Our hearts seem to need that "common bond" that links us all together.
I love the idea that languages of all kinds are like music to the heart. I think language elicits connection through developing understanding between two or more individuals. All languages, whether verbal or by other means, is earth life”s way of transmitting information and possibly concern for the survival of one another. It is like a symbolic offering of validation of purpose in a much larger world. It’s a form of reassurance of safety about one’s existence. If you have ever been in a place where no one speaks your language, you know it can be frustrating and scary. When you hear someone speak your language, there is an instant sense of relief, a connection and rapport.
Music and language are like two peas in a pod. They both seem to act as tools used by both heart and mind to connect our thoughts with intent. Music tends to link our memories to events and emotions. Our hearts seem to need a “common bond.” So many things go better with music and it should be present as a necessary part in “peace talks” and on the battle field…most definitely! I think the heart needs what music and other heart languages can offer to take the brain where it resists going.
Both language and music are mathematical in structure and content – the realm of the mind. Meanwhile, the heart is sensitive to the element of purpose (intent) inherent in both music and language. Both music and language tend to connect mind with heart/body.
I think it likely that EVERY living thing (and most we don’t think of as alive) have a resonant musical note or set of notes that speaks to them in their own individual language – the language of their consciousness if you will. Play that note at the correct volume and you’ll achieve deep rapport – the kind that moves mountains, heals wounds, calms troubled waters, and shakes the heavens. Maybe that’s why so many animals (and plants, too) like music – particularly highly mathematical music like Baroque and certain very rhythmic tribal chants.
Perhaps when you get down to the real nitty-gritty of it all, music and language are simply different names for the same phenomenon.
I think that’s true! The heart is equally responsive to music as the mind in different ways. Both the mental and physical experiences of music affect our approaches to the problems we face. There are other symbols besides music that stimulate thoughts of love or hate within us. Those symbols we gravitate to may convince our thinking and behaviors in way we ourselves cannot always predict, in fact we may surprise ourselves at how quickly a symbol can influence our thoughts, and just how capable we are, of doing acts of heroism or horror.
Unconsciousness might just be a library filled with potential responses waiting for the right symbols to set things in motion. We are both comforted and confronted by designs, patterns and what is presented to the mind, by the senses, from the environment. What if our responses to symbols have been predetermined by programming without our consciously knowing what they will be? Is there any way of finding out and if so, what could we do about them?
I wonder if there is such a program (to thrive… to their highest potential). One could view life as an interaction (harmonic convergence) between environment and itself. Resistance and disturbance on earth tend to foster living tissue. What if opposition IS the design?
That’s a valid point! Not only are the natural forces giving us a run for our money, so is our own species. Resistance can make us stronger or else. Variables are based on luck or conscious action. Whatever the designs behind opposition, humans and all life contain the seeds of future life, that suggests an intent by nature to live long enough to reproduce. There are other attributes to our physiology that apparently nature intended continuation for: from conception to old age, there are safeguards built into organisms for overcoming conflict, such as repair mechanisms, self maintenance systems and systems for flight or fight. The drama between life and death, between opposition and nurturing support is a most interesting one, perhaps even entertaining. It’s comforting at least to know that we are capable of reproducing more entertainers to keep the interest going.
Does the physical form invoke a consciousness based on a mass mind entity (the body) – the model in which conception = consciousness? Or is there a sort of frequency convergence (similar to how stars and planets, etc., tend to appear where gravity waves overlap) that invokes consciousness, that in turn invokes matter (the physical body).
Could there be probability waves similar in nature to gravity waves – but on a much finer scale than gravity – in which wave overlaps result in consciousness, that in the right environment result in living tissue? In this case, intersection results in disturbance, which in turn increases the probability of consciousness sufficiently to rise to the level of manifestation (out of the “white-noise” background energy). Music and language is JUST LIKE that, too – perhaps that explains why we like both so much.
What if sperm and egg come together as a result of the convergence of probability waves rather than the coming together of mother and father? (“Sex” could be our justification based more on result than cause)
What you describe here sounds a lot like DNA and its functions. The interpretation of MME ,as mind/body, suggests a central ruling function, surrounded or accompanied by a means for carrying out those rules. We experience MME as what we are taught is true or “real,” the only guide to physical reality. Like the brain is the guide to the body, so the heart is the counselor to the brain, there are apt to be some differences on how and why the body carries out the rules. It is possible that the probability waves behave much like the heart to the MME. Glitches within the operations department of matter maintenance, could be the effect of the way the heart component is putting its own twist on the creation process. When we talk about character traits being inherited, we are playing a card that looks like fortune telling. I think the design of any system begins with a kind of fortune or future telling by conceptualizing a blueprint, a potential model for the eventual physical form. And like a brain allowing the heart some room to express, the physical may be the result of two ruling aspects cooperating in the creation process.
The contribution by a female and male physical organisms probably have very little to do with the actual engineering process of reproduction, other than the need for two bodies…the sperm and egg and even that has been designed and prepared long before a conception event.
These two bodies are symbolic representations – I wonder if the symbols of reproduction are what bring about the actual physical product (a physical body- baby) or is the need for the product what evokes the creation of symbolic representations and manifested through the interaction of probability waves?
re: I wonder if…?
Good question. I wonder if the actuality and the need are one and the same – neither chicken nor egg, but both simultaneously.
As for patterns of living entities – patterns seem to be created whenever probability intersects with probability (the intersection of probability waves) – so why not sperm (probability wave #1) and egg (probability wave #2)? Where probability wave 1 and 2 intersect, life appears. Depending upon WHICH probabilities materialize at the time of intersection (conception), the results (DNA of the offspring) can vary widely – but will most LIKELY appear similar to the patterns extant in the parents (genetic predisposition based on experimental evidence and observation/practice) – which itself is another incidence of intersecting probability waves. In this manner, genealogy could be viewed as a history of actualized probability wave intersections. Genetics could be viewed as the mathematical computations necessary to predict such intersections and their results (actualization).
What happens when probability waves intersect with probability waves?
If probability suggests potential then intersecting with more potential produces yet another probability?
There must be some aspect of the probability that determines actualization between intersecting waves. Consider that water waves behave in similar fashion to probability waves or not: when water waves intersect they create more wave currents that go in a different directions they are still waves and not until they reach a solid surface where they affect a change that may be imperceptible or devastating.
I wonder if designs exist with the waves, blueprints influenced by other factors such as; temperature, pressure, moisture, pH levels, or a safe environment in which to actualize.
When the waves intersect, the program resonates with other wave programs perhaps matching resonance or a “purpose” with something specific within both waves, a convergence of harmonics, and the probability is replaced with actualization.