MBT trilogy in other languages

Post Reply
User avatar
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 144
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 4:20 pm
Location: PMR

MBT trilogy in other languages

Post by Froggy »

I would like to introduce MBT to some relatives and friends of mine. Sadly, they cannot read English. I think it would be a shame if they missed on such a great and enriching read for this reason. I've done a few quick forum searches on this topic, but could not find anything relevant.

So my question is: are there any plans to translate MBT into other languages? If not, I thought we could start a community-based translation project and see how far we can take it on our spare time. I would like to help out with the french translation.
Last edited by Froggy on Sun May 09, 2010 5:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I hear, and I forget. I see, and I remember. I do, and I understand.
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1285
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 12:00 am

Re: MBT trilogy in other languages

Post by twcjr »

I would be delighted for MBT to be translated into as many languages as possible. However I would like them to be really good translations which means, as Froggy and Quamta point out, several people collaborating together (no less that two but three is better -- at least one of which needs to be fluent in MBT concepts). Unfortunately, these will be hard books to translate well -- much more challenging than your typical novel. Martin's idea has triggered a thought -- a first on the internet -- Put up a limited wiki MBT translation site on the internet where all users can read whatever is completed thus far in any of a dozen languages, and be encouraged to contribute whatever they can. A PDF English version could be made available for them to work from. To avoid the problem where some contributors might inadvertently tend to disimprove what was already accomplished, each language would need its own moderator with some MB conceptual savvy to approve the posts and incorporate them into the growing final text -- then re-post that growing final text say weekly so more work and editing could be done on it. Also, if necessary, only registered users could be allowed contributor status by the website moderator. Or the moderator could assign pages or chapters to those willing to translate rather than edit. It should eventually become self energizing since people who liked what they were reading would want more of it in their own language and thus be more inclined to want to contribute -- even if only a few pages a month -- eventually -- maybe 4 or 5 years -- it would get done.

I have shipped books to 32 non-English speaking countries and to many people in the English speaking countries for which English is a second language. I could announce this concept/website once it was more fully thought out to everyone who has ever bought a book through my website. That may get us started with a volunteer to be the moderator or co-moderator in several languages - more will be added later. All we need is somebody with an understanding of, and some experience in, the art of translation (understands the issues) to lead, organize, and manage this effort as well as others to get the website built and yet others to write text and directions, and explanations required by the website, and do the marketing/outreach to let the world know that this web-wiki-MBT-translation effort exists.

So, what is the probability that something like this might actually work? That enough volunteers could be found to design, manage and run such a wiki translator? How many would it take - perhaps only I or 2 or 3 to start (depending on skills needed) -- and if it is successful, it should grow (develop support) at its own rate in its own time. Take the long view - the longest journey starts with a single step.

Tom C
User avatar
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 144
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 4:20 pm
Location: PMR

Re: MBT trilogy in other languages

Post by Froggy »

Tom: a wiki sounds like a pretty good idea to me. It will be especially useful when it comes to managing the cooperative work of several individuals. I suppose Martin would be the best person to set this up? If not, I could certainly help in this area as well. I would be honored to be responsible for the french side of the endeavor. I'm no professional translator, but this certainly won't stop me and I'm sure I can deliver on the quality and accuracy of the work.

I agree that having at least two persons working together would be the minimum ideal number, as peer reviewing is paramount to guarantee a certain level of quality in any complex project. Hopefully I can find a courageous french-speaking soul or two in the near future :)

It's great to see there's some interest in this, I think it would be great way to give back a bit of what we've received through Tom's work.
Last edited by Froggy on Wed May 19, 2010 2:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I hear, and I forget. I see, and I remember. I do, and I understand.
User avatar
Normal User
Normal User
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 1:35 pm
Location: Norway

Re: MBT trilogy in other languages

Post by Loka »

Okay, so now I've been transcribing for a couple of hours, and I'm done with the section 2/12. I don't know how you would like it to be, but I thought I'd just paste it right up here, and then you guys can just read through it and see what you think. Then let me know what I have to fix up etc. And I've put these (?) in where something has been a bit strange, for example if Tom has mumbled a little, or something like that, so if someone can help me check if I've guessed correctly, or not, then I would appreciate that. I also broke the sentences down in smaller chunks, so hopefully it will make the job of 'subtitleizing' (haha) them easier. I did not note the time except from a couple of places, since I agree with Bette's suggestion that the one re-reading it and matching the text to the clips can take care of it. Okay, so here we go:

Thomas Campbell - The Monroe Institute Lecture - 2/12

I remember Joe because, the way it worked is that Bob
would come right in the morning, and he'd say hello to
everybody and give them a little pep-talk. Then he would leave it,
and Dennis, Nancy Lee and I would run the program, and Bob
would show back up in the end, you know, just when everybody
was done, and say, well, how'd everybody do and talk and, you know,
have a little thing at the end. So I remember Joe very well.
I think he was a little disappointed that he had to deal with a couple
of twenty-something-year olds, you know, and not Bob Monroe
for the whole weekend, but in any case that's the way it was run.
Well, we found out pretty soon that twenty rooms wasn't enough,
and then that put Dennis and Billy Ose (?) and I back in the garage
building now a portable audio harness that could play to thirty,
I think, maybe forty people. We had started renting large
conference rooms in hotels, taking all the furniture out.
The hotel people were wondering what were we doing.
The table went out, the chairs went out, everything, and we
would have, uh, it would be a room like this room, and we'd
have aisles, and we'd have bodies laid out all over the floor,
you know, and every two or three feet there would be
another body laying out on the floor, and they all had to
come with their own mats, and if they didn't have a mat,
they just laid on the floor. We put this wiring harness down
the middle of the aisle that (?) field off the earphones and
sent (?) them to everybody. And again, you know, was
Dennis, Nancy Lee and Tom that ran the seminars, and Bob
would come in at the beginning and he'd come in at the end.
So we did this and ran a whole bunch of those.
At that time the demand kept growing. Pretty soon it was
needed a way to do this off site, not just here in the Charlesville area (?),
but off site. Now, this new land hadn't happened yet,
we weren't here where we are today. We were still at Whistlefield
Farm - it was the headquarters of all of this.
So we started to go on the road. We'd pack up that harness
and Nancy Lee and I would go off to California and do a seminar,
and Nancy Lee and Dennis would go off to the North-East and do
a seminar. And so it went until Dennis and I, with full-time jobs
and full-time families, you know, and now being trainers besides
on the road was just more than we could stand. So at that point
Dennis and I started to kind of back out and look for replacements.
And Bob took a little chance to kind of stop and rest and see what
he was going to do next with it, because it was obvious he had
something that was going to work. So it was shortly after then that
Bob purchased this new land, a place where he could build a facility.
And other people came in, Dennis and I kind of slipped out the back.
You know, I was still on the board and still interfaced a little bit here,
but that was kind of the end of my ten year with it.
So that was the invention, if you will, of Hemi-Sync, and of TMI.
Those things came later. Bob pattened that binaural beat sound
as "Hemi-Sync", it was his name that he chose for it.
And eventually, of course, the organisation got changed a couple
of times until finally it ended up as TMI over here on the new land.
Okay, so that's it for the history lesson. That's where Hemi-Sync
and TMI came from.

(Applause.) 03:25-03:29

Now let's do a little physics and a little metaphysics, and I'll try
to give you a quick run-down about what the nature of reality
looks like. Okay, and I am very likely to break some of your
favorite paradigmes, --- and very likely to run over a few of your
most cherished cultural, personal, scientific beliefs. But instead
of believing or disbelieving what I say, just consider the
possibilities and assess the probablity based on your own experience.
Use open-minded skepticism until you find out. You must develop
you own personal Big Picture from your own personal experience.
Until it's your personal experience it cannot be your Truth.
Okay, so always remain both open-minded and skeptical. If you are
not open-minded you'll never learn anything new. If you are not
skeptical, you will never know whether what you're experiencing
is real or made up. So you must be both.


Okay, now we're going to look at some Big Picture models.
Big Picture model has to describe everything; objective and subjective,
physics and metaphysics, the normal and the paranormal.
Today I'm going to explain Big Picture science, and I will show you
that the Big Picture science derives little picture science, as well
as metaphysics. Okay, to be valuable Big Picture science must
provide a superset; must provide better, more complete physics,
and better, more complete metaphysics.


First the historical perspective: Albert Einstein, the last twentyfive
years of his carreer he worked on a thing called Unified-Field Theory.
This was going to be a TOE. "TOE" means "Theory Of Everything",
and what that means was that one understanding; one set of priciples
in which he could derive all of science just from one principles (?),
and really what he was interested in, he wanted one set of principles
that could derive both quantum mechanics and relativity.
Those were the two big new things in science, and they didn't look
like they went together. They were kind of separate things off doing
their own thing, and he knew there must've been something
more general understanding from which you could derive both.
And that's what he wanted, and that actually boiled down to just finding
out just two things. 1: Why was the velocity of light a constant?
Because that's the key to developing relativity. Once you understand
that light is constant relativity just falls out with a little algebra.
Okay, and the 2. was: Why should particles really not be particles,
but be probability distributions? Because once you understand that
then quantum mechanics falls out very naturally with a little algebra.
So those were his issues. Now I will do some quotes to know
where Albert Einstein ended up after twentyfive years of studying
the larger reality from his view. What were his conclusions?
"Space does not have an independent existence." It's a quote from
Albert Einstein. "Reality is merely an illusion", okay, hence it's
clear "that the space of physics is not, in the last analysis, anything
given in nature or independent of human thought. It is a function
of our conceptual scheme.
" Space, which is our reality is a function
of mind, and this is Albert Einstin, this isn't some New Age guy,
you know, with long hair on the street corner - well, he had long
hair, but still wasn't a New Age guy. This was Albert Einstein,
probably one of the most competent and farreaching scientists
who knew how to think out of the box, and this were his conclusions.
Okay, now, David Bohm, another physicist, very highly respected,
worked with Albert Einstein, so, you know, he had to be highly
respected to work with the best of the best. The thing he said was:
"Our notions of consciousness must have room in them to
understand what it means for its content to be 'reality as a whole".
Okay? Consciousness has to contain reality as a whole.
Again, these are physicists, very, you know, the top of the top.


They had a problem. They knew that consciousness was at the root,
that was fundamental, but they just didn't know what to do about it.
They were stuck: "All right, we know that. Now what?"
Well, here's a letter from Einstein to Bohm, written in October 28
1954: "One has to find a possibility to avoid the continuum
(together with space and time) altogether. But I have not the
slightest idea what kind of elementary concepts could be used
in such a theory.
" You see, they were just stuck.
Now coming from a different direction quantum mechanics
produced an even stranger view of reality.And I am going to
run through why quantum mechanics came to be.
Quantum mechanics existed because of this experiment. It's a
very famous experiment, and it's called The Double Slit Experiment.
For many years scientists knew that if you put light through two slits
in a barrier, that you would get this diffraction pattern. What would
happen was some of the light would go through this slit, some of
the light would go through this slit, and then the light would interfere
with each other. The way it interfered is that the distance between
here and that point and the distance between here and that point
from the two slits had to be some integral number of wavelength
so that the wavelengths got there in phase. And when they did
you'd get some light, and when they didn't, when they got out of
phase, you got nothing; you got dark spots inbetween them.
Okay, so this was an experiment well known, done many times,
diffraction grading. And then Einstein came along and studied
the thermal electr-, uhm, light hitting things and knocking out
electrons, okay - yea, the photo electric effect. He was studying
that and he realized that light looked like a particle. It seemed
to always have some integer number of chunks of momentum.
It came with little chunks of momentum just like particles. So he
said: "Light's a particle!" And his theory supported that. Well, now,
that made a big question. If light is a particle .. particles we know,
you know, they go through slits. They just travel in straight lines
unless interacted on by an exterior force, right. Newton told us that.
And they would put a little spot of light behind that slit, and a little
spot of light behind that slit. That's what a particle would do.
So if light's particles, you know ---

end of Section 2/12
My free eBook "Life is Freedom - Pointers to Enlightenment": https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/283421 - Enjoy :)
User avatar
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 144
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 4:20 pm
Location: PMR

Re: MBT trilogy in other languages

Post by Froggy »

Here it is (part 5 of 12):

Http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czv7upz6 ... re=related

..or it can stay the same. Well in any large complex system staying the same is not a stable option. You might think: "well ok, it might gain a little, lose a little, gain a little" and kind of stay constant on average but that doesn't happen. That's "short-term stable" but not "long-term stable". Large systems that can change will either eventually evolve or de-evolve. So it's your choice there if you're one of those systems as to evolve, or die. That's the choice. Which means you decrease entropy, or die.

Individual consciousness evolves toward lower states of entropy and that's equivalent to saying higher quality consciousness or more spiritual states. So then we'll take one step from that and say that love is a description of a low entropy consciousness.

Now you can think about that, does that make sense? Love is cooperative. It's about other, it's about caring. That builds, constructs. Watches out for each-other. You can see that as a building construction thing, whereas on the other side you have fear, you have hysteria, you have anxiety, you have all that sort of thing and instead of being about others it's about self. It's all about "me" and "mine" as opposed to building anything constructive. It's about me making sure I get hold of mine. That tends to pull things apart. That's not cohesive, that doesn't build.

So you can see that love is the direction of evolution in consciousness. You lower the entropy of consciousness, you're moving toward love.

( 01:40)
Ok, attributes of consciousness.
- Input: that's experience.
- Memory: if you didn't have memory, every input would be the first.
- Processing: you have to be able to look at this experience that you get from input, and assess it.
- Purpose: that's how you asset it. You assess it against the purpose.
- And you have to be self-modifying.
Those are the basic attributes.

Now think about those attributes. They describe exactly our biological system as well. Think of those biological cells, say the first cell if you like or the first group of multi-celled creatures that are in the primordial sea some place, what do they have to have? They had to have connections to their environment, interact with their environment. That's the input.

They've had to have memory. It wasn't intellectual memory, it was just cellular memory. But they had to have memory otherwise they would never know where they've been, whether things were better or not.
They had to have purpose: that was to procreate and survive. That was their purpose, which means lower their entropy.

And they had to be self-modifying. If they weren't self-modifying, well we wouldn't be here, right? They'd just be just these few little cells. They had to be able to change themselves against their purpose: survive and multiply against the data that was coming from the environment, against their input.

So as it turns out, this input, memory, processing, purpose and self-modifying is a description of consciousness. It's also a description of life. Those are the qualifications for sentience. Anything that's sentient, anything that can react and interact, has to have these attributes.

Well what else does that remind you of? Input, memory, processing: sounds like a desktop computer, doesn't it? Until we get down to the last two: purpose and self-modifying. But someday those two will be overcome as well. We will one day probably see conscious computers.

Anyway, I'll just drop that bomb and move on... Hm...
We'll talk about that later if you'd like.

Alright let's do a summary.
Consciousness is best modelled as a super-set: a self-modifying digital information system capable of computing virtual realities
The larger consciousness system evolves by lowering the entropy of the system
It lowers the entropy of the system by organizing the bits at its disposal into a more profitable configuration - Just summarizing all the things we've just said
Feedback of the results of previous choice allows us to modify future choices (free will)

Next, let's find out where we come from. What are we, here, consciousness.
Because experience is the generator of input, in order to have the experience you need interaction with something. Experience comes from interaction. Well if you have one monolithic consciousness, the only thing it can interact with, the only thing it can have experience with is itself. That's extremely limiting.

So, just like these biological cells that decided to split and start to evolve multi-celled things which were lower entropy, more ordered, more construction, more things working for the whole... same with consciousness! Consciousness divides itself into pieces so those pieces can interact with each-other, with free will.

Now, you have, let's say, thousands of smaller things all interacting with free well. Suddenly, your ability to have novelty and to have experience that you can grow from, that you can lower your entropy from, is much much greater.
Much more experience. Instead of just one thing interacting with itself.

Ok, so that's what we are. We are those chunks of consciousness. We're one of those chunks of consciousness.
Now you see that we, just our existence, what we are here for is just to lower our entropy, to evolve toward love. Right? That tells you your purpose.

And also it tells you we are part of the system. But the system now is the larger consciousness system. We're part of that system's way of evolving. We're its strategy to evolve. As we evolve and lower our entropy, the whole system lowers its entropy because any part of the system that lowers its entropy by a small smidgeon also makes the whole system lower its entropy by that smidgeon. So we're part of the strategy of the larger system. Its evolution.

Alright, that tells you our purpose, the positive direction of that purpose, that defines what's negative, positive, good, bad, what's moral or immoral. What's positive, good and moral are all those things that lead to decreasing the entropy, moving toward love.

What's negative, bad and immoral are all those things that do the opposite, that increase the entropy of your personal consciousness.

A logical break-out of that is done in my forums. There's a thing in there that's a moral code that kind of lays all that out and how that works. We don't have time for that now. That would be more than two hours by itself.

Now we've got us, what about physical reality? Where does physical reality come from? Well to produce an effective profitable interaction you need two things.
You need a goal. Well we've got a goal: lower the entropy.
But you also need constraints. Why do you need constraints? Constraints give us strategy, logic, order, feedback, learning. You can't learn without constraints.

Think of a kindergarten class with no constraints, what would they learn? They'd learn to be wild, anarchists, that's what they'd learn!
Thus you need constraints to learn. Think of a game. Let's say you're a player with 3 other people. Four people sitting down playing cards, and there are no rules. What's your strategy? How do you learn? How do you know who's winning?

You can't. Without constraints, without rules, it's impossible. You can't get any traction on it. Without rules, basically, all you have is chaos. Evolution is difficult or impossible.

This reality then is an elementary school. This is our school house. It has rules.
What's the rules? Physics. That's what scientists do. Our rules ??? or/are ??? our sciences. Science goes out and tries to discover what the rules are. So the rule-sets are physics.

In order for a virtual reality like our physical reality to be effective, consciousness must be able to roughly predict what's going to happen next. I can show you later why it is so. That information is important because it provides feedback and it's important to render this reality. It's just used as a tool.

So the consciousness system has to have a rough idea what's going to happen next. We have free will so nobody can know exactly what's going to happen next because we can do things that are unexpected.
But because we're in a virtual reality, then how do virtual realities work? They all work the same way. Now you've probably bumped up with virtual realities before, at least if you know any kids you have... My son plays World of Warcraft, so I know about World of Warcraft, because he was constantly at his computer when he should have been doing his homeworks.

My daughter played The Sims. Both of those are virtual reality games. Multiplayer virtual reality games that you've either played or you probably know somebody else that's played them. Well they all work the same way. We are a virtual reality who can then create other virtual reality games.

The way virtual reality works, the way any dynamic simulation works is you have the simulation and then you step it by time. So let's say we start right now and time is something. Well then you increase that time by a delta-t, just a little bit more, and then you go back to the simulation again. Ok, what happens if time is incremented a little bit? Then you increase delta-t, you go back through it... You're in a time loop, it's called the outer time loop that drives the simulation. All dynamic simulations are done that way. Well so is ours, so is World of Warcraft's...
Last edited by Froggy on Sun May 23, 2010 11:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
I hear, and I forget. I see, and I remember. I do, and I understand.
User avatar
Normal User
Normal User
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 1:35 pm
Location: Norway

Re: MBT trilogy in other languages

Post by Loka »

Great job, Froggy!

I'm done with my second transcription of english subtitles, 4/12. If I've done anything wrong, clumsy or less than optimal, please let me know. And I'm not sure about the places where I've put (?).


Thomas Campbell - The Monroe Institute Lecture - 4/12

.. I guess about ten years later and then this came about ten
years after that, so we're leaping decades here,
and this digital physics caught on. There are digital physicists
now all over the world. Digital physics is a solid branch
of physics, still out on the fringe, but you know,
breakthroughs only come from the fringe.
Breakthroughs never come from the senter. That's not
the senter's purpose. The senter's purpose is stability
and infrastructure, not creative thinking. Creative thinking
always comes out on the fringe.
In any case, Brian looked at this because the digital
physicists said reality is virtual. It's computed, and
the fundamental theory of physics says that reality is
because it is. You know, it starts with a big bang,
and the big bang has no cause. It's an acausal thing,
you know, there is no cause for the Big Bang.
Physics just starts with a big bang without a cause.
It happens, you have all this energy very tightly packed,
then it expands and it cools and you get planets collides and suns (?)
and so on. But there is no cause for the Big Bang, so, you know,
that's a mystical assumption, something without a cause.
So the fundamental traditional physics is really based upon
a mystical assumption that something happens out of nothing,
which is the Big Bang, so our universe is kind of popped out
of nothing. Well, Brian took these two ideas; the traditional physics
that we just exist because we do, and everything's here because
it is, and the one that this is a computed virtual reality.
He had this big matrix, and down one side was all
the things we knew, all the facts; What do we know by
experiment? That's the data. Those were the datapoints.
And then he took the virtual reality idea and said how does
that fit the data; how does that explain the data?
And then he took the traditional physics, how does that fit
the data? So he had this big matrix and when he was done,
the last paragraph in his paper said: "Physicists wake up!
This concept of a virtual reality fits the data a whole lot
better than the traditional concept. It explains more with
fewer problems. So, that was a paper just presented like
a year and a half ago, and since then Woodworth (?) has presented
another paper that takes this idea on a little further.
So that's where we are present day.


Now let's leave physics for a bit, and talk about metaphysics
and reality, and see how all this ties together. Okay, reality
is information. Now that may be a little hard for you
to swallow, but reality is information. Now, look at it
this way: What is your reality? What's your reality right
now? Well, it comes to your sensors, right, it's just what
you see, hear, feel, smell. That's your reality. If you didn't
have any senses, what would you reality be? Nothing.
You'd be a point of consciousness floating in a black void.
That's all. Okay, so what is this reality? It's just data.
That's all. Photons hit your eyes, get focused by the lens,
go to the retina. And what happens at the retina? They turn
into electrical pulses - discrete electrical pulses.
Not continuous electrical, discrete pulses. Those pulses
go into your nervous system, and what do they turn into?
They hit synapses and neurons fire off in different directions,
you get neurons and patterns of neurons. What are neurons?
Discrete pieces of information. So what is your reality?
It's data. It's little electrical blips. It's neurons and patterns
of neurons. It's digital data, and when I say digital, I mean
discrete. Digital is another word for discrete. It comes in
packets. Well, separate units. Neurons. Little pulses.
So that's what your reality is. Nothing but data.
Now, if all of your senses were somehow terminated
and you were in that black void of point consciousness,
and then I could stimulate your sentral nervous system
just like it's being stimulated now. I could reproduce
all those little electrical signals just at the right places
on your sentral nervous system. What would you experience?
You'd be experiencing just what you're experiencing now.
And there would be no way for you to tell the difference.
No experiment that you could do that would differentiate
one from the other. So now it's just a small step from there,
to say: What is our reality? It's just a datastream.
It's a datastream coming down to consciousness, and we
interpret that data as this reality. Because, in fact, that's
what's happening here. We're getting the photons, we're
getting the pressure waves on our ears. It turns into data,
and our brain - we think it's our brain, it's not really our
brain, it's our consciousness interprets that data to be this
reality. This is just an interpretation of a lot of digital information.
That's what this is. That's what all this reality is.
Okay, so consciousness is the fundamental reality.
The Larger Consciousness System (LCS) is a digital
information system. At the most fundamental level
consciousness is just information. Information at the
most fundamental level is bits, and I'm not gonna -
you know, we can get more complicated than bits
and binary. We could go cubits, and there's other things
besides binary, but I'm just keeping it at the most basic
level here to get the consepts across.


The most basic level, information is bits,
and the most basic level bits are binary.
That's the most basic thing, so information
is non-physical and subjective, thus consciousness
is non-physical and subjective. And you're thinking:
"Information is non-physical? Wait a minute,
you know, this is the Information Age, and I have
information overload, and why is it non-physical?
It would be easy to get rid of it if it was non-physical!"
But think about it, it is, information is the meaning,
the content, the message. It's not the media.
That's the paper in the book it's the media. It's not
the code symbols, that's the ink skribbles on the book.
Those are the code symbols. Neither one of those
are information. It's not until consciousness looks
at those code symbols on that paper that it extracts
the information. Information requires consciousness.


[[ This next sentence kind of puzzled me.
What I believe Tom is literally saying here is:
"you can put a book, ink, paper in a bottle."
This is probably just words swapping places, so what I think he intends to say is:
"you can put paper in a book, and ink in a bottle."
This seems, to me, more logical. Or maybe he's meaning to say something
else which I'm ignorant of. Perhaps some of you know for sure?
Anyway, for now I chose to go for what I think he intends to say.]]

Now, you can put paper in a book and ink in a bottle. You could
put ink in a bottle, but you can't put information in a bottle.
The content, the meaning, is non-physical. That can't be
weighed, has no weight. Takes up no space. It's non-physical.
So information is non-physical. If consciousness is just an
information-field, then consciousness is non-physical.


Okay, we've done that (turns page).

That takes us to information in a digital system is represented
by organized bits, so let's talk about organisation.
If you're a double E (?) you'd say this in terms of signal and noice.
You have a signal, that's the information. And you have noice,
and that's still energy, but it's random. There's no information
in randomness. So to get information you have to not have
randomness. You have to have order. Now, a measure
of order, or perhaps I should say a measure of dis-order
is called entropy. It's a measure of disorder. So if you have
high entropy, you have a lot of disorder, you have randomness.
If you have low entropy you have a lot of order. A lot of
coherency. That's the difference.
So if you have an information system, this information
system is, as it has information in it, it has to have order.
As that information dissipates and no longer has information,
you go to higher entropy.
Entropy can be thought of in another way as well, and you'll
see how the two are connected.


If you have high entropy you have very little ability to effect
anything or do anything. If you have low entropy you have
a lot of ability to effect things. You have power. The physics term
is it's the ability to do work. But you have power.
Imagine a bottle of gasoline. So you have a bottle of gasoline,
and as a bottle of gasoline, the molecules in that gasoline
will be our system. They have a lot of ability to do things, right?
They can change things. You could throw a match in there and
suddenly everything that's in it is changed. You can pour it in
your car and you can drive your car some place.
So that gasoline, because those molecules of gasoline
are ordered, they're packed in a very small place, so dense
it's a liquid. Now we let that same gasoline evaporate.
Now they're evaporated, entirely gone. We still have a system
of gasoline, still same number of molecules exist in the universe.
It's just spread all over the atmosphere, what can they do?
Nothing. See, they've lost their power because they've lost
their order. Now they're random and they lose power.
So that's two ideas about entropy. It's a measure of disorder,
and it also tells you it's a measure of power, or ability to effect

All right, um ..


Self-changing systems with a purpose evolved to be more
successful within their environments by lowering their entropy.
Evolution is a very fundamental concept. Technologies evolve,
you know, governments, monetary systems, everything evolves.
Or de-evolves, you know, it goes both ways. But things change.
Self-changing systems that can learn and can change themselves,
evolve. And you can take that evolution, and explain it in
terms of entropy. You evolve when you're decreasing the entropy
of your system. In other words the system works better,
it's more organized, it's more functional. And you're
de-evolving as you dissipate that information and it becomes
more random. So even our own biological evolution can be
put in that term, in terms of entropy.


So consciousness is a self-aware, self-modifying system
evolving toward lower entropy states.
Let's talk about the attributes of consciousness.
Well, one more thing about evolution, and that is that
a large complex system only has two choises. You think
it might have three: it can either evolve, it can de-evolve ..

end of segment 4/12
My free eBook "Life is Freedom - Pointers to Enlightenment": https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/283421 - Enjoy :)
User avatar
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 9999
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Location: Ridgecrest, CA

Re: MBT trilogy in other languages

Post by bette »

Okay, here is 0/12 ready for proofing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVfaZz6E ... playnext=1

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 of the 22nd professional seminar is Consciousness: The Endless Frontier. As one of the original explorers who has never stopped exploring I am particularly pleased to have been asked to kick off this 22nd professional seminar.

We are here because of our association with TMI, and because of our interest in creative useful applications of Hemi-sync. So, I will give you a short description of the geneses 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 lions share of the two hours allotted me. I'm going to be here all day today, tomorrow, and the next day as long as most of you will be here.

I am very open to, 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 its more like a hop, skip, and a jump of thought across 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 trying to figured 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 mad at 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 I'm motivated to to get done. So it is going to be quick. All of these slides are going to be available on my web site, you see that? 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 way to pick them up. Um, So if the slides become become a problem for you trying to read them and listen, stop reading ands just listen. I will say everything you need to hear, just let the slides go if they become annoying for you.

Okay first a little introduction. Now and always a scientist sums it up pretty well. In college I uh, 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, uh system behavior, complex system behavior. So the team that I work on, and it's a fairly large team; what we do is, is try to discover what could possibly go wrong, what the probability is of it going wrong, and then if it does go wrong, how do you fix it.

Okay, well how did a physicist like me end up exploring consciousness and being part of the explorer program early on. Well once I left graduate school my um, I took a job and my first boss, Billious?, introduced me to Bob Mornoes first book. Well at that time, this is 1972, early in 72at that time it was his only book. The boos comes out and hands me the book and says, "Tom, I want you top read this and tell me what you think."

So I did, I read it, and uh, a few weeks later he asked me, Well what about this book". I said, well there's three possibilities. One this, guy has a good imagination and is just trying to sell books. Two, this guy is nuts. Three 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? You know, unless you can meet him and can get a measure of the man, how do you know? You know, is this guy nuts or what?

Well my boss and I both kind 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 said, "Tom, we've located Bob Monroe, he doesn't live that far away. There's a bunch of us going out and and visit him, and would you like to come?"

And I said, absolutely I want to come. I want to know whether it's one, two, or three. You know, I want to meet this guy. Well that was, um like I say now that was more like the spring of 72, and um, toward the end of that meeting; we did meet with Bob, and we spent the whole evening with him he was very gracious as usdual, and I found out of course that it wasn't one or it wasn't two. That Bob was very real, 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 and put up with us for a whole evening. Towards the end of the night, we were on the 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 um you know, build it and they will come. He, he had built it and he wasn't quite sure what he was gong 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? And we all kind of looked at each other like what's coming next? And we nodded our heads yeah, and he says well, would any of you like to join me here and work in this lab and 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 would love to do that Bob, but um, I'll do it if you teach me what you know. And he kind of consider that for about another half a second after that another hand went up in the air, and it was Dennis Mennerich, um. Now you have to understand we 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'd like you to teach me what you know."

So, uh, Bob kind of looked around at the rest of the group, and I think he really was hoping for someone with more stature and experience, and reputation 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, it was a field farm, we are meeting with Bob, and from then on we would meet with like Bob Monday's, Wednesday's, and Friday's. We'd get there after dinner, around 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 any measurement devices for the people, there was just audio and the three booths. 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 now, experiments and things that we could do at the lab. After about an hour or so Bob would come up, and then Dennis and I would get in the booths, there were three booths, and uh Bob would 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 program then, I don't even know that 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, that was our goal.

Well we did this for for years, you know Dennis and I were coming out here probably for for pretty much straight five years or so we were coming out three days a week, and we'd come out on weekends. So you can imagine that we were averaging somewhere between 20 and 30 hours a week uh you know with the lab and with Bob. So 20 hours a week with Bob Monroe as your personal trainer you know 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 nonphysical friends and people we could get information from. We were doing experiments. Everything had to be experimental. There wasn't any point in doping 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" and it took awhile before, it probably took a year and a half before I got to the point that I could answer that question "yes" and that, everyone has to come to that point somewhere where you decide, you know, is this real, or am I making this up?
All That Is
what is?
User avatar
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 9999
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Location: Ridgecrest, CA

Re: MBT trilogy in other languages

Post by bette »

Okay, here is 6/12 ready for proof.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAMG0iUG ... PL&index=6

So is The Sims, they all work that way. As time is stepped through character change and do things, and motion happens. Um, we're going to talk about past, present, and the future now that we understand time, and by the way time is local to each reality frame. So this our reality frame, this virtual reality that we're in has its own clock, its own fundamental time. Other reality frames have their own time. Well what would be another reality frame, well your dream frame, that's a different reality frame. You notice something about reality frames. When you're in this reality frame this seems physical, doesn't it? When you're in your dream frame, that seems physical, and this one isn't. When you're in this frame this seems physical and that one isn't. So there is no such thing really as physical and nonphysical, it's all just a matter of the observer, it's perspective. There's nothing fundamental about physical and nonphysical. Things appear to be physical when your perspective is in that reality frame, and everything else appears to be nonphysical. That's taking the theory of relativity one more step. So that there is no, uh uh there is no there is no standard inertial frame like Einstein said about relativity, there is no fundamental reality frame, they are all just relative to the observer. I just thought I would toss that in.

Um, okay, um, databases, there's three databases, actually there's just two I'm going to make it three, I'm going to break one into two pieces because it's easier to understand that way. First is the future probable reality, so okay here we are in a delta-t computed our reality, now we can we can guess what's going to happen next delta-t before it actually happens, okay. We just extrapolate what's going on. Now these delta-t's are very small, okay, they like 10 to the minus forty-four seconds, very small. That's a nano, nano, nano, nano, nano second, okay, very small. Much much smaller than we can measure by about thirty-five orders of magnitude. Okay, so to us that seems instantaneous, but it's not really instantaneous, okay. So that's, these things are very very tiny, and that's just our our clock. So, what we have to try to do is try to guess what's going to happen the next 10 to the minus forty-fourth second from now. Well that's not too hard right because when you guess real short end, you know, it's really easy to make that guess. But then we can say well, well, let's assume we guess right, and using that as as as truth guess the next one, and we assume that that one is right, and we guess the next one. We can keep doing that and work it out as far as we want to. But of course, our accuracy gets rattier and rattier the further we go out because we have this whole stack list of assumptions each one being that the last one was right. But we can, we can do that, and that's called the future probable database. Now you know there's a rock rolling down hill, and the next delta-t what's it going to be. Well it's going to roll a little further, right. That's easy, all the stuff is easy to calculate. What about the people and their choices? Well that's not that hard either because if you are if this is a virtual reality you are a collection of data, rules, memory, you know the things that we said was consciousness?" You are consciousness, you are. You a thing, you are a piece of consciousness getting a data stream. That data stream you interpret as this reality, okay.

Okay so um, everything happens in the present, I mean free will happens in the present. So you are being modeled because every thought you had, every idea, every feeling, every tiny thing that makes you up is consciousness. Is data, it's all saved, and there is a model of you there, basically that can project to the next delta-t. And it's a pretty good model because its got all the data of everything you've felt, said, done, thought of. So it's not that hard to project you either but that doesn't mean it's always right, you have free will, you can always do something different. And when you do the system just has to make that adjustment and run it back up through the calculation whenever that happens, but it doesn't happen that often. Okay everything then, we make all our choices in the present, after the present, um, that what was the probable future then flows into the past. Now in this probable future database is everything that possibly could happen, and the probability that it would happen. Okay, associated with probabilities. So then after the present we make our choices, and our choices like I say may or may not be what was predicted, but we make our choices and then everything that we did, the choices we made become our history thread, and everything that we didn't choose, in other words everything we could have done but didn't becomes the nonactualized history. This is really just one database, this one history database, but we are breaking it into two. Our actual history, and all the things we did and all the things we could have done, but didn't. Okay so now we have these databases. All right now next you'll see how these databases are important.

All right, now I'm going uh to talk just a little bit about what this means to(in?) the larger reality. Okay, you are consciousness; your reality is data. How do you communicate to another consciousness? You have to move data. Okay now how to you make up data? You have to put that data in terms of symbols or metaphors, and metaphors really are symbols just a different kind. So you have to put it in term of metaphors and symbols. Some thought, something that you have, make it into metaphor and symbol and you pass that out there to an other. And what does that other do with it? They take the data, that's all they can get is the data you send, and they have to interpret that data in terms of their own symbols and metaphors based on their experience. You can send it out in term of your experience; you cannot put it in terms of metaphors you've never experienced because you don't have those metaphors. They can't interpret it except by the metaphors in their experience. So that's the nature of communication. Okay, you can see that tells us why there is so much miscommunication, okay. That's the way it has to happen, okay, uh now so experience within various reality frames are defined and limited by your fears and belief because the way you interpret that data you get has to do with what's in your experience base. That's all of your knowledge that's all of your lack of knowledge. That's all of your fears, that's all of your ego, that's all of your love, everything that you are pulls together to give a best pattern match for that data you received. But it's a shadow, it's a expression of you how you interpret that data. And from the senders view point it is an expression of them, of the data that they sent. You can never share and experience with anyone directly. Experience is unshareable, it's private and it's personal. You can describe that experience in terms of symbols and metaphors, and you can share the symbols and metaphors, but you can't share the experience, you see it's unshareable, it's yours.

Okay so here's how some of this stuff comes out. I'm going to use Bob's first book because everybody here certainly has read that probably more than once, and most people out there in the larger world has read it as well, it is a very popular book. Do you remember once when Bob was out of body and he was trying to come back, and he ran into a wall. Okay, he ran into this wall, okay, well what is that wall? Some of you may have experience similar to that wall, have run into that wall. That wall is just a metaphor, it was Bob's metaphor for a fear of not being able to get back, okay that's what it was. He gets the data, he interprets the data, his interpretation is that wall that was the fear. When you are in that out of body state you often manifest your fears. Now I'm not talking about intellectual fear, I am talking about a fear that's down at the blood bone and sinew level, not one that's up in your mind. We have those fears, we have a lot of fears we don't even know we have. They come with out culture, they come with just existence on this planet. We learn it just by breathing and interacting with other people. Remember he stuck his hand through the hole and got a hook in it. That was the fear of the thing that can get you, all right, the boogie man under the bed when you were a child. That was another metaphor. Um, how about people doing NDE, near death experiences? A lot of them go through tunnels, you get in a tunnel, you go through the tunnel, there is a light at the end of that tunnel. They open up and they are in a different reality frame. Why do they go through tunnels? I assure you it is not because the consciousness system is full of tunnels. That's not it. So why do they go through tunnels. They go through tunnels because they have a belief that you can't get somewhere without going. Why do people fly in the out of body, because they have a belief they can't get somewhere they can't get from A to B unless they move. Otherwise if they don't move they are still at A. Well that's a belief, that's not true, when you're out of body you teleport, when you want to go someplace you just change the data stream. Hook into a different data stream and you're there. You don't need to travel, but we have that belief that's why we need tunnels. Okay, so these are just metaphors, um, flying it's just a metaphor. What about the great white light? People get into the larger consciousness system and they often will find this, they've run into this being, it's a great light white being, and they feel the love, they feel the connectiveness and it is so wonderful, it is just one with all and they just rest in that beautiful spot for a moment.
All That Is
what is?
User avatar
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 9999
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Location: Ridgecrest, CA

Re: MBT trilogy in other languages

Post by bette »

Here is 8/12 for proofing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQ_Pxk73 ... re=related

Now are get the defin, the definitive answer to it. If a tree falls in the woods and nobody's there to hear it, does it make a sound? Well here's the answer to that, there is no tree, there is no woods, there's no listener. They're all virtual statistical, and probabilistic.

Okay now how does that work? So a man walks into a woods, okay this is a virtual man walks into a virtual woods, and what's rendered for him? What's rendered for him at that instant, because it's probable because of all the history in the background and so on. That there's a dead tree standing there, now it's kind of wobbly, but it's still standing, and that's what gets rendered to him, okay. Let's say that that's the first time he has been in that woods, he sees that dead tree. Now he goes away and he comes back five years later, and he walks into the woods. And what's rendered to him? A tree lying on the ground. Why? Because that's probable.

Because five years later the probability would say, given the rule-set that because of winds and storms and the natural things that would happen over five years that tree would fall over. So you see that tree was standing, then it was laying on the ground, but it didn't have to fall. It was just rendered to him standing, and it was rendered to him laying on the ground. Because that's when the measurement was made, and when the measurement is made you go to the, reality is just a probability distribution, just like those particles.

Hey, these particles make up all this reality, don't they? I mean everything here is made up from those little particles. And just because it happened with photons, it also happens with electrons, protons, atoms, all massive things are just probability distributions until they're measured, and come into this reality frame; okay that's a fact of physics. So it gets rendered based on the probability. So we find out that this whole concept that is said just to be only used for the very little tiny things in quantum mechanics, only on the subatomic scale does this hold. It doesn't, it holds in everyday life, our whole life is governed by the same principle. Doesn't that seem odd to you that there's this generalized physical principle and it only holds for little things? It holds for everything, it is one principle.

Okay, so let's go on to the next one. I'm seeing Shirley eying that big hook and I need to move on before she gets after me. Okay you are consciousness experiencing a virtual reality generated by consciousness. So you see you are part of the creation as well as part of the, as well as the experiencer. You are the creator and experiencer both. Okay the system is designed to facilitate its own evolution by facilitating our evolution and gives us a PMR where experience and feedback, you know facilitates that.

Now consciousness Intent changes the probabilities. So we talked about that future probable database. Your consciousness can change the future, can change those probabilities. Because your consciousness, the systems consciousness, the reality is just data. Now how does that work? Well you've heard of The Power of Positive Thinking, right 1950 something. Norman Vincent Peale wrote The Power of Positive Thinking. What everybody knows, that's of obvious right? If you think positive, positive things tend to happen. If you're a very negative person and you just grouse about how awful life is, you're going to end up having a lot of awful things to have to deal with. That's the power of positive thinking. A very obvious thing. I know people who create parking spaces for themselves because as they leave their home going to a congested area they'll in their mind visualize a parking space opening up just before they get there, because if it opens up too soon someone else will snag it, right? So they have it open up just in time for them, and they work on that and if they apply their mind to that they find that about 80% of the time they get a parking space, if they don't do it about 80% of the time they don't get a parking space.

People hail taxicabs in the same way that live in cities, you have to visualize that taxi-cap, you have to see it, you have to apply your mind to it. And you can make those things happen for you, all right that's kind of, you know we do that sort of thing a lot. I have another guy who whose says that he walks into a grocery store now and he never gets a cart as he goes in. He materializes a cart inside the grocery store so he can just walk through the door and there is one just sitting on the floor with nothing in it, and he pick that up, and he says that works about 80% of the time when he does it, so. These are little games that you can you know that you can play to see how that works.

Okay well what about prayer, okay, prayer works, why? Because you have people focusing their intent, that intent modifies the probabilities of the way things happen. What about healing? That's how healing work. You heal not because that little black thing, you know disappears, with that you know that imaginary black thing that symbol black thing with that symbol light. All those symbols are doing, those are just tools, metaphors to help you focus your intent. It's your intent that changes the probabilities, consciousness is the only active ingredient going on here, the rest of it is just tools.

All right, um, what about the placebo effect, a very widely known effect in medicine. All right, you give some people a pill with sawdust in it or something, most people say sugar but sugar is so bad for you I can't say that, so. It gives you a pill with sawdust in it or just cellulous, and they take that pill and they're told the same thing that people are told that take the medicine, they are told this is a wonderful new pill, we've just invented it, it's great, it's going to cure your disease. They take that pill, and about 30% of them it makes them better. It's not that it makes them feel better, or just think they are better, it actually heals them, makes them better. How the hell ;), how are they healed, how did the placebo effect work? It works because they now have a positive intent, and that positive intent modifies the probabilities, okay, and once you modify those probabilities your modifying what you're going to find when you take that measurement, right? You're modifying that probability function, you're modifying the, the probability wave function, if you will.

Okay now that takes us to one that's kind of been rampant in the last some years. What about the law of attraction? All right, that law of attraction, that's a um, that's the same sort of thing, right you use your mind and intent to program, they say the universe, but it's really the larger consciousness system to give you what you want. Okay, well that works in that you use that intent, you can modify the probabilities, sure enough, but beware. You have a system that is generated to help you evolve and has this feedback in it so that your intent does modify future probabilities therefore it modifies your future choice that you make, future measurements. The results of future measurements, but at the same time this system is here to help us evolve. That means lowering your entropy by getting rid of ego, getting rid of fear, becoming love. So now take a system that is evolved to respond to your positive intent, and to help you drop your ego. You see you're asking if you use this law of attraction to aggrandize your ego to get stuff because you want it, because it makes you big and important, and so on. Then you're asking a system to use itself against itself. What's probably going to happen is that you may even get what you asked for, but you're also going to get a lesson that comes with it that will help you decrease that ego, and here's an example.

There was a fellow who wanted a hundred thousand dollars, he just wanted, he just, if. His life would be perfect if he had a hundred thousand dollars, so he spent his time focused on that hundred thousand dollars. He saw pictures of a man walking down a corridor in a suit handing him a check for a hundred thousand dollars, he worked on it, and worked on it, and worked on it. About four months later his mother and father, his brother and his sister, and all their children all died in an automobile collision; and he was the sole heir he got a hundred thousand dollars, and that man walked down that aisle and handed it to him just like he saw it. Well, now there's a lesson in ego. So if you're going to ask the system to work against itself, you better be careful not necessarily what you, but why you ask it. It needs to be for the right reasons. So yes, law of attraction works, but its, don't ask it to work with your ego.

All right, synchronicity, how does that work? Let's talk about synchronicity, Jim mentioned that, and I'll explain how that works. A system only has to compute the probability of the next thing happening according to history and the rule set, remember those are the two things. Okay, a weak history provides for multiple solutions. Whenever you have uncertainty, the system only has to abide by those two rules so if any of those two rules is loose then the system has leeway in the solution that it can provide for you. All right, so let's look at an example, um, you go away for two weeks, you come back, you've been in airports, airplanes all day long. Your throat's kind of kind of sore and you'd like a nice carbonated beverage so you open up your refrigerator door, and there's no beer in your refrigerator. And you know that there was at least three or four beer in that refrigerator when you left, and you think, what happened to the beer? Oh, I bet the guy that comes in that gives the dog water and food, he's been drinking my beer I bet. Well, perhaps not, you see unless you took a picture of what was inside that refrigerator it's not really a part of the record, it's just your memory. And you know everybody knows memory plays tricks on you, right? Memory is not that good. So when it comes time to open that door, what are you doing? You're making a measurement. When you open that door you are making a measurement of what's inside that refrigerator. Well if you had taken a picture of what was inside there, and you could see that there was four bottles of beer sitting in there, well then the probability distribution for that four bottles of beer would be really sharp.
All That Is
what is?
User avatar
Normal User
Normal User
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 1:35 pm
Location: Norway

Re: MBT trilogy in other languages

Post by Loka »

Thomas Campbell - The Monroe Institute Lecture - 7/12

Well, yes, they have tapped into the larger consciousness system,
because that's what it is. A system going toward lower entropy,
toward love. And it turns into this white light? They see, right, now,
where are your eyes when you're out of body, right? They're back
in your body. You don't actually have eyes. You don't actually
have ears, but you see and hear things out there. How's that?
It's because you interpret in terms of metaphors of your senses
because that's the only thing you know. If you don't interpret it
in terms of your sense metaphors you can't think about it, much
less talk to somebody else about it. It's not yours to deal with.
So everything .. the data you get has to be converted into some
metaphor applied to your sensory data, because that's all you know.
Okay, so, uh, and why a white light? Well, why do good cowboys
wear white hats? You know, that's part of the archetype. You know,
it's a social belief in our system. Besides a black light would be hard
to see, wouldn't it? Uhm, what about the Silver Cord? If you remember
those people going out of body - it wasn't called 'out of body' in those
days - Bob was the one who coined the word 'OOBE', because he
wanted to get away from all the junk that went with the out of body,
the 'astral projection'. But everybody did astral projection, you know,
Fox, Molden and Carrington, if you read all those old books, everybody
that went out of body had a silver cord. They needed that silver cord
because that was their lifeline. Because their belief was that the spirit
and the body had to be united whole, and if the body lost the spirit,
the body would die and go away, and if the spirit lost the body,
it would, you know, wander forever and be lost and so on, so they
had to be connected. That was a fear. That was a need, so they
connected with the silver cord, okay. Well, where are all the
silver cords now? Bob didn't talk about any 'silver cords'.
Nobody sees silver cords anymore, well, they're just not needed
anymore, because we don't have the same belief system.
For those people that was just like the airhose going down to
the diver, right, it was necessary. If they lost that cord, how could they
get back, you know? It's like the bread crumbs, you know, for
Hanzel and Gretel. That was their way back, and that was their
lifeline, because that was the belief that they needed it. Okay,
so silver cords go away. Uhm .. Specific beings: angels, saints,
relatives. You know, you see Uncle Fred, right, Uncle Fred.
You know, he's been dead ten years, and you go out and
and see Uncle Fred, and there he is. He's in that same plaid shirt,
you know, with that same straw hat, you know, and that corn cob pipe
just the way you remember him. That same smile on his face,
and you talk with Uncle Fred. Well, you think Uncle Fred's been
years without a change of shirt? No, no, you know, we dress
those people based on our own knowledge, because that data that
says 'Uncle Fred' to us, then that's our interpretation. That's our metaphor
we put on it. What about beings in general? When we have a conversation,
we get data that we interpret as conversation, then we turn it into a 'being'.
Because we have no conception of getting data from a rock, right? It has
to be another being if it's talking to us. And if it's a being, of course,
we kind of make it look like it's got a head on top, and shoulders and
arms. We kind of make it look like us, because that's our concept
of 'being'. So those beings that you see out there, that's your metaphor.
The way you dress them is your metaphor. Okay, and those people
that we don't know how to dress, I mean, we know how to dress
Uncle Fred, but we don't know how to dress a lot of those people,
because we don't really know who they are or where they're from.
What do we do? Put a robe on 'em. They all wear robes. Yea, robes
are high fashion in the non-physical. Everybody there wears robes.
Ya ever been in the non-physical and seen somebody naked?
No, never, because we have beliefs generally that make us use
those metaphors. Okay, uhm, let's do a couple of more metaphors.
Those are easy! What about when we heal? What do we do?
We envision the bad stuff that needs to be healed is like a dark
mass of some sort, right? And we put white energy on it.
We project white light to it till we burn all that dark stuff away.
It's the way a lot of us heal. Well, that black thing is just a
metaphor. All right, that white light is just a metaphor.
There is no light. We send somebody energy. Oh, and they
feel better. There is no such thing as energy. This is a virtual
simulation. That's a metaphor. Energy is our metaphor for
something that makes the difference. For something that has
power and can produce an action. Just a metaphor. There's only
one active ingredient: Consciousness. Conscious intent is the
only a active ingredient. That beam of white light is a metaphor.
What about the Hindus? The Hundus have chakras, right, they
take, uh, they have seven chakras and they place them different
places on the body (?). The chakras are just metaphors. Okay,
now, when I say 'just metaphor', you might get the idea that
metaphors really aren't all that important, but metaphors are good!
We need those, that's how we communicate, we can't communicate
without them. It's not that a metaphor 'just' a metaphor means it's
not really real. We need metaphors, that's how we break things into
pieces, that's why I told you there are two databases instead of one.
It's easier for you to see it that way. So we take the data,
we break it into things that's easy for us to see, that makes sense
to us. We give those various pieces properties, right. And then
we can talk about it. And then we can have conversations.
So we work up these models. They're all models.
And they're just models. Okay, so we begin to see that
I am steppin' all over your beliefs here. Uhm, so light's
a metaphor, energy's a metaphor. All of these things
are just metaphors. All right .. Now, so the Nature of a Virtual Reality.
This will be another big step. If you think I'm leading you down,
you know, a rabbit hole now, you know, well, this one's
a big step for you to take, but it's the way it is.
So I'll tell you the way it is. If you remember what your kid
was playing, and I'm going to use World of Warcraft and Sims,
because those are the only two I know. Uh, In World of Warcraft
and Sims, do the people who make those games,
do the programmers who make those games render- they render
the characters, right, they render the images - do they have
to render oxygen for the images to breath? Well, you're thinkin':
"That's ridiculous, of course they don't have to render oxygen
for the characters to breath! They're not real, like us!
They're just made up in a computer. They're just virtual
characters." Well, you know, if one of those World of Warcraft-
characters falls in a lake, or falls in a river, or if, in the Sims,
they get in a swimmingpool, and there's no way to get out,
there's no ladder - what happens to them? They drown!
Why do they drown? Because, there's not enough
oxygen under water for them to breath! That's why they drown.
You don't have to simulate, or render, the details.
You only have to render the effects. And that's true in this reality
as well. There's no reason at all to render any oxygen in this room.
No reason what so ever to render oxygen in this room, okay.
This is a probabilistic reality, a statistical reality. Here's the
measurement: (breathing in) I'm still here, then the measurement
said that there's oxygen in the room. That's because when the
measurement was taken you go to the probability, you go to the
statistical distribution and you make a sample: Is it probable
that there's oxygen in this room? Well, look at the rule-set.
The rule-set says, well, there's trees around, you know,
there's, you know, still there's plankton in the ocean. All these
things that make oxygen, yes, it's probable that it would
be oxygen in this room, well, if it's probable that there's
gonna be oxygen in this room, then we carry on. It keeps
rendering us. We cut down all the trees, kill all the plankton,
then it's not probable that there's going to be any oxygen and
we all fall over, you see. So it's a probability-based reality.
You don't render anything that you don't have to.
That's wasted cycles. Okay, so right now, you're all looking
at the front of the room. In your minds, there's no data
in you datastream that's rendering the back wall. None.
Back wall doesn't exist for you now, because it's not
in your datastream, 'cus you're not looking at it.
You turn around and look at the back wall, then this
is not rendered for you. You only get the data you
need when you need it. It would be wasteful for
computer cycles to render anything that wasn't needed.
In those videogames, your little video character
turns around the corner and in the background you
see the trees spring up, and the mountains, you know,
jump up. That's because their server isn't very fast.
Well, this is working on a cycle of ten to the minus
fourtyfour seconds, let me tell you, it's fast.
You don't notice those kinds of things here.
Okay, now I'm going to- oh, here's one important thing,
that middle of bullet there (?). When something is rendered
it must be consistent both historically with existing data
and causally with the rule-set. Those are the only two rules.
This is a statistical reality. And what it renders is based on
those two rules. It has to be consistent. That's why, when
that particle went through that, was detected at that slit,
it couldn't do anything after it was brought into the reality
as a particle, except go in a straight line like particles do.
Okay, because once it's rendered here, it's here and has
to abide by the rule-set. The rule-set says particles drive
on a straight line unless acted on by some other force.
So as soon as the probability collapses to a physical value,
then you have to abide by the history. You can't have
history jumping around, it has to be consistent, and you
have to abide by the rule-set. Also the same with us.
And you're going to see this is going to explain a whole
lot of things that are right now unexplainable.
Okay, now I'm going to solve one big mystery that we've
all pondered over, and probably laughed at, and we
probably wrote it down as a semantics issue, but you're ...

... end of segment 7/12.
My free eBook "Life is Freedom - Pointers to Enlightenment": https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/283421 - Enjoy :)
User avatar
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 9999
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Location: Ridgecrest, CA

Re: MBT trilogy in other languages

Post by bette »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSu2jRG2 ... re=related

Real high delta function, real sharp, deep probability because you've got the record, it's in the system. So historical um, staying within what historic demands would make that beer have to be there just like the picture. Unless of course you guys stealing your beer, but then you would know for sure. Anyway, if you don't, if it is just you and your memory instead of that sharp probability you have this big kind of broad probability because there may be four there may be three there may be two, there might not be any. And when it takes that sample out of the probability function, it might just get zero. Or it might just get six, or it might get three, okay. So you open that door you make a measurement the wave function collapses to a physical state, and there is a certain number of beer on that refrigerator, and that's what you get.

Now, because the system can do multiple solutions it can manipulate that to nudge you, and that's where synchronicity comes from. That's also where all these anomalous things comes from. How many have put your glasses or keys or something someplace; I left them on my desk. You come back four hours later or the next day, and they are not on your desk. And you find them, you know, in your bedroom or someplace, and you knew you didn't leave them there, you know. How many times do things like that happen to you? Well these anomalies aren't necessarily because you're just getting old and can't remember where you left things. Sometimes that's just the system, the system may not know exactly where you left it because there is no data because the probability function is broad, and when you make the measurement it's just not there. So you live in a very flakey reality you see. But, it will only do that when there is enough uncertainty that there is no violation of either the rule-set, or of the consistency of the history, and we'll see how this plays out in the next slide or two.

Um, okay so what about the synchronicity? So, you look in the refrigerator and there just happens to be no beer because the system wants to nudge you a little bit. So you go get in your car, and you drive down to the neighbor grocery store, and you're driving in the parking lot, and you right drive by this empty space, and you say, okay I'll by and go to back in it. You start to back up, and just abut the time you expect to be entering the space you turn around and look, and just as you look, crunch, you hit a car, and you look back there and say, where did that car come from? All right, where did that come from, it wasn't there, I just looked? And then you think, somebody, some jerk just pulled into that space just as I was backing into it. So you look again, and there's nobody in the car, and you think, boy they must have been fast. So you get out, and you walk around to the car, and you look and see there's really no damage, you were going very very very slow, and there's no damage. And about that time you look up and here's somebody coming out of the store with two bags of groceries obviously, you know, had been in there awhile, and that's their car. So they look at it, and you both look at the thing, and say, well there isn't any damage, and what happens? And what happens, that person ends up being your soul mate, you get married. That person turns out to offer you a job, that person turns out to invite you to their meditation class, and it changes your life, you know. That person, and so on. This is synchronicity, things just happen, there's no beer in the refrigerator, went to the grocery store, went to the car that wasn't suppose to be there, ran into the person that changed your life, or was very meaningful, or that turned you on to a particular book. Or whatever it is, that's how the system works the synchronicity, it's that uncertainty gives it the ability to manipulate you and nudge you, and it can do that as long as it doesn't violate those two principles. It's a statistical reality, we don't live in a objective reality. If I had time I could, I could explain to you why objectivity is only an approximation. We live in a statistical probabilistic reality. Quantum mechanics tells us that, we just don't believe it because we don't know what to do with it. But that's the way our reality is, all right, next.

Now we're going to use this knowledge to solve some problems. Okay the appearance, the false appearance of backwards causality. Now this isn't the experiment I'm going to give you follows what actually happened, but it isn't what actually happened because I am just giving you a kind of character of it that makes it easy to understand. Okay now imagine 20,000 hospital records, these hospital records go back say over two decades, two decades of people coming out of the hospital. You're going to take those 20,000 records you're going break them into 20 group of one thousand randomly separate them into 20 groups of one thousand. Then each group of one thousand you're going randomly break into two groups of 500, one of those groups of 500 is the control group. The other group you're going to use your Intent to improve the health of those people that are in that one group of 500. Okay now this was done, the first one that I know of, was done in Israel, and I think it was a group of Rabbis' and others who prayed for these people or otherwise used their Intent for good health. Well, what they found out was that group that they had prayed for and used their Intent to make them healthier, they had statistically significantly lower hospital stays, shorter hospital stays than did the control group, statistically significant. Well, you know that means that um, there was only probably a 10% or less probability that that would happen that way. Well that's not that amazing, you know, things that are only 10% probability happen every day, but then they did the same with the next group, and the next group, and then next group, and eventually they had all 20 groups. Every one of them that they had prayed for and used their Intent on had shorter hospital stays than the control group, than the other 500. All right now the first one was interesting, but not miraculous. Twenty in a row, now you're talking about 1 in a million, that's like flipping a coin twenty times, and getting a heads every time, hard to do by accident. Okay, so this is, the conclusion they came to is that somehow they were effecting the health of these people in the past. Because this data was old, this wasn't current data, this was old data. That's called reverse causality. This experiment is done a lot of different ways, it's been done over and over. It's been done at Princeton, it's been done lots of places, not necessarily with patients.

It's been done with radioactive isotopes, where they take a radioactive isotope that's decaying, they take two Geiger counters, each Geiger counter should should over time have roughly the same number of counts because when it decays in decays in any particular direction. Then they take this data and years later they will have people bias the results such that say the Geiger counter on the right gets significantly more counts than the one on the left. They have a little, in Para Lab they had a little robot, and that robot is given a random motion in four directions. So they put it down in the middle of a big circular table, and they let it just wander around. They could let it wonder around for days, and it never leaves, you know, about a square foot box where it just wonders around at the center of the table because it's random motion so you get as much going in one direction as the other, so it never goes anywhere. A person applies their Intent to it that little robot walks across the table and falls off the edge. Now these are experiment that have literally been a hundreds of times under immaculate protocol, and scientific inspection. So this is a, a fact that happens.

Okay, why does it happen? Well, obviously they're modifying reality, right? But are they affecting these patients 20 years ago? Of course not. What are they measuring? They're measuring the data, they're measuring that data of those hospital patients, those hospital stays (stats?) is what they're measuring. And they're biasing the data because that data hasn't been brought into this reality yet, no body's has looked at that data, so that data is still in the future. I mean, the statistical results of that data is still in the future nobody has calculated it yet. And because it's still in the future it's just probability just like everything else that is in the future, it only exist in probability. And like everything that exist as probability, conscious Intent can modify the probability. So that's how they do that. Now let's say that somebody, um takes that data, and before it's given to the Rabbis they do a statistical analyze of what's in both pieces, this 500 and in that 500, right. They do a statistical analyze and they know exactly what those hospital, average hospital stays are for both groups. They give it to the Rabbis to work on, and they work on it, and they work on it, and of course the Rabbis didn't know that this has been done. Guess what? They couldn't do it, they couldn't bias it one bit, it just didn't work. Why? Once the data's here there's historical precedence it has to stay here, you can't change it, that would be against the rule set, it wouldn't be coherent history. All right now what if they, just before they gave it to the Rabbis, they just looked at the statistics for the whole set of 1000, but not the two individual groups of 500, and then gave it to the Rabbis, would the Rabbis be able to do it? Yes, but guess what else would happen? As much as the group that they prayed for went to shorter hospital stays the other group would have to go an equal amount to longer hospital stays because they have a constraint now that they didn't have before. I don't know that they've ever done that experiment, but if they did that's the way it would have to come out because that's the way this works, okay. So if you just looked at the whole 20,000 and did statistics on that, then yes you could bias things, but again now you would have a constraint, and you have to meet that constraint because now that data is in this reality frame. Now let's take another example, let's say that they took this data, and they did measure all the groups of 500 and they knew exactly what the statistics where on all of them, and they put that in a drawer, and that building caught fire and the data went away. All right, now they can pull that data back out of another computer someplace where it's still never, statistics haven't been done in the computer, they just were done once and no record was kept except what was in that drawer, and the guy who did it, well jeez, you know, there were..
All That Is
what is?
User avatar
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 144
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 4:20 pm
Location: PMR

Re: MBT trilogy in other languages

Post by Froggy »

Alright, here it is, part 12 of 12:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olmkfXNR ... re=related


One: get rid of the ego, move toward love, compassion. You see, it's all there. It explains all those things. Why c (speed of light) has to be constant, why particle are probability distributions... Well physicists today are worried over the interpretation of that. How do you interpret that these particles are probability distributions? There is no interpretation. There is just probability distributions. That's the way reality works.

Everything is a probability distribution until the measurement is made. Our whole reality works that way.

The purpose of your existence.
What's important, what's not.
How people can know things that they shouldn't be able to know.
All these psi experiments, like ((name? Raiden?)) experiment.
How people know the unknown.
What happens after you die.
How personal psi experiences work.
Paranormal information. You know we're all netted, it's all in these databases.
Past, present and future.
Precognitive dreams: you're just getting things out of the probable future database.
Healing: you're modifying the probabilities
Remote viewing: if it's a remote viewing inside this reality, you're just getting data out of the databases.
When you see auras - you know I've seen auras for probably 30 years. It's just data. You can define that output however you want. You're connecting to the database and getting data. The aura is just a metaphor. It's a visual metaphor for the data.

((unclear)) So, the failure of science defines consciousness in the brain, or delimits the effects of consciousness. Because it's not consciousness.
We finally answered Fredkin's big question. He said "Other. It's in Other. We don't know what that is". Well Dr Fredkin, consciousness is the computer.

Ok, that gets you now to the point that I was at when I first came out to see Bob Monroe, all those years ago. When I first came out to see Bob Monroe, my thought was: "is this guy nuts or what?". Well you have to be thinking that because unless you have extensive experience within the larger consciousness system you really have to have that question and that attitude. You have to be sceptical as well as open-minded.

Consistency is strong among people who have experienced. You got back and look at Lao Tzu who started Taoism, and he expressed his understanding of reality. And it's obvious that Lao Tzu understood reality at a very deep level but the best he could do was writing poetry. My conclusions agree with his conclusions. The difference between my Big TOE and Lao Tzu's is that his was poetry and mine is science. It's all logical and it derives from the ground up and it explains all the data.

So far we've not found any data or anything that we couldn't explain this way and we are looking for things that we cannot explain.
Ok, last thing that I'd like to leave you with is that Truth, Big Truth, cannot be your truth until you experience it. What you have to do is: find out. And if I give you nothing else, I'd like to give you a spark of ambition and interest and gumption to get out there and find out. It's not as hard as you think. That's it, thank you very much ladies and gentlemen.

((The End))
I hear, and I forget. I see, and I remember. I do, and I understand.
Normal User
Normal User
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 7:58 am

Re: MBT trilogy in other languages

Post by Kathryn »

quamta wrote:Bette,

the word "consciousness" is somewhat ambiguous in Spanish. You can translate it either as "conciencia" or "consciencia". I think that if you translate it as "conciencia", even though one of its meanings is related to being aware of one's existence or the mechanism by which one perceives reality, it also means something like "the awareness of good and evil through one's own actions". I think people tend to associate "conciencia" with the latter meaning, not so if you translate it as "consciencia", which is culturally closer to the meaning "being aware" (i.e. perceiving reality through the senses, the opposite of being unconscious maybe). However, somehow, "consciencia" sounds worse than "conciencia", even within this context, don't ask me why. Both of them are probably correct anyhow.
Hola a todos. Somos el equipo Kathryn-Carlos (primero las damas), dispuesto a adjuntar nuestro grano de arena al trabajo de traducción que desarrollais. Kathryn es inglesa -ha vivido 30 años en España- y yo español.
Encontramos conveniente puntualizar que, en castellano, "conciencia" y "consciencia" no son en absoluto sinónimos. CONCIENCIA es el conocimiento que el ser humano tiene de sí mismo -alude, por lo tanto, a un saber- pudiendo asimismo significar la facultad que permite censurar los propios actos (en referencia a la moral), mientras que la CONSCIENCIA se refiere a aquello que en lengua inglesa se conoce por "awareness". En este sentido, "ser consciente de..." equivale a " to be aware of...".
Que los términos "conciencia" y "consciencia" NO SON intercambiables se echa de ver claramente en que, por ejemplo, un hombre para actuar sea con o sin conciencia, ha de estar obligadamente con consciencia, pues, caso contrario, ni siquiera tendría capacidad de conocer.
Conciencia es un "sub-set" de la consciencia.

Sobre la discusión de la traducción de "intent" bien por "propósito", bien por "intención", tenemos por cierto que no son totalmente equivalentes, o sea sinónimos.

¿Tom va a supervisar la fidelidad de las transcripciones antes de comenzar la traducción? Si es así, y si os parece, podeis indicarnos la/las secciones para traducir o bien repasar las ya traducidas (nosotros hemos ya transcrito los primeros 20 minutos del video TMI (version completa) y la traducción está en marcha).
Un saludo a todos, Carlos y Kathryn
Last edited by Kathryn on Thu Jun 03, 2010 8:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
Normal User
Normal User
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 7:58 am

Re: MBT trilogy in other languages

Post by Kathryn »

Aunque en el lenguaje corriente se emplean como sinónimos, una más sutil observación permite considerar una diferencia semántica en cuanto que la intención es anterior al propósito:
Si tengo intención cualquiera, pero no la pongo en práctica, de ello simplemente se sigue una ausencia de acción; pero si tengo un propósito (o sea, me propongo algo) y no lo cumplo, entonces se sigue, además de la dicha ausencia de acción, un sentimiento de íntimo fracaso que no se da en la intención no realizada (o al menos no se da en el mismo grado) y que produce frustración, tristeza y otros sentimientos concomitantes.
La serie de causas y efectos que estamos considerando en esta discusión es la siguiente:
serie.png (13.64 KiB) Viewed 7232 times

En lo referente a la discusión sobre el término conSciencia, es tal la fuerza de penetración del lenguaje de uso corriente (o sea fuera de los ámbitos específicos de los diversos campos del conocimiento) que conceptos tales como conciencia Universal, conciencia Cósmica y similares son ampliamente utilizados y correctamente entendidos en su significado aunque, desde el punto de vista de la corrección gramatical, debieran sustituirse por conSciencia Universal, conSciencia Cósmica, etc. En este sentido estamos de acuerdo con Quamta en su referencia a que la palabra conSciencia suena peor (se aleja de la más corrientemente utilizada y resulta por ello extraña).
Nosotros proponemos el uso, en toda traducción al castellano de MBT, de consciousness por conciencia y de awareness por conSciencia, SIEMPRE añadiendo a continuación entre paréntesis el término del original inglés correspondiente:
consciousness....conciencia (consciousness)
awareness.......conSciencia (awareness)
Consideramos además indispensable, al margen de la conveniencia o no de las "notas a pie de página", la inclusión antes del prólogo en volumen traducido, de unas "Notas del equipo de traducción" aclaratorias de estos y otros extremos.
Un saludo, Carlos
Last edited by Kathryn on Wed Jun 02, 2010 12:46 pm, edited 4 times in total.
User avatar
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 9999
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Location: Ridgecrest, CA

Re: MBT trilogy in other languages

Post by bette »

Ready to be proofed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W30PxwvA ... re=related

Okay, um, let's see where was I? All reality frames and everything contained in them are all part of the same consciousness system, they are connected, and they all have the same mission, and that is to lower entropy. What's the difference between physical and nonphysical reality frame? Only the observers perspective, nothings different, there's nothing fundamental between the dream state and this state, they're just two different points of view. All right, one last point and that's your video lag. You know when you do a virtual reality game the big bugaboo thing, the big thing that is a problem is video lag. Okay, if you are playing World of Warcraft you can help fix that video lag by speeding up your computer. There's two things that causes it, one is being last in line, and the second is being slow. Okay, in a WOW, in a World of Warcraft video game you're both. You're last in line because the server has to compute first, and it sends it out to you so you're last in line to get the data. And then your video card, your computer, your network is slow. So what can you do there? Well the only thing you can do there is speed up your video card, and your computer, and your network, you can't change that you're last in line.

Now with consciousness it's just the opposite. What slow in this virtual reality, what slow? We are, it's this physical body. It is this virtual body has to abide by the rule set, the rule set that evolved us, right, this whole, our whole planet evolved out of this rule set. Right, there was the big digital bang in the computer, you have a bunch of energy, you put it into a tight spot and you let it evolve eventually you end up with our universe, and the you end up with this planet, then you end up with us, we all evolved under this rule set so we represent that rule set. You can't change the rule set so slow is fixed, but you can change whether or not it comes last. So here's what we would do, um before I get to that let me have one other one, you have to understand between little consciousness and big consciousness. Little consciousness, little c consciousness is your intellectual awareness, that's what we call our individual consciousness. What we see and hear, that's our little physical matter consciousness. Big C Consciousness is the big Consciousness System, it's what you really are, okay. Now big Consciousness System computes and makes little c consciousness. You have a data stream, in big C consciousness, that data stream is interpreted in big C Consciousness, and then it is put, it is given to you here as your reality. You then have that interpretation, this is your reality, that's a little c consciousness, your awareness.

Okay so how would this, how should this system work, we're going to see, we're going to make a prediction here, and we're going see how it works. First thing that happens is that reality is probable, right. We have reality starts in the probable database. The very next thing that happens is your body is going to start to move, okay. Now we haven't got of the present yet, we are still in the probable reality. So before you even make your choice your body, we're going to put that body in next, we're going to move that body up as high in the sequence of events as possible so we decrease the video lag. We're going to start that body moving before we've even decided what it is the body's going to do. Moving the body up, now the next thing we do then is to, we get to the present where we make a choice. Now the body started to move based on what was the probable choice we'd make, and if its wrong the body has to stop moving, and go back and start to do something else. If it's right then the body can keep on moving as we progress with our choices. And then the very last thing that happens is that the big C Consciousness computes the little c consciousness, and we have awareness. All right, let's look and see how that plays out.

All right, participation in future events. What you see in italics is not my words, those are words written by Dr Craig Hogan, he made a list of, and I quote, "unexplainable, repeatable, well documented, scientific experiments." Okay, now we're going to go through those experiments, and we'll see how each one of them works so they no longer will be unexplainable. The first was the Dean Radin's study showing the body reacts to a calm or disturbing picture six or seven seconds ahead of time. Now, what he did is he had a computer with a random number generator going on and accessing a library of pictures. So that computer would grab a random number which is associated with a picture go get the picture, and show it to someone. Now the time between when the random number got generated, and the picture was shown was probably milliseconds. It doesn't take a computer long to grab a picture, and show it; certainly no more than tenths of seconds. Six seconds earlier people would react to the picture. So they were going to show them something horrible; now they didn't react in their intellect, they reacted subtly in their body. The electrochemical mechanical processes in the body is what we have to speed up, it's not the mental part, that's fast. It's the slow, has to abide by the rule set of this physical virtual reality stuff we got to speed up. So they hooked them up to where they could see what glands secreted, what the EEG was doing at fine levels, you know the little potentials of the muscles, all this sort of stuff. So these people were wired to see what their bodies got, electrochemical processes going on. Seconds, six seconds before the computer chose the picture they would start to react to a horrible or to maybe a beautiful picture, and horrible and beautiful things would cause different secretions, different reactions, and they could measure these. Well how does that happen? Well obviously, you know, we know. Probable reality database allows participation. Well what about that random number coming out of that computer? Well you know, that's a virtual computer just like we're virtual bodies, you know. The Consciousness System is playing all ends of this game, so it knows, it isn't really a random number, it's a pseudo random number, there's an algorithm that produces that random number, and the Consciousness System whose generating that computer knows what that is, it knows what picture is coming up, and it knows what pictures coming up as far ahead as it wants to.

Okay, there was another one. It wasn't on his list but, it should have been, called the Bright shaft potential. That was back in the 80's and what they found out, is they hand these subjects, and they'd say, okay when the bell rings raise your hand. Well they'd find that very fine measurements of the muscles and the brain that the motion would start about a second and a half before the bell would ring, so the arm, the right hand would start to come up about a second before the bell would ring. It's called the Bright shaft Potential, again it's measured, it's old hat back in the 80's this is, this is science. And it's the same reason, right. We start the body first so we avoid the video lag problem, so it seems like it works that way. Now everyone gets this data ahead of time, but you don't get it far enough ahead of time to operate on it, and you don't get it at the intellectual level. Little c consciousness isn't involved in this, this is big C Consciousness.

All right, reverse causality, we already talked about that. I just want to point out that what these, what he wrote about it, and this is the misperception people have. He said, somehow it has an effect on an experimental group of cardiac intensive care patients. It didn't have any effect on the patients, what happened to those patient is what happened to the patient. That's part of the record, that came into the system, that measurement was already made. What it affected was the data, okay, the data hadn't been analyzed yet. The problem is that people believe in, I don't now, objective deterministic reality, and they think that because what the patients did the data has to reflect it, just like they believe that what those Geiger counters got, you know, that the data has to reflect it. The clicks on a Geiger counter recorded at one time can be influenced; the clicks on the Geiger counter weren't influenced, the Geiger counter clicked however it clicked. It was the data describing those clicks that got modified; the actual clicks on the Geiger counter were gone, they're lost, there's not in the record anywhere. The only record is that data, it's still in the future, what that data is, how many clicks were in each one. You can manipulate that because it is in the future. Um, that Consciousness can effect machines that use energy; random number generators, random noise generators, telephones, recorders, and all that stuff. It doesn't effect the machine, it just effects the output from the machine. See you have to divorce the idea that the output that the machine makes has to be the output of what happened, of what the machine did. Those two aren't necessarily the same, we live in a probable reality.

Okay, the last one I think it's the last one, yeah. Is the fact that no one has been able to show that consciousness, that the brain produces consciousness. In fact, when they put remote viewers and other people in Faraday cages which takes away all electromagnet fields, and other such things, it doesn't make any difference. They can remote view just as easily in a Faraday cage as they can any place else, and it doesn't matter where their target is, whether it's on the other side on the planet or not. They don't see any time lapse, that's because there is time lapse, but the times are very small. Okay, so Consciousness is not physical, of course you can't isolate it with physical things. It's information, information is nonphysical.

All right this takes us to the basically the last chart, the value of a theory. Unfortunately in the real world the value of a theory is whether or not it supports current scientific beliefs, but it shouldn't be. We know that the actual value of a theory is whether or not it explains what is known, and then it has to explain what is unknown, and that has to be verified by experiment. And here is a whole list of things that are now paradoxical or mysterious that this explains completely. And here is a whole list of things that new information is being predicted. Okay so we have all of that, I won't bore you with all of that. Okay, like how Intent changes random distributions such as Princeton Frontier Science labs. How and why backward causality works. Why Lao Tzu and the Buddha, you know, what were, what was Lao Tzu and the Buddha talking about, all right, all, we are all..
All That Is
what is?
Post Reply

Return to “What's Next?”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests