As such, anything sourced in
> mathematics is not necessarily real.
Does this mean that all your I-Ching type fractal mathematics which underlies
all your theories of psychology and evolution, etc., has no basis in reality?
;-) Or, that evolution theory is 100% true in all its aspects and
assumptions based on chance or random mutation?
So, what is "real"? Is a thought in my mind real? Is the image I see of
the outer world real? Is a pain I feel in my toe real? Unfortunately, since
mathematics can only deal with and represent countable or measurable things,
I doubt that it can deal with anything supposedly unreal one can imagine, like
fairies or ghosts for instance (even though those imaginary things might be
real images in our minds). In the same way, it can't deal with consciousness
(awareness, will, qualia, etc.) or anything else subjectively or
experientially real -- such as a near death out of body experience or other transcendental
epiphanies and intuitions I've had (and many others have reported) in and out
of deep meditation or perfect concentration.
Therefore, while string theory mathematics does predict the "multiverse" -- I
don't think it can tell us anything about what that multiverse actually is or
where those parallel universes actually come from. Just as such theories
also predict primal matter as "strings" and "membranes" -- I don't think it
can tell us what those strings or membranes are or where they came from. But,
nevertheless, I do think such predictions are real in the same sense that my
thoughts and consciousness are real. How, can they not be, if I can use them
to manipulate real objects as I will it? (Or, is that a figment of my
However, since all mathematical measures must start and end somewhere -- that
empty (but potentially full zero-point) singularity out of which this whole
universe appears, must be as real as the exact zero-point that the racing car
tire rests on in the space between the particles of the starting line before it
begins its measured run down the track -- which can be measured
mathematically from one zero-point in Planck space to another. So, whatever mathematics
can correctly measure or determine through its proven logic must be as real as
are the mathematical equations themselves, the metaphysical and physical
universe they describe, or the conscious beings that thought them up or discovered
them in the universal mind's infinite information bank.
Therefore, the zero-points of infinite energy in absolute space, from which
all mathematical measurements start from and end on, and where all cosmic
intelligence lies, are also real. And, since those points all have infinite axes
of potential spinergy or G-force, they serve as the basis of the multiverse,
and all other mathematical predictions -- no matter how counter intuitive they
In such a case, true "intelligent design" (not "creationism") is as real as
could be the universal consciousness that imagined this universe before it woke
up its spinergy to form this material universe and all the beings in it --
which we can mathematically (but not sensorially) know everything about, both
metaphysically and physically.
The problem -- so that non mathematicians could understand it -- is to
interpret that mathematical knowledge into graphical metaphors, word pictures, or
symbolic images the mind can visualize and truly comprehend the nature of...
Something, that most current scientific theories (except, perhaps, Einstein's
special theory of relativity) have yet to accomplish satisfactorily.
Therefore to deny the real existence of the zero-point of pure consciousness
surrounded by its infinitely intelligent potential force existing as abstract
non linear spin motion, containing infinite holographic information or
knowledge (pertaining to its experiences and structures during its previous cyclic
existence) as interference patterns of potentially radiant energy fields that
fractally *involve* (before physical forms *evolve* after symmetry is broken) --
is to deny the existence of the universe itself.
But, if we admit the existence of that singularity, with this universe
spinning on only three of its potential infinite axes, is to admit the possible
existence of the multiverse and its infinite parallel universes, as well as
acknowledge the simultaneous existence of the universal consciousness that is
potentially, if not actively or continuously aware of everything that is, was or
ever will be.
The only things unreal, then, are; (A) The imaginary ideas we have that
what we sensorially experience of the universe is actually what it really is --
which only mathematics (in all its aspects from algebra to geometry) or our own
intuitive visualizations and understandings, can reveal... And; (B)
Whatever fantasies we conjure up about supernatural beings and miraculous occurrences
based on misinterpretation or literal belief in written words that are
mistranslated, intentionally fictional, or metaphorical.
See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application