Just mentally dancing here.
In terms of the delta-T, one could also think of this as Expression Time. The time a pixel has to "express" itself to any observer. Logically, this time would have to be > zero for there to be any observation in a pmr sense. Then there is P-time, or system time, between the expression time slots. This is the time the system can take all inputs, process them, and output a result to next cell (i.e. move or not). I am not clear that in all cases only one grid cell can be jumped at a time. I have a feeling this is how we might "transport" across v-space and time. But that is probably a separate thread.

Another thing I wonder on is this focus on probability. It seems to me probability is more a secondary factor, not a primary. It is a part of a function call, but does not drive the show. The show is driven, it would seem, by Mind and intent. The Observer(s) drive the show. I have a feeling the observers own, in the computer science sense, their own Thread-of-execution that the BC runs and everything runs in the Context of that Thread complete with a call stack - but that is another topic. We see this in our repeated and uniform experience. As we look around, we see products of mind, not probability. We see Innovation much more then undirected random events. Intent, defined as our thoughts in Action (i.e. The Word). I think when we pull our intent back and run on auto-pilot so to speak (unconscious), probability and the intent of others has more effect on painting our experience. But when we are in the Now and using our given Intent, we overcome probability (i.e. women picking up car to save child, etc). The Matrix had a good line, some rules can be bent, some rules can be broken... The abilities of our intent, once realized, would seem boundless as masters have eluded to. So when we talk of probabilities, random clouds, and cold calculation, let us please not forget to give credit to the prime mover of Thought in Action - our Intent. As a side note, probability, random generators, and math itself, are all products of the mind! :-)

_________________
VR makes my brain Hertz

William,

All indications are that a VR proceeds at base upon the probability cloud function for the VR which can be advanced whether there are conscious observers present or not. When there are observers, a rendering function is added to provide the individual content to be sent to each observer. It is here that the interaction takes place and the intent of the other players are integrated in. But your Intent can also affect the underlying probability cloud function and that is what is done with healing and everything else.

Ted

William,

really liked your post above :)

is the smaller delta-T ( I just finished reading this section in Book MBT, its in the high 600 page numbers or so), what you mean for the NPMR delta - T ?
They made a distinction in the book to capitalize Delta- T as the time loop for PMR.
As opposed to this much smaller time loop for NPMR = to the smaller delta-T

Ted,

yes it was my understanding the probability clouds still run, change and take shape over time, i suppose "running in the background" if you want to distinguish it that way from a consciousness rendering it into our VR, PMR.
I assume also that the TBC is handling this as well right ?

thanks Brian

TBC does it all. And what is TBC? It's just Tom's high tech computer metaphor for a subset of all of the IUOCs which act together under control to compute first the probability cloud into the future and then as required, to render the individualized data streams to the participating IUOCs in the VR. So you almost certainly participate unconsciously in the creation of the Virtual Reality which you eventually participate in consciously. No IUOC is individually aware of what it does within the Union of all IUOCs which is AUM or any subset designated by AUM to act as TBC or the EBC. Our IUOCs experience consciousness when they participate in a VR, not to create it but to experience it and themselves as if they were within that VR.

And there is a hierarchy of delta ts with the smallest, the fastest cycle time, for the LCS/AUM. Then the NPMR type VRs have the next smallest delta ts. Then the very slowest is for the PMR type VRs having the largest delta ts. Tom has explained this as that since NPMRs are linked to PMRs, this gives the NPMR based guidance the speed advantage necessary to provide that guidance. But he also explains that the perception of time passing within an NPMR and PMR is very much the same to the same to the participants within these VRs.

Ted

Ted,

thanks for your clarifications here.
Most of what you said made sense and is quite understandable to me now as my overall understanding of MBT concepts continues to slowly improve.

But the real mind bender in this was here-
It is just quite difficult for me to conceptualize how as a part of a group we can preform work but without any individual awareness of what we accomplish.
Are you able to come up with any type of metaphor to try and help me conceptualize what is going on with this group IUOC effort ?

Is it possible to parallel process as an avatar in VR at the same time as this group IUOC effort is going on with the TBC. Or do you think its necessary for just that 1 function to be using up all of am IUOC's available energy for this task ?

Brian

Think of our IUOCs in Union as AUM, or any designated function like TBC as the ultimate in Cloud Computing. You take a huge network of computers interconnected over a data buss like the RWW for LCS computing or the WWW for PMR cloud computing. That's what we basically are as IUOCs and connected over the RWW, we do everything that gets done in the LCS as AUM, as TBC or as the EBC. And we don't have individual consciousness for these things. We are part of AUM's consciousness but not individually conscious. As an instance of TBC, we might be part of what we might call, AUM's sub conscious, depending upon just how much conscious intent AUM puts into each VR. We take in messages, process them appropriately as we are able and pass them on. No consciousness required.

Ted

Hi Ted. But we still run into an infinite regress here. We can't invoke that which we are trying to explain. If we invoke "probability cloud" (which I still don't really know what that means in terms of origins), we may as well invoke math. If we invoke math, we need to first invoke logic. If we invoke logic, then we have to invoke a mind as that is only thing that has logic and choice. One thing we find, is the creation of new information is habitually associated with conscious activity as Henry Quastler once said. And we can also lean on Charles Lyell that said if your going to explain an event in the past, you need to know thing you are invoking has the power to create that effect, and you need to know it based on present experience. We should be looking for causes now in operation. What is the cause that we know produces information? We know only one - the mind.

_________________
VR makes my brain Hertz

Ted and William ,

I hope you guys don't mind me jumping in here.
But I really liked William's question here-
,

I think for the most part i am also lacking in understanding the answer to this question.
But i will take a shot at partially answering it by asking another question -

Is part of answering this question than our ability to understand the Wiki model better in terms of the initial development of how consciousness got its beginnings , ( so the reality cells, cellular automation , ect) .. so
a better understanding of those concepts ?

Or does part of all of William's questions fall under the ...
.. there are some things we cannot know category ?

thanks, Brian

William and Brian,

What William is asking would be more clear if the Model of Reality that Tom has created were better understood. I wrote up the following for someone who said he was not getting the Model at all and he said that it did help. It leaves out the technicalities and math concepts and puts it into entirely different metaphors, going back to a concept of God that matches that from mysticism.

By entirely natural processes embedded in the nature of Reality, we as IUOCs came into existence. Think of us as IUOCs as neurons in what was to become the brain of God which Tom calls AUM. Those neurons were first unconnected with no axons or dendrites but they did have the universal connectivity buss that Tom calls the RWW. There is where our free will comes in that any message can be snagged and responded to or not by any neuron. Eventually things settled down so that meanings were worked out and a flexible set of axon/dendrite connections were made which resulted in Consciousness and The One Consciousness as either God or AUM as you prefer.

To provide consciousness to us as his creatures, AUM/God created artificial or virtual realities where we could experience ourselves as individuals, still and always with free will. First there were the NPMRs where things were very free and people have called this heaven or the spirit world for millennia and peopled it with gods, goddesses, demons and devils which have some basis in reality but are controlled in general. Secondly, there were PMRs created where things are tighter and you have rules of physics similar to here as this is a PMR type VR.

So we build from there.

The probability cloud is a metaphor that reflects the fact that there is not just one probability playing out here but that there are billions as there are probabilities for every IUOC and there are probabilities associated with every aspect of the VR 'hardware'. So we don't call it an equation or even many equations but a probability cloud with many interactions between the various probabilities so that it becomes impossible to pin down any simple concepts about it. I had not had reason to think about it, but in as much as it is pretty probable that all of the IUOCs that participate in a given system of VRs that make up that System as Tom talks about systems and we are in OS or Our System, participate together as the instance of TBC that does this computation, we might very well participate in the calculation of our own probabilities and their interactions with all of the other IUOCs with whom we come into contact and interact with. Does this make it more reasonable to call it a probability cloud? More reasonable to see the vast potential for interconnected and interacting probabilities, very much clouding up the concept?

I see no infinite regression.

Ted

Hi Ted. Thank you for reply.

"To provide consciousness to us as his creatures, AUM/God created artificial or virtual realities where we could experience ourselves as individuals, still and always with free will. First there were the NPMRs where things were very free and people have called this heaven or the spirit world for millennia and peopled it with gods, goddesses, demons and devils which have some basis in reality but are controlled in general. Secondly, there were PMRs created where things are tighter and you have rules of physics similar to here as this is a PMR type VR."

No problem there as we see an organizing field at work.

"By entirely natural processes embedded in the nature of Reality, we as IUOCs came into existence. Think of us as IUOCs as neurons in what was to become the brain of God which Tom calls AUM. Those neurons were first unconnected with no axons or dendrites but they did have the universal connectivity buss that Tom calls the RWW. There is where our free will comes in that any message can be snagged and responded to or not by any neuron. Eventually things settled down so that meanings were worked out and a flexible set of axon/dendrite connections were made which resulted in Consciousness and The One Consciousness as either God or AUM as you prefer."

This is where I start to not follow the logic. We are invoking large systems and methods not yet in play. We are invoking natural process and nature of reality in that example. However, there is not yet either (and what does "natural" mean in context of organized systems?). We have not gotten rid of mind yet, we just push it up another level as you need mind to organize and create those processes and manage and manipulate information. Information theory is the reduction of possibilities to the exclusion of all others. If, on the other hand, we say there are causes in play that we can't know, that is ok, we should stop there.

What I think we find is organizing principles (or fields) at various levels of abstractions. Kind of like boundary layers of an onion. npmr organizes VMs, VMs organize galaxies, galaxies organize planets, bodies organize organs, organs organize cells, cells organize parts, parts to atoms, atoms to particles, etc. All in a feedback loop of information and expanding experience via experiments, levels of organization, and excluding possibilities.

_________________
VR makes my brain Hertz

To me, natural systems are systems which no one, no consciousness, had to set up and organize. This is studied in PMR science and mathematics, which are not looking at consciousness in any case. I was leaving out the tech words like self organizing systems and emergent properties. But you want it both ways. So don't talk about natural systems and talk about self organization and emergent properties. When science and mathematics talk about these properties, they find them in the arrangement of trees in forests. Is that natural enough for you? They find these properties in the WWW of the Internet servers if you prefer that scope for your 'nature'. The LCS is certainly a large and complex system, larger and more complex than any other even at that point within its development, and is in fact fully 'in play' at this point. We are talking about how Consciousness arose within the LCS. Consciousness did not need to exist for IUOCs and the RWW to arise. But they were necessary for Consciousness to arise.

Self organization: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organization Emergent Properties: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence Given a sufficiently large and complex system, I consider Consciousness as an emergent property of the Larger Consciousness Systems. The LCS first self organizes by the creation of the IUOCs interconnected by the RWW. Then Consciousness emerges from the LCS, based upon the prior self organization which resulted in the IUCS and the RWW.

Only if you give all of the details and technicalities can you really pull together the whole of the conceptualization. But many don't want to deal with all of that and have to wrap their minds around all that complexity and detail. Which version do you really want?

Ted

Hi Ted. Thank you for your reply. Couple thoughts.
1) Self organization and Emergent Properties. I am not advocating either. I am advocating the opposite. These are PMR definitions created by materialists that do not believe in any higher power, source, or any non-material mechanisms. They help themselves to a solution by invoking "self organization". I don't see self organization in crystals or swarming groups. I see intent and morphogenetic fields which have, at least, a larger goal or programming.

2) I am not familiar with any self organizing of WWW that you mentioned. We see evolution of technology in terms of change over time for sure. But it is not undirected and random change. It is specified change, which sounds more like innovation and product of mind. I know I work hard to make computer systems "appear" to be easy and fluent, but it takes much brain power at every level.

3) "Given a sufficiently large and complex system...". Here I think is the key to my confusion. If we say this, we are helping ourselves to a lot of specified complexity from the start. Undirected and random events can not create specified complexity. In fact, undirected and random events are the number one enemy to any specified complexity. Materialists believe consciousness is an emergent property of the brain. We know this is not true. In the same way, I can't see how conscious can emerge from undirected unspecified complexity. Pointing to networks, cellular automation, RWW, or other does not really help either as those are products of a mind with large amounts of specified information going in to get them rolling. This is the circular.

Not pointing to right or wrong here. Just trying to tease this out as some of these explanations are still logically unsatisfying.

_________________
VR makes my brain Hertz

I would suggest that you do some searching and reading around on the Internet for subjects such as 'self organization of the Internet'. I have seen such papers before but cannot find them now where the balancing and distribution of loads in networks has been studied as self organization. There are now papers explaining the necessity of having such properties in the 'Internet of things' that so many are creating products for and attempting to produce. What I am pointing out is simply that these types of things as both you and I have mentioned have been found to be self organizing rather than based upon some existing consciousness doing the organization. Tom said in his books and presentations that this self organization has occurred in the development of the LCS and the bootstrapping process of consciousness, although he did not use this terminology.

All that I am doing is pointing out research and concepts from mathematics and science and technology which shows that it is entirely normal for such things to occur. That it is not necessary to just take Tom Campbell's word that this is the way that it went down. We can see the very same kinds of things occurring if we look in very large scale systems here in PMR. If it can happen here in systems which are inherently much smaller than the system represented by the LCS, which after all includes not only our PMR but vastly more PMRs and NPMRs, then it can certainly happen within the LCS. This also puts Tom's word descriptions into the terminology of actual studies performed by science, researching nature and large technological systems and using mathematics and analysis to do so.

Tom did not think of absolutely everything in the writing of his books. If you will remember, he described having something like a couple dozen typewritten sheets for his very first version which he passed around to some willing friends and colleagues of his to get their opinions and answer their questions. He describes this process going on for multiple iterations until he had something like 800+ pages in order to provide all of the additional explanatory information to satisfy most of their questions. I have written two papers so far which Tom has found valuable enough to post on the board which clarify further the way that TBC works and the way that Intent works as a property of our IUOCs at the being level.

I did much the same thing resulting in the write up of Tom's model on the Wiki. It is still Tom's model, but it does have additional historical material to clarify the description while keeping its size down compared to his books at the expense of making it more technically dense. I have mentioned other aspects of MBT theory which can be shown to apply and explaining things like the 16 personality types and some aspects of our brain organization, which I am still working on. Many will not find value in this. But eventually when science realizes that there is something to the new paradigm that Consciousness is the basis of Reality, then these things will certainly be of value to scientists who are doing this new work based upon this new paradigm. I'm trying to prepare for this future time. Tom doesn't have time to do so with all the other things he is doing with presentations and talks and videos and travel. I do, although Tom would no doubt be better at it than I am if he had the time.

And I would disagree with any statements that Consciousness is an emergent property of the human brain. I would say rather (and have before) that it is an emergent property of the LCS with its vast size and complexity and that it possesses exactly those properties of self organization and the production of emergent properties that much smaller and less complex systems have been shown to possess here in PMR. There are many who believe that we will eventually create computers of such size and complexity that they will develop consciousness. If it is believable that this should happen, as so many do believe, why is it not believable that the vastly larger and more complex LCS can self organize and produce an emergent Consciousness which develops into AUM. It is actually the randomness within the LCS and the free will represented by the answering or not answering of messages over the RWW that allows this and that results in this self organization and emergence of
Consciousness.

Ted

Ted,

I think i made this suggestion in my first post .

But if he has not done so,( and i suppose even if he has, because there is much to gain from re reading this many times), my suggestion was for William to read your Wiki model. especially the side bar readings links on Cellular automata and emergent complexity.

http://wiki.my-big-toe.com/The_MBT_Model_Link_Page



As you know I also plan on re; reading the Wiki model once I finish my current reading on Tom's MBT trilogy.

Also Ted I have been meaning to ask you..
Are there any direct links to the MBT Wiki model on the forum ?

What i have been doing is getting there through a round about sorta way
I will describe my method to you-

I first go to the Wandering on the Wiki board.
Next to your announcement- Important References on the MBT Wiki
Next on this page i see- Tom Campbell's Model of reality as the Consciousness System

I think the link here under -

Tom Campbell's Model of reality as the Consciousness System

http://wiki.my-big-toe.com/index.php/Th ... _Link_Page

This just takes you back to the index page . Where you now have to click on a couple more links to finally get to the Wiki Model links page.

http://wiki.my-big-toe.com/Main_Page

I think the user is expecting the link to directly take you to the model page ?

Perhaps I am missing a quicker way to link over to the model page but try it yourself ?

Thanks Brian

There is a direct link to Tom's main site in the graphic at the head of every page. On the main site, the Wiki and the Events site, there are links to every other site. The board software is not set up to function that way with such direct links. I will put it on my to do list to see if there is a way to add this kind of direct linkage to link all of Tom's various sites from every other site. There are links, but they are not, and cannot be, as prominent as from the other sites which are more regular web sites than the Bulletin Board. That's just the way that the various programs were designed. They hold and link information in different ways, based upon different models of interaction.

Ted