Messages

Posted: Yesterday at 11:11 pm    Post subject:  

beavis, you posted that at exactly 11:11, now that must be something important  
It'll perhaps take me years to understand.

Ok , must be one of those old comps, I dont know much about them.

The signal that brain gets is surely stereoscopic 2d, but inside mind image is 3d.

I think thats what I said, its the job of mind to make a 3D image, senses give only a 2D. Sorry if the sentence was badly written. :p

JoWo:
I've seen your site, and your holon hypothesis is very impressive.
I'm of course not qualified to speak on the most difficult subject of what you call 'All entity', but I feel that although its a neutral enough word, endowing it with human emotions or even making an analogy of this sort is nothing but animism.
Honestly, all we know about it is that it exists, it is.... and nothing less nothing more. This we deduce from our own existence and the fact that we are capable of experience. We cant deny it.
We seem to know a few more things, like its infinite, without extent or time and multidimensional etc. But I don't know what it conveys when someone says that its multidimensional, except that some phenomena can only be described with expressions having higher degrees of freedom.

Furthermore, because our sense organs are constructed in three-dimensional matter, their sensing capability is limited to 3-D

Its true that our sense organs are arrangements of matter. But matter (now we know through QT) is not 3-dimensional. In fact there is no such thing as 3D matter. The subatomic and 'force-particles' surely dwell in many dimensions.
Its also wrong to say that their sensing ability is limited to 3D. May be you know this and must have simplified things for readers, that we 'construct' the 3D world out of whatever impressions our senses register. Take for example - vision, the matter [mD] which reflects the photons [mD] which sensory cells [mD] detect and send EMFs [mD] to the brain [mD], produce a 2D image (not even 3D) in our mind. So its our minds which approximates the world to 3D, even though the information had mD components throughout.
Perhaps in our current state of evolution we can manage only this and live in an illusion of 3D world. Beings that are more evolved can experience more dimensions, perhaps, but it would be nothing more than a higher dimensional illusion to them.

It is true that our senses are responsive to a narrow range of signals. Ironically this makes them more useful. Imagine a radio tuned to all frequencies at once.... you hear only noise, because its being affected by everything and although it has a wide range, its useless. Now filter out all but one frequency on which a signal is being sent, we have useful information which we can hear easily. Senses are doing the same, by limiting themselves to a narrow range they ensure a good signal and meaningful info. This makes our survival possible.

When the pressures of survival are less (as while resting in a safe place), our mind can detune from this 3D illusion and is able to take impressions of a wider range, unfiltered through the senses and unprocessed by the survival-programs of the brain. Unfortunately being accustomed to this 3D illusion, we can't interpret them easily and don't see any meaning in them, so much so that we don't become 'aware' of them.

Spiritual evolutions consists of learning to take those unfiltered impressions, finding the meaning in them, being in close contact with the 'reality.'

Hopefully I was able to add a little bit to your very useful post

[consciously]

xx:11 and xx:12 both happen 24 times a day each. Assuming random checks at the clock throughout the day, odds are 1:30 you will see one of these.

The odds of seeing any time on the watch are exactly the same when I look at the watch consciously !. That's like - oh, let me see whats the time now. The reason can be anything...waiting for something, schedules, attention spans etc.
And the odds should be same when I happen to look at it just by chance, but they are much more (I need to record those now, to make sure)
There is an odd feeling too, that I cant describe.

Btw, attention span cant be the reason because even if my span is 11 min, it need not occur at xx:11 exactly, and stay locked on the multiples of 11 (22,33,44,55),  and even if it gets locked for some reason, after 55, we get xx:06...
Actually my attention span must be like 30 sec or less
I'm always distracted by the internal dialogue.

You mean, why do you always happen to look at digital clocks at those two times?

Yes, but not exactly.
Its not the time, because I often keep my watches faster.
Its something to do with the numbers 11 and 12. My attention is drawn to them, without my knowing, whenever they are on the watch.

It is apparent that 10 was chosen by idiots because its the number of fingers we have.

We have 20 fingers
Its not idiotic in any way, on the contrary its very smart thing. You have a handy calculator attached to your hands.
Its natural that people counted to ten.

I don't see any difference among number systems, they serve the same purpose. Some are good for machines though.

but what are the implications for Quantum Metaphysics?

The implications are.........everything is non-local.
Well, sounds old

Nonetheless its a technical achievement.

communication in any form about paranormal stuff is good

I never say no to that.

$2k? so thats whats going on behind our backs.

Its possible one property of something is infinite while an other is finite

In fact that seems to be the case.
Every time we measure something we must stop somewhere, assume the finiteness, approximate the results, use them and move on.
A rough example : say I measure the size of my bed by a tape. I get say 2.2 m. Now I increase the precision, use a better tape, I get 2.19. I go on measuring it precisely, I end up with a size = 2.17982573...... to infinity. Somehow I cant say where exactly my bed ends. If I push it more, uncertainty principle would make the bed itself meaningless. The bed remains finite...i.e. 1.

I feel at some level the bed becomes a part of me. Its a part of my consciousness, I can't isolate it so I can't measure it. I must negate the bed, the bed is not-me, in order to even perceive it.
If you drill deep into the consciousness of a new born child, you'd find that he faces a lot of confusion regarding whats 'he' and whats 'other'. The growth is mostly focused on his ability to differentiate himself from the surroundings. More isolation = more awareness.

So, in effect you create a soul, if you isolate a part of being from itself and make it look at itself by some means. This part will perceive itself as a consciousness perceiving a world (other parts). The drama starts when, in order to make sense of the world it starts approximating it through its measuring instruments (senses) and  there are a number of such souls. It must drop down to lesser degrees of freedom, if its less evolved. We got a physical plane here

There are a finite number of peaks.

If you say so. So much depends on the method of measurement. Someone can choose the area enclosed by the curve to represent an electron. He may not bother how many peaks are there.

There are 2 halfs of an electron.

Oh no, you cant measure two halves separately. You place a detector anywhere and you find only one. But while its not being measured, the electron occupies the whole universe. The process of measuring approximates it, and the process ends only if someone with a consciousness reads the meter. But I doubt it ends there too.

You are right, if they did this its remarkable.
Although they dont clearly tell what s/w was there or how they got the text.

There must be a good number of dead computer engineers there. But may be not enough to do something useful. We need more of them  

Perhaps its not that the tech is not there, but interfacing with physical is difficult.

Back to infinity..

its not a "real" number, but is a real something.

A real something...hmmm. I told you we dont understand it.
But you are right, there is an infinity under every rock that you trun. Its there...
Btw, Cantor classified the garden varieties of infinities that occur everywhere. One more example ...

2^(3^(4^(5^.....

You know, we are being tricked by the language.
The electron is just a concept, we observed some phenomenon and called it an electron. So when I say an electron, it means 'an xyz concept', and the concept is obviously 'one'. You've just counted the concept, not the actual thing.
Ok, you can count the peaks, but are the peaks same as an electron? Peaks are another concept, so you counted an attribute of the electron, not the electron itself.
Pass the electron through a double slit. How many are there now? No, you cant count, it has become a 'something else'.

Whole fallacy of counting and measuring is that, that you can count or measure anything only if you can isolate it from the other things somehow. But now we know from QM that there is no such thing as 'isolation'. Even consciousness is a part of the system being measured, that itself makes everything indeterminate.

Back on tracks... why do I see xx:11 or xx:12 on digital watches all the time.

Anyway the topic has nothing to do with time.
The signal remains the same, even if I set incorrect times on the watches. So it has something to do with those numbers...11,12,13....most probly 12.

There is a heirarchy of those atomic clocks all over the world, they are nuke-proof. Time is averaged out of all.
Even if something interferes, we'd come to know. The point is it should be consistent so that all clocks go slow or fast equally.
Even if you destroy all of them, we can just build a new one and start counting again. There is no 'base time.'

http://whyfiles.org/078time/2.html

atomic clocks get frighteningly accurate. For example, NIST-7, a cesium clock at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), is accurate to five parts in 10^15. This staggering precision works out to an error of about a billionth of a second per day. To put it another way, this clock will stay within one second of true time for 6 million years.

No, it wouldnt allow measuring both energy and time together.
Atomic clocks are working nicely around the world.

I'd find it better if it never repeated. A linear one, not based on earth rotations, but on vibrations of a reference atom.
It will go on counting the number of vibrations, as atomic clocks do.

Its going off topic ...anyway.
An electron.

Well you are right but both==infinite, so how can two things be infinite and still unequal?
Infinite is not 'real'.

Or simply use your astral powers to materialize them.
Dont forget to check if you dematerialized yours accidently.
Nuts can neither be created nor destroyed, they just change places.

May be. How is metric better than the present one?
Why not binary...for them there would be a lot of 1's to point at.

The pc clock ticked 08:11 to 08:12 as I typed this  

Ya only an idea...thats all.
I never found anything which is purely finite or infinite.
(I was afraid of writing that but anyway I did, lets see)

Ok tell me which is bigger - a set of integers or a set of real numbers?

Ok, the mystry remains unsolved.
Does anybody here knows any higher being or someone who knows what are those xx:11 signals about?

wow...I hope you people aren't serious. Because then I'd have to find a whole new astral projection forum. One without the...you know...painful immaturity.

Best of luck for you, its gona be tuff.
Btw, dog-barks-for-LD is the funniest thing I ever heard on this forum.