Origins of the Universe from an EU perspective

[shrunkensimon]

This is a question that bugs me, and i have been unable to find a concrete answer to. I recognize that the EU theory does away with the singularity destroying itself, aka the big bang, but what does the EU theory have to say about the origins of the Universe?

Also, how does sacred geometry fit into this picture? I know intuitively that sacred geometry is a MASSIVE piece of the puzzle, but im unable to see how we go from something like the Genesis pattern, where spirit as it were, goes from being unmanifested to manifested energy, and how that links into the origins of everything..

Is there a creative process at play in stars or blackholes, where matter is literally created from nothing? A type of Z-Pinch if you will, that is not yet understood? I know the Universe isn't expanding per se, but i get the impression that matter is being brought into the Universe from somewhere. I don't really get the idea that the "Universe has always existed".. there has to be some kind of initial creative event, where again we go from unmanifested to manifested.

Im interested to hear peoples ideas on how we go from unmanifested to manifested potential, the boundary between science and metaphysics.

Thanks for your time

[Steve Smith]

No EU theorist speculates on origins. That's why you can't find any information.

[shrunkensimon]

<snide remark deleted> (fmx)

Im asking for peoples opinions on the matter because i want to see if others share the same views i have, or to see if people have any good explanations and such that mite inspire me etc.

If you don't want to contribute, then don't post, jeez..

[davesmith_au]

but what does the EU theory have to say about the origins of the Universe?

Nothing.

Which was Steve's comment. Don't shoot the messenger, you asked the question and he answered it.

Should you want to know more about "Sacred geometry", patiently read Dave Talbott's mythology threads and see what pops up in time. I say patiently because it takes a good deal of time and effort to understand the big picture (and to explain it), and wild speculation helps none.

Cheers, Dave Smith.

[shrunkensimon]

I did say, "Im interested to hear peoples ideas on how we go from unmanifested to manifested potential, the boundary between science and metaphysics".. I know the EU theory says nothing on the origins of the Universe. Thats why i asked this question lol, i want to know peoples opinions on what THEY think occured. I wouldn't be asking this if i hadn't already tried to search the EU "database" as it were, for an answer.

I'm already quite knowledgeble on the topic of sacred geometry as it is, but what im interested in is how this understanding can be applied when talking about the origins of the universe, or the origins of matter for example. There is nothing available discussing this issue, and the only way to get anywhere is to ask others for their opinions, in the hopes that someone has pondered this subject area and possibly come up with something interesting or plausible.

Could you point me to the examples in Daves threads? I don't fancy reading through hundreds of pages just to get one or two referrences, because its likely i've already covered them in my own research.

Thanks

[moses]

I did say, "Im interested to hear peoples ideas on how we go from unmanifested to manifested potential, the boundary between science and metaphysics"

There have been experiments in the use of willpower to dematerialise an object
and transport it a short distance and then let it re-materialise. So a divine will-
power might have manifested the universe. Consciousness exists and is a response
to electrical activity. Something is only alive if it is capable of consciousness. So
possibly all electrical activity induces some form of consciousness. And so maybe
consciousness can affect electrical activity. And indeed there have been experiments
where a stream of electons is deflected by willpower.

So leaving consciousness out of EU is a mistake, but considering it is fraught with
difficulties, mainly through religious ideas and people grinding axes. If one can
produce an electrical potential difference between one's hands, such that there is
a flow of charged particles between one's hands, then that is enough to create a
universe between one's hands.
Mo

[shrunkensimon]

Thank you Mo, exactly the type of response i was after

I agree there is great difficulty with trying to include consciousness in an EU model, due to pre-existing belief structures and religious ideas, and it will take someone or a group of people with great intregrity and humble nature to approach this particular area honestly.

One piece of information that i came across which i think is highly relevant to connecting consciousness to electrical activity is the following (taken from a book i read on the subject of the Mayan Calendar, by Dr Calleman)

"What we have is a series of spheres, of both geological and an atmospheric nature, that all share Earth's midpoint as their center. These spheres are probably the most significant boundaries between the diffrerent concentric segments that constitute the Earth. In more esoteric language, they could probably be called ethereal bodies.

Magnetopause/Plasma Sheet 60,000Km -- 0.8 Hz -- DELTA/Deep Sleep
Outer Van Allen Belt 25,000Km -- 2 Hz --DELTA/Deep Sleep
Inner Van Allen Belt 12,000Km -- 4 Hz -- THETA/Light Sleep
Earths Crust and Mantle 6,370Km -- 7.5 Hz -- ALPHA/Relaxation
Outer Core 3,500Km -- 13.5 Hz -- BETA/Concentration
Crystalline Inner Core 1,200Km -- 40 Hz -- BETA/Concentration

Delta -- Deep Sleep -- 1-4 Hz
Theta -- Light Sleep; Drowsiness -- 4-7 Hz
Alpha -- Relaxation; Meditation -- 8-13 Hz
Beta -- Mental Concentration -- 13-40 Hz

"The concordance between these traditional ranges for the frequencies of different types of brain waves and the radiuses of the Earth's spheres is remarkable. This concordance however, morever, is not something we need to go to obscure scientific journals to verify. It is amoung the most basic knowledge for students of the respective fields"


If the above can be shown to be true, i think this serves at least as a hint towards a relationship between electrical activity of the Earth and human beings. This in turn also opens up the electrical connection from the Earth to Sun, Sun to Galaxy, and so forth as EU theory seeks to explain.

Personally, i think intuitively there is a definite connection between electricity and consciousness, although i do not know where to begin on explaing why i feel this way about it..

Keep the insights coming

[bboyer]

A quick forum advanced search on "consciousness" and the like, limiting it to this forum and the Human Question (HQ) forum, will also return several recent threads in which this has been taken up by various forum members. But Steve and Dave S. are correct in that, while they undoubtedly have their own personal perspectives on the subject, none of the key EU theorists have, and are not likely to, discuss this publicly. At least not as part of EU theory itself; but as you said, you are aware of this.

[beb]

There was also some related discussion in the FOS forum in a couple of threads.

http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/v ... ?f=8&t=533 Material from Non Material Linear Thread
http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/v ... ?f=8&t=538 What is Real?
http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/v ... ?f=8&t=282 Matter is made of only waves?
http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/v ... f=10&t=445 What is time? (in NIAMI, this forum)

[moses]

Personally, i think intuitively there is a definite connection between electricity and consciousness, although i do not know where to begin on explaing why i feel this way about it.. simon
Other than the obvious connection between brain electrical activity and thoughts,
feelings, light, sound, scent, and others ? It is the most amazing thing that
medical scientists can electrically stimulate some part of the brain and have
the subject report a smell, colour, etc, ie a part of consciousness, and not
realise the implications of this. That consciousness is not physical, although
it is a response to something physical - electricity. Perhaps a good experiment
would be to have an instrument that effects DNA in some way, and to see
whether this produces a response from consciousness. Can something other
than electricity induce a state of consciousness ? And does all electricity
induce consciousness, or is there only such a connection in a living organic
body, which would then begin at conception ? And is Earth such a body, and
does Earth's birth from another astral body represent such a conception !
Mo

[minorwork]

Shrunkensimon,

Consciousness as a waveform on an oscilloscope can be formed into the silhouette of a face, but cannot draw a line reversing the spots line of travel. This has resonated with me. Seems some kind of brain resonance, electrical? Maybe.

My solipsist tendencies make me sympathetic to the following quote on the subject of origins:

"I s'pect I just growed. Don't think nobody never made me." That’s what Topsy said in Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin

Lately I've been trying to see consciousness and the universe as some combination of brain anatomy from Francis Crick's; The Astonishing Hypothesis: The Scientific Search for the Soul and the work of Mark Changizi. Changizi has been interviewed on the Scientific American site on May 30, 2008 and his book; The Vision Revolution: How the Latest Research Overturns Everything We Thought We Knew About Human Vision will be out in 2009. Changizi has analyzed the dominant role of vision as analagous to a super power enabling the human view of the world to project a tenth of a second or so into the future. This because of the time it takes for light on the retina to register as the world in consciousness. The various visual illusions are classified as to the role they play in achieving this ability to compensate. Mark also has a book published in 2003 I have on my must-be-read list called: THE BRAIN FROM 25,000 FEET: High Level Explorations of Brain Complexity, Perception, Induction and Vagueness.

Product Description
In The Brain from 25,000 Feet, Mark A. Changizi defends a non-reductionist philosophy and applies it to a variety of problems in the brain sciences. Some of the key questions answered are as follows. Why do we see visual illusions, and why are illusions inevitable for any finite-speed vision machine? Why aren't brains universal learning machines, and what does the riddle of induction and its solution have to do with human learning and innateness? The author tackles such questions as why the brain is folded, and why animals have as many limbs as they do, explaining how these relate to principles of network optimality. He describes how most natural language words are vague and then goes on to explain the connection to the ultimate computational limits on machines. There is also a fascinating discussion of how animals accommodate greater behavioral complexity. This book is a must-read for researchers interested in taking a high-level, non-mechanistic approach to answering age-old fundamental questions in the brain sciences.

At $110 used I'm gonna have to see if the library can get it. The non-reductionist aspect intrigues me certainly.

Mark has a good bit of info and a link to the Scientific American article here: http://www.geocities.com/changizi/

Personally, I believe the necessity of the terms "beginning" and "ending" are only a human point of view covered as the qualities of an observer. Seems pretty obvious that there is no beginning or end once I'd heard of Zeno's Paradox. The observer has to postulate all kinds of stuff that the observed doesn't have to abide by. As such I see no need for a start for the universe. 'Course I've been in a coal mine doing electric troubleshootin' for 31 years, retired for 2 more and my opinions should be judged accordingly. I do have a BA in philosophy so I'm not known for brevity.