RM:AO - EN:DE

“EN:DE” reminds me of the German word “Ende” (“end”). :slight_smile:

So, do you understand your “EN:DE” as a “Vollendung” (“completion”) of RM:AO?

It reminded me of that word too but I did not remember that it was German. I Just need something to attach that would make this thread stand out.

EN:DE = Encode : Decode

As far as I know, RM:AO has no beginning and has no end. That being said I imagine no possible completion of RM:AO.

But EN:DE must be much orientated on language too.

I guess it is in a way - I would say that James has encoded RM:AO into a language that he is very familiar with and I attempt to decode that language into a language that I am familiar with, and hopefully along the way I find the secret to decoding it into a language that many are familiar with.

Unless you have something else in mind.

:-k

You will manage it. I am looking forward. :slight_smile:

At the moment, I have still two big beers in mind.

:obscene-drinkingcheers:

One for RM:AO, and one for EN:DE.

Cheers. :smiley:

With this excellent goal in mind, is it at all safe to say PtA is in some sense analogous to the Higgs Field? I inferred it could be thought of as an abstraction from James’ (Mr. Saint?) comment that it’s not a substance but a situation. For me, Potentials or situations seem like abstractions. So factoring in this…

…puts me in mind of particles of varying kinds affected by [though not composed of] a sea of force. Too far from the intended meaning?

Is this a commitment to some form of dualism? I do like the explanation. The notion of abstract and concrete realms “touching” but not interacting is interesting.

“James” is fine. :sunglasses:
The Higgs field is a Quantum Magi ruse. It was invented merely to claim absolute supremacy (Godwannabes). They had to have something similar to the aether field in order to make sense out of their prior claims, but they could never allow a non-quantum field of any kind. The Higgs boson (aka “the God particle”) is to arise from the Higgs field in order to initiate the entire quantum mechanical fairy tale. And even though it is entirely fake, just like the Second Law of Thermodynamics, it will be promoted and professed for quite a long time overriding any objections.

In the macroscopic world, PtA is known as “Voltage”, a term with which you are certainly familiar. As a voltage swings up and down very quickly, it radiates EMR (radio waves). The radio waves are the physical energy. The voltage is just the “force”. And likewise, PtA is the “voltage” to the “radio waves” of affectance. The PtA swinging propagates a wave of such changing called “affectance”. And then since affectance interferes with affectance, traffic jams or clusters can arise, forming sustaining particles of the three basic types.

And even though on the ultra minuscule scale there are no actual forces (no pushing or pulling), voltage is thought of as a force for electricity. In reality, things just migrate due to uneven affectance densities, giving the impression and effect of a force being present. That is one of the things that has fooled science from day one (none of the Standard Model forces actually exist at all).

Yes, it is a chosen dualism for sake of ease of understanding. As explained before, one can choose an ontology that best suits their need. The Platonic “Mortal and Divine” realms were used so as to allow for thinking in terms of perfect shapes and concepts that never physically exist, while keeping in mind the physical imperfect and changing things commonly found.

I chose to be a little more precise in declaring a “Physical” and a “Conceptual” for the same kind of reason. And also I often speak of the “Perception Realm” for similar reasons - practicality. The Perception realm refers to all that a mind might perceive, regardless of the truth of the perception so the realm overlays both the Physical and the Conceptual. The Perception Realm is practical to use simply because, as explained earlier, the mind and its emotions are developed from Perception of Hope and Threat (not from actual hope or threat). So the mind deals with both the physical and conceptual realms via perception, including both real and fictitious entities.

James

I wanted to bring this part of our conversation over from the reality thread for some contrast in conversation for everybody’s benefit.

I would honestly have to admit that my efforts have been a little more exposed than I would like this year to provide me with a level of comfort that I am accustomed to but then this is something that can happen in a transition from one philosophy to another - what is still holding me together is the goal that I have set.

To attain a masterful understanding of RM:AO

I had to be a little stubborn to achieve my original targets.

Targets met!

Without your emulator, very little will be gained.

I’d like to focus on one part of the RM:Affectance Ontology-Particle Migration-Momentum and Gravitation video, Anentropic Sheltering.

Help me understand combined particle regions: to maintain anentropic distance the amount of affectance leaving is more than entering. My layman’s understanding is that the steel wrecking ball can’t merge with the concrete wall due to repulsion of like forces on the subatomic level—steel possessing greater energy (in its atomic makeup plus energy gained in momentum) than concrete at this micro level—results in destruction (particle rearrangement) of the concrete. How would anentropic balance play out here?

What’s the nature of the union or mechanism of exchange between PtA and Affectance?

Also, why does the amount of affectance leaving the multiparticle region become greater than that entering when positions of particles relative to one another become close? Unsure of mechanism. If more leaves than enters, wouldn’t that create anentropic imbalance? What’s the mechanism for attraction and repulsion?

Affectance ontology seems mostly concerned with empirical apparatuses, yet its anentropic sheltering feature or aspect is said to determine “the size and density of all objects and gatherings from subatomic particles to populations to global religions and empires.” Since p ^ ~p seems to not yet have been sufficiently breached on other fronts, how is anentropic sheltering able to do this? Is there a dualism of PtA and PHT in the same environment going on? Can’t see how, if the two realms merely touch but don’t merge somehow, the two (churches/courthouses with religious beliefs/laws) combine?

Thanks for your patience. It’s refreshing to have my mind being twisted around something new.

Well, I’m flattered. :blush:

??? I don’t understand to what you are referring with that statement. “The amount of affectance” leaving what?

Any and all anentropic forms must always have the same amount of affectance entering as leaving (else it wouldn’t be anentropic).

Let me answer that after the prior matter is resolved.

That is a disturbing question in that it infers a misunderstanding of PtA and Affectance. Affectance is the propagating waves of changing PtA. It is similar to water molecules versus water waves or more precisely like pulsing voltage and radio waves. So the term “exchange between” doesn’t seem to make sense.

Perhaps imagine that all space is formed of infinitesimal evenly spaced points, each with a PtA level. And since every PtA affects the surrounding PtA levels, waves of changing PtA scatter across space. Those randomly scattering waves would be the “Affectance” - waves of changing PtA levels. In reality, there are no discrete “points in space” other than locations we choose to measure, but the idea of propagating waves is the same. On a little higher macroscale, this is referred to as “EMR”, ElectroMagnetic Radiation. “Affectance” refers more to the ultra minuscule scale of the same thing (subparticle).

Affectance delays affectance. That is the “mechanism” that causes buildups and traffic-jam particles to form. The more dense the affectance happens to be, the more delay takes place, causing an increase in the amount of affectance within a dense region, similar to a traffic jam of cars causing an increase in the number of cars on the highway.

Between two traffic jam clusters of cars, there are more cars still being affected by the main clusters than in outer regions further away from the clusters. Affectance behaves exactly that same way and for the same reasons. Cars cause delays in other cars just as affectance causes delay in other affectance. Particles are merely high density traffic jams of changing PtA or affectance that grows extremely dense in their center.

It is hard to readjust your head after being raised thinking in terms of “forces”, but in reality, there is no pushing or pulling, nor attracting or repelling. The entire mechanism is nothing more than each pulse or wave of affectance (“afflates”) delays and is delayed by others. And the more delaying that is happening, the more dense or compressed the region becomes (this is the cause of Einstein’s gravitational “warping of spacetime”, General Relativity Theory).

“p ^ ~p” ??? means what? If you are referring to the boolean truth table, I have no idea what you are saying.

Perception, the PHT, is formed of the physical PtA changing (“affectance”) plus a great deal of complex arrangements in order to form a mind, thus PHT is also physical. But when focusing only on the mind, PtA concerns are a bit irrelevant. One need not think of the electron flow and circuitry involved while playing a virtual war game.

So it isn’t an actual dualism between PtA and PHT but more of an analog association. Although there is a dualism between the physical and the conceptual (the mental is not the same as the conceptual but has some union commonality).

James

I completely understand where you are coming from and your position - I should point out a few things however.

Is this really true. Don’t get me wrong but RM and AO are focused on helping one attain a comprehensive understanding of reality. The emulator is for proving what RM:AO is claiming as far as I am aware. And the rationale as mentioned above in the original post is for giving one the reason to pursue either building an emulator or studying RM:AO as far as I am concerned. Well the rationale is acceptable for this purpose in my eyes at least.

Attaining a further knowledge of PHT and such is obviously useful to me given what you know of me.

I am both focused on the mind and on reality - typically I work on systems related to the mind, languages and information but what I have learnt is that the emulator is a system related to RM:AO and RM:AO is focused on reality and reality is the flip side and the missing piece of what I do.

Systems ARE how I work - how I tick - how I FUNCTION. . . how I [insert here] . . .

RM:AO sharpens the tools that I use whether you see that or not at the moment so while I deal with this emulator, I want to learn about MIJOT and PHT and likely some things that I do not know about yet << very important to me . . .

A single understanding to me is the essence of all of my goals.

That’s what threw me, the mechanics suggested a constantly sought equilibrium.

In the video is pointed out that in multiparticle situations a higher affectance density region forms between or around the particles. Under the heading “Minimum Antentropic Distance is stated, “If particles come too close, anentropic sheltering can no longer function throughout the region. The amount of affectance leaving from the combined particle region becomes greater than the amount entering. Thus they cannot migrate closer.” Have I misunderstood? Just now occurs to me this probably refers to the delay process noted in another video…?

Sorry, shortened version of Hume’s ‘no ought from is’. Problem of moral value in factual world or consciousness interacting with material body.

Surely it would take less than a second for you to realize that you are not merely your conscious “rationale”.

No matter how perfectly you come to understand reality on a conscious, cognitive level, that will be only a small portion of your mental make. What good would it do for the Senate to have totally truthful understanding of reality, if the House of Representatives is confused and in conflict? They each have different sources, resources, and interpretations of information about reality.

Your mind, and more importantly, your heart, is formed of factions within, “activist groups” who only understand what they see. And they do not see as you see, but with a completely different vantage, perspective, attitude, and realm of concern, sometimes better, sometimes worse. It is from that fundamental make that factions can grow in influence to at times, take over control and cause a sudden shift in personality. The USA is seen by most countries as being schizoid/bipolar, merely because of the constant, at odds, feud between the Republican and Democratic parties (not to mention the very many other demonic allegiances).

On the other hand, what is directly experienced, has great significance on all levels depending upon interpretation, which is why you rightfully seek a single “universal understanding”. But faction interpretation is tricky. Seeing the universe (even a virtual universe) consistently behave by principles, embeds those principles into the deeper activist psyche. That is how hypnotism works and is why all forms of media are maximizing that effort through loud sounds and sparking visions that hide subtle (unseen by the conscious guard) mental programming commands to the mind of the masses.

In short, you must SEE a physical representation of AO functioning before your eyes in order to communicate that universal understanding deeper into the interior in order to mend the bipartisan fractures.

The mechanics of Affect-upon-Affect doesn’t lean toward an equilibrium, but rather a statistical chaos of extreme highs and lows (mass particles being the extreme high concentrations and space being the low).

Yes, the little pulses and waves of affectance, the “afflates”, delay each other such as to cause congestion. But the congestion is always dynamic, fluid.

If two particles are thrown together, they will come very close, but never actually merge. If they are not thrown too hard, they can “stick” together due to the flow of affectance amid the congestion that is the particles and their ambient lower density surroundings. The video that you mentioned explains why they don’t merge even though the gravitational migration would suggest that they should. The bottom line is simply that the physical volume they occupy cannot sustain a stable entering and exiting dynamic if they get too close. This is one of the interesting things that “modern science” seems to never have figured out - the volumetric geometry dictates what physical forms can be stable or unstable.

Imagine a single little subatomic stable particle as the only thing in existence. If you envision a hollow sphere encapsulating that particle, the surface of that sphere must, by definition of “stable”, have the same amount of affectance passing toward the particle as away from it, “entering and exiting”, and at no matter at what radius you choose. Every radius must have an exact balance of entering and exiting.

That principle doesn’t allow just any form or shape of congestion. For that principle to hold, specific densities must be maintained at every possible radius. That is easy for a single particle due to its symmetry. But when two particles come together, things are not so symmetric any longer. Every possible radius of the union of the particles being stable requires that the particles be at a specific distance from each other. Either too close or too far causes the particles to migrate toward stability (that is commonly referred to as “gravitational mass attraction”). Too far apart and there is more affectance entering than exiting. Too close and there is more affectance exiting than entering. That difference is what causes the particles to eventually settle at a stable point by either conjoining or due to momentum issues, separating completely.

But without realizing what is causing this gravitational migration, one is tempted to think that there is nothing to stop the particles from merging into one particle. So they invented the superstition of “Quantum Reality”, wherein everything, including all objects, energies, movements, and time must be quantized and without cause or reason (“just because that’s the way it is. Don’t question it”) and only because they couldn’t figure out why mass and energy tends to be in relatively stable bundles. The reason was there. They didn’t need their quantum magic. But now ego is involved, so rationality is no longer relevant. Quantum Physics is hand-waving mental trickery, conflating statistical observations with ontologically dictated forms of causality. Quantum Mechanics has nothing whatsoever to do with causation, merely statistical correlation.

Oh, well yes, I will claim that RM:AO resolves those issues entirely. But those are more complex concerns, not at the foundation of Affectance Ontology, rather “emergent complex consequences”, yet still fully explainable (unlike Quantum Physics Magic).

I was saying that you need a reason or reasons to do something - for me - anything else will not work.

I once had someone try to tell me that I did not need to know WHY I would do something they had asked - all I could think was, what a peculiar thing to say.

Now I am confused as to what I said that would indicate that I do not realize that I am more than my conscious rationale.

I certainly agree with that, although the reason need not always be consciously deliberated.

It’s that feminizing thing - “Don’t think. Just do what you feel”.
:icon-rolleyes:

It isn’t merely for proving the claims to your rational mind, but also to the inner demon always keeping your heart divided with doubt. Your emotions and subconscious motivations (the “activist groups” within) are of greater concern (I am sure that you knew that too). I was just pointing out the consequences of not respecting the needs of the rest of your mind/heart. One cannot be rid of the demon within to become whole (aka “holy”) without a reason for it to happen. A “demon-striation” is that reason.

When ones heart is set on one set of “things” and then another set of “things” comes along that proves to be just as valuable there can still be conflict.

I still think we make a leap of faith . . .

The inner demon . . . demons are not a part of my usual parlance but I think I understand what you are saying. What brings about doubt must be fundamentally the same for everybody - not what is going on in the world - not what you say or what I say but a safety mechanism deep down below the conscious. The rest of the mind needs discipline as well as some flexibility to make other choices and freedom for imagination to take place - the conscious mind deals with what comes as it comes and the subconscious mind is trained to do what it does and is affected by daily data anew. The activist groups I imagine are those parts of the mind that help or force one to act and are at times in conflict with other parts of the mind.

Ridding oneself of the demon or destructive fixations that occupy each one of us, else is to believe one is without flaw, may lead to something good or maybe something bad, this is echoed in the whole “what is rational is not always good and what is irrational is not always bad device”.

Reason and alignment seem to have related value here.

Such is the good cause to have a unified under-standing, a foundation for all factions. Communicating it is then the issue to address … to all factions.

“Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce … Harmony”

… to all factions within.

I can agree to that.