"Without consciousness at the beginning who would care for something to be "optimal"? ".
It's simply right !
Don't need to be a scientist!
The road is still long until the home.
In keep on walking, i met the following sessions:
29 March 97
Q: (Laura) OK, let me ask this question. In talking about
time, I would like to ask, in relation to time, what is
memory?
A: More specific.
Q: (Laura) You want me to be more specific, well, let me
put it this way. Some understanding of time refers to it as
the 'now', the ever-present now. Well, a lot of people
remember a lot of other 'nows,' some people don't remember
any 'nows' at all, and it seems like memory is almost like
a reverse function of anticipation. Anticipation being
almost like a memory of the 'future' and memory being like
a reverse anticipation into the past. So, what I would like
to know is if time is merely a 'now', what is memory?
A: Conscious and subconscious record of perceptions.
Q: (Laura) Ok. If memory is subconscious or conscious
recording of perceptions, when one accumulates a sufficient
amount of memory, does one then become 'timeless'?
A: One is always timeless.
Q: (Laura) OK, but does one then become aware of one's
timelessness?
A: In 4th density.
Q: (Laura) OK. Does an electron have a memory?
A: Electron is borrowed unit of 7th density.
{...}
Q: (Laura) Is there anything about an atom that holds
memory?
A: Memory is subjective, atom is not.
Q: (Laura) Well, some atoms seem to be somewhat
subjective.
A: No, it is your interpretation.
5 April 97
Q: My first question is: If memory is conscious and
subconscious record of perception, as you have stated, and
there occurs a "reality merge," as you also described
previously, some sort of time manipulation, does this
automatically change individual perceptions?
A: Perceptions "leap" into place according to markers in the
eternally present continuum.
Q: What are these markers?
A: Experiential breaks in the perceptual realm of
continuance.
Q: Markers are experiential breaks. So, one experiences
breaks and they become markers... perceptions leap into
place... is this saying that, when there is a perception
of a break, that some part of the psyche seeks to bridge
this break by leaping into some sort of ...
A: The definition of the previous responses will become clear
for you only after some reflection, my dear!
Q: Umm... does this leaping of perception occur for everyone
as a group, or are some people immune to it?
A: !Como!?! What, said the perplexed ones, incredulously!
Q: Okay, you said that memory is subjective and an atom is
not. If memory is subjective, what you have just been
describing means that each and every person has a slightly
different perspective, even if they are involved with the
same incident or the same time sequence.
A: Of course!
Q: But it also implies...
A: That is the treasury of learning.
Q: Who is the treasurer?
A: The learner.
Q: But still, what you said still implies that an atom has an
objective existence. Is this correct?
A: Yes.
Q: Would you please tell us what constitutes objectivity?
A: The effort on the part of the observer to leave prejudice
"at the door."
Q: How does the effort on the part of the observer to leave
prejudice at the door relate to the objective existence of
an atom?
A: An atom, as with absolutely everything else, cannot exist
without an observer.
Q: So, in the case of the objectivity of an atom, if the
human observers are not objective, where is the observer
who makes the atom objective, or does the atom not exist
if there is no observer?
A: Yes. to the latter comment.
Q: Yes to which part?
A: The latter comment.
Q: So there must be an observer. Must the observer be human?
A: The observer must be a consciousness.
Q: If you say that an atom has an objective existence, yet it
only exists if it is perceived by a consciousness, then an
atom does not have an objective existence, correct?
A: No.
Q: Okay, what is the distinction? You say that objectivity
is the ATTEMPT on the part of the observer to leave
prejudice at the door.
A: Without consciousness, there is neither objective or
subjective!!
Q: So the crux is the attempt to leave prejudice at the door
in the same manner as one would be non-anticipatory in
order to create?
A: Yes.
Q: Well, that is a VERY tricky... (A) Is consciousness
objective?
A: Consciousness is objective, until it has the capacity to
choose to be otherwise.
Q: What is the stimulus for the change, for the giving of the
capacity to choose?
A: The introduction of prejudice.
Q: In a cosmic sense, cosmic consciousness, in the sense of
The One Unified Consciousness, what is the stimulus there
for the ability to choose?
A: When the journey has reached union with The One, all such
lessons have been completed.
Q: But, that doesn't answer the question.
A: Yes, it does!
27 May 2000
Q: (L) Moving along to the next question: we have been discussing memories and how memories of, say, past lives are stored, and that leads to the question of what is the structure and composition of the soul? How does the soul remember? How does it carry its memories from lifetime to lifetime, from body to body, whether simultaneous or sequential? How does the soul "store" them?
A: Has to do with atomic principles. These with gravity present the borderland for the material and the nonmaterial. Which theoretical atomic particulates would you think form the basis here?
Q: (L) How about tachyons?
A: Maybe neutrons?
Q: (A) Neutrons? Or neutrinos?
A: Neutrinos.
Q: (A) Well, first they say neutrons, then neutrinos. Or "maybe neutrons." I say "neutrinos" and they say "yes." So a "maybe" is only a pointer. Neutrinos are funny particles because they are massless. But, some people don't believe that neutrinos exist. My guess would be neutrinos. Do they exist?
A: Okay, we are going to throw caution to the "winds," and say yes. [Laughter.]
Q: (L) In terms of these neutrinos and soul composition, how are memories formed or held or patterned with these neutrinos?
A: Contained within for release when and if suitable.
Q: (L) Memories are contained within the neutrinos?
A: Sort of.
Q: (L) Are they contained within patterns formed by the neutrinos?
A: Closer.
Q: (L) So, that means that if one "consciousness unit," or soul, has more memories or experiences than another consciousness unit, it would have more neutrinos?
A: No.
Q: (B) Different patterns?
A: No.
Q: (L) What's the difference?
A: More data per unit, sort of.
Q: (L) Does that mean that an individual neutrino can be, in and of itself, more "dense" in data, so to speak?
A: So to speak.
Q: (L) Does this increased density of data change the nature or function of the individual neutrino?
A: Maybe it changes the function of the awareness, thus the environs.
Q: (L) Is there a specific number of neutrinos that constitutes a consciousness unit, or soul?
A: Number is not quite the right concept. Orientation is closer.
Q: (L) What are the orientational options?
A: Vibrational frequencies.
Q: (L) Do the vibrational frequencies increase or decrease with density of data?
A: Change; better not to quantify.
Q: (A) We are talking about soul. Soul is what density, in concept?
A: Ark, are neutrinos related to the concept of a bridge into pure energy in some way?
Q: (A) Yes. I was going in that direction. I was wondering why you speak about neutrinos and not photons, because photons are also a bridge to pure energy, I would say. The difference between photons and neutrinos is that photons are bosons and neutrinos are fermions. Neutrinos have to dance so that they don't touch each other. Bosons are like pairs of neutrinos and photons, as bosons, are free to move in space any way they want.
A: We would mention photons in terms of this discussion, but for the tendency of some reading the WebPages to misinterpret in terms of the "love and light" fantastic.
Q: (L) Well, the "light fantastic" was a dance around the turn of the century, so that refers back to the remark about "dancing." (A) Are neutrinos the fundamental building blocks of everything? The most fundamental particle, so to speak?
A: More like a midpoint with spherical outward expansive quality. Tetrahedron, pentagon, hexagon.
How do we retain our knowledge after death?
