Jedi Sentinel Findings

@Gisteron

I believe you misunderstood the purpose of that post. I'm not claiming any of the information I posted as fact. It is a mosaic of information I've observed and its an incomplete mosaic. So if you're asking for explanations, sources, and proof you might be disappointed with the results.

However I feel you cant get better if you run away from a challenge so here we go again...

Please, explain what the individual parts of the Force are and by what mechanism they interact or interrelate to form a "living system of life".

I only have a few pieces of the mosaic and the peaces are based on the masonic teaching. Everything vibrates, everything has poles, everything is a part of the "ALL". The Force is WITHIN the ALL. Thats what I'm observing when I post these ideas.

Please explain how the expansion of the universe does anything to demonstrate a union of our bodies with the universe and how that union is no longer provided because of the expansion.

The universe expanding is not an optical illusion that only LOOKS like its expanding. It is expanding therefore the atoms in your body were the very same atoms present after the big bang. I never said our union is no longer provided. What I've learned is that its actually the "space" that defines object not the object defining the space. Its what we consider to be NOTHING that is actually present in all things. Giving shape to reality. The word nature doesn't account for that space so I cant call the Force nature.

Again, technically a Non Sequitur fallacy.

please, cite the paper you are referring to when you say "according to physics". Surely that paper will have evidence signifying that something that is not the universe is contracting or perhaps a way for us to test that hypothesis.

It would be if I actually claimed any of it to be fact! but I don't.... :dry:

Who is this Nassim Haramein you speak of?

On the other hand the link you posted is technically a Non Sequitur fallacy. :whistle:
Every section that claims Nassim is a crack is only backed by ONE paragraph that says little about WHY he's wrong/debunked but instead insults him for not being very well known or agreed with. As if that was enough to discredit some one. I would be surprised if more than one person edits that page. HOWEVER within that wiki I click on one of the sources. (Schwarzschild Proton debunked)
Its funny to me that the source claims Haramains Schwarzschild Proton is debunked but the people commenting on the article disagree or at least leave room for Haramain to defend himself. What I mean is just because something CLAIMS something else is debunked or false doesn't mean it is. :pinch:

For 7 i cant give you the equation because I dont kow the name of it, if it has one, and I cant reproduce it with the symbols on my keyboard.

as for the other points... do you know what an interrogation drama is? :dry:

@ Akkarin

If you want to have a conversation about what mountain is ACTUALLY the tallest we could but that wasn't the point I was trying to get across. The point is that outside of human perspective there is a reality. Consciousness isn't dependent on JUST humans existence.

If a tree falls in the woods it makes a vibration but its only called a sound when our ears hear it and we name that vibration "sound" picked up by our ears.

Again outside of perspective there is a reality.

@Akkarin:
I didn't so much dispute the labeling of the Force as a system as I asked for clarification. I merely asked for the parts to be named and their interrelations to be explained. So farmers didn't understand that their trees were helping holding their land together. The system was still in place however and by that error the farmes learned about it. Now, I appreciate the analogy and perhaps it digresses into another very interesting discussion topic but I dare assert that the question you set out to, if not answer, so still respond to by that ("let me respond to one") is in no way addressed. Thanks nonetheless

now Daniel:
You're right, I probably misunderstood the purpose of that post. You see, I am used to assume that people say what they mean and mean what they say. Now they can be correct or wrong on any particular issue, but the least I am used to expect is sincerity. So if these are your findings, I am not attacking them by asking where you found those. If this is what you believe, my asking for why or to clarify is in no way an assertion of their falsehood. I genuinely care, and I genuinely wish to learn if I can. However, if my expression of genuine curiosity first of all things spawns something along the lines of "I didn't assert any of it as fact", and I'm using you as an example, there are numerous others way guiltier of that, then in me it begs the question as to why post that in the first place. If you (again, not specifically you, just a general you) do not really think what you write or are not willing to expand on and explain what you write, then why write it? "Hey, look, here is something I care not about and assert no validity to, so let's discuss it!"? Now would that be a discussion worth having?

But I digress. And I apologize if I exaggerated. There are other people much guiltier of that and this reminded me of that problem that is so worth adressing. Consider the previous paragraph a side note for the purposes of this discussion. Now, to your response.

"I only have a few pieces of the mosaic."
Name them. And clarify their interactions. If there is something there to speak of, speak of it. That is exactly what I asked. However, judging from the rest of that bit, it appears you mean the universe by it. Now, you can call that the Force, if you so wish, but the universe is a much more accepted label for that (and it does quailfy as a system, too, I suppose), so for purposes of communication, perhaps it is the more convenient choice. Anyway, it is highly disputable that this is a system of life (whatever that means), eventhough since we are part of that universe and alive by some definitions it may be reasonable to say that the universe is a living system at least.

I don't know about your body, but my body for an overwhelming part of its mass contains atoms that were not present during or immediately after the big bang. They were mostly forged by means of nucleosynthesis inside of stars that did not exist untill about 400 million years after the Planck time and burst out into space during novae and supernovae of said stars numerous million years later. So, yea, apart from the 10%-ish fraction that is hydrogen in my body of which I cannot tell whether it was forged by fission or radiation, in the big bang itself or any other method, I can be pretty sure that the rest of it is star dust. Now nature in the colloquial sense doesn't account for anything, really. I have seen dictionary definitions excluding, for instance, everything man-made from the natural world. However, space is not nothing in the philosophical sense and it is not unaccounted for by terms like "physical" or "the universe" thus again rendering the Force a substitute word with no meaning of its own. As for objects defining space and not vice versa... I don't know how you make that distinction or where you draw the line, but perhaps you would like to expand in a later post.

As I said before, if you don't believe what you write, I think dishonesty is an accurate description of that characteristic. I asked for nothing but a reference, and you even said "according to physics", so apparently you must have read something you are perfectly capable of refering to. Now you may not wish for anyone to review that information in which case I don't think you are in any position to teach anyone anything or you may have just lied and there is nothing you can refer this to and you just made it up adding "according to physics" just to add some credibility to it. That would not only be dishonest but deceptive, too. Please, make a reference to the physics you read just so we know you aren't flat out lying to our faces.

I have posted a link to a place describing what a Non-Sequitur fallacy is. Go there, look it up, come back and show me where I have engaged in any. Right after I posted the link to the RationalWiki article on Mr. Haramein (who should be a world-renowned mastermind of science if he discovered anything bringing us any step closer to a grand unified theory of everything - coz y'know, good science is kind of appreciated nowadays) I said that an argument stands on its merits and not on its messenger and thus asked you to explain any of what you attributed to him saying. It is not unreasonable of me to assume that you read his work whereas I haven't. Please, adress the question next time.
On a side note, you are right, just because someone claims something doesn't help anything. Why we believe things is almost more important than what those things are. I asked you to present Mr. Haramein's evidence. After I have seen that I will review the "debunkings" if the evidence holds up to anything short of that.

I don't recall asking for any equation in paragraph 7. I did talk about one in the notes on the physical world paragraph in which I ridiculed the mere idea of having a fancy many-zeros-fraction to describe the ratio of "physical world" to "reality" which just goes to show what Mr. Haramein apparently knows about either of those. How these notes relate to interrogation drama (which doesn't seem to be an accepted term in literature or else I would have found it by now - gotta keep looking, i guess) is however irrelevant for whether I use rhetoric or not, I try to mean what I say. So if you wish to adress anything specifically, please, do.

First off Gisteron I have to say that I'm having lots of fun. Second I'd like to apologize because I assumed you were attacking every single thing you found wrong in my initial post. Thats why it seem like interrogation drama to me.

Interrogation drama: A method of controlling a relationship or a conversation by asking questions that can't be answered or will not be accepted regardless of the answer given.

This is found in the Celestine Prophecy by James Redfield. If I remember correctly you can find this in our library.

To this I'll ask you Gisteron, have you ever put your self out there. What I mean is do you have any information that you've put out there for others to review. This is a genuine question. Maybe I'd be able to learn how to better present my information from your example.
I've put my self out there countless times and peer review/feedback has altered my opinion in the past. So this is very much welcomed. I cant be right all the time. :evil:

then in me it begs the question as to why post that in the first place. If you (again, not specifically you, just a general you) do not really think what you write or are not willing to expand on and explain what you write, then why write it?

Thats an excellent question Gisteron so I'll flip the question back on to you. Why would I want to claim that any of my observation are fact on a faith driven organization? :huh: Because you strike me as an intelligent person I'll assume that you could have come to this conclusion yourself. The Force is based on faith so to state any observation on it as fact wold be a self defeating argument. Jedi Sentinel Findings is available to others but I made it more for me. Its these discussions that help me grow as a person as much as a Jedi.

Name them. And clarify their interactions.

You're asking me to give something abstract an objective label. I'm sorry but I can't do that. Perhaps I'm just limited in this but I wouldn't know how to start with the information I have.

Nucleosynthesi according to Wikipedia (I understand its not the best source of information) create atoms from pre-existing nucleons (particles of an atomic nucleus) and nucleons are mad up of quarks. If this is incorrect let me know.

I wasn't suggesting that everything was always in existence but rather the possibility that particles that make up your body could have, at one point in time, been a part of other celestial bodies.

However, space is not nothing in the philosophical sense and it is not unaccounted for by terms like "physical" or "the universe"...

You're correct I did say that our reality is mostly nothing but the word was used loosely because thats what most people consider "space" to be. This is a misinterpretation on my part. You're right its not unaccounted for however it is "renormalized" in physics because of an infinitely large number. What Nassim Haramain is looking for is the actually density of the vacuum. By plotting the density of things from subatomic particles to the known universe he found (according to his scaling law) that the classic atoms density isn't very accurate do to the renormalization. So why isn't Nassim Haramain a HUGE name in science? well...its because he brings religion, faith, and sacred geometry to the table. Or at least thats why I feel he isn't very well known.

Your entire next paragraph is a perfect example of interrogation drama. I'll only quote the nicer part.

if you don't believe what you write, I think dishonesty is an accurate description of that characteristic.

My reply to this is that i don't believe what I write "wholeheartedly" because my observations are subject to change. I do believe in what I've posted but not to the point where I'm unwilling to change my mind based on feedback or peer review. Now I do have sources and a few of my fellow Jedi have my sources. The reason I don't give you my sources is because of said drama. :whistle:

With that said Gisteron I have to ask what did I do to you to deserve this attention? :dry:
Pretty much I'm asking is it deliberate? If not than whats the point of calling me out on any and all these things? Because from how I understand it I'm not the first to receive this type of attention from you. :whistle:
Also if I were to answer your questions(correctly or incorrectly) would you get any fulfillment from it?

I have posted a link to a place describing what a Non-Sequitur fallacy is. Go there, look it up, come back and show me where I have engaged in any.

I never said that YOU were engaging in Non-Sequiture fallacy. I said that the website you posted (rationalwiki) or more specifically the page on Nassim Haramein IS, and I stated why.

On the other hand the link you posted is technically a Non Sequitur fallacy.

So I will not be going on the link you posted describing what a Non-Sequitur fallacy is. Instead I'll be asking you to go back to my previous post and rereading what I actually said. :pinch:

Once again you ask for a source on Nassim's work but before you asked you link his name to a website that calls him a crank and claimes that his work has been debunked therefore

It is not unreasonable of me to assume

that you sir express Interrogation drama specifically - "will not be accepted regardless of the answer given."

Gisteron this has been fun But I will not feed your drama any further. As the song says "should your drama prove sincere. Do it somewhere far away from here!"

(as in not around me)

The Force: a mosaic part 2

8. One thing I know for sure is that everything vibrates. The Force must also vibrate. We use eyes to pick up light vibrations and ears to pick up sound vibration. What is used to to pick up the Force? what frequency is it?

9. The light and dark sides of the Force seem to be the toroidal field or the feedback system of the Force.

Note: Neither good or bad but to sides of the Force none the less. :whistle:

Belief: I think that humans alone cant receive information from the Force. It would take a harmonic connection to other lifeforms in order to feel it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmAReOklwNY

The Force: a mosaic part 3

10. I dont think that words or prayers with words in them could be used to communicate with the Force.
Words have thoughts and feelings tied to them and some times those thoughts and feelings could be mixed or vague. Also words mean different things in different languages. Cant expect the Force to be multilingual. We're the ones that need to learn its language not the other way around. :dry:

11. Direct emotions I imagine would work best. Feelings that can be understood rather than words with hidden meanings. Perhaps vibrations can be changed by emotions. Have the right vibration and you'll be understood by the Force.

Note: This could be why the fictional Jedi put such emphasis on controlling your emotions.
There is no emotion there is peace.
If your emotions are not at peace than the request or desire could be misunderstood.

I'm having a difficult time with this. Every month there is a new Missing Teen Age Girl poster at bus stop cross walks and store door way. I'm not sure if its just a Tucson thing but it's starting to get to me. Never have I felt so useless. May the Force Be With those that are lost missing or in a dark place. How I wish I could be your light.

Another Social experiment.

The fastest way out of a man beating on a woman is for some one to come help her. Whats the fastest way out of a woman beating on a man? :whistle:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7M0MW6ON484