Guybrush122 Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 *In a state of shock, Guybrush does something wall-related* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acrylic Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Originally posted by Guybrush122 *In a state of shock, Guybrush does something wall-related* Ummm...run into it perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guybrush122 Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Perhaps... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alia Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Originally posted by Guybrush122 Woohoo! I was missed! Dude! That's why you're still alive! *takes aim again* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernil Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Hey. I'm Alia. I don't really have a religion, but I enjoy making sacrifices to the underlord that I let take over my soul every Thursday night! I also take care of bunnies when their masters are on vacation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoom Rabbit Posted January 23, 2004 Author Share Posted January 23, 2004 Ernil: I don't believe that you're Alia. If you were, you'd be taking care of me. My master's gone away... Ray: Trinity is a concept that most mystics run across in one way or another--which is why it turns up in all the religions. Basically, three is the smallest number that can exist (as a concept) in our universe, and this gets embedded within the fractal matrix of it all as a pattern which repeats at other points in the unfolding universe. It can be demonstrated in our notion of *black* thus: there is black, and there must be white as an opposite to bring it into being, and there must also be a point of view from which to perceive black. Back to that three being the smallest number possible bit. The smallest number possible would be zero, right? Well, nothingness can't exist in a vacuum; once it is conceived as such, it becomes a thing (if only an idea) which means we must have at least the concept of one. However, once we have the concept of one we must have a point of view from which to perceive it--now we're up to two. With these two things, self and other or perceiver and object, there must be a division of some sort between them. Distance no matter how small must cross something...so we must have at least three in order to have existance as we know it. Here is trinity as expressed in our ever-popular wall. There is the wall, there is your nose, and there is the sidewalk for you to bang your head on. Skinkie: Did someone say tapestries? The Carpet-Weaver's Sutra Thus have I heard-- That the ancient art of hand-weaving the carpet is one that is passed from master to apprentice over many years. The master knows things about carpet-weaving that he cannot express with words, so he must guide the apprentice to the point where he can realize the same things for himself. In this way the art is passed down, which cannot be expressed with words, and the apprentice becomes a master in his own right. This makes perfect sense to the master, but confounds the apprentice. One day, after he had trained his apprentice for many years in the tedious complexities of dyeing and spinning thread, the master decided that it was time to begin teaching him about carpets. "Come sit down with me, and I will teach you what is a carpet." The boy sat obediently. "But master, I already know what a carpet is! After all, we are sitting on one now." "Really?" The master clucked his tongue. He held up a spool of thread the boy had dyed and wound just the day before. "If you were to take the carpet and unravel it, it would look just like this spool of unwoven thread. True?" "Yes. But that spool of thread isn't a carpet yet." "Ah. But on this spool is a carpet that will be...and if we unraveled the carpet, the resulting spool of thread would be a carpet that had been. It is only now, when it is a carpet, that we do not see it as thread." "Um...okay." The master laughed. "But you are also right!" He stood up, grabbed the carpet and held it out, tugging at the corners. "This thing, this square bolt of cloth, is a carpet." "So the thread is carpet, and the carpet is carpet?" "It gets better." He walked over to his computer, took the mouse in hand and called up his website. "Here on my home page are some designs of the carpets I have for sale." He enlarged one of the images. "Here is a digital photo of the carpet we were just sitting on. As far as the whole world is concerned...this image is the carpet. It stands for the carpet, in a form which can be shunted and bounced around the internet much more easily than the actual carpet can be." The apprentice scratched his head. "Master, I'm confused. You say that thread is the carpet, the carpet is carpet, and now the design on the carpet is the carpet! If I keep listening to you, I will become a carpet." "Some day you will understand, carpet-boy. Until then, just remember this: 'The carpet is its essence, that from which it came and will return. 'The carpet is its form, that which it defines with its essence. 'The carpet is its design, that which emerges from the form and can be identified as concrete in its own right. 'The carpet is all of these things, and all of them together make a carpet. Whenever one makes a carpet, one must remember all three. To forget one of them is to misunderstand the art of carpet-weaving." Om! Peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshi Posted January 24, 2004 Share Posted January 24, 2004 Other good examples of trinities would be the three perceivable dimensions (although time could also be added to make a fourth, and then some scientists found like 7 new ones in order for string theory to work, but I won't go into that) and time itself be constructed of the past, present and future. Of course some would believe that to be only two considering no one can ever pinpoint the present. Think about it, the past is what has just happened, the furture is what is going to happen and the present is the passage between. But for that to be true, the present has to be infinately small, it can't happen during a second because a second has milliseconds and certain milliseconds will have just happened whilst some are yet to come in 1 second. And it can't be milliseconds because there is only 100 of them in a second which is actually a long time when you think about it and so between milliseconds must be a smaller unit of time, for which past present a future can exist, and then they must exist in that smaller unit of time and then a smaller one until eventually we get to a '0' unit of time which means that the present cannot, and hence must not exist. And if the present cannot exist, how can we be sure anything exists, we only judge our live and existance by what has just happened and what is going to happen and we can never be quite sure what is happening right now. And I just came up with most of that by myself so I'm going to have a lie down and hopefully forget it all. Also Ray, you were talking about colours and how to communicate it without physical or oral representation. Well basically, you're asking, if an alien species came along and we wanted to talk to it, how would we establish their language. Simple, the same way we would any new language, numbers. All we'd have to do is hold up two fingers and say 'two fingers'. Then two apples and say 'two apples' and so on and so forth with different objects until they get familiar with the word two representing two of something. Then we'd just work from there until eventually we get round to colours. There isn't really a way to describe black, black is a colour, but it is also a description in itself and therefore cannot be desribed itself. It's like a primary colour, it cannot be made up of other colours, it in itself can only exist. In reality, we are quite simply just a lucky species of ape who are now talking through a language that was originally developed in order to tell one another where the good berries are, and that's about the brunt of it. I suggest people read this short story for a better insight on things (it's also quite amusing). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guybrush122 Posted January 25, 2004 Share Posted January 25, 2004 Originally posted by Alia Dude! That's why you're still alive! *takes aim again* Your firearms are useless against me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinkie Posted January 25, 2004 Share Posted January 25, 2004 I'd like to convert to Remiism, someone put me on the path to this enlightened stature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kjølen Posted January 25, 2004 Share Posted January 25, 2004 Catholic. Just Catholic. It was how I'm raised. It's what I believe. Simple enough. *Claps GuyBrush122 on the shoulders* Welcome back. Sit. Stay! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guybrush122 Posted January 25, 2004 Share Posted January 25, 2004 Originally posted by Kjølen *Claps GuyBrush122 on the shoulders* Welcome back. Sit. Stay! *rolls over* *plays dead* good to see ya around, K-Jo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Jones Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 joshi: you said present itself must be infinite small and basically cannot exist in an infinite small interval of time. i think that is exacly the point of the "existing" present. the present is the future seen from the past and the past seen from the future. the "space of time" between future and past is the "happening phase", no matter how long it lasts. the bigger this frame of time gets, the more "unsharp" will every observation become. the smaller it gets the more "steady" everything will be. the exact "now" is an infinite small "bit" of time, the present. at this point time is not of relevance because it does not "change", there is only a still left. the fact that we never could realize the "now" must not mean it is not existing. also most of the mathematical and physical formulas can still be solved, even with a "0" unit of time, which is an exact point x on the timeline. so the only thing that actually really exists at a certain point of time is the present. as you said, a trinity would be "past causes the present causes the future". but seen from a certain point of view, past, present and future are all the same thing, the "now". time itself is a infinite long chain of those "nows". as a time depended individual you may theoretically, if you once know one "now", be able to predict all the following, future "nows". practically it is quite impossible because of one (known) not predictable variable: life. and also you could only "predict" the next now. to predict "later nows", you would have to be faster than time, but if time is taken to calculate speed, how can time itself have a speed? .. hmmm.. i think there is a way but it would go to far.. i think. In reality, we are quite simply just a lucky species of ape who are now talking through a language that was originally developed in order to tell one another where the good berries are, and that's about the brunt of it. oop oop eek ack *ack oop* (ray say panty tasty *cry naked*) The smallest number possible would be zero, right? Well, nothingness can't exist in a vacuum; once it is conceived as such, it becomes a thing (if only an idea) which means we must have at least the concept of one. However, once we have the concept of one we must have a point of view from which to perceive it--now we're up to two. With these two things, self and other or perceiver and object, there must be a division of some sort between them. Distance no matter how small must cross something...so we must have at least three in order to have existance as we know it. concept of trinity, eyh? hmmm.. if seen this way.. oookay.. it describes existance as we usually know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoom Rabbit Posted January 26, 2004 Author Share Posted January 26, 2004 Originally posted by RayJones joshi: you said present itself must be infinite small and basically cannot exist in an infinite small interval of time. i think that is exacly the point of the "existing" present. the present is the future seen from the past and the past seen from the future. the "space of time" between future and past is the "happening phase", no matter how long it lasts. the bigger this frame of time gets, the more "unsharp" will every observation become. the smaller it gets the more "steady" everything will be. the exact "now" is an infinite small "bit" of time, the present. at this point time is not of relevance because it does not "change", there is only a still left. the fact that we never could realize the "now" must not mean it is not existing. also most of the mathematical and physical formulas can still be solved, even with a "0" unit of time, which is an exact point x on the timeline. so the only thing that actually really exists at a certain point of time is the present. as you said, a trinity would be "past causes the present causes the future". but seen from a certain point of view, past, present and future are all the same thing, the "now". time itself is a infinite long chain of those "nows". Let's say time was a carpet. The past is a spool of thread, now is the carpet and the future is the emergent design. A bug on the carpet cannot know every fiber of the carpet, but in theory it is all there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernil Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 Let's say time was a carpet. I vote we say time was a...JellyFish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshi Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 Originally posted by Zoom Rabbit Let's say time was a carpet. Only one problem there, it isn't, time is time, and for there to be a past and a furutur, the bridge is the present, but each perceivable present consists of another smaller past and future. This will keep on happenening until the present is soinfinately small that it's not even conceivable and according to the laws of mathematics, can only exist as 0, i.e, time not moving at all (it cannot rest on x, that is quite simply 0, and it cannot be less than that because that would suggest time going backwards). Therefore, our world as we see it has no element of time and therefore only has 3 dimensions instead of the 4th dimension of time and therefore proves the theory of trinity! Turtles all the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Jones Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 to understand time, you have to understand space and to understand space, you have to understand time. trinity is a model. it's a concept that helps to graph basic principles in a "realized world". but the world isnt out there because it's realized.. and what we call "time" is just what we realize of it. with "space" it's the same. if we see time as a carpet, the thread would be space and the design the now? hmm. maybe. how about something like an "iterated" carpet: space is the thread. and the design is space. the carpet itself is the now. a point x on the timeline. and time? time is where design becomes thread. chaos theory. i love it .. ^^ .. *cough* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emma Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 I'd prefer to make my own way without believing in a figment of someones imagination, so I'm an athiest and it's great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guybrush122 Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 Originally posted by Emma I'd prefer to make my own way without believing in a figment of someones imagination, so I'm an athiest and it's great. A week ago you would've been my brethrin. GO FORMER BRETHRIN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwing Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 Zoom: You're a secular christian mystic samurai? Can't say I'm surprised. I am technically, I suppose, a Protestant Christian, but I don't exactly have ...mainstream... beliefs. Naturally, being a bicycle and all. *whistles innocently* But anyway, I do indeed believe in God, and trust in Jesus, and all that other natter you hear those more vocal Christians talking about. ^_~ Why? Primarily, because everything I've seen in life fits together strangely like one giant cosmic puzzle piece after another, and God of the Bible is the only one who fits the bill for all that stuff I've experienced. Cut everything else away, and that's my reason for still being a Christian, even if believing different things than what I was raised to believe... And that's how I style myself religiously. ^_^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reaper Girl Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 Originally posted by Emma I'd prefer to make my own way without believing in a figment of someones imagination, so I'm an athiest and it's great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshi Posted January 27, 2004 Share Posted January 27, 2004 Originally posted by Emma I'd prefer to make my own way without believing in a figment of someones imagination, so I'm an athiest and it's great. And what about a figment of your own imagination. Oh, and Ray, the state of reality is indeterminate until the moment (which I guess we can call the present, at least at the time) they are observed. Curiosity killed the cat. I see you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guybrush122 Posted January 27, 2004 Share Posted January 27, 2004 Originally posted by Orca Wail How final Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Jones Posted January 27, 2004 Share Posted January 27, 2004 Originally posted by Joshi Oh, and Ray, the state of reality is indeterminate until the moment (which I guess we can call the present, at least at the time) they are observed. Curiosity killed the cat. I see you. schroedingers cat..? dead? how can you know? did you see it? hmmmmmm. i think i've went behind such views, or no, i didnt, but did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emma Posted January 27, 2004 Share Posted January 27, 2004 I don't get it. What is it with religion in America? And I will personally rip out the insides of anyone who believes in those ****ty 'True Love Waits' bollocks schemes. Because they're crap and sex before marriage isn't damaging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sivy Posted January 27, 2004 Share Posted January 27, 2004 Originally posted by Emma sex before marriage isn't damaging. that all depends on what you're having sex with... damn splinters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.