The opposite of love is confusion

[Ninja_pig]

I wanted to share an interesting video I came across today. It's from Fred Davis, one of my favorite teachers.

I think that this realization goes very deep, and it ties into the foundational point that the universe is a mind that is trying to understand itself.

We as humans are consequences of the laws of physics playing themselves out. Given enough time, hydrogen in a vacuum will begin to develop language and ask questions such as "what is love". Humans are simply another emergent phenomenon from the laws of physics.

We often see that as time goes on, love tends to increase. As our societies get more advanced we tend to have less cruelty and more acceptance. This is primarily because we become smart and we understand more about ourselves and the world around us.

The universe has quantum fields so that it can have quantum particles. It has quantum particles so that it can create protons and neutrons. It has protons and neutrons so that it can create molecules. It has molecules so that it can create organic proteins. It has organic proteins so that it can create cells. It has cells so that it can create animal life. It has animal life so that  it can create humans. It has humans (or another intelligent lifeform) so that it can understand itself.

The laws of physics are set up to create greater understanding of the universe and thus greater self-love over time. Confusion decreases, love increases!

[Malkom]

As someone who studies quantum mechanics and the theory of relativity, I'd say it's all much more interesting...

And quantum fields aren't exactly what they seem to be; they're cutting-edge, but they're still in the research stage, and that's not a given. It's not fields that are fundamental, but so-called "vacuum oscillators," and certain "symmetry principles" that are fundamental. I'm putting this in quotation marks for a reason, because there's no clear definition yet; it's a rough draft in the research stage.

As for the theory of relativity, in Minkowski's five-dimensional spacetime (Einstein worked with him, and so did Lorentz and Poincaré, but we won't go into details), time is the same coordinate as space, and evolution or development simply doesn't exist there. And "time" itself in this 5-dimensional space-time is a "world line," and when something happens, the "event" is again in quotation marks, because there are no equivalents to this in our 4-dimensional space-time. And light in 5-dimensional space doesn't MOVE, and you or anything at rest already moves at the speed of light by default, and this is two of the many reasons why nothing can move at the speed of light in our 4-dimensional space-time. I'll even say more: if you look at the metric tensor, time comes first, and space comes second, so it's more logical to call it time-space, not space-time. And time is always energy, so what does that mean? Energy is primary... Question...

A little joke - theorists constantly want to simplify everything and make it uniform, while experimenters, on the contrary, want to discover something new.

Does this prove that Consciousness is primary from a scientific perspective? No. Science doesn't work that way. And that's normal for her. Science has its own rules, and if you don't follow them, you're no longer doing science, but something else. Otherwise, we wouldn't be able to enjoy the benefits of civilization.

Is Consciousness primary? If you're interested in my humble, useless opinion, ahahaha. I'd say absolutely YES..

Edited October 24 by Malkom

[Dodo]

Oh no, not Fred Davis the awakeness 😀 

[Ramasta9]

Spiritualists say fear, bashar says guilt, mentalists say confusion, I feel love has no opposites whatsoever.

Fear, guilt, confusion, they aren’t true 'opposites'. They’re distortions or veils of the same love, temporarily misperceived.

Love is all inclusive, there is only love, fundamentally.

[Ninja_pig]

On 10/24/2025 at 1:56 PM, Malkom said:

I'll even say more: if you look at the metric tensor, time comes first, and space comes second, so it's more logical to call it time-space, not space-time

Wow, this is an interesting concept, and it partially lines up with my musings on the nature of time and space. Are you saying that the time component of the metric tensor being in the upper left corner means that it has some priority in the calculations? I didn't know that there was any real significance to the order in which the components of the tensor were arranged. Although I think it's interesting that time and space have opposite signs. Do you know why that is?

I have often thought that there is no such thing as time, there is only the eternal present moment which is everchanging and continuous. That's just what my personal spiritual experiences have informed me of, and I have the suspicion that there is no real 4D spacetime manifold, but representing it that way mathematically gives us an elegant way to talk about relativistic dynamics. If there is no such thing as time then there may also be no such thing as space, although that's something that I have not thought about as much. Space may just be a relationship between discrete points in some abstract graph like Stephen Wolfram says.

On 10/24/2025 at 1:56 PM, Malkom said:

It's not fields that are fundamental, but so-called "vacuum oscillators," and certain "symmetry principles" that are fundamental.

I have heard of symmetry principles in Norther's theorem and the Dirac equation, but I have never heard of vacuum oscillators. What is that? Is it something to do with string theory?

[Ninja_pig]

16 hours ago, Ramasta9 said:

Spiritualists say fear, bashar says guilt, mentalists say confusion, I feel love has no opposites whatsoever.

Fear, guilt, confusion, they aren’t true 'opposites'. They’re distortions or veils of the same love, temporarily misperceived.

Love is all inclusive, there is only love, fundamentally.

Nah you right.