Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This seems nearly self-evident to me and if I'm not mistaken, a tenet of Buddhist thought, as well. It occurred to me as a child as an odd idea, arrived at independently, but Sagan gives it credence. I find it intoxicating:
There is an idea--strange, haunting, evocative- one of the most exquisite conjectures in science or religion. It is entirely undemonstrated; it may never be proved. But it stirs the blood. There is, we are told, an infinite hierarchy of universes, so that an elementary particle, such as an electron, in our universe would, if penetrated, reveal itself to be an entire closed universe. Within it, organized into the local equivalent of galaxies and smaller structures, are an immense number of other, much tinier elementary particles, which are themselves universe at the next level, and so on forever- an infinite downward regression, universes within universes, endlessly. And upward as well. Our familiar universe of galaxies and stars, planets, and people, would be a single elementary particle in the next universe up, the first step of another infinite regress.
Second opinion:
"When you ask the question, “Who am I?”—if you have enough time and concentration—you may find some surprising answers. You may see that you are a continuation of your ancestors. Your parents and your ancestors are fully present in every cell of your body; you are their continuation. You don’t have a separate self. If you remove your ancestors and your parents from you, there’s no “you” left."
"You may see that you’re made of elements, like water for example. If you remove the water from you, there’s no “you” left. You’re made of earth. If you remove the element earth from you, there’s no “you” left. You’re made of air. You need air desperately; without air you cannot survive. So if you remove the element of air from you, there’s no “you” left. And there’s the fire element, the element of heat, the element of light, in you. You know that you are made of light. Without sunlight, nothing can grow on Earth. If you continue to look, you see that you are made of the sun, one of the biggest stars in the galaxy. And you know that the Earth, as well as yourself, is made of the stars. So you are the stars. On a clear night, look up, and you can see that you are the stars above. You’re not just the tiny body you normally may think of as “yourself.”"
Interesting reflections, so what do you want to talk about?
There wasn't anything in particular that I wanted to discuss. I would expect people to refute it, or say it's old hat, or agree, or any number of things. I agree it's an interesting idea.
There wasn't anything in particular that I wanted to discuss. I would expect people to refute it, or say it's old hat, or agree, or any number of things. I agree it's an interesting idea.
Trouble is, we are not in a University where the professor says to his students "blaa,blaa,blaa...discuss". We usually have some opinion of our own which we put forth and people then shoot it down, ridicule it, or occasionally agree with it - all by offering their own opinions. It is too easy to copy and paste a section from another blog etc and then not put your own point forward, particularly if you find it interesting and intoxicating.
Perhaps we are partially furred, variously garbed, electrically powered, food cooking, water filled, gas processing meat bags inhabited by sentient multidimensional beings. The end goal is to ride them until they break, and get in line to ride another.
Perhaps we are partially furred, variously garbed, electrically powered, food cooking, water filled, gas processing meat bags inhabited by sentient multidimensional beings. The end goal is to ride them until they break, and get in line to ride another.
Oh, I get it. I like that. Bit harsh (art? beauty? poetry? music? love?), but harsh seems to be the prevailing temper. To wit: so much of contemporary film. Can't watch most of it because it gives me nightmares.
I really respect Carl Sagan. He was a scientist to the bone, and a genius, but more importantly to me, he exhibited that rare ability among scientists to think outside the confines of what is known. I feel the same way about Einstein and Carl Jung. They never abandoned the scientific method, but also were never afraid to try to see a larger picture with the vast knowledge and intellect they had available to them.
I really respect Carl Sagan. He was a scientist to the bone, and a genius, but more importantly to me, he exhibited that rare ability among scientists to think outside the confines of what is known. I feel the same way about Einstein and Carl Jung. They never abandoned the scientific method, but also were never afraid to try to see a larger picture with the vast knowledge and intellect they had available to them.
I love Sagan, too, and have all his books. Bertrand Russell is my other great favorite. And Richard Dawkins. One of Dawkins' books, the God Delusion, holds up under multiple readings.
That's why the paranormal stuff has to be examined with a critical eye, right?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.