Unlimited Ideas (Was Frank's Ideas.)

[infinitethoughts]

I just stumbled onto this forum, and then I "stumbled" onto Frank's idea. Very cool.  
I've been thinking the same thing for awhile also, you don't "leave" your body, etc, etc.

This also brings up the very interesting idea if there is such a thing as actual "movement" in the physical. (I'm inclined to say NO). Sure looks like "movement" but things aren't always as they seem.

Same thing with "time". For years I've thought that this progression of "time" is really the User picking out the next Nows that they want out of infinity (or the F4 Framework?), but under the guise of "You have no choice, but to experience what time tells you".

I have a question. Can anyone point me to posts where Frank talks more (or Frank if you're around) about choosing your next "upcoming" physical realities in the F2 framework?

Btw- Frank, I get a kik how you feel about all the Stupidstitions of the Ages.
Same here Dude.....same here.

[Telos]

Hmmm... I've been thinking about taking a Saturday and collecting all of Frank's big posts and summarizing them into a Wikipedia article about the phasing model, but then I realized that would take much longer than a Saturday.

I highly encourage you to use the search function and look through the archives at your leisure, but when/if I get those threads together, I'll let you know.

[Frank]

Hi:

The topic of the laying of probabilities in order to influence your reality within the physical requires quite extensive explanation coupled with some explanatory diagrams. It is not easy to get to grips with in the sense that it is not like taking a walk in the park. But anyone with a modicum of intelligence should be able to do it with practice.

Unfortunately, it is way beyond what I can present in a post to the forum. But it will all be thoroughly detailed in my up and coming book. I do not yet have a date when it will be ready. I had hoped it would all be finished by now, but I have been especially busy this year. Everything seems to be taking 3 or 4 times longer than I anticipate. It has all been very positive but very time consuming. :)

Yes, I agree on the leaving the body thing. In fact, one of the greatest, most successful pioneers of this art, Robert Monroe who founded the Monroe Institute, later concluded too that there was no such thing as "out of body". It was Monroe, I believe, who actually first coined the term "out of body" in his experiments with Dr Charles Tart in the 1960's or thereabouts.

It was Monroe who also originally discovered the phasing approach, which I adopted and developed. This led me to discovering the subjective structure of our Wider Reality. I named my model of the wider reality the Phasing Model of consciousness in memory and honour of Monroe, in his remarkable work and the incredible legacy he left us. He was a great pioneer.

Yours,
Frank

[mrloki]

it kind of reminds me of that what the bleep movie....they touch on the whole "create your day" thing and say everything inside of us affects what happens outside, its kind of wishy washy, but they make some interesting points nonetheless.  I've come across Frank's posts and newsletters lately and have read them all...it really blows my mind because this could be very very influential stuff Frank, I'm sure you already know this, but I just thought i would give my two cents =) have a good one.

[RJA]

(Remeber, that Jesus said, "The Kingdom of Heaven is within you".)

Also, since we exist within time-space we perceive events as occurring in a particular order.  But suppose every instant - past, current and present were a particular point in the time-space continuum and our true consciousness when outside of time-space is that of God - able to perceive everything as a single, timeless, cohesive whole.  But, while  inside the "box" of time-space, our consciousness is a machine, if you will, that experiences a subset of all the points in time-space (think linked-list here, for you software folks), in a particular order that causes us to perceive that we are an individual entity living out a particular life (physical or otherwise).

In that case, experiencing a snippet of what we perceive as a "past-life", is really simply temporarily adjusting our focus to a point in some other "life" and following that linked-list of points in time-space for a period of time, before returning back to our own "life".  

In our current form we can not fully understand all of creation, so we use our limited senses to come up with palatable metaphors such as the various religions, philosophies, and sciences.  None of them are completely true, but they are essentially scaling the mountain of truth from different locations.  Thus, whether we choose to characterize the scheme of the universe as a religious heirarchy, scientific construct, protocal stack, etc.  - they are all just different ways of using our limited sensory abilities to take a small sip from the ocean of energy that we are awash in, and then to shoehorn it into some type of construct that our brains can handle.  Unfortunately, much of the meaning contained in that swirling mass of energy around us, is lost when we filter it through our senses into a format that our physical brains can understand.  But that's life inside time-space for ya!

[catmeow]

But suppose every instant - past, current and present were a particular point in the time-space continuum and our true consciousness when outside of time-space is that of God - able to perceive everything as a single, timeless, cohesive whole.

This apparently is how the "life review" is often experienced during NDE. Kenneth Ring describes this "panoramic life review" in his books.  Freed from teh constraints of space-time we can see our entire life in an instant.

http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=157658&highlight=#157658

catmeow

[pmlonline]

Same thing with "time". For years I've thought that this progression of "time" is really the User picking out the next Nows that they want out of infinity (or the F4 Framework?), but under the guise of "You have no choice, but to experience what time tells you".

The topic of the laying of probabilities in order to influence your reality within the physical requires quite extensive explanation coupled with some explanatory diagrams.

Read the MWI (Many Worlds Interpretation).  It is the science theory that most top scientists now believe in, including Stephan Hawking.  IMHO it is far from correct, but has many truths.  I am not an expert on the theory, but it states that there are infinite universes.  As a particle travels, QM (Quantum Mechanics) states that the particle is not in any specific location.  This is called the probability wave.  When the particle collides with another particle, then the wave function collapses.  According to MWI every time a particle collides, it traverses a universe that matches the outcome.  So there may be a universe where the particle ended up at this location, or that location, etc.

Everything seems to be taking 3 or 4 times longer than I anticipate. It has all been very positive but very time consuming.

Isn't that Murphys Law?

[catmeow]

hi pmlonline

I'm not sure that Hugh Everett's Many Worlds interpretation is as widely accepted as you suggest, although Hawking is believed to be a supporter, though this may be apocryphal.  At the moment it's one of seven (?) competing interpretations of Quantum Mechanics, which are all of equal merit.  There is no experimental evidence to favour any one of these theories.  The excellent Wikipedia encyclopedia gives a lot of info:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many_worlds

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretation_of_quantum_mechanics

btw, my gripe with Many Worlds is just where does the energy come from to create an entire new universe every time a particle splits?

catmeow

[pmlonline]

hi pmlonline

I'm not sure that Hugh Everett's Many Worlds interpretation is as widely accepted as you suggest, although Hawking is believed to be a supporter, though this may be apocryphal.

I read about a poll that was taken, but I am unable to find that source again.

btw, my gripe with Many Worlds is just where does the energy come from to create an entire new universe every time a particle splits?

I think science is leading away from the old intuitive way of thinking and leaning toward the idea that is umm, well, ... really strange.  Perhaps one way to describe it is like computer memory and software.  The software can simply create things by turning the bits on and off.  So in that sense, is it real??  Personally, and from a spiritual perspective, I would have to say it is all an illusion created by group consciousness and that spirit or consciousness is the only part that is real.

Paul

[infinitethoughts]

btw, my gripe with Many Worlds is just where does the energy come from to create an entire new universe every time a particle splits?

At this point you move into definitions, like Infinity for example. It's said in an infinite universe everything has already happened. So it's a matter of twisting the concepts in your mind, then one see's its not a matter of getting new energy, but rather choosing which probable universe to experience.

[Telos]

Those of you who champion the Many-Worlds interpretation, and the "create your day" implication that follows, do you understand its reliance on probability space? There must be some way to account for the history of exceptionally uniform probability distributions. It's not just that there are an infinite number of realities, but that there are a number of probable realities, which means that some realities are uniformly unlikely, such as a reality where you win the lottery every single day.

Therefore, in MWI you should expect to find yourself in a universe of high probability, not one that is subject to infinite creative power. The creation of your day is restricted by probability - did they tell you that in "What the Bleep?"

[mrloki]

I'm sorry man, i dint remember if they did say that or not, because its quantum physics....and they aren't quite up to speed with us yet if you know what i mean, i just made that reply because i thought it was relevant to the topic. Other that that i know exactly what you are saying Telos and i cant agree with you more. I dint buy much in to the create your day, and this many words interpret thing

[Telos]

I worded that perhaps a little too aggressively. Probable realities are one way of accounting for the observed probability distributions. Someone like Frank might say that the distribution is an objective representation of a particular expectation in a certain primary focus of consciousness, and still support MWI without probable realities. But nonetheless the MWI does not account for probability directly and this can lead to careless use of MWI as justification for new age/self-help authors.

That said, the MWI should probably not be dismissed outright, but we should abhor a careless support of it as we should abhor a careless support of any world-view. I'm a "what the bleep" polemicist, but not necessarily a MWI polemicist, because I admittedly do not know MWI very well.

[infinitethoughts]

Therefore, in MWI you should expect to find yourself in a universe of high probability, not one that is subject to infinite creative power. The creation of your day is restricted by probability - did they tell you that in "What the Bleep?"

..........this restriction of probability has Everything to do with the particular Meta program that you were born into.....or.....ideally the one you decide to choose that day.

[Telos]

Therefore, in MWI you should expect to find yourself in a universe of high probability, not one that is subject to infinite creative power. The creation of your day is restricted by probability - did they tell you that in "What the Bleep?"

..........this restriction of probability has Everything to do with the particular Meta program that you were born into.....or.....ideally the one you decide to choose that day.

You deliver us this truth and fail to elaborate? If I created you as part of my day, I must say I did so very poorly.

[David Warner]

So lets say that the projectionist is able to validate target locations that are in different rooms or a house or outside. wouldn't this rule out Frank's RM and Franks model of Phasing?

There has to be some kinda of movement of the astral to validate these claims. The greats of the past (Swann and many others) that have succeeded in these tests proved validation.

How can you explain if you're still in one location, and the body doesn't separate that you can view the targets in the first place and get it right?

Tvos

[Telos]

How can you explain if you're still in one location, and the body doesn't separate that you can view the targets in the first place and get it right?

Frank has said that all knowledge is self-knowledge and that there is no separation in consciousness. Knowing the card is akin to knowing one's self. He has repeatedly corrected his own statements, immediately after he makes them, to stress the language limitation in allowing him to express his ideas within the unity of all Self. (Of course, Frank speaks for himself so please do not take my words as absolutely definitive of his).

You are not alone, though, if you think that "all knowledge is self-knowledge" is a troublesome and confusing dictum. Although I definitely see where such a statement may come from, I do not think it is accurate. However, I don't think the idea of an energy body is accurate either. To clarify, I'm also not one to decree that wisdom is incommunicable or that it is superior to knowledge. Wisdom is a way for old people to convince others that they are not actually at the end of life but its apex, for it follows that the only way to achieve great wisdom is by a lifetime of experience. This is ageism at some of its worst.

Hmm - that was not intended as a criticism of anyone in this forum!

Anyways, Frank has said that everything he says can be verified through experience. For example, he once said that one can achieve irrefutable proof of reincarnation, life after death, or choosing parents before birth - I forget which one. But essentially it is that these things are possible via the unity of our consciousness. This verifiable experience is precisely what he is trying to encourage through his models.

Again, I have grown a habit for speaking about Frank and it sometimes looks as if I am speaking for him - but I have no such endorsement. But it's funny. If Frank and I are one, then I really am speaking for him, and he created me in his experience for just that purpose, just as you created me for just the same, and I created you so that I could speak. How prompt that is for giggling.

[Vvid1012]

First of all I would say that the probability would be the probability you give yourself.  It is said we only use some small precentage of our brain.  Maybe as a more evolved species the probabilities seem to change.

As far as Frank goes...too many people treat Frank like he's some sort of god here.  Yes he's on to something and has similar experiences as us.  But he like everyone else has his own knots to work out.  We each have our path... I believe your perspective on wisdom is slightly skewed.  Wisdom is a result of knowledge and understanding...not from being old, however, experience aids in the process.  Also, is it that hard to believe we have an energy body?  It has even been proven that we emit some percentage of bio-electricity.

Sorry if I seem rude..I am in a slight hurry, and felt like getting a good argument going  anyways...i'd like to know know your opinion further.

[Nay]

Then allow me to giggle.......

Frank did not create you to spread his word, but if that is what you feel, then so be it.

Are you so lacking that you need someone to lead?  Or perhaps make you feel more above?  I'm quite creeped out by this last post of yours.

Being a mod, I'm quite likely to be told to step down, but enough is enough.

I'm tired of this whole "go my way business"!!!!!  what ever happened to personal experiences??

Has EVERYONE forgotten what they are all about?  That we are ALL trying and striving for the same thing?!!

Why is it..............that I've have looked upon WEEKS of nonsense of people whom at one time were as one, yet can't see past their noses?

Seriously!!  I'm appalled!  

Ignorance is bliss.........

If these are my last words...just let it be, that EVERYONE needs to follow noone but their own soul.  Noone is for you to talk through or uphold to the other.  You are YOU...  

Why is it that we all are being against each other?..... I'll tell you why, ego.....period.  

I'm here to tell you that YOUR way is the RIGHT way, but you cannot push that.  Allow it to be what it is........your experience.

As much as everyone thinks that they can pigeon hold an experience...they can't.  

I've spent, going on years reading posts on this forum and one is not like the next.  We used to grow from each other....*sigh* so nice.  Now......it's...........not the same.

I'm getting old and tired....  

I'm for everyone........and just wish that everyone else could see that.

Nay....so outta here.

[Telos]

First of all I would say that the probability would be the probability you give yourself.

Then the consistent probabilities observed by quantum physicists over the passed 50 years have been consistently created by me everyday? Even before I was born? Or you? Or Us?


Nay, most of the questions in this forum recently have been about Frank and his model. But troublingly Frank has already given most of his answers to these questions and has done so tirelessly. It takes a concerted effort to condense his volumes of writing, and I'm just trying to help.

Are you so lacking that you need someone to lead? Or perhaps make you feel more above? I'm quite creeped out by this last post of yours.

No, I just have no one else to talk to about these things, and I have trouble communicating with even those few people because of what seems like a cultural, linguistic, and philosophical barrier. It's sad... but creepy? Why do you say that?

I've been very critical of Frank. I scarcely think that I follow him more than I follow his writings.

I agree with you that we should post more experiences. I've been saying that since day one. If fact I just posted a rather lengthy one. If you want to get creeped out you should go there! ;)

And finally, please see my offenses as failed attempts at humor, because that's what they probably are. (I wonder what probability, though... 15%? 90%? Is that one of those "probabilities you give yourself"...?)

[Edit] • • • • • •

Nay, I have been rereading your post and I think I understand a bit better what you're talking about.

Why is it..............that I've have looked upon WEEKS of nonsense of people whom at one time were as one, yet can't see past their noses?

We are as one. "Out of many, one," at least for you, me, and the other yankees. No matter how many opposing viewpoints we can still be friends, work over our differences, hopefully changing them and growing through one another, getting rid of what does not work for us, and have a better tomorrow. That has not changed in my mind.

Nay, I've seen you interpret my attacks on other people's ideas as attacks on them, and it's my mistake if I made it seem like that. And if I did I ask for people to point it out and help me change that. But I must say that not being able to expose the weaknesses of other people's ideas is absolutely horrible for discourse, nay, it is the antithesis.

Why is it that we all are being against each other?..... I'll tell you why, ego.....period.

We're not! Please, Nay, I have not seen anything but people working together.

[David Warner]

Ap Friends,

Yes, we've gotten off the true meaning of our research and that is to learn from one another, help, give advice, and realize that our experiences our gifts. Just imagine if we all were on the same team what a difference we could make in the world today. Lets start working together instead against.

Anyways, I've added a experience for sharing. This is post:
09/21/1988 - Lengthy OOBE - Title: Donna
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=171467#171467

After all these years of reading every so often on this, I still can remember the details like it was yesterday.

Hope you enjoy it - I know that I did..

Tvos

[infinitethoughts]

You deliver us this truth and fail to elaborate? If I created you as part of my day, I must say I did so very poorly.

this restriction of probability has Everything to do with the particular Meta program that you were born into.....

If you read that more thoroughly, it'll make sense. Think of it this way ----as if you just came from another part of the galaxy, and since you came from another part of the galaxy, your meta programs would be completely opposite of the ones in place here.

For example, you'd have the ability to move objects with your mind, read minds, etc.
All this from having a completely different meta program.

The good news is the present meta progams can be changed, are changing, and have been changed thru out the history of this planet.

(Also I think you did an excellent job of "creating" me, if you need to put it that way.........someone who you disagree with. I myself would not phrase it that way, it's too simplistic.)

[Telos]

as if you just came from another part of the galaxy, and since you came from another part of the galaxy, your meta programs would be completely opposite of the ones in place here.

For example, you'd have the ability to move objects with your mind, read minds, etc.

How do you know this? That's quite a claim to say that just because of our location in the galaxy we'll have superpowers in another part.

And what are meta programs? How are they different from programs? Are there meta meta programs and meta meta meta programs ad infinitum?

I now create you with provoking answers! :)

[infinitethoughts]

I "know" this from acute observation of the "place" that we exist in. At first glance, it seems we exist in an existence where we have "solid" physical reality, and a "flimsy" mental reality. Where our thoughts have absolutely nothing to do with this "solid" physical reality. Where the boundary between you (the "fill-in-the-blanks" you call yourself)  and physical reality, seems to be billions and billions of light years apart.

But, looks are deceiving. Luckily for me Quantum physics already has proved how the line between the mental and the physical is extremely thin, so thin that one actually influences the other. So thin that one is just the other side of the coin, or the other half.

Meta-programs. Another word could be "world-view". The particular world-view prevalent today on this planet is just that a "world-view". We get so attached to it we think it is the absolute truth.

So now at the present time we have a "world-view" that vehemently and boisterously says, incident "x" is possible, but incident "y" is impossible. Luckily again for me, history proves over and over again, that boundaries crash and burn, fall left and right. "Fly to the moon? What are you out of your FRIGGIN MIND?"

But this is just a point of view, that's all. What makes it so hard to change is the ancient and out dated world-views that the majority on this planet hold. The more comical ones are a creator hanging out helping you out, but only if his steak wasn't cooked too rare for his evening dinner and conversely he's in a bad mood.  And we all know he will help that particular football team. Why? Well we all know the creator wants the RedBuck Buckaroo Bucktooths High School football team to win. Right?!

Change your world-view, and your reality changes.

Are there meta meta programs and meta meta meta programs ad infinitum?

And there you've hit the nail on the head. You start to look at yourself and ask "What the hell am I?" You find out either you are a big fat Infinite or a big fat zero, which coincidentally is the same exact thing.   Which then leads one to the next fork in the fork on the infinite paths.....that you can be anything you want.

[Telos]

Thank you for your post, infinitethoughts.

How do you differentiate "meta-programs" and "philosophy?" Are meta-programs philosophies that are "running" in our thoughts?

Change your world-view, and your reality changes.

Easier said than done, eh? I'm sorry, I wasn't expecting these overly simplistic statements from you after you said that my creating you was simplistic.

I've changed my world-view many times, conducted quite a number of experiments, actually practicing these types of statements. And, oh, certainly reality changes - but for worse things than I had intended. Perhaps I have been doing it wrong, but all I have succeeded in doing is repeatedly face idiocy.

big fat Infinite or a big fat zero, which coincidentally is the same exact thing.

Who on earth started this vile view... it seems popular to say this in new age circles. Can someone show me a mathematical proof that infinity and zero are the same? Because that's what they are - mathematical concepts. And they are not the same.

I suppose my world-view is at fault here? Infinity and zero are intrinsically part of an already established view - the philosophy of mathematics. Speaking about them outside of that view is not changing reality, but making nonsense.

Again, I appreciate your taking time to clarify things, infinitethoughts, but I don't understand how your words are not washed repetitions of empty guru affirmations. Oh yeah, with the now obligatory careless reference to quantum physics.

I apologize. The fault is mine. I created your post, after all!