It is a possible explanation for synchronicity, what prejudging does, and how the world unfolds according to intent.

Synchronicity: probabilities collapsing in a way to mirror your own thoughts/feelings in the physical world.
Judging: forcing probabilities to be collapsed in a negative way, and not using opportunities to influence positively.

Opportunities to influence are created by NOT judging, because it leaves possibilities open.

The basic goal - "growing QoC" - is to create an "inner world" that is mirrored in the real world. This is why attempting to remold the real world instead of adapting the "inner world" fails.

But it also means that people do not have the same level of volition. This is where I always get confused.

_________________
Johan

free will does not mean control. Directed/focused intent is subject to many filters...what is the level of uncertainty, is this good for overall system profitability, is this someone on the shit list, or someone we are working with that is sending this intent, your technical ability to focus, your state...I think?

Its also possible that everyone you interact with is a dream character subject to your intent, but that is not Tom's model.

generally I believe the system is taking care of a lot of background materialist details for me, as long as I maintain my Intent to serve the system's broader purpose, phone call or no phone call.

this is a "belief" or working hypothesis that I carry forward from the Christian teaching...first seek the kingdom of God, and all the material crap will be taken care of for you...or words to that effect, and that worked out for me, but I am only one datapoint.

In business or career, I try to look out for an underdog to help, and things just seem to work out, in spite of peeving off many of my bosses (and occasionally my wife), especially the high entropy ones.

I personally believe that if I were to get off track and move toward more selfish Intent, according to my nursery school understanding of such things, all bloody hell would rain down on me, and I have already had something like that happen. If the system sends you a windfall, don't buy a sportscar...thats all I will say on that.

the timing of the phone call was the more obvious thing - I perceived it to be the system reminding me that life is not entirely random, and that I am not just imagining all this, and that my guides/whatever liked that I was investing time with Binaural and focused intent. I got very different feedback from investing attention on the sportscar. I have a lot of fear now associated with conspicuous consumption. ; - )

or I am really good at seeing patterns where there are none...but then we bring in Pascal's Wager. It doesnt actually matter if all this is a comforting delusion, it is profitable even under the PMR small science ruleset. There is no upside to being a nihilist materialist.

it all being true, would be a cherry on the cake. PSI types of course don't have this problem, as the uncertainty has been removed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCRZZC-DH7M

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?

There are many people with sportscars that don't have hell raining down on them, not to mention the sociopaths. That gives only a few a options:

- People are held to different arbitrary standards ("that one must not have this")
- You are causing it, because your beliefs are reflected in the world that is continuely created around you

There is an idea that all probable events occur at the same "time" but in different "universes" or "timelines". When we skew probabilites with intent, we actually choose to follow a different "timeline". A timeline is imagined to be analogous to a path through a bayesian network. Tom talks about future probable databases, and in general I think Tom's ideas are mostly compatible with this.

The interesting part is that the versions I see of you are chosen to reflect my beliefs and fears. I have free will in my world. You have free will too, but when you make a choice that doesn't reflect my beliefs you disappear from my world and I'm left with the version that is coherent with my "inner world".

What do you think?

_________________
Johan

yes, feedback is definitely calibrated to the individual, and it is driven by belief, as it is all intent driven, according to belief. The 911 suicide pilot who actually believed he was serving the better good, will be rewarded for courage and intent, but will have to spend a lifetime wearing a dunce hat ; - )

Intent decides which possible "timeline" to actualize, setting up a novel decision space for your next fork in the road, based on your last intent, built on your previous intents, built on your previous lifetimes, built upon the intent of the simulation designer.

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?

If my world is steered to be a reflection of my beliefs, how does it teach me what I need to know? The golden rule must somehow be embedded in the mechanics here. The world would need to change in a way to make me experience the consequences of my choices.

If this was a computer game: let's say there are agents walking a giant graph (of probable events). The graph itself might correspond to decision-space.

Everytime an agent updates itself, it forks the entire graph in a seperate dimension, and becomes two agents (old and new) - walking on two separate graphs, which share one node (where they forked). These two graphs are identical in all other dimensions. If an agent updates itself to a state which is identical to another agent, they merge.

This is the basics for a game. Let's try to figure out what the goal is. To merge all agents? Not likely, because it seems to grow exponentially.

The tricky part is this: the merging/forking mechanics must encode the "golden rule".

_________________
Johan

I would say the golden rule is baked in through the inherent construction of the manifold. The M part of AUM. We are more the sheet than the individuated bumps on the sheet.

I think becoming love is a PMR-centric word for becoming less stupid, big picture wise. Working toward an optimal balance between individuation and oneness. Figuring out how to balance the selfishness of trying to get laid, with the higher ruleset of being agape love for the other person. Balancing paying for kids educations, and dealing with a hungry planet.

Ultimately, I think its all about filling the time, and having something tangible to do, and becoming love is part of the playground orientation process, but I am reaching beyond MBTOE with that.

the fundamental of fundamentals, philosophically, is that something, anything, is better than a void.

i.e. closing scene of American Beauty the film

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?

Our consensus Reality is a reflection of the "average" QoC of those in it, is that what you mean? We create our own Reality by our interpretation of the data is this what you mean? :)
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.