The Quonset Hut

Quantum rules applied to the thought dimension.

Around a year ago FB discussed with me his idea that thought was a different dimension and the old cogs have been cogitating this interesting theory.

I have as a thought experiment realised that the "Is it a particle or is it a wave", and how can a particle appear to exist in more than one location at the same time.

Exchange "a Particle" for "True" and "wave" for "all probabilities".

I think FB was on to something, not quite sure what it means yet, but it does explain why apparently mutually exclusive truths can both co exist, but not with any stability in the same thought stream (individual).

Just a random observation.

Wags,
I am obviously lousy at communicating My thoughts?
As I have been trying for years to describe how thought is in concious fields.

Your 3D dimension physical is supplied by such from 4D.
You exist also in higher dimensions( and I have chatted to Myself in 5D)

My fingers are not moving, they are displacing relative to thoughts .
Kevin

kevin wrote:Wags,
I am obviously lousy at communicating My thoughts?
As I have been trying for years to describe how thought is in concious fields.

Your 3D dimension physical is supplied by such from 4D.
You exist also in higher dimensions( and I have chatted to Myself in 5D)

My fingers are not moving, they are displacing relative to thoughts .
Kevin

It does encompass time each thought stream (individual) does. It is equivalent to the possible paths taken by an electron in the light slit experiment.

Particles being carried on a wave and therefore the observer is only observing one or the other but not both?

Mikado

Wags,

Tiller elaborates on a similar idea with is psychoenergetic research...and he has some terrific graphics
http://www.tillerinstitute.com/

I think, Kevin, you have linked this before, but it is always good in almost any context.

rose

re-rose wrote:Wags,

Tiller elaborates on a similar idea with is psychoenergetic research...and he has some terrific graphics
http://www.tillerinstitute.com/

I think, Kevin, you have linked this before, but it is always good in almost any context.

rose

Yes most respected rose , I have.
I have also tried lousily to describe a base omni present substance for all of these dimensions to exist in the self same location.
It's not easy been inadequate in modern technology and such abilities, whilst been personally able to visualise such absolute magnificance.
Maybe there is another Me better adapted to current methods?, Me I simply crawled out of a hole in the ground, and thought ..WTF?
Kevin

kevin wrote:I have also tried lousily to describe a base omni present substance for all of these dimensions to exist in the self same location.
It's not easy been inadequate in modern technology and such abilities, whilst been personally able to visualise such absolute magnificance.
Maybe there is another Me better adapted to current methods?, Me I simply crawled out of a hole in the ground, and thought ..WTF?
Kevin

I've said it before...we must first teach the physicists to dowse.

And after THEY get through saying WTF, they will begin to develop the new language that bridges lines, geometries, particles, waves, "psychoenergetics" and the omnipresent "ether" for lack of a better word. Floundering is allowed until then.

rose

re-rose wrote:

kevin wrote:I have also tried lousily to describe a base omni present substance for all of these dimensions to exist in the self same location.
It's not easy been inadequate in modern technology and such abilities, whilst been personally able to visualise such absolute magnificance.
Maybe there is another Me better adapted to current methods?, Me I simply crawled out of a hole in the ground, and thought ..WTF?
Kevin

I've said it before...we must first teach the physicists to dowse.

And after THEY get through saying WTF, they will begin to develop the new language that bridges lines, geometries, particles, waves, "psychoenergetics" and the omnipresent "ether" for lack of a better word. Floundering is allowed until then.

rose

Yes , but a problem exists called EGO.
It resides in the thought field, and thinks it's correct.
BELIEVERS will kill to protect such.
Kevin

P.S,
No need for the modesty, You are most respected.
Kevin

There is logic to what you say Rose. I have said it before and will say it again....I would love to hook up kevin to a machine and figure it out and in doing so, we can establish the "dictionary" of terms that are specific to what it is. Using terms from other areas only help to confuse.

Mikado

Mikado14 wrote:There is logic to what you say Rose. I have said it before and will say it again....I would love to hook up kevin to a machine and figure it out and in doing so, we can establish the "dictionary" of terms that are specific to what it is. Using terms from other areas only help to confuse.

Mikado

I am already "hooked up to a machine" it's called a body.
The first time I held a three way coversation with Myself thrice, was very bizzare and comical.
My body was only intent on having itself back in it's recognisable form, whilst the middle Me was amused at this.
My higher dimension Me first off instructed the middle Me to repeat whatever I could, thus imprinting the information onto My middle Me's information field.Any machine will be made of and be subjected to this planets 3D physical body.
This is why nearly all scientists are basically correct in 3D.
To 4D the 3D is as if none existant.
To 3D the 4D is as if none existant.....except to buffy the vampire slayer.
I was getting used to 4D, and wasn't ready to meet 5D, it came as a shock, a most fabulous shock.
I haven't puzzled yet how to access 5D more readily, I was perfectly located where FOUR POINTS meet when I first encountered My 5D Me.
It's hard enough surviving in 3D without encountering more dimensions, and everyone in 3D considers such talk as that of someone who is bonkers
Kevin
Kevin