\**/ > (oo) > consciousness

[Somnia]

Originally Posted by The Necromancer

Well, I was gonna ask this guy why he does it:
http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/sh...8&postcount=10

...but I thought r6 would know a lot more about the whole point of being self-indulgent when it seems only self is pleased about this.

I don't think r6 is being self-indulgent, I think he's just expressing himself in a manner that makes the most sense to him...Some people express their thoughts with words, others with paintings/drawings, and others with mathematical equations and numbers...

So, from my perspective/observation r6 is to mathematical equations as Hypertiger is to numerology...(That sounds like a mathematical equation thing-y right there, Haha ;P)...It's the way their spirit/Higher selves chose to express their thoughts in this physical world...

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by Somnia

I don't think r6 is being self-indulgent, I think he's just expressing himself in a manner that makes the most sense to him...Some people express their thoughts with words, others with paintings/drawings, and others with mathematical equations and numbers...

So, from my perspective/observation r6 is to mathematical equations as Hypertiger is to numerology...(That sounds like a mathematical equation thing-y right there, Haha ;P)...It's the way their spirit/Higher selves chose to express their thoughts in this physical world...

Thank you. I was just curious about all of this, is all...but I guess it's the same reason why Hillary climbed Everest - because it is there.

Some people just don't need a reason to do what they do and I am trying to lose my reason for doing whatever I am doing...I'm just afraid that if I lose my whole reason for trying to communicate, I'll stop communicating altogether and retreat further into darkness, depression and solitude.

[r6r6]

What we do not see occurring in this thread is anyone addressing my comments as stated and there intentions.

Also we do not see others addressing my questions posed to them with any reply, and certainly no reply that has rational logical common sense.

What we have is people who like to make ambigous comments, with our additional clarification when asked, and,

unceccesary, uncalled for ridicule, demeaning, derrogatory comments, that, have not direct relevance to the meanings of my comments as stated. :--(

Uneccessary, uncalled for pot shots at me, that does is not relevant to the comments as stated is a sign of a lack of intellectual knowledge base and moral integrity. imho

r6

Originally Posted by r6r6r

(oo) or as ( ^v )( v^ ) = simple consciousness ( observer-observed ) and line-of-relationship, gravity ( ), that embraces both.
....least complex consciousness......
\**/ = most complex, human female
...most complex consciousness as single bioloigcal entity........
I'm not sorry for speaking truth, facts and various proposed speculations thereof, based on those facts, or truth, expressed with concise explanations, that, are often referenced with links to graphics, or graphics and texticons.
A picture is worth a thousand words, tho those with open heart and open mind. To others the same picture is worthless.
Love my cigarette smoking, alcoholic mother for her sincere attempts to have quasi-deep discussions involving God, heaven,spirit, soul, metaphysicsal etc via her following of Mary Baker Eddies Christians Science books.
My ego allows me to keep posting what I believe is some relative, and cosmic truths.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synerg...gs/tb2701.html
After viewing graphics on the above link consider the following.
4 points-of-consideration >< 6 relationships = 3D set aka the abstract tetra{4}hedron at minimum. 4:6 ration of vertexes/points to chords/lines
Perhaps we can say that is visual of abstract time is inherent to the 4:6 ratio above.
Does the next set as follows, show a considered set, that has a specific numerical set, or value, we can assign to observed time?
5 points-of-consideration >< 10 relationships = 3D + observed time?
...again see above link to graphic..........
In my geometric Standard Model, the is the 10 primary great circles/tubess of the 5-fold icosa{20}hedron, I associate with EMRadiation { photon }.
See following link regarding those 10 great circles that define 5 sets of the 4-fold Vector Equilibrium/cubo{6}-octa{8}hedron.

http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/Lynn/LynnS54.html

Science has trouble with consciousness because consciousness is inherent to those aspects of observed time, as occupied space, ex fermions, bosons an any collection thereof.

Observed Time = Consciousness = Some, if not all Aspects of Occupied Space.

Space( ) - Time ^v - Space )(

Space ( gravity ) outer surface arcs of a torus

Time ^v sine-wave frequencies inside of a torus

Space )( dark energy inner surface arcs of a torus.


----------------peak of outer surface arc of Space-------------

vvvvvvvvvvvvv peak of trough of sine-wave vvvvvvvvvvvvv
^^^^^^^^^ peak of sine-wave ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Y

-------------- peaks of inner surface arc of Space-------------

aka, and derived from the following,

...1...........5....7..........11....13........... ...17.....19..........

0.................6................12............. .........18...............
.........3................9.....................15 ............................

......2.....4..........8...10.............14.....1 6..............20.......

and the latter above, was originally conceived as the following, then I turned it inside-out,

0..........6..............12....................18 ...........
..1......5..7.........11....13...........17......1 9.......
....2..4......8...10............14...16..............20 ...
......3..........9...................15.................. ......

What I discovered with the above pattern, is that all prime numbers, except 2 and 3, fall on the 2nd line. This patter I associate with a hexa-hepta sine-wave-like, sequential numerical pattern.

The above translates/transforms to a hexagon, with zero at exact center, and all prime numbers, except 2 and 3 fall on every 7th of 5th radii of the hexagon.

Ian Stewart { mathematician } wrote to me from Oxford University to inform me, that, this had been discovered 200 hundreds years ago, algebraically and showed me the formula;

6 * n + or - 1 is where a prime number will occur, if it occurs at all. Other non-prime numbers also fall on that line, or two radii of a hexagon.

6 times any number plus or minus one number higher or lower is where all prime numbers, except 2 and 3 will fall/occur.

The truth is out there for those who seek it, those who don't and those who scoff at it. imho

PS here is link to a graphic of abstract time { as XYZ tetrahedron } dynamically cspun via the conceptual spinning on 6 axes, the 6 chords/edges of a tetrahedron;
http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synerg...igs/f5511.html

r6

[Shivani Devi]

I'm sorry r6, no disrespect was intended to you. I was just trying to understand why you post things beyond the basic comprehension of others and expect them to reply or give comment. This has been happening to me ever since I joined here basically and I was really getting annoyed with it...I just wanted to find out how other people who post similar stuff that nobody else out there understands, deals with this. No disrespect was ever intended here, I was trying to learn something for myself and maybe using you to do it...but everything is fine now...I understand and again, I apologise.

I hope that somebody who does understand all this can reply to your thread(s), but you are right, I don't have any intelligence whatsoever. I am totally dumb and stupid without any intellectual knowledge base at all, so please...carry on...and you can ask a moderator to remove all extraneous responses from your thread if it helps.

[Clover]

R6r6 with all due respect, you have to start your threads with a question or explanation. Copying and pasting scientific equations and expecting the viewers to research and understand your conception is not productive in a Spiritual discussion forum. Technically, copy and paste is not allowed. In the future, these types of threads are subject to removal. This is a discussion forum were we encourage constructive expression of opinion.

When I did internet search I found that, there appears to be a 6:1 ratio of men to women idiot savants.

The use of the words "woman idiot savants" seems highly contradictory/counterproductive in a science study. This thread will be closed. Also, I do encourage members to not comment on threads if your not interested in contributing to the subject. This will help keep the peace with each other, which is our ultimate goal

Read Forum Rules

Clover