XJ Corps
04.16.2014
22:53 EST
-XJ
Wednesday, April 16, 2014
Monday, April 7, 2014
Thoughts: The Whole of Reality is the Cause and Effect of Its Creators
Thoughts: The Whole of Reality is the Cause and Effect of Its Creators
XJ Randall
04.07.2014
Sorry about my last post, wrote that kind of quickly. There were numerous spelling and word 'usages' that were out of place and also incorrect. I have read numerous doctrines and one thing I disagree with is when a person wants to make an argument, he or she wants to persuade you to do something, however the article he or she has written is full of spelling and grammar mistakes...! Yikes, that's not professional at all. If you are EVER trying to persuade someone, especially with "conspiracy" theories, and you want to be professional, at least one spelling mistake guarantees a stamped-on connotation for a paper equivalent to the word 'primitive', or almost ignorant, in effect. But enough about my opinion.
In order for an outsider of my reality to understand my explanation, it would fit that I begin by using terminology that is dependent upon a *timeline. This is the current widely accepted language to communicate with (nowadays). So that you get where I'm coming from, it is better to describe the nature of the idea's beginning.
*I will explain my idea for new language syntax at the end of the paper.
Suppose I was angry at the world. But what is anger or hatred for that mattter...? A robotic emotion...? Is it even an emotion at all, or is it the void of emotion...? In that case it could be robotic, because robots are incapable of emotion (we'll get to that point).
One could say that to be void of something required is to be a prisoner to its absence. The reason why I write this is because doing so is a better opportunity than what 'anger' offers. Someone, or something, made an offer I couldn't refuse. It knew that forcing me to stand down would reveal a better opportunity to correct the situation. As all 'king-philosophers' must know.
There is probably an arguable difference, but for INTENDED purposes, the word, "reality", is a term I loosely interchange with 'matrix'.
I once heard somewhere that only specific entities within this reality are capable of upholding it, keeping it from 'falling apart', or basically discombobulating. The memory of the exact structure is vague, but I got the gist of one article I was reading.
Now I have also heard that this reality's existence is not dependent upon 'special nodes', or what you might call 'drones', that have more ability, power, and / or responsibility to do so. Rather, it is dependent on laws that transcend all matrices: like 'global' variables or functions in programming terminology, the laws that exist outside of this reality could automatically be used within this matrix (or function). This differs from 'local' laws (local variables or nested functions) as they are incompatible to exit the stage, because they are built solely from the tools only accessible within this matrix (function). You might have heard the phrase, "As above, so below." This applies to this concept.
Now someone once told me that similar to computer files having an 'obsolete' date, like 'cells within a body that must die off', so too must the matrix. In this argument, I assume that this occurrs once the conditions to keep it alive are not met. But this theory addresses exactly what it is that keeps this matrix alive, or kept it alive for that matter, exactly who or what is capable of manipulating it, and it is the presence of entities I call "creators". This term is coined from my previous research and thoughts, and I am certainly not the first person that uses it.
There are at least 4 different types of entities that are classifiable by or from their manipulation capabilities for this matrix. The first type, or what some people call 'order', is the creator of this matrix himself (herself). This is what some beliefs term as 'God', 'the Supreme Ruler', 'the Grand Architect of the Universe' (Freemasonry), 'the Energizer', 'The Master Idea', 'Allah', etc., etc. The first level, or God, can do anything he (she) wants. It would be as simple as thinking it. The second type or level would be extensions of the original creator, or otherwise genuine copies of the creator. These entities are also called 'creators' as well. These are the only two types that can manipulate the matrix, and not surprisingly, the only two types that gaurentee its existence. The first two types are 'genuine', meaning they probably can exist outside of this matrix, just like the creator. The second type has intelligence and is aware of itself but also has emotion, something that might be correlated to its capability (this is arguable). The next two types are void of emotion, they are: 3.) Robots: intelligent functions that are (possibly) aware of themselves but are not capable of genuine emotion, and 4.) All other existence that probably materialized from some type of consciousness but is not aware of itself (or not intelligent).
Concerning this, I entertained a not so jolly idea. Because if most intelligence in this reality was not 'genuine' it is possible that I could be a robot myself. But how do we tell the difference...? There might be thoughts for that later. For now, let's make up a scenario where I am one of the few creators existent within this reality (I have heard they number the thousands (perhaps most people are creators...(?))). That would mean that everyone else who is not a creator and is also not 'God' is just a function, i.e. a robot. They behave as expected, as their function calls them to be, however it is not genuine.
Isn't that something to think about...? The robot is an intelligent entity oblivious to its incapacities but believes it has none. It might even think it is a creator, that it has emotions, however it does not. It acts like it is alive, thinks it is alive, talks like it is alive. However, it is not truly living. Thus, we move on to the point of this entire post: the idea that a robot's memories are not dependent upon 'time' but are dependent upon the entity that created them.
This means, in our 'timeline ideology', that the creator existed *before the memory, regardless of when he (she) appears, or even if he does not **appear at all.
*We say 'before' to fit in with our timeline terminology which states that there is a beginning to everything. Something must have caused the memory to exist, i.e. the creator. However, we could also argue that after ignoring time itself, 'before' could be interchanged with 'while'.
**Perhaps, a creator is oblivious that he (she) is a creator. In which case he wouldn't have a notion that he could manipulate reality and also he would have no idea that the reality he lives in is entirely constructed to foster his existence.
Now I will move on to explain why the above is an important (and interesting) thing to note, without using 'timeline' terminology. Based on the 'Master Idea', time does not exist. It states that 'The NOW' is the sole legitamacy of any sort of manipulation revolving around any concept of a superficial time. In my previous notes I stated the theory that, 'When you touch an atom in the present, you touch an atom in every position it has ever been in in the past and the future, all while in the present' (see earlier notes for theory). The revelation that we get here, is that in a timeline a robot would not have memories if at some point within the timeline the creator did not appear or exist. This means that all existence as we know it is here for and because of the creator. 'When you make a decision in the present, you make it in the past and the future'. The creator is the cause and effect of his (her) existence in the matrix. Notice how this compliments quantum theory.
As an analogy, say I am a creator (and this will only work if I am a creator) and I live in the suburbs of a large city called Chicago. One day I need to buy shoes. So I go to my nearest shoe store and pick up a pair of green and black hitops from Osiris (shoe maker). Do you think the shoes would have been there if at some point in the past no one thought there would be a demand for them...? My arguement is that, as a creator, if one were motivated to buy shoes in the present, it would send 'shockwaves' to the past (and consequently the future) to have them available at your nearest shoe store. The decision from a creator transcends time so that the cause made in the present creates the effect in the past*. Such are the capabilities of one who can manipulate reality.
*I hade an interesting thought based on this. More like, everything must be the cause of itself. More on this later...
So I am saying, the memories in a robot's mind are only there because creators exist to be the cause of them, regardless of time. This is like saying someone is loading contents of a cd onto a harddrive of a laptop. The laptop is a robotic entity, it has partial intelligence, and might even think it thinks, but its memories, the contents of the cd, exist outside of time, they are not dependent on the harddrive. So we get from this the philosophical thought that robots think they have a past dependent on their existence, but their past is but a memory that supports the existence of creators who caused them and are effected by them.
If there is a past, then there is a creator. A question we can answer for later is, do you think the past could be aware of itself, if the creator was not aware that he was a creator (expand on that later)...? Suppose the robots only knew they existed if the creator only knew if he existed. There is no recollection of the past, however, it exists in the NOW, for how would the reality that you see in front of you exist without it...? How would, 'How would', be the first two words of this sentence. How would you even be reading this at all...? This gets deeper, including the theory that 'reality is the sum manifestation of every creator's intent in this matrix (meaning there is a network)' (paraphrase).
But for now, the past is without reach to be experienced, but it can be directly manipulated through the NOW. Events 100 years ago could have been caused by the motive of a creator in the present. Are you a creator...? The reason why you are reading this is because you had a motive for it to be created, an intent, a decision. Although, I am the only person accountable for the experience of this draft being created.
Robots think they have a past, they think the past is dependent upon their seemingly uniquely contrived actions, but in reality, they are a function to foster the existence of the creator. It, reality, all was created at one time. The past to a robot could be inserted into his mind (hard drive) at the moment a creator becomes aware of himself (herself) and the reality around him, or the moment he enters this matrix (but he (she) has been here forever, for how would the matrix exist). It is arguable that the 'past could be aware of itself', even when a creator is not aware of himself.
Additional things I want to add, although it's probably not going to matter, is that the language we use today, its syntax, is structured in a way that causes barriers. We could be communicating in a more efficient matter by changing the way we deal with time in language. I just picked up a book dealing with "Semantics, Tense, and Time". Pretty sure I'll find some interesting stuff in there. More on that later.
-XJ
XJ Randall
04.07.2014
Sorry about my last post, wrote that kind of quickly. There were numerous spelling and word 'usages' that were out of place and also incorrect. I have read numerous doctrines and one thing I disagree with is when a person wants to make an argument, he or she wants to persuade you to do something, however the article he or she has written is full of spelling and grammar mistakes...! Yikes, that's not professional at all. If you are EVER trying to persuade someone, especially with "conspiracy" theories, and you want to be professional, at least one spelling mistake guarantees a stamped-on connotation for a paper equivalent to the word 'primitive', or almost ignorant, in effect. But enough about my opinion.
In order for an outsider of my reality to understand my explanation, it would fit that I begin by using terminology that is dependent upon a *timeline. This is the current widely accepted language to communicate with (nowadays). So that you get where I'm coming from, it is better to describe the nature of the idea's beginning.
*I will explain my idea for new language syntax at the end of the paper.
Suppose I was angry at the world. But what is anger or hatred for that mattter...? A robotic emotion...? Is it even an emotion at all, or is it the void of emotion...? In that case it could be robotic, because robots are incapable of emotion (we'll get to that point).
One could say that to be void of something required is to be a prisoner to its absence. The reason why I write this is because doing so is a better opportunity than what 'anger' offers. Someone, or something, made an offer I couldn't refuse. It knew that forcing me to stand down would reveal a better opportunity to correct the situation. As all 'king-philosophers' must know.
There is probably an arguable difference, but for INTENDED purposes, the word, "reality", is a term I loosely interchange with 'matrix'.
I once heard somewhere that only specific entities within this reality are capable of upholding it, keeping it from 'falling apart', or basically discombobulating. The memory of the exact structure is vague, but I got the gist of one article I was reading.
Now I have also heard that this reality's existence is not dependent upon 'special nodes', or what you might call 'drones', that have more ability, power, and / or responsibility to do so. Rather, it is dependent on laws that transcend all matrices: like 'global' variables or functions in programming terminology, the laws that exist outside of this reality could automatically be used within this matrix (or function). This differs from 'local' laws (local variables or nested functions) as they are incompatible to exit the stage, because they are built solely from the tools only accessible within this matrix (function). You might have heard the phrase, "As above, so below." This applies to this concept.
Now someone once told me that similar to computer files having an 'obsolete' date, like 'cells within a body that must die off', so too must the matrix. In this argument, I assume that this occurrs once the conditions to keep it alive are not met. But this theory addresses exactly what it is that keeps this matrix alive, or kept it alive for that matter, exactly who or what is capable of manipulating it, and it is the presence of entities I call "creators". This term is coined from my previous research and thoughts, and I am certainly not the first person that uses it.
There are at least 4 different types of entities that are classifiable by or from their manipulation capabilities for this matrix. The first type, or what some people call 'order', is the creator of this matrix himself (herself). This is what some beliefs term as 'God', 'the Supreme Ruler', 'the Grand Architect of the Universe' (Freemasonry), 'the Energizer', 'The Master Idea', 'Allah', etc., etc. The first level, or God, can do anything he (she) wants. It would be as simple as thinking it. The second type or level would be extensions of the original creator, or otherwise genuine copies of the creator. These entities are also called 'creators' as well. These are the only two types that can manipulate the matrix, and not surprisingly, the only two types that gaurentee its existence. The first two types are 'genuine', meaning they probably can exist outside of this matrix, just like the creator. The second type has intelligence and is aware of itself but also has emotion, something that might be correlated to its capability (this is arguable). The next two types are void of emotion, they are: 3.) Robots: intelligent functions that are (possibly) aware of themselves but are not capable of genuine emotion, and 4.) All other existence that probably materialized from some type of consciousness but is not aware of itself (or not intelligent).
Concerning this, I entertained a not so jolly idea. Because if most intelligence in this reality was not 'genuine' it is possible that I could be a robot myself. But how do we tell the difference...? There might be thoughts for that later. For now, let's make up a scenario where I am one of the few creators existent within this reality (I have heard they number the thousands (perhaps most people are creators...(?))). That would mean that everyone else who is not a creator and is also not 'God' is just a function, i.e. a robot. They behave as expected, as their function calls them to be, however it is not genuine.
Isn't that something to think about...? The robot is an intelligent entity oblivious to its incapacities but believes it has none. It might even think it is a creator, that it has emotions, however it does not. It acts like it is alive, thinks it is alive, talks like it is alive. However, it is not truly living. Thus, we move on to the point of this entire post: the idea that a robot's memories are not dependent upon 'time' but are dependent upon the entity that created them.
This means, in our 'timeline ideology', that the creator existed *before the memory, regardless of when he (she) appears, or even if he does not **appear at all.
*We say 'before' to fit in with our timeline terminology which states that there is a beginning to everything. Something must have caused the memory to exist, i.e. the creator. However, we could also argue that after ignoring time itself, 'before' could be interchanged with 'while'.
**Perhaps, a creator is oblivious that he (she) is a creator. In which case he wouldn't have a notion that he could manipulate reality and also he would have no idea that the reality he lives in is entirely constructed to foster his existence.
Now I will move on to explain why the above is an important (and interesting) thing to note, without using 'timeline' terminology. Based on the 'Master Idea', time does not exist. It states that 'The NOW' is the sole legitamacy of any sort of manipulation revolving around any concept of a superficial time. In my previous notes I stated the theory that, 'When you touch an atom in the present, you touch an atom in every position it has ever been in in the past and the future, all while in the present' (see earlier notes for theory). The revelation that we get here, is that in a timeline a robot would not have memories if at some point within the timeline the creator did not appear or exist. This means that all existence as we know it is here for and because of the creator. 'When you make a decision in the present, you make it in the past and the future'. The creator is the cause and effect of his (her) existence in the matrix. Notice how this compliments quantum theory.
As an analogy, say I am a creator (and this will only work if I am a creator) and I live in the suburbs of a large city called Chicago. One day I need to buy shoes. So I go to my nearest shoe store and pick up a pair of green and black hitops from Osiris (shoe maker). Do you think the shoes would have been there if at some point in the past no one thought there would be a demand for them...? My arguement is that, as a creator, if one were motivated to buy shoes in the present, it would send 'shockwaves' to the past (and consequently the future) to have them available at your nearest shoe store. The decision from a creator transcends time so that the cause made in the present creates the effect in the past*. Such are the capabilities of one who can manipulate reality.
*I hade an interesting thought based on this. More like, everything must be the cause of itself. More on this later...
So I am saying, the memories in a robot's mind are only there because creators exist to be the cause of them, regardless of time. This is like saying someone is loading contents of a cd onto a harddrive of a laptop. The laptop is a robotic entity, it has partial intelligence, and might even think it thinks, but its memories, the contents of the cd, exist outside of time, they are not dependent on the harddrive. So we get from this the philosophical thought that robots think they have a past dependent on their existence, but their past is but a memory that supports the existence of creators who caused them and are effected by them.
If there is a past, then there is a creator. A question we can answer for later is, do you think the past could be aware of itself, if the creator was not aware that he was a creator (expand on that later)...? Suppose the robots only knew they existed if the creator only knew if he existed. There is no recollection of the past, however, it exists in the NOW, for how would the reality that you see in front of you exist without it...? How would, 'How would', be the first two words of this sentence. How would you even be reading this at all...? This gets deeper, including the theory that 'reality is the sum manifestation of every creator's intent in this matrix (meaning there is a network)' (paraphrase).
But for now, the past is without reach to be experienced, but it can be directly manipulated through the NOW. Events 100 years ago could have been caused by the motive of a creator in the present. Are you a creator...? The reason why you are reading this is because you had a motive for it to be created, an intent, a decision. Although, I am the only person accountable for the experience of this draft being created.
Robots think they have a past, they think the past is dependent upon their seemingly uniquely contrived actions, but in reality, they are a function to foster the existence of the creator. It, reality, all was created at one time. The past to a robot could be inserted into his mind (hard drive) at the moment a creator becomes aware of himself (herself) and the reality around him, or the moment he enters this matrix (but he (she) has been here forever, for how would the matrix exist). It is arguable that the 'past could be aware of itself', even when a creator is not aware of himself.
Additional things I want to add, although it's probably not going to matter, is that the language we use today, its syntax, is structured in a way that causes barriers. We could be communicating in a more efficient matter by changing the way we deal with time in language. I just picked up a book dealing with "Semantics, Tense, and Time". Pretty sure I'll find some interesting stuff in there. More on that later.
-XJ
Sunday, April 6, 2014
Saturday, April 5, 2014
Tuesday, April 1, 2014
Theory: The Rent is Too Damn High... There is No Change.
Theory: The Rent is Too Damn High... There is No Change.
10jackofhearts (c) 2014 XJ Randall (Hall)
04.01.2014
It's time to update...!
Warning: This shit is bananas. Do not take this shit seriously: None of this is 'proven' true until I have created an application for it. Until then, this is mostly conjecture. By the way, it's copyrighted. Read at your own will, or read it and weep...!
-XJ
In the past 2 months, I have come up with numerous realizations, but am rather perturbed that I couldn't connect the dots to consummate a conclusion. I'm pretty sure this last set of thoughts leads to something big, but I'm not sure what...(?) Along with the goal of finding out where this specific idea leads me, I want an application that demonstrates the facile manipulation of reality as a consequence of the lack of time. Hopefully by the end of the year, we will find out (I'm sure we will)...
Hello, actors. This post is probably the longest I've written. Sorry, had a lot of shit to think about. If you'd like, skip to 'The Arm Analogy', to begin reading the awesome-ness.
Now on to the list of things which must be explained, for this post.
■ The Matrix of Perception.
■ The Analogy of the Glass Aquarium and Video Game Concept.
■ The Arm Analogy.
■ Interactions Are Emulations.
■ Walking Around a Tree and Applying Our Thoughts to Time.
■ What does this have to do with the problem of Gravity...?
And finally, the reason why we thought of all this,
■ Infinite Selves and the Trans-Dimensional Theory.
0.) The Rent is Too Damn High... There is No Change.
How did we come to this conclusion...? Well, for one I checked my pockets, and really, there was no change. But that's not the change I'm talking about, YOU KNOW IT. I'm talking about what humans generally refer to and define as a 'difference from before'. But don't be fooled, just because something is different, doesn't mean anything has changed at all. Here's why...:
1.) The Matrix of Perception.
Based on experience I can fairly say that there are realities outside of the reality that I am typing this post in that are certainly independent from my current perspective. How do I know this...? Well, for at least 3 years of my life I was made the laughing stock of a large group of people because of my personal habits, but the real reason was because I was a targeted individual. Now, you may not know many things about what they call, 'T.I.'s, but if not, it is reason why you should stop what you are doing right now and look it up on Google. To put it shortly, we all are T.I.s to a certain degree, but this argument does nothing for this post, so I will leave out the details and allow you to research the evidence yourself.
Moving on: After half a decade, now knowing that I was being watched and harassed constantly without even knowing that this was going on at the time, it is safe to say that there were realities outside of my own little 'Nobody' bubble that existed without me being aware of them existing. From this we jump the stepping stone and land on the conclusion and theory that perhaps, the realities that exist have always existed, therefore they don't change; the only thing that changes is the perception of the realities view-able from my finite 'camera', or 'spy glass', so to speak.
It is like a 'Matrix of Perception'. We have a matrix of 10 rows by 10 columns, and being a stupid human being hybrid, I only can see 1 cell / unit at a time. Now other people I have come in contact with can see more than me, but we won't get into that, because I am solely talking about my experiences that lead me to the conclusions (who else's would they be...?).
My perception only pertains to the window of the one cell. Within this one cell is a number: either a '1' or a '0'. I can't see any of the other cells, but most assuredly they exist, and so do the unchangeable numbers within them. Now for this theory we will concentrate only on the idea that there is no change, therefore if I moved my 'spy-glass' window to another cell, say 7 rows down and 7 columns right, the number would have been the same whether I was viewing it before or not, and NOW I am viewing it.
Such is the nature of realities present around us. We can only experience a reality if we have our 'spy-glass' window concentrated above the specific cell that contains it. The number within the cell never changes, the reality we perceive (observe and experience) was always there, only in or out of 'sight'.
2.) video Game Concept.
Now we move to the analogy of the Glass Aquarium which would make an interesting video game.
■ Synopsis.
In the past, Earth was once the breeding ground for numerous water species that were secluded to our own environment. But in the distant future, when hazardous human habits disadvantaged the fostering of these species, the inter-galactic federation stepped in to 'Noah's Ark' every single species of organism within the waters of earth and culminate them on a single 'green-house aquarium' set on a moon of mars.
■ The Glass Aquarium Analogy.
Say you are a 'Zookeeper' for the glass aquarium set on a moon of mars in the distant future. Your job is to take care of all the species of organisms in the water, but there is a dilemma. The water itself is in pristine condition, however it is not the water that isn't crystal clear, it is your ability to discern between the multidimensional organisms that inhabit it. In order to facilitate the care of all the species you must be able to see them, thus calling for a 'filter device' that switches the 'view-able vibrations' between the species' habitats.
■ Example.
The Zookeeper has his 'filter' device and is in the waters of the green-house aquarium. The Zookeeper switches to the 'Red' filter, to filter out the 'Red' frequencies within the water. A inner-dimensional species of jellyfish suddenly appears. Now the Zookeeper switches to the 'Blue' filter. A huge Octopus appears. Now the Zookeeper switches to the 'Green' filter. Oh look...! Some tourists in an underwater ship that looks like something Captain NEMO built. It's huge hull slowly drifts by.
■ Explanation.
Our realities are like the different vibrations of habitats (colors (or dies)) within the futuristic glass aquarium. Every reality conceivable is already outside of our finite perception(s). It is whether we turn our 'vibration' up enough on our 'devices' that allows us to perceive them. This is similar to light in a prism. A white light is one, until a filter, a prism, is used to differentiate and separate the frequencies within it. I am saying this is the same way realities work.
■ What accounts for a 'filter'...?
From this we ask, 'Well, how do I get myself a filter...?' I go back to my experience as a T.I. and I conclude that what really opened my eyes to the reality that was, and is probably still around me, is the knowledge of it. I was told. In other words, knowledge can be a Pandora's box for different filters. I am using the word 'knowledge' loosely.
3.) The Analogy of the Arm.
Now, moving on, I keep saying that there is no change. The matrix of numbers is the same all the time. In fact, there is no time (see previous posts). Thus, since there is no change, we assume that there is not movement as well.
Hold your arm up in the air for 2 seconds. Now put it back down. You might say that this is movement, however, it could not be movement if your arm was already held in the raised position before you raised it. Huh...? Did I just mindfuck you...?
That's right, it is not possible for there to be movement if an object is in every conceivable position possible before you put it there. In fact, you are not putting it there, it is already there since the beginning of time, you are only changing your perception to view it in that raised position.
Wow! Isn't that awesome. A different way to look at things. This means that you are everywhere possibly conceivable by the laws of your 'matrix' at one time, but your perception is what determines the position that you are currently observing. See the exit nearest you...? You are already there, in that doorway, but one more time, the position itself is independent of your perception, it is the perceived position that matters in observation. And this is why we tend to think there is change or 'movement' when there actually isn't (based on this theory).
4.) People Are Emulations.
Delving further into this realization, we come to questions that lead us to conclude that your interactions with people are mostly emulations.
One might be curious how each consciousness of each person interacts with every other consciousness in the network of consciousnesses, also called society (see Image Broadcasting Theory). Well, logic tells us that if you are in every possibly conceivable position based on the laws of your matrix, then so are they. And...? And this means that your interaction with another entity, whether it be an object or intelligent being, is you interacting with its position in the matrix, therefore it is possible that you are not interacting with the total consciousness of the object or entity itself, but the perceived consciousness in the specific position. Thus, interaction is an emulation.
This is similar to you using Google search engine: the code for the html page is static, but is everywhere on the web at one time. Many people use Google, however the 'position' it is in, each person's search query, is unique to their specific usage and perception.
Hey that is something to think about. The next time you talk to someone, remember, based on the (my) NO CHANGE theory, you are talking to the 'perceived' position of that person. However, what that intelligence or consciousness perceives, itself, could be something entirely non-related to your experiences.
5.) Walking Around A Tree And Applying Our Thoughts To Time.
Are you near a window...? If you are, look outside. Anything noticeable...? Probably some trees and the sky, maybe if you are in the city some skyscrapers. Find the tallest thing in site. For intensive purposes, let's say it is a tree. You can choose to perceive the tree near you (if you walked up next to it) or farther away (in your current position). The question that arises, if there is no change, no movement, then how am I 'moving' up to this tree and back again...? How is it even possible for anything to move...? Things like the Sun, the rotation of the planets, birds in the air... What accounts for this observable difference...?
■ Remember Memory.
When answering this question, the most important thing to remember is that memory decides what we popularly define as 'moving'/automated or not. But what is memory...? There has to be movement if there is a difference, and there is definitely a difference because I remember it, RIGHT...?
I'm not going to delve into it deeply, you can look up the post on Wednesday, August 21, 2013, "Thoughts: All Noise is a Memory, An Extension of YOU", to understand what I say when I say that everything sensible in your reality (mine) is a memory, but more importantly an extension of you. Yes, you are a memory of yourself (myself). You can also look at my more current previous notes, to get a gist of my personal 'memory' concept analogy.
Your consciousness, or otherwise 'memory mechanism', is you being more aware of yourself at one time, in any altering position, in the NOW. We just said above that your interactions with people, based on this entire thread, are most probably emulations (if you think about it like that). That means that, likewise, YOU, as a consciousness, are also spread apart into infinite degrees of positions based on the probability and/or possibility of those positions defined by the laws of your matrix. You are everywhere possibly conceivable...! So, when you walk across the ground, you are not 'moving', you are becoming more aware of YOURSELF (ME) in those positions, once again, dictated by the possibility based on the laws of your matrix.
Now, that is something to think about. But it also leads to believe that there still is change, for how else would I be able to decide that I want to become aware of one position of myself more than an other....?
From this we are lead to a conjecture that there must be 'Free-Will', however it is severely limited compared to the popular definition of what we assume it to be. This consideration, I will go into at a later time. But for now, the gist for this point is that there is no change, but there is 'Free-Will' (however disabled) to become more or less aware of that which never changes.
■ Applying These Thoughts to Time.
Now, I just said, based on these notes solely, that we have the Free-Will to perceive/become more aware of that which never changes. From this, one might ask how it is explainable that objects like the sun follow a daily pattern...? Logic says that if I am choosing to be aware of the sun in its differing positions, then we must conclude that the pattern of the sun must come from within me.
In other words, if I did not choose to be aware of that which never changes, it would never, by popular definition, 'change'. Yes, that is correct. But the most surprising idea we get from this is that the observation of 'time' (or lack thereof) is somehow tied into ourselves as a sort of personal characteristic or 'biological property', such like DNA. Therefore, based on theory, there would be differing accounts on how 'fast' or 'slow' time is perceived to be.
In my previous notes I also said that our DNA is like a language, and all languages exist because they are conditioned to exist. Can you read...? Because you were conditioned to read.
To answer the question asked, based on these notes solely, we loosely conclude that patterns, such as objects like the sun 'moving across the sky', are woven into each person's DNA as a consequence of a conditioning process. The sun is not 'moving' across the sky; You are more aware of the properties that successfully brought you into and foster your existence. Consequently, the latter is a mutually shared circumstance between you and any 'language' (see Sunday, January 26, 2014).
6.) What does any of this have to do with Gravity...?
Good question. Before I answer, I have research to do. Up until recently, I was never aware that there was a problem to begin with, but apparently it has to do with the popular definition of Gravity being promoted by current 'scientifics', which might I add, is moot compared to the equally formidable differing alternatives. Most specifically, Nikola Tesla's jettison of Einstein's theory of relativity holds superlative value as Tesla was purported to have 'drafted an anti-gravity machine capable of traveling thousands of miles across the Universe in a matter of seconds' (paraphrase).
7.) Infinite Selves and the Trans-Dimensional Theory.
Finally. Here are some of my previous notes that lead up to this post.
Notes
03.04.2014
19:32 EST
"...therefore it is possible to affect other Universes within the matrix of the Master Idea, specifically if consciousnesses are not limited to a single self: meaning, as humans, we are aware of one self at a time, however while we are limited (because of our nature) we could have up to an infinite number of selves existing behind the veil of awareness."
This post proves this to be true. Next,
"Consciousnesses have a "pull"/weight (a density) so that in a perceived reality the language that is interpreted reacts to the consciousness itself. Not only that, but the "pull" of the consciousness transcends all time and (DIMENSIONS)."
"The Mind of God is a "nothingness viewed": While something can be seen, the energy that makes it visible subtracts from that things overall ENERGY-POTENTIAL. I.E. Something that cannot be seen or felt with any of our senses has the most potential to become anything possible."
"The Universe is like a 'potential-matrix'. It is infinite. When 'The Mind of GOD' wants to create something, it goes to an empty 'cell' within the matrix."
Basically, to lump this all together, (you can get the gist from one of my previous illustrations, "Thoughts: 2 Different Ways To Visualize A One 'Core'"), the Matrix inside of God's Mind (or the Master Idea) is infinitely filled with empty cells, similar to the number of points on the surface of a sphere. Now, visualize, and suppose each one of these 'cells' was hexagonal or triangular in shape so that it would be like a vacuole to hold 'something'. A Universe, perhaps. And imagine that every point on the infinite plane of the sphere is equally shaped. These empty cells have the most potential to have separate Universes be created within them. The important thing to realize is that every single one of the infinite points (vacuoles) on the surface of the sphere all lead back to the core; they all are part of the 'ONE-NESS'. It is like an umbilical cord for every cell, and the operator, the core itself, connects a Universe in every filled cell to every Universe in each cell it is not. Thus, we conclude that consciousnesses within one Universe can be warped by root, through the core to every other infinitely possible universes.
We also get from this that, since there is no time (only the NOW), any esoteric technology that is vastly superior to our own could not have come from this cell on the grid, but even if it were from the future on the same 'timeline' correlated to a specific cell, the future itself would have to be a separate cell. This idea is just a different way to describe dimensions (or traveling through them), visually on a 3D scale.
...
I once had a dream that I was Prometheus. Please, wake me up.
More soon . . ...
-XJ
10jackofhearts (c) 2014 XJ Randall (Hall)
04.01.2014
It's time to update...!
Warning: This shit is bananas. Do not take this shit seriously: None of this is 'proven' true until I have created an application for it. Until then, this is mostly conjecture. By the way, it's copyrighted. Read at your own will, or read it and weep...!
-XJ
In the past 2 months, I have come up with numerous realizations, but am rather perturbed that I couldn't connect the dots to consummate a conclusion. I'm pretty sure this last set of thoughts leads to something big, but I'm not sure what...(?) Along with the goal of finding out where this specific idea leads me, I want an application that demonstrates the facile manipulation of reality as a consequence of the lack of time. Hopefully by the end of the year, we will find out (I'm sure we will)...
Hello, actors. This post is probably the longest I've written. Sorry, had a lot of shit to think about. If you'd like, skip to 'The Arm Analogy', to begin reading the awesome-ness.
Now on to the list of things which must be explained, for this post.
■ The Matrix of Perception.
■ The Analogy of the Glass Aquarium and Video Game Concept.
■ The Arm Analogy.
■ Interactions Are Emulations.
■ Walking Around a Tree and Applying Our Thoughts to Time.
■ What does this have to do with the problem of Gravity...?
And finally, the reason why we thought of all this,
■ Infinite Selves and the Trans-Dimensional Theory.
0.) The Rent is Too Damn High... There is No Change.
How did we come to this conclusion...? Well, for one I checked my pockets, and really, there was no change. But that's not the change I'm talking about, YOU KNOW IT. I'm talking about what humans generally refer to and define as a 'difference from before'. But don't be fooled, just because something is different, doesn't mean anything has changed at all. Here's why...:
1.) The Matrix of Perception.
Based on experience I can fairly say that there are realities outside of the reality that I am typing this post in that are certainly independent from my current perspective. How do I know this...? Well, for at least 3 years of my life I was made the laughing stock of a large group of people because of my personal habits, but the real reason was because I was a targeted individual. Now, you may not know many things about what they call, 'T.I.'s, but if not, it is reason why you should stop what you are doing right now and look it up on Google. To put it shortly, we all are T.I.s to a certain degree, but this argument does nothing for this post, so I will leave out the details and allow you to research the evidence yourself.
Moving on: After half a decade, now knowing that I was being watched and harassed constantly without even knowing that this was going on at the time, it is safe to say that there were realities outside of my own little 'Nobody' bubble that existed without me being aware of them existing. From this we jump the stepping stone and land on the conclusion and theory that perhaps, the realities that exist have always existed, therefore they don't change; the only thing that changes is the perception of the realities view-able from my finite 'camera', or 'spy glass', so to speak.
It is like a 'Matrix of Perception'. We have a matrix of 10 rows by 10 columns, and being a stupid human being hybrid, I only can see 1 cell / unit at a time. Now other people I have come in contact with can see more than me, but we won't get into that, because I am solely talking about my experiences that lead me to the conclusions (who else's would they be...?).
My perception only pertains to the window of the one cell. Within this one cell is a number: either a '1' or a '0'. I can't see any of the other cells, but most assuredly they exist, and so do the unchangeable numbers within them. Now for this theory we will concentrate only on the idea that there is no change, therefore if I moved my 'spy-glass' window to another cell, say 7 rows down and 7 columns right, the number would have been the same whether I was viewing it before or not, and NOW I am viewing it.
Such is the nature of realities present around us. We can only experience a reality if we have our 'spy-glass' window concentrated above the specific cell that contains it. The number within the cell never changes, the reality we perceive (observe and experience) was always there, only in or out of 'sight'.
2.) video Game Concept.
Now we move to the analogy of the Glass Aquarium which would make an interesting video game.
■ Synopsis.
In the past, Earth was once the breeding ground for numerous water species that were secluded to our own environment. But in the distant future, when hazardous human habits disadvantaged the fostering of these species, the inter-galactic federation stepped in to 'Noah's Ark' every single species of organism within the waters of earth and culminate them on a single 'green-house aquarium' set on a moon of mars.
■ The Glass Aquarium Analogy.
Say you are a 'Zookeeper' for the glass aquarium set on a moon of mars in the distant future. Your job is to take care of all the species of organisms in the water, but there is a dilemma. The water itself is in pristine condition, however it is not the water that isn't crystal clear, it is your ability to discern between the multidimensional organisms that inhabit it. In order to facilitate the care of all the species you must be able to see them, thus calling for a 'filter device' that switches the 'view-able vibrations' between the species' habitats.
■ Example.
The Zookeeper has his 'filter' device and is in the waters of the green-house aquarium. The Zookeeper switches to the 'Red' filter, to filter out the 'Red' frequencies within the water. A inner-dimensional species of jellyfish suddenly appears. Now the Zookeeper switches to the 'Blue' filter. A huge Octopus appears. Now the Zookeeper switches to the 'Green' filter. Oh look...! Some tourists in an underwater ship that looks like something Captain NEMO built. It's huge hull slowly drifts by.
■ Explanation.
Our realities are like the different vibrations of habitats (colors (or dies)) within the futuristic glass aquarium. Every reality conceivable is already outside of our finite perception(s). It is whether we turn our 'vibration' up enough on our 'devices' that allows us to perceive them. This is similar to light in a prism. A white light is one, until a filter, a prism, is used to differentiate and separate the frequencies within it. I am saying this is the same way realities work.
■ What accounts for a 'filter'...?
From this we ask, 'Well, how do I get myself a filter...?' I go back to my experience as a T.I. and I conclude that what really opened my eyes to the reality that was, and is probably still around me, is the knowledge of it. I was told. In other words, knowledge can be a Pandora's box for different filters. I am using the word 'knowledge' loosely.
3.) The Analogy of the Arm.
Now, moving on, I keep saying that there is no change. The matrix of numbers is the same all the time. In fact, there is no time (see previous posts). Thus, since there is no change, we assume that there is not movement as well.
Hold your arm up in the air for 2 seconds. Now put it back down. You might say that this is movement, however, it could not be movement if your arm was already held in the raised position before you raised it. Huh...? Did I just mindfuck you...?
That's right, it is not possible for there to be movement if an object is in every conceivable position possible before you put it there. In fact, you are not putting it there, it is already there since the beginning of time, you are only changing your perception to view it in that raised position.
Wow! Isn't that awesome. A different way to look at things. This means that you are everywhere possibly conceivable by the laws of your 'matrix' at one time, but your perception is what determines the position that you are currently observing. See the exit nearest you...? You are already there, in that doorway, but one more time, the position itself is independent of your perception, it is the perceived position that matters in observation. And this is why we tend to think there is change or 'movement' when there actually isn't (based on this theory).
4.) People Are Emulations.
Delving further into this realization, we come to questions that lead us to conclude that your interactions with people are mostly emulations.
One might be curious how each consciousness of each person interacts with every other consciousness in the network of consciousnesses, also called society (see Image Broadcasting Theory). Well, logic tells us that if you are in every possibly conceivable position based on the laws of your matrix, then so are they. And...? And this means that your interaction with another entity, whether it be an object or intelligent being, is you interacting with its position in the matrix, therefore it is possible that you are not interacting with the total consciousness of the object or entity itself, but the perceived consciousness in the specific position. Thus, interaction is an emulation.
This is similar to you using Google search engine: the code for the html page is static, but is everywhere on the web at one time. Many people use Google, however the 'position' it is in, each person's search query, is unique to their specific usage and perception.
Hey that is something to think about. The next time you talk to someone, remember, based on the (my) NO CHANGE theory, you are talking to the 'perceived' position of that person. However, what that intelligence or consciousness perceives, itself, could be something entirely non-related to your experiences.
5.) Walking Around A Tree And Applying Our Thoughts To Time.
Are you near a window...? If you are, look outside. Anything noticeable...? Probably some trees and the sky, maybe if you are in the city some skyscrapers. Find the tallest thing in site. For intensive purposes, let's say it is a tree. You can choose to perceive the tree near you (if you walked up next to it) or farther away (in your current position). The question that arises, if there is no change, no movement, then how am I 'moving' up to this tree and back again...? How is it even possible for anything to move...? Things like the Sun, the rotation of the planets, birds in the air... What accounts for this observable difference...?
■ Remember Memory.
When answering this question, the most important thing to remember is that memory decides what we popularly define as 'moving'/automated or not. But what is memory...? There has to be movement if there is a difference, and there is definitely a difference because I remember it, RIGHT...?
I'm not going to delve into it deeply, you can look up the post on Wednesday, August 21, 2013, "Thoughts: All Noise is a Memory, An Extension of YOU", to understand what I say when I say that everything sensible in your reality (mine) is a memory, but more importantly an extension of you. Yes, you are a memory of yourself (myself). You can also look at my more current previous notes, to get a gist of my personal 'memory' concept analogy.
Your consciousness, or otherwise 'memory mechanism', is you being more aware of yourself at one time, in any altering position, in the NOW. We just said above that your interactions with people, based on this entire thread, are most probably emulations (if you think about it like that). That means that, likewise, YOU, as a consciousness, are also spread apart into infinite degrees of positions based on the probability and/or possibility of those positions defined by the laws of your matrix. You are everywhere possibly conceivable...! So, when you walk across the ground, you are not 'moving', you are becoming more aware of YOURSELF (ME) in those positions, once again, dictated by the possibility based on the laws of your matrix.
Now, that is something to think about. But it also leads to believe that there still is change, for how else would I be able to decide that I want to become aware of one position of myself more than an other....?
From this we are lead to a conjecture that there must be 'Free-Will', however it is severely limited compared to the popular definition of what we assume it to be. This consideration, I will go into at a later time. But for now, the gist for this point is that there is no change, but there is 'Free-Will' (however disabled) to become more or less aware of that which never changes.
■ Applying These Thoughts to Time.
Now, I just said, based on these notes solely, that we have the Free-Will to perceive/become more aware of that which never changes. From this, one might ask how it is explainable that objects like the sun follow a daily pattern...? Logic says that if I am choosing to be aware of the sun in its differing positions, then we must conclude that the pattern of the sun must come from within me.
In other words, if I did not choose to be aware of that which never changes, it would never, by popular definition, 'change'. Yes, that is correct. But the most surprising idea we get from this is that the observation of 'time' (or lack thereof) is somehow tied into ourselves as a sort of personal characteristic or 'biological property', such like DNA. Therefore, based on theory, there would be differing accounts on how 'fast' or 'slow' time is perceived to be.
In my previous notes I also said that our DNA is like a language, and all languages exist because they are conditioned to exist. Can you read...? Because you were conditioned to read.
To answer the question asked, based on these notes solely, we loosely conclude that patterns, such as objects like the sun 'moving across the sky', are woven into each person's DNA as a consequence of a conditioning process. The sun is not 'moving' across the sky; You are more aware of the properties that successfully brought you into and foster your existence. Consequently, the latter is a mutually shared circumstance between you and any 'language' (see Sunday, January 26, 2014).
6.) What does any of this have to do with Gravity...?
Good question. Before I answer, I have research to do. Up until recently, I was never aware that there was a problem to begin with, but apparently it has to do with the popular definition of Gravity being promoted by current 'scientifics', which might I add, is moot compared to the equally formidable differing alternatives. Most specifically, Nikola Tesla's jettison of Einstein's theory of relativity holds superlative value as Tesla was purported to have 'drafted an anti-gravity machine capable of traveling thousands of miles across the Universe in a matter of seconds' (paraphrase).
7.) Infinite Selves and the Trans-Dimensional Theory.
Finally. Here are some of my previous notes that lead up to this post.
Notes
03.04.2014
19:32 EST
"...therefore it is possible to affect other Universes within the matrix of the Master Idea, specifically if consciousnesses are not limited to a single self: meaning, as humans, we are aware of one self at a time, however while we are limited (because of our nature) we could have up to an infinite number of selves existing behind the veil of awareness."
This post proves this to be true. Next,
"Consciousnesses have a "pull"/weight (a density) so that in a perceived reality the language that is interpreted reacts to the consciousness itself. Not only that, but the "pull" of the consciousness transcends all time and (DIMENSIONS)."
"The Mind of God is a "nothingness viewed": While something can be seen, the energy that makes it visible subtracts from that things overall ENERGY-POTENTIAL. I.E. Something that cannot be seen or felt with any of our senses has the most potential to become anything possible."
"The Universe is like a 'potential-matrix'. It is infinite. When 'The Mind of GOD' wants to create something, it goes to an empty 'cell' within the matrix."
Basically, to lump this all together, (you can get the gist from one of my previous illustrations, "Thoughts: 2 Different Ways To Visualize A One 'Core'"), the Matrix inside of God's Mind (or the Master Idea) is infinitely filled with empty cells, similar to the number of points on the surface of a sphere. Now, visualize, and suppose each one of these 'cells' was hexagonal or triangular in shape so that it would be like a vacuole to hold 'something'. A Universe, perhaps. And imagine that every point on the infinite plane of the sphere is equally shaped. These empty cells have the most potential to have separate Universes be created within them. The important thing to realize is that every single one of the infinite points (vacuoles) on the surface of the sphere all lead back to the core; they all are part of the 'ONE-NESS'. It is like an umbilical cord for every cell, and the operator, the core itself, connects a Universe in every filled cell to every Universe in each cell it is not. Thus, we conclude that consciousnesses within one Universe can be warped by root, through the core to every other infinitely possible universes.
We also get from this that, since there is no time (only the NOW), any esoteric technology that is vastly superior to our own could not have come from this cell on the grid, but even if it were from the future on the same 'timeline' correlated to a specific cell, the future itself would have to be a separate cell. This idea is just a different way to describe dimensions (or traveling through them), visually on a 3D scale.
...
I once had a dream that I was Prometheus. Please, wake me up.
More soon . . ...
-XJ
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)