ADORE720

PHILOSOPHIC vs SCIENTIFIC

If the statement 'Daisies exist' is a scientific statement which is
subject to proof and verification, then so is the statement 'The
physical universe exists.'

There is no topological different between them.

Daisies are merely a subset of the physical universe.

Thus it doesn't matter if one asserts that daisies exist, or
planets exist, or stars, or galaxies, or spacetime, or the PU itself,
they are all simply existential assertions that are open to verification
by demonstrating the existence of at least one such instance of any of
them.

If there is a daisy, show me one.

If there is a physical universe, show me one.

DEMONSTRATING the existence of a daisy inside the PU, is no
different than DEMONSTRATING the existence of the entire shebang.

Show me one, and it's done.

Notice that if you can show me a daisy, you HAVE shown me a
physical universe, by definition of a daisy being a subset of the PU.

Notice also that it is not sufficient to show me a PICTURE or a
conscious experience of one to prove it exists I need to see one
directly, otherwise it remains forever a theory.

There in lies the rub, because if all I can see are pictures of
things, or conscious renditions of them, and I can never see the thing
itself directly, then I can never have the proof I seek that the thing
in question actually exists. All I have proof of is the existence of
the pictures and conscious renditions!

The existence of the messenger never proves the existence of the
King, even if the message the messenger brings from the King is "I-AM!".

The existence of the object in question remains a theory, supported
but never prooven by the evidence of pictures and conscious renditions,
which are at best messengers.

One can argue, yes but why would there be a royal messenger if
there weren't a King to send him, but we will leave that kind of
argument to the mentally broken.

Existence of the symbol does not prove existence of the referent.

You can never learn with perfect certainty about A by looking at B.

It's kind of silly to even try.

Now some will claim that science only applies to the existence of
those things IN the physical universe, not to the physical universe as a
whole.

They would claim that the assertion that the physical universe
exists, is a philosophical position and not a scientific one.

That's ok by me, but I don't see the necessity to the complexity.

If the existence of the entire physical universe is not in the
realm of science, then what realm is it in? Science is supposed to give
us truth, the actual truth and nothing but the truth. What good is
getting the truth about an arena of activity, if the very existence of
that arena itself is in scientific question or worse scientific
irrelevancy?

By claiming that only those things in the physical universe are
objects of valid scientific study, science removes itself from the
bigger truths of the AllThatIs, that may also surrender to the exact
same methods science uses in the physical universe.

OBSERVE, THEORIZE, PREDICT, EXPERIMENT, OBSERVE.

To say that this activity in the physical universe is sound
science, but the exact same activity in the conscious universe is not,
is lunacy.

Someone is trying to DEFINE the conscious universe out of
existence, because somehow 'only science gives us the truth' and 'only
the physical universe is a valid arena for scientific study.'

If you fall for that one, you must have wanted it and paid for it,
and so it serves you right.

ACTUAL vs VIRTUAL

If the physical universe is a virtual universe, a dream or co
hallucination in the mind of God and many dreamers, then it is obvious
that experiments within the virtual universe, may never be able to
detect the actual universe that is virtualizing it.

And if something can be learned about the actual universe from
studying one of its virtualizations, then it is possible the actual
universe wanted it to be so and built in those abilities into the
virtual universe.

But then again, maybe not, it depends entirely on the motivations
and abilities of the creator universe what it puts into the created
universe.

Things inside the virtual universe are virtual actualities, while
the virtual universe as a whole is an actual virtuality.

In this sense one might be able to say that discovering knowledge
about things inside the virtual physical universe is some how different
than discovering things ABOUT the actual virtualizing of the physical
universe in the first place.

Those are two different arenas for sure.

But the METHODS of science remain the same, because LOGIC remains
the same, and IS is IS remains the same, and ALL, SOME and NONE remain
the same and thus verifiability and falsifiability remain the same.

Whatever you say about ANYTHING from rock to God is either an
existential statement like 'Some thing exists', or a universal statement
like 'All things are such and so'.

Thus any existential statement is verifiable via instantiation,
presenting those interested with an actual direct instance of the
statement.

"Daisies exist", well here's a daisy.

And just so, any universal statement is falsifiable via counter
instantiation, presenting those interested with a direct countering
instance of the statement.

"All daisies are white", well here's a black daisy.

Inside the virtual universe one is limited to virtual tools to
discover virtual rules, and virtual phenomenon and their apparent
relations to each other.

Outside the virtual universe, one must use actual tools to discover
actual rules, and actual phenomenon and their actual relations.

One admits that the outside universe may have created a virtual
book inside the virtual universe which contains a detained description
of the outside universe, but really in general no virtual tool inside
the virtual universe will ever be able to sense or report anything
actual about the actual universe that is virtualizing it.

Thus there is a science on how to make daisies inside the virtual
universe, and there is a science on how to make virtual universes inside
the actual universe.

The science INSIDE a virtual universe is merely a virtualization of
the science OUTSIDE the virtual universe!

Thus science in the actual universe existed first before it could
be virtualized into the virtual universe.

Thus if science exists in the realm of Mammon, science must also
exist in the realm of God.

Thus the scientific method remains the same whether one is in a
dream or not, whether one studies things in the dream using dream tools,
or studies the dream itself using actual tools, namely consciousness.

Homer

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sat Feb 13 22:55:27 EST 2010
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

ADORE533 (fwd)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

BUGS AND BABES

Heidrun Beer (hBeer@sgmt.at) wrote:
>Now as soon as I can tune in to whatever "focus level"
>I want to see, I will have a better basis for deciding what
>and what not to perceive at any given time.

OK, well from a self confessed idiot savant who has never run a
process to F/N, I would indicate that you are underjudging the enormity
of what you wish to perceive. Thus you seek to see something that isn't
there, too small in conception.

>I want to talk to my people, and when my body is asleep,
>I want to be able to utilize the time by going to other
>places, looking at things and inspecting what has been
>created. I agree with your "need to know" concept, but it
>really should be me who makes the decision what I need
>to know!

Well I 'talk' to 12 year old babes every other night, but I gotta
talk to the bugs every other night!

As long as I do well with the bugs, and the snakes, and the
parasites, and the black cooties from hell, and the bees in my ears and
nose, and spiders coming out of my eyes, and the snakes out of my dick,
the next night, wham, there is nothing better than soft young titty
especially if it ain't ARCX with being a girl yet.

>For instance - I have the google search engine and I am
>perfectly happy to not-know the majority of its entries.
>I don't need to know anything about Britney Spears or
>Prince William or how to build a dirty bomb. But I would
>be upset if I put in my search words and it didn't work
>for me but tell me "you don't need to know that". I must
>be the one who decides!

Carol is saying perhaps you have decided that as long as you
underestimate what you wish for, you won't get it, as you don't have a
need to know what ain't there.

For me, I bitch about the Black V thingy, then my vision starts to
turn on, and I say, "Oh Right, ok, that's enough, I just love that black
V..."

That turns Black V back into a solution again rather than a
problem.

Inabilities as problems are lower toned than inabilities as
solutions.

So any inability that is a problem needs to be audited back up to
inability as a solution, then you can open the door by pushing it
gently closed any time you wish.

Homer

Sun Jul 8 22:50:46 EDT 2007

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Sep 26 03:06:02 EDT 2013
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore533.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFSQ9zaURT1lqxE3HERAqcgAJ9Y0TET7mn9tmL4mO2mZ1cK7KyBRACff/jk
lIjQUJmp8tg4Ef274+K/M+U=
=Vi/z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

ADORE931

FUNCTION AND STRUCTURE

> What I wonder about that I hope you can shed light on is:
>
> The original "Dianetics" that I read had no e-meter involved, but rather
> an elaborate means of "Reverie" using the file clerk, etc... This
> method of auditing made a lot of sense to me and even though it claimed
> it was not Hypnosis and explained the differences, it all made sense to
> me. Then enter the e-meter and sitting at a table...
>
> I have a bit of trouble understanding how this is the same process with
> the same results achieved. I do understand what the e-meter measures
> and how easily troubles can be identified, but it seems very different.
> I cannot see how access to the file clerk is made, anymore.
>
> Please help me see what evades me on this matter, if you would not mind
> and have the time.

Structure monitors function.

That means for every observable function or action of something,
there must be some underlying 'structure' to account for it.

That structure may be some space time gizmo, machine, or system of
parts interacting via cause and effect across a space time distance, or
it may be some zero dimensional scalar operating actuality such as
consciousness.

The problem with any scientific investigation of function is that
the function is observable but the structure often is not, or is
completely unknown at the time of first discovery.

Thus one builds THEORETICAL models to account for the observed
function. The models constructed are fantasy but may then lead to
predictable outcomes of new functions that allow one for example to do
things with the original function not otherwise obvious.

In clearing we have anatomy and approach.

Anatomy is a theoretic model for how and why the preclear is
aberrated. From this model we can then possibly surmise an approach to
clear the aberrations.

If you know 'why or how' something is broke, you can often figure
out how to fix it, or at least prevent it in the future.

The approach works until it doesn't work, or some new approach is
found accidentally at which point the model is changed to accommodate
the new approach. Or maybe the model is upgraded first and a new
approach derived from it.

At some point during 1952 Hubbard wrote Advanced Procedure and
Axioms wherein he reported that the preclear is aberrating himself via a
computation, known as the service facsimile computation.

Thus the preclear is holding to himself everything that he is
suffering from and no longer knows it.

The service fac computation involves injustice, blame, guilt and
refusal to 'put it there' or take responsibility for all sides of the
conflict.

Early approach, 1950's, was to get the preclear to look at WHAT he
was holding in place, modeled on the theoretical time track recordings
of pain and unconsciousness, and later approach became to get the
preclear to look at WHY he as holding all this stuff in place, at which
point WHAT the exact nature of the time track was became moot.

Some kind of theoretical model of a time track has continued
through the history of auditing to modern time, the heavy facsimiles
called engrams, the secondaries of death, departure and reversal, and
the locks that restimulate them are all part of present day 'anatomy'
and they are all theoretical but work well if used with understanding.

Basic understanding is that emotion is unencysted through full
feeling of the incident over and over again, and then doing the same to
earlier similar incidents where were not run at the time they happened,
back to basic on the chain where the basic postulates of question
asking, irresponsibility and failure to 'put it there' lie.

Fully running out the death of a loved one, or the impending death
of everyone you love, produces nothing less than a miracle of spiritual
case gain as the whole idea of loss and unique preciousness is
rearranged. It isn't possible to do this and remain a meatball.

Running repeater holders, deniers, forgetters, groupers, derailers,
bouncers and call backs works when it works.

The senior datum is the preclear always has full visio, audio, and
other sensations at the exact point where he is stuck, if no where else.

The problem then is not getting the preclear to MOVE to where he is
stuck, but to get to look AT where he is stuck and feel around for the
thoughts, emotions, efforts, words, sounds and sights of that exact
moment. The action phrases IN the incident will apply TO THE INCIDENT
and block data until the exact action phrase is located, often by simply
listening to the preclear complain about how he can't, won't or
shouldn't run it etc.

One also needs to understand very advanced Theory 2 scientology,
which says that all MEST is beings mocking up particles, atoms,
molecules etc. This includes the time track and all its pictures, which
is actually a christmas tree of living elemental conscious units each
one responsible for mocking up a moment of time and keeping it in
restimulation or not depending on the moment involved.

The time track, its creation and function is not at all a MEST
phenomenon, but a living phenomenon.

Again this is a model of the time track, but it is probably more
correct than the old one of mere pictures being recorded in some who
knows what medium etc.

The point is that being alive and consisting of living elements,
the time track can be commanded by the intention of the auditor, and by
the preclear if he is willing to audit the exact place he is stuck at.

This was all unknown or unreported in early Dianetics, but the
'file clerk' and various somatic strips for each sense, and demon
circuits etc, were all a kind of anthropomorphization of the structures
that allowed for the functions required of them, namely to move on the
time track. You could for example ask of the file clerk for the next
incident necessary to run to resolve the case, and the incident would
appear to the preclear just like that, it would work.

Did the preclear 'move on his time track to that incident?'

Does it matter?

Move is a real bad term for moving on the time track, because move
conjures up ideas of space and linear travel as if the time track is
stretched out in space. It isn't, and 'moving' on the time track is
caused by refocusing on a different cross section of it, in zero
dimensional scalar consciousness.

Given that the time track is a living constellation of attentive
elemental entities, it is no surprise that this early model of file
clerk worked. Hubbard said very clearly, "it works, I have no idea why,
go figure."

So now the meter comes along, and the meter can tell you way in
advance if the auditor and the file clerk are getting along and working
together. Pity the poor preclear whose file clerk always gives out
wrong answers.

Remember the bank obeys the auditor, not the preclear because the
preclear is buried in the bank and is more likely to dramatize bank at
his bank in trying to push it around than audit it properly. You can't
use one part of the bank to move to another :)

The meter will show reads on incidents found properly, rising TA as
the incidents erase until basic is found when the TA cascades back down
again.

Now enter Dianetics today.

At this point depending on the file clerk to present incidents was
replaced with getting the preclear to LIST attitudes, emotions,
sensations and pains that he was bothered by, and running them in order
of greatest read.

"The file clerk will now hand us the next incident necessary to
run" was replaced with "Locate an incident of another causing you grief"
say.

Then the meter was used to know when to go earlier similar, and
again the file clerk was not asked for the next earlier incident, but
the preclear was told "Locate an earlier similar incident".

Hubbard claims that the auditor is always talking to the bank via
the preclear, but its unclear in the preclear's reality who or what is
locating these incidents etc.

Many preclears when commanded to "Move through to the end of the
incident", try to move the bank themselves, not realizing that an engram
should RUN IT SELF AS A MOVING SURROUND SOUND PICTURE and should only do
so when the auditor commands it to and BECAUSE the auditor commands it
to.

These kinds of confusions happen early on in dianetic running
particularly when the preclear isn't really up to running engrams
anyhow.

In the end it doesn't matter HOW you run the bank, file clerk,
listing, e-meter etc, if all incidents are full erased, you get a clear.
Ease of use and repeatability amongst poorly trained auditors of low
reality favor the e-meter over the file clerk. Like a wild horse the
file clerk elementals will not respond well to someone who isn't a horse
whisperer.

Done properly and when ready for it, dianetics is kind of like
sitting back and watching the picture show, letting the auditor run the
bank back and forth until chains and the whole thing is clear.

Its like going to the hair dressers, you pay good money to sit back
and enjoy having your brain washed.

If the preclear is sitting there trying to move through the
incident himself, or worse is running vague nothings or ideas of things,
it isn't being done right and it won't be fun, and the gains will be
questionable although non zero, sometimes even negative.

A preclear can have a charged track but not be stuck in any
particular valence or place in it, meaning he is pretty well
destimulated and F/Ning at session start. Thus the auditor can move him
around to the next thing that needs to be run and everyone has fun, as
the bank and all of its elementals are cooperative as hell about going
free.

But if the preclear is stuck on the track, his TA high, he can only
reach other incidents on his track by REACHING TO THEM, and then he
snaps back to where he is stuck anyhow, and nothing gets run properly.

This kind of person can't be moved on the track and really needs to
be audited directly where he is no matter how black it is. This can be
difficult, because DIANETICS R3R per se won't do it.

He can't locate, he can't go to, he can't move through, he can't
tell you what happened etc.

But you can pester him with the meter for the holders, deniers,
forgetters, groupers, bouncers, call backs, and shutoffs that are
keeping him pinned down.

Remember he isn't pinned to his time track, HE IS PINNING THAT
MOMENT OF THE TIME TRACK TO HIMSELF.

As I remember R3R asks the preclear 'What do you see?', well he may
have more attention on audio or taste, smell, touch or emotion, so
really it needs to be "What are you experiencing?"

Further 'move through to the end of the incident" is terrible, it
is much better to run as 'experience through to the end of the
incident.'

You see, minor adjustments to approach can produce significant
gains in auditing quality and efficiency, but based on what? Some model
or another of what is there. The model mostly serves for the student to
hang his study of approach on, the pro doesn't need the model any more,
he just knows what works and to hell with why.

He merely looks at the elementals and they scramble to comply.

I hope that helped.

Homer

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
Tue Jan 22 20:43:31 EST 2013
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

MCT7

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1







FORCE AND MASS, WILL AND MOTIVATION

MCT - 7
25 December 1993

Copyright (C) 1993 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.


THE PRIMARY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A MEATBALL AND A DREAMBALL IS WHAT
THEY THINK CONSCIOUSNESS IS.

The meatball thinks that consciousness is a name for mechanical
processes going on in the brain, in the same way that dieticians
consider that metabolism is a name for processes going on in the body.

The dreamball thinks that consciousness is its own thing.

There are two kinds of dreamballs, Hybrids and Projectionists.

Hybrids believe in a hybrid theory that contains both the physical
universe AND this thing called a conscious unit. In this sense the
conscious unit is another part of the whole, a part working and
interacting in tandem with the remaining physical universe parts that
make up the body.

They envision consciousness as something that can be the effect of
physical forces and events, and also as something that can CAUSE
physical forces and events. They conceive that cause travels FROM the
physical universe TO the conscious unit, THROUGH the conscious unit, and
back into the physical universe again.

For example physical sensory data comes in from the physical senses
through the retina, and the optic nerve and are distributed on the
visual cortex of the brain.

Here the conscious unit overlays the visual cortex and the physical
energies in the visual cortex, which cause a color form display in the
conscious unit, much as a television signal finally gets display on a
color TV set.

Then the self, which is also part of the conscious unit is able to
see this data right off the conscious color form screen, and so make
decisions based on its desire and knowledge and issue a command back out
towards the physical universe to create a physical action.

The intentional volition of the self, originating in the mechanics
of the conscious unit itself and NOT in any 'underlying' physical
processes in the brain, travels out of the conscious unit back into the
neuromuscular command pathways of the brain via a second interface, and
the nerve pathways translate the outward going causal flow into body
action.

Thus there are two hybrid interfaces in this theory. The first is
the in coming data interface whereby physical data in the visual cortex
becomes translated into conscious color form data for the self to see.
The second is the out going action interface whereby volitional
intention on the part of the conscious unit self is translated back into
physical universe nerve impulses in the brain to be carried out by the
neuromuscular system.

There would also have to be another set of in coming and outgoing
data interfaces to deal with physically stored memory, but it is also
assumed that the conscious unit has its own memory capacity independent
of the body memory, and which does not depend on the underlying physical
structure of the body for its existence.

Of course this is a hotly contested and very controversial theory
of things. Most hardball scientists would reject it out of hand.

On the surface this theory might imply a violation of conservation
of energy and momentum, because of the influence of the conscious unit.
It has to take energy from the visual cortex to conform its color form
display to the physical data in the visual cortex, and when the self
issues a command to the body, it must be generating impulses to initiate
nerve flow, which involves more energy.

Even among the hybrids there is contention concerning the role that
the CU plays in such energy transfers. One group holds that the CU is
merely a stimulus response part in the over all system of parts. It is
moved by incoming energy, and it in turn moves other parts according to
how it was moved, much as any other state determined part in the system
behaves. The CU plays the role of gaining its desires and acts as a
computer that constantly calculates what to do based on what it knows
and what it wants.

The other group claims that the CU has a connection to a higher
universe and can actually inject energy into this universe, and take
energy out of it and does so all the time. In their view, the CU can
originate actions independently of what is happening to it in the
physical universe, in other words it can do things that are not a
function of its past in the physical universe. They hold that the CU is
not state determined by its past in either this or the higher universe,
but is of course always state determined by its own present nature.

This view obviously conflicts with strong conservation of energy
and momentum, but it is claimed that on average the amount of energy
added to this universe is equal to the amount absorbed back out, so the
over all effect is minimal. This is very dissatisfactory to the
mathematically strict conservationists and state determinedists.

A deeper look however might suggest that one merely need to
increase the width of one's universe to include the conscious universe,
where one might find that between the two of them, the physical universe
AND the conscious universe, energy and momentum are still conserved.

But then again one might find that they are not. The very creation
of a universe at all is the grand daddy of all violation of conservation
of energy and momentum, and if the universe was created at all, then why
not have little moments of creation and destruction going on all the
time.

Recent mathematical models of the universe suggest that the
universe never was created, it just always was. The model holds that
both space and time are circular and closed, so one has sort of an
unchanging permanent universe of space-time, forever shining in the
library of spaceless, timeless Eternity.

As an aside, one of the philosophical reasons that people like to
think that energy is conserved, is because they consider that energy
is what is real. Since intuitionally they conceive that something
can't come from nothing, nor can something go into nothing, energy,
which is the real 'something' of this universe, must therefore be
conserved.

It might be called more accurately, the conservation of Something.

Although some of the hybrids claim that energy may not be
conserved, what they are all saying is that there are two fundamental
realities interacting with each other, one based on force and mass, and
the other based on will and motivation.

The meatballs wish to reduce will and motivation TO force and mass.
They wish to reduce PAIN and PLEASURE to PUSH and PULL, as they claim
there is no evidence to support the more complex theory.

Notice that the hybrid theory IS a more complex theory, probably
exponentially so, however, what the meatballs are really saying is that
they are too lazy to figure it out given a total lack of evidence that
it might be true.

Philosophers however go at it the other way around. FIRST they
come up with the more complex theory, not to explain anything they have
observed, the 'scientists' have already done that, but just to do it.
THEN they see if this theory predicts anything new that hasn't even been
thought of before, let alone observed, and THEN they try to observe it.

WAITING for evidence to come along and FORCE you to change your
theory is a smug meatball's way of getting out of work. It is also a
way to not rock the boat. They already have their thesis written that
the universe works this way, and not that way. Why dream up weird
theories that might predict weirder phenomenon that might then be
observed to exist, when you can just keep quiet, and let everyone be
satisfied with the extant, self consistent and closed body of evidence
and theory that already exist?

Science can become sort of a self fulfilling body of ignorance.
Ignorance comes from the word IGNORE by the way. It doesn't mean
stupidity, nor does it mean uneducated or unknowledgeable. It means the
state of mind you get into when you IGNORE things that are clearly
visible.

Anyhow if the scientific community has a body of evidence that they
have found, and a theory that models the evidence as well as they can
measure it, then you have a closed self consistent system. This does
not mean it is correct, nor does it mean that MORE evidence is not
available for observation. It may mean only that no one has thought of
the remaining evidence because it is not predicted by their theory, and
so they may never get around to looking for it.

So unless such new and unknown evidence comes along on its own
accord and kicks some scientific rump, people can get kind of
complacent. They sit around WAITING ON CALL for some evidence to show
up. But Lord forbid they should ever start theorizing something new out
of the blue, that might predict some new phenomena they would then be
obligated to go verify.

It is politically DANGEROUS to theorize in the absence of evidence
prompting you to do so. It creates more work for scientists who have
already written their theses and it ruins perfectly good theories that
give people stature and importance and awards in their communities, even
though they are completely wrong.

Everyone knows they have to change their theories if evidence comes
along, but why push it?

So you find societies falling into stagnant eddies of scientific
thought. Their theories predict the evidence and the evidence supports
the theories, and you have a closed system that everyone thinks is the
last word, even though in truth it covers about .00001 percent of
reality.

That's about where we are today with our nuclear physics and quarks
and things. And don't be fooled, our present theories will NOT advance
very far in the same direction they have been going all along, into more
and more quarks and things and different kinds of sub atomic particles.
They will advance instead into more CONSCIOUSNESS.

OF COURSE the meatballs scream for proof, they are terrified you
might have it.

What would happen to their physics if one little thetan could throw
one little spark that someone else could feel?

What would happen if they put two people in two separate Faraday
Cages, you know the kind completely surrounded with chicken wire so
NOTHING electrical could get through, and these two could still swap
notes on a telepathic basis?

I mean forget the social, religious and political impact of such a
demonstration. What about the poor guys in white lab coats. What would
happen to them? They would have no where to go. Their priorities would
fall through the floor. They wouldn't know where to start picking up
the pieces. All they were good at was making ADJUSTMENTS to theories,
they never thought they would have to start FROM SCRATCH.

You see it is still too wild. They can't even conceive of the
consequences. It would take a science fiction writer like Asimov or
Clarke to figure this one out.

Now I am being a bit unfair, this kind of scientific revolution has
happened before including during the late 19th and early 20th century
with the discovery of Special Relativity. Those guys had to throw it
ALL away and start over again. And they were up to the job, but me
thinks those days are gone, and those guys are gone too, although they
may still be walking among us.

You know great advances come in waves, in periods. For example,
all the really great music happened from 1650 to 1930 or so. But now
they are gone. You are NEVER going to get the likes of Mozart, Brahms,
Bach, Beethoven, Chopin, Tchaikovski, Grieg, Mousourski, Rachmaninoff,
and Debussy walking around the planet again. Music has decayed down to
levels of degradation that those guys never dreamed could happen.

Today, except for a few exceptions like Bernstein and Rogers and
Hammerstein, and a couple of songs here and there, people put noise
pollution on a pedestal and call it art.

Same for physics. Today you have very few people who are really
able to do the work that Maxwell, Faraday, Einstein, Heisenberg, Pauli,
and Borh did.

Maybe it will take a new breed of person to finally crack open the
next level of how this universe really works. The meatballs don't seem
to have the depth to do it. They have the intelligence and the
complexity to do it, but the shallowness of their Divinity is appalling.

They are like the technicians that Beethoven complained about who
could play his pieces with extraordinary technical skill and speed,
never making a mistake, but who left everyone bored stiff. They had no
FEELING.

The same thing goes for today's extant breed of high tech
physicist, they struggle to get that last decimal place in their
equation to agree with reality and then they think they will have it
all, the pinnacle of achievement of conscious thought in this universe.

AND THEY WILL HAVE NOTHING.

For maybe the universe does not work the way they think it does,
maybe they have it all wrong from beginning to end. Maybe the world
really is a dream as the Dreamball Projectionists think and maybe all
this physical universe nonsense was just an intellectual trap to tie up
a civilization's resources so that they would develop the bomb before
developing a heart.

And that brings us to the real dreamballs, if there are any of you
out there. You listening?

You have your work cut out for you. NO ONE WILL LISTEN except
those who can see. Everyone else would prefer to eat rather than wake
up. Even if the physical universe is true, we don't have to be here.
We CAN be here if we want! We can come visit the machines, and the
people who think they are machines, and we can argue the philosophy of
those who say we are machines.

But first and foremost, we need to collect our own kind. Tap them
on the shoulder, tell them, "You can wake up, remember where you came
from, remember that you DON'T know how it all works."

Remind them that consciousness-of is consciousness of certainty and
cause. Remind them that machines can never be certain of anything and
can never know if there is cause.

Remind them that machines don't care and don't give a damn.

Remind them that people who think they are machines, act like
machines and shouldn't be in control.

Keep after them until they know that without consciousness of
certainty and cause, their souls are but Dust in the Wind.

They will get it fast enough. Any 3 year old can understand this.

Then you won't have to be alone when the government and the police
force, and the army, and the Church, and the school teachers, and the
drunken parents, and the religiously insane, and the Psychiatric Zombie
Lords, and the walking dead, come for you in the middle of the night for
waking up people who they would prefer to be asleep.

There is only one crime in this universe of lies.

LUCIDITY.

Why?

Because it wakes you up from the liars.

It's a loss of havingness to them, because they have no one to lie
to any more.

Homer

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Sep 24 03:06:02 EDT 2013
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/mct7.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFSQTnaURT1lqxE3HERAkfaAJ9VWeal7Tev+hGZx5yvbXoFSmkGigCgi161
NcsZJ/OG4Hpg/YHHcbTK9Zs=
=0wBA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

VAL5

VALENTINE'S DAY LECTURE V

THE PROOF A QUICK SUMMARY

Hello, tonight is late evening Saturday April 11th, 2009.

Well as promised we are going to get back into the interesting
stuff.

And so it will be.

In truth this material is so far out in left field, they don't have
a name for it.

GOD AND SOUL

The proof says that if A and B are two different objects they can
never be certain of each other, neither of each other's nature, nor of
each other's existence.

Thus if God and Soul are two different objects, they must forever
remain a theory to each other.

Thus even if God did make the Soul as something separate from God,
God would never be able to know that the Soul exists or was made as he
intended.

And, Lord save the Soul, if the Soul is not God, then the Soul will
never be able to know if God exists except in theory, even if God did
make him.

Long ago I once said that the intent of the suppressive person is
to destroy facility in intimacy.

Intimacy is being able to know each other with perfect certainty,
through *INTIMATE* (direct) contact.

There can be no direct contact between two different objects and
thus no intimacy.

All the intimacy that two different people seek and feel with each
other is actually intimacy they are seeking and feeling with themselves,
which they then cast onto the other as if it were theirs.

If God and Soul are two different objects, two different things, if
the Soul is not an operating aspect of God itself, then the Soul will
forever long for intimacy with its creator and never find it.

If God and Soul are two different objects, then the Soul is damned
to live in faith forever more.

On the other hand, how many different zero dimensionalities can
there be?

We know that the Soul has a spaceless, timeless, zero dimensional
core which allows for perfect certainty born of self symbolizing self
luminosity called consciousness. Self luminosity is not a temporal
process, if it were, it would never self luminesce, you couldn't SEE IT.

Just as cause is not sufficient to witness cause in the physical
universe, that is you can't use effects to see cause, space and time and
things made of space and time are not sufficient to witness space and
time with certainty.

Just as a machine, that can only learn by being an effect, can
never prove the existence of cause, a machine made of space and time and
thus also learning by being an effect, could never know for sure if
either space or time existed.

A space time gizmo can never be certain of ANYTHING, let alone that
it is truly a space time gizmo.

So if there is something above the Soul, that is different from the
Soul, that made the Soul, there is no way we could ever know about it
anyhow.

And since the proof says it is impossible to learn with certainty
about B by looking at A, the Soul can never learn about the external
objective physical universe by looking at his own subjective conscious
rendition (experience) of it.

The soldier in the tank looking at his color TV screen can never be
sure if the external world,which is represented to him by his TV,
actually exists or not.

Thus since the Soul can ONLY see directly its own consciousness
(symbol), and never what his consciousness represents to him about the
alleged external world (referent), the Soul can never know with
certainty if that alleged external physical universe (referent) exists
at all.

The referent must forever remain a theory.

The Soul USES the model of an external physical universe of space
and time to model and explain the presence of his conscious experience
of it.

Nonetheless, external space and time remain forever a model. To
use one's conscious rendition of space and time as evidence for that
model of external space and time, is interesting at best, folly at
worst, because just because one SEES space and time, doesn't mean there
IS space and time.

OCCAM'S RAZOR

Occam's razor tells us not to multiply causal factors unnecessarily
in seeking a theoretical modeled understanding of the world.

OCCAM'S SHARPENING STRAP

Occam's sharpening strap says never hypothesize something that you
can prove you can't prove.

That's a tough one because it includes the alleged physical
universe but also includes the God that everyone thinks made the Soul.

Out of what, they will not say.

Occam's sharpening strap is good for bean counters to rubber stamp
NO on grant requests to study things one can prove can't be prooven one
way or the other.

On the other hand, if we work with what we have, which is the self
aware, personally agent Soul, and offer the possibility that the Soul is
God in carnation, then we have both our Soul and God as one thing, that
thus can know about each other with perfect certainty because they ARE
each other, as they are two operating aspects of the same underlying
phenomenon.

So we call this one thing the GodSoul.

Self Aware, Self Luminescent, Self Symbolizing God and Soul in one.

Poetically we might say each person is the Soul of God in
carnation.

Formally we say that the incarnating Soul is one function of a
multi function operating actuality called the AllThatIs.

"The existence of a multifaceted operating actuality is self
evident." - Sufi

AllThatIs is hard to spell and pronounce so we call it God for
short.

However there is clearly more than one Soul, thus this God we are
talking about is a Multi I-AM being, which means it can dream many
dreams at the same time, each one a *FULL* instantiation of that multi
I-AM being, living the individuated life of that particular Soul.

Me and thee.

Thus the multi I-AM God incarnates into individual I-AM's, as
dreamtime space time creatures.

TRANSSUMMATE GOD

Is this really so beyond our imagination that there could be an
infinite number of infinite minds (Souls) from one point of view, and a
unified transsummate God from another?

Transsummate means that the AllThatis is acting from the state of
being where all its infinite number of I-AM's are working in unison and
co operation as an unincarnated knowing willing team.

There never is, nor was, nor ever will be a single large I-AM.

The Multi I-AM does not split, or fracture, or shatter into many.

It IS many. But as many, the High US, it can act in unison, as if
one, or a finite subset can do the same. 10 billion I-AM's can fork off
a game that only they are playing, locking out the infinite number of
other I-AM's they could have been playing with.

It is considered that any particularly universe is such a forked
subset of the multi I-AM being, with the caveat that in some universes
other beings can enter it after it is first created.

Thus new beings waking up after a good long sleep at the top will
find many games already going on, that they can pick and choose from, or
they can get together with others and make their own.

The AllThatIs is not filled with just one being forever and ever,
it is filled with an infinite multi being that can act at will as many
different individual I-AM's or as an integrated unison of team
cooperation.

We are NOT saying that the Soul comes from a larger ocean of
'Soulness' like a drop of water comes from a cup of water.

Souls are more like an infinite marble in an infinite bag of
marbles.

Souls retain their individuality across eternities.

But they can operate in unison as part of the bag, or alone outside
the bag incarnated in dream space and time.

Thus Souls are individual and eternal, but can operate either alone
as incarnations in space time, or as a unified team in the transsumate
(disincarnate) state.

The difference between the incarnated state and the transsummate
state is the difference between "I AM" and "WE ARE".

It is one of the great lies of all time to say that God is the
"Great I AM".

The hell he is, that's the incarnated Soul that is the great "I
AM".

Or some poor devil pretending to be the one and only God, for those
that would bow and pray to idols of time, stone and dust in the wind.

God is the great 'WE ARE'.

There is a ONEness to God, that is the underlying substrate that
powers and connects the whole thing, but the operating entity called the
AllThatIs, operates through the MANY to provide manifestation and life.

Thus the AllThatIS is both One *AND* Many, two different functions
of the underlying phenomenon.

The purpose and function of the one is to power the many.

Not all of God is incarnate at one time.

And the parts of God that are incarnate can be independently
incarnated as groups in many different unrelated universes at the same
time.

This universe we are all in now, is a sub group of the total HIGH
US.

The transsummate state is aware of the HIGH US, the incarnate state
is often certain only of itself.

That's because in the incarnate state, the I-AM being tries to
communicate to other I-AM beings THROUGH the created universe of
(virtualized) space and time, and thus no certainty is obtainable about
the nature or existence of others because the I-AM is trying to use
learning by being an effect to learn about something or someone it
considers different from itself.

In the transsummate state, the individual I-AM communicates
directly with other beings via the one substrate that connects them all.
Via that path they ARE all one and so can know each other.

The HIGH US is not a WE outside of you, it is a WE inside of you,
all living in the core, while pretending to themselves to be living in
dream space time.

Understanding this leads to the end of loneliness and isolation.

Loneliness is when all beings are outside of you.

Fulfillment is when all beings are inside of you.

And by all, we mean *ALL*, whether incarnate, or not, whether in
this universe, or another universe or no universe at all, whether
manifested or sleeping, ALL of them are there in side you.

"An infinite number of infinite minds..."

You can of course withdraw from the ALL of them to a manageable
subset. :)

Or not, depending on your willingness of the day.

If you do choose to withdraw to a manageable subset, you can browse
among souls in subsets at will (direct co communion), and change your
subset as you wish.

This is quite fantastic, not to be believed until seen.

CONTRADICTIONS

There are contradictions in the above. It is easy enough to see
how God and Soul could be one and thus able to know each other with
certainty. But it is quite a bit harder to see how multiple different
Souls could ever know about EACH OTHER.

Philosophy has long worried over the problem of the one and the
many.

Could something that was truly one appear to itself to be many,
even as an illusion?

Could something that was truly many, appear to itself to be one
even as an illusion?

If they were truly many, how could they know about each other with
certainty? Being an effect of another does not prove cause.

Is it possible that a zero dimensional operating actuality could
yet have different functions or aspects, that were none the less not two
different objects in the sense of the proof, and thus still be able to
maintain interprocess certainty amongst each other?

Similar problems arise with the issues of certainty of time. It is
quite clear that a machine MADE of space and time can never know for
sure if space or time exists, because such a machine can never know
ANYTHING for sure.

In particular,

"State does not prove change in state."

Thus it is impossible for a machine to be certain it has changed
state, and thus can't be certain of time.

It is easy to see how space might be a holographic illusion, any
dream at night is such an illusion.

But time is a bit harder. Go out one night and watch a traffic
light blink on and off for a few hours until you are absolutely certain
that the light is blinking. Blinking means it is changing state, and
change means time, namely two different moments of time.

The paradox is that anything that is MADE of space and time can
never be certain of time. But something that is made of a timeless self
luminous core apparently can be certain of time.

But if time is an illusion as space is, then is not that certainty
of time a false certainty, and have we not said that false certainties
are impossible by definition?

The paradox is simply that certainty of space implies no space.

If it were 'out there', you wouldn't be able to see it, thus if you
can see it, it isn't 'out there.' - Clarke Letters.

In the same way the certainty of time implies no time.

There is simply nothing in the state of a machine that implies with
certainty that the machine has changed state!

And worse the logical computed implication from a machine's present
state to a prior change in state is not the same thing as direct
perception of change!

Direct perception of change is not learning by implication, it's
learning by direct contact.

Is it possible that there is both a timeless state in the core, and
a timeful state in the display of space and time?

Can we brook the idea that the core can be certain of time because
it has none, but anything inside of time can not be certain of time?

That which has time can never know it has time, but that which is
timeless can know?

These issues are very difficult, and lead to Godel Jails galore.

The reader is encouraged to pick and choose his jails according to
taste.

THE FOUNTAIN HEAD OF SOURCE

The fountain head of source is the neck of the hydra that connects
all Souls to the one source, the underlying functioning substrate of
existence.

But the underlying substrate is not conscious!

And although the underlying substrate is the source of the
GodSoul's ability to manifest, it only manifests when one or more
GodSoul's command it to.

"Source sources only when will casts." - Adore.

So God is not a ONE, God is a ONE AND A MANY, and you are one of
the MANY and probably AWOL to boot.

When lost in dreamtime, a Soul can "lose its high masters, and lose
its high apprehentices, and now no one is pure before source."

When a GodSoul incarnates, it is possible for it to postulate that
it has lost its connection to the fountain head of source.

When a GodSoul makes such a postulate, it will then live and suffer
as if it really were disconnected.

But in truth, this disconnection is an illusion wrought by too much
introversion into the apparitions of space and time.

The apparency of disconnection may be fair chosen, the GodSoul is
an Imp Soul of magnitude, and likes practical jokes most of all, but
delusion it still is.

The connection to the fountain head of source can never in fact be
broken.

If it were cut, the dream would end, as all dreams of separation
from the fountain head of source, are POWERED by the fountain head of
source, via the will casting according to it's fair chosen views.

Thus there are no truly lost sheep, except the apparency of such
amongst the juggernaut of dream time.

EXTERIORIZATION FROM SPACE TIME

The reason that people can't exteriorize from the space time
apparition is because they fail to understand that home base is both
spaceless AND timeless.

If you are to experience spacelessness, you must also experience
timelessness.

If you are to experience timelessness, you must also experience
spacelessness.

And you must be willing to experience perfect certainty of personal
agency, self luminescing and eternally lighting the dark of the void,
along with an infinite number of other lights in the darkness, namely
other GodSouls.

THE COLOR OF PERSONAL AGENCY

The color of personal agency is "I AM!" and I give a damn, and if
you aren't careful, I might DO something about it!

More formally it's I AM, I KNOW, I WANT, I DO and I HAVE.

But being in the core doesn't mean that space and time stop, it
only means that YOU are no longer IN them, and are viewing them going on
from a place where there is no space or time to go on.

If you can understand the dichotomy, you are most of the way there.

There are lots of things going on in the TV set, but the TV set
itself is still. If you can become the TV set, you can attain the peace
that passeth all understanding and continue to watch all the action
going on in the set.

But if you think you ARE one of the things going on in the TV set,
then woe be unto you, unless she's a real doll.

Notice that if you are inside the image on the TV set, then you are
inside the displayed universe as the cowboy say, and the girl is outside
of you.

Thus the universe 'made you' and you can lose the girl.

But if you are the TV set, then the entire universe is inside you,
along with the cowboy and the girl, and she can never be lost or removed
or separated from you.

And so from that spaceless timeless core, one can perceive
everything going on inside of space and time which is still going on.

But YOU are no longer 'going on', as there is no more space or time
for you to go on to.

Besides if you ever get bored, which you won't, you can always jump
back into the TV set picture, and forget the eternal omniance of the
core itself.

Omniance means everywhere and everywhen present.

DR WHO'S PHONE BOOTH

Although we say that the eternal core is inside of you, the truth
is you are the eternal core, and the dream of space time is inside of
the core, the way the movie is inside the TV set.

The core is the static spaceless timeless AllThatIs, looking inside
itself for kinetic action.

There can be nothing outside of the AllThatIs!

Space and time look like they are outside of you, but in fact they
are inside you. There is more space and time inside you than could ever
be dreamed to be outside.

OMNIANCE

Omniance means everywhere and everywhen present via being nowhere
at all.

The nameless dreams the nameable for a while.

It isn't that the spaceless and timeless core is small, from the
viewpoint of the core, it is space and time that are small.

IT TAKES HAVING DIMENSION AND EXTENSION IN THAT DIMENSION TO BE
FINITE AND THUS SMALL.

The core has no dimension and no extension, thus it has no finite
size, thus large and small do not apply. To the core, size is a DOMAIN
ERROR.

The Core is the AllThatIS.

Space and time are but one of an infinite number of baubles to
visit, admire and get eaten by.

The one you are living in now is called "Killer Pit".

But the Core is also zero dimensional.

Smallness is size. Without dimension there is no size, big or
small. THAT is freedom from definition and limitation.

It is the ability to live in the zero dimensional core of home and
yet let the body and life run with the wind in the dreamtime of space
and time that provides the ultimate freedom.

It isn't that we are trying to leave space and time behind and
never come back.

Oh no, we just want to be the damn TV set, and perhaps change the
channel once in a while and perhaps sometimes stick our nose into the
action.

SIN

Sin is the preaching or commitment of effort to the doctrine of
separation of God and Soul, and Soul and other Souls.

We are all not just brothers and sisters, but we are all identical
twins.

An infinituplet if you will, capable of outward differences, but
inside all the same.

Separation condemns both God and Soul to eternal darkness of each
other, because nothing and no one can consciously see across a distance.

Justice is you get what you postulate (create).

For a being who can create in the mere conception of things,
Justice is swift.

If you postulate fundamental separation between God and Soul, then
eternal separation is what you get by definition, for as long a you
postulate it.

All it takes for salvation is to change your mind.

No one is meting out punishment, except perhaps the GodSoul to
itself.

And fortunately all such states of sin can only last for a while,
as eventually all GodSouls reattain the awakened state.

"Class is an attitude, that *ALL* should be my friend and live
forever (outside of time).

This dream ends forever when the circle of *FRIENDS* are all
holding hands again." - Adore.

But the sin goes further than simply teaching separation between
God and Soul, it also includes teaching separation of God, Soul and the
AllThatIS and any universe in it.

There used to be an idea back in the dark ages that God existed,
then made the universe, then made the Soul and stuck the Soul in the
universe.

Made out of what no one will say.

The truth is the GodSoul, self aware "I AM ness", is a FUNCTION of
God, and God is a huge data matrix that can be rendered as conscious
color forms in the GodSoul's consciousness.

The universe is basically a persisting postulate that you will
experience something in dream time if go there to look. That coffee
shop is always there when you go to visit right?

Everything you see, is the body of yourself glowing in the night of
the void, and everything you see is also yourself, as perceiver and
perceived must be one, if it weren't, you could never see it.

The purpose of the glow in the dark conscious unit is to render the
data matrix, within itself and others so it can have a game of kinetics.

Each being has and is his own rendition and they are kept
synchronized with each other via the ONE that connects the many.

The guy sends a letter out into dream time and it gets to his lover
on the other side of the ocean. But at the same time as he knowingly
sends the letter out into dream time, he also sends it (unknowingly,
wink wink) out the eternal channel that inwardly connects them forever.
Thus his lover can dream the same dream that he is, and read the letter.

This allows for co dreaming among many dreamers which is what a
dreamtime space time universe is.

Reaching out there for another is a fast way to lose them, as pure
telepathy does not travel outwards via dream time, but travels over the
inward eternal communication channels that connect us instantaneously
together.

It may be fine to say that normal communications must have a delay
in getting from point to point because the speed of cause through dream
time is the speed of photons, but notice each dreamer is dreaming the
same dream INSTANTANEOUSLY in perfect accord and synchronization, as it
doesn't take any time for the co telepathy that glues a dream together
amongst many dreamers, to travel through timeless eternity from being to
being.

So if you are going to send a letter, why bother with the space
time route? It's a charade.

Thus when looking for God, take a look around you, you couldn't
possibly see anything that wasn't God and yourself, in eternal tango
with other's like yourself. ("The only dance there is. - Sufi")

THE GODSOUL REVISITED

God and Soul are not two different objects.

The GodSoul has two functions, the God function and the Soul
function, but it is a single object.

God and Soul are two different functions of one object we call the
GodSoul.

The GodSoul does not create anything, it just changes state.

In particularly the God part does not create the Soul part, they are
co eternal and immutably inseparable.

Thus for example the God function can't damn the Soul function to
hell forever without damning itself to hell forever with it.

There are hells and there are heavens, but they are dream space
time manifestations and thus CAN only last a while.

The GodSoul is like a coin, one coin with two different sides.

When the GodSoul incarnates it's like flipping from head to tails,
from God to AssSoul.

(Sorry I just transcribe this stuff...)

God and Soul relate to each other pretty much as Creator and
Creature relate to each other, except that the Creator function is to
create *ITSELF* as the Creature.

The creator does not create the creature, but does create the
adornments of identity and limitation that allows the creature to play a
game with other creatures.

So in truth nothing is created except the adornments the God
function bedecks upon itself as the Soul function.

And it does this merely by changing the colors of self
lumninescence on he display screen of its own substrate.

The conscious TV set puts up a new image of a cowboy and cowgirl.

What has changed now?

Nothing of MATERIAL has been created, only the state of that
material has changed from no glow to glow.

Thus we can not say that the Soul is created by God, for the
GodSoul and both it's functions of Creator and Creature are co eternal,
and thus can not be created nor destroyed and the bond between them
never ever rendered asunder.

What can be created and destroyed are only dreamtime apparitions of
space and time glowing in the body of each GodSoul in the dark of the
void, bedeckments and adornments surely, but mere self luminescence one
and all.

Some of these adornments the GodSoul can put on and take off at
will merely by flipping states and changing the pattern of self
luminescence on display on its own substrate.

Others are here for the count, but only for a while even if a long
while.

And if you buy any of the above, I have a bridge to sell you.

A bridge from heaven and hell to eternity.

OK, so much for fantasy, now back to our regular programming.

THE FULL PROOF

LEARNING WITH CERTAINTY

So we have the first three lines of the proof as follows:

1.) LEARNING IMPLIES LEARNING WITH CERTAINTY OR LEARNING WITH NOT
CERTAINTY.

2.) DISTANCE AND LEARNING IMPLIES LEARNING BY BEING AN EFFECT.

3.) LEARNING BY BEING AN EFFECT IMPLIES NOT LEARNING WITH
CERTAINTY.

The fourth line is simply:

4.) LEARNING WITH CERTAINTY EXISTS.

Therefore,

5.) LEARNING WITH CERTAINTY IMPLIES LEARNING, BUT NOT BY BEING AN
EFFECT, AND NOT ACROSS A SPACE TIME DISTANCE.

But I ain't going to touch that one, without a few donuts, so let's
take a break.

Nothing like a dreamtime donut to raise dreamtime sugar levels.

Homer

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Mon Apr 20 14:14:19 EDT 2009
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

ADORE257 (fwd)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

SELF AND NOT SELF

Rogers. D.Scn. (The_Bindu@NOSPAMmsn.com) wrote:
>Ron might very well have already had this, but I think CBR was the one to
>articulate this basic. It's an additional element. Not only does a thetan
>mock up a games paradigm (a universe) and then enter it, the thetan
>postulates that universe as a "not-self." Becomes self-determinedly
>dominated by that postulate upon interiorization into the universe. Becomes
>self-modified by that postulate as long as participation in the universe
>continues. Probably applies to the entire universe, but PARTICULARLY to the
>interiorization into a playing piece. Takes on a "not-self" attribute that
>is obviously going to be basic on amnesia and "being a body," right?

Yes.

Further the thetan identifies with one side of a dicom item as
'self' and enemies out the other side. Its the postulate that the other
side must not exist, must never have existed, and must never exist
again, and that I didn't invite it into the game in the first place, and
my job is to make you not exist forever and ever amen, so we can enjoy
our football field for what it was intended to be used for, planting
flowers", is what sticks the being in his fair chosen cement shoes.

You see good people would never have created evil people to fight,
so of course good never wins and eventually becomes evil.

You can't win over what you won't PUT THERE.

You become what you resist if you lose to it, but the only way to
to win over evil, to vanquish evil, to stop evil, to stop anything is to
start it again, perfect duplicate. If the being, couldn't, wouldn't or
shouldn't start evil again, then he can only stop it, and he goes insane
at that moment, totally devoted to destroy etc, and the irresponsibility
for condition, fixation on stop without operating start etc, sinks him
forever more into what he is fighting. He closes terminals with it,
eventually feels sorry for it, no matter how evil it is, those sad eyes
and all, and finally becomes it.

No sympathy -> Sympathy -> Propitiation -> Becoming it.

Total responsibility is holding onto all three corners of start ->
change -> stop at the same time, thats pan determinism.

Once a being let's go of start and slides all the way to only stop,
or let's go of stop and fixates at start, then he's a goner, actually a
persister, which is the same thing as a goner :)

He's gone into sticking around forever and ever.

Miracles and Majesty, Romance and Sin,
Tragedy and Travesty, that's where I've Been.

Tragedy and Travesty, Romance and Song,
Miracles in Majesty, that's where I've gone...

Homer

>Les.



- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Sep 23 03:06:02 EDT 2013
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore257.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFSP+haURT1lqxE3HERAokcAJ9Iq/koqh+plSrzqA83fp5iceVdBACguKu5
YuftHKKAkbQ3Eoxs4vY5M14=
=E32O
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

ADORE921

TO RUN

I am asked below to define what TO RUN means.

First we need to word clear the standard terms

TO PROCESS and

A PROCESS

Scientifically a process is a change of state or a series of
changes of state, such as the process of energy escaping from the main
spring of a clock through the escapement mechanism as it winds down.

To process is to put something through a process, or a series of
changes of state. To process food for example, by homogenizing it,
chopping it up, exposing to ultra violet etc. The end result is more
desirable than the original raw state.

To process a human case, as in a preclear, we get the preclear to
engage in a series of actions, either physical, emotional, mental, or
spiritual, that cause charge to come to the surface for inspection,
reevaluation and thus erasure.

Any particular series of actions that a preclear is requested to
perform towards this goal is called 'a process', as it puts the preclear
though changes in state toward a better end.

To 'run' a process comes from the term to run a program on a
computer. Again a computer program is a series of instructions causing
the computer to engage in various actions like adding numbers, putting
them here and there, printing them out etc.

A program for a computer is very much like a program for a
preclear, a series of actions the computer or preclear are requested to
do in order to change their own state or the state of something else.

Thus we 'run a program' on a computer, or we 'run a process on a
preclear', or the preclear runs a process on charge in his bank. We are
processing the preclear or the preclear's bank, by engaging in a series
of actions which bring about a series of changes in the preclear or his
bank (of charge) to a better end, which is the E/P or End Phenomenon of
the process.

When we say run a process, or run an incident, or run the preclear
on an incident, or simply to run 'an item', we are talking about
applying the appropriate action in the appropriate way to the situation
in order to produce case gain.

An item is any idea, person, place or thing that a preclear might
have charge on.

Mother is an item, so is anger, fear, sorrow or apathy.

Goals are items, to be worthwhile, for example.

An item is just about ANYTHING that might have charge on it, or
lead into an area of charge.

An incident is a period of time when charge was built up with
various items in the incident.

A terminal is a PERSON in the incident or the preclear's life.

Thus the term 'run X' is very broadly used, and generally means 'to
do what is right' to handle and erase charge on X.

One runs a process in until no more change comes from it, or the
preclear has a significant cognition about the item or area being
processed, and is feeling better.

The most basic process is simply to spot the item over and over.

"Spot how you feel about your eternal future."

Or to get the idea of:

"Get the idea of being Mortal."

"Get the idea of being Immortal." (one time line forever in time.)

"Get the idea of being Eternal." (outside of time lines.)

For those who are heavily into not-isness, making nothing of charge
via force, denial, and blackness, an item might seem to have no charge
on it or be unapproachable.

So then we add NO AND SOME to the item being run in order to get
the preclear to run out the NOT ISING of the item, then run some of the
item, then the not ising of the item, then some of the item, back and
forth.

"Spot NO sorrow over mother's death."
"Spot SOME sorrow over mother's death."

If the preclear is suffering to death on an item, we add in AND to
really get at what the preclear is doing to drive himself crazy.

"Get the idea of not wanting to live forever (in time) AND
not wanting to die forever (in time.)"

"Get the idea of wanting to die forever AND wanting to live forever
at the same time."

Some preclear's may need NO and SOME added into AND!

"Get the idea of NO [wanting to die forever AND wanting to live
forever at the same time]."

"Get the idea of SOME [wanting to die forever AND wanting to live
forever at the same time]."

Serious charge in the bank has 'tricks' of unavailability to the
preclear's attempt to audit it, and this results in the apparency of
unauditability.

Say your preclear is a 'nothing there' case.

"Get the idea there is nothing there."
"Get the idea there is something there."

Say your preclear is a 'no one there' case.

"Get the idea there is no one there."
"Get the idea there is some one there."

If he is really crazy and he is running NOTHING AND SOMETHING, you
gotta run the same thing.

'Get the idea there is nothing there AND something there at the
same time forever.'

'Get the idea there is no one there AND some one there at the
same time forever.'

Running NO and SOME and AND on the unauditable item is usually
enough to break it open.

He wants to live and die at the same time, but he has not-ised that
to a point where if you say 'Tell me an AND', he will say "What AND?"

So you run,

"Get the idea of NO AND."
"Get the idea of SOME AND."

Assuming he knows what an AND is, 20 minutes of that will pop the
next AND into his face and make it ready to run.

Remember an AND is not an indecision, should I go left, should I go
right. That's an OR, and even though it may never stop, it doesn't use
up all his energy, just all his time :)

An AND is a decision to go BOTH LEFT AND RIGHT, and he puts his
full OT power into doing both and thus goes nowhere while burning his
thetan jets bright white.

If he is running an AND on to look and not look, he will be pushing
infinitely hard to not see, and pulling infinitely hard to see at the
same time forever.

This forms a mucky clay in front of his face which eventually shows
up as an impenetrable 'nothing there'. He can't put his attention in
it, on it or around it.

HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY ATTENTION LEFT, its all eaten up by the total
effort to push and pull at the same time.

Or to push left and push right at the same time.

Or whatever, ANDS always involve full power, and FORCE AND EFFORT
against each other to produce no motion and no change.

Fully running out the operating AND's on the case will produce
permanent relief beyond one's wildest imagination. But there are a lot
of them, and they are DEADLY, each and every one, and he has about 20 of
them or more that need to be spotted and run to relief.

He is basically trying to GO AND NOT GO in everything in his life.

Running out ALL ANDS from a case produces a being who is no longer
crazy (by definition), and who can feel and operate smoothly again or
not depending on the color of sunset or the mood of the moment which HE
paints on things, not his craziness.

A being filled with ANDS, is always going AND not going, going AND
not going, 24 hours a day, awake or asleep.

He may be going 51 percent and not going 49 percent, so it might
seem he is moving forward, but he is driving with the brakes on, both
pedals to the metal.

And he's always asking a whole mess of questions he is terrified of
knowing the answers to, TO KNOW AND NOT KNOW, TO LEARN AND NOT LEARN, TO
REMEMBER AND NOT REMEMBER, its just on and on, one creates and lives in
one's own hell by being and doing this way.

You can always tell such a preclear by the smell of smoking brakes
and exhaust that pervades his thetan space :)

Outwardly he will tell you he is a black V, inwardly he is white
hot from self generated friction.

What a black V can't see or originate about IS HIS FUTURE.

He thinks it is his past that is bothering him, but it isn't, its
his present time headed right off the rails into the future just a ways
down the track. He will even tell you how long to inexorable disaster.

A black V has no future, because he both wants a future and doesn't
want a future at the same time forever and ever Amen.

Homer

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com

> Homer,
>
> I read the article on "Unauditabilty" and wondered if you could explain the
> term "run" a little more. I have read this word in your previous articles
> and still do not completely understand what we are doing when we run a
> situation. I get the process of "some" and "none" in a run but what is the
> ultimate goal of the "some" and "none" in the audit? Is the run the
> attempt to alleviate the charge from whatever is being run?
Mon Nov 26 20:38:53 EST 2012
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

DESIRE OF THE CREATOR, DESIRE OF THE CREATURE

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


DESIRE OF THE CREATOR, DESIRE OF THE CREATURE

Hubbard said that there was theta the problem creator, and theta
the problem solver.

Adore says there is the game creator and the game player,

Author and Character.

Creator and Creature.

The primary opposition of desire then is between the desire of the
game creator to extend the game, and the desire of the player to win the
game.

Justice is that we get what we postulate.

That would be a best of all possible worlds, wouldn't it?

Surely justice is that we deserve that!

If any justice exists at all then, of course justice reigns at all
times, for the first thing we would have postulated is that it do so.

Thus one can surmise that we want what we have, and we have what we
want, and we have it exactly and only because we want it.

The question is which one of us wants it, the game creator or the
game player?

For those lost in the valley of the shadow of death, this can be a
hard question, for life certainly does not look desirable even as a game
we would have created for ourselves.

No one in their right mind would create themselves and their
loved ones as human in this meat grinder of a universe.

Naivety is thinking they would. :)

Life boggles our sense of could, would and should.

This is overwhelm, overwhelm of our sense of artistic motivation
for the creation of ourselves as creature and the context we live in, we
can't create ourselves big enough as creatures to consider that we were
or are creators over our own game.

"Who me? Not I, Sir! I certainly did not create or even agree
to this game, I am still seeking a place to hide from it!

Thus the creator has created something for itself that exceeds
itself as a creature.

However all of life is God in carnation, thus it can be no other
way.

Thus the creature spends its whole life seeking for who or what
created him, and to chew a bone with it, asking why is it such an
asshole. when in truth God is to be found under your own pillow.
utterly and absolutely where you already are and always will be, here
now.

Doubt in this leads to resentment, faith in this Creator/Creature
relationship should lead to acceptance which leads to vanishment.

Thus recovering for the being that he is playing HIS game, and that
he can call time outs on it periodically to adjust the laws of play,
goes a long ways to making a well and happy being.

No longer human perhaps, for who would call a resentment free
being, human, but recognizable none the less as something to make and
be friends with, in yourself and in others.

The creature doesn't mind playing other people's games too, but
only by HIS choice, and if he gets too impressed with someone else's
game he will want to out do it himself in return favor.

Thus games and trade in games have gotten quite involved, and the
competition as to who can make the roughest, toughest, longest lasting
game is in the semi finals.

The games we lose quickly are no fun, the games we win easily are
no fun either. The games that are the most fun are the games that put a
load on our motor and keep it there.

The fun is in the chase, the quality of that dance from conception
to attainment called time and the effort to win that flows through it.

Caught between the desire for greatness and seriousness, the being
dances as if on the ball floor of hell, dodging the gauntlet of fire to
win whatever bauble he envisions is worth the danger of failure and
defeat.

The only mercy is that if he is defeated utterly, and I do mean
*UTTERLY*, he wakes up to Eternal Omni Awesome Peace again as if the
whole thing never happened.

He designed it this way as his backup out should he never win at
anything ever again.

Thus although the player pretends he wants to win, down deep he
knows the glory is in the play.

In the ideal game, he will play forever and then win at the end
just before his energy runs out :)

Much art only exists where there is form in motion, and thus time,
and time only exists where there is separation between conception and
attainment.

Thus the hardest games are the games of long duration, because they
were and are the most fun, but many of them may be forgotten by now, as
they went on 'too long'.

No they didn't, he's just saying that to keep them going.

If he didn't complain about the game, they might all vanish on him
and everyone else too.

Thus your preclear may be found to be in a state of trying to continue a
game by resisting it, not playing it fully, or trying to win a game by
losing it.

These inversions need to be handled so the preclear can come back to
orientation about what game it is he really wants to play and what game
he is, and has been, playing anyhow born of high appreciation for
ludicrous demise.

Every thing else will handle itself once the vectors of game play
are reoriented towards action and ability and willingness, nay
eagerness, to be here.

Get the idea of Eternal Eagerness.

That games of seriousness and greatness run on courage does not in
any way change any of the above.

Homer

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com

Thu May 3 01:00:14 EDT 2007

======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sun Sep 22 01:07:06 EDT 2013
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore494.memo
Send mail to archive.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning but
Not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFSPnr6URT1lqxE3HERAimZAJ4ycr4aw4IeGOWQ4rMNocLME3XbswCgohLN
Up3mRInVwq1mNgxdcHPKCAA=
=FEAc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

DESIRE OF THE CREATOR, DESIRE OF THE CREATURE

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


DESIRE OF THE CREATOR, DESIRE OF THE CREATURE

Hubbard said that there was theta the problem creator, and theta
the problem solver.

Adore says there is the game creator and the game player,

Author and Character.

Creator and Creature.

The primary opposition of desire then is between the desire of the
game creator to extend the game, and the desire of the player to win the
game.

Justice is that we get what we postulate.

That would be a best of all possible worlds, wouldn't it?

Surely justice is that we deserve that!

If any justice exists at all then, of course justice reigns at all
times, for the first thing we would have postulated is that it do so.

Thus one can surmise that we want what we have, and we have what we
want, and we have it exactly and only because we want it.

The question is which one of us wants it, the game creator or the
game player?

For those lost in the valley of the shadow of death, this can be a
hard question, for life certainly does not look desirable even as a game
we would have created for ourselves.

No one in their right mind would create themselves and their
loved ones as human in this meat grinder of a universe.

Naivety is thinking they would. :)

Life boggles our sense of could, would and should.

This is overwhelm, overwhelm of our sense of artistic motivation
for the creation of ourselves as creature and the context we live in, we
can't create ourselves big enough as creatures to consider that we were
or are creators over our own game.

"Who me? Not I, Sir! I certainly did not create or even agree
to this game, I am still seeking a place to hide from it!

Thus the creator has created something for itself that exceeds
itself as a creature.

However all of life is God in carnation, thus it can be no other
way.

Thus the creature spends its whole life seeking for who or what
created him, and to chew a bone with it, asking why is it such an
asshole. when in truth God is to be found under your own pillow.
utterly and absolutely where you already are and always will be, here
now.

Doubt in this leads to resentment, faith in this Creator/Creature
relationship should lead to acceptance which leads to vanishment.

Thus recovering for the being that he is playing HIS game, and that
he can call time outs on it periodically to adjust the laws of play,
goes a long ways to making a well and happy being.

No longer human perhaps, for who would call a resentment free
being, human, but recognizable none the less as something to make and
be friends with, in yourself and in others.

The creature doesn't mind playing other people's games too, but
only by HIS choice, and if he gets too impressed with someone else's
game he will want to out do it himself in return favor.

Thus games and trade in games have gotten quite involved, and the
competition as to who can make the roughest, toughest, longest lasting
game is in the semi finals.

The games we lose quickly are no fun, the games we win easily are
no fun either. The games that are the most fun are the games that put a
load on our motor and keep it there.

The fun is in the chase, the quality of that dance from conception
to attainment called time and the effort to win that flows through it.

Caught between the desire for greatness and seriousness, the being
dances as if on the ball floor of hell, dodging the gauntlet of fire to
win whatever bauble he envisions is worth the danger of failure and
defeat.

The only mercy is that if he is defeated utterly, and I do mean
*UTTERLY*, he wakes up to Eternal Omni Awesome Peace again as if the
whole thing never happened.

He designed it this way as his backup out should he never win at
anything ever again.

Thus although the player pretends he wants to win, down deep he
knows the glory is in the play.

In the ideal game, he will play forever and then win at the end
just before his energy runs out :)

Much art only exists where there is form in motion, and thus time,
and time only exists where there is separation between conception and
attainment.

Thus the hardest games are the games of long duration, because they
were and are the most fun, but many of them may be forgotten by now, as
they went on 'too long'.

No they didn't, he's just saying that to keep them going.

If he didn't complain about the game, they might all vanish on him
and everyone else too.

Thus your preclear may be found to be in a state of trying to continue a
game by resisting it, not playing it fully, or trying to win a game by
losing it.

These inversions need to be handled so the preclear can come back to
orientation about what game it is he really wants to play and what game
he is, and has been, playing anyhow born of high appreciation for
ludicrous demise.

Every thing else will handle itself once the vectors of game play
are reoriented towards action and ability and willingness, nay
eagerness, to be here.

Get the idea of Eternal Eagerness.

That games of seriousness and greatness run on courage does not in
any way change any of the above.

Homer

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com

Thu May 3 01:00:14 EDT 2007

======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sun Sep 22 01:07:06 EDT 2013
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore494.memo
Send mail to archive.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning but
Not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFSPnr6URT1lqxE3HERAimZAJ4ycr4aw4IeGOWQ4rMNocLME3XbswCgohLN
Up3mRInVwq1mNgxdcHPKCAA=
=FEAc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l