Return Home
It is currently Thu Aug 22, 2019 10:54 pm

All times are UTC-06:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 68 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: QOC + Related topics
PostPosted: Wed Jul 17, 2019 5:54 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 4:47 am
Posts: 1042
Location: Tampa Bay, Florida
Human + VB

thanks for your recent postings.
I think as both of you know by now yes i do look up to you guys as my "teachers" in these postings..

Let me state what I thought was the case ( as usual in a low confidence fashion).
And than I greatly appreciate your "corrections " or lack of understandings on my part where it is needed, thanks !
This would be based almost entirely from MBT and my interpretation of Tom's 'talks" and of course the videos i watch..

My current understanding on the different VR's we experience upon reception of a data stream (info), ( in regards to their different constraints) ..

The VR itself varies in the constraints imposed on us which would be apart from any other constraints..
So for example i have heard Tom, refer to PMR as having "Tighter " ,.." more or stricter" constraints than for example the dream reality frame..

I Interpreted this to mean regardless on what "form or metaphor" of "self" we refer to our descriptions of "us " as a multi dimensional being..
IE; , avatar, FWAU, over-soul ect ect ??
they would all be subject or effected by the constrains of the given VR we experience.

i am quite interested in your guys thought or how you are interpreting these concepts ?


Top
 Post subject: Re: QOC + Related topics
PostPosted: Wed Jul 17, 2019 6:26 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 8:55 pm
Posts: 672
Quote:
Quote:
But I am not convinced by the evidence that the soul is the constraint
The FWAU is a constraint upon consciousness because it is bound to a specific function to only interpret a specific data-stream. This data-stream the FWAU interprets also structures the VR. When the specific data-stream is no longer being interpreted - then FWAU has effectively "died" or uploaded.

So the FWAU is a constraint upon consciousness to interface a specific datastream and further the FWAU itself is constrained by the VR ruleset of the avatar it is incarnated to.
Ok, but I think the avatar, at that level of consciousness specifically the intellectual level, has relevance in this equation and needs further analysis.
Quote:
Although, you have corroborated my assertion that the soul is not constrained by this PMR rule set.
Quote:
Please pay attention to the nuance before you pat yourself on the back. You were being argumentive with Sainbury(like always) for this discrepency you missed. Of course consciousess is not inherently bound to a PMR ruleset but in this instance it is. Please refer to the concept of "incarnation".
I am paying attention, I do not view this through your looking glass. Look, neither you or Linda know my intent. I am not arguing with Linda. so let's get off this. Please understand the meaning of the post and my interaction with Linda, by profession I am an forensic investigator. we draw our conclusions on the evidence, meaning you have provided corroborative evidence in support of my assertion. The assertion is derived from metaphysical evidence and my own experience. In other words, it is another piece of MBT evidence that reconciles to the metaphysical models I have studied. I am trying to find commonality amongst the models that's all. I am not patting myself on the back. I am not arguing. I will revise my style of communication to avoid the erroneous feedback. This is important for me because it adds credibility to my experiences and provides a credible scientific basis in the service of advancing consciousness, it is not personal. You are opening up new avenues here. Let's get on with it, explore and have fun.
Quote:
Well, the problem here is that the brain is not relevant to the issue.
Quote:
What is the, "issue here" please provide a time stamp to your issue, I am not going through a 40 minute video to try and figure out which part you're referring to. Whatever your assumption is, I may be able to add nuance.
The issue is your topic, your post. Is that not what we are discussing. You refer to the brain. Tom says the brain is not relevant and he refers to scientific evidence to support his claim. You will find the evidence in this thread. Just scroll down to my post where it is attached. There is other evidence that might be of interest. The brain
Quote:
You do not go out of body as an FWAU. You go out of body as an avatar.
Quote:
Avatar does not exist independent of the FWAU unless it's an NPC, because the FWAU is INCARNATED here, then NPMR data-stream is interpreted from the base VR it's incarnated in.
I get your point but the avatar at the intellectual level needs further investigation.


Top
 Post subject: Re: QOC + Related topics
PostPosted: Wed Jul 17, 2019 7:41 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 9:47 am
Posts: 279
Quote:
The issue is your topic, your post. Is that not what we are discussing
Yes but you linked a 40 minute video with no timestamp so I don't know where specifically to look for what Tom says in relation to that issue. Can you link it so we can examine it within the context.

I also need specificity on the other link you provided as it's a thread with a 1 hour long Tom video link and 7 pages of posts that I am not immediately seeing the relevance in as in, I already know the brain is virtual.

Quote:
I get your point but the avatar at the intellectual level needs further investigation.
Elaborate


Top
 Post subject: Re: QOC + Related topics
PostPosted: Wed Jul 17, 2019 7:42 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 9:47 am
Posts: 279
Quote:
I Interpreted this to mean regardless on what "form or metaphor" of "self" we refer to our descriptions of "us " as a multi dimensional being..
IE; , avatar, FWAU, over-soul ect ect ??
they would all be subject or effected by the constrains of the given VR we experience.
In terms of the subsets of consciousness, I agree. My interpretation is that, fundamentally consciousness is not limited by VRs but it can partition itself into subsets designed for a specific function, such as interface with a specific data-stream, like the FWAU. That represents a constraint within itself but that partitioned consciousness(FWAU in this case) is even further constrained by that VR/Data-stream which also structures the experience that they are, "incarnated" in.


Top
 Post subject: Re: QOC + Related topics
PostPosted: Wed Jul 17, 2019 8:10 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 8:55 pm
Posts: 672
Here is my post specific to the brain:

John Lorber a British neurologist:

"There's a young student at this university,"
says Lorber, "who has an IQ
of 126, has gained a first-class honors degree
in mathematics, and is socially completely
normal. And yet the boy has virtually
no brain."

The article follows:

http://rifters.com/real/articles/Science_No-Brain.pdf

Here is your post specific to the subject issue: When you "incarnate" to a specific data-stream - you are constrained to the data-stream with its rule-set and in this case, our human avatar brain that our consciousness is filtered through.

The entire video is specific to the issue.
Quote:
Elaborate
Review the subject matter and let's address it first.


Top
 Post subject: Re: QOC + Related topics
PostPosted: Wed Jul 17, 2019 8:43 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 9:47 am
Posts: 279
Disregarding any potential PMR explanations that might explain this instance, assuming he does not have a full brain as a typical human -- he is still operating as a human with a full brain would with the standard processing and functioning that was evolved through this VR's ruleset which defines it.

It is not that consciousness is physically filtered through the brain that this is a relevant point to bring up. We know the avatar is virtual.

Me invoking the PMR brain as a constraint is an example, just as I could say the rule-set and other factors of this data-stream represent a constraint as well.

When Tom brings up this case about the brain, he does it as an example to demonstrate to people there is more to this physical reality but he does not say that the boy is not also functioning as a typical FWAU in this VR(Human) who is also bound to the constraints here.

This is common sense as Tom has many hours about explaining how constraints affect our consciousness within a VR.
There is also him giving the example of how it would be more difficult for a brain-damaged person to deal with certain factors.

Again, ruling out PMR explanations and assuming we know everything about the brain:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuro ... S_XWOhKi70


Top
 Post subject: Re: QOC + Related topics
PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2019 9:11 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 8:55 pm
Posts: 672
Quote:
Disregarding any potential PMR explanations that might explain this instance, assuming he does not have a full brain as a typical human -- he is still operating as a human with a full brain would with the standard processing and functioning that was evolved through this VR's ruleset which defines it.
OK
Quote:
It is not that consciousness is physically filtered through the brain that this is a relevant point to bring up. We know the avatar is virtual.
Just to be clear, I did not point it out. You did here: When you "incarnate" to a specific data-stream - you are constrained to the data-stream with its rule-set and in this case, our human avatar brain that our consciousness is filtered through.


I provided evidence that opposes your point. No, I am not patting myself on the back or other similar perception. I am following the evidence. I am bringing it to the table to critique.
Quote:


Me invoking the PMR brain as a constraint is an example, just as I could say the rule-set and other factors of this data-stream represent a constraint as well.

When Tom brings up this case about the brain, he does it as an example to demonstrate to people there is more to this physical reality but he does not say that the boy [in the Lorber article] is not also functioning as a typical FWAU in this VR(Human) who is also bound to the constraints here.


Here is Tom referring to the evidence on the brain at around 5:10:

Controversial questions and modes of consciousness

He further states at around 6:35: "all the avatar does is set the constraint the consciousness has to work with" to play the avatar.
Quote:
This is common sense as Tom has many hours about explaining how constraints affect our consciousness within a VR.
There is also him giving the example of how it would be more difficult for a brain-damaged person to deal with certain factors.
Maybe it is common sense maybe it is not common sense. Would you consider common sense to be a belief, a intellectual level humanistic concept?


Top
 Post subject: Re: QOC + Related topics
PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2019 12:13 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 9:47 am
Posts: 279
Quote:
Human+: It is not that consciousness is physically filtered through the brain that this is a relevant point to bring up. We know the avatar is virtual.
You replied:
Quote:
JDJR: Just to be clear, I did not point it out. You did here: When you "incarnate" to a specific data-stream - you are constrained to the data-stream with its rule-set and in this case, our human avatar brain that our consciousness is filtered through.
This is incorrect. My comment does not imply there is a, "physical" process of the consciousness going through the brain and being filtered.

This has already been explained, the VR brain is virtual but it represents a constraint either way. It is just 1's and 0's being computed, which is why I clarify with, "represents" a constraint. In this case, it doesn't matter if the brain is fully there or not because he is still existing through the constraints of a typical, "full" brained human and living his experience packet through those constraints. Whether brain gets rendered that way upon closer inspection does not indicate that his consciousness is not being constrained through a typical, "full" PMR avatar brain. Actually, those constraints are being demonstrated by his equivalence to regular functioning people without Hydrocephalus.

Quote:
He further states at around 6:35: "all the avatar does is set the constraint the consciousness has to work with" to play the avatar.
This does not contradict or counter or argue against anything I said, what are you confused about?

Quote:
Would you consider common sense to be a belief
No, I did not imply common sense here would be a belief.


Top
 Post subject: Re: QOC + Related topics
PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2019 1:02 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 8:55 pm
Posts: 672
Quote:
Human+: It is not that consciousness is physically filtered through the brain that this is a relevant point to bring up. We know the avatar is virtual.
Quote:
You replied:
Quote:
JDJR: Just to be clear, I did not point it out. You did here: When you "incarnate" to a specific data-stream - you are constrained to the data-stream with its rule-set and in this case, our human avatar brain that our consciousness is filtered through.
Quote:
Human+:This is incorrect. My comment does not imply there is a, "physical" process of the consciousness going through the brain and being filtered.
I did not say it does or doesn't. I presented evidence in opposition absent the expression of a personal view. You modified your post after the evidence was presented. I did not bring either point up, you did.
Quote:
He further states at around 6:35: "all the avatar does is set the constraint the consciousness has to work with" to play the avatar.
Quote:
This does not contradict or counter or argue against anything I said, what are you confused about?

I am not confused. You asked me to time stamp the video. I did. I am not countering or arguing. I am taking in your original and modified explanation. I see the means by which the FWAU links to the avatar worthy of further investigation as relates to the issue of constraints.

Quote:
jdjr: Would you consider common sense to be a belief
Quote:
Human+:No, I did not imply common sense here would be a belief.
I did not suggest that you implied it. Here is the question: Would you consider common sense to be a belief, [and] a intellectual level humanistic concept? I just asked a question. I would like to read your thoughts on it. If this is your answer, fine.


Top
 Post subject: Re: QOC + Related topics
PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2019 1:42 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 5673
Location: Ocala, FL
Quote:
Tom says the brain is not relevant and he refers to scientific evidence to support his claim.
The brain is the most important constraint in the PMR data stream. And so in that way it is extremely relevant.

Tom:
The brain is virtual organ that represents a data partition, (filter and interface) between the lager consciousness system and the experience of the virtual reality we call our universe. It enforces the constraints and limitations of our virtual reality rule set upon our experience. You can only experience here in PMR what your PMR-evolved brain allows or supports - it limits your experience of PMR and records and expresses what you become here. As you change at the being level due to your experience, your brain changes to support that new level of being (what is allowed inside of the partition). Consciousness leads, and the virtual body (including virtual brain) follows.
http://www.my-big-toe.com/forums/viewto ... t&start=15

The cases of a person who is seemingly normal, but is found to have a profoundly abnormal brain are more nudges from the LCS. This probability is not even in the edges of a probability curve. If any of these people were found to have this brain abnormality in utero they would not survive birth.


Top
 Post subject: Re: QOC + Related topics
PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2019 1:46 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 5673
Location: Ocala, FL
I have searched for a day and a half for the relative information that I think will clear up a lot of misconceptions discussed in this thread.

Msagansk: Let's say I go to sleep and dream: I am now in a different virtual reality in NPMR -> Has my FWAU in PMR been temporarily suspended, or has it been lifted of its restrictions to the PMR rule-set and is now operational in the NPMR dream reality frame, or am I now the FWAU that was already in NPMR?

Tom: You are a FWAU in PMR1 getting a data-stream defining your physical bodies interactions within PMR1 environment. You fall asleep. Now, you are that same FWAU in PMR1 getting a very different data-stream defining your interactions within the dream environment while getting little to no data defining your PMR1 environment. Next, assume that you are having an OBE exploring the dark side of the moon or some other PMR2 but also parallel processing PMR1 simultaneously as you walk through a park in PMR1. In this case, you, that same FWAU in PMR1, get a data-stream that contains data from both of these reality frames (OBE and PMR1) simultaneously.

PMR1 is the base reality for your PMR1 experiences and all your excursions beyond PMR1 since all the data goes to the FWAU attached to PMR1. All the data represents the FWAUs experience in multiple realities. The OBE in PMR2 does not generate a separate FWAU, it simply modifies the data-stream going to the FWAU attached to PMR1. Thus, if someone throws cold water on you and then slaps your physical face as you walk in the park in PMR1, all the other reality frames will disappear and you will find yourself wet and startled in PMR1. If, while exploring PMR2 you get eaten by a monster, that reality vanishes and you are back in PMR1. If while walking in the park in PMR1 you get eaten by a monster (or run over by a truck) all local realities (dreams, OBE in PMR2 and PMR1) vanish and you are back in NPMR within the VR that helps you deal with the exit out of PMR1 and plan your next experience packet in PMR1.


Msagansk: how is the NPMR version of me making free will choices without the PMR me being aware of it? What if "I" wanted to make a different choice? My best guess is that I would probably never make a better choice because the NPMR me has a bigger picture and is more aware.

Tom: Think of a subroutine within a larger program. And the subroutine says: “How does the larger program make choices without the subroutine being aware of it? You, through your intellect, may wish to make a different choice while the you in NPMR simply expresses the present you at the being level.
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=6258&p=44081#p44081


Top
 Post subject: Re: QOC + Related topics
PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2019 1:52 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 5673
Location: Ocala, FL
TOM:

Let's explore the idea that you interpret the data you receive from NPMR in terms of metaphors and symbols that mean something to you - that are relevant to your experience data base.
For example: You experience a NPMR being of great knowledge teaching or helping others on a grand scale. As a result, you interpret: Saint, angel, Jesus / Ancestor, guru, Master / Advanced Being, guide, helper depending on your beliefs and culture. If You have a deep fear - insecurity - that you are small and out of your element when in NPMR, you may get a monster, an evil being as a metaphor or symbol of that fear.

Another example: You are asked to remote view and describe a picture on the wall. The picture is of horses jumping over a hedgerow on a sunny day with onlookers -- a picture of an Old English Fox hunting scene. You get the fundamental nature of the picture - a sense of jumping animals, lots of commotion and excitement, a mix of people and critters - staged drama, something impending, an uncertain ending. Because you are not at all familiar with the experience of fox hunts, but have been to many circuses, you interpret this data as a circus act - horses or other animals jumping - multiple animals, lots of commotion and excitement, a mix of people and critters - staged drama, something impending, an uncertain ending. So you say: "It's a picture of a circus act involving people and animals doing tricks - with the ambiance of a bright, fun, and expectant holiday outing atmosphere ... except, you say, there is this overtone of violence that just doesn't fit. if you are NOT a practiced observer, you might add in some clowns and elephants just to make your circus metaphor more complete. The little red hats the fox hunters are wearing are entirely missing from your received data because they carry no value or significance in NPMR terms. They are meaningless details of the PMR set not worth recording. Though you get a 100% as far as receiving the NPMR data describing the picture accurately, your metaphor is wrong and much detail of the setting (e.g., red hats, woods, etc) is missing - from the PMR view (where the physical setting detail is the most important thing - a literal, linear list of the stuff in the picture) you failed miserably and get a zero. Point: when your intent says: "what is that picture about, what does it look like", you should not expect to receive a photographic image of the picture. You will get only data that captures the significance of the picture from an NPMR perspective and you will have to interpret that data according to your experience base.

Fear, Belief, and Inexperience are the primary constraints that keep you from experiencing what is actually there (the full content of the data). Not from experiencing at all, but from experiencing what is actually intended by the larger consciousness system to answer your specific intended query.

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2915&p=5574&hilit=p ... erow#p5574


Top
 Post subject: Re: QOC + Related topics
PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2019 2:37 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 9:47 am
Posts: 279
Quote:
I did not say it does or doesn't. I presented evidence in opposition absent the expression of a personal view

Where is it in opposition against what I said?

Quote:
You asked me to time stamp the video. I did. I am not countering or arguing
I asked you to timestamp because you intimated that it goes contrary to what I was saying. I am asking where is it contrary.

Quote:
You modified your post after the evidence was presented.
I clarified, for you, after you intimated your confusion. I did not take back anything or say I made an error.


Top
 Post subject: Re: QOC + Related topics
PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2019 3:36 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 8:55 pm
Posts: 672
Quote:
Where is it in opposition against what I said?
The first quote from you is the topic and the subject issue your subscribe to. Here is our previous interaction:
Quote:
Human+:When you "incarnate" to a specific data-stream - you are constrained to the data-stream with its rule-set and in this case, our human avatar brain that our consciousness is filtered through.
Quote:
jdjr: Well, the problem here is that the brain is not relevant to the issue.
Quote:
Human+:What is the, "issue here" please provide a time stamp to your issue, I am not going through a 40 minute video to try and figure out which part you're referring to. Whatever your assumption is, I may be able to add nuance.
Here I identify your reference to the brain and the source for my statement above,as relates to its relevance, the source being Tom:
Quote:
Jdjr:The issue is your topic, your post. Is that not what we are discussing. You refer to the brain. Tom says the brain is not relevant and he refers to scientific evidence to support his claim. You will find the evidence in this thread. Just scroll down to my post where it is attached. There is other evidence that might be of interest. The brain
Quote:
You asked me to time stamp the video. I did. I am not countering or arguing
Quote:
I asked you to timestamp because you intimated that it goes contrary to what I was saying. I am asking where is it contrary.
Tom states it goes contrary to what you are saying in your unmodified version. You did not want to dig out the topic on the brain from a 40 minute video, that was your reason.
Quote:
You modified your post after the evidence was presented.
Quote:
I clarified, for you, after you intimated your confusion. I did not take back anything or say I made an error.
I was not and am not confused nor did I intimate it. I am gathering evidence for analysis. I did not say you took back anything or said anything wrong.


Top
 Post subject: Re: QOC + Related topics
PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2019 3:50 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 9:47 am
Posts: 279
Quote:
Tom states it goes contrary to what you are saying in your unmodified version
I asked, where does it go contrary. Nothing Tom says there is contrary to what I'm saying. Please point it out and make an explicit statement instead of hinting at a disagreement.
Quote:
Human+:When you "incarnate" to a specific data-stream - you are constrained to the data-stream with its rule-set and in this case, our human avatar brain that our consciousness is filtered through.
Quote:
jdjr: Well, the problem here is that the brain is not relevant to the issue.
Why would that be a problem? The, "brain" is being given as an example of a constraint, which is why I say, "In this case". A PMR brain isn't inherent to a FWAU as we all know so what are you even trying to bring up as a, "problem"?


Top
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 68 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next

All times are UTC-06:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 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