Notes from an "alternate universe": The Revelation of the Real World

[link to ibb.co (secure)]

This is where it would help to be able to distinguish the types of 'intuition'.

The first thing that comes to your mind could be the 'next step' in your flow. I would say the way to tell the difference is that, with a sense of flow, you all ready know the answer before you've had a chance to think of it. If it takes more than a second to get 'a feeling' then it's probably an inverted metaphysical sense that has all ready been expressed.

If I can think of a better way to express this, I'll let you know.

You become more like the animal, which isn't rational since human being is the form we assume.

Entire books could be written on this alone.

There are some remnants of this in traditions around the world. For example, in modern Christianity you 'eat the flesh of Christ' in a ritual. It's now convoluted, but the idea was to become more like Christ rather than the beasts.


Yes.


Take a close look at your habits.

I would very much like to participate in several of the ongoing discussions more deeply (or at least, verbosely) but longer attempts are still being blocked…
In the shortest possible summary of recent events:
I wound up with a rental car with blatant neuronics as a license plate
I accidentally travelled to 2012 (and feel bad about stepping on the toes of others’ storylines…)
I developed a sudden allergy to peaches

I will also boldly push my word limit with a question - I have recently become aware of the Garden of Cosmic Speculation and find it very upsetting - any idea why this is?

The site itself is a massive operation (like this one), so I wouldn't assume that such posts dealing with those things are by actual persons, or persons acting on their own behalf.

The internet itself is one of the biggest, but that's an other story. ("Defence" means "against humanity".)

About those types of posts, I don't have much else to say.

People tend to follow the queues from the authorities they subscribe to, with modes of behaviour being one of the major ones. The artificial authorities here being the 'directors', if you will.

The population 'goes along with the script' and are, indeed, actors who would behave much differently if left to their own devices. Their mind is not their own. Much of this is a reflection on the nature of perspective, illustrating how what you see follows your own direction.

Like a 'Truman Show' if Truman was also the producer and director without being conscious of how it happened.


This was in answer to your question asking what "good presented as evil" could be, rather than a question about authority.

The document was meant as an authority for artificial government (to limit its powers) rather than an authority over people.

In any domain you need rules that define the reality. Without definition there is Chaos. The more rational the definition and rules, the better. The document wasn't meant to serve as an authority over a person, but to make sure that individual agency and freedom within the system that was the early United States was not inhibited. A 'good' artificial government would seek to empower people and secure their inherent rights, not possess or rule over them.

The individual agency? The supreme authority of the Self, working within the guidelines provided in the system it chooses to adhere to.

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union..."

The 'union' here was about joining the Old World (Confederation of States) with the New World (The United States of America).

The intention of the Old World was economic partnership, while the intention of the New World was economic theft.

On one side you had the UK and the USA, while on the other you had the Confederacy, Russia, and several others. One side used weapons and there was very little actual fighting, if any at all.

The text of the Constitution was kept, but the spirit and understanding of it changed as the New World changed definitions, values, etc.

Note two things: "something" and "thought experiment" :)

Are you maybe using banned words? Idk what all of them are on here but that's been annoying for me in the past

Don't worry about stepping on my storyline's toes, you're in my storyline, and I in yours :) also it's actually comforting. What happened, how was it? How'd you know it was 2012?

Last Edited by Sabai_ on 07/20/2022 06:58 AM

It seems these two go together, and there's been some confusion on my end on what you mean by "actor." To me, an actor has the connotation of someone being aware that they are acting, or is willingly complicit in deception. You're not the first, and I doubt you'll be the last, to compare all this to a show/movie/play/scene with actors and directors, but with the dynamics at play with the Cult it seems more apt to describe it as a tableau with figurines. The artificial authorities move the figurines, which would, on their own, act differently.

The figurines may also be aptly described as "mortants;" a tableau vivant is a "picture of life" and a "bon vivant" is a "good living man." So, a "mortant" would be a "dead man," "dead" in the sense that he does not sense life for himself. The artificial authorities may be called "mal mortants" rather than directors, as it seems to me that though they may be more willingly complicit in deception ("mal," "bad") and do direct, they do so without sensing the life they're directing away from.

Calling them actors and directors brings to mind ideas of grand conspiracy, of which there is none. Calling those who are just following the "script" "actors" also elicits a sort of fear akin to Truman syndrome, where one believes they are in a show surrounded by actors and so they cannot trust anything or anyone. To call celebrities and politicians actors is one thing, but it's an other to suggest everyone around you who's unaware is also an actor. Mortants genuinely believe what they promote, they're not actively trying to deceive, they're not acting when they express fervor for anti-racism or -sexism or whatever else. Mal mortants are acting and have ulterior motives, but those motives are also disconnected from "reality" and they fully believe in their interpretation. Maybe there are "mal vivant" individuals who are aware of the life they're directing away from (aware of the dynamics of perception and use them to deceive), but it seems its just more of a self-perpetuating system of mal mortants and mortants as I cannot imagine someone who's aware of the "true" meaning of "the golden rule" participating in deception at that level.



... yeah okay I'm silly. Head wasn't screwed on right for that question

--------------------------------------------------------

Recently, the bedroom that I had in 2012 has become incredibly central in my dreams. There've been at least four where it's incorporated in a central way. That's interesting to me

I'm reminded of the following post from a little over 9 years ago...

The post after the one referenced above:


and


"Truth is stranger than fiction," as we will soon see.

Hm. yeah, okay. I see.

I am uncomfortably aware of how this, a bit down from the chain comment, relates to my efforts to ""time travel,"" and I feel the intense desire to defend myself. I won't as I want to, though, as there's no need to. I will say, though, that I don't see why ""time travel"" can't be my first step into making a sort of transition.

Some time ago I ventured into the depths of hell, as it were, here in these threads to look Chaos in the eye.

I discovered the Cult and began to refer to them as cyanderthals. Seeing their effect upon the world, I toyed with the idea of destroying them from within, or perhaps by other means. But then I realised that they were not the cause, but a symptom. Then I began to see how beautifully the various parts, the good and the bad, so-called, worked together.

I was shocked to learn and understand that the Chaos I was looking for was what humanity itself had become. We were the Cult of Chaos.

So, the various aspects of my Self made peace, so to speak.

Then I began to think of what could be done.


How would the extended self (the world) find its equilibrium as I was beginning to? What would be the logical narrative to make that happen?

What could be done about the culture of Chaos that permeates the system we now find ourselves in?

What is the most rational narrative irrespective of moral consensus? What would nature do in all of its equilibrium of neutrality, so to speak?

I've been considering these things for quite a while, perhaps ever since I was first tested on this question nearly 11 years ago. It has taken me that long — perhaps longer — to really understand 'the situation'.

"How much of your extended Self are you willing to give up in order to experience who and what you really are?"

The events in the US in 2008/2009 set the original thread in motion. I've had a connection to the 'actor' (actress) mentioned above since I was a toddler, and the second actor (actress above) since I was a young child. It is something that has probably taken that long to set up, as the implications are vast, at least for my exoself.

How does the world, or exoself, resolve the peace the endoself has found, in a way that is logical to the existing narrative?

What would it look like in, say, 5 or 10 years?

Last Edited by The Builder on 07/20/2022 12:53 PM

Sounds like things are gonna get a tad bit more interesting. Can’t wait to see what we will soon see!

Do you ever get tired of having to do it all yourself? Ever feel so lonely that it feels like you've physically been broken in half?

Though I'm not nearly as integral to all of this as you, I'm tired. So I can't even imagine what it might be like for you. But I'm tired. I've got no one. I should just give all this up. Who am I kidding.

It's just perspective unfolding in the mental 'blcokchain'. It doesn't really require much effort to mine new realities, so to speak.

For each, it is the same Self.

Anyone can do this, and much more.


I'd been used to feeling alone since I left school and started to teach myself and explore the city in which I lived by myself. But the more I understand the less alone I feel. It's the opposite feeling of being alone, I think.


Each is the same Self :) Nothing that exists has any more value or is more integral to the process of existing. From a perspective, however, some things help the process more than others.

There are two ways of thinking about it.

1) Divorced from your perspective. "What could I possibly do to change that-thing-over-there?", for example.

2) You are your perspective. "That thing over there is me. How does it make sense, all things considered? How could I change my perspective so that that-thing-over-there needs to be experienced differently, all things considered?"

It is easy to think that you've got no one if you limit your perspective. But being alone is irrelevant. There is only existing (or seeming to) and not. Just find something or make up a system to busy yourself and the feelings of being alone will disappear.

Last Edited by The Builder on 07/20/2022 08:29 PM

See #2 in my last post, above.

It wouldn't just change the way you see your house deed, of course. Your entire perspective would change. So, you'd have to figure out the narrative where that makes sense.


Is that what I meant? :)


It depends on the system the digital dollar is using. If gold can be produced from other things, for example, then it's possible that a certain CBDC could be more rare (in a system that has some kind of limit).

But I think the plan is for everyone to have their own CBDC, managed by a central bank. (Like an NFT for your person, business, school, thing, etc.)

What is the best way to change a narrative? I dont know how to change the gold paper narrative on the worlds stage so would I focus on my local narrative?

Buying a doormat to my perceived front door deed would that even make any changes if the doormat is stored in my current closet?




Buy something that is non real? What is not real to me? Are you telling me to buy paper gold, hehe jk. DLT? I cant detatch from solid gold so easily. I need cult dollars. Buy an expiring contract?

Buy a fantasy. Which fantasy is going to 10x? Can you use fantom in a sentence.

What can I buy that will be disappearing making it super 10x valuable? All hints welcomed. What passes with time and could be perceived as much more valuable? What decays and is potential worth a lot of monies.

What contains worldly wealth (as opposed to spiritual gains).

The long game with you builder is insane. By the time we all have our own CBDC ill age 10 years and you will age 10 minutes.

Metis oh favorable cult member as we all are, send me 19 btc, thx.

This fantom? [link to fantom.foundation (secure)]

Trying to wrap my head around the bold part.

Current conception

So far witnessing how you alter reality is that you take the current geometric shape, and then introduce different information within it that unveils a new reality.
The examples accrued - such as the guns for the missing thousand years, or the scrubbed photos of new world portraits vs old world portraits - to me these seem like new pieces of information that shift reality.

In this instance we're still going to introduce new pieces of information: the facts of the drama to unfold.
But the central change within comes from assuming it is already so, and one assumes it is already so from the bundle of facts which make up the drama. Dramas can be localized to memory or to reality depending on how much one is building.

I suppose this also occurred with the historical artifacts: by witnessing these artifacts and their new relations, the assumptions that are bound to them are thus already assumed! i.e. one can photosynthesize. Or history is wildly different, and thus more waits. Race is a mutable property, etc.
Something to that effect.

Formalizing the process

Just trying to formalize/map-out the process.
In short, one needs a context and assumptions inherited by going through the context.

For example, if one wanted to alter their sleep patterns, the narrative may be how - at least in my life - sleeping more after waking usually makes one more tired.
From this observation, one can introduce a context where sleeping does not have to be a rigid 8 hours.
Some reasons would be that: there are different categories of sleep; some take energy, others heal. The whole point of sleep is to feel rejuvenated: why is this not the case when "sleeping in"?
Then one goes through the drama built by sleeping less, and then inherits the assumptions of no longer needing as much sleep by discovering the desired time needed to sleep.

So I suppose a better formalization would be select assumptions (which'll be "filled in"), observe current reality, build off of current observations through experience and conjecture.

Attempt

Feel free to critique the attempt at all in any manner!

First one selects the assumptions, the "missing" parts that'll fill in: in this case, massive computing capabilities.

Then one needs to observe current logic structure within reality, otherwise there's no foundation for step 3.
Some observation needs to be pinpointed and built off of.
In the case of computing capabilities, one can note the complex actions the body takes everyday in a parallel processing manner: just how one types on a keyboard while thinking out the response. Riding a bike.
The amount of concurrent processing everyone does in their day to day life is taken for granted, but yet it is an implicit ability in all humans.
So we see that parallel processing is a potential reality.

The next step, from this tendril of logical reality, is to build off of it: what drama needs to unfold that maps it into a visceral effect, where one may have parallel/nonlinear thinking/thought processes?
You can link it to a piece of information already known: [link to en.wikipedia.org (secure)]
Immediately one sees how the eureka effect is parallel processing in reality.
One can "send" ideas to the brain and they are handled in a different thread, and then returned to you as sudden insight.

Thus the assumptions are fully assimilated: we all have parallel processing capabilities and can take advantage of them by thinking or reading a question and waiting for a response.
If that is where all computing power goes, and as it is "voiceless" one can naturally ask: what is the voice in my head? Interesting line of thought to follow.

How to link this to telepathy...? That seems more difficult to build. What is something that can appear like telepathy in the current logic structure?
Gut feeling is the first thing that comes to mind: sometimes you get a bad feeling about someone, or a good one. Why is this?
The current answer is that one is familiar with face signals and expressions. Yet there are instances where the "hair stands up on the neck" as someone passes you on the street, or enters a room without you looking at them.
How did one have a gut feeling without even looking at the person?
Immediately one could say electromagnetic fields around a person. We use frequencies all the time to communicate, verbal ones, sound ones: could telepathy just be electromagnetic frequencies instead? One would need to expand upon how to translate gut feelings into something more tangible, though.

The issues from harnessing telepathy would be no more privacy & dealing with the darker thoughts of those around you. I'm not sure if telepathy would be worth it.




Reminded of the significance of sacrifice, equivalent exchange.
Absence of things can naturally be conditions for new things.
Reminded of a character in Hunter X Hunter that uses Conditions to heighten their power; conditionals are an effective way to change reality.



Is sticking to that drama enough to feel alive?
I suppose it is, and it's effective: lots of emotions to process from being unable to express oneself.
So simpler dramas are more readily sustained until one can prove to the subconscious that there's a greater feeling of being alive from complex relationships, perhaps?



Thank you for sharing this information.

With regards to the Spanish or learning any language, an insight I had recently has to do with the parallel processing and will try to expand it on my own further, to keep this post short. Labeling things as "side-effects" is an effective point, thank you.

I fear I'll feel so stupid once I get around to "getting this." Which is maybe why I haven't. Which makes me feel more stupid than I probably would in the event of "getting it."

No, na, nope, no chance, hmm, maybe not.

Teehee.


There are enough storylines to go around :)

They're all yours in the big scheme of things, anyway.


It's funny how our perspective works to make things more or less relevant sometimes.

But, as you become allergic to peaches your frame of mind may become more rational in a specific way ;perhaps diet. (It's an old symbol of rationality.)


Not sure. But it sounds like what the Cult has been doing to describe the universe over the past few hundred years. Although that's more like deception than speculation.

Still stuck with this :c

Also, how's metaphy coming? Just curious c:

I assumed it had something to do with the visceral reaction I have always had towards physics as it is generally taught. I always avoided courses in school for unknown reasons (I am perfectly comfortable with math, so it is nothing like that). The pictures of the garden seem to represent another expression of the same unknown repellence. It’s as if the proportions are an affront to the golden ratio in some way that I was hoping to hear your insight into.

I assumed the peach allergy was a simple case of shopping for a certain car and suddenly seeing it everywhere but now I am curious to explore the relationship with rationality. My diet is already very rational as I see it - I don’t eat things that bother me and that is like 99% of foods. As a result my diet is also very irrational as it relates to the world I live in (I generally don’t eat anything in most restaurants and have to make weird requests to the chef/supplement with backup food I carry when eating with others).

I will try again to post something about my time travel
Adventure soon. I was just hoping that it might offer some helpful tips to those attempting it intentionally. Although, my biggest advantage was probably that I was NOT doing it intentionally. Kind of like how I couldn’t have a particular dream on command. But it did also seem to have a lot
to do with mapping things in my perspective in a certain way. There is one thing in particular in my life that I know used to be something ELSE and that fact seems to act as a kind of logic key for me. Essentially, the more things you can control to be in the same configuration as they were in a certain time/place (or recognize as their ‘past’ counterpart), thanks the easier it is to recognize that everything IS whatever time/place and the little leaps are easier the smaller the gap is.

Telepathy also came up and my one real success story there may have been the result of a (possible 3 month long?) logical bridge building project. Curious if the Builder’s 3 month cycle looked anything like mine. There was a process of exoself backstory buildup (random schizophrenic man takes up residence nearby). At the same time, my more local self happened to be reading a lot about the evolution, history and also pathology of language - kind of establishing the framework for rationalizing what would otherwise be called ‘telepathic’ communication. So the bridge was being built from both shores and eventually met in the middle, catalyzed be an incident that also drew in other kinds of supporting logic. Basically, no different from the way that anything ‘happens’.

Someone that I know who has been pushing FTM for the last few months would be very amused to get a bump from this thread if I could ever explain to them what this thread is without being institutionalized…

Re: the bold, pretty sure I have to "figure it out" before I can do it so I suppose I don't have to worry. I wouldn't mind waking up in the "past" without knowing how to apply the NooNeuroicons, but that'd be an accident. If I want to know how I'm doing it I gotta "get it."

Particularly with anons description above, I (think I) understand it in theory. Everything around me "now" is the same as it was "then," it just looks different. If I can sense the "old" (it is ofc new) configuration and interpret it that way I can then interact with it as if the "old" configuration were physical, making its physical expression more relative and, thus, experiencable.

The "problem" is, from what I see, you have to interact with the whole of what's around you as if the expression intended is already expressed, and that's difficult to do with mental "software" that's not neuronics. Not impossible because I essentially did it the "first time" I "did it" by sensing the furniture and room configuration that'd be around me in 2015, but obviously that wasn't enough because I wasn't able to "stay" (or do it again).

Software update in progress

[Emphasis mine] lol same with me. At the time I had no idea what my aversion to physics was (though it wasn't an active aversion, I was just pointedly disinterested), but looking back on it now, it just seems so complicated. Like, unnecessarily complicated. Even before I found these threads it seems I figured there was no reason to waste my time invested in those models.

I get this funny feeling, or reaction or sensation or something, to some things like that. I'm exposed to certain things and it's as if my mind and the [thing] are two objects with frictionless surfaces gliding against each other, and it's a sensation that tells me there's something else that'd better fit my needs (whatever those needs may be). I've felt it with physics, with the stock market, with computer programming languages, and with all of the "reality manipulation" spheres of inquiry I encountered on my way to these threads including religion, demonology, quantum mechanics, hermeticism, and the "law of attraction." They interest me at first, and then something says "nope, not what you're looking for" and then it's as if my mind can't get ahold of the structures.

LKing, a poster on the OG thread, likened this to resistance and compared it to people going from fad diet to fad diet in an effort to lose weight when the "real" solution ("diet and exercise") is the most obvious and is ignored. I can see how this could be the case, I'm not sure. It led me here, anyhow.

OP, what's the difference between Ec and Neuronics?

Edit: I understand the latter is a more "advanced" version of the former, but I guess I was wondering how they relate. Using the four "elements" in the Ec language makes sense to me, but I don't quite understand how those elements are reflected in Neuronics. I know that each of the four elements are chaos and order; possibility and interaction are chaos and symbol and logic are order. Is it like possibility is metaphysical chaos and interaction is physical chaos, and logic is metaphysical order and symbol is physical order?

I asked a while back about how the equation relates to the new Neuronics, and I am still curious about that but I understand if that's not where focus lies

Edit 2: I guess I mean "difference" in use. With the new neuronics, there are several notations that can be used depending on need and intent (care to expand on which notations are better for what things, by the by?) Is Ec more useful for some endeavors, or was it 100% just a stepping stone to neuronics

Last Edited by Sabai_ on 07/22/2022 04:16 PM