User Controls
What is your vibrational frequency, and how does it improve your spiritual well-being?
-
2023-05-12 at 8:14 PM UTCFolks, what tone & pitch are your vibrating molecules achieving?
-
2023-05-12 at 9:56 PM UTC50-60z Ultrasonic
-
2023-05-12 at 11:20 PM UTCfolx?
-
2023-05-13 at 12:38 AM UTCNigger
-
2023-05-13 at 3:21 AM UTC66.6
-
2023-05-13 at 3:23 AM UTCi mean the higher the better thats what i always say
-
2023-05-13 at 7:15 AM UTCThe better, the higher, folks. đź’–
-
2023-05-13 at 9:08 AM UTCNigger?
-
2023-05-13 at 9:54 AM UTCShittskin?
-
2023-05-13 at 10:32 AM UTCCrackers, spics n niggers?
-
2023-05-13 at 11:31 AM UTCPeople dont know their individual frequency without years of esoteric occult[ish] studies. Even then i doubt you can just 'know your frequency by a number'
Its more of a feeling, in fact there is no matter everything is at a vibrational frequency. Bad stuffz is often considered low vibrational frequency while good stoofz is high, even though i dont fully believe this and would like to see more studies verifying this claim.
The main problem with studuies like this is that science refuses to work in conjunction with or 'marry' religion, in turn being partially responsible for the massive divide among scientists and structured religion.
Explain to me how 90% of an atom is negative space, yet is supposed to be the 'building blocks' for matter. Atoms may create what we know as matter but in reality its just vibrational frequencies that our mind decodes as an object.
Nothing is real we are living in a simulated reality most likely.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2023-05-13 at 11:36 AM UTC
Originally posted by RIPtotse People dont know their individual frequency without years of esoteric occult[ish] studies. Even then i doubt you can just 'know your frequency by a number'
Its more of a feeling, in fact there is no matter everything is at a vibrational frequency. Bad stuffz is often considered low vibrational frequency while good stoofz is high, even though i dont fully believe this and would like to see more studies verifying this claim.
The main problem with studuies like this is that science refuses to work in conjunction with or 'marry' religion, in turn being partially responsible for the massive divide among scientists and structured religion.
Explain to me how 90% of an atom is negative space, yet is supposed to be the 'building blocks' for matter. Atoms may create what we know as matter but in reality its just vibrational frequencies that our mind decodes as an object.
Nothing is real we are living in a simulated reality most likely.
Thanks for the interesting contribution, Totse. Appreciate it. -
2023-05-13 at 1:52 PM UTCYou should read david icke everything you need to know but have never been told book, it lays it out pretty good
Everyone thinks hes just a reptilian shapeshifter guy but thats kinda like starting at theoretical physics level math when people start with the reptiles, instead of starting with adding and subtracting, you have to build up to that and dude deserves more credit than he gets. -
2023-05-13 at 2:16 PM UTC
Originally posted by RIPtotse Nothing is real we are living in a simulated reality most likely.
The problem with simulation theory is that we’re just outsourcing reality to somewhere else. If we don’t live in the “real world”, someone out there does, so why can’t it be us?
Simulation theory is just religion for areligious people, because it explains nothing and puts the burden of explanation onto some unknowable higher power.
The best argument I’ve seen so far in favor of it is something like this: if we assume it’s possible to simulate reality almost perfectly, then the simulation will be able to do the same thing. So there’s this cascading infinitum of simulated realities all descended from a single “original” universe. So that means the odds are near infinite to one that we are the original, ergo we probably aren’t.
There’s a couple problems with this, the most obvious of which being where is all this processing power coming from? It takes resources to simulate reality so as the simulations get more and more complex as they begin their own intensive simulations, the power requirements would grow exponentially. I guess there’s no reason we can’t assume the “original” universe somehow has infinite energy but that would have its own set of logical inconsistencies.
Another problem is the fact that our civilization has not figured out how to simulate reality. So either we are at the very “bottom” of the simulation chain, or we really are the very first reality and we haven’t created it yet. So instead of the odds being infinite to one it’s more like 50/50.
Finally, as more and more realities are simulated in the chain, the odds increase more and more that one of the “higher” realities will hit the OFF switch, either intentionally or accidentally, which would instantly delete every universe in the chain below it. So why hasn’t that happened yet? The longer time goes on without this occurring increases the chances we are NOT living in a simulation. -
2023-05-13 at 2:31 PM UTCIf it's real I assume the people I attract into my life are a good measure. If they're positive people or not. Right now there's no one in my life, so ig no one matches my frequency rn.
-
2023-05-13 at 2:32 PM UTCI say this while there's a cute ginger right outside mowing the lawn.
-
2023-05-13 at 2:34 PM UTCI'd ask him if he'd like a cup of tea but he might say coffee and I still don't know how to make that.
-
2023-05-13 at 2:36 PM UTC
-
2023-05-13 at 2:39 PM UTC
-
2023-05-13 at 2:43 PM UTC
