Matrix Interface Technologies

I have a series of some 40 very interesting volumes of information emailed to me in the early 2000s by a man who presumably was a person in the know regarding the so-called Matrix of reality. I'm going to share some of this information in the hopes that someone either has seen it before or knows where it originated from. I must admit it starts becoming very difficult to understand the deeper you go.

Filebin:

filebin.net...

a reply to: Loki

I have a series of some 40 very interesting volumes of information emailed to me in the early 2000s by a man who presumably was a person in the know regarding the so-called Matrix of reality.

Does it have anything with Neo? Who was the protagonist of a 1999 movie?

a reply to: Phage

Indulge me, have a read.

I really wanna click that.. but I'm too suspicious of random links, especially from someone who is a 'trickster'! This IS a conspiracy site after all

a reply to: Phage

a reply to: Lysergic

Nuh uh.

Here's an excerpt from the 20th email that I think lends a bit of understanding to the subject matter being explored:

The Technology of the True Mind and the Workings of the Matrix, both in the Soul and Outside
your Soul, should be given Credit for this beautiful illusion that has us all convinced, our Universe is both physical and real, when really the mind is only reading a story from Program Books,
through the Soul..

a reply to: Loki

Sounds pretty trite. Actually.

You've been around since 2003 so why? and that excerpt sounds just like the ramblings of someone both familiar to ATS of the late 2000's and whom was not taken seriously.

Well the person that wrote that email.. forgot to tell us how he knows these things, and how he got the information.
And he did not explain how the "real" world looks like. He only tells us if you rotate a N it becomes a Z.
woahhhh..

a reply to: Loki

I'm not gonna lie that email is extremely interesting, I'd love to read more

a reply to: Loki

Follow a random link to read volumes of who knows what? Yeah. Not likely.

originally posted by: Loki
I have a series of some 40 very interesting volumes of information emailed to me in the early 2000s by a man who presumably was a person in the know regarding the so-called Matrix of reality. I'm going to share some of this information in the hopes that someone either has seen it before or knows where it originated from. I must admit it starts becoming very difficult to understand the deeper you go.

Filebin:

filebin.net...

I don't see anything about science or technology in the file. It's more like unscientific "new-agey" stuff like this:

"The Soul is actually a Body. It is much larger then the Universe you experience; as the Universe
is actually very, very small indeed, and only appears to be very large."

The number of peer reviewed scientific papers I have read confirming the universe is actually very, very small is exactly zero.

I would suggest asking the mods to move the topic to another forum, maybe "the gray area" which is for unproven claims, and saying "the Universe is actually very, very small" is an unproven claim if I ever saw one.

One of the intentions of this video is to portray the concept that the universe is actually very, very large:

Cosmic Voyage clip annotated with powers of 10

The images on the second document look to be the ones created by "The Matrix Traveller", someone I discussed his ideas several years ago on a different forum.

Edited to add that, although I had those conversations on a different forum, he was also a member of ATS, as you can see here.

He had some interesting ideas.

a reply to: ArMaP

What's your opinion of his authenticity?

It definitely does sound like a bunch of poppycock.

But!!!

Take in consideration a metaphysical stance... like when Jim Carey said... we are all 1. The universe and us... one great organism interconnected even if only by dark matter. And a simple physiological rule, we can only see relative things, relative matter, something we might identify either by the molecular state or astronomical existence within our dimension. We understand there's a limit to our physics here on earth and there's far greater things undetected by our senses all around us than detected. Nothing is actually absolute based on our space/time but outside of these manmade devices like time... we know there's a conclusion, we know we age, and we grasp that we live and die here based on various laws of physics. How do we know these things that have yet to happen? Is our thought predetermined, is our brain creating this reality at the exact moment we experience it? Or is there always multiple outcomes to every equation and can we only apply the variables given for each formula because everything has actually already happened and we are wired by a DNA code to complete specific tasks only adequate for this being... this dimension... this particular space/time?

Maybe we are God but not quite yet... we develop and become this deity over time.

Maybe we can only see ourselves in everything?

Its widely accepted, by some of the smartest minds today, that if black holes truly do exist... the single greatest powerful phenomenon ever witnessed by man... the single greatest force ever discovered... observed is mind-blowing .... not because of what it does. These great forces, the greateat ever witnessed by mankind, blow scientist's minds because we are apart of even THAT! Everything we see in the known universe came from the same origin. A teeny tiny dot.... because we see it in existence... we are relative. And black holes have been observed and confirmed real recently! O_O


There's a lot of bunk information out there, things not relative to anything peer reviewed. There's also mind blowing discoveries happening as well... theories that lead to actually leaning many towards the idea of simulation theory, influenced by the string theory, and multiverses.

Maybe we are actually time travellers by default... because we are time... we are space... we are here and we are not. Our minds are simply programmed for selective realities not of our knowing?


a reply to: Arbitrageur

a reply to: MikhailBakunin

like when Jim Carey said

Do you really think he came up with that notion?

originally posted by: MikhailBakunin
We understand there's a limit to our physics here on earth and there's far greater things undetected by our senses all around us than detected.

It's true that our human senses are limited, which is why we made some interesting advances in science and continue to make them using detectors which operate at a range beyond our human senses. About 10 months from now we plan to launch the James Webb Space Telescope which will use infrared light beyond our range of vision to observe some of the most distant objects in the universe thus confirming the very large size of the universe.

Its widely accepted, by some of the smartest minds today, that if black holes truly do exist... the single greatest powerful phenomenon ever witnessed by man... the single greatest force ever discovered... observed is mind-blowing .... not because of what it does. These great forces, the greateat ever witnessed by mankind, blow scientist's minds because we are apart of even THAT! Everything we see in the known universe came from the same origin. A teeny tiny dot.... because we see it in existence... we are relative. And black holes have been observed and confirmed real recently! O_O

OK black holes are a bit mind blowing, but you say they've been confirmed real, how? By science, a method of objectively knowing things. If you use that same science to observe the size of the universe, it's very large, not very small.

There's a lot of bunk information out there, things not relative to anything peer reviewed. There's also mind blowing discoveries happening as well... theories that lead to actually leaning many towards the idea of simulation theory, influenced by the string theory, and multiverses.

And how do we tell which is the bunk and which is the real objective knowledge? Again science is a way of objectively knowing things that we can hopefully agree on, of separating the bunk from the scientific knowledge.

If the statement from the writings the OP posted that "the Universe is actually very, very small indeed, and only appears to be very large" was backed up with some scientific analysis I'd read the analysis, but it was just a statement with no science and I'm familiar enough with the science to know that's not what the science shows.

P.S. String theory and multiverses are not mind blowing discoveries as you seem to claim, though if you watch popular media on science I can understand how you might get that impression. So I am not only concerned about Loki posting very unscientific ramblings in the science forum, but as my signature hints, I am also concerned that people commonly think of "string theory" as a scientific theory when it's not a scientific theory. To the extent string theory "predictions" have been tested against observation, they have failed, so it should perhaps be called a failed hypothesis, instead of a theory. Multiverse theory may not even be testable to say it's failed.

Why String Theory Is Still Not Even Wrong

Experimental results from the Large Hadron Collider show no evidence of the extra dimensions or supersymmetry that string theorists had argued for as "predictions" of string theory. The internal problems of the theory are even more serious after another decade of research. These include the complexity, ugliness and lack of explanatory power of models designed to connect string theory with known phenomena, as well as the continuing failure to come up with a consistent formulation of the theory...

The problem with such things as string-theory multiverse theories is that "the multiverse did it" is not just untestable, but an excuse for failure. Instead of opening up scientific progress in a new direction, such theories are designed to shut down scientific progress by justifying a failed research program.

When ATS member The Matrix Traveller posted on ATS 8 or 9 years ago, I see some of his threads were in the skunk works forum, which would be a better fit than the science forum, seeing how his statements aren't scientific. I'm all for freedom of expression, but not for misrepresenting things as science which are not science. ATS has the science forum for posting about science, and other forums like skunk works for posting about non-scientific things like The Matrix Traveler's writings.

The most effective "technology" you're talking about to see and interact (somewhat) with the simulation is essentially psychochemical. The patched together quality of reality becomes much more apparent. If this could be further enhanced by other technologies such as virtual reality, that could be very interesting.

Yeah I am gonna download a .DOC off the internet cause that's always a safe bet...

Either re-post on here or bugger off!