Do There Exist Laws Of Nature Within Pure Awareness?

[Wouter]

Recently I got intruced to ideas like "you are a field of awareness". I wonder why reality is so consistent. Granted, where we set the bar for reality to be consistent is, is arbitrary. But, I still think it is strange that there are laws of physics, if there is only awaraness. I mean if there fundamentally only is awareness, why can't everything happen (be perceived) within this awareness? Is our notion of "everrything" to vague?

 

[vizual]

The 'laws' of physics is only a projection of the mind, there really aren't any laws at all. You can literally see and make up laws wherever you look, in chaos there is always order. That's actually a function of the mind, we create and hold on to consistencies in our reality. Even your own mind is a collection of chaotic thoughts, then you make up a consistent story about those thoughts and call them 'you'. The mind is always looking for patterns in its perceived environment, and thus always making up new 'laws'.

So why can't everything happen within this awareness? Who says everything is not happening within this awareness? Sure, you can't manifest a flying car on the spot. But awareness is infinite and not bound to only 'you'. Everything that is happening in the universe is happening because that is the most interesting thing that can happen. If everyone would just started manifesting everything they can think up immediately there would be no point to anything anymore. The point of the universe is the journey, not the destination.

[Wouter]

On 29-4-2016 at 0:10 PM, vizual said:

So why can't everything happen within this awareness? Who says everything is not happening within this awareness? Sure, you can't manifest a flying car on the spot.

That is exactly my question. If there is not an external world dictated by physical laws, why are we so sure that "you can't manifest a fling car on the spot". 

The impression I seem to get from spiritual teachers (wich can obviously be a wrong perception of what they want to say) is that consciousness is more fundamental to reality than we generally asume. But why than does it feel so obvious that "sure, you can't manifest a fling car on the spot". Or do we perceive "the laws of nature just as laws of nature because" we are wired to see patterns. But if you go for the last statement, is it than possible that tomorrow one of these "laws" gets broken?

 

 

[Isle of View]

@Wouter

Interesting question.

The parameters in which we experience, the universal laws, seem to be a playing ground with constant rules.

Who set those rules? How did we end up having them? Ho decided how they will all fit together to give us a more or less homogenous experience?

 

I have some idea about it, but let me know if you come up with your own conclusions.

 

Chris

 

[FindingPeace]

15 hours ago, Wouter said:

is it than possible that tomorrow one of these "laws" gets broken?

Only humans define the 'laws'. And then we can come along and redefine the laws when we thinl we know better or differently. And sure, laws can be 'broken' because they were only a human concept in the first place. Just because we define some law of nature doesn't mean we truly understand nature, or that nature won't do something unexpected that breaks the 'law'.

There are no laws in reality. Reality just 'is'. If we stopped trying to analyse it and understand it, if we didn't try to identify any laws, reality would carry on being reality. Reality isn't dependent on these 'laws' that we think we identify. Sure there are patterns in reality, patterns that our minds try to connect together and rationalise.

But this all comes down to our compulisive need, as humans, to try to find 'meaning' and define 'laws' for everything around us. As if we actually have the cognitive abilities to even understand reality for what it really it. That's pretty arrogant and egotistical of us. We seem to assume that we can actually understand it. Why do we even need to? Like I said, reality will carry on being and doing what it is and does regardless of whether or not we impose laws, or see patterns or derive meaning and value from it.

Reality just 'is' and jus 'does'. No laws, no value, no meaning. Those are human projections.

15 hours ago, Wouter said:

why are we so sure that "you can't manifest a fling car on the spot". 

Has anyone managed this yet? When someone does, then we see it as possible. Until it happens, we see it as not possible. Noone can say for sure whether it is or isn't possible. Just that noone has achieved it yet.

[Henri]

Every law belongs to a certain developed mindset. The known laws of nature are the borders of that mindset.

Everything is happening within consciousness, which is limitless. What are the limits of our selves? 

Limited senses, limited knowledge because of limited metaphysics, all kinds of believe systems limiting you, limited self knowledge, experience, one can go on here for a while. And a real important one; truth cannot be grabbed by merely words. 

When you talk about a field of awareness, you talk about monism. When you talk about the laws of nature, you talk about dualism. The bridge between those worlds must be non-dualism. If you arrive there you`ll be able to manifest your cars in the sky. Only the need will be gone...

@Wouter

[David1]

On 4/28/2016 at 0:51 PM, Wouter said:

Recently I got intruced to ideas like "you are a field of awareness". I wonder why reality is so consistent. Granted, where we set the bar for reality to be consistent is, is arbitrary. But, I still think it is strange that there are laws of physics, if there is only awaraness. I mean if there fundamentally only is awareness, why can't everything happen (be perceived) within this awareness? Is our notion of "everrything" to vague?

 

Why does mathematics describe nature? İt's a mystery. And if you dig into this, you'll end up with a theory that's not falsifiable.

" I mean if there fundamentally only is awareness, why can't everything happen (be perceived) within this awareness? "

Because its not practical? İn the same way that it's not practical if you would have to do conscious effort to digest the food you eat, or to make your heart beat.

Why can't we manifest a flying car on the spot?

Because the story has to be consistent. İ'm sure one day nanotech will make this possible. "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Arthur C. Clarke"

[Wouter]

@David1

5 hours ago, David1 said:

 

Because the story has to be consistent.

I have lots of questions on your comment

But that is exactly what is baffeling me, why does the story has to be consistent? Will every story be perceived as consistent because we just search for the patterns in the given story? What defines "real" consistency? In what way exactly would the story be inconsistent when there would be perceived a fling car?

[David1]

15 hours ago, Wouter said:

But that is exactly what is baffeling me, why does the story has to be consistent? Will every story be perceived as consistent because we just search for the patterns in the given story? What defines "real" consistency? In what way exactly would the story be inconsistent when there would be perceived a fling car?

What would be your reaction if you encountered something inconsistent in reality? It would be a dead giveaway of illusion or dream. You can't manifest a flying car out of thin air, with no logical explanation ( eg. nanobots constructing it...) unless you're dreaming. So an inconsistency would end the game of pretending, and we don't want that. So the story has to be consistent.

 

Edited May 28, 2016 by David1

[Wouter]

I <3 Alan Watts

[charlie2dogs]

On 4/28/2016 at 6:51 AM, Wouter said:

Recently I got intruced to ideas like "you are a field of awareness". I wonder why reality is so consistent. Granted, where we set the bar for reality to be consistent is, is arbitrary. But, I still think it is strange that there are laws of physics, if there is only awaraness. I mean if there fundamentally only is awareness, why can't everything happen (be perceived) within this awareness? Is our notion of "everrything" to vague?

 

would you explain by what you mean about reality being consistent,  what is reality, where can it be found, how does one access it,

[Nahm]

With respect laws: Being an observer is awesome. Being a creator is even better.

 

[mostly harmless]

 What is a law? A law is required to direct actions. Does the universe ask a physics book what to do? These 'laws' of nature are meant to help human's understanding of the physical world. What we regard as laws of nature is just our current understanding. It happens occasionally that previous models of how the world works are replaced by new ones. That much to how solid laws of nature are. Not absolute.

As I understand your question you ask yourself, if awareness is the biggest container of reality, then the physical world must be inside it and its rules must be set by awareness. Is that how you think of it? Maybe the physical world is not something within awareness. I would indeed suggest it isn't. Otherwise, why would awareness appear in the physical world, if the physical world is in principal already contained within awareness? My understanding is that it is a misunderstanding to assume that the physical world does not exist on its own outside of awareness.

Awareness in an empty universe would not be able to be aware of anything. There needs to be something happening to be aware of. Awareness is not any thing. It is a space. In that space something can be. Like a universe with planets and suns and stuff. If that space is empty though, awareness would be in a dark, silent, eternal emptiness. It would be asleep.

 

[Nahm]

The moment you are so one with everything that you could manifest a flying car, you no longer desire a flying car. 

[Nahm]

On 4/28/2016 at 6:51 AM, Wouter said:

Recently I got intruced to ideas like "you are a field of awareness". I wonder why reality is so consistent. Granted, where we set the bar for reality to be consistent is, is arbitrary. But, I still think it is strange that there are laws of physics, if there is only awaraness. I mean if there fundamentally only is awareness, why can't everything happen (be perceived) within this awareness? Is our notion of "everrything" to vague?

 

@Wouter You are on the tip of a major breakthrough.  An analogy in hopes it helps,  - in our perceived reality there is constant motion, you take a picture, and when you put your focus on the picture, it doesn't look like anything is moving (in the photo). Then you return your focus back to the the room or whatever and there is motion again. Just go one more layer, and perhaps the fluidity in the everything is our more default state, outside or after this 'photo' or life / ego. You can connect to it here, but we peoples are tricky as fuck. Beliefs are like the ego's tentacles, but to us they feel like warm blankets.   I think all roads lead to the everything and that it is good. Enjoying the ride is just as important as time in and focus. One removes the doors and the other welcomes home the truth.

 

[Scholar]

I'd say this is an entirely linguistic problem. The problem is that "consistency" is a concept. "Physical laws" are concept. Even what you call "awareness" is merely a concept. The entire cognitive system is based on concepts and symbols. The ideas are not invalid because they are wrong, the ideas are invalid because they are ideas. They are not reality. "Everything happening in awareness" is just as much concept as the notion of physical laws. Infact, any interpretation of reality is completely invalid. The notion of truth itself is invalid.

That is the problem, and that is why people tend to have problems. Enlightenment is the art of not knowing, but people take it and use it to pretend they know. One needs to understand that understanding itself is not what it is understanding. Any notion is unreal, even the notion that any notion is unreal. This is so hard to comprehend because there is no way to comprehend it. Any attempt to comprehend is already a mistake.

 

So in a sense, any words even the most enlightened person utters is completely invalid. In the end the only thing that is left is silence. And make no mistake, that silence doesn't mean anything. It does mean that "everything is awareness". It doesn't mean that you are infinite. It means absolutely nothing at all. And that, the absence of truth, the absence of understanding, is all that will be left. I guess a lot of people hope for some ultimate supremecy of truth.

Ironically, truth exists, it's just exactly what we think it is, a thought. Not more than that.

[Nahm]

On 4/28/2016 at 6:51 AM, Wouter said:

Recently I got intruced to ideas like "you are a field of awareness". I wonder why reality is so consistent. Granted, where we set the bar for reality to be consistent is, is arbitrary. But, I still think it is strange that there are laws of physics, if there is only awaraness. I mean if there fundamentally only is awareness, why can't everything happen (be perceived) within this awareness? Is our notion of "everrything" to vague?

 

I am so intrigued by your original question. I don't think anyone, myself included, actually contributed anything close to an answer, undertstanding, etc. Why are there laws? You can say they are a concept, nothing is real, everything is consciousness, and we all agree, but aren't you finding these as all cop out nonanswers? No one can walk out their front door and break a single law. Only in the mind. So there is a clear separation between the mind and the laws. Are the laws random emergence from probability, like matter, and we just think they're laws because we haven't observed that level yet? Seriously. 

[SLICKHAWK]

Everything is vibration, shh don't speak do not write.

Feel. 

[Nahm]

10 hours ago, SLICKHAWK said:

Everything is vibration, shh don't speak do not write.

Feel. 

Ditto.

lol

You rock Slickhawk. Love your way, by the way.