Neuronics: The future of humanity (Humanity without physicality)

Thank you. We have the same query regarding Ec numbers.

I am very keen to get started on a standard translation for at least the most popular 30 words.

Would be more effective and accurate if others had input, hope you are as keen an me.

I am tired, need sleep. Getting clumsy. Look forward to catching up again. Love to start attempting the 1st 30 tomorrow.

You're a little further along than I am, I'm still working to memorize the characters, meanings and sounds.

No I havn't memorised them all, but the more I interact with them, the more meaningful a relationship I am creating with them, easier to remember that way. Plus the mind mapping aspect. Ec seems a comfortable fit for my brain/mind.

Havn't had the chance today to work on the words, hopefully tomorrow.

:D

Have you gotten the genius to work for you yet?

Every day, but not with conscious intent.

I have absolutely no fucking idea where to start to with this stuff. I've been reading this guy's posts, I can follow along. But the language, man, what? Someone talk to me. I just signed up for this class- what am I doing?

Chaol... is the approximate value of 1.7 relevant to interaction? If not, I've been wasting a lot of time. If you say yes, I'll post an interesting observation.

Last Edited by MutantMessiah on 10/06/2011 06:53 PM

Checking the chaol threads every day. I'd sure like to hook up with you guys, but I really have no clue where to start with the language. Will try the genius advice though!

Good Tuuur, we need you for the Ec-German translation too. And your help on the English translation appreciated too.

I can only share what has worked for me. and I want to clarify that at this point I havn't memorised all of the icons (well their pronunciation) at all. I still don't have a deep understanding of the Ec, but it feels as if I am on track.

I think the most useful thing for me was familiarising myself with the four foundations, Symbol, Interaction, Possibility and Logic, and what they represent. So that everytime I tried to play with an icon I didnt have to keep referring to the Choals definitions of such.

Also, learn the neuronic matrix if you havn't already. Draw a copy of it and stick it on or near your computer or the like, somewhere in your line of sight.

The next useful thing I noted was that the icons progress in a logical order (as stated on the Ecsys site). Take a look at the Ec chart again. There are 11 possible icon combinations when we begin with high Symbol as input, 10 for neutral Symbol, 9 for low Symbol; moving clockwise, there are 8 possible combinations for high Interaction, 7 for neutral Interaction, 6 for low Interaction and so on (total 66). Knowing this, I am now able to write every icon off by heart, or imagine them accurately without referring to a chart.

I have written the icons on coloured paper with their pronunciations, and in the case of the number icons, I have included their value also. These I have stuck to my walls, so when I sit to eat a meal or I walk past them I can glance over them or study them if in the mood. I think it is helpul just looking at them. I do think it is important to write them out though, don't just print out the chart.

I think it is up to us to make the rules needed to make this language understandable by all, Choal has given us the foundation only. But I am beginning to see that that is all we need, with a little guidance from Chaol of course.

Hope this is of some value.

(corrected spelling)

Last Edited by curve on 10/07/2011 03:35 AM

Yes, same. I have been very lazy with direct use of the Genius. Mostly because I am not sure what I want to change, or what I want to change first, or how to phrase what I want which is pretty lame. So time to explore that some.

I feel though, that I brought a new friend to me using the Genius, only partially consciously though.

After reading Chaols threads and learning the power of matrices elsewhere, I did make a 3-dimensional version of the simple matrix out of pipe cleaners as Symbol. (In hindsight, it was not a unique creation so it wouldn't have been as effective as something original). But I couldn't consciously decide what to do with it from there, (as in) what it represented, and I didn't assign any rules (Logic). However it has been, and still is, being Interacted with a great deal, by myself and others, in many Possible ways.

I still like it though, people ask me about it, everyone likes it, it leads to inevitable discussions on Ec and the Genius.

Time to try the Genius with intent now.

Hoping my posts (above) have been of use.

Hi.

(The following may get more confusing as you continue to read)

The Ec language itself follows the Genius.

For "Symbol" we have neuronicons.
For "Interaction" we have inputs and outputs.
For "Possibility" we have Ec language.
For "Logic" we have the rules of Ec language.

So, you could say that inputs and outputs are ways for each neuronicon to interact with one-another.

There are 66 neuronicons. Each of the 4 elements (Symbol, Interaction, Possibility, Logic) can function as either an input or an output. This way, each element can interact with a neuronicon, creating further possibility.

e.g., we use Logic to Interact with a Symbol, creating Possibility.

Symbol is the most interactive input and can be an used in 30 icons.

Logic is the least interactive input and can only be used in 3 icons

On this Ec chart [link to ecsys.org] going clockwise from the top of each symbol an input is first, followed by the output.

What good is an input and an output? It allows your brain to process information faster (i.e., making distant things more relative).

In school, We learn that everything has an input and output value according to your perspective.

For ease of explanation, take a clock.

Imagine that you put one of the 4 elements into a clock and out comes one of the 4 elements.

Then, do determine the input and output for the clock we can ask (to illustrate):

(For Input) "What is the element before we interact with the clock?"
(For Output) "what is the element after we interact with the clock?"

Often, the input is a symbol (which is why it is most compatible). We can then ask, for example, "Is it a powerful symbol, a neutral symbol, or a weak symbol in my perspective?"

We could say that a clock is a powerful symbol because it represents time.

We could also say that the output of the clock in your perspective is interaction (or even possibility) because interacting with the clock often causes us to interact with other things. This isn't as strong, so let's say that it's neutral.

So now we have: input-high symbol, output-neutral interaction

Which is equal to the 4th Ec, "oo"

You would do this as many times as you feel comfortable that you have mapped the clock in your perspective.

Usually, Ec words have 3 characters so you could do it 3 times. Perhaps 'clock' is more common and easier to map, so then you can do it 2 times to define its place in your perspective.

The above may sound complicated but once people get the hang of it it's not so bad.

When mapping a concept there are really only 3 things to think about:

1) What is the element before and after I interact with it?
2) If not mapped fully in my perspective, then repeat step 1
3) How is it written and how do I pronounce it?

Hope this helps (and I haven't confused more than helped)

I would recommend starting with the Genius.

Ec would be far more difficult to grasp, I think, because it almost requires a re-mapping of the human mind.



(See above)



No need to repeat neuronicons unless you're doing some calculations with it.

Also, no need to write in order. Any element can be first (S, I, L, or P).

Wheres the Ecsys game I heard was coming?

You could define a frequency entirely in Ec, since you can use some neuronicons as numbers: [link to ecsys.org]

'Number' icons can be used either as words or numerical values.

The "rule", if there was one, is that zero is 'high possibility' as an input (per the icon). Everything else follows in place.

Hi.

It is approximately 30 (~30). So they could be any that you use most commonly.

However, it could be that your most common words have duplicate values. In this case, it would be necessary (for basic Ec usage) to illustrate an other concept using 2 icons instead of 1.

It may help to draw it out on a piece of paper to see how each icon flows to the next.

Also, there is no need to create straight lines. As long as you have the anchor (the box) where it should be it doesn't matter how straight they are.

heh.. That's the result, but perhaps you were being facetious :)

Eventually, it would become second nature and you can do things on-the-fly.

Just keep in mind the Genius and Ec language are somewhat separate for 'the basics'.

The Genius: Create a map from one perception to the next (within 1-3 days if done properly and used without Ec).

Ec: Several uses. But can be used for more advanced 'Genius' purposes. Basic purposes are to alter your perspective consciously, increase your thinking 'speed' (making associations), and others.

Last Edited by Chaol on 10/07/2011 04:42 PM

I don't think so.

But what is your observation?

Just try one word, and see how it works for you.

Start with a feeling or concept that you'd like to bring closer to your perspective.

Pick one of the following that you think best describes it: Symbol, Interaction, Logic, Possibility

(We'll make this the input, and make it strong for ease of use)

Now pick a second one from the same list (Symbol, Interaction, Logic, Possibility)

(We'll make this the output, and make it neutral)

Now check the following graphic and see what your input and output would look like: [link to ecsys.org]

Draw it on a piece of paper. Be sure to include the box position if it is right next to a box.

Now see this chart: [link to ecsys.org]

Make note of the icon that corresponds to your concept/feeling.

You can stick with one icon or, for better results, use two.

Practice saying the new sound or phrase and thinking of it when you think of this concept/feeling.

Notice when others say it, too, or when you hear it.

Say it to others, also, and use it in everyday language.

You've mapped the concept to your perspective, and that is one of the ways that Ec works.

Our perspective is like a complex language that interacts endlessly. We can insert our own 'words' into this complexity in order to manipulate our own reality.

Eventually (in more advanced uses) you can form your entire reality this way.

Wonderful.

Memorizing could have some benefits, but it is more effective to know a couple and begin to make use of them.

Without it interacting with your perspective, no map can be drawn.

Glad to see people learning this :)

That's the thing. Sometimes we can't define what it is we want.

That could mean, however, that the 'creation' process is beneath the surface and outside of our direct knowledge of it.

It still has intent, even without your conscious knowing of what it is.

But it's better to give it intent yourself. That way, you know what people are interacting with :)

After spending a few thousand dollars developing it, it turned out the developers really had no idea how to 'make it work' the way that it should.

So, it's vaporware.

It is better, I have realized, for others to join in and come up with different ways of learning. I, too, have learned a lot from the process.

Thank you Chaol! You've cleared up a lot of my confusion. With regard to my post about the 1.7ish number... after looking further into it, it looks like it's related to Phi. Found an interesting correlation with a right angle triangle hyp of square root of 3, opposite of 1 and adj of 2 with the 1,2,3 and 5 of ec. The rest might sound insane, so if you don't know of a correlation, I am probably way off base (with a very overactive imagination)

There is some correlation with Ecsys Prime (123), Pi, Phi, etc.

Here's a somewhat related video:



The maths here is quite different, but it's always interesting to hear of such things.

I messed up above^

Here goes some irrelevant fantasy:
Consider the 30 degree angle the location of the observer, the hypotenuse to be "possibility," adjacent to be the square of interaction and the opposite to be logic. Rotate the shape around the line of possibility, making two cones, connected at their base(neutral at approx Phi away from the observer). The relevance to the observer is more in the cone closer and less in the further cone. At the opposite end frm the observer lies the focus or intent of the observer. Lol. This is a summary.