Eherm

Whoops sorry that was the wrong slide

'We' could well be making up this conscious realty as we go along.... So it's going to be a matter of speculation.

I speculate that when life as we know it was tiny, tiny, ickle, wickle , lickle bits of bacterium, or even smaller than ickle, wickle, lickle bits of bacterium living in a slurp, the slurp was the universal consciousness, a shared agreement, nothing existed outside of the slurp.
Only when the residence of the slurp did examine the surface of the slurp, they then did perceive an edge, the edge of the slurp represents something that much later was known as the sky.

Now then.... further specualtion ('now then' btw I'm not doing Jimmy Savile impersonations)

So there was a time in human history when it was proposed that the Sun did orbit the Earth, this was later proven to be wrong and the Earth orbits the Sun.

I'm unsure if it's grammatically correct to use Capital letters and the start of words for stars or planets. Sun sun... Earth earth?

Anyhow back to the speculation...I propose that the Earth was orbited by the Sun at the time of that proposition, and it's only when an explorer finds another boundary that the perceived boundary is gone (sub-atomic particles do randomly appear disappear).
So all memory of the previous proposal has gone, it is only now recalled into memory as a mistake.
The new proposal that the Eearth does orbit the Ssun is the present mantra of human consciousness.

it's a bit like when in far far away history this planet was flat, and it's only after experiments were conducted to propose otherwise that the planet then was perceived as round, of course 'we' can't just make this happen, for it to happen, an explorer has to produce enough evidence to shatter the previous illusion that then is morphed into the new illusion, and again the previous illusion is only recalled as a memory of being wrong.

So in a nutshell, the perception that ended at the end of a slurp now ends at the edge of what we now call consciousness, people who go beyond what is perceived searching for their spirit or upper awareness by astral projection etc... Are kidding themselves, because they are peering beyond a boundary that is yet to exist, and might never exist.
It's a bit like perceptual blindness, the new has to replace the old, so the old no longer exists, however it did exist, it was true, there is always room for error, this means that if an explorer is cunning enough with experiments the new could be shown as wrong, then that no longer exists as it's been replaced by the new new.
We can't see the old new anymore because it vanishes when replaced by the new new, it's a bit like putting a jelly fish into a jelly fish shaped container, the container would be any shape and so could the jelly fish, it might not fill every compartment of the jelly fish shaped container at the same time, an explorer who could see the jelly fish was ready to move. could tap the container with his/her finger causing the jelly fish to move, then next time we look it's there, not back there, see you were all wrong, that jelly fish was not where you thought it was.

It depends on your perspective.
The sun does move, it orbits the centre of the milky way which itself moves through the universe.
So in actual fact we move in a spiral pattern if you were to look at it in 3D.

Blue_Tackler wrote:
And you'd be quite correct, as were our ancestors before us (or after us, or currently...depending on your pov).

It's entirely subjective, all of it. Fun, isn't it?

2 things can only be 'still' in relation to each other, as andy says there is no way of possibly knowing/asserting that any point is 'still'.

Ok let's look at it in a slight of quantum.
A quantum event occurs, all possibilities do occur, only one is experienced (In any one reality) (as far as we know but some realities may experience more than one).
So let's suppose all realities can only perceive an outcome, the other outcomes are not perceived in it.

So, when an explorer uses experiments to discover an outcome (Schrödinger's cat) the cat is not dead or alive, it's dead and alive, the observers outcome will be apparent when the box is opened.

So with a solar system we have the same paradox, when an explorer experiments with the boundaries of perception both outcomes The sun orbits the earth Vs the earth orbits the sun are true, though only one outcome can be perceived.

So, once the perception has been chosen, or altered given new experiments a quantum event is likely, when the new perception is born the old must die, be forgotten, it must be only remembered as something that 'we' wrongly believed to be true, we were led by naivety.

We never think that the old ways were true and that they are now only false because of a quantum event that has altered the perception of the obserever(s).

This means that each stage of evolution was true, when the perception of the life of the slurp beings was slurp, then that's as big as the universe was, it was a slurp pond, now the slurp still exists and we walk over it whilst out walking in the countryside perhaps, now it's just an obstacle to avoid, life on earth will never admit that that slurp was once our universe.

Ab Origine wrote: Yes, even Einstein told us that....'' In the final weeks of his life, when Einstein learned of the death of his old physicist friend Michele Besso, he wrote the Besso family: “He has departed from this strange world a little ahead of me. That means nothing. For us believing physicists, the distinction between past, present and future is only a stubborn illusion.”

I believe it follows the same for your own 'internal' comprehension too. I've absolutely no 'scientific evidence'...just little bits and pieces I'm beginning to notice along the way.

If a belief is something you inherit from someone else, a school, or a religious philosophy...that is the tint through which 'you' will perceive the world around you.

Until such a time as 'you' decide not to, that is.

After years of asking why the fuck I came, I think I'm beginning to get it now...

My life has led me to the point where my current perception is that we do literally create reality in the moment. Individually and collectively. Consciousness selects that which it needs from the infinite energy of the vacuum, in order to build the 'reality' we/it is exploring.

That dead American comedian got it pretty good to my mind.

knobmeup wrote:
I knew it wasn't just your devastating good looks I liked about you...

Though...you do look bang-tidy in a tight frock.

This is why I have no truck with silly mathematical string based theories of 11 dimensions of relative yoghurt weaving Abs.

Creation, is observably simple. Water flows the easiest route down. Flowers are built according to a beautifully simple pattern. Air trapped in a liquid will try to form a sphere, which is the simplest shape it could form.

Any 'theory' as to how it works would ofc have to embrace/be that simplicity. The universe we experience and are part of does not want to do too much work, the lazy bastard

The simplest 'theory' is as the OP, we are making it up as we go along. We are experiencing and imprinting, wonderful, individual pictures in the limitless range of possibility. The thing we call the moment is all that ever was or will be in this universe feeding from and to the vacuum in equilibrium. Everything and nothing.

I think you just made me orgasm. I'll go check.

EDIT: Yep..ya did. Cheers.

I'm sure I saw that the topic of schools was raised....
Well thank you because, It brings me on quite nicely to a supplementary point

I've heard some speakers even the dastardly Mr icke mention how schools are holding pens for children and processing plants for their inductions into general society and it's associated hidden matrix.

I don't really know why I'm laughing because to some extent I agree, it's just that the point goes much deeper than they think.
We need to start about here. Exchanging symbols, there are very few scientists/explorers etc... that actually live a life and learn, the rest of us pass around symbolic representations of their experiences that have been kindly edited for the consumption of our minds.

I hope I'm not going to far with this, often this topic brings me vague expressions.

Anyhow, what the general public get is symbolic representations of events, they then think they know something, how can they?
How can someone really know something without experiencing it?
What they/we know is the symbols.

Ok it gets more now.

It's a type of magic, imaging your mind as a blank page, now, when you have learned the alphabet, reading, writing mathematics, and pictorial meanings, such as then you are now equipped to be dealt the magic.

So you get some information, information that you know not of, nothing, zero, zilch, so when you see the symbols, these symbols are absorbed into the mind, from viewing these symbols an illusion is conjured in the mind, your mind is tricked into thinking it knows an experience,.
What it really knows is a shadow of the experience that has self developed into a story.

In my opinion an education would be more like this, a pupil would go with a tutor and try an experience, after the experience has been tried out once or several times, depending on the requirement then the pupil would take notes with encouragement from the tutor to describe, how they felt, how they feel it went, what they learned, everything about the experience that they could think of to note, they ought to note.
Then later when they needed to reflect on this experience they would be able to see their own symbols that they had arranged that would be linked to real memories in their minds.

When it comes to matters of history the pupil will need to be exposed to conflicting views so that no particular perception is adopted as a knowledge, and the outcome would be 'I don't know but these are the accounts of reference that are available to access.

I have no idea what really happened but here are accounts of other people, none of which I need to believe.
All I know is how it made me feel when I was exposed to these accounts but my feelings are only a manifestation of how I felt absorbing these accounts.

So basically someone can learn the accounts proposed but will never learn anything else about the experiences beyond the accounts but the illusion is that they do....
Because people falsely absorb the account(s) of others and build an imaginary scenario in their heads as if they now know what happened as if they were there and it was their own accounts of events.

So to conclude this strange episode I'd say that I learned more about my school dinners than my 'education' because at least begrudgingly I ate them so knew what they tasted like.
Imagine if school dinners was just a book about school dinners so you just read about them

You've a fair point, I reckon. Were we teach children some discernment and investigative skills (be that in a 'school' or elsewhere) we could probably just wind them up and let them loose in a library (if such a thing still exists near you) to complete their education.

At the risk of joining you on the step, blue...
Great post

I agree that what we call education is not fit for purpose.
I have a passing interest in physics. I have never worked in a lab or met a Higgs Boson. My interest in physics is more of a practical, observational and experiential nature than one I get from text books. I do like to read some 'scientific' work but that's probably due to my passing interest in the psychology of the mind prison

Anyway, I totally agree that a real education would be an experiential one rather than the largely second/third/fourth...hand one which we employ today.

Ab Origine wrote:
An education should include farming including livestock and butchery, fishing, survival, swimming, and general skills for life, imo it's pointless anyone discussing the pros & cons of industrial farming when they are incapable of preparing a beast themselves.
I would like to see schools as farms where the beasts are treated with the upmost respect until the time of their slaughter.

I'd like to see schools teach pupils about rights, about how standing up for ones own human rights could actually be effecting the rights of another.

All we hear presently is my rights my rights my rights, not many people consider how them having their rights can effect other people in other ways.

So why are students who will likely never use higher mathematics staring out the window bored shitless when there are far more important things to be learned than the square route of a box of cornflakes

Whilst not necessarily having the same list of skills as your good self that I'd like to see in schools, I too would like to see education being about living life rather than this abstract, useless crap that will never be needed again once the exam is done.

You can't consider the subject in isolation however. It must be viewed in relationship to things like, economics, society 'values' and ideologies.
There's no such thing as an isolated system
These things are interdependent and have led us to this state of play whereby humanity is probably more fragile than it ever has been before.

Blue_Tackler wrote:

Have you heard of John Taylor Gatto, tackler?

If you haven't, I think you'd like him alot. He's a remarkable man. I believe there's stuff floating around here in relation to him but if he's new to you, get yourself a copy of his book 'Dumbing Us Down'.

psketti wrote:


Ok I'll keep an eye out thanks for the tip.

knobmeup wrote:
Well the reason that I wanted to insert this bit about education into the thread is because it appears to cause a fix to a perception, ok we're all fixed already, I mean its a reinforcement the 100th monkey effect etc....

I want to move slightly away from education firstly to look at the myth of the role of the left right brain function, it's not true that the left does this and the right that, they both do both but perceive it differently but both sides of the brain are in use during tasks, it's just they have a focus range to synchronise.

I think it best explained here


I don't think a person can function as someone who can process reality until they understand at least the concept of how a brain works.

I've always told my kids that whatever they learn at school only shows they can......not do.
One has finally graduated last year...the next one this year....my eldest said..."at least I've got the useless bit of paper I'm going to be paying for most of the rest of my adult life".
However, she has had the argument with her boyfriend about getting a job in teaching. In Gloucestershire, you now have to get your teaching qualification by getting a school placement....you can't get your PGCE through a university. This situation came about while she was doing her degree....the irony is...it was well known as a teacher training college when I was there. Anyhow...he was going on at her about getting a teaching placement in a primary school.....to which she responded with "I didn't spend 3 years at Uni and get myself up to my eye balls in debt to get a degree in English literature to teach 5 year olds how to spell c a t!" Bless her!