posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:46 PM
reply to post by ZenBaller
Yes the contention of McKenna was that when the graph goes up, experience reflects a return to normality, and when it goes down things become more
novel. However, presently we are in territory where a few new definitions might be necessary in order to explain our relationship with the graph.
Events now, whether on the upside or downside of a peak, can be novel, especially when the compounded novelty of all historical events prior is taken
into consideration. The novelty of the past, according to basic causality, has a direct influence on the present and the novelty within the now.
The flow of the graph tracks a creative process that builds upon itself in cycles and appears to be collapsing in on itself via accelerating
connectivity. Here at the 'pointy end' of the graph, connectivity is already so great, events now in both peaks and troughs carry novelty at levels
unseen in human history before this year.
And though there are moments of normality within our daily lives, these exist because of a certain amount of adaptation we've achieved while embedded
here early in the 21st Century. We've gotten used to the idea somewhat that change is accelerating. Here we do get a sense of the speed at which
we're hurtling through time, but to any consciousness outside of time, our experience has accelerated to unbelievable speeds.
So here near the end if the graph, novelty is inescapable throughout the remaining highs and lows.