Philosophy Now Forum

http://buyological.files.wordpress.com/ ... /bild1.jpg

These two opposing forces (Clockwise and Counter Clockwise) are nothing more than false illusions on part of the mind and the senses. The truth of the matter is, as a whole we always move forward in motion and never move back. This is true for, as an example, the two (or more) lanes of certain highways (that I at least find in the U.S.). They seem to represent going forward to another destination (one lane) and going back home or to the last destination (opposite lane) only to the relative senses and thinking of an observer. Many other observers may think that the opposite lane is the way forward, depending on where they were in their last destination and where they are going to their next direction.



The above picture (a longitudinal wave) is an example of how there are no opposites; the wave keeps on moving forward in rhythm. As a whole, there cannot be opposite forces, and thus there cannot be duality. Instead, existence as a whole is one moving organism that is not inflicted by any opposing force.

Some more evidence and examples of this can be found on one video, "Electric Nature of Magnets", where they apply the same ideas to electricity/magnetism.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8BpjI-sOmI

In conclusion, there is no such thing as opposite forces.

In a wave where you are talking about energy waves yes, in a physical system where you are talking about pushing a boat off from the shore no. In short you have to be more precise about what system you are talking about, even at the atomic level there can be opposing forces, it just depends how you set up your argument.

Blaggard wrote:In a wave where you are talking about energy waves yes, in a physical system where you are talking about pushing a boat off from the shore no. In short you have to be more precise about what system you are talking about, even at the atomic level there can be opposing forces, it just depends how you set up your argument.

To clarify, I am mainly (in a broad way) talking about energy and existence on a macrocosmic level, and the model I am using is the wave structure model, as we are all in fact interconnected with each other in that we interact via energy (which means that I am not talking about discrete particles, but in fact waves).

The idea of "opposing forces", I believe, is mainly true on our 'human' level, with the struggles to find happiness inside a society that tries to bring dominion to Nature. Our 'human' Society, or ecosystem of humans, rely on strife with another in the modern capitalist society (man vs. man, man vs. nature, man vs. society, man vs. himself), but those are changing and impermanent compared to the larger Nature which permanently vibrates in a continuous rhythm.

"Duality" is a relativist concept in our sensory and mental illusions which perceives it as absolute, but when we were to clarify our minds, we no longer experience "duality" but "unity". If we are to talk about "unity", then there can be no "two opposite sides", but in fact one rhythm without friction, but dynamism.

WanderingLands wrote:...
To clarify, I am mainly (in a broad way) talking about energy and existence on a macrocosmic level, and the model I am using is the wave structure model, as we are all in fact interconnected with each other in that we interact via energy (which means that I am not talking about discrete particles, but in fact waves). ...

And yet we are discrete systems?

The idea of "opposing forces", I believe, is mainly true on our 'human' level, with the struggles to find happiness inside a society that tries to bring dominion to Nature. Our 'human' Society, or ecosystem of humans, rely on strife with another in the modern capitalist society (man vs. man, man vs. nature, man vs. society, man vs. himself), but those are changing and impermanent compared to the larger Nature which permanently vibrates in a continuous rhythm.

Capitalism does encourage competition but it also relies upon cooperation which is what helped us survive in a largely hostile Nature.

"Duality" is a relativist concept in our sensory and mental illusions which perceives it as absolute, but when we were to clarify our minds, we no longer experience "duality" but "unity". If we are to talk about "unity", then there can be no "two opposite sides", but in fact one rhythm without friction, but dynamism.

Could you explain how duality is a relativist concept?

Arising_uk wrote:And yet we are discrete systems?

Didn't say anything about that.

Capitalism does encourage competition but it also relies upon cooperation which is what helped us survive in a largely hostile Nature.

Not in this day and age where corporations are heavily dominant in American business and driving the smaller ones out of the competition. Capitalism may be good, only if it were reduced to localized markets where everyone can participate and play by the rules.

Could you explain how duality is a relativist concept?

One example is on directions, which I've explained in the OP.

These two opposing forces (Clockwise and Counter Clockwise) are nothing more than false illusions on part of the mind and the senses. The truth of the matter is, as a whole we always move forward in motion and never move back. This is true for, as an example, the two (or more) lanes of certain highways (that I at least find in the U.S.). They seem to represent going forward to another destination (one lane) and going back home or to the last destination (opposite lane) only to the relative senses and thinking of an observer. Many other observers may think that the opposite lane is the way forward, depending on where they were in their last destination and where they are going to their next direction.

Also in the OP I've talked about waves (using a longitudinal wave as an example), where "clockwise" and "counterclockwise" are really nothing more than illusions when talking about the entire existence, which moves forward endlessly and eternally in cycles. Same can be applied with forces, where you may think that there are two forces causing friction with one another, but in reality they are one and in union on a macrocosmic level, as on a whole we are all interconnected with each other in terms of both Mind and Will.

Let's elaborate this with the two types of interference in waves: constructive interference and destructive interference. Constructive interference is where two or more waves are added to compliment the sound and/or rhythm or motion of things as they move in the same direction, whereas the destructive interference is where opposite directions which cause friction which results in the cut off of flow. Now, representative of existence, destructive interference would be the end of existence; however, there still is existence because of the Conservation laws and possibly other Metaphysical implications. So, since waves move forward in one direction and and union with other constructive waves, so is true for existence and the concept of forces. Thus, "opposite forces" cannot truly exist, and are nonexistent to Nature and Reality.

I can go on and on with the concept of duality, such as the debate of it in theological circles, but it's all the same story.

WanderingLands wrote:

Arising_uk wrote:And yet we are discrete systems?

Didn't say anything about that.

What did you mean by "macrocosmic"?

Not in this day and age where corporations are heavily dominant in American business and driving the smaller ones out of the competition. ...

America has a very strong anti-trust system. You are assuming that small businesses are necessarily the best?

Capitalism may be good, only if it were reduced to localized markets where everyone can participate and play by the rules.

Pretty much everyone can play in a capitalist system. The trick is to come-up with a product others want to pay for. Are you saying you agree with import tariffs?

One example is on directions, which I've explained in the OP.

These two opposing forces (Clockwise and Counter Clockwise) are nothing more than false illusions on part of the mind and the senses. The truth of the matter is, as a whole we always move forward in motion and never move back. This is true for, as an example, the two (or more) lanes of certain highways (that I at least find in the U.S.). They seem to represent going forward to another destination (one lane) and going back home or to the last destination (opposite lane) only to the relative senses and thinking of an observer. Many other observers may think that the opposite lane is the way forward, depending on where they were in their last destination and where they are going to their next direction.

Have to admit I have no idea what you are talking about and how what you say relates to 'forces'. Although I'm guessing its something about perspective, i.e. to those involved the direction is relative and to a third party they are going counter and clockwise upon the road.

Also in the OP I've talked about waves (using a longitudinal wave as an example), where "clockwise" and "counterclockwise" are really nothing more than illusions when talking about the entire existence, which moves forward endlessly and eternally in cycles. Same can be applied with forces, where you may think that there are two forces causing friction with one another, but in reality they are one and in union on a macrocosmic level, as on a whole we are all interconnected with each other in terms of both Mind and Will.

Again I have no idea why its supposed to be counter and clockwise other than that a clock sweeps in one direction so its a useful metaphor. Otherwise I just see a wave going back and forth between two poles.

To me it sounds like you are assuming what you are proposing. Personally I have no idea how my 'Mind' or 'Will' is connected in any physical way to others?

Let's elaborate this with the two types of interference in waves: constructive interference and destructive interference. Constructive interference is where two or more waves are added to compliment the sound and/or rhythm or motion of things as they move in the same direction, whereas the destructive interference is where opposite directions which cause friction which results in the cut off of flow. Now, representative of existence, destructive interference would be the end of existence; however, there still is existence because of the Conservation laws and possibly other Metaphysical implications. So, since waves move forward in one direction and and union with other constructive waves, so is true for existence and the concept of forces. Thus, "opposite forces" cannot truly exist, and are nonexistent to Nature and Reality.

You'd have to explain to me why the idea of an opposite force is an issue? Then again one would have to explain what a 'force' is? As I thought it a place-holder for the idea 'we have no idea?'.

I can go on and on with the concept of duality, such as the debate of it in theological circles, but it's all the same story.

It pretty much came from the scholastics as its the problem of my will and 'god's' but Descartes appears to have added to it with the idea of 'mind' being independent of body, which is where I think the problem lies, i.e. 'mind' is the being of a certain body with senses and a language.

What did you mean by "macrocosmic"?

The whole entire Universe; that's what I meant by "macrocosmic". But even the dichotomy between "microcosm" and "macrocosm" itself is an illusion that's created by the individualist mentality of ego and confusion.

America has a very strong anti-trust system. You are assuming that small businesses are necessarily the best?

Pretty much everyone can play in a capitalist system. The trick is to come-up with a product others want to pay for. Are you saying you agree with import tariffs?

That is BS when corporations have been given unlimited life and limited liability (something that's opposite for small businesses), are thriving under a globalized economy which is all in their favor over the people in both America and the world, and because of this have a large dominant influence everywhere with an oligopoly on many of our natural resources and economic needs. This is completely contrary to what a real free market should be, which does not allow for monopolies which is why small businesses are best because it represents the common folk and makes more efficient and diverse products.

Have to admit I have no idea what you are talking about and how what you say relates to 'forces'. Although I'm guessing its something about perspective, i.e. to those involved the direction is relative and to a third party they are going counter and clockwise upon the road.

[...]

Again I have no idea why its supposed to be counter and clockwise other than that a clock sweeps in one direction so its a useful metaphor. Otherwise I just see a wave going back and forth between two poles.

It mainly is about perspective and how a mind who thinks within a "small horizon" (as in a individualist point of view) misconceives the idea of opposing paths, which is similar to "forces" as both are represented as waves.

I believe that you need to contemplate on this in order to further comprehend what I am saying here, as I may seem a bit wordy when talking about this stuff. It's about contemplation and intuition when it comes to thinking more deeper into the "higher" metaphysics.

Personally I have no idea how my 'Mind' or 'Will' is connected in any physical way to others?

"Mind" represents the intellect of the people and the ability to describe or to explain phenomena. It's information that's often passed on to other people, and those people exchange the information onto other larger groups of people. That's how we are all connected by "The Mind", as in the Universal Intellect which is a composite of the "Monad" or the "Source".

"Will" is energy and motion, which all forms of creation are bind together to via conservation, which makes it never-ending. It can also be emanated on an individual level as a personal drive, which is part of the Ego (defined here as the Human Will or the Human Paradigm).

Put "Mind" and "Will" together, and you have put together the live organism called Existence, which is all emanated from the Monad.

You'd have to explain to me why the idea of an opposite force is an issue? Then again one would have to explain what a 'force' is? As I thought it a place-holder for the idea 'we have no idea?'.

Well, let's get down to the basics of this. "Force", first of all, is simply defined and synonymous with "motion", or "moving". The common misconception of forces is that there are two opposing forces that cause friction, which goes against the idea of a continuous flow. This concept is represented by waves and constructive and destructive interferences, as waves are always moving themselves. If there is friction, there cannot be any flow, which is contrary to Nature (ie. a flowing river, or flowing wind). If there were to be an actual friction in Nature, all things would blow up and existence would be no more (imagine it as like a war or a conflict).

If you were to look at a wave (in one wave, or constructive interference), you would see that it travels forward; there's no such friction or any "push" or "pull". So that would mean that the "clockwise" and "counterclockwise" dichotomy is not real.

WanderingLands wrote:The whole entire Universe; that's what I meant by "macrocosmic". But even the dichotomy between "microcosm" and "macrocosm" itself is an illusion that's created by the individualist mentality of ego and confusion.

You claim this and yet you appear to think that your individualist mentality is immune?

That is BS when corporations have been given unlimited life and limited liability (something that's opposite for small businesses), are thriving under a globalized economy which is all in their favor over the people in both America and the world, and because of this have a large dominant influence everywhere with an oligopoly on many of our natural resources and economic needs. This is completely contrary to what a real free market should be, which does not allow for monopolies which is why small businesses are best because it represents the common folk and makes more efficient and diverse products.

A 'real free market' would exactly allow for monopolies that is why we don't allow them and have anti-trust and monopolies and mergers commissions to interfere with the market.

You'd abandon limited liability? How will these small firms grow if they cannot attract investors?

It mainly is about perspective and how a mind who thinks within a "small horizon" (as in a individualist point of view) misconceives the idea of opposing paths, which is similar to "forces" as both are represented as waves.

Still not understanding your point?

I believe that you need to contemplate on this in order to further comprehend what I am saying here, as I may seem a bit wordy when talking about this stuff. It's about contemplation and intuition when it comes to thinking more deeper into the "higher" metaphysics.

Actually I think you need to read a bit more of the works of those we call the philosophers before you start talking about 'higher' metaphysics.

"Mind" represents the intellect of the people and the ability to describe or to explain phenomena. It's information that's often passed on to other people, and those people exchange the information onto other larger groups of people. That's how we are all connected by "The Mind", as in the Universal Intellect which is a composite of the "Monad" or the "Source".

Not sure about the latter bit but for sure language and especially the written form allows us to pass on knowledge to others. To then reify this into a thing is a mistake I think.

"Will" is energy and motion, which all forms of creation are bind together to via conservation, which makes it never-ending. It can also be emanated on an individual level as a personal drive, which is part of the Ego (defined here as the Human Will or the Human Paradigm).

I understand that this makes sense to you but to me its a bunch of terms culled from various disciplines and strung together with very little philosophical concern for meaning or communication.

Put "Mind" and "Will" together, and you have put together the live organism called Existence, which is all emanated from the Monad.

Ditto.

Well, let's get down to the basics of this. "Force", first of all, is simply defined and synonymous with "motion", or "moving". ...

Not really, as it's the general understanding that its the amount of energy required to deflect an object from its path.

The common misconception of forces is that there are two opposing forces that cause friction, which goes against the idea of a continuous flow. This concept is represented by waves and constructive and destructive interferences, as waves are always moving themselves. If there is friction, there cannot be any flow, which is contrary to Nature (ie. a flowing river, or flowing wind). If there were to be an actual friction in Nature, all things would blow up and existence would be no more (imagine it as like a war or a conflict).

The common understanding is that friction is the interaction between two moving objects and 'friction' is the name used to describe the impedance of their progress, at least thats the best I get. I've also heard that it's caused by the interchange of electrons between objects but don't quote me on that.

If you were to look at a wave (in one wave, or constructive interference), you would see that it travels forward; there's no such friction or any "push" or "pull". So that would mean that the "clockwise" and "counterclockwise" dichotomy is not real.

If I look at waves I notice that they do appear to move but have it upon reasonable authority that they just go up and down.

Mate,
Don't get me wrong, I think you obviously reasonable bright and thinking about things and I understand that in the UK education has become an economic proposition which denies many the opportunity but I seriously think you need to focus upon achieving results in one field and then maybe you can diversify.

You claim this and yet you appear to think that your individualist mentality is immune?

Not totally immune to the whole existence; just an emanation of will and intellect that makes a thing an individual (using the term broadly to include animals, plants, trees, etc.). The "individualist mentality" can be good, as in trying to set up goals in life and to be ambitious and all. It's only bad when that mentality is excessive in desires that cannot be easily obtained and is unreasonable, which leads to suffering and a host of many negative emotions (fear, anger, hate, alienation, disillusionment, etc). It also becomes bad when you grow arrogant and condescending to others and want to dominate them through whatever means. So, it's always good to have balance: being the unique individual you are while still being One with the Universe.

A 'real free market' would exactly allow for monopolies that is why we don't allow them and have anti-trust and monopolies and mergers commissions to interfere with the market.

You'd abandon limited liability? How will these small firms grow if they cannot attract investors?

There's more to it than that: it can be the fact that rich people influence and become in cahoots with the government and politicians which can justify their unjust monopolies and unjust intimidation against those who are struggling to start a small business.

You see, abandoning limited liability would force firms and corporation to actually compete more fairly and to be accountable for whatever bad thing it would cause. It would favor the common people, instead of favoring the rich and the wealthy when giving them limited liability.

This book explains it all: http://radgeek.com/gt/2011/10/Markets-N ... ohnson.pdf

Still not understanding your point?

The point being that when you take into account thinking about existence that you may start to realize that the so-called "opposite forces" are due to dualist and individual thinking.

Actually I think you need to read a bit more of the works of those we call the philosophers before you start talking about 'higher' metaphysics.

You can read about philosophers but it has much more important for you to actually think for yourself and to observe on your own, which is how you can actually get insights into things of which you are asking of.

I understand that this makes sense to you but to me its a bunch of terms culled from various disciplines and strung together with very little philosophical concern for meaning or communication.

Philosophers use terms all the time, and I'm not sure if I can put it bluntly other than calling it "Will", as I believe that it's the simplest of all terms.

WanderingLands wrote:http://buyological.files.wordpress.com/ ... /bild1.jpg

These two opposing forces (Clockwise and Counter Clockwise) are nothing more than false illusions on part of the mind and the senses. The truth of the matter is, as a whole we always move forward in motion and never move back. This is true for, as an example, the two (or more) lanes of certain highways (that I at least find in the U.S.). They seem to represent going forward to another destination (one lane) and going back home or to the last destination (opposite lane) only to the relative senses and thinking of an observer. Many other observers may think that the opposite lane is the way forward, depending on where they were in their last destination and where they are going to their next direction.



The above picture (a longitudinal wave) is an example of how there are no opposites; the wave keeps on moving forward in rhythm. As a whole, there cannot be opposite forces, and thus there cannot be duality. Instead, existence as a whole is one moving organism that is not inflicted by any opposing force.

Some more evidence and examples of this can be found on one video, "Electric Nature of Magnets", where they apply the same ideas to electricity/magnetism.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8BpjI-sOmI

In conclusion, there is no such thing as opposite forces.

TV commercials use background music to dull the mind of the viewer, thus leaving it more susceptible to their pitch. The dumber the product, the louder and more insistently repetitive the background percussion. With these facts in mind, buy some cheap insurance from a cartoon lizard for your soon-to-be-recalled GM car, wash down some cheap frozen pizza with some Buds, and try watching that stupid video again.

Even better, find a university and take a real course in physics, one that requires calculus.

Greylorn

Greylorn Ell wrote: TV commercials use background music to dull the mind of the viewer, thus leaving it more susceptible to their pitch. The dumber the product, the louder and more insistently repetitive the background percussion. With these facts in mind, buy some cheap insurance from a cartoon lizard for your soon-to-be-recalled GM car, wash down some cheap frozen pizza with some Buds, and try watching that stupid video again.

Even better, find a university and take a real course in physics, one that requires calculus.

Greylorn

How many more insults, Greylorn?

Hi WanderLand,

I would like to know more about your video about electric nature of magnets.

I have notions in chemistry, so I know by example that an atom with a pair number of valence electrons is diamagnetic (or in the common sense: "non magnetic"), and one with a impair number of valence electrons is paramagnetic (we can attract it with a magnet).

But I am not really aware about what really cause the iron-magnetsim (in french: ferromagnétisme), except the fact that it would be caused by dynamics off electrons.

This state of affairs even in scholastic theories.

-I am interested in your video, but the pronunciation rhythm is too fast for my english.

So could we benefit (maybe in a dedicated topic about magnets) a resumed synoptic of what is said ?

I have understood that terms of gender would be more accurate than nord and sud poles, but I did not exactly understand for which raison.

I am also very interested about Cobalt they are talking about.

Thank you in advance.

NielsBohr wrote:Hi WanderLand,

I would like to know more about your video about electric nature of magnets.

I have notions in chemistry, so I know by example that an atom with a pair number of valence electrons is diamagnetic (or in the common sense: "non magnetic"), and one with a impair number of valence electrons is paramagnetic (we can attract it with a magnet).

But I am not really aware about what really cause the iron-magnetsim (in french: ferromagnétisme), except the fact that it would be caused by dynamics off electrons.

This state of affairs even in scholastic theories.

-I am interested in your video, but the pronunciation rhythm is too fast for my english.

So could we benefit (maybe in a dedicated topic about magnets) a resumed synoptic of what is said ?

I have understood that terms of gender would be more accurate than nord and sud poles, but I did not exactly understand for which raison.

I am also very interested about Cobalt they are talking about.

Thank you in advance.

Well, it's not really 'my' video; it's really from someone else in which the channel Theoria Apophasis had uploaded (which is probably not 'his' video, either). However, that YouTube channel that I have named had actually researched more into magnetism and has an online book on the Archive website entitled Uncovering the Missing Secrets of Magnetism. It does have some good information, but you're going to have to cut through the many biases that this author has made, such as mainly frequent insults at the mainstream scientists (as much as they are wrong).

https://archive.org/details/magnetism1small

He also has videos that goes into the experimental detail of magnetism, if you don't want to read the book.

http://www.youtube.com/user/kathodosdotcom/videos

One basic idea that I recall from looking into this, is that magnetism does not have two but four poles. There's two centripetal forces, and then there's two centrifugal forces. You can also read into Walter Russell, who also talks about this.

Thank you WanderingLand for the reference!

I see that the book is free, nice! -Its author, Ken L. Wheeler, were he be the son or a member of the family of John Wheeler ?

NielsBohr wrote:Thank you WanderingLand for the reference!

I see that the book is free, nice! -Its author, Ken L. Wheeler, were he be the son or a member of the family of John Wheeler ?

Never really heard of John Wheeler. I just searched him and it seems as though he made some of the concepts in modern physics that Ken L. Wheeler is against, which mainly includes Quantum Mechanics and Relativity.