Origin of energetic life

[zareste]

So I'd like to probe everyone's deep knowledge for a moment.  We talk about souls a lot around here, obviously, but where do you suppose they came from?

My greatest guess is they originated in a star system somewhere, probably pretty far away, probably a long time ago.  It'd be nice if I could study a soul and come up with a more detailed theory on how its formed, but I'm a little too attached to my cellular body and don't have much luck leaving it.  Plus I hear the soul tends to hang around the back of your head, so, yeesh.  Sucks when the essence of your existence is so hard to see.

One big issue is whether cellular life preceded energetic life, the other way around, or both formed separately.  There's a slew of possibilities:
1. We came from - maybe - an animal somewhere out there who spawned a personal spirit as a means of evolutionary preservation (invincibility of complete death) and we came from there.
2. A species evolved to live on a higher frequency due to harsh low-freq conditions on the planet, and was able to come here at one point or another.
3. We originated on a higher frequency (ie. the star system theory) and invented cellular life manually, but Earth's materials could only produce low-freq bodies.
4. A species somewhere had a dying environment and needed a means of interstellar travel.  Invented souls capable of holding memories, living in space and shooting over long distances almost instantly.  (The soul is a very advanced, very capable thing; we might be some sort of technology.)
5. Cellular life AND energetic life came about separately, but energetic life forms learned to alter cellular forms so we could control them.

And of course a bazillion others.

I personally wouldn't believe for a minute that cellular life originated on Earth (on its own).  It's very young, the system is very young, and the possibilities are one in a trillion.  In the time this would take, countless other species from older, more suitable planets could have come to Earth and left its mark.

The soul itself is a real smoking gun for this; our very essence is something capable of moving near or past light speed between planets, systems, and can go unharmed by the vacuum of space.  Could something have just popped up out of an Earthly human's body one day with all these capabilities?  I doubt it.

I guess it's a tad pitiful that the mainstream evolutionary theories have complete ignorance of energetic life and millions of other factors. I didn't feel like setting around whining about it, so I thought I'd correct it.

Anyone else have any input on the makeup of the soul or where it came from?  I'm no expert on what it's like outside the body, so it'd be cool to have more real facts to work with.

[Wells]

I believe God / The Creator created the universe with its laws of physics, and let the system evolve.

When humans had evolved, God chose us to integrate (part of) his consciousness with.  Our 'soul' is the part of us that branches off from God.  It is integrated with the physical through the various higher dimensions, through the energy body etc.

That's my current 'belief' of how everything came to be anyway.

[zareste]

Thing is that 'universe' indicates 'everything' so nothing can precede it, plus God is an intelligent life form and intelligence requires several elements to function, so with that sort of complexity, he'd have to have come from somewhere first.  So, assuming souls came from God, one has to figure out where God came from.

[Wells]

Well it always comes down to the "If X created Y, what created X" etc etc.  Thinking like this gets you nowhere - so you have to realise that at some point there must be a universal IT that just exists, with no creator.  I think the notion of creation is related to time, and I believe time is something that has been created by God too.  So God exists beyond time, he always has and always will exist, he wasn't created, he just... is!

By 'universe' I mean the space that the physical lies in.  I think it does end somewhere if you go far enough out.  Or maybe it's a dynamic space - as the universe expands, more space is 'created' for it to fill.

[zareste]

That was just my point.  The origin of the universe is inevitability; from inevitability you get cause and reaction. That's what time is; it's not a creation.  Intelligence can't just 'be there', it has to form, using time.  So the questions are still unanswered.

[Legend]

So I'd like to probe everyone's deep knowledge for a moment.  We talk about souls a lot around here, obviously, but where do you suppose they came from?

My greatest guess is they originated in a star system somewhere, probably pretty far away, probably a long time ago.  It'd be nice if I could study a soul and come up with a more detailed theory on how its formed, but I'm a little too attached to my cellular body and don't have much luck leaving it.  Plus I hear the soul tends to hang around the back of your head, so, yeesh.  Sucks when the essence of your existence is so hard to see.

One big issue is whether cellular life preceded energetic life, the other way around, or both formed separately.  There's a slew of possibilities:
1. We came from - maybe - an animal somewhere out there who spawned a personal spirit as a means of evolutionary preservation (invincibility of complete death) and we came from there.
2. A species evolved to live on a higher frequency due to harsh low-freq conditions on the planet, and was able to come here at one point or another.
3. We originated on a higher frequency (ie. the star system theory) and invented cellular life manually, but Earth's materials could only produce low-freq bodies.
4. A species somewhere had a dying environment and needed a means of interstellar travel.  Invented souls capable of holding memories, living in space and shooting over long distances almost instantly.  (The soul is a very advanced, very capable thing; we might be some sort of technology.)
5. Cellular life AND energetic life came about separately, but energetic life forms learned to alter cellular forms so we could control them.

And of course a bazillion others.

I personally wouldn't believe for a minute that cellular life originated on Earth (on its own).  It's very young, the system is very young, and the possibilities are one in a trillion.  In the time this would take, countless other species from older, more suitable planets could have come to Earth and left its mark.

The soul itself is a real smoking gun for this; our very essence is something capable of moving near or past light speed between planets, systems, and can go unharmed by the vacuum of space.  Could something have just popped up out of an Earthly human's body one day with all these capabilities?  I doubt it.

I guess it's a tad pitiful that the mainstream evolutionary theories have complete ignorance of energetic life and millions of other factors. I didn't feel like setting around whining about it, so I thought I'd correct it.

Anyone else have any input on the makeup of the soul or where it came from?  I'm no expert on what it's like outside the body, so it'd be cool to have more real facts to work with.

You may want to read what Bruce wrote in the tutorial section of his main page.  There's one section that basically explains his understanding of the should and I personally feel comfortable wit the idea.  It may not make sense to you if you haven't move up enough to relate to the concepts,but it's a start.

Basically, you have to let go the notion of time (even modern physics - read Einstein has done this).  Time is the fourth dimension and when time does not exist, is there really a sense in having creation and destruction?  The other thing you need to know is how everything is frequency (lower frequency is what you can call mater).  Higher frequency (radio signal, ...) and even higher ones are basically an energetic signature.  Thus the frequency can be replicated perfectly and co-exist anywhere

[zareste]

Does anybody have the slightest bit of input?  I'm looking for logic, and a bunch of nihilism doesn't explain anything.  At least give it a shot; it's not like anything bad will happen.

[Wells]

You say the origin of the universe is inevitability, why not say the origin of God is inevitability?  Why can't intelligence just 'be there'?  The universe is intelligent - it has rules and laws governing its behaviour, so if it can just exist, then couldn't God?

edit: and I don't think anyone is being nihilistic....

[zareste]

I did say God is inevitability.  Well, maybe implied it.  Intelligence requires a lot of factors to come together; those factors can't be intelligent without advancement, hence time is needed before it has intelligence.  The universe can't actually think in its current state.  Parts of it can (us for example) but, by default, it's just idle matter until it can be used for intelligence or life.

[Wells]

Ah I see what you're saying now.  Well, I don't think intelligence needs time to be intelligent.  I think it's difficult to think beyond time, but no time doesn't mean nothing happens, it doesn't mean things just sit there idle doing nothing.  Thinking about something as being 'idle' almost requires time, i.e. it is doing nothing now.... and it is still doing nothing now (a short time after).  Without time, things just happen I guess.  Bah, now I'm getting confused.

[zareste]

Time is when things happen.  Things progress simply from cause and effect, and intelligence can't just be there when the whole universe is a single point.  The elements can't be right when they're all indistinguishably fused together.

[Legend]

That was just my point.  The origin of the universe is inevitability; from inevitability you get cause and reaction. That's what time is; it's not a creation.  Intelligence can't just 'be there', it has to form, using time.  So the questions are still unanswered.

Your concept of time is overly simplistic.  You have to think of time as another dimension.  This word may seem scary, but it's no different from <x, y, z>.  If you've read any physics book, you'll be familiar with the concept of <x, y, z, t>.  If you're not there yet, that's where you need to start.  Think of it as many world running at the same "time" for a lack of a better word.  Many yous playing out various games.

You are seeking the answer to things for which you do not understand the foundation.  Try explaining to a cave who speaks English how a light bulb works.  This is an overly crude example, but it illustrates the idea that you need to learn the more basic concepts before you reach the eternal questions.

[zareste]

Dimension is an issue of space measurement; it doesn't take events into account.  You have no insight into the logical side of this situation if you don't understand the most basic fundamentals, so you can't stick around clouding a thread with baseless information from whatever dogma you're trying to reenforce.

[Wells]

Time is when things happen.  Things progress simply from cause and effect, and intelligence can't just be there when the whole universe is a single point.  The elements can't be right when they're all indistinguishably fused together.

If nothing happens without time, how does time itself come into existance?  No time doesn't mean nothing happens, I'd have to agree with Legend in that your concept of time, and timelessness is wrong.

[Frank]

Time is not an entity in itself, nor is time a dimension. Though I can fully understand how people come to think that way. Time, is a notion, an idea, a concept. One that has developed from a particular kind of interactionism. A result, if you like, of having to perceive events via our physical senses. That is all.

Yours,
Frank

[aleshah]

The experience of space creates auto/passively 'time' , and time creates passively the experience of space.
Another point is space is relative/ as time is.in physical means
Existence needs no prove for it's own existence (MIRROR MIRROR), this are just questions of mind and stay so long that void space exists without it's opposite part.
as voids/idle came to this world freely they leave this world  freely.
Maybe the void plate of void created auto/passively this MIRRORS. / 'time'
Soul of souls, houses of houses, spaces of spaces.
As time extends, space extends, experience extends passively.
Evry extension of time and space changes the form of void.
Maybe this void is not stable in itself, and has got anti - void particles which travel back to origin, inplode in itself  - this results in no beginning and no end  of creation.

[zareste]

No time = no movement.  Stuff doesn't happen when it doesn't move.  Movement wasn't an invention, as the inventor would have to move to make it, and it's incredibly obvious how it came to exist: inevitability.

Frank is pretty close, really.  The word 'time' itself began with a baseless meaning because of lack of understanding.  It was just a form of measurement back then.  Now it's pretty obvious to most that things change by cause and reaction, so the meaning now is more scientific.

And nothing needs to prove its own existence.  I intend to figure out where something came from.  Is that so hard to grasp?

[Wells]

Your idea of No Time seems to be more like Time Stopped.  Movement it defined in terms of time (like idleness) - at time A, object is at position X, at time B object is at position Y.  No movement means the object hasn't changed between time A and time B.  But you still have time there.

To think with No Time is an entirely different matter.  There is no A and B to compare with, so Change takes on a completely different meaning.  I think No Time is almost beyond human thinking, but I try to imagine that everything happens all at once, spontaneously to infinity.

[aleshah]

Maybe it just all slowed down....

[Tombo]

Time is a human cncept meaning that thing A happens before B meaning thus A can influences B but B cannot influence A, which leads to cause and effect. Now I thinkm it is pretty unlocigal to assume that our brains can really comprehend the universe or even the orgine of the soul; if there is such a thing at all. Physics already operates with more then 4 Dimensions to explain what we see, can our brains understand lets say 11 Dimensions? I can't.........

[Wells]

Well according to leading physicists, time isn't just a human concept, it is a tangible property of sorts.  Check out Steven Hawking's "A Brief History of Time".

At the end of the day though, you're right - the human brain can't comprehend such things!  Best to get on with Life I suppose.  It doesn't really matter at the end of the day.

[BirdManKalki]

Check out the properties of the voids within our universe and how they function. This would lead to an interesting parodoxical conclusion. This leads one to ponder on the divine universal mind until...

[Leo Volont]

Well according to leading physicists, time isn't just a human concept, it is a tangible property of sorts.  Check out Steven Hawking's "A Brief History of Time".

At the end of the day though, you're right - the human brain can't comprehend such things!  Best to get on with Life I suppose.  It doesn't really matter at the end of the day.

'Time' does not exist apart from 'rate of motion'.  There is no 'Dimension' of Time until mathematicians design totally artificial charts which shoehorn a Time Axis into their purely imaginary number play.

And Steven Hawlings is apparently the world's most intelligent expert on everything but common sense.  I think you could comb his pithy books through the thousands of sleepy pages and not find a single useful idea.

[Frank]

Well according to leading physicists, time isn't just a human concept, it is a tangible property of sorts. Check out Steven Hawking's "A Brief History of Time".

Because of our physical neurological structure, we can only perceive events in a sequential manner. In other words, we see events taking place one after another in a sequence of moments.

On perceiving sequences of these moments, we feel a sensation of passage. This sensation is what we have decided to call "time". I suppose we had to call it something. All the other sensations we typically experience have been labelled, and there is no reason why the sensation of passage should be any different. So Time is just the name we decided to call the "     " that comes about between one moment of neurological perception to the next.

Someone could well argue, of course, that time must surely be a tangible property of sorts because, irrespective of the label attached to it, something or other has taken place between moment "a" to moment "b".

Yes, of course! What has taken place is the sensation of passage, and no one can argue (well, no one in their right mind, let's say) that the physical sensation does not exist. It definitely exists, that's why we attached a label to it. But it's still only an idea we came up with to serve a particular purpose, i.e. to describe a particular feeling relating to our perception of events that come about within physical reality.

This feeling arises, as I said in my previous post, from a particular kind of interactionism. A result, if you like, of having to perceive events via our physical senses.

Yours,
Frank

[Wells]

This is interesting - I used to hold exactly this view, that time was just our perception of change, but changed my mind after being told that was wrong by too many people.  I think I need to stop listening to others!

I need to ponder on this some more now...