Kevin, The bottom line is, there is no bottom line. Case has accurately cited the observable evidence of Humanities best minds for the past 100 years supporting the big bang theory. (nothing to sneeze at) Due to my observations (something to sneeze at) I make the point that perhaps what they are observing is'nt absolute, that perhaps while the universe Expands in one area it also may be contracting in another and that perhaps that the "rounding error" Phenomenon gives us a clue as to a more accurate theory of the totality of this universe since mathmatics Is an almost 1 to 1 analogie of objective reality. I think after this conversation, that it has more to Say about how subject percieves object. Subject may only percieve object when a limit to sensory input Is applied otherwise objective reality could not be interpreted usefully. The paradox is that subject Seems to be: object aware of itself. Which works in MOQ.
The thing I can't shake about subjective primary reality is the rational conclusion of it, that human Beings/me are/is an "entity" or soul or whatever, is real and objective reality is an illusionary Construct of said subjective "entity". that humans/me exist and create objective reality. Leaving Me to ask Did I/we allways exist? Are we just a ball of entities floating in (space?) Creating matter out of energy? that we, in fact are the center of the universe and really it's just us And nothing more. Just me and nothing more for how can I be sure of any other awareness other than my own? So from this perpective I see that I am the creator of my universe and ultimately myself. Childhood An illusion, parents an illusion, learning an illusion. I am and I have allways been, with out beginning Or end. I killed the Dinosaurs. I admit it, and I'd do it again..and on the seventh day I said fuk it that's all I'm doing. Then I got lonely and developed multiple personalities, so you see, God is insane and Experience is nothing more than masturbation. Now THAT is weirdness. I think the experience of objective reality is limited by subjective Awareness. Thus within that context you may make the observation that Objective awareness is subjective. It is a useful way to see Outside objective materialism and the obsession with it but to Call it scientific "fact" and claim it primary is just weird and irrational. And that's about the last blow I'm going to level on that dead horse (which I've beaten down to it's componant molecules) -Ron -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Perez Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 4:33 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MD] FW: Quantum weirdness Hello Case and Ron. So what's the bottom line? Thanks. Kevin --------------------------------- Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A. moq_discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ moq_discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
