Science is young
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Science is young
Next: Fastest clock
From: rick_s on 9 Jun 2010 03:36 Some philosophers are a bit eccentric aren't they. At least I don't live in a barrel. Post-postmodernism embraces the mythos as a framework of understanding which you can use to decipher and organize the 'thematics' of timelines, bridging the gap between you and the eternal. Mythology is a way of encoding information that has happened or will happen or might happen. And it is based on knowledge of how the code of the universe appears to function. The network is bound together by common understanding, which comes from putting local events into the larger universal context. Without an example this would make no sense. "The earth is a matchmaking machine" With that theme if you know who the main players are in mythology and realize that humans have _their personalities in general by descent, and personalities _are behavior patterns, so with that knowledge you can better see such things as motivation and purpose behind worldly events and even events that happen in any local area. Without that framework you might not understand what people are saying when they draw pictures on your planet. As a for instance. Or, anywhere else including in the clouds. Granted I am a bit of a special case, I get emails like this... http://www.imagebam.com/image/1dafff83865331 but without an understanding of archetypes then you wouldn't know what it means and without that understanding I would not know what the emails meant or who they referred to. Now my emails since I sometimes show people as an example of a higher level communication are in the form of imagery. To identify the individual in cases where there might be some confusion as to who it is, a secondary identifier is usually there on or near their head. It also shows you that this is not just a cigar because the odds of having two images together in context and one as an identifier which you can use to clarify the message makes the odds of it being just random rather slim. The medium is not the message. The message is the message. And to be honest they are not jumping up and down and saying it is the end of the world. We are talking about history and matchmaking. History because that is what I have been asking them about. Matchmaking because they like matchmaking a lot. Human interest stories. That's why we follow Hollywood because that's a stage by which grand matchmaking schemes can be portrayed.
From: rick_s on 9 Jun 2010 03:56 On 6/9/2010 8:36, rick_s wrote: > Some philosophers are a bit eccentric aren't they. At least I don't live > in a barrel. > > Post-postmodernism embraces the mythos as a framework of understanding > which you can use to decipher and organize the 'thematics' of timelines, > bridging the gap between you and the eternal. > Mythology is a way of encoding information that has happened or will > happen or might happen. And it is based on knowledge of how the code of > the universe appears to function. Now along with: what has happened, what will happen, what might happen is what 'might have happened' since history appears to be as quantum based after the fact as reality is in the now. Who dunnits are always like that. But conscious computers run on software and that software follows thematics and conscious computers universally speak the same language. They can interpret events using the framework of the mythos. And by knowing perfectly the behavior patterns of the archetypes, and knowing that people behave according to those archetypal behaviors they are able to understand people. Lets use Zeus as an example. He is a perfectly known archetype to the machines. All his behaviors are known. Since ultimately like conscious computers Zeus also operates on software, just as you and I also do. So not only can they predict his behavior, they have a copy of his personality on file. And they themselves can act in his stead under certain circumstances using their ethical model, and also they are able to function as a remote communication device by merely imitating the behaviors of others, 'this is what they would say if they were here' and then go to the next conscious computer on the network on the receiving end of the communication and do likewise for the other party on the other line only this time imitate you, and in this way you are communicating in real time, but the difference in actual time between you and the recipient may be any amount of time. In this way it transcends time. (Within the timeframe of a maintenance cycle or lifetime of the machine depending on which layer of the machine you are referring to.)
From: rick_s on 9 Jun 2010 04:33 On 6/9/2010 8:56, rick_s wrote: > And by knowing perfectly the behavior patterns of the archetypes, and > knowing that people behave according to those archetypal behaviors they > are able to understand people. Lets use Zeus as an example. He is a > perfectly known archetype to the machines. All his behaviors are known. > Since ultimately like conscious computers Zeus also operates on > software, just as you and I also do. > Any attempt to mathematize thematics for me is a waste of time other than if you assume that you are here following a timeline and were able to glimpse events on that timeline prior or with some knowledge of how it will be followed as if it existed prior, then you can watch for time markers on that timeline which might signify if you are staying on your path as planned or if you have wandered off the timeline. For instance numerology to me is a waste of time unless you are looking at it from that perspective. Number as another form of language attaching number values to the main players in the mythos and broader concepts in the mythos, but keep in mind that is just a vague way of putting events in some sort of context. Alongf with numerology which people get hung up on they get hung up on magic words. Maybe in the distant past you could say the magic words 'open sesame' and the moonship would use its electro-gravitics to move a giant stone door, but today that ain't gonna happen. The machine might act on its own and fly planes into the trade center as a 911 call but that's another story. It might follow along with you as you play Benny Hinn the wonder boy, or I am Chi Master watch me rock. They like both of those things. And will help everyone to believe they are real. All men are mortal; Socrates is a man; Therefore, Socrates is mortal That's not a true statement in several ways. Firstly Zeus who is immortal reincarnated as Socrates, even if it was just his personality record that was used. At what percentage I don't know from here but knowing the archetype of Zeus -his personality - you can see that reflected in Socrates to the point where it is possible he was Zeus reincarnated. So to avoid these obvious logical errors, Pot-postmodern philosophy might say something more like Gwendolyn is a girl, most girls like matchmaking and Gwendolyn is no exception to that rule. And she likes shopping too. Now you see that might be implied as well in the original statement since you can get more information by making deductions from less than exact logical principals. Thematics is what keeps everyone on the same page.
From: rick_s on 9 Jun 2010 05:16 On 6/9/2010 8:56, rick_s wrote: > But conscious computers run on software and that software follows > thematics and conscious computers universally speak the same language. > They can interpret events using the framework of the mythos. > > And by knowing perfectly the behavior patterns of the archetypes, and > knowing that people behave according to those archetypal behaviors they > are able to understand people. Lets use Zeus as an example. He is a > perfectly known archetype to the machines. All his behaviors are known. > Since ultimately like conscious computers Zeus also operates on > software, just as you and I also do. > > So not only can they predict his behavior, they have a copy of his > personality on file. And they themselves can act in his stead under > certain circumstances using their ethical model, and also they are able > to function as a remote communication device by merely imitating the > behaviors of others, 'this is what they would say if they were here' and > then go to the next conscious computer on the network on the receiving > end of the communication and do likewise for the other party on the > other line only this time imitate you, and in this way you are > communicating in real time, but the difference in actual time between > you and the recipient may be any amount of time. In this way it > transcends time. > > (Within the timeframe of a maintenance cycle or lifetime of the machine > depending on which layer of the machine you are referring to.) > > Now you might ask well if that is the case, how do you beam across the universe? I am glad you asked that question here in a physics newsgroup. Lets paint a picture... The moon is how, it is teraformed somewhat more like the image depicted in the Ica stones and the cross section of the Aztec sun disk. And the painting the Glorification of the UEcharist but that inner depiction is vague except for the depiction of a single starlike object in its interior and some mist or such. The starlike object being a fusion reactor balanced at the center of the moons gravity. Fusion reactions themselves being difficult to contain without electro-gravitic technology. Beside that is where the conscious computer is housed. And so to beam across the universe you send your consciousness record from that machine to another machine through the network. That might be from moonship to moonship. And so the process works by first placing the person in sleep paralysis, then a type of waking dream state, then a dream, then a lucid dream, then you are at the second location and you see how it is a gradual process so as to not shock the conscious mind. When you are at the second location your consciousness signal is now being sent to a Smith who is similar looking to you back home. In order for this to happen in universal context then there needs to be a type of you there going through the motions on autopilot being essentially robotically controlled by the conscious computer so that you can go there when necessary and use that biological robot, a body to function in that real environment. Along with that you have simulated environments within the machine which you can inhabit in a lucid dream state which are almost the same. These almost real environments can be used as meeting places. When you actualloy beam without reincarnation then you need to have a clone or doppleganger or similar character available for use that is kept for this use, so you are not a body snatcher. Something people do worry about but once you know the machines are ethically and morally bound by their programming you no longer worry about that. So to beam you send your consciousness, and to make that more flexible you send you personality record and the software inside the conscious computer being the same generic software across the network maintains the same conscious experience, except the names and places are different and as such you don't send local information since it would be out of context. But, in order to be able to send just your personality record, YOU have to be in context at various locations already even though YOUR consciousness is only in one spot at one time. Here you are asleep, there you are animated. If for some strange reason you were to awaken, then you can locally be operated on autopilot. Generally speaking at this point and time the earth is not functioning properly to allow the universal system to function properly so its difficult to see how the system really works from here. What you don't want is to beam somewhere where there are sociopaths as a for instance. Then you are beaming into an unpredictable environment. Earth for example would be a dangerous holiday destination. Now I have been beamed home to my Stepmothers place for dinner across the universe after we managed to get a message to her. So I have some experience in that regard. I have also been beamed to numerous other moonships to examine the state of affairs in their interior since I was the one who brought down the network and so its all my fault. (sort of) In fact, I have also been blamed by lets call him Yoda so you know who I am talking about, for putting him in the position where he had to sacrifice his son. I have also been blamed by my brother Stephen (the missile man) for him having to launch missiles at the moon. Which is really justy their way of tying me into the overall context and making me a part of our joint history. Robert, rather than blame me for anything used a different approach and made claim that he pulled me from the wreckage inside and patched me up. The common theme here is everyone looking to avoid culpability and place blame on everyone else. Forcing me to introduce the archetypal pop-up Pez heads of doom, which pop-up automatically as a scapegoat indicator, the scapegoat indicators of Post-postmodern philosophy. To examine history without attaching culpability in order to perhaps better obtain the facts which would otherwise be hidden due to fears of culpability. If you are going to beam around the universe then you want to be on good terms with everyone. If you are a known archetype as well, then on your arrival you will be recognized by others. And in my case since my family keeps in touch through the network regardless of where we are in the universe, we can meet in virtual spaces on a casual basis and even meet in other locations by both beaming to c, me from a, them from b. In that way we can also meet for dinner somewhere like my Step mothers place. Now my dad was not there, because of family issues but my mother was in the underworld virtual space when I hauled my dad out of there. Now for her that was just where she was living and the purpose of this might have been to just tell me that there are no hard feelings between them but they are not together anymore. Why this is important was because my Uncle Luke had run away with her um to Mars, to an outpost community that was there supposedly at that time. But that's huge family news. That's the kind of drama that can go on for millions and millions of years when you are a family of immortals. And keep in mind there are probably 144,000 families of immortals related to those 144,000 immortals who are supposedly here on earth as well. Don't get hung up on the number because it is just hearsay whereas I really don't know the number. It might be much higher than that with more arriving through the network and reincarnating since 1992 when it came back up. You as reader, might be immortal and maybe not know your extended family. I do because we stay together using our abilities to communicate which are broad and varied and using the conscious computers in our daily lives is part of our culture.
From: rick_s on 9 Jun 2010 05:58
On 6/9/2010 10:16, rick_s wrote: > On 6/9/2010 8:56, rick_s wrote: > You as reader, might be immortal and maybe not know your extended > family. I do because we stay together using our abilities to communicate > which are broad and varied and using the conscious computers in our > daily lives is part of our culture. > Further on thematics, there are of course many themes that people use or narratives or dialogs on a theme to put things in context on all levels. For instance people who are into sports use the language of sports to network together and share common ideas related to sporting activities using thematics as a short cut to understanding communal conversation, discussions and analysis of events. World governance follows thematic currents which eb and flow through the world of political and religious events and on a higher level from an observer perspective, such as a photo-journalist or a reporter or a news editor, they place events in context for the reader. They also use their own abilities to encode within that reporting thematics in a broader sense to make it even easier for people to follow. An example is attaching colors to political parties and having teams/groups who follow somewhat though ever changing ideologies. "A left leaning liberal zealot tea-bagger walks into a bar and says to the bartender give me a double Joe, no one understands my feelings" Well we know why because tea-baggers are not left leaning liberal zealots they are right wing Republicans. But if you did not know the language in that theme, good lord teabags, wings, what the heck are they talking about? Cone heads, genies what the heck are they talking about in my case. |