Facts and Laws of our understanding

[LARAGORN]

I am going to share a discussion from another forum, simply because brain food is yummy
The views you are going to read are that of an interesting individual who has a firm understanding of the LOA (law of attraction) and a unique way of explaining it. I will post a bit at a time so we can discuss it, if any are interested that is.


Andrew;

First let me state, that the only Law in the universe, IS the Law of Attraction. Every other "law" we've managed to experience is purely a result of the first law. We wanted it, and thus we got it. Think about how science operates for a moment. A theory (an imagined scenario of "how things work" is developed within the mind of a scientist), then that scientist goes about trying to "prove" whether the theory is right or wrong. The universe mean time is doing everything it can to make the theory right, assuming of course the scientist is happy about being recognized as the finder of this great new model of the universe. Once the scientist allows the theory into existence, he shares it with other scientists that mull it over and imagine the possibilities, and then they collectively allow or disallow the new theory, usually based on ego and self gratification. Even though a scientist will argue that it was all very serious work, held up to the standards of the scientific principle. Which it may or may not have been. The point being, it was the scientists that created the “law” in the first place. Once the scientists collectively allow a new theory into existence, they go around convincing everyone that it's true. Since most people assume the scientists know what they are talking about, they accept the new reality without question or regard for the consequences. It's all Good don't get me wrong. It's just not what most people realize is going on. So! What does that mean for the rest of us. It means that everything you think you know about how the physical world works is completely YOUR CHOICE. The unified field theory equation that I will be presenting shortly proves once and for all that the answer to all math questions is 1. It proves that all things are 1. It proves that 1 equals any and all other numbers, including 0, and negative 1. It proves that math is a flawed model of the universe, and thus should be banned from this day forward. I am so appreciative of the positive energy I feel at the cheer of glee coming up from all children past, present, and future that all math classes will be discontinued. The other great news is that if someone ever asks you a math question you can show your mathematical genius by answering the question, before they finish the telling of it, as undeniably 1. I will start by stating the unified field theory equation in it's simplest and most pure state. 1? Without explanation or “proof”, that statement is meaningless to you now. You will quickly come to realize the beauty, simplicity, and shear ecstatic bliss, that this is mathematical proof of the Law of Attraction. 1 represents itself. It is the familiar numero uno digit that you are aquainted with. ? is a new mathematical operator that I refer to fondly as the “strange operator”. More to come, ahhh, you're going to Love this, Andrew

Ok, I'm back. Source decided to give me a much needed week of appreciation. I'm so thankful Source loves us as beyond comprehension. Where were we... hmmmm... Ah, yes. I had just stated the equation "1?". This is the simplified form of the equation "E = E + 1". Assume that E represents infinity. Modern mathematics supports the concept that adding any finite number to an infinity still leaves you with infinity. In other words, finiteness is so small compared to infinity that adding anything finite to the infinite has no effect on the infinite. This also applies to taking a finite number away from an infinite source. What I want to do here more than anything, is to demonstrate to you that math is just a language we use to “attempt” to model the physical universe. Math is no more true than any other thought construct we've created. All thought constructs or belief systems are built upon assumptions. Assumptions are thoughts we choose to be true although we cannot prove them one way or the other. Math is no different. Math has assumptions that cannot be proven. The main assumption of math is the concept of equality, the “=” operator. If I write, 1 = 1. Most everyone will say, “Oh, yes, that is definitely true.” I say, “Within math, it is true, because we choose to believe it is true. However! There is no example of equality in nature, so how can math be used as the fundamental measure of understanding physical reality?” Here's my challenge. Find me any two things in nature that are equal. If you can manage to demonstrate two things that are truly equal in every way, I'll demonstrate you have the same thing from two different perspectives. If you have the same thing from two different perspectives, then you don't have two things that are equal. Life is not about knowing how things works, it's about choosing how you want life to work. Choose wisely. More to come, Andrew p.s. Math is a useful tool, and allows us to do some amazing things. Math is good, but it is not God. Andrew

[tssthorn]

in the end I think 1 = 0 ... well according to are math lol ... pretty bad isn't it.

[Nurahk]

Math is good, but it is not God. Andrew

I agree, it exists, doesn't it

So far I don't think he's really explained anything about the law of attraction, more argued that math is a concept, which I believe everybody agrees with.  So, there is not too much to discuss.

All the same, looks like it will turn out into something quite interesting, can't wait until you post more.

[lordraleigh]

Before replying, I would like to link to an interesting article I found using google that points some interesting things on mainstream "science":

Why Science is Failing

     A theory (an imagined scenario of "how things work" is developed within the mind of a scientist), then that scientist goes about trying to "prove" whether the theory is right or wrong. The universe mean time is doing everything it can to make the theory right, assuming of course the scientist is happy about being recognized as the finder of this great new model of the universe. Once the scientist allows the theory into existence, he shares it with other scientists that mull it over and imagine the possibilities, and then they collectively allow or disallow the new theory, usually based on ego and self gratification

As any mainstream group, scientifical mainstream "truths" exist to be questioned and may be wrong while the "fringe theory" everybody ridicules is right. Just because someone named Occam said a simpler theory is possibly closer to truth, we shouldn't assume that, the simplicity part of the razor is just used for the sake of pragmatism. Today mainstream laughs at parapsychology, even though some few people try to make a way of gathering evidence of its existence in the best scientifical way possible in the middle of new-age BS(the main contributors to the view the ridiculousness on such studies), but as psychology, it is not something easy to measure and analyze on the traditional scientific sense as physics. Yesterday mainstream ridiculed(and killed) those who believed the Earth was round and turned around the sun. Can you measure and study in the typical scientifical sense feelings, ideas or the human self-awareness? No, but does it mean they don't exist?

    Even though a scientist will argue that it was all very serious work, held up to the standards of the scientific principle. Which it may or may not have been. The point being, it was the scientists that created the “law” in the first place. Once the scientists collectively allow a new theory into existence, they go around convincing everyone that it's true. Since most people assume the scientists know what they are talking about, they accept the new reality without question or regard for the consequences.

I guess few uphold an agnostic point of view in both religion and science. Newton's laws of physics for example, are they appliable for situations of particles moving on relativistic speed? Well, before relativity existed, any particle on movement would always be subjected to those laws. Science != Truth, specially knowing that our scientifical knowledge is pretty limited, and then belief systems come to fill such gaps, for better or(usually) for worse. Who knows if in year 2500 several of the current scientifical theories will be obsolete? Perhaps the sciences of the future will laugh at the currently employed "scientific method" or at the mainstream "science" of nowadays.

       It's all Good don't get me wrong. It's just not what most people realize is going on. So! What does that mean for the rest of us. It means that everything you think you know about how the physical world works is completely YOUR CHOICE. The unified field theory equation that I will be presenting shortly proves once and for all that the answer to all math questions is 1. It proves that all things are 1. It proves that 1 equals any and all other numbers, including 0, and negative 1. It proves that math is a flawed model of the universe, and thus should be banned from this day forward. I am so appreciative of the positive energy I feel at the cheer of glee coming up from all children past, present, and future that all math classes will be discontinued. The other great news is that if someone ever asks you a math question you can show your mathematical genius by answering the question, before they finish the telling of it, as undeniably 1. I will start by stating the unified field theory equation in it's simplest and most pure state. 1? Without explanation or “proof”, that statement is meaningless to you now. You will quickly come to realize the beauty, simplicity, and shear ecstatic bliss, that this is mathematical proof of the Law of Attraction. 1 represents itself. It is the familiar numero uno digit that you are aquainted with. ? is a new mathematical operator that I refer to fondly as the “strange operator”.

     The possibility that every single matter, every tiny bit of existence on the Universe is a part of One single element, if proved, would confirm such theory. If everything is One, and One is everything, but they are always One, E = E + 1 . Still from a pragmatist point of view, such claim is fully useless for calculating expenses, accounting resources among every other practical application of nowadays math and wouldn't be appliable for smaller matter as well, in the same way relativistic physics only apply to particles nearing the speed of light.

Ok, I'm back. Source decided to give me a much needed week of appreciation. I'm so thankful Source loves us as beyond comprehension. Where were we... hmmmm... Ah, yes. I had just stated the equation "1?". This is the simplified form of the equation "E = E + 1". Assume that E represents infinity. Modern mathematics supports the concept that adding any finite number to an infinity still leaves you with infinity. In other words, finiteness is so small compared to infinity that adding anything finite to the infinite has no effect on the infinite. This also applies to taking a finite number away from an infinite source. What I want to do here more than anything, is to demonstrate to you that math is just a language we use to “attempt” to model the physical universe. Math is no more true than any other thought construct we've created. All thought constructs or belief systems are built upon assumptions. Assumptions are thoughts we choose to be true although we cannot prove them one way or the other.

I can't agree with that, how many fingers does an average human being have @LARAGORN? Mathematics is the science that is most closer to our logic reasoning, but anyway there is a possibility we are wrong, but the quote from "Nineteen Eighty-four" on my sig gives a hint on the importance of logic and on the way it is usually defiled by political/social/cultural/religious "truths".

Math is no different. Math has assumptions that cannot be proven. The main assumption of math is the concept of equality, the “=” operator. If I write, 1 = 1. Most everyone will say, “Oh, yes, that is definitely true.” I say, “Within math, it is true, because we choose to believe it is true. However! There is no example of equality in nature, so how can math be used as the fundamental measure of understanding physical reality?” Here's my challenge. Find me any two things in nature that are equal. If you can manage to demonstrate two things that are truly equal in every way, I'll demonstrate you have the same thing from two different perspectives. If you have the same thing from two different perspectives, then you don't have two things that are equal. Life is not about knowing how things works, it's about choosing how you want life to work. Choose wisely. More to come, Andrew p.s. Math is a useful tool, and allows us to do some amazing things.

One, as the numeric representation of quantity, logically equates itself to the same numeric representation of quantity of one, One as a certain object does not equate to One as another object. Still this does not bring down mathematic's logic, only thing that could do it(not on the reality of science, but on the reality of thought control) would be IngSoc. 1 != 1 ;  2 + 2 = 5
The current mathematic model is much more useful than the E = E + 1 as well.

Math is good, but it is not God.

Yes, they are definitively different concepts, math is based on a fully logical approach to general quantification of objects, things, etc that is not only logically proven by our own senses and by our brain logical thinking, but also fully useful to reality. While the concept of  a "God" usually is based on mysticism, dogmas and "Words of God/Gods" filled with logical fallacies and outrighteously absurd "truths", and that served mankind pretty well with Jihads, Crusades, slaughters, stagnation among many other attrocities and mistakes commited in the name of a god. Of course these things don't apply to Deism, but still there is no way to really prove that a god exists, as there is no way to prove a god doesn't exist either.

[zanzibar]

LARAGORN, I invite you to share this with your friend.

A theory (an imagined scenario of "how things work" is developed within the mind of a scientist), then that scientist goes about trying to "prove" whether the theory is right or wrong.

False.  Theories are always tested and never confirmed.  This is the nature of induction.  Theories are only ever proven wrong.  We keep theories which agree with what we know and that lead to new information -- until they're proven wrong.

The universe mean time is doing everything it can to make the theory right, assuming of course the scientist is happy about being recognized as the finder of this great new model of the universe.

Does this mean to say that the universe is a concious being capable of agency, or am I just tired?

The point being, it was the scientists that created the “law” in the first place.

Yes, however with material sciences there are certain standards and measure which are more or less "objective" and so the material sciences are set apart from the humanities.

Since most people assume the scientists know what they are talking about, they accept the new reality without question or regard for the consequences.

Irrelevant; if there is a theory you dislike, then attack it based on its weaknesses.  It is wrong to say "People are gullible therefore everything is false".

It means that everything you think you know about how the physical world works is completely YOUR CHOICE.

Not really.  There's the social factor (what you're taught) and there's the biological factor (evolution of the human brain).  Both are limiting to "choice".  Even then, what has been said so far does not bar human beings from being in touch with objective reality in a real sense.

The unified field theory equation that I will be presenting shortly proves once and for all that the answer to all math questions is 1.

Of course.  It just depends on how you define "1".

1 represents itself.

No... 1 represents whatever we arbitrarily say it represents.

"E = E + 1". Assume that E represents infinity. Modern mathematics supports the concept that adding any finite number to an infinity still leaves you with infinity. In other words, finiteness is so small compared to infinity that adding anything finite to the infinite has no effect on the infinite.

False.  There are different kinds, sizes, and rates of infinity.

∞ < ∞ + 1
∞ < 2∞
∞/0 = 0
1/∞ > 1/[∞+1]

And so on.  This is a universally accepted concept in mathematics -- infinity is a process, not a value, and you can have different infinities which are described by different rates.

Math has assumptions that cannot be proven.

They're called axioms and they're a fundamental if varying component of any logical system.

There is no example of equality in nature

False.  F=ma.  E=mc^2.  And so on.

More examples of "equality" in nature:

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=einstein+spooky+science

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=virtual+particles

Find me any two things in nature that are equal. If you can manage to demonstrate two things that are truly equal in every way, I'll demonstrate you have the same thing from two different perspectives. If you have the same thing from two different perspectives, then you don't have two things that are equal.

This is a play on words.  "Equal" is being used to mean different things; sometimes the author is using one meaning of it, sometimes he is using another meaning of it.  In other words, he's exploiting semantics.

[Parallo]

Why Science is Failing

Ahaha! "Scientific dogma!" That stuff is hilarious.

[LARAGORN]

Interesting posts   There were varying replies to Andrews posts, none as thorough as lordraleigh or as cynically closed minded as Zanzibar, most equated his thoughts to reductionism.

I can't agree with that, how many fingers does an average human being have @LARAGORN? Mathematics is the science that is most closer to our logic reasoning, but anyway there is a possibility we are wrong, but the quote from "Nineteen Eighty-four" on my sig gives a hint on the importance of logic and on the way it is usually defiled by political/social/cultural/religious "truths".

You have almost answered your own question. We all agree that we have five fingers because we have accepted that value to be represented by the number 5, and in our mind we believe it is true; but as you said we could be wrong.

Now to post the next few posts and I am going to add a few posts from others to keep the continuity. Enjoy
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-words numbers So, IS 1 REALLY the lonliest number? Tori

1 is the only number. Everything else is all in how you look at that 1. Andrew

-I am assuming this is in reference to the string theory. And Andrew, do you consider yourself a reductionist and have discovered the T.O.E.? If so....dish the goods:0 Tori math makes me angry. Tori


re•duc•tion•ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-dksh-nzm) n. An attempt or tendency to explain a complex set of facts, entities, phenomena, or structures by another, simpler set: “For the last 400 years science has advanced by reductionism... The idea is that you could understand the world, all of nature, by examining smaller and smaller pieces of it. When assembled, the small pieces would explain the whole” (John Holland). ---- By that definition I'm not a reductionist. Instead of examinging smaller and smaller pieces, I just looked at the whole of it all. By understanding the whole, you then understand all the pieces. So... I think that makes me an inductionist. ---- in•duc•tion ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-dkshn) n. The process of deriving general principles from particular facts or instances. ---- Yes, I believe I have the mathmatical equation to the T.O.E. Andrew


-Andrew...I KNEW you would challenge me on the "reductionist" comment. I enjoyed your response:) Now, you thoughts on Aca cords? And when will you share your "1" T.O.E. formula? Looking forward to exchanging/sharing info w/ you. Be the One fun:) tori


Actually I have given the equation. It's "1?". It's not the equation that's difficult. It's explaining why this is the equation that's going to take some time. Aca cords are a construct within a certain perceptual context. If I see the universe as me and a bunch of others, then aca cords make a lot of sense. If I see the universe as me and Source, aca cords don't make that much sense. If I see the universe as only Source, aca cords are irrelevant. I'm not here to say what way of looking at the universe is best. I'm simply here to say that however we look at it, that's what we get. The beauty is we alone get to create our own reality, there is no right or wrong way of doing that. The fundamental thought I wish I could share with everyone is, if a certain construct works for you, great! However, it's not necessary that that construct work for anyone else. In other words, in creating our own reality, we do not need the consent/approval of others to validate that reality. Aca cords are a pretty widely accepted construct in certain circles, so they have more thought energy backing them up. Again though, it's completely up to the individual whether they exist within a given individual reality. Andrew p.s. I got this sentence from a website out there. "Between each of us & every person we interact with, there is an invisible cord in which the energy flows back & forth. In the Western Occult Tradition, it is referred to as 'The Silver Cord', and in the Huna tradition it is called 'The Aca Cord'." p.p.s. In my own reality I know that nothing can be taken from me. I also know that anything I give is returned unto me many times over. The only one that effects my Well-Being is me.


-you described it perfectly....thanks. I've heard of the concept, just never heard that particular term before. I've done a lot of reading on the idea that we create our own realities and thought power. I find it facinating. thanks! Heather


And what feels good for one, may feel bad for another, and vice versa.

I've sought validation for much of my life, and I realize now that it's not needed, or even wanted. I am that I am, and that's what I am. Each of us is the center of the universe, and we are writing the fundamental quantum rules of our own existence.

Let me give you a personal example. For many years, I've felt energy flow in my body. I've studied Tai Chi to help increase that flow. Before, I saw myself as a physical body generating a field. Therefore, in my reality, the better I treated my body (i.e. diet, exercise, sleep, etc) the better my flow was. After reading Ask and it is Given, seeing What the Bleep Do We Know!?, and fully realizing that I was creating my own reality, I decided to see myself as an energy being housed in a physical body. All it was, was a change in perception. Now, the flow I feel is magnitudes stronger, and my physical body is getting into better shape, with almost no work. Before I would watch my calories, try to eat “healthy” food. Now I eat what I desire, and appreciate every bite. I'm pure energy, food is just something I enjoy with my body.

I'm going to preface this with, “Everything I say is for entertainment purposes only!” I don't mind saying that, because, Life is supposed to be FUN! I will not be held accountable for your results however, since everything experienced comes down to the individual allowing.

Try my High Joy Content Diet, I'd Love to hear of any success stories. Just remember do what feels best to you, and let others do what feels best to them. We can have different realities and still appreciate one another for who we are.


-hello Andrew! Ok, have a couple of questions for ya...are ya ready for this? 1. The "diet" you created....well I would tend to think that it would be essential to one's well being to have a balance....not too much acid...and the more alkaline is a good thang...rust and rot from the inside out. fact. 1. NOW, you asked for an example of 2 things that are alike...I stated numbers and letters...yet, you did not comment on said statement. 1. I am a fairly intelligent gal thus I can wrap my brain around **most** concepts...so am curious to hear more about your "1" theory and how it IS the T.O.E. 1. I enjoy meditating...and find it easy despite my energetic disposition. Do you practice a particular method? 1. What do you do for fun? Do you have any hobbies? be the fun... Tori

[Radiant Memphis]

0=2 yup that about sums it up for me. Great thing science.

[bilbous]

So how do I lose 30 years of physical aging without losing 30 years of perspective. And while we're at it how do I make 30 years of bad mistakes that hurt other people disappear and dead people alive again?

[zanzibar]

Interesting posts   There were varying replies to Andrews posts, none as thorough as lordraleigh or as cynically closed minded as Zanzibar, most equated his thoughts to reductionism.

My response was not cynically closed minded!  The guy simply doesn't understand math, and I was pointing out his mistakes!

You can believe him if you want to, but don't pretend you aren't simply choosing what to believe arbitrarily with disregard to the facts!

[tssthorn]

I agree with zanz ... this is just getting stupid ... so far nothing has been proven other then the fact that somone here has an oppinion. How ever I am still wating to hear this thing about the number 1. Oh yes and about that two things are equal thing ... umm I beleive they explained that on What the Bleep do we know?. That lab thing they talked about ... you see two objects .. 1 in one glass and another in the other glass, but they are equal because they are really one object but you see two, or there really is two objects and there just linked too each other ... either way you see 2 and there equal ... so I think that works for me. Though I some how think im wrong.

[zanzibar]

I agree with zanz ... this is just getting stupid ... so far nothing has been proven other then the fact that somone here has an oppinion. How ever I am still wating to hear this thing about the number 1. Oh yes and about that two things are equal thing ... umm I beleive they explained that on What the Bleep do we know?. That lab thing they talked about ... you see two objects .. 1 in one glass and another in the other glass, but they are equal because they are really one object but you see two, or there really is two objects and there just linked too each other ... either way you see 2 and there equal ... so I think that works for me. Though I some how think im wrong.

I wasn't going to use the s word, but I agree.  The foundation of his theory is factually inaccurate .

"What the heck do we know?" is a horrible movie filled with lies and pseudo science.  But yes, it does touch on Einstein's "spooky science" theory.

[LARAGORN]

I do believe you are missing the point, the math isnt the important thing here. I think the method is more important than the content, it is the proccess of analisys. To break away from conventional thinking and allow new non black and white, fact = fact mentality, discovering new possibilities.

Please tell me what 'lies' you are reffering to in "What the Bleep Do We Know", I would be happy to know.

Here is a little more of the discussion
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I Love your enthusiasm and challenging spirit.

1.The "diet" you created....well I would tend to think that it would be essential to one's well being to have a balance....not too much acid...and the more alkaline is a good thang...rust and rot from the inside out. Fact.

The trick to this diet is in realizing we each create our own realities. Abraham says, “That our natural state of being is a state of Well-Being.” Taking the limit of this statement, there is nothing outside of us that can remove us from this place. It's not what we eat or don't eat, it's how we feel about what we eat.

If we believe we need balance, then we do. The statement, “eat what you desire”, means just that. The body has a natural knowing of what it wants. The basis of quantum mechanics is “what we see is what we get.”

I Love spinach for example. Then one day someone tells me spinach is toxic. I'm still working to remove this unwanted program. Each person is unique. What's right for one may not be right for another. I believe that if each person truly listened to their own bodies they would eat what was appropriate for them. The trick to this diet is in following all the rules as a whole, not just one or two.

1.NOW, you asked for an example of 2 things that are alike...I stated numbers and letters...yet, you did not comment on said statement.

I mean two physical tangible objects, not concepts. I'm bouncing around the concept that math does not truly model nature. It's only an approximation.

1.I am a fairly intelligent gal thus I can wrap my brain around **most** concepts...so am curious to hear more about your "1" theory and how it IS the T.O.E.

I've been pondering how to explain the next segment of my proof of “1?”. I'll post it soon.

1.I enjoy meditating...and find it easy despite my energetic disposition. Do you practice a particular method?

I don't use any particular method. I sit or lay down. I prefer to lay down. I relax my entire body, relax/clear my mind, and breathe deeply. I focus on the feelings in my body, for me an energy flow.

1.What do you do for fun? Do you have any hobbies?

For fun, I post on PI. :-) I also do Tai Chi and Kung Fu. I like to sing. I really like to set an intention and then just go with the flow. Sometimes I end up in places I never would have dreamed, just by following those little inner tugs. I guess in a nut shell my biggest hobby is living. :-)

Andrew


Question;
Hiya Andrew! I am enjoying this thread. Ok, here we go, a tangible example: My hand and your hand...are alike and exact. OR are you going to throw at me the fact that the Golden ratio is an irrartional number therefore does NOT apply? And yes, I eagerly anticipate your next post:) Tori


Ah, they are similar, very similar, but they are not exactly the same. Different sizes, different ratios, different number of hairs, different number of lines, different in many ways. This is a good example because it shows how it's all in how you look at it. From one perspective they are the "same". From another, they are very different. You really cannot compare apples to apples, because no two apples are perfectly identical. Hehe, Andrew


Tori,

I want to thank you for giving me some inspiration. You've given me a good base to start explaining "?", what I call the "strange operator".

Operators in math or the action symbols like "+", "-", "*", etc. The strange operator is an operator that pulls the observers point of view into the equation.

So!

You would write the hand example as:

  Tori's Hand = Andrew's Hand

I would write the hand example as:

  Tori's Hand != Andrew's Hand ('!=' means 'not equal')

Using the strange operator, we could reduce this controdiction into:

  Tori's Hand ? Andrew's Hand

The strange operator (?) becomes what you believe it to be. In other words, both of our equations are true, simultaneously, based upon our own individual interpretations of the reality of the situation. Our hand's are both equal and not equal at the same time.

Now, going a step further, since there is only one thing in existence, we can reduce the equation to:

  1 ? 1

or:

  1?

Because the one on either side of the question mark is the same 1. Thus, the equation becomes circular and reduces even further. It's hard to describe this aspect with words, so I need to make a visual, which I will do soon.

Andrew


Tori;
Andrew, I DO understand...I am diggin' the crazy hand jive...lol (there I go again with a song reference...occupational hazard). is this somewhat (loosely) based on a Lynn Grabhold theory? I no longer have the book to use as a reference so I can't back up my statement. The purpose for using the hands as an example is due to the fact that each individual has the same mathematical equation when measuring fingers, arm span, etc....and it is based on sacred geometry...the Golden Mean...or Golden ratio 1.618...so could the "strange operator" factor into that as well. I gues so, IF everything IS one..that would be the case as many ancients utilized this equation. I can't claim the following as my own from Drunvalo Melchizedek: The size of the Earth is in harmonics with ( in phi ratio to)the moon, and these ratios are found in the porportions of our human energy fields and even in the very Egg of Life itself. "Man is the measuring stick of the universe." If you were to draw a horizontal line thru the center of the Earth to it's circumference, then the lines from those 2 points up to the center of the moon, and from the center of the moon a line back down to the center of the Earth, these are the precise porportions of the Great Pyramids in Egypt! That angle is 51 minutes, 24 seconds, exactly the same as that of the Great Pyramid. Since the Earth, the Moon (and the entire solar system), the physical human body and the Egg of Life are all related geometrically and the Great Pyramid ties them all together; and since we have these three different consciousness levels that happen to have pyramids inside each one (I can share the math on that too)....the human energy field contains the size of the Earth we live on and the Moon that moves around her! If our bodies are the "measuring stick" for the universe, does it mean that we contain within us, somehow or somewhere, all sizes of all possible planets? Does it mean the sizes of all suns are located in us somewhere? So, that would loosely support your "1" theory to a certain extent. There is NO randomness, at all. Ok, your turn... Tori

[zanzibar]

I do believe you are missing the point, the math isnt the important thing here.

His entire theory is based on math... so how is the math not important?

Please tell me what 'lies' you are reffering to in "What the Bleep Do We Know", I would be happy to know.

They misrepresent quantum mechanics and they edit interviews to make it seem like people are saying things they didn't mean to say.

Andrew, I DO understand...I am diggin' the crazy hand jive...lol (there I go again with a song reference...occupational hazard). is this somewhat (loosely) based on a Lynn Grabhold theory? I no longer have the book to use as a reference so I can't back up my statement. The purpose for using the hands as an example is due to the fact that each individual has the same mathematical equation when measuring fingers, arm span, etc....and it is based on sacred geometry...the Golden Mean...or Golden ratio 1.618...so could the "strange operator" factor into that as well. I gues so, IF everything IS one..that would be the case as many ancients utilized this equation. I can't claim the following as my own from Drunvalo Melchizedek: The size of the Earth is in harmonics with ( in phi ratio to)the moon, and these ratios are found in the porportions of our human energy fields and even in the very Egg of Life itself. "Man is the measuring stick of the universe." If you were to draw a horizontal line thru the center of the Earth to it's circumference, then the lines from those 2 points up to the center of the moon, and from the center of the moon a line back down to the center of the Earth, these are the precise porportions of the Great Pyramids in Egypt! That angle is 51 minutes, 24 seconds, exactly the same as that of the Great Pyramid. Since the Earth, the Moon (and the entire solar system), the physical human body and the Egg of Life are all related geometrically and the Great Pyramid ties them all together; and since we have these three different consciousness levels that happen to have pyramids inside each one (I can share the math on that too)....the human energy field contains the size of the Earth we live on and the Moon that moves around her! If our bodies are the "measuring stick" for the universe, does it mean that we contain within us, somehow or somewhere, all sizes of all possible planets? Does it mean the sizes of all suns are located in us somewhere? So, that would loosely support your "1" theory to a certain extent. There is NO randomness, at all.

This is metaphysical BS filled with assumption and pseudoscience.  It's a bunch of nonsense and I could pick it apart to show how silly it is, but I don't feel like wasting my time.  For now, all I'll say is that humans built the pyramids and our solar system is more or less randomly put together so any patterns that arise which are not the result of magnetism and gravity are merely the result of coincidence in the most secular sense.

[bilbous]

Umm infinity is not a number in the ordinary sense. Infinity+1 is a meaningless concept. I'm not saying I agree with what is being put forward, just that the rebuttal is lame. Now if I can hear how to turn back time or to hit the cosmic "undo" I might give this some credence as far as I was able to put it into practice. I know a few dead people who didn't deserve what they got and who I would welcome back.