-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
anonymous@electra.lightlink.com wrote:
>I do NOT think you are "clear." I have NEVER met anyone in or out of
>borgdom who meets the many definitions of "clear" bandied about by the
>cult. I have never met a "clear" or "OT" whose case level was even up to
>death. RON was down in CRIMINALITY and MUST BE CONTRIBUTED TO, and
>everyone else was LOOKING UP to him. The concept of clear is a FRAUDULENT
>LIE, and functions as a WRONG ITEM to send you into listing error frenzy,
>and spend megabucks on subsequent "handling." Forget about clear.
>Consider tone level.
Half of that indicates to me, and the other half says, wait I
*KNOW* clear exists...
There is a definition of clear wandering around that at least
makes sense to me. Basically it is, no longer *REACTS* uncontrollably
to the force and pain of restimulation of the reactive mind.
Clear: Restimulation -> Choice -> Dramatization
Non Clear: Restimulation -> Dramatization
Non clears, when something turns on, react instantly to it, they
have abdicated their choice in the matter. Its not that they
have no choice, its that there is no moment of space time in there
in which to insert the possibility of choice.
Their time track also responds instantly to the auditor's
commands and not their own. Thus they can not solo but need dual, and
CAN dual.
Clears have been able to put a moment of choice between
restimulation and reaction, they may still react, but they know they
are, and they CAN not react if they have a reason not to. Their time
tracks no longer respond at all to the auditor's command,s they have
to MAKE it do it, if they are of a mind, and they can solo, and often
CAN'T dual, or when they are dualing, they are actually soloing along
with the dual.
Now you all know I have this *THING* in my body, like the alien
creature that crawled out of the guys chest and scurried across the
floor in Aliens 1.
Probably just me twisting my brain into a pretzel, but its bad
none the less, absolutely mind destroying terrifying actually.
Many years ago, I was working with this thing in my room one day,
oh back in 1974 or so, and it was just getting worse and worse and
worse, and I was getting more and more frustrated, the body was
beginning to lose its temper, and all of a sudden this huge fountain
of or really dark destructive painful anger start to well up in me, I
was really ready to dramatize all over the place and be as destructive
as I could be.
Instead I did nothing, I just stood there still, essentially made
the decision to let the thing in my body hurt me as much as it wanted
to without a single protest or erg of resistence out of me.
In a flash, WHAM! the whole room, my anger, my consciousness, turned
into total delicious glorious beauty. *WAY* beyond any acid I had
ever done.
'Delicious Anger' was the phrase I later used to describe it, or
Classy Anger. The pain just went out of it, all that was left was
pure unadorned gorgeous pleasure. I was still angry but it was pure
joy, and the Gold Light all around me and beginings of Christ
Conscoiusness were just too beautiful to behold for long.
Kind of left me in Aghast at how much beauty there can be in one
conscious mind.
Never been able to replicate that experience, although I still
use 'let it hurt me as much as it wants to' when things get
intractable.
But its an example of the choice to not react, not draamtize, not
go out of valence and dramatize permanent destruction.
So perhaps that is a state of clear under this definition. It
doesn't mean the reactive mind is gone, it doesn't even really mean I
know I am mocking it up, because Lord Save me *NOTHING* I know of
under sun, moon and stars, not all the beings in the world, not all
the hosts in heaven, not all the Gods in eternity, could mockup this
son of a bitch from hell, let alone me, but it does mean that a moment
of conscious choice has been reinserted between the moment of
restimulation and the moment of dramatization.
If such a moment slips away from me or gets the better of me, I
can catch it after the dramatization, and then re run the moment of
restim -> xxx -> dramatization over and over until I RE INSERT that
moment of choice in place, so that that particular sequence won't
happen out of my control again. I may still dramatize it again, but
it will be choice rather than having it slip out of my control.
This is in part why I dramatize so much, trying to keep it in
practice so the pressue doesn't build up to a point where I *HAVE* to
dramatize. My body and my life are a boiling kettle with the lid
locked on tight, and every unimaginable thing trying to crawl out from
under it, should I let it off for even a moment.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Jul 31 12:06:02 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/hom51.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFXniHqURT1lqxE3HERAtZJAJ4iZIu+whegb+mJq0DpfnZSu2lEjwCgpXwp
PWQH+skW1/Z7FCJuWim2Q5g=
=zNFu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Sunday, July 31, 2016
ADORE905 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
GAMES VIII
WHAT TO AUDIT
The preclear wants sympathy.
The auditor wants a confession.
The preclear wants advice, he wants to be told what to do.
The auditor wants to know what he IS doing.
The preclear thinks that the way to solve any problem is to DO
something more.
The auditor knows that more DOING won't solve anything, except make
problems persist better.
THE NATURE OF THE GAME and FAIR GAME
The preclear is fighting a game of ferocity and bone crushing
violence.
Of seriousness, importance, permanence and pain.
Of forevers and nevers.
Of life and death, both as a mortal meatball headed to death
forever, and as an immortal spirit headed to hell forever. He will be
trying to do both at the same time.
Each side of the game has an image of the other's intention, and
how it leads to death for himself and those he loves.
Since death is the perceived outcome of the other's intention, the
only solution to those who purvey death, is death.
To kill those who are killing.
Thus the overts of importance to this conflict, particularly the
continuous present time overts which keep the case alive, are the
efforts to stop, shut up, silence, pin down, imprison, enslave, torture,
damn, terminate, crush, blow up, smash, destroy, murder, kamikaze or
suicide mission the other side into hell or nonexistence forever.
To render inoperable.
You see that's the essence of Anti Adoration, which along with
Adoration of your friends, powers the whole thing.
"Adoration is Operation, if you adore something, operate it" -
Adore.
The opposite of To Adore is To Abhor.
The opposite of To Operate is To Crush.
Well people just love to anti adore things they hate and so the
game is afoot.
The irony is that only the purveyors of death and damnation
eventually fall into in the morgues or hells they prepare for others.
All it takes is a wish to purvey, thus attempted murder counts as a
done on the thetan plane.
WANTING OR WISHING SOMETHING TO HAPPEN *IS* DOING, BECAUSE ON THE
THETAN PLANE WANTING CREATES WHAT IS WANTED IN THE MERE CONCEPTION OF
IT.
Desire = Cause.
We are trying to get back to that state, now aren't we, so we can't
disavow mere desire for another's demise as nothing.
You have to conjure up and thus create the fate you wish on others,
and if they don't accept it, guess who is left holding the bag?
Remember a creator can only CREATE HIMSELF AS _____.
He then tries to get others to create themselves AS _____. If he
fails to get others to create themselves as, he forgets to UNCREATE
himself AS, because he continues to try forever more to complete pawning
it off on the other.
Once he gives up trying to get others to create themselves as, he
can then cease peacefully from creating himself as.
Thus no hell can outlast a true confession.
That is absolute.
Dig and don't leave it.
You know Gods create serious games, but they don't create them
seriously.
The thetans sees and knows that to get stuck ramming himself with
all his might into a wall for the rest of time that never gives, he will
have to not know that the wall out persists him because he is worried it
might, and also not know he knew this trap might happen if he just threw
himself into the universe with utter abandon.
There is a moment of beauty in doing this to himself, it is the
beauty of creating something eternally horrible through not know. His
innate faith in himself tells him it won't be forever no matter how hard
he tries to abandon himself. The beauty is so high, he doesn't even
bother to have an exit strategy, he DARES the trap to last for more than
a while.
Thus all things in any time stream MUST end one day, it can't be
any other way.
Thus Immortality in time is always a lie, and Eternality out side
of time is not.
Thus you have a GodSoul creating the most serious possible futures
for himself with a light heartedness that could heal anything.
If you get so messed up so that the hardest heart would cry for
you, and you go to a God level being begging for sympathy and
co-miseration, he will laugh at you with unfathomably deep respect.
Take a moment to understand that statement.
It is the difference between a human and an OT, the human may cry
with you, or they may laugh at you with CONTEMPT, but never ever will
any human laugh at you with respect.
"Oh Gorgeous and most Excaliper Lord,
Master of Magnificence and Respect..." - Adore
And indeed the only way to heal anything is to contact the moment
of gorgeous lightheartedness with which the die was cast, for it is that
beauty which powers the GOING IN.
That beauty is the last moment of being out before going in, and in
that moment one can simply just not go in, leave it for another day.
Thus practice coming in, puts you out long enough to change your
mind and decide to stay out.
CASE ADDRESS
All one needs to do to open a case in present time is address THE
PRESENT TIME INTENTS TOWARDS FOREVER DEMISE.
Such games of ludicrous demise do not take place between people as
such but between concepts of people.
Thus it is not mother who is the problem so much as it is MOTHERS.
If there hadn't been a problem with MOTHERS in general, mother
wouldn't have ended up in the wild fire like she did with the child.
Thus on the second dynamic of family, one doesn't audit Daddy and
Daddy Jr., one audits FATHERS (DADDYS) and SONS, MOTHERS AND DAUGHTERS,
PARENTS AND CHILDREN, HUSBANDS AND WIVES, and every possible cross
relationship between them, including all relatives, ancestors and heirs
in the past and the future.
Although it might seem that a child's life is mostly tied up in the
aberrations of his second dynamic, family mostly acts as a restimulator
for the much bigger games that are in swing on the higher dynamics.
Why is the child in a body? Probably to enhance mankind or some
such thing, you see. Oh brother, you had better know your opposition
before you enter that game with your finger in the air and swinging your
ax.
When the cost of failure is atomic war, the issue of life and death
FOR EVERYONE is branded brightly on the entrance to such a game.
The only thing that can cause death is death. A preclear can not
die psychosomatically of a game of chess. He can however die from
playing the game of wiping out evil at all costs.
He tries to murder the murderers.
Then one day he fails to murder someone he should have, and lots of
his friends and family die who wouldn't have.
Then on another day he murders someone he shouldn't have, and lots
of people turn on him and his loved ones in retribution.
Then he decides he can't tell who should be murdered or not
murdered any more, and finally decides maybe HE should be murdered.
Worse if he is conjuring up times he WAS murdered as a
justification and template for how he should be murdering others, then
when he fails, he falls back into all those recordings of BEING
MURDERED, and starts to suffer them all in valence in present time.
Then just to make sure he is doing heart felt penance that his
buddies will appreciate for being such a major bumble f*ck, he really
sticks those times of being murdered to himself to a point where HE
STARTS TO DIE FROM IT.
His body starts to rot, his muscles fail, he can't breathe, run or
walk, and when his buddies call him to arms again against real foe, he
just can't lift his sword.
He dies finally in shame or suicide.
He can't lift the sword to swipe the head of a foe, but he can lift
it enough to stick it in his own gut or fall on it.
Deep at the core of every case is such a game, regardless of the
frivolous inanities that it might be dressed in.
In order to get a preclear out of his body, you HAVE to audit what
he is doing in one IN PRESENT TIME to clarity.
You won't find it by ransacking his past though, its a present time
thing, you will only find it by addressing the present time game he is
playing and how he is playing it.
Why he CAME in may not be why he REMAINS in.
The problem is finding the game and shedding light on the players
and how it should be played and how he IS playing it.
Your preclear will be found to be buried up to his ears in code
violations, indecisions, ANDS, regrets, corruptions, temptations and
seductions to change sides, playing one side against the other, trying
to betray the enemy and ending up betraying his friends, engaging
finally in disgrace and ignobility, all of which is leading to
horrendous, horrific and hideous consequences, including leaving himself
alone in his own mind, because he thinks no one on either side could
stand what he has become, particularly those who trusted him to be the
standard code bearer though it all.
He starts off trying to always DO right, and ends up trying to
always BE right, mostly about having DONE WRONG.
Eventually he WILL change sides, become a bum on the street, or
be patient as hell as a patient in hell, depending on his inner
fortitude.
After he has murdered too many with too much collateral damage, he
will decide life would be easier to BE the other side, to whom murdering
innocents was right in the first place.
Eventually he will become sick of that too, and decide to stay
around as a spectator, observer, a.r.s septic or art critic.
But he will no longer be the player in the grand majestic tapestry
of ludicrous demise that he once was, although he might have a vintage
sword or two hanging on his wall for his parlor parties.
He will have fallen down from war is war, to business is war, or
tennis is war, or some such thing.
He is still playing games, and they will be of life and death, but
they will be smaller games harbored within the whirlwind of the original
one.
Real OT case gain for him will involve a step back up in the world.
First you want the War of the Mortals.
Then you want the War of the Immortals.
Then maybe, he will open up on the War of the Eternals.
Homer
GAMES
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games1
GAMES II
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games2
GAMES III
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games3
GAMES IV
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games4
GAMES V
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games5
GAMES VI
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games6
GAMES VII
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games7
GAMES VIII
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games8
GAMES IX
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games9
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Thu Jun 14 20:49:11 EDT 2012
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Jul 30 12:06:02 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore905.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFXnNBqURT1lqxE3HERAmG5AKDGcT7v6wLSGTNX7Gy6Qjx83Fu2fACeJ/Jt
j+9pmNU7OZZt2FvqVXwT1tI=
=Zjur
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
GAMES VIII
WHAT TO AUDIT
The preclear wants sympathy.
The auditor wants a confession.
The preclear wants advice, he wants to be told what to do.
The auditor wants to know what he IS doing.
The preclear thinks that the way to solve any problem is to DO
something more.
The auditor knows that more DOING won't solve anything, except make
problems persist better.
THE NATURE OF THE GAME and FAIR GAME
The preclear is fighting a game of ferocity and bone crushing
violence.
Of seriousness, importance, permanence and pain.
Of forevers and nevers.
Of life and death, both as a mortal meatball headed to death
forever, and as an immortal spirit headed to hell forever. He will be
trying to do both at the same time.
Each side of the game has an image of the other's intention, and
how it leads to death for himself and those he loves.
Since death is the perceived outcome of the other's intention, the
only solution to those who purvey death, is death.
To kill those who are killing.
Thus the overts of importance to this conflict, particularly the
continuous present time overts which keep the case alive, are the
efforts to stop, shut up, silence, pin down, imprison, enslave, torture,
damn, terminate, crush, blow up, smash, destroy, murder, kamikaze or
suicide mission the other side into hell or nonexistence forever.
To render inoperable.
You see that's the essence of Anti Adoration, which along with
Adoration of your friends, powers the whole thing.
"Adoration is Operation, if you adore something, operate it" -
Adore.
The opposite of To Adore is To Abhor.
The opposite of To Operate is To Crush.
Well people just love to anti adore things they hate and so the
game is afoot.
The irony is that only the purveyors of death and damnation
eventually fall into in the morgues or hells they prepare for others.
All it takes is a wish to purvey, thus attempted murder counts as a
done on the thetan plane.
WANTING OR WISHING SOMETHING TO HAPPEN *IS* DOING, BECAUSE ON THE
THETAN PLANE WANTING CREATES WHAT IS WANTED IN THE MERE CONCEPTION OF
IT.
Desire = Cause.
We are trying to get back to that state, now aren't we, so we can't
disavow mere desire for another's demise as nothing.
You have to conjure up and thus create the fate you wish on others,
and if they don't accept it, guess who is left holding the bag?
Remember a creator can only CREATE HIMSELF AS _____.
He then tries to get others to create themselves AS _____. If he
fails to get others to create themselves as, he forgets to UNCREATE
himself AS, because he continues to try forever more to complete pawning
it off on the other.
Once he gives up trying to get others to create themselves as, he
can then cease peacefully from creating himself as.
Thus no hell can outlast a true confession.
That is absolute.
Dig and don't leave it.
You know Gods create serious games, but they don't create them
seriously.
The thetans sees and knows that to get stuck ramming himself with
all his might into a wall for the rest of time that never gives, he will
have to not know that the wall out persists him because he is worried it
might, and also not know he knew this trap might happen if he just threw
himself into the universe with utter abandon.
There is a moment of beauty in doing this to himself, it is the
beauty of creating something eternally horrible through not know. His
innate faith in himself tells him it won't be forever no matter how hard
he tries to abandon himself. The beauty is so high, he doesn't even
bother to have an exit strategy, he DARES the trap to last for more than
a while.
Thus all things in any time stream MUST end one day, it can't be
any other way.
Thus Immortality in time is always a lie, and Eternality out side
of time is not.
Thus you have a GodSoul creating the most serious possible futures
for himself with a light heartedness that could heal anything.
If you get so messed up so that the hardest heart would cry for
you, and you go to a God level being begging for sympathy and
co-miseration, he will laugh at you with unfathomably deep respect.
Take a moment to understand that statement.
It is the difference between a human and an OT, the human may cry
with you, or they may laugh at you with CONTEMPT, but never ever will
any human laugh at you with respect.
"Oh Gorgeous and most Excaliper Lord,
Master of Magnificence and Respect..." - Adore
And indeed the only way to heal anything is to contact the moment
of gorgeous lightheartedness with which the die was cast, for it is that
beauty which powers the GOING IN.
That beauty is the last moment of being out before going in, and in
that moment one can simply just not go in, leave it for another day.
Thus practice coming in, puts you out long enough to change your
mind and decide to stay out.
CASE ADDRESS
All one needs to do to open a case in present time is address THE
PRESENT TIME INTENTS TOWARDS FOREVER DEMISE.
Such games of ludicrous demise do not take place between people as
such but between concepts of people.
Thus it is not mother who is the problem so much as it is MOTHERS.
If there hadn't been a problem with MOTHERS in general, mother
wouldn't have ended up in the wild fire like she did with the child.
Thus on the second dynamic of family, one doesn't audit Daddy and
Daddy Jr., one audits FATHERS (DADDYS) and SONS, MOTHERS AND DAUGHTERS,
PARENTS AND CHILDREN, HUSBANDS AND WIVES, and every possible cross
relationship between them, including all relatives, ancestors and heirs
in the past and the future.
Although it might seem that a child's life is mostly tied up in the
aberrations of his second dynamic, family mostly acts as a restimulator
for the much bigger games that are in swing on the higher dynamics.
Why is the child in a body? Probably to enhance mankind or some
such thing, you see. Oh brother, you had better know your opposition
before you enter that game with your finger in the air and swinging your
ax.
When the cost of failure is atomic war, the issue of life and death
FOR EVERYONE is branded brightly on the entrance to such a game.
The only thing that can cause death is death. A preclear can not
die psychosomatically of a game of chess. He can however die from
playing the game of wiping out evil at all costs.
He tries to murder the murderers.
Then one day he fails to murder someone he should have, and lots of
his friends and family die who wouldn't have.
Then on another day he murders someone he shouldn't have, and lots
of people turn on him and his loved ones in retribution.
Then he decides he can't tell who should be murdered or not
murdered any more, and finally decides maybe HE should be murdered.
Worse if he is conjuring up times he WAS murdered as a
justification and template for how he should be murdering others, then
when he fails, he falls back into all those recordings of BEING
MURDERED, and starts to suffer them all in valence in present time.
Then just to make sure he is doing heart felt penance that his
buddies will appreciate for being such a major bumble f*ck, he really
sticks those times of being murdered to himself to a point where HE
STARTS TO DIE FROM IT.
His body starts to rot, his muscles fail, he can't breathe, run or
walk, and when his buddies call him to arms again against real foe, he
just can't lift his sword.
He dies finally in shame or suicide.
He can't lift the sword to swipe the head of a foe, but he can lift
it enough to stick it in his own gut or fall on it.
Deep at the core of every case is such a game, regardless of the
frivolous inanities that it might be dressed in.
In order to get a preclear out of his body, you HAVE to audit what
he is doing in one IN PRESENT TIME to clarity.
You won't find it by ransacking his past though, its a present time
thing, you will only find it by addressing the present time game he is
playing and how he is playing it.
Why he CAME in may not be why he REMAINS in.
The problem is finding the game and shedding light on the players
and how it should be played and how he IS playing it.
Your preclear will be found to be buried up to his ears in code
violations, indecisions, ANDS, regrets, corruptions, temptations and
seductions to change sides, playing one side against the other, trying
to betray the enemy and ending up betraying his friends, engaging
finally in disgrace and ignobility, all of which is leading to
horrendous, horrific and hideous consequences, including leaving himself
alone in his own mind, because he thinks no one on either side could
stand what he has become, particularly those who trusted him to be the
standard code bearer though it all.
He starts off trying to always DO right, and ends up trying to
always BE right, mostly about having DONE WRONG.
Eventually he WILL change sides, become a bum on the street, or
be patient as hell as a patient in hell, depending on his inner
fortitude.
After he has murdered too many with too much collateral damage, he
will decide life would be easier to BE the other side, to whom murdering
innocents was right in the first place.
Eventually he will become sick of that too, and decide to stay
around as a spectator, observer, a.r.s septic or art critic.
But he will no longer be the player in the grand majestic tapestry
of ludicrous demise that he once was, although he might have a vintage
sword or two hanging on his wall for his parlor parties.
He will have fallen down from war is war, to business is war, or
tennis is war, or some such thing.
He is still playing games, and they will be of life and death, but
they will be smaller games harbored within the whirlwind of the original
one.
Real OT case gain for him will involve a step back up in the world.
First you want the War of the Mortals.
Then you want the War of the Immortals.
Then maybe, he will open up on the War of the Eternals.
Homer
GAMES
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games1
GAMES II
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games2
GAMES III
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games3
GAMES IV
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games4
GAMES V
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games5
GAMES VI
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games6
GAMES VII
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games7
GAMES VIII
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games8
GAMES IX
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games9
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Thu Jun 14 20:49:11 EDT 2012
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Jul 30 12:06:02 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore905.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFXnNBqURT1lqxE3HERAmG5AKDGcT7v6wLSGTNX7Gy6Qjx83Fu2fACeJ/Jt
j+9pmNU7OZZt2FvqVXwT1tI=
=Zjur
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Friday, July 29, 2016
THE SEARCH FOR PERFECT CERTAINTY
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
THE SEARCH FOR PERFECT CERTAINTY
If you say
"All generalitzations are false"
you have issued a self referencing AND self denying statement.
The statement itself is a generalization and thus by its own
assertion must therefore be false.
If it is false that 'all generalizations are false', then it must
be true that some generalizations may be true.
In which case how would he look for one and how would he know it
when he found it?
In the same way, the person who claims
"I am uncertain of everything."
has issued a self referencing AND self denying statement.
His statement is part of everything, so he has claimed he is
uncertain of it too.
If he is uncertain of his statement, then he has claimed that maybe
his statement is false, which means maybe he IS certain of some things
after all.
In which case, again, how would he search for something he
was perfectly certain of, and how would he know it if he found it?
Therefore, the failure of the search for a perfect certainty can
never be a forgone conclusion.
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
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Fri Jul 29 23:59:02 EDT 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1021.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)
iD8DBQFXnCYGURT1lqxE3HERAl/kAJ4r0gnRjVg0+8TbbOfGQRJ0MRy3/wCeK6o3
p/Peo9B/78ooaKs8Po7OUE8=
=K4wQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
THE SEARCH FOR PERFECT CERTAINTY
If you say
"All generalitzations are false"
you have issued a self referencing AND self denying statement.
The statement itself is a generalization and thus by its own
assertion must therefore be false.
If it is false that 'all generalizations are false', then it must
be true that some generalizations may be true.
In which case how would he look for one and how would he know it
when he found it?
In the same way, the person who claims
"I am uncertain of everything."
has issued a self referencing AND self denying statement.
His statement is part of everything, so he has claimed he is
uncertain of it too.
If he is uncertain of his statement, then he has claimed that maybe
his statement is false, which means maybe he IS certain of some things
after all.
In which case, again, how would he search for something he
was perfectly certain of, and how would he know it if he found it?
Therefore, the failure of the search for a perfect certainty can
never be a forgone conclusion.
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
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Fri Jul 29 23:59:02 EDT 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1021.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)
iD8DBQFXnCYGURT1lqxE3HERAl/kAJ4r0gnRjVg0+8TbbOfGQRJ0MRy3/wCeK6o3
p/Peo9B/78ooaKs8Po7OUE8=
=K4wQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE130 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Is a mental image picture of wood made out of wood?
Is a mental image picture of aluminum made out of aluminum?
Are mental image pictures of wood and aluminum made out of
the same thing?
Is anything made out of wood or aluminum?
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
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Jul 28 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore130.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD4DBQFXmi1pURT1lqxE3HERAss8AJiqE2s7gpCRI02vw/ZfUCI/HWSjAJ9Hyhpg
+h34+kDT/kFPqzDGCidADw==
=HObX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
Is a mental image picture of wood made out of wood?
Is a mental image picture of aluminum made out of aluminum?
Are mental image pictures of wood and aluminum made out of
the same thing?
Is anything made out of wood or aluminum?
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
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Jul 28 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore130.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD4DBQFXmi1pURT1lqxE3HERAss8AJiqE2s7gpCRI02vw/ZfUCI/HWSjAJ9Hyhpg
+h34+kDT/kFPqzDGCidADw==
=HObX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Wednesday, July 27, 2016
LOGIC8 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
So let's take a deeper look at Carol's propositions.
All that comes from God is Good.
All bad comes from Man.
Notice that worded this way, some Good also comes from Man,
that's the whole point of this travail, to learn to be like God.
But let's look at "All bad comes from Man."
What about the plagues, the earthquakes, the tidal waves, the
hurricanes, the volcanoes, the famines that destroy millions of lives,
crushing bodies, leaving little children homeless, splitting lovers
forever.
What about asteroids that take out half the planet and ruin life
for millions of years?
What about suns going super nova destroying entire solar systems
and all civilizations on them forever?
Certainly these did not come from Man, even though Carol once said to
me that people had a choice about living at the bottom of the volcano
so they were responsible for their own suffering.
No these things did not come from man, they come from God the
creator, who created this universe of thermonuclear explosions and
put man on their planets to fend as best he could against the forces
of the night.
So is it true that Only Good comes from God?
If it is not true that only Good comes from God, if in fact both Good
and Bad come from God, what relationship then is there between the IDEAL
OF GOOD and God?
Does God live up to that ideal of Good?
Should Man?
Can Man?
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Jul 27 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/logic8.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFXmNvqURT1lqxE3HERAqL2AJ9Qt031HY/ohA6u+h6yjyBPILP+vgCaAh4r
0qO7RfXqzZbCVSIwsY1KRGY=
=QVFB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
So let's take a deeper look at Carol's propositions.
All that comes from God is Good.
All bad comes from Man.
Notice that worded this way, some Good also comes from Man,
that's the whole point of this travail, to learn to be like God.
But let's look at "All bad comes from Man."
What about the plagues, the earthquakes, the tidal waves, the
hurricanes, the volcanoes, the famines that destroy millions of lives,
crushing bodies, leaving little children homeless, splitting lovers
forever.
What about asteroids that take out half the planet and ruin life
for millions of years?
What about suns going super nova destroying entire solar systems
and all civilizations on them forever?
Certainly these did not come from Man, even though Carol once said to
me that people had a choice about living at the bottom of the volcano
so they were responsible for their own suffering.
No these things did not come from man, they come from God the
creator, who created this universe of thermonuclear explosions and
put man on their planets to fend as best he could against the forces
of the night.
So is it true that Only Good comes from God?
If it is not true that only Good comes from God, if in fact both Good
and Bad come from God, what relationship then is there between the IDEAL
OF GOOD and God?
Does God live up to that ideal of Good?
Should Man?
Can Man?
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Jul 27 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/logic8.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFXmNvqURT1lqxE3HERAqL2AJ9Qt031HY/ohA6u+h6yjyBPILP+vgCaAh4r
0qO7RfXqzZbCVSIwsY1KRGY=
=QVFB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Tuesday, July 26, 2016
PROOF39 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
DELUSION ABOUT ILLUSION
The primary delusion is that something exists independent of what
we perceive. He sees a car and thinks it is a *CAR*, rather than a
colorform picture of a car in his conscious unit.
Say someone gets out of his body with full perception. Chances
are he will be seeing more than the usual physical universe around
him. This universe seems to a a composite universe, with perhaps
multiple universes intersecting and interacting, and higher and lower
levels of each universes interplaying like a layer cake.
With the body's eyes we see the lowest layer of one of the
universes, the one we call the physical universe. Go exterior and
perhaps you start seeing higher levels of the physical universe, and
perhaps intersection areas of other universe.
So say this guy goes exterior and he sees a shadowy figure off in
the distance through the wall etc and his first reaction is "I see a
Ghost!" Ok that's fine. But now he says "It *IS* a Ghost!", or "It
ISN'T a Ghost!" or "I'm not going to believe you are a Ghost until
someone else proves to me you are a Ghost!"
This is going to dry up his perceptions. Why? Because it is
evaluation. He is evaluating for the experience and like evaluating
for a pc, it is death to the experience. He is trying to overlay a
frame work of *TRUTH* on this experience, but its an add on, and an
alter-is.
The truth is "I perceive something that looks like a ghost", anything
more is evaluation.
There are people who don't want to perceive anything that isn't
real. Perhaps they consider it impolite to the God of Reality.
This presumes that things exist independent of our own
perceptions, because "if they exit only in our own perceptions, they
aren't real!"
This also puts the person into the problem of determining what is
actual or not. It's easy to determine what you perceive, if you
perceive it, you perceive it. But how do you determine if something is
'real'?
Unfortunately most people determine if something is actual by
whether or not other people perceive it also. But how did THEY
determine it was actual? It's sort of a catch 22 endless regression,
and what they don't realize is that ultimately actuality had to start
with someone who said "It's actual because I perceive it." That allows
everyone else to say "Well its ok for me to perceive it because its
actual, and I know its actual because Goober says so!"
This is the framework upon which the science of proving actuality
stands.
Science is stuck in the fundamental catch-22 that in order to prove
something is actual it must be observed by 'others'. But how does one
prove the other's exist in the first place?
You can't use others to corroborate your evidence that others
exist.
You gotta go it alone. Once you have determined ALONE that others
exist, you can then feel better if others agree they exist too!
Notice that science itself has little to do with proving the
actuality of things, that's an alter-is twist that certain meatballs put
on it. The scientific method of observation, theory, prediction,
verification and peer revue, actually has nothing to do with
establishing the 'actuality' of anything, only the dependability of the
theory of interactions between these observations and predictions.
Its a further alter-is of things to claim that if things are
dependable, they must be ACTUAL.
Now The Proof has an underlying principle that is usually left out
of the discussions. By far the most important line in the proof is
number 2.
2.) Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Looking at
Effects.
It's simple enough to model, put a video camera out there attached
to a TV screen, and look at the world through the TV screen as your only
mode of perception. If the video camera is pointed at a red car say,
light waves come onto the car and bounce off the car and head for the
camera lens.
The change in the direction of the light waves records the
existence of an external cause out there called the red car. The car is
cause and it EFFECTS the light waves by causing them to bounce.
The light waves go to the video camera and now THEY cause the CCD
screen, the 'retina' of the camera to emit electrical signals, which
travel to the TV set which cause the scanning electron gun to change its
intensity, which causes the phosphors on the screen to light up, which
causes light waves to be emitted from the TV screen towwards your eyes,
which causes YOUR retina to emit eletronic signals to head for your
brain, which causes activity in the visual cortex, which causes
conscious picturs to appear and you see them.
YOU end up looking at effects, namely the pictures in your
consciousness, in order to learn about cause, namely the car many levels
of cause and effect back.
Notice that at no time is the video camera in contact with the car
out there, it is only in contact with light waves that were caused to
change course by the car. The video camera doesn't even actually know
if the car is out there because the light waves could have been bent by
God to make it look like there was a car out there. The video camera
only knows about the effects in itself and those effects do not prove
cause.
OK, so this is Learning across a Distance by Looking at Effects,
and does not produce certainty of cause.
Now what's left out is a deeper analysis of why learning across a
distance implies learning by looking at effects.
Here is what the proof has to say on it.
The primary assertion is if A and B are two different objects, then
then only way B can learn about A is if A is cause and has an effect on
B. B must change state because of A in order for B to learn about A.
This implies that if A has no effect on B, then B can never learn
about A no matter what it does or how much cause B has on A in return.
This also implies that the ONLY thing B can learn about A, is how
A's cause affected B, in other words the only qualities that two objects
can learn about each other are causal relations.
The Proof further says if A and B are separated by a actual
distance, then A and B are two different objects.
So we have
2a.) If A and B are separated by a distance, then A and B are two
different objects.
2b.) If A and B are two different objects, then the only way B can
learn about A is by looking at effects in itself caused by A.
Therefore
2.) If B is learning about A across a distance, then B must be
learning by looking at effects.
So you see how 2.) is derived?
Ok now notice that the proof says if A and B are two different
objects, they must learn about each other by looking at effects in
themselves caused by the other, and therefore can't have certainty of
each other at all.
Notice this is true even if A and B are NOT separated by a
distance. Even if A and B are on the same point, but are nonetheless
two different objects, they must learn by looking at effects in
themselves caused by the other, and therefore may never enjoy certainty
of each other's existence or cause.
Thus the only way for A and B to learn with certainty about each
other, they must be the same object!
*THEY MUST BE ABLE TO SEE THE CAUSE THAT IS CAUSING THE EFFECT
AND NOT JUST THE EFFECT THAT IS CAUSED*
As long as cause and effect are two different events or objects,
even if they happen on the same point of space and time, then effect
can never prove cause with certainty.
Effect can prove cause with certainty only if cause and effect
are one and the same object, in which case one is learning about
the cause by looking at the CAUSE.
That is an oxymoron to normal established physics by the way.
Since the conscious self is able to learn with certainty about
the existence of cause in its conscious picture color forms, one
therefore has to conclude that the self IS the same object as its
perceived color forms.
In other words you ARE what you perceive.
Self = Effect.
Effect = Cause.
Therefore Self = Cause and Effect at the same time.
Now a meatball will start saying "Homer is saying I am a tree!"
No, trees do not exist, only your perception of the tree exists as
a colorform picture in your conscious unit. Yes you are the colorform
when you perceive the tree, that is why you can perceive the existence
and cause of that colorform, because you are learning by looking AT
CAUSE, and not learning by looking at effects.
Even if we believe that trees exist, its still not true that you
are the tree, you are however the colorform you see of the tree, even
though holographically the colorform looks like it is 'out there' where
you fancy the tree to be.
The virtual reality theory of the physical universe however claims
that trees do not exist at all, nor does space or time of any kind, only
colorform pictures of such in the eye of each conscious unit.
Each person has his own colorform of the tree, we aren't all seeing
the same physical conscious picture. The pictures may look alike, but
are individual pictures for each being. Each being sees only his own
colorforms at all times.
Since space itself is an illusion, all observers are on the same
point/place, and the idea that someone else is 'over there' in your
picture is just plain wrong. Everyone is 'here' where you are.
So if you take a look at Quantum Mechanics, its primary departure
from Newtonian mechanics, aside from a bad case of fuzzy wuzzies, is
that 'what actuality is' depends on the process of observation itself.
They say that actuality doesn't actually exist until it is
observed, and that the process of observation kind of precipitates pre
actuality into actual actuality according to the process of observation
itself. This means that different events of observation might
precipitate slightly different final actualities.
If you take a look at what they are saying in the context of the
proof and the idea that the entire external universe is a hologram of
coloforms, then you can see where it might be leading.
The proof says that the perceiver and the perceived are one and
the same thing because certainty of cause and existence of cause flows
between perceived and perceiver.
Perceived = Cause
Perceiver = Effect or Learner
The only way perceiver can be perfectly certain of perceived is if
the perceiver is can perceive the CAUSE and NECESSITY of correctness
flowing from the perceived to the perceiver.
The virtual reality theory says that all there is are perceivers
and perceiveds and that therefore things are only as actual as they are
perceived, no more and no less.
Thus of course the process of observation 'precipitates' actuality,
as observation IS actuality.
Hopefully some day the Quantum Boys will wake up, and hopefully we
have made a few meatballs roll over in the graves they call their life.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Tue Jul 26 15:30:38 EDT 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/proof39.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)
iD8DBQFXl7peURT1lqxE3HERAo9HAJ4sIy31bEFYMoecSDtRpyNFNKN5ogCfSHYV
hFcUkDaB28ft8xdLyUgljys=
=VUgd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
DELUSION ABOUT ILLUSION
The primary delusion is that something exists independent of what
we perceive. He sees a car and thinks it is a *CAR*, rather than a
colorform picture of a car in his conscious unit.
Say someone gets out of his body with full perception. Chances
are he will be seeing more than the usual physical universe around
him. This universe seems to a a composite universe, with perhaps
multiple universes intersecting and interacting, and higher and lower
levels of each universes interplaying like a layer cake.
With the body's eyes we see the lowest layer of one of the
universes, the one we call the physical universe. Go exterior and
perhaps you start seeing higher levels of the physical universe, and
perhaps intersection areas of other universe.
So say this guy goes exterior and he sees a shadowy figure off in
the distance through the wall etc and his first reaction is "I see a
Ghost!" Ok that's fine. But now he says "It *IS* a Ghost!", or "It
ISN'T a Ghost!" or "I'm not going to believe you are a Ghost until
someone else proves to me you are a Ghost!"
This is going to dry up his perceptions. Why? Because it is
evaluation. He is evaluating for the experience and like evaluating
for a pc, it is death to the experience. He is trying to overlay a
frame work of *TRUTH* on this experience, but its an add on, and an
alter-is.
The truth is "I perceive something that looks like a ghost", anything
more is evaluation.
There are people who don't want to perceive anything that isn't
real. Perhaps they consider it impolite to the God of Reality.
This presumes that things exist independent of our own
perceptions, because "if they exit only in our own perceptions, they
aren't real!"
This also puts the person into the problem of determining what is
actual or not. It's easy to determine what you perceive, if you
perceive it, you perceive it. But how do you determine if something is
'real'?
Unfortunately most people determine if something is actual by
whether or not other people perceive it also. But how did THEY
determine it was actual? It's sort of a catch 22 endless regression,
and what they don't realize is that ultimately actuality had to start
with someone who said "It's actual because I perceive it." That allows
everyone else to say "Well its ok for me to perceive it because its
actual, and I know its actual because Goober says so!"
This is the framework upon which the science of proving actuality
stands.
Science is stuck in the fundamental catch-22 that in order to prove
something is actual it must be observed by 'others'. But how does one
prove the other's exist in the first place?
You can't use others to corroborate your evidence that others
exist.
You gotta go it alone. Once you have determined ALONE that others
exist, you can then feel better if others agree they exist too!
Notice that science itself has little to do with proving the
actuality of things, that's an alter-is twist that certain meatballs put
on it. The scientific method of observation, theory, prediction,
verification and peer revue, actually has nothing to do with
establishing the 'actuality' of anything, only the dependability of the
theory of interactions between these observations and predictions.
Its a further alter-is of things to claim that if things are
dependable, they must be ACTUAL.
Now The Proof has an underlying principle that is usually left out
of the discussions. By far the most important line in the proof is
number 2.
2.) Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Looking at
Effects.
It's simple enough to model, put a video camera out there attached
to a TV screen, and look at the world through the TV screen as your only
mode of perception. If the video camera is pointed at a red car say,
light waves come onto the car and bounce off the car and head for the
camera lens.
The change in the direction of the light waves records the
existence of an external cause out there called the red car. The car is
cause and it EFFECTS the light waves by causing them to bounce.
The light waves go to the video camera and now THEY cause the CCD
screen, the 'retina' of the camera to emit electrical signals, which
travel to the TV set which cause the scanning electron gun to change its
intensity, which causes the phosphors on the screen to light up, which
causes light waves to be emitted from the TV screen towwards your eyes,
which causes YOUR retina to emit eletronic signals to head for your
brain, which causes activity in the visual cortex, which causes
conscious picturs to appear and you see them.
YOU end up looking at effects, namely the pictures in your
consciousness, in order to learn about cause, namely the car many levels
of cause and effect back.
Notice that at no time is the video camera in contact with the car
out there, it is only in contact with light waves that were caused to
change course by the car. The video camera doesn't even actually know
if the car is out there because the light waves could have been bent by
God to make it look like there was a car out there. The video camera
only knows about the effects in itself and those effects do not prove
cause.
OK, so this is Learning across a Distance by Looking at Effects,
and does not produce certainty of cause.
Now what's left out is a deeper analysis of why learning across a
distance implies learning by looking at effects.
Here is what the proof has to say on it.
The primary assertion is if A and B are two different objects, then
then only way B can learn about A is if A is cause and has an effect on
B. B must change state because of A in order for B to learn about A.
This implies that if A has no effect on B, then B can never learn
about A no matter what it does or how much cause B has on A in return.
This also implies that the ONLY thing B can learn about A, is how
A's cause affected B, in other words the only qualities that two objects
can learn about each other are causal relations.
The Proof further says if A and B are separated by a actual
distance, then A and B are two different objects.
So we have
2a.) If A and B are separated by a distance, then A and B are two
different objects.
2b.) If A and B are two different objects, then the only way B can
learn about A is by looking at effects in itself caused by A.
Therefore
2.) If B is learning about A across a distance, then B must be
learning by looking at effects.
So you see how 2.) is derived?
Ok now notice that the proof says if A and B are two different
objects, they must learn about each other by looking at effects in
themselves caused by the other, and therefore can't have certainty of
each other at all.
Notice this is true even if A and B are NOT separated by a
distance. Even if A and B are on the same point, but are nonetheless
two different objects, they must learn by looking at effects in
themselves caused by the other, and therefore may never enjoy certainty
of each other's existence or cause.
Thus the only way for A and B to learn with certainty about each
other, they must be the same object!
*THEY MUST BE ABLE TO SEE THE CAUSE THAT IS CAUSING THE EFFECT
AND NOT JUST THE EFFECT THAT IS CAUSED*
As long as cause and effect are two different events or objects,
even if they happen on the same point of space and time, then effect
can never prove cause with certainty.
Effect can prove cause with certainty only if cause and effect
are one and the same object, in which case one is learning about
the cause by looking at the CAUSE.
That is an oxymoron to normal established physics by the way.
Since the conscious self is able to learn with certainty about
the existence of cause in its conscious picture color forms, one
therefore has to conclude that the self IS the same object as its
perceived color forms.
In other words you ARE what you perceive.
Self = Effect.
Effect = Cause.
Therefore Self = Cause and Effect at the same time.
Now a meatball will start saying "Homer is saying I am a tree!"
No, trees do not exist, only your perception of the tree exists as
a colorform picture in your conscious unit. Yes you are the colorform
when you perceive the tree, that is why you can perceive the existence
and cause of that colorform, because you are learning by looking AT
CAUSE, and not learning by looking at effects.
Even if we believe that trees exist, its still not true that you
are the tree, you are however the colorform you see of the tree, even
though holographically the colorform looks like it is 'out there' where
you fancy the tree to be.
The virtual reality theory of the physical universe however claims
that trees do not exist at all, nor does space or time of any kind, only
colorform pictures of such in the eye of each conscious unit.
Each person has his own colorform of the tree, we aren't all seeing
the same physical conscious picture. The pictures may look alike, but
are individual pictures for each being. Each being sees only his own
colorforms at all times.
Since space itself is an illusion, all observers are on the same
point/place, and the idea that someone else is 'over there' in your
picture is just plain wrong. Everyone is 'here' where you are.
So if you take a look at Quantum Mechanics, its primary departure
from Newtonian mechanics, aside from a bad case of fuzzy wuzzies, is
that 'what actuality is' depends on the process of observation itself.
They say that actuality doesn't actually exist until it is
observed, and that the process of observation kind of precipitates pre
actuality into actual actuality according to the process of observation
itself. This means that different events of observation might
precipitate slightly different final actualities.
If you take a look at what they are saying in the context of the
proof and the idea that the entire external universe is a hologram of
coloforms, then you can see where it might be leading.
The proof says that the perceiver and the perceived are one and
the same thing because certainty of cause and existence of cause flows
between perceived and perceiver.
Perceived = Cause
Perceiver = Effect or Learner
The only way perceiver can be perfectly certain of perceived is if
the perceiver is can perceive the CAUSE and NECESSITY of correctness
flowing from the perceived to the perceiver.
The virtual reality theory says that all there is are perceivers
and perceiveds and that therefore things are only as actual as they are
perceived, no more and no less.
Thus of course the process of observation 'precipitates' actuality,
as observation IS actuality.
Hopefully some day the Quantum Boys will wake up, and hopefully we
have made a few meatballs roll over in the graves they call their life.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Tue Jul 26 15:30:38 EDT 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/proof39.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)
iD8DBQFXl7peURT1lqxE3HERAo9HAJ4sIy31bEFYMoecSDtRpyNFNKN5ogCfSHYV
hFcUkDaB28ft8xdLyUgljys=
=VUgd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Monday, July 25, 2016
ADORE501 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
ZERO DIMENSIONALITY
Discover Magazine, Special Issue. 5/2007
Article 'In NO Time",
"As Rovelli explains it, in quantum mechanics, all particles of
matter and energy can also be described as waves. And waves have an
unusual property: An infinite number of them can exist in the same
location. If time and space are one day shown to consist of quanta, the
quanta could all exist piled together in a single dimensionless point.
"Space and time in some sense melt in this picture," says Rovelli.
"There is no space any more (and no time). There are just quanta kind
of living on top of one another without being immersed in space."
My comments:
Been saying this since 1973, Learning with Certainty across a
distance is impossible, since consciousness IS perfect certainty, it can
have no distance in space or time (dimension).
Existence consists of a multi faceted ZERO dimensional operating
actuality.
What they will find, once they get below the Planck scale of 10*-43
are quanta of consciousness, and all the rest of the macro scopic nonsense
that we call MEST will be merely quantum dreams in quantum conscious
units.
It is a very big error to consider that consciousness is a
mechanical macroscopic phenomenon, ie chemistry bubbling away at 98.6.
Mechanical macroscopic phenonmenon are illusions of space and time,
consciousness is not an illusion, thus consciousness is not a mechanical
macroscopic phenomenon of any kind.
Consciousness is the substrate on which illusions are displayed.
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 May 19 19:54:01 EDT 2007
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Jul 25 12:06:02 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore501.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFXljjqURT1lqxE3HERAuigAJsEja8WoBtl/FhHGBEpHcQ4Zx8yCQCfZ3yL
U2UeK5osXeW2lHQf3CLgw00=
=N9u9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
ZERO DIMENSIONALITY
Discover Magazine, Special Issue. 5/2007
Article 'In NO Time",
"As Rovelli explains it, in quantum mechanics, all particles of
matter and energy can also be described as waves. And waves have an
unusual property: An infinite number of them can exist in the same
location. If time and space are one day shown to consist of quanta, the
quanta could all exist piled together in a single dimensionless point.
"Space and time in some sense melt in this picture," says Rovelli.
"There is no space any more (and no time). There are just quanta kind
of living on top of one another without being immersed in space."
My comments:
Been saying this since 1973, Learning with Certainty across a
distance is impossible, since consciousness IS perfect certainty, it can
have no distance in space or time (dimension).
Existence consists of a multi faceted ZERO dimensional operating
actuality.
What they will find, once they get below the Planck scale of 10*-43
are quanta of consciousness, and all the rest of the macro scopic nonsense
that we call MEST will be merely quantum dreams in quantum conscious
units.
It is a very big error to consider that consciousness is a
mechanical macroscopic phenomenon, ie chemistry bubbling away at 98.6.
Mechanical macroscopic phenonmenon are illusions of space and time,
consciousness is not an illusion, thus consciousness is not a mechanical
macroscopic phenomenon of any kind.
Consciousness is the substrate on which illusions are displayed.
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 May 19 19:54:01 EDT 2007
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Jul 25 12:06:02 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore501.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFXljjqURT1lqxE3HERAuigAJsEja8WoBtl/FhHGBEpHcQ4Zx8yCQCfZ3yL
U2UeK5osXeW2lHQf3CLgw00=
=N9u9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Sunday, July 24, 2016
ADORE85 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
ON THE WINGS OF THE DICOM II
>Hi
>Thanks for responding.
>The URL for your posting is:
>
>http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/adore
>
> I have never run terminals that were goals, so I don't understand
>what you mean by "run the item". I didn't do the clearing course or
>OT levels so I don't know the procedure. What I am looking for is a
>process that I can run for years if need be (as a way to compliment
>and give me diversion from running just BT's forever), that will keep
>on finding and blowing charge.
>
> I am doing "free solo" on BT's and it has been great. And I have
>tried UCP and felt totally stoned after the session, and couldn't run
>BT's via Free Solo method very well since then, so I am afraid to try
>UCP now, maybe I should have run a havingness process after but I
>didn't. Your suggestions are greatly appreciated.
>
XXXXX
OK, first each person has their own path.
Some people, if you don't GIVE them any tech, they don't HAVE any
tech. You see the problem with this, right?
Each person must come up with their own tech ultimately for their
final approaches to total freedom. Yes other's can benefit from this,
so share what you find. But my route won't be yours, hopefully! :)
Now to answer your question.
The primary thing the being is doing wrong is dramatizing.
To dramatize means to bring drama to, and then to act out within
the context of that drama with serious seriousness.
Drama is permanence, importance, seriousness and pain.
All forms of permanent loss etc. Notce that even being stuck
with a gorgeous girl forever is a form of permanent loss to a being
that wants the freedom to come and go forever for free.
Ok, so the being is dramatizing 'items'.
Take respect and not respect. He respects some things, and
doesn't respect other things, and he takes his respect VERY SERIOUSLY.
You see, it owns him, he doesn't own it. He isn't free to make things
he would not respect and to destroy things he does respect, but as a
sovereign Creator in control of his own experience as a Creature, he
has to be able to make both sides of the wings of the dicom. The
Void, freedom, lives in the center of the wings.
He is parked at the respect end of the wing, trying to be
respectable and fighting everything that is not respectable, and thus
sliding ever so inexorably towards the other side of the wings.
Eventually he becomes an abomination.
So you run any process you know that will break the process of
dramatization, of taking respect and not respect seriously,
permanently, importantly and with pain etc.
You have simple dianetics "Locate an incident of respect/not
respect", you have all the Grades, Comm, problems, withholds, arc
breaks, make wrongs, service fac computations on the subjects of
respect and not respect, and everyone else's also. You have goals and
terminals on respect and not respect and you have the whole CDEINR
scale on respect and not respect.
You also have Adorian stair cases like
The Beauty of Respect
The Ugly of Respect
The Beauty of No Respect
The Ugly of No Respect
So that adds up to about 2 million different 'processes' to run
on the pc and his items, so you choose the one that indicates.
Simply "What do you respect?", "What do you not respect?" is
enough to break into the dramatization while it is going on and kick
the being upstairs to Creator/Author and away from Creature/Character.
We want the being willing and able to artistically make both
sides of all dicoms, good and evil, light and dark, love and hate etc.
The Creator as Author creates tapestries of space/time manifestations
of these dicoms at war with each other.
God is not good. God is Author. Creatures/Characters are good
or evil, and to the degree that they take themselves seriously,
permanently, importantly and with pain, they lose. Because there is
no willingness to create the other side. Once the Good get the idea
"Hey lets create some evil so we can have a game!" they are no longer
good, they are Author again. That is the final E/P of all auditing.
It doesn't matter WHO you audit, yourself, your body, your
friends, your families, bugs, animals, universes, gods, BT's, etc.
Everyone is dramatizing. Wherever you can get a wedge in that
dramatization, no matter who it is, you free someone from something.
The point is to find deep items, for example just for yuks, try
1.) Respect - Not Respect
2.) Chosen - Not Chosen
3.) Benefit - Detriment
Spot them in operation, that is the basic 'process'. Everything
more complicated than that is rote mechanical auditing that works and
serves its purpose but eventually is just so much dev-t, to a mind
that can make and not make at will.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Jul 24 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore85.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFXlOdpURT1lqxE3HERAvMHAJ9dPNOeGCgZkIBDknQRDYS2Km8VcwCeIaeM
FjzEyBsccZyNNIbyPGdCbjU=
=X+Tg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
ON THE WINGS OF THE DICOM II
>Hi
>Thanks for responding.
>The URL for your posting is:
>
>http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/adore
>
> I have never run terminals that were goals, so I don't understand
>what you mean by "run the item". I didn't do the clearing course or
>OT levels so I don't know the procedure. What I am looking for is a
>process that I can run for years if need be (as a way to compliment
>and give me diversion from running just BT's forever), that will keep
>on finding and blowing charge.
>
> I am doing "free solo" on BT's and it has been great. And I have
>tried UCP and felt totally stoned after the session, and couldn't run
>BT's via Free Solo method very well since then, so I am afraid to try
>UCP now, maybe I should have run a havingness process after but I
>didn't. Your suggestions are greatly appreciated.
>
XXXXX
OK, first each person has their own path.
Some people, if you don't GIVE them any tech, they don't HAVE any
tech. You see the problem with this, right?
Each person must come up with their own tech ultimately for their
final approaches to total freedom. Yes other's can benefit from this,
so share what you find. But my route won't be yours, hopefully! :)
Now to answer your question.
The primary thing the being is doing wrong is dramatizing.
To dramatize means to bring drama to, and then to act out within
the context of that drama with serious seriousness.
Drama is permanence, importance, seriousness and pain.
All forms of permanent loss etc. Notce that even being stuck
with a gorgeous girl forever is a form of permanent loss to a being
that wants the freedom to come and go forever for free.
Ok, so the being is dramatizing 'items'.
Take respect and not respect. He respects some things, and
doesn't respect other things, and he takes his respect VERY SERIOUSLY.
You see, it owns him, he doesn't own it. He isn't free to make things
he would not respect and to destroy things he does respect, but as a
sovereign Creator in control of his own experience as a Creature, he
has to be able to make both sides of the wings of the dicom. The
Void, freedom, lives in the center of the wings.
He is parked at the respect end of the wing, trying to be
respectable and fighting everything that is not respectable, and thus
sliding ever so inexorably towards the other side of the wings.
Eventually he becomes an abomination.
So you run any process you know that will break the process of
dramatization, of taking respect and not respect seriously,
permanently, importantly and with pain etc.
You have simple dianetics "Locate an incident of respect/not
respect", you have all the Grades, Comm, problems, withholds, arc
breaks, make wrongs, service fac computations on the subjects of
respect and not respect, and everyone else's also. You have goals and
terminals on respect and not respect and you have the whole CDEINR
scale on respect and not respect.
You also have Adorian stair cases like
The Beauty of Respect
The Ugly of Respect
The Beauty of No Respect
The Ugly of No Respect
So that adds up to about 2 million different 'processes' to run
on the pc and his items, so you choose the one that indicates.
Simply "What do you respect?", "What do you not respect?" is
enough to break into the dramatization while it is going on and kick
the being upstairs to Creator/Author and away from Creature/Character.
We want the being willing and able to artistically make both
sides of all dicoms, good and evil, light and dark, love and hate etc.
The Creator as Author creates tapestries of space/time manifestations
of these dicoms at war with each other.
God is not good. God is Author. Creatures/Characters are good
or evil, and to the degree that they take themselves seriously,
permanently, importantly and with pain, they lose. Because there is
no willingness to create the other side. Once the Good get the idea
"Hey lets create some evil so we can have a game!" they are no longer
good, they are Author again. That is the final E/P of all auditing.
It doesn't matter WHO you audit, yourself, your body, your
friends, your families, bugs, animals, universes, gods, BT's, etc.
Everyone is dramatizing. Wherever you can get a wedge in that
dramatization, no matter who it is, you free someone from something.
The point is to find deep items, for example just for yuks, try
1.) Respect - Not Respect
2.) Chosen - Not Chosen
3.) Benefit - Detriment
Spot them in operation, that is the basic 'process'. Everything
more complicated than that is rote mechanical auditing that works and
serves its purpose but eventually is just so much dev-t, to a mind
that can make and not make at will.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Jul 24 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore85.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFXlOdpURT1lqxE3HERAvMHAJ9dPNOeGCgZkIBDknQRDYS2Km8VcwCeIaeM
FjzEyBsccZyNNIbyPGdCbjU=
=X+Tg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
adore155 (fwd)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 06:06:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: Clearing Archive Roboposter <roboposter@lightlink.com>
To: clear-l@mailman.lightlink.com
Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology
Subject: adore155
THE HUMAN AND OT's
The human's very desire to change the present to protect the future
guarantees his failure.
It is the OT's sense of humor and lack of seriousness in all
matters than assures his success.
One can change anything that one is willing to have put there, and
is willing TO PUT IT THERE NOW, then one ceases putting it there, and puts
something else there.
If one is working on a 'this should never have happened' basis,
then of course one is not putting it there, and thus one can not
cease putting it there.
The human is very serious about CHANGING things, to make
them better.
The OT is merely changing his mind about the brush strokes
that create reality.
The more OT a person is, the more OK everything is now as it is,
but his artistic sense will still cause him to change and perfect
things.
Humans are moved by horrow and sorrow to change things forever,
OT's move themselves out of an inner sense of art.
That is in part why OT's won't demonstrate powers, they could care
less about the plaintive cries of the doomed.
The OT sees the humor to ludicrous demise and appreciates the show.
The human is trying to stop the show.
The OT is trying to improve it.
Homer
Wed Nov 5 20:03:27 EST 2014
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Jul 24 06:06:02 EDT 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore155
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.
_______________________________________________
Clear-L mailing list
Clear-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/clear-l
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 06:06:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: Clearing Archive Roboposter <roboposter@lightlink.com>
To: clear-l@mailman.lightlink.com
Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology
Subject: adore155
THE HUMAN AND OT's
The human's very desire to change the present to protect the future
guarantees his failure.
It is the OT's sense of humor and lack of seriousness in all
matters than assures his success.
One can change anything that one is willing to have put there, and
is willing TO PUT IT THERE NOW, then one ceases putting it there, and puts
something else there.
If one is working on a 'this should never have happened' basis,
then of course one is not putting it there, and thus one can not
cease putting it there.
The human is very serious about CHANGING things, to make
them better.
The OT is merely changing his mind about the brush strokes
that create reality.
The more OT a person is, the more OK everything is now as it is,
but his artistic sense will still cause him to change and perfect
things.
Humans are moved by horrow and sorrow to change things forever,
OT's move themselves out of an inner sense of art.
That is in part why OT's won't demonstrate powers, they could care
less about the plaintive cries of the doomed.
The OT sees the humor to ludicrous demise and appreciates the show.
The human is trying to stop the show.
The OT is trying to improve it.
Homer
Wed Nov 5 20:03:27 EST 2014
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Jul 24 06:06:02 EDT 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore155
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.
_______________________________________________
Clear-L mailing list
Clear-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/clear-l
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE464 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
DEMONS
The demon is an old friend of yours turned to the dark side of the
force.
Find out how many he is, just ask him, 'How many are you'.
Insist on an answer. If no answer help him out, 1, 10, 100, 1000
up to the 100's of trillions.
You will know when you get it in the right ball park, he will go
still and untroblesome.
Make sure you look him in the eyes while doing this, that often
alone is enough to melt them. But without the eyes lock they aren't
paying attention. First one to look away loses.
Absorbtion into yourself is the only thing some demons understand,
and if its not complete, they stay half absorbed. Just walk right
towards them and into them.
But resistence is futile if they are strong. Force won't win,
neither will suppression. They got sinews of steel and concrete.
If not repsonsive to how many are you, play around for a while
with what's your name, what's your job, who do you work for etc.
Try "You are a real person/being/people!"
Always alternate your with my. You want his conception of you
also.
You gotta hire them at twice their pay, and put them on standby
telling them to do nothing until given orders to exercize their
licence to demonize. They kind of gargoyle out awaiting orders.
They can do this forever under a good master.
They only get itchy under the waver of an uncertain master.
Let them know there will be some seriously juicy tidbits down the
track a ways.
They like the admiration and your confidence in their ability, and
loyalty. This will lead to absolute obedience.
Get them the idea you are a worthy master to work for. They are
good at demonizing but they are absolutely dependent on someone more
intelligent than them to determine WHO. That's why most of them work
for the Devil.
Then oh by the way as you are petting them in their quiescent stand
by state, 'How many are you anyhow my sweet...'?
Interest the demon with how many am I? Who am I? What am I?
You are a few bugzillion by the way, the demon can't count that
high, but he will get awareness that you are more than him, which will
allow him to spot how many he is. At that moment its over.
If you ain't trollin', neither am I.
Homer
thesanitycruzer (thesanitycruzer@gmail.com) wrote:
>Here is my predicament: Back in 1973 at the age of 23 after a lot of
>auditing I ran out what I thought was all of my last lifetime. I had
>been in WWII, had a nervous breakdown, was institutionalized, given
>shock treatments and then put on SSI where I thought I had killed
>several women. I then was put on death row and gassed in San Quentin,
>end of story. I went and got more auditing and did well in life and
>was a COS staff member. Unfortunately the whole lifetime did not
>reveal itself until 1982 when I had a major key-in told my new auditor
>there was something "there" in my last lifetime. We went into session
>and ran where a "demon" had actually taken over my body in my last
>lifetime and had killed these women. Unfortunately I only could get
>through the incident once because during the exam I had delusions that
>I was telephathically talking to LRH. This greatly scared the staff
>and the next day I was told no more auditing as it was dangerous and
>"the demon" would be handled on the upper levels. I was not feeling
>well and very sleep deprived so I was then routed onto the Survival
>rundown where I had a major key out and did well and prospered for
>years and forgot all about my case. Unfortunately my ethics went out
>on the second dynamic but I was still doing rather well in life until
>I became sick with the childhood disease the "whooping cough" in 2005.
>This keyed back in everything that had keyed out and again I am
>feeling awful. I made things worse by buying an exercise bike that got
>me so tired that I experienced another key-in and now my ears ring as
>well. Because of my out-ethics my splinter group refused to audit me
>unless I went to endless monthly meetings so I went to the Freezone.
>My ethics are now in but because I could not sleep I started to become
>paranoid and Kaiser Permanente put me in an institution where I stayed
>for 4 days. Fortunately I got out but only because I was lucky as
>during my stay I experienced delusions and thought one of the inmates
>was the "demon". I am now receiving auditing and am feeling somewhat
>better. I have spent $14K just in the last year trying to survive
>these key-in's and my case. My auditor says I am not ready for the
>upper levels and I am about to run out of money. My work performance
>is rather bad and I could lose my job also. I have had case gain as
>the paranoia is not as bad as it was but it is still there. When I
>tell my auditor about it he says the paranoia is caused by "the
>incident". He also says I have keyed-in my whole case. I am scared!!!!
>BTW, this suppressive demon took over my body only once this lifetime
>in 1983 when I was told I could drink alcohol by my first group which
>was part of the COS at the time.. It took over my body for about 5
>seconds but I was able to get back in control. I was then told to stay
>away from alcohol and "use my TRs". Before I was institutionalized for
>4 days in 2005 it seemed to be to trying to take over my body again as
>I was completely overwhelmed. I actually told my wife to leave the
>house as I feared for her safety. Of course I never drink now. I have
>completed the Instrospection Rundown and my auditor now says I can do
>objectives at home now if I am feeling bad and that seems to help a
>little. Any suggestions?????
>I am being totally honest here and any advice would be helpful. Thank
>you.
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Wed Mar 7 02:14:58 EST 2007
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Jul 23 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore464.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFXk5XpURT1lqxE3HERAoyzAJ4ibi8+soZVvXolnoGRJ7pgQOB0BgCgifn+
MLsrLl6jLBuUDGhXZdyIg48=
=z56b
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
DEMONS
The demon is an old friend of yours turned to the dark side of the
force.
Find out how many he is, just ask him, 'How many are you'.
Insist on an answer. If no answer help him out, 1, 10, 100, 1000
up to the 100's of trillions.
You will know when you get it in the right ball park, he will go
still and untroblesome.
Make sure you look him in the eyes while doing this, that often
alone is enough to melt them. But without the eyes lock they aren't
paying attention. First one to look away loses.
Absorbtion into yourself is the only thing some demons understand,
and if its not complete, they stay half absorbed. Just walk right
towards them and into them.
But resistence is futile if they are strong. Force won't win,
neither will suppression. They got sinews of steel and concrete.
If not repsonsive to how many are you, play around for a while
with what's your name, what's your job, who do you work for etc.
Try "You are a real person/being/people!"
Always alternate your with my. You want his conception of you
also.
You gotta hire them at twice their pay, and put them on standby
telling them to do nothing until given orders to exercize their
licence to demonize. They kind of gargoyle out awaiting orders.
They can do this forever under a good master.
They only get itchy under the waver of an uncertain master.
Let them know there will be some seriously juicy tidbits down the
track a ways.
They like the admiration and your confidence in their ability, and
loyalty. This will lead to absolute obedience.
Get them the idea you are a worthy master to work for. They are
good at demonizing but they are absolutely dependent on someone more
intelligent than them to determine WHO. That's why most of them work
for the Devil.
Then oh by the way as you are petting them in their quiescent stand
by state, 'How many are you anyhow my sweet...'?
Interest the demon with how many am I? Who am I? What am I?
You are a few bugzillion by the way, the demon can't count that
high, but he will get awareness that you are more than him, which will
allow him to spot how many he is. At that moment its over.
If you ain't trollin', neither am I.
Homer
thesanitycruzer (thesanitycruzer@gmail.com) wrote:
>Here is my predicament: Back in 1973 at the age of 23 after a lot of
>auditing I ran out what I thought was all of my last lifetime. I had
>been in WWII, had a nervous breakdown, was institutionalized, given
>shock treatments and then put on SSI where I thought I had killed
>several women. I then was put on death row and gassed in San Quentin,
>end of story. I went and got more auditing and did well in life and
>was a COS staff member. Unfortunately the whole lifetime did not
>reveal itself until 1982 when I had a major key-in told my new auditor
>there was something "there" in my last lifetime. We went into session
>and ran where a "demon" had actually taken over my body in my last
>lifetime and had killed these women. Unfortunately I only could get
>through the incident once because during the exam I had delusions that
>I was telephathically talking to LRH. This greatly scared the staff
>and the next day I was told no more auditing as it was dangerous and
>"the demon" would be handled on the upper levels. I was not feeling
>well and very sleep deprived so I was then routed onto the Survival
>rundown where I had a major key out and did well and prospered for
>years and forgot all about my case. Unfortunately my ethics went out
>on the second dynamic but I was still doing rather well in life until
>I became sick with the childhood disease the "whooping cough" in 2005.
>This keyed back in everything that had keyed out and again I am
>feeling awful. I made things worse by buying an exercise bike that got
>me so tired that I experienced another key-in and now my ears ring as
>well. Because of my out-ethics my splinter group refused to audit me
>unless I went to endless monthly meetings so I went to the Freezone.
>My ethics are now in but because I could not sleep I started to become
>paranoid and Kaiser Permanente put me in an institution where I stayed
>for 4 days. Fortunately I got out but only because I was lucky as
>during my stay I experienced delusions and thought one of the inmates
>was the "demon". I am now receiving auditing and am feeling somewhat
>better. I have spent $14K just in the last year trying to survive
>these key-in's and my case. My auditor says I am not ready for the
>upper levels and I am about to run out of money. My work performance
>is rather bad and I could lose my job also. I have had case gain as
>the paranoia is not as bad as it was but it is still there. When I
>tell my auditor about it he says the paranoia is caused by "the
>incident". He also says I have keyed-in my whole case. I am scared!!!!
>BTW, this suppressive demon took over my body only once this lifetime
>in 1983 when I was told I could drink alcohol by my first group which
>was part of the COS at the time.. It took over my body for about 5
>seconds but I was able to get back in control. I was then told to stay
>away from alcohol and "use my TRs". Before I was institutionalized for
>4 days in 2005 it seemed to be to trying to take over my body again as
>I was completely overwhelmed. I actually told my wife to leave the
>house as I feared for her safety. Of course I never drink now. I have
>completed the Instrospection Rundown and my auditor now says I can do
>objectives at home now if I am feeling bad and that seems to help a
>little. Any suggestions?????
>I am being totally honest here and any advice would be helpful. Thank
>you.
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Wed Mar 7 02:14:58 EST 2007
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Jul 23 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore464.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFXk5XpURT1lqxE3HERAoyzAJ4ibi8+soZVvXolnoGRJ7pgQOB0BgCgifn+
MLsrLl6jLBuUDGhXZdyIg48=
=z56b
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
GODEL's PARADOX, the undrunk version.
Typo's and math corrected, sheesh....
GODEL'S PARADOX
Godel talking to Einstein said "It's fine for time to be relative,
but its not fine for existence to be relative." (My words).
Take a standard Mikowsky space time diagram with two observers.
Time is the vertical axis and X is the horizontal access.
Positive time is up and postive space to the right.
Observer A and B are both on the same spot of space time at each
other's respective Minkowsky Zero Point (MZP), namely 0,0 on the time
and X axes.
Observer A is 'stationary' and observer B is moving to the right at
Gamma .866 or half the speed of light.
Gamma .866 means A and B will measure each others meters to be .866
meters long , each other's seconds to be 1/.866 or 1,15 seconds long.
The diagram as a snap shot is taken at the exact moment the two
observer's cross each other's path at their now coincident MZP for each
of them.
For the stationary observer A, his now line is the X axis.
For the moving observer B, his now line is slanted upwards and to
the right 26.56 degrees or the arctan of .5 (half the speed of light).
By definition an obsserver's now line is the locus of all space
time points that happen at the same time, thus A and B have a different
concept of what is 'now' for them and who or what occupies that now at
the time the diagram is made.
Notice that at the MZP, both observers are at 0,0 in their own
coordinate system and are also in fact on the same space time point in
the diagram.
Further notice that if two different events happen at the same
space and time for one observer, they will happen at the same space and
time point for all observers, although each observer may lable those
space and time points differently. In other words the same point on the
diagram with two different assigned coordinates to them.
Now consider that all that 'exists' is now and now is all that
exists.
Existence is the locus of all space time points that exist for each
observer and from which cause may be issued.
Things that are in the past no longer exist and can no longer
affect us or anything else.
Things that are in our future do not exist yet, and also can not
affect us or anything until they come into the present.
Only those things that exist NOW can cause anything.
Yet both observer A and B have different concepts of the locus of
space time points which contain things in their respective but different
nows and which thus exist in such a way as to be able to cause something
to them or anyone down the road.
Any point on the X axis to the right of observer A is in his now
and thus can issue a casual wave from that point of spacetime.
But that same point is below the now line of B and thus is in B's
past, and thus can no longer issue a causal wave to affect anything.
So each observer has two different concepts of what exists now and
is or can be causally active.
Worse for an observer C moving to the left, his now line is slanted
to the right and DOWN, and thus that same point on A's now line, is
ABOVE C's now line and thus is in C's FUTURE and hasn't yet become
causally active for C.
How then can there be multiple different collections of points in
space and time that all exist or do not exist according to the movement
of the observer?
Worse, motion is relative, any observer can consider him self still
and the others moving.
So if we remove A and C from the above diagram and leave B, his now
line does not change, it continues to slope to the right and up, and
clearly indicates to him the locus of existing things to the right an up
of his present location at his MZP.
Likewise if we remove A and B from the diagram, C's now line does
not change either, it still points to the right and down, yet it points
to a completely different selection of what exsits now and is causally
active than either A or B.
So how can existence be relative to different observers?
What does it mean to exist at a location in space time where you
are not and how can that existence depend on whether or not you are
moving?
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
Mon Jul 11 22:06:17 EDT 2016
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
GODEL'S PARADOX
Godel talking to Einstein said "It's fine for time to be relative,
but its not fine for existence to be relative." (My words).
Take a standard Mikowsky space time diagram with two observers.
Time is the vertical axis and X is the horizontal access.
Positive time is up and postive space to the right.
Observer A and B are both on the same spot of space time at each
other's respective Minkowsky Zero Point (MZP), namely 0,0 on the time
and X axes.
Observer A is 'stationary' and observer B is moving to the right at
Gamma .866 or half the speed of light.
Gamma .866 means A and B will measure each others meters to be .866
meters long , each other's seconds to be 1/.866 or 1,15 seconds long.
The diagram as a snap shot is taken at the exact moment the two
observer's cross each other's path at their now coincident MZP for each
of them.
For the stationary observer A, his now line is the X axis.
For the moving observer B, his now line is slanted upwards and to
the right 26.56 degrees or the arctan of .5 (half the speed of light).
By definition an obsserver's now line is the locus of all space
time points that happen at the same time, thus A and B have a different
concept of what is 'now' for them and who or what occupies that now at
the time the diagram is made.
Notice that at the MZP, both observers are at 0,0 in their own
coordinate system and are also in fact on the same space time point in
the diagram.
Further notice that if two different events happen at the same
space and time for one observer, they will happen at the same space and
time point for all observers, although each observer may lable those
space and time points differently. In other words the same point on the
diagram with two different assigned coordinates to them.
Now consider that all that 'exists' is now and now is all that
exists.
Existence is the locus of all space time points that exist for each
observer and from which cause may be issued.
Things that are in the past no longer exist and can no longer
affect us or anything else.
Things that are in our future do not exist yet, and also can not
affect us or anything until they come into the present.
Only those things that exist NOW can cause anything.
Yet both observer A and B have different concepts of the locus of
space time points which contain things in their respective but different
nows and which thus exist in such a way as to be able to cause something
to them or anyone down the road.
Any point on the X axis to the right of observer A is in his now
and thus can issue a casual wave from that point of spacetime.
But that same point is below the now line of B and thus is in B's
past, and thus can no longer issue a causal wave to affect anything.
So each observer has two different concepts of what exists now and
is or can be causally active.
Worse for an observer C moving to the left, his now line is slanted
to the right and DOWN, and thus that same point on A's now line, is
ABOVE C's now line and thus is in C's FUTURE and hasn't yet become
causally active for C.
How then can there be multiple different collections of points in
space and time that all exist or do not exist according to the movement
of the observer?
Worse, motion is relative, any observer can consider him self still
and the others moving.
So if we remove A and C from the above diagram and leave B, his now
line does not change, it continues to slope to the right and up, and
clearly indicates to him the locus of existing things to the right an up
of his present location at his MZP.
Likewise if we remove A and B from the diagram, C's now line does
not change either, it still points to the right and down, yet it points
to a completely different selection of what exsits now and is causally
active than either A or B.
So how can existence be relative to different observers?
What does it mean to exist at a location in space time where you
are not and how can that existence depend on whether or not you are
moving?
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
Mon Jul 11 22:06:17 EDT 2016
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Friday, July 22, 2016
ADORE651 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
GAMES V
HOW GAMES BECOME ABERRATED
Games have an anatomy.
There is play, win and lose.
Play is more important than win or lose, because winning or losing
the item in the game leads to loss OF the game.
The saddest day of a champion's life is the day he wins the gold
medal.
There is nothing worse than having no game to play.
It's like an orgasm, when its over it feels like hell.
People become aberrated on the subject of games to the degree that
losing the game results in serious consequences.
The most serious consequence of losing a game, is losing the right
or ability to ever play a game again, either through death forever or
hell forever.
When the EXISTENCE of games depends on winning a game, then the
being is not only playing that particular game, he is also playing the
game of games.
Losing the game of games means no more games period.
And that IS death forever or hell forever.
A common form of playing the game of games is playing the game of
MORTAL body survival.
People didn't come here to solely and only make a body survive,
although to look at some, one can wonder.
One can get so involved in body survival, that they lose sight of
the bigger games they wanted to play, but they feel that if they lose
the body survival game they won't be able to play at all ever again.
Now a sane being will understand that once a car gets old, you go
get a new car.
Same with a body, there is no need to cry about never being able to
play games again once the body is in the grave. You can and should cry
about the loss of a one and only precious unique body that you loved,
but your eternal future is still there with a billion more of them, if
you want such a thing.
It's like cats, they lean out for love and will lean that way for
ever. You lose one cat, and there are a billion more little kittens
screaming for it.
The guy who loses a cat and goes 'No more cats, I am done with
cats!' is actually setting up his own future for eternal lonliness.
Yes cats are hard on the heart but that's what it says on the
warning lable, so who is responsible for your condition now?
But things are more complicated than a car, you lose a body, you
lose a lot more than a body. Some of that is aberration, but some of it
is just how things work in this joint.
You work your whole life to be a Dallas Cowboy, and you die in mid
season, it will take you years to get back to playing football again,
and by that time all your friends will be gone, you probably won't make
the Dallas Cowboys again, and if you do it won't be the same. Besides
in your next life you are bound to come back as a doctor or balloonist
who hates football, you see?
So loss of a body is not disasterous to the long term welfare of
the being, but it is ruinous to the local games he is playing at the
time that depend on that particular body.
Ruin is at -7.0 on the awarenesss characteristic chart,
disaster is at -12.0. They left off catastrophe.
ACC
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/electra/acc.memo
It is particularly worse if a guy dies unexpectedly. If you have
an old car that his headed for the junk yard, its almost a relief if
someone totals it for you, but if its a new car in the prime of its
life, this can really piss you off.
But some people are in an even worse state, they believe this is
their one and only car FOREVER, their one and only body FOREVER, and so
at the end of it's life, its the end of games FOREVER.
Many will tell you this is a good thing, they have had time enough
for love.
They are lying.
And they aren't loving.
They have fallen out of love with their car, their kitten and
their body.
Keeping the body alive for them isn't a fun game any more, its
SERIOUS by which we mean he no longer wants to be playing the game, but
has to, and will start to do anything to win at all costs.
He can no longer afford to lose (even though in the end he will
lose anyhow.)
Thus enters corruption, temptation and seduction to cheat, and
enslave others to play the game for you, take the risks, and give you
the rewards.
Every enslaver who ever was, was far more worried about his own
future than the enslaved was worried about his.
So how do games become aberrated?
Well it starts with the consideration that one didn't choose to
play the game, and therefore one doesn't want to play it.
It is quite impossible to feel comfortable playing a game one
didn't choose to play, so the moment the being is no longer in contact
with the desire to play, the desire for the trophy, the invitation to
self to play, THE ACCEPTANCE OF THAT INVITE, or with the DECISION to
enter the playing field and pick up the ball, he is no longer in contact
with his POWER of coming into the game, and worse the power of the
author who wrote the game and can change it.
It doesn't matter who wrote the game, all games come with author
rights, just as they come with player rights.
You wouldn't have it any other way.
It's the only guarantee that you will like the game, the ability to
tune it to your play level.
The power of the desire to have the game whether you created it or
another did, and power of the decision to enter and pick up the ball PUT
THE GAME THERE and you in it.
As soon as the being loses contact with that power, something
starts to put the game there for him, and him in it, and he has no
choice about it, and he becomes less than the game.
If you do something, and you claim you didn't do it, you become
smaller than what you did.
No being can stand this.
At that moment the being will start to NOT play the game, and
failing that he will try to WIN the game AT ALL COSTS, and failing that,
he will try to LOSE the game, anything to get rid of the game, anything
but PLAY the game!
Now trying to win a game that you created and want to play, and
trying to win a game you wish didn't exist just to get out of it, are
two completely different orders of things.
The being who is playing a fair chosen game would NEVER think of
cheating or getting others to play for him.
That's like an arcade game writer who is so pissed off at the game
he wrote that he tries to cheat on his own game, to covertly VIOLATE the
rules while INSIDE the game.
It never works, can't be done, and no self respecting game
writer/player would ever do such a thing.
If he doesn't like the game, he rewrites the game from the outside
not the inside, then he jumps back into the fray.
There is a difference between the author rewriting the rules of a
game, and a player covertly trying to violate them.
And that is a sense of Authorship.
The first makes you divine, the second makes you a sinner.
The first is the source of self respect, the second is the source
of self contempt.
But the player who thinks he had nothing to do with being in the
game, and didn't source or agree to the invite, and had nothing to do
with the creation of the game or choosing up sides, will start to cheat
at first opportunity.
Godless mortals always like to claim how ethical they are, but they
are constantly up against the corrupting forces of overwhelming fear
which lead to temptation and seduction.
Those that know they chose the game, aren't.
It starts with corruption, a crack, in their sense of
responsibility.
Corruption is a lack of perfect integrity of responsibility.
Integrity is knowing what you are and are not responsible for.
If you chose and then pretend you didn't choose, that's fair chosen
out integrity, disintegrity.
Temptation to cheat shines through the cracks in the being's
integrity, offering him a better time if he cheats, enslaves, steals,
and generally acts like a criminal, etc, and seduction is going for it.
How long is a mortal going to last on his high pillar of purity,
with those odds?
You will find most mortals BEGGING for the devil to hand them his
tail dripping with blood so they can get on with signing the damn
paperwork already.
So you get a mortal meatball in session, and the first thing you
clear up is corruption, temptation and seduction and then have at it,
until he sees it is hopeless remaining pure without a change of view
about himself.
"No man will maintain a level of nobility higher than the nobility
of the universe he conceives made him." - Adore
He WANTS to remain pure, but he knows he can't survive without
being preemptively dirty in a world where everyone else is doing the
same thing.
"Code of Honor? What's a Code of Honor?"
If he doesn't do it to them, they will do it to him first, and his
family depends on him to help them survive too, so he HAS to do what he
has to do, or he will never be able to live with himself, if his family
dies because he was unwilling to be just a little rotten.
Joke is, living rotten, even for the sake of one's family, he won't
be able to live with himself or his family anyhow.
After a while you will find your average mortal in the valence OF
the universe, doing to others what the universe does to him:
"This universe treats love like the ocean treats sand castles in
the sand." - Adore.
He has become what he feared most because he lost to it. To be a
winner then, he needs to become what defeated him.
Most of your marching armies are in the valence of the physical
universe.
But really the issue is desire to play, and above that, having
chosen to play and WHAT to play.
It is almost enough to simply want to play, but without that sense
of responsibility for being in the game, either as writer or buyer of
the game, if there is no CHOICE powering being in the game, his ability
and willingness to play will dwindle no matter how much he desires to play
it.
No matter how much he enjoys playing the game, his ASKING where
this game came from and what is he doing in it, will forever taint and
throw off course his motion through it.
It is one thing to simply be in life and scramble as you can, it is
quite another to HAVE CHOSEN.
You see the power differential there?
Now NO ONE wants to play a game where the penalty of loss is to
never play again.
They like to scare themselves with such a game for a while, but
it's never forever.
So as your are auditing this guy, he has to change his mind about
the consequences of losing.
Then he has to recover his desire to play, because if the
consequences of losing are not that bad, he can AFFORD to play honestly
which is where the joy and glory come from.
There is no glory in cheating and being a conniving scoundrel or
underhanded weasel.
There may be joy in winning but there is no glory in cheating, even
if others "don't know."
The taint to the win will always be there.
And trust me, if one mortal is cheating so are all the other
mortals walking around, so thinking that others don't know is silly,
even if each one thinks they are the only cad in town.
That's why auditors have the advantage, when the preclear goes
'What withhold?' the auditor *KNOWS* the preclear is lying, even if
unknowingly. Withholds can only stay withheld if they think they can
get away with it. Once they know the jig is up, confess or die, they
just fold up and the overt comes spilling out on the table.
It is the AUDITOR'S CERTAINTY that makes it happen.
Then the last hop is recovering full responsibility for choosing
the games that call you in to be played.
One came here for a reason after all, and if the power of that call
can drag you all the way across the universe, to this God forsaken
place, that power can help you play once its thrust OF COMING IN is
integrated into your forward motion in the game.
The desire to be here powers the PUTTING IT HERE.
You can't win a game if you don't want to play.
And you can't want to play, if you didn't chose to play it.
And them's inexorable words.
Homer
GAMES
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games1
GAMES II
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games2
GAMES III
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games3
GAMES IV
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games4
GAMES V
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games5
GAMES VI
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games6
GAMES VII
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games7
GAMES VIII
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games8
GAMES IX
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games9
- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Feb 26 01:59:22 EST 2009
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Jul 22 12:06:02 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore651.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFXkkRqURT1lqxE3HERAkqYAJ0ZNrfO1SNrXafeutHkwmGwpTU69gCePBzn
DMiOT4ekm44N0VNiEN+Glvs=
=zbeS
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Fri Jul 22 17:11:28 EDT 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore651.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)
iD8DBQFXkowAURT1lqxE3HERAlZWAKC0SszaQWqXmMkMWmwLyHq911mlIACeOf/A
KI9q+sNHkAJG4ZSNGGygZYc=
=NdJL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
GAMES V
HOW GAMES BECOME ABERRATED
Games have an anatomy.
There is play, win and lose.
Play is more important than win or lose, because winning or losing
the item in the game leads to loss OF the game.
The saddest day of a champion's life is the day he wins the gold
medal.
There is nothing worse than having no game to play.
It's like an orgasm, when its over it feels like hell.
People become aberrated on the subject of games to the degree that
losing the game results in serious consequences.
The most serious consequence of losing a game, is losing the right
or ability to ever play a game again, either through death forever or
hell forever.
When the EXISTENCE of games depends on winning a game, then the
being is not only playing that particular game, he is also playing the
game of games.
Losing the game of games means no more games period.
And that IS death forever or hell forever.
A common form of playing the game of games is playing the game of
MORTAL body survival.
People didn't come here to solely and only make a body survive,
although to look at some, one can wonder.
One can get so involved in body survival, that they lose sight of
the bigger games they wanted to play, but they feel that if they lose
the body survival game they won't be able to play at all ever again.
Now a sane being will understand that once a car gets old, you go
get a new car.
Same with a body, there is no need to cry about never being able to
play games again once the body is in the grave. You can and should cry
about the loss of a one and only precious unique body that you loved,
but your eternal future is still there with a billion more of them, if
you want such a thing.
It's like cats, they lean out for love and will lean that way for
ever. You lose one cat, and there are a billion more little kittens
screaming for it.
The guy who loses a cat and goes 'No more cats, I am done with
cats!' is actually setting up his own future for eternal lonliness.
Yes cats are hard on the heart but that's what it says on the
warning lable, so who is responsible for your condition now?
But things are more complicated than a car, you lose a body, you
lose a lot more than a body. Some of that is aberration, but some of it
is just how things work in this joint.
You work your whole life to be a Dallas Cowboy, and you die in mid
season, it will take you years to get back to playing football again,
and by that time all your friends will be gone, you probably won't make
the Dallas Cowboys again, and if you do it won't be the same. Besides
in your next life you are bound to come back as a doctor or balloonist
who hates football, you see?
So loss of a body is not disasterous to the long term welfare of
the being, but it is ruinous to the local games he is playing at the
time that depend on that particular body.
Ruin is at -7.0 on the awarenesss characteristic chart,
disaster is at -12.0. They left off catastrophe.
ACC
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/electra/acc.memo
It is particularly worse if a guy dies unexpectedly. If you have
an old car that his headed for the junk yard, its almost a relief if
someone totals it for you, but if its a new car in the prime of its
life, this can really piss you off.
But some people are in an even worse state, they believe this is
their one and only car FOREVER, their one and only body FOREVER, and so
at the end of it's life, its the end of games FOREVER.
Many will tell you this is a good thing, they have had time enough
for love.
They are lying.
And they aren't loving.
They have fallen out of love with their car, their kitten and
their body.
Keeping the body alive for them isn't a fun game any more, its
SERIOUS by which we mean he no longer wants to be playing the game, but
has to, and will start to do anything to win at all costs.
He can no longer afford to lose (even though in the end he will
lose anyhow.)
Thus enters corruption, temptation and seduction to cheat, and
enslave others to play the game for you, take the risks, and give you
the rewards.
Every enslaver who ever was, was far more worried about his own
future than the enslaved was worried about his.
So how do games become aberrated?
Well it starts with the consideration that one didn't choose to
play the game, and therefore one doesn't want to play it.
It is quite impossible to feel comfortable playing a game one
didn't choose to play, so the moment the being is no longer in contact
with the desire to play, the desire for the trophy, the invitation to
self to play, THE ACCEPTANCE OF THAT INVITE, or with the DECISION to
enter the playing field and pick up the ball, he is no longer in contact
with his POWER of coming into the game, and worse the power of the
author who wrote the game and can change it.
It doesn't matter who wrote the game, all games come with author
rights, just as they come with player rights.
You wouldn't have it any other way.
It's the only guarantee that you will like the game, the ability to
tune it to your play level.
The power of the desire to have the game whether you created it or
another did, and power of the decision to enter and pick up the ball PUT
THE GAME THERE and you in it.
As soon as the being loses contact with that power, something
starts to put the game there for him, and him in it, and he has no
choice about it, and he becomes less than the game.
If you do something, and you claim you didn't do it, you become
smaller than what you did.
No being can stand this.
At that moment the being will start to NOT play the game, and
failing that he will try to WIN the game AT ALL COSTS, and failing that,
he will try to LOSE the game, anything to get rid of the game, anything
but PLAY the game!
Now trying to win a game that you created and want to play, and
trying to win a game you wish didn't exist just to get out of it, are
two completely different orders of things.
The being who is playing a fair chosen game would NEVER think of
cheating or getting others to play for him.
That's like an arcade game writer who is so pissed off at the game
he wrote that he tries to cheat on his own game, to covertly VIOLATE the
rules while INSIDE the game.
It never works, can't be done, and no self respecting game
writer/player would ever do such a thing.
If he doesn't like the game, he rewrites the game from the outside
not the inside, then he jumps back into the fray.
There is a difference between the author rewriting the rules of a
game, and a player covertly trying to violate them.
And that is a sense of Authorship.
The first makes you divine, the second makes you a sinner.
The first is the source of self respect, the second is the source
of self contempt.
But the player who thinks he had nothing to do with being in the
game, and didn't source or agree to the invite, and had nothing to do
with the creation of the game or choosing up sides, will start to cheat
at first opportunity.
Godless mortals always like to claim how ethical they are, but they
are constantly up against the corrupting forces of overwhelming fear
which lead to temptation and seduction.
Those that know they chose the game, aren't.
It starts with corruption, a crack, in their sense of
responsibility.
Corruption is a lack of perfect integrity of responsibility.
Integrity is knowing what you are and are not responsible for.
If you chose and then pretend you didn't choose, that's fair chosen
out integrity, disintegrity.
Temptation to cheat shines through the cracks in the being's
integrity, offering him a better time if he cheats, enslaves, steals,
and generally acts like a criminal, etc, and seduction is going for it.
How long is a mortal going to last on his high pillar of purity,
with those odds?
You will find most mortals BEGGING for the devil to hand them his
tail dripping with blood so they can get on with signing the damn
paperwork already.
So you get a mortal meatball in session, and the first thing you
clear up is corruption, temptation and seduction and then have at it,
until he sees it is hopeless remaining pure without a change of view
about himself.
"No man will maintain a level of nobility higher than the nobility
of the universe he conceives made him." - Adore
He WANTS to remain pure, but he knows he can't survive without
being preemptively dirty in a world where everyone else is doing the
same thing.
"Code of Honor? What's a Code of Honor?"
If he doesn't do it to them, they will do it to him first, and his
family depends on him to help them survive too, so he HAS to do what he
has to do, or he will never be able to live with himself, if his family
dies because he was unwilling to be just a little rotten.
Joke is, living rotten, even for the sake of one's family, he won't
be able to live with himself or his family anyhow.
After a while you will find your average mortal in the valence OF
the universe, doing to others what the universe does to him:
"This universe treats love like the ocean treats sand castles in
the sand." - Adore.
He has become what he feared most because he lost to it. To be a
winner then, he needs to become what defeated him.
Most of your marching armies are in the valence of the physical
universe.
But really the issue is desire to play, and above that, having
chosen to play and WHAT to play.
It is almost enough to simply want to play, but without that sense
of responsibility for being in the game, either as writer or buyer of
the game, if there is no CHOICE powering being in the game, his ability
and willingness to play will dwindle no matter how much he desires to play
it.
No matter how much he enjoys playing the game, his ASKING where
this game came from and what is he doing in it, will forever taint and
throw off course his motion through it.
It is one thing to simply be in life and scramble as you can, it is
quite another to HAVE CHOSEN.
You see the power differential there?
Now NO ONE wants to play a game where the penalty of loss is to
never play again.
They like to scare themselves with such a game for a while, but
it's never forever.
So as your are auditing this guy, he has to change his mind about
the consequences of losing.
Then he has to recover his desire to play, because if the
consequences of losing are not that bad, he can AFFORD to play honestly
which is where the joy and glory come from.
There is no glory in cheating and being a conniving scoundrel or
underhanded weasel.
There may be joy in winning but there is no glory in cheating, even
if others "don't know."
The taint to the win will always be there.
And trust me, if one mortal is cheating so are all the other
mortals walking around, so thinking that others don't know is silly,
even if each one thinks they are the only cad in town.
That's why auditors have the advantage, when the preclear goes
'What withhold?' the auditor *KNOWS* the preclear is lying, even if
unknowingly. Withholds can only stay withheld if they think they can
get away with it. Once they know the jig is up, confess or die, they
just fold up and the overt comes spilling out on the table.
It is the AUDITOR'S CERTAINTY that makes it happen.
Then the last hop is recovering full responsibility for choosing
the games that call you in to be played.
One came here for a reason after all, and if the power of that call
can drag you all the way across the universe, to this God forsaken
place, that power can help you play once its thrust OF COMING IN is
integrated into your forward motion in the game.
The desire to be here powers the PUTTING IT HERE.
You can't win a game if you don't want to play.
And you can't want to play, if you didn't chose to play it.
And them's inexorable words.
Homer
GAMES
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games1
GAMES II
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games2
GAMES III
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games3
GAMES IV
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games4
GAMES V
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games5
GAMES VI
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games6
GAMES VII
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games7
GAMES VIII
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games8
GAMES IX
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/games9
- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Feb 26 01:59:22 EST 2009
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Jul 22 12:06:02 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore651.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFXkkRqURT1lqxE3HERAkqYAJ0ZNrfO1SNrXafeutHkwmGwpTU69gCePBzn
DMiOT4ekm44N0VNiEN+Glvs=
=zbeS
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Fri Jul 22 17:11:28 EDT 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore651.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)
iD8DBQFXkowAURT1lqxE3HERAlZWAKC0SszaQWqXmMkMWmwLyHq911mlIACeOf/A
KI9q+sNHkAJG4ZSNGGygZYc=
=NdJL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Thursday, July 21, 2016
PROOF19 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
"Spot a certainty that could be wrong."
"Spot a certainty that can not be wrong."
Run until facile with both and no longer prone to
confusing one for the other.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Jul 21 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/proof19.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFXkPLpURT1lqxE3HERApRPAKCRvNBOvoectgJitpN7l7cW12rFLwCfatfy
GZ8NbBqlwL6bKJQ85X7NEWM=
=/CTj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
"Spot a certainty that could be wrong."
"Spot a certainty that can not be wrong."
Run until facile with both and no longer prone to
confusing one for the other.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Jul 21 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/proof19.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFXkPLpURT1lqxE3HERApRPAKCRvNBOvoectgJitpN7l7cW12rFLwCfatfy
GZ8NbBqlwL6bKJQ85X7NEWM=
=/CTj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Wednesday, July 20, 2016
LOGIC16 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
SELF DENYING SYLLOGISMS
If you state,
"Syllogisms don't apply to anything"
you are intending that this statement be used as:
"Syllogisms don't apply to anything.
Exhibit A is a syllogism
Therefore Exhibit A doesn't apply to anything"
The point is that merely MAKING THE STATEMENT syllogisms don't
apply to anything assumes and intends that they do.
People who build their philsophies around self denying statements
are all wind between the ears.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Jul 20 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/logic16.memo.bak
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFXj6FpURT1lqxE3HERAoltAJ0eMfE+1m/6QlUMjWiidbIVXAhymgCcDwXW
1Ou9/BpBajQEx+zV6YIEOUY=
=Bdgv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
SELF DENYING SYLLOGISMS
If you state,
"Syllogisms don't apply to anything"
you are intending that this statement be used as:
"Syllogisms don't apply to anything.
Exhibit A is a syllogism
Therefore Exhibit A doesn't apply to anything"
The point is that merely MAKING THE STATEMENT syllogisms don't
apply to anything assumes and intends that they do.
People who build their philsophies around self denying statements
are all wind between the ears.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Jul 20 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/logic16.memo.bak
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFXj6FpURT1lqxE3HERAoltAJ0eMfE+1m/6QlUMjWiidbIVXAhymgCcDwXW
1Ou9/BpBajQEx+zV6YIEOUY=
=Bdgv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE132 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
SPACE/TIME DIMENSIONALITY AND THE ILLUSION/DELUSION DICHOTOMY.
Actuality is herein *DEFINED* to mean what is true.
Reality is herein *DEFINED* to mean what we think or feel is true.
Space/time dimensionality is a virtual reality projected into a non
dimensional actuality called the All-That-Is.
Hubbard called the non dimensional actuality the Static, and the
dimensional virtual reality, mockups which are created images in our
consciousness of space, time and objects made of matter and energy.
He said that the Static extended anchor points, dimension points
and points to view. Anchor points are points that demark the boundaries
of the space and time, dimension points are any point inside that space
and time, which then become points to view as objects and action.
Some have interpreted this to mean that the Static CREATED
space/time in actuality, when in fact the Static created the *ILLUSION*
of space/time in itself, in its own zero dimensional substrate.
The world is thus a sort of glow in the dark tatoo on the
body of God.
The Static, the All-That-IS, is a kind of infinite but non
dimensional holographic film that can hold the apparencies of finite
dimensional objects, such as space/time and the objects we find in it.
Now this view is very important.
For one it is in direct contradiction to the prevailing meatball
view which is that dimensionality is actual, that actuality has in fact
many more than the 3 or 4 dimensions of space/time that we normally
experience. The Scientists of the Rock are up to 10 or 12 dimensions
mathematically at this point and getting more lost every day.
The meatball theory claims that dimensionality and out there ness
are actual, and that the objects out there have actual cause that
interact between them. The ball bounces off the wall *BECAUSE* the wall
has cause over the ball, or both the wall and the ball have cause
between them.
In this view the conscious unit is a PROCESS in complexity of parts
called the brain, built out of various actual external dimensional
space/time objects like electrons, protons and neutrons.
When that complexity of parts is busted apart the conscious unit
dies never to live again.
Further the conscious experiences, or color forms, that the
conscious unit has, are used by the being as symbols to refer to these
external dimensional actualities.
His conscious color form of a car that he sees when looking at a
car is a symbol referring to an actual dimensional car existing in
actual dimensional space/time.
When he turns away from the car or closes his eyes, his conscious
color form of the car disappears, but the car remains.
Thus his conscious color form of the car and the car are two
different objects, each made of their own stuff. The conscious color
form of the car is the symbol, and the actual car is the referent.
Where the symbol has no external referent the being is 'seeing
something' that is not overlayed against an actual external dimensional
object that exists. If the being knows he is doing this, we call it
imagination. If he doesn't know he is doing it, we call it
hallucination or even dreaming.
These are natural and necessary conclusions to be drawn from the
underlying meatball theory that external dimensional objects are actual
and that conscious beings are MADE OF THEM.
Further meatballs tend to laugh at OT (paranormal) powers, because
they know very well that anything that is MADE OF various stuff will
never have ascendancy over that same stuff.
In other words if you are made of electrons, protons and
neutrons, you will never be able to have any cause over those same
things which those things don't already have over themselves or
each other.
Thus although the brain is MADE of millions of tiny electric
circuits with electricity flowing through them, the brain will never be
able to throw a lightning bolt across the street at a bully that lives
over there.
So if there are no physical laws that say electrons can talk to
each other across a distance faster than the speed of light, you can
rule out any form of instantaneous telepathy etc.
If you are made of ball bearings, all you can ever hope or aspire
to be is a ball bearing or a cluster of ball bearings, banging around
together.
Thus to a meatball all talk of OT powers comes across as clueless.
AND WITHIN THEIR PARADIGM THEY ARE QUITE RIGHT.
They have a problem however, which is that if someone did come up
with an OT power that they could demonstrate, the meatball wouldn't have
a theory in which to fit it, as their theory of external dimensional
actualities is completely lacking.
The dream ball theory however allows for OT powers, in fact it
claims that every ability IS an OT power.
Rather than postulate external dimensional objects as actualities
and conscious units as a made of them, the dreamball theory postulates
the conscious unit as a zero dimensional actuality which is a projector
of dimensional but virtual realities.
THE VERY ACT OF A ZERO DIMENSIONAL CONSCIOUS UNIT PROJECTING A
VIRTUAL DIMENSIONAL OBJECT IS AN OT POWER!
Thus the electron, neutron and proton do not in fact exist, have
never existed, never will exist, and in fact CAN NOT EXIST as external
dimensional actualities. They can only exist as virtual dimensional
realities, i.e. arcade game color forms in the conscious unit's eye.
In this model the conscious unit's experience or color forms are
non dimensional actualities, used as symbols to refer to a non existent
dimensional virtual realities, namel space, time and objects out there.
In this sense EVERYTHING the conscious unit sees is a hallucination
as there isn't and never has been any actual external referent to over
lay the experience on.
From this point of view, any dreamer, whether sleeping or awake,
could be said to be hallucinating external dimensional virtual
realities, the only question left is does he know he is doing this or
not, and is it under his control.
Above 26.0 (Apparencies are Actuality) on the tone scale, the
dreamer knows he is dreaming and is doing so knowingly, willingly and
with full awareness of the consequences. He knows he is actual, and he
knows his conscious experiences are symbolic actualites for virtual
realities that do not in fact exist, at all.
From this vantage point the being CHOOSES to go non lucid in his
dream and drops below 26.0 on the tone scale into Apparencies are
Actuality.
Virtual renditions of outthereness and external cause between
objects become 'actual' to him, and he will argue strongly against the
idea that there is a meaningful difference between reality and
actuality.
In this state the dreamer is no longer aware he is dreaming, he
considers outthereness and external cause to be actual, and he considers
himself to be MADE OF bits and pieces of that delusional external
'actuality.'
Above 26.0 on the tone scale the conscious unit is engaging in the
creation of illusions of external dimensionality and knows it.
Below 26.0 on the tone scale the conscious unit is engaging in
delusion about illusion, namely that there is no illusion.
The track back to OT power over the physical universe and the All
That Is, is to start with recognizing where one is already operating
full OT power in the creation of the universe as it is.
YOU CAN'T CHANGE IT UNTIL YOU CAN PUT IT THERE.
Surely if you can put the universe there you can move the mountain
in the universe.
Once one can own and operate what one is already doing, i.e. flip
it from below 26.0 to above 26.0 on the tone scale, one is then free to
continue with that ability in what ever way one wants, including
creating grander illusions and diving deeper into the sea of delusion
about them.
The real OT is not the one who can move the marble on the table.
The real OT is the one who can put the table and marble there,
and limit himself until he can't move the marble any more, and starts
to post to a.r.s. as a mental ward septic.
Imagine a cowboy on a horse that thinks it IS the horse.
"Ve have meds for that!" - Psych
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Wed Jul 20 00:04:23 EDT 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore132.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)
iD8DBQFXjvhHURT1lqxE3HERAr+wAJ4qLDwXs2hzxLjH1tS8QFoD13lD7gCeO46k
3P1yqbXlmN/QaH7XxBtksck=
=dG/M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
SPACE/TIME DIMENSIONALITY AND THE ILLUSION/DELUSION DICHOTOMY.
Actuality is herein *DEFINED* to mean what is true.
Reality is herein *DEFINED* to mean what we think or feel is true.
Space/time dimensionality is a virtual reality projected into a non
dimensional actuality called the All-That-Is.
Hubbard called the non dimensional actuality the Static, and the
dimensional virtual reality, mockups which are created images in our
consciousness of space, time and objects made of matter and energy.
He said that the Static extended anchor points, dimension points
and points to view. Anchor points are points that demark the boundaries
of the space and time, dimension points are any point inside that space
and time, which then become points to view as objects and action.
Some have interpreted this to mean that the Static CREATED
space/time in actuality, when in fact the Static created the *ILLUSION*
of space/time in itself, in its own zero dimensional substrate.
The world is thus a sort of glow in the dark tatoo on the
body of God.
The Static, the All-That-IS, is a kind of infinite but non
dimensional holographic film that can hold the apparencies of finite
dimensional objects, such as space/time and the objects we find in it.
Now this view is very important.
For one it is in direct contradiction to the prevailing meatball
view which is that dimensionality is actual, that actuality has in fact
many more than the 3 or 4 dimensions of space/time that we normally
experience. The Scientists of the Rock are up to 10 or 12 dimensions
mathematically at this point and getting more lost every day.
The meatball theory claims that dimensionality and out there ness
are actual, and that the objects out there have actual cause that
interact between them. The ball bounces off the wall *BECAUSE* the wall
has cause over the ball, or both the wall and the ball have cause
between them.
In this view the conscious unit is a PROCESS in complexity of parts
called the brain, built out of various actual external dimensional
space/time objects like electrons, protons and neutrons.
When that complexity of parts is busted apart the conscious unit
dies never to live again.
Further the conscious experiences, or color forms, that the
conscious unit has, are used by the being as symbols to refer to these
external dimensional actualities.
His conscious color form of a car that he sees when looking at a
car is a symbol referring to an actual dimensional car existing in
actual dimensional space/time.
When he turns away from the car or closes his eyes, his conscious
color form of the car disappears, but the car remains.
Thus his conscious color form of the car and the car are two
different objects, each made of their own stuff. The conscious color
form of the car is the symbol, and the actual car is the referent.
Where the symbol has no external referent the being is 'seeing
something' that is not overlayed against an actual external dimensional
object that exists. If the being knows he is doing this, we call it
imagination. If he doesn't know he is doing it, we call it
hallucination or even dreaming.
These are natural and necessary conclusions to be drawn from the
underlying meatball theory that external dimensional objects are actual
and that conscious beings are MADE OF THEM.
Further meatballs tend to laugh at OT (paranormal) powers, because
they know very well that anything that is MADE OF various stuff will
never have ascendancy over that same stuff.
In other words if you are made of electrons, protons and
neutrons, you will never be able to have any cause over those same
things which those things don't already have over themselves or
each other.
Thus although the brain is MADE of millions of tiny electric
circuits with electricity flowing through them, the brain will never be
able to throw a lightning bolt across the street at a bully that lives
over there.
So if there are no physical laws that say electrons can talk to
each other across a distance faster than the speed of light, you can
rule out any form of instantaneous telepathy etc.
If you are made of ball bearings, all you can ever hope or aspire
to be is a ball bearing or a cluster of ball bearings, banging around
together.
Thus to a meatball all talk of OT powers comes across as clueless.
AND WITHIN THEIR PARADIGM THEY ARE QUITE RIGHT.
They have a problem however, which is that if someone did come up
with an OT power that they could demonstrate, the meatball wouldn't have
a theory in which to fit it, as their theory of external dimensional
actualities is completely lacking.
The dream ball theory however allows for OT powers, in fact it
claims that every ability IS an OT power.
Rather than postulate external dimensional objects as actualities
and conscious units as a made of them, the dreamball theory postulates
the conscious unit as a zero dimensional actuality which is a projector
of dimensional but virtual realities.
THE VERY ACT OF A ZERO DIMENSIONAL CONSCIOUS UNIT PROJECTING A
VIRTUAL DIMENSIONAL OBJECT IS AN OT POWER!
Thus the electron, neutron and proton do not in fact exist, have
never existed, never will exist, and in fact CAN NOT EXIST as external
dimensional actualities. They can only exist as virtual dimensional
realities, i.e. arcade game color forms in the conscious unit's eye.
In this model the conscious unit's experience or color forms are
non dimensional actualities, used as symbols to refer to a non existent
dimensional virtual realities, namel space, time and objects out there.
In this sense EVERYTHING the conscious unit sees is a hallucination
as there isn't and never has been any actual external referent to over
lay the experience on.
From this point of view, any dreamer, whether sleeping or awake,
could be said to be hallucinating external dimensional virtual
realities, the only question left is does he know he is doing this or
not, and is it under his control.
Above 26.0 (Apparencies are Actuality) on the tone scale, the
dreamer knows he is dreaming and is doing so knowingly, willingly and
with full awareness of the consequences. He knows he is actual, and he
knows his conscious experiences are symbolic actualites for virtual
realities that do not in fact exist, at all.
From this vantage point the being CHOOSES to go non lucid in his
dream and drops below 26.0 on the tone scale into Apparencies are
Actuality.
Virtual renditions of outthereness and external cause between
objects become 'actual' to him, and he will argue strongly against the
idea that there is a meaningful difference between reality and
actuality.
In this state the dreamer is no longer aware he is dreaming, he
considers outthereness and external cause to be actual, and he considers
himself to be MADE OF bits and pieces of that delusional external
'actuality.'
Above 26.0 on the tone scale the conscious unit is engaging in the
creation of illusions of external dimensionality and knows it.
Below 26.0 on the tone scale the conscious unit is engaging in
delusion about illusion, namely that there is no illusion.
The track back to OT power over the physical universe and the All
That Is, is to start with recognizing where one is already operating
full OT power in the creation of the universe as it is.
YOU CAN'T CHANGE IT UNTIL YOU CAN PUT IT THERE.
Surely if you can put the universe there you can move the mountain
in the universe.
Once one can own and operate what one is already doing, i.e. flip
it from below 26.0 to above 26.0 on the tone scale, one is then free to
continue with that ability in what ever way one wants, including
creating grander illusions and diving deeper into the sea of delusion
about them.
The real OT is not the one who can move the marble on the table.
The real OT is the one who can put the table and marble there,
and limit himself until he can't move the marble any more, and starts
to post to a.r.s. as a mental ward septic.
Imagine a cowboy on a horse that thinks it IS the horse.
"Ve have meds for that!" - Psych
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Wed Jul 20 00:04:23 EDT 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore132.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)
iD8DBQFXjvhHURT1lqxE3HERAr+wAJ4qLDwXs2hzxLjH1tS8QFoD13lD7gCeO46k
3P1yqbXlmN/QaH7XxBtksck=
=dG/M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)