Page 2 of 2

Re: HUMAN EXISTENCE IS A NESTED SYSTEM OF REACTIONS

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2025 12:12 am
by Eodnhoj7
popeye1945 wrote: Fri Oct 10, 2025 10:26 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Oct 10, 2025 3:41 pm
popeye1945 wrote: Fri Oct 10, 2025 12:27 am

Time is not the source of joy, and it's debatable as to whether time exists. The perception of time is relative to a subject's speed, I believe. I could be wrong, but I suspect so. To be detached from time is to be focused and unaware of time, a restful place to be. I think the rest needs to be worked on for clarity; it doesn't sound reasonable as is.
Here is food for thought.

Distinctions exist because of change, change exists because of time. The distinctions of joy and sorrow require time.

Thoughts?
Again, what are the distinctions you need to compare to have distinctions? These claims you jump into; you need to be able to back up, it's not enough to announce as if they were fact statements.
Forms, limits, boundaries...these terms can be used synonymously.

To be formally accurate, a distinction can be expressed as "A is..." or "A->".

Re: HUMAN EXISTENCE IS A NESTED SYSTEM OF REACTIONS

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2025 1:25 am
by popeye1945
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Oct 11, 2025 12:12 am
popeye1945 wrote: Fri Oct 10, 2025 10:26 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Oct 10, 2025 3:41 pm

Here is food for thought.

Distinctions exist because of change, change exists because of time. The distinctions of joy and sorrow require time.

Thoughts?
Again, what are the distinctions you need to compare to have distinctions? These claims you jump into; you need to be able to back up, it's not enough to announce as if they were fact statements.
Forms, limits, boundaries...these terms can be used synonymously.

To be formally accurate, a distinction can be expressed as "A is..." or "A->".
Perhaps you are correct when speaking to someone who is coming from the same place, drawing their rationale from the same formal system; it makes little sense to those not engaged in that system. You need to get into a dialogue with others using the same language.

Re: HUMAN EXISTENCE IS A NESTED SYSTEM OF REACTIONS

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2025 1:48 am
by Eodnhoj7
popeye1945 wrote: Sat Oct 11, 2025 1:25 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Oct 11, 2025 12:12 am
popeye1945 wrote: Fri Oct 10, 2025 10:26 pm

Again, what are the distinctions you need to compare to have distinctions? These claims you jump into; you need to be able to back up, it's not enough to announce as if they were fact statements.
Forms, limits, boundaries...these terms can be used synonymously.

To be formally accurate, a distinction can be expressed as "A is..." or "A->".
Perhaps you are correct when speaking to someone who is coming from the same place, drawing their rationale from the same formal system; it makes little sense to those not engaged in that system. You need to get into a dialogue with others using the same language.
Then don't use the formal systems.

"Distinction", as a word, can be viewed as synonymous to the words "limit", "boundary" or "form".



1. Limits exist because of change, change exists because of time. The limits of joy and sorrow require time.

2. Boundaries exist because of change, change exists because of time. The boundaries of joy and sorrow require time.

3. Forms exist because of change, change exists because of time. The forms of joy and sorrow require time.



Help at all? Any of the above is correct.

Re: HUMAN EXISTENCE IS A NESTED SYSTEM OF REACTIONS

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2025 11:06 am
by popeye1945
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Oct 11, 2025 1:48 am
popeye1945 wrote: Sat Oct 11, 2025 1:25 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Oct 11, 2025 12:12 am

Forms, limits, boundaries...these terms can be used synonymously.

To be formally accurate, a distinction can be expressed as "A is..." or "A->".
Perhaps you are correct when speaking to someone who is coming from the same place, drawing their rationale from the same formal system; it makes little sense to those not engaged in that system. You need to get into a dialogue with others using the same language.
Then don't use the formal systems.

"Distinction", as a word, can be viewed as synonymous with the words "limit", "boundary" or "form".
This is a dictionary particular to the system you're working with-- yes? Nothing wrong with that, but it should be known that it uses its own terminology.

1. Limits exist because of change; change exists because of time. The limits of joy and sorrow require time.
2. Boundaries exist because of change, change exists because of time. The boundaries of joy and sorrow require time.
3. Forms exist because of change, and change exists because of time. The forms of joy and sorrow require time. [/quote]

1. How do limits exist because of change? How does change exist because of time? Yes, it is a common thought that all things occur in time
2. How do boundaries exist because of change? How does change exist because of time? Again, common knowledge all things occur in time
3. How do forms exist because of change? How does change exist because of time? Again, common knowledge.

Help at all? Any of the above is correct.
[/quote]

Re: HUMAN EXISTENCE IS A NESTED SYSTEM OF REACTIONS

Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2025 11:31 pm
by Eodnhoj7
popeye1945 wrote: Sat Oct 11, 2025 11:06 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Oct 11, 2025 1:48 am
popeye1945 wrote: Sat Oct 11, 2025 1:25 am

Perhaps you are correct when speaking to someone who is coming from the same place, drawing their rationale from the same formal system; it makes little sense to those not engaged in that system. You need to get into a dialogue with others using the same language.
Then don't use the formal systems.

"Distinction", as a word, can be viewed as synonymous with the words "limit", "boundary" or "form".
This is a dictionary particular to the system you're working with-- yes? Nothing wrong with that, but it should be known that it uses its own terminology.

1. Limits exist because of change; change exists because of time. The limits of joy and sorrow require time.
2. Boundaries exist because of change, change exists because of time. The boundaries of joy and sorrow require time.
3. Forms exist because of change, and change exists because of time. The forms of joy and sorrow require time.

1. How do limits exist because of change? How does change exist because of time? Yes, it is a common thought that all things occur in time
2. How do boundaries exist because of change? How does change exist because of time? Again, common knowledge all things occur in time
3. How do forms exist because of change? How does change exist because of time? Again, common knowledge.

Help at all? Any of the above is correct.
[/quote]
[/quote]

No, because limits, boundaries and forms connect and separate, hence they are distinctions.

The movement of attention from one thing to another, or the transformation of one thing into another, all of which occur by time, necessitates that change is necessary for a thing to be distinct for without change in attention or change in the thing there ceases to be things as there ceases to be comparison.

We know a thing for what it is and what it is not, this comparison occurs as the change through time itself.

Re: HUMAN EXISTENCE IS A NESTED SYSTEM OF REACTIONS

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2025 1:47 am
by popeye1945
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sun Oct 12, 2025 11:31 pm
popeye1945 wrote: Sat Oct 11, 2025 11:06 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Oct 11, 2025 1:48 am

Then don't use the formal systems.

"Distinction", as a word, can be viewed as synonymous with the words "limit", "boundary" or "form".
This is a dictionary particular to the system you're working with-- yes? Nothing wrong with that, but it should be known that it uses its own terminology.

1. Limits exist because of change; change exists because of time. The limits of joy and sorrow require time.
2. Boundaries exist because of change, change exists because of time. The boundaries of joy and sorrow require time.
3. Forms exist because of change, and change exists because of time. The forms of joy and sorrow require time.

1. How do limits exist because of change? How does change exist because of time? Yes, it is a common thought that all things occur in time
2. How do boundaries exist because of change? How does change exist because of time? Again, common knowledge all things occur in time
3. How do forms exist because of change? How does change exist because of time? Again, common knowledge.

Help at all? Any of the above is correct.
[/quote]

No, because limits, boundaries and forms connect and separate, hence they are distinctions.

The movement of attention from one thing to another, or the transformation of one thing into another, all of which occur by time, necessitates that change is necessary for a thing to be distinct for without change in attention or change in the thing there ceases to be things as there ceases to be comparison.

We know a thing for what it is and what it is not, this comparison occurs as the change through time itself.
[/quote]

Time is context rather than cause, the playing field upon which the game of change occurs; the players come and go, the field remains. One needs to ask oneself, given that all meaning, including time, is subjective knowledge, does it actually exist? Because something is experienced does not mean it is what is experienced. You see color and you hear sound, neither of which exists in and of itself, but is only as subjective experience. You're prompting me to think a little deeply; let's take one premise at a time.

Re: HUMAN EXISTENCE IS A NESTED SYSTEM OF REACTIONS

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2025 9:08 pm
by Eodnhoj7
popeye1945 wrote: Mon Oct 13, 2025 1:47 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sun Oct 12, 2025 11:31 pm
popeye1945 wrote: Sat Oct 11, 2025 11:06 am

This is a dictionary particular to the system you're working with-- yes? Nothing wrong with that, but it should be known that it uses its own terminology.

1. Limits exist because of change; change exists because of time. The limits of joy and sorrow require time.
2. Boundaries exist because of change, change exists because of time. The boundaries of joy and sorrow require time.
3. Forms exist because of change, and change exists because of time. The forms of joy and sorrow require time.

1. How do limits exist because of change? How does change exist because of time? Yes, it is a common thought that all things occur in time
2. How do boundaries exist because of change? How does change exist because of time? Again, common knowledge all things occur in time
3. How do forms exist because of change? How does change exist because of time? Again, common knowledge.

Help at all? Any of the above is correct.
No, because limits, boundaries and forms connect and separate, hence they are distinctions.

The movement of attention from one thing to another, or the transformation of one thing into another, all of which occur by time, necessitates that change is necessary for a thing to be distinct for without change in attention or change in the thing there ceases to be things as there ceases to be comparison.

We know a thing for what it is and what it is not, this comparison occurs as the change through time itself.
[/quote]

Time is context rather than cause, the playing field upon which the game of change occurs; the players come and go, the field remains. One needs to ask oneself, given that all meaning, including time, is subjective knowledge, does it actually exist? Because something is experienced does not mean it is what is experienced. You see color and you hear sound, neither of which exists in and of itself, but is only as subjective experience. You're prompting me to think a little deeply; let's take one premise at a time.
[/quote]

Okay, cool.

Time is how cause occurs, without time change ceases and change requires cause thus time is an expression of causality.

Now time can expand and contract but this does not necessitate it ceases.

Dually the expansion can contraction of one dimension of time necessitates a dimension of time beyond it by which the change in time occurs as distinct.

Change observes everpresent potentiality, a void by which is absolute given potentiality permeates all things.

Re: HUMAN EXISTENCE IS A NESTED SYSTEM OF REACTIONS

Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2025 12:53 am
by popeye1945
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Oct 13, 2025 9:08 pm
popeye1945 wrote: Mon Oct 13, 2025 1:47 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sun Oct 12, 2025 11:31 pm

1. How do limits exist because of change? How does change exist because of time? Yes, it is a common thought that all things occur in time
2. How do boundaries exist because of change? How does change exist because of time? Again, common knowledge all things occur in time
3. How do forms exist because of change? How does change exist because of time? Again, common knowledge.

Help at all? Any of the above is correct.
No, because limits, boundaries and forms connect and separate, hence they are distinctions.

The movement of attention from one thing to another, or the transformation of one thing into another, all of which occur by time, necessitates that change is necessary for a thing to be distinct for without change in attention or change in the thing there ceases to be things as there ceases to be comparison.

We know a thing for what it is and what it is not, this comparison occurs as the change through time itself.
Time is context rather than cause, the playing field upon which the game of change occurs; the players come and go, the field remains. One needs to ask oneself, given that all meaning, including time, is subjective knowledge, does it actually exist? Because something is experienced does not mean it is what is experienced. You see color and you hear sound, neither of which exists in and of itself, but is only as subjective experience. You're prompting me to think a little deeply; let's take one premise at a time.
[/quote]

Okay, cool.

Time is how cause occurs, without time change ceases and change requires cause thus, time is an expression of causality.
Now time can expand and contract, but this does not necessitate it ceases. Dually, the expansion can contraction of one dimension of time necessitates a dimension of time beyond it by which the change in time occurs as distinct.
Change observes ever-present potentiality, a void by which is absolute given potentiality that permeates all things.
[/quote]

Can we agree that time is the field, not the cause, and that all things occur in time? Can we agree that being in and of itself is a cause to all other beings? Time is local, depending upon a given local context of the cosmos. Perhaps local time is not isolated; therefore, it may be influenced by the greater whole of the cosmos. Things seem to be governed by the larger, less temporal, and are what they tend to adapt to. How on Earth can you make a statement like, "Change observes the ever-present potentiality, so you are saying change is conscious of its surroundings. Listing a bunch of proclamations, I have no idea how this is to turn into a discussion. So, potentiality is the void and is the absolute given the potentiality of all things . You need to connect all this in a meaningful way. As being in and of itself, as cause is, of course, potentiality.

Re: HUMAN EXISTENCE IS A NESTED SYSTEM OF REACTIONS

Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2025 4:31 am
by Eodnhoj7
popeye1945 wrote: Tue Oct 14, 2025 12:53 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Oct 13, 2025 9:08 pm
popeye1945 wrote: Mon Oct 13, 2025 1:47 am
No, because limits, boundaries and forms connect and separate, hence they are distinctions.

The movement of attention from one thing to another, or the transformation of one thing into another, all of which occur by time, necessitates that change is necessary for a thing to be distinct for without change in attention or change in the thing there ceases to be things as there ceases to be comparison.

We know a thing for what it is and what it is not, this comparison occurs as the change through time itself.
Time is context rather than cause, the playing field upon which the game of change occurs; the players come and go, the field remains. One needs to ask oneself, given that all meaning, including time, is subjective knowledge, does it actually exist? Because something is experienced does not mean it is what is experienced. You see color and you hear sound, neither of which exists in and of itself, but is only as subjective experience. You're prompting me to think a little deeply; let's take one premise at a time.
Okay, cool.

Time is how cause occurs, without time change ceases and change requires cause thus, time is an expression of causality.
Now time can expand and contract, but this does not necessitate it ceases. Dually, the expansion can contraction of one dimension of time necessitates a dimension of time beyond it by which the change in time occurs as distinct.
Change observes ever-present potentiality, a void by which is absolute given potentiality that permeates all things.
[/quote]

Can we agree that time is the field, not the cause, and that all things occur in time? Can we agree that being in and of itself is a cause to all other beings? Time is local, depending upon a given local context of the cosmos. Perhaps local time is not isolated; therefore, it may be influenced by the greater whole of the cosmos. Things seem to be governed by the larger, less temporal, and are what they tend to adapt to. How on Earth can you make a statement like, "Change observes the ever-present potentiality, so you are saying change is conscious of its surroundings. Listing a bunch of proclamations, I have no idea how this is to turn into a discussion. So, potentiality is the void and is the absolute given the potentiality of all things . You need to connect all this in a meaningful way. As being in and of itself, as cause is, of course, potentiality.
[/quote]

From that angle, assuming that is the case:

If time is interwoven with being and being is the cause of being then time is the cause of being as time is inseperable from being.


Anyhow:

Change requires everpresent potentiality otherwise it ceases for their is no potential for a thing to change. Without change a thing ceases to be for it ceases to be distinct. Because change is constant then potentiality is constant. If all things change then potentiality, void, underlies all things for otherwise change ceases.

Potentiality, void, is ever-present cause for all things are actualized from potentiality.

Re: HUMAN EXISTENCE IS A NESTED SYSTEM OF REACTIONS

Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2025 6:08 am
by popeye1945
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Oct 14, 2025 4:31 am
popeye1945 wrote: Tue Oct 14, 2025 12:53 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Oct 13, 2025 9:08 pm

No, because limits, boundaries and forms connect and separate, hence they are distinctions.

The movement of attention from one thing to another, or the transformation of one thing into another, all of which occur by time, necessitates that change is necessary for a thing to be distinct for without change in attention or change in the thing there ceases to be things as there ceases to be comparison.

We know a thing for what it is and what it is not, this comparison occurs as the change through time itself.
Time is context rather than cause, the playing field upon which the game of change occurs; the players come and go, the field remains. One needs to ask oneself, given that all meaning, including time, is subjective knowledge, does it actually exist? Because something is experienced does not mean it is what is experienced. You see color and you hear sound, neither of which exists in and of itself, but is only as subjective experience. You're prompting me to think a little deeply; let's take one premise at a time.
Okay, cool.

Time is how cause occurs, without time change ceases and change requires cause thus, time is an expression of causality.
Now time can expand and contract, but this does not necessitate it ceases. Dually, the expansion can contraction of one dimension of time necessitates a dimension of time beyond it by which the change in time occurs as distinct.
Change observes ever-present potentiality, a void by which is absolute given potentiality that permeates all things.
Can we agree that time is the field, not the cause, and that all things occur in time? Can we agree that being in and of itself is a cause to all other beings? Time is local, depending upon a given local context of the cosmos. Perhaps local time is not isolated; therefore, it may be influenced by the greater whole of the cosmos. Things seem to be governed by the larger, less temporal, and are what they tend to adapt to. How on Earth can you make a statement like, "Change observes the ever-present potentiality, so you are saying change is conscious of its surroundings. Listing a bunch of proclamations, I have no idea how this is to turn into a discussion. So, potentiality is the void and is the absolute given the potentiality of all things . You need to connect all this in a meaningful way. As being in and of itself, as cause is, of course, potentiality.
[/quote]

From that angle, assuming that is the case:
If time is interwoven with being and being is the cause of being then time is the cause of being as time is inseparable from being.
Anyhow:
Change requires everpresent potentiality otherwise it ceases for their is no potential for a thing to change. Without change a thing ceases to be for it ceases to be distinct. Because change is constant then potentiality is constant. If all things change then potentiality, void, underlies all things for otherwise change ceases. Potentiality, void, is ever-present cause for all things are actualized from potentiality.
[/quote]

I think the statement that there is no such thing as independent existence pretty much covers the field. When the existence of something is dependent upon its adapting to a higher order, a larger manifestation, it cannot be said to be purely distinct. Adaptation is survival; adaptation is belonging. Reaction/adaptation to the larger realm is the means of belonging to a greater whole. I would say potential is constant, but certainly not a void, void implying nothing, not even energy. Yes, the universe seems to be the caldron of creation, an endless energy source or potential.

Re: HUMAN EXISTENCE IS A NESTED SYSTEM OF REACTIONS

Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2025 3:48 am
by Eodnhoj7
popeye1945 wrote: Tue Oct 14, 2025 6:08 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Oct 14, 2025 4:31 am
popeye1945 wrote: Tue Oct 14, 2025 12:53 am

Time is context rather than cause, the playing field upon which the game of change occurs; the players come and go, the field remains. One needs to ask oneself, given that all meaning, including time, is subjective knowledge, does it actually exist? Because something is experienced does not mean it is what is experienced. You see color and you hear sound, neither of which exists in and of itself, but is only as subjective experience. You're prompting me to think a little deeply; let's take one premise at a time.
Okay, cool.

Time is how cause occurs, without time change ceases and change requires cause thus, time is an expression of causality.
Now time can expand and contract, but this does not necessitate it ceases. Dually, the expansion can contraction of one dimension of time necessitates a dimension of time beyond it by which the change in time occurs as distinct.
Change observes ever-present potentiality, a void by which is absolute given potentiality that permeates all things.
Can we agree that time is the field, not the cause, and that all things occur in time? Can we agree that being in and of itself is a cause to all other beings? Time is local, depending upon a given local context of the cosmos. Perhaps local time is not isolated; therefore, it may be influenced by the greater whole of the cosmos. Things seem to be governed by the larger, less temporal, and are what they tend to adapt to. How on Earth can you make a statement like, "Change observes the ever-present potentiality, so you are saying change is conscious of its surroundings. Listing a bunch of proclamations, I have no idea how this is to turn into a discussion. So, potentiality is the void and is the absolute given the potentiality of all things . You need to connect all this in a meaningful way. As being in and of itself, as cause is, of course, potentiality.
From that angle, assuming that is the case:
If time is interwoven with being and being is the cause of being then time is the cause of being as time is inseparable from being.
Anyhow:
Change requires everpresent potentiality otherwise it ceases for their is no potential for a thing to change. Without change a thing ceases to be for it ceases to be distinct. Because change is constant then potentiality is constant. If all things change then potentiality, void, underlies all things for otherwise change ceases. Potentiality, void, is ever-present cause for all things are actualized from potentiality.
[/quote]

I think the statement that there is no such thing as independent existence pretty much covers the field. When the existence of something is dependent upon its adapting to a higher order, a larger manifestation, it cannot be said to be purely distinct. Adaptation is survival; adaptation is belonging. Reaction/adaptation to the larger realm is the means of belonging to a greater whole. I would say potential is constant, but certainly not a void, void implying nothing, not even energy. Yes, the universe seems to be the caldron of creation, an endless energy source or potential.
[/quote]

Void is the absence of things.

It is relative as the absence of x, y, and z.

It is absolute as the potential of all existence.

Time as a field is one way of conceiving time but this field is nested. The time according to the relation of planets x and y is different than the time by the relation of particles x and y. Time is the ratio of movements relative to another ratio of movements. The set of movements we use as a fixed foundation to measure other movements determines our conception of time.

Planets x and y versus particles x and y are two different fields. They exist in relationship but when localized produce there own framework of time.

Re: HUMAN EXISTENCE IS A NESTED SYSTEM OF REACTIONS

Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2025 5:54 am
by popeye1945
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Oct 15, 2025 3:48 am
popeye1945 wrote: Tue Oct 14, 2025 6:08 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Oct 14, 2025 4:31 am

Okay, cool.

Time is how cause occurs, without time change ceases and change requires cause thus, time is an expression of causality.
Now time can expand and contract, but this does not necessitate it ceases. Dually, the expansion can contraction of one dimension of time necessitates a dimension of time beyond it by which the change in time occurs as distinct.
Change observes ever-present potentiality, a void by which is absolute given potentiality that permeates all things.
Can we agree that time is the field, not the cause, and that all things occur in time? Can we agree that being in and of itself is a cause to all other beings? Time is local, depending upon a given local context of the cosmos. Perhaps local time is not isolated; therefore, it may be influenced by the greater whole of the cosmos. Things seem to be governed by the larger, less temporal, and are what they tend to adapt to. How on Earth can you make a statement like, "Change observes the ever-present potentiality, so you are saying change is conscious of its surroundings. Listing a bunch of proclamations, I have no idea how this is to turn into a discussion. So, potentiality is the void and is the absolute given the potentiality of all things . You need to connect all this in a meaningful way. As being in and of itself, as cause is, of course, potentiality.
From that angle, assuming that is the case:
If time is interwoven with being and being is the cause of being then time is the cause of being as time is inseparable from being.
Time is the field upon which the game of change plays out. Being is not the cause of being, but all being interacts through a cycle of cause and reaction, reaction being the mode of belonging to the whole. Time is not the cause of change, just as a football field is not the cause of a football game.


Anyhow:
Change requires ever-present potentiality; otherwise, it ceases for there is no potential for a thing to change. Without change, a thing ceases to be for it ceases to be distinct. Because change is constant then potentiality is constant. If all things change, then potentiality, void, underlies all things, for otherwise change ceases. Potentiality, void, is ever-present cause for all things are actualized from potentiality.
[/quote]

All is energy frequency, and vibration; energy cannot be created or destroyed thus it is the unlimited potential for all things. The field of energy is the source/potential as ultimate reality, which brings forth the world of things, apparent reality to subjective consciousness. Energy underlies all things. Energy is ever-present in and of itself and in various forms

I think the statement that there is no such thing as independent existence pretty much covers the field. When the existence of something is dependent upon its adapting to a higher order, a larger manifestation, it cannot be said to be purely distinct. Adaptation is survival; adaptation is belonging. Reaction/adaptation to the larger realm is the means of belonging to a greater whole. I would say potential is constant, but certainly not a void, void implying nothing, not even energy. Yes, the universe seems to be the caldron of creation, an endless energy source or potential.
[/quote]

Void is the absence of things. It is relative as the absence of x, y, and z. It is absolute as the potential of all existence. [/quote]

All is energy.

Time as a field is one way of conceiving time but this field is nested. The time according to the relation of planets x and y is different than the time by the relation of particles x and y. Time is the ratio of movements relative to another ratio of movements. The set of movements we use as a fixed foundation to measure other movements determines our conception of time.
Planets x and y versus particles x and y are two different fields. They exist in a relationship, but when localized produce their own framework of time. [/quote]

Yes, time is local.

Re: HUMAN EXISTENCE IS A NESTED SYSTEM OF REACTIONS

Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2025 3:16 am
by Eodnhoj7
popeye1945 wrote: Wed Oct 15, 2025 5:54 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Oct 15, 2025 3:48 am
popeye1945 wrote: Tue Oct 14, 2025 6:08 am

Can we agree that time is the field, not the cause, and that all things occur in time? Can we agree that being in and of itself is a cause to all other beings? Time is local, depending upon a given local context of the cosmos. Perhaps local time is not isolated; therefore, it may be influenced by the greater whole of the cosmos. Things seem to be governed by the larger, less temporal, and are what they tend to adapt to. How on Earth can you make a statement like, "Change observes the ever-present potentiality, so you are saying change is conscious of its surroundings. Listing a bunch of proclamations, I have no idea how this is to turn into a discussion. So, potentiality is the void and is the absolute given the potentiality of all things . You need to connect all this in a meaningful way. As being in and of itself, as cause is, of course, potentiality.
From that angle, assuming that is the case:
If time is interwoven with being and being is the cause of being then time is the cause of being as time is inseparable from being.
Time is the field upon which the game of change plays out. Being is not the cause of being, but all being interacts through a cycle of cause and reaction, reaction being the mode of belonging to the whole. Time is not the cause of change, just as a football field is not the cause of a football game.


Anyhow:
Change requires ever-present potentiality; otherwise, it ceases for there is no potential for a thing to change. Without change, a thing ceases to be for it ceases to be distinct. Because change is constant then potentiality is constant. If all things change, then potentiality, void, underlies all things, for otherwise change ceases. Potentiality, void, is ever-present cause for all things are actualized from potentiality.
All is energy frequency, and vibration; energy cannot be created or destroyed thus it is the unlimited potential for all things. The field of energy is the source/potential as ultimate reality, which brings forth the world of things, apparent reality to subjective consciousness. Energy underlies all things. Energy is ever-present in and of itself and in various forms

I think the statement that there is no such thing as independent existence pretty much covers the field. When the existence of something is dependent upon its adapting to a higher order, a larger manifestation, it cannot be said to be purely distinct. Adaptation is survival; adaptation is belonging. Reaction/adaptation to the larger realm is the means of belonging to a greater whole. I would say potential is constant, but certainly not a void, void implying nothing, not even energy. Yes, the universe seems to be the caldron of creation, an endless energy source or potential.
[/quote]

Void is the absence of things. It is relative as the absence of x, y, and z. It is absolute as the potential of all existence. [/quote]

All is energy.

Time as a field is one way of conceiving time but this field is nested. The time according to the relation of planets x and y is different than the time by the relation of particles x and y. Time is the ratio of movements relative to another ratio of movements. The set of movements we use as a fixed foundation to measure other movements determines our conception of time.
Planets x and y versus particles x and y are two different fields. They exist in a relationship, but when localized produce their own framework of time. [/quote]

Yes, time is local.
[/quote]

Energy as frequency is akin to the alternation of distinctions in and out of reality. Pure energy is the void by degree of the potential it allows for distinctions to occur. What we understand of frequency is similar to recursion, both are cycles.

Energy is a distinction, we assume it is axiomatic but it is not. What is axiomatic is a distinction by degree of all Axioms being distinctions and an axiom as a distinction.

Yes, I see where you are going with "everything is energy" but energy is not axiomatic, it is a distinct means of conceptualizing reality but this concept is often not questioned and if questioned is obscure in answer.

Now if I question "distinction" the question itself is answer by its own occurence as a distinction. Can distinction be defined further? Yes, but these would be further distinctions.


Time as local requires time as self referencing, one locality of time exists in another, so on and so forth. It is a distinction of 'ocurring change'...and change occurs within change.

Re: HUMAN EXISTENCE IS A NESTED SYSTEM OF REACTIONS

Posted: Sat Oct 18, 2025 12:48 am
by popeye1945
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Thu Oct 16, 2025 3:16 am
popeye1945 wrote: Wed Oct 15, 2025 5:54 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Oct 15, 2025 3:48 am

From that angle, assuming that is the case:
If time is interwoven with being and being is the cause of being then time is the cause of being as time is inseparable from being.
Time is the field upon which the game of change plays out. Being is not the cause of being, but all being interacts through a cycle of cause and reaction, reaction being the mode of belonging to the whole. Time is not the cause of change, just as a football field is not the cause of a football game.


Anyhow:
Change requires ever-present potentiality; otherwise, it ceases for there is no potential for a thing to change. Without change, a thing ceases to be for it ceases to be distinct. Because change is constant then potentiality is constant. If all things change, then potentiality, void, underlies all things, for otherwise change ceases. Potentiality, void, is ever-present cause for all things are actualized from potentiality.
All is energy frequency, and vibration; energy cannot be created or destroyed thus it is the unlimited potential for all things. The field of energy is the source/potential as ultimate reality, which brings forth the world of things, apparent reality to subjective consciousness. Energy underlies all things. Energy is ever-present in and of itself and in various forms

I think the statement that there is no such thing as independent existence pretty much covers the field. When the existence of something is dependent upon its adapting to a higher order, a larger manifestation, it cannot be said to be purely distinct. Adaptation is survival; adaptation is belonging. Reaction/adaptation to the larger realm is the means of belonging to a greater whole. I would say potential is constant, but certainly not a void, void implying nothing, not even energy. Yes, the universe seems to be the caldron of creation, an endless energy source or potential.
Void is the absence of things. It is relative as the absence of x, y, and z. It is absolute as the potential of all existence. [/quote]

All is energy.

Time as a field is one way of conceiving time but this field is nested. The time according to the relation of planets x and y is different than the time by the relation of particles x and y. Time is the ratio of movements relative to another ratio of movements. The set of movements we use as a fixed foundation to measure other movements determines our conception of time.
Planets x and y versus particles x and y are two different fields. They exist in a relationship, but when localized produce their own framework of time. [/quote]

Yes, time is local.
[/quote]

Energy as frequency is akin to the alternation of distinctions in and out of reality. Pure energy is the void by the degree of the potential it allows for distinctions to occur. What we understand of frequency is similar to recursion; both are cycles.
Energy is a distinction; we assume it is axiomatic, but it is not. What is axiomatic is a distinction by degree of all Axioms being distinctions and an axiom as a distinction. [/quote]

That is a very bold statement; there must be a great many possible frequencies, and I am assuming when you speak of in and out of reality, you are referring to apparent reality? So, your distinctions are necessarily things. Frequency is a pattern, as an arrangement repeated. Are you inferring a feedback loop from the manifested thing/distinction to the source of the frequency? Ok, so energy is not a thing. What is it distinct from? Sorry, don't mean to frustrate you, but all these statements and proclamations do fit into a flowing process somehow, yes?

Yes, I see where you are going with "everything is energy," but energy is not axiomatic; it is a distinct means of conceptualizing reality, but this concept is often not questioned, and if questioned, is obscure in answer. [/quote]

Agreed.

Now, if I question "distinction," the question itself is answered by its own occurrence as a distinction. Can distinction be defined further? Yes, but these would be further distinctions. [/quote]

So, absolutely everything is a distinction, material and immaterial? As long as it has a cognitive effect?


Time as local requires time as self-referencing; one locality of time exists in another, so on and so forth. It is a distinction of 'occurring change'...and change occurs within change.
[/quote]

Well, you're going to have to labour, I think, to make me understand the above.

Re: HUMAN EXISTENCE IS A NESTED SYSTEM OF REACTIONS

Posted: Sat Oct 18, 2025 3:25 am
by Eodnhoj7
popeye1945 wrote: Sat Oct 18, 2025 12:48 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Thu Oct 16, 2025 3:16 am
popeye1945 wrote: Wed Oct 15, 2025 5:54 am

Time is the field upon which the game of change plays out. Being is not the cause of being, but all being interacts through a cycle of cause and reaction, reaction being the mode of belonging to the whole. Time is not the cause of change, just as a football field is not the cause of a football game.


Anyhow:
Change requires ever-present potentiality; otherwise, it ceases for there is no potential for a thing to change. Without change, a thing ceases to be for it ceases to be distinct. Because change is constant then potentiality is constant. If all things change, then potentiality, void, underlies all things, for otherwise change ceases. Potentiality, void, is ever-present cause for all things are actualized from potentiality.
All is energy frequency, and vibration; energy cannot be created or destroyed thus it is the unlimited potential for all things. The field of energy is the source/potential as ultimate reality, which brings forth the world of things, apparent reality to subjective consciousness. Energy underlies all things. Energy is ever-present in and of itself and in various forms

I think the statement that there is no such thing as independent existence pretty much covers the field. When the existence of something is dependent upon its adapting to a higher order, a larger manifestation, it cannot be said to be purely distinct. Adaptation is survival; adaptation is belonging. Reaction/adaptation to the larger realm is the means of belonging to a greater whole. I would say potential is constant, but certainly not a void, void implying nothing, not even energy. Yes, the universe seems to be the caldron of creation, an endless energy source or potential.
Void is the absence of things. It is relative as the absence of x, y, and z. It is absolute as the potential of all existence.
All is energy.

Time as a field is one way of conceiving time but this field is nested. The time according to the relation of planets x and y is different than the time by the relation of particles x and y. Time is the ratio of movements relative to another ratio of movements. The set of movements we use as a fixed foundation to measure other movements determines our conception of time.
Planets x and y versus particles x and y are two different fields. They exist in a relationship, but when localized produce their own framework of time. [/quote]

Yes, time is local.
[/quote]

Energy as frequency is akin to the alternation of distinctions in and out of reality. Pure energy is the void by the degree of the potential it allows for distinctions to occur. What we understand of frequency is similar to recursion; both are cycles.
Energy is a distinction; we assume it is axiomatic, but it is not. What is axiomatic is a distinction by degree of all Axioms being distinctions and an axiom as a distinction. [/quote]

That is a very bold statement; there must be a great many possible frequencies, and I am assuming when you speak of in and out of reality, you are referring to apparent reality? So, your distinctions are necessarily things. Frequency is a pattern, as an arrangement repeated. Are you inferring a feedback loop from the manifested thing/distinction to the source of the frequency? Ok, so energy is not a thing. What is it distinct from? Sorry, don't mean to frustrate you, but all these statements and proclamations do fit into a flowing process somehow, yes?

Yes, I see where you are going with "everything is energy," but energy is not axiomatic; it is a distinct means of conceptualizing reality, but this concept is often not questioned, and if questioned, is obscure in answer. [/quote]

Agreed.

Now, if I question "distinction," the question itself is answered by its own occurrence as a distinction. Can distinction be defined further? Yes, but these would be further distinctions. [/quote]

So, absolutely everything is a distinction, material and immaterial? As long as it has a cognitive effect?


Time as local requires time as self-referencing; one locality of time exists in another, so on and so forth. It is a distinction of 'occurring change'...and change occurs within change.
[/quote]

Well, you're going to have to labour, I think, to make me understand the above.
[/quote]

********

Pardon if the answers are off, the quoting on this thread is acting up for either me or you.

So...what I can clearly read of yours:

1. There are infinite frequencies within the context of holographic distinctions.

2. Yes there is a feedback loop. In a very simple context, maybe more subtle than "simple". A distinction emerges. A distinction dissolves. A distinction emerges. A distinction dissolve.

The pivotal point is the void itself, this void is the act of attention for we only know distinctions through attention.

3. Energy is a thing, why? Because it is a distinction. It is a context of how we percieve the distinction of change. Energy is purely the occurence of a thing. So yes distinction can be synonymous to energy...but that is not the full picture.

Why?

There is Energy and it is distinct if there is a distinction of an absence of energy. This is considering a thing is distinct if there is something the thing is not.

So...what about distinction itself?

There is distinction. This distinction is what it is if there is an absence of distinction that allows distinction to be (contrast). However, and this is where is gets interesting: "absence" is a distinction thus the absence of a distinction is a distinction within distinction and distinction exists as a self-referential recursive process.

"Absence" and "Presence" are but isomorphisms of distinction, they are variations of distinction as a distinction.

What we see as "absence" and "presence" are contexts.

"Absence" is a context where one distinction is absent relative to another's "Presence". "Presence is a context where one distinction is present relative to another's absence.


4. Paradox is a distinction. We know this as there are non-paradoxical things. There is a self-nesting of paradox by degree of the duality that reality is "both paradoxical and not paradoxical."

5. All empirical and abstract things are distinctions. "Empricality" and "Abstraction" are distinctions. Reality cannot be limited to the empirical or abstract, the only limit to reality is attention. Attention is voidness.

6. Time is a distinction as the ratio of movements relative to another distinction of movements. Now because of this, if time is a ratio of movements, and there is a ratio of movements within a ratio of movements, than this ratio of movements (as the distinction of time) is recursive.