Posted by Roberta Grimes • February 12, 2022 • 40 Comments
Quantum Physics, Understanding Reality
Morning has broken like the first morning.
Blackbird has spoken like the first bird.
Praise for the singing, praise for the morning,
Praise for them springing fresh from the world.
Sweet the rains new fall, sunlit from Heaven,
Like the first dewfall on the first grass.
Praise for the sweetness of the wet garden,
Sprung in completeness where His feet pass.
– Yusuf Islam (Cat Stevens), from “Morning Has Broken” (1971)
The fact that mathematics is used in creating the structure of material reality is such a gigantic weirdness that it’s difficult to even get our minds around it. Of course, the first question to be asked and answered is what mathematics even is. Is math a natural science or an invented science? If you are sure that it’s natural, then please feel free to skip the rest of this post. But if you suspect, as I did when I was sixteen, that math is as human-invented as a screwdriver, then read on….
I still can vividly recall the moment when I stood in line after Algebra II class and asked my teacher whether math is a discovered or an invented science. She told me, sounding impatient, that math is an invented science. And she moved on to the next student in line. It was a nothing moment for her, but it was a monumental moment for me! People just dreamed it up? Well, who needs that? I never took another class in math. Then there was a moment twenty years ago when I was watching a PBS special on the universe. A young physicist was narrating it. He said in what was clearly a throwaway line, “For some reason, math can be used to study the universe.” And his “for some reason” caught on my mind.
The more I have learned about the greater reality over the past ten years, the more I have come to realize that my insight at the age of sixteen might have been one for the ages! What I am going to write for you today is a doodle. I’ve been doing these every year or two, just taking some concepts that make sense individually and putting them together to see whether a stretch of an idea that seems to be almost unimaginable can begin to make sense when separate sensible ideas are combined. Here are some things that we know are true:
All right. So now let’s look at the clockwork material reality that mainstream scientists tell us is where we live. Scientists say this universe began when something came from nothing 13.8 billion years ago in a Big Bang, and it still carries on from there unassisted and within unimaginably tiny tolerances. For the past nearly fourteen billion years, and with no help at all, it somehow has managed to avoid either collapsing in upon itself or blowing apart. Scientists assure us that they are still in the process of figuring it out. Or as the great Rupert Sheldrake tells us they are wont to say, “Just give us one free miracle and we’ll explain the rest.” But it is going to take a whole lot more than just one free miracle to make sense of the scientific creation story that has to cover fourteen billion years and counting! It is past time for us to accept the fact that the whole scientific fairy tale of creation is impossible. And imagining a religious God Who just says “Presto!” and makes it all happen and keep on happening isn’t really a whole lot better, is it? The plain fact is that both the scientific and the religious creation stories are so vastly unlikely as to beggar belief. They are both myths from a much more primitive time when myths were all that human beings could muster. But we know for a fact that creation must actually have happened. Demonstrably, this universe exists. So, what might we get when we demand a creation theory backed up by some actual evidence?
When I first asked Thomas about creation a year ago, he drew my attention to three popular-science magazine articles that indicate that modern humankind and about ninety percent of all the other animals and plants first came into existence at about the same time, around 200,000 years ago. I blogged about it then. That seems to be astoundingly recent! Whenever he throws one of these ideas at me, I reel with it at first, as I did when he first hit me with his Godhead idea, and with his filmstrip ongoing-creation idea. But I am becoming used to all of it now. And I have come to realize that he is probably right! So let’s juxtapose what I think of as Thomas’s creation story against the theist and atheist creation stories. Part of the evidence we find in that overlooked valley between the theist and the atheist hills is the boggling certainty that material creation is based in and governed by, and can therefore be studied using… human-created mathematics?
And the more I think about it, the more that fact seems to be a kind of magic bullet.
More even than punctuated equilibrium and so many other glitches in creation that you can spot if you look for them, the fact that the universe is based in mathematics seems to show us its actual creator’s hand. And astoundingly, that hand is our own.
Before you laugh, please follow this through with me.
Okay, so it’s a doodle. It’s a third version of the creation story that has been harvested from the valley of real information between those two false beliefs-based hills. It’s a creation story based in the astounding possibility that we ourselves are the genuine architect of all that we see. We ourselves are the part of God that was separated two hundred thousand years ago, and now we are rescuing one another and elevating one another spiritually so that one day, at last and forevermore, the kingdom of God will overspread all the earth, as if the separation never had happened. Mathematics may be a more important clue than we ever could possibly have known.
Mine is the sunlight, mine is the morning,
Born of the one light, Eden saw play.
Praise with elation, praise every morning,
God’s recreation of the new day.
Morning has broken like the first morning.
Blackbird has spoken like the first bird.
Praise for the singing, praise for the morning,
Praise for them springing fresh from the world.
– Yusuf Islam (Cat Stevens), from “Morning Has Broken” (1971)
40 thoughts on “Mathematics”
Wonderful topics you covered here, the nature of mathematics, and how Creation came about. Last year, in two papers I too addressed these two topics, and came to similar conclusions to what you propose. It was hard enought to write these papers, so I will briefly quote from them to convey the essence of my conclusions.
On the Nature of Mathematics
“There are two classic philosophical questions about mathematics that have seemed irresolvable: (1) When a mathematician defines a new branch of mathematics, or even discovers a theorem, is such definition or discovery truly creative, or merely a discovery of what already existed in the sense that Platonic realism holds mathematics is eternally real with no reliance on minds for existence? (2) Why does mathematical modeling for physics work so well, such as, for example, the Schrodinger wave equation? This note argues that both questions are well answered when the inquiry posits that there is God who created both “real” and material existences. ” (https://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/766 )
How May We Explain the Creation of the Material World?
“Traditional theorizing and philosophizing about Creation possibilities offers two distinct explanations with each of the two not satisfying common sense. First, there is the idea that the world somehow emerged from what had been pure nothingness, no time, no space, nothing; that idea defies common sense. Second, there is the idea that the world that our senses register simply always existed, even if its form has been changing, such as would follow from the Big Bang; this idea also defies common sense, as we learn and expect that one event triggers the next. But that progression assumes some sort of initiating event, so this solution does not solve the issue by simply assuming its own truth.
What is proposed here is that our common sense analysis is contaminated by its education in a physically appearing world of time and space. Max Plank had come to a realization that the material world known by our perception, created by body and mind, was a form of illusion :
I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.
Let us define consciousness to be a “substance” unlike those defined by E = mc2. Consciousness has as a primary attribute self-awareness, but lacks mass and lacks energy; it’s being is perfectly immaterial. Given that consciousness is defined to lack any physical dimensionality, and not to experience time, it is thus not subject to the forces and change we learn about in our physical experience.
Consciousness is timeless and immaterial and has an infinite potential for information in which the information coding is immaterial. We may next ponder about consciousness as we had earlier inquired about how Creation came about. So, we will assume that consciousness was able to create the physical world, but is not itself material. Thus we ask if consciousness always existed or came from nothing. Given that consciousness is purely immaterial, it may have sprung from nothingness (i.e., immateriality), and also, since it does not exist in time, it always existed in a timeless realm of being. ” (https://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/758/798 )
Oh my dear Jack, you are talking so far above me here that I am craning and shading my eyes with my hand and squinting, and still I can barely see you up there! Please remember that I quite willfully abandoned mathematics at Algebra II, and I never bothered with physics at all beyond what I later picked up as an enthusiastic science hobbyist. Humanity may have used mathematics to create this material reality, but I am far more interest now in helping us to discover the part of reality that remains hidden in what is still rather seductively called dark matter!
I do agree with with you though that Planck was right. It is extremely difficult for us to avoid reasoning from where we are right now, but in fact, we cannot get behind Consciousness. That dear man who had to see his favorite son executed for attempting to assassinate Hitler will perhaps go down in history for having at last discovered God.
Feeling totally guided by revelation and guided inspiration, I did a 20-year research on the very nature of numbers, a kind of psycho-analysis if you will, as numbers are THE building blocks of mathematics, I came to the only conclusion possible; numbers are the perfect expression of an intelligence and “I Am” given-ness that totally defies human intelligence. Also, just the numbers present in our solar system are so well arranged, that no one in his/her right mind can ever say that this universe is just a coincidence, the accidental outcome of an unguided process. That last assertion by naive scientists is the greatest fairy tale ever told.
May I point you to my book (free pdf online):
Oh my dear Dr. Adrian, thank you! I seem to be allergic to numbers – they give me hives, and I mean that literally, but my Thomas is delighted with your book!
Two ideas come to mind reading this. Forgive me for what you will probably see as naïve presumption to ask.
Could our universe of charged atomic particles (the world we perceive) be surrounded by a universe of uncharged atomic particles that we cannot detect, and which contain spirits and higher orders of beings? This might explain where spirit guides reside like Thomas, and the 95% of matter we cannot detect. The difference would be in the electrical charge on protons and electrons.
Could our universe consist of higher energy beings and reality (which we recognize as light) and our world was created when energy slowed down to such an extent that it precipitates out as matter, matter that contains perceived time. The spirit world would then be matter at higher energy, and 95% of matter that exists is in a higher energy plane that we cannot detect. This would be consistent with the observation that physical objects are largely empty space.
Are either of these realities congruent with your discussion of mathematics, consciousness, and creation?
Not just surrounded, my dear Chuck, but interpenetrated! Everything is energy! We only perceive the matter here as solid, but it really is no more solid than is any random TV channel. By George, my dear friend, I think you’ve got it! 🙂
Chuck, Your ideas here correspomd to my own with a good summary of my research findings and conclusionsposted at ( https://near-death.com/near-death-experience-of-space-time-and-consciousness/ ) by Kevin Williams, webmaster of the IANDS information website.
In brief, there are three Domains. First (not as time but as sequence), there was God alone as pure consciousness (and then the spirits He created), with such consciousness owning awareness, but perfectly devoid of any form of matter/energy as a timeless domain that only experiences an eternal Now.
Second, God created the world of light that we know of as Heaven.
Third, God created the material world we inhabit as a subst of the 2nd Domain; The so called Dark matter and energy we sense is the 2nd Domain.
Why would God have created the 2nd and 3rd Domains? The 2nd Domian of light makes existence more “tangeable” or interesting and exciting, with creativity positively expressed. However, because the 2nd Domain is indeed perfectly blissful, the development of spiritual qualities is severely limited. The stresses created by the 2nd Domain’s material life for survival of the body, and to meet the demands of the mortal body’s needs and wants, creates the opportunity for spirtual developm,ent for qualities such as courage and self-sacrifice.
Thank you, Drs. Hiller, Adrian and Webb for posting your thoughts. I am no scientist, but what you all said makes perfect sense to me. The dark matter that makes up so much of the universe is obviously of huge importance or otherwise it would have dissipated by now. Therefore to say that it is basically the spirit world resonates with me. It is hard to imagine an Eternal Now while we are in the physical realm, but it is likely easier to understand it once we leave the material world. Every scientist agrees that most of the universe is impossible to perceive and that only a small percentage of it is visible to us, Therefore, dark matter is probably impossible to study in any physical way. Am I right in assuming that?
Wer infer what is called Dark energy and Dark Matter from effects of galactic motion that are not explainable by what is visible in the electromatic spectrum; so, in effect, we are studying the influence of things not visible.
NASA ha a good, brief intro to the topic: ” In the early 1990s, one thing was fairly certain about the expansion of the universe. It might have enough energy density to stop its expansion and recollapse, it might have so little energy density that it would never stop expanding, but gravity was certain to slow the expansion as time went on. Granted, the slowing had not been observed, but, theoretically, the universe had to slow. The universe is full of matter and the attractive force of gravity pulls all matter together. Then came 1998 and the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) observations of very distant supernovae that showed that, a long time ago, the universe was actually expanding more slowly than it is today. So the expansion of the universe has not been slowing due to gravity, as everyone thought, it has been accelerating. No one expected this, no one knew how to explain it. But something was causing it.
Eventually theorists came up with three sorts of explanations. Maybe it was a result of a long-discarded version of Einstein’s theory of gravity, one that contained what was called a “cosmological constant.” Maybe there was some strange kind of energy-fluid that filled space. Maybe there is something wrong with Einstein’s theory of gravity and a new theory could include some kind of field that creates this cosmic acceleration. Theorists still don’t know what the correct explanation is, but they have given the solution a name. It is called dark energy.
What Is Dark Energy?
More is unknown than is known. We know how much dark energy there is because we know how it affects the universe’s expansion. Other than that, it is a complete mystery. But it is an important mystery. It turns out that roughly 68% of the universe is dark energy. Dark matter makes up about 27%. The rest – everything on Earth, everything ever observed with all of our instruments, all normal matter – adds up to less than 5% of the universe. Come to think of it, maybe it shouldn’t be called “normal” matter at all, since it is such a small fraction of the universe “
Oh wow! My pea-brain always thought that the universe’s expansion would continue to slow down and that it would collapse eventually, and this would result in another “big bang.” LOL. However, they seem just as befuddled as I am as to why it would expand faster over time, as noted by the Hubble telescope. Since we can see so little of the universe (5%), it doesn’t seem likely that it could be studied in any material way, I thought dark energy may represent what we call the “spirit world” but I don’t know how that could explain the weird acceleration. Do you have any thoughts on this?
Dear Jack, more is indeed unknown than is known! And materialist physicists in their vast willful cluelessness have somehow managed to persuade investors to waste another billion dollars on yet another fruitless search for a source of consciousness inside the human brain. When I was 65, and I still cared what people on this terrestrial ball thought of me, I believed that if we ever got around to starting Seek Reality Online we might humbly suggest that maybe, you know, just possibly dark matter and dark energy might have something to do with the astral plane. But, good grief, now that I am 75 and Seek Reality Online is being developed and I cheerfully hope to go home in another decade or so, I can throw caution to the winds! My dear Jack, as you know, that less than five percent that we live on and consider to be all that matters is interwoven with the more than ninety-five percent of reality where humankind lives its glorious eternity! And where indeed we visit every night to take a break, have a proverbial smoke, and recharge our batteries. You and I both know that. And I love you for the fact that although you are even older than I am in human terms, you still are willing to play this human game by human terms. Oh my dearly beloved Jack, I don’t know where you find the stamina for it!
Dear Roberta, Trying to fence with dogmatic matrialist physicists and neurologists is actually a form of entertainment. I sat “trying,” because when I challege their positions with “certified” scientific facts and logical analyses they fall silent. Recently for example, an
article about the possible origigins of space-time (creation of the material universe) was published in Scientific American (Feb 22 edition). The author reported seemingly plausibkle explanations which prominently included the mechanism of quantum entanglement which is now dogmatically believed to create insantaneous “spooky” (no mechanism defined) signaling between particles however far apart they might be (say 14 billion light years, defying Special Relativity which limits the speed of signaling to light speed), and do so with no clue as to the signaling mechanism. Now, in my public paper on quantum entanglement I had demonstrated from multiple lab results (by others) that no instantaneous spooky signaling took place, and the idea for such magic was a fiction based on a mistaken Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle which held that particles lacked a definite existence until probed (Einstein having argued that this idea was nonsense). In emailing the author about this mistake, I included prominent physicists, including two Nobel Laureates. It’s been two weeks now, and the response is SILENCE.
Roberta, the ideas you presented today that you put in a beautifully summary, I have been struggling to understand for the past year. I finally get it and you made that possible!!. For anyone thick headed like me, Roberta has included links to her past blogs that you can look up and reread that back up her summary. I found these links very helpful. Thanks a million Roberta!!!!! Dave
Oh my dear wonderful friend, thank you for posting here! My goodness, David, if ever I had a friend, that is what you are to me. You really make me smile. Thank you 🙂
It seems like about 95% of what I have just read is way over the top of my head, despite having taken some graduate courses in Math. What I do think I understand is that if the Big Bang theory were true, all of creation stemmed from a singularity as required by the Big Bang. It seems to me that of necessity a singularity is symmetric in form and yet the visible universe is anything but symmetric, Unless the dark part of the Universe is complementary to the visible part so the two combine to create a perfectly symmetric shape, sphere, creation could not have been formed this way. Am I making sense?
Oh yes, my dear Cookie, you are making sense. It is all fundamentally a Jabberwock. I once had dinner at an afterlife conference with a wonderful retired physicist. They would come to those conferences and drink too much at dinner and then speak rather too freely, which was a delight for those who shared a table with them. He happened to be sitting next to me, and at one point he leaned and privately said, “The thing about math is that it can be made to say whatever you want it to say.” And wow, that must have been close to ten years ago now, but I never forgot it!
” Beware the Jabberwock, my son, with claws that bite and teeth that scratch. Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun the frumious bandersnatch!” as Lewis Carroll was fond of saying. It is all nonsense. If you can indeed make the math say whatever you want it to say, then by now the science is far gone into the weeds indeed!
Lolo and David,
Any possible scientific explanation for the creation of the material universe, whether or not it started with a Big Bang (which is pure nonsense, because that idea of a Big Bang start ignores how an singularity could have been formed, especially from nothingness) is in principle beyond the capability of conventional materialistic science to engage. I have explained the reasons in a chapter in my text on the nature of consciousness (in which consciousness is theorized to be the foundation of ALL). Here is the summary for my chapter on what I’ve termed the Principle of Interior Unknowability:
” 6. An Absolute Limitation to the Rational Analysis of Experience, Consciousness, and World Origin: the Principle of Interior Unknowability
After working for approximately a decade to produce a defensible theory for how the world came to be, I realized that I had made zero progress. I questioned why that effort was entirely futile, and came to an interesting conclusion — the question itself implied an observational framework external to a Creation event, but scientists could never in principle locate externally as “privileged observers” to be able to see what happened. Thus, a new postulate for the metaphysics of creation was defined. This postulate was termed the Principle of Interior Unknowability (PIU). It was argued that the PIU stands on two legs of support.
The first leg is an analogy posed about fishes born in a fish tank having no opportunity ever to locate outside of their tank. From their interior location in the tank, they (or scientists in the material world) would never be able to learn where it came from or how it was made; the same argument applies if the world were instead conceptualized to be infinite with no boundaries.
The second leg is a conjectured analogy with Kurt Godel’s Theorem of Undecidability, developed while he was working on his Incompleteness Theorems. This leg of the argument for the PIU reasons that postulates, axioms or assumptions based on internal observations of our world, applied to mathematically model its creation, are susceptible to creating a paradox (historically known as the Liars Paradox) by self-reference. To escape the potential for producing a valueless or misleading paradox, information would have to be gathered external to a system to be used for modeling its creation. “
My dear Jack, I absolutely and fundamentally love you. The way you do science politely demolishes existing science the way that drunken physicist at the dinner table that evening was demolishing it, because you understand how preposterous it is. As I guess that at this point most theoretical physicists realize that it is, but sadly they are still beholden to its false dogmas for their children’s educations and their future retirements. Rock on, my dear friend!!
There was a scientist on Coast to Coast recently who said that some of his colleagues feel that dark matter is a combination of black holes, dead stars, dwarf stars etc. None of these emit light, so can’t be seen by even the most powerful telescope, so he feels there is nothing very mysterious about having dark matter in the universe.
My dear Lola, we know that the astral plane is as real as black holes are real. We can assume that dark matter might very well be made up of some combination of all sorts of things.
I think so too. I just repeated what this guy said to show that they will hold onto material explanations at any cost. It was even mentioned that there could be countless universes that were created – so many that there was bound to be at least one that was perfect enough for us to be here. Obviously, there is zero evidence for that theory, nor was any explanation offered for how these “countless universes” showed up in the first place.
Dear Roberta and all,
I cannot believe you are talking mathematics. I just had a thought come to me, which aligned with many things on our earthbound journey and the need for consistency. What happens in our lives is hard, on many levels, but the consistency we feel with the physical elements we see every day is the biggest coping mechanism. Powerful, when we figure out something or determine a year exactly 325.25 days or the phenomenon of PI, an “infinite number.” I was thinking how important it is to us (humanity) to use mathematics and discover theorems that correspond to the physical world. It’s a language in its own. But it has nothing to do with our spirituality and doesn’t begin to tell the real story. In fact, I don’t think we can ever understand the real story in these physical bodies, but maybe that’s where faith in our eternal existence is so important, and we begin to see evidence and experience revelations all the time.
My dear Tim, if you can’t believe I’m talking mathematics, you can imagine how I feel! I’m allergic to numbers, for heaven’s sake. I think they have cooties! And since while we are in these physical bodies we have access to such a small part of our eternal minds, I agree that perhaps we really can’t understand anything.
I’m writing Seek Reality Online scripts this morning. And you are so right about everything! What is important is even more than faith in our eternal existence. It’s an absolute, outright certainty of it! We can know that, and once you really know it, then my God, nothing ever again is the same!
Quote from above: “And as each of us raises our own conscious vibration with the aid of our own spirit guides, we come ever closer to the parent Consciousness, the Spirit, what Jesus teaches us to call our Father.”
Hi Roberta, hi everybody! I really like this “doodle”! Something tells me that although our own (also human-constructed) language presents a barrier to the concept, this is a very elegant way of expressing the nature of the base Creative force that we can call (I am still comfortable with the word though I know many are not) God.
Until we can see ourselves from the perspective of the eternal (discussed in previous blog posts) rather than from this earthly experience that we perceive as incarnation, our being forever and always within and part of the Divine Consciousness may feel odd. But if we can turn our point of view around and understand ourselves as we really are, we see how truly powerful all of this is.
Oh my dear Mike, thank you for this! And there is indeed a Divine Consciousness, a Parent Consciousness of which each of us is an infinitely beloved part, and which indeed beyond time we never have left. I think we know that on some profound level, and it is that core comfort which is our Peace.
As my beloved guide says, “There is no darkness—only discovery!”
Arrow is funny, my dear Mike. All her pithy sayings have a twist to them, like this one! We expect her to say, “There is no darkness – only light.” But instead she says, “There is no darkness – only… discovery.” And that makes you stop and think before you realize that it also works!
She has always worked this way!
This has nothing to do with mathematics but I have been reading your insights for some time and with all evolving reality, have formed my own. You have vast connections and I am unaware of my own, so I have wanted to ask you for some time to think on and/or pass this concept on to whomever might find it a potential developing reality to study or pilot a course to follow. I apologize if anyone has had this thought before me as I am not as well read as some and often feel I have stumbled on something that perhaps no one else has. So here goes, my streamlined version which omits how and why I got to this in the first place. If we are truly all energetic conscious life forces, and if we have control of our energy in various degrees; and if for some of us we are longing to connect the physicality and spirituality of those we know and love; then has anyone else thought of or explored or know how to use our computer-generated avatars, to make contact with those beyond our physical worlds? I am intrigued by the thought that I may develop an alter-self, let’s say in a game such as Second Life (see on line) and when I die, be able to still make that avatar connect with those I love still left here. If people can really use their energy to communicate with ouija boards, and make computer changes controlled by the brain/consciousness through bio/neurofeedback, then why not? Is anyone studying this? I’d love your thoughts and those of others and I thank you for sharing your wisdom, your candor and time.
Oh my dear Jan, if I understand what you are proposing, then I think what you are hoping to do is some sort of blending between videogames and your post-death life? Well, if I understand what it is that you’re thinking about, to be perfectly frank, the you who has transitioned, is living in the afterlife, has rejoined her greater mind, been through a life-review, had a party, is living among her eternal friends, and now has a vast world of remembered and glorious new wonders to enjoy, is extremely unlikely to care one jot about a pathetic little avatar in some earth-based videogame!
Bingo: ” …the you who has transitioned, is living in the afterlife, has rejoined her greater mind, been through a life-review, had a party, is living among her eternal friends, and now has a vast world of remembered and glorious new wonders to enjoy, is extremely unlikely to care one jot about a pathetic little avatar in some earth-based videogame! “
Hi Roberta. In thinking about this question of the connection between mathematics and the nature of reality, my eyes want to cross, because like you, and many other people, I don’t particularly enjoy math, and like you never got much farther than algebra II, but where my mind keeps wanting to go is to something almost universally loved, and that is music. There is something very mathematical about music, but also something very spiritual, and some of the highest levels of ecstasy I have reached were induced by music. I can’t put my finger on it, not being a mathematician, but music seems to hold some sort of key to our understanding of the world, and many of the ancients, like Pythagoras, felt the same way. We seek harmony over discordance in music, just as we seek ever more perfect love, or unity (the “Harmony of the Spheres?”)
over fear, or separation, and the process of getting back to that Love with a capital L is as endlessly creative as music can be. Is that why this universe seems to ever expand? Are those higher spiritual levels beyond this 5% or so that we perceive as physical reality like higher musical octaves, or maybe ever more complex chords encompassing the more limited notes of the lower levels, so that as “musicians” going up the “scales” we learn to master ever more complex compositions? Its all just vibration after all I guess, as you have said. Who knows, I’m just doodling. 😁
Hi Roberta, g’day everyone,
I have a sense that there is the holding, dark, etheric, creative-potential, ‘space.’ Then there is the electric, bright, creative ‘firework’ of thought-feeling and the great love-effort of bringing into being; of creation, as it were.
It is a sense of the blessed, holding dark and the sudden, piercing spark of light. It is the infinite rest and the explosive movement that is everywhere at once. One could say it is the silence and the perfect, clear, Single note breaking into the symphonic: It is the moment of quiet mind and the springing forth of a thought. It’s rest and movement; blank paper and the scrawl of a single number or letter.
In a world of continuous creation, both the potential and the kinetic are found in a dance that is observable and participatory.
Roberta, I was thinking of a thousand devotional heart-minds bringing forth their Mother Mary of light atop the church at night. A thousand Hindus devotees bringing forth trickling milk from their altar at worship. Do they know that their heart-minds did this? Out of the creative holding space, the expression of their own love took form – arising out of the Infinite Love that underpins all.
So… if a mother newly freed into the Afterlife deeply wishes to speak to her grieving daughter on earth, through a computer-generated avatar in the game Second Life she may well be able to do so. In a creative, mind-based reality of love, what is impossible? 😉
Efrem: This is a good thought. Things that we take for granted today were once considered impossible, and I don’t see any reason why spirituality and technology can’t co-exist. Dr. Gary Schwartz and others are currently working on what they call a Soul Phone to talk to those who have “died”, and Sonia Rinaldi in So. America has succeeded in contacting loved ones for people, and even she says she couldn’t have done this without her computer and special software. (She is not a medium) , This is all in its infancy right now, so who knows where it will take us in years to come.
Hey Lola 👋
Good to chat to you my dear. Hope life is treating you better in 2022. 😊
I agree with your thinking; what was thought impossible yesterday may indeed be possible today or tomorrow. And I’ve come to wonder if religion will evolve into true spirituality, while science will morph into meta-science in the not too distant future. Who knows? Maybe we will have one vast ‘science of reality’ that includes all dimensions, from the material to pure Consciousness. Well, I can dream I guess. 😉
I have looked into the Soul Phone invention team and Sonia Rinaldi’s work. It is all quite breathtaking actually. I don’t know, but perhaps their successes have something to do with ‘endurance’ and the higher afterlife souls working with Dr Schwartz and Sonia Rinaldi. It seems that the human scientists have been working on their discoveries for many years. They haven’t walked away and done something else instead… Is it this endurance, this longevity of connection to the other side, that facilitates their breakthroughs? In other words, do such scientists need to build the connection with the elevated souls in the afterlife over time? Then both human scientists and afterlife scientists can work at discovery from both ends of their ‘bridge’ to bring it to fruition. Just a thought..
Yes Lola, as you say: who knows where it will take us in years to come?!
Hi Efrem: Cooperation between elevated souls and the researchers is of the utmost importance. Both Rinaldi and Schwartz (especially Schwartz) acknowledge this, so it is very reasonable to assume that discovery will come “from both ends of their bridge,” just as you mentioned, with technology being the medium for this to happen.
Hi Lola 👋
I guess you are right; cooperation between elevated souls and researchers on earth, does seem to be of the “utmost importance.” (You have obviously studied this emergent area of discovery before.)
Here’s the rub –
Can you imagine the scientific institution deigning to work with higher beings that they cannot see and control?Can you imagine such dogmatists even admitting the possibility of sentient beings beyond the material world?
Hence the real proof of life beyond death, belongs to those brave scientists on the fringes of the prevailing establishment or beyond them…
Does not real change often come from the fringes of society?
Hi Jan Lyon. Mikey Morgan ( in his book “Flying High in Spirit …” ) says when those who have transitioned draw closer to this dimension they can especially influence electronics. Now who knows what avatars will be like when you go. But, if even after what Roberta explained, you still want to interact with those still here, your idea sounds good to me.
Dear Roberta and all the others,
mathematics wasn‘t difficult for me in school, but I didn‘t like it very much. I think, we just use it to describe reality as we use words to do so. But I always thought as Max Planck said: „Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are a part of the mystery that we are trying to solve.“
I had a profound NDE at the age of 5 and in this experience all my questions were answered. I was given a deep understanding of everything, the universe, life, the reason and the meaning…. And it seemed to me so complex and at the same time so simple and logical, although I was a small child.
Unfortunately I wasn‘t allowed (or not able?) to take very much of these answers and explanations with me when I came back into my body besides that feeling, that we all will get the answers to everything when we will leave this world.
Later on, as a teenager in the year 1982, I watched the tv-series „The hitchhiker‘s guide to the galaxy“ in Germany, which became a cinema movie in 2005. The content seemed a little bit odd to me, but in the end I laughed out loud, when the computer finally put out the answer to the question for the meaning of life, existence and the universe and the answer was a simple „42“!
I thank you so much, dear Roberta, for your great and very understandable explanations of all those topics and the connection to physics.
I wonder if transitioned spirits are able or allowed to give us some answers to these profound questions? Or may be we are not supposed to know everything while we are in our bodies because this could keep us from fulfilling our purpose on earth?
Efrem and Ray: Scientists working with afterlife souls is impossible to imagine at this juncture. Just the suggestion of it would bring gales of laughter. Ray: I do recall Mikey Morgan’s comment about the ability of spirits to effect electronics, and he isn’t the only one to have said this, so I think they rather like to “mess” with our devices.