Theos-Talk Archives (December 1998 Message tt00002)

In a message dated 11/29/98 8:57:37 PM, Jerry wrote:

(?)
>>Chaos-theory just points to the fact that life finds its
>>equilibrium at the verge of order and dis-order and constitutes
>>in the words of David Bohm exactly an "Implicit Order".
>
(Jerry)
>I would hardly limit its findings to "just" that. However, what
>you say here, a well-demonstrated truism, shows that we
>living beings require chaos (alias free will and change) as much
>as order (alias permanancy and stagnation) and and this idea
>seems anathema to Dallas and others.

What does that mean?  Just what would you limit those (whose? what?) findings
to?  How is such "truism well demonstrated"?  Do you even know or understand
what that truism is?  Have you studied Bohm?  Do you know the meaning of
"implicit" (or explicit) order", or the reference to quantum, chaos and
indeterminacy theories that they imply?  Are you talking through your hat
again?

>>Remember, that in antiquity, the expression Chaos refered to th
>>homogeneity of undifferentiated cosmic substance -before
>>differentiation- (do I hear anyone shout pre-big-bang concept ?)
>>and not to disorder.
>>
>>Pete.

>I have to disagree with your notion of "homogeneity."  Undifferentiated
>cosmic substance has ever been called Chaos (or Prakriti) but
>it is NOT homogeneous (a characteristic of order) and never was.

What makes you think that chaos "is NOT homogeneous?  How could it be anything
else?  For if it had some *form* of "order" it couldn't be chaotic.  Could it?
Another example of your know-nothingness?:-)

However, even so, you should have caught the inference in the statement you
disagreed with--that undifferentiated cosmic substance (or Prakriti) is also
chaotic--since the energetic fractal interference patterns in it have not yet
been reduced to the metric, linear, local, explicate *order* holograms of
dimensional forms that are inherent in the implicate *order* of its non-
linear, non metric, non-local nature based on the fundamental (cyclic) Laws of
its action potentials.  That's all explained in the S.D. as well as correlated
with modern science in my theory of ABC.)
<A HREF="http://www.tellworld.com/Astro.Biological.Coenergetics/";>
http://www.tellworld.com/Astro.Biological.Coenergetics/ </A>

F.Y.I., the fundamental nature of chaos is that it has inherent *implicate*,
but not *explicate* order--as Bohm pointed out, and as confirmed, b.t.w, in
the Secret Doctrine. . . (Where he, along with Einstein, Bohr, and Heisenberg
probably got their ideas in the first place)  As for Einstein, at least, check
out:
<A HREF="http://users.aol.com/unIwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/einstein.html
">http://users.aol.com/unIwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/einstein.html </A>
and find out for yourself.

Suggest, along with the SD, you go study some quantum, post-quantum and
cosmological physics, fractal geometry, as well as chaos, complexity, string,
M-brane, and simplicity theories before opening your mouth again with
reference to the "fundamental" theosophical science (as presented, from all
seven different points of view, in the S.D.), and that both presages and
confirms these theories.

(Maybe then, you too, can become a true, blue (non pejorative :-) "FUNDA-
MENTALIST", with an inner confirmed conviction, and no doubts whatsoever--as
most of those advanced theosophical students in this forum you have been
vainly arguing with.

Best regards
(with hope for your ultimate enlightenment)

LHM