:)... ps... at the est 6-Day Training, I figured out answers to both the 'what's the sound of one hand clapping' question as well as the proverbial "if a tree falls in the forest and nobody's there to hear it, does it make a sound?"

In the first situation, First Define "Clapping"; in the second, First Define "Sound."

Nobody ever starts there or goes down that path, so the 'discussions' are, as a college friend of mine created the descriptive adjective, "Fruitile"... A combination of Futile and Fruitless.

:)

Definitely yes, thanks :)
By the way, all the problems persist just because most people resist to think, and when they do, they accept compromising within the contradictions. I don't accept compromising.
Nice discussion, thanks.

btw, it ain't ME giving you down-votes on those comments... I'm sorry the down-votes aren't accompanied by new comments.
Although the theory of Downvoting is, as I understand it, a commentary on 'does the comment advance the thread's discussion?', so I can understand someone making that judgment. But I really have enjoyed our conversation!
cheers!

Ok, but i'm not going down the path of 'is Poverty "something" versus Not 'Something'."

Asking why 'something' exists is, to me, too confusingly-broad of a bucket to try to fit things into or not-into.

Yes, your generic answer is one I can't dispute, but in my real world, the Problem Is to determine Which Contradiction Is The Root Cause of the Problem, which, if addressed, fixed or 'cured,' will effectively (and hopefully, economically,) eliminate/reduce/handle The Problem of the first statement.

If you have always been able to understand How To Eliminate The Contradiction, there must still be something missing, because the Original Problem Has Not Yet Been Eliminated... whatever it is.... Poverty? High Unemployment, Health issues?

Even Werner Erhard (of the est Training) had a popular mantra of his own... "Understanding is the booby-prize."

Somewhere past 'understanding' is Effecting A Solution.

Less confusing, I hope?
Cheers!

Surprise! I agree with those comments!
You can observe their effects, but not 'them.'
True!

But you CAN measure those 'discernible things' about gravity, but 'love'? ....

Sorry, very confusing. You accept asking why does poverty exist, but don't see the point of asking why does something exist. So poverty is not something.
By the way, I have a generic answer for the generic question 'why do problems exist?' They are all caused by a contradiction. Even better, I know how to detect what specific contradiction for each problem, and (so far) I have always been able to understand how to eliminate the contradiction. That is real fun!

+5^ or even better ....

or http://www.plusaf.com/linkedin/linked-in...

:)

The Asking Why process that I recommend is, imnsho, best used on things that present as Problems... Why Does Poverty Exist? Why Is Unemployment Too High?, and such.

I'd never try to apply that approach to a "question" like 'why does something exist' or even try to Prove That Something Does Exist!

Hell, the philosophies and belief systems reviewed in the est Training made it pretty clear to me that, for example The Center Of The Universe is wherever your 'mind' is... because Everything In The Universe is radially outside in all directions!

As for Existence Existing, the similar 'argument' or explanation goes something like this... Everything you experience is experienced In Your Mind. It's fairly impossible to really prove that Anything Is Real because Everything (i.e., Every Experience) can be described as A Construct In Your Mind.

Love, pain, life, death? All constructs in your mind. Impossible to prove any external reality of any of it... If you choose to go down that path.

I reconciled that in My Mind by realizing that, yes, you can choose to see the Universe that way, but it's much more fun (and probably more useful) to live life based on the philosophy (theory, belief, whatever) that external reality Does Exist and to enjoy interacting with it!

:)

Good point, Robbie... In fact, if I reword that to simply say "God IS Love," all the same descriptions apply, including the 'where is it and can I put it in a container and deliver it to you...'

But it seems that So Many People describe "God" as 'being somewhere' and 'doing things' in such tangible ways, that, well.... you may be right, and if you are, there are just TONS of confused people running around with a gross misunderstanding of "God"!

Thanks!

I have no problem with that, of course!
And I did update that Law's wording. Thanks for the inspiration!

Wait one second, ok? You say you CAN'T Objectively Measure Gravity?! Or Mass?

Surely you jest, or have some other meaning or definition behind that statement?!

Effects of gravity and mass are commonly discernible and measurable and predictable, through scientific experiment or common experience.

Love, on the other hand, clearly exists in myriad different 'shapes, sizes, causes and effects' and certainly there are NO 'meter-sticks' with which it can be 'measured.'

Experienced, sure! Described? Maybe, but poorly. Bottled and delivered? Only in perfume ads.

c'mon, Robbie! :)

And astrophysicists have found a LOT of complex molecules floating around in interstellar space. It seems that, it's 'their nature' for many elements to attract others and bond to them. You can attribute that to a Divine Plan (or planner) if you need to, but... well,... hydrogen loves oxygen and nitrogen likes nitrogen... so they tend to bond pretty easily.

Asking "why?" is an interesting approach, though it seems a little simplistic To Me that the frequent answer is "God made it so."

Too unscientific for me, but again, that's Me.

The recent remake of the COSMOS series postulates some very plausible 'how things happened' theories, including evolution, too, unless one automatically rejects evolution as a possible Answer.. :)

Your YouTube video shows an entire crystal using transmission electron microscopy, which gives atomic resolution in the x-y, but not in the z. It looks at the full height of whatever is being penetrated. STM just looks at the top layer, but requires a smooth, conducting surface.

Don't be sorry. I didn't know that, thanks for the info (I couldn't wait to know more about it :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqLlgIaz...).

So I learned that now it is possible to actually see atoms whereas their existence was logically deduced long before.

Relying on miracles is now what Maduro in Venezuela is doing.

Way too cool. :)

Sorry, Fish and plusaf, but I see individual atoms with my scanning tunneling microscope all the time. In fact, I just trained my students on how to do so last night.

And how do you KNOW atoms are like they are described? (Definitely the super string theory challenges that concept, and that theory is still to be disproved). My point is that asking 'why' several times it is inevitable to reach abstract entities by deduction. That doesn't mean they don't exist.

I read in other posts that it doesn't make sense to ask 'why does something exist?' and the argument is 'existence exists. Period.", which sounds like a tautology to me.

Yes, beware of circular logic: that is a real trap.