Energy, catalysis, and self-awareness (chemistry and Gurdjieff)

Torvedana

A Disturbance in the Force
Well, after much time without an initial contribution to the forum, here I would like to share with all some thoughts that I had when speaking to a friend the general scheme of the STS dominion over the Earth (i.e., how civilization is basically a farm to feed our overseers.)

As I was trying to explain him what they were feeding on in a clear enough way, I found myself asking the question: how is it possible that negative emotions radiate the energy from which they feed? What is it about negative emotions that they specifically need to survive? Why can't they use positive emotions instead? I first tried to define the characteristic(s) that distinguish one kind from the other, and I visualized that negative emotions would be a dispersal of energy, as in an increase of entropy by a thermodynamic system that dissipates heat to its environment, whereas postive emotions would be an optimal utilization of energy. Positive emotions would be different in that the individual wouldn't be losing energy, but instead using it on oneself. I then imagined the whole Earth, dissipating energy from every single human being whose consciousness was lost to the rush of anger, to the hypnotizing distractions of the media, to the terrible feelings of their own fears and preocupations... and then I understood just what a banquet the Earth really is for them. Negative emotions is the accesible source of nurishment for them, because it is liberated without any control, while posotive ones are difficult, if not impossible, to obtain.


Of course, this made me realize that the production of emotions requires energy, just as any industrial process requires some kind of energy input to produce its goods. Any muscular action takes up energy, the brain uses a LOT of the body's energy, and somehow thougths are related to the brain, and so on... So our emotions were being produced and this in turn necessitates energy from us. That's where Gurdjieff comes in: I remembered what he said to Ouspensky about humans being just factories, and how the conscious shock was responsible for obtaining more energy from our nourishment, specifically air. A connected all this to the chemical process of catalysis. From Wikipedia:

Catalysis is the increase in the rate of a chemical reaction due to the participation of an additional substance called a catalyst.[1] With a catalyst, reactions occur faster and with less energy. Because catalysts are not consumed, they are recycled. Often only tiny amounts are required.
(enfasis mine.)

Clearly Gurdjieff saw a lot of parallels between the psychological processes of a human being and the realm of chemical reactions. Chemistry plays a very important role in his system that I still cannot fathom. (Maybe we could take the chance to talk about that topic in here as well!) So what the first lines of Wikipedia's entry are saying is essentially that a catalyst optimizes the energy used/liberated during the reaction! So the analogy that I came with is that the act of self-remembering is the equivalent of catalysis, in which consciousness acts as the catalyst that optimizes our internal energy so as to produce better quality emotions/feelings/thoughts/actions, which in turn would allow us to produce higher quality end-products (Gurdjieff's hydrogen-notation, for example). This made a lot of sense to me, and is something that pertains directly to one of the C's main points: that knowledge protects; if these creatures can only feed from the wasted "heat" of our consciousness vibrating at a frequency band that stands for "negative emotions" (or emotions that make one forget-oneself), then using self-remembrance as a catalyst would reduce the amount of energy given freely to them, and in turn makes us "produce" states of consciousness of a superior quality.

Another thing that got my attention from the Wikipedia entry was that a catalyst is not consumed, are not affected by the reaction itself, but only influence it somehow, and then they are recycled! Just like consciousness, like mind, which is eternal... it is constantly recycled through experiences, but never actually lost nor augmented.

I would like to hear from your ideas on this topic, which seems to me quite interesting... How different ideas interconnect: the C's, Gurdjieff, physics, chemistry... On that note, although I said that positive emotions would be not available to the 4D STS beings, I actually believe that that isn't the case. For, what counts as a positive emotion? I mean, sexual pleasure could certainly be a positive emotion, wouldn't it? And yet, it makes sense to me that these beings are also taking advantage of sexual intercourse. Then there's happiness, cheerfulness, for example: sometimes it is such that it seems rather like a waste of energy, just like anger. So I think that positive emotions refer more to a state of tranquillity, of peace of mind, just as the Buddhist and the Stoics aimed for (ataraxia, apatheia, etc.)

What excites me is this scheme in which a positive state of mind (rather than an "emotion") not only is a finer source of nourishment, but also it is only available for us: so Lizzies et al are receiving poor quality food but in great quantity, and those who progress in the Work are able to cut off that channel of bleeding and refocus it to themselves: what food we receive we process it then to produce a <<new being>>, to be reborn. It is, after all, a matter of personal economics, of managing the household, the factory, and preventing thieves from taking from our land.

I would like to look into classifications of states of mind in terms of energy. Maybe chakras have something to do with it, or there is an ancient system (Samkhya is the first thing that comes into mind, albeit randomly) that once recognized this as Gurdjieff did. I hope this makes sense and that I made myself clear with my English!
 
I think your line of inquiry here is very important! If you are interested in Gurdjieff's understanding of chemistry and the development of man, I would suggest you to look further into what Ouspensky recorded in his book In Search of the Miraculous as "the table of Hydrogens" (G's breakdown on the substance of matter/vibration) and "the Food Diagram of Man #4" (how it is that we assimilate these "hydrogens" or substances into our organism through the "three foods" of physical food, the air we breathe, and the impressions we receive, in relation to the structure of the octave).

G says "At the same time, however, if we study the manifestation of the law of octaves in vibrations of other kinds we shall see that the laws are everywhere the same, and that light, heat, chemical, magnetic, and other vibrations are subject to the same laws as sound vibrations. For instance, the light scale is known to physics; in chemistry the periodic system of the elements is without doubt closely connected with the principle of octaves although this connection is still not fully clear to science." (ISOTM, p.124-5)

We can put this statement somewhere around the year 1915 to 1918, about the same time that Walter Russell (a TRUE scientist) was developing his theories on the octave and the periodic table of elements, the same theories he used to accurately predict the placement of Plutonium. You may also want to research Walter Russell's work.
 
I wonder what a Periodic Table with the elements sorted in order of the frequency of the light they absorb in the spectrum would look like. A rainbow, perhaps?
 
https://writescience.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/atomicspectra.png

http://www.umop.net/periodic_spectra.png
 
Thanks for that, Martfotai, it's absolutely nothing like what I thought it might be!
I was imagining the colours would flow from one element to the next.
Oh well, it was pretty.
I need to examine it more closely to see if there's anything more to it.
 
Remember that there are other ways to schematically represent the periodic table. For instance, Walter Russell arranged them on a logarithmic spiral -- I'm sure the spectral emission data would come across differently if viewed from that perspective.

We very often take things as objective truth (for instance, the equal-temperament musical scale, the 7 colors of the visible light spectrum, the periodic table, etc) when in fact, they are conventions designed to make something more manageable.
 
I just finished that whole section of ISOTM where he goes into the octaves and hydrogens, and it's definitely a puzzle to me. Up till that point, because of reading the Wave and everything else on the sites, the ideas weren't new to me, but that took me by surprise. I get some points while others seem like he is saying one thing while the diagram shows another. All in due time though. It gave much to think about.

What are your thoughts on 'shocks?' In my mind, and trying to place within my own story where the shocks were, I feel they came at times of really seeing a situation as it truly was. So, in trying to be able to induce one's own shocks, won't you along the pursuit of constantly trying to see things as they are, build up a tolerance so as the shocks come less and less? Because at some point my train of thought circles back to the idea of not flinching at the unknowable, at which point you aren't shocked by anything. Note: looking at it in writing here, I suppose I could be viewing different states on different points of the cycle and trying to connect them in not-so-correct ways.

In any event, I'm curious to learn more about the mechanics of storing up the different levels of energy and, from what it seems like is being described, be able to consciously know where, when and how to apply the shocks as to achieve a desirable outcome for your current trajectory.
 
In any event, I'm curious to learn more about the mechanics of storing up the different levels of energy and, from what it seems like is being described, be able to consciously know where, when and how to apply the shocks as to achieve a desirable outcome for your current trajectory.

From what I've come to understand from the reading I've done is that energy in the psychological sense refers to dopamine sensitivity in your brain. Things that consume tons of energy are all those that trigger large dopamine releases (such as negative emotions, sexual excess, and many habit-forming dissociative activities like television, reading and games). When you engage in these activities your brain gets accustomed to a certain high dopamine level, your receptors decrease. This forces you to rely increasingly on psychological effort to accomplish tasks. You conserve dopamine by relaxing, avoiding activities that your mind wants to wander back to, and being more physically present. In doing this your brain responds more readily to objective concerns like looking after yourself and those around you, gaining knowledge, and being genuinely creative and self-inventing. Your brain will find those activities more naturally rewarding when you avoid frivolous high-dopamine-releasing activities that deafen your reward circuitry to more objective needs and concerns.

I found the book Cupid's Poisoned Arrow to be quite educational in that regard. It focuses on how distorted reward systems affect romantic relationships, but it talks a lot about the dopamine reward/seeking system :huh:and is easily generalizes me to a smorgasbord of other energy-draining habits. :)
 
Pearce said:
What are your thoughts on 'shocks?' In my mind, and trying to place within my own story where the shocks were, I feel they came at times of really seeing a situation as it truly was. So, in trying to be able to induce one's own shocks, won't you along the pursuit of constantly trying to see things as they are, build up a tolerance so as the shocks come less and less? Because at some point my train of thought circles back to the idea of not flinching at the unknowable, at which point you aren't shocked by anything. Note: looking at it in writing here, I suppose I could be viewing different states on different points of the cycle and trying to connect them in not-so-correct ways.

In any event, I'm curious to learn more about the mechanics of storing up the different levels of energy and, from what it seems like is being described, be able to consciously know where, when and how to apply the shocks as to achieve a desirable outcome for your current trajectory.

This is where it's really important to find a group of people, in the flesh, who are working under similar principles of development. The chemical emanations of types dissimilar to yourself (as the Work attracts all types) will causes constant shocks for self-remembering, especially if both people are actively engaged in self-remembering and intentionally directed inner work. Working by oneself (if even networking with others online) is simply no substitute for working WITH others, within each others presence. For instance, to carefully prepare a written post is a completely different experience than speaking one's mind openly in conversation; the impressions of oneself are of a very different quality. Online, we only see masks; some are more well-made than others, but masks they are, all the same.

We're given the analogy of escaping prison. One person can never make it out alone, but working together, we can take 'shifts.'
 
whitecoast said:
In any event, I'm curious to learn more about the mechanics of storing up the different levels of energy and, from what it seems like is being described, be able to consciously know where, when and how to apply the shocks as to achieve a desirable outcome for your current trajectory.

From what I've come to understand from the reading I've done is that energy in the psychological sense refers to dopamine sensitivity in your brain. Things that consume tons of energy are all those that trigger large dopamine releases (such as negative emotions, sexual excess, and many habit-forming dissociative activities like television, reading and games). When you engage in these activities your brain gets accustomed to a certain high dopamine level, your receptors decrease. This forces you to rely increasingly on psychological effort to accomplish tasks. You conserve dopamine by relaxing, avoiding activities that your mind wants to wander back to, and being more physically present. In doing this your brain responds more readily to objective concerns like looking after yourself and those around you, gaining knowledge, and being genuinely creative and self-inventing. Your brain will find those activities more naturally rewarding when you avoid frivolous high-dopamine-releasing activities that deafen your reward circuitry to more objective needs and concerns.

I found the book Cupid's Poisoned Arrow to be quite educational in that regard. It focuses on how distorted reward systems affect romantic relationships, but it talks a lot about the dopamine reward/seeking system :huh:and is easily generalizes me to a smorgasbord of other energy-draining habits. :)

Thanks for this! I feel like it hit the nail on the head. I will give that book a look-see also :)


Martfotai said:
Pearce said:
What are your thoughts on 'shocks?' In my mind, and trying to place within my own story where the shocks were, I feel they came at times of really seeing a situation as it truly was. So, in trying to be able to induce one's own shocks, won't you along the pursuit of constantly trying to see things as they are, build up a tolerance so as the shocks come less and less? Because at some point my train of thought circles back to the idea of not flinching at the unknowable, at which point you aren't shocked by anything. Note: looking at it in writing here, I suppose I could be viewing different states on different points of the cycle and trying to connect them in not-so-correct ways.

In any event, I'm curious to learn more about the mechanics of storing up the different levels of energy and, from what it seems like is being described, be able to consciously know where, when and how to apply the shocks as to achieve a desirable outcome for your current trajectory.

This is where it's really important to find a group of people, in the flesh, who are working under similar principles of development. The chemical emanations of types dissimilar to yourself (as the Work attracts all types) will causes constant shocks for self-remembering, especially if both people are actively engaged in self-remembering and intentionally directed inner work. Working by oneself (if even networking with others online) is simply no substitute for working WITH others, within each others presence. For instance, to carefully prepare a written post is a completely different experience than speaking one's mind openly in conversation; the impressions of oneself are of a very different quality. Online, we only see masks; some are more well-made than others, but masks they are, all the same.

We're given the analogy of escaping prison. One person can never make it out alone, but working together, we can take 'shifts.'

Agreed completely, and this is where I find myself: not yet having found a physical group while also feeling like there is still plenty of prep-work to be done, even though some of it has to be done in a group. All in the flow though, I can see the stepping stones along the way. Just gotta persevere. Thanks for the responses, Happy 'New Year' all!
 

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom