-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
UCP2
To expect has two dichotomous meanings.
To expect means to demand with expectation of accomplishment.
To expect means to predict what effect you will be of the future.
The first is a causal definition, the second is a waiting to be an
effect and can do nothing about it definition.
KP was a one of a kind obnoxious poster on a.c.t for many years, he
had a tendency to claim everyone was hallucinating but himself and even
taught me some things about name calling.
He had a process called UCP or Universal Clearing Process.
UCP was a good process and probably vital tech within a greater
context of a working body of technology.
However KP claimed that UCP was a one shot clear process, meaning
it was the only process one needed to clear either others or oneself,
and all other processes should be eschewed.
Similarities to TROM and Time Breaking of Dennis Stephens is
obvious.
It went something like this.
1.) Where have you been? Compare to 2 and 3.
2.) Where are you? Compare to 1 and 3.
3.) Where could you be? Compare to 1 and 2.
The word 'where' was defined wider than simply a spatial location
but more along the lines of the word 'How'.
I and everyone else on a.c.t eventually got sick of KP and we voted
and uninvited him from the a.c.t list. He then created his own at
alt.ucp which remains to this day a barren wasteland of delusive
hallucinators and KP sycophants.
UCP is a good process, for a while, but not at the expense of
destroying or making criminally insane the use of any other process.
You think "Keeping Scientology Working" is bad, you haven't seen
"Keeping UCP Working."
Below is my spoof on KP and UCP, my process is a workable process
for those that are 'where it is on the bridge' to run it.
Notice the process is run as questions which we don't do any more.
Questions kill.
It should be translated into the "Get the idea of" form.)) - Homer
UCP2
I have discovered a new unlimited one shot process that consists of
2 questions that will take everyone all the way up the bridge.
Each question is run until no interest, then the other question is
run, which should then open up interest on the first question, back and
forth etc.
They are:
"Where are you?"
"What do you expect of your future?"
Anyone who doesn't agree with this is a Mank Waster and a
Hallucive Delucinator.
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 ====================
Tue Mar 5 12:00:04 EST 2019
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore150.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)
iD8DBQFcfqsVURT1lqxE3HERAp56AKC5Y8XpgVRg9U9JS30RjmWssmD8oQCghM5r
8SdDDGyZBXCNavV9Lv9FMgU=
=+Gsl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Wednesday, March 6, 2019
Sunday, March 3, 2019
adore768.memo (fwd)
07/09/10 Friday 6:16pm EST
KARMA GROUPS
> Is this Hinduism or Buddhism karma?
Neither.
Remember Blubbard said that if you solve a problem in your own
space, it will solve it in other's space too. I seen that happen with
me, hard to know exact causes beyond coincidence.
However one can easily imagine a 'karma group', those that have
charge on each other, each one holding the charge in place for the
others, so it becomes a self locking group.
"I hate you, you hate me, so neither of us can be free."
One can also see that one being can belong to many different karma
groups with little over lap in who belongs to each one.
Anyhow for each item that a being clears in himself about others,
it clears that item to some degree in them too.
One's karma group is what 'holds' one (me-you pair) here, unfree to
leave the game. One still owes, and also one is still trying to collect
on what one is owed. So one can't go.
As the auditing of items begins to run deep, an amnesty process
takes place, you no longer owe, and they no longer owe, and if they did,
you certainly ain't going to hang round trying to collect, and so you
become free to leave, even though you have done terrible wrongs to
others.
They actually stop caring and forgive you with out knowing why, or
even talking to you about it.
The postulate that you have to hang around and make amends to those
you have wronged, precommits you to the prior postulate that they are
still hurting and holding onto the damage you 'caused' them, and thus
they 'need' your help, and need of course bestows right to them, and
duty to you, so of course you can't get off your horse and walk away.
Thus when the Christians ask God to forgive them as they forgive
others, they are appealing in a basic way to this phenomenon. On the
surface one might complain that just because God forgives you, doesn't
mean anyone else does, and really the debt is not to God but to them.
But if you understand that we ARE God in carnation, then forgiving
others and being forgiven by others IS being forgiven by God the
High-US, and the whole thing makes a lot more sense.
Forgiving is in part re owning other people as brother and sister,
mother and father, child and mate, as in undisowning them, and in doing
so, they have a hard time continuing to disown you, or others they were
disowning as you were disowning them.
This is part of Most Detested Terminal processing, and defies
most attempts at physical logical explanation as to why it works.
Once you blow Goober as a Nemesis One, Dufus blows you
as a Nemesis One.
So the whole web of hate starts to break up in chunks that might
not seem realted to each other.
Its all about flows in the conscious universe.
There is more to life than tick tock physical mechanics.
Homer
Fri Jul 9 19:05:10 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Mar 3 12:06:01 EST 2019
FTP://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore768.memo
WWW://www.clearing.org
BLOG://adoretheproof.blogspot.comSend 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
KARMA GROUPS
> Is this Hinduism or Buddhism karma?
Neither.
Remember Blubbard said that if you solve a problem in your own
space, it will solve it in other's space too. I seen that happen with
me, hard to know exact causes beyond coincidence.
However one can easily imagine a 'karma group', those that have
charge on each other, each one holding the charge in place for the
others, so it becomes a self locking group.
"I hate you, you hate me, so neither of us can be free."
One can also see that one being can belong to many different karma
groups with little over lap in who belongs to each one.
Anyhow for each item that a being clears in himself about others,
it clears that item to some degree in them too.
One's karma group is what 'holds' one (me-you pair) here, unfree to
leave the game. One still owes, and also one is still trying to collect
on what one is owed. So one can't go.
As the auditing of items begins to run deep, an amnesty process
takes place, you no longer owe, and they no longer owe, and if they did,
you certainly ain't going to hang round trying to collect, and so you
become free to leave, even though you have done terrible wrongs to
others.
They actually stop caring and forgive you with out knowing why, or
even talking to you about it.
The postulate that you have to hang around and make amends to those
you have wronged, precommits you to the prior postulate that they are
still hurting and holding onto the damage you 'caused' them, and thus
they 'need' your help, and need of course bestows right to them, and
duty to you, so of course you can't get off your horse and walk away.
Thus when the Christians ask God to forgive them as they forgive
others, they are appealing in a basic way to this phenomenon. On the
surface one might complain that just because God forgives you, doesn't
mean anyone else does, and really the debt is not to God but to them.
But if you understand that we ARE God in carnation, then forgiving
others and being forgiven by others IS being forgiven by God the
High-US, and the whole thing makes a lot more sense.
Forgiving is in part re owning other people as brother and sister,
mother and father, child and mate, as in undisowning them, and in doing
so, they have a hard time continuing to disown you, or others they were
disowning as you were disowning them.
This is part of Most Detested Terminal processing, and defies
most attempts at physical logical explanation as to why it works.
Once you blow Goober as a Nemesis One, Dufus blows you
as a Nemesis One.
So the whole web of hate starts to break up in chunks that might
not seem realted to each other.
Its all about flows in the conscious universe.
There is more to life than tick tock physical mechanics.
Homer
Fri Jul 9 19:05:10 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Mar 3 12:06:01 EST 2019
FTP://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore768.memo
WWW://www.clearing.org
BLOG://adoretheproof.blogspot.comSend 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
ADORE398 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
THE PROOF IN A NUTSHELL
THE FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF LEARNING
If A can not influence B, and A can not influence anything that
can influence B, then any changes that B undergoes are irrelevant to
the nature of A, and thus can provide B no learning about A.
LEARNING BY BEING AN EFFECT
Learning by being an effect means to learn about A by looking
at B (usually ourselves).
If A and B are separated by an actual space time distance, then A
and B are two different objects.
If A and B are two different objects, then the only way B can
learn about A is for B to be the effect of A.
Why are we learning about A by looking at B?
Because B's state is a function of A, but only if there is a
causal pathway between them.
CHANGE OF STATE
Learning is a change in state that is causally connected to the
learned about.
In the absence of a change in state, there is no learning.
In the presence of a change in state, there may still be no
learning unless the change in state was caused by the learned about.
In the absence of cause there is no learning.
In the presence of learning, there must be cause between learner
and learned about.
It is not enough to just be right accidentally.
WHY IS THERE NO CERTAINTY?
Because present state does not prove prior state, and thus does
not prove change in state.
After B has changed state allegedly because of A, B has no proof
that B in fact changed state. In the absence of a change in state,
there is no learning, in the absence of proof of change in state,
there is no proof of learning.
Even if one were to assume that B could know it changed state,
the third party law forbids B from knowing if its changes were truely
caused by A.
THIRD PARTY LAW
If A changes state and then B changes state, it is possible that
A's change in state caused B to change state, or it is posible that a
third party C caused both A and B to change state in such a way as to
make it look like A's change in state caused B to change state.
It is not possible to determine if a third party is operating
merely by looking at A and B.
If one finds a C that seems to change state before A and B do,
then either C is causing A and B to change state as a third party to
them, or there is another third party D that is causing both C and A
and B to change state to make it look like C caused A and B to change
state.
Thus it is always impossible to prove whether or not there is a
third party operating between any two events.
Thus there is no certainty that changes in B's state are actually
a function of the nature of A as they could be merely C's offering to
B about A. Or D's offering to B and A about C. A doesn't even have
to exist for B to change state, if the causal pathway between them is
being impostered by a third party.
EFFECT DOES NOT PROVE CAUSE
CORRELATION DOES NOT IMPLY CAUSATION
Lastly there is no absolute certainty that all effects are
caused. In particular one can not prove that any effects are caused
merely by being an effect. The effect does not contain proof that
there was a cause, because the change in state does not contain proof
that it even changed state, but even if it did, the change in state
contains no proof that it was caused by another change in state
somewhere else.
Thus it is impossible to build a machine that learns by being an
effect that can prove with certainty that cause exists at all.
Thus the fact that B changes state proves nothing at all about
the nature of anything except B, and then only that it is in the state
it is in.
CONSCIOUSNESS CAN BE CERTAIN
The conscious learner can be certain that it sees differences in
color because it is looking at the color directly. A machine can not
do this because a machine can only look at effects in it self
allegedly caused by the color.
The relationship between the conscious looker and its conscious
looked-ats, is not the same as the relation between a machine being
impinged upon by an alleged photon from the outside.
The conscious learner can be certain of personal agency between
the desire to move its arm and the movement of the arm. The machine
can only report a correlation between effects.
Since changes in state in the machine do not prove the existence
of cause, either between an external impingement and the machine, or
between two correlated impingments and each other, causation is
insufficient to witness causation. Thus a machine is forever blind to
personal agency or external agency.
Agency forever remains a theory to a machine.
The conscious learner can tell that it is changing state and is
aware of time. A machine can not tell if it has changed state, and
thus can not be aware of time nor prove that time exists.
The conscious unit can learn that it exists with certainty and
can continuously reverify this fact as time goes on. A machine can
not prove its own existence because it can not verify that any symbol
(machine state) it might contain claiming that the machine exists is
there BECAUSE the machine exists.
The conscious unit can be certain of these things with no
possibility of error. A machine can only theorize about these things.
Thus conscoiusness is not a machine.
WHAT IS A MACHINE?
A machine is a system of parts interacting via cause and effect
across a space time distance.
Machines are dimensional entites.
THE LAW OF DIMENSION
If an object has a dimension, it must have non zero extension
along that dimension in order to not be a nothing.
A 2 x 3 x 0 chunck of gold is no gold.
Extension allows for two different objects in that dimension, as
each point of the extension is a different point from every other.
Thus learning across an extension, means learning between two
different objects, which means one point learning by being an effect
of the other point which means no certainty of learning.
A machine, being a dimensional object, therefore can not learn
anything with certainty, including its own existence or the existence
of cause.
Since consciousness can learn with certainty these very same
things, consciousness must not be learning across a space time
distance about itself and its desires and personal agency and color
forms. Thus consciousness must not be a dimensional object. In other
words consciousness is scalar, zero dimensions.
SHAPE OF AN OBJECT
The shape of a 3 dimensional object lists its extensions in each
dimension. For example a 2x3x4 piece of gold has a shape of {2,3,4},
and the shape of its shape, called its dimensionality, is {3}, as
there are 3 elements in its shape.
Notice that a piece of gold with shape {2,3,0} is no gold.
Notice that a piece of gold with shape {2,3} is some gold
although only two dimensional.
{2,3,0} is a 3 dimensional nothing.
{2,3} is a 2 dimensional something.
The shape of a zero dimensional scalar consciousness is the empty
set {}, as it has no dimensions at all in which to have extension.
The shape of the shape is {0}, as there are 0 elements in the shape.
REALITY AND ACTUALITY
Just because we see space and time, doesn't mean there is space
and time.
Reality is what we think is true.
Actuality is what is true.
The AllThatIs consists of a zero dimensional operating actuality,
whose purpose is to project multi dimensional virtual realities.
The conscious unit is the virtual reality helmet.
Thus for most people the shape of reality is {x,y,z,t} and the
shape of the shape is {4}.
The truth is that the shape of actuality is {}, and the shape of
the shape is {0}.
If we define the greek letter p (RHO), to be the mathematical
symbol for the shape of the object to the right of it, we can write
the above as follows:
{x,y,z,t} = pREALITY {4} = ppREALITY
{} = pACTUALITY {0} = ppACTUALITY
SPACETIME and CAUSEFFECT
In space time, cause and effect are two different objects, two
different events.
In a scalar actuality, cause and effect are one and the same
event. as there is no dimensional extensionality to separate them.
Thus learning with certainty can take place because the learner
is looking directly at the learned about, because learner and learned
about are one and the same event.
GOD AND SOUL
The AllThatIs is a Church of brick.
Souls are the bricks, the Many.
God is the mortar, the One that binds the Many and allows them to
communicate and co create with each other.
The bricks are not made by the mortar, and the mortar is not made
by the bricks.
Without the Brick God would be nothing, and without the
Mortal the Soul would be alone.
Both are forever co eternal in the structure of the Church.
The bricks are conscious and are cause.
The mortar is beyond words.
THE PROOF IN A NUTSHELL
Either you are learning or you are not learning.
If you are learning, then either you are learning with certainty
or learning with not certainty.
If you are learning across a distance, then you are learning by
being an effect because distance between learner and learned about
implies they are two different objects, and the only way two different
objects can learn about each other is for one to affect the other.
If you are learning by being an effect, then there can be no
certainty because you are learning about A by looking at B.
Thus if you are learning with certainty, you can't be learning by
being an effect across a space time distance.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Thu Nov 16 15:18:28 EST 2006
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Mar 3 12:00:04 EST 2019
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore398.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)
iD8DBQFcfAgUURT1lqxE3HERAki0AKCP/q4riyzk/AXXafh/62KtBEED7wCgtS+i
/PFbaT2miX8UBB2n0+eO0bo=
=/kNC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
THE PROOF IN A NUTSHELL
THE FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF LEARNING
If A can not influence B, and A can not influence anything that
can influence B, then any changes that B undergoes are irrelevant to
the nature of A, and thus can provide B no learning about A.
LEARNING BY BEING AN EFFECT
Learning by being an effect means to learn about A by looking
at B (usually ourselves).
If A and B are separated by an actual space time distance, then A
and B are two different objects.
If A and B are two different objects, then the only way B can
learn about A is for B to be the effect of A.
Why are we learning about A by looking at B?
Because B's state is a function of A, but only if there is a
causal pathway between them.
CHANGE OF STATE
Learning is a change in state that is causally connected to the
learned about.
In the absence of a change in state, there is no learning.
In the presence of a change in state, there may still be no
learning unless the change in state was caused by the learned about.
In the absence of cause there is no learning.
In the presence of learning, there must be cause between learner
and learned about.
It is not enough to just be right accidentally.
WHY IS THERE NO CERTAINTY?
Because present state does not prove prior state, and thus does
not prove change in state.
After B has changed state allegedly because of A, B has no proof
that B in fact changed state. In the absence of a change in state,
there is no learning, in the absence of proof of change in state,
there is no proof of learning.
Even if one were to assume that B could know it changed state,
the third party law forbids B from knowing if its changes were truely
caused by A.
THIRD PARTY LAW
If A changes state and then B changes state, it is possible that
A's change in state caused B to change state, or it is posible that a
third party C caused both A and B to change state in such a way as to
make it look like A's change in state caused B to change state.
It is not possible to determine if a third party is operating
merely by looking at A and B.
If one finds a C that seems to change state before A and B do,
then either C is causing A and B to change state as a third party to
them, or there is another third party D that is causing both C and A
and B to change state to make it look like C caused A and B to change
state.
Thus it is always impossible to prove whether or not there is a
third party operating between any two events.
Thus there is no certainty that changes in B's state are actually
a function of the nature of A as they could be merely C's offering to
B about A. Or D's offering to B and A about C. A doesn't even have
to exist for B to change state, if the causal pathway between them is
being impostered by a third party.
EFFECT DOES NOT PROVE CAUSE
CORRELATION DOES NOT IMPLY CAUSATION
Lastly there is no absolute certainty that all effects are
caused. In particular one can not prove that any effects are caused
merely by being an effect. The effect does not contain proof that
there was a cause, because the change in state does not contain proof
that it even changed state, but even if it did, the change in state
contains no proof that it was caused by another change in state
somewhere else.
Thus it is impossible to build a machine that learns by being an
effect that can prove with certainty that cause exists at all.
Thus the fact that B changes state proves nothing at all about
the nature of anything except B, and then only that it is in the state
it is in.
CONSCIOUSNESS CAN BE CERTAIN
The conscious learner can be certain that it sees differences in
color because it is looking at the color directly. A machine can not
do this because a machine can only look at effects in it self
allegedly caused by the color.
The relationship between the conscious looker and its conscious
looked-ats, is not the same as the relation between a machine being
impinged upon by an alleged photon from the outside.
The conscious learner can be certain of personal agency between
the desire to move its arm and the movement of the arm. The machine
can only report a correlation between effects.
Since changes in state in the machine do not prove the existence
of cause, either between an external impingement and the machine, or
between two correlated impingments and each other, causation is
insufficient to witness causation. Thus a machine is forever blind to
personal agency or external agency.
Agency forever remains a theory to a machine.
The conscious learner can tell that it is changing state and is
aware of time. A machine can not tell if it has changed state, and
thus can not be aware of time nor prove that time exists.
The conscious unit can learn that it exists with certainty and
can continuously reverify this fact as time goes on. A machine can
not prove its own existence because it can not verify that any symbol
(machine state) it might contain claiming that the machine exists is
there BECAUSE the machine exists.
The conscious unit can be certain of these things with no
possibility of error. A machine can only theorize about these things.
Thus conscoiusness is not a machine.
WHAT IS A MACHINE?
A machine is a system of parts interacting via cause and effect
across a space time distance.
Machines are dimensional entites.
THE LAW OF DIMENSION
If an object has a dimension, it must have non zero extension
along that dimension in order to not be a nothing.
A 2 x 3 x 0 chunck of gold is no gold.
Extension allows for two different objects in that dimension, as
each point of the extension is a different point from every other.
Thus learning across an extension, means learning between two
different objects, which means one point learning by being an effect
of the other point which means no certainty of learning.
A machine, being a dimensional object, therefore can not learn
anything with certainty, including its own existence or the existence
of cause.
Since consciousness can learn with certainty these very same
things, consciousness must not be learning across a space time
distance about itself and its desires and personal agency and color
forms. Thus consciousness must not be a dimensional object. In other
words consciousness is scalar, zero dimensions.
SHAPE OF AN OBJECT
The shape of a 3 dimensional object lists its extensions in each
dimension. For example a 2x3x4 piece of gold has a shape of {2,3,4},
and the shape of its shape, called its dimensionality, is {3}, as
there are 3 elements in its shape.
Notice that a piece of gold with shape {2,3,0} is no gold.
Notice that a piece of gold with shape {2,3} is some gold
although only two dimensional.
{2,3,0} is a 3 dimensional nothing.
{2,3} is a 2 dimensional something.
The shape of a zero dimensional scalar consciousness is the empty
set {}, as it has no dimensions at all in which to have extension.
The shape of the shape is {0}, as there are 0 elements in the shape.
REALITY AND ACTUALITY
Just because we see space and time, doesn't mean there is space
and time.
Reality is what we think is true.
Actuality is what is true.
The AllThatIs consists of a zero dimensional operating actuality,
whose purpose is to project multi dimensional virtual realities.
The conscious unit is the virtual reality helmet.
Thus for most people the shape of reality is {x,y,z,t} and the
shape of the shape is {4}.
The truth is that the shape of actuality is {}, and the shape of
the shape is {0}.
If we define the greek letter p (RHO), to be the mathematical
symbol for the shape of the object to the right of it, we can write
the above as follows:
{x,y,z,t} = pREALITY {4} = ppREALITY
{} = pACTUALITY {0} = ppACTUALITY
SPACETIME and CAUSEFFECT
In space time, cause and effect are two different objects, two
different events.
In a scalar actuality, cause and effect are one and the same
event. as there is no dimensional extensionality to separate them.
Thus learning with certainty can take place because the learner
is looking directly at the learned about, because learner and learned
about are one and the same event.
GOD AND SOUL
The AllThatIs is a Church of brick.
Souls are the bricks, the Many.
God is the mortar, the One that binds the Many and allows them to
communicate and co create with each other.
The bricks are not made by the mortar, and the mortar is not made
by the bricks.
Without the Brick God would be nothing, and without the
Mortal the Soul would be alone.
Both are forever co eternal in the structure of the Church.
The bricks are conscious and are cause.
The mortar is beyond words.
THE PROOF IN A NUTSHELL
Either you are learning or you are not learning.
If you are learning, then either you are learning with certainty
or learning with not certainty.
If you are learning across a distance, then you are learning by
being an effect because distance between learner and learned about
implies they are two different objects, and the only way two different
objects can learn about each other is for one to affect the other.
If you are learning by being an effect, then there can be no
certainty because you are learning about A by looking at B.
Thus if you are learning with certainty, you can't be learning by
being an effect across a space time distance.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Thu Nov 16 15:18:28 EST 2006
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Mar 3 12:00:04 EST 2019
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore398.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)
iD8DBQFcfAgUURT1lqxE3HERAki0AKCP/q4riyzk/AXXafh/62KtBEED7wCgtS+i
/PFbaT2miX8UBB2n0+eO0bo=
=/kNC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)