Jim Naseum

Hold your hand out in the air. Turn on your "nano-vision" allowing you to see the atomic level. On your left is an electron spinning around a central force in the "air". On your right is an electron spinning around a central force in your "finger." What divides finger from air? Keep zooming in, trying to find a boundary considering the distance from any electron and it's nucleus is 60,000 diameters of the nucleus. And if both nuclei are "carbon" doesn't that demonstrate a single fabric of energy?

It reflects only "commonality." "Commonality" is not at issue. All parts of the same force can see the same force at work. In fact, your argument for commonality supports my view, not yours. Time is just a convenient human mind abstraction arising from our limits of perception, and the lifespan our bodies have. But nothing about the idea of time negates the "single fabric of energy" idea of the universe.

First of all, take note that you are an amalgam of the same elements found every where else in the universe! What a coincidence! If you were indeed a unique object within an existing structure, it would be more likely that your construction would include elements unfound in the existing universe. We are stardust we are carbon..... Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

We all see the same moon because that energy is part of the same fabric of the universe that human energy is a part of. The moon moons, humans human, apple trees apple. The fabric is twitching, bubbling, popping, gurgling and all nodes in the energy field can not be isolated or separated, one from the other. You think of your self as a different entity from me. That's just an abstraction of your conscious mind. In fact, we are just different locations on one fabric. There may be some arbitrary unit of distance between us, but at the atomic scale it is meaningless. When viewed from the moon, you and I are just bubbles in a boiling spot on the fabric. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

You're missing the concept here. In order to judge that X is real, we have to know what would be judged unreal. And that's where the problem lies --- we only have self reference. "It's real because I experienced it," provides no distinction between dreams, simulations, or awake perception. The principle so holds that it's not possible to know a dream is not life while you are dreaming it.Distance is only meaningful when there are objects. Light is only meaningful if there is dark. Large and small, future and past, happiness and unhappiness etc. Unreal means what, exactly? Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

And we haven't even broached the other problem....time.

Nick Bostrom's Hypothesis that it is almost CERTAIN we live in a computer simulation is well, fascinating. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis

Well, that's epistemology for ya!

The only way for that to have meaning is to know what real means. Real, probably just means you can sense it, and then your mind spins you a yarn about it. You can't be aware of any world you can't sense. And so, it leads right back to the electrical signals in the brain, from which arises a mind. If we are unsure what mind is, how can we know that what it conjurs up is real? How is the awake world any more real than the dream world?

When you're on acid you're tripping. Yes, tripping into another dimension out of the limit less dimensions possible. The mind creates all these worlds. Imagine the mind of a schizophrenic. Which ever state you are in, you could never be convinced there are others.Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

Of course not. If all our minds died in the next minute, would not the mockingbird in my yard sing in the morning? No. How could he sing, when he is not an independent object? Would the cats still not scratch the bald cypress trunks and the squirrels not find the acorns? No. What arrogance do you subscribe to that says the universe only exists because we think it does? The anthropic cosmological principle people are bad enough, but that is a magnitude of order worse. Why would arrogance favor one position or another? We ARE the universe looking back on itself. Playing hide and seek. Our minds are just the universe expressing it's energy. The mocking bird and the tree and the human are just lumps in a fabric of energy. I would think "arrogance" might apply to those who imagine they are unique and separate objects.

Of course not.

Not sure you understand it. Main point of the final is that there is NO reality independent of the mind. Goes back to Descartes, "cogito ergo mundus talis est." Barrow and Tipler: "Observers are necessary to bring the Universe into being." Dave Descartes? He is intuiting his EXISTENCE. And, it is well within some universe. In short, it would be the opposite proposition.

Not sure you understand it. Main point of the final is that there is NO reality independent of the mind. Goes back to Descartes, "cogito ergo mundus talis est." Barrow and Tipler: "Observers are necessary to bring the Universe into being." Dave What I read of B&T is that the conditions of the universe are necessarily those that can be comprehended by "life". And, it appears that they certainly view human life as objects within a real universe.

Except for those who don't believe there is a reality independent of the mind. Well, that's at least me.

This idea that we are objects operating in an existing universe, is of course crazy.

Therefore we used to be the center of the solar system and the sun revolved around us. But now somehow we are not. Amazing. The mind keep growing in ideas of higher complexity and abstraction. One mind infects the next, until a whole new belief exists within the minds. But it's only passed on formally. A new born, left in the wild, with no formal education, will not imagine the earth going around the sun. How could they?

I guess the two main views are this: 1. There is a dimensional universe of planets, particles and objects with space in between, and we humans are special kinds of objects place within that system. 2. We humans are the universe interacting with itself. So that, without us there is obviously no universe apart from us.

You are wherever your mind is creating. Where is that somewhere when you are on LSD or DMT? It is obviously not the same somewhere as the normal awake state, or dream state. You can't have any choice of place, other than what mind creates at the moment.

Where are we when awake? Where are we when dreaming? An alternate universe? To be, has a somewhere implied. The 'where' is created in the mind. Where is the person with no senses? Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

Maybe there are just two states. A common state of us all, and a private state. The common state we call real, because it is being confirmed by others. That makes sense. We all see the airplane simultaneously, and because that it so different from our private state we assign more importance to it. Reality. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

Exactly. There is dreaming, vivid dreaming, and lucid dreaming. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

From another site: Quote Inside our sleeping dreams, we also perceive bodies who seem to think and act and experience the world around them. Those bodies, brains and minds have no objective reality outside of the mind that is dreaming them. Why, then, is it so hard for people to accept that this world, too, is merely another dream? Accepting that the waking world is another dream, devoid of objective reality outside of our minds, is the secret to permanent peace. It is lucid dreaming in the waking state. We participate in the world, totally accepting that is a dream and acknowledging that the dream has no objective reality. Once we accept that our own concept of self, of the ego, the “I”, is a complete fabrication, it is impossible to take it seriously like we once did. If you were asleep and having a lucid dream (i.e. aware that you are in a dream), would you worry about anything happening inside the dream? Or would you just go along with it and enjoy the ride? End Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

I posit you are not really dreaming then. While dreaming what test do you use to tell dream from awake? Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

Not quite. I am saying we should have left the largest banks to completely fail and be liquidated. And, all the toxic assets - bad loans- should have been written down to market value. Then, use the $3T from the FED to refi 5 million homes on low interest terms. There would not be A 20 year recovery, but something more like 5. The huge brunt of all loss should have been on the richest swindlers, who were made whole. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk