It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Synchronicity and Parallel universes

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 07:12 PM
link   
I've been reading up on Carl Jung and his theories on synchronicity and archetypes is pretty interesting.

I think synchronicity and parallel universes compliment each other.

Jung says uncaused events or coincidences happen because of an underlying order or the collective unconcious.

Parallel universes say things happen in our universe because of events that happen in universes beyond our observation.

So, a guy can move into a new house and when he gets his new number it starts with 751.

He goes to Rite-Aid and gets a few things that add up to $7.51.

He doesn't play the lottery alot but he goes to the store and puts $2.00 on 751 and he hits the number.

In our universe this is seen as a coincidence.

What we don't know is that in a parallel universe a version of you passed Rite-Aid and went to CVS.

He got the same new number but at CVS his total came to $6.75.

When the number comes out, it's 751 and he's mad at himself because he didn't hit.

We see these things as uncaused coincidences but there are causes at work beyond our observation.

I just thought that was kind of interesting.




posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 07:55 PM
link   


What we don't know is that in a parallel universe a version of you passed Rite-Aid and went to CVS.

He got the same new number but at CVS his total came to $6.75.




In principle (and, up to a point, even in practice), I have no problem believing in parallel universes or time-lines.

But here's the thing: each one of these two hypothetical people has his own consciousness, unaware (or perhaps even dimly aware) of the other one.

If "I" equals consciousness (self-awareness) - and it does - then such a scenario would imply two "I" - i.e. two people.
And regardless of their theoretical identity - they are both "I", even if they are dissociated from each other - the two can never merge.

Or can they?




[edit on 23-6-2008 by Vanitas]



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 08:25 PM
link   
I would suggest watching the movie Southland Tales. It takes place in '08 and has some very interesting factors in it.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 10:07 PM
link   
Lately I have been able to see the collective unconscious unfold all around me and have recently come to a greater understanding as to how it all works. I'll offer what insight I can based on my observations:

Manifestations of the collective unconscious are all around us. Both our conscious and subconscious minds project thoughts which are constantly reflected back to us. Although they tend to change forms in such a way that we normally don't take notice. Thoughts are archetypes.

Base archetypes like numbers are much more noticeable when reflected back because they have less possible forms. Put simply, they're much easier to recognize. The more complex thoughts are reflected back in pieces and in multiple forms. Figuring them out is like putting together a puzzle. You just connect the dots.

Manifestations of the collective unconscious follow one simple rule: they manifest in such a way as to be believable by all. This means people with different beliefs will perceive the same thing differently. What is a miracle for one, is a coincidence to another. What's a spirit for one, is a hallucination for another. And so on.

The collective unconscious is also not limited by time since it exists in the realm of the photon/ether. We effect the past as well as the future. While the past doesn't appear to be rewritten, it is often reinterpreted. Also artifacts or things we "discover" may not have existed until the thought created them. There's always a connection from present to past or present to future.

Ever make up a word and then hear everyone start using it? Maybe you thought of something you later read in a book which turns out was written before you thought of it? We find creative ways of explaining away these "coincidences" or deja vu. Although every once in a while it hits us so hard that we ask ourself if something else is going on here (like Jung did).

Parallel universes don't have to exist for the collective unconscious to work. Not to say parallel universes don't exist... certainly they exist in our dreams, and we may even share those dreams with others.

There's a definite connection to the collective unconscious and quantum physics. By understanding this, Schrodinger's cat becomes elementary.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Kruel
 

Kruel, I think you may have misunderstood what Jung meant by the collective unconscious and by archetypes.

Archetypes are simply the way in which instinctual drives are projected into consciousness.

The collective unconscious is just a term used to identify the conceptual space in which these projections occur. It is collective because all human beings have the same instincts.

There is really nothing mystical or nonphysical about this.

It's easy to forget that Jung was a doctor, a scientist, who saw mysticism and the supernatural as psychological phenomena. He did not, as many seem to think, regard the mind as a mystical or supernatural phenomenon. Jung was not a believer in magic or religion.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 03:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Vanitas
 


i remember steven hawking talking about somthing like this when i was living over seas. the explanation he gave was that just as you are who you are now,,,,,,,,,,,you were also who you were when you were an infant.

that is to say that even though in two seperate time lines you exist, you are both the same person and have the same conscience.
in this scenerio conscience transcends time and space linking the two.

so the same can be said for multiple universes, as well as other time lines.
where you exist in one you also exist in another, regardless of where you are you are consistantly YOU.
now im a christian and what im about to say in some ways contradicts what im "supposed to beleive".. but from what i can understand from this is that sense time is not in a state of past present and future, but rather a constantly overlayed on itself infinitely then you are in multiple locations at once,...that being your true physical self.

possibly multiples in different universes too potentially an infinite number.. basically this all adds up to the probability that each human being is everywhere in every time period doing potentially all things unto infinty.. all possiblities are occuring and because of this people are omnipresent but not omniscient and do not share a collective knowledge of everyones individual experiences...

however these experiences are sometimes linked and sync up in a significant way allowing for coincidence...

im sorry i cant find qouted proof of this.. i have been looking.
i feel i didnt do a very good job in explaining it either..



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax
It's easy to forget that Jung was a doctor, a scientist, who saw mysticism and the supernatural as psychological phenomena. He did not, as many seem to think, regard the mind as a mystical or supernatural phenomenon. Jung was not a believer in magic or religion.


Neither am I. There's nothing mystical about it. It's all perfectly logical and understandable. The "super" in supernatural is only super until it makes sense. Once understood it's acknowledged as perfectly natural.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Kruel
 

Yes, that's true. But Jung was working entirely within the 'natural'.

I seem to keep linking to this post, but once again, for what it's worth...



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by snowen20
 


You did just fine, Snowen.
(And considering that this is one of my pet subjects, I'd probably understand what you're saying even if half of the words were missing.
)

By the way, I like to consider myself a Christian, too.
And I don't see any contradiction between Christ's words and what we're talking here.
Quite the opposite, actually.
But more on that some other time.

P.S Please, do not waste your time on finding "quoted proof".
To me, quotes only "prove" that the person has read something.
Personal thought is what matters - and for that I am grateful.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by snowen20
 


P.S.

Here is a page you might like:

Multiple Timelines

(It's from Halexandria, a very good website.)



new topics




 
0

log in

join