Tom,

In Monroe's 3rd book he describes one possible future of Earth of which he was given a brief experience. He described humans as being capable of existence in or out of bodies as a natural course of existence. Such a future would seen to be an evolutionary step, of some form or another. Do you know of, or have any speculations on what exactly may be involved in such an evolution? And do you know of any other systems where bodies are used as containers in such a fashion, or similar fashion?

Nothing sounds more fun than an out of body game of tag.

_________________
"It's just data."

http://igg.me/at/liavg
http://lifeisavideogamethemovie.com
https://www.facebook.com/LifeIsAVideoGameTheMovie

Roland,

That sort of an outcome is only likely if the VR system is a closed system -- i.e. there are no new consciousnesses entering the VR continually (enroll) while others leave (graduate). It is my experience that our PMR is not a closed system, thus such a condition of universal advanced evolution of consciousness as Bob described it is less likely -- not impossible perhaps, but very unlikely. The average level of your neighborhood elementary school participant stays about the same, decade after decade -- because being an elementary school is its function. My guess is that bob had a implicit belief that the system was closed when he had that experience and that belief colored his interpretation. Perhaps I have an implicit belief that the system is open but I do not think so -- my position on that is derived from firsthand experience of new entries into the system -- some already advanced, some just beginning their journey. Could my experience be anomalous? Perhaps, but I don't think so. As I have said often, skepticism and open-mindedness must travel together because reports from NPMR are interpreted by the experiencer and thus reflect the experiencer's limitations. Experiencer's who present their visions as certain truth just don't understand the nature of reality. How many times have I cautioned: "don't confuse the model of reality with reality".

Tom C

Tom,

Closed/open; I've wondered about the points you've noted on this. In this instance, Monroe was given this view by the INSPEC, if memory serves. This begs a question that digs even deeper, of course. Why was he given this future to experience? Obviously the (or "a") VRRE was running the future VR(Earth) as Monroe experienced it, as were the other participants who Monroe met in that VR (one was an old NPMR friend).
----
"How many times have I cautioned: "don't confuse the model of reality with reality"."
-
I don't see how my question confused them. According to the theory/model, all dimensional realities are virtual... no?

Tom said:
That sort of an outcome is only likely if the VR system is a closed system -- i.e. there are no new consciousnesses entering the VR continually (enroll) while others leave (graduate).

Tom,
I am half-way to completing the trilogy at this point but have always wondered if what I have considered the sparks (units of consciousness) off the whole (AUW) that we are in our human experience have a finite number. To try to use my new MBT lingo, are there brand new units coming in or are they recycled units experiencing a new reality in their current incarnation? I think I realize that the AUW isn't required to be it then it also seems that what could appear to be new units might just be new to this AUW and that what the sparks (old habits are hard to die) all came off of while not infinite could seem that way. I probably heard you say that in the London lectures. This is on my mind because I think it is all cyclic with no beginning or end, but this requires at some point all the units meeting up at zero entropy so the whole thing can collapse and then reburst (BB) into a totally new system of systems. All the units meeting up, becoming one, requires a finite number of units, in my understanding.

Tom said:
Experiencer's who present their visions as certain truth just don't understand the nature of reality.

To the experiencer it is their certain truth, how else could they present it?

Tom said:
How many times have I cautioned: "don't confuse the model of reality with reality

This reminds me of one of my favorite sayings, "If I've told you once I've told you a million times, don't exaggerate" which then, of course reminds me of another of my favorite sayings" All generalization are bad." How many times have you cautioned not confusing the model with the real thing?

Peace out
Love
Bette

The "How many times..." thing was obviously a very poor way of emphasizing my point.

Roland,
The phrase.. "How many times..." was not an admonition to you but a teaching point to readers. In every post I say things not only to inform the person I am replying to but also to help the hundreds of readers who will eventually read this post to get maximum value.

2b,
New units matriculate in, old units matriculate out and the rest recycle. How many units report for attendance each day (current population) is limited on the upper end only by the efficient carrying capacity of the school -- and on the lower end by zero.

If an experiencer with integrity realized his NPMR experience was a personal subjective interpretation he would never present it as certain truth -- unless he believed himself to be omniscient. Thus skepticism is always in order no matter whose work you are reading i.e., whether the experience under consideration is yours, mine, or someone elses.

Exactly 87.5 times (Once I was interrupted in the middle and never got back to it).

Tom C

I can see a pattern joining this thread and the sub conscious mind thread together. I hope I can focus it to bring more clarity. The subjective experiences of Bob Monroe sometimes seem at odds with the framework of MBT, specifically instances when he interacts with a past and future self. I think that both threads are showing up a blind spot we all have in our interpretation of linear time, even with Bob's premise of an interactive timeline. He is assuming that when he experiences visiting a past self and interacting with it he is dealing with a free will entity that is operating in a past delta t. What if these events are his subconscious expectations being projected into the big computer or VRRE and being rendered according to the probabilities. He would be experiencing the projection as truth because of the assumption the other entities experienced were operating with free will, not just probability projection.

Tom went into this in MBT and it seems likely to me this might explain many of Bob's experiences. The fine line between true delta t experience and a rendered projection experience would be very hard to discern if he wasn't aware of that possibility. The learning experience would be nevertheless real for him, the conclusions reached and written would be guided by his own subconscious belief in the linear interaction of past, present and future. It seems we all have a blind spot in that we are seeing a closed system, i.e. progression of events with a beginning and a conclusion. Our interpretation of probability rendering in fractal time is influenced by an assumption that it is part of delta t iteration of free will experience, and as Tom says often, we are seeing the model as reality. Hope this helps in a small way, the pattern I'm trying to explain is very hard for me to condense into a shared idea.

_________________
always, John

You are funny Tom, that's a great way to be. Thank you for your answers.
Bette

Stroker,

I believe you have hit the nail on the head again.

In dealing with the historical and future probable databases, as always -- garbage in/garbage out -- or beliefs in/beliefs out. one cannot make a database system give you any more accuracy than the data contains.

Using the historical database (most likely source): If the historical characters recorded in the play had certain beliefs/limitations, then the extrapolated results to future states are dependent on those beliefs. As in the example of seeing what would have happened if Hitler had won WW II.

Working from the probable future database: extrapolating ahead a thousand years worth of the interactive free will choices of 6 billion people living in a super fast paced world leads to garbage -- the extrapolation of likely choice accuracy craps out long before one gets a thousand PMR years out in time. And most advanced explorers would not know if they were exploring the most likely choice thread or some unlikely thread. How the databases are constructed and work is not widely known.

Tom C

Well, if it was all just a subjective belief oriented illusion, I suppose the logical conclusion is that one cannot be even relatively sure that any of his out of body experiences were based in reality - whatever that is. Further, since the vast majority of stories relating NPMR experiences & information about NPMR follow this same pattern, the logical conclusion would be that virtually none of it is reliable with respect to reality - whatever that is.

Roland,

You are basically correct. None o fit can be taken as absolute fact. Not by you and not by the experiencer. That is the nature of subjective interpretation -- it is personal. It can be shared but not exactly. Statistics provides credibility where it can be applied and when data is available. However, among sources with skill and integrity, you can be assured that what is described is as close as they could get (in terms of PMR language and within the limitations of their experience base) to a description of what they experienced. How correctly they interpreted the meaning or significance of the experience is probably more prone to error than the description of the experience itself. This process is not at all like describing the flowers in your back yard. This is a mental experience in terms metaphor and symbol, very unlike a sensory experience in PMR -- though that is exactly how it is usually interpreted back into PMR concepts and language

Tom C

I know edge, doesn't it? I wonder if a sleeper (someone without awareness during sleep like me) still gets to play? Funny I found this discussion now ;), I was searching VRRE and came across this Monroe thread. I've been thinking a lot about the emitter in Ultimate Journeys (I can actually visualize it) and wondering if it is a machine like a generator or TBC, is it virtual, made of virtual particles? Is it in charge of the data flow? If so how deep into what an iuoc can experience? Is it perpetual? Is it it, the bottom line? I am aware that my thinking is stuck, well, highly enmeshed in PMR thinking on everything except death and even then I am sure there is PMR in that as well. These might be stupid questions, but they are what they are, stuff I wonder about. I'll tell you what edge, the first thing I'll do when I can is hit you up for a game of OOB tag, you're IT!

Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.

Bette,

The Emitter was described as the source or origin of/creating our reality if I remember correctly and it was PMR being referred to as our reality. Well, the origin of PMR experience/reality is the combined information/energy flow from the 'Eagle' via TBC/VRRE to the individuated consciousnesses participating in the PMR VR to create their experience of PMR. The Eagle being the metaphor for an unknown something acting as the prime source of reality. Thus the Emitter was a clear metaphor for the information/energy stream creating our reality. The 'souls' of the participants in PMR were returned to the Eagle by the other, periodically opening, orifice in the symbolic barrier between PMR and the rest of Reality. They were to serve as 'food' for the Eagle. In discussing the relationship between our higher or total self and our virtual reality selves, we have attributed the most growth potential (entropy reduction) to our experiences and interactions here in PMR with some potential for growth within NPMR as well. Aum/The One clearly values this entropy reduction/growth and has set this up as essentially automatic functions. And also as discussed, the individuated consciousnesses function collectively in some way, details unknown, as parts of The One Consciousness. So thus the growth produced within the virtual reality of PMR returns to nurture/generate the growth of AUM/The One Consciousness via the growth of the individuated consciousnesses. Thus the return of the 'souls'/growth products of PMR to 'feed' the Eagle constitutes a clear metaphor for the growth of individuated consciousnesses and AUM/The One Consciousness.

Does this make sense to you?

Ted

Ted,

Yes, it does make sense to me, thank you, as always. Is the Eagle tasting the pudding?

Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.