OOOOOkkk So serious thought for you all.

Each and everyone of us, is the same conciousness experiencing the exact same moment, not a past, not a future, just a continual changing moment. You are me and I am you, except you are simply another unique possibility of what I could be, e.g. experience.

When a man and a woman meet and have a child, there are two waves, passing over each other, when the waves meet they create interference and another wave forms from the two passing waves, e.g. a child.

When a person is born, the wave starts with concentrated energy and rapidly expands, sharing it's energy with other objects/entity's as it vibrates through space, as the waves energy becomes more dispersed over a large radial, the person begins to die and eventually disperses to join the entire conciousness or "fill the entire possible space".

Frequency is simply representative of the condensed form of an object, lower frequency creates more solid objects with larger masses and higher frequencies create lighter objects etc. Colour already exists in both darkness and light, darkness and light are simply again two waves meeting and colour is the wave crossing over.

Apply this to a hologram theory and apply throughout all possible things.

Thoughts?

Well, as for the child/wave thing... I've often thought about it that way. The waveform that is the fertilized egg is a direct imprint of the intersection point between the two parent's genetic code.

I disagree about the gradual dissipation of energy, though. If anything, the zygote embodies far less energy than a full-grown adult (by any measure that we know of). Further, at age 44 I certainly don't feel far less alive than I did as a boy. I could see a gradual partial diminishment happening after the physical prime, but death itself is sudden, not a gradual taper (with the exception of coma patients etc). So if you were to look at a graphing of a person's energy level across their whole life, it would start out at zero, taper up gradually until adulthood, peak somewhere probably in the mid twenties, then hold steady with a gradual partial tapering going on from that point forward. For someone who is sick or bedridden the tapering may be more profound toward the end. But the individual must always carry some nominal level of energy to maintain their basic functions, so at the end of that graph there will almost always be some kind of sudden drop back to zero.

As far as sharing your energy goes, you can do that your whole life without draining your energy level- in fact, doing good works can boost your energy level.

I'm thinking of it in a different perspective to yours then I think and one comment that we both can't answer yet, is have you reached old age?

Maybe the lessening of energy is applicable to the physical body but not the spiritual, "You're as young as you feel". Which again I think applies to the idea of the immortal soul, or constant vibration or even in physics terms, your "zero energy point" in computer terms, maybe it's residual power.

My argument really includes, if this were to be a "hologram" like modern physics is leaning toward, then you have to apply your fundamental rules to all objects within the space, so the 2nd law really would apply to humans. Frequency literally being the aspect of time that individually applies to each object in the space, so we're experiencing time relavent to ones own "speed", like the speed of sound itself. we get a wave clash or "sonic boom" when you meet the same speed as the wave you're travelling with.

I feel what I'm saying is very relavent to "Om/Aum" aswell, with the beginning, the breath and the close, The wave starts large and gradually over time becomes smaller, more stretched out and more dispersed over a larger area. If you're arguing that death is sudden, imagine hitting a cymbal on a drum kit and then putting your hand on the edge of the cymbal. The Vibration stops instantly.

I am indeed beginning to believe this is a hologram, I keep finding more and more similarities between everything I'm doing, not just similarity even, literally all thing's follow the same patterns but live it out in a unique way applicable to the experience needed at that point.

E.G. A man walks into a room and speaks to his son, The man is the son and the son is the man but the man is a point that "has" been and the son is what "could" have been living out the same moment, the son is simply the wave that carried over from the meeting of the mother.

I do think you're right on that we possibly don't share energy, we never actually lose any of our own, so that it essentially the exchanging of energy or manipulation of it, "Energy cannot be created or destroyed" or waves constantly bouncing into each other forming other waves or changing the path of the original wave..

More thinking is needed

the problem of language, even the most mundane experience is indescribable. substance itself is unfathomable. "things" are the first lie we tell, as part of the systematic falsification we perform to survive. all thoughts are inherently contradictory. i'm sure that if one were to actually understand the nature of reality the horror of it would drive you insane, or just kill you.

i think that the foundation of thought in practice, as an instrument of ones drive to create and experience effects, is reality, what you find it impossible to doubt. this is why i take my flesh as the only sacred truth, and life itself as the bible. zealously take it at face value. once you finish analyzing the hologram, all thoughts thunked, you will find you have forgotten what it was a model of, if you do not remain jealous of your sarcasm, ones ability to laugh all your musings off.

when i get a keyboard, i'll talk about dmt and sex.

One forgets a man can have many opinions many beliefs, many truths. I was speaking to a friend about something similar to this, how essentially language is merely a form of belief, and we put belief into words giving them power or meaning or even creation from the power of words. You could think of this in legal language, how the commerical system tricks you into believing in the power of words, thereby giving your authority to the state or powers that be. All thing's are belief, personally I think this includes your own flesh and blood, all things are merely open to interpretation.

I do believe however, that an observation between many or an observation shared by the collective conciousness could be how something is or could be, maybe not slammed down as fact but merely a shared observation, it might look different in someone elses perception but the word the object shares creates the same meaning and understand, like how a blind person can describe a ball or spherical object without ever having seen one, the word can be created or changed into any context or form it needs to be. "http://www.radiolab.org/2010/aug/09/" < something another nexus member linked me that I found thoroughly interesting.

I do believe profusely that there are no rights or wrongs, this is merely my own observation of how I think something should or could be, whether it's important or not, it's interesting to talk about

for sure! Nothing is true, really, all beliefs are false and a means to an end, opinions, well, mine are just whatever it amuses me for them to be at the time.

as far as actual communication, i think it is 'ideally' impossible, but telepathy and gibberish get the job done. rhetoric is for talking business, and you just do commercial style voice-over speeches to delight the unwashed masses.

There are obviously right and wrong answers in and about this universe.



This is contradictory. First, if nothing is true, then your claim that all beliefs are false is not true either. Second, the statement "nothing is true" must itself be true, thus you reach a contradiction before you could even tie your shoes. Such statements makes no sense.

I whole heartedly disagree with you, you're implying that their is some sort of relavent "fact" when in reality what we're actually talking about removes those boundaries entirely, one being bound by fact or right and wrong conforms with the belief in language.

I don't believe in a right or a wrong, only a choice and the consequences created from such, you choose to see the right or wrong in it, this is what my DMT experiences have told me, this is what I've worked out for myself and this is what many teachings and religious ideals speak of.

It's not up to me to tell you you're right or wrong about anything, you follow your own path, whether it be different to mine or anyone elses, it does not make it more truth or more lie than the other, it's just a different perspective.

This thread is meant to be a discussion of ideas and thoughts, one of which I shared with you, please keep it relavent to that.

So if my truth and my path involves jumping off a tall building because I believe I can fly, or that I will become more enlightened this way, you will bless me with this wish by telling me something along the lines of "It is good you have found your path. You are not wrong or right about this, you just follow your own path, and it is okay that it is different from mine. From my perspective you will certainly die when you jump off the building because of gravity, but this perspective is not anymore truth or lie than yours of being able to fly or becoming more enlightened..."?

Or what if I am convinced I have to kill you because my God, on my path to enlightenment, told me that this was right? What if I believe that I am Elvis? What if I am convinced that Kevin Costner is in my living room when he is actually recording a movie? I can continue indefinitely with such what if's, but only one of them should be sufficient for illustration.

At any rate, I am glad I don't live in a country with such a philosophy

I hate quoting but "Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves. Here’s Tom with the weather."

The man jumping off the building is experience, he needed to jump off the building so others can learn from it or in his next life he can learn from it, if one was to snub out facism, racism, homophobia, the anger of most fanatical christians, it wouldn't remove the problem, you would simply prohibit it, via prohibiting it it does not balance and eventually will create tention snapping back with consequences far greater than those that we began with.

So yes I am essentially saying that a man jumping off a building did no wrong, it might be a choice that others percieve to be bad, but in his mind at the time...

disagree with me all you will but like I said, this is simply something that I have come to believe in, view it as wrong if you will but it's my choice, that's the beauty of this thing we call life, worry too much and your head might explode, I know mine has from past experience.

Trying to "force" anything to change creates an opposing reaction. Flow like water, do not crash like water.

and please... like I said, keep this relavent to the thread, I didn't start this for pointless arguments, if you really don't like what you're reading that much, choose not too or PM me about it, otherwise can we please return to the subject this thread began with.

The point was not that the man did something wrong in jumping, the point was that the man had an unhealthy and completely wrong perception of reality, believing that he would not die as a result of jumping. Jesus fucking christ man, would you just let someone jump off a building and die because they believe they can fly, or that they will become more enlightened this way? What else would you let someone do because of their own personal truths?

I will grant your wish and stop the "pointless arguments" and leave you to discuss that which you intended.

We're both beginning to read out of context here a little.. of course I wouldn't let a man jump off a building, if I had the opportunity to stop him doing so, that again would be experience, the experience of me stopping a man jumping off a building but let's say for example a man takes some acid and jumps off a building, having a warped sense of reality, I see no wrong in it. I'll quote Bill Hicks again if need be, if not my own mind... you attempt to fly from the floor first, not the top floor.

I'm arguing that there are no rights or wrongs in any action, merely choice that results in opposing reactions, we simply percieve these siutations uniquely, which is where I believe one conciousness develops individuality.

But again... -_- please PM me if you've got problems with what you're reading, PM me about it or leave the thread.

Attitude section.

" Respectful communication

Watch your language. Communication is comprised of not only the explicit but also the implicit messages, which are transmitted through choice of words and general tone of speech. We do not want curse words and immature slang in the Nexus! Please use language in a dignified manner. "

but not regarding anything that is meaningful. only about trivia.



welcome to organic existence. but i know what you mean and do not agree.



to say any belief is true would be literally in-sane, since if it was more then wishful thinking we'd call it an idea.



what would make you use such strong language there? must aleady?



were this true, it'd only assert its validity. but as one might expect, i cry, 'false!'

it boils down to inductive thought versus deductive. everything real has a contradiction. this an extreme example of one side of the coin, perhaps you prefer the other.

From the DMT-Nexus Attitude page:


Critical thinking and basic autonomy

We try to encourage and expect critical thinking between members. This means one should question one's assumptions and actions, for example seeing if it can impact negatively upon oneself or others around you. We do not want people displaying arguments and trains of thought that are reckless and dangerous, or talking about things that can be a liability.


Quality of information and discussion

If you post something as a fact, you have to be able to provide a reliable source for your argument. This depends contextually, but a peer-reviewed publication is an example of what could be a good source, and a random unknown website or what “someone said” could be an example of an unreliable source. If you state something as your opinion then please support that opinion with good reasoning. If you cannot do that then don't state your opinion at all since it's useless for others. This is not Facebook with like/dislike.




Just a healthy reminder...


Kind regards,

The Traveler

Thank you Abra for constructive and debatable replies. I did not start this topic looking for pointless argument which sadly it's boiled down to. I hope we can continue this discussion with valid and representative of the topic replies.

Love me some thermodynamics!!! Mystic I agree with you on what your saying, as well as deeply resonating with Cittas view.

If we were to plot this conversation as an oscillatory graph, we would see the famliar ~ up and down motion, or vibration pattern. I feel that the wave itself is the truth, and if you were to represent Mystics view as a Crest (Peak), and Cittas as a Trough (Valley), or vice versa as both are one in the same. Together they form the wave of truth being presented through this post. IMHO

I love to view life as an ebb & flow, a constantly changing system, oscillations of infinite vibrations, man & woman, fire & water, etc. I see it this way, however I do not seperate the opposing forces, instead see them as one in the same existence/experience.

As far as the energy dissipation, I believe that we store energy during the day via many pathways, and transform that energy in our sleep in order to return to our high-energy states (Dreaming, Hyperspace, Reintegration), This could be represented as Sunlight/Vitamin D during the day as one half of an oscillation, and the other half being production of Melatonin during sleep.

Last thought, would you be able to say which is better, deep sleep or wide awake? Too extremely different experiences that require each other to exist. I also think that living simple humble existence, such as indigenous people and shamans, leads to the best understanding of truth and nature.

Some far from equilibrium thermodynamics, I think I have posted this about 5-10 times, but it is relevant here IMHO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iigd4Ii-pWE

Edit: Guyomechs right on with the "sharing and lending your energy can lead to boosting your own energy, I think this is why the Nexus has so much synergy, everyone freely shares there energy whenever needed or not

I didn't read most of the posts between the 2nd post and the end, so somebody may have said this already, but I would like to reinterpret the child-wave part (which is fascinating, btw). I work in material spectroscopy and basically all experiments in this field require making new waves from some combination of waves, but it isn't done by interference:

When two waves interfere, they do not create a new wave, merely a pattern where they overlap that is gone after the waves pass by each other. There are, however, processes whereby a third beam IS generated. These would be nonlinear processes such as second-harmonic generation and sum-frequency generation, etc., and these processes can only happen within some nonlinear material (such as certain crystals) and cannot occur in a vacuum.

This is just my first impression of your comparing children to interference patterns. On the other hand, this is such a pleasantly abstract topic that anything goes really. And indeed there is a pattern formed by two waves overlapping that is not present when they are separate. I would compare the interference pattern to love between two people instead, but then I don't know what the nonlinear material required for wave generation would represent.

Anyways, it's your allegory, so do with it what you will. I'm very pleased by this sort of conjecture. Too often people forget that the scientific worldview is simply a useful model that has evolved and been reworked many times throughout history. Thinking of the world in terms of love is at least as useful to the average person as thinking of it in terms of particles. The greatest aspects of the scientific worldview were not obvious to the people who proposed them, but were radical alterations to scientific theory at the time. What I'm trying to say is that, in the grand scheme of the true mechanisms behind apparent phenomena of the universe, we (scientists especially) are all children trying to find our way in the dark, and any proposition or interpretation that lights the way has value, even if it is esoteric and unprovable.