Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,484 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,221,959
Pageviews Today: 1,721,805Threads Today: 451Posts Today: 9,413
03:29 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

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

 
U3

User ID: 9834739
United States
06/19/2013 03:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
Discovering the Most Efficient Way to Shape your Reality: Part 1

As I mentioned a few days ago, when I first started to "feel the power" of whatever it is that I am and was experiencing when I first began to explore Ecsys, I was thinking about flying.

Flying is "cool" but it is not something our physical bodies find easy to do, nor our reality because of it.

Learning about the importance of the law of energy efficiency and how it relates to my perspective has led me to some rather unique experiences.

That is when I thought about why I wanted to do something like that. What would the purpose be in my reality if I could fly?

Because it was more interesting than useful, it is perspective-inefficient. Flying served no real purpose other than to satisfy a curiosity and perhaps making myself feel good in the process. If my reality found it efficient to fly instead of walk or use some other way of getting from one point to another then I would be able to fly.

But in the process of coming up with a flight plan, with Genius elements, I reminded myself of what I have learned. And that is our next experience is relative to surrounding experiences.

So instead of flying I thought about dematerialization and rematerialization (or 'teleporting' from one place to another). This is less interesting and perhaps more confusing than flying but it can probably be more useful to me and my experience.

I began to think of the most perspective-efficient way to get from where I am to someplace else. Really, from where I seem to be to someplace else.

The result? I have managed to teleport myself across the house.

I begin by selecting my starting and ending rooms and making both dark. I then place two identical objects outside of each room. In each room I have a different song playing at low volume. I carefully inspect the identical objects outside of the rooms carefully. Entering the first room I hear the music and close my eyes. I then imagine that the song changes to the song in the destination room, and the shape of the room changes to it. There is a giant sucking sound and a strange sense of physical vibration but after about a 40 seconds of this I find myself in the second room.

Over the past few days I have tried this again and again, and it usually results in what I can only refer to as teleportation. I have done everything but lock the destination door in an attempt to foil myself or catch myself in sleepwalking or some other trickery of perception. But I am now convinced that I can change my physical perspective in moments, simply by linking the two rooms.

I'm not sure why I experience a physical vibration but I do not think of it as de-materialization. It is an actual change of perspective, although slight because I have made the two rooms very relative to my perspective. During this time I am kind of convincing myself that the easiest way to get from one room to other other room is simply to be there. (Or, more to my thinking, to experience a transition of one room.)

It does not work when the lights are on or I don't have something to link the two rooms (identical objects or music). I have not yet discovered why but I am assuming it is because the values represent a kind of perspective wormhole linking the two spaces in my reality.

It does not work (yet) for locations outside of my home, though I have been experimenting.

My next post will talk a little more about this and explore how we can use this method for any kind of experience.
 Quoting: Chaol


I experience what feels like a physical vibration increasing in frequency over the course of a minute or so when entering a lucid dream or ooh state. I imagine it's our sudden unawareness of our "physical" bodies. When it pops, I'm "there".
 Quoting: MutantMessiah




Remember Chaol reminded us of the movie, Inception? And that just before physicality fell, there was music...or shall we say noise? It hasn't been that long since people around the world were reporting strange noises.
Happy Holidays! xmas
U3

User ID: 9834739
United States
06/19/2013 03:30 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
Chaol's teachings begin with some basic "assumptions" that help to understand what he's teaching.

I find it useful (now more than ever) to keep them in mind. He provided them in a gentle way on his website, calling them the "Code of Ecsys"

from: [link to web.archive.org]

For neuronic exercises there's the Code of Ecsys. By practicing one or more the following simple exercises every day you are learning how to remove physical constraints from your reality. Here's a summary of the Code:

House of Orbia
Respect the logic of others. Try to understand whatever you resist. Exercise 'unlogic' by asking yourself, “How could I be wrong?”


(This^ practice is the "unfocusing")

House of Kosmosis
Explore what is outside of your usual perspective. Do things you would not ordinarily do.


(This^ practice allows for "new" possibilities)

House of Chaos
Be honest with the people and things around you. The more transparent you are the more you are connecting with your perceptions.


(This^ practice takes care of the resistance and piggybacks on the "House of Orbia")

House of ThohT
Make your thoughts and desires physical in a small way. Symbolize your internal reality in your physical reality.


(This^ practice allows us to take advantage of the other practices by queuing up a desired perspective)

He was looking to provide us a simple nudge in the direction we wanted to go, gently introducing simple practices to accommodate a fertile ground for the more advanced concepts to grow.

 Quoting: MutantMessiah




This is going in my blog, MM. Thank you.

So I guess we are always a metaphor for who we have ever perceived ourselves to be and who we are continuously morphing into?

And if Not-Chaol opens up, I think we will all learn a lot. I'll work on that part of my perspective, heh!

Last Edited by ERE3 on 06/19/2013 04:14 PM
Happy Holidays! xmas
U3

User ID: 9834739
United States
06/19/2013 03:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
Thank you for sharing your experience, NeoChaol. How exciting.

I would like to know why we separate this reality with the dream world? Some of us spend almost as much time there as here, anyway. Let's say 8 hours of sleep at night and 2 hours of meditation during the day....plus an hour a day in these threads....it adds up. And if you take a nap during the day or chill out listening to music, there's another hour or two.

So, when we do a Genius, what is the difference in deciding what's relative and the logical path to something in the Dream World?
 Quoting: U3

Are there parts of this reality that seem separate?

For example, talking and thinking?

Why, in this physical reality, do we share other kinds of realities? Some, like thinking, similar to our dreamworld?

Of the dreamworld there are other kinds of realities, also.

One kind of physicality (this one) is not separate from another kind (the dreamworld) but can been interpreted as being separate in the same way we can interpret our fingers to be separate when their essence is beyond fingerhood.
 Quoting: Chaol




Okay, then why did you say it's not as relevant for us to fly in this reality? What I'm trying to get at is we live within shifting worlds all the time. Why can't we make it logical to do things in one world that we do in another? Is it just the separation we accept that makes the difference?

Btw, a few days ago, several of us were talking about our toilets on this thread, lol! Just thought I'd let you know, I fixed mine. I wanted to test it several days before saying anything!
Happy Holidays! xmas
U3

User ID: 9834739
United States
06/19/2013 03:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
bump. i love this thread.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 41963897




You made me smile. I love this thread, too! ;o)
Happy Holidays! xmas
U3

User ID: 9834739
United States
06/19/2013 04:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
...




I think that's probably closer. ^^^^^^^ For example, I don't think I really want to be here. I couldn't eat for the first month of my birth. And there are other things that from observation, would make this my conclusion.

The trouble with not eating certain foods that seem to start the pain is, in many cases, it's inconsistent. I can eat something one day and not the next. The things that are consistent means I have to read labels, question waiters if I go out to eat.....it's a constantly having my mind on food.

How can I become another person and think new thoughts if I always have to be aware of these challenges?
 Quoting: U3


There is often a gap, particular in our human lives, between what we want or think we want, and what is relative to us.

Being here may not be what you want, but surely it relates to you somehow (your logic, your existence, your purpose, or whatever it may be called)

You don't need to become another person and think new thoughts. You are everywhere and every person you need to be, right now.

Are they challenges, or parts of your reality? (Parts of you)

It sounds a bit like resistance. What do you think?
 Quoting: Chaol

Yes, it sounds like resistance. So what now? Change perspective?
 Quoting: U3


Changing perspective is what happens naturally (seems to happen). There is nothing that must be done.

I'm not suggesting we do nothing. I'm saying that one action is no more valuable that another action. Any action may seem to result in experiences that are relative to it (considering other things around it, too).

But new perspectives may come from a realization that everything in your perspective is you.

Why are the challenges there? It's just one of the endless ways we divide our perspective.

When you ask, "How can I become another person and think new thoughts" do you realize you are already that person and thinking those thoughts?

There is no need to become what you already are.

But this is all nonsense. Practically-speaking, you can get to where you want by making it more relative.

Are they challenges or are they parts of who you are? Why conquer yourself? Why solve yourself?

As you know, you can accept these problems or challenges in order to change the relationship and the experience.

The problems are the result of resistance being illustrated. They are not inherently problems, they are chaos (an order we do not understand). We interpret some as problems, or in conflict with our own order or way of doing things or perception.

When we think of something as not-me, or "that over there", or a problem, we are illustrating that we are not it. Thus, there is conflict. We create the conflict when we work against ourselves when we think we are not everything in our perspective, you could say.
 Quoting: Chaol




I am trying to make the new perspective more relative. I'll get it eventually, lol! I did find that by relaxing, I'm able to find another space, without the challenge. I'm basically chopping away at it, little by little. Thanks for going into this with me.

Btw, Chaol said that the Genius won't work unless we think new thoughts and become someone else. That's why he told us to do things like copy the next animal you see and things like that.

It seems the underlying "lesson" is to continuously expand
perspective...to carve out perspectives within chaos.
Happy Holidays! xmas
MutantMessiah
Jesse

User ID: 11481360
United States
06/19/2013 11:39 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
Some top notch Chaol in this old version of the ecsys.org site:
[link to web.archive.org]


Missing the graphics unless Neo.Chaol still has them archived but it's good stuff (Chaol, please, if I've overstepped and posted too much lemme know, this stuff isn't "live" on line anymore and deserves to be consumed)

The following is all from the (NOW NONEXISTENT page "Ecsys Questions and Answers: Consciousness and Reality"
from: [link to web.archive.org]

What Is Perception?

The most fundamental force of the universe is neither physical nor quantum. It is consciousness. Consciousness is perspective.

The way our consciousness works also has a lot to do with how we perceive things. Our traditional 5 senses as well as our sense of time, space, and thought are rooted in a kind of forgetfulness. We forget how we sense anything. What is truly interesting about representations is that we quite often mistake an object or thing with its representaiton and forget that we did just that. This "forgetfulness" is rooted in the brain's deeper cognitive processes.

When we see a sunset we are not aware of the complex neural processes involved in creating the sensory experience. To be aware of the process is to be aware of overloaded, fragmented, and pretty much sunset-less noise. That all these stimuli are representations of "sunset" escapes us. We have no choice but to mistake the map for the territory. It all seems real because we have no choice. We cannot 'see' beyond our own perspective.

Take a look at the graphic on the right. Looking between the black squares you see a circle. The circle you're looking at is white. However, the circles you're not looking at are off-white, grey, or black depending on how far they are from the one you're looking at. So what color is the circle? (Answer: there is no circle. There is only an ever-changing relationship between representations. Sometimes it appears white, sometimes it doesn't.)

It's not something else that changes. It is your perspective that changes. (There is only you, re-member?) When your perspective changes then your relationship with everything else also changes. From these changing relationships we get a sense of time, space, and physical change.

Physical change is simply a representation of changing relationships that follows a certain pattern. We've experienced this pattern since we were babies so we call it "physicality". Though physicality is only an illusion, it is no more or less real than your thoughts are. The only thing "real" is the representation's immediacy to our senses (making it seem real). If we were using a different method to perceive then the things we see using that method would seem more real to us than anything else. We place so much importance on just one of our senses (sight) that we forget a guitar can be represented in a myraid of other ways, only a few of which can be perceived with our other senses. The reality we create is based on our perspective. When we say we walked around the table we're not talking about deflecting its electromagnetic energy into II-tubes. However, we could choose how or why to interact with the table because of our perception of those non-visual relationships.

This multi-worlds phenomena presents a kind of paradox. Something can either be true, or it can be perceived. It cannot be both. We can be aware of something but not be aware of the truth of what it is. When the totality of something cannot be grasped in our perception, it appears infinite (such is your reality, seemingly infinite in every direction).

Our mind creates representation to expand perception (increase consciousness). For example, the words we use for something affects how we perceive it. 47 words for snow*** allow Eskimos to perceive distinctions in snow that most English speakers cannot. We use language (a representation) to create physically-based perceptions. The representations change how we perceive. (Another representation, the physical brain, also affects how we perceive.) Using specific metaphors allow for specific perceptions.

Representations are how we remember, perceive, and think.

A perceives B in a context relative to the AB perspective. The nature of what you perceive affects how you perceive it. Your perception of a beam of light, for example, is very physically-based. That same beam of light may manifest in your dream as a sound or another representation. Contrariwise, the beam of light would not "perceive" your physical representation if it were shining on you. Your body would be something else to it much the same way other entities manifest as clouds in your experience.

We can observe photons of light in space where no real space exists (nor photons, until we perceive them and the need for the representation to manifest arises). The "space" is simply an illustration of gravitational attraction and repulsion. All internal phenomena. Two objects next to one-another may be physically close (say, in perspective A) but not psychologically (in perspective B). In perspective B the two objects may be as distant as stars. A star may be distant from us from one perspective (requiring much physical fuel) but very close from another perspective (requiring no fuel).

You could never perceive the sun as it truly exists right now. The apparent light from it is several minutes old, taking "time" to travel through "space". But it is not physical distance that ages the light. Rather, this "8 minute" variable illustrates how attracted the representation is to us. If the representation were more physically relative it would be perceived as being physically closer. There is a representation that is much closer to our perspective and that is, of course, our bodies. But of this, too, we are not able to perceive it as it is "now". Light also takes some time (albeit a very, very short amount of time) to get from our toes or arms. We can never see ourselves as we are Now. We are always experiencing an illusion of ourselves. A representation.

Thus, the act of perception is like looking into the void and measuring it. This of course cannot actually be done but we try to do it anyway. This creates representations of the void (or so we think) that we can then interact with. [Ecsys-speak on the right.]

Something's perspective is its relationships with everything else. The meaning of something is in its perspective, not in how it is perceived by another.

[***Note: The Eskimo language actually takes what would be for us be under-utilized phrases for snow and represents those phrases with singular concepts, or nouns, that are not had in English. The representation of a concept makes all the difference in the perception of it.]

And:

How Do My Thoughts Become Reality?

Ecsys holds that you do not think your thoughts but perceive them. (You choose to perceive them, if you will.) Thoughts are sensations, like smells or visual stimuli. It's kind of like drinking milk with your eyes closed. Everything in your environment says that you will perceive the sensation of milk in your mouth. Similarly, everything in your perspective enables you to perceive exactly the next thought you will have. Your thoughts are the result of the relationships in your perspective. Test it out for yourself by observing a change in thought as your perspective changes. (This doesn't mean that your thoughts are dependent on external variables and you have no control. You are your external variables because they exist only in your perspective.)

Along with our traditional 5 senses we have a sense of thought. We internalize "distant" stimuli or relationships and make it a relative part of our experience. Distant thoughts are like smells you no longer smell because your environment does not dictate the perception of them. A thought is another kind of representation.

Similar representations tend to group together and become realms of consciousness and experience. The closer a representation is to a grouping the more powerful is the realm's affect. (From the graphic to the right, an "emotional" representation can become more attracted to the physical realm and take on physical properties. A physical representation can be attracted to —or repelled by— the microbial realm and take on —or discard— microbial properties, etc.)

But what does that mean for us?

Imagine a distant object as a thought which has not taken on physical attributes and a near object as that which is relative to our physicality. You could say that the distant object is indeed a physical thing. In theory that would be true. It is not really, however, in your physical realm of experience and is to your perspective somewhere between physical and not-physical. (The moment you begin to observe it to prove it is physical is the moment at which you bring it closer to your physical experience. And so then it becomes more physically real. Touch it and it will become even more physically real. This is why no kind of particle is the most fundamental element of creation. They're not there until we need to perceive that particular representation. Perspective is the fundamental element.)

Thoughts take on physical form as the thought is expressed more physically, changing your perception of it. Bring the thought into your physical experience and you will experience it physically. This could be as simple as drawing a picture of the house you want instead of just desiring it. You are physicalizing the thought, re-representing it.

Reality does not have 3 dimensions or 20. It has one: perception. When you re-create a thought physically you are introducing attractive and repulsive forces to it. The physicalization of the thought may mean that it can build stronger connections with other things in your experience (attraction) or has less of a need to manifest emotionally (repulsion).

What we think of as motion is not something moving by itself, but the relationship of something changing with its environment. There is no physical movement through space at all. You do not move from point A to point B. You simply shift awareness from A-ness to B-ness. There is no motion in space because space exists only in the 1 dimension of perception. (The futility of imposing an abstract concept, the 1st dimension, onto physical space notwithstanding.) "Motion" is you changing your perspective, not moving through three dimensions.

What we think of as "now" is not something that we have never experienced before. It is a kind of space that exists between our structuring and unstructuring of perspective. Past and future are as much 'in the now' as we think 'now' to be. For example, if you recall a memory from 10 years ago is that a past memory or a present one? Are you able to import the past memory completely unaffected by your current perspective? Are you actually creating it anew? When something is more structured (and has less potential energy) we think of it as Past. When something is less structured (and has more potential energy) we think of it as Future. If we provide structure to a "future" thing we will seem to experience it in our Present before it seems to go to the Past.

Consciousness triggers manifestation. If a non-physical thing becomes related to our physical experience, then we will experience it physically. When representations are interacted and associated with more, you are more likely to experience it in space/time.

Your dreams can become physical reality simply by interacting with their representations more.

And:

Dreams: You In Another Reality

All of the trappings of physicality can be experienced in your dream state. We may think of our waking state is persistent and our dream state as chaotic, but that is not the case.

A table may appear "solid" to us but most of the table is actually non-physical. There is about as much space between its particles as there is space between heavenly bodies (proportionally).

Our physical experience is like the graphic on the right. With our physical senses we sense only physically-based experiences. Thinking back, we remember only those experiences that are relative to the apparatus we are using to remember. Our physically-based mind does not show us the other realities in which we exist, or the other perspectives we are partaking in at this very moment.

We continue to experience physicality when we are dreaming. When we awaken from our dreams we do not cease to exist in our dreams. We are still dreaming. Our dream state never stops. It is only our perspective that changes.

The particles that compose your body are not static. They are in constant "motion" between other perspectives and time-experiences. In a similar way, neither is your dream reality static. In between those physical moments we are processing our waking life in our other states of mind. We also process our dream experience in our waking state. Our dream life is so intertwined with our waking life, it could be said there is little difference between the two experiences. Both states are persistent and have a "solid" reality. The atoms and molecules that make up our physical world also make up our dream world. We are just as physical in the dream world as we are in the waking world. Which is to say, not much at all.

Using your brain to recall something your brain does not experience doesn't work, however. Its "memories" are very heavily influenced by physical reality. You will project the structures of the waking world when trying to perceive the dream world. Dreams make plenty of sense when you're experiencing them, but not when you project unfitting representations onto them upon awakening.

During wakefulness we sometimes receive dream stimulus. But we are sure to make this stimulus a part of waking reality in order to ensure continued wakefulness (and perhaps sanity). We interpret this dream stimulus as sudden knowledge, déjà vu, intuition, etc., in waking experience. It is similar to how you will probably incorporate a loud sound that happens in your room into your dream experience if you are dreaming, in order to ensure continued sleep. (The interconnectedness of waking and dreaming states can be observed by paying attention to the events in the dream right before the sound occured. For example, how did your dream state know there was going to be a sound?)

Sometimes the sounds in our room penetrate more easily into our dream reality. Conversely, sometimes we are awake and experience strange phenomena like see ghostly forms, hear voices, or do extraordinary creative works or physical feats.

We simultaneously experience all states of mind (beta, theta, etc.) but each is aware of its own and, to some degree, others like a focused light shining in a particular section of a dark room while other sections continue to exist and function (and may be partially illuminated from your perspective).

Imagine spacetime as your tongue with 6 areas. Instead of bitter, salty, sour, etc., you have physical, ultraphysical, metaphysical, conscious, sub-conscious, dream-aware. Each physical experience actually exists in the 5 other domains simultaneously (but may not be simultaneous from a different point of reference). But there is no need to know about those 5 others because it has already been translated into your experience. The apple has but one taste interpreted several different ways.

An experience that occurs in one domain is translated into another domain. For example, your physical experiences are translated into dream experiences and vice-versa. But it could be that a dream experience you will have tonight is occurring "simultaneously" with a physical experience 5 years from now.

When you are dreaming your dream world appears as "reality". When you are awake your waking world appears as "realty". Consciousness is interaction. And interactions are just as real in one as they are in another.

AND:

The Nature of Time

Time is a narrative illusion that we make for ourselves in order to make particular sense of something that cannot be perceived. Spacetime is the algorithm of our physical experience.

If you observe three clocks on a table for several minutes and each keeps the same time as the others, down to the second, it cannot be said that each clock has the same "experience" of time. Imagine that instead of three clocks we have three sleeping persons whose biological clocks are 'set' to rise at 6am each morning. Observing each for several hours until approximately 6am we see that each person awoke within minutes of one-another. However, we cannot say that one of those persons did not experience an extra few hours (or days) from their perspective. However, from our perspective each person (and each clock) has their time synchronized.

In a more obvious example, two people can live exactly the same amount of time yet have a completely different experience of time. But scientists would say that these two persons experienced time the same (especially if they were always next to one-another). In time experiments scientists look at only the most obvious example of a difference in two clocks placed far apart because the same cognitive process used to perceive the spacing of the clocks is used to perceive the time on the clocks (or vibrations in them). You cannot use the same cognitive tool for both your control clock and your experimental clock because the result would show only part of the picture.

Scientists know that time is relative to the observer and is not universal because of physical distance of the observer. Ecsys extends this theory to include the perspective of the observer. Physical distance is irrelevant when time knows no physical bounds.

ANDAND:

The Beginning & The End

Imagine, if you will, an apple sitting in a void. Nothing else was around for as far as the eye of the apple could see. This apple was quite lonely because there seemed to be nothing else. Not only that, it could not know of itself and did not feel alive because there was nothing else to relate to. So after some deliberation it decided to do a very wise thing. Cut itself into pieces. (It does not do this in a literal way because it doesn't have a knife and there is no need to. It simply creates a apple-protein that makes each apple-slice forget that it is part of the whole.)

The simple act of dividing itself up created the core of its existence. For each slice was then able to perceive of other slices. For the first time in its existence it could see its own existence. The very moment when it sliced itself was when the apple universe was created. Time, space, and all the trappings of a satisfactory existence. (And, of course, consciousness.)

Only representations exist in the universe because the actuality of what the universe is is beyond perception. We have an infinite variety of representations (things, possibilities, elements, energy, thoughts, perceptions, etc.) because the entirety of It cannot ever be fully illustrated.

What we see is the universe, interpreted in a way that we can readily perceive.

But we do not live in a physical universe. Neither do we live in a spiritual universe. Anything can be expressed physically, spiritually, emotionally, politically, although in an incomplete way and one relative to the agent that is used to express it.

We are indirectly discovering more about the 100% of the universe that isn't physical as our ability to think abstractly expands through the use of computers and networks, games, books, and other media. We are now more involved in abstract mental exercises than ever before. We are traveling through "self" as we travel in time and space.

Astrobiologists look for (organic) life elsewhere in the universe, bypassing the intelligence in our own clouds and geosphere. More importantly, we overlook the capacity for human intelligence to become entirely different than anything we've seen before.


(There is so much more on that incarnation of the ecsys.org, I strongly recommend it.)

Last Edited by MutantMessiah on 06/19/2013 11:42 PM
Maybe... you are all powerful... all knowing... forever present in all ways... you've chosen to forget... remember?
Chaol

User ID: 24697767
06/20/2013 12:19 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
Some top notch Chaol in this old version of the ecsys.org site:
[link to web.archive.org]


Missing the graphics unless Neo.Chaol still has them archived but it's good stuff (Chaol, please, if I've overstepped and posted too much lemme know, this stuff isn't "live" on line anymore and deserves to be consumed)
[snip]
 Quoting: MutantMessiah


Thanks for posting. It's good stuff :)
Chaol

User ID: 24697767
06/20/2013 12:42 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
Thank you Neo-Chaol, this was extremely helpful!

I have just been reading/lurking the thread lately, finding myself most of the time with too many pages to catch up with. Even tried to read the thread backwards, but that doesn't work for me. I guess, I'll pick up from where I am, right here.

At first I didn't know what to make of the New Chaol turn of events, and I missed the Old Chaol.
Old Chaol will always be in my heart.
But the more I read, the more I can see how valuable the Neo-perspective is. I really like your input and approach!

So, a belated "welcome back" to you, and "hi" to all in this thread. :)
 Quoting: Ambra 41936602

Thank you :)

Based on your concept of perspective efficiency (which reminds me of Old-Chaol's "next logical step"), I shall come up with two Genius models, and let you know how it goes.

Genius 1 is for the noisy fridge, charging most of the time. It's been a toll on my nerves. Attempts at repairs haven't worked. Instead of imagining the fridge magically fixing itself, the genius will be for the repair man finally finding the correct part. That is the most logical narrative for me right now.

The easiest and most immediate would be to go and buy a darn new fridge by myself, except that I'd like to buy the new one for my new home. Besides, it's a great way to get some training with the Genius models.
 Quoting: Ambra 41936602

It sounds like it might work much better. Let us know how it goes.

Genius 2 is for my dream home (which I tried back then, but did not give results). This time, I'll do it about finding the perfect ad I've been waiting for. Awesome deal, great house, right location.

I am just wondering when it's best to be specific vs making the Genius only about the desired result, but leaving the "how" to the workings of the values, because there could be multiple logical and perspective-efficient ways that something could become part of our reality.

For example:
a) disappearing tree - bulldozer, lightning, you name it
b) dream home - online ad, local friend telling me, driving around and seeing a sign for sale
etc.

For the time being, I am once again busy changing the geometry of relationships at home, and doing space clearing.

:)
 Quoting: Ambra 41936602


I sometimes wonder if we are already specific before we even know what, specifically, we want. Perhaps our subconscious is aware of the specific reality that would be best-suited for us?

Was your intention with your previous Genius model (for your dream home) general or specific?

Chaol mentions that a specific intention is fine but not to intend the result directly.

So, as you have illustrated with your G1, to intend around it: finding the perfect ad you've been waiting for.

And of course there's nothing wrong with making another Genius (for how you're going to pay) once you've found the ad.

Regarding specificity for G1, I think it depends on how much detail we are giving it. For example, we can A) give detail about the bulldozer taking away the tree; or B) give detail about neighbors coming over to ask why the tree is gone.

In A since our intention is to make the tree disappear we are providing too much detail about how it happens. Allow your Genius to figure that out. So then we leave the possibilities open. Instead, we can make a model for B. And since our intention is related to the tree disappearing (and not the neighbors) this would make it far more likely to occur in our reality, I think.

So specificity is fine as long as is it indirect specificity.

(When we are specific about something directly, the reality is already satisfied in our detail about the thing, as Chaol mentions.)
Chaol

User ID: 24697767
06/20/2013 12:50 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
Yes, we are immortal already. But Chaol said we may overcome death.

I'm really interested in how the logic works either in overcoming death or in how our logic works for a lifetime. I'm also interested in Chaol's statement that we are "here" because we forgot the logic.

I'm just trying to understand logic from every angle I can. To me, logic manifests the representation.
 Quoting: U3

Let's pretend we are in a children's park. Yay! You are in a sandbox and I find some cardboard.

The sandbox is potential energy. But really you're focused on the cardboard I give you because it will define your reality. It is Logic.

You then take the box and make a shape. Any random shape will do. I then ask you to place the box onto the sand.

As it lands on the sand suddenly you find yourself in a chamber of some sort, surrounded by water and connected by cords and wires. OMG! You're in a womb and have begun a new life.

This is essentially what we are doing at each moment. We simply define nothing (you could also say that we define something in a way that does not actually matter) and then work within what we have defined.

In this way, we seem to exist. The importance is in the relationships, not in how the box is structured.

The specifics of logic do not matter. We could think for this thought experiment that the universe experiences every possible kind of logic simultaneously in order to illustrate nothing-in-particular.
 Quoting: Chaol


If the specifics of logic don't matter, then why is forgetting the logic why we are here?
 Quoting: U3


hehe.. your question has the answer hidden in it.

We forget because they don't matter. I suppose you could say it is "temporary" and only good for one purpose.

If a particular Logic is like your life now (for example) then we forget in order to move onto the next life. (Not implying that there is such a thing as past lives, of course, but for convenience of explanation.)

In order to pretend to be "B" we forget that we are pretending to be "A".
Chaol

User ID: 24697767
06/20/2013 12:57 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
So specificity is fine as long as is it indirect specificity.

(When we are specific about something directly, the reality is already satisfied in our detail about the thing, as Chaol mentions.)
 Quoting: Chaol


A corollary of this, in practical terms, would be if you were 15 and making your plan for the next 10 years.

You could be specific and say that you want to get a Master's degree in Civil Engineering with a 3.8 GPA, have a steady boyfriend who likes rock-climbing, a silver Ford Mustang GT, and become expert at playing the violin.

The more specific you are the more energy it will take to get there. The plan above is achievable but highly unlikely, and again unlikely to be experienced without expending plenty of energy to carry it out as you had planned.

So, perhaps, instead you could be indirectly specific with your goal: knowledge and understanding of civil engineering, an adventurous boyfriend, a car that you like, and lots of time to practice the violin.

In the former we are presuming that we know better than our own Genius (subconscious) and know the best way to get there.

In the latter we are influencing the values that make up our perspective in such a way that we may very well end up with what we then want.
Chaol

User ID: 24697767
06/20/2013 02:00 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
...

Would you prefer a different experience?

Perhaps I can be of service.
 Quoting: Chaol


Very much!
I am curious as to how you could be of service.
 Quoting: tuuuuur

by influencing your reality.

The wheels are already in motion, simply by your previous response.

It's not something that I 'start' to do, just something that happens and I see happen.

The only way to not participate is, unfortunately, to not respond in this thread.

But of course I encourage you to continue exploring your perspective.

I hope to find a better way in future, but for now that is what it is.

Do you prefer your drink mixed, shaken, stirred, refilled, sipped, or replaced?
 Quoting: Chaol

So, Neo, I get a couple of impressions at this point. One being that we are moving on somewhat from Chaol's teachings? Is this correct? Iow, some of what he has taught is not as viable as it was when he taught it. They were specific and strategic for that period.

Additionally, from your statement above, re: helping us. Do you see, what I call "surgery" happening, either now or in the future.

Chaol did these type things and actually, they have happened to me over the years, anyway. I had no idea what they were about or who was deciding to do it, but I was always energized after.

Chaol always told us we have to walk over the bridge. That we have to do the work. I asked him why and he said because we wouldn't appreciate it if we didn't do the work ourselves. This indicates there are other ways to cross the bridge. And, since we are apx. 63% there, I just wondered what other changes in whatever the Chaol figure has in store for us, might take place. ;o)
 Quoting: U3

Hi.

I would hope that our understanding is always changing/evolving and, with it, the ways by which the new understanding is influenced.

One can only assume that this "change" was intentional and part of the plan.

He mentioned a few times that this thread was at the very basic level, and that the 'teachings' would change as our understanding does.

Regarding the 'surgery' in your statement, I am not sure. This would imply an external force interfering with the natural course of something or someone. Although you can say that this interference is everywhere and in all ways, what is being done here doesn't seem to be much different than what happens naturally anyway.

But I think here it is more obvious than, say, the surgery that you perform in your life each time you sleep.

And if it were not for knowing of Chaol in these threads you may not have thought of a Chaol performing surgery. (Meaning that it probably happens quite often but we're only aware of it when we see it at work.)

Chaol is a part of you, always.

Have you ever represented Chaol physically? Perhaps like making a Genius for the idea of Chaol closert to your reality? (I don't mean you making one for getting to where Chaol is, but something more relative to where you are now today.)

There is much, much more to all of this that I have seen and I see pretty much every night or every other night in extraordinarily lucid dreams. I can only assume that this is the process, or whatever, of what is occurring here.

Without going into detail, it is basically:

As Chaol has stated:

-This physicality shifting to more dreamworld physicality. (I believe this may have been the 50% threshhold, or standing in the doorway that he spoke about, and of the crossing of "X" or Elenin that everyone thought was insignificant.)

-The breakdown of Western civilization in 2013 and of the old physicality

-The realization that we are in the dreamworld, and everything that comes with it. (Not an instant realization, but an extremely significant change.)

As I have already stated:

-The death of "Ecsys", which is just the crumbling of the bridge to the dreamworld. This is not an event.

-The rise of what Ecsys influences. (I don't know what this is exactly. But I have seen it and it is absolutely amazing. I am trying my hand now at 'creating' this but I am not sure if it's a person or an idea or whatever.)
Chaol

User ID: 24697767
06/20/2013 02:18 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
Thanks Chaol 2.0.

I find your experience inspiring and appreciate your posts. The implication, of course, would be that EC provides an "outside" logic by which a tree disappearing or a new room environment are probable.

Thank you. Just reading through your last few posts, sheds new light on how I've come to experience so much of my subjective weirdness and why its been so hard to convince those closest to me it's any more than hard work or coincidence. It's because from their perspective, that's exactly what it is.
 Quoting: MutantMessiah

Ahhh.. the lovely power of coincidence.

Do you need to convince others (yourself)?

There's always more fun in the stew to go round.
 Quoting: Chaol


Simple answer, no. (It would seem that) In discontinuing my "quest" to include everyone I want to tag along with me into the "next" chapter of my "story" of perspective, the resistance to the next chapter falls away. With a turn of a page I(everything "I" am, including the people represented as resistant) will find myself saturated in new story where there is no need to convince "anyone" of "anything" (or anything of anyone lol).

It also seems the more that I just sit back, watch and comment (or act) with what "comes to mind first" (not just on this thread), the more I "feel" I understand and the more I "know" I do not. (sorry if that doesn't make sense, I'm finding the words do not illustrate the experience with great accuracy, more or less wraps around it)

popcorn
 Quoting: MutantMessiah

Well, I guess the moral of our story is that it's okay to resist whatever.

Resistance is natural. Without it, there'd be nothing.

Yes, it may be difficult to take all that you want into your next perspective. That illustrates just how tightly our grip is.

Would I risk losing all that I know and love in this world to realize my next one? In a word, yes.

I would realize that there would always be people I dearly love no matter what reality I am in, things I love, a life I love, and always be quite comfortable with my own thoughts and day-to-day existence.

...so that means I would probably never be willing to let go.

But that is not to say that I would end up with a reality that I do not learn to love, some or all of the people I loved before would not be there with me, and I would be unable to have a reality that I wanted.

Chaol has often stated that his (my) girlfriend is the reason he is here. He worked to bring her into his world, so to speak. (I hope that he is including me, too! lol)

In order to do so the surrounding reality must also be changed.

If you cannot bend a spoon without 'bending' its reality (and surroundings to accommodate the change in value) then he would not be able to bring her into the dreamworld without changing the world she lives in. And so, the "selfishness" of these posts is explained. He is lifting all boats in order for the 1 boat he loves to be able to drift to shore.

He is literally moving mountains and more if this is the case. I suppose that if someone could do anything within their power for love, why not? Even if it takes planning, dedication, lots of time, and who knows what else.

But for the rest of us I suppose some trust in ourselves is needed that our 'next step' is one that fills out our circle of life that much more and makes us more complete.
Chaol

User ID: 24697767
06/20/2013 02:20 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
Chaol's teachings begin with some basic "assumptions" that help to understand what he's teaching.

I find it useful (now more than ever) to keep them in mind. He provided them in a gentle way on his website, calling them the "Code of Ecsys"
[snip]
 Quoting: MutantMessiah

Thank you kindly. I will definitely incorporate and expand on that in my document.
Chaol

User ID: 24697767
06/20/2013 02:23 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
[snip]

By doing some very simple groundwork, we find our minds easily "accept" that we're the center of it all. That we've limited ourselves (purposefully) and forgotten we had (purposefully).[snip]
 Quoting: MutantMessiah

To that, I would add that "we" are everything in our perspective.

I don't want some people to get the idea that they are the center of the universe.

Your "I" is everything and not-you-in-particular.

Perhaps I'll discover a better way to explain it.
Chaol

User ID: 24697767
06/20/2013 02:25 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
I experience what feels like a physical vibration increasing in frequency over the course of a minute or so when entering a lucid dream or ooh state. I imagine it's our sudden unawareness of our "physical" bodies. When it pops, I'm "there".
 Quoting: MutantMessiah

When our bodies (minds?) are vibrating like this, we are still physical but of a different kind of physicality.

I wonder what things we can do while in this state?

We could say that we're physically different at this time and realize that our own bodies is the key to the new world.

(Your last line sounds like a song or the title to a book. "When it pops, I'm there!" lol)
Chaol

User ID: 24697767
06/20/2013 02:33 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
Thank you for sharing your experience, NeoChaol. How exciting.

I would like to know why we separate this reality with the dream world? Some of us spend almost as much time there as here, anyway. Let's say 8 hours of sleep at night and 2 hours of meditation during the day....plus an hour a day in these threads....it adds up. And if you take a nap during the day or chill out listening to music, there's another hour or two.

So, when we do a Genius, what is the difference in deciding what's relative and the logical path to something in the Dream World?
 Quoting: U3

Are there parts of this reality that seem separate?

For example, talking and thinking?

Why, in this physical reality, do we share other kinds of realities? Some, like thinking, similar to our dreamworld?

Of the dreamworld there are other kinds of realities, also.

One kind of physicality (this one) is not separate from another kind (the dreamworld) but can been interpreted as being separate in the same way we can interpret our fingers to be separate when their essence is beyond fingerhood.
 Quoting: Chaol

Okay, then why did you say it's not as relevant for us to fly in this reality? What I'm trying to get at is we live within shifting worlds all the time. Why can't we make it logical to do things in one world that we do in another? Is it just the separation we accept that makes the difference?

Btw, a few days ago, several of us were talking about our toilets on this thread, lol! Just thought I'd let you know, I fixed mine. I wanted to test it several days before saying anything!
 Quoting: U3


We haven't made machineless flying relative to our current physicality yet.

Once it's more relative we're halfway there. (This might entail us being able to fly 3cm off the ground, for example. But we're not there yet.)

Our sense of physicality is quite strong. Strong enough to ignore most of what physicality is. We see light, but see only an infinitesimally small part of the visible spectrum. We hear sound, but again, ignore most sound. We ignore most of physicality and have a very strong idea of what physicality should be, how it should be, and how it relates to what we can and cannot do.

We need only to make "flying" relative if that's what we want. To begin incorporating the parts of physicality that we have been ignoring into our physical narrative. (The parts where walking is irrelevant, perhaps.)
Chaol

User ID: 24697767
06/20/2013 02:42 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
I am trying to make the new perspective more relative. I'll get it eventually, lol! I did find that by relaxing, I'm able to find another space, without the challenge. I'm basically chopping away at it, little by little. Thanks for going into this with me.

Btw, Chaol said that the Genius won't work unless we think new thoughts and become someone else. That's why he told us to do things like copy the next animal you see and things like that.

It seems the underlying "lesson" is to continuously expand
perspective...to carve out perspectives within chaos.
 Quoting: U3

When we change realities we are certainly becoming someone else. But, more accurately, we become someone that we already are.

Chaol has said that you are not the same person you were yesterday. You have become another person, yet are still the same person. Your reality has shifted along with your perspective. Yet, we do this all the time.

Using the Genius effectively requires a change in perspective. But it's something we know already, subconsciously. We represent everything in our reality, and everything in our reality is a representation that we interact with, that has rules, etc.

By using the Genius in a way that works it requires thinking new thoughts and becoming someone new because we are changing our perspective.

But I would add to this that the new thoughts are not forced, nor do we force ourselves to become someone new. We simply let go of the old perspective and be open to possibility, letting our subconscious (Genius) "guide" us.
U3

User ID: 9834739
United States
06/20/2013 02:49 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
Yes, we are immortal already. But Chaol said we may overcome death.

I'm really interested in how the logic works either in overcoming death or in how our logic works for a lifetime. I'm also interested in Chaol's statement that we are "here" because we forgot the logic.

I'm just trying to understand logic from every angle I can. To me, logic manifests the representation.
 Quoting: U3

Let's pretend we are in a children's park. Yay! You are in a sandbox and I find some cardboard.

The sandbox is potential energy. But really you're focused on the cardboard I give you because it will define your reality. It is Logic.

You then take the box and make a shape. Any random shape will do. I then ask you to place the box onto the sand.

As it lands on the sand suddenly you find yourself in a chamber of some sort, surrounded by water and connected by cords and wires. OMG! You're in a womb and have begun a new life.

This is essentially what we are doing at each moment. We simply define nothing (you could also say that we define something in a way that does not actually matter) and then work within what we have defined.

In this way, we seem to exist. The importance is in the relationships, not in how the box is structured.

The specifics of logic do not matter. We could think for this thought experiment that the universe experiences every possible kind of logic simultaneously in order to illustrate nothing-in-particular.
 Quoting: Chaol


If the specifics of logic don't matter, then why is forgetting the logic why we are here?
 Quoting: U3


hehe.. your question has the answer hidden in it.

We forget because they don't matter. I suppose you could say it is "temporary" and only good for one purpose.

If a particular Logic is like your life now (for example) then we forget in order to move onto the next life. (Not implying that there is such a thing as past lives, of course, but for convenience of explanation.)

In order to pretend to be "B" we forget that we are pretending to be "A".
 Quoting: Chaol




LOL! OK, then I was reading too much in it.

What about when we write a Genius and don't do the logic?

And in our experiments, where we are the Genius, how are we using logic?
Happy Holidays! xmas
U3

User ID: 9834739
United States
06/20/2013 02:53 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
Thank you for sharing your experience, NeoChaol. How exciting.

I would like to know why we separate this reality with the dream world? Some of us spend almost as much time there as here, anyway. Let's say 8 hours of sleep at night and 2 hours of meditation during the day....plus an hour a day in these threads....it adds up. And if you take a nap during the day or chill out listening to music, there's another hour or two.

So, when we do a Genius, what is the difference in deciding what's relative and the logical path to something in the Dream World?
 Quoting: U3

Are there parts of this reality that seem separate?

For example, talking and thinking?

Why, in this physical reality, do we share other kinds of realities? Some, like thinking, similar to our dreamworld?

Of the dreamworld there are other kinds of realities, also.

One kind of physicality (this one) is not separate from another kind (the dreamworld) but can been interpreted as being separate in the same way we can interpret our fingers to be separate when their essence is beyond fingerhood.
 Quoting: Chaol

Okay, then why did you say it's not as relevant for us to fly in this reality? What I'm trying to get at is we live within shifting worlds all the time. Why can't we make it logical to do things in one world that we do in another? Is it just the separation we accept that makes the difference?

Btw, a few days ago, several of us were talking about our toilets on this thread, lol! Just thought I'd let you know, I fixed mine. I wanted to test it several days before saying anything!
 Quoting: U3


We haven't made machineless flying relative to our current physicality yet.

Once it's more relative we're halfway there. (This might entail us being able to fly 3cm off the ground, for example. But we're not there yet.)

Our sense of physicality is quite strong. Strong enough to ignore most of what physicality is. We see light, but see only an infinitesimally small part of the visible spectrum. We hear sound, but again, ignore most sound. We ignore most of physicality and have a very strong idea of what physicality should be, how it should be, and how it relates to what we can and cannot do.

We need only to make "flying" relative if that's what we want. To begin incorporating the parts of physicality that we have been ignoring into our physical narrative. (The parts where walking is irrelevant, perhaps.)
 Quoting: Chaol




Interesting! Thanks NeoChaol.

Chaol always told us to integrate the new perspective and we are half-way there. To me, we've done that so I've been curious to see what else might be needed. It's not actually something I'm working on right now, but it seems to me I learn by looking at things a lot of different ways.
Happy Holidays! xmas
U3

User ID: 9834739
United States
06/20/2013 02:55 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
Just found this. It's a link to about 20 pdf's, of the Jane Roberts,' Seth books!

[link to esotericonline.net]
Happy Holidays! xmas
Chaol

User ID: 24697767
06/20/2013 02:56 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
...

Let's pretend we are in a children's park. Yay! You are in a sandbox and I find some cardboard.

The sandbox is potential energy. But really you're focused on the cardboard I give you because it will define your reality. It is Logic.

You then take the box and make a shape. Any random shape will do. I then ask you to place the box onto the sand.

As it lands on the sand suddenly you find yourself in a chamber of some sort, surrounded by water and connected by cords and wires. OMG! You're in a womb and have begun a new life.

This is essentially what we are doing at each moment. We simply define nothing (you could also say that we define something in a way that does not actually matter) and then work within what we have defined.

In this way, we seem to exist. The importance is in the relationships, not in how the box is structured.

The specifics of logic do not matter. We could think for this thought experiment that the universe experiences every possible kind of logic simultaneously in order to illustrate nothing-in-particular.
 Quoting: Chaol


If the specifics of logic don't matter, then why is forgetting the logic why we are here?
 Quoting: U3


hehe.. your question has the answer hidden in it.

We forget because they don't matter. I suppose you could say it is "temporary" and only good for one purpose.

If a particular Logic is like your life now (for example) then we forget in order to move onto the next life. (Not implying that there is such a thing as past lives, of course, but for convenience of explanation.)

In order to pretend to be "B" we forget that we are pretending to be "A".
 Quoting: Chaol

LOL! OK, then I was reading too much in it.

What about when we write a Genius and don't do the logic?

And in our experiments, where we are the Genius, how are we using logic?
 Quoting: U3

I'm not sure I understand. How can you make a Genius model without logic?

Logic structures perspective, 'resulting' in reality.
Chaol

User ID: 24697767
06/20/2013 02:56 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
Just found this. It's a link to about 20 pdf's, of the Jane Roberts,' Seth books!

[link to esotericonline.net]
 Quoting: U3

That's wonderful. Thank you!
Chaol

User ID: 24697767
06/20/2013 03:05 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
By the by, I noticed that when I eat certain foods it's much harder to shift my reality, and my thinking is somewhat different (and clouded). I must then go back to eating what I normally do for 1+ day before I feel "myself" again and able to do 'magical' things.

Although a list of suggestions won't follow here, we can consider the effect of things we put into our bodies (food, drink, and everything else) and how they may hinder our physical evolution.

Chaol has mentioned things like fluoride in the water but I would also add GMO foods to the list. (And in the West, pretty much everything has GMOs.)

I could only assume that certain values in our perspective want to hold onto the old physicality, and so introduce these elements as a way to do so.

lol.. we have conspired against ourselves to keep us "comfortable" and not evolve our own physicality.
Chaol

User ID: 24697767
06/20/2013 03:17 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
Some top notch Chaol in this old version of the ecsys.org site:
[link to web.archive.org]


Missing the graphics unless Neo.Chaol still has them archived but it's good stuff (Chaol, please, if I've overstepped and posted too much lemme know, this stuff isn't "live" on line anymore and deserves to be consumed)

The following is all from the (NOW NONEXISTENT page "Ecsys Questions and Answers: Consciousness and Reality"
from: [link to web.archive.org]

What Is Perception?

The most fundamental force of the universe is neither physical nor quantum. It is consciousness. Consciousness is perspective.

The way our consciousness works also has a lot to do with how we perceive things. Our traditional 5 senses as well as our sense of time, space, and thought are rooted in a kind of forgetfulness. We forget how we sense anything. What is truly interesting about representations is that we quite often mistake an object or thing with its representaiton and forget that we did just that. This "forgetfulness" is rooted in the brain's deeper cognitive processes.

When we see a sunset we are not aware of the complex neural processes involved in creating the sensory experience. To be aware of the process is to be aware of overloaded, fragmented, and pretty much sunset-less noise. That all these stimuli are representations of "sunset" escapes us. We have no choice but to mistake the map for the territory. It all seems real because we have no choice. We cannot 'see' beyond our own perspective.

Take a look at the graphic on the right. Looking between the black squares you see a circle. The circle you're looking at is white. However, the circles you're not looking at are off-white, grey, or black depending on how far they are from the one you're looking at. So what color is the circle? (Answer: there is no circle. There is only an ever-changing relationship between representations. Sometimes it appears white, sometimes it doesn't.)

It's not something else that changes. It is your perspective that changes. (There is only you, re-member?) When your perspective changes then your relationship with everything else also changes. From these changing relationships we get a sense of time, space, and physical change.

Physical change is simply a representation of changing relationships that follows a certain pattern. We've experienced this pattern since we were babies so we call it "physicality". Though physicality is only an illusion, it is no more or less real than your thoughts are. The only thing "real" is the representation's immediacy to our senses (making it seem real). If we were using a different method to perceive then the things we see using that method would seem more real to us than anything else. We place so much importance on just one of our senses (sight) that we forget a guitar can be represented in a myraid of other ways, only a few of which can be perceived with our other senses. The reality we create is based on our perspective. When we say we walked around the table we're not talking about deflecting its electromagnetic energy into II-tubes. However, we could choose how or why to interact with the table because of our perception of those non-visual relationships.

This multi-worlds phenomena presents a kind of paradox. Something can either be true, or it can be perceived. It cannot be both. We can be aware of something but not be aware of the truth of what it is. When the totality of something cannot be grasped in our perception, it appears infinite (such is your reality, seemingly infinite in every direction).

Our mind creates representation to expand perception (increase consciousness). For example, the words we use for something affects how we perceive it. 47 words for snow*** allow Eskimos to perceive distinctions in snow that most English speakers cannot. We use language (a representation) to create physically-based perceptions. The representations change how we perceive. (Another representation, the physical brain, also affects how we perceive.) Using specific metaphors allow for specific perceptions.

Representations are how we remember, perceive, and think.

A perceives B in a context relative to the AB perspective. The nature of what you perceive affects how you perceive it. Your perception of a beam of light, for example, is very physically-based. That same beam of light may manifest in your dream as a sound or another representation. Contrariwise, the beam of light would not "perceive" your physical representation if it were shining on you. Your body would be something else to it much the same way other entities manifest as clouds in your experience.

We can observe photons of light in space where no real space exists (nor photons, until we perceive them and the need for the representation to manifest arises). The "space" is simply an illustration of gravitational attraction and repulsion. All internal phenomena. Two objects next to one-another may be physically close (say, in perspective A) but not psychologically (in perspective B). In perspective B the two objects may be as distant as stars. A star may be distant from us from one perspective (requiring much physical fuel) but very close from another perspective (requiring no fuel).

You could never perceive the sun as it truly exists right now. The apparent light from it is several minutes old, taking "time" to travel through "space". But it is not physical distance that ages the light. Rather, this "8 minute" variable illustrates how attracted the representation is to us. If the representation were more physically relative it would be perceived as being physically closer. There is a representation that is much closer to our perspective and that is, of course, our bodies. But of this, too, we are not able to perceive it as it is "now". Light also takes some time (albeit a very, very short amount of time) to get from our toes or arms. We can never see ourselves as we are Now. We are always experiencing an illusion of ourselves. A representation.

Thus, the act of perception is like looking into the void and measuring it. This of course cannot actually be done but we try to do it anyway. This creates representations of the void (or so we think) that we can then interact with. [Ecsys-speak on the right.]

Something's perspective is its relationships with everything else. The meaning of something is in its perspective, not in how it is perceived by another.

[***Note: The Eskimo language actually takes what would be for us be under-utilized phrases for snow and represents those phrases with singular concepts, or nouns, that are not had in English. The representation of a concept makes all the difference in the perception of it.]

And:

How Do My Thoughts Become Reality?

Ecsys holds that you do not think your thoughts but perceive them. (You choose to perceive them, if you will.) Thoughts are sensations, like smells or visual stimuli. It's kind of like drinking milk with your eyes closed. Everything in your environment says that you will perceive the sensation of milk in your mouth. Similarly, everything in your perspective enables you to perceive exactly the next thought you will have. Your thoughts are the result of the relationships in your perspective. Test it out for yourself by observing a change in thought as your perspective changes. (This doesn't mean that your thoughts are dependent on external variables and you have no control. You are your external variables because they exist only in your perspective.)

Along with our traditional 5 senses we have a sense of thought. We internalize "distant" stimuli or relationships and make it a relative part of our experience. Distant thoughts are like smells you no longer smell because your environment does not dictate the perception of them. A thought is another kind of representation.

Similar representations tend to group together and become realms of consciousness and experience. The closer a representation is to a grouping the more powerful is the realm's affect. (From the graphic to the right, an "emotional" representation can become more attracted to the physical realm and take on physical properties. A physical representation can be attracted to —or repelled by— the microbial realm and take on —or discard— microbial properties, etc.)

But what does that mean for us?

Imagine a distant object as a thought which has not taken on physical attributes and a near object as that which is relative to our physicality. You could say that the distant object is indeed a physical thing. In theory that would be true. It is not really, however, in your physical realm of experience and is to your perspective somewhere between physical and not-physical. (The moment you begin to observe it to prove it is physical is the moment at which you bring it closer to your physical experience. And so then it becomes more physically real. Touch it and it will become even more physically real. This is why no kind of particle is the most fundamental element of creation. They're not there until we need to perceive that particular representation. Perspective is the fundamental element.)

Thoughts take on physical form as the thought is expressed more physically, changing your perception of it. Bring the thought into your physical experience and you will experience it physically. This could be as simple as drawing a picture of the house you want instead of just desiring it. You are physicalizing the thought, re-representing it.

Reality does not have 3 dimensions or 20. It has one: perception. When you re-create a thought physically you are introducing attractive and repulsive forces to it. The physicalization of the thought may mean that it can build stronger connections with other things in your experience (attraction) or has less of a need to manifest emotionally (repulsion).

What we think of as motion is not something moving by itself, but the relationship of something changing with its environment. There is no physical movement through space at all. You do not move from point A to point B. You simply shift awareness from A-ness to B-ness. There is no motion in space because space exists only in the 1 dimension of perception. (The futility of imposing an abstract concept, the 1st dimension, onto physical space notwithstanding.) "Motion" is you changing your perspective, not moving through three dimensions.

What we think of as "now" is not something that we have never experienced before. It is a kind of space that exists between our structuring and unstructuring of perspective. Past and future are as much 'in the now' as we think 'now' to be. For example, if you recall a memory from 10 years ago is that a past memory or a present one? Are you able to import the past memory completely unaffected by your current perspective? Are you actually creating it anew? When something is more structured (and has less potential energy) we think of it as Past. When something is less structured (and has more potential energy) we think of it as Future. If we provide structure to a "future" thing we will seem to experience it in our Present before it seems to go to the Past.

Consciousness triggers manifestation. If a non-physical thing becomes related to our physical experience, then we will experience it physically. When representations are interacted and associated with more, you are more likely to experience it in space/time.

Your dreams can become physical reality simply by interacting with their representations more.

And:

Dreams: You In Another Reality

All of the trappings of physicality can be experienced in your dream state. We may think of our waking state is persistent and our dream state as chaotic, but that is not the case.

A table may appear "solid" to us but most of the table is actually non-physical. There is about as much space between its particles as there is space between heavenly bodies (proportionally).

Our physical experience is like the graphic on the right. With our physical senses we sense only physically-based experiences. Thinking back, we remember only those experiences that are relative to the apparatus we are using to remember. Our physically-based mind does not show us the other realities in which we exist, or the other perspectives we are partaking in at this very moment.

We continue to experience physicality when we are dreaming. When we awaken from our dreams we do not cease to exist in our dreams. We are still dreaming. Our dream state never stops. It is only our perspective that changes.

The particles that compose your body are not static. They are in constant "motion" between other perspectives and time-experiences. In a similar way, neither is your dream reality static. In between those physical moments we are processing our waking life in our other states of mind. We also process our dream experience in our waking state. Our dream life is so intertwined with our waking life, it could be said there is little difference between the two experiences. Both states are persistent and have a "solid" reality. The atoms and molecules that make up our physical world also make up our dream world. We are just as physical in the dream world as we are in the waking world. Which is to say, not much at all.

Using your brain to recall something your brain does not experience doesn't work, however. Its "memories" are very heavily influenced by physical reality. You will project the structures of the waking world when trying to perceive the dream world. Dreams make plenty of sense when you're experiencing them, but not when you project unfitting representations onto them upon awakening.

During wakefulness we sometimes receive dream stimulus. But we are sure to make this stimulus a part of waking reality in order to ensure continued wakefulness (and perhaps sanity). We interpret this dream stimulus as sudden knowledge, déjà vu, intuition, etc., in waking experience. It is similar to how you will probably incorporate a loud sound that happens in your room into your dream experience if you are dreaming, in order to ensure continued sleep. (The interconnectedness of waking and dreaming states can be observed by paying attention to the events in the dream right before the sound occured. For example, how did your dream state know there was going to be a sound?)

Sometimes the sounds in our room penetrate more easily into our dream reality. Conversely, sometimes we are awake and experience strange phenomena like see ghostly forms, hear voices, or do extraordinary creative works or physical feats.

We simultaneously experience all states of mind (beta, theta, etc.) but each is aware of its own and, to some degree, others like a focused light shining in a particular section of a dark room while other sections continue to exist and function (and may be partially illuminated from your perspective).

Imagine spacetime as your tongue with 6 areas. Instead of bitter, salty, sour, etc., you have physical, ultraphysical, metaphysical, conscious, sub-conscious, dream-aware. Each physical experience actually exists in the 5 other domains simultaneously (but may not be simultaneous from a different point of reference). But there is no need to know about those 5 others because it has already been translated into your experience. The apple has but one taste interpreted several different ways.

An experience that occurs in one domain is translated into another domain. For example, your physical experiences are translated into dream experiences and vice-versa. But it could be that a dream experience you will have tonight is occurring "simultaneously" with a physical experience 5 years from now.

When you are dreaming your dream world appears as "reality". When you are awake your waking world appears as "realty". Consciousness is interaction. And interactions are just as real in one as they are in another.

AND:

The Nature of Time

Time is a narrative illusion that we make for ourselves in order to make particular sense of something that cannot be perceived. Spacetime is the algorithm of our physical experience.

If you observe three clocks on a table for several minutes and each keeps the same time as the others, down to the second, it cannot be said that each clock has the same "experience" of time. Imagine that instead of three clocks we have three sleeping persons whose biological clocks are 'set' to rise at 6am each morning. Observing each for several hours until approximately 6am we see that each person awoke within minutes of one-another. However, we cannot say that one of those persons did not experience an extra few hours (or days) from their perspective. However, from our perspective each person (and each clock) has their time synchronized.

In a more obvious example, two people can live exactly the same amount of time yet have a completely different experience of time. But scientists would say that these two persons experienced time the same (especially if they were always next to one-another). In time experiments scientists look at only the most obvious example of a difference in two clocks placed far apart because the same cognitive process used to perceive the spacing of the clocks is used to perceive the time on the clocks (or vibrations in them). You cannot use the same cognitive tool for both your control clock and your experimental clock because the result would show only part of the picture.

Scientists know that time is relative to the observer and is not universal because of physical distance of the observer. Ecsys extends this theory to include the perspective of the observer. Physical distance is irrelevant when time knows no physical bounds.

ANDAND:

The Beginning & The End

Imagine, if you will, an apple sitting in a void. Nothing else was around for as far as the eye of the apple could see. This apple was quite lonely because there seemed to be nothing else. Not only that, it could not know of itself and did not feel alive because there was nothing else to relate to. So after some deliberation it decided to do a very wise thing. Cut itself into pieces. (It does not do this in a literal way because it doesn't have a knife and there is no need to. It simply creates a apple-protein that makes each apple-slice forget that it is part of the whole.)

The simple act of dividing itself up created the core of its existence. For each slice was then able to perceive of other slices. For the first time in its existence it could see its own existence. The very moment when it sliced itself was when the apple universe was created. Time, space, and all the trappings of a satisfactory existence. (And, of course, consciousness.)

Only representations exist in the universe because the actuality of what the universe is is beyond perception. We have an infinite variety of representations (things, possibilities, elements, energy, thoughts, perceptions, etc.) because the entirety of It cannot ever be fully illustrated.

What we see is the universe, interpreted in a way that we can readily perceive.

But we do not live in a physical universe. Neither do we live in a spiritual universe. Anything can be expressed physically, spiritually, emotionally, politically, although in an incomplete way and one relative to the agent that is used to express it.

We are indirectly discovering more about the 100% of the universe that isn't physical as our ability to think abstractly expands through the use of computers and networks, games, books, and other media. We are now more involved in abstract mental exercises than ever before. We are traveling through "self" as we travel in time and space.

Astrobiologists look for (organic) life elsewhere in the universe, bypassing the intelligence in our own clouds and geosphere. More importantly, we overlook the capacity for human intelligence to become entirely different than anything we've seen before.


(There is so much more on that incarnation of the ecsys.org, I strongly recommend it.)
 Quoting: MutantMessiah

When I read it I cannot believe that my fingers typed all of that in a coherent way.

But at the same time, as soon as I read it I completely understand it (or at least I think I do).

I suppose I am re-membering what I have forgotten in order to represent it in a way different from the one that has caused it to be remembered.

Last Edited by Chaol on 06/20/2013 03:30 AM
U3

User ID: 9834739
United States
06/20/2013 03:53 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
By the by, I noticed that when I eat certain foods it's much harder to shift my reality, and my thinking is somewhat different (and clouded). I must then go back to eating what I normally do for 1+ day before I feel "myself" again and able to do 'magical' things.

Although a list of suggestions won't follow here, we can consider the effect of things we put into our bodies (food, drink, and everything else) and how they may hinder our physical evolution.

Chaol has mentioned things like fluoride in the water but I would also add GMO foods to the list. (And in the West, pretty much everything has GMOs.)

I could only assume that certain values in our perspective want to hold onto the old physicality, and so introduce these elements as a way to do so.

lol.. we have conspired against ourselves to keep us "comfortable" and not evolve our own physicality.
 Quoting: Chaol




OK...so, let's figure out how to un-conspire. Any suggestions?

Btw, I'm eating mostly vegetables....small amounts of fruits, nuts and protein and very little grains, but all our food is a mess.

Last Edited by ERE3 on 06/20/2013 03:54 AM
Happy Holidays! xmas
U3

User ID: 9834739
United States
06/20/2013 03:56 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
...


If the specifics of logic don't matter, then why is forgetting the logic why we are here?
 Quoting: U3


hehe.. your question has the answer hidden in it.

We forget because they don't matter. I suppose you could say it is "temporary" and only good for one purpose.

If a particular Logic is like your life now (for example) then we forget in order to move onto the next life. (Not implying that there is such a thing as past lives, of course, but for convenience of explanation.)

In order to pretend to be "B" we forget that we are pretending to be "A".
 Quoting: Chaol

LOL! OK, then I was reading too much in it.

What about when we write a Genius and don't do the logic?

And in our experiments, where we are the Genius, how are we using logic?
 Quoting: U3

I'm not sure I understand. How can you make a Genius model without logic?

Logic structures perspective, 'resulting' in reality.
 Quoting: Chaol



You tell me. You're the one that is experimenting with "being" the Genius. Where was your logic in the teleportation experiment?
Happy Holidays! xmas
U3

User ID: 9834739
United States
06/20/2013 04:09 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
So, Neo, I get a couple of impressions at this point. One being that we are moving on somewhat from Chaol's teachings? Is this correct? Iow, some of what he has taught is not as viable as it was when he taught it. They were specific and strategic for that period.

Additionally, from your statement above, re: helping us. Do you see, what I call "surgery" happening, either now or in the future.

Chaol did these type things and actually, they have happened to me over the years, anyway. I had no idea what they were about or who was deciding to do it, but I was always energized after.

Chaol always told us we have to walk over the bridge. That we have to do the work. I asked him why and he said because we wouldn't appreciate it if we didn't do the work ourselves. This indicates there are other ways to cross the bridge. And, since we are apx. 63% there, I just wondered what other changes in whatever the Chaol figure has in store for us, might take place. ;o)
 Quoting: U3

Hi.

I would hope that our understanding is always changing/evolving and, with it, the ways by which the new understanding is influenced.

One can only assume that this "change" was intentional and part of the plan.

He mentioned a few times that this thread was at the very basic level, and that the 'teachings' would change as our understanding does.

Regarding the 'surgery' in your statement, I am not sure. This would imply an external force interfering with the natural course of something or someone. Although you can say that this interference is everywhere and in all ways, what is being done here doesn't seem to be much different than what happens naturally anyway.

But I think here it is more obvious than, say, the surgery that you perform in your life each time you sleep.

And if it were not for knowing of Chaol in these threads you may not have thought of a Chaol performing surgery. (Meaning that it probably happens quite often but we're only aware of it when we see it at work.)

Chaol is a part of you, always.

Have you ever represented Chaol physically? Perhaps like making a Genius for the idea of Chaol closert to your reality? (I don't mean you making one for getting to where Chaol is, but something more relative to where you are now today.)

There is much, much more to all of this that I have seen and I see pretty much every night or every other night in extraordinarily lucid dreams. I can only assume that this is the process, or whatever, of what is occurring here.

Without going into detail, it is basically:

As Chaol has stated:

-This physicality shifting to more dreamworld physicality. (I believe this may have been the 50% threshhold, or standing in the doorway that he spoke about, and of the crossing of "X" or Elenin that everyone thought was insignificant.)

-The breakdown of Western civilization in 2013 and of the old physicality

-The realization that we are in the dreamworld, and everything that comes with it. (Not an instant realization, but an extremely significant change.)

As I have already stated:

-The death of "Ecsys", which is just the crumbling of the bridge to the dreamworld. This is not an event.

-The rise of what Ecsys influences. (I don't know what this is exactly. But I have seen it and it is absolutely amazing. I am trying my hand now at 'creating' this but I am not sure if it's a person or an idea or whatever.)
 Quoting: Chaol




No, I haven't made a Genius for bringing him closer here. I do have one for meeting him in the Dreamworld. Although, I do talk to him and also address trees and poles as if they are him.

I wouldn't mind doing a Genius to bring him closer. I'm not sure what's meant by closer to this reality, though. It seems it would be easier to just bring him here. I was already bringing the Dream World here before I found these threads.

Thanks for the idea. I'll think about how to do it.

The rest you shared sounds exciting. Are you saying the bridge crumbling is a process? And is this what you meant by the seed is meant to wither?

I hope you'll say more about the rise of what Ecsys influences. What is amazing about it that you have seen?
Happy Holidays! xmas
CK05

User ID: 1655711
South Africa
06/20/2013 07:40 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
Hi Chaol,

Even when much energy is required to realise anything that is beyond my current perception. I may still want whatever it is because of how much I value it.
1. Is it a good idea to set goals or bring about something that's beyond my immediate perception or should my life always be about the immediate reality?
2. If I were to persist in wanting what I want, how best do I muster the energy required to achieve it?
CK05
MutantMessiah
Jesse

User ID: 11481360
United States
06/20/2013 09:13 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
[snip]

By doing some very simple groundwork, we find our minds easily "accept" that we're the center of it all. That we've limited ourselves (purposefully) and forgotten we had (purposefully).[snip]
 Quoting: MutantMessiah

To that, I would add that "we" are everything in our perspective.

I don't want some people to get the idea that they are the center of the universe.

Your "I" is everything and not-you-in-particular.

Perhaps I'll discover a better way to explain it.
 Quoting: Chaol


Bwah? Are we not "technically" the center of our own (the one and only) universe (perspective)?

When we say all that exists, does so within perspective. Then we say nothing need exist outside of perspective. We are kinda implying that all that exists is structured around your personal perspective with you like a fish eye lens at the center of it looking out into one of infinite directions all equally valid if only you could find the logic to perceive them.

When I think of the "I" it seems to me it may be defined as the difference between all representations within a given perspective. Or the no-thing-substance that fills the void between all things in perspective.
Maybe... you are all powerful... all knowing... forever present in all ways... you've chosen to forget... remember?
Ambra
User ID: 42022593
Italy
06/20/2013 09:27 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Notes from an "alternate universe". Introduction to a new way of thinking.
@MM - Jesse
Thank you for posting the Code of Ecsys and the other material, a great reminder! hf

@Chaol

I sometimes wonder if we are already specific before we even know what, specifically, we want. Perhaps our subconscious is aware of the specific reality that would be best-suited for us?

Was your intention with your previous Genius model (for your dream home) general or specific?

Chaol mentions that a specific intention is fine but not to intend the result directly.
 Quoting: Chaol


The previous model was general, in the sense that I represented with a symbol my home in nature, without thinking of "how" I'd find it, or details about the looks. But it did intend the direct result, the home.

My understanding at that time, was that we create a specific symbol, to represent what we want in this physicality, as a "placeholder". Another Genius I made using this concept did work. (Actually, come to think of it, it may have been "around it"...)

So, as you have illustrated with your G1, to intend around it: finding the perfect ad you've been waiting for.

And of course there's nothing wrong with making another Genius (for how you're going to pay) once you've found the ad.
 Quoting: Chaol


I made a symbol, using a rubber ring with a bell attached to it with a string, inside a tiny ziplock bag.

Logic - once a day, I walk three times counterclockwise in the garden, around a veggie container.

Space/possibility - tiny ziplock bag

Interaction - In my bag, so it comes around with me.

Because I wasn't sure about the specificity when I made it, it was about "the perfect home making itself known to me", thinking that this would take care of multiple "hows".

This morning, I found myself with the "old habit" and holding the symbol while doing the rounds as if it was the placeholder/representation of the house itself... I may be creating confusion and wonder if I will have to make another Genius, or the original intention still stands.

Regarding specificity for G1, I think it depends on how much detail we are giving it. For example, we can A) give detail about the bulldozer taking away the tree; or B) give detail about neighbors coming over to ask why the tree is gone.

In A since our intention is to make the tree disappear we are providing too much detail about how it happens. Allow your Genius to figure that out. So then we leave the possibilities open. Instead, we can make a model for B. And since our intention is related to the tree disappearing (and not the neighbors) this would make it far more likely to occur in our reality, I think.

So specificity is fine as long as is it indirect specificity.

(When we are specific about something directly, the reality is already satisfied in our detail about the thing, as Chaol mentions.)
 Quoting: Chaol


Yes, I also remember Old Chaol mention that when we are too specific, we may carry resistance over that we may not be aware of, so it's best to move around it and be indirect.

I find this easier to apply regarding "situations", or desired general experiences, but more confusing with a specific physical thing, because of the "placeholder" symbol concept.

Regarding the Genius for the noisy fridge, I caught myself cheating on me (lol), because I realized that I indeed do want the darn appliance to magically fix itself!!!

I made a symbol for a correct repair (but in truth just for a silent fridge).
symbol - a small ball of my cat's fur, inside foil, with a strip of tape.
logic - once a day juggle the ball between hands for 10 times
space - inside a lantern over a cabinet
interaction - with everything else in the room, especially the mosquitoes that like that area...

Given the noise, it's hard to unfocus from that, so to speed things up, I sent a text message to the repair man (with the great intention to give him the chance to find the part). No reply so far.

Then, I recalled another method Chaol taught us, about creating a unique word to express a concept.

I tried this before, and it did work after some time!
So, in addition, I created the word "milabir" to express "I enjoy soothing quietness at home".

At first stuck the post-it note on the fridge in the hopes of giving it "instructions", then removed it and placed it elsewhere, as the concept is general and takes the fridge out of the direct equation.

Let's see what happens!

So specificity is fine as long as is it indirect specificity.

(When we are specific about something directly, the reality is already satisfied in our detail about the thing, as Chaol mentions.)
 Quoting: Chaol


A corollary of this, in practical terms, would be if you were 15 and making your plan for the next 10 years.

You could be specific and say that you want to get a Master's degree in Civil Engineering with a 3.8 GPA, have a steady boyfriend who likes rock-climbing, a silver Ford Mustang GT, and become expert at playing the violin.

The more specific you are the more energy it will take to get there. The plan above is achievable but highly unlikely, and again unlikely to be experienced without expending plenty of energy to carry it out as you had planned.

So, perhaps, instead you could be indirectly specific with your goal: knowledge and understanding of civil engineering, an adventurous boyfriend, a car that you like, and lots of time to practice the violin.

In the former we are presuming that we know better than our own Genius (subconscious) and know the best way to get there.

In the latter we are influencing the values that make up our perspective in such a way that we may very well end up with what we then want.
 Quoting: Chaol


Yes, I do understand the principle. I guess the challenge is in trying to express a general concept around a specific desire, find a way to step back a little, and focus the values around it that would bring it forth.

Back to the house example, given that I already have something quite close to my desire, except that I am renting and there is less privacy than I'd like, I could focus on a situation that allows a huge veggie garden of my own and more privacy, the freedom of fixing the place as I please, the surroundings, etc, rather than the home itself.

I'll wait a bit with the current Geniuses, just to see how they go (as a way to learn from possible mistakes), then will apply the above to another symbol, if needed.

I hope that my practical issues about the Geniuses will help others, thanks to Chaol's input. However, I also enjoy and appreciate the other discussions going on!

News