Nothing ever dies????

[user_1919]

energy can exists in negative form.

Can you please explain how energy can exist in negative form? Is it something theoritical?

PEACE & LOVE

 

[BrainEater]

energy can exists in negative form.

Can you please explain how energy can exist in negative form? Is it something theoritical?

PEACE & LOVE

maybe energy that is yet to be created can be considered negative energy ???


or maybe it is something similar to "dark energy" ????


just guessing though :weedman:

 

[psm]

energy can exists in negative form.

Can you please explain how energy can exist in negative form? Is it something theoritical?

PEACE & LOVE

it's a model actually. based on the same idea as anti-matter. the whole subject is (and will be for quite some time longer) more on the theoretical side from scientific point of view (not so from shamanistic or psychonautic).

but it is simple dualism. negative and positive, chaos & order, 0 and 1. alpha and omega. there is a reason why god is called that...
energy is based on the same principal matter.

STNG is a good indicator of the thoughts of the great minds of the 20th century. (Gene Rodenberry was a member of a council in the mid 50ies, that included many great thinker - they, among other thing, worked on how utopia could be achieved, or life extension and many other things - learys SMI²LE is based on their work. and Gene worked that stuff into Star Trek [original is the 4 lower circuits, STNG all 8 ])...

 

[GOD]

Guy you are waffeling again . Talking around things , away from questions and giving answers that dont have anything to do with the questions you are asked / i ask you . Cant you talk simply , in plain english and explain clearly what you mean ? If someone knows something and understands what they are talking about they can explain it .Thats how scientist qualify . And dont be childish and try to taslk your way out of it by saying that i`m to thick to understand .

 

[BrainEater]

eternity cannot be explained by language as you already pointed out GOD.


peace.

 

[psm]

Guy you are waffeling again . Talking around things , away from questions and giving answers that dont have anything to do with the questions you are asked / i ask you . Cant you talk simply , in plain english and explain clearly what you mean ? If someone knows something and understands what they are talking about they can explain it .Thats how scientist qualify . And dont be childish and try to taslk your way out of it by saying that i`m to thick to understand .

dude, i answered EVERY question truthfully and the best way (circumstantially) possible.

your preposition to deny any philosophical depiction is not my fault, nor my problem. you don't want to understand, so don't. but then, please do not ask me to explain anything, since you will not (deliberately) understand anything anyway.

I cannot tell you the cosmic joke, because you will have to get there yourself. no clear, none-abstract word or sentence I might say will get you any closer (same thing applies to enlightenment > the other topic).

 

[GOD]

Just more twisting what i say . More blah , blah , blah . More talk for talks sake . More excuses and waffeling .

As i said , if someone understands what they are talking about they can explain it , and you havent up to now .

My last post on the subject .

 

[psm]

Just more twisting what i say . More blah , blah , blah . More talk for talks sake . More excuses and waffeling .

more accusations from someone that thinks, because HE does not understand anything, the source must be wrong. another sign of megalomania...

As i said , if someone understands what they are talking about they can explain it , and you havent up to now .

I do, I have, I did.

My last post on the subject .

thank GOD...




if other people would have the same trouble with my posts, as you do (objectively, not out of sympathetic choice), I might reconsider redefining my way of sharing information. but until now, no one seems to do so, or at least doesn't make an issue out of it...

 

[BrainEater]

My last post on the subject .

thank GOD...

HAAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :weedman:


that one was too nice, obviously.


peace.

 

[user_1919]

No need for argument. But psm I am too confused still. So you are saying that the only reason negative energy exists is because 'positive' energy exists? Like the old saying everything has it's opposite. Is there any evidence supporting 'negative energy' or any examples? Maybe it's just the human mind, but I cannot grasp 'negative energy'. I understand the transfer of energy from system to system, and how energy can be gained or lost, but once you have a system with zero energy, if that is even possible because energy exists in every atom, how can it loose what is not there? Theortically 'negative energy' cannot exist in my eyes because in order for their to be 'negative energy' you would have to have abosulte nothingness. There is energy is every element, every electron, and every nucleus, so to go beyhond the zero point, which would be absolute nothingness is just behyond me. If there is nothing in the first place, how can you take something away?

PEACE & LOVE

 

[psm]

No need for argument.

Ahh, don't worry. happens every few days nothing serious (for my part at least)

But psm I am too confused still. So you are saying that the only reason negative energy exists is because 'positive' energy exists? Like the old saying everything has it's opposite. Is there any evidence supporting 'negative energy' or any examples?

There are many ideas out there. And no, there are no evidence, because it all belongs to metaphysics and theoretical physics. there are signs and evidence that support the notion, but don't factually show it. The whole thing, from modern science point of view, is very young.
Tho some great minds throughout history suggested similar thing. So did da Vince, Aristotle, Einstein and I think even Hawkins mentions it somewhere in his works on black holes.

Here are a few links to ideas in that linage:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_entropy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exotic_matter
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_sea
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_energy (the scientific stuff, not the conspiracy)

Maybe it's just the human mind, but I cannot grasp 'negative energy'. I understand the transfer of energy from system to system, and how energy can be gained or lost, but once you have a system with zero energy, if that is even possible because energy exists in every atom, how can it loose what is not there?

But you see, I do not talk about 0. 0 is god. It does not exist and is still the essential transition point. It is where all creation happens, but it does not exist in any form of substantial way.

Yes, it is indeed heavy stuff and very hard to wrap a mind around. But so is light speed, or quantum mechanics, infinity and much more.

Theortically 'negative energy' cannot exist in my eyes because in order for their to be 'negative energy' you would have to have abosulte nothingness.

Why so?
I agree that there is no absolute nothingness. negativity is not nothingness. it is something. it is negative, but it is something. it is not the absence of something, but a simple form. it is.

There is energy is every element, every electron, and every nucleus, so to go beyhond the zero point, which would be absolute nothingness is just behyond me. If there is nothing in the first place, how can you take something away?

There is no nothingness. 0 is the absolute. The only absolute number. it is the "all", not the "nothing".
(~)+(- ~)=0
It is all.

Here is a sincere tip to come to understanding: meditate about the sacred chao. it really helps (if you want me to explain the sacred chao, let me know).

PEACE & LOVE

While I usually do not mention it, I mean all the same

 

[user_1919]

Thanks for your reply.

Why so?
I agree that there is no absolute nothingness. negativity is not nothingness. it is something. it is negative, but it is something. it is not the absence of something, but a simple form. it is.

That is a good point that negative is not nothingness, but something. But the problem with that is the transition from positive to negative. If you have positive energy, how can it transfer to negative energy without crossing that nothingness?

There is no nothingness. 0 is the absolute. The only absolute number. it is the "all", not the "nothing".
(~)+(- ~)=0
It is all.

Exactly! But inorder to go to negative energy it must cross the zero point of energy, but the zero point in energy is not possible.

PEACE & LOVE

 

[psm]

Exactly! But inorder to go to negative energy it must cross the zero point of energy, but the zero point in energy is not possible.

Why?

What if the negative form is beyond infinity?
Where positive infinity ends, negative infinity starts. but from there it declines, until it reaches zero, from where positive infinity started to emerge from? so the transition is not at zero, it is only start and end. the transition might happen from "overloading" on the positive side.
But that is just one idea, that came into my mind right now (but a very interesting one).

I do not see Zero as "the point of none-existence". Zero is a mechanism. It is the only absolute number and still, it is not a number at all. Which in itself carries both all positive and all negative energy. Zero is not the point of "no energy" but the point of ALL energy, no matter what form, no matter whether negative or positive.

Better?

yeah I know, though one. but once you got that, you will be -3.15 energy away from the cosmic joke, I promise!

 

[Nomada]

let us pseudo-talk our way into complete pseudo-or-not-misunderstanding.

I've never in my life seen anyone make some sense out of anything, specially an
Aristotelian-logic, Descartes-'-duality, mono-paradigm-with-no-sense-of-relativity scientist or a hokus pokus magic charlatan.

The map is not the territory, as above so below, language is holographical.
Any not-so-pseudo-word about anything just points the way towards the supposed pseudo-object we are pseudo-intellectually discussing.
Objective truth is a observer-dependency corroborated collective supposition tossed
around with no regards to holy madness.

We are supposed to be pushing the limits on ourselves and the language we speak, outwards, not inwards.
Let us have an essay at godness.
Let us contradict one another and ourselves, above all.
Let us run naked through the black jungle.

The principle of the coincidence of opposites must be completed by that of absolute opposition in order to attain full paradoxicality and hence psychological validity.
Its this wordless-chamber, the indefinite, the uncertain, the paradoxical, the true paradise of intellectual intoxication.
Don't talk as means of expression, leave that for conditioned primates and emos.
Talk is an activity of mind.

"Go and run in the fields, gallop across the plains like a mad horse, run until blood bursts out of your chest, and when you're six years old, you won't know anything anymore and you'll see mad things."

The medium is truly the message.

Light :weedman:

 

[user_1919]

That is a good point! Zero energy may not be the point of transition, but it is only logical from current understand of the Universe and the way systems work. But what would make the theory wrong would be behyond infinity, because infinity is essentially forever and never ending.

It is the only absolute number and still, it is not a number at all. Which in itself carries both all positive and all negative energy. Zero is not the point of "no energy" but the point of ALL energy, no matter what form, no matter whether negative or positive.

Well our defination of zero is different. Zero is not a number for me. It is the transition point from positive to negative. So I define the 'zero-point' as a point where essentially no energy exists, which is not possible unless you have nothingness. As I said before, if the transiton from positive energy to negative energy occurs as it would normally in the number system, then it would have to cross this 'zero-point' of no energy. To me negative energy does not exists, but I am not a Ph.D physists, although I have ALWAYS been interested in this field of study. I chose rather to take the route of studying psychedelics.

PEACE & LOVE

 

[BrainEater]

are we just figments of the imagination of the biggest consciousness there is ?=??


or are we really real ??? are we the expression of the imagination of the biggest consciousness??? the glorious human race, doomed from the beginning to cause it's own downfall????


what is the purpose of the universe?????? is it only there to provide its inhabitants the chance to discover that we are only doomed stardust ????

probably yes...!!!?? or probably not ???

what do you think??? :weedman:

 

[psm]

That is a good point! Zero energy may not be the point of transition, but it is only logical from current understand of the Universe and the way systems work. But what would make the theory wrong would be behyond infinity, because infinity is essentially forever and never ending.

It is the only absolute number and still, it is not a number at all. Which in itself carries both all positive and all negative energy. Zero is not the point of "no energy" but the point of ALL energy, no matter what form, no matter whether negative or positive.

Well our defination of zero is different. Zero is not a number for me. It is the transition point from positive to negative. So I define the 'zero-point' as a point where essentially no energy exists, which is not possible unless you have nothingness. As I said before, if the transiton from positive energy to negative energy occurs as it would normally in the number system, then it would have to cross this 'zero-point' of no energy. To me negative energy does not exists, but I am not a Ph.D physists, although I have ALWAYS been interested in this field of study. I chose rather to take the route of studying psychedelics.

PEACE & LOVE

very well said!
I have to (dis)agree 199%, but it depends.

 

[psm]

That is a good point! Zero energy may not be the point of transition, but it is only logical from current understand of the Universe and the way systems work. But what would make the theory wrong would be behyond infinity, because infinity is essentially forever and never ending.

Even infinity has an end. It's just really far away!

Well our defination of zero is different.

Let's explore that.

Zero is not a number for me. It is the transition point from positive to negative.

Until here, we are on par.

So I define the 'zero-point' as a point where essentially no energy exists, which is not possible unless you have nothingness. As I said before, if the transiton from positive energy to negative energy occurs as it would normally in the number system, then it would have to cross this 'zero-point' of no energy.

There are two faults in logic here (from my POV of course):

1.: A transition point IS something. (as an better understandable example Lets say it would a device, that would transform soundwaves into light or an object, that transforms magnetism into electricity or something that transforms one type of movement into another.
In our conversation, zero would be the machine performing that transformation.

2.: You are thinking in simple arithmetic. The idea of energy is a little more abstract then that. The human arithmetic factor is not really usable here. Which is the reason why scientists are so mad about quantum mechanics, because it mocks them to change their reality.
The universe is a hologram and far away from 2 dimensional human worldview.

 

[psm]

are we just figments of the imagination of the biggest consciousness there is ?=??

Yes you are. Mine...

or are we really real ???

Depends on what day it is.

are we the expression of the imagination of the biggest consciousness???

I am, of yours.

the glorious human race, doomed from the beginning to cause it's own downfall????

While this is a little bit off the topic of your own post. The answer would be, yes and no. Not doomed to, but it will most likely happen.

what is the purpose of the universe??????

To tell a pretty good joke.

is it only there to provide its inhabitants the chance to discover that we are only doomed stardust ????

That would imply that the universe gives a shit...

probably yes...!!!?? or probably not ???

probably

what do you think???

probably

 

[BrainEater]

basically all the physical stuff has been found out in physics i think.... you only needed to look them up and connect it to the big picture.

but it's the greatest danger possible. because such revelations are prone to be wanted to be owned by someone or at least the useful thing about the theory.

if not for some REALLY SMART people there wouldn't have been a bomb powerful enough like maybe 10000 bombs taken together which were possible before the time of THAT BOMB. i suppose you know which bomb i am talking about....

but of course it's always smart not to shout it out if you are really smart you would already consider that knowledge if in the wrong hands can be dangerous.


the thing with nothingness is in my opinion that you can't comprehend it, because you probably have never experienced it in your life and the concept of nothingness is well.... pathetic.... because of it's simplicity, but sometimes brains won't crack the easiest problems, because of their adaptation of complex concepts.



peace.