Consciousness Mechanics
 

Now, I consider myself to be rather intelligent, but there's this one video that I have watched six times already and it totally does my head in every single time...and I am no closer to understanding it after six times than I was after the first time I saw it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWSu_EewZZI

I'm still stuck on how nothing is 'real' outside my mind when my senses say otherwise and also how many people can perceive the same thing if nothing really exists outside the mind.

As a spiritual person, I can understand how everything is connected at the atomic or sub-atomic level, but there are still distinctions between 'self' and 'other' and between 'subject' and 'object' and about existing and orienteering my position within space and time, when all of that is just a product of my mind...and I cannot explain to myself how that can possibly be....and lordy, how I have tried because I want to know...I want to feel this.

Whenever I watch this video, I'm forever going "I don't get it...I WANT to get it, but I just don't get it". lol

Now I am wondering if this is basically only me, or do others also struggle with wondering if things exist ONLY because we see them or they wouldn't exist otherwise?....nope, don't get it.

So, if there are simple explanations for this, I am all eyes.

Hi,

The simple explanation is, you do not resonate with that video. It has not been helpful. What it presents is inaccurate for You.

John

I, too, watched this video three or four times, along with the part two. There are theory physicists who, as a result of experiments and math equations, believe reality is an illusion. Everything we perceive to be real, isn't. Yes, when we see, hear, taste, smell, and feel, seems real, if you define reality as that of which your five senses detect.
Particles are waves until observed. That is, all possibilities of an event exist.

I've tried to understand the " double slit " experiment, and the more I try, the more confusing it becomes.

Another experiment baffles me to no end. Your brain makes a choice 6-7 seconds before you're aware of it. Now, how can that be?

Without checking out this video (it is 1h 42 min long; you're persistent) ... Seth (Jane Roberts) claims something similar to what you describe. Everybody creates their own reality, and is in a constant telepathic connection with everybody else.

Thank you all for your kind replies.

As an update to this, it took another video to explain the first one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EE8s5CfOuNw

Now, I understand what all this is about and I can rest.

Thanks. Going to watch it a couple of times to digest it.

I agree with your thoughts on the video, I clicked on it but it was too long for this moment, I'll try to watch it tonight.
For me the idea of illusion I think is a term that has been used for a very long time and from a time in which we knew less of physics. I think all the illusion is, is our general assumption at birth that what we see is what there is. More of what I was trying to get at was that in the opening of the video it seemed to make an importance of personal realities and for me I think that in the creation of everything there is an importance of space-time inseparability and dimensional distinctions meaning that at this point in overall reality there is a great number of personal realities which I would say create a collective reality which expresses a certain bit of restriction in reation to each other but as you progress towards unitiy restriction is thus reduced. Currently I'm working out a model which reframes the process of the big bang to make sense of the distinction of object and subject, so I believe it's entirely possible to view all of it without issue or use of words like illusion. anyways I lost my train of thought; i'll watch the video and make a better response later; cool video, thanks.

I haven't watched the video yet, but I dare to make a few comments.
All your brain can do is process the signals coming in from your nervous system. It creates pictures, sounds, smells etc. from these signals. You may think what your mind makes of it is reality, but basically it's just your mind's reaction to electro-chemical processes triggered by physical effects from the outside on your body.
You have no way of knowing if your mind reproduces reality or just "creates" a reality from the input it is given.
E.g. I have tinnitus. I hear a constant high pitched sound. As I can hear it, it could be real, but as I have no evidence of a possible source my mind decides it's not real because it can't make any sense of it.
With other sensations the minds connects different inputs that seem to support the "reality" and so I consider it the truth.
But I have no idea how other people perceive what triggers my reality. If two people loof at a green oak leaf, they would agree that they are watching a green oak leaf. But what image that creates in their minds could still be completely different. If person A could look in person B's mind he might see a blue leaf but person B has learned that the color it sees is called "green".
Of course it's also possible that all the inputs from my nervous system have no external source at all and there is no reality out there, but then it wouldn't make sense to type this post. :smile:

How this part of it works is that is how the brain basically functions. When you see light passes in through the eyes and is translated into other signals. When you use your other senses take in things they work in a similar manor. The issue with sensory information is that it is difficult to say if a stimulus such as the light you see is actually coming in or is does it just seem as if it is; such a thought is how the idea for the matrix was created.
For me I can not or haven't tried to disprove the thought but other models of reality I find just as good for describing observations and these other models feel better to me.
In the first paragraph I described a hypothetical situation in which the sentence you wrote could be explained. The second paragraph was my thoughts on the subject. The subject however was relational to the video and I was only able to get myself to watch 34 minutes of it before too many issues in how it related to me had developed, but in this paragraph I well attempt to address the thought in relation to the video. I think for the video the real thought was that nothing was just as unreal as it was real. The video was describing the mechanics of consciousness and in doing so it exposed various pieces and chose to call them illusionary. I think the word illusion was a mistake; the basic thing with the word illusion was, in think, not that reality was fake but that our common experience of reality is not as limited as we would imagine it to be. Penny Pierce is an author who writes about such things, her book Leap Of Perception would be helpful; it helps to develop such abilities. From what I got from the video it was saying that the outside (ones body, other people and their reactions, and the world) is a solidified frame which exist in an infinite variety; consistency in frame transition is a common experience but not a limitation of consciousness (the inside, the observer). For me I don't like the idea of infinite realities but it is a possibilities that needs to be eliminated in coming to understand things. The system of the video was dealing with causal rules; effecting such rules means, if you believe that the body and universe is made of layers, means getting in touch with one of your most subtle layers and effecting change through it. Other layers function on an energetic or on a physical level.


what exists outside consciousness in the video is the solidified frames. Imagine that all possibilities have already occurred, the frames are moments in time too short to include time, time is produced through frame transition, so the frames already exist but consciousness choices which to experience next or which to link into a chain of frames. The idea about other people in relation to the frames is aether that no one else exists or that there are infinite realities so that for each individual consciousness the sequence of frames are past through in a different way without effecting causality or effecting individual free will. Personally for various reasons I believe that other people exist and reality in singular not infinite; the way I preserve causality and free will in a consciousness based model of reality where in individuals can impact manifest is by employing levels of awareness, levels of consciousness, a process of unity, and through a more ambiguous definition of personal self.


I agree but I don't know if the video would agree in the same way to such a statement.


in the video other would be the frames which exist in all time. Self in the video would be the individual point of consciousness which choices frame sequence. The connection in self and other through unity is usually a concept relational to a different point in space-time ie. the frames exist in all time in this dimension of space-time but in a different one they must have been imagined into existence by consciousness which can at some point be divided into multiple points of consciousness or could be considered for all time and dimension as singular; because I did not finish the video I can not say for curtain what it was stating.


It's a common experience. Einstein rejected quantum physics, which we now know to be true, because he didn't like the idea of uncertainty, of a things ability to collapse into wave form when not observed. For me I would resolve the issue by saying that other observers exist beyond myself in the same singular reality which helps to keep things from collapsing into non-manifest.


the matrix movies would be the first example; another would be the many worlds theory, parallel universes; another would be a movie real. A movie real is made of images; multiple movie reals exist; when a movie was played in a theater in the old way it came on multiple reals which had to be linked together; it is not necessary to link the same similar reals together, one could even cut all of the images in the real apart and then randomly link them together; consciousness watches the movie and control the order of images.

I believe that the "parallel universes" idea is a misinterpretation of the fact that each person lives in their own universe, created by their own beliefs, perceptions and emotions.

As always, a misinterpretation is added on to, and on, and on, resulting something far from its seed.