New Research

A good way to say it is that I believe time is linear, but our conscious connection to time is nonlinear. Ie, our consciousnesses is stronger than time and able to manipulate our connection with it.

An unconscious action is something your brain does without you telling it to. Ie, moving both legs when walking, breathing, how to drink, etc. These are old habits we no longer think about, they are instinctual. A conscious action is something you think about. Ie, how to do this math problem in a test with the new knowledge I learnt this year, how to drive to the new restaurant with my wife - not how to drive, that may be unconscious, but where to go, may be consciously thought about.

Humans were once bottom of the food chain and eaten by many animals, now we have guns and can kill most animals. Meaning we are at the top of the animal food chain.

I think it is the same with time, I think somewhere in our evolution, our brains learnt to "be top of the time (food) chain". In that we learnt to conquer it, but like some random English word we learnt in the past but can't really remember what it means consciously, our brain has the capacity to do and remember things subconsciously but it is not something we consciously understand anymore. Our brain does it without us being in full control because it has moved out of the conscious and into the unconscious because we learnt it a long time ago possibly.

I believe brains do it as a survival mechanism. Similar to most innate things. That life is hardwired to take you through situations which lead you to things. Ie, you may kick your toe so you're in a bad mood because you need to be a bit tougher at work that day because events may require extra strength. I believe that events are not unlinked, if they were, hypothetically we would not need to have any form of memory at all because it would not be as useful as 100% situational awareness adjusted in the moment constantly - similar to more animal instinctual ways of existing which is generally not related to long term memory at all. So, I believe some things that do not kill you, that the brain assesses are extremely threatening, such as making a small error which leads to a large problem such as being hit by your parents or failing something which you could have passed, these are things that cause the brain to go into trauma and your brain's subconscious tries to hardwire a "way out of" which is in its power to do. The question is not whether the brain "does it", we all know our brain does it. When you get nervous, you instinctively start to look for a way out of your situation. We all do that automatically and our body has a range of innate reactions. A few examples of sweating, feeling nauseous, stammering, widened eyes, and a wider range of fight and flight responses, etc. The question is whether the brain has the capacity to manipulate your relationship with the linear time pattern as a mechanism.

You cannot stop your death necessarily because you would be dead whilst reversing if that makes sense. Your brain must consciously have enough willpower to have the energy to reverse. Everything in the universe requires energy to occur (either matter or anti-matter, ie, the possibility of something occurring as the concept of anti-matter is in itself a form of energy but that's more complicated). If you are dead, you are disconnected from the ability to use the resource hypothetically. Does your brain have enough energy to disconnect and reconnect you with linear time? It is not moving your body. It is only moving your consciousness back through your memory which is already a resource. Computers and AI can do this easily, you can restore a prior update without any stress at all. I believe the brain has this same restoration capacity as a computer does. It is just because we lose memory, we have no connection to the hardware properly as we are humans embedded into the software process. Ie, we are inside Windows 95 and most humans cannot access BIOS, so we cannot see that there was a "rewrite" which occurred on July 17th at 10am. Some people have better smell, some better sight, some more attractive, some more intelligent; I think some see the BIOS easier because they have thought to ask "is there a BIOS" that's all.

Our brain records time as a line, we know this as memory. I think the brain understands how to send our "conscious" connection to time forwards and back. This is due to no physical matter being changed, so it being lower energy to do than moving the physical matter. Like changing how the world "looks for everyone" tomorrow would be very difficult and take a lot of energy. Changing merely "when" you connect with the timeline is within our brain's power because it affects absolutely no other people. As you were already in the past. You are changing nothing but making the "conscious" move back to prior moments and in a sense "adding more energy" to the past.

If you woke up yesterday, rather than today, how would you know that yesterday is not today if you had no memory of yesterday? You would of course have no memory of yesterday because you are living yesterday and it has not happened yet. But it has, but it hasn't. So your brain cannot connect properly to the recording. Like a movie you half-watched, where do you store that data? Where does the brain store data that didn't happen yet? It doesn't know so you can't connect to it properly because its not in the normal memory place as that is only for linearity.

The discussion as to whether consciousness is internal or external is discussed in detail in this lecture by Rupert Sheldrake and is in part, where science is heading. Similarly discussed by Anil Seth in this Ted interview. The quantum approaches to consciousness are very interesting and has become a massive field due to humans trying to give AI consciousness, which as of right now is beyond impossible as Anil Seth discusses. Stanford discusses it in this article, as to the discussion of how much consciousness affects the reality which is extremely complicated in quantum physics. For a movie reference, these subjects are discussed by Dr Quantum, which is what is being discussed by Stanford in a part of the article. The affect consciousness has on the world and how much influence our brain can have on reality. Quantum level things like adaptation to time is complicated in terms of the brain's capacity, "This system is capable of transforming mechanical, thermal, electromagnetic and chemical energy into electric potential energy." Quantum Nature of Consciousness and the Unconscious Collective of Carl G. Jung by Adam Grzegorz Adamski (NeuroQuantology, 2013), and "... the quantum entanglement theory together with its relations with Bell’s inequality and finally describes an “entanglement model of consciousness/mind”, Quantum Entanglement: Fundamentals and Relations with Consciousness/Mind by Mustafa Erol (NeuroQuantology, 2010)" the concept as to whether we may be entangled with our past states and that is how the brain can manipulate the matter into returning to past states by the present still being entangled with the past, and also the future. Which is one dominant hypothesis in the theory and research of synchronicity.

https://mindandsoul.space/home/2019/8/28/understanding-the-dimension-of-time-is-it-linear-or-circular

https://www.space.com/29859-the-illusion-of-time.html

(I named my guinea pig Smouse)

Cheech and Chong

Video / Video

Someone gave me Brand's book when I was going through a rough time in my life. From what I read of the first chapter, it delved into sex addiction. Whilst I didn't read the book past this chapter, it remained in my mind as recognising Brand as someone who had some form of similarity with me.

Later on, a splattering of him popping up in my entertainment (I recently found him through his interviews with Jordan Peterson), I found I quite like his persona. I like his evolution of life, I like his eccentricities and the way his brain formulates cognitive thought. Ie, I think he's cool.

Not a lot of people I'd say that about, I'd say interesting, or intriguing, etc. Which are also compliments, and more traditionally what I am drawn towards. Acquisition of knowledge.

I genuinely would say that I actually think Brand is 'cool' in my opinion. A magician would be another word. Creating things from the Self to dazzle people, and the things he creates I find interesting. So I find him a cool person. Not common I say it but yea. I find it a good definition. Neverending source of interesting creation. Someone I would go to, to hear their opinion because I just like him as a cool person in general.

Video / Video

To explain why Haidt is so important to me, besides me respecting him as a person, is to give some background of my opinions of the US. I am someone who has done a lot of research on multiple subjects over my life, and generally my research leads me to anything hidden or unknown to mass culture. Due to this, America being the current Empire (usually under economic imperialism), and the fact that I am English speaking has led me to fall down the dark rabbit hole of things America does wrong more often than any other country. Which is normal for an Empire, but not normal when the rest of the world can sometimes see them as goody-two-shoes hero protector. Generally due to media proliferation as an export (ie, people watch their TV Shows, Music, Movies, Journalism, etc), generally other cultures see their Empiricalism as a positive rather than a negative under blind faith. Over the years I developed what could only been seen as a depressive hatred of the country. I had it since my teens and it continued on throughout my 20s.

Upon hitting upon the Intellectual Dark Web, I ventured into a different kind of understanding of America that I had not really seen before. Not the stagnant IQ, not the lack of Healthcare, not the drone wars, not the fiat push... Haidt just kind of represented something else to me. A pure passionate intellectual love of America. As someone with polish ancestry, and living in America his whole life. He garnished a very different intellectual opinion of America. Alongside the fact that his research is invaluable to the world. He made me understand aspects of psychology, and zoomers on a grand scale. Ie, I respected his knowledge so alongside this, found reason to value his opinions as a person.

I started off slow, and cautiously, but I feel what he represented greatly changed how I perceived the country to be far more open minded than before. Whilst I always had a more reasonable like of Texas and New Orleans due to have specific teenage interests in people from those areas (journalists and authors), overall the country represented an entirely negative point of view for me. In recent years this has become a lot more "fair" as I became a bit more in control of my confirmation bias.

Max and Stacy have given me an incredible measure of unfiltered knowledge about economics. I feel they are most useful presenters in terms of guests they present, the topics they discuss, and the unfiltered showing of the issues currently in the world economy in a manner that I feel is unrestricted by mainstream doctrines. Ie, they say what the fuck they want and it will save you money in the long term. They don't just say shit cause other people say it, they call big names out and tell you about the bullshit going on behind the scenes in the economic market. They are generally right years before anyone else coins onto ideas.

Max is also hilarious and charismatic, and Stacy does a great job being the stable intellectual. Both of them provide a fantastic quality show.

Philosophy and psychology discussions. I love religious history. Mesopotamian and Norse being my two favourite historical subjects. I enjoy Peterson's research on the Abrahamic Religions.

I feel my life has been bettered immensely by Peterson. Gave me some strength that there was still some intelligent people out there, especially those who gave a shit about general society like I do.

Jordan did something for me that nobody has done in a long time. Gave me back some respect for Western society. I set myself on a search to know the extent of my own intelligence, which led me to knowing how high my IQ was, and doing psychological profiles to better be able to explain the kind of person I was to others. Gave me the actual desire to bother to breed.

Acknowledging my high IQ, and blue eyes: I decided for the first time in over a decade that me breeding might be worthwhile for the world. Prior to this my bitterness about love, due to my relationship history in my teens, resulted in my severe hesitancy to bother with the notions of relationships let alone the idea of breeding with a male. Being able to run around on youtube with a community filled with other intelligent people thirsting for knowledge, alongside Peterson's own words, eased the bitterness enough for me to give people a fairer chance again. Due to my high levels of dominance, and industriousness, I sometimes can just be an untouchable wall. I need to allow people in myself due to this, and I kind of just hit up against my own wall from the other side but never truly allowed it to come down. Though I had been trying over the years, Peterson really gave me the advice I needed to know that I would be okay actually finding reasons to trust people again.