> On Fri, 7 Mar 2008 00:56:05 +1000, "brian fletcher"
> gmail.com> wrote:
>

>>
>>"Art" zilch.com> wrote in message
>>news:t2cvs3tt5aek0i0o4e32if5hdde5pm1c3h@4ax.com...

>>> On Thu, 6 Mar 2008 00:55:19 +1000, "brian fletcher"
>>> gmail.com> wrote:
>>>

>>>>"Art" zilch.com> wrote in message

>>>

>>>>> What is it that we know what it is not but
>>>>> not what it is?

>>>

>>>>Inspirational, Art. Congratulations.

>>>

>>>>Until one is ready, no amount of evidence is ever enough. When you are,
>>>>evidence becomes confirmation. You already knew , but didnt know you did
>>>>:-).

>>>
>>> Here's a fellow with a cure for the philosopher's disease:
>>> http://thenaturalstate.org/index.html
>>>
>>> But let's pretend we're ignorant philosophers and all we have at
>>> our disposal are our intellects. Instead of seeking inner knowingness
>>> or eternal bliss we get our kicks playing with puzzles.
>>>
>>> The one I had in mind is randomness. I read that some philosophers and
>>> mathematicians at a meeting on the subject concluded and concurred
>>> that we know what randomness is not but not what it is. We can devise
>>> batteries of tests to apply to alleged random number sequences and
>>> determine that some sequences fail our statistical criteria. In that
>>> sense and in that sense only we know what randomness is not. But
>>> nobody has a clue as to what randomness is.
>>>
>>> Nature supplies us with several kinds of sources believed by
>>> physicists to be random (note the word "believed"). We can construct
>>> RNGs based on radioactive decay, electronic white noise, etc.
>>> It's found that whatever source of supposed randomness nature supplies
>>> us with, that human minds can willfully have a statistically
>>> significant effect on the sources. Worse yet, it doesn't matter
>>> when the random sequences are generated. Seqences generated
>>> yesterday or last week are affected.
>>>
>>> Maybe in a deeper reality "underneath" physics and forming the
>>> objects of physics there is "perfect" randomness (whatever that
>>> means) but we can never see that "perfectness" manifest itself
>>> since whatever is manifest is always affected by the necessity to
>>> form some sort of structure or order.

>

>>I learned a numberof years ago, that the human mind can only discover
>>"that
>>which is not". Confirmed at every step and continues to be so :-).
>>
>>A holographic structure, looking for structure!
>>
>>This reality can only be percieved as ones authentic nature starts to be
>>realized. When "one" can observes "one's mind".. We`each need to pursue
>>such
>>illusions, to wake up to who is doing the pursuing.

>
> Then what?

> Where do you go from there?

> What's the nature of that which
> pursues illusions or decides not to?

> Isn't posting on this newsgroup
> pursueing a illusion?

> Maybe you've "awakened" to an illusion :)
>

> Art
> http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg
>
>
>
>
>