MEST perception needs movement and change to persist.

      Movement needs force and mass, causing the movement.

      It is casted CAUSE in the image that makes it solid, real and 

     To cast means to put out there, in the physical universe force is
the proxy cause for postulates and considerations.  Thus postulates and
considerations which are actual cause, cast 'cause' out there onto the
physical universe by casting force and mass into the scene.

     Thus trying to mockup a base ball, base ball bat, and a batter in a
stadium with 1000's of people will be fleeting at best.

     But have the pitcher throw the ball with tremendous force and
acceleration to 100 miles an hour at the batter who HITS the ball with
the bat with a tremendous amount of force and *CRACK*!, and the ball
goes sailing out into outer space and the crowds provide a thunderous
roar, is much easier to mockup.

      It is the FORCE or impact causing the motion that allows for
persistent images.

      Trying to mockup mass without force pushing or pulling on it is 
almost impossible, because mass without force is unchanging and does not 
give any feel for how much mass there is in it.  Only when a force is 
applied does one get a sense of its mass.

      If you have a persistent but still image, you can run it
out by spotting the force causing motion in it, it will start to move
and run out.


In article  you wrote:
> Visualization and Recall
> Bill Maier
> April 1, 2000
> Recently I've been going back over the basics of auditing technology
> and questioning everything. An interesting idea occurred to me while
> reading the mock-up processing in the Pilot's Self Clearing book. I
> decided I could learn more about my own mind by doing experiments
> with visualization. In particular I wanted to get some of idea of
> the differences between created images (visualizations) versus
> recalled images.
> First, I tried to visualize a chess board with complete with pieces.
> I noticed the following:
> * The board is very fleeting and insubstantial, unlike a real chess
>        board.
> * I get only brief glimpses of the board.
> * It vanishes quickly and then must be recreated.
> * I do not see it in full detail, as I would a real chess board.
> * I don't actually see the full board and all the pieces at once, I
>        see only portions of the image.
> Now try the same thing but with a recalled memory. For this I chose
> a pleasure moment from many years ago in this lifetime.
> * The image is fleeting and insubstantial.
> * I view the scene sometimes with an exterior viewpoint, sometimes
>        interior (i.e. interior or exterior from the normal body
>        viewpoint I had at that time).
> * I get some images which seem to be more solid than the others.
>        They are still brief, but they seem to have a more solid
>        basis.
> * I get some images which, while based in reality, are clearly not
>        real replicas of what actually occurred.
> In both the visualized and recalled cases, the images were chaotic
> and hard to control. I was only able to hold an image for an instant
> before it disappeared.
> In the recalled picture, much of what I knew to be true was simply
> known, and not observed to be true in the picture.
> I then tried to visualize a simple ball, quite small:
> * The image changed rapidly as I tried to hold it steady. It was
>        impossible to just create the ball and have it stay there
>        without changing.
> I then decided to try to recall a past life picture. I chose an
> incident where I was a small boy in ancient Rome, playing in a
> courtyard. This seemed to be a happy time for me.
> * The images are fleeting, just as before.
> * I have an image of the marble floor where I was playing.
> The transitory nature of the images is similar in all these
> experiments. The images seem to be static, with no motion to them.
> This may be because they are themselves so temporary that there is
> no time to see motion in them.
> In many creative processes, the assumption is made that the PC's
> mock-ups persist after he creates them. This is a false assumption,
> for my case at least.
> I would suggest you try these experiments yourself. You may not get
> the same results as I did. You may learn something.
> These experiments suggest a process that could be run. Do the
> following commands as a bracket (i.e. A, B, C, D, A, B, etc.):
>  A. Visualize an image
>  B. Notice something about it
>  C. Recall an image
>  D. Notice something about it
> I ran this process and achieved a nice win.
> ================ ====================
> Wed Dec 31 00:06:02 EST 2014 
> Send mail to saying help
> ================== ===================
> Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
> Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
> Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
> Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but 
> not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.

Homer Wilson Smith   Clean Air, Clear Water,    Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959       A Green Earth, and Peace,  Internet, Ithaca NY  Is that too much to ask?
Wed Dec 31 16:07:30 EST 2014