Some other thread got me pondering on something. The role of streams and filters seems so fundamental, I think it may be worthy of more exploration:
1) God/Source/Love is primary and is source data.

2) Streams are a flow of data. Streams are a mechanism that provide for the flow of data to and from Source energy. The carrier wave is love.

3) Filters are "Abstractions" that transform data in some way. This could be reducing the data, changing the data, expanding data, or all three. A filter can be a passive abstraction that only filter the spectrum of data, like a camera lens filter. It can also act more like a process fractal and take an active role in changing and adding to the data stream.

4) A Pipeline is the Set of all Filters between source and self in a feedback loop. Input filters process data to you, and output filters process data back to Source. Some may say this is how Source "knows itself" in this feedback loop. Some may also defined this as Ying and Yang.

5) As the stream is presented to us at the end of the pipeline, we make Choices on it. We are in our choice always. We make choices (i.e. our intent) and send our choices back to the Output channel which has its' own set of filters.

With this model of pipelines and filters, a few things seem to fall out:
- Seems our perception does indeed shape our reality. The filters shape how we perceive the input data and the filters shape how our choices reflect back to source.
- Filters, limit our choice space. This is by design. For example, a whole PMR can be constructed just out of a set of filters. Some of these can be changed, others cannot (at least without a lot of work).
- Some filters can be system filters, others can be filters by Kind (i.e. human, bird, etc.), still others can be filters by habit and learnings. Rupert talks about morphogenic field and habits. Could be these "habits" are really just filters that have been inserted at some higher level that get "inherited" by others in the Set.
- Combinations of filters combine to form things like ego, anger, pride, and others.
- Change your filters, change your life.
- How much of our intent is actually going into the universe as opposed to just changing our set of input filters? I mean if I could knock out a whole set of my filters at will, would that not dramatically change my view of the world I see and interact with.
- Over a life, as we add more filters to our input stream, we further reduce our Choice. The reverse is also true. Is enlightenment really just a function of clearing most of filters?
- Could psychic ability just mean that person has more direct access to data because they are less limited by a certain filter? Seems probable. Potentially the same reason why children seem to have more direct access. They have less filters, then over some time of building up filters, we reach a tipping point where we just filter that ability out. Then in dream, we drop many of these filters and bingo, back in contact like throwing a switch.

_________________
VR makes my brain Hertz

William,

In the best data and understanding that we have, TBC as Tom's metaphor of what creates the VRs, is just a group of IUOCs which operate together through messaging to create the VR with the first stage based on probability. The second stage within TBC is the VR Rendering Engine stage where the individual data for each delta t of the VR is created and sent to each IUOC participating in the VR.

It is within the second stage that the filtering that you are discussing is accomplished. It is not that a message is created and then sent through filters to modify it for you particularly and specifically. As the data for each delta t is created, it is created to produce the experience that your IUOC has including the effects of every personal situation that is required to produce your experience. If you are disabled or injured, that effect is included within the data stream. If you have a mental illness, that effect is created within TBC and the result is sent out to your IUOC so that it experiences the effects of that mental illness.

Nothing is said by you that is wrong. It's just that it is easier to produce a data stream containing every aspect of your experience that is special to you than to create some kind of standard data stream and then filter out what you should not receive. If you look at it as I am describing it, it works whether you have things removed, or filtered out, of a 'standard' data stream or added in to represent special conditions which would not work with a filter metaphor. Filters as a concept remove things, not add in other things that are needed. Otherwise you have the general concept well spelled out.

Does this make sense?

Ted

Thank you Ted, that does make sense. In fact, it was you and that got me thinking about it with your ideas on it. I think we are saying the same thing but at a different level of abstraction. You are drawing a circle and saying "here is a process, you get a data stream tailored to you..." (forgive the paraphrase). I am saying, ok, I got that. But as an software architect who thinks in terms of abstractions and patterns (circles and squares), I am breaking that circle open and trying to define how it is layered and implemented deeper inside that big circle. The net result is the same. In the abstract, the process is doing filtering and stream creation to give you your experience packets. I was attempting to enumerate how that be architected using pluggable filters. If I am losing my hearing and eye site from age (for example), there is a filter for that that gets plugged in and/or *dialed up with age. If I have an injury, there is another filter that is inserted for that. If I recover from injury, that filter is slowly dialed back and removed. The resultant stream is after all filters are applied (i.e. the Net experience).

_________________
VR makes my brain Hertz