The Astral Pulse
News: Acceptable Use Policy for the forums. Please read and ensure that you respect these policies. Thank you.

Please note that due to the amount of spam posts we have been receiving over the past few months, we have switched Registration to require you to be approved by a moderator.  We will go through the approval list as often as we can, but if it's been 24 hours and you haven't been Approved yet or you've received a rejection email, please email myself or one of the moderators immediately so we may correct the application.

We apologize for any inconveniences this may cause, but it's the last resort we have to fighting the spam for now.
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. March 18, 2018, 16:48:12

Login with username, password and session length

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 88
76  Dreams / Welcome to Dreams! / Re: Selski's Dream Journal on: July 23, 2017, 13:32:34
I really enjoy reading these, keep it up! I should start sharing more of mine here as well... I have VERY vivid ones that I make a point to review and retell to myself when I wake up. You have experiences in dreams that you would have no other place... it is like you get to experience someone else's life for a moment.

I think I'll jump on this bandwagon  cool
77  Astral Chat / Welcome to Astral Chat! / Re: New Old... new? Moderator! :) on: July 22, 2017, 16:59:27
I think it is sort of part of a cycle.

There are peaks when the public is more interested in this stuff. For instance, in the early days of the public internet boom (1997 or so) there was a large uptick in the interest in consciousness studies / metaphysical ideas that happened naturally due to the availability of the material to a new audience, around sites like "Spiritweb". The Pulse sort of sprang up riding that wave.

And then of course there was the 2012 nonsense that got people thinking about metaphysical ideas again, but in sort of a fad mentality, so small uptick again there. There hasn't really been anything since then.

I think the Pulse' membership is falling off a bit due to the manual account registration now, as we do accidentally reject many actual people (as opposed to bots). The ones that are interested despite the difficulty will email me to help them (because I am the first name in the mods list lol); I bet you will now be the first name, since you have the oldest account!
78  Astral Chat / Welcome to Astral Chat! / Re: New Old... new? Moderator! :) on: July 22, 2017, 02:24:30
Ages lol. The last time I saw you around, Robert Bruce was still affiliated with the forum. That must be what, 2003?

Welcome back!
79  Metaphysics / Welcome to Quantum Physics! / Re: World Is A Simulation on: July 03, 2017, 04:36:11
In other words, the matter is just numbers.

I think this is sort of a confusion of language. In some sense, the base constituents of the actual matter are pretty evasive; the further down we go, the more structure we see... so lacking any view at substance, we use numbers as representation. But this is very different from saying the matter IS numbers as its identity. It is sort of irresponsible to make that conclusion... more responsible would be to say that the ultimate nature of the material is not known.

We have electrons, protons and all such entities here, that are identical in every way.

This actually isn't true. Every proton and neutron is slightly different. The mass of a nuclear particle changes with the atomic number of of the element in question. This is why it is fairly trivial to perform a chemical reaction, but nuclear reactions require massive shifts of energy inward or outward. The Protons of Helium are a hair smaller than the ones in Hydrogen; part of the mass was burned off as energy in the fusion process.

There would be some constants, some global fixed values, that appear for no obvious reason. E.g. there are physical constants like c or G or h that appear in many equations.

It is pretty strange how arbitrary the universal constants are, no? Or for that matter, what causes them the change slightly over time and space... one of the great mysteries of this world...

Loading of processors can happen when there is a huge amount of data to be crunched. We see such effects near very large bodies, such as stars, where time slows down near their surface because there are too many particles to compute.

This is sort of a stretch... we have a pretty good answer for why time dilates in response to velocity and gravity in relativity, and relativity's predictions hold across many domains.

Statistical nature. Some outcomes are predicted instead of being calculated exactly. This is faster but less accurate. So we have laws of thermodynamics, gas laws or fluid dynamics, probability distributions and uncertainty principle.

This may also be a matter of accuracy. The real events may be so obscure to us that the outcomes APPEAR statistical. There are many other interpretations of quantum behavior, such as Bohmian mechanics, which suggests that quantum events are indeed classically regular and deterministic, and not subject to chance.


I actually don't disagree with the simulation theory on the face of it. There are many strong philosophical reasons to suppose this reality might be a simulation embedded in another reality (which I can get into, if you'd like). I would just caution against taking observations about the world, and bending them to the service of an idea when they don't really fit. It is really hard to avoid confirmation bias when there is concept we are fond of. There are many very good reasons to think this world might be simulated. We don't need to invent new ones to artificially bolster what is already a strong idea.

This is the original claim of non-dual teachings, that are unchallenged since thousands of years.

Both Monisms are more appealing than dualism, I agree. I think idealistic monism (of mind) is an easier position to hold, because it has a lot less explaining to do. It is much easier to explain that a material world can be an idea held by a mind (thus unifying them) then to explain how a material world can give rise to a mind (when they are quite dissimilar).
80  Astral Projection & Out of Body Experiences / Welcome to Out of Body Experiences! / Re: What have you learned about the fundamentals of the universe? on: June 27, 2017, 09:41:45
Not really. As an experienced projector, I haven't reached any conclusions. It's a valid addition.  smiley


The main way you learn truths about the universe is through science (and to some extent greater philosophy). It is very difficult to apply any kind of science in a projection experience in most cases, due to the subjective element. You lack repeatability. You lack peer corroboration. You lack peer-review. I would be very skeptical of someone claiming to learn fundamental truths in that environment. You get endless fuel for thought, and get endless glimpses of things which may be. Conclusions are few and far between if you want to be responsible about it. 
81  Dreams / Welcome to Dreams! / Re: Back to College on: June 25, 2017, 20:50:21
Yeah good to see you around again for sure!
82  Astral Projection & Out of Body Experiences / Welcome to Astral Projection Experiences! / Re: What happened that made you realize astral projection is real on: June 23, 2017, 06:01:52
What is real in this context? Helps to know what the goalposts of the question are... because I can think of senses in which it is both real and not real!
83  Astral Projection & Out of Body Experiences / Welcome to Out of Body Experiences! / Re: sexual fantasies? on: June 12, 2017, 02:49:51
I guess it is like anything. As long as it is consensual, no one is harmed, and it doesn't dominate your mind, it is probably healthy enough.

I think there is is sort of a stigma against sensuality in the context of mysticism and metaphysics. I think it comes from the beginnings of western philosophy, which were rooted in Plato and Christian teachings in dialogue with one another. Plato very much idealized the abstract, and it caused him to view the physical and all that was associated with it as lesser. The early church sort of absorbed this all up, and the emphasis shifted to heavenly rewards and the present world being labeled profane. I think this attitude has carried to the present, and I have a feeling many people here view projection as a means to escaping to a more refined state of existence away from the tainted physical.

But sensuality can also be a very great ally and teacher, if it isn't your master. It is very different in later Hindu philosophy. There is a reason why the theory of chakras places the root sensual chakra as the wellspring which feeds the others. Sensuality can animate us, and be filtered into every facet of our lives as an incredibly positive and constructive force. I think one of the problems is that sensuality is limited to the area of sex in modern thinking, which is very good, but limiting, since it has a strong part to play across our entire lives.
84  Astral Chat / Welcome to Astral Chat! / Re: Is there racists in the astral? on: March 18, 2017, 08:29:45
If we experience only one personality ever, then what amount of knowledge will we gain. I am not talking reincarnation only in the physical, but in many other dimensions. Lets not separate what we call physical and all other levels of existence regardless of thought responsiveness. What knowledge will a baby who lives a few hours only will receive? Or the fruit fly, LOL. Think about it.
Individual spirits will always have personalities no matter where they are. It's a part of the multiversal existence. If you only decide to merge completely with the source and become one with everything, then you will lose your personality, but then there will be no more learning. The reason the source spread as endless personalities is to continue growing and expanding. Otherwise there will be just one static ball of energy Smiley

I don't think we loose our personality immediately after death. If it was so, when we project there will be no interactions with different entities. They do have personalities, right? Many of us have done retrievals, and the spirits trapped still retained their personalities, fears, beliefs, that's why they were trapped. Also, we as the personalities we know currently exist simultaneously in many many levels.

Here is a perspective:

When people talk about biological evolution, they often speak as though animals that evolved later are more advanced, or better adapted. They speak as though biological evolution has a purpose, or a goal, and that by evolving, animals are getting closer to that goal. The scientific truth of it seems closer to being that animals are merely changing over time, and that evolution is driven by mutations making some individuals more likely to survive and pass on their genetics, because those mutations made those individuals more competent at working and surviving a certain niche. So in the case of evolution, the misconception is that there is a purpose, and the reality is that it is merely an emergent process happening in the physical system.

I'd say something similar may be happening with respect to a life a being experiences. Who is to say there ever was a purpose? And if there is, why does that purpose have to be cumulative? Maybe it is a one shot and you're done thing. Maybe the life the fruit fly lived isn't helping a "higher self" grow to the point where they can experience the duck life. Maybe the fruit fly life was its own goal.

Clearly, if the purpose was to gain human-type experiences which we judge to be of quality, this universe and planet are VERY poorly setup for that. If I was an alien being evaluating what divine purpose the earth might serve, I would reason it must be a place to experience insect and oceanic arthropod life. Compared to all of them, human life is a very small sideshow. There are probably tens of billions of insects and other arthropods for every single human life here. This is really their show. So I'd reason if a "Source being" was interested in anything here, they wanted to find out what it was like to be a krill shrimp a millimeter across, since that is overwhelmingly what is happening over here.
85  Astral Chat / Welcome to Astral Chat! / Re: Labels on: January 27, 2017, 21:14:25
We tell people you should "Act like a man!" or "Act like a woman!"... when those statements are actually relatively meaningless.

I agree with this. Gender roles are pretty artificial constructs, and they vary substantially across countries, which only reinforces the fact that they are fairly arbitrary. When someone says "Act like X", what they are really saying is "conform to my personal standard of views about what I want X to do".

But then the flipside bridges into Plasma's statement:

Yeah I must admit that the whole LGBT thing is having a crisis because many of them are applying way too many labels as in pronouns and expecting society to use them.

So Plasma is pointing out that there is friction between the new gender identity folks, and everyone else in society, and part of it is over pronouns. There are pretty much only 2-3 (m / f / neutral) in most languages. Why are they there? Well society by necessity, not choice, must treat male and female people differently in some circumstances. This is not a statement about individuals, so much as general rules which lead to safety and smooth functioning. Due to evolutionary differences, men and women behave differently as groups in some situations. Due to these critical differences, the labels make important distinctions. So society has an expectation that people who look one way will carry x label, and another will carry y label, to make it all easier. When people ask to step outside this naming convention, it does two things: firstly, it punishes normal people for lacking knowledge about the individual in advance, which they tend to resent; Second, it confuses; when an individual says that they are going against the general pronoun naming rules, the others now realize they don't know what expectations to have of the person. So this person looks biologically male, but they want to use a female or other pronoun? How should I interact with them? Like a female or a male? What expectations of them should I have?
86  Astral Chat / Welcome to Astral Chat! / Re: Labels on: January 27, 2017, 11:57:23
Ok, I'll give it a shot.

I am 5'11" tall.

I am biologically male (due to having a Y chromosome). I tend to think of myself as genderless in my own self-relfections, but then that doesn't change physical reality that we are inhabiting for the moment, so the classification is still useful for interacting with others.

Aren't some labels useful, if nothing else for filing or classifying or sorting?

I know that I am more than my current experience, etc, etc; but for the moment, using those labels can have their uses, no? I know that I needn't buy toddler's shoes for myself, because they will not fit my feet.

I understand that the labels we are talking about here are probably more on an abstract level, but wouldn't the same principles apply?
87  Astral Chat / Welcome to Members Introductions! / Re: Hello everyone from a physicist! on: November 30, 2016, 18:26:58
Good to see you made it on after the registration mixup! It is always nice having people of different viewpoints and background around.
88  Astral Chat / Welcome to Astral Chat! / Re: Is there such a thing as a non-physical world? on: October 22, 2016, 04:38:25
Well, if a character has negative destructive thoughts they cant tune into a reality that has a "higher" if you will energy quality. That is the simplest example I can think of.

This does seem to happen. It is the old "like-states attract like-states" argument of metaphysics. But I guess the question I was asking earlier, is if there is some way to pin this effect to the concept of vibration (I don't think there is), or if the connection is mainly a constant metaphor in common use.
89  Astral Chat / Welcome to Astral Chat! / Re: Is there such a thing as a non-physical world? on: October 22, 2016, 04:35:06
My current understanding is that physical and non-physical is all one thing.

I think so too. It is all likely to be material in some form, or immaterial in some form. It is hard to explain how immaterial and material things would interact, in fact famously so.

With respect to science, our society is very dependent (e.g., because everyone has a biological brain) upon the materialist arguments, so I quietly disengage those that are grounded to the physical earth when debate arises (e.g., those of us that know from experience will understand).

Yeah, the mind very much appears to be an immaterial thing, because from the vantage point of this world only, there is no explaining why it can exist. There is no obvious way to cross the ontological gap of the material world, with a known set of properties, and first person awareness, which doesn't seem in any way related to any of those known properties. But interestingly, even if the mind is immaterial from the vantage point of this world, it may be material from the vantage point of another, as other worlds are not bound necessarily by these same material laws and properties!

I would not be too quick to draw up a bunch of laws or rules about the relationship between the physical and non-physical. The Universe has a lot of mystery built in purposely.

I agree, that from this vantage, very little can with certainty be learned about the other realities. But the question is, are there any self-evident truths, or very easily derived arguments about something we could deduce to be true of these other realities?
90  Astral Chat / Welcome to Astral Chat! / Re: Is there such a thing as a non-physical world? on: October 22, 2016, 04:23:14
If we forget about the terms "physical" and "non-physical" and call them all realities, things will get much simpler. Realities differ from one another by frequencies, thought responsiveness, stability, density,

I am familiar with the concepts of metaphysical "vibrating frequencies", and "density". I can't really make sense of them though... I wish I knew who originated these terms, since it would be easier to investigate the history of their usage. The concept of vibration of course applies fully to this physical existence, as everything is in constant pulsing motion, of some grade. But I am not convinced that frequency of motion corresponds to other realities... I have run into many assertsions that this is true, but haven't run into an argument for how we can know it to be true.

The multiverse is very complex, and with our limitations here we can only speculate.

For sure. And isn't it a grand time speculating!  wink
91  Astral Chat / Welcome to Astral Chat! / Re: Is there such a thing as a non-physical world? on: October 22, 2016, 04:13:55
THis topic seems to reflect the philosophical discussion we know for ages, e.g. Descartes and his 'duality' (here's the material world - here's the spirit world and only few connections) vs. the ideas of idealism or monism.

Very much so. I tend to think one of the monisms is likely to be true. Either everything is immaterial, and materiality is an illusion, or everything is material. It is hard to grasp why there would be two cartesian substances.

I do not think that what we call non-physical does have to have the same rules or any rules we know.

I would tend to agree. I think the laws of this physical are determined from above, and the next existence it is nested inside is not at all bound to those laws (but probably its own set).

Our minds cannot grasp the higher reality rulesets as long as we are here because according to this ruleset here we are not meant to have this capability.

I agree, their rules could probably not be learned from this vantage point. But I am pressing a different question here- can we reason the fact that they must have rules at all? I am supposing we might do this, with my instability argument above.

92  Astral Chat / Welcome to Astral Chat! / Is there such a thing as a non-physical world? on: October 21, 2016, 21:29:37
Careful with this question, it may mean something different than you might suppose!

This is a question relating to the philosophy of cosmology I have been considering lately.

Why this question arises becomes more clear when we consider the root meaning of the world physical: a physical system is a system with physics- a system who's behavior can be understood as being governed by laws, be they known or unknown.

So with this definition in mind, let's approach metaphysics. Now most of us here seem to agree that the reality we are experiencing does not appear to be base reality, but rather that this reality is "grounded" in something else. In this tradition, this reality is called "physical", and the reality it is grounded in is called "nonphysical". But is this right? For instance, wouldn't we expect this grounding world to behave by discernable laws? If it in fact did behave by laws, it would in effect be physical. And if it did not behave by laws? That is something of an alarming concept. What would an existence which was not governed by any laws be like? I would expect such a reality to be incredibly unstable; if there are no laws of any kind, you basically have bedlam... it would be impossible to predict what would happen, because there would be no causes. Even contradictions could be true, because the rejection of contradictions is itself a law. Now because our physical world is dependent on this grounding world, if that world were to be random, then this physical world would also be unstable, by consequence.

But this is not what is observed. So the very fact that we live in a world with fairly regular and dependable laws seems to indicate that this world is itself grounded in another world governed by laws (and thus physical). The same logic would apply to any world that other world was grounded into, ad infinitum. A possible conclusion then, seems to be that either there is no non-physical world, or else that world is entirely separate from anything even related in any metaphysical way to this world, since its instability would consequently spill into any world it had a relation to.

Since the subject of physical laws is matter / material, a consequence of this line of thinking would be that we are in fact material beings afterall (just not in the sense that mundane materialists might suppose) !

I have known several metaphysicians to personally hold this view, and I don't think I understood it until just recently, having stumbled onto it by accident.

What do all of you think of this concept?
93  Spiritual Evolution / Welcome to Spiritual Evolution! / Re: Reincarnation on: October 21, 2016, 01:19:01
I get the distinct impression that a lot of what you are asking about is less about metaphysics here, and more about your current situation. Something is bothering you in the here and now, that you want to know about other times and places open to you...
94  Spiritual Evolution / Welcome to Spiritual Evolution! / Re: I believe on: October 19, 2016, 05:56:43
I believe I know.

That can be very dangerous!
95  Spiritual Evolution / Welcome to Spiritual Evolution! / Re: I believe on: October 15, 2016, 05:26:43
Reminds me a lot of listening to Alan Watts.

I very much enjoy listening to the thoughts of people from the 1950s-mid 60's. The people closest to the present day, but still partially unshackled by most of the modern institutions of popular culture, and steeped in the traditions of philosophy. There is a certain clarity of those perspectives. Eisenhower sounds like a scholar alongside today's pandering politicians.

96  Astral Projection & Out of Body Experiences / Welcome to Out of Body Experiences! / Re: Can astral projection be used to kill people? on: October 04, 2016, 21:30:15
LOL, of course. I see people being referred to old topics all the time.

Nothing against our users, but a lot of them do some iffy things  cheesy

No strictly express reason not to... just that when you bring up a topic this old, it generally merits an increasingly better reason or finding, the older it is.
97  Astral Projection & Out of Body Experiences / Welcome to Out of Body Experiences! / Re: Can astral projection be used to kill people? on: October 04, 2016, 21:10:06
For a moment, I thought Zorgblar was back, and shuddered.

Did you really need to respond to a decade-old question, lol?
98  Astral Chat / Welcome to Astral Chat! / Re: Masculine Energy on: September 05, 2016, 00:44:01
Not only does the universe "definitely contain polarities" but it absolutely depends on it. There would be no physical universe without it. Also calling creativity "feminine" is, imho, more fundamental than calling a particle's charge negative (which truly is completely arbitrary). Electrons and protons carry opposite charge but which one we choose to call positive (and the other negative) is strictly convention.

We need to make the distinction between the name and the essence here though. Sure, the positive/ negative names are convention. They could be easily reversed. But that is not what I am talking about. There is a fundamental bi-polarity in these particles which is one of the most basic of all things in our universe. What you call each one doesn't change that. A very small number of things are this fundamental here... biological sex is several orders of magnitude less fundamental. It is tied to our reproductive approach, which while common, is not the only means. Many forms of life are not broken down into sexes, and reproduce by either sharing genetic material in an equal way (called conjugation in bacteria), reproducing a clone of the self, or re-arranging one's own genetic material. I think if we encountered alien species, we would see something similar. Some of them would be divided into sexes, and others of them would have singles sexes, and some of them might have 3 or more sexes with different roles (such as one to provide eggs and gestate, one to fertilize, one to care for new children, etc).

I think there is a degree of anthropomorphization going on here... we are applying the human experience to life and the universe as a whole. I think we would find some parts of it would resemble us, and other parts would bear no similarity. We are one form of many.
99  Astral Chat / Welcome to Astral Chat! / Re: Masculine Energy on: September 04, 2016, 08:33:00
Gosh Stillwater, I am going to try to reply to your politically leaning comments as best I can without sounding political....

Not sure I follow. I agree there is a lot of discussion of gender in a political context lately, and it is very overdone.

But I don't see what agenda there is in discussing the accepted definitions of words. It helps to define terms when two parties are using the terms differently, and that difference can cause difficulty in understanding one another properly.

In my experience there is a realm of universal undifferentiated energy that exists as potential with respect to this universe of duality where positive energy exists in relation to its opposite, negative energy. In Hindu terms we are talking about Shiva, Vishnu and Brahm.
Within the Hindu trinity of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva, Brahma is the creator, Vishnu the preserver and Shiva the destroyer. The destructive element is generally identified with the Left.
(Ya gotta pick one...)


That much is fundamental. Otherwise we don't even have a physical universe to operate in.

This world we live in definitely contains polarities. Obvious ones are the charge of "particles", and spin of particles. But when we are talking about things like male or female "energy", I guess it matters if we are talking about loose figurative terms, or literal fundamental ones. In a figurative sense, sure there are the ideas of creation and destruction, assertion and passivity, and it makes sense to associate them with the different sexes. But are we talking about fundamental structure of the universe at that point? Clearly calling creativity "feminine" is not as fundamental as calling a particle's charge negative?

I think this may be what is tripping people up here. It may not be clear whether we are talking about a figurative myth, or a base fundamental.

100  Astral Chat / Welcome to Astral Chat! / Re: Masculine Energy on: September 04, 2016, 07:01:23
When a human is born with male genitalia he is male.
When a human is born with female genitalia she is female.
[queue the almost totally irrelevant nitpik about hermaphrodites that occur in infinitesimally small numbers]

When they get older and get confused about what they really are it is called "Gender Identity Disorder".

We have to make a bit of distinction here.

The medical definitions of "sex" and gender" are different and distinct.

Sex refers to physiology. Male and female physiologies are unquestionably different. They are physically and chemically different.

Gender refers specifically to social roles that are associated with each biological sex.

Sex is biology, and gender is psychology/ sociology.

Sex is an unchangeable reality. Gender is a combination of evolutionary psychology, and arbitrary social rules which are unique to the society the individual finds them self in, such as roles relating to childrearing, or social interactions. I think there is value in questioning the norms related to gender, insofar as they are not common across different societies, which is proof they are partially arbitrary.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 88
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums

The Astral Pulse Copyright 2002 - 2014
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! Dilber MC Theme by HarzeM