a reply to: Peeple
Never said I wasn't
But yes, it is the burden of anyone and everyone who has ever invented anything to consider whether their creation will cause more harm than good. Its
a responsibility to both creating and
using tools that most would rather not speak or think about. And despite claims otherwise, we still don't
fully understand the full inner workings of even common, everyday devices. Something like a transistor can be used without us fully understanding how
Arguably, it is the most natural path of exploration, learning, and science. We come upon an unexplored realm, device, or invention and then work to
expand our understanding so that we can extrapolate the behavior into other arenas. I would argue that this is the case for anything at its inception
stage, and long into application.
Given that one of my areas of work is AI, I really do feel technology like that must be carefully considered. Plenty don't agree, which is why I see
it as more of a personal burden. Its going to happen whether or not I am personally involved, so it becomes a question about participation.
Unequivocally stating what is or is not possible has always struck me as a bit presumptuous. I think we can learn from our past on that one, but
perhaps its repetition implies it is something that will continue until the end of our species.
As for time manipulation, I believe it is something we all do all the time. In the context of what I have already posted, time would be an inherent,
relativistic property of matter and space. Change the latter, and you can manipulate the former.
If there is a timeless realm linked to the time-filled realm, that would necessitate the existence of a perspective where time is not a linear motion.
Within the relativistic system though, it may not be possible outside of its "onward" direction anymore than it is possible to change the flow of
water by swimming against the current.
So, inexorably onward (
), we mundanely interact with these systems as talked about above, but also through everything from quantum mechanics,
CERN, GR, to lasers.
Systems have also been explored with a "spiritual" bent, beginning quite a long time ago. I strongly hold the opinion, however, that generalized
schools of thought can only point in a direction and can not actually travel there without walking. In part, this is just a commonly accepted notion.
Talking, or thinking, about moving our arm does nothing until we actually use the right neurological paths to move the arm. The actual distinction is
difficult for us to observe beyond the fact that one moves the arm and the other does not.
However, I think there is also an objective component in the location and parameters in time and space. Much like Earth's moon does not orbit Jupiter
because of its attributes in space and time. This is another one of those aspects that most will respond with a "duh," but it might have deeper
implications in this topic than simply being self-evident.
If we span across such disparate systems, its relatively easy to conclude that observing and exploring it requires the motivation and ability to be
able to perceive each system as they are, perceive how each system itself "views" things, and perceive how they might all work together to create what
we see as "ourselves."
The moon "sees" things differently than the Earth, even though there are obvious commonalities. In much the same way, our bodies are made up of a
massively diverse ecosystem from the brain to the heart to the lungs to even little bacteria living around our eyes.
Normally, we view all of this solely from one perspective rather than different parts of the same whole. Beyond that, we tend to view things not as
they actually are, but how we think they should be. It becomes immensely easy to then define everything around us and within us as we think they are,
rather than what and how they exist outside of our perception. It seems obvious to some, or a meaningless distinction to others, but experientially,
they are oceans apart.
To start, we can begin by assimilating these different perspectives in our own body. Many practices move in this direction, but few (if any?)
explicitly state where that road is .ed. In a breathing exercise, most have the inclination to think about the breathing and the resulting
relaxation confirms this. But, in the context of these posts, thinking about our breathing makes no more sense than breathing about our thinking. Its
not "bad," but when attempting to truly recognize each part in the whole as well as its unique perspective, it can be as counteractive as attempting
to explain someone else's thoughts, actions, and being by assuming they are exactly the same as us in every facet. That filter not only gives
inaccurate perceptions, it frequently ends up feeding itself.
This process of recognizing and integrating independent pieces into a cohesive whole can then be carried out throughout other aspects of our being. At
a certain point, these become more easily located once we build the habit of primarily perceiving things as they are. The mind still influences the
results, but in one approach we essentially are only
exploring our mind and in the other, we are exploring how the mind perceives things that
As this process continues, there is a tendency to notice that there are parts of who we are that were previously background noise (at best). Like a
rock in our shoe that doesn't "exist" until we step on it. In much the same way as the idea of thinking about moving an arm versus actually moving it,
we have to learn how to actually use these newly perceived pieces of what was always there. Like an arm twitch, or even a muscle spasm, we can use
them inadvertently at some point as well.
We can also use transients to achieve actions that may not be accessible with other tools. This can be done in a plethora of ways, but manipulating
our perception is probably the easiest to describe. Once a nice, constant "picture" of "what is" is achieved, this object can be instantaneously
collapsed to achieve a burst that can be directed at will. The continuity of our perception quickly rebuilds it afterwards. It might be easy to think
about this as some sort of guided magic missile, but in this context, it is more aptly described as something that can enable us to do anything from
more easily break out of a habit to making a profound life change. Whatever neurological pathways we guide it will serve as a foundation to be built
upon over time.
Similarly, we can add weight to certain probabilities beyond others. This can even be done solely by adding energy to one over another (I.e. working
towards a goal). As I think I've mentioned before, I like to visualize the overall process of "happening" as a frayed thread being pulled through the
eye of a needle. The frayed ends represent possibilities that are linked to the past and present, but their exact location in the thread has yet to be
determined. As the thread is pulled through, it slowly combines possibilities to probabilities to certainties and when it comes out the other end
(giggle), it is the consistent construct of the past. I see all of these threads coming together to create the tapestry that we call life and reality,
I'm just not convinced we are particularly good at weaving (yet).
That about covers the basics