Notice of new site address .

If you will, visit my new site that continues with the same type of information and listings as on this site.

(Click here)

Thursday, January 25, 2007

# 15 Random Reality and Psychic Reality

This was just found. It is a hard read, and some what matches along with what was covered in post # 13. These two posts, #13, and this one, fit in beautifully with the Seth material, written by Jane Roberts. Notice that I didnt say " ahaa, now I understand it all", but "some" loose ends were tied together. Bit by bit, and still way over my head at this point, perhaps one day, I'll intuit it into a cohesive understanding. Anyway these scientists are first now, coming up with what Seth was explaining, about reality, some 25 years ago.
Random Reality

Space and the material world could be created out of nothing but noise. That's the startling conclusion of a new theory that attempts to explain the stuff of reality.
If you could lift a corner of the veil that shrouds reality, what would you see beneath? Nothing but randomness, say two Australian physicists. According to Reginald Cahill and Christopher Klinger of Flinders University in Adelaide, space and time and all the objects around us are no more than the froth on a deep sea of randomness.
Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised that randomness is a part of the Universe. After all, physicists tell us that empty space is a swirling chaos of virtual particles. And randomness comes into play in quantum theory -- when a particle such as an electron is observed, its properties are randomly selected from a set of alternatives predicted by the equations.
But Cahill and Klinger believe that this hints at a much deeper randomness. "Far from being merely associated with quantum measurements, this randomness is at the very heart of reality," says Cahill. If they are right, they have created the most fundamental of all physical theories, and its implications are staggering. "Randomness generates everything," says Cahill. "It even creates the sensation of the 'present', which is so conspicuously absent from today's physics."
Their evidence comes from a surprising quarter -- pure mathematics. In 1930, the Austrian-born logician Kurt G -- del stunned the mathematical world with the publication of his incompleteness theorem. It applied to formal systems -- sets of assumptions and the statements that can be deduced from those assumptions by the rules of logic. For example, the Greeks developed their geometry using a few axioms, such as the idea that there is only one straight line through any pair of points. It seemed that a clever enough mathematician could prove any theorem true or false by reasoning from axioms.
But G -- del proved that, for most sets of axioms, there are true theorems that cannot be deduced. In other words, most mathematical truths can never be proved.
This bombshell could easily have sent shock waves far beyond mathematics. Physics, after all, is couched in the language of maths, so G -- del's theorem might seem to imply that it is impossible to write down a complete mathematical description of the Universe from which all physical truths can be deduced. Physicists have largely ignored G -- del's result, however. "The main reason was that the result was so abstract it did not appear to connect directly with physics," says Cahill.
But then, in the 1980s, Gregory Chaitin of IBM's Thomas J. Watson Research Center in Yorktown Heights, New York, extended G -- del's work, and made a suggestive analogy. He called G -- del's unprovable truths random truths. What does that mean? Mathematicians define a random number as one that is incompressible. In other words, it cannot be generated by an algorithm -- a set of instructions or rules such as a computer program -- that is shorter than the number. Chaitin defined random truths as ones that cannot be derived from the axioms of a given formal system. A random truth has no explanation, it just is.
Chaitin showed that a vast ocean of such truths surrounds the island of provable theorems. Any one of them might be stumbled on by accident -- an equation might be accidentally discovered to have some property that cannot be derived from the axioms -- but none of them can be proved. The chilling conclusion, wrote Chaitin in New Scientist, is that randomness is at the very heart of pure mathematics (24 March 1990, p 44).
To prove his theorem, G -- del had concocted a statement that asserted that it was not itself provable. So G -- del's and Chaitin's results apply to any formal system that is powerful enough to make statements about itself.
"This is where physics comes in," says Cahill. "The Universe is rich enough to be self-referencing -- for instance, I'm aware of myself." This suggests that most of the everyday truths of physical reality, like most mathematical truths, have no explanation. According to Cahill and Klinger, that must be because reality is based on randomness. They believe randomness is more fundamental than physical objects.
At the core of conventional physics is the idea that there are "objects" -- things that are real, even if they don't interact with other things. Before writing down equations to describe how electrons, magnetic fields, space and so on work, physicists start by assuming that such things exist. It would be far more satisfying to do away with this layer of assumption.
This was recognized in the 17th century by the German mathematician Gottfried Leibniz. Leibniz believed that reality was built from things he called monads, which owed their existence solely to their relations with each other. This picture languished in the backwaters of science because it was hugely difficult to turn into a recipe for calculating things, unlike Newton's mechanics.
But Cahill and Klinger have found a way to do it. Like Leibniz's monads, their "pseudo-objects" have no intrinsic existence -- they are defined only by how strongly they connect with each other, and ultimately they disappear from the model. They are mere scaffolding.
The recipe is simple: take some pseudo-objects, add a little randomness and let the whole mix evolve inside a computer. With pseudo-objects numbered 1, 2, 3, and so on, you can define some numbers to represent the strength of the connection between each pair of pseudo-objects: B12 is the strength of the connection between 1 and 2; B13 the connection between 1 and 3; and so on. They form a two-dimensional grid of numbers -- a matrix.
The physicists start by filling their matrix with numbers that are very close to zero. Then they run it repeatedly through a matrix equation which adds random noise and a second, non-linear term involving the inverse of the original matrix. The randomness means that most truths or predictions of this model have no cause -- the physical version of Chaitin's mathematical result. This matrix equation is largely the child of educated guesswork, but there are good precedents for that. In 1932, for example, Paul Dirac guessed at a matrix equation for how electrons behave, and ended up predicting the existence of antimatter.
When the matrix goes through the wringer again and again, most of the elements remain close to zero, but some numbers suddenly become large. "Structures start forming," says Cahill. This is no coincidence, as they chose the second term in the equation because they knew it would lead to something like this. After all, there is structure in the Universe that has to be explained.
The structures can be seen by marking dots on a piece of paper to represent the pseudo-objects 1, 2, 3, and so on. It doesn't matter how they are arranged. If B23 is large, draw a line between 2 and 3; if B19 is large, draw one between 1 and 9. What results are "trees" of strong connections, and a lot of much weaker links. And as you keep running the equation, smaller trees start to connect to others. The network grows.
The trees branch randomly, but Cahill and Klinger have found that they have a remarkable property. If you take one pseudo-object and count its nearest neighbors in the tree, second nearest neighbors, and so on, the numbers go up in proportion to the square of the number of steps away (click on thumbnail graphic below). This is exactly what you would get for points arranged uniformly throughout three-dimensional space. So something like our space assembles itself out of complete randomness. "It's downright creepy," says Cahill. Cahill and Klinger call the trees "gebits", because they act like bits of geometry. Tree roots: pseudo-objects link up into random trees, which link into ever larger structures. The hierarchy of neighbors is just like that of points in 3D space
They haven't proved that this tangle of connections is like 3D space in every respect, but as they look closer at their model, other similarities with our Universe appear. The connections between pseudo-objects decay, but they are created faster than they decay. Eventually, the number of gebits increases exponentially. So space, in Cahill and Klinger's model, expands and accelerates -- just as it does in our Universe, according to observations of the recession of distant supernovae. In other words, Cahill and Klinger think their model might explain the mysterious cosmic repulsion that is speeding up the Universe's expansion.
And this expanding space isn't empty. Topological defects turn up in the forest of connections -- pairs of gebits that are far apart by most routes, but have other shorter links. They are like snags in the fabric of space. Cahill and Klinger believe that these defects are the stuff we are made of, as described by the wave functions of quantum theory, because they have a special property shared by quantum entities: nonlocality. In quantum theory, the properties of two particles can be correlated, or "entangled", even when they are so far apart that no signal can pass between them. "This ghostly long-range connectivity is apparently outside of space," says Cahill. But in Cahill and Klinger's model of reality, there are some connections that act like wormholes to connect far-flung topological defects.
Even the mysterious phenomenon of quantum measurement can be seen in the model. In observing a quantum system any detector ought to become entangled with the system in a joint quantum state. We would see weird quantum superpositions like Schr -- dinger's alive-and-dead cat. But we don't.
How does the quantum state "collapse" to a simple classical one? In Cahill and Klinger's model, the nonlocal entanglements disappear after many iterations of the matrix equation. That is, ordinary 3D space reasserts itself after some time, and the ghostly connection between measuring device and system is severed.
This model could also explain our individual experience of a present moment. According to Einstein's theory of relativity, all of space-time is laid out like a four-dimensional map, with no special "present" picked out for us to feel. "Einstein thought an explanation of the present was beyond theoretical physics," says Cahill. But in the gebit picture, the future is not predetermined. You never know what it will bring, because it is dependent on randomness. "The present is therefore real and distinct from an imagined future and a recorded past," says Cahill.
Sand castles
But why can't we detect this random dance of the pseudo-objects? "Somehow, in the process of generating reality, the pseudo-objects must become hidden from view," says Cahill. To simulate this, the two physicists exploited a phenomenon called self-organised criticality.
Self-organised criticality occurs in a wide range of systems such as growing sand piles. Quite spontaneously, these systems reach a critical state. If you drop sand grains one by one onto a sand pile, for instance, they build up and up into a cone until avalanches start to happen. The slope of the side of the cone settles down to a critical value, at which it undergoes small avalanches and big avalanches and all avalanches at all scales in between. This behavior is independent of the size and shape of the sand grains, and in general it is impossible to deduce anything about the building blocks of a self-organised critical system from its behavior In other words, the scale and timing of avalanches doesn't depend on the size or shape of the sand grains.
"This is exactly what we need," says Cahill. "If our system self-organises to a state of criticality, we can construct reality from pseudo-objects and simultaneously hide them from view." The dimensionality of space doesn't depend on the properties of the pseudo-objects and their connections. All we can measure is what emerges, and even though gebits are continually being created and destroyed, what emerges is smooth 3D space. Creating reality in this way is like pulling yourself up by your bootstraps, throwing away the bootstraps and still managing to stay suspended in mid-air.
This overcomes a problem with the conventional picture of reality. Even if we discover the laws of physics, we are still left with the question: where do they come from? And where do the laws that explain where they come from come from? Unless there is a level of laws that explain themselves, or turn out to be the only mathematically consistent set -- as Steven Weinberg of the University of Texas at Austin believes -- we are left with an infinite regression. "But it ceases to be a problem if self-organised criticality hides the lowest layer of reality," says Cahill. "The start-up pseudo-objects can be viewed as nothing more than a bundle of weakly linked pseudo-objects, and so on ad infinitum. But no experiment will be able to probe this structure, so we have covered our tracks completely."
Other physicists are impressed by Cahill and Klinger's claims. "I have never heard of anyone working on such a fundamental level as this," says Roy Frieden of the University of Arizona in Tucson. "I agree with the basic premise that 'everything' is ultimately random, but am still sceptical of the details." He would like to see more emerge from the model before committing himself. "It would be much more convincing if Cahill and Klinger could show something physical -- that is, some physical law -- emerging from this," says Frieden. "For example, if this is to be a model of space, I would expect something like Einstein's field equation for local space curvatures emerging. Now that would be something."
"It sounds rather far-out," says John Baez of the University of California at Riverside. "I would be amazed -- though pleased -- if they could actually do what you say they claim to."
"I've seen several physics papers like this that try to get space-time or even the laws of physics to emerge from random structures at a lower level," says Chaitin. "They're interesting efforts, and show how deeply ingrained the statistical point of view is in physics, but they are difficult, path-breaking and highly tentative efforts far removed from the mainstream of contemporary physics."
What next? Cahill and Klinger hope to find that everything -- matter and the laws of physics -- emerges spontaneously from the interlinking of gebits. Then we would know for sure that reality is based on randomness. It's a remarkable ambition, but they have already come a long way. They have created a picture of reality without objects and shown that it can emerge solely out of the connections of pseudo-objects. They have shown that space can arise out of randomness. And, what's more, a kind of space that allows both ordinary geometry and the non-locality of quantum phenomena -- two aspects of reality which, until now, have appeared incompatible.
Perhaps what is most impressive, though, is that Cahill and Klinger are the first to create a picture of reality that takes into account the fundamental limitations of logic discovered by G -- del and Chaitin. In the words of Cahill: "It is the logic of the limitations of logic that is ultimately responsible for generating this new physics, which appears to be predicting something very much like our reality."
New Scientist magazine, 26 February 2000

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

# 14 The Day "The Talker" Was Born -Time Capsule

The Day "The Talker" Was Born Time Capsule
This is a fascinating site, ( at bottom ) to see what was going on, while mom and pop were getting their first glimpse, of the new "kid". Things like the current price for some food items and of course gasoline. Songs of the day, who was president,and little goodies like that. Give it a try, for your birth date.
Now for those of you who are wondering,
"Who and what is that Talker guy? "
Well now, I'm a Moonchild sign, also known as Cancer. I carry traits of both the Gemni and Leo signs. ( one rarely hears of cusp influences ) A water sign and ruled by the Moon. Water sign represents anything that is, fluid, emotional and psychic. Due to influences of the moon, a Moonchild is changeable, subject to moods, impressions and occult forces. This sign tends toward psychic faculties that allow them to examine an undertaking in their mind. There is a tendency to be lethargic, and one can be quite moody (a pain in the ....) and melancholic at times. Males of this sign are not always easy to live with.( wife knows this, but I hope she never sees this admission ) Characteristic of this water sign, can be, dark and gloomy one moment, bright and sunny the next. ( a jerk or nice guy ) Generally speaking, natives of this sign are interested in all phases of the occult and many , are truly, psychic, and often become mediums, prophets or clairvoyants.To ensure good health, a Moonchild needs to learn control of emotions and follow proper dietary rules. When some Gemni traits mix-in with my Moonchild traits , there can be, or show traits of, love to acquire knowledge, be superficial, let diversified interests impair a relationship, ( wish some of the musical traits had kicked in ) adept at making gadgets, enjoys reading, and here another tendency towards moods, and, another tendency toward intuition, When the Leo traits blend in, I get into some of Leos' fire areas,that I'd rather not have. Don't misunderstand me here, both Gemni and Leo signs, have many traits, I would just love to have, but evade me. When I start tripping over the heavy negative energies, my sign and mood mix can give, I find a quite place and do some EFT sessions (mentioned elsewhere), that salvage the moment. Of course I "cherry" picked in the above write-up, Didn't want to highlight all my faults.

Sunday, June 27, 1926
Top News Headlines This Week:
Jun 29 - Carter Woodson wins Springarn Medal for research of Black history
Jul 1 - Canada restores gold standard
Jul 2 - US Army Air Corps created; Distinguish Flying Cross authorized
Jul 4 - Baronie soccer team forms in Breda Neth
Jul 4 - NSDAP-party forms in Weimar
Jul 9 - Chiang Kai-shek appointed to national-revolutionary supreme commander
Top Songs for 1926
Play Gypsy by Harry B. Smith
Because I Love You by Irving Berlin
Desert Song by Otto Harbach
When Day Is Done by B.G. DeSylva
Animal Crackers by Fred Rich
Bye Bye Blackbird by Mort Dixon
Cross Your Heart by B.G. DeSylva
Say It Again by Harry Richman
US President Calvin Coolidge
US Vice President Charles G. Dawes
1926 Prices
Avg Income:$1,427/yr
DOW Avg:157
People born on June 27,
1913 - Willie Mosconi world champion pool player (1941-57)
1927 - Bob Keeshan aka Capt Kangaroo/Clarabelle (Good Morning Captain)1880 - Helen Keller blind-deaf author/lecturer had more sense than many
Top Books in 1926
Religion and the Rise of Capitalism by R. H. Tawney
The Sun Also Rises by Ernest Hemingway
Autobiographies by W. B. Yeats
Shen of the Sea by Arthur Bowie
Chrismancopyright 1997-2007 dMarie Direct Inc

Saturday, January 20, 2007

# 13 Psychic Activity and What The Bleep Do We Know!

Well now, my Babbler has been prowling into subject rooms of my mind, bringing up what I call "loose straws". Things that did not fit into any coherent pattern. My Babbler has an insatiable desire to resolve the unresolvable litter of data that begs coherency, within my thought processes. Things that keeps slipping my thought processes, into a "Sisyphus" state, when pondering specific subjects. Much to my chagrin, the little snot, brought up "quantum mechanics". I really didn't want to wrestle with this one again, but am going to see where it takes me. Perhaps some semblance of clarity will set in, that may make sense to me, but to no others. I've often, "puzzled", with my minuscule knowledge of quantum mechanics, along with the leading scientists in the world, about it. Now, by no means am I a scientist, nor will I actually solve the puzzle, these scientists came up with. Now, I'm going to skip a lot of details, and get right to the question that they could not answer. Namely, "how can something, come from nowhere, appear, and then disappear into no-place ". When I first came across that data, it really got my attention. It still does, and I wanted to keep it buried, but alas, Babbler is serving it up again. I was somewhat annoyed and walked away to complete some household chores. While, so involved, some undulatory " feeling tones" came on in a nagging fashion, that didn't stop until I was back in my den. As I sat in my swivel chair and gazing at the mess around me, I swear, that a book's title was smiling at me. So I picked up the book, and you know what happened next don't you, it opened to a page containing a note placed there almost a year ago. Wow, talk about coincidence and ah-Ha's. I'll just read the paragraph that "my thumb, just happened to be pointing at", "distinguished people in their fields--in psychology, cognitive neuroscience, basic neurosciences, physics... who privately are very, very interested in... psychic phenomenon." So there was my ah Ha, and what my "Babbler" was prompting me to talk on. So now, let's see what comes out!
Apparently all the prior posts, asking "am I psychic, are you psychic, and words about psychic activity and psychic phenomenon, reminded my "Babbler" about the above quote, read almost a year ago. Another coincidence! Wow, fantastic. Now, I'm hard pressed to give a coherent answer here, but it appears that some part of the "feeling tones" I've talked about, can actually come from an unknown source, and location. Now, I can't prove it, but I do believe, that this unknown source and location, derives from the "Creator of All", that I call "God". Thinking on psychic activity and psychic phenomenon, from this viewpoint, lends credence somewhat, at least to me, on how psychic activity can take place. You are wondering which book it was, you know I wouldn't leave you in a lurch. "What The Bleep Do We Know", is the title, and in the Amazon search box, enter the numbers-- 0 7 5 7 3 0 3 3 4 X .

Wednesday, January 17, 2007

# 12 Psychic Lull Day

I was experiencing a "lull" day. So I took advantage of it, and went surfing on the Internet. Now you "psychically" knew, due to the nature of this blog, "what" I was going to be clicking on didn't you! ( LOL )
Naturally you "guessed", "psychic phenomena", and in all its glory, there they were, loaded with tons of "pro and con" postings. Asking, am I psychic, are you psychic, prove it, prove that you are a psychic, seems to be the theme of the day. Were many interesting sites. Quite obvious, on many of the sites though , was the "zero" in the comments section. It appears that many are interested in "psychic phenomenon", and being psychic, write about it, but, for what ever the reason, the readers of these psychic posts, hesitate to make a comment. I realize of course that leaving a comment is no longer a simple process.
What with nasty spammers being so prevalent, safety measures had to be taken. So entered the the added step, verification process, so, be it.
I did leave comments on a number of blogs. What the heck, these psychics, put it in a lot of effort sharing their knowledge with us. Why not a simple "hey a great job", or "thank you", to encourage the blogs continuance. Many of the psychic sites I visited were beautifully set up, and detailed psychic processes in great detail. Nicely covered, were the various methods of a psychic reading. Many psychic sites included the usage of what I call "tools of the trade." Tools like, the crystal ball, tarot cards, fragrances, tea leave reading and other items. But even an ordinary deck of playing cards, can be used as a psychic tool. Psychic tools can range from, highly sophisticated, to utter simplicity. It's rare, that I find, any explanation, of why these "psychic tools" are used. Basically, as I see it, they are used to achieve a "fine tuned" focus of "feeling tones".
A simile here, would be like, getting a flat tire, on your automobile while driving. Nothing psychic here, but definitely a change of focus. What changed the "feeling tone" of your original "focus"? It was the thump thump thump, of the flat tire. That got your attention. Your original thought pattern, while driving, was interrupted. What might your next thoughts, have been! Was it still on the music you were listening to, while driving, or was it on the car-jack you're going to have to use. Car-jack, takes first place, right ! Another change of focus takes place. Need a safe place to pull the car over to, while doing a tire change. Another rapid change of focus takes place, watch for moving traffic. Move out of the automobile, after shutting off the engine and removing the key. Insert the key to open the trunk. Many thoughts now enter your mind, rapidly changing your focus into various channels. Question like "do I have a jack", "will the jack work", "Hope nobody bangs into me while I'm changing the tire". All of this takes place quite rapidly and without any great effort on your part.
So, what did we have going here, a great psychic at work! There was a rapid changing of focus, until you got the desired results. Honing in on your feeling tones for psychic activity is much the same process. For the beginner, and perhaps, even for the more experienced psychic, there is a bit of a problem involved. Of all the psychic thoughts coming in, which is the most legitimate one to follow-through on.
Easy! Not necessarily, but definitely doable. In real estate, the prime words are "location, location, location". In learning any sport or skill, the prime words are "practice, practice, practice". From my point of view, the same would apply, in developing ones psychic abilities. Am I psychic, yes. Are you psychic, Yes. Now I can't prove it one way or the other, nor am I, even, going to try. But I do believe we all function at a psychic level, all the time. So why can things get to be, so messed up, at times? We just have not learned, to fully trust, and properly act upon our psychic intuition.

Saturday, January 13, 2007

# 11 My Book Sources For Psychic and Health Reading

My book reading is quite varied. Do some what go with the mind window, I'm looking through, for a given interest cycle.There is a huge amount of rehashed material published, that gives me pause. So I try to get as far back as possible, to an original version of what I'm researching / looking for. Over the course of
years in doing so, have found certain sources that became a good starting point. Besides Amazon, I frequently use these:

Health Research Books goes back a long time with me, dating back to the original owners. They make copies of many titles, that are out of print, many of which I have. Worth your while to check them out. The A.R.E. , is also an old time source, and is set up around Edgar Cayce's material. You will find a title at Woodland Publishing, called "The Ultimate Healing System" by Donald Lepore, a worthwhile addition to have.The books that Redwing Book Company lists, will blow you away with the scope of listings there. Was the only source for some titles I needed.

An added bonus here from J.J..
My above listings were from much earlier days.

Thursday, January 4, 2007

# 10 I Hear You Talking, But What Are You Saying!

Thanks KF. Like I had mentioned, getting comments from readers, helps me to readily recall events long, forgotten. You asked the question "I can't distinguish between my "ego" and the "voice",and perhaps you can comment on that at some point." It's an interesting question, and I have also wrestled with it.
Let me mention here, that " The Art of True Healing" book, is only a door opener into psychic activity. It may or may not be all one needs for a full-blown, WOW, I can do this, and not have to pay someone else to do it". Did mention elsewhere "different strokes for different folks".
Same applies with this re learning process.
With a tad of only "paying attention.", some what , the relearning process becomes, semi-automatic.
By actually and deliberately practicing, one finds that more and more " coincidences " (as nonbelievers call it) becomes more common".
Now for the "posed" question you asked. Depending on the specific event, that one's "babbler", is looking at, you/I, may not be able to tell " is this idle chatter or not." But there will be occasions when a (words do get in the way some times) more intense " Greater / clearer / clarity / seeing / feeling " accompanies the " feeling tone " that you would, without further questioning, just act upon. Yes, there will be flubs, misses, and a " not clear " event many times.
Again I mention, there are no flashing lights highlighting,
what you should " see or feel", nor is there, a beautiful voice, perfectly sounding out each word. I've been to psychic fairs, and it was quite an experience. After my first reading, I decided to use a few other psychics there, that were giving readings. All of the reading, were it seemed, what is called "cold readings". Some were better than others, but none could "see" the resolve to what was "posed" by me. In all fairness though, I did endeavor, holding the same "theme and feelings" for the various psychics I sat with. Each one came up with different " answers ", that led me to believe that " I could have done that ". Did that mean that the psychic was unreliable! No, not necessarily so. Assuming legitimacy, on their part, it probably meant only, that they were not able to hone in on the " time-frame involved."
(More on this later) Of course, at that time, I was very curious, and wondered " if you're a psychic, why can't you come up with an answer to what was "posed " ? These experiences took place many decades ago, when the word " psychic activity " was greatly misunderstood and always applied to someone else. So back to more research. Very interesting data began to surface.
Will endeavor to keep it simple and clear, something on the order of muddy clarity. (LOL). Keeping in mind, that psychic activity and healing are intimately entwined, will, help in understanding what I say next. Healing of one sort or another can be found in many ancient texts, but I don't recall any mention of psychic abilities in those texts. It may seem out of place here, but with some deep thought, think on this. In Matthew 16: 13, 15, the Bible mentions, Jesus asking "who do they say that the Son of man is?" And in Mark 8: 22, 25, one finds, that "Jesus, had to work harder", on his miracle and redo it. With all the questions, that it may raise, I ask " did Jesus have trouble in "fine-tuning ", his " feeling tones " in these events!" Jumping ahead to more recent times, and that actually involve " time ", some mind-boggling concepts came to light.
By reading books written by, Jane Roberts / Seth, what we call " time " is some what clarified, but still not, well understood. Coupled with the " time " event read, the Seth material, further explains a situation of " multiple realities ", that helped put the " time and events " into clearer perspective. Now the possibility, is there, to understanding, why a psychic might not be able to " hone " in on a closer " feeling tone " that could relate to a " posed " event. Simple, right!
I don't think so! Now we enter, what I will call, the twilight zone, of comprehension.
Here is where one can get mired in " wow " and really start thinking " that is crazy ", so it'll help if, you keep an open mind to " possible future probabilities".
Wait now, we've only entered " crazy ", the worst is yet to come.
Seth goes on to explain, that our individual " probable futures " ( notice the plural ) are not necessarily things or events that " will happen ", but things or events, that " could happen ". Now comes in, what, according to the Jane Roberts / Seth material ( and if true ) " Everything we think but don't act upon ", takes on the energy of that thought, and goes sailing, into an " alternate reality ", continuing " it's " life at the point, from, when it left you. Are you still with me! Just as difficult to comprehend, is that a group of scientists, stated, that we are all, " blinking on and off, all the time "! With that in mind, another question comes up, " where are we, when, we are not " in, the present blink! So where is this all going? If any of the above " could " apply, one could probably say, the psychic " tuned " into your " alternate reality ", that had nothing to do with your " current reality " and the " posed " theme, ( a total miss ) on what, you were trying to find out about.
Consider the times you may have thought or said something like this:
I'm just not myself today .....
I don't know why I said that ......
Why did I do that ....
I just drove 150 mile and have no awareness of how I got here .....
I felt like I was floating in space ......
I was jolted awake by what felt like a severe shock to my body ...
Can only ponder, which alternate reality, was kicking in or out at the time!
Maybe, somebody, more in the know, was telling us something with movies and stories like: " Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, Back To The Future, Star Trek, and What The Blank Do We Know ". And TV series like Medium, and Ghost Whisperer, and other programs of that nature. With a little training, one could probably do their "own" readings and be more accurate. Based on the law of averages, one could be correct 50% of the time.
This is so wild, but interesting!

Monday, January 1, 2007

# 9 How Do I Know If I'm Psychic!

Good question, but totally unnecessary. We all entered this physical world with psychic abilities. So what happened to all of these abilities? Well, they are still there, unrecognized of course, with only rare occasions of usage. Little things like knowing who is on the phone when it rings, finding a parking place in a busy area, having a sense of danger to one of your children, and other little events similar to these, indicates psychic activity. Coincidence, you say! Could be! But not really. The process of growing up, is where we start learning to diminish those psychic abilities. Now, I'm not able to prove what is said here, and I'm not going to try, but try this for "could it be true." One needs to relearn the process, not learn, but re-learn. Work with your "Babbler", or whatever you want to call it, in private, and pay attention to what takes place. Why in private! It's problematic enough even thinking about psychic ability, much less having someone seeing you and hearing you, doing your activation, relearning process. Of course, you'll experience, many awkward moments in doing so. Moments of "this is stupid" and other similar thoughts. That's okay, just ignore those thoughts, and learn to smile through it all.
I used to get so frustrated, when I would read, that this or that well-known psychic, was experiencing psychic phenomena, during their early childhood. Those little things, like seeing and talking to aunt Martha, who had passed away one year ago. Or speaking to their unseen playmates. Oh yes, I had a vivid imagination, at the age of 10 and up, and my playmates were people like "Mandrake, the Magician", "the Shadow", "Jack Armstrong", from the comics and listening to the radio. For me though, it's was mimicking their actions, as I don't recall seeing any one. Now, I'm not in any sense of the word, an accomplished psychic. But enough incidents have taken place, to thoroughly convince me, on what is taking place. I still fumble and at times question my sanity about those times, when that little "Voice" gives a response to a "posed" question. Nothing dramatic, no high blaring volume, just a "feeling tone voice" that still needs to be interpreted. Generally, the first impression is the valid one, if you endeavor to logically interpret that "feeling tone voice", you'll mess it up. Where do they come from, these "feeling tones voices", more important though, is "who" or "what" originated it, both the question, and what seems like the answer! So, from that perspective, one is only a step away, from being hauled away in a white restraining jacket.
Not a pleasant thought is it.
Notice also, that I have given my inner voice (at least one of them) (LOL) recognition by naming it "Babbler". Rather than having a wild uncontrolled "inner voice" I did, decades back, realize, the value of this ally inside me and learned to use it. It may seem, that I'm overly emphasizing the sanity aspect, but it is important to look at this scenario through the eyes of another person. What would you think about a person describing hearing "voices" in their head! Have had many occasions where I just had to smile, and laugh at what I was doing it times. Like, sitting or standing, eyes closed, making motions with my hands, somewhat like petting a cat or a dog, while moving my lips in a silent prayer.
(I'm even chuckling now, doing this write-up)
Haven't tried it yet, but will try a search on the web looking for "silly feelings+ psychic+ learning" and see what comes up. All stories about psychics, seem to start, once they've achieved prominence. Maybe some of them experienced, some of the things I speak on here, but didn't want to talk or write about it. Oh well, like heard in a song a long time ago. "What a fool am I", I don't recall the name of the song though.
There were many books read that highly influenced me. One I have already mentioned "The Secret of The Ages", another is "The Art of True Healing" by Israel Regardie, this goes back to the late 1960s, at that time it was ISBN 0 900448 20 2, should check this out for you, but I'll leave that up to you. This particular book is a greatly simplified version, of what is a very complicated system, that was used in the "Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn". Many Eastern and European, secret and mystic societies used techniques, based upon what is called "The Tree of Life".
Some of these processes are a lifetime endeavor. There are many sub-features involved, where you will hear about "Inner Pillar", "Outer Pillar" and titles of that nature. Some very beautiful, and beneficial practices. In Regardie's book is described, what is called "The Middle Pillar", and you will find dozens of variances in books by other titles.
The how and what of it, in these other titles, is of course, greatly modified to suit the desires of those promoting these methods.I won't detail here, the ways Regardies book is to be used, get the book and read it.
Will say, though, it will lead you into trained creative imagination.
Amazon has the book listed, there is a link above.