Hello, Cy, hello, OMF II

First topic message reminder :

Testing.......

Yes, it is working.

Congratulations to Cyrellys & Co.!

I will be continuing the BPWH blog from Compass Morainn, which was a continuation from the original OMF site on ProBoards, which is in the process of being re-archived from that site.



(cont.)

Yes! That's what I'm trying to figure out........

And, yes, electrical analogies do play a definite role in the BPWH. Talbot seems to take these analogies a bit too literally, for my taste.


3:20---------

And this is probably part of my difficulty...... trying to draw a line between the literal and metaphorical aspects of the BPWH. Nature abhors vacuums and boundaries.


So, golly, maybe Ron is right, maybe I should throw in the best possible towel. But where is my pension? Louise was lucky, in that she was able to pass on, with her boots still on. That is one problem with not having a job...... you can't figure out how to quit. There is no retirement party, and no gold watch. Life is tough. Darn that Sun, anyway! It is nothing but a headache for us struggling metaphysicians.


When the visitors come here, they don't usually eat our food, and may not breathe our air. But can they get sunburned? Now, there's an important question, for you! Some suggest that they wear sunglasses. I kid you not!


Look, if we eat, then plants have got to eat, too. But who decided that they should eat photons? Who ever dreamed that up? That sure took some imagination. It's way above my pay grade.

Hey, is it not the snow-birds who cause the Sun to go south in the winter? That is a form of heliotropism. I'm struggling, here, folks.


I have heard of eye-candy, but normally we can't eat our perceptions, yet somehow the plants figured that out, smart little buggers that they are. Was it Jimmy Carter who had something to say about that? Or was it JC?

I think I need to beef up heliotropism.


I don't wish to make light of a horrible situation, but the fathers of the two recent rampagers are both connected to the LIBOR scandal. There is a conspiracy waiting for a theory....... http://beforeitsnews.com/conspiracy-theories/2012/12/2-mass-shootings-connected-to-libor-scandal-2446788.html Don't get me started. Well, ok, then, Nancy was a 'prepper'. Need we say more? Where is the comforter, when we need her? Nothing like a tragedy to shrink the world.


Plants have to struggle to embrace the sun. Is that not a direct perception? How do we struggle? What do we struggle to embrace? Our Source? Whither do we go, lest we wither? Is Ra not their Source? Ode to a Grecian urn......?

Fair youth, beneath the trees, thou canst not leave
  Thy song, nor ever can those trees be bare;  
    Bold Lover, never, never canst thou kiss,  
Though winning near the goal—yet, do not grieve;  
    She cannot fade, though thou hast not thy bliss,  
  For ever wilt thou love, and she be fair!

Am I making any sense? Now.......?

Above thy deep and dreamless sleep
The silent stars go by
Yet in thy dark streets shineth
The everlasting Light
The hopes and fears of all the years
Are met in thee tonight.

How much do you want to bet.....?

A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

Hey, don't blame me! Are we the body electric, or is it mourning comes Electra? Are we ready to find out?

Will I be able to remember this, next time? Will anyone else catch the drift? How much space is between sink and source? That space is an illusion. It is but nothing. What is the rough beast? We are that. Are we cancer or chrysalis? Death throes or birth pangs?

Though seemingly unrelated, the emotionally wrenching school shootings may soften the hearts of politicians as they try to resolve the fiscal crisis.

Slouching, indeed!

Double duty.......? Geometry finds the geodesic. There is nothing incidental about day and night. Night hawks eat the moonlight. Scurry, scurry. What better proxy for the Monad than ecology? The eclipse pierces the side of the mother. The trinity comes home. Was Babylonian astrology not born out of that shock and awe? Who will believe? Who can believe? It is a slender thread.



(cont.)

Summing up, here was the key advance from yesterday........... there is a metaphoric parallel between the Sun and God. Mention was made of the Egyptian worship of Ra, for one of many historical instances. This is not news, is it? Well, what I wish to make plausible, today, is that humankind does not live by bread alone. Again, is this news? Perhaps it is, in the context in which I wish to deploy it.

The cynic might be quick to agree...... yes, we, humans, need both bread and circuses. I wish to amend that slightly.......

I say that we live by both bread and words, and that it is our consumption of the living word that has shaped our world, much more than has our consumption of calories. And I mean this in both the social and physical senses. I am even suggesting that Ra came before the Sun. Would this fact be newsworthy, were it to be made plausible? I think it might be.


10:20----------

Why is it plausible that words shaped the world.......?

Well, there can be little doubt that numbers have shaped the world. This is a tautology of physics, going back to Pythagoras. And where did numbers come from? Well, they came from logic. Of course, I'm thinking....... Logos..... Can logic and logos be separated? Not on my watch they can't. And which came first..... logic or logos? I'll wager you ten to one that logos came first. Is this newsworthy? It ought to be, and it will be, when the hour is ripe.

So, yes, we do have the Solar logos, a term that has also been usurped by various New Age groups. The sun is the organizing principle for the sky, and for life on Earth.

The sun emerged from the big bang, which emerged from nothing, or so we are told. Well, that is not true. It is a vast oversimplification of scientific cosmogenesis, and the innumerable strands of speculation, therein.

I am suggesting that, as per the logos, there never could have been nothing. There is, instead, the eternal Potentia. That is the mother source. Then there is the 'father' source, the logos spermatikos, the seed crystal that is dropped into the supersaturated, supercooled Potentia. Ra was a crucial aspect of that logos spermatikos. Does this sound like a myth? Well, it is the Mythos, which is the study and etymology of the archetypes, the logoi.


11:30--------

The upshot is very simple, mind/logos came before matter. Why is this simple and irrefutable fact not being annunciated from the rooftops? The time is not quite ripe. Yes, the time is pregnant, but the hour and manner of the parturition has not yet been revealed. We'll know it when we see it.

As of today, the most likely venue will be the SfA. God willing, the time will be Sunday. We shall see. The actual zero hour will depend mainly upon Bill's mood, bless his heart. How expansive will his mood be, on Sunday? When Bill is ready, I'm ready, yes, as of today, just to be specific........

From: Bill 
Date: December 17, 2012 10:35:31 PM EST
To: Dan Smith 
Subject: The end of the world

Dear Dan,

Here is a link to a good article I just read giving a perspective on the end of the world.  See you Sunday.

http://www.reasons.org/articles/the-end-will-come-just-not-later-this-week

Yours,

Bill

Hmmm............

In the bible there are, at least, three distinct accounts of Genesis. There are the two in the book of Genesis. Where is the third, and, to my mind, the crucial one.......

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

Why should there be so much doubt about this? IMHO, the present large extent of doubt is a crucial part of our plan of salvation.


John 1:1-4 says it all. I am merely elaborating on these exact words. It should be passing strange that, when Xians speak of Creation, they do so entirely in terms of the Old Testament. Why do they shy away from John? Are they gun-shy? Bill, for instance, wants to speak of process. This probably comes from the notions of Process Theology. IMHO, John is not speaking of process. Yes, he has no process.

Only in such manner may we reconcile the YEH and the OEH, for instance, or, rather more significantly, may we reconcile the Alpha and the Omega.......

 “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”

Do you see any mention of process? I sure don't.


12:40----------

TBMK, Process Theology is an oxymoron. Well, yes, it is about..... baby-steps, Ellie. God, allegedly, also takes baby-steps, in the Creation 'process'. Well, where does that leave the Alpha and Omega? Where does that leave the big-bang? Nay, where does that leave being born again? Yes, there is gestation, but there is also fruition, and there are also Revelation and Apocalypse.......

 Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. 9For we know in part and we prophesy in part; 10but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away. 11When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things. 12For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known. 13But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love.

Have I left anything out? Do any stones remain unturned, lo these many years? I'm sure I'll think of a few, before Sunday, but will they indicate my lack or preparedness for prime time? Will they prevent my making additional comments on Sunday? Will Bill so prevent? Does there need to be another confrontation between the two of us?



2pm-----------

Bill was supposed to have been discussing 'process', last Sunday, but he had also promised me ten minutes to speak about the disconnect between the two RtB books...... C&C and LGM. The other five attendees and I were still going strong, 35' later, when Bill intervened in the proceedings, and gradually brought the discussion back to 'process'. This morning, he sent me the email posted above. I have not responded. I have not ruled out contacting him prior to Sunday, but am inclined not to.

I have also not ruled out attempting to contact any executive or legislative officials regarding the R&D show.

2:45--------

I have called the public affairs office at the CIA, and had an 18' conversation with Molly, and then mainly with Will Morgan. I was requesting confirmation of the legitimacy and/or status of my continuing liaison with Ron. After explaining, in some detail, to Will the nature of this liaison, he said that he would not be able to provide me with any assistance. In attempting to call back to public affairs, Molly will say hello, and then I say that I will speaking with Will, and the line goes dead.

I now wish to contact someone on the legislative side.


5:40-----------

I ended up driving down to Sen. Mikulski's office, in the city. After some conversation with staff-person, Marianne, I was instructed to write a letter to the Senator, which I did, while sitting in their front conference room. I am requesting a reassurance wrt the assurances that were offered to me by Chris Straub, in 1995, then the ranking staff member on the SSCI.

Having completed the one page letter, Marianne told me that it would be delivered to their Washington office, by "snail-mail", where it would be routed to their Intellignce liaison person. I have since left a phone message, at that office, requesting to speak with the liaison person.

I have left another message on Ron's mobile phone, which he said he would be monitoring. There has still be no response. Well, I feel that I have done my due diligence concerning my current status wrt Ron.

If I've heard nothing, within the next day or two, my logical next step would be to revisit the FBI office in Catonsville, which I last visited, I believe, on or about, 9/17/2001. On that previous visit I had a ~15' conversation with a woman, outside the newly fortified building. She took detailed written notes as to my concern that Ron appeared to have had prior knowledge, concerns that I have elaborated upon, on my website and on these OM forums.

I have never gotten any direct response from that visit, but, once again, I will be able to feel assured that I have done my due diligence, just as a concerned citizen.


Here is a followup thought that has just occurred to me. When contacting that Catonsville office, I should perhaps, just to be doubly assured of my due diligence, tell them that I would then head on down to Washington to contact the Secret Service, at the White House. It ought to be interesting to see what, if any, is their response to that information. Yes, I'm beginning to think that this could be an educational adventure, all around.


6:35---------

From: Dan Smith 
Date: December 18, 2012 6:31:53 PM EST
To: Ronald 
Subject: Update.......

Ron,

For various reasons, it has occurred to me that I should be making periodic inquiries as to my current status wrt being just your barbecue buddy.  I had been under the impression that, once upon a time, there was a more serious aspect to our communications.  If that is no longer the case, then I would like some (official?) confirmation to that effect.  

Dan

I should have added that I am currently and actively seeking such confirmation from appropriate third parties.


8pm------------

At the very least, I am owed a response from a public official who can assure me that there once was some appropriate oversight wrt my communications with Ron. Then, should there not be some additional statement concerning present and possible future communications? Even a no comment would be helpful. Failing all of the above, I would put increased pressure on Ron to explain the communications. If he can only offer that I am his barbecue buddy, then I will be more reluctant to accept his calls and invitations in the future, if there should be any such. I wonder if Ron will now deny that there was a briefing, or any meetings with Chris Straub, one of which meetings having been attended by Ron.

Would it be too inflammatory, now, for Ron or any other official to admit that, way back in 1995, I had a meeting with Chris Straub wherein the subject of eschatology was discussed, in connection with my ongoing communications with Ron?

Or would it just be too boring for any government official to provide any comment whatsoever?




(cont.)

Since the sun is shining today, I figure this is a good time to make hay, and not give Ron any more headaches by, say, taking a trip to Catonsville or down to 1600. Let's save those for a rainy day.

Tomorrow comes my next opportunity to make a presentation, this time at the local Interfaith center, with Sam and Bibi. I'm thinking of giving the folks at the ICJS a preview of my next talks at GFC and BGF, which, as I was realizing last night, should be of the same basic substance, with only some differences in emphasis.

I now see that the essential connecting link is likely to be the closed timelike curve (CTC). With this one round stone I can 'kill' both birds..... Science and Religion.

Anyone wish to make a bet? Maybe we'll find out tomorrow.


And you know what the biggest miracle may be is that I have gotten this close to the MoAPS, without anyone noticing. Even in this age of the Internet, and my plotting every step, right out in public view. And this stealth factor has likely been essential to the proper gestation of this baby. I'm also willing to bet, maybe on lower odds, that it will turn out that there has been a deliberate cone of silence wrt my little sandbox with its sandcastle, the BPWH. A cosmic conspiracy of Silence, with a little help from Ron&Co? Sure, why not? If you were God, how would you orchestrate the MoAPS, within a prophetic tradition? Has there ever been a Vision without a Visionary? That's just not possible, is it?

There will be one main difference between the two talks........ for Grace, I start with a straight timeline, from Alpha to Omega. For the Greens, I start with the Circle of Life, which, as it turns out, also just happens to be the cosmic CTC.

Is this getting simple, or what?


With Grace, I just start connecting the dots by using a third dot, above the timeline, which will be labeled as the Logos.

With the Greens, I draw a horizontal timeline, bisecting the circle of life, and extending beyond the circle, on either side, toward the past and toward the future.

Is 'everyone' following this? You should probably have a sketchpad in front of you. I will be using a sketchpad and/or a whiteboard in the talks. My sketchpad is mainly just in my little noggin.

The directed timeline represents the prophetic tradition. The circle of life represents the mystical tradition. Out of these two, diametrically opposed worldviews, neither of which is coherent, I am constructing a coherent synthesis, and if you know where this has been done before, please just post the URL. That would save us all a lot of trouble! No?


2:10-----------

Things continue to move ahead locally...........

Sam and I are meeting with Bill, in a few minutes. The meeting at the Institute, with Bibi is on Friday. I invited Bill to the Institute, but Les was concerned that it might become a circus, so it appears that I'll be the sole representative of the Evangelicals.

Gary sends us the following link....... http://www.ted.com/talks/martin_rees_asks_is_this_our_final_century.html I do recommend it. Notice Martin's reference to the Ouroboros, and to our final century. So near, yet so far!


3pm-----------

Waiting for Bill and Sam to show up.............


5:40----------

Bill and Sam aren't quite ready for me to save the world, not just yet, anyway, but maybe tomorrow or the next day! Nothing is wasted, I keep telling myself.

On Sunday, Bill will be talking about process and purpose in Creation. It turns out that there are many allusions to Creation, in the bible. IOW, there must be a lot of wiggle room for us, metaphysicians.

Trying to make a synthesis of a straight line and a circle should be more difficult even than squaring the circle, but I'm not one to refuse a challenge. Are we surprised that the J-man provides the answer? I pointed this out to Bill, but he didn't see it. My kingdom for a whiteboard! Give me a whiteboard, and nothing can stop me.

Now get this....... http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2007/02/was-gods-purpose-in-creation-to-glorify-himself/ Nice question. Do I have competition?




(cont.)

It turns out, as per Bill, that there are many accounts of Creation in the bible. I need to peruse these, before Sunday. In the meantime, I have downloaded a copy of Gaston Bachelard's Psychoanalysis of Fire (1938). Gaston is a critical idealist. I hope that he can help me with my rationalization of the Sun. He relies mainly on relationalism, as found in alchemy, astrology, etc. What is the analogy for combustion? I'm coming back to Occasionalism and the consumption of cotton by the flame. How do relations subsume causes?

Gaston goes back to the four elements...... earth, air, fire and water, along with the four principles and the four humors. The relation of fire to the other three are hard for me to intuit. Fire is, clearly an outlier. It is a process, it is alive. Women were said to have a fire in the belly and a baby in the oven. Hey, it just occurred to contrast cooking with combustion, and I am thinking of The Raw and the Cooked, by Claude Levi-Strauss. Certainly there are the sacred fires and eternal flames.

Fire is a kind of naked life, with no limits on its caloric input or output. The function of an internal combustion engine is very similar to that of our muscles. But, still, who ordered fire? Is it not merely a logical spillover from vitalism, or does it have a logic of its own? Is it not the basis of our fabrications and factories? It is hard to imagine chemistry without fire.

Gaston points to a connection between the Promethean and Oedipal complexes...... also to the seminal aspects of fire. The spark of life? Fire and electricity? Where is the nexus? What about spontaneous combustion or ignition? Fire vs. Aether.... the fourth and fifth elements. Fire & spirit, tongues of flame at the Pentecost. Fire & light. Is light an element, or what? Can fire and light be separated? Fire & motivation. Light of fire and light of the mind. Are we getting closer to a nexus?

Where would consciousness be without light? Ask a blind person?

What is the inner light? What is enlightenment? Let there be light. How does the unconscious come to light? Is there not a fundamental synesthesia between between light and thought? Think of the iconic cartoon head and the lightbulb. Where did that come from?

How does blindsight work? Then get this..... anosognosia.

Somehow, I'm thinking that light (and fire) define the boundary between the Cs and the uCs. No? Is this boundary the nexus that we seek?


12:45----------

And, I'm also thinking that this has something to do with Ned Block's panpsychic catastrophe, i.e. the Apocalypse. Not too shabby, IMHO.

What is omniscience, other than an unobstructed Cs? And, then, which comes first, omniscience or omnipotence? Or is there a difference? Viva la difference? Or not?

For an immaterialist/idealist, there may not be a difference, thus the panpsychic catastrophe.


2:10-----------

I have been a bit neglectful, by not following Gary's series of articles on Skinwalker. According to Jack, Skinwalker may presently be the closest thing we have to a smoking gun wrt Disclosure. I cannot disagree....... http://www.starpod.us/2012/12/17/the-monsters-are-due-on-skinwalker-ranch/

Gary makes special reference to a 2010 NYT article that, in an aside, states.......

His space stations are not his only interest in space. “I’ve been a researcher and student of U.F.O.’s for many, many years,” Mr. Bigelow said. “Anybody that does research, if people bother to do quality research, come away absolutely convinced. You don’t have to have personal encounters.”

He added: “People have been killed. People have been hurt. It’s more than observational kind of data.”

Other views that run counter to mainstream science include a belief in the power of prayer and a disbelief in the Big Bang theory.

Hmmm........ It is not immediately clear why there has been a 30 month delay in the probing of this seemingly casual aside.


3:30-----------

At the beginning of this month, Jesse Ventura's TruTV broadcast an episode on Skinwalker, during which there was mention of a possible murder. Gary followed up on this, obtaining denials from John A and from Kit, but he also uncovered the NYT quote from Bigelow, and then Jack recalled a meeting in London, shortly after the alleged incident, in 2004, where this same topic came up.

In another recent article, Gary implies that Jack had come forward with his third-hand account, in response to the earlier NYT 2010 article. But this is the first that I recall hearing this rumor, even though I did read some of the Skinwalker book, wherein this rumor was denied.

Jack is quoted as telling Gary that he had, in '04, relayed this story to someone at the CIA, who asked him to not pursue it.

I called Jack this afternoon about an unrelated matter. About halfway into this 15' conversation, I made reference to the recent series of email exchanges concerning Skinwalker. The person he had spoken to was Ron. Ron said that he would followup on the rumor, and asked Jack to not pursue it.

Do recall that I had been out of communication with Ron, from 1999 until 2004, with the notable exception of a series of communications and meetings from 9/1/01 through 9/16/01. It was on 9/17 that I went to Catonsville, and had my final, brief conversation with Chris S.

It was ~2005 that I met with Ron at his then office in Clarendon. I'm guessing that this was his MASINT/DNI office. I had several meetings across the street from that building, in the Clarendon Grill, with Ron and with various of his colleagues, in the span of one or two years.

After one of these meetings, I drove him back to where his then GeoTracker was parked, at a metro stop within a few minutes of his home. During that drive, it came up the Kit was in town and wanted to meet with Ron. He called Kit, from the car, and suggested a meeting at Kit's hotel near Dulles A/P. He told me that Kit was refusing to meet with me, unless he was along. I believe that Ron told Kit that we would both meet him for dinner at his hotel. He told me, however, to meet with Kit, alone, which I then did. This was the second time that Ron had pulled that stunt. I have blogged about the earlier occasion when I met ...... allow me to do some more fact checking........


4:45----------

The second time that this bait and switch occurred was in the spring of 2007, when I met with Kit at the NAS building in DC. Well, I don't recall, quite so specifically, how this meeting was arranged, by Ron, but I have elaborated upon it, on several occasions, under the rubric of the 'Repositioning', particularly involving Mike McConnell.

But back to '05........ I recall two main topics of the meeting...... the 'briefings' of the former Presidents, and Skinwalker. Wrt Skinwalker, the main topic was his knowledge of Colm Kelleher's investigation into mad-cow-type infections of cattle in Utah, in connection with the ranch investigations. There was no mention of any (human!) deaths.

I note that Kit has denied, to Gary, the Bigelow/Sarfatti rumors.

Could this be a smoking gun? We need the name(s) of the deceased Bigelow staffer. Have we not been able to obtain this information? Bob B would be the most likely source. Will he now be in denial mode? What about RP, or is he too busy with Benedict?


5:06 (2')----------- Jack calls back to say that the death incident was mentioned in his 2004 book, Destiny Matrix II. He said he would send an exerpt. I'll see if I can find it, in the meantime.

I only find reference to the original edition, 2002. I'm checking my old laptop to see if I might have a download of the second edition.


5:40----------

The earliest download I can find on the laptop is from 9/09. Jack will need to send an excerpt from the '04 edition of DM.


6:20---------

Jack now suggests that the Skinwalker incident was related in his Super Cosmos (2005), but it is not available electronically.

Do note, however, that How the Hippies Saved Physics has been selected by Physics World as their book of the year.

From: Gary S Bekkum 
Date: December 20, 2012 8:21:55 PM EST
To: Dan Smith, Ronald P
Subject: 2004-2005

Dan,

Regarding your new post at OMF on Skinwalker (and if the urge strikes,
do feel free to comment below the original articles at STARpod.us), a
few related articles from 2009-2010 ...

http://www.starpod.us/2009/11/19/going-rogue-the-prisoner-mind-control-then-and-now-part-three/#.UNO37CZGJ5Q

http://www.starpod.us/2009/10/17/paranormal-activity-of-the-fourth-kind-aliens-demons-and-men-who-stare-at-goats/#.UNO4HiZGJ5Q

My first stories about the Skinwalker Ranch death rumor were published in 2010:

http://www.starpod.us/2010/06/11/billionaire-aerospace-entrepreneur-tells-new-york-times-about-killer-ufos/#.UNO41yZGJ5Q

http://www.starpod.us/2010/06/12/bigelow-aerospace-lethal-ufo-extraterrestrial-battle-rumor-exposed/#.UNO5DyZGJ5Q

I notice that, in Gary's 6/12/10 article, he reports that Jack had told him of another indirect source to the the Skinwalker death, shortly after Bigelow's comment was reported in the NYT. Jack heard the story in London, in 2004, shortly after the alleged incident.




(cont.)

Well, we can hardly fault Ron on his sense of timing..........

From: Ronald 
Date: December 21, 2012 6:03:30 AM EST
To: Dan Smith 
Subject: Re: Update.......

Big meeting today.  Princess may use some of your suggestions.

Ron

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 19, 2012, at 12:31 AM, Dan Smith 

Ron,

For various reasons, it has occurred to me that I should be making periodic inquiries as to my current status wrt being just your barbecue buddy.  I had been under the impression that, once upon a time, there a more serious aspect to our communications.  If that is no longer the case, then I would like some confirmation to that effect.  

Dan

In another article by Gary, about Jack....... http://www.starpod.us/2012/06/29/stealing-warp-drive-from-the-gods-the-men-who-would-build-prometheus-starpod-us-interviews-jack-sarfatti/ there is reference to the following concept.......... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novikov_self-consistency_principle , which, in turn, is an elaboration of the CTC.


11:10----------

And, now, Sam and I are off to our interfaith meeting...........



5:40-----------

Sam just left from our postmortem of the ICJS meeting, which was amusing. They have a beautiful office home, one minute from my place. They represent the spiritual aspirations of corporate Baltimore, very buttoned-downed, very straight faced. But there are definite possibilities, which Sam and I discussed, at some length.

But, hey, how about that email? Is that something, or what? Will miracles ever cease?



6:40---------

And Sam and I had a chuckle over this one........ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/30/racist-harvard-finals-club-flier_n_2219468.html

How often are afforded such an opportunity to laugh at ourselves?




(cont.)

Sorry to be awake in the middle of the night, but I do have Novikov on the mind...... and the howling wind is keeping me awake. It is nice to have a home, even if it is somewhat borrowed.......

For all these years, I've been talking about CTC's, but somehow I never latched onto Novikov's version, or, really, his vision, involving, particularly, the problem of self-cosistency.

This does bring into focus the closely related problems of self-organizing, self-reference, bootstrap, strange-loop....... and there must be many other such ideas.

If only I can get Jack to focus on this problem, that would make my trip to SF a whole lot easier. Yes? And, yes, this could easily, then, put the BPWH over the top. No?

Why the heck didn't Novikov figure out this bootstrapped/BPWH version, back in 1990? Maybe he did, but he didn't want to have to play the Jesus card. Lucky guy....!

Now, I just give a careful reading of the Novikov wiki entry. And this oversight is not completely my fault. If you go to the CTC entry, there is no mention of Novikov! How can that be? I'm gonna complain to Jimmy W!

I wonder why Jack has not latched onto Novikov. How could he have missed it?


And lookee here....... they're talking about the Polchinski paradox, which is about a billiard ball looping through a wormhole. Whereas I'm talking about the cosmic soul looping through the Omega/Alpha gap. How are these not the same problem?!

I also notice that Kip Thorne and Robert Forward were collaborating with Novikov, both being acquaintances of Jack's, I believe. Once again, there seems to be a conspiracy to drop the BPWH ball.

Part of the self-consistency must involve Leibniz' least action principle, just being rephrased as the optimal action principle (OAP). Then we can include Feynman's quantum sum over histories. Once again, everybody was so near, but, miraculously so far, especially when you consider Wheeler's Participatory Universe, and Yakir's weak measurements. All these folks knew each other, and they all knew Jack.

Yes, participatory universe/anthropics (PAP)........ talk about self-organizing, self-consistency! It's been right there, in front of our noses, all along. Why do I have to explain it to them? They should have been explaining it to us, lo these many years. What am I seeing that they didn't, couldn't, wouldn't? Conspiracy of the geniuses?

Well, probably this is just another fevered dream. It will have vanished in the morning. But, wait, it is morning, almost....... 4:30--------- and the wind is still howling, outside, I think.....


4:45---------

One of their problems may have been that they were too focused on the wormhole as just a kind of contrivance or add-on, not quite grasping that we are all living in a wormhole, i.e. a self-contained toroid. Surely there must exist such a model. The toroid has many applications in mathematics, particularly in j-functions, I believe, not to mention its important applications in controlled fusion and, yes, particle accelerators, LHC, etc..... What were we all thinking...... asleep at the switch......



10:40-----------

Unfortunately, I'm not finding much on the Novikov consistency that is available online.

I'm going to be out for a couple of hours..........

I need to figure how best to sound out Jack, on this topic. I was hoping there would be more discussion online. What is available is mostly just dealing with the technicalities. No indication of a toroidal universe.



1pm------------

PTL, I was wrong........ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doughnut_theory_of_the_universe .....


My modest, BPWH, proposal is just to shrink their doughnut down by a few orders of magnitude......... well, make that quite few orders! Oh, and make time be the longitudinal dimension...... a four-dimensional doughnut. Just some minor modifications, and we have our best possible Ouroboros.


5:50-----------

I have been reading the following article by David Deutsch......... http://www.hpc.unm.edu/~alsing/Courses/RQI/articles/deutsch_prd44_p3197_Y91_qm_closed_timelike_curves.pdf . He envisions, and discusses at length, time-traveling versions of Adam and Eve. He speaks very cautiously, and points to numerous logical, if not technological, difficulties, but, at the end of the day, he never says never. Bless his heart!

Heck, he even envisions a time-travelling solar system, and uses this possibility to explain the Fermi Paradox. So you cannot blame such speculations on me, alone! Physical plausibility is fully in force.

What I have not found yet is a more immaterial version of these self-referential ideas or models that would help to flesh out Wheeler's notion of a participatory universe and a final anthropic principle. I'll wager that such bootstrapped immaterial cosmologies are lurking in more minds than just Chicken Little's....... but, where the angels fear to tread........!


9:30-----------

I was invited out, when D wanted to show off a new room paint job to her friend. I invited myself to join T and Maggie at the local watering spot. In came Khori of Grace, and so we have a renewed lunch date, for the first of the year. Something seems to be afoot. Are we still slouching toward Bethlehem?


I cannot fail to note that, as a Christmas bonus from the Economist, we get a mild watering down of Hell. I could not have guessed that the staid Economist could ever be so flamboyantly PoMo. Are they breathing down my neck? I'd better not look over my shoulder, or I'll surely stumble.


All I have to do is turn physics inside-out, but, for the life of me, I still have no clue. This is what Jack and I need to discuss, asap.

Is physics a kind of glue, holding our little egos together? How does that logic gain traction? I was attempting to address this with the psychoanalysis of fire. We butterflies have to be careful, lest we venture too close to the flame. Just ask Icarus.

We are the warp, and physics/logic is the woof. But what is logic? Does anyone have a 'clew'? Is it supposed to lead us out of the Labyrinth? Should we ask Russell or Whitehead?

Maybe Godel, Escher, Bach...... strange loops. The aviary had their wings clipped. Were they not getting too close to the flame? Ask Robert. Ask Kit.

How does holography work, metaphysically? Are there not two threads..... two beams? Indra's necklace. Like the old memory cores...... air cores?

Is that how the akashic record works? Doesn't that require a third wire? Third rail? What would that be? Must be the trinity. Something's not computing.


11:15------------

Where is the observer? Who is the observer? What about the processor? It is also the clock.

Are we not a quantum computer? What holds the histories together? I have no clew. We might suppose that the third rail is the SoT. The kingdom within.



(cont.)

SfA topic is the purpose of the Universe. Hmmm......... Ex nihilo, or what?

Who created the world? Was it God or Jesus or the Spirit? Was is out of water and clay, or was it from the Word/Logos?



2:10-------------

We had another great discussion in the SfA this morning, lead as usual by Bill. I was just trying to call him to propose a followup to my earlier contribution wrt C&C and LGM. He was not in, so allow me to compose my thoughts here..........

I believe that I see a viable plan of salvation, which happens to have a considerable overlap with the Xian tradition, more so than with the others. It also happens to be a fairly obvious way to avoid Armageddon, Tribulation or what have you, which eventualities seem to been a particular fascination of Xians, for the last two millennia.

It also seems that the Xians have been laissez-faire, when it comes to seeking long-term solutions to the various threats to our long-term survival on the Earth.


3:40----------

Their prophetic 'apocalyptic' eschatology tends to keep them focussed on their immediate personal salvation, rather than investing in species survival. One may easily observe that the lack of Xian commitment to our long-term survival produces a major deficit in the chances of that survival.

So, I'm proposing to intervene in this sub-optimal status quo, as a putative agent of God wrt her plan of Salvation. Should I not be welcomed by all and sundry, with open arms, or, at the least, with open minds and hearts? Well, so far, that has not been the case, and that may be chalked up mainly to my own lack of grace, inspiration and wisdom. But neither have I thrown in the towel, now, have I?




(cont.)

dan wrote:So, I'm proposing to intervene in this sub-optimal status quo, as a putative agent of God wrt her plan of Salvation. Should I not be welcomed by all and sundry, with open arms, or, at the least, with open minds and hearts? Well, so far, that has not been the case, and that may be chalked up mainly to my own lack of grace, inspiration and wisdom.

Dan,

If you were of the Father, the Father would answer your solitude. If you did the work of the Father, the Father would bless your work and make it flourish. If you do not the work of the Father, the tree will wither and bare no living fruit.

For Christmas, may the teacher in this movie help you to understand;

The Gospel of John - The Movie

wikipedia-
"The Gospel of John is a 2003 film that is the story of Jesus' life as recounted by the Gospel of John. It is a motion picture that has been adapted for the screen on a word-for-word basis from the American Bible Society's Good News Bible. This three-hour epic feature film follows John's Gospel precisely, without additions to the story from other Gospels, nor omission of complex passages."


Blessings

Thank you, Jake, for the inspiring movie. I have watched the part 1/2, an hour and a half long. Every time I am exposed to the bible I am able to learn new things. One is always able to hear things that one had not been able to hear before. There is no end to the potential for meaning.


And please allow me to wish you and Cy and everyone else at OMF II a Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays, and thank you so much for still putting up with my meanderings. Just now, it's snowing a bunch, back here, and just starting to lay down. Good timing for the eventide.


Not surprisingly, it should be a lot easier to preach metaphysics at GFC than at BGF. There must be a better entre with the greens than what I now have, which is none!

I was going to speak of miracles........ the fact that we exist, just for starters. How could we have come all this way, just by accident? And there is the cancer vs chrysalis issue. There is the question of perpetual progress and the ETH. They are more into transition towns and tree hugging.


There is something unnatural about us, something that naturalism fails to grasp. It may be something as basic as the difference between is and ought. What is natural about that?

Are we simply too smart for our own good, or are we, somehow, too cool for the school of nature? We may be about to find that out.

What is it about our free will, or is it just our cussed willfulness? Too many of us sense a transcendental dimension. This sense has gotten us into a a lot of trouble, but might it also get us out of trouble?

What is it that existentialism points to? How do we, alone, manage to contemplate our own absurdity? How did we manage to get all dressed up, and then discover that we have nowhere to go? Let's explain that to ourselves. It seems we have a lot of 'splaining to do.

.

Jake Reason wrote:
For Christmas, may the teacher in this movie help you to understand;

The Gospel of John - The Movie

I found myself watching this video in the wee hours of the night, practically until dawn broke the hidden horizon. I pondered many things and plucked out the gems that spoke to me on an emotional level. The validity or should I say authentic interpretation as it came to me may not be correct, and I concede this, but it did make me dwell within.

In John 4:44 - I thought of Dan’s plight. Not that I believe he is a prophet, but a teacher in his own way.

“For Jesus himself testified, that a prophet hath no honor in his own country.”

Throughout John’s testimony he conveyed numerous times that Jesus knew the thoughts of others as well as their pasts. He knew what people felt and knew events that were to transpire. It made me ponder the lore of the apparent visitors and their capacity to do the same. It is just testimony, right?

If we could know the thoughts and feelings of another being – and they to us – could seeds of darkness, (deception, malice, and malign) remain hidden behind the masks we wear? What would our world look like if we woke up to this reality?

John 12:25 I thought of myself....

“He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.”

Not that I intend to go on public display here……

Jesus laments throughout his travels to his disciples, crowds, and markets about the miracles he has performed and still they do not believe. They saw with their own eyes those miracles and still they did not believe.

This led me to question – ships in the sky – man2k’s proverbial burning bush. How many would refuse to believe what their eyes told them in these days? How many would deny - or rather - who would believe?

And poor Judas Iscariot, with his feet freshly washed by the hands Jesus himself, is singled out as the one who would betray for the next couple millennium.

If Jesus knew what resided within the minds of those around him, knew the future, and saw the past – why did he tell Simon he was being betrayed when he was not? How can one be betrayed, in knowing?

After sending Judas away with coin in hand - “Go, do what you must.” he proclaims in John 13:31 “Therefore, when he was gone out, Jesus said, Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in him.”

May we all realize one day - our place as gods and guide those beneath us.

Dan:

Why does it seem like the bird flu has stricken remnants of the Aviary? Especially recently....

MD02,

Bird flu.........! I like that, but I think it was many years ago.......



2:30----------

Two previous high-water marks for the Aviary were 1991 and 2004, TBMK.......

In both instances, there followed an abrupt decline, more or less coinciding with the initiation and then the resumption of the R&D show, respectively.

Both high marks have been memorialized......... Robert Collins' Exempt from Disclosure (2005), and Colm Kelleher's Hunt for the Skinwalker (also 2005).



Back to the BGF, in preparation for a talk in February...........

I think I should start out with a review of our physical situation.........

1.) Biophysical Economics - Charles Hall

2.) Too Smart - Craig Dilworth

3.) A Prosperous Way Down - Howard Odum


I then venture into the metaphysical realm via Existentialism.......

How do we respond to the double absurdity of our present existential crisis?

The only two reactions presently being observed are denial and despair.

I'm the only one I know who is pointing to a third alternative..........

I am pointing to the putative MoAPS, the mother of all paradigm shifts........

Let me hasten to say that many spiritually inclined folks have been pointing to a New Age, or more specifically the age of Aquarius.......

BUT, the new-agers make no reference to our Existential Crisis. Why the heck not......?

Because the new-agers are, just by self-designation, acosmic.


But, wait, what does cosmology have to do with ecology, pray tell......?

Well, this is precisely where the MoAPS comes in........

What I'm talking about is an idea coming from the bleeding-edge of physics and cosmology. It was first proposed by John Wheeler in 1990. It is called the Participatory Universe.


4:10------------

Now, watch out, here comes the plot spoiler to end all plot spoilers, IMHO..........

Our Existential Crisis is just that humanity has become a Cancer upon the Earth. Yes? No?

Well, sports fans, here is the other side of that coin.........

When you combine the participatory universe with the holographic principle, instead of the Cancer paradigm, we get the Chrysalis paradigm, and this, as promised, constitutes the MoAPS/BPWH.

Any questions......??


4:40----------

And this answer also answers the above question about the acosmic stance of the new-agers.......

The MoAPS necessarily entails eschatology. No one, but no one, will touch the Easchaton with a 10' pole. TBMK/IMHO, the only previous person to actually embrace the Eschaton was the J-man. Why him? And why me, Lord?


The prophetic tradition has, by definition, touted our ultimate apokatstasis, even though the many who have so touted, have always been flirting with heresy, and, here's another plot spoiler, I am no exception.

Why heresy........?


How did one person get away with it, while no one else has?

Well, speaking quite frankly, that one person had a lot of pull. He managed to get away with a lot, and the main thing he got away with was his embrace of the Eschaton, which most of his followers now suppose was the mother of all failed prophecies.

Now comes Chicken Little......... that being my aviary code-name. My aquarium code-name was reputed to be Sunfish.


My putative mission, as the wannabe SoT, is to reinstate that prophecy, by way of apologizing for its putative failure, simply by pointing out that it was the best of all possible failed prophecies........ to wit, you and I would not be here, were it not for its 'failure'.


5:40------------

Just to be quite a bit more specific, the putative 'failure' turns out to have been the best possible setup for the MoAPS/BPWH.


6:30------------

I have made two calls.......... 5:48 (5') Ron. 5:54 (28') John S.......

The connection was alleged to have been a Fr. Porter, friend of John's. But, it turns out that the Father was not really involved, and so John mainly served as an over-educated babysitter for the Princess-in-training. Also, it turns out that their search for a Greek island, has now turned into a search for a Turkish island that would be cheaper and easier to obtain.

According to R, J's theology tends to be a bit goofy, and so the meetings, on or about 12/22, were mainly dependent on the less goofy theology of the Princess. John left Rome on the 21st.

John has written a cogent letter to the NRA concerning school security, he being a frequent substitute teacher in So. Cal, and also a frequent hunter, thereabouts. But, for the the life of me, I cannot recall the substance of the letter.


Nontheless, the meetings in Italy are alleged to have been related to salvation, and that I am the first to know about this connection, stateside. Should we be a tad skeptical? Yes?


I am expecting a call, after dinner.........


Oh, yes, now I recall the gist of John's letter to the NRA. He pointed out to them that the preferred weapon of terror upon schools, outside of the US, has been bombs. By outlawing semi-automatics, the deranged terrorists will, more likely, resort to bombs and, thereby, increase the death-toll, as has been observed, overseas. I cannot easily find a fault in that logic. Nonetheless, the politics of this logic is probably lacking. Yes?


8:50-----------

A watched phone never rings, that is a basic law of quantum physics.



(cont.)

Merry Christmas Dan & Jake. May your holiday be full of rich ideas and good friends that far surpass ham & gravy in satisfaction.

Cy

On the NRA,

it is sad really that the NRA fails the basic knowledge test for Patriot Community membership. They seem to have a hard time understanding that the 2nd Amendment is not about hunting or individual self-protection but rather about the citizenry's obligation to be the deterrent to Government and to have the capacity and capability to prevent it from morphing into a tyranny.

It is thus the citizen's duty to not only be armed but to be equally armed and ready and observant. A duty severely neglected in many quarters and in the process of remedy as we speak. Just ask a certain ammo supplier who has sold three years worth in three days. The tragedy of the elementary school was conscripted by those with agendas. Whilst there may yet be conspiracy there, it is compounded by the imperative to advance a tyrannical global governance and the total decapitation of the economic system & US dollar. O the rumors of Ayers compatriots on the guest book at the WH. Shrug. They are eating cake, failing to see the forest for the trees...but there's been alot of that going on lately.

Chrysalis Dan, always chrysalis. It comes in so many forms that one might need the multi-faceted eyesight of the common housefly to see it all...like the ESA Study about Phobos.

Yet while this evolution of the butterfly moves forward our greatest danger is in allowing ourselves to become ideologically divided beyond any reconciliation or common ground. The PtB desire such division for it binds us from acting on corruption and dissonance. It binds us from seeing stories of maps of economic sectors intended for after the day the atms reveal empty nests. It binds us from listening to sorrowful whispers of foreigners pledged to the 2015 goal?

It binds us from reasonable and effective recourse, these intractable ideologies. Will deists lift a Claidheamh Soluis once more in word and if necessary deed when the day arrives? Or will it wither in the cocoon in favor of a twisted dream concocted by men of illustrative depravity, without perspective, and without universal mind?

Or cannot Esaidh Ruadh escape his perpetual encapsulation?

From hills and firmament the aspirant sheds allusions and steps with character, destination to be determined.

...faint strains of melody from a pied bard, unkempt from watching but merry in optimism...slender of hand; a speckled salmon upon a Constitution remembered.

"...help them remember who they are," echos the salmon in the rushing water with the gleam prominent upon his scales.

What is real cannot be broken or lost, only temporarily forgotten.

Cyrellys

Cy,

Thank you for the Christmas wishes, and I wish you a fulfilling New Year.

I tend to agree that we cannot just legislate our way out of our social predicaments, nor can we transcend laws without fundamental transformation.

Are there those who conspire to do evil against their fellow humans? There are. But, in the end, it is usually the banality of evil that triumphs over righteousness. Can this banality be stopped with firearms? I doubt it.


The enemy, finally, is our ignorance........ our ignorance of our own transcendent power and grace. There has been a conspiracy to maintain our self-ignorance. That conspiracy mostly resides within. It resides in our fear of the unknown. We are comfortable with these self-imposed limitations on our knowledge. We have grown comfortable in our spiritual prisons. Continued material progress is what has mainly lulled us into our slumber of materialism. As that progress grinds to a halt, so will our spirits begin to grow restless.



Now, as a case in point, we have the issue of the recent visit to Rome.......

I was beginning to see some light at the end of my own little tunnel. There was some reason to hope that awakening could be 'arranged' so as to maximize its spontaneity. This would minimize the public participation of the PtB/MJ12/visitor contingent.

Is it now the case that the Pope, for instance, wishes to not be excluded from a possible historical watershed? Should I be glad or sad, at this prospect? Do I have a choice? Should I no longer accept calls from Ron or Rome? Would that be sticking with my protocol, come hell or high water? As a perfectly practical matter, I can hardly sever my communications with the rest of the world. The relative cone of silence, lo these many years, has not been of my own doing. Were there to be a decision, from above or below, to remove that cone, I would have precious little to say about it. I have only ever operated on a daily basis, trying to deal with what is put in front of me.

My only agenda has been for history, not for myself. OTOH, this is most likely to have been another will o' the wisp, vanishing in the light of day.

I can only ever ask myself, wwgd? If God wished to keep the PtB on the bench, I'm sure that could be arranged. They have a need to know certain things. Their need to act is likely to be rather more circumscribed. There have been ample warnings, where warnings are due. Those channels of 'instruction' have been well established. A significant part of the acclimation has been about acclimating the PtB. No? So, no, I have no reason to exercise exclusion toward anyone. I only keep trying to exercise common sense.



10:50--------------

It should be pretty clear that were I to get a call from Rome, it would likely have a disruptive effect. OTOH, were it to turn out that there had been a substantive conversation, possibly having something to do with eschatology, it would be feasible to convey that information, mainly by implication or indirection, at the best discretion of all concerned.


Besides the fact that there is alleged to have been a meeting is the fact that prior to that meeting, there was that abortive visit to R&A, wherein it was suggested that my blogging days were over, and that I should turn my attention to their Kashmiri school project. I made it clear that this suggestion was unwanted, and there has been no further clarification...... just the statement of a meeting. Am I to suppose that this suggestion was not merely spontaneous, on their part? Who knows? Whatever the source, there seems to be more heat than light, with plenty of fog to go around. Just ignoring it all is easier to say than to do.



1pm-------------

The notion of a paradigm shift is the common ground that I have, between Grace and Green. This is a narrow opening that I have in both doors. I need to widen it as much as possible, using somewhat different approaches, in each case.

I recall being at University of Maryland, in the mid 70's, and discussing the idea of a paradigm shift with my physics advisor, Charles Misner. He made the reasonable suggestion that I should refrain from making any philosophical speculations about the future course of physics..... that I should wait patiently for the physicists to do their own work and own speculation. When and if a new scientific consensus was arrived at, only then would it be proper for the philosophers to get involved in explaining the meaning of this new worldview.

Well, there has been a lot of water under that bridge, and we seem no closer to any larger truth.

All the while, the need for a higher common ground only increases. Is there not a need for a new vision that all can embrace, something other than the notion that we are all just meat machines? Can we give up the hope that we might do better than this? What is the price of despair?

But who am I to entertain a vision? What are my credentials? And where else to start that with something that looks a lot like a BPWH?


And who would want to have to pin their hopes on a long-shot, a terribly long one? Would that not only be an admission of the depth of our desperation, and what sane person would wish to admit such a thing, even to oneself? Muddling along is not easy, but it is passable, especially when compared to what seems a reckless gamble. Until there is a reasonable proof of an assertion, there is precious little warrant, even for its entertainment. I am proposing rather more than mere entertainment.

It may well be that our mere existence is miraculous, on almost any rational grounds, certainly on any scientific grounds. But how can we be expected to hang onto that notion, with day after day of just managing to get by? The miraculousness becomes increasingly remote and abstract. Where is the Bank to which we can take this miracle? It is not a legal tender.

I am suggesting that we may take this minor miracle, and, somehow, exchange it for a bigger one. Since when are two birds in the bush worth one in the hand?

Just because we are suddenly in need, does not that mean that God is obligated to rush to our side, we the prodigal ones.


Had a brief conversation with Ron. There was barely any mention of Rome, and nothing of new substance about any meetings therein. So maybe we are just back to the status quo ante. We can all relax, again.


I'm pointing out that there is very likely to be a source of sapience, which, otherwise, has been quite content to leave us to our own devices. Our existentialism has sufficed, unto the day. We have, in general, comported ourselves about as decently as might be expected, without any additional guidance, most of our surplus effort having been efficiently devoted to material progress. Have we not met and even exceeded most expectations? Where we have fallen short, may we not blame our spiritual ignorance, confusion and lack of guidance...... due mainly to our being stranded between conflicting and outmoded paradigms?

Now we seem to be waiting for a revelation, but doing so without outward complaint or impatience. Patience, especially in spiritual matters, is a virtue we have learned, possibly just a bit too well?

Should we be impatient for the scientists to loosen their grip on their paradigm? I don't think we want them to drop a worldview that has proven beneficial, for so many years, until they can see a viable alternative. Even just to let it be known that they were actively seeking a new worldview would open the floodgates to rumor and speculation. We are hardly ready for that.

The last thing that most any religionists would want is to have to compete directly against the pointy-heads of science. They both will say about their respective worldviews that, if they are not obviously broken, then don't endeavor to fix them. Without a tested blueprint or plan, our unguided efforts could well get us into a bigger mess than whatever one we may suppose ourselves to be in, already.


I speak frequently of likelihood and plausibility, but this is hardly the language of religion, and barely even the language of science. Scientists take pride in their trusting of nature no further than they can measure it. The faithful, on the other hand, will trust religion no more than have their parents or peers, and often less.



(cont.)

Ok, let's try a different tack...... a more psychological approach.......

This is also problematic in that both science and religion eschew psychology, each for their own reasons. Well, each one harbors profound misgivings about the unconscious (uCs), and don't we all, to one extent or another.

I am, and we all ought to be, concerned about how our psyches have been compartmentalized, particularly under the rubric of modernism, which rubric was actually founded upon the Cartesian dichotomy between mind and body, or, more gnerally, between mind and matter.

The Cartesian dichotomy was, almost without hesitation, translated into a division between body and soul, and so we have the modern hiatus between the 'magisteria' of science and religion. Science will look after our bodies, while religion tends to our souls.


Ok, but so what? What does psychology have to do with either Grace or Green.......?


Let's try alienation.......

Alienation is our quintessentially modern disease, enshrined in the pantheon of Existentialism.

Alienation has come of age, in the age of science and technology. However, our quintessential rationalist, Sigmund Freud, has been quick to point the finger at monotheism, as the seat of our modern neuroses. Or ask Margaret Mead, with her studies of Samoan culture.

Nonetheless, here we are, alienated, it seems, in every conceivable dimension. The Greens are concerned particularly with our alienation from Nature, while Grace, on the other hand, is concerned with our alienation from God. Both point to the evils of modernity, with its inordinate emphasis on materialism, in one form or another.

There is a very significant tension between these two belief systems, particularly when it comes to the matter of our ultimate concerns.........

What is our ultimate concern? Is it survival or salvation? And even those last two terms may have very different meanings, depending on your allegiances.


My modest proposal consists of a cure for both forms of alienation. And what is this cure? It is Utopianism, it is the BPWH.

What is the BPW? Well, the bad news is that we are looking at it. The good news is, also, that we are looking at it, but now from a rather different perspective.

And what is this different perspective? It involves a slight paradigm shift, well, that's not quite true. It invokes the Mother of all paradigm shifts (MoAPS).

A radical disease requires a radical cure. Yes? But will the cure be worse than the disease?



(cont.)

Happy Holiday Season all, Hope everyone had a nice Christmas.

We got 6" of snow last night, which is considered a major storm in Southern Ontario. Probably nothing in comparison to Cy's neck of the woods.

That Gospel of John movie was a good one. I think it is the best Jesus movie I've ever seen. It well displayed how Jesus was so uniquely different from any other person in history. That the genius and wisdom of his teaching could be so perfect that it would last for 2,000 years without error to be found. He never missed a beat, nor even made a tiny mistake. His teaching remains flawlessly coherent after two millennia of critique.

Aviary? 2004/05 high-water marks? I would add 1988 for their UFO Cover-Up Live Television show. And I'd have to add SERPO to the list. The Aviary were all abuzz for that. And a few of them had their hands all over it.

So John says Rome was about salvation? Hmmm, perhaps the little Princess was Christened. That would make sense. Good for global PR. If there ever will be a Kashmir, and if Aliyah and daughter are in fact heirs to the throne, a princess who is both a Muslim and Catholic could be helpful. And if she was Christened, what better place than Rome to exemplify it and insure its historical registry.

Jake,

Well, I hadn't thought of that angle. Yes, if one is going to be Christened, might as well go to the P-man....... don't mess around with the small potatoes!


But, yes, I do think that psychology may be a better approach to the MoAPS. Yes?

With the Greens it will be psychology, but, with Grace, it will be the psyche, or spirit.

Well, with the Greens, I may also speak of deep ecology, which may be identified with pantheism. Why should Grace be averse to deep theism, which is transcendental pantheism. No?!


The difference between transcendental pantheism and deep theism hinges upon the personhood of God. Clearly, the compromise candidate is the Holy Spirit, that utterly numinous being, also known as the spirit of truth (SoT) and Sophia.


Viva la difference.......! This difference will be preserved even into the Eschaton.

Wait one minute......... eschaton??

Yes, ultimate understanding can only come in an eschatological context. This I do not need to explain to the theists....... they just believe it. But, in explaining the Eschaton to the pantheists, the theists will come to a deeper understanding of it.


2:10---------

Quite frankly, the historical Eschaton has been used by the theists as their main rationale for not saving the world. But, by the same token, the personal eschaton of the pantheists has been used as their main rationale for not saving the world.

How do we reconcile these two versions of eschatology? How do we explain either one to our materialist friends? But, once again, we don't have to explain eschatology to the materialists, they already believe in a very materialistic version of the Eschaton, and was it not the scientific materialists, i.e. physicalists, who brought us the Bomb? J Robert Oppenheimer, father of the Bomb....... “Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds."


Hey, maybe this is how I should start the talk, with all three parties....... theists, pantheists and atheists. Do the pantheists not understand the Bomb? And how did I get into the business of Salvation, if not through Oppie, and his physics.


So, what I should be talking about is the psychology of eschatology. This is the logical starting point for the BPWH.......!!

After all, it was just that psychology that brought me into physics and transcendental pantheism, both at about the age of eight. I did not consciously see the connection until age thirty-three, when I had my close encounter with Sophia and John. That is when I became a metaphysician, wanting to heal the world with the vision of an ultimate Truth.


I ask folks whether the world needs to be saved. It is only the hard-core Buddhist who may claim that the world does not need to be saved. The hard-core Buddhist is liable to be fatalistic to a fault. Well, not really....... she may be fatalistic about the world, but she is also very existential about her personal fate. It is pretty much the same with the Hindus.

Well, there may be a fundamental difference between Hindus and Buddhists.......... Hindus subscribe to karma, ie works, while the Buddhists subscribe to enlightenment, which is also the distinction between Catholics and Protestants........ works vs. faith.

What do I subscribe to? Does one need to ask? Both, of course! That is the only rational position, and what am I, if I'm not a rational panentheist?


3:30-------------

The bottom line of the BPWH is that the only way to avoid the Eschaton is to embrace the Eschaton. Is this not the lesson of Major T J Kong of Dr Stangelove? I even wrote that plot line in 7th grade, in 1955, but, in my version, it was only a test, on a desert island. For those few, ~144 million/thousand, who fully embrace the Eschaton, there will be no Eschaton.

In effect, those 144,000 will become immortal via the Nephilim. Take my word for it, but now I'm headed out........


9pm----------

I think this might work, but it will need a fair amount of refining. I may, however, have to rule the atheists out of court, since the basis of their atheism must emotional, as a mirror image of the fundamentalists. Neither of those two sides can tolerate or comprehend agnosticism. So I would also have to rule the fundamentalists out of court for the same reason, i.e. for not being able to contribute to any reasoned discussion.

I wonder if it is logically possible for fundamentalists to contribute to an apologetic discourse, since they cannot comprehend any view, other than their own, as being something other than depraved. Yes? No?

Am I being unduly polemical by pointing out that existential atheism is an oxymoron, because, virtually by their definition, free-will and reason, which are an essential component of any existentialism, are transcendental capacities, i.e. they are not naturally explicable? So, yes, sports fans, both Sartre and Camus are oxymoronic. Evidently, they did not even bother to read their own syllabi. Continental philosophers tend to be a bit sloppy in their thinking, IMHO.

.

I believe that I may have mentioned Chris L and his CTMU, previously, on these pages.

Ron sent me a copy of his correspondence with Jack, John A and Larry F. I suggested to Chris that we might meet up at the next prvt ufo conf in Phila.......

From: Dan Smith
Date: December 28, 2012 10:57:28 AM EST
To: Chris
Cc: Ronald, JACK SARFATTI

Subject: CTMU >> Immaterialism? >> BPWH >> Eschatology

Chris, 

Allow me, please, to introduce myself..........

I have been in communication with Jack since ~'95.  This was our latest public communication......
www.youtube.com/watch?v=A56hT_51v7I  

> [early website.... http://www.bestpossibleworld.com/index06.htm .  Latest blog..... https://openmindsforum.forumotion.com/t6p705-hello-cy-hello-omf-ii#1562 ] <

I am an eschatological panentheist, and a rather heretical, yet born-again, Xian.  

I have known Ron since '91.  

Chris, I see that you struggle mightily with the disconnect between your idealism/immaterialism and scientific cosmology.  It was in '81 that I was finally able to forego my then quantum mind/matter dualism, in favor of a strict coherentism, which, necessarily, leads us to a pre-Copernican worldview.  This view is also, necessarily, eschatological, and thus my call to Ron, in '91.  I continue to labor under that sense urgency.

Chris could be a godsend, IMHO. Can we teach another old dog a new eschatological trick? This spoken by the prototypical one-trick-pony!


1:15-----------

I just finished another run-through of the 46' J&D video, linked above. IMHO, even though, after five months, there have only been 190 views, it is not entirely implausible that this could become the most important video of all time. It would be very difficult for Jack and me to do any better than this. Perhaps we should just leave well-enough alone. The very evident spontaneity could never be reproduced.

There was a very important addendum to this video, concerning what Jack called a 'die-off'. I was temporarily distracted with the electronics, and failed to respond immediately. Five minutes later, I responded that, according to the BPWH, there would be no die-off. There would only be a continued precipitous decline in our fertility, so that we would reach a level of ~144 million, in about 200 years.

And this is strictly in accord with Jesus' most direct admonition concerning the Endtimes, http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-24-19/ ...... And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!

Need anyone say anymore?!

Well, yes, Bobby J has something to say....... http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/28/opinion/republicans-must-support-public-financing-for-contraception.html

Yes, the (ny) times, they are a changin'......


2:10------------

I have calls into Ron and Jack. I've only been able to speak with Sam. We discussed a title for my February talk to the BGF. So far we have........ Grace & Green, thinking outside the box...... How is that, for starters?


But, ITBK, the only significant event is likely to be my meeting with KS, next week. I mean, let's get our priorities straight.

Am I ready for that? Will I be? I'm reasonably confident that, if this game now needs to be moved forward, it will, then, be arranged, quite adequately. The Spirit moves where it will.


Just once in awhile, the spirit seems to breathe upon me. It has only ever been about as much as I can, sort of, handle, which is not a whole lot. The burden is only about as heavy as a feather.


4:10------------

Just got off a 45' convo with Bill L, bless his heart...... he could sense that I was lonely, and sitting by the phone, as usual. I think we were able to catch him up to date.




(cont.)

Yesterday, I sat by the phone, waiting in vain for Chris L to call. It was a good thing that Bill L called, so that we could reminisce about the good ol' days. I'm a tad skeptical that Chris will spring for my meager bait. He has too much going with his non-eschatological dualism.

Bill recommends the eschatological/utopian adumbrations of HG Wells' In the Days of the Comet (1906)...... a master story-teller, certainly.

Wrt next week's meeting with KS, should I suggest that we be waiting for a sign from above, or from within? WWGD? I would be working on the inside, quite frankly.

Bill was surprised to hear that the Aviary was still active, at least as far as John and Ron were concerned. Well, that's only two, out of more than a dozen former tribesmen.


noon-----------

Back to G&G........

Does the world need to be saved? Can it be saved? How might it be?

Would it require a miracle? Could a MoAPS constitute such a miracle?

In order to act locally we must also think globally...... we can't just save our end of the boat. But is not the larger picture liable to induce despair, and, so, inaction? And/or it might induce us to think outside of our little boxes. Think beyond the Book?

Why should either G or G humor my speculations? Mainly just because I'm here, and still kicking. But, also, as an obligation to betterment/salvation, and as an alternative to an apocalyptic scenario.

So far I've said nothing that could be ruled out-of-bounds at either Grace or Green. And all I'm asking for is some occasional continued access to individuals members or small groups. There is a significant degree of synergy between pressing the flesh and participating in a Internet forum. .


I should point out that the BPWH continues to be and, hopefully, always will be a work-in-progress. I would have it no other way. I have never seriously contemplated the major interruption in this ongoing development that would be required for a publication. Anyone and everyone should feel free to make use of these ideas, FWTW. There is no copyright.


Eventually, we come to a fork in the road, between Grace and Green. How best to describe this fork to both parties.....?

I can explain how I came to this fork, over many years........ starting by looking for a scientific answer to our apparent limits to growth....... I came of age with the Bomb and Sputnik. The mushroom cloud cast a long and dark shadow, and I wondered where could be the silver lining. I didn't find it until 1975, when, allegedly, the Hippies Saved Physics. In the meantime I had had close encounters with several denominations, attempting to understand the non-scientific worldviews.


2pm-----------

Just as the Bomb casts a long shadow, so does Religion, down through the ages. Put them together, as in Israel and Iran, and we have a looming environmental apocalypse, on our hands. Who's problem is this? Is it not God's problem? Is it not also our problem?

Still no fork.......!




(cont.)

Hi Dan, Gary here ... I noticed you mentioned Novikov a while back.

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0007064

Michael Mensky proposed his extended Everett many worlds after collaborating with Novikov on time machine physics.

I suggest a careful read of his paper:

http://arxiv.org/abs/0712.3609

Dan, speaking of living inside a wormhole, check out the big trip:

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0607137

Hi GSB/SSR , if u have not been formally welcomed to the openminds forum , I welcome you now. Hope your stay here is a long and welcomed one. Do u have a story to tell or just wish to partake in discussions here feel free to do so , also if u want to know what the old archive looked like , please don't hesitate to click on the left hand column omf archive 1

Ani12,

I believe that you know Gary Bekkum, a frequent contributor to OMF I. His website is starpod.us, a must see for ufo/conspiracy buffs, and an outlet for aviary/aquarium shenanigans. He and I are in regular communication. He is still listed here, as a special guest, but seems too busy with Starpod and a day job.



Gary,

Thank you for the links to these three physics articles. The last one, The Big Trip, is especially apropos for the BPWH.



1pm----------

I've been conversing with Bill L about Larry F and Chris L, the L&C show...... He sends the following links...... http://flightattendantswife.wordpress.com/2012/08/19/ancient-alien-astronauts-theory/ and http://anamericanatheist.org/2011/04/07/my-criticism-of-chris-langans-ctmu-theory/ , which I've only been able to glance at.


After the brief flurry of invective between Jack and L&C, there has been no further communication. Too bad. I did my best to defend Jack's penchant for polemics.


So now, just in the blink of an eye, I've gotten seriously behind in my reading and in preparing to meet up with KS of GFC. I'll be lucky if I get two hours and any access to a whiteboard. I'll have to walk a fine line between retrospective and prospective, and between Grace and Green.

I'm thinking I should bill myself as being engaged in an Endtimes outreach to non-Christians. I could say the same to the Greens, with a slight tongue-in-cheek...... Repent, the End is near! Why didn't I think of this before?!


2pm------------

OMG, I almost forgot that Bill also alerted me to Chris Langan's 2-hour stint on Coast-to-Coast, Friday night. Unfortunately, you have to open an account with C2C, in order to access their archives. His appearance comes almost exactly 2 years after Gary's and mine...... just a little bit of orchestration.....!?

The basic problem with the L&C show, as compared with the R&D show, is that they just don't have an adequate go-team........ as with Sam, Jack, Gary, Bill, GFC, BGF, etc.......... not to mention MJ12, of course.


I'm presently reading this one, of Gary's links...... Postcorrection and mathematical model of life in Extended Everett’s Concept, Michael B. Mensky. It also may be very apropos.


3:20-----------

Then there is this video of a Roger Penrose lecture on the Mind...... www.youtube.com/watch?v=gscEK5df8vE , recently recommended by Jack.




(cont.)

Hi Dan,

I have taken up an interest in Emanuel Swedenborg. Someone no doubt you've looked into before.

I noticed this wiki quote, which is one of your contemporary interests:

"In the 1730s Swedenborg became increasingly interested in spiritual matters and was determined to find a theory which would explain how matter relates to spirit. Swedenborg's desire to understand the order and purpose of creation first led him to investigate the structure of matter and the process of creation itself. In the "Principia" he outlined his philosophical method, which incorporated experience, geometry (the means whereby the inner order of the world can be known), and the power of reason. He also outlined his cosmology, which included the first presentation of his Nebular hypothesis."

I started off my study by learning of his life and works. And now I'm currently reading one of his books:
The Earths in Our Solar System Which are called Planets
and the Earths in the Starry Heaven, and Their Inhabitants;
Also the Spirits and Angels There
From Things Heard and Seen

He apparently liked long titles.

Anyway, he claims he was taught the information in this book, by Angels.

Have you ever studied any of this man's work, Dan?


Happy New Year!