Mystical Experience

[valaki]

If a rocket could travel at light speed, time would stop on the rocket.

And even if a rocket could travel at 99% the speed of light, distance would be so shortened, we could travel anywhere in the universe in our own lifetime.

And as no other lifeform has reached us in our own galaxy suggests there is no one there.

Or they didn't evolve enough yet. Can such a rocket be built at all?

 

[Mole]

Or they didn't evolve enough yet. Can such a rocket be built at all?

It's impossible to build a rocket that will travel at the speed of light, however it is possible to build a rocket, or a vehicle, that will travel at near the speed of light. Of course it is a technical challenge way, way beyond us.

And there are vast numbers of planets in the Milky Way so the chances of a civilization building a vehicle that can travel at near light speed is good. But we see no sign of them. So we may be alone in the Milky Way.

 

[valaki]

It's impossible to build a rocket that will travel at the speed of light, however it is possible to build a rocket, or a vehicle, that will travel at near the speed of light. Of course it is a technical challenge way, way beyond us.

Yes, I was asking about the rocket that travels at 99% of the speed of light. And yes, I thought that at the minimum it was a big challenge to build one.

And there are vast numbers of planets in the Milky Way so the chances of a civilization building a vehicle that can travel at near light speed is good. But we see no sign of them. So we may be alone in the Milky Way.

Or they just have not got to that level of technology yet to build the vehicle, this was my point.

 

[Mole]

Or they just have not got to that level of technology yet to build the vehicle, this was my point.

We have recently discovered there are vast numbers of planets in our Milky Way alone. So the chances of another civilization are correspondingly increased.

I would emphasise, the number of planets is very, very large yet we see nothing of another civilization.

 

[valaki]

We have recently discovered there are vast numbers of planets in our Milky Way alone. So the chances of another civilization are correspondingly increased.

I would emphasise, the number of planets is very, very large yet we see nothing of another civilization.

I do get your argument, I still don't know if there's been enough time for anyone to build the rocket. Just too many unknown factors for me to draw a conclusion. Interesting thought nonetheless. Do you think it's really that unlikely for life and then for intelligent life to evolve?

 

[valaki]

[MENTION=3325]Mole[/MENTION]

I'm going to rephrase my question.

Do you think it's more likely that it's harder for a civilization to build this super-rocket or that it's more likely that it's harder for life to evolve spontaneously especially into an intelligent type of life? I would say the latter requires less luck, the former is the same just with the extra added luck of building that rocket. And we know it has happened, with us on Earth The rocket hasn't yet happened. Now say, life happened a million times, and intelligent life happened a thousand times and the rocket hasn't yet happened. So maybe there are intelligent life forms, they just did not get to building that rocket (yet). A bit less absolute of an assumption than assuming that there are no intelligent life forms other than us. I mean this in the case of basing the assumption on the single fact that we have not seen a super-rocket. It's in that case that it seems a jump that's too big to assume. If you have other arguments too to support the idea that it's only our civilization that's ever happened I want to hear them. At this point, kind of no good that we (at least I) don't even know the actual likelihood for intelligent life to happen and then the separate likelihood for building the rocket.


Or another rephrasing of the issue. You seem to say that the ability to build the super-rocket is sort of a required part of what an intelligent life form is. Or at least that it's got a high enough likelihood to happen as a result of a civilization. What do you base that on?


Alright I'm just curious because this topic is... if I think deeper about it, it's kind of scary goddamnit

 

[Mole]

[MENTION=3325]Mole[/MENTION]
I'm going to rephrase my question.

Do you think it's more likely that it's harder for a civilization to build this super-rocket or that it's more likely that it's harder for life to evolve spontaneously especially into an intelligent type of life? I would say the latter requires less luck, the former is the same just with the extra added luck of building that rocket. And we know it has happened, with us on Earth The rocket hasn't yet happened. Now say, life happened a million times, and intelligent life happened a thousand times and the rocket hasn't yet happened. So maybe there are intelligent life forms, they just did not get to building that rocket (yet). A bit less absolute of an assumption than assuming that there are no intelligent life forms other than us. I mean this in the case of basing the assumption on the single fact that we have not seen a super-rocket. It's in that case that it seems a jump that's too big to assume. If you have other arguments too to support the idea that it's only our civilization that's ever happened I want to hear them.

Or another rephrasing of the issue. You seem to say that the ability to build the super-rocket is sort of a required part of what an intelligent life form is. Or at least that it's got a high enough likelihood to happen as a result of a civilization. What do you base that on?

Alright I'm just curious because this topic is... if I think deeper about it, it's kind of scary goddamnit

Yes, it is scary.

When we were little children, we were scared to be left alone by our parents. Our fear was realistic because we were dependent on them.

We grew up we replace our parents with God, but as God is invisible, we said He has ascended above the clouds.

And as we don't seem to have found God above the clouds, we look for life on other planets.

And if there is no life on other planets, we are really alone, and this is really scary.

 

[Mole]

What is a mystical experience?

Mystical experience is an attempt to have direct experience of God.

So mystical experience is in contradistinction to revealed religion, where we don't have direct experience of God, rather God is revealed to us in sacred texts.

However in trying to directly experience God, we have developed ways of changing our perceptions, such as by meditation, or by sufi dancing, or by fasting, by belief, or by serving the poor, or by liturgy using music, song, prayer, and ritual.

 

[Galena]

I am not prone to these experiences, but have been a player in other people's.

 

[inventor]

Mystical experience is an attempt to have direct experience of God.

So mystical experience is in contradistinction to revealed religion, where we don't have direct experience of God, rather God is revealed to us in sacred texts.

However in trying to directly experience God, we have developed ways of changing our perceptions, such as by meditation, or by sufi dancing, or by fasting, by belief, or by serving the poor, or by liturgy using music, song, prayer, and ritual.

Thanks


In that case I've them more then once.

 

[Mole]

Thanks

In that case I've them more then once.

It is important to judge a mystical experience by the fruits it produces.

So we ask, as a result of our mystical experience, do we help the poor; do we visit prisoners; do we provide company for the lonely; are we patient and kind.

If our mysticism doesn't bear good fruit, then it is no more than narcissism and we may as well spend our time with the pornography of sex and the pornography of guns.

 

[valaki]

Yes, it is scary.

When we were little children, we were scared to be left alone by our parents. Our fear was realistic because we were dependent on them.

We grew up we replace our parents with God, but as God is invisible, we said He has ascended above the clouds.

And as we don't seem to have found God above the clouds, we look for life on other planets.

And if there is no life on other planets, we are really alone, and this is really scary.

Lol when trying to explain why I felt this way, I did draw the same parallel about kids vs parents and this. I didn't think of the God parallel though. That one doesn't really make sense to me tbh, I never felt the need to have a God image after I grew up enough not to be dependent on parents.

I guess it was also seeming scary because it makes you realise that we are here only by a tremendous amount of luck. I mean, in the case that life or intelligent life never developed elsewhere.

But you didn't answer me on that, do you think it's more likely for a civilization (of one or of many) to be able to build the super-rocket traveling at 99% of the speed of light than for intelligent life to develop more than once?

I'm honestly curious!

Mystical experience is an attempt to have direct experience of God.

So mystical experience is in contradistinction to revealed religion, where we don't have direct experience of God, rather God is revealed to us in sacred texts.

However in trying to directly experience God, we have developed ways of changing our perceptions, such as by meditation, or by sufi dancing, or by fasting, by belief, or by serving the poor, or by liturgy using music, song, prayer, and ritual.

That's a way to look at it I guess. I have had spiritual feelings - pretty sporadically - and I never related it to any kind of God. No, it's more about a direct experience of how awesome this world is. Something like that. But I don't have these feelings when looking at whatever. It's always disconnected from that, it's when I don't look at anything concretely and just get in the mood for a few seconds and I'll live this feeling of how great it all is. In a very general and vague way. The God thing to me doesn't make sense in any concrete form whatsoever.

I hope the way I described this makes sense. This is really how it is for me, there must be individual differences.

 

[valaki]

It is important to judge a mystical experience by the fruits it produces.

So we ask, as a result of our mystical experience, do we help the poor; do we visit prisoners; do we provide company for the lonely; are we patient and kind.

If our mysticism doesn't bear good fruit, then it is no more than narcissism and we may as well spend our time with the pornography of sex and the pornography of guns.

I don't need mysticism to help people. I will do that without any such prerequisites. I again don't connect helpfulness with God stuff or with morality or whatever and I don't need to feel better about myself just because I help someone (or feel worse either ).

Thus, I disagree about the narcissism part.

 

[Mole]

But you didn't answer me on that, do you think it's more likely for a civilization (of one or of many) to be able to build the super-rocket traveling at 99% of the speed of light than for intelligent life to develop more than once?

I'm honestly curious!

I didn't answer because I honesty don't know the answer.

 

[valaki]

I didn't answer because I honesty don't know the answer.

Yeah, okay, I just thought you had some information on educated guesses by people who've thought about this a lot or something. (Because of how you presented your original conclusion)