-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
George,
I bypass much of the problem by saying the following.
God is the AllThatIs.
We are God in carnation.
Thus I call a being a GodSoul.
It operates as both God the Creator, and as Soul the Creature.
Everything created therefore comes from us either as God,
or as Soul.
Dicom's exist, good and bad, love and hate, life and death etc.
The purpose of creation is ART, not order.
Order is just another stupid dicom.
Art is a comingling of order and disorder, harmony and disharmony
followed by resolve.
Not just any harmony will do, not just any disharmony will do, only
those harmonies and disharmonies that fold into a final resolve of
laughter, worthwhileness and peace complete the equation.
That's simple music theory.
Harmonies are enhanced by disharmonies via the resolve at the end.
Thus we seek a good work of art, not a good being.
As Author we seek a good story, not a good character.
If everyone in a story were good, the story would not be interesting.
From the character point of view, the good side of the dicom seems
to be more valuable than the bad side of the dicom.
Pleasure is intrinsically good to the character and pain
intrinsically bad.
Thus most bad comes from people who are trying to give themselves
pleasure by preemptively giving others pain. They have become only ones
against an empire of zombies in their own minds.
Its a psychosis of the good character hallucinating evil where it
doesn't exist, rather than some fundamental ontological valid evil that
does exist.
The character however does believes in the evil because he can feel
it, which is why he gets preemptive about it.
But that's from the Soul point of view.
From the God point of view of the same GodSoul, the use of any side
of all dicoms is a valid color in his palette of painting the tapestry
of life, tragedy and travesty, miracle and majesty.
Thus there is no right or wrong, there are only bad stories and
good stories.
No God creates a bad story at will, he does his best to create a
good story. Thus both sides of good and bad will be played out by the
Creature.
There is thus no 'obedience' to God, because the Soul is God in
carnation, and can not help but obey the dictates of his own Authorship
through the labyrinth of good being to bad being to free being again.
If one soul doesn't like the authorship of another soul, the first
can tell the second 'God will punish you', but its all bullshit, and
eventually comes back on the first who ends up in hell for a while for
wishing the second into hell forever.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Mon Nov 29 01:33:55 EST 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Jun 13 12:00:03 EDT 2019
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore825.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)
iD8DBQFdAnMEURT1lqxE3HERAvLUAKCthLFi0Ct4zxgwzi1mbt/bQCorwACffvQr
EgPsqzoOi9fRILmAqiZNlEU=
=isNB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Thursday, June 13, 2019
Wednesday, June 12, 2019
ADORE675 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
QUESTIONS OR COMMANDS?
Well the issue here is question asking itself.
Auditing was built on the fundamentals of asking questions and
getting answers.
Scientology is defined as the science of knowing how to know
answers to questions.
The problem is that the being is so totally caught up in question
asking, that you can't possibly ask him a question without a trillion
years of failure convulsing on every question he ever failed to answer.
"All aberration is waiting for an answer." - LRH Dianetics 55!
Worse many questions are self answering, the QUESTION is the source
of the problem, and ceasing to ask the question is the answer to the
problem!
All persistence of any kind is cemented into place by a question.
Postulate -> Alter-Is -> Question -> Committment of Effort ->
Persistence.
The guy postulates a spider, denies he created it (alter-is), asks
'what do I do about it?', commits effort to the answer (get a gun), and
the spider comes after him as he goes for the gun, which is persistence.
The question is usually of the form, 'where did that come from, and
what can I do about it!'
If he really wants to do something about it, he can make it again,
and it will vanish when he lets go.
But the question asking COMMITS effort, and thus him, to his
consideration that he didn't make it and has no clue what to do about
it, and justice is you get what you postulate.
Thus running,
"What question are you asking?"
is a great process, except it is a QUESTION!
run instead,
"Spot NO question."
"Spot SOME question."
A NO question would be a question the preclear or anyone is asking
but no longer knows it.
"The Service Fac is an excuse for not expressing a resentment by
asking a question instead." - From Adore.
Every service fac condition is cemented into place at the end of it
with a question about why it is there and what can I do about it?
"Who or what is cause around here, and why is it such an asshole?"
That is probably the generic who, what and why question, and your
top level listing question that is driving your pc nuts.
Now that he has a persistence going, he asks further 'What can I DO
about it?' and away we go into time.
It is all a deceit of magnitude because the being just put it there
himself.
He KNOWS. What then is he doing asking questions about how to get
rid of it except in order to keep it around?
Question asking is an effort to continue not knowing the answer to
a problem, via pretending to want to know.
He will ask the question on the pretense of wanting to know the
answer, which will make sure he never finds the answer, which is what he
wants underlying the deceit, a rough game.
These lead to games that can never be won.
The end result of question asking in auditing is the auditor asks
"Whatsit?" and preclear says "I don't know, you tell me, you are the
doctor."
The pc has turned the tables around on the auditor by getting the
auditor to answer 'What is wrong with me!', and that's called out of
session.
Even the questions asked during in-session sessions add up and
build on the bank which is all snarled up and persisting because of
failed or wrong answers to questions!
And silly auditor thinks he is going to clean up that snarl by
getting some *RIGHT* answers to questions this time!
Good luck.
Primary dramatization is question asking!
Run "What am I dramatizing?" until you are dead.
Run "Spot NO/SOME dramatizing" until you are alive again.
This is in part why auditing itself needs to be run out at the end.
Every question that is asked of the preclear restimulates the
entire bank just that much.
You think the preclear can ask just one question at a time?
Dream on.
You are trying to be laser precise in your auditing, yet your every
question kicks the whole bank into a great big grinding groan.
Especially if the question or process you are running is not THE
exact question you should be running at this instance. But who can ever
know ahead of time really what to run. So while the preclear is trying
to answer the given question, he is also seeking for the right question
that should be being asked, which is self C/Sing in the chair as a
result of wrong C/Sing.
Rather than add thousands and thousands of more questions to the
bank and time track, we want to spot questions that are already going on
and as-is them out of existence, particularly the questions that are
self answering and thus are killing the preclear while trying to find a
(by definition) wrong answer to them.
If a question is self answering, then ANY further answer to that
question is a wrong indication, and the preclear will start seeking
those answers with a feeling of doom because he knows when he 'finds the
answer' he will feel just awful because Truth stinks.
Below Grade 3, ARC Break Release, he knows this for sure, and thus
the worse he feels the closer to the truth he is sure he is. Given two
possibilities, he will accept the one that makes him feel the loudest
and the worst.
He has already missed the correct answer, the question itself, and
thus ANY search for another answer to that question is SEEKING a wrong
indication and thus leads down the path of final dismay.
The prclear at Grade 3, ARC Breaks, will learn not to do this.
He can get the correct answer to questions because he determines
the correctness of an answer by how good it makes him feel rather than
by how bad it makes him feel :)
All ARC breaks stem from seeking the answer to a self answering
question.
That is the missed withhold!
Homer
Wed Dec 2 18:13:49 EST 2009
06/06/16 Monday 7:52pm EST
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Jun 12 12:00:04 EDT 2019
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore675.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)
iD8DBQFdASGEURT1lqxE3HERAjlJAJ479QlKYzY8wvCY0phzL2g+LWZ3UgCgv9bR
FNDnhTUaWsNXi9crbOHLH6c=
=x/sV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
QUESTIONS OR COMMANDS?
Well the issue here is question asking itself.
Auditing was built on the fundamentals of asking questions and
getting answers.
Scientology is defined as the science of knowing how to know
answers to questions.
The problem is that the being is so totally caught up in question
asking, that you can't possibly ask him a question without a trillion
years of failure convulsing on every question he ever failed to answer.
"All aberration is waiting for an answer." - LRH Dianetics 55!
Worse many questions are self answering, the QUESTION is the source
of the problem, and ceasing to ask the question is the answer to the
problem!
All persistence of any kind is cemented into place by a question.
Postulate -> Alter-Is -> Question -> Committment of Effort ->
Persistence.
The guy postulates a spider, denies he created it (alter-is), asks
'what do I do about it?', commits effort to the answer (get a gun), and
the spider comes after him as he goes for the gun, which is persistence.
The question is usually of the form, 'where did that come from, and
what can I do about it!'
If he really wants to do something about it, he can make it again,
and it will vanish when he lets go.
But the question asking COMMITS effort, and thus him, to his
consideration that he didn't make it and has no clue what to do about
it, and justice is you get what you postulate.
Thus running,
"What question are you asking?"
is a great process, except it is a QUESTION!
run instead,
"Spot NO question."
"Spot SOME question."
A NO question would be a question the preclear or anyone is asking
but no longer knows it.
"The Service Fac is an excuse for not expressing a resentment by
asking a question instead." - From Adore.
Every service fac condition is cemented into place at the end of it
with a question about why it is there and what can I do about it?
"Who or what is cause around here, and why is it such an asshole?"
That is probably the generic who, what and why question, and your
top level listing question that is driving your pc nuts.
Now that he has a persistence going, he asks further 'What can I DO
about it?' and away we go into time.
It is all a deceit of magnitude because the being just put it there
himself.
He KNOWS. What then is he doing asking questions about how to get
rid of it except in order to keep it around?
Question asking is an effort to continue not knowing the answer to
a problem, via pretending to want to know.
He will ask the question on the pretense of wanting to know the
answer, which will make sure he never finds the answer, which is what he
wants underlying the deceit, a rough game.
These lead to games that can never be won.
The end result of question asking in auditing is the auditor asks
"Whatsit?" and preclear says "I don't know, you tell me, you are the
doctor."
The pc has turned the tables around on the auditor by getting the
auditor to answer 'What is wrong with me!', and that's called out of
session.
Even the questions asked during in-session sessions add up and
build on the bank which is all snarled up and persisting because of
failed or wrong answers to questions!
And silly auditor thinks he is going to clean up that snarl by
getting some *RIGHT* answers to questions this time!
Good luck.
Primary dramatization is question asking!
Run "What am I dramatizing?" until you are dead.
Run "Spot NO/SOME dramatizing" until you are alive again.
This is in part why auditing itself needs to be run out at the end.
Every question that is asked of the preclear restimulates the
entire bank just that much.
You think the preclear can ask just one question at a time?
Dream on.
You are trying to be laser precise in your auditing, yet your every
question kicks the whole bank into a great big grinding groan.
Especially if the question or process you are running is not THE
exact question you should be running at this instance. But who can ever
know ahead of time really what to run. So while the preclear is trying
to answer the given question, he is also seeking for the right question
that should be being asked, which is self C/Sing in the chair as a
result of wrong C/Sing.
Rather than add thousands and thousands of more questions to the
bank and time track, we want to spot questions that are already going on
and as-is them out of existence, particularly the questions that are
self answering and thus are killing the preclear while trying to find a
(by definition) wrong answer to them.
If a question is self answering, then ANY further answer to that
question is a wrong indication, and the preclear will start seeking
those answers with a feeling of doom because he knows when he 'finds the
answer' he will feel just awful because Truth stinks.
Below Grade 3, ARC Break Release, he knows this for sure, and thus
the worse he feels the closer to the truth he is sure he is. Given two
possibilities, he will accept the one that makes him feel the loudest
and the worst.
He has already missed the correct answer, the question itself, and
thus ANY search for another answer to that question is SEEKING a wrong
indication and thus leads down the path of final dismay.
The prclear at Grade 3, ARC Breaks, will learn not to do this.
He can get the correct answer to questions because he determines
the correctness of an answer by how good it makes him feel rather than
by how bad it makes him feel :)
All ARC breaks stem from seeking the answer to a self answering
question.
That is the missed withhold!
Homer
Wed Dec 2 18:13:49 EST 2009
06/06/16 Monday 7:52pm EST
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Jun 12 12:00:04 EDT 2019
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore675.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)
iD8DBQFdASGEURT1lqxE3HERAjlJAJ479QlKYzY8wvCY0phzL2g+LWZ3UgCgv9bR
FNDnhTUaWsNXi9crbOHLH6c=
=x/sV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Tuesday, June 11, 2019
ACT42 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
DIRTY TRICKS
ACT - 42
22 January 1994
Copyright (C) 1994 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
> Thank you Homer for your post on the GO. We disagree on lots of
>things but we can still learn much from each other. It's nice being
>able to discuss the tech and the org with knowledgeable people who are
>willing to be challenged and to challenge others.
You think they have an OPS out on me yet?
Let's see how's it going to be?
Maybe I will get a call from one of my long term contacts at
Cornell, 'Homer? We heard something real strange about you the other
day from a reputable source... What's this we hear about you using your
accounts to defame that wonderful Church of Scientology?'
Or maybe the police will come knocking at my door with a search
warrant... What will it be, child porn, guns, drugs? Maybe Church
secrets? 'A concerned citizen told us...'
What?! Guns AND drugs! Oh no, a confirmed felon!
So let's see which is it gonna be, do I get rid of the guns, or do
I get rid of the drugs? Hmmm, hard choice. Of course there will be
blood and urine tests. Got to prepare for them. Maybe I should go
straight one of these days. My addiction to Chloropromazine will be the
hardest to kick...
Of course they will have a subpoena for ADORE, ALL of it! All of
my computers and tapes and disks and everything I own will be taken and
searched for damning information. My business will be ruined.
Oh yes, and of course there are all the years and years of case
note books and case tapes, all of which will be read into evidence.
Or perhaps they will call up our buyers and vendors and tell them
not to do business with us because I am a communist or a fruit cake, or
a homo or a child molester or a Scientologist... Oh God no, tell them
anything, but PLEASE don't tell them I'm a Scientologist!
'Hello Spencers? We notice you have been selling Art Matrix
fractal posters. Yes? Good. We thought you might like to know we have
evidence that Art Matrix is funding its production runs of fractal
posters with money made from Kiddy Porn downloaded from Copenhagen. Do
you wish to be associated with this kind of company? No? Good. We
will keep you informed...'
You think the Church has found my old case folders yet? Let's see,
just what IS in them? Oh my, gulp... Well maybe they have lost them.
Let's hope so.
Or course there are my neighbors, and my land lord, shall we count
the ways we can third party someone to a neighbor or bear false witness
to their community?
Oh yes, and don't forget the IRS, a short note to their good
buddies in the Internal Revenue Service could get me audited back to the
beginning of time. All those donations to the Church of Scientology...
gee I don't know, you think they will pass the audit?
Or maybe a note to the credit bureau tarnishing my perfect credit
record, maybe get a hacker to enter the files...
You think the apartment is bugged yet? You think they have moved
in across the street so that they can observe me?
You think they will follow me when I take walks at night or go
places in the car?
And what about Boogers, my dog, gotta keep a watchful eye on him or
his days may be numbered.
And how about my car, sugar in the gas tank, maybe a loosened spark
plug, maybe take off 4 of the 5 nuts on a back tire. I had someone do
that to me once, the tire came off when the last lug bolt broke clean
off at 60 miles an hour on a highway and the tire went rolling past the
station wagon as smooth as you please. "Gee, look at that tire honey, I
wonder who's tire that is?" No problem, I wasn't there, my friend was
driving the car.
Now HE had a problem, he was carrying 200 small plants for his
plant store in the back of the wagon, and they ALL went up in the air
when he hit the guard rail. He should have known better than to hit the
brakes... Don't they teach you nothing in Driver's Ed?
How sick do you have to be before any Church will try to make you
well?
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Jun 9 12:00:04 EDT 2019
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/act42.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)
iD8DBQFc/S0EURT1lqxE3HERAmsKAJ9b49HffO4U0SQDsRfwGF4c1ZbrjgCffJQw
vPVVqQ0cK7OB47PsuoBzl1A=
=qSrG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
DIRTY TRICKS
ACT - 42
22 January 1994
Copyright (C) 1994 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
> Thank you Homer for your post on the GO. We disagree on lots of
>things but we can still learn much from each other. It's nice being
>able to discuss the tech and the org with knowledgeable people who are
>willing to be challenged and to challenge others.
You think they have an OPS out on me yet?
Let's see how's it going to be?
Maybe I will get a call from one of my long term contacts at
Cornell, 'Homer? We heard something real strange about you the other
day from a reputable source... What's this we hear about you using your
accounts to defame that wonderful Church of Scientology?'
Or maybe the police will come knocking at my door with a search
warrant... What will it be, child porn, guns, drugs? Maybe Church
secrets? 'A concerned citizen told us...'
What?! Guns AND drugs! Oh no, a confirmed felon!
So let's see which is it gonna be, do I get rid of the guns, or do
I get rid of the drugs? Hmmm, hard choice. Of course there will be
blood and urine tests. Got to prepare for them. Maybe I should go
straight one of these days. My addiction to Chloropromazine will be the
hardest to kick...
Of course they will have a subpoena for ADORE, ALL of it! All of
my computers and tapes and disks and everything I own will be taken and
searched for damning information. My business will be ruined.
Oh yes, and of course there are all the years and years of case
note books and case tapes, all of which will be read into evidence.
Or perhaps they will call up our buyers and vendors and tell them
not to do business with us because I am a communist or a fruit cake, or
a homo or a child molester or a Scientologist... Oh God no, tell them
anything, but PLEASE don't tell them I'm a Scientologist!
'Hello Spencers? We notice you have been selling Art Matrix
fractal posters. Yes? Good. We thought you might like to know we have
evidence that Art Matrix is funding its production runs of fractal
posters with money made from Kiddy Porn downloaded from Copenhagen. Do
you wish to be associated with this kind of company? No? Good. We
will keep you informed...'
You think the Church has found my old case folders yet? Let's see,
just what IS in them? Oh my, gulp... Well maybe they have lost them.
Let's hope so.
Or course there are my neighbors, and my land lord, shall we count
the ways we can third party someone to a neighbor or bear false witness
to their community?
Oh yes, and don't forget the IRS, a short note to their good
buddies in the Internal Revenue Service could get me audited back to the
beginning of time. All those donations to the Church of Scientology...
gee I don't know, you think they will pass the audit?
Or maybe a note to the credit bureau tarnishing my perfect credit
record, maybe get a hacker to enter the files...
You think the apartment is bugged yet? You think they have moved
in across the street so that they can observe me?
You think they will follow me when I take walks at night or go
places in the car?
And what about Boogers, my dog, gotta keep a watchful eye on him or
his days may be numbered.
And how about my car, sugar in the gas tank, maybe a loosened spark
plug, maybe take off 4 of the 5 nuts on a back tire. I had someone do
that to me once, the tire came off when the last lug bolt broke clean
off at 60 miles an hour on a highway and the tire went rolling past the
station wagon as smooth as you please. "Gee, look at that tire honey, I
wonder who's tire that is?" No problem, I wasn't there, my friend was
driving the car.
Now HE had a problem, he was carrying 200 small plants for his
plant store in the back of the wagon, and they ALL went up in the air
when he hit the guard rail. He should have known better than to hit the
brakes... Don't they teach you nothing in Driver's Ed?
How sick do you have to be before any Church will try to make you
well?
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Jun 9 12:00:04 EDT 2019
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/act42.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)
iD8DBQFc/S0EURT1lqxE3HERAmsKAJ9b49HffO4U0SQDsRfwGF4c1ZbrjgCffJQw
vPVVqQ0cK7OB47PsuoBzl1A=
=qSrG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Monday, June 3, 2019
ADORE69 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Adore is a baby phase religion. As such it has most of its
attention on women, specifically mothers and girl friends.
The intent here is not to make friends with women, but to hang
them high for the sins of their children, until they are worthy as
beings again to breath the air that we all live in.
If you do not clean up woman, you will never clean up the spawn
of women, and the men will continue with their wars and atomic wars
until there is no air left to breath for anyone.
This is what men think of their mothers, and this is what men do
for their mothers.
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 ====================
Mon Jun 3 12:00:05 EDT 2019
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore69.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)
iD8DBQFc9UQFURT1lqxE3HERAuVhAJ9/0qEJd8KJD6kJp9V/Mc/Z3bq2YgCaAtVV
jjJumf70nfXFg46deOY2cd0=
=LEDD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
Adore is a baby phase religion. As such it has most of its
attention on women, specifically mothers and girl friends.
The intent here is not to make friends with women, but to hang
them high for the sins of their children, until they are worthy as
beings again to breath the air that we all live in.
If you do not clean up woman, you will never clean up the spawn
of women, and the men will continue with their wars and atomic wars
until there is no air left to breath for anyone.
This is what men think of their mothers, and this is what men do
for their mothers.
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 ====================
Mon Jun 3 12:00:05 EDT 2019
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore69.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)
iD8DBQFc9UQFURT1lqxE3HERAuVhAJ9/0qEJd8KJD6kJp9V/Mc/Z3bq2YgCaAtVV
jjJumf70nfXFg46deOY2cd0=
=LEDD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Sunday, June 2, 2019
ADORE414 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
12/11/06 Monday 11:49pm EST
CONSERVATION OF SOMETHING AND NOTHING
An object is that which has qualities.
A quality is that which describes an object.
A something is an object with a non empty quality set, the set of
all qualities that describe the object.
A nothing is an object with an empty quality set.
There can only be one nothing, because if there were two different
nothings, their quality sets would be different and thus they couldn't
both have empty quality sets and thus couldn't both be nothings.
THE FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF SOMETHING AND NOTHING.
The fundamental theorem of something and nothing tells us,
Something can not come from nothing, and
Something can not go into nothing.
Therefore if something exists now, something must have always
existed and will always exist.
The justification for this theorem comes from the idea that if a
nothing had the quality of potential ability to give rise to a
something, that quality would render the nothing's quality set non
empty, and thus render the nothing not a nothing.
Thus potential ability to give rise to something is already a
something.
Various somethings however can change form, thus giving the
apparency that something is changing into a different something.
However underlying the various surface forms of somethings that
change into each other will be a common something which is the actual
something which can neither be created nor destroyed.
Change of form of the actual underlying something is not creation
or destruction.
Thus mass which is a something called energy can change into
photons which is also a something called energy. Mass and light have
very different surface qualities, but the actual common something
between them is energy.
THE CONSERVATION OF SOMETHING AND NOTHING.
What this tells us, is that if you have something, then you have
always had that something and will always have it, regardless of what
form it takes.
And if you have a nothing, you have always had that nothing, and
will always have that nothing. Notice a nothing can not change forms as
it has no qualities to change.
The somethings that make a universe can be varied and complex, it
is not true that there is only one kind of something in the world.
The hunt for something, is the hunt for what is conserved, for an
understanding of what is actual in a universe and what is merely real,
(apparently actual to people's sense of reality, but not actually
actual) and allows the beings in that universe to play the game better.
This hunt is the process of science.
For example, in the alleged physical universe of dimensional space
and time, both space and time are generally considered to be conserved,
thus they are considered actual.
As mentioned above, the common somethings underlying the physics of
objects in that space and time, are energy, momentum, spin, charge and a
few other weird ones like baryon number.
Physicists seek that which is conserved, because they hope that
what is conserved is what is actual underlying the apparencies that come
and go.
In other words if all actual somethings must be conserved, then
that which is conserved is probably an actual something.
Notice the word probably.
In the middle of the last few centuries, natural philosophy started
to change from 'God causes everything according to His Will', to every
thing follows mathematical law.
Galileo was imprisoned for suggesting that the tides were caused by
the Moon. The Church said this limited God's will and control over
things and was thus heresy.
Galileo argued back that God was free to create things as he
wished, and if he wanted the tides to march in step with the moon and
its various mathematical laws, that was His prerogative.
The Church didn't buy it as the primary purpose of the Christian
Church at the time was to be a holding pen for idiots.
But now we hear from modern Physicists that there is no need for
God to explain anything any more, we have mathematical natural law
instead.
The earth goes around the Sun in an ellipse 'because' of the forces
of gravity and there is no need for God to explain anything.
The same argument however applies to this new age Church of the
Bomb, they have explained exactly nothing by merely describing HOW the
earth moves around the sun. The have posited forces and masses and
equations between them, but again one is free to ask why is it this way
instead of some other way, and who or what is ultimately responsible for
bringing it about?
And again the Church of the Bomb doesn't seem to want to buy it,
mostly because it too is a sargasso sea for sick, dead, and dying beings
who think they are made of meat.
They believe they can explain everything with their 4 fundamental
forces of nature, they seem to miss that Love and Shame can not of force
and mass be made.
If they ever do unify their 4 fundamental forces of nature
into one grand unified theory of everything, they will find that
the one top level cause is CONSCIOUSNESS.
But at that point they will be in serious trouble because presently
they consider that consciousness is MADE of the 4 fundamental forces,
namely a process in space time mechanics in the brain.
You can't make a non space time entity (consciousness) out of space
time machines, no matter how many you use or how complexly you put them
together.
One thing HAS however come out of the past 2000 years of
religious and scientific barbarism, and that is if God does exist,
then,
"God is apparently a mathematician first, and a purveyor of
damnation second." - Adore
In studying the mathematics of the physical universe one is struck
by the awesome intelligence it must take to understand all the
mathematics behind everything that works, let alone have devised and
designed it this way.
It seems unlikely that such an intelligent being would spend its
time by stooping to such crass and rank behaviors like sending people to
hell forever for the sins of four score and 20.
Unless maybe they were Christians.
But no, I am a sinner and repent of my hatred in dust and ashes,
and so any God as great as the mathematics of the cosmos would be able
to find a better way to deal with even me and them.
This is something to aspire to.
But now we have to ask, why did God create the Sun and Earth such
that it went around in an ellipse? Why not a square?
Surely if God can do anything, he could just as easily make the
Earth hang a louey every 3 months with the same approximate effect.
The answer comes down to conservation of something, and the desire
to create the illusion that the physical universe is a something.
I once had a dream, I was sound asleep and there was a lamp on my
table in the dream that I wanted to turn on because the room was dark.
The lamp had a standard lamp shade and a metal pull string up where the
bulb was.
So I reached over in the dream and pulled the metal string, and the
lamp turned on.
There was a perfect conical ray of light coming down from the
bottom edge of the lamp shade to the table where the lamp was standing,
and the rays made a perfect circle of light on the table as you would
expect such a lamp to do.
But the bulb remained off, the lamp shade itself was dark and the
room was not lit at all even by the light bouncing off the table.
This woke me right up.
Why?
Because in that dream I did not know I was dreaming, and I expected
the lamp to be a something, and I was reaching to it to operate its
cause to increase the light in the room. When I pulled the string, and
light appeared out of nowhere at the bottom edge of the shade down to
the table, I was suddenly hit by the truth that the something I thought
was there, wasn't there at all. How could light appear OUT OF NOTHING,
and the bulb remain off.
This violated something from nothing big time, and the end result
was I woke up.
Of course once awake, I knew that in a dream anything could happen,
even if the bulb had turned on, and the walls had lit up, the light
coming from the bulb wasn't was lighting the walls anyway, as EVERYTHING
in a dream is self luminous.
So I was comfortable again residing in the waking universe of
"true" somethings and I could get on with my day.
Little did I know, eh?
THE SUN AND THE EARTH
Now let's say that the Earth did manage to move in a square around
the Sun. This now needs an explanation, how come it moves in a straight
line for 3 months, and then suddenly turns left, and then follows a
straight line for 3 months more.
This can't happen for no reason because that violates SOMETHING
FROM NOTHING.
We expect, and in fact need, that if a change takes place, then
something prior must have caused the change, and if there is no change
in anything prior to the Earth taking a left, then that's something
coming from nothing.
Something must always come from something!
Changes must always be preceeded by other changes, either internal
or external to the object even if it is just time!
Now God could have created all kinds of 'somethings' to account for
why the Earth changes course suddenly in its orbit to form a square. If
he doesn't, then everyone will be stuck with the non understanding that
comes from things coming from nothing and happening for no reason, and
they would wake up!
Every being naturally seeks the lowest common denominator of the
universe where something and nothing are comfortably conserved.
So what He did do is create a very simple system of conservation.
In this system there are forces and masses, forces and masses are
related by simply mathematical rules whereby forces, which are
something, are allowed to impart motion to or change the courses of
masses, which are ANOTHER COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SOMETHING.
He further said that the force the sun exerts on the Earth is a
function of the sun's mass, and since the sun's mass isn't changing
significantly over time, neither can the force the Sun exerts on the
Earth. Further since the Sun's mass is spherical and there is no
preferred direction, the Sun's force must act equally in all directions
at all times on the Earth, depending only on how far the Earth is from
the sun.
Given the above, the mathematics of the situation inexorably
computes out to an ellipse. Thus if left to their own devices,
celestial objects like to orbit in ellipses, and the apparent somethings
or force and mass are all conserved.
In this case, the apparent somethings are cause and effect, namely
force and mass. Effects with out cause, and causes without effects both
violate something from nothing, and if this actually happened in any
dream universe, the beings in it would wake up to the next universe out
where something and nothing were properly conserved.
Now we already know that there is no mandatory reason that impels a
God to create a dream universe where something and nothing are
conserved.
He can just as easily make the Earth go around in random zig zags,
and let everyone down below know he is doing it out of caprice. There
ARE no actual somethings or nothing to be conserved in any dreamtime, so
the God can do what he wants. But the beings in the dream, including
the God himself when he jumps into his own creation, will have a very
hard time figuring out the rules, and eventually say "Oh screw it" and
wake up on purpose, because they KNOW the universe isn't actual.
You see for a universe to persist for any length of time the beings
in it must think the universe is more actual than they are. It is best
if the beings think they are MADE OF the universe somethings, like being
a brain or some such.
So The God creates dreamtimes that conserve something and nothing
purely out of a practical need, namely to make sure he doesn't wake up
when inside the dream universe.
If his created universe is going persist it's somethings have to be
more conserved than he is!
He can be incipient carrion or dust in the wind, but the oceans and
the rocks will out live him forever.
He won't ever wake up out of that dream!
His dream has to act as if it is actual right down to the last
quark, so he can continue to think he IS an actual machine operating in
an actual space time continuum.
If one single quark doesn't burp in just the right way, and the
dreaming being gets the faintest idea that something is no longer
conserved in an irreconcilable way, he will wake up and lose his dream.
This is why OT powers in the physical universe are really bad for
beings, it wakes them up like a meteor hitting their house.
Some people claim they really want it to happen, but once it does
they wish they could enter the dream again and can't.
The dream's cover has been blow, conservation of something and
nothing.
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
Tue Dec 12 01:09:09 EST 2006
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Jun 2 12:00:04 EDT 2019
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore414.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)
iD8DBQFc8/KFURT1lqxE3HERAv+tAJ0U4dFLZH6SqCVHE44qc286vDvdQwCg0MEc
UkRQ/1duQIjyJX9x8U9yvIE=
=QDWN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
12/11/06 Monday 11:49pm EST
CONSERVATION OF SOMETHING AND NOTHING
An object is that which has qualities.
A quality is that which describes an object.
A something is an object with a non empty quality set, the set of
all qualities that describe the object.
A nothing is an object with an empty quality set.
There can only be one nothing, because if there were two different
nothings, their quality sets would be different and thus they couldn't
both have empty quality sets and thus couldn't both be nothings.
THE FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF SOMETHING AND NOTHING.
The fundamental theorem of something and nothing tells us,
Something can not come from nothing, and
Something can not go into nothing.
Therefore if something exists now, something must have always
existed and will always exist.
The justification for this theorem comes from the idea that if a
nothing had the quality of potential ability to give rise to a
something, that quality would render the nothing's quality set non
empty, and thus render the nothing not a nothing.
Thus potential ability to give rise to something is already a
something.
Various somethings however can change form, thus giving the
apparency that something is changing into a different something.
However underlying the various surface forms of somethings that
change into each other will be a common something which is the actual
something which can neither be created nor destroyed.
Change of form of the actual underlying something is not creation
or destruction.
Thus mass which is a something called energy can change into
photons which is also a something called energy. Mass and light have
very different surface qualities, but the actual common something
between them is energy.
THE CONSERVATION OF SOMETHING AND NOTHING.
What this tells us, is that if you have something, then you have
always had that something and will always have it, regardless of what
form it takes.
And if you have a nothing, you have always had that nothing, and
will always have that nothing. Notice a nothing can not change forms as
it has no qualities to change.
The somethings that make a universe can be varied and complex, it
is not true that there is only one kind of something in the world.
The hunt for something, is the hunt for what is conserved, for an
understanding of what is actual in a universe and what is merely real,
(apparently actual to people's sense of reality, but not actually
actual) and allows the beings in that universe to play the game better.
This hunt is the process of science.
For example, in the alleged physical universe of dimensional space
and time, both space and time are generally considered to be conserved,
thus they are considered actual.
As mentioned above, the common somethings underlying the physics of
objects in that space and time, are energy, momentum, spin, charge and a
few other weird ones like baryon number.
Physicists seek that which is conserved, because they hope that
what is conserved is what is actual underlying the apparencies that come
and go.
In other words if all actual somethings must be conserved, then
that which is conserved is probably an actual something.
Notice the word probably.
In the middle of the last few centuries, natural philosophy started
to change from 'God causes everything according to His Will', to every
thing follows mathematical law.
Galileo was imprisoned for suggesting that the tides were caused by
the Moon. The Church said this limited God's will and control over
things and was thus heresy.
Galileo argued back that God was free to create things as he
wished, and if he wanted the tides to march in step with the moon and
its various mathematical laws, that was His prerogative.
The Church didn't buy it as the primary purpose of the Christian
Church at the time was to be a holding pen for idiots.
But now we hear from modern Physicists that there is no need for
God to explain anything any more, we have mathematical natural law
instead.
The earth goes around the Sun in an ellipse 'because' of the forces
of gravity and there is no need for God to explain anything.
The same argument however applies to this new age Church of the
Bomb, they have explained exactly nothing by merely describing HOW the
earth moves around the sun. The have posited forces and masses and
equations between them, but again one is free to ask why is it this way
instead of some other way, and who or what is ultimately responsible for
bringing it about?
And again the Church of the Bomb doesn't seem to want to buy it,
mostly because it too is a sargasso sea for sick, dead, and dying beings
who think they are made of meat.
They believe they can explain everything with their 4 fundamental
forces of nature, they seem to miss that Love and Shame can not of force
and mass be made.
If they ever do unify their 4 fundamental forces of nature
into one grand unified theory of everything, they will find that
the one top level cause is CONSCIOUSNESS.
But at that point they will be in serious trouble because presently
they consider that consciousness is MADE of the 4 fundamental forces,
namely a process in space time mechanics in the brain.
You can't make a non space time entity (consciousness) out of space
time machines, no matter how many you use or how complexly you put them
together.
One thing HAS however come out of the past 2000 years of
religious and scientific barbarism, and that is if God does exist,
then,
"God is apparently a mathematician first, and a purveyor of
damnation second." - Adore
In studying the mathematics of the physical universe one is struck
by the awesome intelligence it must take to understand all the
mathematics behind everything that works, let alone have devised and
designed it this way.
It seems unlikely that such an intelligent being would spend its
time by stooping to such crass and rank behaviors like sending people to
hell forever for the sins of four score and 20.
Unless maybe they were Christians.
But no, I am a sinner and repent of my hatred in dust and ashes,
and so any God as great as the mathematics of the cosmos would be able
to find a better way to deal with even me and them.
This is something to aspire to.
But now we have to ask, why did God create the Sun and Earth such
that it went around in an ellipse? Why not a square?
Surely if God can do anything, he could just as easily make the
Earth hang a louey every 3 months with the same approximate effect.
The answer comes down to conservation of something, and the desire
to create the illusion that the physical universe is a something.
I once had a dream, I was sound asleep and there was a lamp on my
table in the dream that I wanted to turn on because the room was dark.
The lamp had a standard lamp shade and a metal pull string up where the
bulb was.
So I reached over in the dream and pulled the metal string, and the
lamp turned on.
There was a perfect conical ray of light coming down from the
bottom edge of the lamp shade to the table where the lamp was standing,
and the rays made a perfect circle of light on the table as you would
expect such a lamp to do.
But the bulb remained off, the lamp shade itself was dark and the
room was not lit at all even by the light bouncing off the table.
This woke me right up.
Why?
Because in that dream I did not know I was dreaming, and I expected
the lamp to be a something, and I was reaching to it to operate its
cause to increase the light in the room. When I pulled the string, and
light appeared out of nowhere at the bottom edge of the shade down to
the table, I was suddenly hit by the truth that the something I thought
was there, wasn't there at all. How could light appear OUT OF NOTHING,
and the bulb remain off.
This violated something from nothing big time, and the end result
was I woke up.
Of course once awake, I knew that in a dream anything could happen,
even if the bulb had turned on, and the walls had lit up, the light
coming from the bulb wasn't was lighting the walls anyway, as EVERYTHING
in a dream is self luminous.
So I was comfortable again residing in the waking universe of
"true" somethings and I could get on with my day.
Little did I know, eh?
THE SUN AND THE EARTH
Now let's say that the Earth did manage to move in a square around
the Sun. This now needs an explanation, how come it moves in a straight
line for 3 months, and then suddenly turns left, and then follows a
straight line for 3 months more.
This can't happen for no reason because that violates SOMETHING
FROM NOTHING.
We expect, and in fact need, that if a change takes place, then
something prior must have caused the change, and if there is no change
in anything prior to the Earth taking a left, then that's something
coming from nothing.
Something must always come from something!
Changes must always be preceeded by other changes, either internal
or external to the object even if it is just time!
Now God could have created all kinds of 'somethings' to account for
why the Earth changes course suddenly in its orbit to form a square. If
he doesn't, then everyone will be stuck with the non understanding that
comes from things coming from nothing and happening for no reason, and
they would wake up!
Every being naturally seeks the lowest common denominator of the
universe where something and nothing are comfortably conserved.
So what He did do is create a very simple system of conservation.
In this system there are forces and masses, forces and masses are
related by simply mathematical rules whereby forces, which are
something, are allowed to impart motion to or change the courses of
masses, which are ANOTHER COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SOMETHING.
He further said that the force the sun exerts on the Earth is a
function of the sun's mass, and since the sun's mass isn't changing
significantly over time, neither can the force the Sun exerts on the
Earth. Further since the Sun's mass is spherical and there is no
preferred direction, the Sun's force must act equally in all directions
at all times on the Earth, depending only on how far the Earth is from
the sun.
Given the above, the mathematics of the situation inexorably
computes out to an ellipse. Thus if left to their own devices,
celestial objects like to orbit in ellipses, and the apparent somethings
or force and mass are all conserved.
In this case, the apparent somethings are cause and effect, namely
force and mass. Effects with out cause, and causes without effects both
violate something from nothing, and if this actually happened in any
dream universe, the beings in it would wake up to the next universe out
where something and nothing were properly conserved.
Now we already know that there is no mandatory reason that impels a
God to create a dream universe where something and nothing are
conserved.
He can just as easily make the Earth go around in random zig zags,
and let everyone down below know he is doing it out of caprice. There
ARE no actual somethings or nothing to be conserved in any dreamtime, so
the God can do what he wants. But the beings in the dream, including
the God himself when he jumps into his own creation, will have a very
hard time figuring out the rules, and eventually say "Oh screw it" and
wake up on purpose, because they KNOW the universe isn't actual.
You see for a universe to persist for any length of time the beings
in it must think the universe is more actual than they are. It is best
if the beings think they are MADE OF the universe somethings, like being
a brain or some such.
So The God creates dreamtimes that conserve something and nothing
purely out of a practical need, namely to make sure he doesn't wake up
when inside the dream universe.
If his created universe is going persist it's somethings have to be
more conserved than he is!
He can be incipient carrion or dust in the wind, but the oceans and
the rocks will out live him forever.
He won't ever wake up out of that dream!
His dream has to act as if it is actual right down to the last
quark, so he can continue to think he IS an actual machine operating in
an actual space time continuum.
If one single quark doesn't burp in just the right way, and the
dreaming being gets the faintest idea that something is no longer
conserved in an irreconcilable way, he will wake up and lose his dream.
This is why OT powers in the physical universe are really bad for
beings, it wakes them up like a meteor hitting their house.
Some people claim they really want it to happen, but once it does
they wish they could enter the dream again and can't.
The dream's cover has been blow, conservation of something and
nothing.
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
Tue Dec 12 01:09:09 EST 2006
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Jun 2 12:00:04 EDT 2019
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore414.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)
iD8DBQFc8/KFURT1lqxE3HERAv+tAJ0U4dFLZH6SqCVHE44qc286vDvdQwCg0MEc
UkRQ/1duQIjyJX9x8U9yvIE=
=QDWN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE813 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
A BET IS A BELIEF
> You said: "Belief is for losers" and "we condemn belief", yet you
> believe in Super Powers and anything supposedly (and unproved!) going
> with it!?
Those that confuse evidence with proof are unworthy of further
discussion.
You assume that super powers are unevidenced to me.
My official public position, is that it is a good bet that the world
is a dream, and thus the existence of super powers is probably self
obvious.
No belief, just rational bets based on a life time of experience
and evidences of all kinds, some merely hearsay, some not so hearsay.
Even if it were ALL hearsay, *MY* bet stands at 51/49 for super powers.
Back in the days when I was a mortal meatball, the bet was 0/100
against. But the proof changed all that and the bet came up to 50/50.
Its been a hard battle against pain, sorrow, and incredulity to bring it
up to a fragile 51/49 for super powers the basic one of course being
personal responsibility for choosing to be here.
If you wish to consider that a bet is a belief in a fair chosen
probability, then fine, yes they are beliefs, but the definition of
belief being referred to by Adore in the quote above, is more sinister,
more like the blind faith that some people have in various things.
That is hope turned into conviction.
Personally I can see the argument that a bet is a belief is a bet
is a belief.
So yeah we all have our bets, and thus we all have our beliefs.
But Adore's point, as unrealistic as it is, is that a good
scientist doesn't confuse his bets with his perfect certainties, and
thus one always needs to seek the perfect certainty in any quest for
true knowledge.
Even if someone were to move the marble for you, you still wouldn't
have a perfect certainty that the event even happened, let alone that it
happened by the methods claimed, let alone that YOU could have such
power, let alone that they were safe for anyone to have.
Over time you would start wondering about the reality or existence
of EVERYTHING.
Those that can not present a finely tuned prime directive on the
matter of the existence and use of super powers won't even be allowed
into the conclaves of research going on.
So write up your version of a workable prime directive with full
explanations of why and wherefore, and hand it in as a resume, and they
might invite you in. Such a resume would involve a detailed discussion
of what evidence you have for and against such powers, and what you
would do with them if you had them, and what the consequences of those
actions would be.
Really its not that hard, if you demonstrate more than the
intelligence of a pig, they will probably let you in.
True certainty of eternality comes from direct perception of
eternality. Others can always wonder and doubt, but just as you can be
certain that you exist, you can also be certain that space and time are
illusions and that you CHOSE to enter.
Perfect certainty of choice is problematic and a big deal, not to
be belittled.
But anyhow most people haven't had that experience, many still
wonder if they exist themselves, for these it will be a while before the
facility of perfect certainty gets put to use.
"I wonder if I am, therefore I am, for a nothing could not wonder
whether it was a nothing or a something." -
Philosophocles, ca. 0 BT (before time).
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
Fri Nov 5 14:28:27 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Jan 9 12:06:01 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore813.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)
iD8DBQFWkT36URT1lqxE3HERAkYIAJwOJ7hSeiqqilOeCw/495sIuO/grgCdHzPA
En9spe37fL5ujudKPWj2MS8=
=enBw
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Sat Jan 9 15:34:34 EST 2016
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Jun 1 12:00:04 EDT 2019
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore813.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)
iD8DBQFc8qEFURT1lqxE3HERAkiAAJ9hW00Qth+DehQvvX7DnOkhKmQyjACeNoyH
zaIR8ye4UXJGnH2yW984YXs=
=hnQ9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
A BET IS A BELIEF
> You said: "Belief is for losers" and "we condemn belief", yet you
> believe in Super Powers and anything supposedly (and unproved!) going
> with it!?
Those that confuse evidence with proof are unworthy of further
discussion.
You assume that super powers are unevidenced to me.
My official public position, is that it is a good bet that the world
is a dream, and thus the existence of super powers is probably self
obvious.
No belief, just rational bets based on a life time of experience
and evidences of all kinds, some merely hearsay, some not so hearsay.
Even if it were ALL hearsay, *MY* bet stands at 51/49 for super powers.
Back in the days when I was a mortal meatball, the bet was 0/100
against. But the proof changed all that and the bet came up to 50/50.
Its been a hard battle against pain, sorrow, and incredulity to bring it
up to a fragile 51/49 for super powers the basic one of course being
personal responsibility for choosing to be here.
If you wish to consider that a bet is a belief in a fair chosen
probability, then fine, yes they are beliefs, but the definition of
belief being referred to by Adore in the quote above, is more sinister,
more like the blind faith that some people have in various things.
That is hope turned into conviction.
Personally I can see the argument that a bet is a belief is a bet
is a belief.
So yeah we all have our bets, and thus we all have our beliefs.
But Adore's point, as unrealistic as it is, is that a good
scientist doesn't confuse his bets with his perfect certainties, and
thus one always needs to seek the perfect certainty in any quest for
true knowledge.
Even if someone were to move the marble for you, you still wouldn't
have a perfect certainty that the event even happened, let alone that it
happened by the methods claimed, let alone that YOU could have such
power, let alone that they were safe for anyone to have.
Over time you would start wondering about the reality or existence
of EVERYTHING.
Those that can not present a finely tuned prime directive on the
matter of the existence and use of super powers won't even be allowed
into the conclaves of research going on.
So write up your version of a workable prime directive with full
explanations of why and wherefore, and hand it in as a resume, and they
might invite you in. Such a resume would involve a detailed discussion
of what evidence you have for and against such powers, and what you
would do with them if you had them, and what the consequences of those
actions would be.
Really its not that hard, if you demonstrate more than the
intelligence of a pig, they will probably let you in.
True certainty of eternality comes from direct perception of
eternality. Others can always wonder and doubt, but just as you can be
certain that you exist, you can also be certain that space and time are
illusions and that you CHOSE to enter.
Perfect certainty of choice is problematic and a big deal, not to
be belittled.
But anyhow most people haven't had that experience, many still
wonder if they exist themselves, for these it will be a while before the
facility of perfect certainty gets put to use.
"I wonder if I am, therefore I am, for a nothing could not wonder
whether it was a nothing or a something." -
Philosophocles, ca. 0 BT (before time).
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
Fri Nov 5 14:28:27 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Jan 9 12:06:01 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore813.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)
iD8DBQFWkT36URT1lqxE3HERAkYIAJwOJ7hSeiqqilOeCw/495sIuO/grgCdHzPA
En9spe37fL5ujudKPWj2MS8=
=enBw
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Sat Jan 9 15:34:34 EST 2016
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Jun 1 12:00:04 EDT 2019
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore813.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)
iD8DBQFc8qEFURT1lqxE3HERAkiAAJ9hW00Qth+DehQvvX7DnOkhKmQyjACeNoyH
zaIR8ye4UXJGnH2yW984YXs=
=hnQ9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
PROOF21 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Meatballs tend to think of certainty in terms of evidence and
conclusions.
They observe some data and from that data draw a conclusion
and then assign that conclusion some degree of certainty, even
100 percent certainty.
Then some more data comes along and refutes their conclusion,
and thus 'they were certain of something that was wrong.'
Well they were never certain in the first place.
*NO* conclusion *DERIVED* from evidence *CAN EVER BE* certain,
one is dealing with probablistic bets only, never certainties.
The *DATA* can be certain because it was directly observed,
but any conclusion drawn from that data, unless it is a logical
tautology, can never be certain.
Certainty is a relationship between the conscious viewer and
his own consciousness of things, himself and his color forms.
All consciousness-of is certainty-of.
For example get yourself two pieces of paper, one red and one
green and put them next to each other on the table and observe them.
Remember you are dreaming, there is no PAPER there, just two color
forms, one red and one green. Or do this with bathroom towels, anything
where the colors are bright and unmistakably different.
Ask yourself the following the question,
"Do I see two different colors?"
"Is it possible I am wrong?"
"Could any possible further data come along to change my
mind that right now I see two different colors in the red and the green?"
"Would I bet my eternity in hell that I see two different colors?"
Do this until you attain a perfect certainty that you see
two different colors and could not be wrong.
Notice how this certainty is different than a certainty
derived from data that might be incomplete or change.
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 ====================
Fri May 31 12:00:04 EDT 2019
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/proof21.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)
iD8DBQFc8U+EURT1lqxE3HERArkdAKDKZLOBAr7+glA+iCGuuxkVf5HjJwCeO4rJ
RwdA2WEEqTK5PXZzoO5lhsQ=
=DfvQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
Meatballs tend to think of certainty in terms of evidence and
conclusions.
They observe some data and from that data draw a conclusion
and then assign that conclusion some degree of certainty, even
100 percent certainty.
Then some more data comes along and refutes their conclusion,
and thus 'they were certain of something that was wrong.'
Well they were never certain in the first place.
*NO* conclusion *DERIVED* from evidence *CAN EVER BE* certain,
one is dealing with probablistic bets only, never certainties.
The *DATA* can be certain because it was directly observed,
but any conclusion drawn from that data, unless it is a logical
tautology, can never be certain.
Certainty is a relationship between the conscious viewer and
his own consciousness of things, himself and his color forms.
All consciousness-of is certainty-of.
For example get yourself two pieces of paper, one red and one
green and put them next to each other on the table and observe them.
Remember you are dreaming, there is no PAPER there, just two color
forms, one red and one green. Or do this with bathroom towels, anything
where the colors are bright and unmistakably different.
Ask yourself the following the question,
"Do I see two different colors?"
"Is it possible I am wrong?"
"Could any possible further data come along to change my
mind that right now I see two different colors in the red and the green?"
"Would I bet my eternity in hell that I see two different colors?"
Do this until you attain a perfect certainty that you see
two different colors and could not be wrong.
Notice how this certainty is different than a certainty
derived from data that might be incomplete or change.
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 ====================
Fri May 31 12:00:04 EDT 2019
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/proof21.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)
iD8DBQFc8U+EURT1lqxE3HERArkdAKDKZLOBAr7+glA+iCGuuxkVf5HjJwCeO4rJ
RwdA2WEEqTK5PXZzoO5lhsQ=
=DfvQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)