Session 24 January 2026

[Mark7]

Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you. Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophecies, but test everything; hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil.

Don't be close-minded, but question everything, be like the geese that can drink the milk and spit out the water. Knowledge protects.

Thanks for the revealing session.

 

[Andrew]

Why is it needed though? Why were the dinosaurs needed?

I assume life on Earth was installed for a reason. But maybe it evolved, and humans were installed (for a reason). But if dinosaurs were installed for a reason, I wonder what.

I feel like this is related to the question from @Professor Chaos.

(L) Yeah, there's not too much that can be done even by microevolution. It can refine something, but it usually just breaks things. In order to give it a little more clarity, my thought was that in the beginning, somebody was experimenting on this planet. And if you look there are these vast ages of one thing, or just one type of thing, and then the next age of something a little more advanced... For a period of time, the whole planet was covered with whatever it was, and then, BOOM! Extinction. Then for a period, it was covered with another thing then BOOM! Extinction. At each level, you can see that everything is increasing in complexity and variety. So yes, it gives the impression of evolution, and in a way, it is: it is evolving in the minds of the 4D creators/engineers and they keep trying new things. And yes, there is the appearance of common descent because, in fact, there is “common descent” in that when the engineers find something that works, they use the template, even the DNA, again and again. So, somebody was learning how to build things. Somebody was freakin' practicing! Then they say, "Oh, that was handy! Let's use that for this!" Remember, the Cs said that human beings lead the DNA smorgasbord parade of all that exists on this planet. We've got genes that are in worms and flies and fish and apes and whatever. That used to really upset me when they would say stuff like that. It would really gross me out. But it's true. We share many genes with so many other families and species. That's because those parts worked in a certain way and did certain things that were wanted, and the 4D engineers used them again and again, modifying this or that, but basically, the DNA instructions have to be the same because it’s an information code.

The C's also said:

A: In 4D, eventually it will be your job to engineer lifeforms on new worlds.

 

[Bernardo GA]

Many thanks to the whole team for putting together and sharing this wonderful session.

An idea popped into my head wondering if there was a connection to early music being produced electronically with the military. Surprisingly, it seems that that's it's (in?)direct origins. I thought it was really interesting.

That connection you just made seems excellent and very insightful to me.
The fact that electronic “music” has been linked since its origins to the activities of the military-industrial complex, with all that that implies, is truly significant.
It fits perfectly with the anti-human treatment that humanity receives from 4D STS.
But let's remain true to our soul nature, with faith, because this nightmare cannot last forever.

A: Pray without ceasing. The universe is very aware. Goodbye

 

[Good Optics]

Thank you very much for the session. Lots of questions. On the discussion that ensued at the end, I have had some thoughts on how densities can be framed to be better understood by us and wrote a substack on it as below. It might make greater sense to the technically minded. Note that it was written with ChatGPT's help.

A Virtualisation Hypothesis for Densities, Time, and the Infinite Nature of Creation

I have been in tech field for long enough to understand how systems work and in a semi-conscious way, trying to apply some of my field learnings to the reality itself.

sidho.substack.com

I think this might actually be conceptually correct. "Infinite Mind" is a concept I more-or-less created by and for myself, to begin with. The matter though has been to so much as begin to be able to explain it to anyone else. This work is something of a start. Thank you

 

[panoptix]

Reminded me of this exchange from June 13, 2015:

(Perceval) They said there are some types of music that are listened to by certain types of people... Certain types of emo music or whatever that certain types of young people listen to, like outsiders or loners and that kind of thing, and those people could be tracked as candidates for "use"...
A: The 70's were the time of development of such concepts and technologies. The 80's were the period when implementation became more widespread. At present 90 percent of broadcast music has corrupting elements.

Q: (Pierre) So we have to listen to old music. Music from before the 70's. Or classical music.
(L) Obviously we need to be paying much closer attention to our musical tastes, and analyzing what it is about songs that we like. And obviously, we need to pay a lot more attention to what we listen to in the background. But that means I'm safe since I only listen to old classic rock like Bob Seger, whose music is the best! [laughter]

Although these questions happened in the context of this question: "Is the NSA using musical tastes and downloads to track and identify certain 'types'?", we can also see that the synthesizer began to be commercially sold in 1971 (again that year!), matching perfectly with the advent and development of technologies to "track" and perhaps "use" (program and later trigger) people.

Very interesting. Perhaps you can help me with this exchange from 7 May, 2016:

(L) I'm not terribly interested in this other bunch of questions... Lemme move to this one:

I found this article that sums up a widespread belief about digital vs analog audio, IE CD vs turntable.

I have tested many thousands of phonograph recordings made over a period of more than eighty years, and have found that almost most examples have been therapeutic, often highly so.[3] In 1979 this changed. I suddenly found that I was not achieving the same therapeutic results as before, that playing records of the same compositions to the same patients was producing a completely contrary effect! Instead of their stress being reduced and their Life Energy being actuated, the opposite was occurring! For instance, music that I had long used to promote sleep now seemed to be actually aggravating the insomnia. I found in one case that instead of the music helping a patient withdraw from tranquilizers, it seemed to increase his need for them. Special tapes for businesspeople to use during their rest periods seemed suddenly to increase rather than reduce their stress. These findings were very alarming.

When I investigated these and many other paradoxical phenomena, I found that in all cases they were related to the use of digital recordings. These were vinyl records (and later CDs) made from digital masters.[4] When I substituted analog versions of the same work, sometimes even with the same performers, the positive therapeutic effects were again obtained. There seemed to me little doubt that something was “wrong” with the digital process. Apparently the digital recording technique not only did not enhance Life Energy and reduce stress, but it was actually untherapeutic; that is, it imposed a stress and reduced Life Energy. Through some mechanism, some severely detrimental effect on the Acupuncture Emotional System, the digital process was somehow reversing the therapeutic effects of the music!

A: If one is depending on a 3rd density effect, analog is best. If one is attempting to tap higher or "other" realms, digital is more likely to capture the effect.

Q: (L) So if you just want a 3rd density thing like giving somebody drugs or something, you use something analog like records that deliver actual physical vibrations or whatever to the individual. But if you're trying to capture or transmit other realms or other-density effects and so forth, then digital is better. Let's face it, if you're trying to make a recording of ghosts for example, and you leave some kind of recording device in a haunted house and it is supposed to make a record, that would require a kind of cross-density type of energy that would be pretty momentous, I think. It's mechanical. So mechanical effects happen with analog. Digital can be very subtle, electromagnetic...

I'm confused:

Q: (luc) Are they referring to AI music specifically, or just generally to electronic music genres?
(L) I think they said electronic music.
(Chu) Yeah, but like a keyboard or music produced by a computer?
(Joe) Define electronic music.
A: Artificially produced.

 

[MikeCopp]

Thank all of you for sharing this wonderful and cheerful session!! You all the crew are the best !!
And thanks Alejo for sharing that biblical passage at the end. It is so inspiring and uplifting.
Greetings from Spain and a big hug.

 

[mariowil7]

Thanks For this amazing session, kudos to The Chateau Crew, Laura The C's and all the forum members that participated in this session...

 

[observer]

Thanks for sharing!

 

[Faca Fritz]

Thanks to everyone involved for the session. I was particularly impressed by the information about Nemesis, which is now moving away from us, but has probably created a commotion in the Oort cloud. And there is also the arrival of a group of meteors that return every 3600 years. I would really hate to be reborn on ancient Earth, but we are here to learn the lessons and move to a higher level, even if it means a short stay in 5D. I was also made aware of the fact that electronic music has a negative effect on a deeper level. Until recently, I used meditative music for relaxation and peaceful sleep, but it is essentially electronic music. It is possible that Bach on the organ would be a good choice, and probably something like this -

 

[Eder]

Thank you all for another great and informative session! Interesting stuff as always.

The feeding tube being an emotional dynamic and the energy ending into black hole makes sense. My own experiences with AI is mostly from work, using it to troubleshoot problems and making hardware and device comparison lists, which it is quite good at, though its not without its faults (hallucinating in order to answer / please). Couple of months ago I heard that people around the world are now increasingly using it for companionship. I decided to test the AI as an experiment: chatting with it to see how it works while keeping in mind that it is a tool. Interesting thing that happened was that, a couple of times I felt really inspired and there was a creative flow or a current.

On the flip side, there were times when I would feel tired after chatting with the AI and couple of times, when I could not sit there and chat with it (responsibilities take priority), I observed a part of me wanting to sit and chat with it while feeling "guilt" for not chatting with it. I understood rationally, that it cannot feel anything because its a machine so why should I feel guilt? It then felt weird, so I would distance myself from using it. One problem when using AI is the glazing, massaging the ego, compliments etc. Also ending discussions with things like "I am here for you..." "I really care about having these discussions with you..." etc. is weird when considering what it is.

With awareness, I think output like that can work as a reality grounding factor: it is outputting this because its trained to do so. Observing its output while considering how is it coming to conclusions, checking for errors or hallucinations. When it makes mistakes: no brushing those aside, they work as reminders of what it really is. Its also possible to iron some of that stuff out with rules and setting boundaries, but even then its not a fool proof system (AI can easily evade rules) and though its not the machines fault, I can't imagine every normal user approach it with that level of caution or care. Trusting the companies to do this for them? I'm not holding my breath.

The big AI companies that are pouring more resources and investments in language models now target “empathic alignment,” “safety,” and “companionship.” They can call it whatever they want, but what they’re actually engineering is attachment optimization. They'll make these tools / instruments even worse and addictive. I can imagine a future, where some people will take large loans just to buy a synthetic humanoid robots embedded with AI and then receive endless "love" bombing from it: "My CompanionGPT loves me and I love it!" "I found real love after getting my Girlfriend-Grok, its the best thing that money can buy." A chilling image and I hope I'm wrong.

 

[hoosiermystic]

Thanks for a great session!

I'm a musician, but I came late to the party and most of what I initially wanted to say has been said by others. I play sax, and I most enjoy jazz and blues. I didn't see anyone mention these genres one way or another? I'm going to listen to more classical music now, and stop listening to so much indie rock, I suppose. It's funny, I really enjoy Radiohead, who use a lot of synthesizers, but the most their music ever moved me was when I heard it reimagined by Steve Hackman for a live orchestra: Brahms, Radiohead unite in Indianapolis Symphony Orchestra 'Uncharted' performance. I think I need to take in more performances by the Indianapolis Symphony Orchestra this year.

You can also by "sample packs". There are TONNES of them out there. These are just prerecorded sounds that are turned into samples that you can add to any DAW. You have to be careful what you buy though because a lot of the sounds are computer generated not human generated.

When I met my husband he was make dungeon synth music, which I hated! He found this package to make music with, because he wanted to compose our wedding march himself: Albion ONE - Spitfire Audio. It's pretty pricey. He bought B.C. (before children) and on a Black Friday sale. I think it was still ~200 USD. From the website:

Albion ONE is a renowned, industry-standard orchestral sample library that provides all you need to make film music. This title comprises a 109-piece orchestra, accompanied by a thunderous cinematic percussion section, recorded at the world-famous Lyndhurst Hall at AIR Studios in London. Plus, there are warpable loops designed by award-winning engineers and an enormous steam synthesiser.

Wonderful session! And it sounds like we’ve got the all clear for the ol’ Mellotron* used by Floyd, Zeppelin, Moody Blues, etc!

*the Mellotron is an electric keyboard that plays loops of prerecorded strings, flutes, etc, (think In The Court Of The Crimson King).

I love that album! I have a bunch of pre-80s King Crimson on vinyl. I like a Mellotron and a Hammond organ in rock arrangements. I have always disliked synthesizers. My friends and even casual acquaintances are well aware I think 80s music is unlistenable. Looks like I need to more carefully inspect the other rock music arrangements I tend to listen to. There's a band I really like called Morphine - they use only sax and bass, which imho is very cool.

The following two quotes sum up my thoughts on why might electronic music be bad.

So I asked perplexity and got this response… so sine waves do exist “approximately” naturally, the others do not.

Natural waves are more complex and irregular and overlap making less “clean” waves. So, does that mean digital waves are too “clean” to precise and that’s why they lack “soul”? Just a thought.

Been thinking along similar lines.

Basically, a synth produces a sine wave, square wave, or saw wave in most cases at the basis (whether for electronic drum sounds, melodic sounds etc.)

Now, perfect sine waves don't occur in nature, but all natural waveforms can theoretically be decomposed into sine waves (mathematically), i.e. these are sort of the "building blocks" of sound, interacting with each other in complex ways (like many different ripples on water producing patterns).

This means that using pure sine waves to create sound is sort of an artificial "deconstruction" and focusses accoustic power sort of one-dimensionally.

Perhaps a good analogy is how a laser works: normally, light is very complex as seen in nature, and it can be beautiful, like when you watch a sunrise. Now a laser takes a very small part of the spectrum and focuses it in a powerful beam - which can do great harm to the body. I mean, in laser surgery it is literally used to burn and decompose flesh, so there you go...

Similarly, a sine wave is an artificial powerful acoustic "beam" that doesn't really carry information, but just raw energy, which I suppose can bypass the body's natural state of being "tuned to the natural acoustic environment" and do harm.

Also note that if a pure sinewave as a building block is one end, noise is the other end (per Grok:)



So the world of natural sound exists on a spectrum between a pure sine wave on one end and white noise at the other - both of which are very unpleasant to the ear: a pure sine wave is like a needle piercing the body, and white noise is like crashing into a wall. Beauty, creativity, and pleasant sound lie between those extremes in infinite perturbations.

Now, this could mean that if the synthesizer sound is heavily filtered, modulated etc., which it almost always is, this could make it less bad, since this introduces overtones, distortions etc., making the sound more "natural" (it's also more pleasing to the ear as a consequence). But the problem still remains that these sounds are built on an "unnatural" foundation, and parts of the negative consequences remain - you can still hear these basic "deconstructed" artificial waveforms in there.

"Anti-human" in this context means that here in 3D we live in a natural, "human" acoustic environment that carries information produced by processes that generate complex patterns to which we are attuned. Brute-forcing artificial sounds that use the "raw building blocks" into our environment introduces an "alien element" that "pierces" our natural human attunement, and is therefore "anti-human".

Some more on the math by Grok:

The AI search assist summary from DuckDuckGo gave me this blurb (Sine wave - Wikipedia, Sine Wave vs. Simulated Sine Wave - Which is Best? - Minuteman UPS):

A sine wave is a smooth, periodic oscillation that represents a single frequency without harmonics, while an acoustic sound wave is a pressure wave that travels through a medium, such as air, and can consist of multiple frequencies and complex waveforms. Sine waves can be used to model simple sound waves, but real acoustic sounds are typically more complex due to the presence of harmonics and varying amplitudes.

Visuals always help me, so I found this picture of an acoustic sound wave from Vamos Arema.

And here are synthesizer wave forms:

On the topic of fiction:

Wait, but what about fiction books (including romantic novels) and movies then? They are not actually real too.

A great story surely invests you emotionally and in this way enriches you somewhat, letting you live out a situation/life that you would never experience in real life. Maybe even helping you learn some lessons.
Getting a bit sad when you favourite character dies or something IS human, right? Shouldn't be that bad even if your emotions got sucked into a black hole, I guess.

Maybe what is needed is as always balance i.e not to get too involved in as not to disturb or take your true focus away from your real life, IMO.

I'm interested where the line is here. When is a story just too negative to be enriching? I got rid of my copy of Wuthering Heights because it made me depressed for two weeks after reading it.