Tagged: quantum
What is real?
Relying faithfully in the information that our senses transmit is a great way to forget about our eternal nature.
What we perceive with our senses is not necessarily real. As a matter of fact, the outside perception is possible only through a referential entity: ourselves, which is made up by our experiences and thoughts.
This collection of information gathered through generations, make up a collective consciousness, which becomes the agreement of what is “real.”
Quantum physics mentions that what we perceive as matter, our bodies and everything else, which are composed of electrons, are particles and waves of light at the same time.
Please see that any “truth” which explains life as being just “one thing,” is denying the other side of perception.
Our physical eyes allow us to perceive matter. Solid particles which get together and make up bigger elements. Our eyes cannot perceive waves of light, which is the other “reality.”
Aren’t we, matter and energy at the same time?
If we trust in what we perceive as being “true,” we will find out that we are missing a different perspective.
That is why consciousness is not related with outside information, which we cannot truly know; (knowing as “being it” and not information or definitions) but instead is related with the understanding of that which we are. That is “being it.”
Take the thoughts away, take the ideas and beliefs out, take the emotions out. What do you find? 🙂
Look at your face in a mirror.
Take a picture of it.
Look at your face in the same mirror ten years later.
Do you see the change?
Is that change you? 😉
However, we have an inborn “idea” of what beauty is and we compare the past with the present, even though we are never the same. We are always being and becoming.
That idea of beauty is there. Even though we understand that our face in the mirror is not truly us, when we hear someone calling us “ugly,” then we accept that information and behave in a certain way.
We believe to be “ugly” and we start building a complex of inferiority even though we could realize that those changes in our face are not really us. Beauty is a matter of perspective. However, when we call something as “beautiful” we create automatically, that which is ugly. Duality.
Why is it, that we cannot believe in the information that we “clearly” understand, that “I” am not that “face in the mirror”?
Because we are not conscious of who we are. Our eternity, through the recognition of the “reality” of “self and no-self.”
We only understand that mentally or as a belief, as “nice” words, as information.
We could say that we are souls or spirits, but that does not mean a thing when there is no consciousness beyond the information coming from our senses.
To say “I am not the body” is not that useful when the idea of what “I” am instead is something, which “I” have not experienced.
The realization that all information which relies on my sense organs is not necessarily true, will give me the opportunity to look for that “truth” in the only possible place that I could find it, which does not rely in my sense organs, that is in discovering what is “me.”
Scientific tales: Why do we use science as the yardstick for truth?
This will be the last article for now on the “Scientific tales” section. The purpose of these articles is to be informed as to demonstrate that scientific knowledge does not reflect truth but rather, a search for answers.
Many times we use “science,” as a way to defy or even shutdown different ideas and philosophies which are non traditional.
We use Science as “truth,” we have been indoctrinated to believe so.
My interest in science grew when I was interested in the topic of time, which is completely misunderstood by science. As a matter of fact, despite all the scientific “progress,” the topic of time remains as one of those untouchable topics which science hasn’t been able to understand. Want a sample?
https://explore7.files.wordpress.com/2019/12/time.pdf Case closed. Add the second law (entropy) here to make things difficult and we will have several explanations, theories without truthful answers.
What about the age of the Universe?
According to scientists a “baby could be older than his own parents.” 🙂
This is an article by a bona fide Ph.D in physics as far as I know.
http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=241424
What about the planet’s orbits around the Sun?
According to what I was taught as a “truth” the planets had an elliptical and predictable orbit around the Sun. Here is a video with that scientific “truth.”
Now, we can understand that the path of the planets around the Sun is not a predicted path which repeats every time as when the Earth goes around the Sun… It is a spiral…
For those of us who ever thought that the platonic time of 26,000 years would dismiss an “eternally repeating cycle of 5000 years,” it would be good to reconsider; for we are relying on our point of reference or observation being the Earth and we are just beginning to understand that there are many different movements in the celestial bodies. For instance the Earth moves around its own axis and the spiral movement around the Sun is not the same pattern nor the same degree in space, for the Earth does not move in “flatland.” Similarly what we observe on a distant star, is merely subjective according to our position in space.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_precession.htm
Moreover, as “it is above so it is below,” therefore, celestial bodies merely reflect the behavior of atomic particles, which we are just beginning to understand under a scientific perspective.
There is a lot to be desired from Science.
Here is one question I sent a group of astronomers sometime ago for their enlightened answer:
wrote:
Thank you for your question to Ask an Astronomer. It will be forwarded to one of our team members to answer.
Question:
“1) The Big Bang. We have extremely strong evidence that the universe as we know it had a beginning, that everything which we can think of, matter and space alike, started off compressed together and has been expanding ever since.”This is a quote from the question here:
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=231
My question: What was the beginning of the Universe? What is the “extremely strong evidence that you have”?
If in fact was an explosion, how the elements which produced the explosion got there? Isn’t this like solving the riddle “who is first the chicken or the egg”?
Finally, How this “extremely strong evidence,” is able to counteract modern views of the “origin” of the Universe cited by scientists like Neil Turok, Paul Frampton and other cyclic models of the universe?
Thank you.
No answer so far.
Finally, I recommend this link for a different view and “research” on what we have believed to be the “true” history of the world.
‘
Exploring the Depth of Living 