Session 11 August 2018

[susy7]

Thank you very much. My question is why Lie algebra is considered in this way by the Cassiopaeans? I also wanted to point out that Algebraic Gememometry developed independently of Algebra and Lie groups

 

[Azur]

Unstable - prone to change
Wave - a periodic disturbance, motion, variation, to convey
Gravity - fundamental idea, instruction, attraction due to being (matter), information

Unstable gravity wave - temporarily make use of fundamental idea/information for purposes of action.

Yes! Exactly what we're for.

That applies to human beings, but what about the rest of creation? Lower density beings don't seem to have that capacity for abstract ideas and purposes.

But they hear and vibrate "upwards" when some around them aren't "going down". The flora around you grows, if you are such. By only being there. Rare, rare thing to notice, though.

And a most of humanity also could be said to act mainly out of biological drives, subconscious impulses. They still learn to speak a language, hold a job, etc. And whose "thought" is it, "God's" or the person's? It seems to me that part of the lesson must be to struggle with a very distorted antenna, and learn as we try, to "read the signs" properly, to separate thoughts that are imposed (biology, childhood, etc.) from more authentic thoughts, combining that with application of the information absorbed, learning as much as we can so as to "tune in" to something that leads to growth, if possible. And the drive one has must be important. Following your analogy, someone can learn a language or a musical instrument very well, just to show off or feel smart, but not do to anything in the way of giving to others with it, or really "organizing information" to expand being, right? It's tricky!

All of that is monkey shine. You, we, some know it.

Another thing that is confusing to me is that if gravity is all information, and learning is reorganizing information bits, then shouldn't "gravity" for a person who has learned a lot be different from that of a person who hasn't, or an animal, a plant, a rock? Yet, we would all fall at the same speed give them same resistance. Of course, the problem here is that we don't know what gravity IS.

Well, are you not beyond a rock or an animal? Pretty sure you are much more of an unstable information gravity wave than a rock. Rocks are sustained (held together) by the same waves: they're less unstable. They think a little slower.

Cue the self-reflexive soul magnet image.

Another confusing thing is that the Cs mentioned the purpose of life being this reorganization of information bits, expanded being. But what about a being who chooses a purely "STS path"? Can we not say that he or she is also reorganizing bits of information, except that the nature of his acts, and the way he organizes the bits lead to more contraction than expansion?

Yeah, Earth has been a good Mother. Lots of good vehicles for Souls to grow. Either way.

I think it's pretty much predefined at some level.

No.

Except for the Arena we've chosen, and are being challenged by.

 

[lilies]

(Pierre) You were wondering about how you relate to them. They're dead, they're far away. Sharing the same DNA antennae, if we are connected via DNA to an information field, and you have other people with similar DNA connected to a similar part of the field, and time really doesn’t exist on other planes, then you can access these kinds of memories or information shared by ancestors...?

Must be like "etheric quantum entanglement". Sharing info between souls via operating similar antennae - between live or dead (incarnated or discarnate) - peeps with similar receivers just need to be powering same type antennas, like CB radio: everyone hears the chatter once tuned in.

This explains the phenomenon of "Direct Knowledge", when a specific invaluable info package suddenly teleports into your mind. Its just there one moment, but it might very well need a revolutionary book acting as a combined strong car battery & jumper cable, so the electricity of the information you just read hits you with "idea jumpstart jolts" and the jolt sends juice to your antenna and it starts to work and you began to receive. Lots of sparks flying at first and restarts needed in the beginning.

The Collingwood books appear to give exactly these very much needed "ancient DNA-activator jolts".

 

[Ina]

Well, are you not beyond a rock or an animal? Pretty sure you are much more of an unstable information gravity wave than a rock. Rocks are sustained (held together) by the same waves: they're less unstable. They think a little slower.

Stunning Carminite crystals from Clara Mine, Wolfach, Black Forest, Baden-Württemberg, Germany

Photo © Mintreasure

Amazing Geologist

Looking at the picture one could easily say that the crystals look exactly like a flower. And there are so many other examples like that.

Also countless videos with animals and birds exhibiting humanlike behaviors.

Maybe it is not just pattern recognition in our perceptions. Maybe the information gets transmitted and assimilated from plants to rocks, from animals to plants from humans to animals....

It is such a pitty that we fail to recognise our sources of inspiration.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

I don't think what is objectively true and false is up to us. I think it's pretty much predefined at some level. Sure, we can proceed with some false ideas and actions for a while, but ultimately they must be proven true or false, real or illusory and we have to accept them as such, that's the "work in progress" part. We, and all conscious beings, are in the (often protracted) process of figuring out the real from the false, which appears to be predefined.

I agree. When I wrote "determining the details is up to us", I meant determine in the sense of "ascertain or establish", not to create for ourselves. There are things that are true and good, and it's up to us to learn what they are. Mathematicians don't 'create' mathematical relationships, they discover them. And people trying to live better lives don't create the values and principles by which they live, they discover them. Evolutionary history is a long string of discovering better ways to live - what works and what doesn't.

When you say: "'higher' is that which conforms with the ultimate purpose and meaning with which cosmic mind imbues the cosmos", that could be construed as someone or something 'deciding' what is real and true, which doesn't really jive with the idea of a free will universe. But then a free will universe, if taken literally and absolutely, is a bit of a paradox, because surely it can't be possible that a thing and its exact opposite can be equally real or true forever.

I take freedom to mean the freedom to choose between alternatives. Reality exists. And we can choose to accept or reject reality. Discernment and cognition are free processes: you must be free to consider possibilities and test them against a norm or standard. But if you define free will as the freedom to create reality, then no, we don't have that. We can deceive or delude ourselves, but reality will always be there to let us know. We can convince ourselves that we are all that matters, but that's a denial of the wider reality.

I think the Cs have given the answer in the form of the STS/STO paradigm. That which determines what is real, or true and lasting seems to be whether or not the 'thing' (a belief system) is ultimately focused on the self or others, on the affirmation of expansion and 'more' and creation or the affirmation of contraction, limitation, and singularity. It's seems logical that something that seeks to limit all things, ultimately down to the a single unit or the self - and then right down to its logical conclusion of a complete lack of existence of anything - cannot be true and exist in any persistent way with the opposite of that idea. So coming back to what you said, there does seem to be a 'preference' that is effectively a law that mandates existence over non-existence, which seems reasonable enough because what's the point of non-existence? There obviously isn't one. So 'the universe' does 'decide', but it's a kind of forced choice, and therefore there is a technical limit to free will, but only in the context of the 'limitation' being itself the limitation to beat them all, i.e. non-existence.

Yep. STS is the ultimate form of living a lie. It denies that you are living in a world where others exist and have value. Some people may be able to force it for a while, but for most people their lives will fall apart from the mismatch with reality. And those that do force it may have a metaphysical price to pay: ultimate disintegration into non-being.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

That applies to human beings, but what about the rest of creation? Lower density beings don't seem to have that capacity for abstract ideas and purposes.

Not to the same degree, for sure, but I think the same principles apply. Like Marshall shows in the Evolution 2.0 book, cells act out purposes; bacteria distinguish 'me', 'you', 'us' and 'them'. They may not 'think' in the ways we think, but they have some rudimentary sense of what works and what doesn't, what feels good and what doesn't, what's safe and what's dangerous. Whitehead called this 'prehension' - a relatively unconscious 'feeling' by which they grasp meaning and purpose. Damasio ALMOST goes there in Strange Order of Things when he writes about 'sensation' in beings without nervous systems, but he's still a bit too much of a materialist to accept that there may be some degree of experience that goes along with that kind of rudimentary sensation.

Whitehead - who was a panpsychist like Thomas Nagel - argued that everything has a rudimentary sense of experience, even subatomic particles. They 'prehend', 'feel' or 'grasp' their purpose, and manifest it by doing what they do. Protons can only be protons because they're so simple, but the more complex that beings become, the more they can experience, and the more freedom they have.

And a most of humanity also could be said to act mainly out of biological drives, subconscious impulses. They still learn to speak a language, hold a job, etc. And whose "thought" is it, "God's" or the person's? It seems to me that part of the lesson must be to struggle with a very distorted antenna, and learn as we try, to "read the signs" properly, to separate thoughts that are imposed (biology, childhood, etc.) from more authentic thoughts, combining that with application of the information absorbed, learning as much as we can so as to "tune in" to something that leads to growth, if possible.

Exactly. Most humans run on autopilot. To use the analogy I used in my reply to Joe: they're using grade-two lessons in grade-three. Not only that, they're skipping classes and thinking they know all the answers to the tests without studying! They can still survive, like animals do - because our bodies already learned those lessons over the billions of years of 2D evolution. And maybe they're even learning SOME of the lessons of grade three, slowly, but they still have a lot to learn. That much is clear when you see how much suffering there is and how unprepared people are when disaster strikes in their lives. Biology and society create a very stable system of survival, but at the same time, they are very limiting. They create the 'domain of the known', in JBP's terminology. And it's a tough job to enter the unknown, learn to read the signs, think authentically, and 'tune in'. But that's life!

And the drive one has must be important. Following your analogy, someone can learn a language or a musical instrument very well, just to show off or feel smart, but not do to anything in the way of giving to others with it, or really "organizing information" to expand being, right? It's tricky!

Yep. Analogies like that only go so far. Like Paul and the Stoics taught, your overall mindset is the most important thing. You can be a good musician but a bad human. But to be a good human, you need to organize your entire being into an STO "shape". That means harmonizing ALL your thinking, feeling, and actions according to an ideal, which Paul called the "mind of Christ".

Another thing that is confusing to me is that if gravity is all information, and learning is reorganizing information bits, then shouldn't "gravity" for a person who has learned a lot be different from that of a person who hasn't, or an animal, a plant, a rock? Yet, we would all fall at the same speed give them same resistance. Of course, the problem here is that we don't know what gravity IS.

I had the same thought while reading the session!

Another confusing thing is that the Cs mentioned the purpose of life being this reorganization of information bits, expanded being. But what about a being who chooses a purely "STS path"? Can we not say that he or she is also reorganizing bits of information, except that the nature of his acts, and the way he organizes the bits lead to more contraction than expansion?

Yeah, I think so. By analogy, take a book by some schizoid postmodernist. The book itself is an organization of information. It may even have bits that are true, but other bits are only kind of true from a certain limited perspective, and even more bits are totally wrong when seen in the context of wider reality. Overall, it's a faulty organization: it doesn't map to reality, and when it is put into practice it only creates chaos - it destroys the wider system of social organization, and the organization of the individual psyches that make up that society.

The life of a person who makes bad decisions is still organized to some degree, but it's an organization that doesn't mesh with all aspects of reality. They're not living up to their potential, they're causing harm to themselves and other people, they don't know things they could know if they tried.

A person on the STS path is kind of like a deadly virus. It survives and reproduces, but it does so at the expense of other beings. It destroys the homeostasis of the wider system of life instead of supporting it.

 

[BlackCartouche]

A: Learning by organizing information bits. Expanded being.

A: Gravity is all information.

(Chu) So gravity is all information, but gravity is also the impetus for going from pure information into matter.

(L) I guess gravity is all information, and the unstable gravity waves are information crossing the bridge.

A: Close.

I read "unstable" as prone to chaos, of raw information without construct or 'order'. If "Expanded being" expands through - and in accordance with - learning through the process of organizing information bits - and organizing and learning is order, then why are gravity waves "unstable" when transferring information into matter? I wonder... Existence is gravity is all-information, and the lack of all that IS is NON-existence (another concept beyond 3D understanding) as represented as the Abyss... Therefor if "Abyss = NON-existence" is what conscious 'being' expands into, and the "information field" (mentioned a few Q&A's down in a different context in regards DNA... although, maybe not really so different a context?) event-horizon of existence coming into contact with NON-existence through expansion, creates a chaos-forming 'impact/interaction-zone' resulting in new yet raw un-constructed un-ordered information... aka Chaos.

Chaos of new information needs ordering for stabilization before finding its way to the source of consciousness. At a consciousness level, this process translates as "learning" born of "organizing" the new information - and is needed for continued expansion (opposite of constriction aka STS). All new information as a result of the ongoing expansion of gravity/existence having interacted with NON-existence goes through an 'unstable' state of matter manifestly expressed as the "crossing the bridge" to be learned/organised into stable gravity/ordered-information before reaching the Source of Cosmos Consciousness.

Atomically speaking, I see it kind of like the reverse-affect as that of the Sun being a black-hole at its core and the exploding/imploding reactive fiery event-horizon we can see is the result of the Universe (localized as our solar system) interacting with the black-hole aka Abyss unseen beneath the exploding/imploding event-horizon. But, in the Cosmic 7D Conscious sense, of Creation is 'within' the 'sun', so to speak, though expanding 'outward' into an 'outer black-hole', so to speak, that is the Abyss of non-existence - and the highly reactive 'event-horizon' is perpetual chaos in need of perpetual organizing as the Cosmos perpetually expands... OSIT.

I hope that makes sense, as i found my thoughts difficult to put in words.

 

[Zasino]

The part about the ancestors was really interesting and sort of confirms my feeling about genealogy work as being something important that could help us learn a lot about ourselves. In short, it's not just a nice pastime for retired people I had begun some research on my paternal family but I've now hit a wall, due to the difficulty of getting official documents, and the lack of "first hand" information. And the info I do have is just basic stuff - names and dates, professions and places of birth/living. It'd be nice to have some juicy stories. At the very least, when you have places and dates, you can read about the history of the country and the period your ancestors lived in, and it can give you an idea of their way of life.

I had once traced my paternal (male) lineage back to a man named Abraham who lived in the 13th century. As a thought experiment I put Abraham in the broader context of my ancestry as follows:
I have two parents, who in turn have two parents each, and so on. Making a few simplifying assumptions (exactly 25 years per generation, no inbreeding) we can estimate the number of direct ancestors as a function of time as 2*2^g where g stands for the number of generations past. In my case (but this applies to everybody) it turns out that Mr.Abraham had his wife plus another (2^28)-1 = 268’435’455 contemporaries contributing their DNA towards mine. That’s already a huge number, seven centuries back . Granted, if we account for inbreeding (near or distant) that number is bound to decrease substantially. But still I can affirm that I am the product of 536 million love-makings over the last 7 centuries!

Further assuming for the sake of argument (but unrealistically) that DNA contributions are weighted equally, and there is no epigenetics in play, Mr. Abraham’s contribution is really at a homeopathic level. While from my point of view in time looking back, my DNA could be seen as the result of a synthesis or distillation from countless earlier DNAs, from Mr.Abraham’s perspective the operation looks like a big dilution.
As one corollary, I see no point in boosting my ego by claiming that Mr. Abraham, my direct ancestor, was a wealthy landowner and battle hero (unlike myself ).

Another IMO interesting question: according to re-incarnation, in view of the above numbers there is a finite probability of me being one of my ancestors.
But considering that according to the C’s, time does not exist, my brain morphs into a big conundrum, which I hereby gladly share with the forum.

Thank you for the hugely interesting session!

 

[trytofly]

Thank you for this really exciting session !

 

[John G]

Thank you very much. My question is why Lie algebra is considered in this way by the Cassiopaeans? I also wanted to point out that Algebraic Gememometry developed independently of Algebra and Lie groups

Geometric algebra/Clifford algebra can though give you Lie groups. For example, Geometric algebra 2-vectors give you the Lie group called the Spin group. You also get spinors from Geometric algebra and if you combine bivectors and spinors, you can get the E8 exceptional Lie group (which contains lots of other Lie groups as subgroups like E7, E6, D8, F4, A3). So it may be independent historically but not mathematically. Klee Irwin puts a lot of money into E8 research and he very much seeks out people with E8 related models like Tony Smith, Garrett Lisi, and Carlos Castro Perelman. However, these people have some very different ideas aka it's easy to get lost hence the warning from the Cs. The Cs don't seem to like to give away anything that we can figure out on our own so I don't think they are going to say who among these guys is the least lost.

Ark has been into the conformal group for gravity and the Cs seemed to like that idea since they confirmed the 4 pluses and 2 minuses for his conformal metric. The Cs seem to like the brane idea and that via U(N) gauge theory is very Lie group related too. Lie groups seem useful but they may need things geometric algebra and branes to help keep researchers from getting lost. Nice thing about Geometric/Clifford algebra is that even if you are dealing with infinite dimensions, this can be rewritten as a tensor product of infinite copies of an 8-dim algebra since there is an eightfold Bott periodicity. Cl(8) has 256 dimensions and E8 has 248 dimensions. The difference according to Tony Smith is half of the 16 Pertti Lounesto primitive idempotents. Can researchers actually do things like detailed symmetry breaking Higgs mechanism kinds of things using Cl(8) multivectors? I really have no idea.

 

[dantem]

"The programming is complete."

About a week or two ago, I quit carrying my personal crystals. I still treasure all of them. Oh, I also quit using my water crystal about the same time.

Thanks for the session.

It sounds like things are about to pick up speed.

Hi WIN 52, I didn't get it... You mean you quitting the crystal thing for awhile was like a 'disturbance in the force' in relation to the "The Programming is complete" on a mass scale?

For the record: I've thought I've lost my personal crystal, it was around April-June perhaps, then after a 3 or 4 days I'd go sit with the others crystals and sang for minutes, and the crystal showed up on a pocket a few hours later. After that, in June, I've lost the water crystal for a week or two, searched everywhere as in the first occasion. I said, I've lost it for real this time, and thought it slipped on the thrash when emptying my cup... Showed up it was on the ground at home, got whiteish tiles on the floor

 

[Joe]

Yes! Exactly what we're for.

No.

Except for the Arena we've chosen, and are being challenged by.

Since you said "no", can you point out then how the path towards "non being" can be as viable as that towards expanded being?

 

[Joe]

But if you define free will as the freedom to create reality, then no, we don't have that.

I think we can have the freedom to create new versions of reality, and potentially genuinely new creations, but no one can change a fundamental 'law' of the universe (it seems ) that between expanded being and self-centered contraction towards 'nothingness', the former is viable while the latter is not. It seems this is not even a law but a self-evident and immutable truth.

 

[Woodsman]

I thought the same: If programming is complete, then it can't be good because invasion begins. We'll have to see how this translates into reality. I doubt we'll see the mother ship on the White House lawn, with predictions often being symbolic and all that, but what do I know.

Something else I thought is that, if the program is complete, then it is right in front of our eyes in society for us to see it, so we should be able to tell by now what it consists of. I always thought the program had to do with nihilism, materialism and postmodernism, and obviously that's a big part of it. But then about half the people on the ideological spectrum don't share those. A housemate commented that the program is perhaps the ease with which people are manipulated. And I tend to agree with that. Something that many people on both sides of the political/ideological (or even scientific, philosophical and religious) debate have in common is that they seem to be massively influenced by emotions, very hysterical, missing all sorts of nuances and complexities. So perhaps it's as simple as that and more fundamental than the errors of the left: people can't think straight nor deeply these days, or simply have no interest in finding the truth about anything. Thus, they remain divided and very easy to manipulate one way or the other.

When I read your post, I began to wonder if there is any guarantee the invasion might not include something we would not expect. Would not an invasion of viruses or comets also count, that is an invasion of beings in density 2 and 1? And of course there is also density 3 and 4. Another possibility is that the senses and minds of the beholders of some would change, they would begin to experience and to see more, and this rapid increase of sensory perception could also be interpreted as an invasion. Another way of thinking is that the modern technology is invasive; the eyes and ears of machines controlled by algorithms have already totally invaded our lives, and we only have a vague idea of who really is watching. Is it the system administrators, the big cooperations, the intelligence communities and those they are linked up with, or is it the beings and what the C's called soul imprints that are attracted to the machines?

This is older stuff, not available anymore in the transcripts section, (it's from July 25, 1998, during the "Frank" years, so pinches of salt are advised), but I try to keep copies of everything I read that happens to pique my interest. This file was one of them. I'll only post here the relevant part, because I don't want to step on any toes wrt what might have been deliberately omitted from the public files.

~~~~~~
Session Transcript 980725

Q: And where do you transmit through?

A: Cassiopaea.

Q: (L) I read the new book by Dr. David Jacobs, professor of History at Temple University, concerning his extensive research into the alien abduction phenomenon. [Dr. Jacobs wrote his Ph.D. thesis on the history of the UFOs.] Dr. Jacobs says that now, after all of these years of somewhat rigorous research, that he KNOWS what the aliens are here for and he is afraid. David Jacobs says that producing offspring is the primary objective behind the abduction phenomenon. Is this, in fact, the case?

A: Part, but not "the whole thing."

Q: (L) Is there another dominant reason?

A: Replacement.

Q: (L) Replacement of what?

A: You.

Q: (L) How do you mean? Creating a race to replace human beings, or abducting specific humans to replace them with a clone or whatever?

A: Mainly the former. You see, if one desires to create a new race, what better way than to mass hybridize, then mass reincarnate. Especially when the host species is so forever ignorant, controlled, and anthropocentric. What a lovely environment for total destruction and conquest and replacement... see?


~~~~~~


It seems pretty clear to me that the invasion is happening right in front of our noses. -Our species has without question been re-coded to such an extent on the genetic and biological levels, (see "soy-boy") that you can see it and feel it out there walking around, snearing at you. The so-called "culture wars" are evidence, I think, not so much of a war, but merely this final wave of sociological programming butting up against the previous generation of out-moded inveterate livestock which is resisting change.

The world is currently wound up such that when let go to spin, populations can be counted upon now to manifest, en masse, all of the psychological profiles necessary to house alien souls; those shaven haired SJW university students are perhaps not the aliens themselves, but boy oh boy, their KIDS are going to be seriously screwed up! When your mom and dad, (I guess?) are actively trying to prevent you from expressing genuine sexuality based on your body type... From birth! You own parents are feeding you cult victim ideology... Yikes! What chance do you have? -Their genetics combined with a built-in inclination toward fascist/communist social programming, I can definitely see the argument for their being the perfect receptacles for STS aliens.

Whenever we get a glimpse of the interior workings of alien culture, (through hypnosis study of abductees for instance), the image we are able to piece together is one of such an ultra socialist system that it makes Star Trek's vision look postivly raunchy by comparison. -Born in creches, educated through mind control, grown for and placed into specific jobs determined by the system itself, allowing ZERO individuality... All scenes right out of an Aldous Huxley fever dream. -Creepy, hive-mind Socialism which actually works, but only because all sense of individuality has been stripped away, the entire culture resembling more an ant hill than an advanced civilization, the whole thing plays like a nightmare scenario lit with soft whites and smooth edges, where everybody is a happy, productive aberrative insult to God.

The more violently disposed monkeys among us are, my guess, programmed simply to be miserable and violent in order to feed the energy-sucking machine.

Our whole world of today seems brilliantly well programmed, from the alien sense. I have to grudgingly admire their work for the levels of efficiency and cleverness of strategy. How do can anybody fight such a magnificently arrayed beast, cultivated throughout all history, beyond our control?

Heh. Just watch. -Because that's happening also. We're on the winning side of history. It's good to keep that in mind when moving forward, while hacking at the heel of a giant black root, when feeling depressed about the bleakness of it all.

Read a book. Act on what you learn. Sing. Work. Stay alert. And let the butterfly wings do their thing.

 

[Ina]

Reading the replies above a song popped into my head, actually the lyrics, which I’m going to put below. To be pragmatic and crude the one thing that we all have in common irrespective of everything is the money. Take the money away the human race will be reduced to nothing. Humane, humanity manifest as long as....

Oh and a very interesting coincidence. The song mentions singing and dancing. Hmmm.


Price Tag
Jessie J
OK, Coconut man, Moonheads, and me
You ready?
Seems like everybody's got a price
I wonder how they sleep at night
When the sale comes first
And the truth comes second
Just stop for a minute and smile
Why is everybody so serious
Acting so damn mysterious
Got shades on your eyes
And your heels so high
That you can't even have a good time
Everybody look to the left
Everybody look to the right
Can you feel that yeah
We're paying with love tonight
It's not about the money money money
We don't need your money money money
We just wanna make the world dance
Forget about the price tag
Ain't about the uh cha-ching cha-ching
Ain't about the yeah b-bling b-bling
Wanna make the world dance
Forget about the price tag
We need to take it back in time
When music made us all unite
And it wasn't low blows and video hoes
Am I the only the one getting tired
Why is everybody so obsessed
Money can't buy us happiness
Can we all slow down and enjoy right now
Guarantee we'll be feeling alright
Everybody look to the left
Everybody look to the right
Can you feel that yeah
We're paying with love tonight
It's not about the money money money
We don't need your money money money
We just wanna make the world dance
Forget about the price tag
Ain't about the uh cha-ching cha-ching
Ain't about the yeah b-bling b-bling
Wanna make the world dance
Forget about the price tag
Well keep the price tag
And take the cash back
Just give me six strings
And a half stack
And you can, can keep the cars
Leave me the garage
And all I, yes all I need are keys and guitars
And guess what, in thirty seconds I'm leaving to Mars
Yeah we leaping across these undefeatable odds
It's like this man, you can't put a price on the life
We do this for the love so we fight and sacrifice every night
So we ain't gonna stumble and fall never
Waiting to see us in a sign of defeat uh uh
So we gonna keep everyone moving they feet
So bring back the beat and then everyone sing
It's not about the money
It's not about the money money money
We don't need your money money money
We just wanna make the world dance
Forget about the price tag
Ain't about the uh cha-ching cha-ching
Ain't about the yeah b-bling b-bling
Wanna make the world dance
Forget about the price tag
It's not about the money money money
We don't need your money money money
We just wanna make the world dance
Forget about the price tag
Ain't about the uh cha-ching cha-ching
Ain't about the yeah b-bling b-bling
Wanna make the world dance
Forget about the price tag
Forget about the price tag
Songwriters: Claude Kelly / Bobby Ray Simmons / Lukasz Gottwald / Jessica Cornish
Price Tag lyrics © Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC, Warner/Chappell Music, Inc, Universal Music Publishing Group, Kobalt Music Publishing Ltd.