what is seth's pulsing energy, and where does it come from? me, or all that is?

[michaelk]

i'm always looking at the seth material as how can i use this day to day, to create the reality that i want. as he says, this physical reality is for learning to manipulate energy. so i want to do that even better than i do right now.

now - thanks to Tob who mentioned that TES (sessions 50-64) contained seth talking about matter and creation pretty extensively, i dug in there to figure out a couple of things for myself.

i first read it some 15 years ago, and as usual when i go back into a lot of the seth material - it again just blew my mind open. so that's awesome.

in it, my takeaway was that matter first of all exists as consciousness, in patterns as he says (psychic patterns). then from there, energy enters those patterns, which finally ends up creating matter in our physical reality. a very simple summary.

and the energy he talks about that comes in and creates physical matter, is his classic pulsing energy. the energy pulses.

my question is - that pulsing energy - what is your understanding of what it is? is it something that i control, or manipulate, to send it into those psychic patterns to then create my physical realty? (my working knowledge/belief is that those patterns/psychic patterns, are simply the thoughts/beliefs/expectations that i hold)

or is that energy simply always there, always on - perhaps the very energy of all that is - that by its nature pulses out and fills up whatever patterns are in my psychic reality, which then projects those patterns into my 3d physical reality?

i'm trying to keep this as simple as possible. a kind of 40,000 foot view to not get caught up in the minutiae.


many thanks

[Deb]

By pulsing energy, do you mean his mention of the blinking on and off? If not, you can stop reading this now.

In quantum mechanics: "According to quantum mechanics, a vacuum isn't empty at all. It's actually filled with quantum energy and particles that blink in and out of existence for a fleeting moment - strange signals that are known as quantum fluctuations."  https://www.sciencealert.com/physicists-say-they-ve-managed-to-manipulate-pure-nothingness

Then there's Seth:

"To begin with, your physical form is the result of great emotional focus. The fantastic energy of your psyche not only created your physical body, but maintains it. It is not one continuous thing, although to you it seems permanent enough while it lasts. It is nevertheless in a constant state of pulsation, and because of the nature of energy and its construction, the body is actually blinking off and on."
—SS Chapter 7: Session 530, May 20, 1970

"At no time, as a rule, is your body not here to you. Your experience seems centered within it, with the rest of the world safely outside. However, the particular selectivity of your kind of consciousness rides over lapses that you do not recognize. In a manner of speaking, your bodies blink off and on like lights. Their reality fluctuates, from your standpoint. For that matter, so does the physical universe."
—UR1 Section 1: Session 684 February 20, 1974

"It is nevertheless in a constant state of pulsation, and because of the nature of energy and its construction, the body is actually blinking off and on."
—SS Chapter 7: Session 530, May 20, 1970

My understanding of this (and it may not be the same as others here) is that it's a natural phenomenon ("the nature of energy"), where we energy beings alternate existence in both physical and non-physical—the blinking. As we are focused in this reality, the "on" state for us, we don't notice the "off" state that occurs. It's like watching a old time film movie. We the viewers only see the frames, we don't see the gaps between the frames.

What's nice about this on and off situation is that it it's an opportunity for us to constantly recreate our reality. Understanding this and learning how to utilize it consciously is what I see as the challenge.

Was that compact enough? 

[michaelk]

thanks, Deb, and awesomely compact!

I definitely get the blinking, but i'm wondering about the source of the energy itself.

so for you, it's a natural phenomenon, which i kind of lean toward. at least i think it's just the energy of all that is, pulsing out to in essence power... well, all of creation. all of creation, in any and all universes/existences out there.

so i was thinking it was an automatic thing - set up the patterns like i mentioned above, and then the energy just comes in and projects my beliefs/thoughts/expectations onto physical so i can look at them and play inside them.

but yet, your first citation from seth says "The fantastic energy of your psyche..." which implies that i/we... create/control the energy somehow? which in one way fits with seth's comments all throughout the material that we can tap into a lot more energy than we believe we have.

if that's the case, then in order to create we have to work with two elements - creating/managing the patterns i mentioned above, and also call in or somehow generate the "fantastic energy" that he talks about in the quote?

i was kind of hoping it was just the patterns. that i can handle. at least sometimes.

i'm just wondering what the source of that power is, and from there, how do i actually generate it or... get it moving my way.

if i'm here to learn to manipulate energy, then i would hope in all of his sessions, that he would at least have given a hint on how to do that. i've read all the seth books (except the early class sessions), some more than once, and i just don't remember anything that jumped out at me and even hinted at that.

which is why i'm asking my new community if you all remember anything about it?

[Tob]

thanks, Deb, and awesomely compact!

I definitely get the blinking, but i'm wondering about the source of the energy itself.

so for you, it's a natural phenomenon, which i kind of lean toward. at least i think it's just the energy of all that is, pulsing out to in essence power... well, all of creation. all of creation, in any and all universes/existences out there.

so i was thinking it was an automatic thing - set up the patterns like i mentioned above, and then the energy just comes in and projects my beliefs/thoughts/expectations onto physical so i can look at them and play inside them.

but yet, your first citation from seth says "The fantastic energy of your psyche..." which implies that i/we... create/control the energy somehow? which in one way fits with seth's comments all throughout the material that we can tap into a lot more energy than we believe we have.

if that's the case, then in order to create we have to work with two elements - creating/managing the patterns i mentioned above, and also call in or somehow generate the "fantastic energy" that he talks about in the quote?

i was kind of hoping it was just the patterns. that i can handle. at least sometimes.

i'm just wondering what the source of that power is, and from there, how do i actually generate it or... get it moving my way.

if i'm here to learn to manipulate energy, then i would hope in all of his sessions, that he would at least have given a hint on how to do that. i've read all the seth books (except the early class sessions), some more than once, and i just don't remember anything that jumped out at me and even hinted at that.

which is why i'm asking my new community if you all remember anything about it?

'...centuries before the beginning of what seems to have begun'

(Seth's last sentence in Nature of Personal Reality'). Understanding 'reality' takes time. And it requires us to read the Seth books, not to dream or fantasize about them.

The basics are the physics, and a first compendium is delivered in Vol. 2 'Early Sessions'. It looks that it was hard work for Seth as the necessary vocabulary was not available on Jane's end. This is why he put pressure on both of them (Jane and Robert) to read books about quantum physics and astrophysics.

The description of the physics came to a preliminary end around session 85 (end of Vol. 2, Early Sessions). Seth was very proud around that time. Obviously, the core issues have been transmitted in a way that he was satisfied. It is up to us (the readers) to sit and read the material precisely. As it is the case with any other schoolbook as well.

In none of the early sessions (according to the material published) does he talk about CUs or EEs.

Later he comes back to the projection of matter, approaching the wave/particle issue.

He does not want us to think of CUs as particles.

Jane Roberts claims in her 'Aspects' book that she is a particle. Without providing more information. But half of the book is devoted to creation and alternative realities, as well as the constant expansion and contraction (the pulsations).

My advise is to read - or 'approach' Seth together and/or in combination with Bashar and Tom Campbell (Virtual Reality). Tom Campbell is a physicist. He is convinced that the driving force behind creation is consciousness. He was the key experimenter at the Noetic Institute.

The universe seems to be virtual. It is constantly being reconstructed at the rate of Planck time (Campbell). Planck time is the time required for light to pass the distance of one Planck lenght. For whatever reason there is nothing smaller than one Planck lenght. This is why it is called after Max Planck.

If you think of one Planck lenght the width of one millimeter, a real millimeter would be larger than the visible universe. The time it takes light to pass this tiny distance is Planck time. At the rate of Planck time the universe is allegedly being constantly reconstructed. Like the picture of a virtual computer game. Thus, the universe is 'pixelated' (Tom Campbell) at the level of Planck lenght and constantly renewed at the rate of Planck time.

Every new picture (frame) is static, and instantly replaced by a new one. Similar to a film/video on a computer screen. It is the constant renewal rate which gives us the impression of motion and time.

Statements provided by Seth according to which there is 'no cause and effect' make only sense against a kind of 'physicality' described above. No plant the size of 3.9999 cm becames the plant the size of 4.0000 cm. It is an entirely new plant, because it has been newly constructed. The 3.9999 cm plant does not give rise to a 'cause and effect' - relationship. We only think so.

The basics have been provided by Seth. Obviously successfully. They have not been understood so far. The initial translation of 'Seth Speaks' into German (from the 80s) is a disaster, when you examine it closely. If you read the English version in parallel you can see that the information is heavily distorted at crucial points when it comes to key formulations. Some sentences which were obviously too difficult (conceptually, not language-wise) are just missing. The conceptual understanding was just not given on the translators' side at that time.

Does not really matter. There is 'time enough' to upgrade the materials and to work with it...

'...centuries before the beginning of what seems to have begun.'

[Sena]

My advise is to read - or 'approach' Seth together and/or in combination with Bashar and Tom Campbell (Virtual Reality). Tom Campbell is a physicist. He is convinced that the driving force behind creation is consciousness. He was the key experimenter at the Noetic Institute.

Tob, it is interesting that you mention Tom Campbell. I found a chapter in a book which refers both to Seth and to Tom Campbell:

"Meanwhile those of you familiar with the Seth material will recognise the phrase 'probable selves' because he refers to them repeatedly. Actually Campbell quotes Seth Speaks as the closest model of how reality functions that he could find to 'tentatively and sceptically' work with, at least as a starting point. This should perhaps come as no surprise when we've seen how Monroe went to visit Jane Roberts around the time the three of them started working together. According to Campbell such references most likely relate to a version of you that already exists in the database of the probable and possible future, or to a version of you that represents an unactualised past possibility. He's at pains to point out that anyone who stumbled across this data, say in an OOBE, might run the relevant simulation and it would appear to them just as real as PMR (physical matter reality). What's more the other people involved would appear to be making free-will-based, interactive choices, even though in fact they'd just be simulations following the programmed algorithms predicting – albeit pretty accurately – their behaviour. This is clearly one of the big traps that even quite seasoned OOB researchers can fall into, because unless you're extremely experienced and know exactly what you're doing – and not even Campbell himself would claim such a thing after decades of intense experimentation – you can be fooled into thinking that multiple, even infinite, parallel, physical universes exist alongside our own. There are almost certainly some, as we'll shortly discover. But to the extent we're only talking about simulations, which will often be the case, these are not of the same ontology as the shared interactive experience of PMR (physical matter reality) that we collectively create in each now-moment, and which forms the actualised 'thread' that stands out clearly in the 'tapestry' of all possible threads. This is the only version in which we've collectively and actively used our free will. The other versions held on the database are simulations that can only be experienced passively, however they might appear. This too is a key distinction I've been emphasising for many years because it felt intuitively right, and it was wonderful to have it confirmed by Campbell." (from "Supersoul: A Radical Worldview for a New Consciousness (Supersoul) [Kindle Edition]" by Ian Lawton)

https://amzn.eu/4WwUcZ2

The above quote really explains a problem I brought up on another thread. The probable realities mentioned by Seth are SIMILATIONS. There is only one version of physical matter reality.

[Tob]

My advise is to read - or 'approach' Seth together and/or in combination with Bashar and Tom Campbell (Virtual Reality). Tom Campbell is a physicist. He is convinced that the driving force behind creation is consciousness. He was the key experimenter at the Noetic Institute.

Tob, it is interesting that you mention Tom Campbell. I found a chapter in a book which refers both to Seth and to Tom Campbell:

"Meanwhile those of you familiar with the Seth material will recognise the phrase 'probable selves' because he refers to them repeatedly. Actually Campbell quotes Seth Speaks as the closest model of how reality functions that he could find to 'tentatively and sceptically' work with, at least as a starting point. This should perhaps come as no surprise when we've seen how Monroe went to visit Jane Roberts around the time the three of them started working together. According to Campbell such references most likely relate to a version of you that already exists in the database of the probable and possible future, or to a version of you that represents an unactualised past possibility. He's at pains to point out that anyone who stumbled across this data, say in an OOBE, might run the relevant simulation and it would appear to them just as real as PMR (physical matter reality). What's more the other people involved would appear to be making free-will-based, interactive choices, even though in fact they'd just be simulations following the programmed algorithms predicting – albeit pretty accurately – their behaviour. This is clearly one of the big traps that even quite seasoned OOB researchers can fall into, because unless you're extremely experienced and know exactly what you're doing – and not even Campbell himself would claim such a thing after decades of intense experimentation – you can be fooled into thinking that multiple, even infinite, parallel, physical universes exist alongside our own. There are almost certainly some, as we'll shortly discover. But to the extent we're only talking about simulations, which will often be the case, these are not of the same ontology as the shared interactive experience of PMR (physical matter reality) that we collectively create in each now-moment, and which forms the actualised 'thread' that stands out clearly in the 'tapestry' of all possible threads. This is the only version in which we've collectively and actively used our free will. The other versions held on the database are simulations that can only be experienced passively, however they might appear. This too is a key distinction I've been emphasising for many years because it felt intuitively right, and it was wonderful to have it confirmed by Campbell." (from "Supersoul: A Radical Worldview for a New Consciousness (Supersoul) [Kindle Edition]" by Ian Lawton)

https://amzn.eu/4WwUcZ2

The above quote really explains a problem I brought up on another thread. The probable realities mentioned by Seth are SIMILATIONS. There is only one version of physical matter reality.

Thanks. I think Tom Campbell is the key. I could not understand the 'shifting, shifting, shifting' approach of Bashar. It was clear it was a crucial aspect of his cosmology, but it did not make sense. Where are all these other universes and all these other versions of me? And how do I physically get there? The answer is: everything is virtual. Everything is here and now. It is just a matter of vibration.

I tried to produce drawings of all these alternative realities and the shifting. Actually, the term 'shifting' is misleading as it implies some kind of movement 'sideways'. This is not the case. It is a constant re-creation and it is in the context of this reproduction process that we choose either this new universe or that one. According to Seth the synapses play a crucial role in the selection process. They know much more than the brain.

http://www.sethforum.de/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=2609

On page 14 you also find a graphic juxtaposition of Bashar's and Seth's cosmologies. You will see they can be integrated easily.

As I already mentioned, I could not understand Bashar without Tom Campbell. And I could not understand Seth without information provided by Bashar in the 'Nine Levels of Consciousness' Session. I did describe the content of that session on this page. Unfortunately, there are no transcripts one can precisely work with. People in the sessions are just happy if they can meet Bashar, the wizzard. Usually they don't ask these questions. But one can organize private sessions, asking for a clarification of Seth issues. According to Bashar, every single word that Seth was saying, is correct. But the terminology has been used differently.

Jane Roberts developed her own terminology. Some has been taken on by Seth.

[Sena]

Thanks. I think Tom Campbell is the key. I could not understand the 'shifting, shifting, shifting' approach of Bashar. It was clear it was a crucial aspect of his cosmology, but it did not make sense. Where are all these other universes and all these other versions of me? And how do I physically get there? The answer is: everything is virtual.

Tob, my understanding of Tom Campbell is that many realities are virtual, but PMR (physical material reality) is "real". Seth's position seems to be that everything is virtual, and consciousness is the only reality.

The semi-scientific version is the Simulation Hypothesis:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-live-in-a-simulation-chances-are-about-50-50/

If we do live in a simulation, Creating One's Own Reality is certainly a possibility, but we need to understand the rules governing the simulation, the "code" or "software".

[Tob]

Thanks. I think Tom Campbell is the key. I could not understand the 'shifting, shifting, shifting' approach of Bashar. It was clear it was a crucial aspect of his cosmology, but it did not make sense. Where are all these other universes and all these other versions of me? And how do I physically get there? The answer is: everything is virtual.

Tob, my understanding of Tom Campbell is that many realities are virtual, but PMR (physical material reality) is "real". Seth's position seems to be that everything is virtual, and consciousness is the only reality.

The semi-scientific version is the Simulation Hypothesis:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-live-in-a-simulation-chances-are-about-50-50/

If we do live in a simulation, Creating One's Own Reality is certainly a possibility, but we need to understand the rules governing the simulation, the "code" or "software".

I think Tom Campbell's position is that everything is virtual. According to him virtuality can explain some results in CERN which could otherwise not be explained. You may wish to have a look at his interview with Jim Elvidge on youtube.

[Kyle]

"It is nevertheless in a constant state of pulsation, and because of the nature of energy and its construction, the body is actually blinking off and on."
—SS Chapter 7: Session 530, May 20, 1970

My understanding of this (and it may not be the same as others here) is that it's a natural phenomenon ("the nature of energy"), where we energy beings alternate existence in both physical and non-physical—the blinking. As we are focused in this reality, the "on" state for us, we don't notice the "off" state that occurs. It's like watching a old time film movie. We the viewers only see the frames, we don't see the gaps between the frames.

Understanding this blinking has been bugging me since it came up recently. Then I was reading about alternating current (AC), which in effect blinks on and off constantly. The reason AC is used more widely than DC is that transmission of electricity is most efficient at high voltages, which with AC can be converted easily to the lower voltages we use. AC can handle that conversion much better than DC. (btw, Tesla invented AC and Edison invented DC).

Doesn't Seth say in effect that we conscious beings are "running on AC?" If we are running on low voltage (and let me tell you I have lots of days like that), then could higher-level voltages of consciousness give us a boost by converting to or producing a lower voltage? We all know what it means for someone to be "high voltage," right?

So, does this sound nuts, or what? It is of course an analogy.

[jbseth]

I definitely get the blinking, but i'm wondering about the source of the energy itself.

Hi MichaelK, Hi All,

In regards to "energy", here's some interesting things that Seth had to say about it.


NotP, Ch 9, S787:

In the most basic of terms, almost incomprehensible in your vocabulary, energy is not divided. There can be no portions or parts of it, because it is not an entity like a pie, to be cut or divided.

In those terms, energy cannot be considered without bringing to the forefront questions concerning the nature of God or All That Is, for the terms are synonymous.





DE&VF1, Ch 1, S882:

Consciousness and matter and energy are one,...




In TES6, S250, Seth also talks about the "atom" and quasars. In that session he says the following:

Atoms do not create energy in a basic manner. They make energy usable within your system. Energy appears in your universe through the nucleus of the atom, but the nucleus is not the originator of the energy. It simply seems to be.

[... 1 paragraph ...]

Now, quasars are originators of energy. All energy ultimately returns to them also. They are not on the far limits of your universe. They are projections from another system into your universe. They appear to be where they are not.



-jbseth

[Sena]

I think Tom Campbell's position is that everything is virtual. According to him virtuality can explain some results in CERN which could otherwise not be explained. You may wish to have a look at his interview with Jim Elvidge on youtube

Tom Campbell's book "My Big TOE" repeatedly mentions PMR (physical material reality):

An individual in PMR can be aware of NPMR through his or her mind — the nonphysical part of one's being. The mind is the doorway through which you must pass to experience NPMR. NPMR is, if anything, more real than PMR (semantics in the service of an impish smile) because it contains a more fundamental (less constrained) reality of which PMR is only one of many subsets.

7. An individual in PMR, once fully aware in NPMRN, can access and filter the RWW net described above with his or her intent. An individual can access any web-page-entity on this RWW net by using his or her intent (which requires unique knowledge and identification of the URL being sought). One navigates with one's intent. A person's intent is also his or her filter; without this filter one would have difficulty dealing with all the information at once.

[Kyle]

Tob, my understanding of Tom Campbell is that many realities are virtual, but PMR (physical material reality) is "real". Seth's position seems to be that everything is virtual, and consciousness is the only reality.

An individual in PMR can be aware of NPMR through his or her mind — the nonphysical part of one's being. The mind is the doorway through which you must pass to experience NPMR. NPMR is, if anything, more real than PMR (semantics in the service of an impish smile) because it contains a more fundamental (less constrained) reality of which PMR is only one of many subsets.

Hi Sena, it sounds like you're answering your own questions about PMR with that last quote: "PMR is only one of many subsets" of NPMR, which is "more real than PMR." Am I understanding you right? Makes sense to me.

[Sena]

Hi Sena, it sounds like you're answering your own questions about PMR with that last quote: "PMR is only one of many subsets" of NPMR, which is "more real than PMR." Am I understanding you right? Makes sense to me

Kyle, i think you are correct. Thanks for reading that carefully. More quotes from the book:

By design, little picture knowledge appears (from the view of PMR) to be deterministic — an erroneous conclusion based upon the success of science in discovering more and more of the space-time rule-set that defines our local PMR causality. However, there is more to the experience of PMR than the rule-set that defines the possible interactions within PMR. We need to account for the experiencer as well as the logical constraints of the experience. PMR is a virtual reality that is designed to produce a certain type of constrained experience for the benefit of interactive units of individuated consciousness. Consciousness awareness is the active element that experiences the opportunity to exercise its intent as it interacts with virtual mass, energy, time, and other consciousness units that also possess free will.

Wave particle duality, uncertainty principles, and the seemingly instantaneous communications between entangled pairs become simple to explain once you realize that PMR is a virtual reality created by a digital simulation implementing the space-time rule-set within TBC. Given a digital PMR simulation, which is stepped forward by time increments that appear infinitesimal to us, and a virtual reality that must obey only the rules driving its digital computation, these paradoxes disappear along with the illusion of absolute space. Once the limiting belief that all possible reality is exclusively defined by measurements within PMR is abandoned and the true nature of consciousness is grasped, the mysterious paradoxes of physics, philosophy, and metaphysics all melt away like ice cubes in the summer sun.

All that is needed to find solutions to the Big Questions of our time is a simple shift in perspective — a casting off of erroneous scientific, cultural, and religious belief inherited from those who were unable to answer the same questions. Isn't that how it always turns out? New paradigms deliver an expanded reality as we outgrow the old ones. The digital mountain raised up by the approaching information age has simply afforded us a better view at this time. Progress, like quality and ability, is developed through a bootstrapping process. Every new success is built on previous successes.

When you are in NPMR, it appears to be every bit as physical as PMR, but because it operates under a different set of rules, one interacts with it differently. The operational differences between PMR and NPMR simply represent the differences between their rule-sets and the unique causality that each rule-set imposes. Each particular reality dimension has evolved a rule-set to support its own use, function, and purpose. The space-time rule-set supports human function and purpose within OS.

There is no significant distinction between physical and nonphysical realities: Reality is reality. I employ that artificial distinction and terminology (PMR vs. NPMR) as a communications aid. To communicate with you effectively, I need to start (conceptually) from where you are (or think you are). The fact is that most of you are certain that you exist within a physical reality, hence that is the initial perspective we must take. The PMR-NPMR distinction within My Big TOE is used to help you conceptually sneak up on a bigger picture. We will continue to use the PMR-NPMR terminology, especially in the next section, because it greatly facilitates the grasping of inherently difficult Big Picture concepts — like thinking of an atom as a billiard ball with BBs zipping around it — patently incorrect, but useful at an elementary level.

Local reality is an experience of individuated mind interacting within the limitations of a given causality. If there are multiple minds interacting within a given local reality, there exists a shared common (public) experience we define as objective, as well as a personal experience that we define as subjective. The subjective and objective components of reality are both extremely significant — their purpose and function are simply different.

The larger reality is all consciousness (All That Is) evolving toward greater profitability, existing to improve itself through entropy reduction. Aware consciousness is created by the organization of a fundamental potential energy that we have (for reasons of conceptual familiarity) named Absolute Unbounded Oneness — the nature of this organization is digital. The larger reality is a huge interactive digital consciousness system; it is a consciousness-evolution fractal ecosystem that we have named AUM.

To summarize: Physical and nonphysical are relative to a point of view and therefore do not support a fundamental distinction. The mind-matter, normal-paranormal, physics-metaphysics, and science-philosophy dichotomies are likewise simply illusions of perspective created by a limited understanding that is exclusively focused within its own local reality. The experience of our physical matter reality is the result of a particular set of constraints (space-time rule-set) placed upon the interaction of individuated consciousness with other players, which include other sentient beings as well as the environment. Matter is a simulated menial effect that we, as mind, experience because it helps put us in a virtual environment that makes the evolution of our consciousness more efficient and effective.

Are we really saying that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was merely virtual reality?

[michaelk]

My advise is to read - or 'approach' Seth together and/or in combination with Bashar and Tom Campbell (Virtual Reality).

thanks for this, Tob. i tried Bashar a long while ago, but it felt like i first had to translate a lot of that, before i could then look at it and work it into the concepts i'm looking at. but thanks for Tom Campbell. i found his youtube channel and began watching some of his fireside chats and liked them. i like his take on things. i know he has his 3 T.O.E books out there, but i'm going to continue with the chats to get a sense for everything and then see if i want to get into the books. but thanks for the recommendation, he was hitting on some things in one of the chats that is already helping me.

Thus, the universe is 'pixelated' (Tom Campbell) at the level of Planck lenght and constantly renewed at the rate of Planck time.

it's funny, i experienced this once walking down ventura blvd a while back. i had run an exercise that i had been using at that time, placing my awareness on different objects as i walked. by the end of the walk, after i had held my awareness on three different things simultaneously, everything in front of my eyes - just kind of shimmered. pixilated i sometimes called it. that's when i realized, "oh, this really is all just a dream." it was a great experience, and kind of sheered the bonds of 'reality' nicely for me. maybe i'll start calling it the Planck shimmer.

[michaelk]

Hi MichaelK, Hi All,

In regards to "energy", here's some interesting things that Seth had to say about it.


NotP, Ch 9, S787:

In the most basic of terms, almost incomprehensible in your vocabulary, energy is not divided. There can be no portions or parts of it, because it is not an entity like a pie, to be cut or divided.

In those terms, energy cannot be considered without bringing to the forefront questions concerning the nature of God or All That Is, for the terms are synonymous.





DE&VF1, Ch 1, S882:

Consciousness and matter and energy are one,...




In TES6, S250, Seth also talks about the "atom" and quasars. In that session he says the following:

Atoms do not create energy in a basic manner. They make energy usable within your system. Energy appears in your universe through the nucleus of the atom, but the nucleus is not the originator of the energy. It simply seems to be.

[... 1 paragraph ...]

Now, quasars are originators of energy. All energy ultimately returns to them also. They are not on the far limits of your universe. They are projections from another system into your universe. They appear to be where they are not.

thanks for these, jbseth - yeah, the first quote seems to indicate that energy is all that is. which is what i was leaning toward. i mean, everything is all that is, ultimately, but... it just seems like energy is everywhere, just ready for something to use it. it almost seeks out where it can be used. like seth's psychic patterns, that then creates matter.

what do you think?

[Tob]

Hi Sena, it sounds like you're answering your own questions about PMR with that last quote: "PMR is only one of many subsets" of NPMR, which is "more real than PMR." Am I understanding you right? Makes sense to me

Kyle, i think you are correct. Thanks for reading that carefully. More quotes from the book:

By design, little picture knowledge appears (from the view of PMR) to be deterministic — an erroneous conclusion based upon the success of science in discovering more and more of the space-time rule-set that defines our local PMR causality. However, there is more to the experience of PMR than the rule-set that defines the possible interactions within PMR. We need to account for the experiencer as well as the logical constraints of the experience. PMR is a virtual reality that is designed to produce a certain type of constrained experience for the benefit of interactive units of individuated consciousness. Consciousness awareness is the active element that experiences the opportunity to exercise its intent as it interacts with virtual mass, energy, time, and other consciousness units that also possess free will.

Wave particle duality, uncertainty principles, and the seemingly instantaneous communications between entangled pairs become simple to explain once you realize that PMR is a virtual reality created by a digital simulation implementing the space-time rule-set within TBC. Given a digital PMR simulation, which is stepped forward by time increments that appear infinitesimal to us, and a virtual reality that must obey only the rules driving its digital computation, these paradoxes disappear along with the illusion of absolute space. Once the limiting belief that all possible reality is exclusively defined by measurements within PMR is abandoned and the true nature of consciousness is grasped, the mysterious paradoxes of physics, philosophy, and metaphysics all melt away like ice cubes in the summer sun.

All that is needed to find solutions to the Big Questions of our time is a simple shift in perspective — a casting off of erroneous scientific, cultural, and religious belief inherited from those who were unable to answer the same questions. Isn't that how it always turns out? New paradigms deliver an expanded reality as we outgrow the old ones. The digital mountain raised up by the approaching information age has simply afforded us a better view at this time. Progress, like quality and ability, is developed through a bootstrapping process. Every new success is built on previous successes.

When you are in NPMR, it appears to be every bit as physical as PMR, but because it operates under a different set of rules, one interacts with it differently. The operational differences between PMR and NPMR simply represent the differences between their rule-sets and the unique causality that each rule-set imposes. Each particular reality dimension has evolved a rule-set to support its own use, function, and purpose. The space-time rule-set supports human function and purpose within OS.

There is no significant distinction between physical and nonphysical realities: Reality is reality. I employ that artificial distinction and terminology (PMR vs. NPMR) as a communications aid. To communicate with you effectively, I need to start (conceptually) from where you are (or think you are). The fact is that most of you are certain that you exist within a physical reality, hence that is the initial perspective we must take. The PMR-NPMR distinction within My Big TOE is used to help you conceptually sneak up on a bigger picture. We will continue to use the PMR-NPMR terminology, especially in the next section, because it greatly facilitates the grasping of inherently difficult Big Picture concepts — like thinking of an atom as a billiard ball with BBs zipping around it — patently incorrect, but useful at an elementary level.

Local reality is an experience of individuated mind interacting within the limitations of a given causality. If there are multiple minds interacting within a given local reality, there exists a shared common (public) experience we define as objective, as well as a personal experience that we define as subjective. The subjective and objective components of reality are both extremely significant — their purpose and function are simply different.

The larger reality is all consciousness (All That Is) evolving toward greater profitability, existing to improve itself through entropy reduction. Aware consciousness is created by the organization of a fundamental potential energy that we have (for reasons of conceptual familiarity) named Absolute Unbounded Oneness — the nature of this organization is digital. The larger reality is a huge interactive digital consciousness system; it is a consciousness-evolution fractal ecosystem that we have named AUM.

To summarize: Physical and nonphysical are relative to a point of view and therefore do not support a fundamental distinction. The mind-matter, normal-paranormal, physics-metaphysics, and science-philosophy dichotomies are likewise simply illusions of perspective created by a limited understanding that is exclusively focused within its own local reality. The experience of our physical matter reality is the result of a particular set of constraints (space-time rule-set) placed upon the interaction of individuated consciousness with other players, which include other sentient beings as well as the environment. Matter is a simulated menial effect that we, as mind, experience because it helps put us in a virtual environment that makes the evolution of our consciousness more efficient and effective.

Are we really saying that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was merely virtual reality?

Yes. As virtual or as real as buying a bottle of Coca Cola. Why should it be different?

[jbseth]

Hi michaelK, Hi All,

I think you're on the right track here, or perhaps I should say that I think that you and I are probably thinking along the same lines here.

I found some interesting comments from Seth having to do with energy in DEAVF1, Ch2, S884. In this session, Seth more or less says the following (see the spoiler below for more details).


One:
Energy and consciousness and matter are one.

Two:
Consciousness directs the transformation of energy into form and form into energy.

Three:
Energy contains certain characteristics. It is creative, innovative, original and  imaginative. It is also boundless, exuberant and it knows no limits.


I find this last comment about energy having these characteristics to be quite interesting. It would seem to me, that the only way that energy could have these characteristics was if it was conscious. Seth does say that energy and consciousness are one. He also implies that it is synonymous with All That Is.

So when I think about energy, I shouldn't think about it, like I typically do in everyday situations, as some inanimate potential force. Instead, I should think about it, in terms of what She here says about it, in terms of All That Is.

The universe consists of, and is filled with an awareized source of energy, that is All That Is.  


DEAVF1, Ch2, S884:

Sorry but you must log in to view spoiler contents.

-jbseth

[michaelk]

Hi michaelK, Hi All,

I think you're on the right track here, or perhaps I should say that I think that you and I are probably thinking along the same lines here.

I found some interesting comments from Seth having to do with energy in DEAVF1, Ch2, S884. In this session, Seth more or less says the following (see the spoiler below for more details).


One:
Energy and consciousness and matter are one.

Two:
Consciousness directs the transformation of energy into form and form into energy.

Three:
Energy contains certain characteristics. It is creative, innovative, original and  imaginative. It is also boundless, exuberant and it knows no limits.


I find this last comment about energy having these characteristics to be quite interesting. It would seem to me, that the only way that energy could have these characteristics was if it was conscious. Seth does say that energy and consciousness are one. He also implies that it is synonymous with All That Is.

So when I think about energy, I shouldn't think about it, like I typically do in everyday situations, as some inanimate potential force. Instead, I should think about it, in terms of what She here says about it, in terms of All That Is.

The universe consists of, and is filled with an awareized source of energy, that is All That Is.  


DEAVF1, Ch2, S884:

Sorry but you must log in to view spoiler contents.

-jbseth

wow - this really encapsulates it, doesn't? thanks so much for this, jbseth.

for your item two, it almost seems like consciousness directs the transformation of energy into form, simply by creating/launching those (psychic) patterns of seth's? which is what people talk about, right? a belief would be a pattern launched. an expectation also. anything you continually think about.

your item three, though - that's just wonderful. it's been so long that i've read that, that... i've integrated all that i've read over the years, in my own way, but then i forget the specifics. this is just such a great reminder.

again, many thanks.

i've printed this bit up, ready to be read with cappuccino tomorrow morning. let it bang around in my brain and see what comes of it.