Will time and space matter in the other world??

[mazHur]

We often talk about time and space and many scientific and philosophical theories are put forth to identify them. Well, time and space may have significance on earth but do they exist in the other world? -I mean in heaven, hell ---that is in the hereafter?? I would appreciate your words on that. thanks

[Gadget Girl]

I don't think so. In Heaven, you will have eternal life, right? So if you will already live there for eternity, time wouldn't matter anymore. You're free to do whatever you want. It's timeless. I think that goes with space too.

[NikolaiI]

Sometimes I think that my energy and matter could somehow teleport at random- be interchanged with the same atoms from another universe or something. Nothing really would change, yet everything could be shifting reality all the time. I also thought that we were eternal- in the sense we are sort of programs loaded up by superior beings in some kind of computer simulation- we're able to play out our program but nothing more. But I also am starting to think it's entirely possible to travel in time; that we could alter time and reality- in some way. There's just got to be some way. Then we'd have complete control over our destiny, and see our lives and history with much more clarity or insight.

Does anyone think it's theoretically possible to travel on a beam of light, or travel through time? I think there's got to be some way to do this- because we are a product of our environment. We're a product of laws and causes, so we don't have any time. All that it takes is for others to be conscious of us, and then reality shifts. If our energy and matter could go through different universes, then we could, too; if we could just develop the ability to warp the reality we live in.

[Gadget Girl]

I will do everything just to travel through time. Just like what you said, we can see our past, our origin, our future. But for me, truthfully, we can't travel through time. We cannot go back or just go forward. We will remain in the present, waiting for our future to come. The life we have in the past will be kept hidden in our hearts and in our mind. Life will go on.

[NikolaiI]

Aw, you're trying to kill my dreams, Gadget Girl! (j/k)

But it just seems logical to me that we can travel time and universes. But perhaps I am insane, and perhaps only insane people can go to other universes and times.

[Gadget Girl]

Not only insane people, but the people who are determined and wanted to reach the limitations of humankind also. But it's impossible still. Only those people who have extraordinary powers can. Since we don't have powers, that proves my point. Maybe we should wait for a person who could make a time machine in a few years time. You and I will be the first ones to use it!

[andrew23]

It doesn't matter because God will erase all of our memories as said by the "holy":D bible..

So in the end, we won't remember a thing, not even the name of your dog hehe..

This is my first post ever by the way. What a weird debut for me to be posting in a topic like this..space and time..

And who knows, perhaps space and time are actually wrong concepts, god will laugh at us even if we actually knew it and talk about it in heaven..

[Scheherazade]

So, you are starting off with the assumption that there is actually an "other world"?

[AuntShecky]

I do not know if there are other planes of existence, an afterlife, heaven, hell, etc. However, theoretical physicists
speculate that there are indeed more dimensions that are beyond the 4 with which we are familiar (the 3 linear ones plus time.) Yours truly is not among the cognoscenti who are versed in string theory, etc. However, the idea of "parallel worlds"-- watered down for us in the popular TV series of the past such as "Quantum Leap" and "Sliders" --suggests the theoretical possiblities.

At present levels of technology, time travel is practically speaking impossible. First and foremost, we would need a mode of transport that could go faster than the speed of light. Then there are the philosophical problems, the logical imperatives; for instance, Isaac Asimov once asks if such a form of time travel existed, could he go back in time and murder his grandfather before his grandfather had sired Isaac's father? That is some imponderable question, but again, it is my understanding that time travel is theoretically possible,
a subject first broached by Einstein, and embellished in recent years by Stephen Hawking and others who speculate that "worm holes" -- a blip in a black hole -- might be an avenue for time travel.

Obviously I don't know what the hell I am talking about.
Beam me up, Scottie.

[Ludmila607]

I do not know if there are other planes of existence, an afterlife, heaven, hell, etc. However, theoretical physicists
speculate that there are indeed more dimensions that are beyond the 4 with which we are familiar (the 3 linear ones plus time.) Yours truly is not among the cognoscenti who are versed in string theory, etc. However, the idea of "parallel worlds"-- watered down for us in the popular TV series of the past such as "Quantum Leap" and "Sliders" --suggests the theoretical possiblities.

At present levels of technology, time travel is practically speaking impossible. First and foremost, we would need a mode of transport that could go faster than the speed of light. Then there are the philosophical problems, the logical imperatives; for instance, Isaac Asimov once asks if such a form of time travel existed, could he go back in time and murder his grandfather before his grandfather had sired Isaac's father? That is some imponderable question, but again, it is my understanding that time travel is theoretically possible,
a subject first broached by Einstein, and embellished in recent years by Stephen Hawking and others who speculate that "worm holes" -- a blip in a black hole -- might be an avenue for time travel.

Obviously I don't know what the hell I am talking about.
Beam me up, Scottie.


The discussion about the number of dimensions are related to the new geometries and maths theories around Lovachesky and Reeman questioing about one of the Euclidean postulades.Three dimension theories were sustented on this euclidian concept of reality.The long, the wideness and the volume...and our concepts on space and time use to rest on Euclides Geometry and Newton mechanic.
After Lovachesky(prince of Maths) and Reeman objections, the for dimensional reallity became more real...and the multidimensional reallity became more believable.Einstein himself used this theories to sustent his own relativity theories.
THe simple change on Geometry brings a revolution to Physichs to Metaphysich and to our undesrtanding of time and space issues.
A real interisting subject to research about...:idea:

[NikolaiI]

What if people could travel on a beam of light? Somehow, get around reality? I wouldn't be surprised if we eventually can. Slip through dimensions just by our thoughts. Suppose it is always being interchanged all the time; then we just have to catch on to it, and away we go!

[crazefest456]

I don't feel that we need some tangible beam of light, to move around time-- around reality...We can always meditate (in whatever form we choose) intensely, having this weird out of body disconnectiveness (i made up that word) with the physical world. I know, when I did only 3-4 hours of the form of meditation I've adopted, I went through this refreshing reawakening, making me less anxious about the present...I actually fell asleep because I became so peaceful after this, 'time traveling'. I see that people who've done this before, feel above our visual dimensions, and into this different spiritual freedom, that is impossible to attain otherwise.
Scintifically, time traveling has a tiny possibility, considering the chances of survival in wormholes. Nevertheless, we can't rule it out, even when we get to the eternal 'other world', because that itself might be a different spatial dimension (if the 10 D theory is correct).

[NikolaiI]

Okay; well in our world, we walk around on its planet, everything moves very slowly; we learn science and measure distances and speeds, eventually we learn that there are beams of light, invisible to the eye, that travel across the solar system in outer space, and they're also here on earth. Now mightn't there be something similar that connects to our world- existing in another dimension? In fact isn't it possible our universe could be touching other universes- other times, other worlds? I feel it could be possible there are higher beings, which are higher than us simply because they live on a dimension we cannot see or detect. They can see and do things to us very plainly, but we have no idea of their existence. We follow the rules and patterns of their universe, and because of this we are able to do something about time, and civilization. Whether civilization falls or continues, and what shapes and changes it will take, all this depends on us; the future could be anything. Because we follow their patterns, we are able to influence the future for good; and even begin to make conceptions about other dimensions and higher beings.

[Riesa]

So, you are starting off with the assumption that there is actually an "other world"?

My sentiments exactly.


but some lovely ideas anyway.

[Gadget Girl]

Hey Nik, do you mean like the idea in the movie, 'Somewhere in Time' like what Richard Collier did? He travelled through time just by thinking it again and again.

Nah, just a thought. :p

[NikolaiI]

Never seen it. More sort-of like what Prot did in K-PAX. It was this movie about PROT, who said he was from another planet, whom they put in a psychiatric ward- anyway, at the end of the movie came the date he said he would leave on, and he went catatonic. He told them he would leave on a beam of light. Loved that movie so much.

[Gadget Girl]

I never seen that either. But it gives us the same idea anyways. :D Richard Collier was determined to to go back because he wanted to find the old woman which he saw in one of his plays. So he found a way how to do that. He recited the precise date and time and he was back.

[NikolaiI]

Ah interesting. Well, yeah, you and I will probably be the first ones to ever do it in real life, then! :) If it doesn't kill us.

[Gadget Girl]

:lol: hope not. :p

[brainstrain]

Assuming that there's gonna be a hereafter, most likely not. At least not in the sense we know it. In reality, eternity is an imaginary thing (try proving that something will never end =P) so if we really are 'eternal' in heaven than it would have to be a place not governed by the same laws as earth.

[baddad]

So, you are starting off with the assumption that there is actually an "other world"?

.........what Scher said..............

I am personally of a mind to live this life I currently have as if there is no other on offer. And......not to pick a fight or attack anyone's beliefs, but heaven and hell fall into the realm of superstition in my opinion. Spirituality is real, a way to view and act within our current existence. Religion/purported rewards in some other world..................well...........a fun way to exercise the intellect, an interesting academic exercise perhaps...................but I think the only "other world (s)" are within our own minds. Am I off topic?? Not that unusual for me I suppose..........................

[Midas]

First let me say that my comments here are for those with an 'open' mind. If you are devoutly religious then it would be a contradiction of terms to be also 'open minded'. All the main religions from what I have studied have strict doctrines that require one accepts certain dogmas, without question, which cover this area.

I am not 'getting at' people who belong to some devout religion, to me, the beauty of life is that who, or whatever, created us, gave us 'free will' (or did He/She/It? Some may argue this, and I feel they well may, here.)

We all know that no one living has the answers. (no Nicholai, not even I) However, it has long been an interesting subject to which most of us, at some point in life, have, or will, give some thought.

To me, words like 'heaven', and 'hell' are merely, the English words which have come to us from religion and they relate to 'conditions' rather than places. Everything that exists to us, exists only in our mind. It is personal to us in its form. The 'picture' and I do not mean just outward visual, but the 'inward eye' visual, comes from how our mind interprets the vibrations received via the senses.

It is a bit like a TV receives a transmitted series of vibrations and creates a picture. If we checked a number of TV sets in a room all tuned to the same station the actual quality of reproduced reception would vary even if only slightly. This would apply even though we used the same make of TV unit. But add to that different TV sets, and even different people viewing those sets.

Now in that same room if we switched off those sets, we switch off the 'pictures' to us, but they are still in the same room - passing through walls and other obstructions to get there and pass on. So they are there with us, though we can't see them - as also is electricity.We did not invent electricity, we only discovered how to use it, and create it artificially.

I believe that we are 'minds' with a body, not bodies with a mind. By that I mean the really important part that is us, is our mind. I could put forward a good argument to support this if I am challenged but will not waste time now. We cannot see a 'mind'. We can see the 'equipment' in our body that allows 'mind' to exist. And, according to Descartes, allows us to exist -'Cogito ergo sum'.

All I have done here is to provide a few seeds from which anyone interested (if not, that's OK) to propagate (enlarge upon) in some quiet moment, and there is nothing good on TV or you have got tired playing with a computer game, or texting on your Ipod. I believe it is in this area that could well provide a link to the answer.

Remember, an open book is useless without an open mind. And an open mind does not mean we can't finely focus it when required. Most of us have minds like drunken monkeys - jumping around all over the place. Don't believe? Just think of how many thoughts you have flitted to in even the last hour. And yet, you know darn well there is something that you should get done, and all it would take is for your mind to centre on it long enough and it would be done, and you would do a first class job that would make someone happy - if only yourself.

Actually, Nicholai you are not that far 'off beam' (forgive the pun) in some of your posts here - particularly #3. After all 'light' whether in a beam or not - in fact a beam is only vibrations of light focused. That 'light' on the TV set comes from a 'beam' which is actually invisible to the naked eye while it is on its way.

We can also see and hear someone in that room 'live' from the other side of the world. They have been transported 'artificially' by us along 'beams'. And from what I have seen, so far, whatever we have created from our minds - our inventions, can also exist, even if only by function, in nature as in electricity which existed before humans, and transport ('legs', and horses to ride, as a function to permit travel). And those are just examples.

I have experienced far too many times that I have been able to transport my thoughts to others. But I am not unique (well not in this ability -smile) We can all do it. I believe it requires only 'belief' and relaxed, but focused thought. (absolute belief, that means without any question, is the real essential) I also believe when we were 'primitive' we did these things as a matter of course as in 'survival', and communication.

I believe animals can still do it, and this has been seen in many studies. How we use any of our abilities, in which they are stronger in some than in others, comes from how we have applied to them importance in our lives.

In the rest of the animal kingdom the focus is one of survival, and procreation of the species - very basic. That was our way once, and, I believe, is still basic to us now behind all the added sophistication we have accrued, if we are honest.

You will have noted what may seem an over use of the word 'believe' or its noun form, 'belief'. No apologies, it's the root of most achievment - believe me!

[amanda_isabel]

there probably does not exist time and space in the other wolr d-or what supposition there is of it, since time and space are providers of limits and the other world has no limits...

[oracle13]

I find it odd that so many people answer this question without stopping to even question what they're actually answering.

I have many religious friends who take great comfort in having their Church as an answer to some of the problems with existence. But I find it quite odd when people take the teachings of their particular religions and feel that they can apply some kind of empirical, scientific reasoning towards them.

Religious belief is, as Campbell has said, mythology taken out of context, in my opinion. I never really understand why people answer questions like this as if there is actually a 'right' answer, when really that's like saying, is Hades really guarded by a three headed dog?

If its real to you, then fair enough, but I don't see how you can apply a belief in something non-empirical to some kind of scientific conjecture...

[Mr. Dr. Ralph]

I find it odd that so many people answer this question without stopping to even question what they're actually answering.

I have many religious friends who take great comfort in having their Church as an answer to some of the problems with existence. But I find it quite odd when people take the teachings of their particular religions and feel that they can apply some kind of empirical, scientific reasoning towards them.

Religious belief is, as Campbell has said, mythology taken out of context, in my opinion. I never really understand why people answer questions like this as if there is actually a 'right' answer, when really that's like saying, is Hades really guarded by a three headed dog?

If its real to you, then fair enough, but I don't see how you can apply a belief in something non-empirical to some kind of scientific conjecture...

Quoted for truth. Asking whether a question has a reasonable answer in the first place is obviously the right course of action, especially when the answer is not immediate. Reading up on the background of the question is probably a better idea than speculating on its solution.

That being said, time and space are terms that describe physical phenomena, which obviously have no logical place in a location, as it were, such as heaven or hell. This is another awkward example of imposing terms and conditions into a context that cannot possibly be understood in the first place.

[Midas]

In response to the last two posts, which make a valid point - up to a point,
lets deviate for a minute from addressing the actual question posed by the thread, to the question itself in what is it really asking, and what other questions does it pose.

First, however, let me say, in deference to the originator of any thread on this, and most online forums: These web sites reach all over the world. Many who contribute do not have English as their first language, and many, consequently are struggling with it, but they are trying. Some are doing a darn good job.

Also, the internet is not owned by any particular nation, so all are equal
( and no crack about 'but some more equal than others') but many forget this

Then we have age. Many here are still at school, and in various grades.

Therefore tolerance must be shown for the different levels at which people are communicating.

Sometimes it is difficult to make clear in a few words, unless you are highly skilled, exactly the answer you are seeking. As a result, people do not always
interpret the question the same way as others.

Then, as has been mentioned, the question often poses other questions that need to be addressed in order to answer the main question, as the question may assume some point as an understood, and accepted, fact.

The question, this thread states: 'Will time and space matter in the other world?'

This question then assumes two main points (1) that everyone's concept of time and space incuding its relevance to us is the same. (2) (a) that everyone understands what is meant by 'other world', and (b) that there is another existence and a suggested 'heaven and earth' are also understood, and accepted by everyone.

So, is it any wonder, from just that alone (there are other considerations) that we get what may appear to some, because it leaves their track of thought, responses straying from the thread.

Then we get responses to responses which may take us, what may appear to some, further away.

Therefore, unless the originator, not anyone else assuming how they see it is the right one, of a thread enters the discussion and makes it perfectly clear the confines, as in perimeters, of the question have been breached whenever it is felt that a response has strayed outside the context, then let us evaluate, and appreciate, all contributions on their own particular merit.

[mazHur]

i take your point, Midas, but the point is that even if someone doesn't believe in the 'other world' or has a different concept of 'time and space' I would personally feel he has equal right to express his thoughts. if the thread starter begins commenting in the middle of everything it will only lead to an unnecessary debate and arguments will not serve the intent of the thread. So, let everybody share the thread and have his say. The super moderator is here and can take care of any offensive or personal remarks that it feels off topic or objectionable. I hope you will appreciate my point and not urge the thread starters to 'pop' in every time somebody comes up with his thoughts
thanks
mazHur

[Midas]

Mazur, thank you for your comment, but you appear to have misunderstood me. That is not quite what I said (or meant). In fact, it was contrary.

Using this particular thread as an example. I clearly state that the way the question is phrased, and even this type of question, calls for responses addressing the points which they feel need to be addressed in order to begin to get to the core of what the questioner may appear to be posing.

Also, as has also been mentioned, there can be no definitive answer to such a question no matter which part of it, or all, one does, or does not accept.

Because of this, by its nature, it can stir flights of fancy, especially in those with great imaginations whose answers, sparked by the question, are interesting, and thought provoking, in themselves.

I assumed, obviously wrongly, that I had made the point that it was only in threads posing discussion where it has been made perfectly clear where the
thread was centred, and that any question had some semblance of being answerable by sound, supported, argument, where the thread originator may
keep people 'on track'. ( This has nothing to do with infringements of the code of ethics where the moderator would intervene.)

An example here using parts of the thread theme. Do you believe in the concept of an after life.?(you could add) If so why? if not, why not?

Here, you are not assuming there is one, but asking if anyone believes there is one. That could even be answered by a simple 'Yes' or 'No' , but by asking
for a support of their stance, you elicit what can be interesting discussion on not so much whether there is, or isn't but on the points of view as to why people think what they do.

The point I was making in my post was that there may be, as far as that part
of us which is the real 'us' our mind, or spirit, a continuous existence in that we are merely parts of a whole - an all pervading Universal Intelligence, that for a period of time use a physical body in which to act and react to collect through experience further knowledge to supply the whole.

Now that is extremely simplified. I did give some analogy to support the thoughts. I was not attempting a thesis, merely sowing seeds for thought.

If I had time, and the inclination, and I thought there were sufficient similar like minds, I could explain more, but I am aware of the limitations here and decided otherwise.

I am also still open to interesting observations, and hoped that I might spark
some imaginative response that could add to my own thoughts on the matter.

If not, what have I lost. When we put something down in writing we reinforce our own thoughts, and open them to self question, so here there is always some gain.
Thanks again for your comment, giving me an opportunity to explain further.

[mazHur]

Thanks, Midas. I appreciate your clarification.

In fact, the question posed in the thread is not that simple for it has its roots in philosophy, metaphysics, religion as well as science. As to whether there is an afterlife, I can only say there is no definite answer to this question as no one has yet returned from the 'other' world to tell us about it. Thus all that we know is from the study of different subjects or perhaps, in case of atheists, a mere stretch of imagination. Arguing on this aspect of 'other life' would thus only split the original question and the discussion here will get lost in vagueness and off topic. Let us assume there is or there isn't an other world and where does the question of time and space rest. In case of those who believe there is no other world it is more important for them to substantiate their statements with justification as to where they ( or other creations) would 'go' after death? They ought to relate it to matter and the fate of the existing time and space. I mean to say that if we think time and space is present then where will it lead us after we are more in this world> Whether the world will end or will it continue after death? In both cases how would time and space relate to both conditions, viz life and death as well as after death.

best


here again..........

here is yet another view of time and space ,,,,,hope it will provide some insight into the phenomena in the other world !;)

http://billychasen.com/clock/

[NikolaiI]

Haha, thanks, Midas, and you likewise seem to have some good thoughts on the matter. What I mentioned is something that relates to other ideas I have thought of, or phenomena I have come to believe in, that I've discovered in studies of myself, reality, and the farthest reaches of my nature. Every person has their own reality; yet it seems apparent there is a common reality we all share. If this can't be proved, at least it seems apparent. Now, I believe that reality itself can be bended, at least very slightly. I've seen this particularly in my quest for enlightenment. Some words from the Buddha were very helpful in understanding all this. I'll just quote it in two places. The firs two lines of the dhammapada are
"The mind is the forerunner of actions,
All deeds are led by mind, created by mind."
And later:
"As rain does never penetrate
a house that is well-thatched,
so lust does never penetrate
the mind well cultivated."
Other translations call it "developed mind." I've found that this is true. When the mind is enlightened, the mind is transformed, then it is protected from negative and harmful thoughts or karma. There's something you can actually feel when you do some kind of practice towards this; you can feel your mind becoming transformed. I can't exactly explain why I believe reality can be transformed, but it's very related to this. When one enlightens oneself like this; one is able to see that reality itself can be changed, possibly only by the mind. I don't understand everything that goes on in this process, but one's mind being transformed- the mind is part of reality, true?

The other thing that I was thinking about was more fanciful. Since we are the result of stimuli and conditioning and our environment; it seems like we should be able to transcend time. I mean, perhaps I am giving too much power to the imagination; but since we can imagine ourselves at the end of time, at the end of our lives, looking back, it seems like at least something should be possible because of this. Could we not send a message to the future? Could we not say- "We have attained enlightenment! By these words, and this canon, we're dancing around at the farthest reaches of our nature- and we are happy! We pass on this knowledge, for the purpose of sharing the knowledge of living and happiness." Is there not a link between present and future? The past is fixed- so they say- but could not the past be not fixed? The present now is the past to the future, and the present is changeable, and so the past is changeable. It's not so much that we can jump on a light beam and travel across the universe; it's that we can simulate this by the our incredible experiences and our knowledge of how the world works- our knowledge of how ourselves work, and how we are created by our environment and stimuli. Why is not the present moment a key, a turning point in history? If the past has been filled with darkness; the entire past, wouldn't it be balanced, to have the future filled with a little more light? Don't we mistrust our writers and our teachers from the past, isn't it all tinged with the unknown, and don't we have the healthy and well-placed mistrust that in that unknown exists darkness- I mean hatred and ignorance? The present is the turning point- the link to infinity, the link to transcendence.

So if we can't travel in time with our mind, we can at least record our existence and then give an entreaty to future generations to give us something back. Pray for us! Just live simply- and always stretch the boundaries. If we can't travel across the universe on a beam of light, then we can at least purify our minds and become enlightened. We unravel reality- rather, we just realize that everything that comes into existence will cease to exist; and put ourselves outside of that- and seek our own interpretations of reality.

Now, finally- I believe that reality can be changed- at least one's own reality, their own mind- and through that the rest of their lives; and how much more so with more than one person? So this is not necessarily the otherworldly; but it also seems to be that anyone, at any time, could die. They could also dissolve into insanity, or enlightenment?
Thanks for your thoughts on this...

[Midas]

My suggestions Nicholai, and please take this in the positive light in which it is meant is strengthen your personal belief in that which you are 'seeing' but not quite taking on board. I firmly believe you are on the right track, it's just a question of getting rid of some of those doubts of which probably you are not fully aware but which some things you say give it away.

Some doubt is fine in the early stages, but, I feel you have gone a little further along the road and those little doubts could be holding you back from moving on.

Those quotes about the power of the mind are rock solid. In fact, it is difficult for anyone, and that includes me, in spite of all I have seen, and all I have experienced to retain that understanding, and awareness of just how powerful the mind is.

There are people in this world who are aware of it, as it has been handed down to them over the centuries from their mother's knee. It has given them power over us, and elevated them to positions where their influence permeates every aspect of our lives - and I do not mean our elected politicians most of who are at the best, puppets, and at the worst buffoons
(and often both).

Metaphysics is, I believe, the most exciting part of psychology/philosophy. It is also the least explored, and understood by the majority.

There is one statement you made:-
' I mean, perhaps I am giving too much power to the imagination; but since we can imagine.......... '

You/we CANNOT give too much power to the imagination (and this I know you know). Everything we have today outside of what nature has provided, has come to us as a result of IMAGINATION. Einstein is quoted as saying (I am always a little wary of assigning quotes) 'Imagination is more important than knowledge.'

The university faculties are full of people with immense knowledge, but little, if any, imagination. This is probably to what G B Shaw was referring when he said -
'He who can does, he who can't teaches. '

But these professors with their knowledge do serve a useful function, they act as a catalyst to those students who come under their wing who have the imagination to use that knowledge, and seek more - hopefully to use in a positive way. Unfortunately some have used their imagination to great effect, but in a negative way and brought forth, among other horrors, weapons of mass destruction.

Would love to expand my own theme more, and discuss further but time is against me. You see, as you, and most posters will know, it is difficult to crystallise, and explain fully, and clearly, ones thoughts in hurried posts and, at the same time, observing that there is a vast differing level of readers in ability, age, and interest.

Also there are those who also don't have the time, or patience to read a post sufficiently to understand something complex. It is not so much complexity as it demands a truly free mind and the imagination to 'see' things outside the norm. And you can soon be involved in long lengthy, time consuming explanations. of explanations.

Keep up the searching, and let your imagination run free. Nature, and nurture,
appear to mobilise to destroy this ability that almost every child is born with in large dollops, so that by the time most have left their halcyon days of childhood and joined the real world, it has become suppressed and lost in the dark recesses of mind.

[mazHur]

Midas, you have a point there but arn't you getting off topic?

[mazHur]

"The mind is the forerunner of actions,
All deeds are led by mind, created by mind."
And later:
"As rain does never penetrate
a house that is well-thatched,
so lust does never penetrate
the mind well cultivated."

the world of mind is devilish,
the world of heart is the real world !

[Midas]

Midas, you have a point there but arn't you getting off topic?

I think I indicated in one of the posts that it is difficult with a thread like this to know where it begins and ends. It presupposes so much.

It calls upon imagination, and imagination calls upon mind, and........ so it goes on. So, you can't deal with one, without touching the other. This applies
to many threads in this category especially when they are worded loosely.

Let us take just one word - 'Time' (I could have taken any other) What do you mean by time. Until about two hundred years ago - hardly that, 'Time' for the common man, at least, meant only what the sun indicated - sunrise when he got up, sundown when he went to bed, until the next sunrise.

'Space' was how much land he had to tend, before he stepped on his neighbours toe, and/or room in his wattle and daub hut, in early Britain, or wigwam in North America.

For many thousands of years, man got by without worrying too much about precise time. He was aware of the change of seasons and the movement of the moon and sun - to some it meant more than others and could 'time' changing weather, for example, in varying degrees of accurancy.


I'll leave it there but one could go on.

Thanks though MazHur for your comment, and your following post which makes my constant point of the importance of mind. 'As a man thinketh, so is he'.

[mazHur]

Thanks, Midas. I get your point of view but the point is that if we are going to search definitions for each and every word aside the established definitions then there would be no end to the string. So, I think as far as definitions of 'time' and 'space' we stick to the conventional definitions and not burden our minds or imagination to find new dimensions to them

[Midas]

Why do you say 'new' ones? They are not new. We don't have to use our minds to think of new ones, What 'new' ones did I invent? Were they new to you?

[mazHur]

By 'finding new dimensions'' I mean we should rest our discussion to what is already established or known as pushing our imagination up to find new meanings to ''time'', space, matter, other world,mind, imagination, etc will only take us off topic

Time and space has been the topic of discussion in many subjects such as sciences, metaphysics, philosophy, religion, etc and we may benefit from the findings of these. Imagination alone would tend to make a mountain of a mole hill !

[Midas]

Time and space has been the topic of discussion in many subjects such as sciences, metaphysics, philosophy, religion, etc and we may benefit from the findings of these. Imagination alone would tend to make a mountain of a mole hill !__________________

MazHur

You need to do some serious 'thinking'. Without 'IMAGINATION' you can't even begin to contemplate and discuss any of it.

While we are on the subject of this thread, let's look at the wording:-

'Will time and space matter in the 'other world'

Now I will put some questions to you. Along with some comments

(1) What 'other world' ? (Does it exist outside someone's imagination? if so, where?

(2) Is everyone's 'picture' (imagination) of this 'other world' the same?

(3) Does everyone believe (can they imagine?) 'another world'?

(4) Is everyone's idea of time and space the same?

(5) Even the great minds that have theorised, and discussed the philosophy of 'time and space' are they in agreement?

(6) Has anyone proved, as in arrived at, a definitive answer on their relationship?

(7) if not, then it obviously has not mattered to us in this 'known' life has it?

I mean, life goes on without our absolute knowledge of the 'scientific answers, just as it has since the dawn of life. Man gets by with the very basic knowledge to where it is required for survival as I explained in more detail in my post. So why should it matter in any 'other world' (assuming you can IMAGINE another world)

You still believe imagination doesn't matter, or should not be discussed?

Even Einstein said - Imagination is greater than knowledge. And, although I consider Einstein a highly probable plagiarist, on this quote I concur?

[mazHur]

gOOD GRACIOUS! we are not discussing ''Imagination'' and I am for Imagination ,please try to understand.

As for the other world , allow me to say that by other world I mean the life hereafter. Whether someone believes it or not, let him come up with his imagination. That is what his imagination says about the topic??

An atheist may not believe in the hereafter so let him have his say whatever its. Similarly, let Jews, Chhristian and Muslims who believe in after life make their point; let Hindus or Buddhist or Jains or Parsis who may believe in reincarnation shed light on the subject. Imagination is a great thing but the point here is different. The topic needs outcome of imagination, thought, whims, knowlege, ignorance, beliefs, etc whatsoever. I hope this clears the confusion

[Midas]

MazHur,

First I am not in the least bit 'confused'. Not the least. I also have been blessed with the intelligence to know what you meant by ' the other world'. And I would say that probably most would have figured that out (though a writer must never just assume anything when his readership is so diverse in more ways than one). And, it still requires 'imagination' to visualise something that does not exist for the eye to behold; especially something with a strong intangible aspect, like a suggested other existence.

You picked on the word 'imagination'. Now if you still do not see why I discussed it, and you still do not see relevance, then we have little more to discuss.

In fact, my explanations re your comments are more for those out there, not so well versed in the subject, or even in familiarity with the language, as I feel that I am not going to get far with someone who would pick me up on my being 'off thread' because I referred, perhaps with some emphasis. to the key element in such an exercise - 'imagination'.

If you had read a little more of my post objectively instead of skimming to
only see one point that would permit you to reach quickly to your holster, you would would have seen I made the point that is one of the many diverse views you say such a thread is open to attract.

[mazHur]

Here is article about God and Time and which may provide some insight into the matter,,,,,,,,,,

http://www.the-highway.com/articleAug01.html

[mazHur]

Read more on Time and space,,,,,,,,,

click http://www.allamaiqbal.com/ias/timeandspace.html

[Midas]

MazHur, we could fill the thread with pages of articles that would 'throw light
on the subject'. That is if we take that 'light' as just another someone's idea from their 'imagination'.

Taking just those two links you give above, they would require two attributes at least from anyone taking the trouble to read them. (1) Imagination, and (2)a free and open mind in which to give them an unbiased evaluation.

You cannot enter the metaphysical world unless you have the ability to stretch the imagination. This still would not make you unbiased, and open minded, but even to be, say. a Christian, and accept its doctrines, and they are not strict in the sense of, say, the Muslim religion, or Jewish Orthodox, it still requires imagination to create the mind 'pictures you are fed.

There is not one word in ANY language that has any meaning in itself if it does not create a picture in the mind. Don't believe me - try it!`

'Imagination', comes from the word 'image' or picture. Life, to us all is pure imagination. Each of our images is as unique as our DNA. Everything comes to us via waves to our senses where they are transformed to creat a mind picture, and this is OUR, personal, reality.

Someone else's reality could be very similar, slightly different, or even completely different. Not understanding this is the cause of most of the world's problems. It breaks up friendships, and marriages.

To some, your reality, and in which you may be 'comfortable' could be somone else's nightmare, or living hell.

Referring once again to the thread subject. We have proved we can live for thousands of years in this existence without a definitive answer to the relationship of time and space, so why should it matter in any other 'world', providing you can 'imagine' another world. And, if you can, is it necessarily the same as another person's 'other world'.

[corehealer]

all you have is here right now, why are you elsewhere?

[Midas]

all you have is here right now, why are you elsewhere?

Yes, this is how I used to think. At least it is how I used say I thought. However when I thought about it more deeply, I saw something different,

It is thoughts of tomorrow that gives value to my today. I like to create special events to which to look forward. It makes today's life exciting to have something ahead.

That does not mean at the expense of today. Here again it is a question of balance - enjoy the moment, but see your tomorrows as an extension of your today - sleep is merely a rest stop in one continuous life we have artificially broken into days like we break the hour into minutes and seconds, but which are all part of the day.

It is the past with which I have a problem as this creates comparisons which the future doesn't; not until that future, itself. becomes our past.

[mazHur]

I do not deny the significance of imagination. One without it is an animal. It was imagination which helped Einstein solve his equation, e=mc square !

Let us suppose there is NO other world. Then arn't we denying the existence of the existing world? You will then say that the existing world is visible/tangible therefore you believe in it. But are you right in saying that seeing is believing?? Will you then believe, for example, whether Jesus or Muhammad existed or not just because you did not see them?? I think we cannot rely on our senses or imagination only. HG Wells had more imagination than his contemporaries but his was not the final word.

According to an oriental poet

Life is just a pause,
A break to refresh ourselves
Before we proceed further
To our destination
(that is the other world)


Or,

what is life?
An arrangement of elements.
What is death?
A disarrangement of the same elements.

Or,

There are more worlds beyond the stars
don't give up
keep striving irrespective of the tests of love
which are still on the look out for you!

Or,

Time is God itself
He was in the Beginning
He will last everlastingly !

If there was no time and space in the other world, how come Jesus will return to earth as its Saviour or Messiah??
This fact is not only confirmed by the Bible but also by other scriptures including the holy Quran and leaves no room for our ''imagination' to doubt.

[Metanoia]

I dont think we can ever say "never", I think that anything is possible. I believe that reality is but perception, and every thing we precieve is beaten into us from birth. If we can tweek our percption, even slightly it will change our reality. I think we have only hit the top of the iceburg of this fathomless mysterious "reality". Anyone who is contimplating these issues should read the "crack in the cosmic egg" and the Carlos Castaneda series.

[Midas]

"life can teach in a moment,that which reality will not admit in a lifetime." -Shelley


Ah! these poets. Unlike Shakespeare, they do not all shine with their philosophical offerings.

Surely, to each person their life is their reality. Reality, as with everything, is personal to the individual. We perceive, and understand only from our individual interpretations of the vibrations reaching our senses.

Another person's may be similar to ours, or, at the extreme, quite different. As the saying goes - 'one man's meat is an other man's poison.

This is where our greatest errors are committed - thinking everyone else should, or does, see life as we see it. How many relationships, and marriages, has this broken? How many wars has it started?


MazHur:
I do not deny the significance of imagination. One without it is an animal. It was imagination which helped Einstein solve his equation, e=mc square !

Will leave the rest for now.
'One without imagination is an animal' Really?
Do we not all belong the animal kingdom? Do animals lack imagination?
If dogs could carry out experiments on humans, would they perhaps not conclude we had no sense of smell? Would eagles not assume we were blind, or almost so?

I believe that all animals, and that includes us share the same basic characteristics and attributes. Where we differ is in their distribution and development. Humans moved away from the rest when they developed their 'imagination' to areas outside that of survival, but yet born out of survival instincts, which never really leave us no matter how sophisticated we advance life.

When you are eating something, and your dog is looking up at you and dribbling at the mouth as it licks its lips, is it not partly the imagination (mind pictures) of that food, or some of it, being shared, or inadvertently dropping to the floor? Have you not observed that it will look at you, then at the floor?

Everyone has imagination, and uses it constantly while awake, and perhaps when we are sleeping. It is just how it is used that makes the difference. Imagination like physical strength, is something which develops stronger, and in different directions, in some, than in another. Well, that is my opinion, it does not have to be everyone else's.

[mazHur]

I dont think we can ever say "never", I think that anything is possible. I believe that reality is but perception, and every thing we precieve is beaten into us from birth. If we can tweek our percption, even slightly it will change our reality. I think we have only hit the top of the iceburg of this fathomless mysterious "reality". Anyone who is contimplating these issues should read the "crack in the cosmic egg" and the Carlos Castaneda series.

I like your approach in the subject. It provides useful lead to research more.

and Midas,
If
Reality, as with everything, is personal to the individual.
then fire wouldn't burn us !!

Wow, what a breaking news ! Never knew Shakespeare was famous for his 'philosophy''!

Animals don't have imagination---they go purely by instinct.
Humans have senses but less developed or lost unlike animals. If animals had imagination they would be singing the universal national anthem!

[Midas]

then fire wouldn't burn us !!

Not sure how you intend this to relate.


Wow, what a breaking news ! Never knew Shakespeare was famous for his 'philosophy''!

Then you have never really read Shakespeare, or you don't understand philosophy, or both.


Animals don't have imagination---they go purely by instinct.
Humans have senses but less developed or lost unlike animals. If animals had imagination they would be singing the universal national anthem!

I know lots of humans who don't sing a
'universal' national anthem (is there one?) or even their own national anthem. But, all humans have imagination.

I also see, as will any other, I am sure, who has a pet with which they are close, or spent a lot of time studying animals, that animals have far many more traits, of which so many humans feel are only exclusive to humans, than for which they are given credit.

But, think as you will.

[Metanoia]

Ah! these poets. Unlike Shakespeare, they do not all shine with their philosophical offerings.

Surely, to each person their life is their reality. Reality, as with everything, is personal to the individual. We perceive, and understand only from our individual interpretations of the vibrations reaching our senses.

Another person's may be similar to ours, or, at the extreme, quite different. As the saying goes - 'one man's meat is an other man's poison.

This is where our greatest errors are committed - thinking everyone else should, or does, see life as we see it. How many relationships, and marriages, has this broken? How many wars has it started?

Very true...but I believe if you had actually read what I posted you would have realized that's what I was saying. And The quote is saying that the "reality" that we know, such as what society or religion has pounded into our heads from childhood, can be altered in a moment from our own discovery, our own perception. You clearly misunderstood me AND Shelley.

[Midas]

When we use a 'quote,' and in your case, where it was used as a kind of footnote below your main post, then we must read it as stated. That is what I did.


If there is something additional by Shelley (which one, Percy B or Mary?), attached to that which would throw a different meaning, as in to qualify what is inferred as written, then that should have been included.

Now, going back to your actual post, upon which I did not comment. No matter how I read it, or your follow up, it does not quite make clear that it supports my thesis that 'reality' is subjective. By that I mean that one person's reality is not necessarily similar to that of another. (It cannot be the 'same' as another, because it cannot be identical in every respect.)

There is a generally accepted 'reality' as being that which exists and shares
a commonality with the majority perception - a sort of accepted composite.

It all stems from our individual perceptions, and those perceptions are how we (ourselves) see, and react to life. This can be at variance to that accepted, and projected by media, and other forms of indoctrination which
attempt to exert influence on our perceptions.

The American Indian, I am told, had a saying - ' We must learn to walk in an other's moccasins'. Robert Burns the Scottish poet, gave a different slant when he wrote

' Oh would some power the gift to give us, to see ourselves as others see us, it would from many a blunder free us, and foolish notion' (I have avoided the dialect)

Here, he is pointing out that our perception of ourselves, is different to that of how others perceive us. With the Indian quote it is that we cannot understand others, unless we see things (life) as they see them (it).

Our life is the sum of our perceptions. Our perceptions are our reality, our life,
but this is not necessarily as life is to others.

For example, it is now accepted, and has been for a few hundred years that the world is round. The vast majority of us will act and react to life on that basis. However, if we came upon a tribe in some remote area of the African Congo, or the far reaches of the Amazon, I am sure there could be some who still believe the world is flat. (probably we would not have to go so far to find some who have this sort of belief, if only metaphorically). Then their life would be shaped by that belief.

Summary: Our perceptions shape our beliefs, and our beliefs shape our lives. They are totally interrelated.

If that is what you meant, then I apologise for not having 'the perception' to see it, though others, applying a different perception, might have done so.

[Metanoia]

Apology accepted, argument over. I'm glad we share the same belief on reality its hard to find such open minded intellectual people these days. Good day to you sir.:)

[blazeofglory]

Heaven is a process, a journey, a state of us, and is not a physical abode or something that has to do with time and space. I think we can make heaven out of anything or any pace, only we think and that way, in a heavenly way.

[mazHur]

Blaze

Time and Space is a complicated subject and it requires us to delve deeper into it rather than take it for granted as most people do. I don't claim to have any conclusive answer to the question except what is stated by poets, different religious texts and philosophy. As regard to heaven, your idea is so ideally expressed by the Poet of the East, Allama Iqbal, who goes to say that


It's Actions which go to the making of Life, Heaven or Hell
In his nature, this mortal is neither made of earthl nor light.

For more enlightenment on the subject, try this link (A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking)

[url]http://www.submarineinstitute.com/userfiles/File/stephen_hawking_a_brief_history_of_time[/u
rl]


for quotes, click :http://www.generationterrorists.com/quotes/abhotswh.html

[blazeofglory]

Time and space are material stuffs and it is often said there is no such things in heaven. We read in sacred texts man does not age in heaven and that proves that time does not reach heaven.

Meantime it is said that once one is in heaven one can take any shape and form. Corporeal forms are earthbound phenomena and in heaven they are nonexistent.

If we really believe in heaven, most of us do not in substance subscribe to the idea of heaven and hell, time and space are earthly features and not heavenly attributes.

Yet all that I said are sheer my ideas and I am just sharing it not arguing with you.

[Countess]

I believe reality is an illusion - that what is real (permanent) lies beyond this current plane of existence.
I believe if I believed that my life was my reality, I would without question kill myself, cos my life is one giant cesspool of pain.
So, I disinherit it and cast it off.
As for time / space - time is another dimension, space another (so we have five now?) - I believe we exist in more than 3 dimensions - the soul occupies another dimension - essentially timeless/spaceless - but is tied to consciousness here.
God exists in all dimensions fully, something incomprehensible.

[mazHur]

so true ,,,,,

Look at the stars
they are not what they
pose to be
Still you believe
they are not
deceiving you ?


Time and space are material stuffs and it is often said there is no such things in heaven. We read in sacred texts man does not age in heaven and that proves that time does not reach heaven.

Meantime it is said that once one is in heaven one can take any shape and form. Corporeal forms are earthbound phenomena and in heaven they are nonexistent.

If we really believe in heaven, most of us do not in substance subscribe to the idea of heaven and hell, time and space are earthly features and not heavenly attributes.

Yet all that I said are sheer my ideas and I am just sharing it not arguing with you.

Time and space are material things....okay but are they so or we just think so ? How can we believe aging is related to ''time'' ,,,isnt that a presumption again? Who knows whether or not people age in heaven,,,nobody returned from there to tell us that ?