Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.

Does anyone know if Chaol has mentioned critical mass in any of the threads?

Mars!

Do you happen to have a pdf of Chaol's thread, Calling All Great Minds? ;o)

Right now, I don't have one. Sorry.

Not read any of this yet but GREAT artwork, Cat!
Really glad you're doing this

Great stuff! Nice and simple, ty

Critical mass of what? In reference to what?

mars is a value in your perspective. What do you think it represents?

Critical mass (or tipping point) within the collective. Also called the 100th monkey effect.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Thanks.

Cat, is this your artwork? It is great but I hadn't realized it might be yours.

There is only one perspective. What is a collective - it is all you.

That's a good point! I wonder what Mars represents? How do we investigate that? Through good old, reliable Sekhmet?

For me Mars represents war. You can check in with Sekhmet and report back.

Hi Chaol,

I was wondering where the first eternal spirit originated from, if it was first surrounded by black nothingness?

Thanks

Chaol: I noticed that whenever someone talks about the soul, you keep acting like you don't know we are talking about. If you think there is only perspective (relationship of symbols), but no soul, how do you describe happiness? What is happiness then? What is love then?
Why do I feel happy when I keep thinking about things I like? When I visualize a nice meadow with lots of tulips? When I am thinking about my three kids and my wife? When I am thinking about peace and love? Why is that I feel awful when I watch a pro-Israeli propaganda on youtube or hear people quarreling?
If there is no soul, what feels these emotions? How do I know by nature what is good and what is bad (good meaning what brings me closer to actually who I am)?
Why is that I always feel bad when Sekhmet (the warrior goddess) pops up now and then in the thread? How do you describe this bad feeling? You say there is no such thing as good or bad, just what seems so from my perspective. And yet I can still feel exactly what is good or bad at any time, independent from what symbols are nearby or relative to me.

What if the "feelings" are a symbol within your perspective as well? You only feel what you do because of what you believe you've experienced up until now. You (whether you believe me or not) do choose how "things" make you "feel".

Does a soul have to exist to have feelings? If so, perhaps your definition of a soul and Chaol's definition of perspective may be the same thing.

Everything is nothing and nothing is everything.

Jesse, isn't it also possible that what we in our world call "Godlike experiences" could also be experiences of the Divine......which in Chaol's world they call something else within their perspective?

In other words, aren't both worlds assigning meanings to experiences? And if one believes in God, they call it a Divine experience? And if one believes they are God (such as in Chaol's world), call it something else...maybe an experience beyond perception?

Emotions represent possibility.

There is nothing beyond perspective. It's a mathematical impossibility. All that is and isn't = perspective.

Why and when did nothing decide it wanted to be everything?

Thanks

Did you create yourself?

Nothing wants to be nothing.

To answer what I think was the intent of your question. It was shortly before decided it wanted to be a colour and water decided it wanted to be wet.

Is that possible? If you are perspective and perspective is everything could you create yourself? Could you even perceive yourself?

Nothing wants to be nothing.

To answer what I think was the intent of your question. It was shortly before red decided it wanted to be a colour and water decided it wanted to be wet.

Doesn't perspective indicate an observer?

Chaol says we will learn that WE CREATE OUR PERSPECTIVE! If this is so, then someone is creating the perspective and this someone also observes it.

Perception is creation.

Further. You aren't perceiving something that is already there. The act of perceiving creates what is there.

OK, I get this.

But who is learning how to create perceptions?