Scientific Method and Mindfulness

SM1

 

Mindfulness is the application of the Scientific Method to the Metaphysical Universe.

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Comments

  • Chris Thompson  On December 6, 2013 at 8:13 PM

    Mindfulness is required to apply the scientific method to the metaphysical universe. There are quite a lot of uses and interpretations of mindfulness on the ‘net. Mindfulness seems to be the practice of being mindful or attentive and alert to one’s environment and interaction with that environment. This can get pretty big.

  • Chris Thompson  On December 6, 2013 at 8:15 PM

    KHTK seems to be mindfulness wed to the Scientific Method.

  • Chris Thompson  On December 6, 2013 at 8:23 PM

    That is a cool flow chart. I may have that tattooed next to my Ů.

    • vinaire  On December 6, 2013 at 8:46 PM

      LOL!

    • vinaire  On December 6, 2013 at 8:51 PM

      Now people will wonder about what your Ů is.

      • 2ndxmr  On December 7, 2013 at 4:02 AM

        You’re really trying to paint a picture there, aren’t you?

        That just can’t be un-seen. 😉

        • vinaire  On December 7, 2013 at 5:21 AM

          LOL! The key to mind is visualization. If you can visualize it correctly, then you can understand it.

  • Chris Thompson  On December 6, 2013 at 8:35 PM

    Why Practice Mindfulness?

    Studies have shown that practicing mindfulness, even for just a few weeks, can bring a variety of physical, psychological, and social benefits. Here are some of these benefits, which extend across many different settings.

    Mindfulness is good for our bodies: A seminal study found that, after just eight weeks of training, practicing mindfulness meditation boosts our immune system’s ability to fight off illness.
    Mindfulness is good for our minds: Several studies have found that mindfulness increases positive emotions while reducing negative emotions and stress. Indeed, at least one study suggests it may be as good as antidepressants in fighting depression and preventing relapse.

    Mindfulness changes our brains: Research has found that it increases density of gray matter in brain regions linked to learning, memory, emotion regulation, and empathy.

    Mindfulness helps us focus: Studies suggest that mindfulness helps us tune out distractions and improves our memory and attention skills.

    Mindfulness fosters compassion and altruism: Research suggests mindfulness training makes us more likely to help someone in need and increases activity in neural networks involved in understanding the suffering of others and regulating emotions. Evidence suggests it might boost self-compassion as well.

    Mindfulness enhances relationships: Research suggests mindfulness training makes couples more satisfied with their relationship, makes each partner feel more optimistic and relaxed, and makes them feel more accepting of and closer to one another.

    Mindfulness is good for parents and parents-to-be: Studies suggest it may reduce pregnancy-related anxiety, stress, and depression in expectant parents. Parents who practice mindfulness report being happier with their parenting skills and their relationship with their kids, and their kids were found to have better social skills.

    Mindfulness helps schools: There’s scientific evidence that teaching mindfulness in the classroom reduces behavior problems and aggression among students, and improves their happiness levels and ability to pay attention. Teachers trained in mindfulness also show lower blood pressure, less negative emotion and symptoms of depression, and greater compassion and empathy.

    Mindfulness helps health care professionals cope with stress, connect with their patients, and improve their general quality of life. It also helps mental health professionals by reducing negative emotions and anxiety, and increasing their positive emotions and feelings of self-compassion.

    Mindfulness helps prisons: Evidence suggests mindfulness reduces anger, hostility, and mood disturbances among prisoners by increasing their awareness of their thoughts and emotions, helping with their rehabilitation and reintegration.

    Mindfulness helps veterans: Studies suggest it can reduce the symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in the aftermath of war.

    Mindfulness fights obesity: Practicing “mindful eating” encourages healthier eating habits, helps people lose weight, and helps them savor the food they do eat.

    • 2ndxmr  On December 7, 2013 at 3:57 AM

      Ct:”Mindfulness changes our brains: Research has found that it increases density of gray matter in brain regions …”

      And that was measured how? Reference?

      I am slightly of the mind that you intentionally omitted:

      “Mindfulness helps you leap over tall buildings in a single bound.”

      Ref: Superman, Action Comics #1, June 1938, J. Seigel

      (One should always include citations when referring to scientific findings.) 😉

      • vinaire  On December 7, 2013 at 5:18 AM

        No wonder, 2x, now I understand why I was missing you! 🙂

        .

      • Chris Thompson  On December 7, 2013 at 8:12 AM

        Good point! I’ve recklessly and unintentionally flooded my post with a bunch of assumptions. I don’t know the references, source data, and the like. I need to review the entire list. That was lazy of me to copy and paste that.

      • Chris Thompson  On December 7, 2013 at 3:35 PM

        2x: And that was measured how? Reference?

        ct: I’m feeling a little less of a jackass after chasing down this study

        “The study, published last month in the journal Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging, suggests that meditating for just 30 minutes a day for eight weeks can increase the density of gray matter in brain regions associated with memory, stress, and empathy. The researchers tracked 16 people who were participating in the Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) program, the training program developed more than 30 years ago by Jon Kabat-Zinn. Over eight weekly meetings, the program leads participants through meditation exercises meant to build the skills of mindfulness—a moment-by-moment awareness of one’s thoughts, feelings, bodily sensations, and surrounding environment. Participants are supposed to try these practices on their own between classes. . . . But in this study, the researchers weren’t just asking the participants how they felt. They were examining their brains, two weeks before and right after the eight-week program. Over the same period, they also scanned the brains of people who didn’t receive the MBSR training. The MBSR participants, none of whom were experienced meditators, reported spending just under half an hour per day on their meditation “homework.” Yet when their brains were scanned at the end of the program, their gray matter was significantly thicker in several regions than it was before.

        Brain scans of the hippocampus, showing the regions the researchers determined were affected by meditation. Image adapted from B. Hölzel, et al., Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging Vol. 191 (1), January 30, 2011, pp. 36-43.

        One of those regions was the hippocampus, which prior research has found to be involved in learning, memory, and the regulation of our emotions. The gray matter of the hippocampus is often reduced in people who suffer from depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The researchers also found denser gray matter in the temporo-perietal junction and the posterior cingulated cortex of the meditators’ brains—regions involved in empathy and taking the perspective of someone else—and in the cerebellum, which has been linked to emotion regulation.

        • vinaire  On December 7, 2013 at 3:43 PM

          Good research!

        • 2ndxmr  On December 7, 2013 at 4:25 PM

          Zee leetle gray cells, zee gray matteur, is zee seengking matteur. (try your best Belgian accent here. Zat was Poirot speaking.)

          Gray matter = unmyelinated neurons. The old think was that we were born with a fixed amount (fixed number) of neurons and if these died or were destroyed, they were not replaced.

          The cited study is interesting in that context. It implies either an increase in density by increased neuron count or by increased cross-linking and synaptic generation. The latter would be the easiest to explain as it also occurs as learning occurs, but that begs the question “What learning is occurring in MBSR?” Or is learning just one of the paradigms that can be established as a gray-matter enhancer, with stress being a counter factor to that enhancement. That would imply that the less stressed the university experience was, the greater the learning potential.

          All kind of benefits could come from that correlation.

        • vinaire  On December 7, 2013 at 9:54 PM

          Mindfulness seems to enhance learning in terms of making it more consistent. Inconsistencies are resolved, assumptions are removed, and better linking is established.

  • MarkNR  On December 6, 2013 at 8:57 PM

    Good stuff.

    • Chris Thompson  On December 6, 2013 at 9:08 PM

      I’m kind still reeling from Vinay’s beautiful statement of applying the Scientific Method to the metaphysical universe. It is so obvious and profound. I mean we’ve been talking about this for while but when he stated it just that way it really affected me.

  • vinaire  On December 6, 2013 at 9:28 PM

    Mindful Subject Clearing seems to be a workable approach to ascertain consistency.

    .

  • vinaire  On December 6, 2013 at 9:34 PM

    Application of Mindful Subject Clearing (MSC) seems to provide the following sequence for the various concepts associated with SPIRIT.

    .

    > The English word spirit comes from Latin spiritus “breath”, “motile air”
    … “Breath” represents the aliveness of the body, so spirit is the aliveness of the body.

    > a non-corporeal substance contrasted with the material body
    … Spirit is simply an abstract notion expressing the aliveness of the body

    > incorporeal, without a physical body, presence or form
    … The earliest ideas of incorporeal came from thin matter, such as air; and from energy, such as fire.

    The only things, which are truly without a physical body, are patterns among physical bodies. These are abstractions that do not lie in the physical dimension.

    .

    Later concepts start to add assumptions to the above.

    .

  • vinaire  On December 6, 2013 at 9:51 PM

    Geniuses seem to apply MSC (Mindful Subject Clearing) implicitly without knowing. They look for consistency, and thus discover missing concepts.

    But anyone can now apply MSC in its explicit form as expressed in KHTK to make discoveries for oneself.

    .

  • vinaire  On December 6, 2013 at 10:20 PM

    I was just looking at the graph for “f(x) = sin 1/x”. The frequency of this curve increases as x approaches 0 from either direction.

    It seems that a three-dimensional version of this function would define a particle perfectly .

    .

    • 2ndxmr  On December 7, 2013 at 4:33 AM

      V:”It seems that a three-dimensional version of this function would define a particle perfectly .”

      I think you might be happier with f(x)=(sin x)/x as a starting point. That creates a nice envelope.

      • vinaire  On December 7, 2013 at 5:27 AM

        Yes. I was thinking of something more like f(x) = (1/x)(sin 1/x) on the same lines. It simultaneously reduces the amplitude and increases the frequency as one approaches the “center of the particle”.

        .

        • 2ndxmr  On December 7, 2013 at 12:58 PM

          The real problem of sin(1/x) is that the period of the wave (wavelength) goes to zero at x=0. That would mean the energy of every particle would be equal and infinite.

          Also, one has to consider what x=0 implies. It is very straightforward when one considers a cyclic action but less so if one tries to consider it as the center of a particle.

          Electrons show quantum differences in energy levels as they orbit an atom. They would not do that with a sin(1/x) component but they would with a (sin x)/x as model as that defines a constant period (constant wavelength / constant energy).

        • Chris Thompson  On December 7, 2013 at 2:43 PM

          2X: The real problem of sin(1/x) is that the period of the wave (wavelength) goes to zero at x=0. That would mean the energy of every particle would be equal and infinite.

          CT: Does this zero have to be a problem if there we consider a consecutive process of iterations occurring say, every Planck second?

        • 2ndxmr  On December 7, 2013 at 5:31 PM

          CT: “Does this zero have to be a problem if there we consider a consecutive process of iterations occurring say, every Planck second?”

          Yes. Whether you define x by spatial length or by time unit the same problem occurs.

        • Chris Thompson  On December 7, 2013 at 10:36 PM

          Is it reasonable to ask whether a null is useful to form discreteness.

        • 2ndxmr  On December 8, 2013 at 2:15 AM

          CT:”Is it reasonable to ask whether a null is useful to form discreteness.”

          There are a lot of ways one can look at that: are all nulls equal?; when is a null not a null?; is there ever really a null?; how null is a null?; how should a null be defined?; can a null have quality without quantity?; how can a question about nulls beget so many questions?

          Of all those questions, if one can answer yes to whether a null can have quality without quantity, then the answer to your question is probably “yes”.

        • Chris Thompson  On December 8, 2013 at 11:51 AM

          Those are good questions. For instance, a null can be the “reference zero” say of the reference grounding to give binary systems something to consistently call zero. Yes, I get that.

        • Chris Thompson  On December 8, 2013 at 2:39 PM

          2X: There are a lot of ways one can look at that:

          CT: So the null I was particularly wondering about would be if we could see and measure small enough, what would we see occur when an electron “moves” from one nuclear shell energy state to another? Does it travel? and what does travel mean in that context? and/or Is there a null between shell states? Does it exist continually but disappear as a result of sinusoidal revolution away from sight and detection, Or does it have an empty null state where it does not in fact exist (I doubt this)? Or does it seamlessly disappear from one shell state and simultaneously reappear in the next shell state?

        • 2ndxmr  On December 9, 2013 at 1:28 PM

          CT:” Or does it seamlessly disappear from one shell state and simultaneously reappear in the next shell state?”

          First consider the means by which an electron jumps from one level to another, or falls from on e level to a lower level. The falling action (from a higher level to a lower one) is used in lasers. What occurs when the electron falls is that a photon of a specific wavelength (energy) is released.

          We had previously talked about the volume of an orbital based on the orbital shape and “level” and how that related to the wavelength of a photon that could occupy the orbital. Since wavelength decreases as energy increases, but we observe that the volume of an orbital increases as energy level increases, then the obvious conclusion is that there are multiple periods of one wavelength to an electron in a higher orbital. This reasoning is supported by the fact that an electron has a base energy, the s1 level. The notion of this level is that it is spherical. The way I look at it is that it consists of one wavelength of the longest wavelength that an electron can have (its base energy level). It may be that this wave wraps around on itself so that the “head” connects to the “tail”.

          I believe this model of “head” connecting to “tail” can even represent the shapes of higher orbitals. The higher orbital shapes can be more like a figure-8 (p sub orbital) or lobe (d sub orbital). My speculation is that the multiple-period-wavelength-chains that would occupy the higher sub orbitals will actually fold over on themselves the way a twisted-up rope will. These various foldings are stable in their basic shape, giving a suborbital its volume contour as the folded shape revolves along the axis of the fold. That is to say, a shape of an 8, if spun, will produce a contour that looks like a dumbbell.

          When an electron releases energy in the form of a photon, the head-to-tail loop length is now shorter and a new wavelength will also exist. This is not stable in the same path-configuration (shape) it had before releasing the photon, so it re-folds to a shorter loop with a different shape. This action would account for the quantumization of energy levels.

          As to your question about how long that takes, my guess would be that it occurs in a Planck “cycle” which may equate to the Planck second.

        • Chris Thompson  On December 9, 2013 at 5:57 PM

          Thank you. That is a good answer. So if I made the analogy of an orbital shape and size being a “shell” or “skin” or “envelope” and I added or subtracted a photon, and the shell either expanded to a higher shell energy state or diminished to a lower shell energy state, would you say that the electron “package” moves from precisely quantized energy state-to-state or does it jump without gradual motion, disappearing from one shell and appearing in the next?

          I tried imagining this as a toy balloon with air. As we let the air out, the balloon shrinks and vice versa. This is an analog, very smooth transition, it is hard to imagine what process is occurring at the quantum level, however I am pretty sure that an elementary question that I could imagine like this is and has been well worked out for some time. The photoelectric effect seems to require a photon of a certain quantized wavelength to cause the electron to shift between shells. There seems to be no in-between or gradual shift in position for the electron.

        • 2ndxmr  On December 9, 2013 at 7:24 PM

          CT:”The photoelectric effect seems to require a photon of a certain quantized wavelength to cause the electron to shift between shells. There seems to be no in-between or gradual shift in position for the electron.”

          The next thing you need to get an understanding of is that energy at the electron level is equated to the angular momentum of the particle.

          If you tie a weight to a rope and swing it around a circular path the angular momentum is the momentum defined by the mass of the weight times the velocity the weight would have if you released it (the tangential or angular velocity).

          Angular momentum is proportionate to angular velocity and it must be understood that this is not the same as propagation velocity. Propagation velocity will be c for the wave but the angular momentum will relate to wavelength, a shorter wavelength having greater angular momentum.

          The effect of this angular momentum can be seen in bowling where the pro bowler puts a good spin on the ball – which is different from its rolling speed down the lane – and when the ball hits the pins it imparts this angular momentum to them making them fly with more force than a straight rolling ball could deliver.

          Same with a photon. A photon will carry angular momentum and if it strikes an electron orbiting an atom, it may impart some or all of that momentum to the electron. The key word is “may”. To cause the struck electron to change quantum levels, the photon must have an adequate amount of energy to spin the electron up to a high enough energy level that it can make the jump. If the striking photon is very energetic, it may spin-up the electron so much that the electron has enough energy to escape the atom’s grasp.

          All this follows the rules of quantization. You can’t approximate the idea with the balloon and gradual air release. The quantization comes down to the idea of integer numbers of wavelengths. That is to say, you can’t have 3-1/2 wavelengths in an orbital. It will be 3 or it will be 4, or some other integer number.

        • Chris Thompson  On December 11, 2013 at 10:37 AM

          2X: That is to say, you can’t have 3-1/2 wavelengths in an orbital. It will be 3 or it will be 4, or some other integer number.

          Chris: Thank you for your very thorough replies. I am learning. What I am looking at, if I can form the question, is if the most basic units of energy are discrete packages (are they?) then is the most basic unit of spacetime a discrete package? (is it?) And if it is, then is the smallest movement a discrete and measurable distance?

      • vinaire  On December 7, 2013 at 12:58 PM

        Actually, f(x) = x sin 1/x produces the curve I had in mind.

        .

        • vinaire  On December 7, 2013 at 1:54 PM

          The function sin (1/x) does not converge to any limit at 0. Therefore, we cannot say that its wavelength goes to 0 at x=0. But the function x sin 1/x does go to the limit of 0. But then its amplitude also goes to 0. So, there would be a finite limit to a particle’s energy, that would have a 3D function analogous to x sin 1/x. In that case, the origin (x=y=z=0) shall be at the center of the particle.

          (sin x)/x is a ratio. I roughly drew the curve and does not seem to look like a wave function. I do not have a graphic calculator.

          .

        • 2ndxmr  On December 7, 2013 at 2:55 PM

          An linearly increasing amplitude as distance increases from the center of your particle? Or are you ultimately aiming for a spherical volume going to infinity (once you bring in the other axes)?

          The problem is still in the wavelength going to zero at x=0, not to mention that now the limit of x sin(1/x) will go to zero at x=0. And sin(1/x) will go to zero (static) as x goes to infinity. So basically the model becomes a particle that is all wave with zero amplitude at its center and an infinitely increasing static “charge” as it expands. I can’t think of a particle manifestation that would imply this where x represents a distance from the center of the particle.

          The domain and range of the function can both go to + and – infinity. That is simply not consistent with the observations of field strengths of particles.

        • 2ndxmr  On December 7, 2013 at 3:04 PM

          2x:”That is simply not consistent with the observations of field strengths of particles.”

          But it might be closer to the model for dark energy, which seems to have the very effect of increasing with distance. However, it doesn’t address the problem of wavelength: if dark energy followed this function it would become visible as distance increased. Since the original wavelength could not have been less than a Planck length at “bang”, and if wavelength had been expanding by sin (1/x), then at some point in time there should have been a “visible” period of the energy and there should be some cosmic echo of that.

        • vinaire  On December 7, 2013 at 3:06 PM

          Here is the graph for x sin 1/x:

          xsin1x0blow2

        • Chris Thompson  On December 7, 2013 at 3:15 PM

          vin: Actually, f(x) = x sin 1/x produces the curve I had in mind.

          ct: Please explain the metaphor of this graph.

        • vinaire  On December 7, 2013 at 3:12 PM

          Here is the graph for sin (x) / x:

          sin-x-over-x

        • vinaire  On December 7, 2013 at 3:15 PM

          Solidity seems to come with higher frequency.

          .

        • Chris Thompson  On December 7, 2013 at 3:20 PM

          vin: Solidity seems to come with higher frequency.

          ct: I see higher amplitude, same frequency.

        • 2ndxmr  On December 7, 2013 at 3:16 PM

          V:”(sin x)/x is a ratio. I roughly drew the curve and does not seem to look like a wave function. I do not have a graphic calculator.”

          Go to:
          http://www.wolframalpha.com/

          and type in the command “graph (sin x)/x” without the quotation marks.

        • 2ndxmr  On December 7, 2013 at 3:36 PM

          V:”The function sin (1/x) does not converge to any limit at 0. Therefore, we cannot say that its wavelength goes to 0 at x=0.”

          The graph you posted at

          https://vinaire.me/2013/12/06/scientific-method-and-mindfulness/#comment-15150

          shows the effect of decreasing wavelength as x goes to zero. It may not evaluate right at x=0 and that is why we talk in limits, of course. But x can be made much smaller than 10^-35, the Planck length and sin(1/x) will still evaluate. Therefore you have to begin by defining the minimum size of your particle.

        • 2ndxmr  On December 7, 2013 at 3:50 PM

          2x:”Dark energy… …then at some point in time there should have been a “visible” period of the energy and there should be some cosmic echo of that.”

          Since we can begin to “see” (measure with instrumentation) beginning at 10^-18 meters, and since dark energy should not be propagating faster than speed “c”, then we should be able to find the dark energy echo beginning at a distance (time) defined by sin(1/x) evaluating to 10^-18 meters.

  • vinaire  On December 7, 2013 at 8:19 AM

    In my MSC of Calculus, my list so far is:

    Change
    Calculus
    Limit
    Continuity

    .

    • vinaire  On December 7, 2013 at 8:21 AM

      Of course, one needs to understand graphs and functions before starting on calculus.

    • vinaire  On December 7, 2013 at 8:26 AM

      I am indeed having fun with calculus because I am smoothing out all my previous understanding. I cleared up how I can rearrange triple integrals. Here are some great videos.

      .

  • vinaire  On December 7, 2013 at 3:35 PM

    https://vinaire.me/2013/12/06/scientific-method-and-mindfulness/#comment-15148

    2x… “An linearly increasing amplitude as distance increases from the center of your particle? Or are you ultimately aiming for a spherical volume going to infinity (once you bring in the other axes)? …”

    .

    My view of a wave particle is very high frequency in the center, which is then decreasing as one moves away from the center. In my view, density of a wave particle is proprtional to its frequency. This is just a conjecture. I have not worked it out.

    .

  • vinaire  On December 7, 2013 at 3:49 PM

    I think we are cross posting here. My favorite graph for a particle is this one.

    https://vinaire.me/2013/12/06/scientific-method-and-mindfulness/#comment-15150

    Here, as one approaches the center, the frequency ( and hence solidity) increases to infinity, while amplitude decreases to zero. This helps converge the function to the limit of zero (infinite frequency with zero amplitude). This seems to me a good model for a wave particle.

    .

    • 2ndxmr  On December 7, 2013 at 6:34 PM

      V:”My favorite graph for a particle is this one.”

      But what observation is it consistent with?

      Consistent observations:
      – any singular photon has a singular wavelength
      – orbiting electrons have a consistent energy level per type of orbital. This can be converted to a singular wavelength per orbital type
      – field strength follows the inverse-square law; field strength decreases with distance from the source.

    • 2ndxmr  On December 8, 2013 at 2:53 AM

      While I’ve noted what appear to be inconsistencies with the accepted makeup of particles using the function (sin(1/x))/x compared to (sin x)/x there nevertheless exists a rather fascinating correspondence between (sin(1/x))/x and the interpreted mechanism of dark energy.

      A sort of analogue of the apparent effect of dark energy is the feedback phenomenon that can occur between a microphone and a loudspeaker. I say “sort of” because there is an understood energy source to maintain and increase the oscillation in the microphone-amplifier-loudspeaker-feedback loop. Such may or may not apply to dark energy.

      In electronics the rule is “keep out of the third quadrant” if you don’t want a positive-feedback oscillation to start up. (The third quadrant being the are of -x and -y on the simple x,y graph). The reasoning behind that gets mathematically complex but the simple way of looking at it is that the 3rd quadrant is the perfect mirror of the 1st quadrant (+x and +y) and a perfect spring effect can be set up between the two. The oscillation that can be set up in a spring is fairly easy to understand.

      I think if I were trying to build a universe, I might just add in something like this to make the universe expand infinitely as opposed to a universe that would expand for a while and then collapse on itself.

  • vinaire  On December 7, 2013 at 5:58 PM

    I shall not be getting into too much math here unless it has to do with clearing up concepts in Calculus. Otherwise, I shall simply be dealing with general ideas, conjectures and thought experiments.

    Right now I am MSCing myself on CALCULUS and SPIRIT.

    .

  • vinaire  On December 8, 2013 at 10:14 AM

    In my MSC (Mindful Subject Clearing) list for Hubbard’s Mission, I have the following:

    Dianetics
    …..Auditing
    Unwanted condition
    …..Charge
    …..Restimulation
    Inconsistency
    …..Engram
    …..Bank
    …..Unconsciousness
    Preclear
    …..Case
    …..Aberration
    Clear
    …..No case
    …..No potential for a case
    Mission: Clearing the planet
    Means: Church of Scientology
    Barriers: reactive mind (clandestine suppressive powers)

    .

    • vinaire  On December 9, 2013 at 8:18 AM

      It appears that to Hubbard, the reactive mind came to be the “clandestine suppressive powers” of this universe.

      But these “suppressive powers” is not so much present in the physical universe as they are present in the metaphysical universe.

      The metaphysical universe is made up of abstractions, speculations and assumptions. All inconsistencies lie in the assumptions strewn all over the metaphysical universe.

      So, to associate these “suppressive powers” to people in this physical universe is wrong target. This is what Hubbard did, and look where he ended up!

      The correct target are the inconsistencies and the underlying assumptions. The general solution for this problem is MSC = Mindful Subject Clearing.

      .

      • Chris Thompson  On December 9, 2013 at 10:32 AM

        This is a big improvement.

        To understand your model, I ask if you speculate that the initial condensate of manifestation of existence occurs in the metaphysical? And is this a similar manifestation to what appears as mental? Not because of mental but consisting of the same or similar physics as mental?

      • vinaire  On December 9, 2013 at 1:35 PM

        In my view, the initial condensate of manfestation of existence contains the whole dimension of abstraction, even on a small scale. Please see

        KHTK Model of The Universe

        .

  • Nic  On December 8, 2013 at 10:51 AM

    RIGHTS OF A THETAN.
    1) RIGHT TO YOUR HEALTH ‘MENTAL.
    2) RIGHT TO HAVE A GAME.
    3) RIGHT TO CHANGE A GAME.

    Nic ARC infinity

    • vinaire  On December 8, 2013 at 10:57 AM

      What is a thetan?
      What are you really?
      Are you a sum total of ideas, postulates and desires?

      .

    • vinaire  On December 8, 2013 at 11:35 AM

      Or, are you (thetan) something mysterious?

    • vinaire  On December 8, 2013 at 12:00 PM

      Thetan is postulates. Postulates limit the thetan.
      Thetan may have “right” to his mental health, but he is limited by his postulates regarding mental health.
      Thetan may have “right” to have a game but he is limited by his postulates regarding games.
      Thetan may have “right” to change a game but he is limited by his postulates to do with “changing the game”

      These postulates make the thetan what he is.

      .

  • vinaire  On December 8, 2013 at 2:56 PM

    It seems that deep understanding of mathematics amounts to systematic thinking, and it is a high level endeavor.

    It seems impossible to have deep understanding of mathematics without mindfulness.

    • vinaire  On December 8, 2013 at 3:02 PM

      Over 99% of people seem to have only an “accounting type” understanding of mathematics.

      • Chris Thompson  On December 8, 2013 at 3:23 PM

        Yes, the way a computer does. My math teachers in the past were proficient in this way, thus I thought there was no way to learn what I wanted to learn and no way to understand how these maths could be applied.

    • vinaire  On December 8, 2013 at 5:14 PM

      I am now adding key materials on TRIGONOMETRY and CALCULUS as I go through my current study.

      https://vinaire.me/mathematics/

    • vinaire  On December 9, 2013 at 8:22 AM

      I am making rapid progress MSCing the subject of Calculus. My understanding of calculus so far has been data in this subject strewn all over the place in my understanding. Now it is all coming together in a consistent manner that is much simplified.

      .

  • vinaire  On December 9, 2013 at 8:27 AM

    TRIGONOMETRY = three + angles + measurement of.

    When you magnify or shrink a triangle, the measurement of sides is affected, but NOT the measurement of the angles.

    Angles are determined by relativity among directions.

    So the magnification and shrinking affects the distances but not the directions. If you can understand this datum, you’ll have no problem understanding TRIGONOMETRY.

    .

    • vinaire  On December 9, 2013 at 8:34 AM

      The other datum to understand in Trigonometry is RATIOS.

      As you magnify or shrink a triangle, the ratios of the measurement of the sides are also not affected.

      So, the subject of Trigonometry relates ANGLES to the RATIOS of the spatial dimensions of a figure.

      Triangle as a figure is selected because that is an enclosed figure with the smallest number of sides.

      .

    • vinaire  On December 9, 2013 at 8:36 AM

      The ratios of spatial dimensions are somehow related to relative directions in space.

      .

    • vinaire  On December 9, 2013 at 8:42 AM

      There are six different ways that you can determine the ratios of three sides of a right angle triangle. These ratios are called: SINE, COSINE, TANGENT, SECANT, COSECANT, and COTANGENT.

      These six ratios may be related to angles.

      .

      • Chris Thompson  On December 9, 2013 at 10:44 AM

        Yes and from the sixth grade, Mr. Shipp drew a circle, then proceeded to disect and talk about the circle first with center point, a diameter, a radius, and then with triangles showing chord (inside the circle), tangent (touching outside the circle), then I got lost and forgot the rest. Clearing up these terms might bring a great focus back to me. I still remember how to derive Pi from extrapolating between two polynomials, one inside and one outside the circle. This “trig” like plane geometry makes a lot of sense to me. I am weak on the language through decades of disuse but a brush up should bring it back nicely. After this, doing algegra, working with binomials lost me as I didn’t see the purpose. However, now that I have an interest in the results of plotting in the complex plane I think I can learn to work with this. Plus I am feeling a pressure from my 78 year old sister who is studying for her GED. I am afraid to let her pass me up!

        • vinaire  On December 9, 2013 at 1:21 PM

          An inconsistency is an inconsistency, no matter what subject that inconsistency lies in and it needs to be sorted out in order to clear aberration.

          I am glad that you want to clear up the inconsistencies that are impinging on you in the subjects of Geometry and Trigonometry.

          Get busy with an Excel worksheet. I shall send you the one I have put together, which is just at the beginning stages, and simply contains the words that I am inetersted in.

          You need to build up your own.

          .

  • vinaire  On December 9, 2013 at 8:44 AM

    Trigonometry is basically the ‘algebra’ of space. It lays out the relationships among the elements of the static structure of space.

    .

  • Nic  On December 9, 2013 at 2:37 PM

    Hello Vin, my post was a suggestion, or a good
    idea of ​​CBR. A thetan is a postulate? It seems to me
    an inconsistency. It ‘s like saying: And’ the postulate that
    postulates? Self-sufficient? It would be a new discovery!
    It would also be demonstrated.
    Nic ARC infinity

    • vinaire  On December 9, 2013 at 4:46 PM

      Nic,

      When I look mindfully, I simply see aliveness in the body, which vanishes at death. This was the original definition of spirit.

      Added to this simple observation are a whole lot of speculations that introduce the ideas, such as soul and thetan.

      I am looking at this subject of spirit, soul, thetan, etc., using MSC (Mindful Subject Clearing) – a KHTK approach.

      I plan to separate what is there from what is being assumed. All these assumptions may be classed as “postulates”.

      I shall publish my finding when it is complete.

      .

    • Chris Thompson  On December 9, 2013 at 6:00 PM

      Nic: It would also be demonstrated.

      Chris: I know that it is counter-intuitive to go against our conditioning. It is awkward like trying to write left-handed when one is right-handed. But reducing assumptions might mean that it is the thetan which must be demonstrated. Would you be prepared for that?

      • 2ndxmr  On December 9, 2013 at 9:36 PM

        CT:” But reducing assumptions might mean that it is the thetan which must be demonstrated. Would you be prepared for that?”

        Just bear in mind as you wield your razor of Occam that what you can’t demonstrate today does not imply that you won’t be able to demonstrate it tomorrow.

        The Copenhagen interpretation came out when? At some fuzzy point in the 1920s. How appropriate that there should be some uncertainty to such a specifically understood (or misunderstood) principle. Yet here we are 80 years later with scarcely a dent made in demonstration of proof of quantum phenomena yet incredible strides in applying the principles. And just a few of those principles would be the principles of semiconductor operation that gave you this gift of pixelated communication.

        The Copenhagen interpretation conveyed the message that: “It holds that quantum mechanics does not yield a description of an objective reality but deals only with probabilities of observing, or measuring, various aspects of energy quanta, entities that fit neither the classical idea of particles nor the classical idea of waves.(wiki)”

        Note the emphasis on “…a description of objective reality.” Objective reality applies to the 3-dimensional space we tend to think of as reality. The Copenhagen interpretation says that real effects can come from beyond what we can define as reality.

        So I say that unless you are prepared to say that quantum mechanics is bunk because it cannot be directly demonstrated, you have to be very careful about demanding that a thetan must be demonstrated. To do otherwise smacks of a very inconsistent level of evaluation. One normally associated with grouchy old men with very fixed ideas. 😉

        I have posted why I think the thetan could be every bit equal (actually more than equal) to the quantum mechanical model of probability (probability: a dimensionless quantity) and have yet to see an inconsistency in the model that further inspection does not resolve consistently in alignment with the findings of quantum mechanical research.

        There is much more research to do, of course – we are just at the equivalent of the early 1900s thought experiments, so much, much work lies ahead in figuring out how to make indirect measurements, let alone direct measurements. Or, let alone, to think that by reducing assumptions you can come to some definitive conclusion about something so difficult to define.

        • vinaire  On December 9, 2013 at 11:04 PM

          2x: “Just bear in mind as you wield your razor of Occam that what you can’t demonstrate today does not imply that you won’t be able to demonstrate it tomorrow.”

          Is that an axiom or just a postulate of yours?

          .

        • vinaire  On December 9, 2013 at 11:14 PM

          Do you think, 2x, that thetan is a quantum mechanical phenomenon?

        • vinaire  On December 9, 2013 at 11:33 PM

          Sometimes there is a fine line between speculation and what is actually there.

        • vinaire  On December 9, 2013 at 11:35 PM

          What is a thetan anyway? Is it a postulate? If not why not?

          What do you actually see?

        • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 12:01 AM

          It is good to question ideas rather than take them for granted, whether one is young or old, grouchy or not.

        • 2ndxmr  On December 10, 2013 at 1:43 AM

          V:” Is that an axiom or just a postulate of yours?”

          It’s an observation. It’s been made by many before us.

        • 2ndxmr  On December 10, 2013 at 1:51 AM

          V:”Do you think, 2x, that thetan is a quantum mechanical phenomenon?”

          I think the quantum phenomenon has an enormous similarity to theta. The key similarity being the quality of probability without dimension or substance.

        • 2ndxmr  On December 10, 2013 at 2:12 AM

          V:”What is a thetan anyway? Is it a postulate? If not why not? What do you actually see?”

          I could go on for hours, perhaps, on what a thetan is. I do believe that to duplicate my concept of a thetan you must be able to duplicate the concept of quantum mechanical probability. QM probability is a non-physical, dimensionless value with an uncertainty factor.

          In our universe I believe this has been made a meta-state or second state of the basic cycle of action of the elementary particles as they oscillate between real and pure probability.

          V:”Is it (thetan) a postulate?” A thetan could make a copy of itself. That is like a postulate but different from the action of a postulate. A thetan could also postulate another thetan but that does not equate to the thetan being a postulate.

          V:”What do you actually see?”
          You’ll have to expand or clarify that question. I’m not getting what you actually want to know.

  • vinaire  On December 9, 2013 at 11:37 PM

    Quantum mechanics is simply an incomplete subject with complicated explanations for observed phenomenon.

    We need simpler explanations.

    • 2ndxmr  On December 10, 2013 at 2:33 AM

      V:”Quantum mechanics is simply an incomplete subject with complicated explanations for observed phenomenon.”

      I think this is a bit of a diss, along the lines of the diss’ing that the idea of the Higgs boson had just a few years ago. We are not dealing with a subject for which we can expect instant clarification or gratification. Very, very bright minds have formulated the concepts of QM from observations interpreted by the mathematics applied by physics.

      Thought experiments that have subsequently been proven – such as Wheeler’s delayed choice experiment – can really leave one with the sense that the universe is rule-based, designed, and not the product of a purely random fluctuation. QM may not be a complete subject but I would not discard it lightly just because of incompleteness.

      • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 6:56 AM

        It is a diss, but not to the actual subject of Quantum Mechanics.

        Just like String Theory, there is very little observation but a tremendous amount of speculation in describing Quantum Mechanics.

        As soon as I get some time, I plan to separate actual observations in Quantum Mechanics from all the speculations that have been added to it.

        .

        • 2ndxmr  On December 10, 2013 at 9:06 AM

          V:”As soon as I get some time, I plan to separate actual observations in Quantum Mechanics from all the speculations that have been added to it.”

          I think a very good place to start that would be with the Wheeler experiment.

          This began as a thought experiment circa 1978 but it took about 20 more years to make equipment fine enough to demonstrate the principle.

          This experiment provides the observations you are seeking to separate from speculations.

          It is not easy data to assimilate as it flies so contrarily in the face of simple reason. Yet, from my read, the incontrovertible data from this experiment confirms the QM theory of the effects – at the quantum level – of interacting with particles at the physical level.

          This experiment will challenge your concepts of physical reality and time. It is difficult, but not impossible to understand if you take some time with it. MSC will be very valuable here.

          The real beauty of it is that it demonstrates a principle that the application of logic, even mindfulness, on its own, would result in an opposite conclusion.

        • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 1:10 PM

          Thank you. I have made a note of it.

          It would be interesting to see how MSC would work in this case.

  • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 6:31 AM

    2x: “I think the quantum phenomenon has an enormous similarity to theta. The key similarity being the quality of probability without dimension or substance.”

    What is “the quality of probability without dimension or substance” in laymen terms?

    I think that the “language” of Quantum mechanics is quite obfuscating. You seem to be saying is that all you have is a hypothesis.

    .

    • 2ndxmr  On December 10, 2013 at 9:56 AM

      V:”You seem to be saying is that all you have is a hypothesis.”

      I’ve never said anything more. And I’ve never relied on a self-formulated axiom to support a further conclusion, either.

      As with any starting hypothesis, it is based on observations, both personal and of others. These observations weren’t made in a scientific setting as no scientific setting exists to record the observations.

      But neither was any observation of Buddha or any other -osophy, -ism or -ology that anyone can bring in to this discussion. That playing field is level.

      Since we can equally discount each others personal ideas of beingness based on experiential bias, that no longer seems to be a worthwhile discussion point.

      Fortunately, in the QM field of experimentation we do have the kind of scientific observation that can’t be easily discounted. Regardless of how you currently view conscious reality, physical reality, and the origin of the universe, a careful study of QM experimental data and interpretations should provide a solid foundation for formulating any new hypothesis or strengthening any old one.

      • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 1:54 PM

        Scientific method is based on consistency among observations of physical nature. The experiments are there to test that consistency.

        Similarly, mindfulness is based on consistency among observations of metaphysical nature. Thetan is supposedly a metaphysical phenomenon. Hubbard looked at it as a starting point. You seem to look at it as a starting point too.

        To me the idea of considering thetan as a ‘unit’, and then postulating many such units is inconsistent with saying that there no MEST associated with the concept of thetan.

        There seems to be a gradient of MEST in the dimension of abstraction, which is associated with the idea of a Thetan.

  • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 6:36 AM

    2x: “Just bear in mind as you wield your razor of Occam that what you can’t demonstrate today does not imply that you won’t be able to demonstrate it tomorrow.”

    Vin: Is that an axiom or just a postulate of yours?

    2x: “It’s an observation. It’s been made by many before us.”

    What you cannot demonstrate is an inconsistency from the viewpoint of scientific method. A hypothesis is not a valid theory until it has been demonstrated.

    .

    • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 6:38 AM

      A thetan is basically a hypothesis. To consider it a valid theory is inconsistent.

      .

    • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 6:45 AM

      The attention should be on demonstrating the hypothesis of THETAN rather than on defending it as if it is a valid theory.

  • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 7:01 AM

    2x: “A thetan could make a copy of itself. That is like a postulate but different from the action of a postulate. A thetan could also postulate another thetan but that does not equate to the thetan being a postulate.”

    I would like to see a demonstration of a thetan postulating another thetan.

    .

  • Nic  On December 10, 2013 at 1:19 PM

    Hello Vin, what you ask is quite possible.
    Not so much from me, but from yourself.
    In theory (in experimentation) can be
    really do much, much, much more.

    Never regret the past.
    Life is in you today.
    And you make your tomorrow.

    Nic ARC infinity

    • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 1:24 PM

      Nic, I believe you are referring to the following post.

      https://vinaire.me/2013/12/06/scientific-method-and-mindfulness/#comment-15214

    • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 1:36 PM

      In my opinion, postulates define the thetan. These postulates also limit the thetan. The thetan is that set of postulates.

      When I refer to myself, am referring to a set of postulates that are acting in unison or, which are impinging on each other.

      These postulates become simplified to the degree resistance among them is dissolved.

      What is this resistance? That would be something interesting to take a close look at.

      .

    • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 1:42 PM

      What is that keeps one postulate separate from another postulate and prevents them from discharging against each other?

      What is the bounday of a postulate?

      This is a question very similar to what is the boundary of a photon?

      .

  • Rafael  On December 10, 2013 at 3:38 PM

    My guess is that the basic mistake lies on trying to define life.

    My guess is that life cannot be defined, thus, it cannot be demonstrated either.

    The moment you try to define it, you start to encapsulate it and then you lose it.

    I also know that is a contradiction which blocks any attempt to make any scientific studies, but that is what I´m wrestling with right now. It´s like looking at the boundary of an inverted black hole.

    • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 4:58 PM

      That is a very good observation, Rafael.

      Life is basically consistency. It cannot be defined, because it is what one inherently is.

      What stand out are inconsistencies. One should simply be focusing on inconsistencies and resolving them one by one.

      Once a consistency is resolved it merges into the background of what one inherently is. It is no use speculating about that.

      So, forget about trying to define a thetan. Simply focus on what is inconsistent and work on resolving it.

      To think of oneself as some idea called “thetan” is inconsistent.

      • Rafael  On December 10, 2013 at 5:40 PM

        That is how I see it, too. And then, looking at the manifestations of life, it seems that as they become more fixed and predictable is when they have lost most of their inherent life and potential.
        As the “Thetan” becomes more recognizable, it has less life.
        When we try to know ourselves, or be known, we commit suicide Ha ha ha!!!
        …………………………………………………………………………………………………………
        …………Oh shit, that is what I spent most of my life doing, and of course also trying to be not known, etc,etc…Oh God, what a dumbmmy!!

        This reminds me…..Dennis Stephens made a great point with his games manual:

        The basic games matrix was something like

        Know …………………………………….. Not know

        Make something known ……………. Make it not known

        I´ll take a mindful look at it, I left it at a flat point starting level five some years ago……

        • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 6:22 PM

          That is the greatest cognition one can have!

          Well done, Rafael. 🙂 🙂 🙂

        • MarkNR  On December 10, 2013 at 6:22 PM

          TROM was a bit nebulous for me to spend enough time on. I thought a C/S series could be researched and written on it. Also, I was thinking it could be audited at first and then soloed, as with NOTs. Just my thoughts from not enough experience.
          Mark

        • Rafael  On December 10, 2013 at 7:06 PM

          I had the same problem with it back then, Mark. There was a point where I got kind of lost, even after having some fucking amazing releases which I still
          can not explain, like big chunks of bank which just vanished before I could get enough time to turn back and look at them. Really startling.
          I think it can only be done by very experienced auditors, so geting started as a Pc seems a good idea, I hope this time I will be able to get a deeper grasp of it.

        • MarkNR  On December 10, 2013 at 11:48 PM

          Rafael:
          I get you. I BELIEVE there are many areas and methods of handling those areas of undesirable case. And I use case as a generality meaning parts of oneself that one does not have full control and use of. TROM, Super Scio. Ind. clearing processes, KHTK and Mindfulness, Ind. Scn. etc.
          I, personally, right now, am using a structured, methodical method of observing and understanding my past existence and returning as much as possible to useful knowledge. My biggest targets are old, stuck, many times reinforced opinions. Often called basic considerations. Vin’s writings and others have assisted me greatly with my work.
          It is not the only work I will do, just the work I’m doing right now. I believe that to escape the foibles and pitfalls of this or any universe, one must master it, all of it. One can be the bad effect of anything one is not hatted in. The physics of universes and the physics of how one interacts with and gets entangled with them is one area that must be discovered. Vin, Chris and 2ndxer are working diligently on that one. I think the greatest guarantee of success in any field is the ability to apply long term effort toward a goal. Without that, no advancement is possible. I also believe that Scn. and other existing studies of life, done honestly and wisely, may be enough to get one started. That eventually, to reach a higher state one must take it on as a research project of sorts, by learning, observing, and understanding life.
          I figure a few hundred years to get into pretty good shape. I’m in it for the long haul, really got nothing better to do.
          Well, you know me pretty much, what you up to lately?
          Mark

        • Rafael  On December 10, 2013 at 7:10 PM

          Thanks Vin, that is what usually happens during exchanges with The Unknowables Ha ha ha!!

        • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 7:13 PM

          🙂

        • Rafael  On December 10, 2013 at 8:13 PM

          Thetan can be a very good description of WHAT one IS being, but it is not a description of what one basically is. That cannot,……… should not be described.

          Oh shit!!
          Seems like now I´m agreeing ALMOST completely with The Old Man!!!

          (Bending on my knees…..):
          Our Father who art in heaven;
          Hallowed be Thy Name;
          Thy kingdom come;
          Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven;………………..

        • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 8:25 PM

          The truth is that even “individuality” is a form of identity.

          The Old Man threw us a curve in Scn 8-8008 when he wrote the section “Individuality versus Identity.”

        • Rafael  On December 10, 2013 at 9:26 PM

          Yeah and that is inconsistent with the Thetan being basically a Static, if static is defined as having no position in time or space no individuality can be proven to exist there either. Static is the undescribable, thus, unknowable, unless you turn it into something lesser than static.

          Of course you can say that you KNOW this no-thing is actually a thing from outside this universe, implying that you can see what is inside and outside without any scientific proof and then you are above science and can start a religion.

        • Chris Thompson  On December 11, 2013 at 12:08 AM

          Rafael: ” . . . lesser than static.

          Ct: LOL!

        • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 9:40 PM

          LOL! Today you are on a roll, Rafael!

          .

        • Rafael  On December 10, 2013 at 9:53 PM

          Yeeeees !

          Down the hill ! Ha ha ha ha!!!

        • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 9:54 PM

          It is quite a breakthrough! I have never seen you so happy before. 🙂

        • vinaire  On December 10, 2013 at 9:55 PM

          Enjoy the ride!

        • Rafael  On December 10, 2013 at 10:58 PM

          Yes I will brother 🙂
          Time to sleep, have an early start tomorrow

        • Rafael  On December 11, 2013 at 6:46 AM

          Mark:
          That is the way I see it also, and I´m in it for the long haul too.
          It´s very easy to get lost in it, that seems to happen to me all the time!

          At this point I´ve reached some sort of big pool of nothingness where those basic considerations which are left are very hard to come by and I´m basically living my life mindfully, not following any particular method, but with my eyes wide open to anything which might appear at the limits of my consciousness.
          I will take another deep look at TROM and try to advance in math in the meantime.
          And, of course, visit you guys here every chance I have. Cheers man!!

    • Chris Thompson  On December 10, 2013 at 5:19 PM

      Greetings Rafael! Your post describes one reason that I’ve tended to rant about existence not being laid out right. There always seems to be yet another undercut to understanding who we really are. Satisfied and happy now with a sense of myself, and a little weary as you describe of being unable to describe what is indescribable from here, I’ve turned my attention to what can be known and described. I am trying to rehabilitate my social and math and physics education and just sort of give it another go. I am constantly running into smart people who understand much more than I about the world, and this is in ways that can be learned and so I am trying to learn. I am on an Ayn Rand vector just now which I haven’t brought up because it doesn’t fit in with these other things we are studying. And I’m even teaching myself a favorite tune of mine on the Dobro guitar. I’ve been listening to Indian political and folk music and developed a taste for Cumbia! hahahaha!

      • Rafael  On December 10, 2013 at 6:10 PM

        That is a beautiful tune, man I play a little bit of guitar too, and I really really want to have some time to continue studying math, they seem to be the basic tool to study what can be known and described, as you say. The best form to describe reality.

        In the meantime, we can always laugh about ourselves and dance a little cumbia too. Ha ha ha!!!

        A big hug for you, my friend.

  • vinaire  On December 11, 2013 at 6:16 AM

    Individuality is not something different from identity.
    Individuality is an aspect of identity.
    Anything that creates a unit is part of the identity of that unit.
    If thetan is an awareness of awareness unit, it is a bundled up awareness.
    That bundle is an identity

    • Chris Thompson  On December 11, 2013 at 9:36 AM

      Vinay: Individuality is not something different from identity.

      Chris: And neither is individuation different. This is a great inconsistency in the subject of Scientology that the individual is exalted while individuation is abhorred.

      • Rafael  On December 11, 2013 at 12:31 PM

        Chris: This is a great inconsistency in the subject of Scientology that the individual is exalted while individuation is abhorred.
        R: That seems to be one of the basic foundations of the church of scientology.

        • Chris Thompson  On December 11, 2013 at 1:12 PM

          Yes brother and I don’t know how I blocked that dissonance from my mind for years of participation. The fact that I did that is so troubling to me in present time that it makes me wonder what and how much I am blocking cognitive dissonance from my current state of mind. Seriously, what primrose path am I currently walking?

          Answer: Tautology. The primrose path that we might walking is always one. We do what makes sense to us and while we do it, it makes sense and then later it doesn’t and we go, “Oh, how could I?”

        • Rafael  On December 11, 2013 at 1:59 PM

          Ha ha ha!! you are so fucking right, I´ve tried to understand this so that I can find a surefire method of geting out of my own shit fast, but there seems to be no way arround it:

          When we are inside, we are inside.
          And:
          When we are outside, we are outside.

          And that is all there is to it

          Except now I´m wondering: Will there be a day when I discover this beautiful cake I´m eating is actually shit?

          And the answer is: Most probably yes.

          So, now I find more comfort in doubt than I will ever again find in certainty

          Certainty was one of my goals in life, now certainty seems more akin to stagnation.

        • Chris Thompson  On December 11, 2013 at 2:09 PM

          Rafael: So, now I find more comfort in doubt than I will ever again find in certainty

          Chris: You are so right. Letting go of that fixation on crystallized certainty lets me feel the world moving again. There’s a kind of vertigo that I feel when I notice I’m holding on too strongly but that evaporates and I get my “sea legs” and learn to move with the ship instead of cursing that it rocks.

        • Rafael  On December 11, 2013 at 2:57 PM

          That is the spirit Bro!!!

      • vinaire  On December 11, 2013 at 12:49 PM

        You are individuals but you are not allowed to individuate from the collective of the Church of Scientology.

        “The Borg are a collection of species that have been turned into cybernetic organisms functioning as drones of the Collective, or the hive.” ~ Borg (Star Trek)

  • vinaire  On December 21, 2013 at 9:02 PM

    Does E-meter reaction provides unequivocally proves that some incident is trillions of years old?

    What does the time stamp of “trillions of years” really means?

    .

    • vinaire  On December 21, 2013 at 9:43 PM

      The idea of date locate puts unnecessary significance on time. The actuality is that the pc is working under the idea that “date locate” needs to be very exact before the incident would blow.

      Well that has nothing to do with the unit of time. It has to do with sorting out the inconsistency in the exact detail by narrowing it down farther and more exactly.

      • MarkNR  On December 21, 2013 at 11:09 PM

        Regardless of the origin or underlying structure of time and space, we are here and now in it’s throws. We may or may not have chosen this existence, but we are in it as demonstrated by these messages. Occurrences do have a beginning middle and end.and related factors happened at certain times. Cause and effect and the why of things are determined by the where and when. This may seem childishly simple, but becomes very important when sorting out inconsistencies and confusions.
        The purpose of looking back is to understand. Sometimes 10 or 100 billion years is irrelevant. Sometimes a matter of a few minutes makes all the difference in resolving the riddle or not. Sometimes knowing that an event occurred 23.41 trillion yrs ago in this particular space, run by this group of guys, with these exact rules, and knowing who was there is vital to knowing exactly why you made that decision.
        Bottom line; it takes whatever it takes. Knowing exactly what it takes and when to skim over or when to dig deep will come with experience, just as knowing when to stop and do an MSC on the experience to resolve something that is sticking.
        It gets easier and more fun as you go along.
        Learn to be diligent and lighthearted at the same time. BPC is no longer a problem when the attitude of “I’m glad I touched on that so I’ll know what to keep an eye out for over the next few sessions.” is employed.
        Just have a good time and you’ll have no significant problems.
        I’m still working on that viewing others time track or the physical universe track thing. More fun.
        Mark

        • vinaire  On December 22, 2013 at 3:56 AM

          I do not like the idea of selectively restimulating part of the bank in order to handle it. To me one should be continually addressing the existing restimulation of an unwanted condition in here and now.

          When one addresses here and now continually as through mindfulness and contemplation, then one is acting like a clear from the get go.

          .

        • vinaire  On December 22, 2013 at 4:48 AM

          It seems to me that

          TIME = SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
          SPACE = LOCATION WITHIN A MATRIX OR INDEX

          Yes, we are subject to time and space until we have mindfulness humming at a good clip. 🙂

        • Chris Thompson  On December 23, 2013 at 5:43 AM

          Vinaire: Yes, we are subject to time and space until we have mindfulness humming at a good clip. 🙂

          Ct: Why “until?”

        • vinaire  On December 24, 2013 at 3:28 AM

          Let’s discuss the inconsistency you are looking at.

        • Chris Thompson  On December 24, 2013 at 6:28 AM

          You used the word until. Conversely, we will not longer be subject to time and space after we have mindfulness humming at a good clip. Maybe I don’t understand what you mean by “subject to time and space.” Is this some kind of Hubbardianism? haha

        • vinaire  On December 24, 2013 at 11:15 AM

          It was a response to Mark, who said:

          “Regardless of the origin or underlying structure of time and space, we are here and now in it’s throws. We may or may not have chosen this existence, but we are in it as demonstrated by these messages. Occurrences do have a beginning middle and end.and related factors happened at certain times. Cause and effect and the why of things are determined by the where and when. This may seem childishly simple, but becomes very important when sorting out inconsistencies and confusions.”

          This is a discussion about having a time track and dating and locating incidents on this time track to blow them.

          My contention is that we do not need the concept of time track and the method of date-locate to restimulate parts of the bank and blow them if we are dynamically and continually addressing with mindfulness what is in restimulation in present time. The natural unstacking of the mind brings to fore what needs to be addressed next.

          So, we do not need to establish a time-track, and we do not need to give importance to the contents of the incidents when mindfulness is functioning at a good clip.

        • Chris Thompson  On December 24, 2013 at 4:19 PM

          So we will be subject to space time even after Mindfulness is humming along at a good clip?

        • MarkNR  On December 24, 2013 at 4:55 PM

          Don’t know. But my IDEA is yes, if we want to interact, have something to do. Personally, I’m not quite ready to sit at tone 40 with my ‘eyes’ closed, knowing all, doing nothing. The big lies that got this party started (“In the Beginning” MNR) gave us all this confusion and suffering. It also gave us the richness and beauty of randomity and interaction. My goal, for now, is to understand knowing and not knowing equally well. Recovering my history is my current method of understanding. That may change. I don’t discount anything. I will look at anything squarely in the face.
          Mark

        • Chris Thompson  On December 24, 2013 at 7:27 PM

          Merry Christmas Mark!

        • MarkNR  On December 24, 2013 at 9:57 PM

          May the love that was Jesus infuse all with joy and peace.
          ARC, especially A,
          Mark

        • Chris Thompson  On December 24, 2013 at 10:46 PM

          Good toast!

        • vinaire  On December 24, 2013 at 8:49 PM

          In my opinion we shall be dealing with the space and time associated with the inconsistencies we are confronted with in the present time only.

        • Chris Thompson  On December 24, 2013 at 10:45 PM

          This is an interesting subject to me. It seems to infiltrate all that I am and all that I ever will be.

        • vinaire  On December 24, 2013 at 11:12 PM

          Yes, the space and time influencing us, when we are being mindful, is that associated with the inconsistencies we are confronted with in the present time.

          The space and time associated with the past track is not there.

        • Chris Thompson  On December 25, 2013 at 1:34 AM

          Vin: The space and time associated with the past track is not there.

          Chris: It is such a mindfuck to consider that all that we observe is as it used to be. My experience of real time is no more than an abstraction of events as they used to be. I cannot even clearly write this down as what this means to me in terms of an inconsistency.

        • Chris Thompson  On December 23, 2013 at 5:44 AM

          Are you finding it useful to break space-time apart and if so, why?

        • vinaire  On December 24, 2013 at 3:29 AM

          Let’s discuss the inconsistency you are looking at.

        • Chris Thompson  On December 24, 2013 at 6:32 AM

          Space-time at the quanta is one thing, no?

        • vinaire  On December 24, 2013 at 11:20 AM

          It has long been established that Space and Time are not absolute but relative. The Theory of Relativity is all about that. I do not understand your question.

        • vinaire  On December 22, 2013 at 4:58 AM

          It is not a matter of “looking back”. It is a matter of “what is unresolved that is impinging on me right now”.

          The idea of ‘time track’, ‘games’ and ‘opponents’ may be tools devised by Hubbard to resolve the present moment, but it is possible to resolve the present moment in a much cleaner and direct way without these vias.

          The ‘exact rules’ of whole track that you are talking about are not vital in my opinion. They are not even necessary.

        • vinaire  On December 22, 2013 at 5:02 AM

          To me mindfulness is a continuous activity that occurs naturally unless interfered with. MSC is a conscious activity that is taken up when things become complicated.

        • vinaire  On December 22, 2013 at 5:11 AM

          It seems to me that with mindfulness there is no need for sessions with e-meter. All one needs is a little contemplation here and a little contemplation there.

          Solo sessions may occur only when one is consciously using MSC. It is the focus on present time that is necessary.

        • vinaire  On December 22, 2013 at 10:00 AM

          There is really no need to know the contents of another person’s time track. But, yes, it is important for other people to resolve their own inconsistencies. Mindfulness is a simple technique for that.

          We are trying to understand the time track of the physical universe through science. The moment we understand how a particle is formed, we would have a clue to how the universe was formed.

          Universe forming could be a harmonic of how clouds are formed in the sky – a precipitation into visibility what was invisible before.

        • MarkNR  On December 22, 2013 at 10:30 AM

          The purpose of mentioning the instance of ‘going back and viewing another’s time track’ was that there was a confusion there that would not resolve due to lack of data. The additional data resolved the confusion.
          I am discovering more solidly with each search that I am a Thetan and I am also Theta. Affinity is the primary key which unlocks the barriers between these two seemingly separate areas. The data was always there but the barriers constructed in order to ‘have a game’ are deeply ingrained. I viewed a few incidents in which I looked around these barriers, cheated in a manner, and lost the game. Not lost AT the game, but lost the game altogether. This is beginning to resolve.
          Mark

        • vinaire  On December 22, 2013 at 10:34 AM

          That’s wonderful that it is beginning to resolve. 🙂

        • vinaire  On December 22, 2013 at 2:36 PM

          How does one view another person’s time track?

        • MarkNR  On December 28, 2013 at 1:32 AM

          Vinaire: “How does one view another person’s time track?”

          Mark: You just look. I know, that’s just a cop out.
          Here is what I did.

          Over the last several years, I have learned my connection with Theta, life wholeness, oneness, love of all. It was a learning and realization process and then a sudden bang. ARC can be taken much farther than I had realized before. The true roots of ARC display the truth of beingness, individuality and,well, oneness.

          Look again at “The beginning” (MNR) with particular attention to the separation process. Look again at “Affinity and auditing and assists” (MNR) with particular attention to “Perfect affinity is zero distance…….etc.” Take another look at “Control”(MNR), especially the part about “A lower form of affinity was established.” This particular concept is especially important. It is the moment that some individuals fully denied their connection with others. When one harms, lowers, suppresses others, he is harming himself, not just metaphorically, but in reality, directly. There was a moment when that was denied, a decision point.

          I began loving others in a way I had never done before. It was not artificial, such as putting forth loving feelings as some psychologists have suggested. It was a deep, feel what they feel, be in their shoes, look at life from their point of view, be them love. When one is being a shit or asshole, admire how they can operate with so much confusion and pain bearing down on them. Feel that weight and add your own strength, confront their case until it becomes your own, and then see it for what it is, a part of you.

          When you can love David Miscavidge or Stalin as if they were your own newborn child, you will have learned.

          You expand and be everything around you. It’s a gradient that you, Vinair, have experienced. Like doing TR-0 and hearing and knowing what is going on in the room. Then it is feeling what is in the room. Then it being the things around you. Things are also an aspect of Theta, simply not as animated as individuals.

          During the one particular incident I described, I did not return to the incident, I brought the incident to present time. I relaxed all effort and allowed it to occur. (Thank you Vinaire) I embraced others and played their part of the incident as myself. I knew what they knew, which was actually me all along.

          And then I laughed,,,,,,and laughed.

          This whole game has become a lot more fun and I would like others have fun with it. I believe Hubbard may have missed this point, but were it not for him and you and several others, I would never have stumbled upon it.

          I am now looking at individuals relationship with MEST and bodies. MEST is actually a form of Theta, stuck in continuation, with less active attention. Sort of.

          Will get back with you, got some looking to do. By the way, this is a big part of the 2D relationship, but not all. The bliss of near oneness with Theta, or at least a part of it.
          I will send copies of those aforementioned write-ups if you would like.
          marknr@hushmail.com

        • vinaire  On December 28, 2013 at 1:33 PM

          So, it is all visualization on one’s part!

          Sent from my iPhone

          >

  • vinaire  On December 21, 2013 at 9:15 PM

    From L. Kin’s Book 1:

    “DMSMH had stunned the world – the medical world in particular – with the proposition that prenatal life was sentient; that there was a thinking and feeling being inside the embryonic body. Amongst auditors this never was a point of discussion as most preclears had no difficulty contacting prenatal incidents and alleviating their psychosomatic problems after “running them out” (auditor jargon). However, when Hubbard discovered in 1951 that some seemingly unresolvable cases were getting swift results as soon as they contacted past life incidents, a storm of arguments for and against it broke loose in the auditor community. ”

    It is my opinion that cases were resolving in 1951 not because “past lives” were contacted, but because the preclear was allowed to let the mind unstack itself without the consideration of being right or wrong.

    The content of an incident doesn’t really matter. Sometimes the content is very abstract, and the words used to describe it cannot be taken literally. What really matters is looking at what is really there and resolving the confusion. Describing an incident is not really necessary.

    So, the whole subject of past lives has dramatic value only and no technical value in fact.

    .

    • vinaire  On December 21, 2013 at 9:25 PM

      The whole concept of time track, or whole track, is quite superfluous because

      (1) Content of the incident doesn’t rally matter because it doesn’t need to be analyzed.

      (2) Only thing that matters is bringing to view all data that is relevant to an inconsistency (unwanted condition).

      (3) Even “earlier similar” does not matter. What matters is letting the mind freely unstack itself. It will automatically go to the incident necessary to resolve the case, regardless of where in the sequence that incident is.

      (4) The key to resolution is understanding and practicing mindfulness.

    • MarkNR  On December 22, 2013 at 12:20 AM

      Earlier-Similar
      Routine 3, and later as a case advances, variants of R3, have been vital in my work and have yielded great success in my work and in auditing others. One thing that was left out was scanning upwards after a so called basic is reached. The next more recent event can then become the new basic and so on. He may have decided that the skill level was to high for most auditors to know when to do this and when not to. It can be arduous on a PC when it’s the wrong time and yield enormous understandings when it’s right. This tech is in 1950s book auditing and on the Clearing course, but I have not seen it elsewhere.
      A couple of other vital points..
      When a chain is completely as-is’ed and erased, according to R3ra, it is actually a good release point only. All original postulates and confusions made during the time of large, common universes will relate back to very early considerations where there was NO BELIEVED CONFUSION OR INCONSISTENCY AT THAT TIME. The inconsistencies came later and can be tracked back to the forgotten considerations, thereby releasing one from their influence. Take the wins at the time, but do not discard the notes, they will be needed later.
      Next, and this is vital tech.
      All of us here have a MEST reactive mind. We decided, or were coerced into deciding to use this as a tool for living.BUT THE MECHANICS OF HOW WE USE AND STORE THIS ‘BANK’ ARE DIFFERENT IN VARIOUS ERAS OF OUR EXISTENCE. THE RULES AND MECHANICS OF DIFFERENT UNIVERSES ARE DIFFERENT AND OCCURRENCES MUST BE HANDLED DIFFERENTLY.
      Meter reactions are different and disappear altogether before a certain point, unless there are later confusions still tagged onto the earlier misunderstood or incident in question. Before a certain time, the rule of “There must be change or alter-is for MEST existence to continue” simply does not apply. The earliest decisions and considerations and postulates had no confusion or MEST attached to them and simply became ‘who you are’. But once forgotten, and especially when confusions and inconsistencies, counter postulates, were piled on top of them, your ability to change your mind was lost.
      These principals are not complex but MUST be well understood to make significant progress much beyond the various release states called Clear.

      Vin, you are responsible for showing me the added techniques which enabled me to work this out.
      Thank you
      Mark

      • vinaire  On December 22, 2013 at 4:11 AM

        In my opinion the idea of ‘earlier-similar’ is useful only to the degree that it gets the pc to look at the inconsistency again and again from different angles.

        Sorting out TIME is essentially sorting out the SEQUENCE. One is sorting out the relative sequence of events or experiences subjectively. No objective unit of time is required. What “trillion years ago” means to one person does not necessarily have to mean the same thing to another person for a resolution to occur.

        • vinaire  On December 22, 2013 at 10:27 AM

          Space seems to the whole matrix. There are contextual locations in that matrix.

          Time seems to be the changes in that whole matrix. Some locations are changing faster than other locations. It is a wonderful calculus of life with all kind of slopes in every direction.

          This makes everything connected… even the events and occurrences. A track is left behind because of inconsistencies. A total picture shall require the sorting out of all inconsistencies in all possible directions.

      • vinaire  On December 22, 2013 at 4:20 AM

        In my opinion the success of KHTK is measured by the degree to which a person is able to apply it to oneself. A KHTK guide may be necessary in the beginning when a person is learning to apply mindfulness to oneself. But once mindfulness is mastered, no KHTK guide is necessary.

        What may be necessary then is to have others to have a mindful discussion with. Ha ha!

        • vinaire  On December 22, 2013 at 4:30 AM

          The most productive mindful discussion one may have is with the masters of a subject through the books they have written. This is accomplished by using MSC, especially the technique where one is summarizing each paragraph of what an author has written and commenting on it as one goes along. That technique acts like a mindful discussion with the author.

      • vinaire  On December 22, 2013 at 10:43 AM

        Routine 3 (earlier similar) is like word clearing. It is viewing all the contents by following the word chains.

        Scanning upwards after the basic is reached is like subject clearing. It is cleaning up the inconsistencies among all the contents now revealed.

      • vinaire  On December 22, 2013 at 11:01 AM

        Auditing is arduous for the pc only when arbitrary decision are being made for him by the auditor in how the case should be run.

        The most natural direction to run the case comes from natural unstacking or unwinding of the mind. In Scientology, this is allowed only on TR0 and, to some degree, on word clearing. That is why these two are the most powerful processes.

        KHTK combines TR0 and word clearing through mindfulness in the technique of MSC. I find it to be very powerful.

        There is no higher skill level needed to do MSC. It clears up fixations, engrams, secondaries, service facs, GPMs, etc., quite naturally in its wake. Mind naturally knows the next inconsistency to resolve at any moment. It is a beautiful calculus of following the curve at the right gradient at any moment.

        An auditor and C/S can only ‘program’ a case to run on a very crude and broad basis. Fine tune running of a case requires solo sessions. Mindfulness is running a case solo on a continuous basis. MSC is used to sort out complications in solo sessionss.

        • vinaire  On December 22, 2013 at 11:06 AM

          I find MSC to be much more safer and powerful than the Scientology technique of Listing and Nulling.

        • vinaire  On December 22, 2013 at 11:58 AM

          The technique of Listing & Nulling is extremely evaluative and dangerous. It is dangerous to the order of ‘betrayal after trust’.

      • vinaire  On December 22, 2013 at 12:17 PM

        Early 1950’s dianetics was a patchwork of guessing based on Freudian conjectures, and which utilized the principles of A=A=A and earlier similar. It easily reached the low hanging fruits but nothing more.

      • vinaire  On December 23, 2013 at 12:00 PM

        Mark: “When a chain is completely as-is’ed and erased, according to R3ra, it is actually a good release point only. All original postulates and confusions made during the time of large, common universes will relate back to very early considerations where there was NO BELIEVED CONFUSION OR INCONSISTENCY AT THAT TIME. The inconsistencies came later and can be tracked back to the forgotten considerations, thereby releasing one from their influence. Take the wins at the time, but do not discard the notes, they will be needed later.”

        Any erasure is relative only. Hubbard’s idea of Clear is a major release only. There is no absolute clearing. An inconsistency is there whenever something does not make sense.

        There is no need to keep any notes. What needs to be sorted out is always there.

      • vinaire  On December 23, 2013 at 12:14 PM

        Mark: “Next, and this is vital tech.
        All of us here have a MEST reactive mind. We decided, or were coerced into deciding to use this as a tool for living.BUT THE MECHANICS OF HOW WE USE AND STORE THIS ‘BANK’ ARE DIFFERENT IN VARIOUS ERAS OF OUR EXISTENCE. THE RULES AND MECHANICS OF DIFFERENT UNIVERSES ARE DIFFERENT AND OCCURRENCES MUST BE HANDLED DIFFERENTLY.”

        To me, the above is too complex. I find simplicity in the concepts of mindfulness and resolving inconsistencies through contemplation.

        The reactive mind is an appearance only.

        • MarkNR  On December 26, 2013 at 3:59 AM

          From Vinaire:
          “To me, the above is too complex. I find simplicity in the concepts of mindfulness and resolving inconsistencies through contemplation.”

          Mark.
          I have built up a very complex relationship with MEST over a long period of time. To actively avoid confronting the complexity is to be forever enslaved by it. What one is not hatted in, one will be adversely affected by. This is true for me. To be truly free of the foibles of this universe, one must master it. I’m in it for the long haul.
          Forget about the quantity of effort required. Just continue to learn, understand, and resolve everything. It will take a little while but have fun with it. That takes away the counter effort.
          Mark.

          PS: Confront and understand the complexities and the simplicities are exposed. Discover the simplicities and the complexities dissolve. Attack from both directions.

        • MarkNR  On December 26, 2013 at 4:34 AM

          From Vinaire:
          “The reactive mind is an appearance only.”
          Mark:
          The reactive MEST Bank, a relatively small portion of a persons case which is operating unseen by the individual, exists in fact. When one discovers why he began using it as a tool, your statement becomes true.
          Mine was suggested to me by a so called friend as a so called favor. It was touted as a ‘machine’ to do things and solve problems for me and a tool to ‘watch my back’ when I wasn’t paying attention. It happened shortly after a moment of overwhelm and was fun…..at first.
          I “knew” this from what I had read and learned, but that was nothing compared to seeing it for myself. Current so called ‘Clear’ is reaching an understanding. OT is actually seeing it.
          There is much more to this than is currently covered in Scientology.
          For instance, the accomplishment of building the mechanics of the MEST bank causes one to refuse to let go of it. “It’s mine, I built it.” I had lots of wins using it. Later, it was reinforced and enforced with implants. Tricked into agreement at first, punished into agreement later.
          My experience.
          Mark

      • vinaire  On December 23, 2013 at 12:23 PM

        Mark: “Meter reactions are different and disappear altogether before a certain point, unless there are later confusions still tagged onto the earlier misunderstood or incident in question. Before a certain time, the rule of “There must be change or alter-is for MEST existence to continue” simply does not apply. The earliest decisions and considerations and postulates had no confusion or MEST attached to them and simply became ‘who you are’. But once forgotten, and especially when confusions and inconsistencies, counter postulates, were piled on top of them, your ability to change your mind was lost.”

        I find the use of E-meter to be superfluous. It simply creates a dependency. An inconsistency is always visible because the attention is always attached to it. All it requires is training on letting the mind unstack itself.

        It is a matter of simply seeing what is there. 🙂

        • MarkNR  On December 26, 2013 at 3:40 AM

          The electro-psychometer.
          An ohm meter that can be adjusted to register a narrow change in resistance. Say, from 3521.4 ohms to 3521.9 ohms. The theory being that the spirit impresses mental mass onto the body, thereby changing its resistance. This mass being of a different form than known atomic particles yet physical universe mass still. This is, of course, a great oversimplification, as is “How the E-meter Works” according to LRH.
          If the theory is true, then it would extend to all masses and energies affected or produced or discarded by the spirit. If this mass/energy exists, then no machine or method has been devised to detect it directly. (I hooked up the test resistor to a meter, looked at and admired the ingenuity of it’s construction, admired the quality of it’s materials, ‘felt’ the hands of the assemblers and loved and became this part. There were fluctuations on the dial.)

          Unneeded distraction, dependency.
          Adjust the leads or look at the dial for reactions and part of one’s attention is off of yourself. But how much? How quickly can one’s attention be fully returned to the actual task at hand? This is individual to the person and is an acquired skill. A skill that can be acquired.
          One can audit with a meter, looking for reads to find something, and F/Ns when he is done. He can feel lost without it. Some meter procedures can be arduous, and some types of considerations do not read on a meter. Some reads have to be produced by the auditor with forceful techniques when the subject matter is predetermined by the process.
          There are problems.

          But there is also usefulness. There are common phenomenon which have been documented over many thousands of persons over millions of hours of use. These phenomenon have been used to find and assist one in relieving distress, inconsistency, in many individuals. The reliability of success is determined by the skill and knowledge of the auditor and PC/OT whether audited or solo. It never reaches 100%. There are very few who are willing and able to put forth the effort to reach a point where significant gain can be made using mindfulness, KHTK, and MSC alone. Use of a meter, along with other tools, can find and help alleviate unwanted conditions quickly, giving the individual wins and increased ability to find further inconsistencies.

          It can assist in getting one up to the point where a meter is no longer needed or can easily know when to and when not to use it. To depend completely on a meter is of course foolish. To ignore it as a tool is an error. To discount it’s usefulness is an indicator of an unseen inconsistency.

          Semi structured mindful unstacking of inconsistencies can relieve considerable confusions. Meter guided searching can produce additional gain in many areas. Used together, as I have found, can locate and guide one through additional areas of case. I hope I am not the only one who has learned to have/not have a meter. The willingness to look or not look at the needle is key.

          There will be many more methods of self improvement I will use in the future. You have given me some, there will be more. I will not discount them.

          Have a lovely Christmas vacation. Ignore the computer for awhile.
          Mark

  • vinaire  On December 21, 2013 at 9:58 PM

    L. Kin says in support of Hubbard:

    “Naturally, such time spans go back to periods before there were bodies or even the physical universe itself. Yet even before there was physical matter, energy, space or time there was the spirit, i.e. you and me. What exactly this means is covered in the next sections.”

    It is inconsistent to think that spirit (Theta) was there before MEST. Both Theta and MEST occur together, and not independently of each other. Thinking that Theta and MEST are separate and independent from each other at basic level is the most fundamental inconsistency in Hubbard’s Scientology.

    .

  • vinaire  On December 23, 2013 at 10:23 PM

    From L. Kin: “The E-meter is… a simple Wheatstone bridge which measures the resistance of the body as influenced by the electric field around it… The auditor, by asking the pc to go deeper into reading areas, will get straighter and faster to the basic incident than by observation of the pc’s skin color, eye brightness, emotional tone… The validity of needle reads is confirmed by the pc changing to the better, i.e. realizing something about the connectedness between past incidents and his present condition, brightening up and recovering physically and emotionally.”

    This E-meter is a crude method and not precise at all. It may work for obvious reactions, but not for reactions that cannot be differentiated from analytical thought influencing the E-meter.

  • vinaire  On December 23, 2013 at 10:32 PM

    The truth is that E-meter reacts to both reactive and analytical thought. It has limited usefulness. Beyond a certain point it leads to endless ‘auditing’ as on OT levels. There it may lead to conditioning and not to sorting out unwanted conditions.

    • MarkNR  On December 24, 2013 at 6:10 PM

      Have yourself a wonderful Christmas with friends and family. I wish you all the best during and after this time of love and forgiveness. May it last all year.
      ARC, Mark

  • vinaire  On December 23, 2013 at 10:54 PM

    From L.Kin: “Once it was established that man is more than a combination of his body and his social security card, there was a need to find the right term for the phenomenon. “Man” was no good as it referred too much to the physical aspect. “Soul” didn’t serve as in the Christian tradition man “had” a soul; it wasn’t customary to say that man was a soul or to wonder who and where the owner of the soul was. What to do?

    A year earlier, in 1951, Hubbard had given a lot of thought to the philosophical foundations of dianetics. The result of his efforts were “The Axioms of Dianetics”, numbering 194. He proposed a theory which – quite in opposition to physics – said that the source of life is comparable to pure thought, that all physical or psychic phenomena are derived from thought, that life derives from thought and not matter. This “life force” he termed theta, simply because the “th” in the word “thought” has its counterpart in the Greek letter “th”, pronounced “theta”.

    He comes to the simple statement: ‘A life organism is composed of matter and energy in space and time, animated by theta” (Dn Axiom 11; [1]). This sentence is the cornerstone of Hubbard’s philosophical edifice which concerns the interaction between matter, energy, space and time (mest) and theta. All struggles of man in his attempt to survive are interpreted with reference to it. (His book, “Science of Survival”, written 1951, is fully devoted to this theme [16].)”

    .

    It is erroneous to think in terms of “source” of life. That leads to speculation. It is more accurate to simply look at what is there.

    Saying that “theta” is the source of life and that it animates the physical organism is entirely speculative. It does not lead to any new understanding. It is just a belief.

    But saying that man has both physical and spiritual attributes that exist side by side is scientifically accurate because it can be observed.

  • vinaire  On December 24, 2013 at 3:48 AM

    L. Kin says:
    “Going back to “History of Man” and the problem of how to call “it” that has existed through the millennia and is neither man nor soul and maybe both together: Hubbard’s solution was to call it “theta being” or simply thetan. To give an example: the preclear William Thompson (51 years old, engineer, married, two children, 178 cm tall, 81 kg weight) receives an auditing session. When he recalls an incident of falling off his bicycle at the age of five, he is referring to the same William Thompson he is now, although then (age 5) his physical and social description was entirely different. When he recalls in some other session how he was hanged by the neck for stealing horses in the year 1535, he is still referring to the same person he is now, with the difference that the body he owned then doesn’t exist any more and that then he wasn’t called William Thompson but Pepe Gonzalez and it all happened during the Mexican conquista. But it’s his incident, it happened on his timetrack. He knows it to be so. This person, this spiritual entity of perennial duration which doesn’t live or die but takes bodies (which live and die) in order to play his games and fulfill what he made his mind up to do, is called “thetan”.”

    .

    (1) Both physical and spiritual aspects, which make up a life organism, seems to have existed since millennia. There is no reason to think that these two aspects have ever existed independent of each other.

    (2) The preclear William Thompson is an identity. At age 5, this identity was different. There is no underlying self, which was the same then as it is now. Self is not something permanent.

    (3) Again it is an assumption that a recall of the incident of 1535 means it was the same person then as the person now. Identity and individuality depend on both spiritual and physical aspects of a person. There is no element underlying identity and individuality, which ever remains permanent.

    • vinaire  On December 24, 2013 at 11:38 AM

      There is no thetan that remains permanent at any two points on the time track. So, any talk about a thetan having a time track is superfluous.

      When we talk about having a childhood, birth etc., we are talking about a sequence of memories attached to our present identity, individuality or self. This self is sort of an abstract label under which these memories are collected. The make-up of self is changing from moment to moment. Nothing is permanent about it.

      Getting attached to self is like getting attached to a bunch of impressions, and to atoms and molecules that keep shifting with time.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: