Message Boards Message Boards

Books and Websites

Please ignore this thread

Toggle
Please ignore this thread
Answer
12/21/19 9:30 AM
Please ignore this thread. I changed the focus of my work and will be back with more suitable content. 

RE: How I made a shooting star?
Answer
12/17/19 7:25 PM as a reply to green1.
Are you open to criticism? Regarding this "subconscious telepathy", we have an inbuilt pattern recognition system that our memory follows and this information is in constant exchange with whatever stimuli we are receiving. Recognizing patterns is what we do and we do it every second of our lives. It's a cognitive bias that can be reinforced. It's very common for us to create patterns where there are none. This sounds more like an exercise in apophenia than self-importance. To be absolutely sincere, I think there's a better explanation. How often do you stare at billboards or hear people talking? Do you often take the time to read the signs you pass on your walks or daily trips? Attention is a commodity in our time so it is targetted heavily and we are unconsciously paying attention to everything. Training yourself to pick up certain patterns happens way too easily.  

The number of likes adjusted to my belief

I think it's safer to say your belief adjusted to the number of likes... If this optomistic world view is the cause for your health and happiness then rock on. I believe most of us have had these synchronistic experiences at some point. I used to play football in my teens and I would always be 52 or 27. I adopted those as good luck numbers and started noticing them more, but it only lasts as long as you allow it to. If this is happening unconsciously then it is still coming from within you, not a higher power. 

Bees have a special meaning to me and I saw a bee exactly when I thought about bees. The word “bee”, to me, is similar to the verb “to be” and means the same thing (a silly word game). Although they have a special meaning to me, I rarely think about bees, and this coincidence was an unexpected one. I felt like my attention was drawn to the bee. How can this coincidence be possible? This can be explained as follows: Insects are capable of telepathy.This can be explained as follows: Insects are capable of telepathy. It is possible that I subconsciously attracted that bee telepathically at the same time as I had a thought about bees. This example also explains Jung’s synchronicity experience with a scarab

I can't tell you how many people make the very same association with bees. Bee-lieve me, I follow an insect taxidermy account on Instagram, it has ninety-two thousand followers and the bee puns are great emoticon Bees are non-stop working so it's just as common to see one as it is to not honestly. I spend a lot of time outside, one of my daily-life meditations is to sit outside in nature and do absolutely nothing but look at and pay attention to everything. You would be surprised how much of your immediate surroundings are brimming with life! Insects alone outnumber us after all. When it comes to bees in particular, they seem somewhat uncommon at first, but if you spend hours and hours in the same spot you're bound to notice their traffic. It has happened on many occasions that a bee will land on me, to rest or inspect, maybe both. It is true they are drawn to us. You are in fact signaling them though... Insects navigate this reality through chemical perceptions. Water is an utmost necessity for bees considering how much work they put in, they need to be able to locate it. Our sweat is like an oasis for them, let a bee land on your sweaty palms and you can actually feel their little "tongue". If this happens, the bee will go back to her hive and tell her friends about the easy access to liquids and they too will come. If you let this process go on for enough time, you can create a little fellowship. The point is, bees are not acting as God's messengers.

As she described a golden scarab—a costly piece of jewelry—she had received in a dream the night before, he heard a tapping on the window. He looked and saw a gold-green glint. Jung opened the window to coincidence. He plucked a scarabaeid beetle out of the air. The beetle, closely resembling the golden scarab, was just what he needed.

I think Jung's report has already been covered. It would be nice if we had a date to account this with. I don't spend a lot of time indoors so I know the beetles in question. I prefer to call them r̃onr̃on the "R" is rolled as in Spanish, it is the sound of their loud buzzing emoticon but anyway, these little monsters are so incredibly clumsy like they are drinking and flying! They are always, always smacking into windows and during their season, there are plenty of them.

Some people keep seeing specific times e.g. 10:10, 11:11 or 3:33 etc. each time they check the time, or use an application on their cell phone. This happened to me as well. How is that possible? It is possible that the subconscious mind has access to time and draws our attention to specific times.

We have an internal clock known as the circadian rhythm. Although it is ingrained in our physiology, It can also be adjusted through lifestyle.

As for the shooting star... my friend, it may have just been by chance. You were after all already staring up as you say. I love watching the night sky as you do, I implore my friends to join me when I do, and whenever a friend actually comes along, they witness their first shooting star. It has happened a lot. I, on the other hand, have been going out staring into the sky since I was a young boy. I would do this for hours and I've yet to see one. We love to lose perspective. We like to think the answers to this reality will leave us in a state of awe. Sadly for a lot of people, the fantastical is more attractive than the practical. It's important to take a step back from our assumptions and look at things objectively.  Let the shooting star be a reminder for you to never lose perspective.

Soul, spirit, consciousness, the mind, the brain, are all separate realms in this existence. What you are referring to as "soul" sounds more like memory to me, or rather an unsullied version of your memory. On the matter of soul, there is no such thing as my soul and her soul, there is this life and then there is soul. As far as I am aware, we may only touch that dimension. I think it would be for the best that we refrain from speaking any further on that which has not entered our life's experience lest we propagate more confusion. Too many are out here saying mend your soul this and develop a genuine soul that. 

This doesn't coincide with the collective mentality theory... there is some research done on such a concept but I would have to dig through and find the articles(most of which are anecdotal at best) some other time as I'll be out the door again shortly

RE: How I made a shooting star?
Answer
12/17/19 8:44 PM as a reply to Mista Tibbs.
Mista Tibbs:
Are you open to criticism? Regarding this "subconscious telepathy", we have an inbuilt pattern recognition system that our memory follows and this information is in constant exchange with whatever stimuli we are receiving. Recognizing patterns is what we do and we do it every second of our lives. It's a cognitive bias that can be reinforced. It's very common for us to create patterns where there are none. This sounds more like an exercise in apophenia than self-importance. To be absolutely sincere, I think there's a better explanation. How often do you stare at billboards or hear people talking? Do you often take the time to read the signs you pass on your walks or daily trips? Attention is a commodity in our time so it is targetted heavily and we are unconsciously paying attention to everything. Training yourself to pick up certain patterns happens way too easily.  

The number of likes adjusted to my belief

I think it's safer to say your belief adjusted to the number of likes... If this optomistic world view is the cause for your health and happiness then rock on. I believe most of us have had these synchronistic experiences at some point. I used to play football in my teens and I would always be 52 or 27. I adopted those as good luck numbers and started noticing them more, but it only lasts as long as you allow it to. If this is happening unconsciously then it is still coming from within you, not a higher power. 

Bees have a special meaning to me and I saw a bee exactly when I thought about bees. The word “bee”, to me, is similar to the verb “to be” and means the same thing (a silly word game). Although they have a special meaning to me, I rarely think about bees, and this coincidence was an unexpected one. I felt like my attention was drawn to the bee. How can this coincidence be possible? This can be explained as follows: Insects are capable of telepathy.This can be explained as follows: Insects are capable of telepathy. It is possible that I subconsciously attracted that bee telepathically at the same time as I had a thought about bees. This example also explains Jung’s synchronicity experience with a scarab

I can't tell you how many people make the very same association with bees. Bee-lieve me, I follow an insect taxidermy account on Instagram, it has ninety-two thousand followers and the bee puns are great emoticon Bees are non-stop working so it's just as common to see one as it is to not honestly. I spend a lot of time outside, one of my daily-life meditations is to sit outside in nature and do absolutely nothing but look at and pay attention to everything. You would be surprised how much of your immediate surroundings are brimming with life! Insects alone outnumber us after all. When it comes to bees in particular, they seem somewhat uncommon at first, but if you spend hours and hours in the same spot you're bound to notice their traffic. It has happened on many occasions that a bee will land on me, to rest or inspect, maybe both. It is true they are drawn to us. You are in fact signaling them though... Insects navigate this reality through chemical perceptions. Water is an utmost necessity for bees considering how much work they put in, they need to be able to locate it. Our sweat is like an oasis for them, let a bee land on your sweaty palms and you can actually feel their little "tongue". If this happens, the bee will go back to her hive and tell her friends about the easy access to liquids and they too will come. If you let this process go on for enough time, you can create a little fellowship. The point is, bees are not acting as God's messengers.

As she described a golden scarab—a costly piece of jewelry—she had received in a dream the night before, he heard a tapping on the window. He looked and saw a gold-green glint. Jung opened the window to coincidence. He plucked a scarabaeid beetle out of the air. The beetle, closely resembling the golden scarab, was just what he needed.

I think Jung's report has already been covered. It would be nice if we had a date to account this with. I don't spend a lot of time indoors so I know the beetles in question. I prefer to call them r̃onr̃on the "R" is rolled as in Spanish, it is the sound of their loud buzzing emoticon but anyway, these little monsters are so incredibly clumsy like they are drinking and flying! They are always, always smacking into windows and during their season, there are plenty of them.

Some people keep seeing specific times e.g. 10:10, 11:11 or 3:33 etc. each time they check the time, or use an application on their cell phone. This happened to me as well. How is that possible? It is possible that the subconscious mind has access to time and draws our attention to specific times.

We have an internal clock known as the circadian rhythm. Although it is ingrained in our physiology, It can also be adjusted through lifestyle.

As for the shooting star... my friend, it may have just been by chance. You were after all already staring up as you say. I love watching the night sky as you do, I implore my friends to join me when I do, and whenever a friend actually comes along, they witness their first shooting star. It has happened a lot. I, on the other hand, have been going out staring into the sky since I was a young boy. I would do this for hours and I've yet to see one. We love to lose perspective. We like to think the answers to this reality will leave us in a state of awe. Sadly for a lot of people, the fantastical is more attractive than the practical. It's important to take a step back from our assumptions and look at things objectively.  Let the shooting star be a reminder for you to never lose perspective.

Soul, spirit, consciousness, the mind, the brain, are all separate realms in this existence. What you are referring to as "soul" sounds more like memory to me, or rather an unsullied version of your memory. On the matter of soul, there is no such thing as my soul and her soul, there is this life and then there is soul. As far as I am aware, we may only touch that dimension. I think it would be for the best that we refrain from speaking any further on that which has not entered our life's experience lest we propagate more confusion. Too many are out here saying mend your soul this and develop a genuine soul that. 

This doesn't coincide with the collective mentality theory... there is some research done on such a concept but I would have to dig through and find the articles(most of which are anecdotal at best) some other time as I'll be out the door again shortly

2 cents:

If you look at a dark night sky in mid-august when the leonids are on, you should see a shooting star every couple of minutes. I've seen hundreds. No better place on earth for sky-watching than the big island.

I once read that 40% of planetary animal mass by weight is ants.

terry

RE: How I made a shooting star?
Answer
12/18/19 9:26 AM as a reply to green1.
Hi Mista and Terry, 

Based on your feedback I added the following section to the article... Thanks.

-- cut here --

The maths 

It would be interesting to note, how probable is the shooting star experience, mathematically. The probability of seeing a shooting star and knowing it 1 second beforehand is p=1/T where T is the period of seeing shooting stars. This analysis does not take into account the position of the shooting star. I saw the shooting star exactly where I was looking at the sky. If we divide the sky into c cells, and the shooting star appears at one of these c cells, then p=1/cT . If we assume that we have 1 shooting star per T=36 (6x6) seconds and if we divide the sky into c=6x6=36 cells, then my shooting star experience has the same probability p as that of getting “6” exactly and in succession, when we throw a dice 4 times. This is a quite low probability (p=0.00077160493). 

Furthermore, T is much higher where I live. In order to figure out how much T is, I waited for shooting stars during many nights and I can tell that shooting stars do not happen frequently where I live. I.e., T is several hours. I had nights without shooting stars at all. Let’s assume that T=1 hour or 3600 seconds and c=36 then p=0.00000771604, which is a very low probability. 

The same maths apply to the bee experience, i.e. the probability p of seeing a bee exactly in the same second as thinking about bees in advance, is the same (where T is the period of seeing bees and c=1).

----

RE: How I made a shooting star?
Answer
12/18/19 10:49 AM as a reply to Mista Tibbs.
There was a woman working at my mother's memory care unit who established a bond with her. Soon after my mother died, this woman  came to me and told me she had gone outside the previous night and was talking to my mother in her mind, and mama sent her a shooting star. I immediately felt a pang of grief and resentment that my mother would have communicated with someone else in this way when I, her daughter, was frantic with longing for contact with her. Then I forgot about it. 

Now I think what you describe here explains this care worker's experience: she was thinking about my mother, and took the shooting star's appearance as a communication from her. I on the other hand am not particularly attuned to shooting stars, so would be unlikely to notice even a lot of them. I have since that time come to realize that my mother communicates with me all the time, every time I look in the mirror and see her face, or do some goofy thing she would have done, or just think about how she might have handled a situation. And then, of course, there is memory, 

RE: How I made a shooting star?
Answer
12/18/19 2:02 PM as a reply to Laurel Carrington.
Laurel Carrington:
Now I think what you describe here explains this care worker's experience: she was thinking about my mother, and took the shooting star's appearance as a communication from her.
Yes, this. At first this seems like it sucks the meaning out of things, but if you stop and reflect it's almost more beautiful that interactive experiences create meaning rather than defined events out there in the world. If meaning were baked into phenomena, each one would only have a single interpretation, and you could get life objectively wrong. On the other hand, if meaning comes from the play between phenomena and you, suddenly the whole system is open, flexible, alive, since many interpretations are possible.

For an in-depth look at this question, check out David Chapman's website Meaningness. I don't agree with everything this guy writes and sometimes disagree quite sharply, but this particular site completely nails it IMO.

RE: How I made a shooting star?
Answer
12/19/19 4:42 AM as a reply to Laurel Carrington.
Laurel Carrington:
There was a woman working at my mother's memory care unit who established a bond with her. Soon after my mother died, this woman  came to me and told me she had gone outside the previous night and was talking to my mother in her mind, and mama sent her a shooting star. I immediately felt a pang of grief and resentment that my mother would have communicated with someone else in this way when I, her daughter, was frantic with longing for contact with her. Then I forgot about it. 

Now I think what you describe here explains this care worker's experience: she was thinking about my mother, and took the shooting star's appearance as a communication from her. I on the other hand am not particularly attuned to shooting stars, so would be unlikely to notice even a lot of them. I have since that time come to realize that my mother communicates with me all the time, every time I look in the mirror and see her face, or do some goofy thing she would have done, or just think about how she might have handled a situation. And then, of course, there is memory, 

Hi Laurel, if she took it for a sign from your mother, shooting stars should be rare in your area. This is the case in my area. There are nights without shooting stars at all.

green1 

RE: How I made a shooting star?
Answer
12/20/19 11:25 AM as a reply to green1.
Updated the math section. Check it out:

https://bit.ly/2qFEic8

The probability of knowing a shooting star in advance is really low.

Cheers, 
green1 

RE: How I made a shooting star?
Answer
12/20/19 4:08 PM as a reply to green1.
green1:
Hi Mista and Terry, 

Based on your feedback I added the following section to the article... Thanks.

-- cut here --

The maths 

It would be interesting to note, how probable is the shooting star experience, mathematically. The probability of seeing a shooting star and knowing it 1 second beforehand is p=1/T where T is the period of seeing shooting stars. This analysis does not take into account the position of the shooting star. I saw the shooting star exactly where I was looking at the sky. If we divide the sky into c cells, and the shooting star appears at one of these c cells, then p=1/cT . If we assume that we have 1 shooting star per T=36 (6x6) seconds and if we divide the sky into c=6x6=36 cells, then my shooting star experience has the same probability p as that of getting “6” exactly and in succession, when we throw a dice 4 times. This is a quite low probability (p=0.00077160493). 

Furthermore, T is much higher where I live. In order to figure out how much T is, I waited for shooting stars during many nights and I can tell that shooting stars do not happen frequently where I live. I.e., T is several hours. I had nights without shooting stars at all. Let’s assume that T=1 hour or 3600 seconds and c=36 then p=0.00000771604, which is a very low probability. 

The same maths apply to the bee experience, i.e. the probability p of seeing a bee exactly in the same second as thinking about bees in advance, is the same (where T is the period of seeing bees and c=1).

----


   The mind - not to say "the brain" - smoothes perception over a sequence it deems reasonable. This sometimes alters the order in which sensations actually arrive at the brain. Thus the phenomenon of looking toward the telephone a second before it rings, or in general expecting to see something that shows up a second or two later.

  Your eyes from a mechanical standpoint are lenses and cameras. If we actually saw what we think we see, it would be upside down, doubled and very blurry. Your ears hear only sounds that it recognizes, even if wrongly; your eyes the same ("It's a bird, it's a plane, it's superman!"). The act of recognition precedes cognition.

   Once you have granted some sort of precognition, anything goes.

   The phenomenon of synchronicity is something else. Jung wrote a famous introduction to richard wilhelm's "i ching" which discusses "synchronicity" as such at some length, in the context of using the oracle and recognizing patterns which depend on random inputs.

   Some synchronous inputs are non-random. Take astrology, practical astrology such as closely observing the behavior of sentient beings as it relates to the phases of the moon. Virtually anyone who has worked in an emergency room has observed that more craziness occurs under a full moon, for example. More subtle observation produces more subtle distinctions. Everywhere you look there is synchronicity - touch a web anywhere and everything jiggles, ripples, and makes waves. Phenomena co-arise.

terry



from the introduction to wilhelm/baynes edition of the "i ching," by carl gustav jung:


The manner in which the I Ching tends to look upon reality seems to disfavor our causalistic procedures. The moment under actual observation appears to the ancient Chinese view more of a chance hit than a clearly defined result of concurring causal chain processes. The matter of interest seems to be the configuration formed by chance events in the moment of observation, and not at all the hypothetical reasons that seemingly account for the coincidence. While the Western mind carefully sifts, weighs, selects, classifies, isolates, the Chinese picture of the moment encompasses everything down to the minutest nonsensical detail, because all of the ingredients make up the observed moment.
Thus it happens that when one throws the three coins, or counts through the forty-nine yarrow stalks, these chance details enter into the picture of the moment of observation and form a part of it - a part that is insignificant to us, yet most meaningful to the Chinese mind. With us it would be a banal and almost meaningless statement (at least on the face of it) to say that whatever happens in a given moment possesses inevitably the quality peculiar to that moment.

This is not an abstract argument but a very practical one. There are certain connoisseurs who can tell you merely from the appearance, taste, and behavior of a wine the site of its vineyard and the year of its origin. There are antiquarians who with almost uncanny accuracy will name the time and place of origin and the maker of an objet d'art or piece of furniture on merely looking at it. And there are even astrologers who can tell you, without any previous knowledge of your nativity, what the position of sun and moon was and what zodiacal sign rose above the horizon in the moment of your birth. In the face of such facts, it must be admitted that moments can leave long-lasting traces.

In other words, whoever invented the I Ching was convinced that the hexagram worked out in a certain moment coincided with the latter in quality no less than in time. To him the hexagram was the exponent of the moment in which it was cast - even more so than the hours of the clock or the divisions of the calendar could be - inasmuch as the hexagram was understood to be an indicator of the essential situation prevailing in the moment of its origin.

This assumption involves a certain curious principle that I have termed synchronicity, a concept that formulates a point of view diametrically opposed to that of causality. Since the latter is a merely statistical truth and not absolute, it is a sort of working hypothesis of how events evolve one out of another, whereas synchronicity takes the coincidence of events in space and time as meaning something more than mere chance, namely, a peculiar interdependence of objective events among themselves as well as with thesubjective (psychic) states of the observer or observers.

The ancient Chinese mind contemplates the cosmos in a way comparable to that of the modern physicist, who cannot deny that his model of the world is a decidedly psychophysical structure. The microphysical event includes the observer just as much as the reality underlying the I Ching comprises subjective, i.e., psychic conditions in the totality of the momentary situation. Just as causality describes the sequence of events, so synchronicity to the Chinese mind deals with the coincidence of events. The causal point of view tells us a dramatic story about how D came into existence: it took its origin from C, which existed before D, and C in its turn had a father, B, etc. The synchronistic view on the other hand tries to produce an equally meaningful picture of coincidence. How does it happen that A', B', C', D', etc., appear all in the same moment and in the same place? It happens in the first place because the physical events A' and B' are of the same quality as the psychic events C' and D', and further because all are the exponents of one and the same momentary situation. The situation is assumed to represent a legible or understandable picture.

Now the sixty-four hexagrams of the I Ching are the instrument by which the meaning of sixty-four different yet typical situations can be determined. These interpretations are equivalent to causal explanations. Causal connection is statistically necessary and can therefore be subjected to experiment. Inasmuch as situations are unique and cannot be repeated, experimenting with synchronicity seems to be impossible under ordinary conditions. In the I Ching, the only criterion of the validity of synchronicity is the observer's opinion that the text of the hexagram amounts to a true rendering of his psychic condition. It is assumed that the fall of the coins or the result of the division of the bundle of yarrow stalks is what it necessarily must be in a given "situation," inasmuch as anything happening in that moment belongs to it as an indispensable part of the picture. If a handful of matches is thrown to the floor, they form the pattern characteristic of that moment. But such an obvious truth as this reveals its meaningful nature only if it is possible to read the pattern and to verify its interpretation, partly by the observer's knowledge of the subjective and objective situation, partly by the character of subsequent events. It is obviously not a procedure that appeals to a critical mind used to experimental verification of facts or to factual evidence. But for someone who likes to look at the world at the angle from which ancient China saw it, the I Ching may have some attraction.

My argument as outlined above has of course never entered a Chinese mind. On the contrary, according to the old tradition, it is "spiritual agencies," acting in a mysterious way, that make the yarrow stalks give a meaningful answer. These powers form, as it were, the living soul of the book. As the latter is thus a sort of animated being, the tradition assumes that one can put questions to the I Ching and expect to receive intelligent answers.

RE: How I made a shooting star?
Answer
12/21/19 9:38 AM as a reply to terry.
terry:
green1:
Hi Mista and Terry, 

Based on your feedback I added the following section to the article... Thanks.

-- cut here --

The maths 

It would be interesting to note, how probable is the shooting star experience, mathematically. The probability of seeing a shooting star and knowing it 1 second beforehand is p=1/T where T is the period of seeing shooting stars. This analysis does not take into account the position of the shooting star. I saw the shooting star exactly where I was looking at the sky. If we divide the sky into c cells, and the shooting star appears at one of these c cells, then p=1/cT . If we assume that we have 1 shooting star per T=36 (6x6) seconds and if we divide the sky into c=6x6=36 cells, then my shooting star experience has the same probability p as that of getting “6” exactly and in succession, when we throw a dice 4 times. This is a quite low probability (p=0.00077160493). 

Furthermore, T is much higher where I live. In order to figure out how much T is, I waited for shooting stars during many nights and I can tell that shooting stars do not happen frequently where I live. I.e., T is several hours. I had nights without shooting stars at all. Let’s assume that T=1 hour or 3600 seconds and c=36 then p=0.00000771604, which is a very low probability. 

The same maths apply to the bee experience, i.e. the probability p of seeing a bee exactly in the same second as thinking about bees in advance, is the same (where T is the period of seeing bees and c=1).

----


   The mind - not to say "the brain" - smoothes perception over a sequence it deems reasonable. This sometimes alters the order in which sensations actually arrive at the brain. Thus the phenomenon of looking toward the telephone a second before it rings, or in general expecting to see something that shows up a second or two later.

  Your eyes from a mechanical standpoint are lenses and cameras. If we actually saw what we think we see, it would be upside down, doubled and very blurry. Your ears hear only sounds that it recognizes, even if wrongly; your eyes the same ("It's a bird, it's a plane, it's superman!"). The act of recognition precedes cognition.

   Once you have granted some sort of precognition, anything goes.

   The phenomenon of synchronicity is something else. Jung wrote a famous introduction to richard wilhelm's "i ching" which discusses "synchronicity" as such at some length, in the context of using the oracle and recognizing patterns which depend on random inputs.

   Some synchronous inputs are non-random. Take astrology, practical astrology such as closely observing the behavior of sentient beings as it relates to the phases of the moon. Virtually anyone who has worked in an emergency room has observed that more craziness occurs under a full moon, for example. More subtle observation produces more subtle distinctions. Everywhere you look there is synchronicity - touch a web anywhere and everything jiggles, ripples, and makes waves. Phenomena co-arise.

terry


Hi Terry, I am changing the focus of my work. I will, from now on, work on only messages from my Higher Self. 

Thanks anyways for your input. It is much appreciated. 

Cheers,
green1