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

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.


No comments:

Post a Comment