Return Home
It is currently Wed Apr 14, 2021 8:22 am

All times are UTC-06:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 94 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 57 Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 11:23 am 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
To the 'Spanish' team,

I cannot contribute anything directly to your choice of the appropriate translations for Intent to Spanish as I basically know no Spanish. I can refer you to this link which will take you to the chapter I wrote referring to the meaning of Intent. I will not say that I have it fully and 'officially' defined therein, but it was Tom who requested that I post this chapter to be available on the BB and I did consult with him extensively as I wrote it. Perhaps it will help you choose the correct words to use in translation. I hope that it does not just confuse you. There is much more to this term as Tom uses it than just something like the details that you discuss in this thread. viewtopic.php?f=18&t=4998
Ted


Top
PostPosted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:43 pm 
Offline
Normal User
Normal User

Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 7:58 am
Posts: 47
My appreciation to Ted Vollers, who said:

"So at the level of Ultimate Reality, actions are not judged by result, but by the intent behind the action that produced the result"

Given that in Spanish, the 'Intencion' precedes the 'Intento', and that the 'Intento' IS action; that said, the polemic, for me, is now clear. Definitively, one could not conceivably consider the possibility of translating Intent as 'Intento'.

Regards, Carlos.


Top
PostPosted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 10:34 am 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
To the Spanish Translators,

Keep in mind that Intent is something that resides inherently in you as you exist as an IUOC. It is not a transient intention although it may be associated with a specific intention of the moment. It exists as something that does not readily change but only with time just as entropy really changes only slowly with time as the result of interactions with other IUOCs. It is the aspect of you that 'backs up' or gives force to your intention. It is something that can be evaluated by the CS just as your entropy level can be evaluated. This is beyond the simple meaning of the English word intent or Intent (with a capital) as simply an English word. I think that the best that you can do is to not select a Spanish word as a translation that is not in opposition to this extension of the meaning. There is absolutely an extended meaning beyond the simple dictionary definition. Tom chose it as the best English word that he could use for the concept from other possible word choices, just as he chose to use entropy, despite the potential for confusion introduced by its relatively obscure meaning based upon physics.

Ted


Top
PostPosted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 1:16 pm 
Offline
Normal User
Normal User

Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 7:58 am
Posts: 47
Hola a todos:
Por el momento, mi interpretacion mas elaborada del termino 'Intent' es la siguiente:
"Determinacion focalizada y simultaneamente PROYECTADA hacia un objetivo"

At the moment, my best interpretation of the term 'Intent' is the following:
"Focalised determination simultaneously PROJECTED towards an objective."


En el caso de que fuera finalmente aceptada la traduccion de 'Intent' por 'Determinacion', debera incluirse en las 'Notas del equipo de traduccion', a las cuales me he referido en un post anterior, la definicion del termino en el particular y especifico sentido arriba indicado.

In the event that the term 'Determinacion' were finally acceptable as a suitable translation for 'Intent', one would have to include in the "Translation Team's notes" (to which I referred in an earlier post), the definition of the particular and specific sense indicted above.

Un saludo, Carlos.


Last edited by Kathryn on Fri Jun 04, 2010 1:55 pm, edited 9 times in total.

Top
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 4:30 am 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Intent, instead of 'acting like a command', is an inherent quality of an IUOC that provides the quality or integrity of that being that induces the CS to react positively to a 'request' by that being. I do not think 'command' is an appropriate word to use in terms of a request to the CS, either directly or in terms of your thinking about such a request. The CS is not open to your "command".

It is this internal aspect of Intent, as a property of the IUOC, that I have been trying to point out and that is missed in all of the considerations being made as far as I can tell of the meaning of specific words, whether in English or in Spanish. I have been attempting to point out that the word chosen for this translation should be selected as not being contrary to implying this aspect of the meaning of Intent as Tom uses it. I have also been pointing out that this aspect of the meaning cannot be conveyed just by selecting the word to use. It really must be defined, fully and clearly, so as not to imply that its meaning is limited to what one finds in a standard dictionary. Intent, as an English word, has this aspect to its meanings in that it can refer to an attitude, a state of mind, as opposed to just an action (especially consider the special use as the design or purpose to commit a wrongful or criminal act).

English words, just like words in other languages, have a history of developing meanings, their etymology, possibly including archaic meanings that are no longer in use. If these things are considered in the choice of words to use, they can convey very subtle differences in meaning. In the typical interchanges of humans who may not have completed (or simply ignored or forgotten) any degree of formal schooling and who mostly communicate in incomplete sentences and thoughts or even incomplete words, this may make no difference. As in the typical 'texting' or e-mail where most users don't even bother to turn on their spelling checkers to see that they have entered a typographical error, this makes little difference. In the expression of subtle ideas of philosophy, epistemology and the subtle nature of Ultimate Reality, this can facilitate the conveying of very specific 'shades' of meaning not otherwise expressible.

As I have pointed out before, this is why My Big TOE is 900 odd pages in length and repeats concepts from so many points of view. It is why so many of us find new meanings and understandings upon each one of multiple re-readings. It should be one of our goals in making a translation of MBT to not exclude this subtlety of content from our translation by inattention to this aspect of the details of the translation. We should attempt to make our translation equally as fruitful upon rereading as Tom's original work.

Ted


Top
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 1:46 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 12:00 am
Posts: 1285
This is a tough one. It is difficult enough for me to define intent in English -- and I know nothing of meanings and their nuances and in Spanish.

One word must be defined in terms of other words but at the same time be different that any of the words used to define it. Indeed, according to English meanings, "intent" can have some of the characteristics of "purpose", "determination", "desire", "want". I think "Command" is too strong and demanding to fit. Intent can be closely associated with "will" as in the expression of "free will".

However, in English:
Purpose carries the connotation of a goal, an objective, a specific result. Intent may have these characteristics but does not have to. Intent may have no specific purpose it may be just the active expression of a being.
Likewise, intent can be determined but does not have to be.
Intent is not a command, it is not demanding, though it can arrange reality to its will.
Will (as in: "will power", or the expression of "free will") is often the best synonym for intent but "will" has other connotations that express "desire" or "want" and intent is not simply desire or want.

Intent, as used in MBT, is composed of several interrelated concepts. It is how one interfaces, communicates, and interacts with other individuals or with the consciousness system. It is the vehicle or mechanism for expression of a consciousness at the being level; thus it is the most fundamental expression of the ability, capacity and quality of an individual consciousness in its interaction with others. It does express an individual's attitude, will and motivation (relative to interaction with others) at the being level.

You, at the dynamic interactive being level, are your intent. Your intent is the dynamic expression of you (your consciousness) that connects and interacts with whatever is beyond or outside of you (the larger consciousness system). In other words, your intent is the essence of you that interacts with all that is not you.

It is your intent that "moves data" in the consciousness system - i.e., that interacts, exchanges, and modifies information within the larger information system.

Intent is not a simple concept in MBT. It is the active personal projection of an individuated unit of consciousness at the being level (as opposed to the intellectual level) into the information field of existence (focused mental energy is one metaphor for that). I do not think you will find a single word in any language that captures all that intent is. As Ted said, that is why MBT is 900 pages rather than 200 pages - English, like every current PMR language, was developed to express things related to physical existence and is not very good at precisely and clearly expressing concepts of consciousness and existence in terms of a nonphysical interactive information fields. So I used lots and lots of words coming together from different angles to get my meaning across. Intent, as it is used in MBT, is difficult to express in any language succinctly but hopefully most readers get a good sense of it, even if they cannot clearly define it (because their language does not support a clear definition). The Spanish team needs to back up to a higher level of consideration (the answer is probably not in the perfect Spanish synonym because "intent" was not the perfect English word to begin with - only the best of what I had to pick from) and there is no one simple definition that will do. If your argument is too detailed, too far down into the linguistic weeds, it may be an argument that will never end or find resolution.

Try to capture the meaning and intent (sorry to use that word) of what is said in MBT as accurately as you can. You can do no more than that. If you cannot agree on how to do that, involve as many other Spanish speakers who understand MBT as you can find in the decision and go with the majority opinion. Or go your own way if feelings run that deep and let it sort out in the market place later (let unknown others decide in some vetting process that is not defined yet).

All of you are volunteers and thus free agents, and I have no idea what Spanish words might be best so I can give little direct direction. I can help make the concepts clearer in English and hopefully I have done that above.

Thanks to all of you for the effort and diligent concern you bring to this extremely worthwhile project.

Tom


Top
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:02 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 4:23 am
Posts: 188
Thank you very much for your reply, Tom.

To the Spanish translation team: I think that Intent as defined by Tom shares several features with what we call "voluntad" (as in "fuerza de voluntad"). It's kind of like the focused energy that allows a procrastinator to get out of his "putting things off" stagnation and allows him to take action and start having work done. At the same time, it seems to reflect the quality of one's consciousness as well. The latter is probably what makes it so difficult to find an accurate word to define it... we have words to define the former, but the latter, not being physical, is very difficult to find a word that represents it accurately (while still representing "voluntad"/"will").

We might as well resort to using an anglicism and leave it as "Intent" in Spanish, but the downside is that it sounds quite odd.

Another awkward translation could be "voluntad espiritual", but "espiritual" is a word with so many religious connotations that could be misunderstood to a large extent.


Top
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 4:19 pm 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
To the "Spanish Translation Team",

Tom in his post above has provided a discussion of the concept of Intent as he uses the term in MBT. This is much more clear and succinct than anything said up to the time that I had written my chapter on Intent and Self Concept. I do not see a basis for changing my chapter based upon this, but I will study it further and adjust as necessary. As I said, Tom and I had discussed this extensively as I wrote that chapter.

For the benefit of the "Spanish Translation Team" (and others that will follow), I have rearranged the operative statements that Tom made into a better flowing order (by moving only the last statement which is somewhat of a summary statement to the beginning as a new paragraph) and included what Claudio left out when he made his own summary. I suggest that it be used as you decide on a choice of the word used to translate Intent into Spanish. These are the nuances of meaning that I was pointing out to not exclude in your specific choice of such a word by selecting a Spanish word that could not be considered as compatible with these concepts. Specifically to note the 'internal' aspects of the concept as opposed to 'external' focused aspects of the concept. I still consider my comments above to apply but by all means ignore that in terms of Tom's discussion. As Tom pointed out, there is no word in any language that includes all the concepts of Intent as Tom uses the word.

From Tom's discussion of Intent:
Intent is not a simple concept in MBT. It is the active personal projection of an individuated unit of consciousness at the being level (as opposed to the intellectual level) into the information field of existence (focused mental energy is one metaphor for that).

Intent is not a command, it is not demanding, though it can arrange reality to its will.

Intent, as used in MBT, is composed of several interrelated concepts. It is how one interfaces, communicates, and interacts with other individuals or with the consciousness system. It is the vehicle or mechanism for expression of a consciousness at the being level; thus it is the most fundamental expression of the ability, capacity and quality of an individual consciousness in its interaction with others. It does express an individual's attitude, will and motivation (relative to interaction with others) at the being level.

You, at the dynamic interactive being level, are your intent. Your intent is the dynamic expression of you (your consciousness) that connects and interacts with whatever is beyond or outside of you (the larger consciousness system). In other words, your intent is the essence of you that interacts with all that is not you.

It is your intent that "moves data" in the consciousness system - i.e., that interacts, exchanges, and modifies information within the larger information system.


Thank you for your attention.

Ted


Top
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 6:19 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 9:53 am
Posts: 2525
I have been puzzling over this topic (intent) for a while now, especially in the last couple of weeks for no apparent reason. Or maybe some of the group mind leaked in...?

My understanding of it is that it has nothing to do with mind or even emotion as we think of those terms.

Everyone has had both the experience of feeling like someone is watching and then turn around to confirm it, and of also happening to look at someone for some reason and they, sensing this, turn around. Take a minute to remember what you can of the experience.

...Okay, notice how when it happens, it really isn't about any 'thought' or 'emotion', but rather you sense this watching in 'some other part of you' ...? Or when you were the one doing the looking, you may not have had any particular thought or feeling but for some reason the person attracted your attention and so you looked?


If these aren't actual examples of intent 'in motion', intent is something very much like it.




In model space, we can suppose an 'intent-o-sphere' and imagine it in this way:

Here we are in a world. We can imagine a screen, like a special pair of glasses that filters out certain data, so that the physical plane becomes invisible, you would then still 'sense' the various emotions and thoughts that people have, and you could even identify those people by the thoughts and characteristic flavors of emotion they have. If your glasses could also screen out the thoughts and emotions... imagine this now with someone you know well.... imagine them with no body, no emotions and no mind... still... there is something left..... can you sense it? It is unique, and it has a particular 'feel' to it, which is nevertheless not an emotion itself.

Imagine then the 'whole world' screened in this manner. What there would be left is the 'intent-o-sphere' , and those intents would be like a bunch of vectors... each with a strength (which includes the notions of coherency and purity), and a 'direction'.

All beings can be thought of as holons occupying niches. From the niche's point of view, some intents can be helpful to the overall function of the niche, while others may be harmful to it. When you map that abstraction on to 'human society' it becomes a little clearer. We have all been around someone whom we instinctively know is helpful and safe, or, on the other hand, emits a feeling of dangerousness. This has to do with the quality of their intent. The intent of a being that will service its own needs and desires regardless of any 'social contract' (and the social contract tends to be implicit in almost all animals within their own species at least; few beings prey on their own kind, and nstead carry on with an (generally) unwritten set of rules), obviously is dangerous and destructive.

The other thing that I can say is that meditations designed to groom the intent are probably the most useful in the long run. Generally one starts with meditations at the mind level: To get the mind focused and operating in a controlled fashion. The next level is that of meditations which groom the heart, where in one instantiates (sorry, I can think of no better word) a particular feeling (not lower emotions related to ego, but feelings which transcend ego, such as reverence, courage, joy, etc...) and practices coherency and control in that part of one's self. Then come the meditations to groom intent: one begins by perceiving one's own intent and examining it and differentiating it as much as possible, much as one, on discovering some radically new thing, proceeds by getting as many observations of it as possible, and then trying to pattern out where whatever is observed is similar or different.

As you proceed, you will sense the different flavors of the stuff in yourself. When you gave the guy that cut you off in traffic the finger, the intent was confrontative and pushy, for example, and really, precedes the thoughts and emotions you attach to the experience, and precedes even the experience itself: The intent is already 'in you' to give anyone that might cut you off the finger. The same thing when stopping to help a stranded motorist: The intent is of a flavor of "Well, we're all in this together", and you stop to help as automatically as you might hold a door open for someone following right behind you. This kind of intent is already 'in you'. In the final analysis, the nature of your intent may be the most fundamental thing that IS you.

Once you perceive the nature of your own 'intent-body' you can then begin to work on what ever changes seem indicated to you.


-All just my current understanding.

-Montana


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 7:06 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Posts: 9999
Location: Ridgecrest, CA
This is also something on my mind, and what it comes to for me is Intent, capital "I" is what is in action when we are confronted with a choice, and Intent makes the choice. In a life or death situation Intent is raw, non-fake able, it IS what makes the decision to run or take the bullet, to jump in to save the other or let them drown, to let the fight continue, or to step in and stop it, or to diffuse a situation, or add to the chaos.

Intent is then based in our level of quality of our Consciousness, and it cannot be faked. Being a happy person can be faked, but Intent cannot.

We raise or level of quality of consciousness by making choices even more outward pointing than our Intent level would indicate, in my opinion. We push it.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.


Top
PostPosted: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:17 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2009 6:12 pm
Posts: 156
I finally found this thread so I know now what you all been up to. Just like Soprano mentioned, I am a native Spanish speaker so I should be able to help. It is going to be an interesting project sine we have Kathryn & Carlos who speak Spanish from Spain, Soprano who speaks Spanish from Argentina, Quamta Spanish that is unknown to me, and myself which speak Spanish from Mexico.

I also have some computer technical knowledge that can assist in such project. I started my Big Toe Wiki last year which did not get too far and became nothing more than proof of concept.

I also noticed the discussion regarding the proper translation of the word "Intent" into Spanish. I did not spent enough time reading each technical variation of every word being proposed but I was able pick up on this:

1)MBT in English is not perfect and even Tom had to settle.
2)We will become a filter of Tom's work, there is no workaround unless Tom learns Spanish.
3)If anyone should be concerned it should be Tom and he is not. Let's do our best, settle for what the majority agrees on and move on.
4)Let's get the bulk of the work translated the best we can, we should aim for a draft. We can polish the details later. Right now lets get any word for "Intent" down into any Spanish and then we can work into polishing it to Castellano, Mexican or Argentinian. I believe that throughout the actual translating work the answer for the best word for "Intent" and such will become obvious.

For me this is not only an opportunity to help other people with their language barrier, it will allow me personally go thoroughly though the MBT trilogy which I always thought as necessary.

So, what is the next stage right now? I saw great progress on the creation of the English subtitles and also saw a Spanish translation too. Can I see a list of the Spanish translations being worked on so I know which out of the 13 to start with?

thanks.


Top
PostPosted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 2:05 pm 
Offline
Normal User
Normal User

Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 7:58 am
Posts: 47
El "Spanish Team" to All:

Tras una atenta lectura del excelente escrito "About Intention and action" de Ted Vollers, hemos logrado profundizar en el conocimiento de la multiplicidad de acepciones que confluyen en el sentido del término inglés "intent". El escrito de Ted incluye ampliaciones explicatorias que, siendo clarificadoras y añadiendo componentes de gran valor didáctico, remiten sin embargo a elementos (conceptos, autores, etc.) que no se encuentran (explícitamente) en MBT.
Como siempre es de esperar que el propio autor de una obra sea quien mejor conozca aquello que desea comunicar, el remitirse a la versión original es siempre sin duda la piedra de toque para poder, en última instancia, emitir un fundado juicio sobre la obra en cuestión.
En el caso que nos ocupa, el propio Tom reconoce que el término inglés "intent", en el sentido en el cual es utilizado en MBT, va mucho más allá de la acepción corrientemente tenida en cuenta por la generalidad de los angloparlantes. Cualquiera que sea el término español elegido para la traducción (salvo INTENTO, del cual ya hemos dejado claro que no queremos ni oir hablar), va a presentarse idéntico problema.
Madurada la cuestión sobre precisar el sentido de la palabra en las "Notas del equipo de traducción", concluimos que, no hallándose tales aclaraciones previas en el original, y recordando que el propio Tom se ocupa de ir enfocando el tema desde múltiples puntos de vista en los sucesivos capítulos -sin duda en aras de ir allanando al lector el camino hacia la integración de los elementos concurrentes en este y otros términos clave- resulta superflua su inclusión. En palabras del propio Tom (Book 2, Section 3, Chapter 10, pg.150, lines 12 &13): " I appreciate the connection between fundamental truth and elegant simplicity and thus avoid unnecessary complication that adds nothing".
Agradecemos a Ted las referencias recién proporcionadas. Seguimos trabajando.
Un saludo, Carlos


Spanish Team to All:

After a most interesting read of Ted Vollers excellent "About Intention and Action" we have reached more profound understandings of the multiple aspects that converge in the meaning of the term ‘intent'. Ted´s written text includes ample explanations that, whilst undoubtedly clarifying and adding further contexts of great didactic value, refer nonetheless to elements (concepts, authors etc.,) which are not (explicitly) found in MBT.
As always it is the author himself who knows best what he wishes to communicate and, returning to the original, is always the Corner stone for an accurate final judgement concerning the work or word in question.
In the present topic, even Tom recognises that the term ‘intent' in the sense(s) in which it is used in MBT go way beyond the current common English-speaking understanding. Whichever the Spanish word finally selected as a suitable translation, (With the marked exception of INTENTO about which we wish to hear, nor speak any further) we shall encounter the same problem.
Reflecting on the question of defining more specifically the sense of certain core words in the "Translation Team's Notes", we conclude that there not being such in the original work, and furthermore remembering that Tom himself works to illuminate and enhance the full significance by approaching it from many different directions in subsequent chapters -with the aim, no doubt, of clearing the path to the integration of the converging elements in this and other key concepts- we thus consider such an inclusion to be superfluous. In the words of Tom (Book 2, Section 3, Chapter 10, pg.150, lines 12 &13): " I appreciate the connection between fundamental truth and elegant simplicity and thus avoid unnecessary complication that adds nothing".

We are most grateful to Ted for his recent proposed references. Work continues.
Carlos.


Last edited by Kathryn on Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:44 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
PostPosted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 2:18 pm 
Offline
Normal User
Normal User

Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 7:58 am
Posts: 47
Hello everyone. I humbly submit a corrected and proof-read TMI transcript of the first 12 minutes, (0-12). Actually I should be grateful if someone would tell me where I should post such articles if indeed not here.

Herewith, section 0/12 proof-read and revised. K

I'm Tom Campbell. It is my pleasure to be here today having been part of the creation that was to become the Monroe Institute. I take particular pleasure in seeing how far it has come, how much it has grown, and how many lives it has enriched along the way. The theme in this 22nd professional seminar is Consciousness: The Endless Frontier.
As one of the original explorers who´s never stopped exploring, I am particularly pleased to have been asked to kick off this 22nd professional seminar. We´re here because of our association with TMI, and because of our interest in creating a useful applications of Hemi-sync. So, I will give you a short description of the genesis of both Hemi-sync and TMI.
Secondly, in consonance with the theme, "Consciousness: The Endless Frontier," I will explain very quickly the core of what I have come to understand about the nature of consciousness and reality. Ok, um, please hold your questions until the end. There is never enough time for questions, and I am likely to take the lion's share of the two hours allotted to me. I'm going to be here all day today,
tomorrow, and the next day as long as most of you will be here, and I'm very open to have meetings, uh, whether it's early in the morning or late at night is fine with me as long as it is fine with Shirley, and it doesn't interrupt with any of the things that are already scheduled for the seminar. So, I think we will have to hold most of the questions until uh later today or the next several days.

This is going to be a very quick skim over the top, actually it's more like a hop, skip and a jump across the very top of this. Actually, this is a very hard presentation to generate. Not because I had a hard time figuring out what to say, but because I had a very hard time figuring out what Not to say, and still stay within the two-hour time limit. That was the challenge.
Now, these slides are going to be busy. They're probably going to have more words on them than you can read. I'm going to go through them very quickly. I'm going to be speaking very quickly so that I can., won't have Shirley be-heading me for going over my time. I understand a big hook comes out from somewhere around here if you go past your time, so I'm motivated to get done.
So it is going to be quick, er, all of these slides are going to be available on my web site, you see that in http://www.mybigtoe.com, um, so you don't have to copy a lot of things down, you can find the slides.., I haven't put them up there but I will just as soon as I get a chance to get on the internet, also the slides are on the computer here so I'm sure TMI will pass them out to you if you have a thumb drive, or some way to pick them up. Um, so if the slides become a problem for you, trying to read them and listen, stop reading and just listen. I will say everything you need to hear, so you can just let the slides go if they become annoying for you. But first, a little introduction. Now and always a scientist sums it up pretty well. In college I majored in both physics and mathematics, went on to grad school, finally did thesis work in experimental nuclear, and now I work for NASA. I do risk analysis which basically means physics models, system behaviour, complexes, and system behaviour. So the team that I work on, and it's a fairly large team; what we do is try to discover what could possibly go wrong; what the probability is of it going wrong, and if it does go wrong, how do you fix it? Okay, how did a physicist like me end up exploring consciousness and being part of the explorer program earlier on? Well, once I left graduate school my er., I took a job, my first boss, Billy Oust(?), introduced me to Bob Monroe's first book. Well at that time, this is 1972, early in '72, at that time it was his only book.
The boss comes out and hands me the book and he says, "Tom, I want you to read this and tell me what you think." So I did. I read it, and a few weeks later, I er, he asked me, "What about this book?" I said, "There's (sic) three possibilities. 1. This guy has a good imagination and is just trying to sell books. 2. This guy is nuts. 3. This guy is sane, honest and accurate, and there is a whole lot of reality out there that I would love to experience and understand, but, how do you know? Unless you meet him and can get a measure of the man, how do you know? You know er, is this guy nuts or what?
Well my boss and I both sort of shrugged shoulders and agreed that it was just really impossible to know from reading the book, but evidently Bill was listening, and about three months later he came by and said, "Tom, we've located Bob Monroe, he doesn't live that far away. There's a bunch of us going out there and visit him, would you like to come?"
And I said, absolutely I want to come. I want to know whether it's 1, 2, or 3, you know, I want to meet this guy. Well that was, um, like I say, that was more like the spring of ‘72, and um, toward the end of that year, we did meet with Bob, and we spent the whole evening with him. He was very gracious as usual, and I found out of course, that it wasn't 1, and it wasn't 2, that Bob was very real, he was very genuine, he didn't have anything to sell, he just wanted to understand what was going on, and he wanted to put it into scientific terms so that he could share it with other people. That was his ambition, and we found out why it is he invited all of us, and put up with us for a whole evening. Towards the end of the night, we were on the back deck of what was called ‘the lab.' There wasn't a whole lot in it at that point yet, but, uh, with Bob it was one of those things like, you know, build it and they will come. He had built it and he wasn't quite sure I don't think, what he was going to do with it at that point, but he looked at all of us, and he um, kind of scanned us over and he said, "you know, you guys are all scientists and engineers, right? We all kind of looked at each other like what's coming next? We nodded our heads and said, "Yeah," and he said, "Would any of you like to join me here and work in this lab, help instrument it and put it together, and study consciousness?"
Well, it took me about a millisecond for my hand to go in the air, and I said, "Absolutely I'd love to do that Bob, but I'll do it if you teach me what you know." And he kind of considered that for about another half a second, and half a second after that another hand went up in the air, and it was Dennis Mennerich (?) and, you have to understand Dennis and I were both in our twenties, we were middle to late twenties at this time, and Dennis said, "I'd like to do it too, but, you know I want you to teach me what you know." so, uh, Bob kind of looked around the rest of the room, but I think he was really hoping somebody with a little more stature and experience, and reputation, you know, would take him up on it instead than two kids not that far out of Graduate school, but uh, nobody else said anything at all, so it was a deal. And about three weeks later, Dennis and I are coming out, to Whistlefieldfarm, we are meeting with Bob, and from then on we meet with Bob like, mondays, wednesdays, and fridays. We'd get there after dinner, about 7- 7:30, we'd go to the lab and we'd start building equipment; there really wasn't a whole lot there. There wasn't (sic) any measurement devices for the people, there was just audio and the three booths, so, we would build equipment and start uh figuring out what we were going to do next, you know, experiments and things that we could do at the lab. After about an hour or so, Bob would come up, and Dennis and I would get in the booths, there were three booths, and uh Bob would begin to carry out his part of the bargain which was to teach us what it is we[sic](he) knew.
There really wasn't a programme then, I don't even know if ‘Focus 10' existed then, it may have, but certainly nothing beyond that, so, you know, Bob was just making it up as he went, and we were just making it up as we went, all trying to come up with something that would make science out of this. That was our goal.
Well we did this for years, and Dennis and I were coming out here probably for pretty much a straight 5 years or so, we were coming out three days a week, and we'd come out on weekends. So you can imagine that um, we were averaging somewhere between 20 and 30 hours a week, uh you know, with the lab and with Bob, so you know, 20 hours a week with Bob Monroe as your personal trainer, you couldn't help but learn something and learn something pretty quickly, so it wasn't that long before Dennis and I had pretty well uh mastered the altered states; we were going out of body, we were making non-physical friends and people we could get information from. We were doing experiments. Everything had to be experimental. There wasn't any point in doing anything you couldn't check to see whether it was real or not. So, that was the kind of the ‘ground rule.' It wasn't just fun and games and have a neat experience, it was "Is this real?" It took a while before.., it probably took a year and a half or so, before I got to the point that I could answer that question with a "Yes!" and that is, everyone has to come to that point somewhere where you decide, you know, "Is this real, or am I making this up?" But, in any case, Dennis and I were in the ‘cut and try' mode and we were doing anything that we could., we ourselves had become very sensitive instruments to altered states of consciousness. Bob drilled us going down to that pulsation state, Out of Body and back up, back down, and so on. We did that 1,000s of times; we'd be very sensitive to the ‘altered states' and the pathway in between them. That was the first part of our training, so Dennis and I were very sensitive to our consciousness and what state it was in at that time. So we did things. We crawled in pyramids, you know, aluminium pyramids, because a book was out that said that pyramid oriented, you could get different, er, ‘altered states'. Everything that was ever published we tried to go into the subject and we go in the pyramids and see what it did to us because we were very sensitive. I stuck my head between two big capacitor plates with a couple of hundred thousand volts.. (laughter from audience) to see whether or not we could oscillate the pineal gland because we had read back in the muldoons and Character (?) days that they thought it had to do with the pineal gland and we thought well., and we knew it had to do with 4hz, because Bob and we did too, because when we got to our ‘pulsation state' we did this around 4hz vibration going on, so we knew that was physical because once we out-fitted the lab with GSR, we could actually, see with the GSR metres that were there and we oscillate at 4hz, so it wasn't just a perception of consciousness, it was something physiological going on that was oscillating at 4hz, so those were our only keys. Um, so we were coming and trying everything. Dennis went to visit some faith healers from the Dominican Republic and, um, see what they did, and each time we were using our body as the ‘instrument' and our mind as the ‘instrument' of "How did it affect our consciousness?" looking for tools. Okay, well, that went on for a year or so and we were unsuccessful in finding appropriate tools, and then one day well, er, I was at work. (Dennis and I worked at the same place. Dennis came by and he gave me some papers and said, "Take a look at this, maybe we can use it out at the lab?" So I looked at it and it was an article by Oster (?) about binaural beats, and in that article it mentioned that it was thought that binaural beats might change EEG brain waves. So that sounded pretty interesting. We thought, "Yeah, let's give this a try!" We were trying everything, um unfortunately, a very few days after that, Dennis had to leave the country with his job that took him out of the country for about a month, and when he came back, he went to the Double E lab; he was at the Double E, so he went down to the lab at the University of Virginia, er, borrowed some equipment and made a binaural beat tape. It was a very nicely done tape. He started out at Alfa and went down, slowed it down at Alfa, stepped down, small steps at a time, down to Zeta region at 4 Hz and he stayed there for an hour or two, stepped back up and we'd go out to the lab at the first opportunity.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Top
PostPosted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 9:06 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 1:54 pm
Posts: 2707
Location: Miami, FL
Hello:

Here is section 3/12:

How do we get this?
So they decided, let's test this out.
They very cleverly found a way to fire one photon
at a time, at these slits.
So, they will fire the photon.
Of course, one photon
isn't enough to measure
completely in those slits,
so they actually fire thousands,
but they only fire them one at a time.
It's only one photon at a time
interacting with these slits
and what do you think they got?
Did they get this, or this?
Well, they got this.
They got a diffraction pattern.
Now, how is that?
You were sending particles on these slits
and you got this diffraction pattern.
Well, they didn't understand that very well.
So, they said, let's look and see what's going on at those slits.
These are the red things that are symbolizing detectors.
So, they put photon detectors there.
So, let's see what's happening at this slit.
So, when they did, sure enough,
they occasionally when a photon got fired,
they found that it would go through this slit,
when they did, they'd get a little thing from their detector,
and when it did, it got straight through,
and stop quite there, back behind the slit.
And when one went through this slit
it would stop right there,
and they got this pattern.
So, then, they were thinking,
so it's the detectors
that are making the difference.
So, when we detect it we get this,
when we don't detect it we get this.
So whether it was by just luck,
or whether because they were clever
I don't know.
But fortunately, one of them decided to
leave the detectors on,
because if they turned off the detectors, entirely,
of course, they got this.
And the idea was,
well, the detectors are interfering.
So, somebody decided to leave the detectors on,
but just not take any data.
In other words, the detectors were there detecting,
but they just weren't collecting any data.
So, it was like going through a magnetic tape,
and there was not a magnetic tape loaded.
OK, the head of the tape was still showing what the detector said,
the head of the tape was still oscillating,
cause the detectors were working.
The detectors were still detecting.
What do you think happened?
They got this.
They got the diffraction pattern.
OK. So what it turned out was that
if they looked, if they collected the data,
then, they get this.
If they didn't collect the data,
and they weren't looking,
they got this.
That let them know that,
it was the actual conscious act of taking the data,
that made the difference as to whether
light was a wave or light was a particle.
Well, that was a really big deal.
OK, suddenly, you know,
life wasn't clear any more.
It had been really clear up to that time,
and it wasn't clear.
Here is how that works.
A bright young guy named Erwin Schrodinger, german.
He was a graduate student,
and if you'd noticed, in Physics,
most of its breakthroughs occured with young people,
because they haven't been in the system long enough
to understand what's impossible.
So, they are still open minded,
they can still think out of the box,
because they haven't got educated enough
not to be able to do that.
So, what he said is
well, look, if these things come through this one at a time
the photon, obviously, can't break up into pieces,
you know, a photon is a photon.
So it must be going through here
and some other times it goes up here
which was a smaller spot.
Some other times it goes .
Each one of these photons must somehow pick
a place to go,
but it always picks one of these spots
and never picks the spaces in between.
So, what he would do is
he said, well, let's say that
this is not a photon at all,
it is just a probability distribution.
Now, by that I don't mean that the photon
is somewhere and we just don't know where
and that's the probability of where it is.
I mean that the photon
doesn't exist as a particle.
It's a probability distribution.
So, even though it is a probability distribution,
some of the probability goes to that hole,
some of the probability goes to that hole,
in other words, the probability is that some would go here,
there is certain amount of probability that goes here.
The probability then interferes with itself like a wave
and you get this pattern.
Well, when he did that with the math, of course, it worked.
And he got the pattern
and the physicists of the day looked at him, shaked their heads.
graduate students, you know what I mean.
OK. You got the answer, but it doesn't make any sense.
Well, then they took his methodology
and they applied it to other things of the day
and guess what, they got the right answers there too.
And they kept getting right answers,
so physicists had to take it seriously,
even though it didn't make any sense.
Quantum Mechanics, now is one of the most successful
branches of Physics ever,
and still doesn't make any sense.
The physicists still don't understand it
but you are going to understand it by the end of this day.
That's it, these particles are just probability distributions.
Now, here is the way that it was described.
At this point, they realized
that because they took the measurement
consciousness is involved.
They said that the probability wave function
collapses to a physical particle
when the measurement is made.
The measurement collapses
the wave form to a physical particle.
Because they made the measurement here
they got a physical particle there.
And when you get a physical particle,
just like Newton says, it travels in a straight line till it hits something.
Here, the measurement was made here,
so they didn't have a physical particle
until the measurement was made
and when the measurement was made here
you got this diffraction pattern
because up until this point there was no particle.
It was just probability.
So that was the answer.
That's still the answer.
I'll give you a couple of quotes from some of the.
people who helped develop Quantum Mechanics
First it's from Eugene Wigner,
he was a Nobel prize winner,
he was one of the leading scientists
that work on the original Quantum Mechanics.
He says: "It will remain remarkable, in what ever way our
future concepts may develop, that the very study of the
external world led to the scientific conclusion that the
content of the consciousness is the ultimate universal reality."
Again, these are not new agers.
The New Age, hadn't happened yet.
This is back in the early 1900's, 1915, 1920, 1925,
that kind of timespan.
These are top notch physicists.
Max Planck, often known as the father of Quantum Mechanics.
He didn't invent it, but he did a lot of work on it.
"Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature
because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are a part of
the mystery that we are trying to solve."
And that sounds just like Einstein in the last quote,
"The space of Physics is a function of our conceptual scheme."
In other words, what's out here, our reality
is entangled with what's in here.
So, the summary of that is:
1. Reality is a product of consciousness.
2. Reality, mass, particles, exist only as probability
until a measurement is made.
Two fundamental truths that we knew back in the early 1900's.
Now, we don't even seem to know that now, right?
Science, probably read those to things and say: "Nah.
you know, that's not possible."
What happened? How come we kinda dumb down over the last
hundred years?
Well, it's because, like in any field,
when you hit the wall,
you just can't take the next step.
Just like Einstein did:
I have no idea what elementary concepts
to use next.
Well, you avoid it,
because, that's a career breaker,
not a career builder.
You go work, where you can make something happen,
where you can write papers and get funded.
So, this whole concept was kinda walked away from
because nobody knew what to do with it.
It was a dead end.
Just like Einstein got dead ended.
OK, now, let's bump up to the present time.
We are going to get contemporary now.
Edward Fredkin started in 1992 with Digital Physics
Edward Fredkin still one of the major physicists.
One of the big guns, if you will, in Physics till today,
still a working scientist, highly respected.
He came to the conclusion from his science,
very well done science,
that he presented this to the physics farm,
that we must be living in a computer simulation,
that our reality is digital,
it's basically information, and we are computed.
OK. Now, it takes a brave man to stand up and say that
in a Physics [?], even in 1992
But, he wasn't saying that because he saw it in a dream
or he felt it was a neat idea,
he had science that lead to that conclusion.
OK, that was a scientific fact in his mind.
Well, of course,
if you tell people that we are living in a computer simulation
the first question is where is the computer?
and who's programmed it?
Well, he said that science didn't tell him anything about that.
So, he just called it "other"
He said the computer is in "other".
And he had no idea where "other" was.
But he did know that the rest of it was a fact
whether he knew about "other" or not.
Then, we have Nick Bostrom.
He is now the head of a department in Oxford.
A person of a great reputation.
He worked at [A?] School in the United States.
He has a Master's degree in both Philosophy and in Physics.
He wrote a paper called "You are living in a Computer Simulation"
and the bottom line is, he said:
"It's very probable that we are all living in a computer simulation"
And now the last guy,
he's not a physicist,
he's actually a mathematician,
he works at the Center for Discreet Mathematics
and Theoretical Computing
This has been around now for a decade.
This came .

Clau

_________________
"Every moment can be as good as you want it to be."
"Experience is the ultimate teacher."

> http://soprano.com <


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 8:07 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2009 6:12 pm
Posts: 156
quamta:
Quote:
Can't they be re-uploaded following that format?
Yes, I am fixing it right now. You see this one already corrected Spanish - Thomas Campbell - The Monroe Institute Lecture- 0 12.srt


Top
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 94 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 57 Next

All times are UTC-06:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 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