> Is a memory in a conscious mind an example of perfect certainty? In other
> words, is a memory in the same class as simple self-awareness, in that the
> memory, even if flawed or deluded, exists in a way that can be categorized
> as direct perception?

      Most mechanical memory is simple picture taking, so no, a mere
picture of the past is not proof of squat.  SEEING THE MEMORY in present
time is a perfect certainty, but relating it to what happened where you
can no longer look is not a certainty.

      Certainty is ONLY of the living now.

      You can never learn with certainty about A (the past) by looking at
B (a picture of the past in the present).

      However that said, the question is more difficult for trailing near
present time memories, like the ones I have of writing this posting as I
am writing it.

      Imagine trying to build a machine that could tell if time is taking
place.  You take a picture, you take another picture later and compare,
if different there was time.

      But causal pathways can be 'messed' with, how does the machine
really know something didn't mess up the second picture during the
taking of it, to make it different when it shouldn't have been.

      Since any causal pathway can be messed with by a superior third
party such as God, no causal pathway can be trusted.  And no amount of
other causal pathways can verify the first causal pathway.

      Using more causal pathways to inspect and verify other causal
pathways is nuts, for who will inspect and verify the second inspector
and verfier pathways.

      So when trying to verify a causal pathway, "More causal pathways do
not a more certain causal pathway make."

      If a machine has 3 cameras, and 2 says something happened and 1
didn't, which report do you trust, the majority report or the minority

      Because of the causal path way problem, it is well known that no
matter how many cameras a machine has, nor how well they can see into
the very circuits of the machine itself, nor how accurate the machine's
internal records of its own circuits are, it is impossible for the
machine to verify the correctness of its circuits to a perfect certainty
by comparing what it sees to its internal diagrams.

      What ever conclusion it draws is always a theory based on trust
that things are working and not being messed with by a higher causal
third party.

      Thus a machine can ever verify that it is working properly.

      So that's the third party law, any two events in the physical
universe that follow each other, might be causing each other, or might
be being caused by a third cause that causes both of the other events in
such a way that they LOOK like they cause each other.

      Do electrons have anything to do with why electrons repell?

      In the arcade game of PONG do the light paddle and light ball and
light wall have anything to do with the ball bouncing off the paddle and
the wall?

      In the first place nothing is bouncing, only being reprojected.  in
new locations.  As time goes on, the paddle, the ball and the wall are
each forever new.

      No, the 'bounce' is caused by a spanning third party causing the
ILLUSION of cause between the paddle, the ball and the wall.

      Worse a machine can not even tell if it has changed state, because
its present state contains no data about any possible prior state.  The
machine is stuck forever in IS, it can't know anything of BECOMING.

      So a machine takes a picture, then another picture, and compares
them and finds out they are different.  That whole set of circuitry
right there, who knows where the results come from, any third party or
interfering party could cause results to be wrong no matter how careful
the machine is to 'look' at what is going on.

      Thus a machine can not tell it has changed state with perfect
certainty, let alone compare states with perfect certainty.  Since all
learning IS a change in state, the machine can never tell with perfect
certainty if it has learned anything or not.

      Thus a machine can not learn with perfect certainty anything about

      And in particular, can not tell with perfect certainty that time is
taking place which involves a certainty that a change has taken place.

      So you go out and look at a blinking red stop light for a few hours
at night at 3am in the morning.  Is the light blinking?  Yes, how do you


      That is not seeing just states, but CHANGES in state.

      A machine can never see the change directly, it can only BE in one
or the other of the two ends states.  Your consciousness can see the

      A non scalar machine can not do that.

      So would you bet your and everyone else's eternity in hell on your
perception that the light is blinking?

      Yes of course.

      But how are you doing this, by taking a memory picture, then
comparing to a later picture when the light has changed state.  At the
later time, how do you KNOW the memory is correct and not messed with?

      Can you take a memory and then 10 seconds later LOOK INTO THE PAST
by 10 seconds DIRECTLY and compare the memory with the past directly?

      How about a memory of 1 second ago?

      How wide is present time?  Can we see into the past and future by
even a millionth of a second, thus having trans time 'memory' which is
perfectly certain?  Or is that just direct perception of a width of time
and not memory at all but none the less gives us certainty of time and

      Same thing with the perception of time and space, both are
illusions, if they existed you could never know it, so the fact that you
'know it' by seeing it with certainty, means they don't actually exist.

      Only a timeless entity could be certain of change and time.  Only a
spaceless entity could be perceptually certain of space and distance, a
machine can't do it at all.

      This isn't true because a timeless entity can see time, its because
a machine working in time CAN'T see time.

      Thus if you can see time, you must not be a machine working in

      That does not at all explain how a timeless entity can experience

      It is conceivable that there is both the timeless state and the
timefull state, then the timeless entity can see time in the timefull
state, but the timefull machine never will.

      Same thing for differences, look at two different colors.  Are you
certain they look different?  A machine can't do that, it can only
receive signals and voltages, compare them with some circuitry that may
or may not work and print out a yes or a no.

      The machine never SEES anything, it just passes incoming effects on
through it self back to the outside again.

      Two frequencies come in, and it prints yes they are different.

      That's just dominoes falling according to code.

      No domino can see any prior domino, it can only change state (fall)
as an alleged result of the prior domino pushing on it with a causal
messenger wave when they 'collide'.

      The two domino's never actually touch, and after the second domino
starts falling, it can never know that it was 'touched' to start the

      So the second domino can never know anything about the cause of its
falling, and there is not continuity of certainty from moment of touch
to later during the fall.

      And WHAT it was touched by will always remain a mystery of theory,
never direct perception of the touching domino, nor even the virtual
photon that came across during the collision.

      The falling domino doesn't even 'feel the force' pushing it, in any
conscious sense of the word, it merely responds to the force by falling.

      Just as pleasure and pain can not be reduced to force and mass in
motion, either can color nor any other conscious experience including
the experience of time and space.

      Color in particular can not be numerified, yes shades of red can be
numerified, but the difference between red and green can not, thus a
machine can never see red, as machines are nothing but numbers of force
and mass.

      OK, so you have a memory of what you ate at breakfast.

      Are you willing to bet your eternity in hell its right?

      If yes, then that mechanism is not a mechanical one, and only a
scalar non mechanical conscious entity could do it.

      But what is the mechanism?

      And what the hell is a scalar 'mechanism anyhow' where cause and
effect are one and the same event.

      In a mechanical system the learner computes back to the nature of
the cause from the effect it receives.

      That's indirect perception.

      In a scalar system, the learner and the learned about are one and
the same entity, and the learning about cause is NOT from looking at the
effect and computing back to some theoretical nature and existence of
the cause, but from looking at the cause directly.

      Well what is the mechanism behind an object being able to see
itself without merely being the effect of itself and declaring that
because it was an effect it must have been cause.

      That's thinking and logical deduction, 'there was an effect so
there must have been a cause.'

      Scalar perception is 'There's a cause because I can SEE it

      In the physical universe, causation is not sufficient to witness

      That's why causal pathways can't be used to verify either
themselves or other causal pathways.  And if they can't verify
themselves, they sure as hell can't verify any other causal pathway.

      Verification of a causal pathway means one can tell with perfect
certainty that any particular change happened BECAUSE of a designated
change before it, and not some 3rd party making it look like there was a
prior different cause.

      In the physical universe all we can see are the two end events, the
two things that 'changed because of each other'.  We can never see the
CAUSE between them.

      We can never tell if two electrons repel because they have actual
cause between them, or because God is moving them directly as if they
have cause between them.

      If two electrons are out in space, and you wiggle one, a while
later the second will wiggle.  Are you perfectly certain that because
the second electron wiggled, that the first one even existed.

      No, God or anything could have wiggled the second for no reason at
all.  So its a theory that the second wiggled BECAUSE the first wiggled,
and the theory is made of model and evidence.

      The model is that there is a first electron that wiggled first and
causal messenger wiggles went between them, and thus the evidence that
there is a first electron is BECAUSE the second wiggled.

      The evidence is always the EFFECT, never the cause.

      And the model is whatever THEORETICAL causation you wish to surmise
between the effect and its prior cause.

      Since all observation of effects and their so called causes USES
this very mechanism to look with, the whole thing may be consistent and
peer reviewed, and completely wrong with God laughing at everyone.

      And with what peers are you going to review your proof that peers
even exist?

      So the whole dependency on peer review depends on ASSUMING with out
peer review without peer review.

      The bedrock of 'objective universe' science is fairy dust.

      Consciousness however can see the cause between things, hold your
finger up, notice the cause between YOU and your finger being in the
air.  That's direct perception of personal agency.

      Look at two different colors, and then hold your finger up BECAUSE
they are different.  Notice the intra conscious causal pathway between
colors, YOU and figure in the air.

      Certainty that any cause of any kind exists at all is the hall mark
of consiousness.

      It may be hard to behold, but in the absence of cause there can be
no learning.  No change, means no learning.

      Thus there has to be cause of some kind, scalar or not, between the
two different conscious colors (not PHOTONS, photons have no color) and
your knowing they are different.  You can see this incoming cause IN THE
COLORS, glowing at you TELLING you with perfect certainty that they are

      Thus you are learning about the existence of cause by looking at
cause in the colors directly, not by looking at some effect in yourself
and computing back taht the two alleged colors must be different and
might be cause of whatever you are computing back from.

      Think is not direct perception is not think is not direct

      Thus certainty of incoming causation is unique to conscious
experiences.  Certainty of outgoing cause is also unique as you observe
yourself hold your finger up and know YOU are doing it, and that it is
up BECAUSE you are PUTTING IT UP, not because some third party is
putting it up for you, or worse making you THINK it is up via some
return effect, when really its still down.

      We are not talking about the physical finger, but the conscious
finger you can see.

      You see the reason you can't learn about A by looking at B, is the
their party could always be between A and B.  You see B, but can't see
A, so you have to trust the changes in B were 'caused by A'.

      A messenger hands you a message from the King, how do you know it
came from the King?

      But with two different colors, you can SEE the KING, you can see
the colors, you can SEE there is no third party between the event of the
colors and your knowledge that they are two different colors.  Thus your
learning is certain, and continuously reverifiable.

      Doubt free perception is the miracle of scalar learning.

      So we have this spaceless timeless mechanism by which consciousness
can behold itself in the NOW, not the THEN which ALL mechanical cause
and effect systems are limited to, because they take TIME betwen the
cause and the effect!

      By the time the effect happens, the cause is gone, so what
certainty is there from the effect that there was a cause?

      Only direct perception of CAUSE proves cause!

      But direct perception of CAUSE has to be timeless by definition,
otherwise one is learning LATER about the cause EARLIER, and now we are
back to learning about A by looking at B.

      Since our minds can ONLY understand scalar mechanics, looking at
effects and computing possible causes (which is not directly perceiving
them), we are at a loss to UNDERSTAND spaceless timeless processes.

      And if spaceless timeless process isn't an oxymoron squared, then I
don't know what is.

      But there it is, no space time process can be certain of anything,
but certainty surely exists.

      Uncertainty certainty exists.  To doubt this is to prove it.

      Therefore certainty exists.  QED

      Certainty of uncertainty is the beginning of wisdom.

      So we DEFINE that which is perfectly certain to be a scalar
process, which uses an oxymoron at best to describe it.

      Scalar processes violate everything we know about everything
because in our lives we are using (wasting) our scalar consciousness to
monitor and learn about the non scalar dimensional universe of space and

      Its an arcade game in our consciousness, how can it be more
important in its utter uncertainty of existence, than the consciousness
which perceives it with perfect certainty?

      Certainty of the TV set is more important than anything going on in
the TV screen.

      We conceive we ARE our space time avatars, bodies, that
consciousness is a process in constituency (what we are made of),
arrangement (of that constituency,) and process, which is the flow of
energy through the machine from high anti entropy to high entropy.

      If the arrangement or the consituency are destroy, busted apart or
jammed, the process dies, and if consciousness IS merely the process,
chemistry bubbling away at 98.6, then the consious unit dies too.

      But if consciousness is scalar, then there is no time for it to
come and go in, so it must be eternal, can't be created nor destroyed,
and in truth, it can't even CHANGE, and when the dream avatars die, the
illusion that we ARE our avatar blows up and we ext from the dream

      What we are exting from is not the avatar but the illusion that we
ARE the avatar.

      We can do that while still living, if we dare.

      Also notice about memory, the primary memory of interest is
RECOGNITION OF SELF, that means I know I am the same self as I was 30
years ago, its still me, and although a lot of my avatars that I
identify myself with are changing all the time, there is at least one
thing about me that isn't changing at all, or I wouldn't be me any more.

      Every atom in my body can be replaced but the core conscious is
never touched.

      So when the avatar dies, and space time blow up when the being
wakes up to his eternality, there he is again, FOREVER AND EVER the same
being, and remembers again WHAT he is, and what he has chosen and how he
got into this mess.  But above that there is no memory of anything to do
with space time retained at all, that's when the being is ready to sleep
and then start a whole new cycle.  No memory of past cycles remain, but
he is aware this is what he does, so he knows there have been past
cycles and will be again, none of which he will remember once they are
done, all by his own choice.

      How likely is that?  Too good to be true?

      An infinite number of finite whiles in which to create, play, close
up shop, sleep and do it again.

      In present time we are using a conscious display screen capable of
perceiving itself and its displays with perfect certainty, to display a
universe in which there IS and CAN NOT BE perfect certainty due to the
two different objects rule.

      Its like the guy in a tank looking at a TV screen and fighting a
life and death war with all the people displayed on the screen, but he
doesn't know if any of the are actual, but he does know that the TV is

      Kind of inverted, to use a perfect certainty to symbolize a
hallucinated virtual reality.

      And from inside the tank he can never prove one way or another that
the story line on TV screen is actually going on, because he can't get
out of the tank.  So he plays his arcade game forever.

      Of course he will eventually realize that even his TV screen is
part of the arcade because he is seeing that with his eyes, and brain,
and even they are part of the arcade, because all he really has is his
conscious unit, himself, which is actual and sure.

      But as long as the conscious unit thinks it is a brain in a tank in
a universe, well then fight he must, and the perfect certainty facility
of his conscious unit goes to total waste.

      The perfect certainty facility is subserviated to the needs of
defending himself in a certainly uncertain nightmare of magnitude.

      "Who cares about perfect certainty, all I care about are the enemy
out there, who I don't have a fucking clue whether they exist or not,
AND CAN'T have a clue, because it is fundamentally unclueable."

      So if you have a memory of which you are perfectly certain, then
its not a mechanical memory, its part of the scalar magic that
consciousness is doing all day long, perhaps even a direct perception of
the past.

      Sometimes you can get flooded with pictures with exquisite detail
and you know this must be SOMEBODY'S picture memory, but without
RECOGNITION as to having seen it before, it can't be yours.

      Since every huma body being is a composite of billions of other
smaller and bigger beings, any one walking around has trillions of
memories to take experiences from and get confused by thinking they are
his own.

      Recognition however comes from the eternal awareness of one's self
as one's self, unchanging, immutable and always you and always will be

      If you have a memory of a time in which you recognized yourself,
then perhaps those memories have enough of an eternal aspect that they
can be said to be perfectly certain, but that's really stretching it.

      The fact of you recognizing yourself may be certain, but the space
time avatarial circumstances surrounding the event, well who knows...

      Recognition of others is also important, loves from forever ago are
just as alive today as they were, and just as you can recognize yourself
though the cloud of illusory spaces and times, so can you recognize
others across eternity.

      But you have to perceive via eternity, not via space and time!

> Theory two is pure and simple Vedic philosophy.

      Yes, I know I wrote it.

      They still don't believe me :)

> I always thought this was nicely poetic, but never understood a word of what
> it meant. Years later I was given a translation of this work, and when I got
> to the good part, I was floored. It read:
> "Time I am, the shatterer of worlds"
> Shows how different translations can change the very heart of a text.
> Anyway, this I got. Timelessness is, I think. what you meant by:
> "It casts APPARENT cause into the kinetics, but in fact the static scale
> maintains cause at all time over the kinetics to make it seem like the
> kinetics has cause over itself."

      Yes, in a sleep dream, the ball bounces off the wall not
because there is cause between them, but because the alleged brain
controls both to make it seem  like they control each other.

      Same with the waking state.

      All physics is orchestrated down to the last quark.

      Some will complain 'But how could I have gotten the idea
that a ball could bounce off a wall' unless I had first experienced
a real ball bouncing of a real wall?

      They define themselves as the accumulation of being an effect.

      God did not have to see a tree before he could creat one.

      Since we are all God in carnation, the High US, and at the top we
create in the mere conception of things, we do not need to have been the
prior effect of external impingement in order to create an experience
for ourselves or others.

      Thus one can dream new things anytime one wants, either in sleep
or in the 'awake' state.

> Arjuna was being told that all of time is an illusion, that the battle, its
> antecedents and its consequences are all, have all been, predetermined, have
> all taken place, and will take place, and always will. Same with the
> universe.

      Not sure about predetermined, the static is envessled in the
kinetic avatar and it CAN act like a state determined machine, dominos
falling, but it can also make a prime postulate and start something new
not related to the past or present of the existing avatarial scene or
state of things.

      The creation of the dream physical universe was itself not state
determined by an earlier dream universe, and thus that same creator can
create new again again even within the avatarial context of his
immediate surroundings.

      He has to be awake enough to do it.

      If he thinks he is a machine and his consciousness is a process
in a space time gizmo like the brain, he won't be able to rise
above is own conception of things.

> Did you ever read Slaughterhouse Five?


> The read was terrific. Did you write that just to me?


      But its now in the public archives, as is this one.

> Do you know that years ago, I wrote the line in your father's Wikipedia
> entry, about you?

      I will check it out.

Homer Wilson Smith   Clean Air, Clear Water,    Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959       A Green Earth, and Peace,  Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com  Is that too much to ask?   http://www.lightlink.com
Sat Apr  4 23:43:02 EDT 2015