Google+ Followers

Saturday, 30 November 2013 FORUM MATERIAL / Response to "Compatibility with other Religions and Philosophies"

Link =

Link = http://www.churchofr...ilosophies.html .

So, guys, haven't done this for a while, so do forgive me if I'm a little rusty.

I read through Marc's latest post. I have been really struck by the "inter-relatedness" thing he's going on about these-days. It reminds me of a book I read about Dialectics (Yin-Yang, for example).

I have some other things to say, but I'll let all you fellas get a word in. ;)


Sunday, 10 June 2012


I wrote about this a while ago, but it was deleted and I forget about it. I think it's useful to remember this. Purpose asks a complex question of a simple truth. The question assumes that there can be such a thing as "purpose". If we get rid of this assumption, there is a much clearer picture. The simple truth is that we exist. There is nothing more. 

Of course, you can have arbitrary purpose, but this is not truth.

So, how do we calculate what to do? Notice that this is different to "purpose". We do things because of needs. We should not confuse this with meaning/purpose. Purpose does not exist. 

What we can do, however, is calculate where our needs are taking us. This gives us an idea about truth. 

We understand that the truth of our existence can either be accepted or declined. The result has no effect.

So, how do you choose, from your perspective, whether to accept or decline? You look at a variable that can be optimised to. And as we all know, there are a lot of those. Which you give priority is up to the truth of your own existence. 

The end result is the same - live, but this saves a lot of misguide about what purpose is. 

Wednesday, 7 December 2011 FORUM MATERIAL / The origin of the Universe and the meaning of Life (2)

(1) - http://myreality.chu...?showtopic=5440

Blurb: This is a deduction what we KNOW, in a real, live, working theory complete with observation and in some cases, proofs.


Before there was anything, there was not nothing. The Big Bang could not occur due to the fact that a singularity wasn't there.

There was the one thing that can exist in a perfect vacuum - the one thing that is all around us even today - energy, pure and flowing at zero degrees Kelvin. The waves would be extremely long, almost flat.

Remember that energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only be transformed.

(Brian Wiler:) "Energy makes up matter. This was theorised by Einstein and can be observed as a result of colliding protons in a particle accellerater. Protons collide at a speed of .9 light and are completely distroyed. In fact all that is left is energy. This energy quickly condenses back into matter. But, just the same as a teaspoon of water boiling away under a cold pane of glass, the matter forms different sizes and shapes. The Higgs boson (a theoretical particle) is what they are seeking. This is a super sized boson that is supposed to be the great grand dad of all matter. Well at least Higgs is making some money out of it.

I find it interesting that scientists are looking for the earliest forms of matter but still cling to the big bang.

My second proof is the research being done at extremely low temps. Matter begins to do strange things at around 1k. All the atoms begin to act as if they are one. They become 'floppy' and act in a wave. Even lower they begin to occupy the same space. I have not read any reports that the size of the atoms changes at all so the old theory that the electrons will collapse into the protons seems less likely. What it does suggest to me is that if matter were to reach absolute zero it would lose the cohesion that makes is matter and would again become energy."

When this pure energy decays, it produces heat and matter. The matter is very, very small: Photons; Gluons; Electrons - each with an electromagnetic force that is repelled by pure energy. The subatomic particles, are, however, attracted to one another. Their interaction would produce small amounts of heat.

(Brian Wiler:) "Gluons form protons, just add an electron and you have the simplest element. In quantum terms these hydrogen atoms would have been quite literally the largest things in the universe. When we factor in the electro magnetic force which bonds two together and we have gravity. The more that get together the greater the gravity until two hydrogen atoms decide to become one (fusion)and bang (the real bang)we have the first star. This wouldn't be just any star, but most likely a giant blue star due to the fact that the fuel is pure. Since hydogen is small with alot of space in it there needs to be a lot of it to crush the stuff in the middle.
The good thing for us is the fact that blue stars burn fast and explode. The debris is all kinds of good stuff that we need, like the eliments.
The new elements are denser and more complex than hydrogen. The problem is that they haven't been given the chance to link up (form molicules). That has to wait until this new matter can draw together again."

The entire universe is "super-positioned"; the "Big Bounce", the universe expands and then contracts back to "Singularity" or "Maximum Potential", before going "Bang" again. The universe is accelerating in it's expansion, then the repeated big bangs blur together like a wheel on a racing car blurs; eg. the "Lorenz attractor".

All possibilities exist simultaneously in the realm of infinity. ["To infinity and beyond!" ;) ]

This is called the "Super Sphere". [What about time?: is this a matter of perspective, an illusion, as Einstein believed?]

(Brian Wiler:) "It makes sense that the more dust and rubble that goes into making a star the smaller the star will be. Let me expalain; With pure hydrogen it takes more matterial to create the gravity and friction to start fusion. If more complex (denser)matter is added then fusion can begin quicker. This matter also has a dampening effect on the star enabling it to burn longer on less fuel. So, looking at this aspect of star formation, the sun could be a fifth or sixth generation star (if we go by the big bang). That would put the age of the universe at well over one hundred billion years. This is another nail in the coffin of the big bang theory which has the age of the universe at around thirteen point two billion years (welcome to my reality).

All this fusion creates more and more complex elements. The bigger the star the more complex the elements. We do, however, have to remember that all the matter originated as sub-atomic particles condensing out of energy."

(Brian Wiler:) "This whole process I like to call the evolution of matter. From sub-atomic particles to more and more complex molicules. Until RNA is formed through a combination of molicules and energy. This energy was most likely kinetic, i.e. a meteor strike. This has been demonstrated in a lab
Through enviornmental changes this RNA becomes more complex and eventualy becomes DNA. The most complex molecular chain known. This is the basis of first simple and then more and more complex organisms. Just remember that they are all matter. This is no more than a continuation of the evolution of matter into more complexity.

All this has lead to us. But the level of matter evolution has more or less reached an end point, at least on earth. So, how can the evolution of the universe continue? Well, it is now the turn of energy. It has quietly been evolving in the back ground all this time. Through its various transformations (heat, kenetic, etc.) then into organisational properties of simple organisms and then to the brain. Now we find that the brain is evolving through thought. The structure hasn't changed much in the last 10,000 years but that doesn't mean we have stoped evolving. Just look at the last 1000 years not to mention the last 100.
All this leads me to several conclusions:
1. The universe is cyclic. The process that started everything is still going. Dark matter is no more than sub-atomic particles that are forming hydrogen. This process can be observed via infra-red (and has been)
2. If God created all things then God is energy.
3. Because the universe is cyclic, the earth will be distroyed eventually. If we are to continue as a species then we will have to evolve to the point where we can leave here.
4. The future of our species is dependent on how our children progress. They have to be smarter, stronger and live longer than us. Their children will have to do the same, and so on.
5. If we fail we fail. The process that begot us will still be valid and on some other planet the process will continue.
6. Since energy can not be distroyed, the energy we develop and organise will remain even when the shell is gone. This energy is transfered into another body to continue evolving.
7. Ultimatly the evolution of energy (which is now us) will become so pure that there will be no need of matter to contain it"

This entire theory is very complicated and very important. "Brian Wiler" clearly has a great understanding of: The theory of the Universe / Quantum Physics / Astro Physics / Dimensions / Time. In these fields, he has the authority and the responsibility of his role as "Director of Field". This secures his seat as a "Board Director" on the Church of Reality , the Church of Realism , and Reality Group .

It is difficult to define energy without using matter or movement. What is the beginning form? It is possible to describe and postulate it's properties. It can even be observed. This is the nergy that is in between matter, it guides matter and ultimately creates what can be described as our "Soul".

"monkeyking"'s Theory of Harmonic Resonance fits in well with "Brian Wiler"'s Theory of Super Sphere.

The human nervous system isn't just electricity, it's more subtle, more elegant, even discerning.

Additional Points:

We must specify each person's specialisation and "Path", relevant to society. The authority and responsibility for this is held by all Board Members, and ultimately, the Chairman.

That's all from me, Brian Wiler and monkeyking, hope you enjoyed the show. ;) xxx    FORUM MATERIAL / The origin of the Universe and the meaning of Life (1)

Well here we are... I would really like to have discussion on what we can deduce from what we KNOW.
I have a real live working theory complete with observation and in some cases proofs. But what I would really like to see is if anyone else can see what I do. That would be a proof of reality in a wider sense. So, here goes part one:

Before there was anything there was nothing (Comments please). This means that the big band could not occure due to the fact that a singularity (Physic speak for 'I realy don't know what it is')wasn't there (because there was nothing).

I'm going to stop here and see what you think.


Wednesday, 23 November 2011 FORUM MATERIAL / What are we trying to achieve? (2)

(1) - http://myreality.chu...?showtopic=5422


The fundamental idea at the heart of the Church of Reality is understanding reality and using it as an analytical tool.

This happens on a personal level and on a political level, among others (business, sport, etc.). The personal level is as important as any of these.

Quote - "My reality is that I see people blindly walking around, creeping through every day, making a bit of money, procreating and believing that that's all there is. What about your great grand children? Are they going to be the same? Worse? Exist? Will they be better than you? What are you doing to improve things? How far does your understanding of reality extend?"

The existential project may be the only project we may be able to get involved in.

We must understand our own abilities to best perform.

The CoR would like to project the understanding of reality on an industrial level.

First, we have to discover something significant in reality.

Second, we have to project that reality on as many minds as possible.

This is our mission statement:

The Church of Reality exists to provide humanity with an accumulation of factual information pertaining to life, the world and all aspects of reality, based on philosophical debate and scientific testing.
We acknowledge that new information is being discovered constantly and that information considered as fact is occasionaly found to be incorrect. With this in mind our indeavor is to maintain currency.

Good work, y'all. :) x    FORUM MATERIAL / What are we trying to achieve? (1)

I'd like to have a deeper analysis of what we're actually trying to do. So, let's look at the completely fundamental idea at the heart of the "Church of Reality". Ultimately, it's about reality, understanding reality. I've talked about how our own "Purpose of Life" comes into this, but refer to that Theme Series if you want to know more. Basically, "Purpose" is created from perspective. Well-being works well. Putting that to one side, let's follow on from "understanding reality". Now, as an analytical tool, understanding reality is useful. And knowledge is power. If we understand something, it makes it so much easier to control and get to grips with. Currently, is there a need for people to appreciate the value of understanding reality? On a personal level, definitely. So much of human suffering and confusion exists because we don't understand the causes of it. On a greater, political level, I've got some doubts. I understand that it's different in the US and other countries, but here in the UK, there isn't much need for change and "understanding reality". I'd like to just look at that. In the case that there isn't a need for political change, is the personal level still important? Of course it is. The "well-being" of people cannot be ignored. Once this well-being has been established, then we can get on with life. But while you're still questioning the lack of well-being, there's work to be done. And the very fact that I'm in this position shows that there is much that can be personally improved. The value of the ideology only stretches as far as that.

So, once you've established "well-being", what goals do you use? Some of the goals of society and also whatever personal goals are created by each individual's personality, as long as they are compatible with society's laws. That's what the score is, then. :)