Time is a sense of elapsing , as something which precedes and something
which follows that which we are experiencing at the moment. A universe that
precedes and that which follows a present universe and the one to which it
is experienced is in a parallel universe.

On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 7:02 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:

> I have found it valuable to consider the concept and experience of time
> from two different perspectives. These two perspectives are linear time and
> durational time. Linear time is conventional clock time with there existing
> a felt sense of past time, present here and now time, and future time.
>
> Durational time is equivalent to vacation, and childhood time experienced
> as timelessness.
>
> These two senses of time sometimes coincide as in the experience of lucid
> dreaming, and in experiences such as that of Proust in Remembrances of Time
> Past. Here both circles of time overlap.
>
> My personal sense is that there is in fact no time. As human beings we fill
> perceived emptiness with meanings.
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pol.science kid <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Tue, Jul 20, 2010 6:42 am
> Subject: Re: [Mind's Eye] Re: Parallel Universes
>
> i thought of continuing in the same thread becoz it seems connected to
> it...what are your ideas about time..i mean your experience of it...when i
> htought about it , i felt.. well i'll explain it this way.. its as though i
> am standing in a river.. facing the current..and the water just flows flows
> beneath me.. and i am rooted to the same spot...this making of time.. or
> objectifying it.. it distorts a lot doesnt it...i mean when you say there is
> not enuf time.. how can that be...we have all the Time we need...my thoughts
> are confused and unclear..but i'd like you all to say something...
>
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 11:04 AM, pol.science kid <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> wow..that was an argument over the 'eye'.. so why dont they use the color
>> wheel? how do you know its plastic..;-)
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 2:56 AM, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, shades of mind is good. Better than this monochrome blue plastic
>>> eye, like I said:
>>>
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye/browse_frm/thread/b34c37072ddda478/85e1846e157e3bdf?lnk=gst&q=goethe+#85e1846e157e3bdf
>>>
>>> On 19 Jul., 17:45, DarkwaterBlight <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > Perhaps as in moderators can be shady at times? :P Shades of mind is
>>> > an interesting concept though!
>>> >
>>> > On Jul 19, 1:03 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > shades?.. really?... in what sense...you mean shades of mind..? i
>>> didnt
>>> > > really give it an actual thought except for taking it at face
>>> > > value;-)..becoz i found it interesting..you can illuminate it for
>>> me..
>>> >
>>> > > On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 1:24 AM, gabbydott <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> > > > now that I hear you saying it, it could somehow be related to shade
>>> > > > concept, what do you sense?
>>> >
>>> > > > On 18 Jul., 09:19, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > > > > a differing shame concept........wow....
>>> >
>>> > > >  > On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 5:30 PM, gabbydott <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> > > > > > A quality person? Is that the opposite of a quantity person?
>>> Also I
>>> > > > > > don't see what Fier ought to feel ashamed of. I interpreted the
>>> blog
>>> > > > > > link in the given context as a reference to find further
>>> information/
>>> > > > > > reasons/proof. A clear case of transparency lived. Whereas I've
>>> > > > > > learned to accept the hidden blog-interest-communication as
>>> part of a
>>> > > > > > culture that knows why it has a differing shame concept.
>>> >
>>> > > > > > On 17 Jul., 09:34, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > > > > > > Molly is a very fine and quality person, and she is right
>>> about your
>>> > > > > > > shameless self promotion, It has been my experience here that
>>> most
>>> > > > people
>>> > > > > > > that stay around have a special talent. The name calling you
>>> are
>>> > > > doing is
>>> > > > > > > really more a reflection of your self.. because what you said
>>> about
>>> > > > the
>>> > > > > > > moderators, well they fit in many categories but not those
>>> you
>>> > > > listed.
>>> > > > > > the
>>> > > > > > > path to wisdom begins first by ,, - - - never mind you know
>>> it
>>> > > > everything
>>> > > > > > > already.
>>> > > > > > > Allan
>>> >
>>> > > > > >  > On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 5:46 PM, Fiercely Free <
>>> [email protected]>
>>> > > > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > On Jul 14, 9:30 pm, Molly <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > > > > > > > > Just to clarify, FF, Minds Eye does not have a problem
>>> with links
>>> > > > > > > > > other than the ones used as a signature in a post to
>>> direct folks
>>> > > > to
>>> > > > > > > > > your personal website. This is what is generally
>>> considered
>>> > > > shameless
>>> > > > > > > > > self promotion or spam in internet groups. We otherwise
>>> like
>>> > > > links
>>> > > > > > > > > that give more info (or humor) to the discussion.
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > Your mindless usage of the words like shameless self
>>> promotion etc.
>>> > > > > > > > clearly reflects the abysmally low quality of atheist
>>> education
>>> > > > > > > > system. Entire squad moderators on this Minds-Eye group
>>> seems to be
>>> > > > a
>>> > > > > > > > group of hopelessly INCOMPETENT STUPID LOAFERS, having no
>>> > > > common-sense
>>> > > > > > > > at all. Minds-Eye moderators are not consistent. I will
>>> quote a
>>> > > > > > > > comment from one of the Minds-Eye moderators "vamadevanada"
>>> (May
>>> > > > 18,
>>> > > > > > > > 2010) :
>>> > > > > > > >     I know. And I have access to libraries. It means
>>> nothing, in
>>> > > > the
>>> > > > > > > >     course of a discussion.
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > >     Here, you do not offer books or blogs in the middle of
>>> a
>>> > > > > > > > conversation.
>>> > > > > > > >     You only put across yourself, what you know and have to
>>> say, in
>>> > > > > > > > terms
>>> > > > > > > >     and using words I can understand. And I suppose I speak
>>> for
>>> > > > > > > > everyone
>>> > > > > > > >     here.
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > Your affinity towards moderated world is in proportion to
>>> your
>>> > > > > > > > mediocrity. You are lucky because it is only my decency
>>> which is
>>> > > > > > > > preventing me from using unparlimentary words that start
>>> with
>>> > > > alphabet
>>> > > > > > > > "f". Otherwise worthless egotist intellectual morons like
>>> you do
>>> > > > not
>>> > > > > > > > deserve anything else than that.
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > Note : I can give you the link to the above mentioned
>>> comment of
>>> > > > > > > > moderator. But that also may not be in line with the
>>> meaningless
>>> > > > > > > > guideline of Minds-Eye group.
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > On Jul 14, 11:46 am, Fiercely Free <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > > On Jul 14, 1:43 am, DarkwaterBlight <
>>> [email protected]>
>>> > > > > > wrote:>
>>> > > > > > > > At any rate, FF, bipolar coordinates are used for 2
>>> dimensional
>>> > > > > > > > > > > illustrations and bipolar system is a term coined by
>>> Kaplan.
>>> > > > "A
>>> > > > > > loose
>>> > > > > > > > > > > bipolar system is a construct in international
>>> relations
>>> > > > posited
>>> > > > > > by
>>> > > > > > > > > > > theorist Morton Kaplan in his work "System and
>>> Process in
>>> > > > > > > > > > > International Politics." The model was largely meant
>>> to
>>> > > > reflect
>>> > > > > > the
>>> > > > > > > > > > > Cold War-era, two-superpower geopolitical
>>> arrangement."
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > >         The bipolar system forms the basis of
>>> civilization.
>>> > > > > > > > > > Fundamentally, it represents the conflict between the
>>> good &
>>> > > > the
>>> > > > > > bad.
>>> > > > > > > > > > It can be applied to global political system as well.
>>> Then why
>>> > > > do
>>> > > > > > such
>>> > > > > > > > > > politically interpreted versions of bipolar system
>>> appear to be
>>> > > > > > > > > > inadequate ? Reason is obvious. Those who proposed such
>>> > > > political
>>> > > > > > > > > > theories were NOT as neutral as they were supposed to
>>> be. It is
>>> > > > the
>>> > > > > > > > > > ignorance of those who interprete. Basic bipolar model
>>> cannot
>>> > > > not
>>> > > > > > be
>>> > > > > > > > > > blamed for that.
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > Are you suggesting that our universe is a folded 2D
>>> universe
>>> > > > > > giving
>>> > > > > > > > the
>>> > > > > > > > > > > appearance of a multiverse for lack of a good vantage
>>> point?!
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > >      In the absence of true infinity, multiverse system
>>> will
>>> > > > never
>>> > > > > > > > > > become multipolar system.
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > Read more: What Is a Loose Bipolar System? |
>>> eHow.comhttp://
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> www.ehow.com/facts_6529365_loose-bipolar-system_.html#ixzz0tb4...
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > >      Thanks for the reference link, DarkwaterBlight.
>>> (You have
>>> > > > > > shown
>>> > > > > > > > > > the courage to go against Minds-Eye guidelines
>>> regarding
>>> > > > links.)
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 1:12 pm, Fiercely Free <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 6:45 pm, DarkwaterBlight <
>>> > > > [email protected]>
>>> > > > > > > > wrote:> Samir, I like your blog! Yes I am sure few would
>>> agree that
>>> > > > you
>>> > > > > > are
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > the most intelligent person on this globe. Your
>>> post
>>> > > > implies
>>> > > > > > > > duality
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > and I am sure reason would suggest that duality
>>> is but an
>>> > > > > > > > illusion.
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > The mutiverse concept is provided for in quantum
>>> physics
>>> > > > as
>>> > > > > > well
>>> > > > > > > > as
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > other advanced theories but all fall short of
>>> PROVING
>>> > > > > > anything
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > therefore these multi layers can ONLY exist in
>>> Minds-Eye
>>> > > > > > space as
>>> > > > > > > > far
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > as we are concerned! The fact that this world is
>>> > > > competitive
>>> > > > > > and
>>> > > > > > > > will
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > always challenge claims made by those who oppose
>>> is not
>>> > > > an
>>> > > > > > issue.
>>> > > > > > > > The
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > issue is being able to support claims made and
>>> > > > persevering.
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > >      I see no duality or subsequent illusion in my
>>> post. My
>>> > > > > > > > objection
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > was for the term "Infinite" and in the absence of
>>> infinite
>>> > > > > > layers,
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > multiverse system will NOT be different from
>>> bipolar
>>> > > > system.
>>> > > > > > So,
>>> > > > > > > > now
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > the onus of supporting claims about "infinite
>>> number of
>>> > > > layers
>>> > > > > > on
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > Minds-Eye" rests upon the organisers of
>>> Minds-Eye...
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 8:23 am, Fiercely Free <
>>> [email protected]>
>>> > > > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >       Any multiverse system will eventually
>>> boil down
>>> > > > to a
>>> > > > > > > > bipolar
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > system. You are either part of Truth axis or
>>> you are
>>> > > > part
>>> > > > > > of
>>> > > > > > > > organised
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > crime. There is no scope for any third option.
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >       Only omnipotent Almighty is infinite. So,
>>> > > > Minds-Eye
>>> > > > > > space
>>> > > > > > > > cannot
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > have infinite layers. If you assume yourselves
>>> to be
>>> > > > > > infinite,
>>> > > > > > > > in this
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > fiercely competitive world, your claim will
>>> always get
>>> > > > > > > > challenged...
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fromhttp://samirsp.blogspot.com
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 3, 5:15 pm, RP <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parallel spaceMinds-Eye  -  2 posts  -  2
>>> authors  -
>>> > > > Last
>>> > > > > > > > post:  Mar
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 12, 2008
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rp singh ... Minds-Eye Space has infinite
>>> layers and
>>> > > > in
>>> > > > > > each
>>> > > > > > > > layer
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > there is a unique universe. Time has no
>>> beginning and
>>> > > > no
>>> > > > > > end
>>> > > > > > > > as the
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > past is ...
>>> >
>>> > > >
>>> http://groups.google.com/g/3517fe0c/t/fca83d2320a90343/d/df18f534e5c8.
>>> > > > > > ..
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I wrote about parallel universes in ME as
>>> above. I am
>>> > > > > > hearing
>>> > > > > > > > a lot
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about parallel universes nowadays whereas
>>> when I
>>> > > > > > expounded my
>>> > > > > > > > belief I
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was ridiculed. Is it just co-incidence?- Hide
>>> quoted
>>> > > > text
>>> > > > > > -
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > --
>>> > > > > > >  (
>>> > > > > > >   )
>>> > > > > > > I_D Allan
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > Be Paranoid.
>>> > > > > > > God is always building a better idiot!!!
>>> >
>>> > > > > --
>>> > > > > \--/ Peace
>>> >
>>> > ...
>>> >
>>> > Erfahren Sie mehr ยป
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> \--/ Peace
>>
>
>
>
> --
> \--/ Peace
>

Reply via email to