Styles of Perception

[nuffsaid420]

Euthanatos , I 've looked at this before, I like numbers alot too. I have actually picked up creating fractal visuals for art pieces. It's all math and equations. I personally like the Mandelbrot, Julian, and more calculus related functions such as sin, cosign, ect. to create (in)finte fractals.


I understood a lot more of the fibbonacci(sp?) sequence when I was activley looking into the numbers themselves, that was about 5 years ago.

You can continue to find bigger and bigger patterns, one of infinity, but it seems that we are stuck with our Eucledean version of geometry.

What about the Non-Eucldiean geometry?

In about 300 BC Euclid wrote The Elements, a book which was to become one of the most famous books ever written. Euclid stated five postulates on which he based all his theorems:

1. To draw a straight line from any point to any other.
2. To produce a finite straight line continuously in a straight line.
3. To describe a circle with any centre and distance.
4. That all right angles are equal to each other.
5. That, if a straight line falling on two straight lines make the interior angles on the same side less than two right angles, if produced indefinitely, meet on that side on which are the angles less than the two right angles.

It is clear that the fifth postulate is different from the other four. It did not satisfy Euclid and he tried to avoid its use as long as possible - in fact the first 28 propositions of The Elements are proved without using it. Another comment worth making at this point is that Euclid, and many that were to follow him, assumed that straight lines were infinite.



And we are back to styles of perceptions. I think it is a little off topic about numbers, but yea it is still a style of perception. But we can start a new thread if you want about numbers.... I'm pretty sure we will have some other bumber lovers hop on that one.

Thanks for the link, lol, perceptions vs. reality, lol. My perception is my reality so there. Thanks for the find! Just had to highlight all the text to read it, you would think someone with this much knowledge could make something readable right? Guess not..... lol.


http://tinyurl.com/66twb3 - Non-Euclidean Geometry.
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Non-EuclideanGeometry.html Ever been here? Goto the top right, DEMONSTRATIONS PROJECTS. Awesome graphicals of math equations. in fact....

http://demonstrations.wolfram.com/Fi...heGoldenRatio/ Have fun!

[nuffsaid420]

Originally Posted by savingJenniB

JFC You guys need to get out ~ like outside ~ Sun, Moon, Stars, Fresh Air, Plants, Animals and real Humans!!!

Disassociation
and
Disorganization
are not synonyms.

Contemplate . . . Constipate . . This Thread is making me dizzy . . or weary . . . so much for prescription medications, I guess.

Err... I just got back from 4 days in Las Vegas, Went to 20 Casino's, Spa, Shows, Dinners, ect...

I have to say I didnt like all the people though. My subtle energies go out the roof around all these mindless people plugged into the machine(chink, kerplunk, ding ding ding).

But spending time with my family was more fun than I thought I could have out there. Memories in my memory bank that I can now mold into an even funner time in my head... and it goes on...

nuffsaid420 added 19 Minutes and 52 Seconds later...

Originally Posted by Euthanatos93420

I love going outside to look at the sky. I took a walk just yesterday for no reason other than to go for a walk. Despite the fact that it is almost freezing outside.

The Taoist attitude... The uncarved block and such. I love nature walks. I live right by the ocean and a marsh. So I have 2 choices everyday when I go walking with nature. To the left is a trail that leads down a creek, there is Mr. Egret, some ducks, and 2 squirrels I always talk to. Plus all the good smelling Eucalyptus trees...Then to the right is the trail to the ocean jetty which overlooks SF. Beautiful, but of course this is my perspective.

And as just an observer then to nature, I feel very connected with it all, absorbing all around me, hearing the water dance around the rocks, and the ducks swimming by, and mr. squirrel about 5 ft next to me at eye level in the Eucalyptus tree... I have a very fancy short story about all this, my perspective and all.

What I feel like I am doing in this moment is painting for you(someone else) the picture that I have seen, as accurately as possible. I'm trying to give you my perception of how I see this path.


Consider this. On the traditional conception of the mind, if you want to study experience, you shut your eyes and you introspect. You look inward and reflect on what is going on inside of you, on the inner show. But if experience, if seeing, hearing, thinking, and feeling, isn't something going on inside of you, but is something you do, then you need a different paradigm of what phenomenology would be, that is, of what a reflection on experience itself would be.


To reflect on experience is not to look inward, it is to pay attention to what you are doing, and to the way in which what you are doing is world and situation and environment involving. Suppose I am a hiker. I walk along and move my legs in all sorts of subtle ways to follow a path along a trail. But the steps I take and the way I move my legs are modulated by, controlled by, the textures and bumps and patterns of the trail itself. There is a kind of locking in. To study experience, to think about the nature of experience, is to look at this two-way dynamic exchange between world and the active perceiver.




Euthanatos I would like to thank you for the input about Ordo ab Chao. goes back to that link you gave me before, which I looked at, and then ended up watching the movie "The Nines" with Ryan (sp?)Renolds. I feel this same way. My orginization is going to look different than yours.(just for your info my desk is a mess, but I know where everything is!!!)

But as Arbitrary standardization is just a manifestation of natural synchronicity it still requires a larger perspective to accurately calculate and predict and while it becomes mostly predictable it is in fact not at all ever wholly predictable unless it aligns with natural patterns. In which case it is no longer arbitrary and is natural with holistic perspective.

Right and this is the rabbit hole we now find ourselves in. Once the larger perspective is obtained, of the natural syncronicities, without the human consequence, then the abilitiy to correctly calculate the natural syncronicities can be obtained through unbiased observation, but alas! I need other humans, to contpemplate with, for this informational awareness can not be kept at all times, here and now in this world that is here to distract us from this kind of work.

For some reason I feel isloation, for atleast a short period of time is necessary. For all the writing and observing without any outside forces knocking on my door. Seems like everytime I sit down to paint, draw, read, write... -ring ring goes the phone- knock knock goes my door- and on and on. Really, do I manifest this by trying to block it out. Would isolating myself really be isolation? Someone has always been able to distract me, Calm and Focused mind to continue, Im almost there.




savingJenniB seems like Euthanatos got to you first

nuffsaid420 added 66 Minutes and 24 Seconds later...

Originally Posted by klonopinz

Klonopinz wonders:

What about unbiased research and findings made from conscious unbiased people like swiy?


Like the lethal dose of a drug in an animal? Is that a perception, or will finding out how much drug will kill you, based on a rats or monkeys metabolism and dose (and life I guess)?

Well unbiased research from unbiased people should produce verifiable results. But how do you verify a study is unbiased?


Of course any research done in a lab is funded by someone, we have to find out if there is going to be bias in the funding part first. For example if the DEA did a study on the effects of Marijuana, their findings would sway towards that of marijuana being a dangerous drug. Thus the perception on the public would be that marijuana need to be a schedule 1 drug with no medical value, but as we have seen from more recent studies this is not true, but is what the DEA continue to rely on to make sense out of their war on drugs.

Perceptions, numbers can always be adjusted to fit the model we are trying to give you.

What about reading the effects it had on 1000 people who didn't know what they where taking and for no particular reason took something, and reported the effects they felt? Can't your perception still not be the same if you read that X and Y can't be mixed at any dosage, and that Z should be given is X causes problems?

Well I think what your sayin is if 1000 people took mushrooms and didnt know it, then reported what happened to them, that could be seen as unbiased, but then again we would have to give some placebos in there too, because people like to make sh*t up. What if we gave 1000 people placebos and told them they took mushrooms? Right... perceptions.

And if I read X cant be taken with Y, I will believe that until I come across another paper stating X can be taken with Y.(But this is where the original question come into mind). I dont need my own perceptions biased one way or the other by reading reports.

What works for me doesnt always work for you.

[klonopinz]

--
Well unbiased research from unbiased people should produce verifiable results. But how do you verify a study is unbiased?

Of course any research done in a lab is funded by someone, we have to find out if there is going to be bias in the funding part first. For example if the DEA did a study on the effects of Marijuana, their findings would sway towards that of marijuana being a dangerous drug. Thus the perception on the public would be that marijuana need to be a schedule 1 drug with no medical value, but as we have seen from more recent studies this is not true, but is what the DEA continue to rely on to make sense out of their war on drugs.

Perceptions, numbers can always be adjusted to fit the model we are trying to give you.
--
And it would be your problem if you permit your perception to be affected by those studies not worthy of. Noticed the tests and research Swim mentions have no perceptions, are observations measured through unbiased objects or unsuspecting subjects and are easily replicated (blindly) if you wanted to.

Get X amount of drug and give to a mouse, record how much it took to cause dead, and it's probably real close to the LD recorded in the next 1000 mouse yoou try it on. Similarly, try Y (without you knowing what it is too BTW) and administer to the rat before dead after X dose and see if survives. Then try again with 1000 rats and things will be similar.

It would be swiys problem to read and believe in DEA marijuana studies, or any other study. Instead he should see what facts they point out, which they might have overlooked (especially those you most belief in, not you dose already doubt) and you make new considerations and ideas. One could also read the La Guardia Report or the Indian Commsion report (or so) which alse shed another perspective of the drug, and read thousands of studies. Then Swiy might want to get some bud extract (in this example), put it in 5 pills, and fill the other 5 with another oil (placebo). Then see the daily effects of 10 intakes of either placebo or bud.

--
Well I think what your sayin is if 1000 people took mushrooms and didnt know it, then reported what happened to them, that could be seen as unbiased, but then again we would have to give some placebos in there too, because people like to make sh*t up. What if we gave 1000 people placebos and told them they took mushrooms? Right... perceptions.

And if I read X cant be taken with Y, I will believe that until I come across another paper stating X can be taken with Y.(But this is where the original question come into mind). I dont need my own perceptions biased one way or the other by reading reports.

What works for me doesnt always work for you.
--

You think wrong, and maybe if you asked if the placebo was involved in my "example" (which actually is always done with a subgroup to prove placebo because of FDA makes them), or your interest was to actually know, that would have been your question, and not simply asserting "What works for me doesn't always for you".

I do agree that numbers can be easily changed to fit the model, but the numbers you should check and prove the most intensively are those you offer to others, not those offered to you (given you are an unbiased person).

[nuffsaid420]

Originally Posted by klonopinz

--

You think wrong, and maybe if you asked if the placebo was involved in my "example" (which actually is always done with a subgroup to prove placebo because of FDA makes them), or your interest was to actually know, that would have been your question, and not simply asserting "What works for me doesn't always for you".

I do agree that numbers can be easily changed to fit the model, but the numbers you should check and prove the most intensively are those you offer to others, not those offered to you (given you are an unbiased person).

My statement "What works for me doesn't always for you". referred to the fact that SWIM might like to take 10 doses of mushrooms compared to SWiy who only can take 5 doses, that is all, misunderstanding.
(We could even go as far as the lethal amount like you refer to, I've seen, heard it happen many times, so and so only took 1 hit or only did that much, and died, usually the result of bad stuff, but sometimes it is the persons own fault through negligence)

We looking for that 1 in a million that doesnt kick it and then find out why.


It also seems that you are agreeing with the placebo effect? Your statement above seems to indicated that placebo groups are already taken into account( control groups) which you are correct.

Also the research being conducted right now is not that of this physical plane, thus the mode for the scientific model has to be adjusted slightly.

[Euthanatos93420]

Originally Posted by nuffsaid420

The Taoist attitude...

I love the Tao te Ching. But I love paradoxes so go figure...

But if experience, if seeing, hearing, thinking, and feeling, isn't something going on inside of you, but is something you do, then you need a different paradigm of what phenomenology would be, that is, of what a reflection on experience itself would be.

Or, in other words...is who you are what you do or is what you do who you are? If who you are is what you do then Can you control who you are by controlling what you do? Can you control what you do by controlling who you are? Is there a difference?

There are two things we have: Choice & Time. Neither are tangible nor quantifiable but they are the smallest measures of humanity we have and can recognize despite our inability to quanitfy and calculate them we neverless continue to judge ourselves and other by the measurement of that which we cannot measure.


Euthanatos I would like to thank you for the input about Ordo ab Chao. goes back to that link you gave me before, which I looked at, and then ended up watching the movie "The Nines" with Ryan (sp?)Renolds. I feel this same way. My orginization is going to look different than yours.(just for your info my desk is a mess, but I know where everything is!!!)

Well unbiased research from unbiased people should produce verifiable results. But how do you verify a study is unbiased?

Objectivity cannot be measured when everything we can perceive is completely subjective. Therefore Objectivity and subjectivity are never absolutes. They are like Hot and Cold. One is never really absolutely 'hot' or 'cold' but relatively so. Biased simply means 'percievably subjective'. When you know that everything is subjective then you can asses relative bias. Where 'hot' and 'cold' (Poles) are relative description of a measurement made on a thermometer (Rod) So objectivity and subjectivity (poles) are measured by bias (rod). While bias is much less quantifiable than temperature the metaphor stands.

Of course any research done in a lab is funded by someone, we have to find out if there is going to be bias in the funding part first. For example if the DEA did a study on the effects of Marijuana, their findings would sway towards that of marijuana being a dangerous drug. Thus the perception on the public would be that marijuana need to be a schedule 1 drug with no medical value, but as we have seen from more recent studies this is not true, but is what the DEA continue to rely on to make sense out of their war on drugs.

So what does this tell about:
1) What's going on in the world outside you.
2) What decisions you must make.

Perceptions, numbers can always be adjusted to fit the model we are trying to give you.

Perception creates reality. Can you control your perception? Is that power? Or is power the ability to control other people's perception? What does it mean if you believe people are not intelligent to make decisions for themselves? What does it mean if someone else believes this? What does it mean if one believes this about oneself?

I dont need my own perceptions biased one way or the other by reading reports.

What works for me doesnt always work for you.

Education and influence cannot be seperated. However one can be aware and by doing so control HOW education influences oneself. That is the Occult Key to Mystical power.

[nuffsaid420]

Originally Posted by Euthanatos93420

I love the Tao te Ching. But I love paradoxes so go figure...

Because I am too lazy right now I just copied from wiki:

"Claims of the form "if A, then B" are called conditional claims. It is not necessary to believe the conclusion (B) to accept the conditional claim (if A, then B) as true.
In formal languages, we sometimes interpret "If X then Y" as a material conditional. On this reading, it simply means "Y, or else not X". Here we would read the sentence as "Santa Claus exists, or this sentence is false". On this reading, Curry's paradox is simply a variant on the liar paradox. However, in natural language this is not usually what we mean by "If X then Y". For instance, "if 6*7=42, then the moon exists" is true as a material implication, but is generally not considered true in natural language, because the moon's existence does not seem to be related to this fact of arithmetic.
Nevertheless we arrived at paradox in natural language. In fact, not only did we arrive at a contradiction, but we were actually able to prove anything at all, without relying on such principles as the principle of explosion which are generally held to be false in accounts of natural language. Thus Curry's paradox poses an additional problem."




Right so, this is a nice linguistic paradox where "If X then Y" doesn't really work because of the observers perspective on the condition. So we could go many directions with the conditionals to show how this paradox works.


If "2+2=4" then "pigs fly"





I like finding those paradoxes and getting stuck there for a while contemplating wondering....Sitting waiting watching.

Or, in other words...is who you are what you do or is what you do who you are? If who you are is what you do then Can you control who you are by controlling what you do? Can you control what you do by controlling who you are? Is there a difference?

Every journey starts with a single step. Actions speak louder than words. We are reflections of ourselves at our certain level of consciousness right now. The higher the vibrations you reach and the more glimpses of the true self manifest it then starts directly reflecting who you are as a person, what you wear, what you eat, where you live, what you do, and so on.

Basically what everyone else sees you as(their perception of you) is simply the reflection of that beings level of awareness(vibrational consciousness).

Thus the more aware you are the more you can control your reflection.

There are two things we have: Choice & Time. Neither are tangible nor quantifiable but they are the smallest measures of humanity we have and can recognize despite our inability to quanitfy and calculate them we neverless continue to judge ourselves and other by the measurement of that which we cannot measure.

Yes and you need to know that choice & time are what help you develop that reflection in the mirror.
For Example:If I got to see a glimpse of myself for the first time -(who I actually am) I would see a healthy person, thus I now have a choice in reality to become that person, which would lead me down a certain path filled with many choices, but through the journey and onward I will then materialize that reflection of myself I saw that was healthy. And this works in all areas of life and situations too. Make sense?

Times is here for the journey we all must take to become who we are. Our true selves.

Objectivity cannot be measured when everything we can perceive is completely subjective. Therefore Objectivity and subjectivity are never absolutes. They are like Hot and Cold. One is never really absolutely 'hot' or 'cold' but relatively so. Biased simply means 'percievably subjective'. When you know that everything is subjective then you can asses relative bias. Where 'hot' and 'cold' (Poles) are relative description of a measurement made on a thermometer (Rod) So objectivity and subjectivity (poles) are measured by bias (rod). While bias is much less quantifiable than temperature the metaphor stands.


So what does this tell about:
1) What's going on in the world outside you.
2) What decisions you must make.

Perception creates reality. Can you control your perception? Is that power? Or is power the ability to control other people's perception? What does it mean if you believe people are not intelligent to make decisions for themselves? What does it mean if someone else believes this? What does it mean if one believes this about oneself?



Education and influence cannot be seperated. However one can be aware and by doing so control HOW education influences oneself. That is the Occult Key to Mystical power.

one can be aware and by doing so control HOW education influences oneself
Exactly the point. And I thank you for the realization of something I didnt know how to quite explain before.

But this is only the surface......

That is only my interpretation of the situation [Spottieottiedopaliscious]

[Euthanatos93420]

I love going outside to look at the sky. I took a walk just yesterday for no reason other than to go for a walk. Despite the fact that it is almost freezing outside.

Humans on the other hand are another matter. Interaction with them tends to have negative reprocussions and as I such I tend to have little to do with them. That's not a good practice nor does it give em happiness but I can't seem to find a positive context for interaction with them very often. I'm sure it's possible but it seems to be like finding a needle in a haystack.

I think disassociation and disorganization are related. Oragnization and Order vs. Chaos are just a matter of perception. Organization is naturally occuring. The way we think an 'organized' desk or room ought to look is an arbitrary concept. What may be organized to you may not be organized for the next person. Thus we have invented standardization or Ordo ab Chao when in fact organization occurs naturally and if we learn natural organization versus arbitrary organization we can find greater meaning from the holistic perspective. However, arbitrary and human creations have their place. Standardization has its place as well. The line between them futher blurs when you consider humans to be a natural occurance and therefore all arbitrary standardization to be just another form of natural synchronicity. Where Arbitrary synchronicty can be calculated with less information than Natural Synchronicity. But as Arbitrary standardization is just a manifestation of natural synchronicity it still requires a larger perspective to accurately calculate and predict and while it becomes mostly predictable it is in fact not at all ever wholly predictable unless it aligns with natural patterns. In which case it is no longer arbitrary and is natural with holistic perspective.

Err...okay now I think I might be starting to sound obtuse like Bernard (Yes, Prime Minister) so I'm gonna stop lol.

[Euthanatos93420]

Originally Posted by savingJenniB

I read this stuff and we (should say you,
cuz i really not contributing

Inspiration is contribution. You inspiraed my observation of polarity from the correlation of Organization & Association to it's opposite Disorganization and Dissociation. I had a nice little Kundalini vibration from that. Thanks!

could talk this thing into a stairwell to the Moon,
and in the end all we would have is our Perception,
of this futile conversation.

If nothing matters in the end then the only thing that matters is what we do right now.

Sorry, My Old Aunt should have more patience with you intellectual boys.

Nah, it's always good to have a push. People put too much emphasis on positive/negative nature of vibrations. I say they are all necessary and without recognizing such then one can never have a holistic perspective.

After all, you will be running the show soon.
Do something with your wonderful, erudite lives,
then we'll chat.

If life itself is wonderful, is that enough?

[klonopinz]

Klonopinz wonders:

What about unbiased research and findings made from conscious unbiased people like swiy?

Like the lethal dose of a drug in an animal? Is that a perception, or will finding out how much drug will kill you, based on a rats or monkeys metabolism and dose (and life I guess)? What about reading the effects it had on 1000 people who didn't know what they where taking and for no particular reason took something, and reported the effects they felt? Can't your perception still not be the same if you read that X and Y can't be mixed at any dosage, and that Z should be given is X causes problems?