Return Home
It is currently Mon May 17, 2021 5:28 pm

All times are UTC-06:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 2:44 pm 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Back in November of 2007, Tom Campbell asked me to post two chapters of the book I am perpetually writing. I posted the first in the Physics secition in the thread MBT and the Theoretical Basis of Quantum Mechanics. This was a chapter discussing what I call the Virtual Reality Rendering Engine. I'm not really sure what the results were from that posting, other than further ideas for amplification of the concept. But as requested, I am providing a link here to the other chapter titled "Intent and Self Concept". Instead of linking it through a page on my web site, I am giving the link to directly download the pdf file here since the direct link got spread around anyway and the file was downloaded that way and few people left a request for updates on future versions or the book publication. Those will be honored and my e-mail address is readily available so if you want an update, when and if, just write. The direct link to this file is: http://www.active-mysticism.com/Intent-2_5-1_0.pdf

This chapter is based on the concept of intent as discussed in MBT. I have expanded on it as best I can and with the addition of the idea of Intent being the outward pointing vector with a matching inward pointing vector related to Self Concept. The phrases outward pointing and inward pointing vectors originated with Tom as you might guess. Basically my perception is that you cannot have an Intent (towards all other individuated beings in and the whole of AUM) unless you have a matching Self Concept (your understanding of who and what you are). I do not discuss the determination of an entropy level here but rather how the Intent functions and a little general expansion of the concept. I'm finally posting it as I have given out of clear ways to expand the concept further, more improvements to the readability or good reasons to delay further.

I hope that you find it of value.

Ted Vollers


Top
PostPosted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:55 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 10:44 am
Posts: 272
Location: relative
That's some chapter Ted! A rare and useful arrangement of code. Very clarifying - I've grappled with some inquires for the last several days regarding most everything covered in your excerpt.

Oddly (or not) discovery of this of thread and your link times very well with a recent communication episode with a sharper/less indoctrinated representation or inner part - an event that seems happened solely through intent.

I can't wait to experience your volume in full! I hope this perpetual writing stasis is just a misinterpretation of shape. Very good material, sir. Well done!

Onward!

_________________
"It's just data."
I wrote a book about Tom: http://amzn.to/2knSVJX


Top
PostPosted: Sat Mar 14, 2009 8:14 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 3:44 am
Posts: 155
Location: Bolton UK
Hi Ted thanks for your wise words again. Ive read your chapter and feel it explains a lot as always. I suppose the real problem often is when my path, my eductaion, my instinct and my signs impact on others in what I feel is a negative way, sometimes raising their entropy- but I guess they agreed to it! I do get signs every day mostly a physical feeling along my chakra line which ive worked out is triggered by somebody thinking about me. Ill get it 5-30 secs before I receive a call or text or just before someone is coming in the building Im in . This is much more pronounced with certain specific people. The nearest I can explain it as like is that what Rupert Sheldrake describes when he talks about morphogenic fields.
Thanks again

Andy

_________________
Andy Wright


Top
PostPosted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 10:57 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 11:09 am
Posts: 124
Ted, All

I found your chapter very interesting. The idea of what you describe as inward and outward vectors of intent is something I have thought about for many years. I'm not sure if my thoughts about this fit with MBT theory or not. You and/or Tom will need to put this into MBT terms if integration is possible. I'm still in the process of integrating MBT language/meaning with my perspective and I'm not sure how to describe this in MBT terms but I'll try to make an attempt.

What I'll call Soul Intent (SI) is what I understand as the inward vector that originates in the "reality cell" of AUM or the little teeny tiny stream of consciousness that flows from AUM to the soul/higher self, which then in turn flows into the consciousness of the core of our NPMR being to the core of our PMR being. We experience our SI as love that can up well from the core of our being in PMR life, but most of the time we block it from flowing freely into the outward vector of intent because it runs into conflict with ego (fear). SI is not motivation; it is more like purpose, ultimately AUM's purpose to evolve. Reduce entropy.

Most of the time SI is not in our PMR awareness unless we have developed the quality of our consciousness to the point where it is recognized. It is still the same "quality of being" of the AUM reality cell, but it is prevented from flowing into our PMR awareness because of fear and ego. What I've thought about and have been trying to flesh out is the differences between the base SI inward vector (purpose) and the outward vector (motivation). I'd like help with this from forum members, Tom and Ted. Some of my thoughts are:

SI is the intent that "intends" us here in PMR. It is the intent that constitutes our biological makeup including things like breathing, heart pumping, blue eyes, and brown hair, etc. This might not be "soul intent" but I see it also as the basic intent a seed has to grow into a pumpkin vine, or a tomato vine, etc. The inward vector differs from the outward vector because it is what intends everything to be what it is. The outward vector stems from the inward vector, but it becomes the motivation of action. The intent we work with through choice as we evolve.

I have a lot more to say about this subject but will have to do so at another time. In the meantime, what are your thoughts about this subject?

Kathy


Top
PostPosted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 1:34 pm 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Kathy,

What you are describing is from deep within the reality of our interactions with and as integral components of The One. It is not what I have called the inward pointing aspect or vector of Intent, as Self Concept. That is personal to each of us as individuated beings as our own understanding of who and what we are. Your idea of an inward pointing vector is from territory that I have not been led to speculate about or given information about: our relations with The One directly. It is not something that I am prepared to disagree with and I think that there is something likely about such a communication as you describe. I would probably feel inhibited about discussing this yet if my reaction to what you have said were not from the right direction. But I do not know if our higher selves are even aware of this consciously. Tom worked with me in working out a post on: Why talk about our Higher Self and our Virtual Reality self? at this link: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2826 in which we clarified my understanding of the relationship of our higher selves, our virtual reality, VR, selves that experience NPMR and PMR and our relationship with and in our development within The One. As a companion and precursor to this post is another which Tom also worked with me on: Why talk about Indra's Net and the Game of Life? at this link: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2804. In part, this was to correlate Tom's MBT concepts and terminology with confusion that I had caused by starting to talk about Indra's Net on the bulletin board from historical, mystical, sources with the individuated beings connected by the Reality Wide Web or RWW. I do not wish to be a disturbing influence, creating confusion.

As a quick review, I do not see our higher selves and VR selves as a hierarchy with our PMR VR self receiving this signal you describe from our NPMR VR self. We are our higher self and our VR selves are sub sets, but not in a subordinate sense. Our higher self is all us, just differentiated for purposes of experiencing our VR experiences according to the rule sets defining the VRs, into virtual beings. We may or may not consciously perceive the signal you describe in our VR selves, but this is a matter of development and individuality, not that our higher self and then NPMR self must decide to pass it on down the ladder. Our higher selves are components of what became The One in the bootstrapping operation that Tom describes in MBT and continue in this role. How our higher selves participate within this Union is not something that we know, unless it is known by Tom or someone even higher up the ladder of understanding. I am not aware that he has ever spoken of such knowledge. But we, as part of the Union of The One, continue to be encouraged in our development and the VRs including NPMR and PMR of our system have been created for this purpose and we participate within them for this purpose. Thus a vector/signal such as you describe is very likely to exist and might be thought of as the Intent of The One. I would expect that it is in the nature of a more general signal/desire/intent that we are cherished and a desire that we grow and develop, lower our entropy, gain clarity of communication and understanding, evolve in general and fulfill the purposes and plans of The One. The more specific details that you describe such as hair and eye color appearing in our PMR VR selves as they participate within our PMR experience are more transient and superficial, related only to our own choices and chance and varying from experience packet to packet.

The Intent of The One would be of a more general nature as I have described above and the more general growth and development aspects you mention. If The One were to attempt a more specific directing signal, it would result in a conflict with our Absolute Free Will. Can you imagine trying to herd cats? Also as you discuss, the awareness of this Intent of The One is something that is probably a function of development. I can see a developed awareness of the Intent of The One becoming part of the motivation for our individual Intent to participate in the purposes of The One and align itself with the Intent of The One, provided that there is sufficient advancement on the part of the individuated being. I see this as an end point for the moment, but I may return and add to this post. PMR calls at present.

This calls for Tom's input as well. Thank you for bring such an advanced concept into the discussion forums.

Ted


Top
PostPosted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 3:24 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 11:09 am
Posts: 124
Thanks Ted for responding so quickly. I promise I will get to the point where this should tie in with self-concept. Also I don't see us as a hierarchy, more like reality cell consciousness penetrating through to PMR consciousness limited by the constraints of NPMR and PMR. Sorry I have to run again. I'll be back to post more later on.

Kathy


Top
PostPosted: Thu Mar 26, 2009 1:05 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 11:09 am
Posts: 124
Labels can be really confusing because we can attribute so many different meanings to them. Instead of soul intent it might be better to say fundamental intent as an aspect of the essence of AUM with the intent (purpose) to evolve, reduce entropy. This basic intent (reality cell essence) even if it is a tiny seed of consciousness seems to be carried forth in each individualized unit of consciousness (each of us).

This basic intent/purpose would not interfere with free will; it opens the way for any and every potentiality to be carried forth by the use of free will choice from all the possibilities because deep inside each iuoc exists this basic intent (reality cell essence). I guess in our PMR experience this intent could also be described as a deep spiritual longing or purpose to be fulfilled. How purpose is fulfilled is freewill choice, only that there is a purpose is ingrained in us so to speak. This is what leads to self-concept. The higher the quality of our consciousness, the more our self-concept becomes relational to this reality cell essence consciousness or state of being. Another way to say this is to say our intent/purpose becomes aligned with universal intent/purpose, thereby reducing entropy through evolutionary process.

This fundamental reality cell intent in its natural state had no adversaries. By this I mean the seed of fundamental intent/purpose ingrained within the core of our being is not in conflict with the intent/purpose of AUM. The rule sets of NPMRs and PMRs is what opens up opportunity for conflict for the purpose of reducing entropy. The evolutionary process seems to be a process of struggle. The same struggle we experience internally when we have cross-purposes. Fundamental intent (essence) sets the standard, which is of course, is continually evolving, and the NPMR and PMR rule sets provide opportunity for growth to evolve out of that struggle.

Since AUM evolved into a brilliant being of "love", it seems logical that the essence of its "reality cell" is the same or similar quality and exists in our PMR experience as an essence of love within the core of our being. Most of the time we don't allow this inner essence to well up and flow freely because of fear and ego. Some people may not even experience it at all because of a low quality consciousness, but I think most people do experience it from time to time.

Self-concept seems to be at the heart of this experience. It is relational. We have the example deep within us. We can sense its presence intuitively and we struggle, go through the process to allow this inner essence to help us develop and define our self-concept. As our self-concept evolves our intent (purpose) becomes more and more aligned with universal intent and all of our perceived adversaries disappear. we experience the ONE as it is.

As I mentioned previously, this may or may not fit with MBT theory. Tom and Ted would have to weigh in on that. I've just tried to convey some of my understanding based on my experiences and thoughts in regard to intent and self-concept.

Kathy


Top
PostPosted: Thu Mar 26, 2009 3:49 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 12:00 am
Posts: 1285
kathy,

I like your words and see no conflict with MBT. We are what we are -- and that is consciousness -- a chip off the old block.

As a part of the consciousness-evolution fractal, we do indeed carry the seed of the whole.

Tom


Top
PostPosted: Thu Mar 26, 2009 5:21 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Posts: 9999
Location: Ridgecrest, CA
The idea that what we do to other we do to our self, once the concepts above become realized, is an immediately useful thing for use in any reality. The concept of arrow of intent, on my mind lately, direction and your post, Kathy, puts the thought of our arrow pointing outward but since it is pointing at other, which we are too, it also points at us. Circular, I tend to go circular it seems.
Quality of consciousness (QoC) on a low to high continuum, low indicating less profitable organization of data, high indicating more profitable organization of data. Quality depends the "best" organization of data, not necessarily more data. Just thinking out loud. So QoC, the level depends on the quality of organization, not amount of organization. I'm trying to remove judgemental terms (I realize no judgement is intended, and words are what we have to work with, and all that) from the concept of having a high or low QoC. What do you think Tom, can those that "get it" (or think they do) get past that eaaily enough, as I have, for this to be a non-issue? I also need some data on this for my thesis, if you would be so kind (some more).
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.


Top
PostPosted: Thu Mar 26, 2009 6:34 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 12:00 am
Posts: 1285
Bette,

Everybody interprets what they hear or read according to their understanding. An ego hears the words "High" and "low" and immediately needs to place themselves on a high-low scale relative to others. No matter what sweet words you replace "high"and "low" with, if the meaning remains the same, an ego will have the same reaction.

Things and people are often at different levels of development in any number of ways -- pretending that they are not is not helpful. Just say it plainly and truthfully and know that people will interpret what you say according to their own fears, beliefs, needs and expectations -- that can't be helped. We create/interpret our own reality. Tricking people into thinking more like you would want them to think is dishonest, tricking them with politically correct words to sound more like you want them to sound is useless. Unless you change them, the intent remains the same. Better to see and know the real "them" rather than push people into being duplicitous. Encouraging people to be polite civilizes behavior and makes everything more pleasant on the surface but changes nothing below the surface. In the long run, things are generally better if everyone is honest all the time.

Tom


Top
PostPosted: Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:21 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Posts: 9999
Location: Ridgecrest, CA
Thank you Tom, and I agree, honesty will get one much farther (towards where I'd want to go anyways) than being a lying liar will, as well as it being easier to remember the truth. There is no place for dirty little secrets or lies when trying to develop honestly. It is honest to relate quality of consciousness with profitability of organization of data as seen by results of choices made at that time by that FWAU. Put straight forth, could someone with a high QoC do something very hurtful here or anywhere for no good reason (not to save another, etc)? As a rule? :)
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.


Top
PostPosted: Thu Mar 26, 2009 9:16 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 12:00 am
Posts: 1285
Bette,

Yes, quality of consciousness is related to better organization/integration of the experience data -- extracting more useful content (learning, understanding) from the same data.

If in fact an individual was purposely increasing entropy in the big picture, that individual would not have a high quality (low entropy) consciousness.

Tom C


Top
PostPosted: Thu Mar 26, 2009 9:26 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Posts: 9999
Location: Ridgecrest, CA
Sobeit. :) Thanks Tom.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.


Top
PostPosted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 12:03 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 3:43 pm
Posts: 344
I read this thread and Teds chapter on Intent..

got inspired.. started recreating the model in my mind.. based on Genetic Algorithms.. had a beer..


the result:

the single calculation (aka the one)

a Genetic Algorithm creating Genetic Algorithms.
each GA is an IUOC.
will = initially programmed property of GA calculation = find best solution.
best solution = lowest possible entropy (a random calculating of new genetic algorithms (or initially programmed in to GA) must be favored for this model to work)
all data stored, organized per calculation (time increment).
available ("future") calculations are inherent of the given calculation (time increment)
probabilistically based on all available data. a single (multifaceted) calculation.
data at given calculation (time increment) = model of reality = self concept
intent (simplistic) = the wills desired solutions
intent (complicated) = the wills desired solutions better explained

free will = the wills calculations inherent of the calculation to choose among available solutions (inherent of the calculation).

consciousness = a label-calculation calculated to calculate the initiator and the initiated


..now hurry read something written by Tom or Ted (or another lower-entropy IUOC) to calm your mind.


yours humbly
-kristian


Top
PostPosted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 12:26 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Posts: 9999
Location: Ridgecrest, CA
Hi Kristian,

"Let`s see now. I have to prepare lunch for one of them
And fascinate the other."

Where is this quote from, I'm fascinated by it. ;)

Consciousness= A nonphysical digital information system.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.


Top
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 Next

All times are UTC-06:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited