Apr 272014

Question by : religious people. what do you think of this video?

Best answer:

Answer by Me
Not religious, but not a big fan of Carl Sagan either. So much more fascinating information is available to us thanks to recent discoveries in quantum physics, the unified field, and the study of consciousness. It appears that god is being redefined by science as we sit before our computers.

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!

Apr 122014

Question by Erik T: Do you think Science can fit in with some of the ideas of Buddhism?
Before you get all uncomfortable about this hear me out. In physics you have Causality or cause and effect. basically every cause should have an effect and it’s huge in not just physics but in logic, statistics, natural science, and computer science. In buddhism you have karma which is basically cause and effect and it is also big in hindu and other eastern religions.

In Buddhism, hinduism and taoism there’s ideas of Pantheism which means we all are one with the universe and nature and we all are basically growing or expanding at the same time. the theory of relativity say the universe is constantly expanding and the big bang theory is just rewinding that expansion to one, singular big bang.. Hence we are all one from this big bang.. Theres even enlightenment in Buddhism which just seems like mental evolution and many Buddhists believe in evolution because their religion doesn’t contradict it. Does the eastern religions seem to make more sense from a science perspective? Obviously I don’t believe everything about religions and cultures but it really seems like the eastern religions such as Taoism, Buddhism, and Hinduism are some what logical. would love to know what you think about it.






Best answer:

Answer by Human
It can obviously agree on some points that have nothing to do at all with spirituality. Whether you want to use reality to justify your beliefs is fine, but the world is the way it is whether we like it or not.

The cyclic cycle model of the universe is incorrect,[1] so I don’t understand how their belief that everything is a cycle will fit into reality.





Although they were going about it the wrong way, they were genuinely trying to see patterns and find out why things were the way they were. This is what separates them from the western “philosophies” that were created to control populations.

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!

Mar 312014

Question by Was that supposed to be funny?: What do you think of this abstract concept?
I have been watching several science programs lately about space, time, and physics. On one of the programs it talks about parallel universes and alternate dimensions, and how they can interact or interfere with our own. It said that there could be a parallel universe right under our nose but we wouldnt be able to see it. First of all, since it is pertaining to science, do you believe it?

Also, it got me thinking about the concept of God and spirituality. What if our minds and our consciousness is connected with alternate dimensions and/or parallel universes? What if souls do exist and they are connected to separate entities besides this one? I’m not trying to undermine His Holy Goodness, but what if God did exist and He was a unit of consciousness connected to a higher dimension that intersects with our own like how a plane surrounds a point, giving His conscious mind controlled ability to interact with or control the Universe.

This all goes back to the question of, is there really more than meets the eye. And while many say no, this is the only thing we’ve got and say it is not likely, I think that is close minded and that there really is more than meets the eye and that it is very, very likely.. What is your opinion on all of this?

Best answer:

Yes, many of the multi universe theories like String Theory M do have a very mystical leaning to them.

What do you think? Answer below!

Mar 052014

Question by ‘little’ book,open(Rev10): What would make anyone think ‘Mystery’ Babylon is a church, or Rome, or the RCC?
Babylon of old was a very specific dominion of the ancient world, its rise and fall are covered much in both the N.T. and the O.T..

As history repeats itself[Ecc1:9 & 3:15] so also will this ‘Mystery’ Babylon of the last days.

Babylon and the Empire of Rome are juxtaposed in so many ways it is deliberate.
How could one be confused with the other?

The 7 hills on which the woman sits[Rev17:9] are the [6+1] continents of the world.
America had[at one time] a military base on each.
Jesus is the most reliable resource out there, besides the Lord God, and they speak plainly[Dt27:8, Nu12:8, Hbk2:2, Pro8:9]. They never refer to Babylon as Rome, are They not reliable?
At the no so tremendous – the bible CLEARLY says the end of the world is at the end of Revelation20:11:15 right after the 1000 year reign of Christ. Repeat someone else’s stupidity shows your lack of depth of knowledge on the subject. Have fun being oblivious!

Will you starve to death today for everlasting life?
For a morsel of bread sell your soul to the everlasting lake of fire?
Tremendoid – I’d rather you find truth in the subject

Mt24:36 But of that DAY and HOUR knoweth no man… What DAY and what HOUR? Christ is not speaking of the end of the world but of the DAY and the HOUR of His coming[v.27] to reign for 1000 years at the end of the age of sin and tribulation which lasts for 6000 years as stated in the Revelation of Jesus Christ chapter 20 and as there is no deceit from the mouth of Christ so then Christ is speaking only of the DAY and the HOUR of His return that cannot be known by anyone until it happens and this is truth. As for the other ‘times’[hrs, days, weeks, years] of the end are they not clearly explained to us by Christ Himself in The Revelation?

And there is what men think verses what God says. God calls Babylon a ‘nation’ a ‘land’, NEVER a church!
Oh! and I would recall the t’sd I gave too as the additional comments by you lead to a greater understanding on your part

this ‘supposed Christian’ – not at all uncalled for…
ESPECIALLY if you desire to show yourself a complete hypocrite

Best answer:

Answer by Ray H

Add your own answer in the comments!

Feb 232014

Question by DMG: What do you think are the metaphysical implications of quantum theory?
The quantum numbers represented by n, l,s,and p have been described as representations of, length, depth, width, and possibly time. These properties we can perceive as a result of our memeory and physical body. There are several numbers beyond these four. What do you think they might represent and could this theory be the unification of physics with metaphysics?
Although I understand what you are saying, Generalist, I disagree with your position on numbers. I believe numbers function to describe all phenomena of our universe. Our technology currently limits our ability to measure (here is where thenumbers come in) and understand all phenomena of our universe, but I do agree with you, if I understood what you were saying, and believe our minds are capable of piercing the physical veil of our existence.

Best answer:

Answer by Generalist
The unification of physics with metaphysics has nothing to do with numbers. The unification will be based on the apparent ability of our consciousness to imprint the quantum field.

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!

Jan 192014

Question by Fresserheim: Do you think the human presence on Mars will go something like this?
First, the explorers arrive, then the military, then, after its opened up to colonists, among the very first will be Catholic mystics, hermits, and other religious? In other words, the same routine as when the New World was discovered?
Polar, you’re bad! :)
When I said mystics, I should have said mystic hermits.

Best answer:

Answer by Fleur
A very informative website, kindly stay a minute in website and enter you email address for getting your answer.

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!

Jan 162014

Question by : I want to know what people think consciousness is?
Modern science, which by its methods, does not accept metaphysical reality, has yet to define consciousness. Quantum Physics has learned things some of its own researchers admit were part of ancient philosophy. In short, they are confirming metaphysical realities the ancients based their cultures on. But they both get stuck when it comes to consciousness, which was actually admitted by a Quantum Physiscist in the documentary, :What the Bleep Do We Know? Going Down the Rabbit Hole”. Their problem rests in the fact that they are trying to define the reality of consciousness within the parameters of physics. To me, its like scientists buzzing around during a live play, studying the physical nature of the stage props, to try to figure out what the play is about, and what all the movement is. In Ancient Kamitic (Egyptian) Philosophy, Reality, and every and anything in it, cxan be placed into two DUAL categories:
1. Material, which is MATTER (nothing more than dead lifeless building blocks that cant arrange themselves by their own accord), and ENERGY which is a material aspect of movement. Scientists seem to focus on the cMATTER, while quantum physicists focus a little more on the ENERGY aspects. To the ancients, energy moves matter, which dictates how it behaves.
2. NON-Material: Consciousness is NOT material. In fact, the ancients believe that matter and energy were initially FORMLESS realities, like a dead still body of water to put it symbolically. Consciousness initiated movement in the water, this movement being energy, which consequently orders matter to take its various forms. And what does Consciousness, the PASSIVE OBSERVER, move energy with? The second of the non-material realities: WILL.
The process of creation, literally, and in our practical life, is Consciousness orders matter to form or behave by willing energy to move it.
OK, what are your takes on this guys? Scientists? Philosophers? Laypersons (like myself!)?
I like everyones answers. I only have one problem with one of the answers, not as an insult, please. An inspirational speaker Dr. Dwayne Dyer, once said, “Years ago, people would ask a scientist,if he or she believes in God. They answered to them, ‘of course not, I am a scientist’. Now, if you ask a scientist if they believe in God, they more often respond, ‘of course I do, I am a scientist’ “. That isnt a word for word quote from him, but the point is, early in our scientific quest, many scientists set out to disprove all the religious and metaphysical explanaitions of life and the world we live in. to get the objective facts only, to answer all of lifes questions. Now, some scientists are realizing that for the Universe to ‘explode accidentally into existence (The “Big Bang”, that I partially agree with, but wonder where the previously non existent materials came from that reacted to one another to cause this accidental explosion), is kind of full of holes, because there is too much

Best answer:

Answer by Abigail
Consciousness is a chemical reaction in the brain.

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!

Jan 112014

Question by Phoebe: Do you think consciousness is contained by words, or visa versa?
Is consciousness retained by vocabulary, or can the mind understand something that has had no words for it?
Thoughts please?

Best answer:

Answer by Lolitta Another Part Of Me
I think that the mind can understand something that has no words. Like you can see something very beautiful, but not be able to describe. Or you can feel grief but not be able to put it into words.

Give your answer to this question below!

Dec 012013

Question by Rita: Do you think there is a starting point to the original creation of consciousness?
Another words God or the universal consciousness has already existed?

Best answer:

Answer by DIVYASHREE RANIदिव्याश्री रानी

What do you think? Answer below!

Nov 212013

Question by simple: Do you think Physics or Math is more difficult?
Not “for you” (i know you are all smart out there :) but in general, apples to apples – which is the more difficult science? I think physics is hands down – you really have to be smart to do physics.

Best answer:

Answer by US Girl
phisics is definitly more difficult
couse one suppose to know math to undertand phisics and for math U don;t need phisiscs
so phisics is like double

Add your own answer in the comments!

Powered by Yahoo! Answers