Polarity in an LOA world

About: forking comments - comment 56004 - comment 56023 - comment 56075 - fastblogit

Excellent example in the about link of LOA or polarity but no-polarity. I have yet to hear of a real monopole in real nature. The minute one creates the distinction polarity the absense of polarity is created as well. Such is basic Tao or Zen.
Once there is a difference of opinion there are two points of view either at the observer or the observed (also a polarity). Such is basic standard waking consciousness.
Aberrations do exist.
Get rid of materiality & other shit doth obtain. Some people can “jump into a volcano” & come out in another universe just the same as the original without any consequence of meeting with the hot lava.
A question does arise about evolving & evolution under such circumstances.
With evolution what is moving forward & what is being left behind?
With the Tree of Life analogy the question becomes “Which Way is UP?” if the tree is open at both ends.
If one identifies with human evolution but leaves humanity behind as currently tethered to Earth is one’s timing off or something else going on in the mitosis of the of the World Cell ? Rapid evolution & reproduction in the human cell is usually associated with cancer.
It may be hard to understand that something similar has been described by Rudolf Steiner in lectures on the Eighth Sphere. I am still digesting what that is specifically with respect to the Lucifer-Ahriman dichotomy which brought us to the current stage of human evolution. The trichotomy will be ignored for now. Some good from the evil & some evil with the good moves evolution in one direction or another. Some don’t want to go in whatever direction there IS!. Some do.

Comments

Mark de LA says
I’m not sure what you are saying about LOA having “both ends of the stick” – maybe someone here is creating a polarity of conversation, eh?

Si says
No. That’s just the labeling LOA commonly uses for the same thing you are talking about. Every stick has two ends, polarity, etc etc. Just a label, they all are, for the same concept. You choose the label you like.

Mark de LA says
In a previous author name incarnation someone suggested that there wasn’t a N-S pole to a magnet. If that was just a name confusion why need it have been pointed out. Physically I presume the N pole of a magnet points to the N pole of the Earth & correspondingly so for the other end.
Anyway the more interesting material in the body of the thought is

Si says
Yep. And wherever that was, you mistook what was being said if you are relating it to this thought. Different concepts.

Mark de LA says

Navigator 2016-08-10 09:09:56 [item 21279#56097]

Not sure what you are saying. LOA agrees with all of that in full. In LOA is is commonly referred to as “both ends of the stick”. Is that what you are saying? Or have you mistakenly gotten the idea somewhere that LOA is about monopoles?

Doesn’t matter as long as you acknowledge there are to ends of a magnet & opposite poles attract as most grade school science classes teach.
Moving on NOW!

Si says
Yes, there are poles on a magnet, and underlying them is the concept of like attracting like. Opposite poles exist and attract because a localized duality has been split out. Underneath it all is the continuous current of like attracting like. Magnets are a perfect example of localized splitting – duality. Under it all is a continuous current, like unto gravity.

Mark de LA says

Seth 2016-08-10 09:36:43 [item 21279#56104]

Wow … lot of intereting things (spirits same thing) in there … all kind of thrown in this one context. Totally kewl though.

… i been thinking of that stuff too.

Let me focus on just one thing at a time, however …

You say: “Get rid of materiality & other shit doth obtain.” ← to which i can heartily agree.

However i translate “materiality” to something quite different than i believe you do.

I think anyone who drills down into what you call “materiaity” necessarily will discover that it is not what is naively thought of as the solid world. Physicist have done that, philosophers have done that, neurosurgeons have done that, priests have done that, … and so have spiritualists … all from different points of view. I too have a different view of “the material world” … mine is consistent with the rest of my thoughts and my experiences and those reported by others.

I’ll leave it at that, just waving at it in passing, since i don’t want to focuse on it today. Your thought, evolve it however you will.

I used the same thought RS used in the Eighth Sphere link for materiality – it is close to the beginning.

The essential nature of the Fourth Sphere is constituted, as I indicated yesterday, by the mineral impregnation of this world-body. That we are able to live on the Earth is due to the fact that this Fourth Sphere has been mineralised: we live in a mineralised environment; what is perceived through the physical senses can be co-ordinated by the intellect. But we must conceive that the mineral element is totally absent from the Eighth Sphere.

When we eliminate the mineral element in thought, all that remains is a later stage of the Old Moon evolution, for whence could anything else originate ? But evolution proceeds; something that is perceptible through Imaginative, visionary clairvoyance but could be nothing else than a residue of the Old Moon—that would be no Eighth Sphere. All that could be said would be that something has been left behind by the Third Sphere

… equivalent to mineralisation. For me the atomic, sub-atomic etc is mathematical-physical imagination.

Mark de LA says
A pile of words & a lack of focus – much like 3-card monte – could lead someone to believe such. Would love to see that spelled out in exact language somewhere else.

Si says
I explained it more fully in the content you mentioned about magnets. Once explained, the labels derived suffice for intelligent conversation. If the labels don’t stick for you because your understanding is set in stone on the model you prefer, that is not my issue and is not misdirection.

Seth says
👍

Seth says
i say there is no north pole without a south pole, there is no good without evil, there is no action without a reaction, there is no distinction without a combination, …. and there is no attraction without repulsion. … and there is no inside without an outside. it just does seem to be the way this is all happening.

Si says
What about gravity? Where is the other pole?

Gravity is the material world expression of LOA … the underlying force that affects all things and upon which all other relationships expand upon.

Seth says
gravity is contraction … there is no contraction without expansion. that all is expanding, is objectively observable, look at the stars in the galaxies and the red shift … that is the opposite pole of gravity.

so that matches your “gravity is the expression of LOA” … but there is also expansion which is experienced as an explosion of diversity. the thesis goes, you cannot have the one without the other.

Si says
Yes, that is one theory of gravity. And the same can be said for LOA using that idea … which is that LOA is the principle of consciousness expanding.

Mark de LA says
Big bang anyone?

Mark de LA says
WOW! the You’re just wrong game!

thought 21239 exemplified & predicted it’s existence as a monopole.

Seth says
👍

Seth says
incidentally it can be shown that the expansion actually creates gravity … see “The New Gravity” by Kent Robertson ben Abraham, published by Bozo Faust.

Si says
Huh? Who’s wrong about what? I am explaining how my verse works. What’s wrong about that? I never said anything was wrong with your model. I even said I agree with everything there in your model and showed you how you can make the jump to something beyond your model without loosing what you got. Wherever you are getting the “wrong” part of your game from, must be all inside your head, not here.

Si says
Yes, I read that in your room back when we were first working on Cybermind. I would favor it myself. You do realize that these are not what most physisists today favor though? They favor a graviton particle that pushes matter.

No matter. Whatever model you use, gravity and LOA are parallel concepts in it and appear as a monopole based interaction in sensory based reality.

Mark de LA says
Huh? to your Huh? read your own stuff – not continuing the game here. Done!

Si says
LOL … yes, we all wish for that … observing Mark being done with rwg is quite another matter.

Mark de LA says
thanks energizer bunny – just trying to clear, maybe later curate this thought of the rwg & comments about it so the meat of the thing, that intoned by

can get above water.

Seth says
yeah these are not accepted theories of mainstream cosmology … nevertheless there are aspects of Kent’s theory that actually work and i cannot ignore.

Like i tried to indicate to you, neither LOA or gravity are “monopole based interactions” … and like the drift of mark and my comments … monopole based interactions may be an impossibility … a thing that can be thought, but does not obtain to honest experience. Or said differently, if you think something is one hand clapping, you are just not seeing the other hand.

Si says
Well, that actually is not what I said. I was very careful to say:

”appear as a monopole based interaction in sensory based reality”

Both LOA and gravity may be otherwise in the largness of the multiverse … but here in our experiences they are unidirectional only.

Seth says
and so i hasten to add … it only appears as such … but there actually is no such thing as a “monopole interaction”. LOA does not seem to appear to me as a monopole interaction in sensory based reality … so maybe that is just you … eh?

incidentally, appearing “as a monopole interaction in a sensory based reality” is wierdly incomprehensible to me. i always look for the other pole even as i sense … because assuming that it is there, even though i may not experience it, i can use that to know something better. So i guess i have no idea what you mean.

Mark de LA says
Maybe, maybe not – gravitation waves (or NOT)
http://www.science20.com/quantum_gravity/blog/gravitational_waves_watch_the_ligo_press_conference_at_1030_eastern-165536

Seth says
if it changes in a wave, then it necessarialy is a action/reaction polarity effect … because that is what waves are. but we are starting to do a whole lot of waving at generalities with no particular details here. me, i hesitate to go there. been there, done that, zombie land to me

Mark de LA says
👍

Si says
Yes I agree. The rest is theory and will operate quite differently in different verses depending on what the science there has invented.

Here abouts, LOA causes like vibrations to attract like vibrations and there is no repulsion effect. You can’t make something go away by thinking about it, only attract it no matter if you want it or not. This is as demonstrable as it is that matter is attracted to matter and no repulsion relationship exists for matter in our experience. Those operate in a similar manner and that’s really all we need to know to think our stories and walk on planets.

Seth says
i can make something go away by thinking about it going away

… or at least prime myself to move away from it

.

if A is close to B and far from C , and moves closer to C, it necessarily moves away B … there is the pole of LOA in operation.

now there are demonstrable stories. what’s in your wallet?

Mark de LA says
ain’t imagination a wonderful thingy !

Si says
👍

Si says
Yes! It builds worlds, creates your entire experience. It is wonderful!

Mark de LA says
The best we can agree on that one is that it is building YOUR entire experience.

Si says
Why do we need to agree?

You build your experience with your imagination and think you are discovering something that is already there. I build my experience with my imagination and know I am doing it. We have different beliefs. Why would we need to agree? What would that do for us?

Seth says
seems to me, LOA itself creates agreeing … balancing the explosion of diversity.

Mark de LA says
We don’t need to agree. It is mostly story & bullshit. Sort of like science fiction epistemology. Maybe even zen-light .

Si says
Yes! LOA does bring you to the vicinity of agreement. It naturally places you where agreement is easiest. Humans, however, do have free will. They can resist, buck the current, and paddle upstream … and often do. There is a whole culture centered around doing this. They have created a whole belief system to support it too. In this belief system, they get indoctrinated into the idea that there is one reality everyone is sharing, and that they are uncovering it as they go along, and must agree on it in order to be considered sane and mentally fit. They are told this from a young age, often punished when they naturally vary from the idea as children, until it is so solid in them that they don’t doubt it no matter what the evidence otherwise.

It is very similar to how Muslim extremist children are indoctrinated to hate the United States, but much more wide spread and culturally accepted.

Mark de LA says
Yep LOA is another religion providing for the salvation of selfs & selfies at the edges of knowing and not-knowing:

birth
death
karma (why things work the way they do) or in short why bad things “happen” to good people
scarcity, sufficiency, abundance
infinity, existence,
wanting & getting – (prayer in the troglodyte version of the Christian religion)
wars – winning & losing
… tbd

Seth says
It feels great that “there is a reality that people share”! … and that feeling brings vast amazing experiences to many of us. I have no want or need to associate Nathan’s oogey stories to that feeling and those experiences.

Mark de LA says
Yet you argue that we don’t share the same reality a lot of the time – which is it? Please explain.

Is it just the parts YOU like or ???

Si says
I’ll bet I share more reality and possibly have gone deeper in the sharing that you have Seth. Why do you call something that is the same kind of sharing experience you are having “oogy”?

Sharing reality is wonderful, and is why most of us are here. Sharing has nothing to do with there being some one reality out there … nothing at all. One reality is just a story that fucks people up and makes it harder to share deep and joyful expereinces because everyone is always focused on there being limited resources, love, and time … which clearly, to anyone who has actually delved into it, there is not limited anything. It’s just something people think and therefore notice a lot. Nothing more. Anyone can think about the multiverse and notice the unlimitedness of all too. It’s just as easy.

Seth says
Conversation forked to thought 21283

Si says
Mark. You are simply confusing shared reality with one reality. They are not the same thing. We share what we experience, and that may not be the same one thing at all … and usually is not for anyone, except in a few tiny details of one’s whole experience.

Mark de LA says
Yep, “true believers” have the “I’m right machine & that’s it” (tool?) – helps when they pass the plate for contributions, sell seminars, books & publish on YouTube. True believers can also go in the opposite direction like Islamic extremism. (Which way is opposite? is another question posed by this thought)

Mark de LA says
Nope! not confused! – just not a subscriber to ontological-fiction or science fiction as you folks are.

Mark de LA says
Forking seems to be a useful tool similar to the M$M in the context of politics (see below). Have stations, blogs, TV, etc that have a one-sided or my-sided point of view & filibuster same. It even gives birth to polls which are wildly bogus (predicting the future) ← the “I’m right game.

CNN SLIPS TO 3RD WITH TRUMP BASHING OVERLOAD... Jumps the gun on Secret Service questioning... WATCH: 10 Minutes Of CNN Cutting Off Those Who Criticize Hillary... SHOWDOWN: Guest refuses to be squeezed by Lemon... PAPER: Attacks on Trump might get him killed... Election Brings Political Passions To New Heights...

59% SAY RELEASE MEDICAL RECORDS WHAT’S WRONG WITH HER?

Mark de LA says
It’s all good though:

Seth says
it is true that CNN is running anti-Trump stories just about 24/7. It is unclear to me whether that is leading or following public opinion in general. Is Trump an ass hole because CNN keeps repeating that he is, or does CNN keep repeating that because he is an ass hole.

or maybe something entirely different is happening ….

you decide.

Si says
Conversation forked to thought 21284

Mark de LA says
Or is any of CNN’s stories true?

Seth says
mostly CNN is reporting what people think about Trump along with what Trump is actually saying. I believe that the part they report of what Trump actually says, he actually does say. I also believe that the talking heads (which CNN gives voice to in plethera) cherry pick their beliefs pro and con just according to their own adgendas.

So to answer you question: yes, there are lots of stories, true to lots of people, being reported on CNN about Trump.

Mark de LA says
So you believe. I’ll bet you never attended a trump rally up front. So you are believing a partisan hump pile of the leftie CNN network.

Mark de LA says
There however must be some truth at CNN because it is so hard for them to LIE all the time.

Si says
Why is it so hard for them to lie? A lie is a deliberate misrepresentation of what is believed. That seems to me to be mostly what news sources do … leftie or otherwise … and is why I don’t get my news from news sources … then I would just be living in a lie of my own co-creation.

Mark de LA says
Well, you misssed the sarcasm. It is easy for them to lie. It is probably hard to do that 100% of the time because even they can’t be consistent & probably make mistakes.

Si says
Okay. Sarcasm is inconsistent with LOA. Using it get’s one more of what they don’t want. As such, I have been weaning myself off of it for the last several years and am nearly there … since I grew up around a lot of it both in the Russell family and the Bawden family. Doing so is one of the things I have done that has opened up my life and made it richer.

Seth says
i do sarcasm sometimes … but try to avoid it. i try to do it only when i am almost positive that it will be taken as sarcasm … thing is to make the game work, you can’t signal the punch. then too it is still surprising how often people miss it.

where there is a complex situation between people, and i am unsure whether the other is doing some weird mirroring of me, rather than just taking what i do, and maybe is projecting themselves on to me, then they go and use irony … it gets so confusing that i just prefer not to play.

Mark de LA says

Wonder how the tags got on here so that I can’t delete them.

Mark de LA says
Living in a monopole world & ignoring valid parts of the sense of language & basic English – sarcasm, irony, humor, paradox …. is very similar to the dichotomy of troglodyte-thelemite that Seth hates. RS has something to say about the tendency to isolate oneself & construct one’s own circle separate from the world in the series Occult Movements in the 19th Century somewhere in/between lectures 4 & 6. If you go back (via RS) to the ancient Essenes whose object was to become pure but by doing so amongst themselves drove the devils out into the rest of the world you can see the parallels to certain parts of the LOA cult. There is LOA as a tool similar to some parts of NLP & there is the cult derived from the somnambulism, channeling etc of “Seth Speaks” cult. Esther/Abraham just carried it further.

Seth says
hmmm … second try at saying this … first one seems to have gotten deleted.

an authors right to deleting others tags and comments on a thought that she created was my original assumption in fastblogit as well as being the assumption every other place in the blogisphere. apparently nathan is pioneering a new permissions model. hopefully it will solve the problem of others hostile intent intefearing with sombody’s clear expression.

Mark de LA says
It is very slow responsive this AM. All a new model – if that is what it is – is doing is inviting a battle of the tags. #bullshit seems likely. Take a look at twitter & see what you find.

I like your original assumption, Seth

Si says
You guys are in a “work zone” talking as if you are in a completed product. Being critical never does anything except invite more of the same.

Be productive, be a writer of a better story.

Si says
Interesting place you found in your verse. Never been there. LOA btw, as said many times, is not living in a monopole world. Not sure why you keep inventing that idea.

Mark de LA says
Being critical shows up (obtrains?) when you take the comments personal; which mostly they are not – merely observations. I don’t see why we have to tap-dance around personal problems to log an observation which may stimulate a change for the better & labor at such language so as to avoid a triggering of personal phobias of negativity.

Seth says
… alternatively some of our comments could inform the “work zone” process … as long as they are tolerant and not hostile to it.

Si says
There are no bugs here, there are only shifting sands. I don’t even think in terms of bugs anymore because it is one of the slowest ways to develop. The fastest possible way is to leverage LOA by telling the story you want to be without any hint of what you don’t want, then even the code drops in faster and cleaner. Every time anyone talks about what they don’t want it slows down the whole project. So please don’t. Just talk about what you want and build that story to any degree you like … then things will “just happen” without hardly a finger lifted.

You have seen it in action many times … it obtains.

Mark de LA says

Seth says
hmmm … seems to me then you should interpert some of our comments as the sands shifting

Mark de LA says
👍

Si says
I do. And it would be nice to have you guys IN the design loop helping write the story.

Si says
What makes you think you can’t delete them? I ran an identical test to this one and was able to delete the tags just fine that were added by another user in my profile group.

Are you not using the long approved tag delete method? (since last December)

Put ! before the tag name in the tag box and submit. It should delete the tag from that thought if you are allowed to delete it. As always, this works for multiple tags if you separate them with commas (,). i.e. to delete both loa and shotgun put !loa,!shotgun in the tag box and hit the add button (or return).

Of course, if you do delete those, I will add them back, for they belong here.

tag wars

Mark de LA says
👍

Si says
Added loa and shotgun

Seth says

#OMG … talk about deapth of threading … this one is a #doozie !!!

Seth says
👍

Seth says
there are at least two of these generalized forces … attraction …. and … differentiation.

the one cannot be explained by the other. they act as independant vectors on the events we experience.

however they may be connected by a #duality ← thinking that is currently beyond my pay grade

it contradicts my experience to think otherwise.

Si says
Conversation forked to thought 22446

Polarity in an LOA world

About: forking comments - comment 56004 - comment 56023 - comment 56075 - fastblogit

Tags

Comments

See Also