“Now
about those planes. There aren’t any planes
in a purely geometric sense. If a spirit has experienced
anything, it is that experience is never flat
level–ups and downs and sudden turns. So when we...
‘not me!’ Ok, when we but not him say plane,
we mean an understanding and experience of existence
which is continuous and consistent--without any inherent
junctures which would invalidate either meaning or
consistency--not that the planes are flat. So rather than
planes, we might say films.
“On the surface of a film, we have our reality. And
it seems plane-like as long as we stay on the surface,
just as the Earth appears flat as long as we don’t
move about much.
“So I don’t want anyone getting all snippy
about flat, or any other physical nature of
planes. They are metaphors. Every plane is a metaphor.
Some are metaphors for flat, and these are
metaphors for consistent and continuous. Ok,
I’ve got that out of my system!” (11/23/2008 -
I#121)
“What if planes are not flat and, therefore, with
edges. What if planes are edgeless, but not by reason of
infinity but by reason of finitude. Then planes become
the surface of spheres.
We have nothing to sphere but spheres themselves. Hi Falla...
arf. Hi Sandy... ARF. Go play.
“So, spheres as the containing yet edgeless arenas
of experience. And the spheres intersecting, like wheels
meshing. And a sphere could have many spheres inside of
it, too. And always another sphere which contains
many--but that larger one, one of many inside another
still larger. But like being on Earth, they feel plane
but are spherical. And wait to see what I can do with
more dimensions! But for now, stick with the spheres. And
think about it: You move from one sphere to another, but
each of them is within another, so switching from one to
another within the same sphere may give one a broader
understanding but not a larger understanding. Eating at
all the restaurants in New York gives you a broader
understanding of the New York dining scene, but tells yous
noting [sic] about New Jersey. So beware of those
who claim wider knowledge just because they have explored
more broadly within the same sphere.
“A sphere is an area, or arena, of complexity.
Within each sphere, the contents--while perhaps
diverse--are not diverse in complexity, but only diverse
in expression of the same complexity. All humans are in
the same sphere, but there are many spheres in it. Aha,
in my Father’s house there are many mansions. He said it!
“And these are not literal spheres, because the
shape is not the important quality but the edgeless
nature of containment. Ponder all this if you dare.
“In limited dimensional perspectives, spheres appear
as circles. I hinted at it long ago.” (12/3/2008 - I#122)
“Those orbs of planes, they can change relative size
in relation to each other. So, a smaller orb in a plane
can become a larger one which contains the one that
contained it.
“Levels of complexity can shift their order of
complexity; it’s not all linear development. In
light of later or greater complexity, earlier or less
complex-seeming levels can be understood as more complex.
Ok, go study that.
“Am I the product or the creator of the complexity.
Does my observation of it create it, or validate it. (The
or is not about between the two, but about the
two being optional expressions of the same thing.)”
(12/7/2008 - I#123)
“So, orbs... expanding orbs. And the orbs are in
flux, not static. Planes imply static, but these
are far from static. They are organic... ‘not to be
confused with organza or origami.’ Thank you, CT.
‘Just want the record straight.’ A twisted
spirit setting the record straight. What’s wrong
with this? Everything! And nothing.
“So, the orbs have lives, so to speak, of their own
and participate in larger lives of their own and
others–a giant universal quivering mass of whatever.
And it’s not mass nor energy. It’s treacle, the
gooey substance of all existence. Hot fudge is an
expression of the All; so is any syrup.
“So, orbs of existence--seemingly, planes--contain
our experiences, and also offer portals to their
expansion. For, as any orb becomes expansive rather than
parochial, it grows to include something which had been
external to it. And even if it contracts again, the
interaction has influenced everything inside the orb, or
on the plane of being. You don’t just keep moving up
the planes of complexity, you integrate the experience of
complexity into the plane. And when sufficient
incorporation has taken place, the lesser plane cannot be
distinguished from the greater plane, and the orbs are
functionally one, though they remain separate. So you
could flit between two planes or orbs, and sense the
difference until they appear the same. But while it will
feel like you are on one plane or in a single orb, you
will have access to all the connective possibilities of
both. Now, recognize this is going on with multiple
organic, not organza, orbs. And the experience of a more
complex plane will open infinitely more possibilities
because you are actually living in multiple orbs, which
cannot be distinguished because they seem the same orb.
But they are singular, yet identical. More later.”
(12/10/2008 - I#124)
“So, all existence is orbic, but all existence
appears to be planar because the field one is in appears
to be flat because we think of things as linear and
linear implies planar, not orbic.
“Orbs–glowing crystal orbs–are not
connected to anything I’m talking about. Pan-orbic
sensibilities–that’s the planar experience. You
sense planes in all orbs. Confused? Linearity. We see
tiny tangents instead of arcs. ARF? No, arc... woof.
Because our perceptions are time-limited, we see many
fragments as if whole, but not the whole. And in each
time fragment, arcs appear as straight lines. But at
least they appear. At other points of complexity, they
don’t even appear as lines or dots or anything.
We’ve come a long way, baby.
“Ok, film--32 frames, say, a second. We think we see
motion, but we only see a succession of stills. So a
movie is a planar experience of an orbic reality because
the actual action was curvy and smooth and thoroughly
dimensional, not 2 dimensions of little film segments.
You think you see the whole, but you don’t. There is
the illusion of motion, but not motion. And you can’t see
what’s behind the camera nor what’s between the
frames. So all movie watching is an assumption, and a
planar one. And it’s a flat reality. Time flattens
reality. Ponder that.” (12/14/2008 - I#125)
“December is an orb in the year, along with July and
October and April and Rikkity... no no no no. But right
about now, December feels like the larger orb. And
Christmas orb, which seems so small the rest of the year,
becomes humongous. If one were to live out the Christmas
orb in July, it would seem to make little sense, and not
be a smooth plane at all. Put it into December, and it
grows and flattens and becomes the territory of the
season–even in the Southern Hemisphere and selected
islands of the Northern one... and I don’t mean
Orkney.
“So, this is an example of how orbs are within other
orbs but can change their relative ranking. At any given
perception, you can tell the whole of all the orbic
components or you can sense the rankings, but you
can’t do both and stay linear. So to sense it as a
plane, you have to lock in the relative relationships or
just go for an undifferentiated whole. Huh?
“You can say God and mean All That Is,
and it makes sense in a temporal manner, or you can name
all the saints and their relative importance, but you can
have both not. Thinketh I thus. Because the whole
perception mitigates the parts and their fluid
relationships, and the parts set into just one pattern of
infinite possibility mitigates a true perception of a
whole. Because the specific excludes an infinite number
of other specifics, and the whole contains not specifics
but universals. Or, to put it in SP, you can have
differences or connections but not both at once, and
still remain on the sanity plane.
“Pizza as an orb is a calzone.
“Have to leave to see it all. Remember flash cubes. And suddenly you couldn’t see
nothing, but you could also see the whole flash. And to
get there, you have to give up perceiving like here.
So a Heaven that looks like a dream Earth is not Heaven,
just a well-furnished spiritual way station. That’s
it.” (12/17/2008 - I#126)
“Strings, strands, planes, orbs. Think content and
container, ahhh. Spaghetti and Tupperware. Jello salad is good example of orbs within orbs that
become the larger orb. The orange jello mold arrives and
you see it has Mandarin oranges in it. The oranges become
more important than the whole salad, because the jello is
a negative factor of the whole. Ooops, pith.”
(12/28/2008 - I#127)
“So, strings: The linear representation of the
events and thoughts and feelings and whatevers of a plane
of existence. Your lives are strings.
“Several strings come together to form
strands–still on the same plane. Let’s call it
Jane... Plane Jane. (Of course the Jains
object, ‘This is religious bigotry.’ And I say blech.)
So, in this image we see our emerging entity as a strand,
made up of our individual strings which are the lines of
our lives. These are the sands of our lives... ‘like
an hourglass’... no no no CT, go watch the
detergents. Clean out your mind.
“So the strings and strands are like the threads and
yarns of an afghan...
ARF... not the hound. And the throw is its own plane of
existence. It has its own pattern, colors, dimensions,
size, edges. But put it on the bed and it becomes just
another element of the whole bed.
“The bed is the orb of your sleeping, so it has
elements of covers and sheets and dreams and fitfulness.
To speak of the totality of the bed is very complex, and
part of that complexity is the afghan. And the afghan
can’t be itself without the yarns, which are
comprised of threads. Yet the whole bed is subsumed when
you get cold and grab for the afghan. The part of the
whole becomes larger than the whole. When you want to get
warm, you don’t give a crap about the sheets. So the
bed is an orb of being which contains the orb of Plane
Jane Afghan, and Plane Jane Afghan can be the presiding
orb when you are cold, but Plane Jane Afghan can’t
be that orb without the strings and strands. But the
strings and strands can’t be the orb; they are
components of the orb, which is just a fancy plane in
more dimensions.
“Ponder all that.
“Now about pillows. In a down pillow, the feathers
are composed, but together the feathers create a reality
that is not in any one of them, and that reality relies
on the pillow itself. For without the ticking...
‘What! A bomb?! Ticking!’ CALM DOWN, CT.
‘O.’ Geez. Without our bomb-sniffing
dog we’d have to worry, but thanks to Sanford we
don’t... ARF.
“Back to the ticking... ‘Another bomb?’ No
no no, and not a crocodile with a swallowed clock. ‘O.’
“Ok, the ticking creates the orb of the pillow
reality, but it is only flat cloth. And the feathers are
just separate entities, but put them together
correctly--with the feathers in the ticking, and not the
other way round--and you get a pillow. So, some strings
become strands which could become planes of existence or
orbs, but only if they relate in certain ways. And
another feather might not become a pillow orb, but become
by itself a bookmark for Curious George. Strings make strands that stand ready
to become components of orbs. So, enough pith for
1/1.” (1/1/2009 - I#128)
“Remember, all I have shared is about structure, not
about content. Because the content that is yet to be
is beyond the structures of our comprehension. The great
test of a psychic is reading comprehension, hahahahaha...
I slay myself... ARF-f-f-f-f-f-f.
“Orbs are metaphors for spheres, plane of
existence--which is really a plane of comprehension and
understanding, but in so many dimensions, I call it an
orb. Actually, I call it Fred. Strings and strands stuff
the orb. We stuff the orb, but we aren’t the orb,
but the orb ain’t no orb if it isn’t stuffed.
What shape is an uninflated beach ball? Flat and
circular, but not spherical. Need that stuffing! Without
the stuffing it’s the potential for a plane
or orb.
“All existence is about definition and content. For
example, a sentence is defined as a statement of subject
and action but, from that definition, all sentences arise
because of content. There’s a big difference between
‘I’m going to take CT home’ and
‘I’m going to take CT home for lunch.’
‘Lunch?’ Just a figure of speech.
‘O.’
“And the ticking is the potential also. And
here’s the strange thing, the definition and the
content is made out of the same stuff: information.
I’m done. Now we return you to your lives already in
progress.
“And every bit of content is also a definition.
Ponder that!” (1/5/2009 - I#129)
“Soup? No, pasta. Orbs are filled with pasta, not
soup. Soup is a mélange, but pasta is a meal... no no no
no no... pasta is a sequence of information. We
didn’t arise out of a cosmic psychic soup; we are a
piece of pasta, coming out of a cosmic pasta
machine–each strand forever, unless someone snips it
off... arfffffff... snap. Put the meaning down! Grrrrr.
Now! F.
“That’s the way it is. Huh. Meaning is a
delicate mixture of experiences, as extruded through the
shapers of the world we know. Pasta machines could have
nozzles for shapes for which we have no names or even
uses... or so we think.
“It is always a combination of the essence of
information and the shape of its delivery–just like
the Eskimos and the film. But with sauce and
meatballs.” (1/9/2009 - I#130)
“Let me clarify. It’s not about noodles and
nodes. Not just any pasta will do. Not all essences of an
entity may be acted upon, but no actions can change
essences. We express but do not create, and choice is
differentiating between what to express and not.
“You want more? Learning and remembering is about
becoming aware of all of one’s facets, and choosing
which to develop and express. ‘But if it’s not
express, it’s local.’ CT. ‘But that’s
true... except on the IND, which has express locals. IRT, no. BMT, no. IND, yes.’ CT, shut up.
“If people lived up to their full potential, oy.
It would be a mess. But if they lived up to their best
potential, much better. And if they lived up to LD’s
potential! ‘Hey, I invented potential.’ He said
humbly. ‘Well, it’s true.’ Mr.
Modest.” (1/12/2009 - I#131)
“I don’t want to leap into a new discussion of
the dimensionality of universes, but soon will. For
example, what would a universe look like with the time
dimension big, but physical dimensions tiny. Ponder that.
“I know time doesn’t exist--and in fact, no
dimensions exist--but we will use the concept as a tool.
Dimensions as tools exist, if not as
realities.
“Metaphors require metaphorical tools. But the use
of metaphors does not validate the reality of the tools
used to create them. Just as physical reality requires
the tool of dimensions for representation and
conception, but the reality of physical existence does
not prove the reality of dimensions. 'Does it prove the
reality of dementias?' Only for you. 'O, I thought as
much... or not.'
“Let’s leave it there.” (1/22/2009 -
I#132)
“A strand of information, crossing existence as a
wave, so the same information can be detected in many
places... oooOOOooo, cue the music... oooOOOooo. John,
don’t open that door! ‘But honey, it’s
just the basement... oooOOOooo. Look, a little wave of
light is coming under the door... oooOOOooo. Here, look,
see... ayeeeeee.’ TL is hungry, he wants a
John! I told him, don’t open the
door–especially with that creepy music. But I just
let out a piece of pith, with which tonight I shall not
deal... oooOOOooo. Don’t open the door. Put the candle back.
“We will return to our exciting adventure after
these messages:
“Wavy strands cluttering your world? Become a
know-nothing with Wave Be Gone. Never be troubled with
new information again! Available at a mosque, synagogue,
or church near you. Just ask for Holy Scriptures.”
(4/2/2009 - I#133)
“Wavy strands create universal patterns of ripple
effect. I will expound on this another time. Because if
it were limited to the strands, then it would be finite,
but it isn’t–just a sorting of the more
powerful and proximate strands, experienced through the
sympathetic vibrations of their waviness. You’ve got
that, right? Later for more.” (4/6/2009 - I#134)
“So, those wavy strands, passing along their
trajectory of time and space, creating sympathetic
vibrations in diverse locales--each sensing the
information as local and specific, whilst being
universal. A line of thought arrives, and in many
countries it is perceived and known as the local wisdom,
but it is later revealed as universal. And if we see this
in a single planet, consider a wavy strand that crosses
dimensions and perceptions.
“And every strand has its origin, so somewhere a
piece of information hums its way into the fabric of
being. And the small-minded will think the frequency of
vibration is the key to understanding, when it is just
the vehicle.
“If the limo drives up, it don’t matter if
it’s a Lincoln,
but who is in it. Charlatans likes to market cut-rate
Lincolns with no seats, trying to convince peeps that
they can get the message with the limo, without anyone
inside.
“So the wavy strands appear in different forms in
different dimensions, but they carry their own info. More
later. Film at 11.” (4/13/2009 - I#135)
“So, when we last left Wavy, our little strand, she
was passing through the Middle Ages and the contemporary
Republican party. And so, both were superstitious and
clueless.
“Next the right wing will claim the Plague was the result of early stem cell
research by LD...
‘Hey-a’... and abortion. And heaven forbid that
peace should break out. Watch in 4 years, when they try
to blame the recovery and peace on him:
‘A real nation knows it is always at war with the
evil-doers, and the economy can’t be healthy because
that’s a sign of excess, and excess is a sin as any
good Christian knows! So only sinfulness will produce a
robust economy. Can’t you see, robust has bust
in it!’ And so they will ask, 'Are you better off
today than 4 years ago,' and Obama will win by 50. He
will get 50% more than the dumb ones (80-20... huh...
70-20, and 10 for Ron Paul). The Republicans will blame
all landslides on Obama. And our wavy strand will just go
on waving.
“Long ago, in the far reaches of human
consciousness, it was already there. It began in the
minority chances of a simple muon particle mating, in which the essential
connections were doubted and a sense of needed magic was
imposed. And that’s way way way way
back, and it stretches to just the moment before total
complex integration. It is the wavy strand of doubt.
It has many cousins, born of the same sentiment. And
every once in awhile, or in a single locale, a family
reunion occurs, and the experience is not a good one.
Entities of all complexities doubt their essence, and the center will not hold... ah!
“One on it’s own is not horrible. It’s
like lima beans. If that’s just one dish, you can
take it. But if all the other dishes are of the lima
family, ugh (butter, fava, fordhook). Just a
tidbit.
“And remember, there is nothing now which has not
always been, and what is now will always be, but
the infinite combinations of them are what spell out history,
until all is One.” (4/17/2009 - I#136)
“So, these wavy strands are integral across a whole
matrix of realities which are time-divided by the likes
of you. Actually, the infinite number of wavy strands
pass through an infinite number of matrices. But
let’s not think that’s important right now.
“Along the wavy strand, its meaning is more or less
intense at any intersection of the matrix and the strand.
And since the strand is multidimensional, that means it
communicates more or less information at that
intersection, and the information flows from that
intersection of the strand and the matrix out into the
matrix as a wave of more or less energy or information.
So at any point in the matrices, there are waves being
propagated by strands, and infinite patterns of
complement and interference. So Strand A gives us plus
4, but Strand B gives us minus 4, so
it’s like the strands don’t exist at that point
in the matrices. And other points are big pluses...
‘but we call them women’s sizes’... CT...
and others big minuses... ‘we call losers’...
CT, GO!
“So these are the patterns of crest and trough,
which are but partial presentations of infinite patterns
of interacting energies and information. All physical
reality is a representation of those nodes... not gnomes,
nodes.
“So, we have this wavy strand of some information or
quality which runs through human experience. Like love–always
there to inform and energize, unless the wavy strand of fear
intersects in the same area of the matrices, and then love
is lost and fear is unrecognized. Whenever an
eternal and universal strand seems missing from an area
of the matrices, then you have to ask ‘What is also
there?’
“So, existence is a big blob of quivering energy and
information, disciplined into order by the piece of the
matrices which correspond to the level of complexity, and
the wave patterns sympathetically created by the
interaction of the wavy strands in that matrix at that
point. There, I have said it! Now, ponderless people,
ponder that.” (4/24/2009 - I#137)
“So, the various patterns which flow from the many
wavy strands, appear as if they were their own wavy
strand called history. But to believe history to
be a two-dimensional reality, is to miss the complexity.
What appears to be ups and downs on any indicator is a
massive interaction of factors. And trying to deal with
the effect does not address the causes... so I’ll remove the cause, but not
the symptoms.
That’s it.” (4/28/2009 - I#138)
“The evidence of a wavy strand is a ripple–just
as waves are evidence of wind and currents and more. I
will leave it all for your pondering.
“They are actually wavy strands; nothing
metaphorical about them. But strands of what?
Information. I am talking about the passage of
information through all matrices of existence, both
physical and spiritual. Ah, you say. Some
strands are physically defined and therefore finite, and
some are spiritually defined and also finite. We get to
keep some info just for us spooks, but the real info is
not contained nor constrained by any system of
subdefinition of existence, like physical, spiritual,
or any of infinite other definitions. What? Yep, beyond physical,
which applies at this level of complexity, and spiritual,
which exists at all levels but ultimate unity, there are
an infinite panoply of other definitions and dimensions
of existence which exist for some smaller or larger
portion of existence, and which all cease to be in
ultimate unity.
“When we all hang together, ain’t nothin’
gonna separate us. Till then, there are an infinite
number of matrix possibilities of being, of which spiritual
and physical are but 2. What about being CT.
That’s the third. We try to humor him, but in fact,
it’s true. But if you asked about HS, that would be
a third, too. Every specific entity is its own
dimensional definition, too, for as long as it is an
entity. Ponder that nugget... ponder that nougat... yum,
caramel.
“I am saying that every entity, at every level of
complexity during its existence, is a
dimensional definition, and some strands belong only to it.
And the trick is figuring out the particulars and the
universals, because the universals will be there when the
unifying is done... and coated with dark chocolate ... and it has nuts ...
and late lamented Mars Bars.
You see, nougat has some strands of being in common with
caramel and chocolate, but also some of its own unique
ones which only last as long as the nougat does, which
isn’t very long... <bite>... grrrr...
snap...no no no no no, Sandy, no chocolate... grrrr...
grrr... barf. Good dog, bad mess.”
(5/2/2009 - I#139)
“Energy is information in only some
dimensions. Yep, there are dimensions which have identity
(i.e., contain information) which do not have energy. So
their existence is not physical nor spiritual, but one of
the infinite others. In physical dimensions, it takes
energy to change info, and info to use energy. So they
are related... but once removed on their mother’s
side.
“You won’t have one without the other and be
physical–part of the dimensional definition.”
(5/2/2009 - I#140)
“The waviness manifests itself differently with
different dimensions.” (5/13/2009 - I#141)
“The waves are manifesting differently with
different dimensions. Now, consider the lilies of the field. If they were to exist in 6 dimensions,
the waving you perceive with 4 dimensions would be true
but partial because with 6 there’d be more action,
and it might not even look like lilies or waves. The full
reality of any expression of existence is what is true in
all dimensions and, at the same time, what is true in
only some dimensions is just as real.
“The square of 2 dimensions is as real as the cube
of 3 and the orbit of 4. But the orbit of the cube with
the square side is more completely descriptive. So
anything and everything manifests differently with
different dimensions. And as long as one only deals with
the number of dimensions experienced or known, what one
sees as real and true is accurate.
“But here’s the catch: If you were to be in a
2-dimensional experiential reality and describe a cube,
that would be speculative, not true or false. Only within
the dimensions which are experiential--as either
theoretical or applied--is there truth. And even theory
must adhere to the limits of dimensions. So don’t
give me any 6 variable crap and talk about 8 dimensions.
Wouldn’t be any better than the pipe dreams of the
saints.
“Now, I am not saying don’t speculate. I am
saying know the limits, and don’t portray
speculation as fact and truth. But also know that every
time you get a sideways glance of another dimension, you
get another vision of another manifestation. That’s
it.” (5/21/2009 - I#142)
“We can only manifest qualities of the realities we
are in. But since vision is a quality of the dimensions
in which one lives, one can always manifest one’s
vision. You can’t envision beyond your dimensions.
What! Yep, and those who appear to do so are merely
exploring the dimensions further and deeper than others.
“They are not creating new boundaries of experience,
but new experiences within the boundaries of your
complexity. And your complexity is not a product of your
dimensions; your dimensions are products of your
complexity.
“You only get a world in which you can make sense.
Ok, pithy pith.” (5/25/2009 - I#143)
“So, we have been considering those cute little wavy
strands. Of course, they are universal, so not so little.
But in your level of complexity, you only have so many
dimensions, so you only get certain manifestations of the
waves.
“There appears to be so much empty space in your
reality--between all thingies, at both the biggest and
the smallest levels. Even at the microscopic, the pieces
are so tiny that even the tiny spaces seem immense. What
if a wavy strand is passing through that emptiness? 'Ok,'
you say, 'how do we know it does.' And we say back,
'Because it has to.' If the wavy strand is not contained
only in the physical manifestation of one thingie, then
it must pass through some emptiness. And since even a
single thingie has great emptiness, even internally, the
wavy strand passes through emptiness. So what happens to
the waviness in the emptiness? The strand waves at the
emptiness. (That’s a joke.) 'Hi.'
“The strand waves, and therefore creates waves. But
wait, I thought you said it was emptiness! How can waves
be generated in emptiness? Hmmm... by causing effect in
other dimensional manifestations.
“When we finally become aware of our oneness with
All That Is and the complexity of Allness of which we are
a part, you won’t find any emptiness. Ultimate unity
will not have any emptiness--which implies that something
else would bring completion. When we get our act
together, there won’t be any gaps physically or
spiritually or in the infinite number of other ways which
describe all the dimensions beyond our present knowing.
And in some other awareness, our very place in it all
appears to be an emptiness. If we don’t share any
dimensions, it’s like we aren’t there. And with
growing complexity, which is the unification and
connection of realities sharing at least one common
dimension, we begin to perceive more. Just like in
marriage: One perceives another set of family perceptions
through the in-laws. The acts of inclusion are always
acts of attempted complexity enhancement, by which that
which is shared opens the windows to that which was
previously unknown and seemingly empty.
“So, the process of Spiritual Persistence, as well
as spiritual enhancement (and they go together as one),
means that we are always opening ourselves to the
potential of greater dimensional awareness and,
therefore, greater manifestation of the universals which
wave by us and 'hi' to us. When we sense something
luminous but ineffable is calling us, we are experiencing
that waving but we are not yet ready for a full awareness
of either the manifestation nor the dimensions.
“When we get a sense of the fullness of All, we are
being prescient of the abiding reality in which we have
our very partial existence.
“The grain of sand, miles from the shore, can
sometimes feel the call of the ocean and sense its place
in a beach--even while it sits alone, part ways up a
mountain, without any concept of ocean or beach to guide
it.
“So the strands of information, which carry the
architecture of existence, share that information
everywhere, and it becomes incorporated in forms that are
visible, or otherwise cognizant, in the setting of the
prevailing dimensions. Just as a seagull might make no
sense in Nebraska, and corn on the high seas, some things
will be there but not seem
there because the dimensions of the perceiver of there
does not have the dimensional complexity. And then,
‘Ah,’ you say! This creates such a
problem it hurts my non-head to not think about it. If
there were only a single progressive path of complexity,
then what is not understood or perceived would
be over the span of a path of complexity development--you
don’t get it, and then you do. But that’s
implying that all the gaps in your perception of
dimensions will, in the course of complexity, fit in
somewhere. Like you don’t get long division until
you can subtract. So division remains a
complexity beyond your knowing, and also a kind of math
dimensions you can’t see, until you first move from
addition to subtraction. And that seems sooo
obvious.
“Digression: No math system teaches subtraction
first! Always addition. Just a subtle reminder that all
existence is based on a little more, rather than a little
less. Return.
“So, you get addition and then subtraction and then
multiplication and then division. And with each, the
world of math has fewer empty places in it. But what if
there is a function (and there is!) that is not based on
your dimensions of numbers, which are descriptive of the
dimensions of your complexity. You need to remember, your
complexity is the product of a vast combination of prior,
less complex, states. And so you are the sum of
everything understood about the dimensions experienced
by, and definitional of, those at your complexity with
the same shared-by-connection history. But you know you
don’t represent all complexity, because you
aren’t yet one with All That Is without any
differentiation and separation. You still perceive gaps
and emptiness, so there must be at least one--and of
course there are an infinite number, less one, other
complexities--which have as extensive a history of
connection and combination, but which do not yet share
any dimensions or manifestations with you. It is not that
yours is the linear growth through which everything will
be revealed, and yet you are the complexity through which
all will be revealed--as are all other complexities.
“In some other complexity, addition, subtraction,
multiplication, and division don’t make any sense,
and appear as emptiness. But they have other
manifestations of the waviness, which are empty to us
now. But when their fullness and our fullness combine, a
portion of seeming emptiness will fill. Is that enough
for now?” (5/30/2009 - I#144)
“So, wavy strands manifest differently with
different dimensions. Now, chicken or egg. I’ve already spoken of how the
wavies do their wavy thing in different dimensions, so
they manifest differently with different dimensions. But
they also manifest differently with
different dimensions! Yep, they can wave up and down and
round about... and they can put their left foot in and shake it all
about. In fact, wavy
strands are what it’s all about. But not all strands
are universal; some just intersect with some
of All. They are complete but not universal, so they do
not manifest in every situation of all dimension
possibilities. And for those strands, they manifest in
many many ways but not all, and so they bring their
particular and peculiar defining dimensions with them,
and embed the dimensions in the manifestations. So they
manifest differently WITH different dimensions. The
dimensions are their product, not their portal.
“Some manifestations arise as possibilities of the
present dimensions, and some dimensions arise as the
possibilities of some manifestations. And how do we know
the difference? Well, you don’t! But the different
modes of manifestation and dimension relationships are
revealed by particular or universal.
And as you slide more toward All, the universals seem to
be ever-present, but so do the particular ones, since
they will be part of All, too. It’s a
puzzle–until you can sort out if the definition is
coming from the dimensions as limits, or from the
manifestations as fulfillments. In the All, everything
will be fulfillment. If it is universal, what is
manifested is universal and the result, not the source. I
guess... or not.
“If Creation is stamping out the dimensions as a
product of itself, that’s limited. But if dimensions
are including every manifestation, then that’s
universal. Ok, ‘nuff for now.” (6/3/2009 -
I#145)
“A strand is not everywhere, but everywhere
has strands passing through. And those strands can begin
and end anywhere, so they appear to come from every
angle... and not every angel. And odd angels are not the
same as angel’s odds.
“Meanwhile, the Babylonians had perfected
agriculture and were making a killing at the mercantile
exchange. I digress.
“So, strands here, strands there, o so many strands.
They make me tired, so tired, I’m pooped. But I digress.
“So, at any intersection of strands, you have
dimensions in common. But away from intersections, the
dimensions are products of the waves of the strands. But
remember, we aren’t talking about physical
here, so don’t replay Physics 101. Just know that
where you are, you experience both the strands that pass
through there, but not all strands, and
you also experience the waves from many other strands,
but not all strands, because there are a
whole shipload of strands that neither arise from nor
which generate the dimensions you are in.
“Time to lighten up. Ayeeee. He uses
strands as bungees.... eeeeyA.
“We are in the midst of strands and waves. We are
stranded, but forces wave at us, so we feel ultimately
connected. Don’t have to be with every strand to
sense their reality, unless you mistake emptiness for
nothingness. As long as you see emptiness as possibility,
then every and all are within your sense.
“And without that sense you’d be at a loss,
because it would appear that there are things which are,
but which will never be explained. God, as
usually used, is the unfortunate reduction of this sense
of dimensions beyond us. So when someone says ‘All
things are possible with God,’ I say
‘Yes.’ But then they start doing the omnipotent
crap dance, because it’s not about power, but
possibility.
“It’s not that God can create anything, but
that in a Creation of infinite possibility--which is an
existence of infinite dimensions, which means infinite
strands and more-than-infinite waves--there is always
more to be created, and God is within that field of
possibility, not as a power or a source, but as the name
for possibilities which are beyond the dimensions of our
naming.
“CT will now name them all. ‘Huh.’ Very
good. When one expresses an utter... not udder, moo...
lack of comprehension, they are expressing the ultimate
truth of anything less than All That Is.
“By dimensions, I mean the defining qualities of the
facet of existence in which the speaker exists. So, I
don’t have dimensions of time and space. You do and
I did and we will and she will... but he won’t. And
for other complex entities which have formed along their
own qualities, those qualities will be their dimensions.
And they will be experienced in a way similar to what you
experience–your physical reality. But in some there
is no hot fudge (not defining, but shared, but not
universally shared). I don’t share my hot fudge.
‘We know.’
“Could be we are still dealing, at this level of
complexity, with dimensions which are productive of, and
products of, strands that are not universal–just
stringing and waving along the fringes. We won’t
know until much greater complexity.
“Maybe we are just living among the preliminaries,
getting us ready for meaningful connection with the
universals. Every level of complexity has the conceit of
thinking it is based on universals, but not necessarily.
Only with the hindsight of greater complexity will we
know, but then we won’t be we, but part of
a more complex us. We be a we we.
“So one of the tricks of maturation of spirit is to
move from seeing oneself as the top of the universal
heap, and beginning to sense how the more fulfilling is a
sense that the real universals are along the paths of
complexity--that we are never at a place of development
and fulfillment where we should be rewarded, but are
always at places where we can see the horizon of more
universal being. If you think you’ve arrived, you
won’t buy the next ticket.
“That’s it.” (6/6/2009 - I#146)
“So, waves, or wave forms. You had hoped I’d
forget? I like to think of them more as wave forms
than waves. That’s because they are
detected in their forms across time, but that is only an
expression of them. But it is easier to deal with an
expression than an abstraction.
“Those strands--which aren’t really strands,
but they play strands in your reality–have their own
presence, which is experienced as wave forms. So The Great Wave of Democracy, etc.–trends, patterns, which
reveal but don’t contain.
“So we sense the strands through the forms
which their presence induces in your complexity level and
dimensions.
“But the forms are not the waves... and the WACS are
not the WAVES
either. Hello, sailor. I bet I could ring your
bellbottoms. And so the spirit told Rob about the night in Marseilles,
and Jane was not amused.
“So, keep on pondering until you hear the dog say,
‘Wave forms, nave forms, posh? It’s all
bunk.’ But the bunk of scientific theory. We done
enough damage here.” (6/16/2009 - I#147)
“So, wittle strings become strands... no no no no...
wee wittle strands become strings. Strings make up
reality, and ropes suggest universals. So, bits
woven into strands and then strands into strings and
strings into ropes. ‘But,’ you ask, ‘what
about cable,’ and I say ‘Too expensive. Use rabbit ears.’
“And those strings and strands and ropes all give
off--or appear to give off--radiation in the form of
effect, as if waves were going forth.
And reality seems to be constructed on the forms of those
waves.
“This is the chapter synopsis: Existence
stands on the forms suggested by the perception of waves
which seem to be generated by the various levels of
complexity as they pass through existence. I
have no more to say. So there!
“It is the product of similarities that inhabit
different dimensions of being. Every time Thingie A in
Reality A1 connects to Thingie A in A2, or B in A1, etc.,
the connection generates information, which is the
building block of existence... and not Legos.
Unless you live in a Legoland. But Legos help to
illustrate. A pile of Legos: infinite possibility,
potential information. Putting any of them together
gathers the possibilities, and realizing them releases
information. Take 12 of them, which could become many
things, and assemble them to release the information you
call a wall.
“I’m done. I’m over. I’m roger. Over, roger, done. Ponder that.” (6/19/2009 -
I#148)
“Time is one of the dimensions we don’t have.
‘Ain’t much on depth, either.’ Shut up.
Spatial dimensions don’t cut it here, either.
‘We have width.’ No we don’t! ‘Then
explain MCP.’ Uh....
“But we can pretend to be in any dimension. Just
know that only a few of ours overlap a few of yours...
that one and that one and that other one. Because the big
ones in your physical being eclipse your knowledge, and
even identification, of the other ones. They are out
there as numbers 18 and 23 and 24. You think 11 dimensions will suffice to explain physical
existence, I think not! So you aren’t even there
yet.
“It’s like a great Roman ruin which you buy in
Provence, and it has been updated often. So you think you
know the house, but when you explore beneath the plaster
you find stucco, and behind that brick, then stone, and
then you realize the stone is blocking up a closed window
that is not even hinted at by the outside or the inside,
but which is similar to the windows on a house in a
village about 100 km away. So your house and that house
are of the same design, but you can’t know that by
looking. So, too, with dimensions.” (8/23/2009 -
I#149)
“Window spirits are spirits through whom we
can sense what other realities are. They are like
translators. What they do is so minimize their own need
to dominate the scene, that they can facilitate a glimpse
beyond their physical beings.
“They seem spiritually transparent. They usually use
little, if any, jargon or technical language, and speak
in the common vernacular. They claim no special powers
nor status. And it is often as if, in a situation, they
had stepped aside but you see both them and something
more. And the poorly initiated will think it is they, but
it is not about the other person but about their
ability to be without claiming the spotlight.
“Most people are like magicians who, by their center
stage actions, misdirect your attention. Window spirits
are just the opposite. By their lack of center stage
activity, they allow you to direct your own attention.
The great spiritual teachers all did this. That’s
why there are so many, and so varied, descriptions of
them.
“The opposite of a window would be someone like, o
yes, Hitler. Nixon. Ok, that’s enough for now. First
step down a long path. A pith path... posh pith path.
Parse that.” (8/23/2009 - I#150)
“And now, down the path a little more. You will
remember, I hope, that part of the living and remembering
of lives is about moving beyond holding onto the past,
and being self-generative of one’s own energy.
“So, when one is no longer relying on past and
others for energy, one becomes, in a way, transparent.
Physical black holes which cannot be seen through are suckers
extraordinaire. So, too, with black hole spirits;
can’t see through them to nothing but the suckiness.
And they take you in, and all your energy... and your little dog, too! ARF. And even the future. But those
spirits that are not sucking but living and giving and love is its crown... oy, I’ve heard it so often, when
everyone knows that the crown is cheese. Why do you think
cheeseburgers are served at Burger King. But I digress.
“So, a spirit that is not sucking energy and is not
focused on the past can be seen through, like a lens. And
through that lens of empowerment we see new
possibilities, which are the glimpses of greater
complexity, so they appear like windows. They have little
to block out our view with their own issues, and they are
forward facing and so the lens of their being gives us
the glimpse. Ok, further down the path but not gone yet.
More, but not today.
“In fact, window spirits aren’t born that way.
They learn and remember into it. Otherwise, they’d
be gone.
“We see greater and grander possibilities through
them, but not of them. Some are great because of what
they show of themselves, and others are greater because
of what they show of us. PtoP.” (8/27/2009 - I#151)
“So, the windows are opened, but will you look or
will the prejudices of human life keep them hidden even
when they are in plain view? And what about door spirits?
Huh? Those who open not only visions but also
possibilities, and say ‘Come on over.’ But
that’s for another call.
“Some window spirits get hidden by society, which
hangs curtains on them. The church loves to hang drapes
so the dark inner-chamber-like appearance makes one never
guess that behind the velvet is a grander view. But when
the religion started, the window was wide open and
unadorned.
“So more than looking for windows, look for drapes
and curtains and pull them back. Miss Havisham was more than a character; she was a
warning. And eventually the hell fires burned in her sacred chamber.” (8/30/2009
- I#152)
“Just a thread and a keyhole. Ok, yous gots a small
hole in a wall. Do you think a thread could pass through.
Why yes, I say. But how’s about a hawser
(that’s a fat nautical rope). I don’t think so.
“Ok, with a peephole spirit you can see through with
some strands and strings, but not all. A window spirit,
you can see through on wider strands. But no aperture is
big enough for all, so even the widest window will give
only a partial view. ‘Mais oui, but what of
zee French doors.’ Marky,
they are still not wide open. ‘But they are... how
you say... stylish, no.’ Yes, but they are no more
open than Victorian pocket doors. ‘Thees ees not true!’ But it
is. ‘Mon Dieu!’ ‘Hey-a,
how’s about Palladians.’ Oy!
“As I was saying, even with the most open and
transparent of spirits, one cannot see all. ‘Hey,
I’ve seen one and, therefore, seen them all.’
CT.
“The dimensions included or understood by a spirit
are in direct proportion to complexity, and are limited
also by the complexity’s separation from oneness
with All.
“So, window spirits can help you see through to
greater complexity, but not greater complexity which
bridges dimensions. Those quantum leap complexity changes are not visible
through any opening of spirit, be it peep, key, or
window. ‘How about revolving doors.’ O dear.
‘They just give an illusion of openness, but at any
given moment they are effectively closed--just like most
political reform.’ Thank you, TJ.
‘Don’t mention it.’
“So there it is, more than you bargained for.”
(9/6/2009 - I#153)
“Some people want the magic key, but also believe
there is no magic key. And I don’t have the
heart--literally--to tell them it’s a combination
lock.” (9/26/2009 - I#154)
“Where was I... o, so we have wittle keyholes and
lenses. Did you know that tiny pinholes
can function as lenses. LD had
to tell me. Because the wave function of light can be
focused in that way through a pinhole. He said that, too.
So, whether we peek to get a glimpse, or use a glass to
get a view, we only get selected strands and strings that
pass through. Or, as we might say, only some waves wave
at us.
“Now, here’s a puzzler: Can we get wave forms
from waves we do not encounter? Those not passing through
our hole or lens. Of course we can, you fools, because
what we do experience contains the wave form information
of the whole... but the wave form, not
the wave. And since every hole and every lens is finite,
then the best we get is wave forms for the vast majority
of our experience. And thus, also, for the vast majority
of our discoveries. We do not discover the essence, but
only the expression, of most things.
“JC wants you to think of God being that
inaccessible essence, and therefore all waves, and
Creation being the forms in which we live. And to make
God into a form sort of like defeats the whole megillah. The use of the dynamic term should be
retained, and never reduced to expression. Otherwise, we
don’t have the wave of Origin, we just have
Creation. He will be available to discuss this and his
parables at the Star of David Bakery, Wednesday night,
next millennium.
“Ok, someone has GW’s
autograph. Do they have him? I think not!
“Lots to ponder. Just another blip: Could say token
instead of form... not toke... a
physical representation of something else. So,
ponder.” (10/1/2009 - I#155)
“Here’s a teaser: You always want the largest
keyhole or peephole or the most inclusive lens you can
find, because that will let in the most strands and
waves, leaving you with the largest number of wave forms
or information.
“The Bigtime isn’t about itself, but what it
reveals. Ponder the teaser... and the Firecat. O my.” (10/9/2009 - I#156)
“O my, what if the strands had spectra
of their own, and so the strands could populate a whole
region of existence through different expressions. So,
the strands are coherent continuities of information, and
also wide expressions of the same. And you could, if you
were more evolved, sense their continuity or their
breadth of expression, but not both.
“They are either bundles of info or fields of info,
and can be either but not both, because those are
self-contradictory states of beings. Take a football
field. Now, for some minutes it is 100 yards of
action-packed drama! A struggle between 2 forces. But the
same field could also be the place where decades of
memories are made, and any single Saturday afternoon is
not replayed in the memory, but only the overall pattern.
The field is empty, the stands empty, no band, quiet. But
that quiet doesn’t negate the crowded noise of games
past and future. Just an analogy.
“Some information spreads out and infuses
everything. Some information focuses itself tightly into
a progression of understanding. Could be the same strand,
acting in 2 of its many modes, holding a full spectrum of
possible expressions.
“Just something to think about.” (10/19/2009 -
I#157)
“So, here we are in a matrix of strands and each
strand a matrix of strings and each string a series of
entities and information arranged in a matrix which is a
strand, etc.–up and down. Forget about atoms. They are just
physical representations of much more essential entities.
But I’ve said enough.
“The universe is not made up of atoms! Atoms just
represent the more primal building units of existence
which, in the end, is information. The same way
that the tiny silicon switches of a computer are not the
data and logic of the computer, but just representations
of the information they present–expressions and
representations and conduits and sewers (shit in, shit
out). For example, the NRP (National Republican Party)
computers and Rush Limbaugh’s so-called brain.
“Here’s a trick. Decide what you want the
output to be, then reverse engineer the input needed,
then only put that in. And if you can
keep the processing the same, it will appear rational.
The process itself is actually reasonable, if only the
full data were entered.” (11/7/2009 - I#158)
“So, let’s recap.
It has been discovered that parallel universes
aren’t parallel, or else we would never get a sense
that they’re there. All realities intersect somehow.
And we increasingly inhabit the points of conjunction as
we become more complex.
“Now a question from little Bobbie Alcera of Rancho
Cucamonga, California: ‘When we get more complex, do
all our parts come from the same plane.’ ‘No,
some come by train.’ CT! Read the card!
‘O.’ But no, you grow in complexity across
planes once you are complex enough to envision planes
other than your own. Actually, you have become more
complex across planes on the step before
you comprehend other planes. It happens to you, and then
you can conceive it.
“This is the long and sad history of complexity: You
are always more complex than you realise. ‘I’m
not.’ See. Otherwise, you would be creating reality
to fulfill your fantasy, but rather you are growing into
your reality by way of your perceptions. Everything LD
invented was already possible... except for the potato
poacher. That still defies reality. Ok,
that’s today’s pith!
“A universe filled with parallel universes would be
a one-dimensional simplistic place. Gotta bump into one
another to get depth.” (12/28/2009 - I#159)
 Page 1 Page 2
|
