So, from there definitely being something, a lack of anything is precluded, and from existence having no opposite that can be, we get that there is an Eternal Existence, this matching God's nature as First and Fundamental, with all else then being of it; but, we can't reason the desired jump from the Eternal Existence to be a complexity of a system of Mind, for only the partless simplex can be elementary, such as the simple continuous wave of a field.

Compounding the above, what is eternal has no input, making its outputs to be random, as we note in Quantum Mechanics, but which we can still presume as everything possible happening from it, this granting creatorship and the resultant transitions by laws that get formed at higher and higher levels.

In the superpositions of all that is possible, as our logical and new 'God', although reduced from our ultimate imaginings, all the paths get followed, but some don't amount to much, while others continue on, this brute force necessity of a method not having to impossibly foresee any specific, workable direction, but still ensuring that one will be found, as ours was.

This new 'God' works for the essential notions as a kind of a lowercase god but at least the contradictions are gone, making for more satisfaction.

Let us praise the creative potential of the Eternal, if that still does something for us, or at least be awed.

What I struggle to verify is how that experience claims to be a ‘free’ agent based on what we can measure in time. — Possibility

I haven't been able to show consciousness to even be an agent, which I would have to first do, I guess, and then go on to show that the conscious will is 'free' from the will's directives based on the nature of the person.

My view is that subjective experience, and by extension, the will, is not bound or structured by spacetime. — Possibility

The will is in an inner space, anyway, and space-time is just the gradational field, but maybe you mean that the will is spaceless and timeless, being more fundamental. Chalmers posits consciousness as be as fundamental as other elementals, with information in physical neural form automatically also being able to get represented in consciousness form. That explains the explanatory gap, a bit, but this doesn't seem to get us to be free of the information having to be such as it is for individual person's make-up and get followed accordingly.

I'm just pointing out that the events are not pre-made, already existent or previously carved from either the point of view of temporality or from the point of view of eternity. — Janus

In presentism, there is only the dynamic now, just generated from the past, with the past then totally gone, and the future not yet created. In eternalism, the future and the past both exist (block universe) and always did. General Relativity suggests the 4D static block universe made of events. We can't tell them apart, so far.

thinking in terms of temporality — Janus

All my references are to the block universe of eternalism derived from Einstein. I am for fixed will, but fairly trying to find if free will can be; I've only gotten as far as trying to make conscious free will instant and productive and thus not just showing what is past due to figurings having to take time. The block universe is eternally as it is, predetermined, so to speak. The traversal of it by consciousness is a kind of eternalistic 'time', at least seemingly to us.

I don't see how ideas like those listed above can possibly lead to any type of consensus. — ZhouBoTong

Right. If only belief and saying could make something true, but it doesn't. One needs to establish a sound ground first, such as the necessity of eternal existence, and build on it from there, which informed us that there can be no information coming into what had no beginning and was never made.

life has meaning in an intrinsical way. — Daniel C

It does, in our temporary parentheses, but overall, none to speak of.

A being who is able to create stones too heavy for him to lift, and lift them, is surely more powerful than one who can't? — Bartricks

You already discarded that old saw as logically impossible.

And, yes, an omnipotent being can, by definition, do anything logically possible.

snide — Pathogen

Nothing 'snide' here, just support and advancing the probabilistic quantum mechanic wave function:

Yes, for the wave function is deterministic before the collapse into a unitary probabilities that add adds to one, giving all a chance, eventually, and the "observation" probability probably means interactions of any kind.

So I think it means that things could have turned out differently if we could have rerun the universe, but is this enough to free the will the way the proponents would want it? Who knows, without a meaningful meaning of what they are calling 'free'.

(Your long post was great, indeed.)

'Free' is the key to what free will is.

human eyeball — Hanover

Sorry, but this is long, although on topic, as poetry after Dawkins:

The Intelligent Designer

I approached a semitransparent,
Theistic Embellishment, quite well lit,
Who was holding out an eyeball—a shove
Of His hand for me to take note of.

“Who might you be?” He mimed,
“For I am the God of Intelligent Design,
The One who was made by the signs discerned,
When the creationists noted them all, unlearned.”

I answered, “I am Austin, Earth’s flower,
Although not ‘Powers’, but ‘Higher Powers’.”

“Ha. Lo, they saw inexplicable complexity in Nature,
And thus they leapt and promulgated that Nature
Must have a Grand Designer of its mechanical dance,
For how could life have come about by ‘chance’?”

I replied, “You’re right about ‘chance’s’ stance,
But wrong about ‘chance’ too, for little greatness,
If any at all, comes about by mere ‘chance’,

“Especially as some giant leap in one bound,
Up the sheer cliff-side of Mt. Improbable—
To find on its top a great complexity
Of something like the eye that You show me;

“However, it is actually an error to suppose
That ‘Chance’ is the scientific alternative
To Intelligent Design, for that’s quite negative.

“Natural Selection is the means of the design,
For it, unlike a one-shot ‘chance’, being not in kind,
Is a cumulative effect that ever winds,
And slowly and so gently climbs

Around the mountain’s other side, behind the sight,
To eventually arrive at the great height
Of complexity—from which we can then view
The beautiful sights through our eye anew.”

“But the widespread Watchtower Zines
Always pronounce that the biological Designs
Were created by Me instead of by ‘chance’!

“Just look at these eyeballs—take a glance—
And the optic system hanging behind them!
How could that come about by ‘chance’, these gems?”

“You, like your followers, may listen,
But You do not hear, writing with untruth’s pen.
IDers deceive by this wrong approach,
Whether they mean to or not; I give reproach.

“‘Chance’ is not the opposite of Nature’s design;
Evolution of the Species through the graduality
Of Natural Selection is the path to complexity;
Your ploy falls as flat as an imaginary line.

“A flatworm has but an optical system’s spark
That can only sense but light and dark;
Thus it sees no image, not even a part;

“Whereas Nautilus has a ‘pinhole camera’ eye
About as good as half a human eye
That sees but very blurry shapes;
Thus these are examples of intermediate stages.

“‘Rome’ can not be built in a day by ‘chance’;
‘Chance’ is not a likely designer at all!

“Really now, could a 747 ever be
Assembled by a hurricane blowing free
Through Boeing’s warehouse of all the parts?
Now is this the sum of Your conversational art?”

“No, Austin—it’s quite unlikely—’tis just to confuse,
And that’s why we always so misleadingly use
The 747 argument as the contrast to ID…

“So then, Austie, ‘chance’ and Intelligent Design
Are not the two candidate solutions we’ll find
To the riddle posed by the improbable?
It’s not like a jackpot or nothing at all?”

“‘God’, Your ID ideas persist, as repetition,
But again, ‘chance’, for one, is not a solution
To the highly improbable situated Nature,
And no sane anti-creationist, for sure,
Ever said that it was; your tale is impure.

“Intelligent Design, is neither a solution—
Because it raises a much bigger question
Than it solves, as You will soon see, in a lesson.”

“Well, I’ll be darned,” replied the Designer.
“Natural selection is a good answer;

“It is a very long and summative process,
One which breaks up the problem’s mess
Of improbability into smaller pieces, less,
Each of which is only slightly improbable,

“But not prohibitively so, thus it’s reasonable,
As the product of all the little steps of which
Would be far beyond the reach of chance—it’s rich!

“The creationists have been looking askance,
Seeing only the end product, perchance,
Thinking of it as a single event of chance,
Never even understanding
The great power of accumulation.

“Such they didn’t know much else—their fall,
Not having any other natural ideas at all,
So they outright claimed that ID did it, as the Tree
That can magically grow the All, namely Me.”

“So ‘God’ You have now seen the light
Of the accumulative power’s might;
This is the elegance of Evolution’s ‘sight’.”

“Yes but what is to become of Me, the Person,
For I only ‘exist’ through their speculation.

“In fact, the improbability of Me is so High,
And so much more so from where I lie so ‘sure’,
Compared to that of ‘simple’ Nature,
That My own origin…”

“…Is a near-infinitely Larger dilemma, Mate,
For the creationists—the problem they love to hate;
That being that You, therefore, can only be explained
By another, Higher Intelligent Designer claimed!

“Far from terminating the endless regress,
They’ve aggravated it with a vengeance
That is way beyond repair or redress—
As beyond could ever be yonder of! Out west!”

With that, the poor Guy faded toward oblivion,
Which remarkably was the very location
I was visiting, but hence he soon reappeared,
Although in another guise, but quite well attired.

…

24. Many oppositional-transitional schemes, such as the 4 fundamental forces having the strong vs weak in opposition and the electric to magnetic in transition, plus our ‘being’ perhaps basically having space vs matter in opposition and past to future in transition. — PoeticUniverse

The chain is forged that links a thousand deaths
To a thousand future-generated breaths
When lips ripe as fruit gently part in pain:
The smile of a corpse is life touched by death.

The important part is that randomness only occurs at the observation. That randomness undermines the fully deterministic worldview. — Pathogen

Yes, for the wave function is deterministic before the collapse into a unitary probabilities that add to one, giving all a chance, eventually, and the "observation" probability means interactions of any kind. So I think it means that things could have turned out differently if we could have rerun the universe, but is this enough to free the will the way the proponents would want it? Who knows, without a meaningful meaning of what they are calling 'free'.

But the temporal structure of the world is not that of presentism. — Carlo Rovelli, ‘The Order of Time’

Rovelli is against presentism, while his good friend and collaborator on Loop Quantum Gravity, Lee Smolin is wholly for it. Each have compelling arguments.

...We do not have a grammar adapted to say that an event ‘has been’ in relation to me but ‘is’ in relation to you.... — Carlo Rovelli, ‘The Order of Time’

The relativity of simultaneity favors eternalism

what the relations may be between these variables — Carlo Rovelli, ‘The Order of Time’

Relations are paramount.


“The objective world is, it does not happen. Only to the gaze of my consciousness, crawling along the lifeline of my body, does a section of this world come to life as a fleeting image in space which continuously changes in time.”

― Hermann Weyl

So, then, in the new free will attempt, fundamental consciousness traverses already existent world-lines of events previously carved, although this doesn't seem so 'free'. I am failing…

Which is easier to accept, that there is no intelligence in the design or that it is wrong to conclude that everything was made solely for humans? — BrianW

Humans became way later on, and that even within 5% of the types of energy in the universe.

How do you mean ‘worse’? — Possibility

Seems like there's more hope to intervene in the actions of the 'now' production rather to the same that was carved in stone, but presentism has problems, so I went with the block idea in order to have events already there to pick from, although I suppose that should still work with brain memory. I'm not surprised about running into contradiction with this new free will approach, but I'm leaving out bias as best can do.

‘Totally connected’ doesn’t take into account the structure of these connections in consciousness. While they appear “to be everywhere in no time”, as you say, these events are nevertheless interacting with experience according to some form of structure: value/significance. — Possibility

Yes, in this new free will approach, consciousness contains all experiences and their relations and has real time access, somehow, in order for consciousness to be the instant cause. It is disconcerting, though, that the pre-made occasions of eternalism's experience would be even worse that presentism determining events as it went along.

There is no stasis; there is transition. — uncanni

These transitions point to that there can't be anything particular remaining even for an instant, and this kind of matches the supposed nature of the Eternal that of course can't have anything particular designed into it, given it has no beginning.

Round and round the Great Wheel turns, bang after bang, it being as impotent as you and I.

And what of the Everythingness about it? Its information content would be the same as not having any: zero, so, again, 'God' gets a revision but can still seem Great, minus the person-hood aspect..

There is no stasis; there is transition. However, we humans can devolve if we don't keep learning deeply. — uncanni

We could all go away in a flash; there is now a strain of bacteria resistant to even the last ditch antibiotic, it, too, as what had to transition.

We can also devolve if low-life's have more children than better people, but, of course, what happens pretty much has to, short of China-like limitations on offspring, and, now, lately they allow two.

'God', then, seems to not intervene, or can't. Seven near extinctions have already come and gone.

I like to think of the cosmos as a giant womb, forever birthing and re-birthing big bangs.... — uncanni

Yes, for if there could be one Bang, then there ought to be others

This insistence on gendering God is a definite sign of an utter lack of understanding. — uncanni

Not only that, but the making of 'God' to be a Person, but who makes us people, without a larger PERSON having then to have made 'God'. They didn't know about life from molecules becoming bacteria, etc., so they posited a 'God' in their image.

all connected and interdependent — uncanni

Quantum entanglement far apart in space shows that connections are more primary than distance.

women's language must disrupt and confound until men are able to tune into a different frequency and understand — uncanni

Women, plus all good philosophers, don't just pull out a specific, labeled box, and talk only about that and put the box back in, but speak to connections not obvious to the straight and narrow thinker.

So, in general, we appear to be outcroppings of the Everything, but really we are still the essence of it, as anything would be, there really only being the One. We age and die, yes, but the energy involved can't go away.

For some reason, the One is energetic, as a given, and this is not only why it is ever, but also why it can never be still and continually has to transform and transition through the states which are probably stitched together via something like the laws of nature.

'God' is in sight, now, perhaps, though having less of a nature than we supposed, but still as the main event. All is a continuation of the one Event, we merely placing arbitrary local boundaries to try to identify local cause and effect, but our isolations of these local events can't incorporate everything and so they are but approximate and so cannot be precise.

Since Existence is a given, having no opposite that could be, is all there in the block universe as everything, instantaneous, via something like as light being able to be everywhere in no time, for light cannot age. All the block universe is would be every path possible to all events, as their world-lines, it being made of events, just like space-time is considered to be, which gives credence.

The events would be such as occasions of experience already made, obviating any more processing time to make them, allowing consciousness to retain its instantness of decisions/thoughts. Consciousness, then, is fundamental and so it is totally connected to all the events, kind of like that even a part of a hologram still contains the whole, although in a dimmer way.

Are we getting anywhere?

I'm in the process of coming up with a post-patriarchal, post-gendered, kabbalistic/buddhist/pagan/derridian feeling of the oneness, the echad. — uncanni

Yes, we may get to something like that.

Since my 'God' description had a "problem", I need to back off of it somewhat, leaving but what could be so.

I'll probably have to remove the 'Mind' notion, probably, but first, what is left intact?

We can show the necessity of existence, in that it has no alternative that can be, namely, non-existence, which now can't even be meant. We can call this The Existence Principle. Everything that is was already there, ever, either all at once, in a block, or potentially by combining bit by bit from what was ever there; however, we don't know the mode of time so we'll have to cover both. The Everything, then, survives as a step toward having 'God, and it seems that the Everything would have all that is possible in it, given that the unborn Everything couldn't have had anything specific designed into it. The Everything needs no creation and can't have creation of it, anyway, and it likewise can never go away. Beginnings and Ends are out, concerning the Everything.

Whoever trusting and believing, offering their prayer of love in faith, will get to see. "Ask for anything in my name, without doubting, and it shall be done for you" — Serving Zion

The "no blame" conclusion is good for those who must honestly admit that 'God' is a maybe, however unlikely, those who didn't accord to the deal to accept 'God' or not have something, or worse, they most likely thinking that what is All Love wouldn't have any controlling conditions, but would true grant true freedom to the human natures designed as such as they are; however, if there is still a penalty foretold, either it is wrong since there can't be any or they wish to retain their freedom or at least integrity by not submitting to the accepting requirement of the conditional giving.

So, to somehow have the deeper kind of free will hinted at, although not well defined, one approach is to shift the action to a consciousness, as a distinct thing, that is directly in charge in the right now of making thoughts and decisions; however, to do that we have to throw out the brain processes that we formerly had in charge, and, better yet, say that those process were never there. OK, they're gone, as they have to be gone. Now we can continue.

Did you intend this for me? — Mww

Well, yes, since you're investigating 'freedom', but for everyone, too.

So, where is Intelligence in the Design? — Jacob-B

It wouldn't seem to be in the seven or so great extinction events so far.

Comments?

Do you have evidence? Or supporting ideas, even? :chin: — Pattern-chaser

It wasn't stated clearly, but it is shooting down that life had to come from a larger life, and so forth… since that makes a regress.

Thanks for doing your homework.


The Bible Study Class continues:

Ex Nihilo: The Real Book of Genesis, featuring Nothing

1 First, as ever and always, nothing made the heavens and the Earth, since there was nothing to make it of. Technically, nothing made the teeny-tiny secondary ‘elementals’, as opposite pairs, before their subsequent combinations, which then went on to form higher complexities, even us.

2 The Earth was once without form, and void, as zilch, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of nothing was moving over the face of the waters. Hey, what waters? Water came later. No waters.

3 And not a thing said, “Let there be light”, and there were photons, and a big electric bill, too. And then as well came forth electrons, quarks, and their anti-particles of opposite matter and charge, ever still summing to the sum-thing zero-balance of nothing. OK, now we’re cooking.

4 And nullity saw that the light was good; and nil separated all the more the light from the darkness in equipoise of positive and negative.

5 Zero called the light day, and the darkness it called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one fine day, and even an afternoon. It was Oneday. Yes, even out in space.

6 And void said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” The “waters” must have been mirages, for there weren’t no waters before all, nohow, no way.

7 And naught made the firmament and separated the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament. And it was so. Water, water not everywhere, nor any drops to drink!

8 And zip called the firmament Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day, plus a yesterday and a tomorrow to come. It was Twosday.

9 And nada said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. Finally, water was in its proper place, as really having become of H2O.

10 Diddly-squat called the dry land earth, and the waters that were gathered together it called seas. And nobody saw that it was good.

11 And not anything said, “Let the earth put forth vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, upon the earth, plus very many weeds.” And it was so.

12 The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. Duh, that was expected. And trifle saw that it was good. Um, wait, there was evolution.

13 And there was evening and there was morning, a third day. OK already; we get the day to day thing. It was Wedding-day.

14 And no big deal said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years and weeks and months and seasons and years and millennia and eternity.”

15 “And let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth.” And it was so. Actually, protons made the stars.

16 And neither here nor there made the two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. This was well before Rockefeller invented kerosene Thomas Edison invented the light bulb.

17 And nonentity set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth, meaning that they really slowly formed—

18 To rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And no-name saw that it was good. Alright, let’s get on with it already.

19 And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day. Cripes! Sure Happy It’s Thursday, or Thirstday.

20 And God Damnit Nothing said, “Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, even mosquitoes, I guess, and let birds fly above the earth across the firmament of the heavens.” So immutable! Evolution, remember?

21 So nonperson created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And Gosh saw that it was good.

22 And nothing blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the Earth.”

23 And there was evening and there was morning, a fifth day. Thank God It’s Friday, or Fryday.

24 And positive/negative said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds.” Dinosaurs were not known of. And it was so. What a zoo.

25 And lack of anything made the beasts of the Earth according to their kinds and the cattle according to their kinds, and everything that creeps upon the ground according to its kind. And zippo saw that it was really getting darned good, although it was getting really crowded.

26 Then yin/yang said, to his wife? “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; (bad move) and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.” Hmmm… the poor subservient animals and the environment.

27 So, love (zero in tennis) created man in his own image, in the image of empty he created him; male and female, and gays and lesbians he created them. Is that “own image” why we are so flawed?

28 And vacant blessed them, while unoccupied said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; (so much for the environment again) and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.” Maybe humans should use birth control and mostly multiply with calculators?

29 And bare said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit; you shall have them for food.”

30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food.” And it was so. Just like that?

31 And clear saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very damned good. And there was evening and there was morning, a sixth day. Sitting day, or Satday.

...it would need to be determined what freedom is, in what manner or fashion it is real, in order to establish the equal validity for what it does.

I’m not sure that can be done. — Mww

So, then, as for free will, I'm figuring that its proponents want to have consciousness to be the cause of what one does, in real time, rather than any subconscious neural brain firings and figurings being already finished by the time their results get into consciousness as a product. So, that's what I'll be going forward with. Consciousness will have to do it all, as it being the will, and we'll still have to get this conscious will not to be fixed, but to be 'free', providing we can define 'free'.

Is there even a first word that won't be controversial? — tim wood

We have to lay out the bare essentials first and see how that goes before layering more upon.

It is an eternal First and Fundamental Being, with a creative Mind, it never having been made, without anything else before it or outside it. It is ever and it is All.

Its existence is necessity, as Everything, for 'Nothing' cannot be, much less be productive. It cannot not be; it has to be; there is no choice in the matter.

Problem: The only inconsistency that I see above is that beings would have to have parts—and so the parts would have to be more fundamental than the being, as in coming before, and the parts of parts, etc. Thus, beings have to evolve, just as we see in our universe, great complexity being later on, not earlier or first.

how free will may be objectively possible — Pathogen

First, we need to know what 'free' means in reference to the will—beyond someone saying that they have it.

What is it free of, concerning the will or what is it free to do, concerning the will, or what is it not fixed to do, concerning the will?

OOO
GOD
OOO

Higher being of humans or AI is always ever in our future, and never in the past, for more complexity only lies in the future and less only in the past.

TIC-TAC-TOE

block universe — Pathogen

Also see 'eternalism', which is the same idea, and 'presentism', which is the other mode that time could have.

What would a definition of free entail? — Pathogen

Something clear that would at least give me something to propose a means for, since I always explore both sides.

by evolution — T Clark

18. Color wheel opposites. — PoeticUniverse

Love takes two
two becomes one — 3017amen

Inspired by Shelley's style:

— The Love Story of the Earth and the Moon —

I am thy moon, thy constant satellite,
Thy crystal paramour of day and night.
Above and below, and within thy sight,
I whirl around you in loving delight.

In a magnetic dance, I whirl and twirl,
Attracted to you, the liveliest world;
Around you as a necklace I’m aswirl—
Wear me as thy crystalline gem impearled.

Wherever thou orbits ‘round Apollo,
I must twirl and whirl, hurry and follow;
Dust I gather, meteors I swallow,
Ranging far and wide through space not hollow.

Thy romantic beam, as Cupid’s arrow,
Pierces my heart and kills my sorrow,
Injecting life and love for tomorrow;
Henceforth, I’ll shine with this life I borrow.

Around you I whirl, a necklace of pearl,
Trailing afterimages of my world,
Adorning you, thy bosom bountiful,
With crystalline gems of another world.

Oh, moon, thy Earth would wobble like a top
With your steadying influence not,
In turns quick of searing and freezing ruins,
Unto dying soon, without you, oh moon!

As twin planets, our orbits must convolve;
Into each our tidal motions dissolve.
Around a common center we revolve—
The focus from which our passions evolve.

As twin planets, each other’s way we pave,
With the push-pulse of the graviton wave.
We’re captured, but not as each other’s slave,
For to the sun our orbits are concave.

To your lines of flux my path I align—
I’m your constant paramour, crystalline;
Your world pours life on mine, on mine!
Dearest Earth, I must be thine, must be thine!

A magnetic beam emanates from thee,
Attracting me, holding me, kissing me;
Tidal love washes freely over me,
Linking you and me for eternity.

Basking warmly in your reflected light,
I’m bright, oh, so radiant in your sight!
In the love and light of your spirit bright
I need not ever face the endless night.

Your vibrations travel without a sound,
Circling from all directions to surround;
This affection touches me ‘round and ‘round
And closely binds me to you—I’m love-bound!

We’re as different as midnight and noon,
Yet drawn close by the force of Earth and moon;
As lovers we merge in a sweet eclipse,
When world meets world as a kiss on our lips.

Oh, as your shadow of love covers me
I am full, so full in the shade of thee;
When we overlap, that union is us;
The you is in me, the me is in thee!

As moon and Earth, we bathe in radiance,
Cleansing our hearts in love’s grand alliance;
Around and around each other we dance,
Entranced by the whirl of our dalliance.

My blood runs warm with the sun’s heat at noon.
My spirit is swept by thee, swelling moon.
Space surrounds us. The tides flow through us.
Global rhythms are always playing our tune.

When the sun burns out, and, soon after,
When the Earth grows cold from that disaster,
When galaxies die and rotate no more,
Then what remains is our love, thereafter.

Go forward go forward, have no tear
For without illumination one has fear — 3017amen

S.O.U.L
Push forward, and deeper, beyond thy fears;
We guide thee, we lift thee, we dry thy tears;
We’re illumination beside thee—of
The Spirits Of Unconditional Love.

dimension — TheMadFool

length,
width,
depth,
4D—your world-line;
5th, all your probable futures;
6th, jump to any;
7th, all Big Bang starts to ends;
8th, all universes’ lines;
9th, jump to any;
10th, the IS of all possible realities.

Ok, so was it true you were driving or true you were not driving, while computing math in your mind? — 3017amen

I don't know, for I was also picking something up from the floor and drinking a beer.

On the other hand poetic universe inspires me every time I read his poems... !! — 3017amen

Now you're asking for it!

Life’s a continual cosmic energy dance,
From an ultimate underlying happenstance.
We’re immersed in matter’s universal rhythm;
Therefore, we must all participate in the dance.

For the others, who ignore life’s romance:
Ignorance, like shadow, has no substance.
The shade is removed by the light within—
Feel the rhythm of the universal dance!

Like the moon, challenge night and gain the light;
Like the rose, suffer the thorn—gain the fragrance;
Of life, surrender to live forever—
Enlightened more than a thousand suns.

navigate through traffic while computing 2 + 2=4 — 3017amen

And I'm using my cell phone, listening to the radio, conversing with passengers, eating a candy bar, smoking a cigarette, rolling a joint, steering with my knee, and writing this post on a tablet.