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

I imagine it "happened" something like this...

In the beginning (yes the very beginning) there was nothing. This nothing is not nothing, it's something. It is impossible to define as it lies outside of anything we can or will ever perceive (it is perception). This "ability to perceive" required additional things be generated at the same time. It "presupposed" a random soup of pure "true" randomness. Within that "perspective", patterns emerged and not necessarily in a physical sense. Could have been the most simple of concepts at first, but in "true" randomness (without time) you can have complex patterns emerge (including time and the observer). Some could just have initial conditions where minute changes over time are allowed. Include continued existence for a concept that can grow in meaning and adjust itself based on what it is currently experiencing.

You see, I don't know that nothing exists, because nothing is as random as possible. Nothing is ever provable. You can only collect evidence of experience and work to predict and understand the probability for it to happen. This evidence allows you to judge how the future can behave.

As I see it, this is how you(we) got here. Or if nothing else, it is how we formed within the framework of these "physical bodies" and their perceived environment. All of your past could have been generated (in whole) at this moment with you as complex as you are.

Edit- Not only did we come into being capable of experience like this, I believe it is this possibility space that we abuse by using the Genius. We provide perspective a possibility for something previously not logical. Once we allow it to interact it is queued into experience. The more irrelevant the symbol the more possibility for that beautiful "true" random to be abused(utilized).

Last Edited by MutantMessiah on 12/21/2012 05:11 PM

I totally agree with the bolded statement.

I couldn't say about the rest but thank you for sharing it. Gives me a lot to think about.

When I consider that I am at this very moment, perceiving a body, a computer in a room, sitting in a chair, a past, a future, family, etc:, etc:, etc;, without knowing how, then it must be that there is a mind or intelligent design. Something that is providing "material" for me to arrange into perspective.

How could it be otherwise? I don't know what I'm doing but there is some kind of GENIUS involved, LOL!


What is your definition of the subconscious? (Let's not assume any of us knows what anyone else is basing logic on.) I am thinking, at this point, the subconscious is the universal mind that I tap into and re-arrange for perspective of endless possibilities.

Subconscious, from a hypnotherapy standpoint is the part of you that you're unaware of. I'd argue that's true.

Following on, I am not implying that there are observers or each has its own wave of possibilities, for #1.

There is no observer in the broad sense. There is only that which (seems to) perceive.

What laws might those be?

It does not seem to follow that there is a "Universal Source" beyond your own perspective, implied from the above.

Whatever order we arrange them is logical.

It could be completely random but we would still make sense of it.

That is, indeed, what is done.

We perceive nothing. There is no inherent order or logic in "nothing".

We make sense of it, according to our perspective.

If you relate anything to anything else it is a relationship and, thus, can be logical.

Infinity does not actually exist, for "nothing" is not actually infinite. However, when we perceive of nothing it appears infinite because it is impossible to perceive of anything directly.

Even when it is perceive it does not exist, but only seem to exist because we have related (what appears to be) something with (what appears to be) something else.

We cannot perceive of something because there is only Nothing.

When we relate one illusion with an other, existence seems to be. When, actually, it was never there at all.

The symbols don't come from anywhere. They don't need to.

When you relate one thing with an other thing (both illusions) you have a symbol (that is also an illusion).

If there was ever a "source" it is Nothing. But we don't pull something out of nothing as it would be a waste of energy (and also impossible). There need only be the illusion of us doing so.

We have a taste of this at every moment in physicality. Things appear solid and are 'good enough' for their purpose. They need not be solid throughout or even real.

We need only relate. And relating two illusions together completely satisfies the need to relate.

Trying to think untraditionally...

but not coming up with anything useful.

Can you elaborate Chaol?


Thanks

They all ready do.

There is far more life in our electronics that we realize. It would be as though there we were surrounded by a whole world of intelligent beings but we only used and analyzed their poopings.

We look at their form of communication and consider it something that we have invented or discovered.

Two elephants are in the forest and, for the first time, they head humans talking. One elephant turns to the other and says, "I have discovered a new type of sound!" and proceeds to dance to get other humans to visit, thus making more sounds.

What we 'invent' is a discovery of something that was all ready there.

As part of the more advanced uses of Ecsys and neuronics we will learn to make use of the understanding that every experience is one of unique symbols.

The doorknob you touched yesterday is entirely unique from the one today. (One that has of course interacted with other aspects of our perspective that would be called "past" and, thus, seems like the same from yesterday.)

You use the Genius at every moment.

It is what 'creates' the illusion of physically-oriented existence.

Some may have success in modeling an electronic component in their mind (i.e., in a more relative perspective) and working with it there.

In this way you could, for example, turn on a device from 20 feet away or (as I tend to do) fix something that is broken.

If someone was talking with herself during this process the exchange could go something like this way:

"My laptop is broken. I will make a Genius model of the laptop in my mind because the laptop exists in my perspective. Although it is not as relative as is my hand it is entirely in my perspective and it can be fixed if I change ("fix") my perspective of it. So now I imagine a black box with pictures and other information on it, which will serve as my symbol of it. I need not know how a laptop works but only how perspective works because it exists entirely in my perspective. I imagine it in the palm of my hand. My fingers interact with the pictures and manipulate the information. But wait.. it's breaking. My fingers have much more difficulty in moving the pictures around. I will put my mental laptop down on the floor and crack my fingers and exercise them. I will also blow into the laptop to clear away any defects within the perception. Now I will pick up the laptop and close it and open it again. I will now power on the other aspect of my mental laptop (the more physical laptop that was broken). It works, so now I can use it."

Last Edited by Chaol on 12/23/2012 01:34 PM

Your Genius is much "smarter" (or wise) than you are so it's best not to have expectations about it.

You'll often be surprised about how ingenious the path to your desired perspective may be.

(It's something that you probably would not have thought of when so closely married to physical perspective.)



The representations have different aspects. Some are mental (dreams, thoughts, etc) and some are more physically oriented in a similar way to what you consider yourself to be (you'd call this the "real" version).

The representation does not morph. You could say that your experience with the representation morphs.

You can shift between different versions of the same thing. You can also make use of multiple representations simultaneously.

The illusion and the real thing are both representations of the same thing. You just call one illusion real because it's a sibling and the other one not-Real because it's a cousin.

Hope this helps.

Last Edited by Chaol on 12/21/2012 06:53 PM

This is quite amusing for me to hear how you've discovered that your electronics have 'a mind of their own'.

It's not a Terminator-type scenario where they're waiting to take over or evolving consciousness.

Every aspect of your perspective is related to something else. The relationship is what you'd call consciousness.

The components of an electronic device (or anything else, for that matter) are related to what you are in some way. They are also related to other parts of your perspective.

Don't confuse the inside of an electronic device with its meaning. (It's value, or meaning, is roughly illustrated in the components but we need not know anything about the components the same way you don't need to know about cellular biology in order to communicate with your friends.)

When a device relates to your world it will bring you the news. A music device is an expression of a type of musical relationships, not just a machine that reproduces the sound for your enjoyment.

When you are reading something off of your Kindle the device is as much what you are reading as you are. There is an interaction between both of you. Your Kindle is telling you a story. It knows who you are like you think your dog might. It relates to you in multiple aspects.

Letting your electronics go isn't losing them. It's just allowing them to more fully-express their own values. It's the subconscious, in a way.

You can maintain strict dictates on your subconscious (which is what the 'conscious' is) and all is fine. Nothing wrong with that, of course.

You can also allow your subconscious to more fully-express its own values.

Your Kindle is not an electronic device. It is you. A part of your subconscious no different from the Kindle in your dream.

(In the dream the inside of the Kindle need not exist, either. Only the relationships matter.)

"They" is all ways "you".

So we create these stories to make sense of how we are ignoring other values in our perspective.

It's impossible not to ignore other values so there's nothing wrong with this.

Neither is there anything wrong with whatever story we come up with.

It could be said (though I did not quite imply the content of your first paragraph) that different aspects of your perspective try to overpower it by interacting with more things but it's a natural process. We get caught up in the details and specifics but it's irrelevant. The true value is in the relationships (and the geometry thereof).

Usually we only see (and care about) the story that we've created to make sense of the geometry of relationships. This is how we understand and is valid because it assists in our understanding of this geometry.

We need not understand the geometry (it's kind of boring, anyway) but only need to understand the geometry through the drama of the relationships (much more exciting and human, and leads to the same understanding although in a different way).

That's why I have said that you are as likely to "become enlightened" (or whatever it's called these days) watching a television drama or playing a game or stepping in mud as you are meditating or going to church.

It's about the relationships, not the way we make sense of them.

Some of us are quite frightened of this power and the ability to do anything.

The ability of the Genius, the subconscious is only as limited as our perceptions.

What could be more frightening to these few than what can be perceived?

Once you've seen it, you cannot unsee it!

To those that are a bit scared by the power of the subconscious or what it's capable of I can say that the only thing to fear is wanting to unsee it.

Being "okay" with whatever is of your Genius is probably the best thing you could do for your total perspective.

Yes, there are some frightening things there. But it is only frightening because you have learned how to avoid it.

There is nothing actually scary in and of your subconscious.

Once you stop resisting you'll find that you are okay with that part of yourself.

You'll feel better, too ;)

For your next one, think of what you want as a thought.

A thought can go away but it can also come back.

When you impose rules on what you want, it will act accordingly.

What you are seeking is a perspective rather than something out of your control.

You did well with this one and I'm sure we look forward to helping you with the next ;)

We treat such things as 'real' or physical objects when they're not.

$5 dollars is the same as $5 billion dollars.

It is the same perspective.

Our relation to either is what determines our experience of the perspective.

They're both illusions.

The question to ask is, "Why is $5 more relative to me than $500 million dollars?"

In a way this is similar to someone close to us talking about pregnancy and "all of a sudden" pregnant women come out of nowhere for the following two weeks.

In a way the pregnant women were all ready there (as values in our perspective).

In an other way it is now easier for us to incorporate pregnant women into our experience because we have changed (if only temporarily) our perspective.

We have a relationship with this brand of physicality so it's usually throughout our perspective.

It is easier for us to experience this brand of physicality but it does not mean it is the only way that we can experience ourselves.

When we develop more of a relationship with other parts of our perspective we will experience them more. (Sometimes it will envelop us, like what we think of as the physical world, because we have such a strong relationship with it.)

To do this, don't kill your current relationship but create and focus on an other one. (Like you didn't have to destroy the perception of 3 non-pregnant women in order to perceive of 3 pregnant women.)

It has only just begun :)

I'm only reminding you of what you all ready know.

I am a part of your perspective, wouldn't ya know =D

Far from an expert. It would be like you going to an other world and explaining how the money system works. There's so much that I don't know but I am happy to help you understand what I do.

You could say that it takes about 2-3 months to clear out old perspectives and adopt new ones.

The change is simultaneous, of course, but our brains make up a story so that it makes sense. (So the illustration of the story takes about 3 months. Less time if you're comfortable with not being who you think you are.)

Last Edited by Chaol on 12/21/2012 07:42 PM

Respecting the logic of others is really being "ok" with the different values of perspective.

Anything is logical, but to your perspective only certain things are logical.

Until you change your perspective, of course.

And to one perspective, an other perspective may not make sense (when it does to itself).

Hope this helps.

It is not necessary to see your reality as a single perspective.

But if you really want to, then it would probably be difficult when some values have meaningless designations (because you would then be assigning your own values that have no useful meaning).

For illustration only, in what perspective might a bad monster be good? It's own.

Which perspective is correct? Neither. They're both illusions.

Considering one thing is good while an other is bad is a waste of energy because neither exist. Both are a part of your perspective.

We are looking for a way to relate to something.

It does not matter how.

So (actually quite randomly) some things we call good while others are bad. We then learn to make sense of these 'random' designations.

3 people being killed is worse than 300,000 being killed, for example. Scrambled eggs are good while fried eggs are bad. We develop a whole library of these meaningless things.

It does not matter what we call it (to our subconscious) only that we relate to it in some way. It need not be good or bad.

If you really wanted to "be okay" with what you consider bad things it does not mean becoming bad yourself. This is irrelevant (since "bad" is what you make it).

Just find a new way to relate to what you consider "bad".

Step 1, Step 2, Step 3...

you make the order above through your perspective and you transition through it.

But it's arbitrary and meaningless. The order does not matter, only the relationship. (The same relationship is still there even without the order than you perceive.)

Why not make it Step 2, Step 3, Step 1?

"Win the lottery" first and then see your numbers match. Make up your own logic for the perspective.

Has someone ever told you to taste "milk" that was actually water? But you could swear that it was milk for the first couple of seconds?

The details are not important. Only the perspective.

But if we focus on the details then we miss the importance of perspective and forget that it takes precedence.

Hope this helps.

Last Edited by Chaol on 12/21/2012 08:03 PM

The laws are if I interact with symbols a certain way, I see a certain perception.

There must also be a law that there are symbols in the first place to be interacted with.

You seem to be implying that the symbol is independent of your perception.

The interaction is your perception, as is the symbol, the potential, and the law.

The laws that you make are as flexible as your perspective. As are the symbols.

There is only perspective. Nothing else need be.

And for perspective there is only one "law"

Why is everyone's subconscious the same?

I can buy that.

So the one law is there is only perception?

And can you explain how I know use my perception even though I don't know HOW I use it?

Last Edited by ERE3 on 12/21/2012 08:25 PM

It was funny because I thought I was ready for new stuff and found out I wasn't quite as ready as I thought!

How does one deal with resistance? And, who is resisting?

Last Edited by ERE3 on 12/21/2012 09:57 PM