Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:21 am
not a challenge, except to draw your theory out.
i was concerned that your original piece was of no additional direct relevance to EU, and might be used by skeptics to turn off too many who might be fertile ground for the science in the theory.
Ok, I'll bite. I'm willing to take you at your word here, that there is a genuine interest. In truth, I'm perfectly willing to talk or not talk about it. As I've stated before, makes no difference to me if the entire thread is deleted or remains.
As to relevance, it should be taken as pure speculation, no more than thought-play. As I implied in the 'piece,' it should not be taken seriously. I am very sincere in what I stated there, but I am not serious about it. To me, it's another irrelevance whether or not it is fodder for skeptical ridicule, disdain, or disbelief. I'm not here for agreement. Nor do I have an agenda or mission to propagate any specific theory, not even EU should it develop into just another insular, exclusive dogma touting its own virtues of elitism.
For those who are solely interested in the objective fact-driven science side of EU Theory, I believe that concern will be adequately addressed soon by separating out the applicable EU science forums from the "humanistic" and more "fringe" aspects. In whatever manner the site admins see fit to implement it. That change should be coming soon as I understand it.
i recognize your courage and thought in the thread founding piece. are you leaving it at that?
further apologies....please resume?
Well, I pretty much said what I had to say. I might add to it from time-to-time, if it doesn't end up deleted, but it isn't like I have some well thought out complete theory. I'm as clueless as the next fellow. As flattering as that may be to ego, courage certainly has nothing to do with it, pat. It's just gab. As amongst a community of like-minded "seekers." I liked what I found here, the spirit of inquiry and the willingness of the people here to think outside the square (as Dave S. points out in his sig). Amidst an atmosphere of courtesy, humor, and respect for others' viewpoints. So I'm just flapping my jaw here. I have nothing to prove, no inside knowledge to impart, certainly no enlightenment to share.
you did suggest that the superior beings were trapped by electrical loss?
Are you sure that was my suggestion, or possibly what you have read into it? There was no intent to suggest such a relationship, i.e. superior and inferior. Though it might be a commonly shared reaction to a first reading, I don't know. Like a conditioned response or something. For example, I don't feel superior to animals, infants, or children; nor do I perceive their beingness as somehow inferior to my own. And it doesn't swing to absurdity in the other direction either. I don't go around answering to my houseplants or see myself as inferior to my dog or my children. Superior/Inferior are mental concepts of ego status and, as I thought was clear in the posting, would be completely and particularly irrelevant to a pre-ego environment.
Obviously, I don't *know* the full story of how it might have been and how it may well be again some day. I am just as much "under the influence" of a human mind as the next. But my feeling is that the relationship, as I was attempting to describe it, was a symbiotic reciprocity. I revised that portion of the posting to one of parent-and-child, or grandparent-to-grandchildren. But even that would only be the sheerest of approximations.
sym-bi-o-sis (simbe-osis, -bi-)n.pl. sym-bi-o-ses (-sez). 1. Biology. A close, prolonged association between two or more different organisms of different species that may, but does not necessarily, benefit each member. 2. A relationship of mutual benefit or dependence.[Greek sumbiosis, companionship, from sumbioun, to live together, from sumbios, living together : sun-, syn- + bios, life. See gwei-.]
re-cip-ro-cal (ri-sipr-kl)adj. Abbr. recip. 1. Concerning each of two or more persons or things. 2. Interchanged, given, or owed to each other: reciprocal agreements to abolish customs duties; a reciprocal invitation to lunch. 3. Performed, experienced, or felt by both sides: reciprocal respect. 4. Interchangeable; complementary: reciprocal electric outlets. 5. Grammar. Expressing mutual action or relationship. Used of some verbs and compound pronouns. 6. Mathematics. Of or relating to the reciprocal of a quantity. 7. Physiology. Of or relating to a neuromuscular phenomenon in which the excitation of one group of muscles is accompanied by the inhibition of another. 8. Genetics. Of or designating a pair of crosses in which the male parent in one cross is of the same genotype or phenotype as the female parent in the other cross.n. Abbr. recip. 1. Something that is reciprocal to something else. 2. Mathematics. A number related to another in such a way that when multiplied together their product is 1. For example, the reciprocal of 7 is 1/7; the reciprocal of 2/3 is 3/2.[From Latin reciprocus, alternating. See per1.]
Excerpted from American Heritage Talking Dictionary
Copyright © 1997 The Learning Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
As far as trapped? Yes, I think that probably describes the general spiritual atmosphere here for many. A majority, a minority? I wouldn't know. For those who are of a different bent, then of course not. It's purely a matter of perception, attitude, and belief, is it not, whether one is trapped? One person's trap is quite possibly another's security.
The suggestion would be that Earth is an evolutionary ... plane ... in an electrical universe. I'm suggesting that perhaps, like EM energy itself, that all things, organic and inorganic, all strata are likewise within a spectrum of manifestation, of physical appearance in form and function. (refer also to the Cymatics
thread) All co-dependent, all reciprocal one to another. That one expression might be on a "higher" wavelength of manifestation relative to others below it does not imply superiority or inferiority of being or function. The absence of the smallest would diminish the entire spectrum of what is. Not what might have been or will be, but what IS. But I don't view it as a static spectrum in terms of the forms that comprise it. More like a hierarchy of dynamic trans-formation (transmutation, if you like, tho' I don't think that is as accurate). The framework of the spectrum may be more or less static, I don't know.
Granting the existence of something that corresponds to what many of us might term a soul - and if you deny the idea, that's fine, and the discussion is over, no hard feelings - but if disbelief is suspended for at least a moment, then what would comprise a soul. I have no idea about that either other than my opinion is that it would likely be some sort of integral vibration. A frequency, in other words, somewhere off the top of the charts of the *known* EM spectrum. And that frequency would be capable of some kind of harmonic movement, crystallizing "downstream" as it were some *where* specific in the entirety of the sea of all extant vibration available as the known universe of materialization.
How does that work? Hell, how should I know? Your guess would be as good as mine. Would souls be susceptible to "trapping." Well, read the Vedas. Read the bible. Read just about any mythology. Would souls have a hand in their own traps? Again, read the Vedas. Check out the bible. Check out just about any mythology. How do electrical circuits work? How does a capacitor retain (trap) its charge? How does a permanent magnet retain (trap) its alignment? How does a concentric solar system maintain (trap) its orbitals? How does a person come to feel inescapably bonded (trapped) or smothered in a relationship, such as in a marriage gone wrong?
If evolution of form and function occurs, how is it timed? Purely by random chance? By mathematically derived equation? By ... intent?
I do suggest a possible link to intention. Not to be mistaken for some fundamentalist notion of an exterior agent's "intelligent design." But something inherent within all manifest life (see other thread mentioned below).
So. In a spectrum of resonant frequencies, I think it's possible - again, positing the existence of a phenomenon that might be termed soul - I think it's possible that such souls, engaged in an evolutionary episode of learning within an environment such as that described by DeGrazia, Thornhill, and others could, indeed, have experienced, could be experiencing, what has become an effective EM trap - perhaps of their (our) own (unintentional) making. But like I said, only to those who perceive it as such. And those would be the ones who - somehow - had some recognition, some intimation along the line, that perhaps not all is as represented, that appearances may not be what they seem. On the order of having a pleasant dream turn into a nightmare and unable to awaken yourself from it. But, collectively, on a worldwide scale, of magnitudes greater.
The "'unwitting' integration of mixed souls" I alluded to ... that, I'm sure, is too outrageous a "leap of faith" and I should probably delete it. I don't think this format is conducive to fleshing that out any further. If I were a *real* writer, I would write a book I guess, but I don't have the organizational skill for that kind of thing. Actually, the whole thing might make a decent SF novella or some such.
But if someone grasped what I was trying to get at in the Cymatics
and Electricity of Life
threads, put it all together, well they might have tuned in a bit. Doesn't really matter one way or the other, though.
There is precedence, however. Check out myths concerning twins. Then, of course, the Osiris dismemberment, Jewish legends of "shattered light/souls," etc. etc.. Yes, in one sense Osiris represents Saturn or whatever. But, are stars and planets just dead, material objects? To most, probably so. But as I've heard someone else say on occasion, "just because you say it is so, doesn't make it true," or words to that effect. Like the proverbial double-edged sword, cuts both ways.
do you suggest that an orgone box or other device might release such a being? could that happen naturally?
what effect on the pet/inferior?
how would we verify this?
No. But there is certainly an abundance of methods and agents to gain a temporary "release" and various gradients of emotional and spiritual pleasure ranging from happiness to ecstasy and bliss - or for those on the inverted scale, the ranges of pain and obliteration or oblivion.
But I've given my thoughts in full about stuff like this in another thread, here The Electricity of Life - a personal view
I revised the concept of pet slightly, if you care to revisit the posting. As I've stated in the thread just mentioned, words and concepts are analogous to a map and are not the territory. Unfortunately, these forums are a word-based medium. About 3 steps removed from the reality (such as: reality-->human mind-->mental concepts, language-->spoken concepts, language-->written symbolic concepts, language). Again, superiority/inferiority is irrelevant.
I do have a feeling that this ... stagnancy ... of evolution that we've experienced for the past several millenia will break up and flow once again. But it will be on a much broader scale than any device or method cooked up by the mind of man can provide or imagine. When "it" happens, then I suspect this entire experience of mankind as we know it will be as a fading dream, soon to be forgotten - but not forgetting as in amnesia. Fading in significance
as in the receding wake of a ship. But with lessons well learned
and retained. Don't ask for particulars because I don't got 'em. Your guess is as good as mine.
Dream-work, as practiced by many indigenous people might hold a clue. Most people, I think, discount their ability to dream, and certainly the significance of the dream itself. I highly doubt many would consider that they learn much from dream experiences; apparently many even think they don't dream at all (seems I remember reading not long ago that it's been proven that all people do, in fact, dream but many have no recall of their dreams upon awakening).
I don't think anyone here, least of all myself, is under the delusion that any of this is verifiable. It is simply a story. His-tory, her-story, my-story. Could be our-story. Some may "resonate" with it, or parts of it, most will consider it bunk. No biggie. Not important. Not serious
This I believe; everything is proceeding as it should
does the combo confer benefits/detriments?
It is what it is. In my own opinion life here is certainly an adventure. A learning experience. Maybe that's the sum total of it.
Provided you are in fact being genuine and not playing juvenile games, perhaps you should consider re-reading the posting. I find little resemblance between the words and concepts you are using and what I was writing about. But I'll take the brickbats for lack of clarity.
The moment of recognizing what cannot be thought is the moment of recognizing who you are. It is a moment of the mind's surrender to silence. -- Gangaji