[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Who makes the rules? Someone else.
- To: Patrick G Konshak
- Subject: Who makes the rules? Someone else.
- From: Robert L. Vaessen
- Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 07:52:58 -0700
- Cc: Robert Garrity ,
- In-reply-to: <20020314.110928.-3889865.3.>
On Thursday, March 14, 2002, at 12:09 , Patrick G Konshak wrote:
Your consciousness (conscience is sense of right and wrong) does
not impose the sequencing order. The limitations on your
consciousness are imposed by laws outside your control. The
cause and effect limitations are dictated by these laws
(physics). Your consciousness is prohibited from visiting the
node where effect does not follow cause. These laws restrict
your selection of nodes along the probability path. It's not so
much that our physical brains are incapable of processing the
data, but that they are not presented with the data in any order
other than that imposed by the 'rules'.
Lets say that there is no such thing as time. All events
happen at once as individual nodes. But our limited brains can
only receive then in a linear events. If this is true then my
conscience would have to be a great super powerful computer to
put these events into a linear pattern of cause and effect.
That is: the striking of a match is the cause of the effect of
fire (not the other way around). Or maybe there is a mechanism
that dose this for my conscience, like time? But that can't be
right, because time dose not exist. So my conscience has to be
a great super powerful computer.
Also my conscience would have to make sure it stays on the
right branch. What's to keep it from jumping around the tree
and seeing fish turn into refrigerators? Is the answer
'space'? Na, what's space? Nothing. It can't exist.
The rules (laws of physics) are what keep your consciousness on
such a narrow nodal path. As I explained in my other email. I
think it's our (mankind) job to figure out what all the laws
are. Perhaps that will allow us to circumvent or work around the
laws. The bigger question is who made these rules?
If our minds are limited to only see events linear, what is the
force or mechanism that's limiting them? Or if the limitation
is do to the lack of something. What force or mechanism is our
Good question. See above. But once again, in a model of a
universe without time. The rules are imposed upon our
consciousness. Not our brains. The laws actually limit which
nodes in the probability matrix we can experience, not whether
cause follows effect. Just like our consciousness, these laws
are outside the matrix.
All the actual physical objects inside the matrix follow very
few rules. They must have a shape, size, color, etc. These
objects do not move (another one of the concepts that must be
accepted if one accepts the principle of 'no such thing as
time') or interact, they are separate from each other. Fixed
into a static grid, a node within the probability matrix.
Therefore all the laws of physics regarding interactions,
movement, cause and effect, etc. Are actually limitations on our
consciousness. They are limitations on the manner in which our
consciousness experiences the matrix. The rules that govern
which node we may visit. If we have just finished processing the
node where a match was struck, then the rules are written such
that we can only visit one of two other nodes. We can either
visit the node where a fire results, or one where a fire does
not. But we cannot visit the node where the match is replaced
with a GE Energy Saver refrigerator.
I know that this is a somewhat simplistic explanation of the
probability path/tree; but we've been following it so far. If
you need more examples that illustrate limitations on which node
you can experience next please let me know.
You say 'time' doesn't exist, and then you say our conscience
perceive things in a linear way. Linear perception is time.
Your say time doesn't exist, but then you say our conscience
exist in time.
Time does not exist. Perception does not equal reality. We
perceive the sun 'Rising' in the morning, and 'Setting' in the
evening. The sun does not 'move' across the sky, and it doesn't
'disappear' at night. Our consciousness processes/experiences
different nodes in the matrix. The manner in which it
experiences these nodes is governed by a series of laws or
rules. One of those laws or rules dictates the order rate in
which we experience the nodes.
We experience the nodes (instantaneous events) in a linear
manner. In one direction at a time. Going back to my
illustration of a probability tree (see my web page:
https://www.robsworld.org/notime.html); Node A, followed
by node A1, followed by node A11. If we were not limited by this
rule/law we could be in more than one place at a time (so to
speak). We could experience node A, followed by A1, and then A2
(or reverse). Since A1 and A2 are adjacent nodes in a standard
experiential probability path you would be experiencing two
nodes simultaneously. You'd be experiencing the nodes in a
parallel, rather than linear, fashion.
We experience the nodes in a sequential manner. In our case, the
consciousness is limited to experiences that follow a path of
node A, followed by node A1, followed by node A11. If we were
not limited by this rule/law we could move from node A11 to node
A, and then to node A1. Moving backward and forward at will
along the probability path.
If we were not bound by the laws as I've described, the
probability tree model would look differently. It would be more
like a probability sphere or cloud.
Our consciousness does not exist in time. The rules which
restricts how it moves with the matrix are interpreted by us as
At one time man interpreted the earth as being the center of the
solar system. He did this because he was unwilling to believe
something that was contradictory to his senses. What are your
senses telling you about time? Very young children have no
concept of time. They learn about time from adults, and what
they are told is reinforced by their senses. Adults describe
time in terms of motion and cause and effect. The lessons are
reinforced by sight and sound.
You say 'events'. Photons, gravity, electron, etc.. exist. An
event. What's an event. Events don't exist because an event
is time. Everything happens at once so there is no such thing
as events. Our minds can't perceive linear events (past,
present, and future), they don't exist. There for we don't
I use the term event to describe a node. A singular
configuration of matter in which all things exist. This
configuration constitutes a single node within the probability
matrix. I call this frozen/unmoving configuration of matter a
node or event. I've been using the terms interchangeably.
An event is not time. An event is a single node within the
probability matrix. There is no time component in the
probability matrix. Perhaps I shouldn't use the terms
interchangeably? I created the term 'node' to avoid the time
based connotations attached to the word 'event'. I thought that
I could use them interchangeably after I had defined node. I
thought you would see the interchangeable aspects, and accept
them as synonymous.
Our minds do perceive linear events. They do this as a result of
the laws imposed upon our consciousness. Our consciousness is
only capable of experiencing the nodes in a linear fashion. In
turn, we rationalize this linear sequence as being part of the
physical order of things.
You need to answer these questions. Don't just say "You have
to ask a priest or something". This is why. You formed the
believe that 'time' dose not exist. You had to base it on
something or did you flip a coin? Base on the questions I
asked above, there's a big part of the puzzle missing. Your
holding back. Cuff it up. What are you hiding up you sleeve.
Maybe you think I will not understand. This why I sent some
may reply. Trying to get you to reveal your secretes.I
decided it's time for a Klingon approach and come right out
and ask you.
I'm not sure exactly which questions you want me to answer.
Aside from the questions about who created these laws, and why
are they written the way they are. I've been doing my best to
explain how our universe could exist without time and motion.
I didn't come up with the idea that 'Time does not exist'.
Others thought about this long before I was born. I sort of
stumbled upon it. Having cobbled it together experientially (Not
experimentally) throughout the years. Reading the book, 'The End
of Time' by Adrian Barbour, is what helped me codify my beliefs
about time. I hadn't even thought about motion until reading
that book. The book helped me put names to the things I'd been
thinking about. It helped me understand why I'd been having
trouble believing other cosmology theories.
I didn't flip a coin, and I'm not holding back on you. The only
thing I haven't been giving you is the formulae. The math that
scientists (There are many scientists who believe that time does
not exist) have been using to support the 'No time' theory. The
math is actually used more to disprove time based models of the
universe, than it is to prove 'No time' theories. I haven't been
using/describing the math because it's way over my head. It
doesn't do me much good, and I usually can't follow it. I suck
at math, and excel at words. I could describe just about
anything with words. But I can't see a sphere in 2(Πr2). (is
If I still haven't convinced you that time doesn't exist I may
never. Perhaps you'd like to read the book I suggested. It
doesn't explain things in quite the same manner that I have, and
it uses somewhat different terms. It does, however go into much
greater detail, and includes mathematical formulae to support
and refute various points.
Actual term: Chronophobia - Abnormal/irrational fear of clocks,
time or duration. Recognized by medical and psychology fields.
Temporaphobia (I made that one up)