User Controls
Identity
-
2016-08-11 at 2:42 PM UTC
Just as only one side of a solid structure can be seen at a time, without a mirror, only one phase of a hyperspacial structure can be perceived directly at one time. It is natural, therefore, to assign a unique identity to different phases that exceed the observer's capacity for resolution into a single gestalt. Virtue is not recognized as the front of vice, no light is seen in darkness, and you have to know your tao to find strength in compliance. Union of complementary opposites transforms them both into a structure of higher dimension. The degree to which you can resolve polar opposites establishes the dimensional scope of your Consciousness. An understanding of hyperspace enables you to answer problems that defy all philosophers limited to three-dimensional concepts.
That's interesting.
Cognitive dissonance is produced by harmonic discord among the vibrations defining ideas, images, and sounds. All differences produce cognitive dissonance until discordant phases are cancelled and the remaining vibrations are resolved into a harmonically integrated gestalt in a higher dimension, like a musical chord. Wave cancellation is the physical basis of the concept of psychological repression established by Freud; these wave mechanics also produce karma.
Interference between (mental) waves transforms them into other frequencies so that objects are not perceived as they really are, if they are not rendered altogether invisible as a consequence of cognitive dissonance. Therefore, each person sees and hears truly only those signals that are congruent with the conceptual patterns already defining one's own mental structure; all other perceptions are distorted and repressed, occulted behind the Veils of Maja. At the bottom line, intereference produces a pair of predominant patterns separated by 180o of phase. As a result, reality is perceived to be polarized between good and evil, black and white, strong and weak, male and female, etc.
If your views of a cone were limited to the extremes of plan and elevation, only extraordinary conditions and mathematical calculation would enable you to realize that the two mutually incommensurable figures were aspects of the same identity in a higher dimension of space. Ordinarily, you are able to relate one extreme view to the other extreme by innumerable other viewing angles revealing the gradual transformation of the circle into the triangle. Even after identifying the circle as an allotropic aspect of the triangle, you would still be unable to form the concept of a solid cone unless your mental space were large enough to comprehend three dimensions; you would believe that the conical structure alternates between a circle and a triangle according to the viewing angle; it would be the wave-particle paradox all over again.
On the atomic scale, hyperspacial rotations occur at such speed that transition phases between extreme views cannot be resolved within the temporal precision of the experiment. The wave-particle dichotomy is refractory to scientific comprehension not only because an electron flips between its two phases faster than the instruments can follow, but also because both wave packets and particles are three-dimensional concepts. Mentally unable to comprehend ultratridimensional entities, physicists identify different projections of one subatomic particle as several new discoveries, and that is why there is no end to the number of elementary particles.
Fusing disparate images depends upon the development of a faculty for ignoring differences. The mind learns to ignore differences by subsuming them to a common feature, such as association of time, place, utility, or physical property. The subsumption of ideas into abstract classifications is produced by wave interference; and so, particular, individual differences are repressed to the Unconscious as the mind grows from perceptions limited to tangible sense data to comprehend abstract concepts.
Plato wrote the original hyperspacial theory explaining that each of the material bodies in this world is a manifestation of an Ideal Form in Heaven. In modern mathematical terms, Plato can be paraphrased to say that each individual structure is a unique cross- section (or projection) of an entity existing in a space of more than three dimensions, intersecting with our tridimensional world. Plato conceived his concept of Universal Form by the mental process of verbal abstraction, and then with true philosophic backasswardness he declared that the particular is derived from the abstract, instead of the other way 'round; nevertheless, Plato is right.
Since Plato explained that all individual differences are unique aspects of the ideal, and since wave interference is proven to be the physical mechanism that subsumes differences within the gestalt, the technical means for revealing a tangible manifestation of the Ideal Form is self-evident. By superimposing an indefinitely large number of individual images of the same class of tangible manifestations, the individual wave-forms arrange themselves according to the principle of the Conservation of Energy into a single, harmonically integrated structure. Photographers will recognize this process as the way to make a hologram. A hologram, therefore, is a tangible hyperspacial structure.
Any sources or is that originally from you? I can't fully understand the concept to be honest. -
2016-08-11 at 3:07 PM UTC
That's interesting.
Any sources or is that originally from you? I can't fully understand the concept to be honest.
While I wish I was the author of that artwork, I am not. I just really appreciate it. I found it a while back somewhere on this site but I can't remember exactly where it was. However you can find a copy of it here except note that forum automatically changed the word "sex" to the word "flower" everywhere it appeared in the text.
As you read it, you should bear in mind that you don't learn about hyperspace so much as you grow into understanding as a consequence of mental/physical/spiritual evolution, like you grow into walking, talking, and sexual consciousness. Always remember and bear in mind that hyperspace extends through more than three dimensions, so you must be able to read construction plans easily before you can make sense of that text. In short, hyperspace is not difficult to understand; if its meaning does not develop like music after some rumination, comprehension is simply impossible, so don't sweat it. -
2016-08-11 at 3:50 PM UTCOh, I think I'm already cool with hyperspace. We kinda depend on eachother, haha.
Thanks for the link. -
2016-08-19 at 1:26 PM UTCWhat if the subjective consciousness is something that is illusory like freewill? What if it's just a creation of words? Like you said Lanny, words/thoughts are required to make the argument. Without that what are we? What is left to identify with?
-
2017-04-27 at 6:21 PM UTC
Originally posted by hydromorphone That's an interesting thought. Have you ever seen the movie 'John Dies at the End' before? The beginning starts off with the same question though phased with a different analogy (he kills this psycho with an axe but breaks the handle, a season later with replaced axe shaft he kills this alien bug creature and breaks the head. Soon after the guy he beheaded originally returns with his head sewn on with weed Wacker line and says as the guy brandishes the axe 'that's the axe you killed me with' or something to the effect- now was it since both shaft and head had been replaced? Besides that, its a very good movie, one of my favorite and goes on with all sorts of complex questions like the one in the OP.)not just for the the idea at hand, but just because its a damn good movie, I highly recommend you checking it out. Its a little sci-fi, horror, and dark comedy wrapped in one.
I guess it wouldnt be. We all change, nothing lasts forever. I've been told that most people change their tastes and attitudes every 7 years- possibly due to our cells replacing? Another thought on this is with organ transplants. There have been documented cases of people say recieving a heart and developing unusual traits just as the donor had in life- maybe they aren't that exact person because of one organ being replaced but it lends to the idea if we replaced everything would we in fact be the same person and where would that line be drawn at. Interesting stuff.
The book was way better.
Also this thought experiment has been around a long time, just phrased in different ways. Another popular iteration is the Star Trek "transporter problem" which postulates that every time a human being uses a transporter device, they are obliterated into their base particles (effectively dead) and reconstructed molecule-by-molecule somewhere else. Rather than a transporter it's more like a fax machine. Kirk has died hundreds of times.
They even explored this in the show a couple times, like that one where they found out there was a 2nd Riker trapped on a planet somewhere. The audience is supposed to ask themselves "but which one is the real one??", the answer is neither - they're both essentially clones of a dead person. -
2017-04-27 at 6:23 PM UTCAnd by the way, in the book the analogy of the axe is more relevant because you find out at the end that Dave is a fucked up clone basically that killed the original and then assumed his life but didn't remember he was a clone. I don't think they mentioned this part in the movie.
-
2017-04-27 at 6:37 PM UTCJust got a fucking backflash to when I read Cracked.com and it wasn't total shit. Whoa.
-
2017-04-27 at 6:39 PM UTC
Originally posted by Open Your Mind Imagine you have a favorite sock. Because it's your favorite, you wear it often. Over time it starts to fall apart, so you patch it up and keep on truckin'. Eventually, over the years, the sock no longer possesses any of the original material - it has all been replaced. Is it still the same sock you fell in love with all those years ago?
If I were a genius and invented a magical machine that could slowly swap every single molecule of Lanny's body with every single molecule of Sophie's body, one molecule at a time, at what point would Lanny and Sophie become each other? Would we ever reach that point? Does this question even make sense?
If we lived in a future world where synthetic body parts were created in labs to replace our natural parts as we got older, including brains, and you eventually got so old that you had to have 100% of your parts replaced, would you still be you after everything that makes you what you are has been replaced?
Yes, what makes you you is not the parts but the energy that controls the parts. -
2017-04-27 at 6:41 PM UTC
-
2017-04-27 at 6:43 PM UTC
-
2017-04-27 at 6:45 PM UTC
-
2017-04-27 at 9:10 PM UTCBut Dargo, what's a soul?The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2017-04-27 at 9:22 PM UTC
Originally posted by Open Your Mind Imagine you have a favorite sock. Because it's your favorite, you wear it often. Over time it starts to fall apart, so you patch it up and keep on truckin'. Eventually, over the years, the sock no longer possesses any of the original material - it has all been replaced. Is it still the same sock you fell in love with all those years ago?
If I were a genius and invented a magical machine that could slowly swap every single molecule of Lanny's body with every single molecule of Sophie's body, one molecule at a time, at what point would Lanny and Sophie become each other? Would we ever reach that point? Does this question even make sense?
If we lived in a future world where synthetic body parts were created in labs to replace our natural parts as we got older, including brains, and you eventually got so old that you had to have 100% of your parts replaced, would you still be you after everything that makes you what you are has been replaced?
way to make up a dillema that many people have already discussed thoroughly. you become the other person when the region that controls consciousness is overtaken by the other person's, by whatever circuit is responsible for this. our bodies recycle ALL of our cells every 7 years or so, so yeah you'd be the same person if you did this artificially. why do you have to be such a New Age "enlightened" dumbshit -
2017-04-27 at 11:08 PM UTCI was about to bring up cell generation but then I got lost wondering about souls.
-
2017-04-28 at 10:53 AM UTC
Originally posted by Darth Beaver Yes, what makes you you is not the parts but the energy that controls the parts.
What makes you think "energy" controls your parts? That's like thinking electricity controls the programs on your computer. That's not right.
The electricity or energy is required for the thing to work, sure, just like the physical components that are required, but the only thing in that "controls" it is the programing. Data. The information stored on it. -
2017-04-28 at 10:54 AM UTC
Originally posted by Very!Berry way to make up a dillema that many people have already discussed thoroughly. you become the other person when the region that controls consciousness is overtaken by the other person's, by whatever circuit is responsible for this. our bodies recycle ALL of our cells every 7 years or so, so yeah you'd be the same person if you did this artificially. why do you have to be such a New Age "enlightened" dumbshit
That's kinda my thing, bro. -
2017-04-28 at 10:57 AM UTC
Originally posted by Open Your Mind What makes you think "energy" controls your parts? That's like thinking electricity controls the programs on your computer. That's not right.
The electricity or energy is required for the thing to work, sure, just like the physical components that are required, but the only thing in that "controls" it is the programing. Data. The information stored on it.
That's how we simulate ourselves with machines that is not how we actually work. -
2017-04-28 at 11:47 AM UTC
Originally posted by Open Your Mind What makes you think "energy" controls your parts? That's like thinking electricity controls the programs on your computer. That's not right.
The electricity or energy is required for the thing to work, sure, just like the physical components that are required, but the only thing in that "controls" it is the programing. Data. The information stored on it.
-
2017-04-28 at 11:48 AM UTC
-
2017-04-28 at 11:53 AM UTC
