You can/cant divide infinity

[AdamR95]

I had an insight today, that when you divide infinity in two, that one part of the two would be still infinite and would be still the whole thing. You can divide infinity into infinite number of parts and every part would still be absolute infinity, you can cut conscioussness to a pieces like you want and it will still be fundamentaly the same thing and thats the reason why duality beetween one and many is imaginary.

[tatsumaru]

Infinity is just a mathematical delusion. Infinity is another voguish belief topic among the object-ive minded. Theories of infinite space, time, and quantity are just objective math. Definitions of infinity are related or relative to the concept of immeasurability in space, time, or quantity. However, if there is no space, time, or quantity, as implied by Prajnaparamita, and quantum cosmology, then there is no infinity either. Infinity and Randomness are just byproducts of the inability of mathematics to explain a non-separate reality. Realize that right now you are just doing mental masturbation. Nothing conceptual is about feeling experience. You can't really divide anything because there are no things to divide.

"Geometry is not true, it is advantageous." - Henri Poincare (French Mathematician)

Edited May 24, 2021 by tatsumaru

[AdamR95]

15 minutes ago, tatsumaru said:

Infinity is just a mathematical delusion. Infinity is another voguish belief topic among the object-ive minded. Theories of infinite space, time, and quantity are just objective math. Definitions of infinity are related or relative to the concept of immeasurability in space, time, or quantity. However, if there is no space, time, or quantity, as implied by Prajnaparamita, and quantum cosmology, then there is no infinity either. Infinity and Randomness are just byproducts of the inability of mathematics to explain a non-separate reality. Realize that right now you are just doing mental masturbation. Nothing conceptual is about feeling experience. You can't really divide anything because there are no things to divide.

"Geometry is not true, it is advantageous." - Henri Poincare (French Mathematician)

I am speaking about actual infinity not the matematical concept. This present moment is infinity. I cant put it better in words, words always gonna be conceptual.

You cant divide it truly that was exactly my point.

Edited May 24, 2021 by AdamR95

[ivankiss]

Yup. The cut is imaginary.

The cut itself is Infinity.

There is no cut. Only Infinity.

[RMQualtrough]

1 hour ago, AdamR95 said:

I had an insight today, that when you divide infinity in two, that one part of the two would be still infinite and would be still the whole thing. You can divide infinity into infinite number of parts and every part would still be absolute infinity, you can cut conscioussness to a pieces like you want and it will still be fundamentaly the same thing and thats the reason why duality beetween one and many is imaginary.

That is true. I also considered something else... If it is outside of Space then, again, division would be impossible because there is no space in which to separate something into! Like trynna fit 10 pixels into one pixel. It can't be done.

[Dodo]

13 hours ago, AdamR95 said:

I had an insight today, that when you divide infinity in two, that one part of the two would be still infinite and would be still the whole thing. You can divide infinity into infinite number of parts and every part would still be absolute infinity, you can cut conscioussness to a pieces like you want and it will still be fundamentaly the same thing and thats the reason why duality beetween one and many is imaginary.

Maybe we can continue this further and say there is no Absolute infinity unless there are infinite number of infinities connected together to make that... That's where we come in I believe - you are one of those infinities, I am another... The actual I am of us... Ultimately the same and different to the other infinities. 

We could also think of it as 0 and not infinity. Divide 0 into as many parts you wish, you still get 0. My localisation is one of those 0s, your localisation another... Would explain how its possible for all this madness! How could there be only one but express as many? Well both 0 and infinity appear to allow this. 

[mandyjw]

❤?

Another way to think of it is with light, with white light all colors are inherent yet the light is colorless. When light shines on an object the object absorbs some colors and reflects another and appears to be a specific color. But if you take away the source of white light from it then not only the color but the separate object itself disappears. 

[Mason Riggle]

[Dodo]

3 minutes ago, Mason Riggle said:

My friend drew this once without knowing what it means. To me it had a deep meaning 

[tatsumaru]

18 hours ago, AdamR95 said:

I am speaking about actual infinity not the matematical concept. This present moment is infinity. I cant put it better in words, words always gonna be conceptual.

You cant divide it truly that was exactly my point.

There's no non-mathematical infinity. If it's not the mathematical infinity then it's not infinity, it's something else. Words have specific meanings. As @RMQualtrough pointed out infinity can only be possible in space. If space isn't real there's no such thing as infinity either mathematical or the one your are imagining. From a mathematical point of view you can actually divide infinity and create multiple infinities and even have smaller and larger infinities which is just to show you how psychotic mathematicians have become, completely identified with the parallel worlds of their conceptual fantasies. They are no longer trying to understand the actual reality but to connect the dots of an imaginary conceptual reality.

[AdamR95]

44 minutes ago, tatsumaru said:

There's no non-mathematical infinity.

What about the absolute/god?

 

[lmfao]

@tatsumaru it looks to me like you're playing a war over vocabulary. In addition to talking about delusions of mathematicians.

I can exclaim and call my experience infinite as the word I want to say, there's nothing complicated about that. There is non-mathematical infinity, the same way I can experience nothingness which isn't the empty set. 

That's a separate issue from the delusion of mathematicians, which by all means you are free to rant about. I understand that you're ranting about that with a context, but to say there's no non-mathematical infinity is limited to whatever scheme of words you're reference. 

Quote

Nothing conceptual is about feeling experience.

But yeah I do kinda get what you're doing with infinity. Since conceptually there with infinity, there is division into many infinities. And you're going after division. 

So I guess what you're also fundamentally going after is perception of "many"/division vs "one", which is cool. 

Also sounds like you're talking about whether there is just one absolute and that's that, or whether there are levels to it. Insert Ralston vs Leo debates. 

Edited May 25, 2021 by lmfao

[gettoefl]

god the infinity localizes itself to a finite self to experience the universe

can infinity map to the finite? 

yes ... proof:

take your infinite number if it is positive assign it the value 1, if it is negative assign it the value -1

i mapped infinity to the finite set 1,-1

god knows what it is doing

Edited May 25, 2021 by gettoefl

[tatsumaru]

1 hour ago, lmfao said:

@tatsumaru it looks to me like you're playing a war over vocabulary. In addition to talking about delusions of mathematicians.

I can exclaim and call my experience infinite as the word I want to say, there's nothing complicated about that. There is non-mathematical infinity, the same way I can experience nothingness which isn't the empty set. 

That's a separate issue from the delusion of mathematicians, which by all means you are free to rant about. I understand that you're ranting about that with a context, but to say there's no non-mathematical infinity is limited to whatever scheme of words you're reference. 

But yeah I do kinda get what you're doing with infinity. Since conceptually there with infinity, there is division into many infinities. And you're going after division. 

So I guess what you're also fundamentally going after is perception of "many"/division vs "one", which is cool. 

Also sounds like you're talking about whether there is just one absolute and that's that, or whether there are levels to it. Insert Ralston vs Leo debates. 

Not really playing a war over vocabulary. I am simply pointing out the fact that insights rooted in mental masturbation aren't really insights and aren't any sort of wisdom. I am also pointing out that without math you will not have the concept of infinity and you wouldn't even think to use it in any context be it mathematical or non-mathematical. I understand that certain people paying meditative attention to the present moment and to direct experience will uncover the falsity of borders and that this falsity was indeed created due to conceptual pursuits. However to start talking about infinities and division of infinities is simply more conceptual nonsense. Directly observing and experiencing what is, as is, isn't infinite. Once you realize that space isn't real you won't even think that consciousness is infinite. What I am saying here is that this idea of infinity is still grounded in beliefs, assumptions and concepts, it's still not real enough. Drop all beliefs, drop space, time, centers, beginnings, endings, above, below and see if there's any infinity still.

3 minutes ago, gettoefl said:

god the infinity localizes itself to a finite self to experience the universe

can infinity map to the finite? 

yes ... proof:

take your infinite number if it is positive assign it the value 1, if it is negative assign it the value -1

i mapped infinity to the finite set 1,-1

god knows what it is doing

The only thing you proved is that you can do something with your imagination.

Edited May 25, 2021 by tatsumaru

[AdamR95]

12 minutes ago, tatsumaru said:

Not really playing a war over vocabulary. I am simply pointing out the fact that insights rooted in mental masturbation aren't really insights and aren't any sort of wisdom. I am also pointing out that without math you will not have the concept of infinity and you wouldn't even think to use it in any context be it mathematical or non-mathematical. I understand that certain people paying meditative attention to the present moment and to direct experience will uncover the falsity of borders and that this falsity was indeed created due to conceptual pursuits. However to start talking about infinities and division of infinities is simply more conceptual nonsense. Directly observing and experiencing what is, as is, isn't infinite. Once you realize that space isn't real you won't even think that consciousness is infinite. What I am saying here is that this idea of infinity is still grounded in beliefs, assumptions and concepts, it's still not real enough. Drop all beliefs, drop space, time, centers, beginnings, endings, above, below and see if there's any infinity still.

The only thing you proved is that you can do something with your imagination.

Maybe direct experience is actual infinity? 

You can imagine the visual field for example as made out of infinite number of points. And when you get to the very edge of the visual field then it also continues forever as a void. In the end every experience is the void wich is also infinite.

See, to talk about anything i need to use language to point to something what i experienced as truth.

[tatsumaru]

24 minutes ago, AdamR95 said:

Maybe direct experience is actual infinity? 

You can imagine the visual field for example as made out of infinite number of points. And when you get to the very edge of the visual field then it also continues forever as a void. In the end every experience is the void wich is also infinite.

See, to talk about anything i need to use language to point to something what i experienced as truth.

Just because you need to use concepts doesn't mean that you have to use concepts that are in no way related to the verity of the relative realm. For example points are static and no amount of them even infinite can turn their static nature into dynamic one. Waves are a much cleaner concept that lives nearer to the nature of relativity. With waves there are no points and differences occur due to frequency not due to quantity of static objects. Space (yin) is just the opposite mate of Form (yang) so if you are thinking about space or infinity you aren't transcending duality and duality is just a magic show that contains no causes whatsoever. If you are thinking about space you are just observing the nature of the eye organ, however eyes also belong to the realm of relativity so they too are dynamic and are not of the source. If you actually discover something static I would come personally to congratulate you and be your slave for 1 year for you've transcended space and duality itself.

[AdamR95]

1 hour ago, tatsumaru said:

Just because you need to use concepts doesn't mean that you have to use concepts that are in no way related to the verity of the relative realm. For example points are static and no amount of them even infinite can turn their static nature into dynamic one. Waves are a much cleaner concept that lives nearer to the nature of relativity. With waves there are no points and differences occur due to frequency not due to quantity of static objects. Space (yin) is just the opposite mate of Form (yang) so if you are thinking about space or infinity you aren't transcending duality and duality is just a magic show that contains no causes whatsoever. If you are thinking about space you are just observing the nature of the eye organ, however eyes also belong to the realm of relativity so they too are dynamic and are not of the source. If you actually discover something static I would come personally to congratulate you and be your slave for 1 year for you've transcended space and duality itself.

This is just turning into word plays. Are you aware that we are just using different words to describe the same truth?

[lmfao]

@tatsumaru Fair dues, all in all I respect how hardcore you're going. 

3 hours ago, tatsumaru said:

 I am simply pointing out the fact that insights rooted in mental masturbation aren't really insights and aren't any sort of wisdom. 

Right

3 hours ago, tatsumaru said:

 I am also pointing out that without math you will not have the concept of infinity and you wouldn't even think to use it in any context be it mathematical or non-mathematical. I understand that certain people paying meditative attention to the present moment and to direct experience will uncover the falsity of borders and that this falsity was indeed created due to conceptual pursuits. However to start talking about infinities and division of infinities is simply more conceptual nonsense. Directly observing and experiencing what is, as is, isn't infinite. Once you realize that space isn't real you won't even think that consciousness is infinite. What I am saying here is that this idea of infinity is still grounded in beliefs, assumptions and concepts, it's still not real enough. Drop all beliefs, drop space, time, centers, beginnings, endings, above, below and see if there's any infinity still.

Okay I got what you saying
_ _ 
The only caveat I'll add is this. People will talk, have to talk about their experience. Talking is by very nature conceptual and allegorical. So be careful about being contentious and declaring war on every concept and label people use. 

You're right in how adamant you are to not confuse the concept with the realisation.

But don't overlook the very simple fact that when I experience mind-blowing I yell "infinity" and that's truthful and authentic, and there's no need to dissect anything in that manner. Provided we can contextualise it correctly and not confuse it with actuality. 

Being excessively contentious in this manner can become another robotic program 

Edited May 25, 2021 by lmfao

[tatsumaru]

2 hours ago, AdamR95 said:

This is just turning into word plays. Are you aware that we are just using different words to describe the same truth?

This isn't how I interpret the situation. As far as I can understand you, it sounds to me that you are preoccupied with the sensation of borderlessness that awareness has and calling it infinity/reality. I could be wrong. Doesn't seem like we are talking about the same thing. I think you are referring to Oneness while I am referring to Tao which are not equivalent or similar.
Regardless if you starting to experience that spearation is an illusion then I don't disagree as long as that is not being contexted like some other sort of separation like space or infinity.

10 minutes ago, lmfao said:

@tatsumaru Fair dues, all in all I respect how hardcore you're going. 

Right

Okay I got what you saying
_ _ 
The only caveat I'll add is this. People will talk, have to talk about their experience. Talking is by very nature conceptual and allegorical. So be careful about being contentious and declaring war on every concept and label people use. 

You're right in how adamant you are to not confuse the concept with the realisation.

But don't overlook the very simple fact that when I experience mind-blowing I yell "infinity" and that's truthful and authentic, and there's no need to dissect anything in that manner. Provided we can contextualise it correctly and not confuse it with actuality. 

Just to be clear I am not looking to wage war against concepts. I think some concepts are useful and that we might even need to create new concepts that currently don't exist in order to point to what's real more efficiently. A large portion of current concepts are rooted in abrahamic religions and materialism and because of this are insufficient or wrong, they are still useful though. Also I am not suggesting some sort of nihilism where nothing can be said about anything. Even Lao Tzu spent his whole life trying to point to the Tao through words. The Indian poet Ashvaghosa said "We use words to become free from words until we reach the pure wordless essence." So words are fine. I am however concerned about misrepresentation of reality through incorrect or irrelevant concepts though such as saying that reality is God or infinity or Oneness or Brahman.

Edited May 25, 2021 by tatsumaru

[lmfao]

3 hours ago, tatsumaru said:

Just because you need to use concepts doesn't mean that you have to use concepts that are in no way related to the verity of the relative realm. For example points are static and no amount of them even infinite can turn their static nature into dynamic one. Waves are a much cleaner concept that lives nearer to the nature of relativity. With waves there are no points and differences occur due to frequency not due to quantity of static objects. Space (yin) is just the opposite mate of Form (yang) so if you are thinking about space or infinity you aren't transcending duality and duality is just a magic show that contains no causes whatsoever. If you are thinking about space you are just observing the nature of the eye organ, however eyes also belong to the realm of relativity so they too are dynamic and are not of the source. If you actually discover something static I would come personally to congratulate you and be your slave for 1 year for you've transcended space and duality itself.

Also I'll add this to what I was saying earlier. What's the point in arguing over the exact accuracy over certain words when you know what the other person means? How is it not just mental masturbation at that point? 

You talk about wanting to drop concepts and not mental masturbating, but then you're also incredibly territorial about your version of words holding. To what end? It achieves nothing and points towards nothing of substance, you're just arguing over what to write in a dictionary

(written before I saw your edit) 

Edited May 25, 2021 by lmfao