Since Newton was mentioned, most are probably unaware he studied the occult and alchemy. Then there's Einstein who believed in some sort of spiritual essence, and Tesla had visions and encounters with light beings.
I've also read a few articles on this unseen vs. materialism debate, where some scientist comes forward to the author describing how he/she and many of their peers secretly believe in psi, ufo's, etc., but to mention otherwise publicly would be detrimental to their careers and garner a lack of respect. Right there we can see how so-called mainstream thought is hindering true expression and honest inquiry, with the insinuation that belief in such things is unintelligent. Yet we can see that intelligent people do believe in such things. I personally don't appreciate being called stupid and don't know anyone who does (not that that's what's going on here).
I think we could move forward at an accelerated pace if we learned to respect each other's views and each other's intelligence, and I'm glad Account1 is more open than most. I've come to not be so bothered by atheists or skeptics, because in the infinity of consciousness, with belief there is also non-belief..each thing having an opposite. Seeing our mirror unifies.
Generally speaking, I think we're always trying to say the same thing but get caught up in the language of things..it's always miscommunication. There's the idea that nothingness is actually something, unstable, and full of virtual particles popping in and out of existence. One is trying to explain it through quantum physics, and the other is attempting to describe it through a spiritual lens.
6.7 The dissolution into nothingness is the dissolution into unity, for there is no nothingness.
82.6 ↥ Questioner: That’s what I thought you might say. Am I correct in assuming that at the beginning of this octave, out of what I would call a void of space, the seeds of an infinite number of galactic systems such as the Milky Way Galaxy appeared and grew in spiral fashion simultaneously?
Ra: I am Ra. There are duple areas of potential confusion. Firstly, let us say that the basic concept is reasonably well-stated. Now we address the confusion. The nature of true simultaneity is such that, indeed, all is simultaneous. However, in your modes of perception you would perhaps more properly view the seeding of the creation as that of growth from the center or core outward. The second confusion lies in the term, ‘void’. We would substitute the noun, ‘plenum’.
Also, my personal opinion is that if we are the universe, everyone has the intelligence to understand all aspects of it. You will often hear the phrase "Well you just don't understand science/math."..I think that's detrimental. There must be a simpler explanation out there..the reciprocal aspect of space and time makes sense. The spiritual, symbolic, feeling aspect of things is also simple and integrating..a way of understanding and comprehending reality.
I've also read a few articles on this unseen vs. materialism debate, where some scientist comes forward to the author describing how he/she and many of their peers secretly believe in psi, ufo's, etc., but to mention otherwise publicly would be detrimental to their careers and garner a lack of respect. Right there we can see how so-called mainstream thought is hindering true expression and honest inquiry, with the insinuation that belief in such things is unintelligent. Yet we can see that intelligent people do believe in such things. I personally don't appreciate being called stupid and don't know anyone who does (not that that's what's going on here).
I think we could move forward at an accelerated pace if we learned to respect each other's views and each other's intelligence, and I'm glad Account1 is more open than most. I've come to not be so bothered by atheists or skeptics, because in the infinity of consciousness, with belief there is also non-belief..each thing having an opposite. Seeing our mirror unifies.
Generally speaking, I think we're always trying to say the same thing but get caught up in the language of things..it's always miscommunication. There's the idea that nothingness is actually something, unstable, and full of virtual particles popping in and out of existence. One is trying to explain it through quantum physics, and the other is attempting to describe it through a spiritual lens.
6.7 The dissolution into nothingness is the dissolution into unity, for there is no nothingness.
82.6 ↥ Questioner: That’s what I thought you might say. Am I correct in assuming that at the beginning of this octave, out of what I would call a void of space, the seeds of an infinite number of galactic systems such as the Milky Way Galaxy appeared and grew in spiral fashion simultaneously?
Ra: I am Ra. There are duple areas of potential confusion. Firstly, let us say that the basic concept is reasonably well-stated. Now we address the confusion. The nature of true simultaneity is such that, indeed, all is simultaneous. However, in your modes of perception you would perhaps more properly view the seeding of the creation as that of growth from the center or core outward. The second confusion lies in the term, ‘void’. We would substitute the noun, ‘plenum’.
Also, my personal opinion is that if we are the universe, everyone has the intelligence to understand all aspects of it. You will often hear the phrase "Well you just don't understand science/math."..I think that's detrimental. There must be a simpler explanation out there..the reciprocal aspect of space and time makes sense. The spiritual, symbolic, feeling aspect of things is also simple and integrating..a way of understanding and comprehending reality.
![[+]](https://www.bring4th.org/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png)