The Limits of Conception

Is the nature of existence finite or infinite?

Speaking as an ardent Wittgenstein and Heidegger fan and a serious student of metaphysical teachings for more than a decade, I am inclined to regard this very question as the most fundamental philosophical query there is.

However daunting at first, by approaching it with the principle of Occam's razor as well as the 1st law of thermodynamics, some convincing deductions - which in my opinion are of unfathomable magnitude - are closer at hand than one might think.

*

Let's assume both scenarios.

(I) Existence is of a linear nature, it has a beginning and shall come to an end.  

(II) All is part of an infinite source, without beginning nor end.  

Of the two possibilities, (I) poses us with a direct problem, namely the follow up question: how does nothing become something?

Theory (II) on the other hand, doesn't contain any apparent fallacies.

**

Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate 

"Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily" is the original rule of simplicity, or if you will, Occam's razor. The principle suggests that out of two competing theories, the simplest one should be favored. 

Thus, if one were to use the principle when considering scenario (I) and (II), the latter one is preferable. 

***

The 1st law of thermodynamics, which constitute the very foundation on which modern physics rests, says that energy can not be created or destroyed. 

This law falsifies scenario (I) and confirms the infinite nature of existence by proclaiming that energy has always existed.

Assuming the correctness of the law, the conclusion must be made that energy is eternal in nature. Energy therefore can not be finite. 

****

If one was to take mentioned results as evidence for the infinite nature of existence, one could further deduce that there can only be one infinity as many-ness is a finite concept. Nothing can truly be separated from infinity.

We ourselves are evidence that consciousness is part of this one infinity.

Consciousness is a form of energy.

[...]

Pictures: 

(1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor#/media/File:William_of_Ockham_-_Logica_1341.jpg

(2) http://bestanimations.com/Signs&Shapes/Worship/chakra-energies-animated-gif-1.gif

If you found this interesting, you might be interested in another post I wrote called Hallmarks of Intelligence.

Meditation

Meditation is the dissolution of thoughts in Eternal awareness or Pure consciousness without objectification, knowing without thinking, merging finitude in infinity. 

-Voltaire

* * *

I believe that meditation is the most powerful and accessible tool for us to grow as individuals and for humanity to prosper. Unfortunately people aren't doing it, perhaps because they have erroneous and confusing ideas about this practice, which in reality demands nothing more than a daily moment of time. 

As a person who's been meditating on a daily basis for the last 7 years, I can vouch for the gifts this practice has to offer. Gifts like insight, joy and love for all parts of the life experience. However, words are not enough to convey the essence, in order to realize/feel its potential one has to try it out. 

Sometimes people ask me how I meditate; positions, breathing techniques and miscellaneous eastern references are often mentioned. As a matter of fact meditation is just about as simple as it gets.

This is how I do it: I sit down on a cushion on the floor, in a comfortable lotus position and keep my spine straight. Then I close my eyes, breathe regularly and relax. Focusing on the breath keeps me in the moment. 

That's it. 

I sit like this for circa 10-15 minutes every morning before breakfast, and often one more time when I come home from work or before bed. The first years I listened to music (solfeggio frequencies), nowadays I prefer silence.  

The key to success is persistence, i.e. every day you can.  

What I just said has been said by others before me. The most accurate and striking description of the practice comes from someone calling himself Hatton. This material surfaced circa 1960. It is the foundation upon my meditation firmly rests on. 

[…] Proper meditation is of uppermost importance, and I should like to dwell for a moment on this subject, for proper meditation is most important in your growth. First of all, place yourself in a position that is proper for meditation. The best meditation can be had in a sitting position. Sit the body comfortably but erect, with both feet placed firmly before you. Keep the body and head erect and straight. Place the hands open and upward in the lap. Allow those racing thoughts to race. Do not try to force them to stop, but bring yourself into a relaxed feeling. Let your mind relax; do not try to control it, and you shall find these racing thoughts in time will slow, will become slower and slower until they eventually stop. And with practice, my friends, this time shall become shorter and shorter, and in due time you shall reach that state of stillness quickly, and in this state of stillness you become one with Creation and life begins to speak to you. In this stillness you can bring yourself in attunement with whatsoever you wish. In this still, very still quietness, all things can flow to you, for your mind is open and receptive to higher knowledge.

[…] Now to some of you it may seem that it is impossible for you to relax in this position, but I say to you, my friends, that is the only true relaxation. For when the body is in positions for which it was not intended, true relaxation does not come, you cannot be receptive. Much of the Universal Energies comes to you through the spine when you are in the physical and unless the spine is erect, they do not flow. You would be amazed when this art is mastered, at what you can do; how quickly you can attune yourself in this state to anything that you desire. […]

-Hatton, 15/6 -1959

In a later communication the necessity of daily practice gets addressed.

[...] In the first place, it is necessary to discipline one’s self, to some extent, and set aside a certain time each day for this practice and you will never become proficient at the art of meditation unless you practice consistently. It is not enough to practice this art once a week or once a month, or even every few days, but this should become a daily ritual. For unless you do this, your progress shall be slow in mastering the art. […]

-Hatton, 23/6 -1961

The first couple of months of meditation were challenging for me, but this was also at a time when I had much emotional baggage to sort through. It might be helpful to begin with shorter time periods, just remember that patience is a small price for wonder.

Ancient Universe

The mainstream cosmological model, widely referred to as the Big Bang-theory, tells us that the Universe is roughly 14 billion years old. A number that doesn't exactly make sense both according to science, as well as from a philosophical point of view, as we shall see. 

The datings are, among other things, based upon our understanding of the properties of light. Mainly the concept of redshift, which means that the distance of a stellar object, can be estimated by the wave length of the light it emits. 

Some of the most remote objects in the visible Universe are called quasars. These objects have redshifts which put them 10 billion light years away from us. On top of that they are extraordinary bright, which suggests that they are several hundred (even thousand) times more energy containing than the Milky Way galaxy. Go figure.

A quasar.

The recently deceased astronomer Halton Arp was one of few in this field who maintained a critical stance against the Big Bang-theory. He based his critique on observations he'd made when gathering pictures of galaxies. Many of the galaxies he observed showed seemingly connecting "bridges" between them and nearby quasars. Considering that the most distant galaxies he detected were approximately 200-300 million years away, they couldn't have any connection with each other what so ever - at least according to the Big Bang-enthusiasts.

 The NGC 7603 galaxy clearly shows a bridge between itself and a quasar.

The NGC 7319 galaxy even has a quasar in front of it.

Arp suggested that quasars derive from galaxies, thus implying a vastly younger age for these objects, and more importantly, that the mechanisms causing redshift aren't fully understood. He proposed that inherent characteristics could be responsible, although unsure of what exactly.

Furthermore, independent observations indeed support a new take on the nature of quasars. Early last year a large quasar group was detected in a rather concentrated area of the night sky; and if we are to believe that these objects are as massive as mainstream cosmology suggests, they constitute 5% of the visible Universe. A fact that directly contradicts the Cosmological Principle which states that matter should be evenly distributed throughout space.

...

Regardless of what's true, I'm intuitively inclined to favor an ancient Universe. The whole notion of dating the Universe through our puny Earth-perspective is not only naïve, but also absurd when we obviously haven't a clue about the nature of time in the first place.

Besides, it's only fair to assume that Existence foregoes Time.  

∞