Return Home
It is currently Wed May 12, 2021 1:50 am

All times are UTC-06:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 10:13 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 8:24 pm
Posts: 101
Quote:
NPMR does not evolve in the sense that PMR does. Evolution is a PMR rule set aspect, not found in NPMR.
Looks like different definitions of evolution are used. I used evolution=entropy reduction, which is supposed to be universal at all fractal levels.
Quote:
It is my understanding that part of the reason for the faster time tick rate for NPMR is that much of the guidance for PMR experience comes from there and this gives an edge to NPMR necessary for 'keeping ahead' of PMR for this purpose. But also for the same purpose, the sense of time passage is not greatly different, also for the purpose of simplifying the business of guidance of PMR from within NPMR.
And this is consistent with NPMR being at a higher fractal level compared to PMR (superset, containing PMR) which I think is how it was shown in Tom's circle diagrams used in presentation slides.

What's really needed is direct experience of all this stuff, otherwise, it is like studying quantum mechanics with its wave functions that you cannot touch as opposed to Newton's laws that can be experienced directly - "Well, officer, that tree just jumped in front of my car".


Top
PostPosted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 10:38 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Posts: 9999
Location: Ridgecrest, CA
Quote:
What's really needed is direct experience of all this stuff, otherwise, it is like studying quantum mechanics with its wave functions that you cannot touch as opposed to Newton's laws that can be experienced directly - "Well, officer, that tree just jumped in front of my car".
I concur.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.


Top
PostPosted: Wed Oct 27, 2010 7:30 am 
Offline
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:35 pm
Posts: 91
Location: Québec, QC
Hi guys,

Thanks for the inputs, but I'm getting more confused about this. Here a basic example that clarify my interrogation:

AA and BB are two inhabitants of NPMR(k) and are both planning to incarnate in PMR(k). BB tells his friend AA that he'll incarnate first to see what kind of experiences they can get in this PMR. So AA will wait until BB complete his first trip to PMR(k). BB lives 70 years in PMR(K) and die. He's now back in NPMR(k). From the perspective of AA, how long this process took?


pman


Top
PostPosted: Wed Oct 27, 2010 8:41 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:32 pm
Posts: 815
Location: Statesville, NC
pman,

In Book 1 Chapter 31 (page 262 in the three book trilogy) Tom says, "In other words, while appears to stand still in PMR. NPMRN continues to race along through 10^18 more time increments worth of activity."

So, the technical MBT answer would be that AA would experience 70 years time 10^18 or 70 billion, billion years.

However, when discussing AUM's time clock, which is 10^18 times faster than NPMRN time, he has this to say about AUM. "AUM does not seem to be getting bored or to be in a hurry. AUM's perception of the passage of time (that AUM itself creates by regularly flipping states in order to organize and orchestrate its activity) is very different from ours. Do not anthropomorphically project your sense of the passage of time to AUM. Imagine how subroutines within a digital computer, or the computer itself, might perceive the passage of time."

Just as we don't perceive every tick of the PMR time clock (10^-44 seconds) but only a tiny fraction of it, perhaps in NPMRN entities can experience as many or as few ticks as they need to accomplish whatever it is that they are doing. In the case of waiting for BB to finish his life, if AA has nothing better to do, perhaps it can "go to sleep" and "wake up" at the end of the 70 PMR years sort of like we go to sleep sometimes and wake up feeling that almost no time has passed.

Of course, this is all conjecture on my part. I would be interested in seeing Tom's take on it too.

Ramon


Top
PostPosted: Wed Oct 27, 2010 11:51 am 
Offline
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:35 pm
Posts: 91
Location: Québec, QC
Ramon,

Thanks for the quote. It strengthens my original questioning. I begin to believe that perception of time is not totally related to tick size.


Top
PostPosted: Wed Oct 27, 2010 12:11 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:32 pm
Posts: 815
Location: Statesville, NC
pman

I agree that perception isn't locked in with time incrementation. Without doing an extensive search I think Tom has said that while PMR is incremented at 10^-44 seconds, our local awareness is normally only aware down to one hundredth or one thousandth of a second. Billions of increments go by without our being aware of them. Many of the beings extant in NPMR might only be consciously aware of the same ratio of NPMRN increments.

Good questions.

Here is another post about delta t and perception.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=3016&start=0&hilit=delta+t

Actually, I see that you posted in that thread too!

Ramon


Top
PostPosted: Wed Oct 27, 2010 12:33 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Posts: 9999
Location: Ridgecrest, CA
Hey, this could be a question for the fireside chat, perhaps.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.


Top
PostPosted: Wed Oct 27, 2010 1:33 pm 
Offline
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:35 pm
Posts: 91
Location: Québec, QC
Bette,

Good idea. Would really love to hear Tom about on this topic.

thanks!


Top
PostPosted: Wed Oct 27, 2010 6:08 pm 
Offline
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:35 pm
Posts: 91
Location: Québec, QC
Ramon,

Yeah I remember this thread. I'll re-read it. But I think it was about PMR only.. but I may be wrong.


Top
PostPosted: Wed Oct 27, 2010 8:11 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:32 pm
Posts: 815
Location: Statesville, NC
Yes, it was PMR only. I was thinking that it was relevant because it dealt with differing perception rates for delta-t increments. I figure it might be the same in NPMR.

Ramon


Top
PostPosted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 1:59 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 7:06 am
Posts: 171
Quote:
Hi guys,

Thanks for the inputs, but I'm getting more confused about this. Here a basic example that clarify my interrogation:

AA and BB are two inhabitants of NPMR(k) and are both planning to incarnate in PMR(k). BB tells his friend AA that he'll incarnate first to see what kind of experiences they can get in this PMR. So AA will wait until BB complete his first trip to PMR(k). BB lives 70 years in PMR(K) and die. He's now back in NPMR(k). From the perspective of AA, how long this process took?


pman
This scenario works well if you imagine two PMR-based entities outside of PMR talking about going into PMR - but it starts to break down when taking into account that the consciousness of an NPMR(k)-based entity could very well transcend the entire chronological framework, rendering the perception of time (not time itself) in NPMR(k) less meaningful than it is here in PMR.

Also - I'm not sure it is safe to assume that time only ticks forward in the non-physical environments. I don't doubt the existence of the forward motion of time in environments beyond PMR, but I also acknowledge the possibility of a backwards running motion of experiential time, as well as a sideways one, and/or an ascending or descending motion of sequential events behaving within dimensions we can't imagine. There are fewer limits in other words than exist in the NPMR(k) scenario described (when compared to how time behaves in our PMR) as far as time is concerned, a wider range of perceptions available to the non-physical observer then has been ascribed to AA and BB, and any account of the perception of time - Tom's, mine or anyone's - would be subject to the level of perception of the observer.

If AA and BB are time conscious efficient types, they should simply feed the data inputs governing the type of experience they want to have at what time/location within PMR-space into the Future Probabilities Database and see what sort of report that spits back. Curiosity satisfied, they could then move onto some other curiosity. Or, they could simply merge for a while into a single unit of consciousness and experience the incarnation together. That'd be fun :)


Top
PostPosted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 2:32 pm 
Offline
Newbie
Newbie
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 1:42 pm
Posts: 8
Quote:

AA and BB are two inhabitants of NPMR(k) and are both planning to incarnate in PMR(k). BB tells his friend AA that he'll incarnate first to see what kind of experiences they can get in this PMR. So AA will wait until BB complete his first trip to PMR(k). BB lives 70 years in PMR(K) and die. He's now back in NPMR(k). From the perspective of AA, how long this process took?


pman
This reminds me of the Last Timers example in the second Monroe's book. Their time in PMR appeared instantaneous to Bob.

Imagine some NPMR of your construction (of the type that is common in Monroe's Focus 27, also known to its inhabitants as New/Old Exchange Territories). Why can't you adjust time increment process in such a way as to skip these additional 10^18 ticks altogether? 1-to-1 correspondence with time perception in our PMR is thus achieved.


Top
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2

All times are UTC-06:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 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