http://www.nbcnews.com/id/49971212/n.../#.UXrZ-SqF_6l
Not sure what I think about this, but here you go:
Printable View
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/49971212/n.../#.UXrZ-SqF_6l
Not sure what I think about this, but here you go:
I actually thought the Universe was quite like our body.
recent studies (released last year) of human newborns using the latest scanning technologies reveal that in normal birth all infants have exactly the same predispositioned neuron-net. this study was inclusive of the entire global offering of 'human'. upon that original network is the human exposed to uniquely become, as the network taking in takes on whatever the becoming individual's givens are.
seeing that we all in kind look up at the starry night without difference of what is observable, we can safely deduce that the uni-verse outlying is pre-dispositional to any one of us in our witnessing arrival.
same identifies same, whether one is consciously aware to it or not. if in the life one does not undergo circumstances that change the physiology of their uniquely formative brain, to be sure, the original predisposition is present, though meshed within the life's offering, though quite unreconizable; as is even the individual, for all human physiology is given toward growth/maturity; even as many individuals bear no sign of being mature in spiritual, emotional or mental capacitys.
yet, the uni-verse remains immovable, as does any predispositional schematic/blueprint/plan. however, in the spiritual realm of the unseen, or that which is not immediately identifiable, simply because of mis-placed ideation; change may occur, to say that, what is schematic/blueprint/plan reaches implementational parity/finish; and even this as the happenning, is not identifiable amongst human kind, as this is not a physiological apparency, but rather is that which remains unseen to the naked eye (innocense).
this is self-exposed in Paul's statement that among sinners he is chief. For he recognizes that the term Holy Man is none other that that which from is seen nought but holiness, asking itself, "what/when/where/why/who and how indeed is not Holy. to have identified that he is chief amongst is to have turned the word, from holiman to Na'Miloh which means great chieften. this can then be reckoned into Jesus' statement of human spiritual hierarchy vs worldy hierarchy. thus a flipping of roles, just like identifying flipping terms/titles. humility is the rule, to say, one is indeed as nothing; from there, only that which God would pronounce, lest what is personally boasted God would denounce. This "good thing" brought to Paul a lot of flack, as he found himself amongst peers/brothers who readily, often greedily, personally took upon themselves the given titles of worldy entitlery/power.
the determinate worldy desire for a gemmed crown while the King of kings wore piercing thorns, was identified by Paul, as he states that within himself is a thorn, and in that personal weakness is Christ Jesus' strength; thus realizing that such a thorn in His crown was very he, Paul; thus realizing that he, Paul, best aspire to bear his unique thorn as one less thorn piercing the King's head over his, Paul's surrendered head.
interesting is the length of Paul's letters, being 14, wherein all of them is a total of 100 chapters, say 50 50, or like this 50|05. the center of which seems off center, but given spiritually is not. emergent twixt the 50 and 50, we may hear Paul's only boast prior to his subsequent pronouncement unto all men other than himself, of Christ Jesus boasted.
Peter gives warning to all brethren, to be cautious with what Paul has given forth, for if not understood it could very well be one's ultimate destruction. it is no wonder, that even today, what Paul set forth and even Paul himself, is considered by some followers as other than godly in respect to good vs evil. the pot wants to call the kettle black; however, the contents of "personal" pot and/or shared-alike kettle yet remain to be overall understood by those venturing to within. Onesimi->Paul->Onesimus->Philemon(Holy Kiss), if ya did miss the only boast.
why have i bothered to include these remarks? because the topic, though given as logical info, is everybit the given logos unseen of mis-ideation's glinted eye.
study of ancient days following the Ar-yan movements southward into India, reveal that at one time there was call for proof to anyone making personal spiritual claims. such a one was demandedly asked to show the Virat-rupa; which apparently would have been upon revealed, an exact duplication of predispositional human, spiritually speaking that is. one supposes that the mystery is not that which may be of a personal claim, but rather, is that which has personal claim upon all that is inclusive to what human is or might be upon self-realization->actualization.
mind boggling stuff, the Mother of all Mysterys. May She universally claim us all. I can't reckon why She would not. but, i reckon not to know what is Her's. I reckon it is proper to leave the Mystery of what is Woman to Her alone. I can't say as any of us ever see anything coming, nor do we see while standing within it, and are always given to 20|20 hindsight, exclaiming, "OMG!".
my penny, and may your net as You cast have caught many fish to from given partiality cautiously choose the Keepers,
Tim
A final note: the Torah as given to Moses is referably named Tziroh, allegorically/analogous to the Sefer Yetzirah (Book of Creation). Moses severally handed to Joshua prior to Joshua's led crossing, what Moses refered to as The Truth Restored. This ?suggests? that while the truth may be lost of mankind through time, it is also within what is given as human, the restorative truth.
i suppose that the brain is like the eye of the needle which the thread goes through. maybe this is why a cat loves a ball of yarn, for such a yarn needs be playfully unraveled to reveal the threaded strung simplicity of the complex balling of yarns (drama).
True I think. The brain extends throughout the body in the form of the nervous system. It's all brain! Made of the sam material.Quote:
Originally Posted by GMAN12
And not sure what to think of that article either. It makes an amusing proposition, but concludes with the understanding we don't know enough yet.
With that, I definetly agree.
It is really fascinating to ponder, I don't think they have the math.
I can't get this post right. It appears I may think I'm some sort of expert here which is PSHAW - not so. Thing is I watched a TedTalks presentation by a guy who had the math to create a very-brainlike software. But I cannot find it again.
Most of all, however, speculation on how the universe unfolded is way premature until we learn something of dark matter/energy. It's a fun game to play, but even the authors (who are no doubt qualified) want to look to Einstein when even Relativity v. Qauntum mechanics are on the bubble concerning information lost/not lost at the horizon of a black hole can not yet be settled.
Mea culpa for not thinking this through before spouting off :oops:.
Yeah even I agree well brain is never ending topic and really very vast too.
[Link deleted. Fewer than 20 posts. Please see: http://www.astraldynamics.com.au/faq...#faq_linkrules]