*raises hand* I have a question

neofight
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 233
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 2:43 pm

*raises hand* I have a question

Post by neofight »

If you had to choose: what is the fundamental nature of all existence?

CHAOS ORDER

please choose one, and explain.

User avatar
Spida
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 2125
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 3:48 pm
Location: New England

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by Spida »

How about 'Order' is the fundamental nature of 'Existence'(although bizarre phenomena(Chaos) exists at a Quantum level), and 'Chaos' would be the fundamental nature of Non Existence? So then you have Order born of Chaos, but since it's part of an Eternal Cycle you can't say one precedes the other.

User avatar
Spida
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 2125
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 3:48 pm
Location: New England

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by Spida »

You could also look at Negative Existence as a Primordial Root, or default value. Existing outside of 4D Spacetime. An Eternal Realm, where periodically this 'Order' or 'Something' Springs from this Nothingness. This puts more emphasis on Chaos over Order fundamentally, it seems.

User avatar
Stukov
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 1093
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 3:23 pm

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by Stukov »

Without order nothing can exist; without chaos nothing can evolve.
I am the Watcher.
I am the Wanderer.
I am the Whisper.
I am the Warden.
I am the Weaver.

User avatar
Spida
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 2125
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 3:48 pm
Location: New England

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by Spida »

Stukov wrote:Without order nothing can exist; without chaos nothing can evolve.
Evolution of Chaos, i.e. Entropy. Order is Born of Chaos, so it is returning from whence it came. There is irony in that progression also involves regression.

User avatar
blindwake
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 213
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2016 7:58 pm
Location: I'm dreaming, but there's no wake.

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by blindwake »

OP, it's cyclic. Order is a special case of chaos. If you equate random with chaos then order is just when by chance you get a random value which is coherent in some way.
Ex: take a random number generator. No matter how good it is, there's probably a chance of eventually getting a sequence of identical values.
While normally you get: 1, 5, 3, 0, 7, 1, ...
Eventually part of it will be like: 1, 1, 1, 1, ... Then it will return to being seemingly free of any pattern. Again though, you have to decide what type of pattern implies "order".
If you look at the sequence of points for a parabola or some complicated polynomial, you might not see a pattern, but there's still one there. Effectively, chaos is order. It just depends on how good you are at seeing patterns.

Spida, what do you mean by negative existence? I understand that in terms of negative existential statements, but I'm not sure that's what you mean.

For example, I could say "The present king of France does not exist", which would be true, because there is not a present king. Or, I could say "the square root of negative one", which does not exist because it is undefined. But the way you word it seems to imply that you have something negative that actually exists as an object. As if the square roots of negative values actually exist somewhere.

Your statement about negative existence residing outside of 4D space time makes me think of files on a hard disk which are loaded into a program. The files are "outside of time" until they are actually utilized by something which has sequence. I wouldn't call that non existing though. More like not instantiated.
If all brains are made roughly the same, then why do I perceive through my own? What special characteristic places me in this skull?
I do not move throughout the world. The engines do not move the ship, but the universe.
The law of synonyms: my experience is synonymous with my brain, I change my experience to change my brain. so I change the physical with my thoughts.

User avatar
chowderpope
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 740
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2015 7:32 am

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by chowderpope »

I choose chaos order
Awake from sleep! Remember you're the son of a Great King, see to whom you're enslaved!

User avatar
Spida
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 2125
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 3:48 pm
Location: New England

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by Spida »

blindwake wrote: Spida, what do you mean by negative existence? I understand that in terms of negative existential statements, but I'm not sure that's what you mean.

Your statement about negative existence residing outside of 4D space time makes me think of files on a hard disk which are loaded into a program. The files are "outside of time" until they are actually utilized by something which has sequence. I wouldn't call that non existing though. More like not instantiated.
I'm not talking about the nonexistence of things within existence. I am talking about the nonexistence of existence itself. You could say nonexistence is analogous to 'Nothing'. Then one would need to define 'Nothing'. You could say Nothing is the absence of everything. Then you would be left trying to define 'everything' so you could know what 'nothing' is.

To approach this nonexistence you could start by eliminating 4D Spacetime. Which are parameters initiated at the time of the Big Bang.

One important question that should arise is: What can exist in the absence of 4D Spacetime? My answer to this at the current time would be Consciousness. So Consciousness would be a Zero Dimensional point. So the Singularity, or in Kabbalah the Primordial Point would be this Consciousness. And the Big Bang is an Expansion of this Consciousness. Creation of time and space.

But this Consciousness, or Primordial Point is 'something'. So to arrive at negative existence we would need to regress or realize something 'else'. I know this is vague at times. So the 'something' that exists independent of 4D Spacetime would be eliminated as well. You are left with either some sort of Formless Matter of the Unmanifest, or absolute 'Nothingness' where somehow Magically Consciousness either Forms via the Unmanifest(Energy), or arises out of absolute nothingness.

I believe there are Quantum experiments where particles appear to pop in and out of existence, but I'm not sure about the application of that idea here. Although it seems that rules prior to creation of time and space would be more applicable to the Quantum world.

The concept of a Multiverse changes things a bit here perhaps.
Last edited by Spida on Fri Dec 08, 2017 3:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Spida
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 2125
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 3:48 pm
Location: New England

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by Spida »

Something else here that is important to realize about Primordial Consciousness. Even although it does not exist externally in 4D Space. It's existence is 'Within". It works the same way in the Microcosm. Even although Consciousness is a Zero Dimensional Point. It's existence can be 'expanded' within. Consciousness can create Space and Time. We do it all the time when we dream. There is no actual 'space'. It's an illusion.

neofight
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 233
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 2:43 pm

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by neofight »

If you're suggesting that consciousness is immortal and exists regardless of matter this may be true, but without matter and senses to know itself, it doesn't actually exist at all. Consciousness is dependent on matter to exist, and since there is an order to matter, then the answer is: order before chaos. Chaos is just another word for "I don't know yet"

neofight
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 233
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 2:43 pm

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by neofight »

It isn't that something came from nothing, its something came from something.

User avatar
Spida
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 2125
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 3:48 pm
Location: New England

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by Spida »

neofight wrote:It isn't that something came from nothing, its something came from something.
Part of the problem here is defining an abstract concept such as 'nothing'. It is difficult to determine whether or not something can emerge from nothing if it is unclear exactly what 'nothing' is. And what rules apply here, if any, remembering that laws governing the Micro, and Macro worlds are not the same, and thus not necessarily logical, or rational.

I suppose you could create an argument for an eternal something by saying there must be something that has always existed, otherwise that would mean at some point something would have had to come from nothing, and since something cannot come from nothing then something must be eternal. The problem again, is it is not clear what nothing is, and it is also not clear what the laws/rules are at this stage of existence.

User avatar
blindwake
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 213
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2016 7:58 pm
Location: I'm dreaming, but there's no wake.

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by blindwake »

Spida,

I'm not sure you can define "nothing". That's kind of a contradiction. "nothing", basically by definition, has to be undefined.
I also don't think that's correct to define "nothing" as what's left if you remove "everything". 1 - 1 does not equal "undefined". It equals "0"; a placeholder.

Besides, you can't actually remove things from existence anyway. Let's say you have a single object floating in a void. If you remove that object, the object doesn't just disappear, rather, it's replaced by more void. This is similar to how if you erase a pencil you'll get paper rather than "nothing".

I'm also not sure it's proper to say that it's possible for things to exist outside of spacetime. If there is no time, there's no way to measure anything anyway. I'd say that sequence / time is an axiom of consciousness. It's almost an oxymoron to say there is consciousness, but that it is outside of time. Then what is consciousness perceiving if not a moment of time / a glimpse of some scene.
Magically Consciousness either Forms via the Unmanifest(Energy), or arises out of absolute nothingness.
Why and how would this happen? By what mutable laws? By some axiom?
I believe there are Quantum experiments where particles appear to pop in and out of existence, but I'm not sure about the application of that idea here. Although it seems that rules prior to creation of time and space would be more applicable to the Quantum world.
Particles popping in and out of existence really isn't that spectacular. Suppose this is a simulation of sorts. Then suppose that all particles are stored in a list. If you want to make particles pop in and out of existence it's as simple as adding and removing them from said list.
Zero Dimensional Point
Apparently that's an actual math concept. I'll have to look into it.
Consciousness can create Space and Time. We do it all the time when we dream. There is no actual 'space'. It's an illusion.
I definitely agree regarding space, but I'd say that time is an axiom of consciousness. In fact, I'd say that space arises from specific patterns of consciousness over time; e.g. it being restricted to only observing changes in 3D data. Regarding space in the physical sense, I'd argue that it's just a special case of reality that comes about from physical laws imposing restrictions on observable data. If you've ever looked into linear algebra, I prefer to think of space in the mathematical sense.

If you mean the creation of time in the sense that consciousness can create its own sequences in a non-linear manner, meaning that it doesn't have to follow any objective time line, then I totally agree. Though I think it would be more descriptive to say that consciousness follows a sequence, rather than "creates" time.

Neofight,
If you're suggesting that consciousness is immortal and exists regardless of matter this may be true, but without matter and senses to know itself, it doesn't actually exist at all. Consciousness is dependent on matter to exist, and since there is an order to matter, then the answer is: order before chaos. Chaos is just another word for "I don't know yet"
I strongly disagree with your statements about matter. Think about what you define matter in terms of. We measure matter based on consciousness. If you take matter and then pull away all perceptible things such as weight, visible motion, visible size, etc., there is absolutely nothing left; it is completely undefined. You could argue that matter is just a pile of numbers, but then you have to remember that numbers still only exist in terms of symbols, counting based on how many objects you see, etc. For this reason, I'd say consciousness has to come before matter, because without consciousness there is no way to define matter. You need a measurement device for data to have any sense. Consciousness is the base measurement device. When we use rulers, etc., they are used as an extension of consciousness.

Order is just a specific restriction of chaos. Theoretically, you can have matter which exists in a completely / most randomized state. When asking questions with vague terms such as "order" and "chaos", you should probably restrict your definition, as lots of people have different interpretations. Here is my definition: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Chaos.html
If all brains are made roughly the same, then why do I perceive through my own? What special characteristic places me in this skull?
I do not move throughout the world. The engines do not move the ship, but the universe.
The law of synonyms: my experience is synonymous with my brain, I change my experience to change my brain. so I change the physical with my thoughts.

User avatar
Spida
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 2125
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 3:48 pm
Location: New England

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by Spida »

blindwake wrote:Spida,

I'm not sure you can define "nothing". That's kind of a contradiction. "nothing", basically by definition, has to be undefined.
I also don't think that's correct to define "nothing" as what's left if you remove "everything". 1 - 1 does not equal "undefined". It equals "0"; a placeholder.

Besides, you can't actually remove things from existence anyway. Let's say you have a single object floating in a void. If you remove that object, the object doesn't just disappear, rather, it's replaced by more void. This is similar to how if you erase a pencil you'll get paper rather than "nothing".

I'm also not sure it's proper to say that it's possible for things to exist outside of spacetime. If there is no time, there's no way to measure anything anyway. I'd say that sequence / time is an axiom of consciousness. It's almost an oxymoron to say there is consciousness, but that it is outside of time. Then what is consciousness perceiving if not a moment of time / a glimpse of some scene.
You are correct. A precise definition of nothing does appear to be difficult at the least. I agree though that 'undefined' is a good substitute for a definition for the time being.

Maybe you cannot remove things from Existence, but you can regress to a time before those things existed. This is exactly what is implied(I believe)when Theoretical Physicists say that time and space did not exist Pre Big Bang.

Now if you remove 'time' from the equation what you end up with is an "Eternal State" where paradoxically something needs to exist outside of time in order to initiate time(and space), i.e. the expansion, or Inflation of the Universe.

So in the context of what I am talking about here at this stage of existential evolution even the 'void' itself does not exist as it *is* 'space' which hasn't been created.

I suppose there is difficulty here as we are metaphorically 'Programmed' for this Four Dimensional Reality Construct so to think outside of it requires a bit of conditioning. Is it correct to think in this manner? I believe so.

User avatar
cactusjack543
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 9:49 am

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by cactusjack543 »

self pride self justice using rights back up basically letting the land work for you at times to survive the day lay offering of tobbaco as such to mother nature though their are some that live by no reward hmm....
Late legal legit landlord papeers.... Signed mianatlantian4-7-11-13-16-28-43-48-53-78-400-480-666-780-999-(1004.1017.4,000.17,000.40,000.48,000) - 4 univ (from below-shades of grey) buy out everything milk even gravity.... so far 4 univ, 4 galaxies, 4 solor systems, 4 respect galaxy, 4 irobot galaxy, 4 vurtual reality galaxy, 4 (i lack in most) galaxy, 4 black hole galaxy, eeven relating creates awareness mission exceptence too earn keep.... recognised people may have extra for....

User avatar
blindwake
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 213
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2016 7:58 pm
Location: I'm dreaming, but there's no wake.

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by blindwake »

Spida, (I understand I write lengthy posts, but response times are sad at best, and it's impossible to discuss anything of real value with only short posts)
Maybe you cannot remove things from Existence, but you can regress to a time before those things existed. This is exactly what is implied(I believe)when Theoretical Physicists say that time and space did not exist Pre Big Bang.
To be honest, I always thought that theoretical physicists just like to sound smart. You might be right that it's just a poor description. When they fail to explain something in a meaningful way, I assume it's equivalent to how some religious people say "god works in mysterious ways", "god is simultaneously everywhere at once". The statements are ultimately just for "wow" value. They are emotionally charged but mean nothing. I don't even try to rationalize. I assume the premises are wrong, and I reinvent the wheel; if I do not, and the premises actually are wrong, then I will spend eternity rationalizing nonsense.

Interpretation of erasure in the sense of resizing reality

Actually, you might be right about removal, but in a different sense, and only to a point. The idea that objects are only ever replaced is only valid if the "size" of existence remains constant. If we take existence to be something like a 9x9 matrix, and set each entry to 0, we might call this a "void". However, there's no reason the matrix needs to be 9x9, and I can't think of any reason it would have to stay that size. You could "remove" objects in a meaningful sense by simply shrinking the matrix's size. Say "1" is a blob and "0" is void, all the matrix is "1" except for the center which is "0". If you kept shrinking the matrix until only the center existed, you'd have effectively converted the blob to "nothing", because its squares are undefined now.

This has its problems too though. For example, though I cannot think of a reason existence has to stay the same size, I also cannot think of a way it could change size. On pen and paper, it works, but in practice, I can't visualize it. I would actually really like this interpretation though, because it correlates nicely with the idea of an expanding universe; you can equate the expansion of the universe to an increase in the amount of data it contains.

Reality check

Of quick note, though we're talking about a universe as if "we" share a single one, I'd like to point out that I don't believe in objectivity in the slightest.

This might be the center of the issue: we're trying to make sense of a situation that never actually happened. Suppose this reality is much like a video game. This video game, much like an RPG, has a rich backstory. But, does this mean that the backstory ever actually happened? When you play an RPG, do you think the developers actually enacted the back story? Of course not. They just planted traces of the story, and you assumed everything happened. In reality, the game world only existed up to the point where you started playing. Trying to extrapolate the game world's objective time to the far past is actually a logic error.

Maybe there never was chaos. Maybe we just expect chaos to exist, but in reality, we just move from order to order. Only ever peering outwards at chaos, but never acting it out.
Now if you remove 'time' from the equation what you end up with is an "Eternal State" where paradoxically something needs to exist outside of time in order to initiate time(and space), i.e. the expansion, or Inflation of the Universe.
Yeah, but time is just an index. When you pick an eternal state, all you're saying is that t = constant (think about t in the sense of a physics equation which models the world). Time still exists, you're just not moving it.

The way I usually approach this, is that we let t = constant, which means that we are executing some single instant of reality, but then we make it a part of this instant's code to run t = t + 1. So, time moves inductively, or, reality is similar to a recursive function.

Perhaps it's not too much of a paradox at all. The idea of time, after all, being a sequential thing, is slightly incorrect. Instead, we have time space, where time is more like a coordinate in a space of its own right, where each point on its coordinate axes results in a specific permutation of reality. Saying that "time exists" or "time does not exist" is then similar to arguing whether or not the x-axis or y-axis on a graph exists; existence isn't really of importance because we are talking about ranges of possibilities. What really exists is a point on a graph, not the axis. The axis is the space where things are made and unmade; this is because we can add and remove points at will. In this way, "something" and "nothing" actually has some meaning.

To fix the paradox, decide that it's not time that's coming into existence, rather, it's the motion across time that is beginning; the sequential part. What's coming into existence is a point which moves across the time axis.
So in the context of what I am talking about here at this stage of existential evolution even the 'void' itself does not exist as it *is* 'space' which hasn't been created.
This fits nicely with the reality resize model.
I suppose there is difficulty here as we are metaphorically 'Programmed' for this Four Dimensional Reality Construct so to think outside of it requires a bit of conditioning. Is it correct to think in this manner? I believe so.
While you're right in a sense, in that we can't easily think of higher geometric dimensions, I think you've made a logical error regarding the time dimension. Basically, you've made certain assumptions about time in your paradigm, then you've realized they don't work. Instead of realizing that this means that your initial assumptions are incorrect, you've decided that it must be simply beyond you to make them work. It's like assuming that for n = 5, n + 2 = 8. But when you realize that 5 + 2 is actually 7, you start trying to make the assumption fit (rationalize it) instead of simply changing n to 6.

I think the time dimension is the most basic dimension. You cannot fathom its non-existence because all of reality is defined in terms of it. Meaning, that without time, reality also doesn't exist. You can define any n-dimensional structure and it will make geometric sense, but it simply cannot exist unless it is defined at some moment. Time is like a painter's canvas, and all the other dimensions are the colors drawn on to it.
If all brains are made roughly the same, then why do I perceive through my own? What special characteristic places me in this skull?
I do not move throughout the world. The engines do not move the ship, but the universe.
The law of synonyms: my experience is synonymous with my brain, I change my experience to change my brain. so I change the physical with my thoughts.

User avatar
Cam Revillot
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2015 9:19 pm
Contact:

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by Cam Revillot »

That's not what the chaos in chaos magick stands for, if that's the subtext

Shawn Blackwolf
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 598
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:09 pm

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by Shawn Blackwolf »

You are all mental masturbating...

I don't need to debate it...

I just *enter* the state of no time on the Otherside ,
like any shaman or witch worth their salt , and access
the information necessary which co exists "all at once"
for lack of a proper term...

Why debate , what you can experience ?

( never understood why people liked philosophy or existential psychology )

No criticism meant , just stating my experiential truth... [wink]

User avatar
blindwake
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 213
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2016 7:58 pm
Location: I'm dreaming, but there's no wake.

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by blindwake »

Shawn Blackwolf,

Because that's not how proofs work. You can't verify anything you see. It's like being handed a recipe without having a clue about why the recipe works.
If you stumbled across a book on how to make a space ship, are you going to invest insane quantities of money into building said space ship without being able to test the book's designs?

Other points:
-If you do happen to get valid information, it's likely you won't understand why the information is valid.
-Anecdotes have zero value in the eyes of an intellectual. That's blind faith.
-I can't enter the otherside with any degree of skill. The whole point of this is to help me get there. I wouldn't even be studying still if I hadn't had logically thought out why magick must exist and be feasible.
-Though you probably have more skill than me, because of my slower approach with derivations, I'm likely more capable of explaining a non-woo theory of magick to a layman. Different approaches have different results. There's no one perfect way.
-The more I think about this material, the smarter I get. Easier isn't always better. Calculator vs Pen and Paper Math

Side note:
You do have a good point though. It is much more efficient to just go search for answers instead of deriving them. I thought about applying this concept to computer science, and I got a pretty good picture in my head.

Could you imagine solving extremely complicated problems by sending AIs into the otherworld to search for solutions? Say, finding the roots of a complicated equation. You could perform guess and check and it wouldn't matter if the otherworld is sometimes unreliable. As long as guess and check is faster than a derivation, you're golden.

Also, I've been thinking about your gematria, and I might have an application for my own variant of it. Your "gibberish" (sarcasm) has been useful. [grin]
If all brains are made roughly the same, then why do I perceive through my own? What special characteristic places me in this skull?
I do not move throughout the world. The engines do not move the ship, but the universe.
The law of synonyms: my experience is synonymous with my brain, I change my experience to change my brain. so I change the physical with my thoughts.

neofight
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 233
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 2:43 pm

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by neofight »

Shawn Blackwolf wrote:You are all mental masturbating...

I don't need to debate it...

I just *enter* the state of no time on the Otherside ,
like any shaman or witch worth their salt , and access
the information necessary which co exists "all at once"
for lack of a proper term...

Why debate , what you can experience ?

( never understood why people liked philosophy or existential psychology )

No criticism meant , just stating my experiential truth... [wink]

Its not masturbation. If something exists "all at once" then there is a reason for its existence, no? How did it get there? What is it for? Do you think it has any real meaning other than what we apply to it? If you debate the argument of chaos and order, and discover which egg or chicken came first, you will find that there might be greater meaning to all of this than just that "it is". I am not saying what "it is", but I definitely think that this discussion reveals that something is, and if something is behind all of this, then what better pursuit could there be?

Shawn Blackwolf
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 598
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:09 pm

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by Shawn Blackwolf »

I had to laugh , Neofight...

Show you why in a moment...

Blindwake , I am always pleased when someone finds personal value
in the code , and can make practical use in it... [thumbup]

Then I had to laugh...

We have an arrangement in the code equaling 894 :

Neuro - Linguistic Programming = 893

Yet :

Gibberish = 326

Phase Lock = 326

And to get to 894 , we add 568 :

Relationship = 568

Therefore , any relationship , with / to , anything / anyone ,
is *gibberish* , or *phase lock*... [wink] ...in my book... [thumbup]

By the way , I did not see anyone asking for "proof" in the thread...just sayin'

Neofight :

First , in this arrangement of the code I work with , illustrated below , the
sixteen symbols each have many layers of meaning and define both on / off
states , and sequential algorithms...

The third level up from bottom , that pair across from each other :

One on left , can mean Order...one on right can mean Chaos...

If you note , the Order symbol is found *within* the symbol for Chaos ,
which itself is formed of two Trough Wave symbols opposing each other ,
descending into a symbol that can mean a Gravity Well...

And the next pair down :

One can mean Polarization / Depolarization , Time / Timelessness ,
and the other symbol , Rites Of Passage / Power To Move Forward...

So , in one sense , I do agree with Stukov , in his previous post...

( just thought I would answer your OP question )

Now , as far as Chicken and Egg...

If I place 16 straight line symbols , next to those 16 symbols in the set
shown below , those straight line symbols have a value of 112...

The four corner symbols in the set , have a value of 159...

112 = Chicken

159 = Chicken Egg

And this is why , originally , that question , was a question as a test to
see if someone was an initiate , or not...as Fulcanelli would say :

I Cant ( as Cant meant to speak in code )...

By the way...( pun intended , as you shall see )

Top symbol on right , pronounced : D'hoarnn , reversed , Nnrao'd...

Invert column on right...the "En" pronunciation symbol comes up opposite
the "H" symbol , in the column on left...

Thus when we asked a person to test them :

"Why did the chicken cross the road" ?

Most would answer wrong...

But the initiate would answer : "D'hoarnnnnrao'd" ?

It was not a Chicken , it was a Hen , and it was to get to the Otherside...

As the value for all symbols in this set is 994 , and "Otherside" = 994...

We all must go D'hoarnnnnrao'd to get to the Otherside... [thumbup]

P.S. That straight line symbol is pronounced "Is"...therefore it "Is" ,
many times over , just because it "Is"... [lol]
Attachments
rsz_09singlemothersrightsinglefatherscolumnleft.jpg

neofight
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 233
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 2:43 pm

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by neofight »

Cam Revillot wrote:That's not what the chaos in chaos magick stands for, if that's the subtext

What is your view of the chaos in chaos magic?

Since I cant decipher your code, it means nothing to me. For all I can know youre just some mad person waving around a bunch of symbols that mean nothing, declaring it to reveal some secret truth just to validate your philosophy (which it seems that I don't find to be logical).

Shawn Blackwolf
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 598
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:09 pm

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by Shawn Blackwolf »

neofight wrote: Since I cant decipher your code, it means nothing to me. For all I can know youre just some mad person waving around a bunch of symbols that mean nothing, declaring it to reveal some secret truth just to validate your philosophy (which it seems that I don't find to be logical).
If this was directed to me , which I believe it was , then to reply ,
I shall say those who are polite to me , and ask me to explain ,
I generally take my time and do so , as I have done before on this
site and others , as I have been teaching for 23+ years...

I have my own group on another site , where I am greatly appreciated...

For those who act like their head is stuck where the sun don't shine ,
with rudeness and a total lack of interest , I simply put it as Rhett
Butler did...

"Frankly , my dear , I don't give a damn"

Just sayin'... [thumbup]

neofight
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 233
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 2:43 pm

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by neofight »

It's okay. We all walk the path at a different pace, and some people travel farther than others.

User avatar
Spida
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 2125
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 3:48 pm
Location: New England

Re: *raises hand* I have a question

Post by Spida »

blindwake wrote: While you're right in a sense, in that we can't easily think of higher geometric dimensions, I think you've made a logical error regarding the time dimension. Basically, you've made certain assumptions about time in your paradigm, then you've realized they don't work. Instead of realizing that this means that your initial assumptions are incorrect, you've decided that it must be simply beyond you to make them work. It's like assuming that for n = 5, n + 2 = 8. But when you realize that 5 + 2 is actually 7, you start trying to make the assumption fit (rationalize it) instead of simply changing n to 6.

I think the time dimension is the most basic dimension. You cannot fathom its non-existence because all of reality is defined in terms of it. Meaning, that without time, reality also doesn't exist. You can define any n-dimensional structure and it will make geometric sense, but it simply cannot exist unless it is defined at some moment. Time is like a painter's canvas, and all the other dimensions are the colors drawn on to it.
I'm seeing a few scenarios here involving different concepts of Time. I will only go into a couple. First you have Physical, or Macrocosmic Time. And you also have 'Perceived' Time, Microcosmic Time as it relates to consciousness. Macrocosmic Time is synonymous with 'Change", and Microcosmic Time is also change, but it is change 'within', i.e. a passing of moments.

Now with regard to the "Initial Cause". Perhaps it would be Physical Time that would be static and frozen, in the absence of space where it is impossible for physical change to occur.

But this Primordial Consciousness may have sense of time. And this would eliminate the problem of something(change) occurring in the absence of Time. Now of course this would also render this Primordial Consciousness Eternal. To avoid a recurring problem of a "no Time" Paradox.

Now what Mr. Blackwolf said about everything existing in a static state all at once. I have looked at it that way, and I like that concept. I actually even arrived at that myself independently. It would be an Infinite and timeless construct where everything does indeed exist "at once". The time paradox is an issue here, but I don't think that invalidates the idea.

So in effect the inflation of the Universe would be feeding off of this static copy of Infinity. Permutations involving an anabolic process implementing a Divine Fractal Architecture of a sort. As one idea.

So in summary. The Primordial Consciousness, which would have perception of time. Would be the initiator (creator) of 4D Spacetime. This would resolve the no time paradox, but changes things a bit.

Post Reply

Return to “Chaos Magick”