“A thing even Theosophers may not fully understand about Real Magic, as contrasted with the fairy-tale-grade magic of literature and movies, is that it may not actually be possible to willfully produce predictable, specific results; however, it may indeed be possible to meditatively create, in advance, general or at least “less differentiated” psychological states or “flavors” which, although reversing the usual cause-and-effect order within the “Matter-Spirit Continuum of Substance,” must nonetheless still be offset or “re-balanced” by specific, “qualitatively consonant,” yet entirely unpredictable, material events or circumstances appearing later.”—General Theosophy

Views: 419


You need to be a member of Theosophy.Net to add comments!

Join Theosophy.Net

Comment by Hari Menon on January 13, 2013 at 10:32pm

Dear Emmanuel .

            Very true Emmanuel , in the spiritual world intent is very very important , why a person pursues  such a path is to be very clear to the practitioner or else there is no hope , after all we are concerned with the Truth and not with any worldy object - Intent is everything , Emmanuel there are people who start out well intentioned but soon become corrupted by the institution and followers - they cannot find it within them to be honest enough to discard everything and leave . I had on more than one occassion met ascetics around whom institutions had grown and they left it "Buddha like" to live in freedom and anonymity elsewhere . There are people who fiercely guard their obtained freedom and avoid associations which will bind them in future .


Comment by Hari Menon on January 13, 2013 at 10:36am

Dear Richard ,

          The I in a human being and the neti neti (iti) ie. not this , not this (but this) are not much different and - there is nothing very esoteric or very psychological in it - It amazes me again and again of the Western penchant to reduce everything to such anachronistic concepts that have evolved recently - It is not to say that psychological , physico logical and mental- physical logic is not valid , they are but aspects which are valid not completely - and the spiritual sciences do have a large area through which it traverses - which is related to modern day psychology  - but psychology itself or the bottling up of a larger concept within the concept of psychology would be doing both a great disservive . Just to put the thing in perspective what is the point of debates and analysis of the ''I'' in a person ?. The western mind cannot comprehend for the life of themselves that the physical is the Final manifestation of non matter . How can a person work his way from an inferior principle to a superior principle ? especially when consciousness is merged within the individual ?.

People think the non self is not this , not this (ie objects ) - nobody is bothered about the world it is there and is not a matter of dispute and just bysaying not this not this nothing will become the non self - the objects will still be there just as much as one is there and percieves it . The substratum of the waking state is the dream state and it is more subtler and hence pervasive than the waking state . The waking state is the state when all the sense organs are at their grossest and the dream state is when they are half open only. neither of the states are true vis a vis each other - the dream state is unreal in the waking state and the waking state does not exist in the dream state . Impressions of the waking state as in memory is what provides the backdrop for the dream world . What are the tools available to a person who is engaged in a voyage within the self ? It is only the mind,intellect,memory and empirical existence all held in consciousness that is required . There is no need for the body or anything in the waking state to be applied for a keen search ,anything that is realted to the waking state is ignorance when one has either closed his eyes and sat down for meditation or is meditating with his eyes open . How on earth can psychology which as a science developed initially to delve into the recesses of the human psyche for enabling a CORRECTION in the physical sense be applicable ? to a keen student of psychology it soon becomes apparent to him that the inner world holds the key to human behaviour and can explain it in toto and more .The dream state is untrue but is more solid and is a half truth whereas the waking state is wholly untrue , the dream state is far superior to the waking state but compared to the sleeping state both the other states are totally untrue because the Knower, known and knowing is totally absent , it is marked by a total absence of the mind and intellect but knowledge is ever present in this state and it is conscious knowledge not inert or dead - hardly any research is possible by any modern methods of the waking state or by any observer observing another (as is possible in a partial way in dream - Hypnosis is the closest to such a thing in this state as a means of observation ). The sleeping state is the substratum for both the dream and waking state - but where or how will any person be able to observe this much less transcend it ? It has to be done alone and intelligently no books can give any idea into it as it is stupid to even contemplating explaining the intricacies of the state of deep sleep since nobody would be able to understand it as it is not a matter of everyday perception of an object but rather one of laya where a person reverts on a daily basis to his original state and then issues forth the next day due to the strength of latent karmas to be finished in order to exhaust the present body . There is no writings available in the whole of the English speaking world as well as a lot of other languages ./ In fact in many things that appear obscure or inexplicable in the dreaming state is only explained by the experiences in the sleeping state which develops as one progresses. A firm knowledge of the nature of consciousness , knowledge through the intellect, dream and memory, agency , will and right reasoning, error in understanding, and knowledge of the changeless is imperative before any such voyage can be even contemplated , thought culture , will culture , cleanliness in mind and firm resolve to know the truth alone must be the intent nothing less will suffice for a completion of the realization in one life .

In closing neti neti iti (not this not this ....but this ) - the non self is starting from ones own body that is all one does not have to die trying to classify the whole world as not this or the non self . The true instruction of not this not this (this) - is thus .... the master indicates that since we indicate everything in the world that is an object by the word "this'' it is understood to be the not self AUTOMATICALLY and one does not have to repeat "not this , not this as a shibboleth , but rather its understanding is enough . since the consciousness in waking anyway is located in the self by a denial of the non self . Further the correct statement is  Neti Netiti (Neti - Neti -Iti) Iti is this and the guru indicates by the teaching of Neti Neti ... as such  - :

Not Not this (pointing to the world and away from oneself ) .....(since it si already the non self in ones consciousness). 

But This (pointing to ones body ) - indicating that one has to discard the body as the non self - it is an object as with all other objects in the world . As we say of the body as if we own it and hence we do not consider the body as ourself. 

And since a person who does not have a body (theoretically ) has nothing to "see"" the world with he is immediately drawn inside - moreover one is enjoined by by the master that mere profession is not enough one has to live in the spirit of the same (as if one has no body ) - so the person becomes non violent and truthful and non stealing and etc etc immediately . He will try and devise ways to live in the world as if he did not have a body but still accepting agency when he is required to do things imperative to his station in life etc.  

A very small teaching from a good master in a few words are more enduring and magnanimous than a million experiences. 

Comment by Hari Menon on January 13, 2013 at 12:21am

Dear Emmanuel ,

             Both the Judge and Levy do not know what they are talking about , it is quite obvious that they are more given to intellectual meanderings and there is quite a grossness attached to their thoughts . I guess we have come quite a long way down the road to degeneracy in the intellect . How on earth can one one find inspiration in such writings and opinions is beyond my comprehension . It does not matter if they have a large following or have been heard in many forums or published books - it only testifies to the fact that mediocre minds will always be mediocre and obstruct other peoples way of thinking also . These are just personal and low level musings of a  couple of uninformed intellects - It is quite obvious that they do not even know the ABC's of a inner journey . 

This type of thinking is worse than the superstitions that were prevalent in the western world during the so called Dark ages . They ''Presume'' a lot of things as given and existing and in the process rae missing the Truth by a mile - maybe these things are only a fad for them and not of any serious concern , probably because they are getting the the adulation they otherwise would not have had in normal life - it is gratification and self importance that keeps such misguided souls alive.

Comment by Richard Ihle on January 12, 2013 at 11:56am

[*T-view = Theosophical-view, i.e., “merely intuition-based”]

As the World Should Have Turned.

Tell yourself the truth about the present; lie about the past. . . .

The Doctrine of Karma is the analogical “Above” in the life-manipulator called “As the World Should Have Turned.”

This technique may be helpful not only for general, lifelong problems of “inadequate attributes,” but also for specific ability declines associated with aging. If, as stated by General Theosophy, The gift of the gods to youth is motivation; to old age, momentum, “creatively re-turning the world” might be one of the things to try if, very, very unfortunately, a person finds himself or herself with way too little of both divine gifts.

As usual, though, it may be more difficult to understand the possible "esoteric" psychological mechanisms involved if an individual has had little or no experience with meditation. Suffice it to say that having at least some notion of what is meant by the term “ego-formation” can be very valuable. Of course, one usually learns about these "differentiated conditions of consciousness” not by watching them directly; rather, by suddenly realizing—in the immediate meditative moment afterwards—that one’s attention had just previously been taken away (away from a mantra or the forehead chakra, for examples) by some Animating, Physical, Desire-Feeling, Desire-Mental, Mental, or Spirit-Mental “Soul-snatcher.” This attention-diverting, “off-track consciousness-creation,” irrespective of how fleeting it was, is called an ego-formation; it is also sometimes called a “semi-Self.”

(Psychologically speaking, incidentally, it is not necessary to believe that a person has a Soul; rather, only that he or she has a lesser or greater ability to en-Soul—that is, to remain Mindful while utilizing—any of the various types of consciousnesses or ego-formations needed to function like a normal human being in everyday life. This developed ability—perhaps translifetime-developed ability—is sometimes referred to as “Degree of Self-Realization” and is, in my T-view*, the psychological analog of H.P. Blavatksy’s anthropological “Root Races.” [The Psychomaturational “Doctrine of Seven-Year Cycles” provides analogs for her “Rounds.”])

Indeed, someone who can persist with not this, not this, not this throughout the six-fold succession of changes of consciousness during the first forty-two minutes of meditation, may eventually attain so much “inner familiarity" that he or she may even be able to make a good analogical guess as to what the Sankhya terms Purusa and Prakriti might really boil down to psychologically.

I and You. That’s all.

One’s real Self is “I”; everything else is “You”. (Of course, what is initially meant here is “Undifferentiated I” and “Undifferentiated You.” The “You”, however, courtesy of human maturation, courtesy of Darwinian evolution, may soon become differentiated by everything that is seen, tasted, touched, smelled, heard, desired, emoted, dreamed, thought, “energy-scintillated,” etc. The “I” [Self, Consciousness], alas, may become egoically “tainted/deluded” by these human things and some Theosophically assisted meditational work may be needed to regain the right perspective on oneSelf.)

Now, such a gross simplification might seem disrespectful to the many scholars who have spent so much of their lives trying to master the recondite, “preternaturally postured,” universe-creating Eastern terminology; however, Eastern metaphysics is one thing . . . and the psychological analogs from which the cosmological verbal spaghetti may have been speculated into academic existence is something else. . . .

Something simpler and easier to understand, for starters. . . .

Still, much could be written about the psychological differences between “I” and “you”. To begin with, “I” is undoubtedly the most sacred word in any language. Here, for example, here is a small fragment of what has been said about the Sanskrit word for “I”: “In Sanskrit, even the sounds which make the word for ‘I’ are consciously selected. [. . .] ____ is the beginning, the breath of life which brings forth creation, and the end. And this is expressed not just symbolically by the letters ____, but physically, based on their location in the mouth.” [“Sanskrit, a Sacred Model of Language” by Vyaas Houston, M.A.; 2006, American Sanskrit Institute]

Can you guess what word goes in the blanks above? Is the missing Sanskrit term the well-publicized Om which has been passed along from one perhaps overly credulous bowed head to another for so many centuries? No. The word which means “I” in Sanskrit is Aham. Aham and Om: so close in sound that it is easy to see how the two might have gotten mixed up over the course of time. The use of Om as a mantra undoubtedly has its own value; however, my T-view is that even H.P. Blavatsky may have gotten the word wrong esoterically. (And unless Sanskrit happens to be one’s first language, why shouldn’t a person just use English and chant “I”? . . .])

(Also in my T-view, though, one thing H.P. Blavatsky did not get wrong was her altering of the usual form of the Kabbalistic axiom from “The stone becomes a plant . . .” to “The Breath becomes a stone [predating E=MC^2, by the way]. . .” [THE SECRET DOCTRINE, Volume 1, p.132]. This, of course, may also suggest that centuries of copy-machine yogis have been and still are in error when they pass along the information about the existence of a “Svadhisthana” or “second chakra.” Indeed, the "sex center" may not be a chakra at all in the usual sense [and this might be somewhat supported by the fact that a person typically needs to reach puberty before he or she really becomes active sexually.] In any case, the "Animating Force" [prana, life-energy, Breath, Fohat, orgone, whatever] may be more helpfully just associated with the front of the physical body [or possibly “first-chakratized” as the general solar plexus area], and if it needs to “move as a current” at all—and manages not to get “orgasmically wasted” by the “recreational escape valve” of a hypothetical Svadhisthana—it may pass through the legs and then crash into the Muladhara at the base of the spine [perhaps the “real” hypostatized second chakra, associated with Physical consciousness], from whence it may proceed directly to the Manipura [third chakra, Desire-Feeling consciousness] in its heavenward “Kundalini ascent” to the Sahasrara [seventh chakra, Undifferentiated Spiritual consciousness], “four finger-breaths above the physical head.”)

Regardless, the "As the World Should Have Turned" life-manipulator does not involve using the pronoun “I”. It uses “you”. Using “I” as a mantra by itself may be one thing; using it in association with other words, however, may be something else—egoically dangerous or at least temporarily Self-deceptive, perhaps. Interestingly, an old technique in psychotherapy (it may or may not still be employed) involved the therapist simply counting the number of times a patient said the pronoun “I”—the more “I”s; the greater possible need for therapy, was the professional thinking. . . .

It made some sense.

And it might be that the doctrines of Reincarnation and Karma can also be made to make some sense, too—at least psychologically in the here and now (the below analogizing with the Above). In this context, every time we wake up in the morning we "reincarnate." Again in this context, everything which happened yesterday or the day before yesterday has some consequential (Karmic) impact—regardless of how slight or how great—on today.

But what if way too many of our yesterdays, perhaps our more recent older-age-hampered yesterdays, or perhaps even those going back to childhood, have been way too crappy? To say the least, our psychological todays might now be considerably less dynamic than they would be for nature’s “Alpha-individuals” whose personal histories seem to suggest almost nothing but Kryptonian DNA and success after success in life. Indeed, it might be much harder for those of us without such extra-stellar motivation and momentum provided by the past to “get on a roll” and keep on it, so to speak.

Is it really possible that a simple, silent sentence to oneself like “You were young, healthy, and energetic” can actually make one (at the minimum, psychologically feel) younger, healthier, and more energetic?

Well, maybe no, if one says it while lying down, sitting in one’s easy chair, or otherwise relaxing. Well, maybe yes, however, if one has mastered (a very easy thing to do) an “advanced esoteric technique” which involves uttering such an internal, past tense, verbal sentence while simultaneously holding a hatha yoga pose. The latter can be as simple as bending over, trying to touch one’s toes. To check whether or not the necessary condition of “psycho-puissance” has been attained, one should silently give oneself the direction, “Raise your right forefinger.” If the finger automatically rises—entirely without any volitional help—then one is ready to start devising a few effective fictions to help yesterday’s world turn in a better way than it actually did.

One should always tell oneself the absolute truth about one’s present condition and circumstances; nevertheless, for the purpose of Theosophical experimentation, sometimes spinning an aggrandized yarn or two about one’s past may produce some interesting “Adept-crafted aftermaths” of semi-Real Magic. . . .

Comment by Richard Ihle on December 30, 2012 at 7:45pm

Greetings and good wishes to all.

In Theosophy, analogical reasoning is very often a helpful adjunct to general intuition. “As Above, so below; as below, so Above,” as the Hermetic axiom is sometimes worded. In a footnote in THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY, H.P. Blavatsky tells us that some of the earliest Theosophists, the Alexandrian Philaletheians, were “*also called Analogeticists.”

My own view, often repeated, is that it may be next to impossible to understand the Psychological Key to THE SECRET DOCTRINE if a person has not had much experience meditatively “recognizing and self-observing” the six varieties of human consciousnesses which might be the down-to-earth analogs of H.P.B.’s “Rounds,” “Root-Races,” “Sub-Races,” etc. Simply put, there will great difficulty understanding the basic concept of a “temporary egoic delusion” (“semi-Self,” “partially false I” etc.); furthermore, a person will almost certainly be unable to see how the grand Theosophical systems of Cosmogenesis and Anthropogenesis might have been devised to be analogically consistent with such “self-observed psychological differentiations.”

So much for the as below, so Above, then. However, perhaps even more unfortunately, such an “uninitiated” individual may also not be able to analogeticize in the opposite direction—i.e., using As Above, so below to investigate how the big Theosophical ideas might give important clues concerning the existence and nature of the egoic delusions and other psychological operations which perhaps analogically helped create and now correspond to them. And certainly, of course, he or she will probably not be able to make much if any sense out of passages like this one from G.I. Gurdjieff: “Man has no individual I. But there are, instead, hundreds and thousands of separate small I’s, very often entirely unknown to one another, never coming into contact, or, on the contrary, hostile to each other, mutually exclusive and incompatible. Each minute, each moment, man is saying or thinking, ‘I.’ And each time his I is different. Just now it was a thought, now it is a desire, now a sensation, now another thought, and so on, endlessly. Man is a plurality. Man’s name is legion.” --IN SEARCH OF THE MIRACULOUS (Ouspensky)

(But how hard could such an “initiation” be, really? For example, in meditation you may be trying to keep your attention focused on the forehead area (“chakra”). Suddenly, you “catch yourself” and realize that your attention had previously drifted away to the headache you have. Voila! You have just recognized Second-Level Physical consciousness . . . and may realize that for a while your I had been at least partially egoically deluded that it actually was some pain sensation. Same thing later if you catch yourself and realize that your attention had been abducted by the pondering of whether or not to refinance your house. Voila! Fifth-Level Mental consciousness: one of your ever-changing, forming and unforming I’s had been at least temporarily egoically deluded that it actually was a thought or mental operation.)

Truth and Consequences.  In a slightly different way, the “Truth and Consequences” life-manipulation technique may or may not also be analogical. This time it might not be Above to below; rather, it might be below to further below—some psychological mechanism analogizing with the human body’s immune system.

There is no question, however, that like “Blessing for Dollars,” this life-manipulator is certainly paradoxical. Not only that, but it goes so far as to challenge the whole ideology of the modern self-hypnotic, “Positive-Affirmations” Industry—“Each and every day I am getting better and better.” etc., etc.

Positive affirmations do get some sort of results, of course; there can be no denying this. Nevertheless, there is at least a possibility that some of the perceived benefits of positive-affirming may simply be the result of its similarity to mantra repetition. Naturally, though, it is also tempting to think that there may be some “purposeful tricking” of the “subconscious” additionally involved, and perhaps there is. However, this might not really be such a good thing. If the overarching purpose of incarnation is Self-realization by the gradual elimination of all differentiated egoic delusions, what sense does it make to add even more false semi-Self deceptions to the ontological mess one already has to deal with? This, of course, is just theoretical carping; a bigger pragmatic complaint is that affirmative benefits often seem to disappear once a person stops affirming—in other words, if an affirmer wants to keep walking, to himself or herself he or she had better keep talking. . . .

But if a person does manage to keep walking and talking, perhaps he or she might also want to consider the possibility that some self-lies might actually be producing the opposite of what they intend—and that if such psycho-gremlins happen to show up only in the longer term, no cause-and-effect connection may ever be made.
Curiously, the mental realm does seem to have a “natural contrarian component.” For example, it is a common observation of Psychology 101 that if you tell a person “don’t think of pink elephants,” that is precisely what a person will start to do. An informal experiment with positive affirmations may reveal something similar: wait for a time when you are very, very tired and then say out loud, “I am completely refreshed and lively.” Re-focus your attention inward, and it is quite likely you will immediately hear your own private contrarian “voice” whisper silently, subtly, but emphatically, something like “NO YOU’RE NOT!”

“I am confident.” (“NO YOU’RE NOT!”)

“I am powerful.” (“NO YOU’RE NOT!”)

“I attract romance in the most magical and unexpected ways.” (“NO DAMN WAY!—AND I’M DOUBLE-SURE ABOUT THIS ONE!”)

Even using self-hypnotic strategies, these immediate nay-sayings may sometimes be powerful enough to undermine positive affirmations; however, even more powerful may be the “little evidences” the world can later give you that it is not being fooled by your psycho-lies. When surprises happen in daily life which are not in concert with what you have been repeating over and over, your misery may be further perfected by the frustrating realization that you are nowhere near being a Houdini-grade magician, after all. Although truth should be what one strives for when making affirmations, it is probably far better to be surprised that things in daily life are not as bad as you have been over-kill-affirming rather than the reverse.

Regarding the use of truth as a life-manipulator, mention should probably also be made of the 12-Step Program. It is still at or near the top as the most admired and effective approach to a wide variety of human problems. In 1999, Time Magazine selected Bill Wilson, founder of Alcoholics Anonymous (along with Dr. Bob Smith) to be in the top 20 of its Heroes and Icons of the Century. And what is the first thing they do at 12-Step meetings? Introduce themselves in the manner of “I’m Michael. I’m a/an [alcoholic, overeater, sex addict].” Speak the truth; reap good consequences.

(12-Step meetings also have a certain religious tinge to them; however, it may not be necessary or even advisable to use the word God in one’s own “truth-declarations.” After all, as Baudelaire once said, “God is the only being who, in order to reign, doesn’t even need to exist.” Just alter this slightly: “God is the only being who, in order to help, doesn’t even need to exist.”)

Here might be a general “truth-declaration”: “I am weak, pitiful, and pathetic; help me in every way.” Truth and Consequences recommends that something like this should be repeated for a minute or two at the beginning of every meditation session—basically just because it is “true” within the larger context of human vulnerability and mortality. However, if a person has identified some specific problems, for example being depressed and suffering, he or she should specifically truth-declare, “I am depressed and suffering; help me in every way.” Another example: “I am unproductive; help me in every way.” Another: “I am aging quickly; help me in every way.”

Again, the principle of analogy might be involved here. Just as the immune system and/or other natural correctives of the human body are not set in motion until a pathogen or other problem has been recognized by it, so too might it be necessary that a person psychologically accept and affirm the existence of some animating, physical, emotional, or mental difficulty before some “root” psychological mechanism—or perhaps even the restorative “Solvent” of Undifferentiated Consciousness—can automatically begin working on it. Furthermore, the “help me in every way” is undoubtedly crucial. Conversely, it is possible that promiscuous use of positive affirmations may require Undifferentiated Consciousness to first spend additional time dissolving a person’s newly added, self-designed egoic pretenses before It can start solving the actual problems.

In any case, it is important to note that Truth and Consequences life-manipulation is often more of a long-term investment rather than a quick slot machine payout. This cannot be emphasized enough. For example, if a person, so long ago that he or she has forgotten about it, had once declared, “I am declining as an athlete; help me in every way,” he or she might someday otherwise inexplicably find himself or herself investigating the virtues of kettlebells as an exercise aid. Indeed, there is a certain amount of faith required for truth-declarations. Look back after a day, a week, a month, or longer, and only then may one recognize its effects and semi- Real Magic miracles.

Comment by Richard Ihle on December 29, 2012 at 12:02pm

Greetings and good wishes and thank you for the kind words, Jessica.

Paradox. I call certain things “Real Magic” when I cannot think of any possible rational explanation for certain circumstances or events which take place. However, there are some actual, Theosophically inspired, “life-manipulating” techniques which I also call “semi-Real Magic.” They are “semi,” not because they don’t always work—they do—; rather, they are called so merely because I can think of some possible psychological reasons why they may be efficacious.

These techniques: 1) “Blessing for Dollars,” 2) “Truth and Consequences,” and 3) “As the World Should Have Turned.” My plan in this thread is just to give the briefest thumbnail sketch of each, one “contribution-lump” at a time.

I should mention at the outset, however, is that these life-manipulators are notable because they often more or less involve doing the opposite of what people in the non-Theosophical tend to do in order to motivate themselves or obtain the same benefits. Incidentally, in my view, that may be something which can help one spot to authentic Theosophers—that is, one should maybe look for a little bit of the “contrarian lifestyle” in people’s approaches to at least certain parts of their lives. And why not experimentally dabble with a few things which might only be able to work paradoxically? After all, “Life Sucks and Then You Die” is country song much beloved and agreed-with by many if not most of those who are doing exactly what their conventionally rational, non-dabbling neighbors are doing.

Blessing for Dollars. This technique involves “prayer-blessing.” The usual approach if a person wants something for himself or herself is to pray in a form something like, “God, give me the rent money.” Of course, good religionists tend to frown on such self-interested prayers. They often advise the use of prayer-blessings, not directed toward oneself, but rather, toward poor, downtrodden, or otherwise suffering individuals.

The contrarian, paradoxical technique is not to prayer-bless unsuccessful people or victims of misfortune; rather, it is to pray-bless those who need it least: the wealthy, the energetic, the young, the healthy, the famous, the geniuses, etc. The form, eliminating the word God, is simply something like, “Bless those who have much more money than they need.”

A possible explanation of why this life-manipulator may bring positive results to the person giving the prayer-blessing could be that subconsciously one may begin to feel oneself belonging to the category of individuals who have been prayer-blessed . . . and start doing certain things which—normal-cause-and-effect—produce the desired results. Theoretically speaking, of course, if one only prayer-blessed poor people all the time, perhaps one might even eventually mold oneself into one of the impoverished. . . .

Anyway, it may not be so good just to pray for the poor and unfortunate and think one is doing one’s duty in regard to them. Perhaps one should give up the distant and vague God-help-them approach and actually show up to give them real money and/or assistance in other hands-on, face-to-face ways. . . .

Comment by John on December 28, 2012 at 1:16pm

"You, John, provide the Paradox . . . and my writings will provide the Confusion. . . . ."

Ahh. our secret is 'out' !!  

I just remembered that I had written a short doc (In Science Group) with an example of how whacky the non-local coupling is (Bell-like effect; from Bell's theorem). The effect (on this new physics paper) is the non-local coupling through time, and the photon is rather confused what its behavior is (was I a wave or a particle.. don't know yet!) until the person does the measurement on their end at the later time.

Any way here is the link to the short paper (cast into classical terms. coin tosses).

last Post in Science Discussion  "Quantum Realities, Science etc."

Bell-Like example.docx Bell-Like example.docx, 17 KB 

The above was about the simplest way to show the paradox using an entangled pair of  objects. (coins in this case. This case is fiction. It is only an illustration)

Comment by Richard Ihle on December 28, 2012 at 9:51am

Greetings and good wishes, John.

Thank you for the interesting information.  It was helpful to be reminded how "counter-intuitive" quantum mechanics theory can sometimes be.  There is an old saying which goes like this: "Paradox and Confusion are the two fierce guardians at the gateway to the truth of who You are."

You, John, provide the Paradox . . . and my writings will provide the Confusion. . . . .

Comment by John on December 28, 2012 at 7:40am

Thought I'd better at least get this out to everyone.  Just some links to the paper(s) I was referring to.

The Links are for a general audience...  not general enough though. I'm not sure any words (i.e. mine) can do better. I am working on diagrams I can use to simplify this.

The point on entanglement is that this is temporal  (most prior experiments were spatial). One can alter what happened after the first event. But the altering is done at the wave-function level.

Particle and Wave-Like Behavior of Light Measured Simultaneously

What is light made of: waves or particles?

================================ ===========

Quantum Procrastination (Summary: (Science -  Perspectives)
Do you have a decision you have to make but you just can't bring yourself to do it? As the irrevocable moment approaches, you squirm more and more, but something inside you says, “Not now, not yet.” Then when it's already almost too late, in a burst of energy and shame, you come through—or not. Afterward, you are irrationally resentful, as if someone other than yourself is responsible for disturbing your peace of mind. You vow that the next time a decision arises, you will make it expeditiously. If you are a severe procrastinator like me (at least when it came to starting this article), have hope—quantum mechanics is coming to your rescue. On pages 637 and 634 of this issue, experiments by Kaiser et al. (1) and Peruzzo et al. (2) show that in the presence of quantum entanglement (in which outcomes of measurements are tied together), it is possible to hold off making a decision, even if events seem to have already made one. Quantum procrastination (“proquastination”) allows you to put off for tomorrow what you should have done today.

================================ ===========

(I have the papers in pdf - they are copyrighted. so, I can't post them)

Comment by Richard Ihle on December 27, 2012 at 11:38pm


Change "In any case, Spirit can sometimes be usefully defined as “Undifferentiated Matter” to "In any case, Spirit can sometimes usefully be considered to be the "most rarefied' form of Matter (on the 'Interpenetrating Circular Continuum of Prana-Matter-Spirit')".

Search Theosophy.Net!


What to do...

Join Theosophy.Net Blogs Forum Live Chat Invite Facebook Facebook Group

A New View of Theosophy


Theosophy References

Wiki Characteristics History Spirituality Esotericism Mysticism RotR ToS

Our Friends

© 2024   Created by Theosophy Network.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service