Reincarnation na rebirth ni kitu kile kile

[Mshana Jr]

🙂
🙂
🙂
🙂
🙂

I thought so.

 

[mose]

View attachment 300413

... And i am the the real badass devil, LOL

 

[Mshana Jr]

... And i am the the real badass devil, LOL

mose we can jus take it easy and accept challenges no matter how negative they are...!

 

[mose]

mose we can jus take it easy and accept challenges no matter how negative they are...!

'Take easy' what?

What is 'negative' and what is 'positive'?

If you see it as a challenge then gotta face it like a challenge.

BUT

How do you care?

Someone may find something like that, all together, as a play...

It is neither negative nor positive.

Just... a play.

Update your 'game'....

Hmmm

 

[Mshana Jr]

'Take easy' what?

What is 'negative' and what is 'positive'?

If you see it as a challenge then gotta face it like a challenge.

BUT

How do you care?

Someone may find something like that, all together, as a play...

It is neither negative nor positive.

Just... a play.

Update your 'game'....

Hmmm

JF is a home of great thinkers...! Let's learn this slogan in the hard way.. mose remember no easy way to go

 

[mose]

JF is a home of great thinkers...! Let's learn this slogan in the hard way.. mose remember no easy way to go

You are mistaken bedrin...

JF is not yet home of great thinkers... Not even close.

I am maintaining my survey, waiting for the 'perfect time'...

But hopefully, individuals like you offer a unique service in the process to facilitate that coming -- the real dawn of the broad spectrum considerations.

The procession won't be easy, i as a man can say; however we can get there.

Keep the ball rolling...

Blessings

 

[mose]

Uzi umekufa...
mshana jr , habari

japo sipendi kuleta jambo ambalo wakati wake haujawadia hasa; wacha nitie chumvi humu kwa kupachika uzi wa mazungumzo ya wadau kutoka kwenye media ingine ya kijamii--nikiwemo mimi mwenyewe, Facebook...

Japo huu ni wa lugha ya kiingereza, maudhui yake yanasadifu pia mashauri yaliyotangulia katika uzi huu na pia kugusia mengine ambayo humu hayakuweza 'kuotewa'...

++++

[h=5]Tom Clearwater[/h]13 Novemba saa 04:55 mchana/ jioni ?






The distinguishing feature of quantum physics, implied by its name, is wholeness. As Bohr put it, the "discovery of the elementary quantum of action ... revealed a feature of wholeness inherent in atomic processes."
Most physicists, not to mention non-physicists, and according even to their own self-reports, do not understand quantum physics. This non-understanding is understandable because perceiving and understanding the wholeness of which Bohr speaks requires enlightenment-level mental coherence, which is in fact a coherence between oppositional realities whether conceived as actual existents like left-brain/right-brain, or as concepts like relative-absolute. One essentially must understand yin-yang duality, which we can call Tao relatedness, and which is why Bohr took the Tao symbol for the coat of arms conferred on him by the Danish state.
Those who understand quantum (Tao) physics will never be heard saying they do not understand quantum physics. Those who haven't this experience do not understand quantum physics, assuming that understanding as I describe it exists. That understanding, for those people, exists only as a potential reality claimed by others.
One important implication here is that if a person (including notable scientists like Feynman or Bohm) does not claim to understand quantum physics, that person, and again assuming said understanding does exist, is incompetent to discern whether any given person who claims that understanding in fact has it. The entire matter, to put it clearly, is developmentally off the former's radar screen, for to understand coherence (wholeness), one must be coherent, which requires the developmental passage into enlightenment (coherence). If that person is honest, they will admit this description on the assumption so presented as true.

LikeToa maoniSambaza




Watu 13 wameipenda hii



33 comments
1 share


[h=6]Maoni[/h]






Joel David Morrison That wholeness, ironically, comes from the continuity aspect or antipode that is the aether.
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 13 Novemba saa 05:01 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison Continuity allows the emergence of harmonic and dynamic (ergodic) quantization.
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 13 Novemba saa 05:02 mchana/ jioni









Tom Clearwater Yes, continuity is the necessarily implied opposite of discreetness, which like you say is quantization, or "particleness." Particleness is but particularity, which is difference, separation, individuality, etc. ~~ in a word, discontinuity, showing its opposition to continuity, which is wave. Wave and particle are accordingly opposites in their fundamental distinction and conceptual role.

I know you get this, but for the benefit of others reading, in the conceptuality of quantum physics, the role of continuity is played by the concept of vacuum, which in its most developed expression is properly conceived as a superfluid. "Superfluid," conceptually speaking, is absolute continuity, i.e. non-separate, non-local, non-actual ~~ in a word, pure potential. Thus on distinctions I draw above, "superfluity" functions as the absolute opposite of distinction-particularity-discontinuity ~~ difference ~~ which is accordingly, itself, absolute.

This absolutization of both poles of the continuity-discontinuity polarity, where polar distinction becomes entirely unmixed, i.e., Tao, i.e., where X becomes ~X-only~ rendering not-X 0% X as it is and must be, is the quantum move. Anything else is conceptual confusion.

Quantum conceptuality is accordingly a play of clarified (absolutized) opposites, which is a move to opposition per se.

For those interested in a good read of the evolution of the quantum vacuum concept, see the attached.

http://www.marcobischof.com/.../art.../Quantum%20Vacuum.doc
Like ? Jibu ? 2 ? 13 Novemba saa 06:35 mchana/ jioni ? Edited








Juli Ragsdale replied ? 3 Replies







Joel David Morrison I wouldn't say that quantization and particle-ness are the same, however, because that is the key error at the heart of modern quantum theory. Some...indeed much of quantization is purely harmonic or cymatic.
Like ? Jibu ? 13 Novemba saa 06:44 mchana/ jioni









Grayson Hewitt Brown Jung may have come to that conclusion later in life. He was fascinated by the Mandela as a symbol of the wholeness of the self and the individuation process moving toward wholeness.
Like ? Jibu ? 13 Novemba saa 07:04 mchana/ jioni









Tom Clearwater Particularity, by definition, is self-contained. Thus at the root of anything that can be named as different is a fractal selfness, if you will, self-referencing self-containment. This self fractal is discontinuity per se, which if you think about it...Tazama Zaidi
Like ? Jibu ? 13 Novemba saa 07:11 mchana/ jioni ? Edited









Tom Clearwater Grayson, maybe Jung got there. In my reading of him, he almost got there. I hear Bohm got there just before his death. Maybe the same is true for Jung? Quite possible as that's the direction he was inevitably traveling.
Like ? Jibu ? 13 Novemba saa 07:14 mchana/ jioni ? Edited









Tom Clearwater Joel, what I am saying here is that difference by its very definition requires self-containment in the manner I describe above. Difference is either discontinuity In the manner of self-containment, or it does not exist. The notion of particularity is t...Tazama Zaidi
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 13 Novemba saa 07:20 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison Tom, I disagree with you on that. Quantum and particle are not identical, and this line of thinking is at the root error of modern quantum theory. No worries.
Like ? Jibu ? 13 Novemba saa 07:21 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison I disagree that difference requires self-containment, actually. It seems there are many other things in here about which we disagree. Particularity is not identical with difference at all, for me. Difference is far more general, and the ground for a...Tazama Zaidi
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 13 Novemba saa 07:40 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison And while a particle is a quantization, quantization is not neccessarily, or even often, a particle.
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 13 Novemba saa 07:42 mchana/ jioni









Tom Clearwater In the distinction "A," where we distinguish A from, say, B, that distinction requires that B be not-A as the very difference between them, yes?
Like ? Jibu ? 13 Novemba saa 07:47 mchana/ jioni








Joel David Morrison replied ? 1 Reply







Tom Clearwater To illustrate the identity of opposites, consider the attached image of movement. What is in one transposition a sine wave (i.e., a reversing pulse) is in another a circle. Breathing, for its part, appears pulsatory: in-stop-out-stop, or in more exte...Tazama Zaidi
Like ? Jibu ? 13 Novemba saa 09:43 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison This is all understood and I am in general agreement there. But I am not seeing how this relates to our discussion of the difference between quantization in general and particularity, Tom.
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 13 Novemba saa 10:26 mchana/ jioni ? Edited









Jacqueline Alice Evans I think the key is to keep it simple Tom so all can understand like emoticon
Like ? Jibu ? 14 Novemba saa 02:16 mchana/ jioni









Tom Clearwater Joel, how do you get to difference without conceiving in the manner of some space-like separation, which type of separation self-containment images?
Like ? Jibu ? 14 Novemba saa 07:46 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison The key is to switch to an all-touching metaphor for continuity instead of an all-connecting one. In an all-touching one, indivisibility is a function of infinite difference without any gaps in continuity.
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 14 Novemba saa 08:46 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison That shift moves from the classical solid bias to the postclassical fluid form, and into their integration in the real causal complimentarity of infinite difference. Both the particle and the wave modes of difference (antipodes of organization) play irreducible roles in the scalar dynamic.
Like ? Jibu ? 14 Novemba saa 08:50 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison I hope you understand that I did not say that particularity has nothing to do with difference. Rather I said that they are not the same concept, for me. Difference is simply a more general concept and functions at the root of "substance". Substance itself is already infinitely differentiated. And this enables both particle and wave modes. But this infinite difference already is both modes, and is not merely one or the other.
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 14 Novemba saa 09:19 mchana/ jioni ? Edited









Tom Clearwater Infinite difference is a spatial-separation notion. "Infinite" in the phrase merely closes the spatial gap between two "differents." Those differents by their nature are separated by a gap.

This gets to my not entirely rhetorical question above, which goes this direction: where we differentiate A from B, that differentiation, or difference, is in that difference absolute, ie, A is in respect of its difference from B ~not~ B, ie, there exists a gap between A and B which, as a spatial representation of that difference, shows the absolute nature of difference itself. Your term difference implies all this. Your qualification which you call "infinite" difference, which is to say your infinitization of difference shows that the concept of difference is fundamentally finite, by implication.
Like ? Jibu ? 14 Novemba saa 10:17 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison As you know, the notion of "infinite division equals indivisibility" is key in my work. There is a span, yes, and plenty of thresholds, but no real gaps. Infinite difference is a continuum, which is pretty much a tautology, or simply redundant.
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 14 Novemba saa 11:53 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison And yes, finity and infinity are inversely identical. Can we bring this down to the topic at hand?
Like ? Jibu ? 14 Novemba saa 11:54 mchana/ jioni









Tom Clearwater How is A's difference from B continuous? Doesn't continuity imply singleness (ie, not two, ie, not different)?
Like ? Jibu ? 15 Novemba saa 12:33 asubuhi









Tom Clearwater Continuity, in fact, requires for its meaning that which continuity is not, ie, discontinuity. Absent the reality of discontinuity, continuity has no meaning.
Like ? Jibu ? 15 Novemba saa 12:34 asubuhi








Joel David Morrison replied ? 1 Reply







Joel David Morrison Continuity implies singleness only in its infinity, Tom. And it doesn't dictate or require or cause the negation of gradients.
Like ? Jibu ? 15 Novemba saa 12:47 asubuhi









Yasuhiko Genku Kimura Understanding of Tao does not make you understand quantum physics without the knowledge of physics and mathematics required for it. Also understanding of quantum physics does not equate with understanding of Tao. Both gives us access to the modes of perception, thinking, and consciousness that transcend the dualistic modes, however. We have come to a point in the evolution of consciousness where we can go beyond the consciousness and understanding of the ancient Taoist.
Hainipendezi tena ? Jibu ? 4 ? 17 Novemba saa 11:45 asubuhi









Tom Clearwater That's your perspective. Mine is that ancient understandings are limited and, in that, obsolete. YMMV.
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 17 Novemba saa 04:27 mchana/ jioni








Linda LolaOlk replied ? 4 Replies







Joel David Morrison All perspectives are limited. And in this limitation (generality) they find their power. Taoism taps into general fundamentals of existence which haven't changed, and likely never will. And so it continues to be as relevant as ever. This isn't true of all ancient thought, but many ideas long forgotten are becoming more relevant as modern understanding comes full circle, out of our own dark age of junk science, and into to the light of these same ancient intuitions.
Hainipendezi tena ? Jibu ? 1 ? 17 Novemba saa 05:09 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison replied ? 6 Replies




Tao Teh Ching Verse One:

No Tao defined is Infinite Taoing.
No Name given is Eternal Naming.

Nameless, it is the beginning of heaven and earth.
Named, it is the mother of ten thousand things.

Eternal Nothingness, we apperceive infinite subtleties.
Evermore Thingness, we perceive finite distinctions.

These two, though different in designation, have the same source,
This same source called the Deep.

Deep beyond the deepest of the deep,
It is the Portal into the myriad wonders.

Copyright 2015 by Yasuhiko Genku Kimura



Moses Simon 'Planck Length', the source of all enigma of fractal wholeness -- Talking about form, change and distinction is pertinent to the sense of 'comprehension' in regard to 'information' and 'intelligence' inherent to processing perceiver--one's mind and ego...

You can say 'Planck Length' is the 'limit' of linear dimensionality and approach. Things get spooky henceforth; from there, anything is truly possible. As far as the 'dimensional objectivity' is concerned, Planck is always at the verge of trans-dimensional figuring out and disposing the secrets of its potential 'hyper-activity'.

it is just I as a person dismiss the equation -- his famous E =hv... For I know, since he too came from the ordinary science; the one which is obsessed with 'measurements' he was susceptible to mis-conceptualization deadlock...

At Planck Length; events, time and distance are collapsible...

Jesus knew something like this in very significant way when he talked of the mustard seed(smallest seeds indeed), faith and the trans-positioning of even monumental forms--Moving the mountains...

Energy cannot be measured, by any means whatsoever... All that science supposes to deduct and measure as energy is something 'lost in translation'...

The whole creation is about randomness and order: palatable information and incognito-ability : awareness or non awareness: self cognition, self reflection -- transcendence, but in the sense of awareness within possible other context of awareness....

Tao and Energy are synonymous.

Even god is like the half of of the story... Perceivable coherence of form thru mind empowers one to see and comprehend things in part... We know things in part as much as we know ourselves in part...

The fullness of comprehension is the last crucible to the Tao... Is to know oneself, as god knows you to be... As the whole has known 'you'.

God shall seize to be, once one comes to full comprehension...

From there is only ISNESS and EMPTINESS...

Could there be another order and sense of trans-dental reality of which renders our mind and its subtle faculty impotent to 'grasp' any further?

I as a man can't 'speculate' any further even with this ordinary mind and state and nature of articulating LOL

Now Fractality + Intelligence is synonymous to incarnation of higher or subtle forms in dense or gross forms...

Living forms are the actual evidence of Hidden Seeds of Consciousness, Will and Potency.

What in the Baghavad Gita -- there are reflections on this -- the saga of 'Jivatman' and all perceivable forms to our cognizable world...

We live as if in another One's Dream... In all dimensional scales.

In his 'Being' we have 'Life'.

Hidden path to Subtle key intricate to Form and Coherence through the 'Quantum World' shall lead us into knowing not just 'tiny' things-- acting kinda wild from one sense into the other of condition toward 'perceiving' them... rather our own 'self-nature'...
Like ? Jibu ? 2 ? 17 Novemba saa 08:31 mchana/ jioni ? Edited

++++

Hebu tuone, kipi utachukua hapa ikiwa utapenda.

Hmmmm

 

[Mshana Jr]

Uzi umekufa...
mshana jr , habari

japo sipendi kuleta jambo ambalo wakati wake haujawadia hasa; wacha nitie chumvi humu kwa kupachika uzi wa mazungumzo ya wadau kutoka kwenye media ingine ya kijamii--nikiwemo mimi mwenyewe, Facebook...

Japo huu ni wa lugha ya kiingereza, maudhui yake yanasadifu pia mashauri yaliyotangulia katika uzi huu na pia kugusia mengine ambayo humu hayakuweza 'kuotewa'...

++++

[h=5]Tom Clearwater[/h]13 Novemba saa 04:55 mchana/ jioni ?






The distinguishing feature of quantum physics, implied by its name, is wholeness. As Bohr put it, the "discovery of the elementary quantum of action ... revealed a feature of wholeness inherent in atomic processes."
Most physicists, not to mention non-physicists, and according even to their own self-reports, do not understand quantum physics. This non-understanding is understandable because perceiving and understanding the wholeness of which Bohr speaks requires enlightenment-level mental coherence, which is in fact a coherence between oppositional realities whether conceived as actual existents like left-brain/right-brain, or as concepts like relative-absolute. One essentially must understand yin-yang duality, which we can call Tao relatedness, and which is why Bohr took the Tao symbol for the coat of arms conferred on him by the Danish state.
Those who understand quantum (Tao) physics will never be heard saying they do not understand quantum physics. Those who haven't this experience do not understand quantum physics, assuming that understanding as I describe it exists. That understanding, for those people, exists only as a potential reality claimed by others.
One important implication here is that if a person (including notable scientists like Feynman or Bohm) does not claim to understand quantum physics, that person, and again assuming said understanding does exist, is incompetent to discern whether any given person who claims that understanding in fact has it. The entire matter, to put it clearly, is developmentally off the former's radar screen, for to understand coherence (wholeness), one must be coherent, which requires the developmental passage into enlightenment (coherence). If that person is honest, they will admit this description on the assumption so presented as true.

LikeToa maoniSambaza




Watu 13 wameipenda hii



33 comments
1 share


[h=6]Maoni[/h]






Joel David Morrison That wholeness, ironically, comes from the continuity aspect or antipode that is the aether.
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 13 Novemba saa 05:01 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison Continuity allows the emergence of harmonic and dynamic (ergodic) quantization.
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 13 Novemba saa 05:02 mchana/ jioni









Tom Clearwater Yes, continuity is the necessarily implied opposite of discreetness, which like you say is quantization, or "particleness." Particleness is but particularity, which is difference, separation, individuality, etc. ~~ in a word, discontinuity, showing its opposition to continuity, which is wave. Wave and particle are accordingly opposites in their fundamental distinction and conceptual role.

I know you get this, but for the benefit of others reading, in the conceptuality of quantum physics, the role of continuity is played by the concept of vacuum, which in its most developed expression is properly conceived as a superfluid. "Superfluid," conceptually speaking, is absolute continuity, i.e. non-separate, non-local, non-actual ~~ in a word, pure potential. Thus on distinctions I draw above, "superfluity" functions as the absolute opposite of distinction-particularity-discontinuity ~~ difference ~~ which is accordingly, itself, absolute.

This absolutization of both poles of the continuity-discontinuity polarity, where polar distinction becomes entirely unmixed, i.e., Tao, i.e., where X becomes ~X-only~ rendering not-X 0% X as it is and must be, is the quantum move. Anything else is conceptual confusion.

Quantum conceptuality is accordingly a play of clarified (absolutized) opposites, which is a move to opposition per se.

For those interested in a good read of the evolution of the quantum vacuum concept, see the attached.

http://www.marcobischof.com/.../art.../Quantum%20Vacuum.doc
Like ? Jibu ? 2 ? 13 Novemba saa 06:35 mchana/ jioni ? Edited








Juli Ragsdale replied ? 3 Replies







Joel David Morrison I wouldn't say that quantization and particle-ness are the same, however, because that is the key error at the heart of modern quantum theory. Some...indeed much of quantization is purely harmonic or cymatic.
Like ? Jibu ? 13 Novemba saa 06:44 mchana/ jioni









Grayson Hewitt Brown Jung may have come to that conclusion later in life. He was fascinated by the Mandela as a symbol of the wholeness of the self and the individuation process moving toward wholeness.
Like ? Jibu ? 13 Novemba saa 07:04 mchana/ jioni









Tom Clearwater Particularity, by definition, is self-contained. Thus at the root of anything that can be named as different is a fractal selfness, if you will, self-referencing self-containment. This self fractal is discontinuity per se, which if you think about it...Tazama Zaidi
Like ? Jibu ? 13 Novemba saa 07:11 mchana/ jioni ? Edited









Tom Clearwater Grayson, maybe Jung got there. In my reading of him, he almost got there. I hear Bohm got there just before his death. Maybe the same is true for Jung? Quite possible as that's the direction he was inevitably traveling.
Like ? Jibu ? 13 Novemba saa 07:14 mchana/ jioni ? Edited









Tom Clearwater Joel, what I am saying here is that difference by its very definition requires self-containment in the manner I describe above. Difference is either discontinuity In the manner of self-containment, or it does not exist. The notion of particularity is t...Tazama Zaidi
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 13 Novemba saa 07:20 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison Tom, I disagree with you on that. Quantum and particle are not identical, and this line of thinking is at the root error of modern quantum theory. No worries.
Like ? Jibu ? 13 Novemba saa 07:21 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison I disagree that difference requires self-containment, actually. It seems there are many other things in here about which we disagree. Particularity is not identical with difference at all, for me. Difference is far more general, and the ground for a...Tazama Zaidi
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 13 Novemba saa 07:40 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison And while a particle is a quantization, quantization is not neccessarily, or even often, a particle.
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 13 Novemba saa 07:42 mchana/ jioni









Tom Clearwater In the distinction "A," where we distinguish A from, say, B, that distinction requires that B be not-A as the very difference between them, yes?
Like ? Jibu ? 13 Novemba saa 07:47 mchana/ jioni








Joel David Morrison replied ? 1 Reply







Tom Clearwater To illustrate the identity of opposites, consider the attached image of movement. What is in one transposition a sine wave (i.e., a reversing pulse) is in another a circle. Breathing, for its part, appears pulsatory: in-stop-out-stop, or in more exte...Tazama Zaidi
Like ? Jibu ? 13 Novemba saa 09:43 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison This is all understood and I am in general agreement there. But I am not seeing how this relates to our discussion of the difference between quantization in general and particularity, Tom.
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 13 Novemba saa 10:26 mchana/ jioni ? Edited









Jacqueline Alice Evans I think the key is to keep it simple Tom so all can understand like emoticon
Like ? Jibu ? 14 Novemba saa 02:16 mchana/ jioni









Tom Clearwater Joel, how do you get to difference without conceiving in the manner of some space-like separation, which type of separation self-containment images?
Like ? Jibu ? 14 Novemba saa 07:46 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison The key is to switch to an all-touching metaphor for continuity instead of an all-connecting one. In an all-touching one, indivisibility is a function of infinite difference without any gaps in continuity.
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 14 Novemba saa 08:46 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison That shift moves from the classical solid bias to the postclassical fluid form, and into their integration in the real causal complimentarity of infinite difference. Both the particle and the wave modes of difference (antipodes of organization) play irreducible roles in the scalar dynamic.
Like ? Jibu ? 14 Novemba saa 08:50 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison I hope you understand that I did not say that particularity has nothing to do with difference. Rather I said that they are not the same concept, for me. Difference is simply a more general concept and functions at the root of "substance". Substance itself is already infinitely differentiated. And this enables both particle and wave modes. But this infinite difference already is both modes, and is not merely one or the other.
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 14 Novemba saa 09:19 mchana/ jioni ? Edited









Tom Clearwater Infinite difference is a spatial-separation notion. "Infinite" in the phrase merely closes the spatial gap between two "differents." Those differents by their nature are separated by a gap.

This gets to my not entirely rhetorical question above, which goes this direction: where we differentiate A from B, that differentiation, or difference, is in that difference absolute, ie, A is in respect of its difference from B ~not~ B, ie, there exists a gap between A and B which, as a spatial representation of that difference, shows the absolute nature of difference itself. Your term difference implies all this. Your qualification which you call "infinite" difference, which is to say your infinitization of difference shows that the concept of difference is fundamentally finite, by implication.
Like ? Jibu ? 14 Novemba saa 10:17 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison As you know, the notion of "infinite division equals indivisibility" is key in my work. There is a span, yes, and plenty of thresholds, but no real gaps. Infinite difference is a continuum, which is pretty much a tautology, or simply redundant.
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 14 Novemba saa 11:53 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison And yes, finity and infinity are inversely identical. Can we bring this down to the topic at hand?
Like ? Jibu ? 14 Novemba saa 11:54 mchana/ jioni









Tom Clearwater How is A's difference from B continuous? Doesn't continuity imply singleness (ie, not two, ie, not different)?
Like ? Jibu ? 15 Novemba saa 12:33 asubuhi









Tom Clearwater Continuity, in fact, requires for its meaning that which continuity is not, ie, discontinuity. Absent the reality of discontinuity, continuity has no meaning.
Like ? Jibu ? 15 Novemba saa 12:34 asubuhi








Joel David Morrison replied ? 1 Reply







Joel David Morrison Continuity implies singleness only in its infinity, Tom. And it doesn't dictate or require or cause the negation of gradients.
Like ? Jibu ? 15 Novemba saa 12:47 asubuhi









Yasuhiko Genku Kimura Understanding of Tao does not make you understand quantum physics without the knowledge of physics and mathematics required for it. Also understanding of quantum physics does not equate with understanding of Tao. Both gives us access to the modes of perception, thinking, and consciousness that transcend the dualistic modes, however. We have come to a point in the evolution of consciousness where we can go beyond the consciousness and understanding of the ancient Taoist.
Hainipendezi tena ? Jibu ? 4 ? 17 Novemba saa 11:45 asubuhi









Tom Clearwater That's your perspective. Mine is that ancient understandings are limited and, in that, obsolete. YMMV.
Like ? Jibu ? 1 ? 17 Novemba saa 04:27 mchana/ jioni








Linda LolaOlk replied ? 4 Replies







Joel David Morrison All perspectives are limited. And in this limitation (generality) they find their power. Taoism taps into general fundamentals of existence which haven't changed, and likely never will. And so it continues to be as relevant as ever. This isn't true of all ancient thought, but many ideas long forgotten are becoming more relevant as modern understanding comes full circle, out of our own dark age of junk science, and into to the light of these same ancient intuitions.
Hainipendezi tena ? Jibu ? 1 ? 17 Novemba saa 05:09 mchana/ jioni









Joel David Morrison replied ? 6 Replies




Tao Teh Ching Verse One:

No Tao defined is Infinite Taoing.
No Name given is Eternal Naming.

Nameless, it is the beginning of heaven and earth.
Named, it is the mother of ten thousand things.

Eternal Nothingness, we apperceive infinite subtleties.
Evermore Thingness, we perceive finite distinctions.

These two, though different in designation, have the same source,
This same source called the Deep.

Deep beyond the deepest of the deep,
It is the Portal into the myriad wonders.

Copyright 2015 by Yasuhiko Genku Kimura



Moses Simon 'Planck Length', the source of all enigma of fractal wholeness -- Talking about form, change and distinction is pertinent to the sense of 'comprehension' in regard to 'information' and 'intelligence' inherent to processing perceiver--one's mind and ego...

You can say 'Planck Length' is the 'limit' of linear dimensionality and approach. Things get spooky henceforth; from there, anything is truly possible. As far as the 'dimensional objectivity' is concerned, Planck is always at the verge of trans-dimensional figuring out and disposing the secrets of its potential 'hyper-activity'.

it is just I as a person dismiss the equation -- his famous E =hv... For I know, since he too came from the ordinary science; the one which is obsessed with 'measurements' he was susceptible to mis-conceptualization deadlock...

At Planck Length; events, time and distance are collapsible...

Jesus knew something like this in very significant way when he talked of the mustard seed(smallest seeds indeed), faith and the trans-positioning of even monumental forms--Moving the mountains...

Energy cannot be measured, by any means whatsoever... All that science supposes to deduct and measure as energy is something 'lost in translation'...

The whole creation is about randomness and order: palatable information and incognito-ability : awareness or non awareness: self cognition, self reflection -- transcendence, but in the sense of awareness within possible other context of awareness....

Tao and Energy are synonymous.

Even god is like the half of of the story... Perceivable coherence of form thru mind empowers one to see and comprehend things in part... We know things in part as much as we know ourselves in part...

The fullness of comprehension is the last crucible to the Tao... Is to know oneself, as god knows you to be... As the whole has known 'you'.

God shall seize to be, once one comes to full comprehension...

From there is only ISNESS and EMPTINESS...

Could there be another order and sense of trans-dental reality of which renders our mind and its subtle faculty impotent to 'grasp' any further?

I as a man can't 'speculate' any further even with this ordinary mind and state and nature of articulating LOL

Now Fractality + Intelligence is synonymous to incarnation of higher or subtle forms in dense or gross forms...

Living forms are the actual evidence of Hidden Seeds of Consciousness, Will and Potency.

What in the Baghavad Gita -- there are reflections on this -- the saga of 'Jivatman' and all perceivable forms to our cognizable world...

We live as if in another One's Dream... In all dimensional scales.

In his 'Being' we have 'Life'.

Hidden path to Subtle key intricate to Form and Coherence through the 'Quantum World' shall lead us into knowing not just 'tiny' things-- acting kinda wild from one sense into the other of condition toward 'perceiving' them... rather our own 'self-nature'...
Like ? Jibu ? 2 ? 17 Novemba saa 08:31 mchana/ jioni ? Edited

++++

Hebu tuone, kipi utachukua hapa ikiwa utapenda.

Hmmmm

mose uzi haukufa ulipumzika na umekuja kuuamsha tena..nimepitia hastily baadhi ya vipengele kuna cha kujifunza nikitulia usiku nitarejea

 

[mose]

mose uzi haukufa ulipumzika na umekuja kuuamsha tena..nimepitia hastily baadhi ya vipengele kuna cha kujifunza nikitulia usiku nitarejea

Sawa mshana jr,

Waite na uwakaribishe wadau wote humu JF unaodhani wanaweza kupendezwa na maudhui yanayoweza kunyambulika na kuchambuliwa; kutokana na yote yaliyotanguliwa kuchangiwa na uzi huu.

Badala ya wadau kufikiri katika misingi ya fikra adilifu kwa misingi ya usadikifu wa kidini (mambo kama kitabu kitakatifu kinasema hivi ama vile), namna mpya za kujitahidi ama kujaribu kutanzua kutokea katika fikra za 'kifizikia ya kisasa' inaweza kuwa mahala pazuri.

Si kuwa sayansi ni kamilifu ama timilifu, lakini yenyewe ni mahala pazuri kuanzia 'kujiongeza'.

Ukiondoa fikra na udhanifu, mawazo na falsafa -- maisha ya Miditisha ama Upendo ni lazima kwa mtu mwenye kutafuta 'Ukweli' -- ulio ni ndani/nje ya vyote yenye kufanyika na basi ulio katika yote.

Mkondo wa Mazungumzo haya si kwa kila mtu, ni kwa wachache wenye nuru na nasibu ya mapenzi mema; wenye kuishi kwa hofu na imani ya kusadiki sadiki tu hapa hawana msaada.

Si kila aliyepitia, anayepitia na wakuja kuyapitia haya sharti kuelewa ama kukubaliana, la hasha; ya humu kimsingi yanaweza hata kusigana fikra adilifu za mpitiaji yeyote juu ya 'kuishi', 'uzima' na 'utimilifu wa mambo'.

Wengi -- na kama vile kila mtu (w)anaweza kusoma, lakini wakusudiwa ni wachache mno.

Ninawatafuta hao wachache, nione pamoja tutafanyika kitu gani humu JF.

Kwa usafi wa nia na makusudi yao katika kushiriki kiu, hamu na mapenzi bora juu ya nuru kwa ustawi zaidi wa jamii, itapatikana njia ya kuongeza maarifa zaidi humu JF; maarifa ya uzima.

Hmmm

 

[Mshana Jr]

Sawa mshana jr,

Waite na uwakaribishe wadau wote humu JF unaodhani wanaweza kupendezwa na maudhui yanayoweza kunyambulika na kuchambuliwa; kutokana na yote yaliyotanguliwa kuchangiwa na uzi huu.

Badala ya wadau kufikiri katika misingi ya fikra adilifu kwa misingi ya usadikifu wa kidini (mambo kama kitabu kitakatifu kinasema hivi ama vile), namna mpya za kujitahidi ama kujaribu kutanzua kutokea katika fikra za 'kifizikia ya kisasa' inaweza kuwa mahala pazuri.

Si kuwa sayansi ni kamilifu ama timilifu, lakini yenyewe ni mahala pazuri kuanzia 'kujiongeza'.

Ukiondoa fikra na udhanifu, mawazo na falsafa -- maisha ya Miditisha ama Upendo ni lazima kwa mtu mwenye kutafuta 'Ukweli' -- ulio ni ndani/nje ya vyote yenye kufanyika na basi ulio katika yote.

Mkondo wa Mazungumzo haya si kwa kila mtu, ni kwa wachache wenye nuru na nasibu ya mapenzi mema; wenye kuishi kwa hofu na imani ya kusadiki sadiki tu hapa hawana msaada.

Si kila aliyepitia, anayepitia na wakuja kuyapitia haya sharti kuelewa ama kukubaliana, la hasha; ya humu kimsingi yanaweza hata kusigana fikra adilifu za mpitiaji yeyote juu ya 'kuishi', 'uzima' na 'utimilifu wa mambo'.

Wengi -- na kama vile kila mtu (w)anaweza kusoma, lakini wakusudiwa ni wachache mno.

Ninawatafuta hao wachache, nione pamoja tutafanyika kitu gani humu JF.

Kwa usafi wa nia na makusudi yao katika kushiriki kiu, hamu na mapenzi bora juu ya nuru kwa ustawi zaidi wa jamii, itapatikana njia ya kuongeza maarifa zaidi humu JF; maarifa ya uzima.

Hmmm

Sahihi kabisa hii si elimu ya wote wenye kupenda kujua na kuelewa japo najua fika kwa muktadha huu wengi watajifunza na kupata kitu tofauti hapa
Nitapenda Jimena, NDUKI na wengine ambao sikuwataja hapa washiriki kwa upeo na kwa kina

 

[Jimena]

Elimu hii mara nyingi inapotoshwa na walimu wa dini, labda kwa kujua au kutokujua, sasa mtu akishajiwekea akilini mwake kuwa mtu akifa kuna moto unamsubiri au mabikira basi hapo hawezi kukuelewa linapokuja swala hili
Cc Bennie 369 na aretasludovick

 

[Mshana Jr]

Elimu hii mara nyingi inapotoshwa na walimu wa dini, labda kwa kujua au kutokujua, sasa mtu akishajiwekea akilini mwake kuwa mtu akifa kuna moto unamsubiri au mabikira basi hapo hawezi kukuelewa linapokuja swala hili
Cc Bennie 369 na aretasludovick

Asante kwa kuwa tag hao wadau Jimena

 

[tomjelly]

Elimu hii mara nyingi inapotoshwa na walimu wa dini, labda kwa kujua au kutokujua, sasa mtu akishajiwekea akilini mwake kuwa mtu akifa kuna moto unamsubiri au mabikira basi hapo hawezi kukuelewa linapokuja swala hili
Cc Bennie 369 na aretasludovick

Mi ulisahau kunitag.

 

[Risen man]

Elimu hii mara nyingi inapotoshwa na walimu wa dini, labda kwa kujua au kutokujua, sasa mtu akishajiwekea akilini mwake kuwa mtu akifa kuna moto unamsubiri au mabikira basi hapo hawezi kukuelewa linapokuja swala hili
Cc Bennie 369 na aretasludovick

Nimeiona mkuu

 

[tomjelly]

Nimepitia uzi na michango ya huu uzi. nimevutiwa sana, japo mambo ni magumu kuelewa kama ukiwa mvivu kuifikirisha akili na usipoiweka huru.. mh!
nafuatilia mjadala.

 

[tomjelly]

Nimeiona mkuu

jitahd kupitia pages zote.

 

[Risen man]

jitahd kupitia pages zote.

Ndio napitia mkuu usione kimya ukashangaa

 

[mose]

Elimu hii mara nyingi inapotoshwa na walimu wa dini, labda kwa kujua au kutokujua, sasa mtu akishajiwekea akilini mwake kuwa mtu akifa kuna moto unamsubiri au mabikira basi hapo hawezi kukuelewa linapokuja swala hili
Cc Bennie 369 na aretasludovick

Hii ni drama inayojirudia.

Dini na watu na jamii ni suala zito kwa watu ambao hawajakomaa kiakili na hisia--hasa katika upande wa vina vya tafsiri kwa mashauri yajayo na hizo; lakini ni jepesi kwa wale wenye mioyo safi na wasiojihesabia hatia kwa kuwa ni wenye moyo kupima bila hofu, kukubali ujinga na werevu pasi aibu, kuwa wawazi kukubali hata yale mageni yenye kubatilisha yaliyotangulia. Wakiwa ni watu wenye kuaminia ukweli na si kingine ila kweli hata hiyo ikiwa inavunjilia mbali jungu la kasumba zao na mapokeo yao. Wenye kuweza kusimama kidete kama mtu mmoja na si kama kundi la watu wenye kufuatishana mkumbo na desturi bila kupima hizo ndani ya wakati na ufunuo...

Je, wewe umepata kusoma kitabu cha 'The Aquarian Age Gospel of Jesus the Christ'?

Kitabu hichi kina mitazamo bora kabisa kuhusu mtu, imani, harakati na ukweli ingawaje namna yake ni tofauti na mashauri ya' vitabu vitakatifu' vya kawaida... Na hichi kikianzia na simulizi za Maisha na Harakati za Yesu kulingana na simuliza la Levi Dowling--Mtu aliyeandika hicho kulingana na alichokiona kwa jicho la ndani katika mahala pa kumbukumbu za nyakati zote; pahala pa kile kiitwacho 'Akasha' kulingana na lugha, udadavuzi na sayansi ya 'kuzama rohoni' kutoka Bara Hindi...

Je, Umepata kutafakari 'ginosia' (kutajwa 'gnosis' katika mashauri ya kiingereza) ni kitu gani katika mtu nayo yahusikaje na mtu; na ukweli wa 'ndani' na 'nje' ya mtu?

 

[Jimena]

Mi ulisahau kunitag.

Yes nilikusahau hapa lakini tupo pamoja sana. Ntakukumbuka siku nyingine najua wewe pia uko huru na unajifunza pasipo kipingamizi!

 

[Jimena]

Hii ni drama inayojirudia.

Dini na watu na jamii ni suala zito kwa watu ambao hawajakomaa kiakili na hisia--hasa katika upande wa vina vya tafsiri kwa mashauri yajayo na hizo; lakini ni jepesi kwa wale wenye mioyo safi na wasiojihesabia hatia kwa kuwa ni wenye moyo kupima bila hofu, kukubali ujinga na werevu pasi aibu, kuwa wawazi kukubali hata yale mageni yenye kubatilisha yaliyotangulia. Wakiwa ni watu wenye kuaminia ukweli na si kingine ila kweli hata hiyo ikiwa inavunjilia mbali jungu la kasumba zao na mapokeo yao. Wenye kuweza kusimama kidete kama mtu mmoja na si kama kundi la watu wenye kufuatishana mkumbo na desturi bila kupima hizo ndani ya wakati na ufunuo...

Je, wewe umepata kusoma kitabu cha 'The Aquarian Age Gospel of Jesus the Christ'?

Kitabu hichi kina mitazamo bora kabisa kuhusu mtu, imani, harakati na ukweli ingawaje namna yake ni tofauti na mashauri ya' vitabu vitakatifu' vya kawaida... Na hichi kikianzia na simulizi za Maisha na Harakati za Yesu kulingana na simuliza la Levi Dowling--Mtu aliyeandika hicho kulingana na alichokiona kwa jicho la ndani katika mahala pa kumbukumbu za nyakati zote; pahala pa kile kiitwacho 'Akasha' kulingana na lugha, udadavuzi na sayansi ya 'kuzama rohoni' kutoka Bara Hindi...

Je, Umepata kutafakari 'ginosia' (kutajwa 'gnosis' katika mashauri ya kiingereza) ni kitu gani katika mtu nayo yahusikaje na mtu; na ukweli wa 'ndani' na 'nje' ya mtu?

Sijapata kusoma hicho kitabu mkuu, kama unacho fanya mpango nikipate please!