why is 'bodes law' faulty... ? On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 9:23 PM, DarkwaterBlight <[email protected]>wrote:
> "In the previous ages (Wisdom, Ritual, and Doubt), there were “more- > than-human” beings. During this time, in what constitutes ancient > prehistory, there was no “civilization”, but an “era of gods”. > According to Hesiod (Greek poet, circa 700 B.C.E.), mortal people > lived as if they were gods, and no miserable old age came their way. > That cycle ended, but those beings continued to live upon the earth in > an invisible way, mantling themselves in dark mist and watching over > mortal men. "...in the realm of Yima, the Persian King of the Golden > Age, before the new cosmic events forced him to withdraw into a > 'subterranean' refuge (the inhabitants of which were thus enabled to > evade the dark and painful destiny befallen the new generations), > there was neither disease nor death... men and immortal gods shared > one common life...” Such descriptions are typical of countless > traditions of different cultures which comprise in part the Chronicles > of Earth. > > > > These beings did not experience time as we do, but had a super- > temporal sense of Time. They regarded time qualitatively (not > quantitatively) and as a rhythm (not a series). From their view, time > did not flow uniformly or indefinitely, but was broken down into > cycles and periods in which every moment had its own meaning and > specific value in relation to all others. Certain numbers, such as > five (Wicca), seven (Tarot), nine (Numerology) twelve (Astrology), and > one thousand (Tao de Ching), were used not to express specific > quantities, but rather to show typical structures of rhythm; such that > different durations might still remain symbolically equivalent. > Meanwhile, the modern world experiences the illusion of time escaping > or slipping away, with one’s goal to somehow capture it -- an attempt > that can obviously never be achieved. > > > > The distinction between cyclical and linear thinking shows itself in > modern astronomy’s use of a faulty “Bode’s Law”, while the Harmony of > the Spheres, being a measure of cycles or orbital periods is the more > relevant measure -- a measure where the end result is not strictly the > time to complete a cycle, but the nature and relationship of the cycle > itself. It is the interaction of the different orbital patterns that > is more important than any subdivision of one cycle and what that > might mean. Astrology, at its fundamental base, is thus a hint of > this super-temporal view of time, where geometric relationships create > the patterns of Sacred Geometry. And therein lies its importance. > > In the beginning of the Kali Yuga there was not only science, but a > very advanced form. Having originated from god-like beings, this > science was dangerous to mankind or anyone not properly appreciative > of the fundamentals. It was thus confined to temples as “mysteries”, > but where it eventually became extinct, when the only thing the > ‘sacred flame’ could do was burn." > http://www.halexandria.org/dward030.htm > > On Jul 20, 6:42 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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/b34c37072d. > .. > > > > >> 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 > > > > ... > > > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - -- \--/ Peace
