What is the meaning of life?

Discussion in 'Serious Discussion' started by sid_16, Jun 9, 2013.

  1. jime1

    jime1 MDL Senior Member

    Jul 16, 2011
    426
    66
    10
    @Yen :

    Its 'nothing' all over again :p

    This Topic will be stuck forever in "one infinite loop" (1 8 0) :popcorn:

    :cool:
     
  2. Yen

    Yen Admin
    Staff Member

    May 6, 2007
    13,106
    14,061
    340
    That doesn't matter, some people's life is stuck in a loop as well. This thread is here to have fun. :)
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  3. LiteOS

    LiteOS Windowizer

    Mar 7, 2014
    2,343
    1,048
    90
    god don't "care" about our believes cos he lives in timeless reality and experience all the time at once
    god just care about experience and being ... living the moment, u can read the book conversation with god


    btw i fixed something


    that prove to me that science doesn't have the final answer
     
  4. LiteOS

    LiteOS Windowizer

    Mar 7, 2014
    2,343
    1,048
    90
    #144 LiteOS, Dec 16, 2014
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2014
    the universe that was before this was not part of this universe nor its space time...

    u only see this universe existence and nothing more cos "in the box" thinking

    just long ago ppls thinked there only one sun our sun
    and now we know there billions
     
  5. sid_16

    sid_16 MDL Giveaway Organiser

    Oct 15, 2011
    2,493
    5,363
    90
    There can be no such concept as something which existed before time.o_O Its because time itself is temporal dimension so if it did begin at a specific point then nothing can have existed before it;). So this is however a physical impossibility because it would violate the laws of physics as absolute nothing cannot exist in actuality:zwinker:. Matter can of course cancel out anti matter. But as matter itself is something as opposed to nothing then no violation would have occurred.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  6. sid_16

    sid_16 MDL Giveaway Organiser

    Oct 15, 2011
    2,493
    5,363
    90
    Hawking and others argue that our universe began with an actual singularity and that spacetime as we know it came into existence with our universe. If this is true, then our universe has to be uncaused.

    I mean, if time did not exist before our universe, then the law of cause and effect cannot possibly have influenced the formation of our universe, right? If there was no "before" before our universe, then there can't be a cause.

    However, I think this discovery about other universes calls those assumptions into question. I mean, if space time from other big bang events reached our universe, then one could certainly argue that time (in whatever form) did in fact exist before our universe: there must have been a "before" our universe. Thus it is entirely possible that the big bang event was caused by something.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  7. Yen

    Yen Admin
    Staff Member

    May 6, 2007
    13,106
    14,061
    340
    I agree with you. But it is not science that hasn't the final answer. It is not possible to find an answer at all...
    The real subject cannot have an answer, it IS the answer.





    Hawking is a victim of his own intellect. He shows up how brilliant he can work with his intellect. But he is too ignorant to get that it is the intellect itself that is trapped in the laws of time.


    The universe has no beginning and no end. It is now.

    Only in the aspect of time it seems to have both. This enforces always another 'object' that must have been before and another that will be after. For the intellect there is no noncausal object!
    ‘Singularity’ what is its cause? THIS is always the question of human intellect, its function to do. To interrupt this function another thought: "There is nothing before per definition" comes into mind, but that is no real knowledge of noncausality!
    In other words nondual and noncausal phenomena cannot be known by an instrument that relies on time.

    Those barriers do not exist for the universe, they do exist in human mind.


    I sometimes can't believe how stubborn scientists must be relying on their barriers of linear time.
    Linear time has the same degree of reality as an unicorn. But no scientist would use the model of a unicorn to explain how reality is.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    And an addition for the curious people: :)

    Humans have ‘measures’ to evaluate linear thinking. They appear as to pray and to meditate (so far). But they have all one thing in common they are events which make people to become aware of the present! Chanting, dancing, music, rhythms, rituals, anything that focusses on the now where life happens at all.
    ‘Unfortunately’ those don’t belong to science (kingdom of science, lol), but they have a much ‘older’ tradition.


    Linear thinking has its laws, its pre-definitions (limits).
    Causality
    Duality

    This means no object can exist without that what is not the object. And no effect can exist without its cause.
    To evaluate what I state one needs to become aware there where the one can OBSERVE this phenomenon.
    This is a transcendental process, though. To observe the ‘thinker’.

    To me this is actually the most reasonable, the most scientific approach one can have.
    But people like Hawking are stuck in dreaming instead of to evaluate the ‘thinker’.

    When becoming aware of what I try to illustrate one recognizes people who must have 'discovered' the same 'already'.
    So one is able then to make qualitative statements without to have rational evidence.

    Hence I can say for instance:
    Einstein, Schrödinger, Heisenberg and C.G Jung gained knowledge of observation of linear thinking, Hawking does not.

    This is no valuing of persons, though. :)
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  8. jime1

    jime1 MDL Senior Member

    Jul 16, 2011
    426
    66
    10

    I never read it.. but I hit "like" :p

    As I know that you know. A LOT :cool:
     
  9. sid_16

    sid_16 MDL Giveaway Organiser

    Oct 15, 2011
    2,493
    5,363
    90
    If time came into existence with the universe, then cause and effect are impossible because there was no "before."

    However, if the research linked here and in the other link posted above turns out to be true, doesn't that mean that time of one form or another existed before the universe even if our universe started with a singularity as Hawking and Krauss suggest?
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  10. LiteOS

    LiteOS Windowizer

    Mar 7, 2014
    2,343
    1,048
    90

    Totally agree with it cant be answer anywhere only if ure whole with god

    number cant describe infinity only infinity can
     
  11. Yen

    Yen Admin
    Staff Member

    May 6, 2007
    13,106
    14,061
    340
    @sid_16

    Please evaluate my thoughts and my conclusions. One has to be very aware the time related intellect is dominant. :biggrin:
    Also feel free to disagree. :)

    Take a deep breath I try to break the dependence of time related relations. :D:biggrin:

    "If time came into existence with the universe, then cause and effect are impossible because there was no "before." "
    When should be that 'time' except 'now'? :biggrin:

    If there is a ‘moment’ where there is no time (yet) then this moment must exist forever / be eternal. Means the process of creating time happens ever now or never.
    To place this moment far away into the past (big bang or even after big bang) is a result of a time dependent (suffering) instrument = intellect which assumes in fact time there already!

    Somebody understands singularity when ‘one’ observes the timeless reality now. By losing focus one creates time 'again'. To the time related intellect it is again a time dependent event. It becomes an object that is judged, compared, measured. It degenerates to an idea of singularity that is locatable in time and has its origin at zero, always. The same applies to other absolute expressions, god, reality…

    If you can comprehend what I try to illustrate, then you need to figure if humans can be able to focus on a timeless reality. If it exists it exist now, the now IS timeless! And all is reasoned in this now :)

    Not many scientists have dared to think like this. Hence I named those because I recognized similarities in their works :biggrin:
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  12. sid_16

    sid_16 MDL Giveaway Organiser

    Oct 15, 2011
    2,493
    5,363
    90
    Sorry to say that I cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds some irrational beliefs.:D
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  13. eight

    eight Guest

    :whip: :eek:
     
  14. nodnar

    nodnar MDL Expert

    Oct 15, 2011
    1,333
    1,069
    60
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  15. Yen

    Yen Admin
    Staff Member

    May 6, 2007
    13,106
    14,061
    340
    #156 Yen, Dec 19, 2014
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2014

    I actually wanted to point to an irrationality in your sentence. :D

    "If time came into existence with the universe, then cause and effect are impossible because there was no "before."

    Time came is a progress in the past that is already related to time and claims a 'before'. ;)
    To say there is no before whilst relating to a progress is irrational. :D

    Instead of I wanted you to evaluate."If there is a ‘moment’ where there is no time (yet) then this moment must exist forever / be eternal."
    Singularity at big bang is a rational scientific result. But the conclusion is not made 'to the end'.
    A time dependent intellect (where rationality is reasoned) has calculated a time where there is no time. Rational? :):biggrin:

    P.S. It has nothing to do with belief. Either one can comprehend or not. :)
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  16. Yen

    Yen Admin
    Staff Member

    May 6, 2007
    13,106
    14,061
    340

    It is expressed with irrational sentences like:
    Stillness is the most original communication. :D

    I know that you know. :hug2:
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  17. nodnar

    nodnar MDL Expert

    Oct 15, 2011
    1,333
    1,069
    60
    smilies are just a dime a dozen, of course, in a serious discussion, but they cannot express a serious thought, of course, they are just too limited for that..
    so i respectfully suggest that you refrain from using them in future. thank you... :rolleyes:
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  18. JimmyHurrell

    JimmyHurrell MDL Novice

    Dec 17, 2014
    14
    0
    0
    Life is beautiful thing. love, emotions, angry are there things is life.
     
  19. eight

    eight Guest

    Look Sharp!

    Yen has used smilies, Sid has used smilies, Timesurfer has used smilies & nodnar too has used smilies.

    Are only my smilies visible to you ?

    The Administrators / Moderators will delete / edit my posts if they deem it worthy of deletion.

    I too respectfully suggest not to prohibit me from exercising my freedom as a legitimate MDL member.