What are the rules?

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 29 Dec 2002, and now archived in the Forum Library.

mehrdad	29 Dec 2002
This topic might seem to complex but it isn’t really. Appearance is so deceiving! It is obvious that our universe follows a set of rules and system of laws to stay in equilibrium. For example, we have the gravity, speed of light, and the complex relation between space and position to create the illusion of time. We have the galaxies dancing away and into each other according to a set of mathematical and physical bylaws. Therefore, our Universe so dazzling and majestic is still a slave to some sets of rules. I think it is also safe to say that our societies, the manner that history, past, present, and future is shaped, and all other external and internal forces that shapes us, are also confined to rules. So by figuring out these rules and how to deal with them, it is theoretically conceivable to create an oracle that can forecast an outcome following a particular path. So if there are rules, then what are they? I was able to come up with these. I appreciate if you can add to this list or provide more examples for or against what I have provided. It is always easier to break than to build- you can destroy a house in seconds but takes much longer time and effort to rebuild it. Everything has a beginning, middle, and end- species, plants, stars, galaxies, civilizations, and ideas are born, live for a while, and then die away or change to something else. Things always come in pairs- matter and antimatter, good and bad, god and evil, night and day, Heaven and Hell, male and female. This pair of opposites is not just how we understand concepts (Einstein’s relativity) but also it is a physical and mathematical law outside of our perception. Black holes were conceived before they were being found partly because of this. Things are always not what they appear to be- it depends on the perception of the individuals to how they perceive them to be. A terrorist can be called a freedom fighter according to who is making the judgment. In every experiment, the interrelation between the observer and observed will determine the outcome. As an engineer I have witnessed, in a laboratory setting, how light can be emitted as photon or wave, just because of the presence of the observer and the observer’s frame of mind (a famous concept in Quantum physics.) Appreciate any thought about this. I wish to create an oracle (a computer program), and I need some materials to build it.

fairyhedgehog	30 Dec 2002
Quote: This sounds like impressive stuff! I wish I had a few more answers for you. Will you need some sort of statement about human nature? Because I feel that I really wouldn't know where to start with that. I hope some other people have some more and better ideas.

allibee	30 Dec 2002
the golden psi, the mathematical measure of all things natural. Don't ask me to explain because I can't find the book, but it is like a cross section and the outward spiral of a Nautilus shell or a flower, where the centre equals 1. All natural forms can be broken down like this and rendered accurately (artistically speaking) and in PROPORTION using this measurement. It is said that in creating the earth and the universe, God was a mathmatical stickler for order in this manner, and that art is mathematics and mathematics is art. I'm an artist but I HATE maths, LOL, it does my head in. allibee

mehrdad	30 Dec 2002
fairyhedgehog and allibee allibee, I agree that mathematics has an artistic nature and in fact mathematics is a poetry recited by the natural world. Unfortunately, I have not heard of “Golden psi” but I will look into it. Mathematics like many other things is subject to our psychology and frame of minds. You hate mathematics because psychologically you have been put into this position by outside factors and forces. Fairyhedgehog, All matter is either in a waveform or particle form. For example sound is waveform and if two people in close vicinity scream at the same time, their sound waves would collide in midair and would create ripple or interferences. If you dip you finger into a pool of standing water, you are creating waves and if someone else also dip her finger into the pool, the waveforms created by your finger and hers would meet and would create interferences. A carbon atom for example, has a waveform and hums in a certain wavelength. Now if you change this humming sound or wavelength you can turn a carbon atom to a gold atom or anything else (chemistry was created because people were trying to change regular matter to gold). Waves scatter all around so they collide and create interferences but particles do not scatter around, would not collide, and therefore would not create interferences. For example if you throw a football, the football is a particle and does not scatter all around. It only goes toward a certain direction. Light has this amazing property to be both waveform and particle form (photons). In this experiment, two sources of light are placed in a way that their waveforms collide and produce interferences meeting at a detector instrument. Now if you, as an observer, try to know which light source created a particular interference on the detector, both light sources act as particles (no interferences). However, if you don’t make attempts to know, suddenly both light sources act like waveforms (interferences). This is like light knows beforehand what is it that you are trying to know and act accordingly. This DUALITY nature of light is the heart of Quantum mechanics and black holes. There are many places that you can read more about this experiment and one simple one is the following: http://www.biols.susx.ac.uk/home/John_Gribbin/quantum.htm Everything is made of atom and electron and electron has this DUAL nature of being there and not being there, be or not to be. Imagine yourself as an electron confronting a wall, now as long as your energy level is lower than the wall, you would stay in one side of the wall. As your energy rises up, your chances of going through the wall to the other side goes higher. There is a time that your energy level (waveform) equilibrium with the waveform of the wall (Temperance in Tarot). At this time you can be at both location (both side of the wall) at the same time. You can exist in many places at the same time and not really exist at all (spirit?). Matter creates curvature on space so it creates gravity. Imagine the surface of a regular children balloon. If you place a weight over the surface of this balloon the surface on the point of pressure would creates a pull that compresses space toward it. This is gravity. Time is a byproduct of the gravity pulling and curving the space downward. In black holes, this point of pressure of pulling (the point of singularity) is so great that it rips the surface of this balloon or ‘time and space continuum’ and theoretically can be used for time travel. The dual nature of light caused many to envision black holes many decades before one was even found.

Red raven	31 Dec 2002
You've forgotten murphy's law. If something important can go wrong, it will. ;) I've never been entirely sure of the pairs one, myself. Sure, it works in nature (Well, for sexual reproduction, anyway.) But I think they'res still something missing. To quote Terry Pratchett, "The flipside of the coing on which good and evil are on the same side."

jmd	31 Dec 2002
I think what was referred to was the Golden Mean, which has a value sometimes called by the Greek letter Phi (not psi), with an approximate value of 0.618 (its precise value is (-1 + root 5)/2, which, as pointed out, has beautiful geometrical and living representations :)).

fairyhedgehog	31 Dec 2002
Mehrdad, Thank you for your really full reply. I found it a bit difficult to follow in places but I take comfort in this quote from the website you posted "Don't worry if you don't understand this. Richard Feynman didn't" :) Just one point: it seems to me that by polarising photons in order to 'tag' them (so you know which ones go where) you aren't just observing them you are physically changing them. In fact all 'observations' at that level involve some kind of physical interference with what is being 'observed' and I presume this is why it affects the outcomes. So it isn't a case of mind over matter, as it sometimes reads as if it is.

Macavity	31 Dec 2002
Thanks for the site reference, Mehrdad. Certainly the author writes (for a change?) with a deal of authority on the subject(s). I only comment to anyone who finds it hard going - so do/did I! :) Sometimes, the mental gymnastics required to *truly* appreciate even the "basic" stuff is difficult and maybe indeed almost an article of faith. Once such faith is (rules are?) acquired however, such questions are rarely revisited, even by the "professionals" who doubtless move far beyond such things? The only thing I always felt about "rules" was in noting the apparent SURFEIT of them in nature - Or at least consequences of rules. In particle physics e.g., why are there so MANY particle states - with most of them redundant at low energies? Perhaps in your "machine" you have the splendid opportunity to reduce the number of rules considerably? ;) Pairings of particles always seemed (to me) to be a rather natural - (as you doubtless know) implicit consequence of their nature - e.g. Fermions and all that good stuff. Fwiw, many other particles: bosons, photons are created and continue to exist quite happily on the own. I also tend to look on most things "macroscopic" as being a rather different question. Males/Females of our species are (imo) different aspects of the SAME fundamental state (sic) But this may be in doubt sometimes from the perspective of either/both sides? j/k LOL. Perhaps I am indeed blase/ about all things quantum mechanical? Moving to larger scales, one can hardly fail to be impressed by the complex requirements of our OWN creation. I read recently that, were it not for the stabilising influence of the Moon on the Earth's rotation, our own existance would have been impossible - at least in our present form? This seems to be confirmed by the (initial apparent) absence of observed earth-like environments in the universe? Oh, I'm very firmly an Evolutionist but have always been impressed by the complexity and amount of "effort" that went into creating the result! That is perhaps more tied in with my personal notion of God as a "divine ordering" (rule-giver?) and might belong on another thread - except for the fact that I rarely venture opinion on such things :D

mehrdad	31 Dec 2002
Fairyhedgehog Respectfully, let me explain couple of things about the experiment and what was said on the website. You are saying that by tagging you are changing the light so therefore it ends up to be wave or photon. First of all tagging is probably a matter of changing a shade to reflect a different spectrum or direction than other shade might produce. I do not believe that by tagging anybody here is suggesting that you physically changing light at the molecular level in any shape or form, because As far as I know, at the present moment we do not have such a technology to do such a thing. All we really can do about light is to observe its behavior according to environmental changes and then try to use them in whatever application we can use them for. For example, the nature of all these radio, electrical, and magnetic waves are not really understood but yet we humans have found ways to use them by observing their behaviors. However, even if we go sci-fi and go as far as supposing that we have the technology to change the internal property of light in midair going with fastest speed imaginable in the whole universe, still there is something that you missed to see. In this experiment, the property of light is determined from the moment that switch is turned on, and not when the light reaches the obstacle. In another word, the light should had known what kind of obstacle it is going to be confronted with (with tag or no tag), because it was already in the waveform or photon form when it reached the place of being tagged. The light already knew that it was going to be tacked because it was in photon form from the instant moment that light gone on. Another thing is about not understanding quantum physics or this experiment, coded by Richard Feynman. I believe what he meant was not that he could not understand quantum logic but the fact that he was puzzled by the result. He was amazed and could not understand how could he explain the mysteries and somewhat magical result, because the implications are mind bugling. He is saying that if you really understand the result of this experiment then you have learned quantum mechanics and not that we do not know what we are talking about and only we are some board kids turning the light on and off. Quantum mechanics is hard to understand mostly because of very confusing results that it produces. Newtonian mechanics is very structured and talk about a god who is a watchmaker, but quantum mechanics is structured outside of our perception so it is hard to comprehend. This is a world that amazing and unbelievable things happen there that is outside of our realm of reality. This experiment is not as hard as it might seem to be. Except for the detector, the rest of the stuff needed for this experiment can be found in any normal household. You just need couple of cardboard boxes with holes on them, some color shades to cover the holes and couple of lights. The fact is that the main job is done on the detector-side and not on the tagging-side. This is the detector that should determine if it is getting wave or photon. In the article it is clearly indicated that it really does not matter if you try to go and look to see which one has A or B tag on them. Your attempt of tagging might be successful or not successful, you might even tag them wrongly, you might afterward go to see which one has which tag or not, none of these does not really matter. It does not matter, because it is not your action that determines the outcome of this experiment but your intention. What is matter for the result is not if you actually tagged the photons or waves but your intent (setting up the instrument) of wanting to do so. This is a very important distinction which I think it should be made to further clarify the matter.

mehrdad	01 Jan 2003
Macavity, I always wonder about how supposedly such a seemingly lifeless universe has created life and intelligent. Surely, Universe is alive otherwise how do we explain the existence of life on it. In terms of the age of our universe and its vastness, our sun, our moon, our planet, and all of our life is nothing but an insignificant unnoticeable blip on a broken radar. No matter how high we go as a species, like many other species before and after us we will also someday become a forgotten history of life on Earth. We have been here only for some thousands years, however, Neanderthal man, dinosaurs, and god knows what else had lived on this planet for hundreds of millions of years before we arrived. And even them with all their long history of existence went away. Some might argue that human species has no chance of surviving even up to the next century or at most survive a fraction of other major species before us did. So do you think that if moon was not where it is now and there was no life on earth, Universe would have missed us? Why should universe cares if we are here or not? If moon was located somewhere else and life on Earth had followed some other direction, then what do you think the resulting creatures would have wondered about? They Probably would have been wondering about the same set of questions on the location of moon and its consequences as we do. Obviously we are here because the things are the way that they are now. If moon or sun were farther away then there would have not been any intelligent on Earth. Why stop on the moon and not go to the source and ask what if there was no big bang at all. However, all these "what ifs" by themselves have no meaning and they do not prove anything.

Ravenswing	01 Jan 2003
try these for size-- form is triangular. triangle is the only stable plane geometric figure, all others are unstable. structure is tetrahedral. tetrahedron is the most basic energy unit. strange thing about circles: if you know the circumference, the area is indeterminate. if you know the area, the circumference is indeterminate. squares aren't what they seem to be. they're really flattened tetrahedrons. only 3 of the 5 platonic solids are really solid. an octahedron is the ultimate energy trap. a bit of food for thought ravenswing

Karenwhe	01 Jan 2003
Mehrdad - I only think I understand what you are trying to do.... some people say that this type of information/realization/knowledge (like dimension travel for one) or whatever you want to call it can be found in the "ascension". Not in the 3D world (you are doing experiments in the 3D). The stuff that is unbelievable and humans can't understand it etc. etc., etc., and can produce results that the human brain can't comprehend. Anyway I am not authority on any of this, but from what I read the problem is with human comprehension and the dimension they live in. Again from what I read to be able to go further DNA altering processes are being teached (don't know how relevant this is), but the DNA they say has a major role to play in the realities you are speaking of and the ability to break the human limitations. They also say that if you want to live multidimensional and get information that the 3D grid can't get you have to perform the "ascension" path. In short the human mind (DNA – at a higher level) is the obstacle to understanding and/or doing something with the knowledge you are looking for and the experiments. But then again.... like I said.... what do I know..... more of this weird stuff you can find in “sacred geometry” and the "Atlantis". I also don’t believe you can use 3D tools to achieve what you are trying to achieve, I don’t know why but it is my gut feeling…… I think that this is way beyond the 3rd Dimension and trying to use 3D experiments to understand the underlying energies feels to me like cavemen trying to understand the power of fire by cooking meat and eating it.

fairyhedgehog	01 Jan 2003
Quote: Originally posted by mehrdad What is matter for the result is not if you actually tagged the photons or waves but your intent (setting up the instrument) of wanting to do so. This is a very important distinction which I think it should be made to further clarify the matter. Well, we shall have to agree to differ on this one :) I believe that what determines the outcome is physical and as I understand it you believe that it is mental. So be it. You probably know more about it than I do and as my mind is now in total boggle mode I shall give it a rest :) Good luck with your project,

mehrdad	01 Jan 2003
Thanks Ravenswing! But I think there are some problems with the Circle part Area of a Circle is = pr^2. In here r is the radius of the circle and it is unknown. But if the area is known then you can easily find r and then the circumference of the circle because the circumference of a circle is: Circumference of a Circle=2pr Let¡'s say the Area of a circle is 49inch, then r can be found as follows: (let's suppose A=area, and C=circumference) A= 49 A= (pi)r^2 49= (pi)r^2 r^2= 49/pi r = squrt of 49/pi so Circumference C is C=2(pi)r = 2(pi)*(squrt of 49/pi) From elementary geometry we all know that pi=22/7 or approximately 3.14. so just subsitute 3.14 for pi and you have the circumference. As you can see, if you know the area then you can easily find the circumference and if you know the circumference then it is easy to find the area. The only unknown quantity in any circle in the world, from a simple drawing of a circle on a piece of paper to the whole universe, is the radius of that circle. Check your references.

jamesriouxctm	01 Jan 2003
Mehrdad, Actually Ravenswing is right, to within a semantic quibble. Since pi is an irrational number, its decimal expansion cannot be known to infinite precision. So you can generate an arbitrary number of digits, and then multiply that by your radius squared to get an approximation to the area, but you still have a tiny bit of inaccuracy in your final result. That does not mean the area is indeterminate (which is a word that technically only refers to a number divided by 0). It does mean that the area is not exactly defined. That's the semantic quibble. And actually, due to quantum effects it's not even really possible to measure the circumference exactly, unless the circle is perfectly stationary. But that's a whole other can of worms. But if you want to hear it from an honest-to-God quantum physicist, feel free to ask away.

jmd	01 Jan 2003
I like the comment that 'only 3 of the 5 platonic solids are really solid' - but that is of course only true in a limited way. If one constructs representations of the mathematically pure platonic solids using only their edges (ie, constructs the solids with sticks), then the only ones which will remain in shape (given ring-type connections at their vertices) will be those which have triangular faces, ie, the tetrahedron, octahedron and icosahedron. However, the other two also have their own 'solidity', which can be demonstrated by constructing their representation as solids. Here are a few other very interesting phenomenon related to this most interesting of topics (I'll assuming edge-constructions in what follows): the hexahedron (ie, the cube) can be 'solidified' with an internal tetrahedron whose vertices (corners) join four of the cube's vertices; the hexahedron can also be 'solidified' by a dodecahedron circumscribing it - again by linking appropriate vertices. This pairing also, of course, 'solidifies' the otherwise quite floppy dodecahedron; by joining the mid-points of the edges of a tetrahedron, an octahedron is formed; (my favourite) by joining the Golden Mean of the edges of an octahedron, an icosahedron is formed (!). Combining these two, one can therefore form, within a quite large tetrahedron, firstly an octahedron, and then within this latter an icosahedron; and then there are, of course, the more well known relations which obtain from joining the centre of each face of the solids, giving the following self-generating pairs: hexahedron <-> octahedron; dodecahedron <-> icosahedron; and the self-generating tetrahedron <-> tetrahedron. It is partly in light of these considerations that I (personally) connect the elements in a different manner to Aristotelian correlations, thus: Tetrahedron: quintessence; Octahedron: (active) Fire; Icosahedron: (active) Air; Dodecahedron: (receptive) Water; Hexahedron: (receptive) Earth. As well as this list, I'll make another relevant post in the Qabalah section titled: Platonic Solids and the Tree of Life.

mehrdad	01 Jan 2003
Karenwhe, When I was a child, I used to see and notice a lot of things about my surrounding that, as I got older, I no longer able to see and feel. I think we all have had this experience that as a kid we used to be more psychic and intuitive. We used to be in tune with nature and could easily understand its language and its signals. As a child our minds was clean, and our still strong bond to our true nature, used to shield us from the brain washing machine of the media, parents, society, and groups. However, as we grow older we, one by one, start to fall into this trap that our parents and our grandparents fell into before us. This 3 dimensional trap boxes our minds and shapes it structurally. It does not shape it for better but it disfigures it. As we grow older we lose that third eye, we lose our sixth sense, and in another word we lose the function of a big part of our brain. If you do not use your hand for a long time, your hand would actually shrinks and eventually might even lose its use. This is a fact that our brain is like any other muscle in our body and can be improved or be shrieked according to how much mental activity it gets. Our society and our religion kills the main part of our brain that is needed for us to be whole. But I say to myself that perhaps there are other ways that I could bring back that gift. A computer is something that it only needs some basic information then it has this ability to calculate, to analyze, and to produce result very fast. However, the problem is where to get the basic information that it needs. In this case my program needs to know the rules of nature, which operates outside of our perception, like mathematics, and other general facts about life. As I provide more information for it, my program becomes more intuitive and psychic.

mehrdad	01 Jan 2003
Jamesriouxctm, If you are an honest-to-God quantum physicist *LOL*, then I accept what you said and I own you for your information. However, I thought we were talking about basic geometry and not even calculus. In any case circle is not the only thing that fall into that category that you mentioned.

Karenwhe	01 Jan 2003
mehrdad - I wasn't speaking of psychic ability and nature and stuff like that..... Take a baby for example..... he/she is pure (from our perceptions anyhow) why can't the baby walk through a wall or be in the same time in both sides of the wall..... or do all sorts of other wired stuff...... What I tried to say is that humans are the issue and their abilities which in turn has something to do with the human molecular structure (DNA or whatever you want to call it). Humans keep trying to change the environment to exceed their physical limitations. But they seem to overlook that it is their limitations that is the problem the environment / cosmos / universe doesn't have the human limitations. And humans keep trying to fix that externally and damage the environment in the process because it doesn’t work that way. You must work with what you have, not change the external environment to fix your abilities. And also if you want to do something so great and beyond and want to know the rules…. us humans and our structure (DNA) is part of the rules… meaning you have to deal with all the rules; may that be mathematical, geometrical, molecular everything that makes everything interact……. I think this is a tall order but if it is to be fulfilled in this life time or another I personally believe all the rules must be applied and the first rules that must be started with and understood (as sad as this may be) is the human rules (structure) to fully understand what limitation exactly is that you are trying to fix via other means. Again I am not expert in any of this, it is just a point of view.

mehrdad	02 Jan 2003
Karenwhe, I think I understood what you said, I was just making a point about what I wanted to do with my program. I was saying that I was trying to create a program that has ‘psychic’ abilities. I understand your point about DNA and the limitation that we human have in terms of going further than what we are meant to go. However, this is Ok, since I am trying to figure out if a computer can think as our unconscious mind can think. For example, I have personally experienced many dreams in my life that all have come true in some fashion or another. If dreams are produced by our unconscious then, somewhere in our brain there exists this ability to project an event long before it happens. I think we have overlooked what our brain is really capable of doing. I think our brain and where our unconscious is seated, genetically (or DNA) there exists a center with strong power to draw a conclusion about a certain event using some basic universal facts. There are many in the history of science or others who have developed their ideas when they saw them in their dream. I have personally solved many of my own problems while thinking about them when going to sleep. We have many cases that people while being put into hypnotize can recall past events in exact details and with clarity (recalling car plate numbers and such.) So, in a sense, our brain receives some input and then by using a certain logical algorithm and probability, forecasts a certain outcome. So this is what I want my program be able to do, so the fact is that not only the DNA case does not bother me that I actually count on that for the success of my program.

mehrdad	02 Jan 2003
jmd, thank you for the information, I am going to study it. And I am looking forward to read your post in Qabalah (which is something that I am studying currently) section .

Karenwhe	02 Jan 2003
Quote: Originally posted by mehrdad to create a program that has ‘psychic’ abilities I have a hard time with this concept. I am not saying that it is bad, just that every person is different so that program may suit you but how will it suite others…. Never mind lets not go there…… Quote: Originally posted by mehrdad I understand your point about DNA and the limitation that we human have in terms of going further than what we are meant to go. We are meant to go everywhere and anywhere…. it is just that “WE” are meant to go there, as opposed to “be taken there” by an external made human program that has all flaws of the human mind that created it. I used to work at one point in Human Factoring for software (HSL Model (Human-System Life cycle). No offence but look at SAP, PeopleSoft, create programs with great intentions and potential, after installation it takes a life time to get the benefit out of it (if ever, as perceived benefit)… but oops in that time you are not around anymore to enjoy it. Not to speak of the integration and the further programming that it needs to work in every environment. Quote: Originally posted by mehrdad I think we have overlooked what our brain is really capable of doing. I think our brain and where our unconscious is seated, genetically (or DNA) there exists a center with strong power to draw a conclusion about a certain event using some basic universal facts. There are many in the history of science or others who have developed their ideas when they saw them in their dream. I have personally solved many of my own problems while thinking about them when going to sleep. We have many cases that people while being put into hypnotize can recall past events in exact details and with clarity (recalling car plate numbers and such.) So, in a sense, our brain receives some input and then by using a certain logical algorithm and probability, forecasts a certain outcome. So this is what I want my program be able to do, so the fact is that not only the DNA case does not bother me that I actually count on that for the success of my program. I agree with all the above, but notice that all the above is done by the brain not an external device of software, that includes hypnotizm, etc., etc., etc. Have you seen yet a device or software created by the conscious mind without any flaws. If yes, it must be reported immediately to the Guinness Book of Records. Algorithm – I have those….. they are great but they are extremely limited (as opposed to psychic abilities – they have no limits). They also have to be modified all the time because they are fixed to the programming in them. What I am trying to say is that you are trying to put a living thinking organism produce and reproduce by a device in this case an algorithm. I don’t see how an algorithm can reach the ability or a living growing organism. Let say you succeed. If you do – haven’t you created the humans most feared nightmare, the bases for android that can think for himself and create the future at FREE WILL ??? As free will must be involved for this to work, as we change our mind the future changes and the outcome changes. But if the device has no FREE WILL then it can’t compete with the Living Organism so it can’t produce the results required. Again, Please, Please don’t get me wrong, I don’t think that it is bad what you are attempting, I just think phychic abilities are developed with time and training at free will by a living and growing organism or energy.

Karenwhe	02 Jan 2003
Just one more thing that I thought about.... Lets say that this Phychic software works, that means that it can read the "soul blueprint", so the questions remains: What did I reincarnate for if I have a software to tell me all that I want to know and all that I have to do? how does my growth as a human being or soul occur? Psychic abilities can tell you the future just like dreams, but if you know the future the problems the road the way to go..... what is left for you to do? Just merly exist and wait for things to take their course, or change the course so that you won't encounter any problems in life and avoid everything in the "soul blue print" that you don't like? I think that this is beyond me a bit, so I think I have more questions than anything else.

WhiteDrag0n	02 Jan 2003
Quote: Originally posted by Karenwhe Psychic abilities can tell you the future just like dreams The future is not set in stone. Whenever a "future" is seen in a psychic vision or dream. It is showing a possible future of what can happen if things dont change. Freewill is just that, no one controls your thoughts and actions. Think of the future like unmolded clay. It takes shape by our actions in the now, however if we change our actions the future also changes.

Karenwhe	02 Jan 2003
Quote: Originally posted by WhiteDrag0n The future is not set in stone. Whenever a "future" is seen in a psychic vision or dream. It is showing a possible future of what can happen if things dont change. Freewill is just that, no one controls your thoughts and actions. Think of the future like unmolded clay. It takes shape by our actions in the now, however if we change our actions the future also changes. Exactly what I meant............. so how is a software going to do that, when the parameters change all the time??

purplelady	02 Jan 2003
I have not read this whole thread in depth yet but wanted to add a few thoughts. merhdad, you say things in the universe come in two's, matter and anti-matter, up and down , black and white etc. Everything has a duality. I read that things in the Physical universe come in twos But in the spiritual world they come in threes. For example the father , son , and the holy ghost.......... maiden , mother, and crone......... body, mind, and spirit............thought, word, action, to name a few SO if you want to know whether something is of the physical or spiritual realm , look to whether it is a duality or a triad! Light IS a wave and a particle , simple as that , it is both . It is both at the same time and maybe our scientific brains simply cannot comprehend that. The only Rule is change is inevitable. purplelady

purplelady	02 Jan 2003
Quote: Originally posted by mehrdad Karenwhe, I think I understood what you said, I was just making a point about what I wanted to do with my program. I was saying that I was trying to create a program that has ‘psychic’ abilities. I understand your point about DNA and the limitation that we human have in terms of going further than what we are meant to go. However, this is Ok, since I am trying to figure out if a computer can think as our unconscious mind can think. For example, I have personally experienced many dreams in my life that all have come true in some fashion or another. If dreams are produced by our unconscious then, somewhere in our brain there exists this ability to project an event long before it happens. I think we have overlooked what our brain is really capable of doing. I think our brain and where our unconscious is seated, genetically (or DNA) there exists a center with strong power to draw a conclusion about a certain event using some basic universal facts. There are many in the history of science or others who have developed their ideas when they saw them in their dream. I have personally solved many of my own problems while thinking about them when going to sleep. We have many cases that people while being put into hypnotize can recall past events in exact details and with clarity (recalling car plate numbers and such.) So, in a sense, our brain receives some input and then by using a certain logical algorithm and probability, forecasts a certain outcome. So this is what I want my program be able to do, so the fact is that not only the DNA case does not bother me that I actually count on that for the success of my program. Is it the human Brain that Dreams at night? Or is it the Mind? Yes, I agree , the human brain/mind thinks of a problum or situation , goes to sleep , and projects it into the future of infinite probabilities. Can your oracle predict infinite probabilities? I have heard that no computer yet can come close to competing with the human mind.

mehrdad	03 Jan 2003
Purplelady, I really liked what you said about the duality and the physical world, I have never heard of that before. I think it worth a research to see if this is really true. And about if mind or brain is doing the dreaming, please explain. As far as I understand it, the brain produces mind and although brain is matter but mind (ideas, thinking…) is not. So perhaps the brain is the machine that as a result of its activity the mind is produced. I think the brain is an environment that sees, feels, and analyzes what it discovers and then invokes a response. This response could be called mind, which is also what makes us to become aware of ourselves. Most of our responses to our environment are involuntarily, like heartbeat, and in general our control over what we do is outside of our control. We do not choose our parents, our genes, our nationality, our religion and what we perceive as a perception is actually a brain wash programming that is constantly controlling us. So where brain ends and mind begins is quite unknown (at least to me). Computers work with ‘0’ and ‘1’, binary language, and this is how usually our brain operates. When you want to make a decision, your decision often ends to a “yes” or “no”, ‘0’ or ‘1’. (Actually binary algebra is a derivative of Iching.) But a difference between a computer and our brain is that our brain has a vast library contains billions of years information as a result of evolution. Computers do not have that advantage, however, we might be able to give them some of our knowledge so they can become conscious (respond to their environment accordingly.) About my program and if it can predict infinite possibilities, I think recently an IBM computer defeated a chess master in chess. So, computers are really becoming very smart.

Karenwhe	03 Jan 2003
Quote: Originally posted by mehrdad Most of our responses to our environment are involuntarily, like heartbeat, and in general our control over what we do is outside of our control. We do not choose our parents, our genes, our nationality, our religion and what we perceive as a perception is actually a brain wash programming that is constantly controlling us. So where brain ends and mind begins is quite unknown (at least to me). I have to disagree here a little bit. IMHO all responses are voluntary, and nothing is outside of our control – we just perceive it as such. It is easier to say (blame) the outer than the inner. For example in the ext communist block millions of people ran away (risked it but did) some over and over again until they made it – it was voluntary it was a choice. The other people that stayed choose to stay, the people who made the revolution choose to do that, the once on the side lines choose to be on the side line. No one and absolutely nothing makes you do something only you – you have the choice – always. The Jews in the holocaust had a choice to leave before the was fully fledged – they decided to stay in mother Germany, most of them were rich, well connected, powerful etc – which made their ability to leave much easier – but they decided to stay – consciously on unconsciously. Which brings me to the next more interesting thing: above all there is a “soul purpose” a “soul blue print” in the holocaust all the souls had a well defined purpose, so did all the people who died in Sept. 11. In other words: before you incarnate you choose your parents, your genes, your nationality, your religion so on and so forth – your soul creates the blue print by choosing everything. This is part of the “life lessons” your soul CHOOSE for the soul growth. How your conscious mind (you) chooses to deal with those environments that your soul choose for you before reincarnating is what will determine your growth and will determine if you will have the same lessons in the next life or not. How you deal with things is: free will, and will determine your soul growth. Some “outside” events that we find ourselves in are actually the planning of the soul in the blue print for us to deal with and grow thereafter. To summarize (my opinion) in simple words: you soul chooses the blue print you encounter the situations and you personally are the one in control of the outcome. The outcome will determine if you “learnt” our “soul lessons” and had the growth planned or not and will graduate that particular lesson in the next life. The beauty of it is….. there is always the next time.

The What are the rules? thread was originally posted on 29 Dec 2002 in the Spirituality board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Spirituality, or read more archived threads.