IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

A brainstorm for Cijadrachon

Grrr Tails.From at hink.Tank'o'Monkeys
Sat Apr 10 19:56:02 EST 1999

On Fri, 09 Apr 1999 16:55:39 GMT, cijadra at zedat.fu-berlin.de
(Cijadrachon) wrote:

><snipped for insertion>

Hello, my friend.(-:
I was just trolling through deja and came across this:

>Someone once bssped through my phone magically, because before he had
>not gotten yet that that is possible and seemed to find it funny
>(I found it less funny) and energies of it reached the left ear,
>though the phone was on the right.

So, here's my 2x cents;
(And I do hope you can make sense out of most of what I'm about to
unleash below)
So, please bear with me (-:

About two days ago, early in the morning, I got up and decided to sort
some thing out on the phone, and I don't what It was - it could have
been my mind still spinning or churning after soon awakening, but I
had picked up the phone and was listen to that damn music they put you
on hold with, when suddenly I stilled my thoughts and just observed
them with that passively objective state of mind.  (you know when you
just stop and take notice of yourself and your interaction with your
surroundings?) and I suddenly became aware of an incredible humming
sound within my head - I didn't know if it was just those usual high
frequency sounds that resonate in the ear-drum, but it appeared to be
a more exaggerated sound than my usual background noise.
So I lifted the phone away from my ear, and I started playing with
this notion that the phone was causing this hum.
And found, that as I brought the phone against my left ear, my right
ear (although the actual hum seemed to be created more within the
right side of my brain, rather than be coming from the actual
ear-drum... I don't know) would resonate quite significantly.

I think it has a lot to do with the sort of speakers they use within
the phone - they use a piezo-electric diaphragm,.
Which is like a matrix of crystal layers, which, besides being a cheap
way to manufacture speakers, they are designed for emitting a wide
range of high frequencies at the same time.

But generally, they are used within the large speakers of the hi-fi
systems, purely for the tweeter quality, because their frequencies are
all over the place, and it's hard to address them in order to produce
any precise sound.

As well, I am VERY in tune with the higher frequency aspects of the
brain - "auras" colors, and all that junk (even though I know you do
not believe in auras. a view which is quite beyond me, seeing as how
you subscribe to the notion of telepathy - which I would personally
place below auras in terms of general acceptance and believability)

Also, while I'm rambling away, I just got a new puter this-year, and
it came with these two big speakers which work independently, and have
their own power-souce - but whenever there is a high energy
(frequency) arc being created, like when the microwave starts, the
speakers emit this loud crackle, upon picking up this change in the
energy field. (now I live in a caravan - so, as you can imagine,
everything [like the appliances I own] are really confined, and close
together) But the greatest effect is when the refrigerator starts-up
(and less so when it stops) but it seems to send out this big change
in the field which makes my speakers crackle the most. But the most
incredible thing that this field of the fridge creates, whilst in
unison with my speaker set-up, is to create this other field, which
sends this incredible jolt, or a burst of change in the field of the
body (just like the wave of the "nexus" within that star-trek movie.)
which in the first few times I felt it, I was most startled.
It's like applying an electrical cardiac massage to the soul - (even
though I know that you do not believe in souls, either)

Sorry, am I boring you yet? (-:

Cos I I've only just started.

Here is a post, which may (or may not) interest you.
But I think it worth mentioning.
And it has much relevance to my experience (which proceeds it.)

Deviant Col soliloquized:
> > > Is solipsism not pointless?
And then he asked, again in soliloquy (which, BTW is the word just
before solipsism in the dictionary):
> > Well,is it?

To which Rick answered:
> Yes, I'd say it is pointless and that is it's strength.
Then AllisonWonderland chimed in:
And all the while, the solipsistic appearance of existence seems to
keep "promising" some kind of meaning. Yet while everything seems to
means something, nothing really seems means anything.

The strength of the promise is like a "magnetic field"... in that it
has a "feel" about it, it has a sense-abiliti-ness... It is felt in
one's total sensory integration of the factors involved. Reality has a
taste, and an odor, and a visual component, as well as auditory and
tactile factors. What all those senses are reporting to the solipsist
becomes that one's reality.

The intensity of the soul-felt, heart-felt, realization, determines
the intensity of the "magnetic feel/field" which is able to draw the
solipsist into a  3D virtu(re)ality to the point of being unable to

The inevitible final resort is to surrender, that is... to "go" with
the flow of the "magnetic feel/field" and just offer no resistance,
flowing to where ever it goes, pointlessly.

> I don't mean that it has no merit or value though.
Its merit or value is measured by how valuable the perception is to
the solipsist involved in his/her particular dream.

> A point, being the simplest structure is only useful when describing structures
> and indeed, all structures come from a point.
(I love it when someone talks like this! :)

> Solipsism, on the other hand is an attempt to understand the whole darn thing
Good point! But the best part is that "the whole darn thing" is only
THAT of which one is aware.

And here we come to another one of the "Magnetic Feel/Fields" that is
the "Unknown".

Once that factor has come into the the dream, the pointlessness is
taken out of the dream-mode of being "Brownian" in nature... to being
inducted into a "flow" against which one has no ability to resist.

When this happens, the solipsist is, of a sudden, caught in the "flow"
of things, and like it or not, the dream goes THIS way!

One can struggle; one can resist; one can deny... there are numerous
reactions to being caught in the solipsistic "flow" of one of these
"Magnetic Feel/Fields" from the "Unknown".

> and goes further than structures and forms in it's investigation.
And the ability to withdraw into the centralized I position to the
exclusion of the impinging world-scene is to withdraw from the dream
and become THE dreamer, lucidly aware of the reality... One does this
by following the "Magnetic Feel/Field" psychocryogenically, that is
without resistance... When one has finally reconciled one's self to
the inevitibility of the flow, only then (and maybe not even then) can
one accept the inevitible results of being caught in that solipsistic

A bit of an analogy: Being at one with the central I of the
solipsistic flow, that is... having withdrawn, to the point of
ignoring the exterior appearance of solipsistic reality, one comes to
bliss. In that sense Ignorance is Bliss!

> Where indeed is love located and what shape is it? It is surely part of the
> equation and yet has no structures.
Love is the only emotion that is strong enough to prevent
disintegration of the centralized I. Still in the purest of senses,
even Love is but a phantasmagoric part of the solipsism, but one that
derives its strength and tenacity not as emmanating from the center,
but as our personal reaction to the center from which the flow is

> An understanding of the self must have love
> in it. It is, after all the one thing that everybody wants.
> As Judi says, "The only point to life that I see is in transcending it. ", and
> while I understand that it is not everyone's cup of tea, most of the things that
> people spend pursuing in their lives can be found in the transcendence of it.
The finding by the solipsist of one's "flow" (or as is more often the
case, a flow finds the solipsist), promotes an epiphanistic education,
an "awakening",  if for no other reason than one is aware of the
evidences of the flow... Like riding along a highway, watching the

> If you find yourself asking, "what is it that I want ?". First you should be
> clear about what the "I" is.
And when one finds one's self looking both ways through the same set
of eyes (this is an actual feeling, I'm sure that others have had it
too), the synaesthetic grokking of the reality of taste, odor, visual,
auditory, and tactile factors that reports reality to the solipsist...
The  "That One" is the solipsistic "I", about which, one should be

This is solipsism.
At it's most particular abstract.

It seems to me that there should be something more said, but I can't
think of what...

Oh, yes... there is something more... after all the above discussion,
the though that what DC was meaning when he used the word "pointless"
was not in the Pythagorian sense of the word... Imagine DC asking: "Is
solipsism not lineless?" or "Is solipsism not planeless?", or "Is
solipsism not cubeless?", or "Is solipsism not tesaractless?".   IF
you get my drift..

Rather what DC was asking was affirmation that there was no rhyme or
reason, no purpose, not only no destinous, but no destiny itself to

And here, I suspect, DC is exhibiting a bit of oxymoronic whimsy... in
that he is using the "No-Rhyme-or-Reason-No-Purpose-or-Destiny"
perception to make a "point". The point is whether it is indeed so
that: Solipsistic reality is "Pointless"... More at "Meaningless".

Like one hand clapping... Like the tree silently falling in the forest
because there is no one there to hear it.

Thinking in these terms makes it clear that (in the mode of linear
thinking): There is "some kind" of "common objective reality"
pervading all existence, is as arbitrary and insubstantial as DC's
cyclical solipsism.

And does it really matter whether we believe in the phantasm of linear
reality, or in the phantasm of cyclical solipsism? Themselves being
nothing but phantasms, is in itself an indication of the solipsistic
nature of perceived existence.

And if one should try to answer DC's question which was (in other
words) "What IS the point of solipsism?" It is a way to rationalize
that which we perceive to be occuring in what seems to be the reality
of existence.

And like all efforts to catagorize, verbalize, digitalize, and then
communicate the ineffable, we are doomed to fail if we cannot transmit
the "Magnetic Feel/Field" of the "flow". and that is assuming that
anyone actually really truely sincerely wants to coexperience
another's or a common Magnetic Feel/Field Flow.

Yadda, yadda, yadda,
[AllisonWonderland - allison at livingston.net]


Now, I got seriously smashed (= very 'in the mood') on cannabinoids a
little while ago.
And the experience is a remarkable experience to be within.
The most interesting thing to note, was the way my mind kept switching
like an alternating current as I moved the focus of my reality around.
It was like the experience of ~taking a new route, or even the feeling
that I were traveling upon a different highway, each time I would
switch my focus upon a different aspect within the scenery.~
And that, from within this experience I could compare the operation of
my mind then, in contrast to how I would normally observe things. For
example, normally, I would observe my computer, and then switch my
focus to the another object, and in the process I would try and drag
the "flow" of the computer into the empathy of my reality, and then
shut that flow of reality off, in order to look at this other object,
in which I would try and attach to my observation the flow of this new
reality, and drag it into the empathy of the abstract formation
therein my mind.
But this feeling (while 'influenced') was like being dragged into the
actual flow and full empathy of that object concerned.
Which made its pure objective reality a most difficult to piece
together within the abstracts of my mind, regarding any general
pattern which was occurring at that time - upon trying to center my
self, in regards to this flow.
I could not work out whether the mind and body were being separated or
what! I was alternating in flow and being thrown around therein the
empathy of this flow so damn much, that I could not find myself any
reliable center.
I would, instead, look at the computer, and "become" the flow the
computer.  Then, as I turned my attention to this other object, my
mind would still be clinging to the subjective reality of the
computer, and this changing in the focus upon a different frame in my
reality, was like stretching at a rubber band which connected my
subjective reality to my objective, so that when I pulled it, it would
still be clinging taut to the computer.  But it would then slowly be
dragged with increasing momentum, as it got closer to my objective
Also, I would lie down and just remain static in my body for a while,
but when I would lift myself up do move, it was like my subjective
mind had slowly melded to that state of flow, and when I pulled it
away, it would be like trying to stretch that subjective rubber band
again. So you can imagine, with no defined pivotal abstract center to
revolve the flow of my subjective mind around, I had nothing objective
to compare this reality with - whilst in this state of flow.
Thus, I would conjure all the usual sorts of thoughts, but would
emphasize them in my brief bursts of centralized introspection whilst
in this state.  Wherein, I would be entertaining a flux of such
emotions as; "maybe I should be doing some yoga, because it appears
that movement speaks a lot through the experience of this flowing
reality" then I would begin to think; "actually, maybe I should do
some meditation, because if I stop my objective body then maybe I can
centralize it long enough to establish and outlay the contents of this
experience into a pattern of sorts"
and then; "but that's not the answer, because the true experience I am
accumulating *now* is itself the contrast of my usual reality of
motion within the context of conscious reality" and the next thing I
know, in being torn between two experiences of reality, was the
arising of the then notion of "then what *is* the passive/active truth
of reality, and the balance therein? is it me *now* thinking about
being torn between these two states of realization, or something else?
or something I should be thinking of outside these three notions?"
Now after a full day of regaining the magnetic flux around my center
once again, this full experience of release, whilst now finding its
central pivotal core, allowed me to experience the "being" of knowing
the significance in the variety of all these aspects of flow, and to
become them as well - not the actual contemplation of how long I
should be dwelling upon each aspect within the flow of each subjective
frame, but the beauty of opening up these channels and allowing the
mind to just become the flow of any of these objects which I took
fancy to at the time - in contrast to the rigid, dense and confined
core of subjective flow I had been holding onto and retaining as my
truth of reality for a *very* long time.
So that the pure beauty of my reality during this transition, was not
in the subjective contemplation of what I should be "being", for
"being" is just one static frame in the transition of the flow of
things, which I saw was simply just a shift in one stream of
subjective flow to another, upon now applying it the core of my
converging reality.  But nor was the pure beauty within this state of
condensation, in holding a fixation for the one abstract paradigm of
trying to create a central and circular uniform/balanced picture of my
subjective experiences of reality therein the vessel of the objective
- for the pure release of my subjective mind from its relational
counterpart allowed me to experience the flow of nature without, in a
pure abundance of empathy - in a childlike vision that; now, this is
the way true "experience" was meant to be observed.  Which made my
centralized and gathered up reality pale in comparison to all these
other experiences, of which I am but a twig upon the tree caught up in
the vorticy of a momentary lightening strike.  Thus it was simply the
knowledge that the letting of myself go gives me little to retain and
grasp onto as a field of influence of my very own, and to embrace it
all as something I have created through my own merits and
achievements, and can change the motion of in flux at will. Yet,
holding onto this begets an influx of stagnation, and a condensation
which has no purpose than it "is" and has nothing to signify to the
very acknowledgement and recognition of the awareness in its own
sentience of achievement/glory.  And that there is so much in the
sequence of flow without, which has so little concern for the empathy
of 'that of which it is not related' (within) , that "to" or "not to"
insert your awareness into the flow of such a range of varying
fluctuations, consists purely of the alternatives of; do you want that
flow to become part *you* and thereby produce such a biased flux in
your flow? or do you wish for *you* to become part of that flow - to
allow it to overtake your field - by neglecting its presence, and
thereby setting up a counteractive field of repulsion within yourself,
thus ignoring these ever shifting and converging fields in flow, which
may soon induce a field of repulsion to warp and disperse the
polarization of this field you have set up for yourself?
Reality is the constant flood of being torn between the struggle of
*these* alternatives (of subjectivity) and this (of objectivity),
which is the internalized struggle of; do you wish to insert yourself
into flow of experience, so that emotions are always becoming
something that is true to the nature of the flow around which you
insert your objective field? Or do you wish to give these emotions
something tangible to relate to and something more established upon
which achievement of gain/evolution can be satisfactorily compared, in
contrast to the gain of separate fields of influence?
Which, between these two transcending states of reality, of conflict
within conflict etc., upon gaining polarization/viscosity within a
fluctuating and shifting state of current, begets a rapid perpetuation
of linear movement therein the motion of the swift streams of flow.
And lends one an insight into the question, which therein transcends a
series of questions, regarding of conflict over this dual&duel-istic
nature of the determinate nature of reality, which goes something not
unlike this; what is the truth of reality? is it the linear growth in
knowledge, of being able to declare ones-self, and constantly reaffirm
within ones changing reality the results and achievements of
constantly changing ones path, and thereby reestablishing their being
within the flood of changes taking place without.  Or is it the
discarding of all this knowledge and just "being" the pure awareness
of what one can become therein the current flood of changes, which are
moving about ones-self - changes which are beyond the strength of ones
field of ascending force, for the setting up any condensing body of
polarized flow?

Opposed to the usual context, of the question over such a conflict,
which usually revolves around the (objective) alternatives of;
"my reality consists of holding/having such-and-such thoughts - is
this wrong? how do I change this? should I be shifting this view into
'this other persons' mind-set/way of thinking? that way of thinking?
or should I be finding and seeking the reality of my own path, in just
"being" whatever comes next?"
"my reality is this, and it is the belief I stick by. I change it
every-so-often.  But I don't care what you think of it because it has
served me well. And is reality for *me*. I dare anybody to challenge
this view as I occasionally project it within my interaction with
other points of view, yet I *do* hold onto the fact that I should be
ever ready and willing to change it, if it doesn't shape up to what is
being put forth in rebuttal to the proposition of my abstraction"

And, also, if I may step out from behind the 'Margot Kidder wood-pile'
just a few paces more.

You know how, within your mouse "options" menu on your computer, how
you can alter the motion of the tail of your mouse pointer?  Well, at
the moment whenever I move the center of my reality, or have reality
move about me, everything in my vision of the passing objects
concerned, create this very ghostly tail.
But the greatest prominence is in how much the tail appears to linger.
I must say, it's not like a static lingering after-affect, but a
gradually and receding fading vision. It appears in the past month or
so to have produced this effect very prominently, in the most
exaggerated lingering effect within my reality of vision - most unlike
your usual "hand is faster than the eye" notion.

I don't if it's to do with the increasing capacity, capabilities or
shutter-speeds in my taking snap-shots of reality or what!, but it, in
turn, has also given me an excellent perspective/or a disfunction in
my vision (however you would like to take it) in viewing fields around
any object.

Also, I thought auras were a "feeling" of colors, rather than the
actual effect of "seeing" them, being the terminology of "seeing
auras" But colors are quite prominent also.
Especially blue around the fingers.


I more thing.  A month or so ago I came across this program called
"the brain" - the links:

You can download from:


It organizes/sorts all your computer components (files/thoughts) into
a structure composed through a series of synaptic-like connections.

I just thought you'd appreciate the beauty of this program.
I don't know if you've yet heard of it, or even may already have it!
(but don't bother even reading the manual, it's a cinch to understand
- a few minutes of tinkering around is all that is needed to get the

Oh, and to "unlock" it, well.. e-mail for a code. (if you wish to keep
using it)

All The Best!

grrr at eisa.net.au

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net