Existence/the universe should be impossible. What is this world?

>>19233841
You are missing the point, infinity have no end and no beginning

>>19233841
So, when are you going back to school?

>>19233841
Those are really interesting questions!
I think contemplation like you are doing rather than an external source is probably the best way to find an answer. But those are really interesting questions!!

>>19233841
I think you MIGHT enjoy reading the law of One. It's kinda crazy but does have a consistent answer to all those questions. But it could just as well be BS. Your post made me think of it though... but definitely trust your own intuition and discenmenr first! There is a lot of BS in new age circles, imo, even though the law of One is probably higher quality than most stuff I think.... that's just my opinion though.

Flat earth explains everything you need to know about our world

No matter what conclusion we come to as 'the origin' of our universe we'll always ask what caused it and what preceded it and what was 'there' before the universe etc because everything always has to be a reaction to something else. Starting to think that the way humans perceive time makes understanding the nature of the universe impossible

>>19233841
Random infinity eventually generated a God Figure that keeps an eternal record.

>>19234126
In that case it's just as likely that random infinity created us, bypassing any so-called "God". How come a random infinity exists rather than nothing, now that's what I wonder about.

>>19233841
>>19234081
this guy is on the right track, op. youre asking questions about a time and place before times or places existed, before spacetime.

by the way, things of this nature are referred to as "metaphysics" which is a branch of philosophy that deals with the fundamental nature of the universe (such as how it began). even most metaphysicians can agree that these are questions that (while necessary to ask) cannot be answered by their very nature. so keep wondering and searching for answers, but try not to take these things too seriously because, in the end, the answers you're looking for exist outside of our plane of existence and understanding, if they exist at all.

>>19234153
This.

>>19234153
Even terms like 'before spacetime' and 'outside of spacetime' show the limitations of our language in understanding the universe, these still refer to temporal or physical positons.

The idea of ever grasping the concepts of not being bound by space and time seems like trying to explain the third dimension to a 2D character, I think it might not be possible.
But I can't tell if it's arrogant to think it's not possible just because I don't understand it

Interesting quote
>13.13 Questioner: Was the galaxy that we are in created by the infinite intelligence or was it created by a portion of the individualized infinite intelligence?
>Ra: I am Ra. The galaxy and all other things of material of which you are aware are products of individualized portions of intelligent infinity. As each exploration began, it, in turn, found its focus and became co-Creator. Using intelligent infinity each portion created an universe and allowing the rhythms of free choice to flow, playing with the infinite spectrum of possibilities, each individualized portion channeled the love/light into what you might call intelligent energy, thus creating the so-called natural laws of any particular universe.

>Each universe, in turn, individualized to a focus becoming, in turn, co-Creator and allowing further diversity, thus creating further intelligent energies regularizing or causing natural laws to appear in the vibrational patterns of what you would call a solar system. Thus, each solar system has its own, shall we say, local coordinate system of illusory natural laws. It shall be understood that any portion, no matter how small, of any density or illusory pattern contains, as in an holographic picture, the One Creator which is infinity. Thus all begins and ends in mystery.

>>19233841
Shut up bitch

>>19233841
I don't really have an answer but this was a lovely flow of thoughts. Intriguing to think about. Thank op.

hey look it's baby's first existential thoughts

>>19234221
>portion of infinity
Scratching my head

>>19234243
Yep this stuff is hard to comprehend desu. I don't think this stuff can be know, maybe. It seems impossible to comprehend infinity, but It's such an interesting thing to ponder about.
I like what >>19234153 said
>so keep wondering and searching for answers, but try not to take these things too seriously because, in the end, the answers you're looking for exist outside of our plane of existence and understanding, if they exist at all.

>>19234232
I was thinking the same thing.

>>19233841
The world is too big and you are too small. Just enjoy what you have. The maniacs are going to do whatever they want and you can't stop them.

>>19234260
Where is the quote meant to be from and what is intelligent infinity?

Infinity is indeed hard to comprehend but by its nature you can't divide it into portions. Either you cut an infinite resource into two pieces which are finite, meaning it wasn't originally infinite, or you cut it into two infinite pieces, in which case it wasn't really divided

>>19233841
Anything but observation is mere unconfirmed rumor

>>19234303
The quote is from the Law of One
>lawofone.info
Well, infinity can be divided in an infinite number of finite parts, like numbers themselves.
The idea is that the creator individualizes itself in an infine number of seemingly finite portions of itself (the material says each speck confains a microcosm of the whole universe). The creator experiences the illusion of finity and separation through the free will of those "individualized portions" (like us) in order to experience itself... there's a lot of other stuff though. This is my understanding. The material is better than what I'm making it. This is kind of a (long) summary
https://infiniteshift.wordpress.com/2014/06/06/the-law-of-one-wikipedia/
The material is still worth reading in my opinion, still with a skeptical and discerning mind as it's pretty "out there". The fun part is they always say to do this themselves (Ra) to respect the free will of readers.

>>19234260
Oops meant "to be honest" not desu!
>>19234303
>>19234348
Oh, and I think intelligent infinity simply refers to the creator, although I'm not 100% sure.

File: download (17).jpg (6KB, 272x186px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 272x186px

>>19233841
Having studied pretty much every philosophy and religious/esoteric tradition I could get my hands on, this is, as far as its possible for me to tell, the massively over-simplified truth of reality:

Nothingness is infinite negativity. the universe did in fact emerge out of nothing, because to say that's impossible is to start asserting what can or cannot happen with nothingness, and thus making it a determinate thing that follows some kind of law, instead of what it is: infinite potentiality 'to be'.

That is to say, the negative, the pure bliss of the unconscious, sleeping void, the source and devourer of all determinate categories, made nothing OF ITSELF by becoming SOMETHING. this something is god, and this incomprehensible dark ground that birthed him is in a way, God too, precisely because in the void negating itself it can't help BUT create god.

So the ultimate mystery if everything nevertheless STILL produces an idea of the Good, of beauty, of consciousness, justice, love, and the human striving to embody these ideals is nothing but the negative abyss now negating its own negativity - exemplified by death, entropy, disorder.

We are one principle, that according to its nature as the Ultimate Brute Fact of Nothing - cannot help BUT transcend its own nothingness BECAUSE it is nothingness.

And consciousness is this negativity itself - what is consciousness but negation? In saying "life sucks" or "reality's boring", aren't we reality itself trying to negate its own shittiness?

Light is NOTHING BUT darkness' negation of itself

We are both "just" molecular systems destined to dissipate at our death, AND that which knows ourself as such, that which negates our very finitude in our longing for the infinite

>>19234462
Interesting perspective.

>>19233841
The universe always was and always will be. The big bang was one of many. The only way to find peace is to wiggle in time with the cosmic noodle.

Post shit that the average stoner thinks of in highschool.

> /X/ considers it impressive.

Fuck this board

>>19234596
It might shock you to learn even the greatest philosophers just think through ideas that have passed through the minds of stoners, or even you can find in a hallmark.

Truth is a simplicity. You get what you bring to it. If you don't see a flash of universal truth in most of the posts ITT, however casual the language they use to express it, sounds like a you problem.

>>19234243
I think that's the point. Infinity as a whole can be understood in concept, and thus accepted. However if one was to take a "segment" of what was designed as its whole to be an infinite system, it would be inherently confusing and contradictory.

>>19233866
I wrote this earlier today as some ideas for dialogue for a book I'll probably never write. It's rough because I was writing as fast as I was thinking. There are probably a bunch of logic holes. One character is trying to break another character's brain:

There is no ascension. There is only the endless cycle of death and rebirth repeating in infinite combinations in a timeless space. You are an infinitely repeating self and you are an infinitely repeating other. You are all and everything. You are me. I am you. We are infinity and thus we are God.
That guy over there, that guy is you. You are that guy. You are also me. Everything is the same thing. Everything is all mashed together. It expands and contracts like the beating of a heart.
This experience we're having; it's just a series of points that just happen to line up in a particular way. What you see as death, is just the end of that line. It will happen again an infinite number of times in an infinite number of ways.
All things are possible. Anything you can think of is true, not because you thought of it, but because it is already true. It has always been true.

>>19234642
I think there is transcendence, you transcend this cycle the more you embody, not just understand, this knowledge through detachment

>>19234153
http://www.crystalinks.com/emerald.html

read this, it might answer some of your questions

l&l

File: 1497893193727.png (25KB, 499x468px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 499x468px

>>19234642
but why

>>19234676
>>19234672
It's a rough draft of the thoughts of a fictional character. I just thought there might be a glimmer of truth in it. It was fun writing until I realized that until I clean it up and add some context it just sounds like a rant from Rick and Morty. I might just delete it and move on because of that.

>>19233841

Everyone tries to understand that if there is a God then how did he come to be? How has he existed forever if our universe was made by him? It drives some insane.

You can't apply rules of this universe to God. God created the universe with specific rules in mind i.e.

>everything has a beginning and an end.

God does not need to follow the rules of the universe he created. Therefore when trying to understand him don't apply rules of our universe to his existance.

>>19236047
So basically you're saying God has existed forever just because?