Parallel Dimension and Ideal Future

[rocket art]

Perhaps to simplify, there's need to 'take' away:

1. closemindedness because it takes away views that 'add up' to wider perspectives;

 

2. logic-bias because it takes away other tools that 'add up' to more effective means of answering our questions.

 

3.history-bias because it takes away the more truthful perspectives that otherwise 'add up' to a better understanding of the whole of human history.

 

I actually wrote this in the later part of my post, but decided to post this first. The next post was actually written prior to my writing this.

[rocket art]

I think it's more like 'add up' instead of 'take away'. Whatever people have learned to believe, they do so because they discover 'truth' to it. Such should not be taken away, but that does not mean it's the only monopoly there is, and one cannot insist on closing one's mind to other views. Perhaps what you meant by taking away, regarding this situation, would be closemindedness , because it 'takes away' the insights that would otherwise 'add up' for wider perspectives.

 

Am also new to encountering more comprehensive discussion regarding my 'Rocket Theory', but I prefer this because it is a continuing process of learning. And with such view a holistic perspective of fusing philosphical, visual imagery, and scientific logic would indeed be preferable. I then define logic as a tool, but not an institution, in which the latter results to logic-biased conditioning that only logic is capable of answering our questions. And yet I highly regard logic as a very important factor, but not in the view that it limits instead. Therefore with such perspective, it is preferable to 'take away' the logic-bias, and 'add up' instead a more holistic approach, where creativity and philosophical ideas, as well as logic reasoning, being means of seeking for our answers.

 

Also, it may not be smart for us to perceive of our past history according to what's being presented in history books only, or what's allowed for the mainstream to know of, because surely history is much wider than what the mainstream records had presented. not to mention that history was being written for the benefit of those who emerged on the upper end of the past struggles. The Human History should be perceived with the 'adding up' of more general and larger scenarios, perhaps even extending beyond our planet, and the 'taking away' of biased treatment to history that may benefit only those who gained the upper end, but not necessarily the benefit of all of humanity.

 

There's a phrase I once heard from one of the internet vids. The narrator said something like: "Think with your heart and feel with your mind." It doesn't mean to 'take away' the other conventional means, but rather to 'add up' for the heart not just to feel, but also to 'think,' and for the mind not just to think but also to 'feel'. A more holistic view, in other words.

 

 

 

 

(I was still in the process of re-editing my posts to reply with request to simplify it in 3 sentences (which I did with the first post), when I mistook the 'post quick reply' button when I should have clicked the 'go advanced button'. Suddenly, in just a matter of seconds someone deducted 'rep' buttons when I'm still rechecking my post. That's not fair treatment.)

[InfiniteNow]

Ric,

 

Buddy... pal... Have you heard the term "Dead horse" before? Understand the metaphor of beating one? :)

[rocket art]

Ric,

 

Buddy... pal... Have you heard the term "Dead horse" before? Understand the metaphor of beating one? :)

 

Understand the necessity of transcending beyond the conventional paradigms then. Do not confine me to such conventionalities, I had even gotten over with a near death experience when I was a little kid to get a bit of glimpse of this view.

 

There's more that needs to be addresed, mainstream science is lacking in metaphysics knowledge to its disadvantage, supressed and unwittingly fueled by conventional mode of thinking of society; zero point technology can no longer be denied; the threat of oil depletion cannot be underestimated, and the dark scenario of a bogus NWO with microchipped slave-society still await to reward a gullible populace unwary of a bleak Future that they allowed to be controlled by a selfish few.

 

Now back to the topic of Ideal Past while we're still at it.

[rocket art]

You should also be aware that there is need to view an anti-thesis (i.e. bleak future) of Ideal Future in order to define what it is. Yet even both of these, being prediction, may be aptly treated in such manner yet to constitute as reality, but not yet reality in itself.

 

In the same manner as the Ideal Past is to be extracted from among the vast resource of memory as we may identify the classics, glories, nostalgia, etc. that differentiate this 'ideal'. These data must have a sense of Pattern to it, and such Pattern (viewed as tool, and not as rule) would necessitate the envisioning of the Ideal Future. Such Pattern may be inherently embedded deep within the individual, for the individual has the innate sense to differentiate between what is beauty or otherwise, good or bad, symmetry from chaos.

 

An example for such innate Pattern may be the integral symmetry of the golden mean to any artwork (saw it in mine, even when it's inadvertent), the fibonacci series always found in nature. This Pattern may constitute what I perceived as [math]sqrt c^2[/math], where such data are embedded in the implosive Ideal Past, and perceived as the rest mass unit [math]c[/math] for the Present. Nature will then be the catalyst for such knowledge data, just as all cultures start with the inspiration from one's natural environment, until these eventually evolve in its complexity.

 

My 'Rocket Theory' is very dynamic. Your comment at comparing it with the term as "dead horse" is erroneous.

[CraigD]

What top three points, preferably limited to single sentences, should they walk away from that dialogue with you in order for you to classify them with the descriptor "understanding?"

Perhaps to simplify, there's need to 'take' away:

1. closemindedness …

I think it's more like 'add up' instead of 'take away'. …

I think there’s been a misunderstanding of idiomatic English.

 

“To walk away with”, in the context above is a figure of speech meaning “understand”, so what’s being asked is “what 3 things would you like to have people understand about Rocket Theory?”

[rocket art]

Thanks, I think it's clearer now. I could point out three, among other things, that we may discuss as we progress with what I initially termed as "Rocket Theory".

 

1. Be aware of the source of Energy from within each individual. It cannot be denied that our profound existence in itself, is a manifestation of Energy, and yet such perspective had seemed unfamiliar with us. This is also consistent with my other "rocket philosophy" that Consciousness is the source of gravity (but this is not similar to Solipsism).

 

2. Detached treatment of conventional Science to the Human Phenomenon may no longer be appropriate. There is need to be impartial to how we deal with answers, but with imbalanced and unjust events occuring in the world today, people cannot be rendered mere commodities to economic machineries. Humanity cannot afford a Future ruled by Machinery rather than being in control of one's destiny. Neither should it be subjective, but rather seen as Human Phenomenon being relative to his/her environment.

 

3. Fusion of polarities. Between positive-negative, human-machine, logic-creativity, Science-Art, etc. It is not the compromise, but rather the synchronicity of Ideals. No side among conscious entities can claim monopoly of answers.

 

Discussing these may also be a new approach to me, and it would be interesting to share ideas. I can perceive a general vision of 'canvas' of "Rocket Theory" that may guide along the way, yet this time we may start discussing the detail 'strokes' of i

[rocket art]

I guess there's really need to discuss further about this because what had been talked about were just tips of the larger picture. I guess we could start discussing about Ideal Past.

 

Dwelling on this, the deeper we probe on the data embedded in humanity's history, the more it would be preferable. Conventionally, especially with the West, the religious agenda of the origin of humanity's creation (i.e. Adam and Eve) predominates mainstream view of the beginning of human history. Yet I had done some research through internet and other books, keeping an open minded approach rather than relying on mainstream norms and limits, and was impressed to discover far greater realities. It's also impressive to observe that despite the diversity of the sources, they tend to fit in like jigsaw puzzle. Sometimes one could even falsify other speculations regarding these hidden pasts because the general information had been consistent. Even the secular viewpoint of evolution would not contradict, but instead would enhance both of these views (w/ creationism), and would even answer olden mysteries that baffle human history.

 

At the most fundamental level, how such knowledge used to be well known in the Past, yet forgotten and relegated as mere myths in the Present, could well be revived just as what occured during a civilization's renaissance.

 

The reawakening to such Ideal Past knowledge could strengthen the most fundamental aspect of our existence, and with the advent of the modern era where such tools as critical thinking and Science had established itself, it should be appropriate for people to be perceptive to the barage of information that the internet era had provided, and making use of such tools to decipher throves of knowledge, rather then to outrightly dismiss such seemingly fantastic views due to mediocre conditioning of collective society.

 

At the fundamental level implying that such knowledge from Ideal Past being revealed nowadays by internet, may actualy be intuitively inherent within each individual even at embryonic stage, as discussed in this video I recently discovered:

Drunvalo Melchizedek - Sacred Geometry 1 of 2 - Google Video http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8673723312620286523&q=sacred+geometry

 

The speaker discussed about other seemigly intriguing topics, even matter-of-factly talked about extraterrestrials. To allay skepticism regarding such and to lessen any unecessary debates about their existence, one may see this:

The Disclosure Project May 9th 2001 National Press Club Conference - Google Video http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1166743665260900218&q=disclosure+project

 

The views being presented here require further discussion and making use of one's reasoning and scientific tools would be encouraged, combined with intuitive instinct to decipher such issues that may be necessary means to pave way for Ideal Past discussions.

[rocket art]

I was wondering if the philosophical views of my 'Rocket Theory' may pave way for the formulation of AI.

[rocket art]

I feel compelled to expand further the probing the mysteries of Humanity's ancient Past. Recently much discussion had surfaced on the other threads that dwelt on 11 millennia and pyramids. It would be appropriate that, as much as possible, the attempt to probe on the Past should require the dependable tools on archeology, carbon dating, and other scientific evidences and its approximations.

 

We could start with the mysteries surrounding the Pyramids in Egypt. It is now clearly evident that the degree of sophistication and the elegant mathematical precision (such as fibonacci series) embedded on such structure should provide clues that our Past used to acquire ancient knowledge in which modern society is yet attempting to decipher. It will not be an intelligent move to merely dismiss such treasures of knowledge that the structures had presented. These must be probed deeper.

 

Recently there was a study made in which it was discovered that the formations of the 3 egyptian pyramids seem to mimic the 3 star formation of the belt of Orion. Also there was an approximation that alignment had occured between these stars and the pyramids dating back further into 10500 BC. It was also noted that during that time, the Nile may have mirrored the location of the Milky Way.

Astronomical Alignment in Egyptian Pyramids

 

Although evidences suggest that the pyramids may have been physicaly built around 2500 BC, the ground plan may have started as early as 10500 BC.

 

However, I may point out an opinion. I remember an archeological study on the pyramids located in the america's that the locals had the habit of reconstructing their pyramids by layering the old one with an exactly new replica, with the result such that the new became much larger than it was before, although the features remained similar to the original. This possibility cannot be disregarded either.

 

There's need to continually probe deeper into the past, and it could be attempted while dutifully following the reliable tools offered by science today so as not to divert the intention of making it as accurate as possible. Even the ancient knowledge seemed revealed like profound 'Ideal' treasures that we seem to have forgotten from our Past, and may even be profoundly applicable how we face the challenges of the Future. The thread may start its journey with attempt to decipher the egyptian pyramids, and then we can discuss further from there to be able to seek from our revealed history the gems from dross as we envision for a better future.

[Pyrotex]

The first is what I would term as Ideal Past, wherein it incorporated our classics, myths, legends, glories that we put into our memory. This reality is implosive, centripetal, that’s why I will have it in squareroot. The pattern of Ideal Past will be: E=mass times square root of c^2...

Rockart,

I'm sorry to be the one to break this to you, but your "theory" cannot be followed or understood by a rational mind. I'm being very serious.

 

What does it mean for "reality" to be "implosive, centripetal"? It does not mean anything. Reality is not a concept that can possibly have those attributes. What does "the pattern of the Ideal Past" mean? It means nothing. And how can this "pattern" be [math]E=mc^2[/math] ? That equation equates matter with energy, now, then and tomorrow. It has nothing to do with defining the Past, Ideal or otherwise.

 

There is hardly a single sentence anywhere in your linked post that makes any sense whatsoever. If it DOES make sense to you, Rockart, then you may have other problems as well. Indeed, perhaps the questions I have asked above make no sense to you!

 

I don't wish to be mean or judgemental, and you can continue posting until you become seriously annoying. But you are going to get nowhere here at Hypography with your fanciful "mentalverse". And make no mistake, Rockart, it is a fantasy. It is not Science.

[rocket art]

Rockart,

I'm sorry to be the one to break this to you, but your "theory" cannot be followed or understood by a rational mind. I'm being very serious.

 

What does it mean for "reality" to be "implosive, centripetal"? It does not mean anything. Reality is not a concept that can possibly have those attributes.

 

Ok. It's good to know that you are very serious, you should. I assure you that I'm serious too, yet the experience to discover something from the serious is fun.

 

Implosive does mean anything, how do you differentiate between memory and your very present state right now? Is it not that we store our memory within us (implosive) , and the very present existence that we are right now is a complex interaction of our selves and the environment outside us? Each moment in space-time dimension is relative to our being observer (as Einstein had incorporated it with his formula), and us being observers play the vital role in affecting our observed space time decision with our every decision.

 

You are challenged to perceive this with the wholistic capacity of your mind, and not just a rational mind because it is not enough.

 

What does "the pattern of the Ideal Past" mean? It means nothing. And how can this "pattern" be [math]E=mc^2[/math] ? That equation equates matter with energy, now, then and tomorrow. It has nothing to do with defining the Past, Ideal or otherwise.

It definitely, profoundly means something, because my concept of Ideal Past distinctively delineates itself from the vast data of our conventional Past. An example, during the reign of Moorish Spain, the inhabitants had experienced a far more advanced culture and technology compared to the rest of Europe(and may helped trigger the reinaissance in Europe, and a far more tolerant society composed of Christians, Jews and Muslims, so unlike the rest of Europe during that time, until it all came to an end when the Spanish Inquisition arrived. (see here http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-768956312207897325&q=moors+spain). Yet such 'ideal' state, until recently, weren't much revealed in mainstream perspctive of what 'Past' really was because those that invaded ensured that society should perceive of the Moors as treacherous opponents (they even commemorated festivals that instill on the populace the Moors as detestable enemies). Such twisting of the Past had caused much strife in the Present, because the knowledge of such 'ideal' past had been supressed in the mainstream sources. These "awareness" have everything to do in redefining the Past, and will inevitablyaffect how we in the Present will mold our Future.

 

Our history have always been relative to how we perceive it as observers. Be aware that Einstein's formula had incorporated the observer by assigning thae largest unit that can be possibly equated, i.e. lightspeed in a vacuum.

 

There is hardly a single sentence anywhere in your linked post that makes any sense whatsoever. If it DOES make sense to you, Rockart, then you may have other problems as well. Indeed, perhaps the questions I have asked above make no sense to you!

 

Actually, the question you asked did make sense to me, and I see your perception as limiting yourself because you so rely, fanatically, on logic, when the capacity of the human brain is capable of achieving more than the logical part (i.e. creativity, imagination, etc.). Do not disregard the Human capacity to create. It does make sense to perceive logic as a tool, but for you to perceive logic as the sole means of defining what Reality really is, as if an institution rather than as tool, such in itself will be utterly nonsense.

 

I don't wish to be mean or judgemental, and you can continue posting until you become seriously annoying. But you are going to get nowhere here at Hypography with your fanciful "mentalverse". And make no mistake, Rockart, it is a fantasy. It is not Science.

 

I will definitely challenge conventional paradigms that attempt to set limits and boundaries of my being a Conscious Human, and I am capable. I believe Science rejoices when obsolete podiums are continually challenged in the quest for truth. Real scientists are not mediocre thinkers and definitely do not make the mistake of disregarding the creative, imaginative capacity of the mind. If you claim to be a scientist, then attempt and struggle to be one because there is a big difference to being a real scientist, and being merely a technician.

[Nikola Tesla]

Underdeveloped....I mean no disrespect......you are too quick to jump on a beam of light propelling itself wayward towards feasible misconceptions.....your theory is by all means well stated, but under-cerebrated.

[rocket art]

Underdeveloped....I mean no disrespect......you are too quick to jump on a beam of light propelling itself wayward towards feasible misconceptions.....your theory is by all means well stated, but under-cerebrated.

 

And I wish to develop and refine it by interaction here.

 

I tend to be more attuned with my intuitive, creative side and I express my thoughts in visual manner, rather than in numbers. With such in mind regarding my approach, perhaps we can communicate, and I will attempt by using the visual figure that you mentioned, as the means:

 

In the expansive dimension of the now, the Present, as the probabilities of its destination expands, the beam of light (i.e. data, knowledge) may be put in a situation that instead propel towards wayward, feasible misconceptions of reality due to the many probabilities of such expansive nature. Such may be so because in the context of the implosive aspect of memory, i.e., Past, its journey must follow distinct patterns imprinted in memory. A manipulation to the distinctiveness of such patterns, such as supression of real accounts from the Past (let's term this as 'Ideal' Past), would then result towards what you termed as 'misconceptions'. But, if such misconceptions were the intended results to profit the manipulator, the latter would then define 'misconception' as the perception of 'reality' itself.

 

However, if someone becomes 'aware' of the manipulation from the hidden accounts of the Ideal Past, that person would then question the 'misconception' of 'reality'. But then, his/her peers, for a long time being conditioned that the view of 'reality' is one that had been defined by the manipulator, they would then tend to brand the 'aware' person as 'misconceived'.

 

The issue of feasible 'misconception' still remains in question.

[Nikola Tesla]

Try if you will it to be.the conception of what i denote ideal-probability of inaccuracy......denoted by q.

[Nikola Tesla]

You are as you assert- a thinker....I myself heed the unwritten laws of expression through words and picture opposed to the contrary.....If ever any other man be proud of his or her acomplishments- it should be you.....for it is you that has broken the conception of tradition....and it is only this rebellion that will direct abderites towards future events intended to dissect ignorance.

[pgrmdave]

Such twisting of the Past had caused much strife in the Present, because the knowledge of such 'ideal' past had been supressed in the mainstream sources. These "awareness" have everything to do in redefining the Past, and will inevitablyaffect how we in the Present will mold our Future.

 

Reality exists whether we think it does or not. What people are taught of the past, and think of the past, has absolutely no bearing on the past. In addition to which, the universe does not care one bit about human consciousness. It existed long before us, and will exist long after us. Breaking with tradition is not admirable in and of itself. Breaking tradtion is only a good thing if good things come of it. I see no actual scientific theory in your 'theory', and would challenge you to come up with a prediction that it makes that can be tested, and a way that it can be falsified. A scientific theory MUST make predictions (or it is useless) and MUST be falsifiable (or it is not science).