How does one PROVE that SELF is an illusion?

Remember all scientific theories come from ideas which originate within the mind …..which is philosophy...……. Some half theories have taken science down blind alleyways for sure.

New ideas, touchy and feely:
There are two kinds of “new ideas”:
1. Just emit more and more “?” into the night sky (casual imagination);
2. Effectively help solve existing “hard problems” in the old theories. In one way, the best.

There are probably hundreds of “new ideas” about one thing nowadays…who has to follow yours? haha

You started the excellent topic of “Too much “toggling” happening in the scientific community “standard” theories then?” It’s a fatal shot targeting the heart of those “prisoner of consciousness”.

Thereafter you jump into the outer space to pursue something even G* is not able to know, while care nothing about the key point: whether their mind is “toggling”? They bubble, they will end up in NEUTRAL.

You automatically abandon your advantage while go to pursue the disadvantage.

“Remember all scientific theories come from ideas which originate within the mind …..which is philosophy...……. Some half theories have taken science down blind alleyways for sure.”

You have entirely leave the scientific category and going down the way back to subjectivity to pursue perfect psychology.

With regard to your statement...….You automatically abandon your advantage while go to pursue the disadvantage...………..

Haha....Maybe …..maybe not....

We know there is too much biased "toggling" going on in science at the moment which is why it has disappeared down a cul de sac.

There is clearly a lot we can take forward from science,it would be ridiculous to think otherwise. All I am saying is that if science could just get over its own hang ups about belief systems and utilize full data inputs (0,0..0,1..1,0..1,1) rather than half data inputs (0,1..1,0) then it may see things differently. It wont stop the "toggling" just yet but it will at least "Freshen things up a bit".

It's the fact that science is only utilizing half logic possibility inputs that's the key issue to overcome at the moment and the reason why science is struggling.

Logic says so, even though science wont admit it....yet.

One step at a time as you say.

I haven't abandoned anything.

I have said why science is struggling...It is utilizing biased half logic.

I am trying to help....not hinder

Anti gravity could be the cause of the big bang then? ….TOGGLE TOGGLE.

“One step at a time as you say.”

Okay.

Now, you are trying to talk about “anti gravity”? haha
Can you tell me what’s the definition of gravity in physics first?

You are trying to help? Or help emit more and more “?” into the night sky by lip service?

Just looked up a definition…

Gravity…the force that attracts a body towards the centre of the earth or towards any other physical body having mass.

What's "force" exactly?

Well…my view is that there are electromechanical principles at play within the whole of the cosmos which includes our physical bodies.Electro mechanics requires an external energy source.It involves current;magnetism;rotation (movement);toggling polarities:changes in the mass of matter which affects gravity; attraction (0,1..1,0)/REPULSION i.e. (0,0..1,1).

FORCES result from the above SYSTEM interactions.

Force Definition:Strength or energy as an attribute of physical action or movement.

In last century, Einstein has employed the conception of “curvature of space - time” to describe “force”. People had moved one step forward in the exploration of the essence of nature. The mainstream agrees with Einstein’s view. Piggy also agrees with Einstein’s mathematical – physical method too because manifold is a mature and effective mathematical tool.

Now the pig head is sitting on the FULCRUM and wants to employ the method in the new era of PRESENCE – SELF to analyze the “space - time” in further step.

As demonstrated by the Space – Time equation △t ∝ 1 / L, space – time is integrity. Space and time are not independent variables. So, in philosophy, either space or time is enough to describe the existence of gravity (inflation / deflation of space or time). Either one method is okay.

But space and time are different things in cosmos / different conceptions in physics. So, in philosophy, the employment of both space and time to describe the existence of gravity (“the curvature of space - time”) is a more complicated method.

Your statement.....In last century, Einstein has employed the conception of “curvature of space - time” to describe “force”.

….....….ok but my question is .....what FORCE causes the increase in mass that causes the curvature of space-time?...………….we're looking for the SOURCE are we not?.....

My view is that the FORCE that causes the increase in mass that causes the curvature of space time are electromechanical forces (which includes magnetism).

It's this force that holds the UPPER POSITION and is the prerequisite to the black hole.

Food for thought:

The electromechanical prerequisite forces that create the black hole involve:
-current
-magnetism
-rotation (movement)
-toggling polarities
-changes in the mass of matter which affects gravity
-attraction (0,1..1,0)
-repulsion i.e. (0,0..1,1)

How can a black hole exist without having been created by a separate external system/force? The external force comes first surely...a black hole doesn't create the electromechanical system.

“…what FORCE causes the increase in mass that causes the curvature of space-time?”
You seem not yet make clear what science is doing.
“Force”, “the curvature of space-time” or “inflation / deflation of space or time” are different methods of description for “that interaction / gravity” in different era.
Strickly speaking, your “definition” of gravity ahead even can’t reach the level of “relativistic subconsciousness”.

“My view is that the FORCE that causes the increase in mass that causes the curvature of space time are electromechanical forces (which includes magnetism).”

Casual imagination remains your greatest character. You seems never can stand on shoulder of the giants.

Perhaps even those “prisoner of consciousness” would consider you are just trying to broadcast your own psychology and intuition.

In the PRESENCE – PRESENCE system, what works is “force”; in the PRESENCE – SELF system, what works is “property”.

Once upon a time you became a diamond on the crown of science. You abandoned it.

Next, go on with the topic of “Too much “toggling” happening in the scientific community “standard” theories then?”

One more outstanding example is “singularity” vs “the core of black hole”.
The BB theory which considers that this cosmos came from a “singularity” can count as “standard” theory more or less;
The mainstream considers the core of black hole is also “singularity”.
That’s fun enough: a cosmos will pop up from a black hole at any time. Obviously it’s absurd. If they are not defective in the mind, they should abandon the BB theory. Isn’t that “toggling” between establish / abandon?

Now on the FULCRUM, the mass – space equation can provide a perfect solution. All are INTERCONNECTED. Even G* can join in the fun too. Why it must not be a good thing?

Bubble bubble…
They bubble, they will end up in NEUTRAL;
Bubble bubble…

My point is that there is already a separate system PRESENT that IS creating “black holes”.The “black holes” don’t create this separate system.We see this system at play in the cosmos all the time do we not?

A Black hole/singularity…is NOT the origin of everything therefore.