• Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).

DMT Entities

Migrated topic.
Tek said:
I sort of look at things in a Platonist perspective. Our physical world is but a shadow world of the divine realm, or the world of thoughts and ideas. As such, which is more real: the thought, or the thing? Put another way, what came first in our 3D space, the thought or the thing? Take a beloved cartoon character like Mickey Mouse. We think in our cause and effect 3D earth space that a guy, Walt Disney, had a great idea one day and created Mickey Mouse, however psychedelics provide a different way to interpret the creative process. If we assume the realm we enter on psychedelics to be Plato's theorized divine realm of thoughts, and if this realm is as infinate as it seems to be, then every idea already exists in the timeless sea of eternity, including Mickey Mouse. In other words, Micky Mouse was not Walt Disney's creation per se, merely Walt Disney was a channel or way for the concept of Mickey Mouse to become manifest in this world of 3D space, you dig? Mickey might exist independently of Walt Disney in another parallel Earth or an alien system entirely. Indeed perhaps every thought is alive in some strange sense, as in everything god (used loosely here) thinks has a life as god is a divine creator of all things. This theory offers a partial understanding why things like cartoon elves exist as independent, seemingly self-aware entities in hyperspace.

I hope that all made sense and was applicable.

That's awesome! I've always seen it that way too. Great analogy with Micky Mouse. It's crazy to think of all the possible forms of awareness there are, and so many possible ways to perceive that awareness.:shock:
 
SpartanII said:
Tek said:
I sort of look at things in a Platonist perspective. Our physical world is but a shadow world of the divine realm, or the world of thoughts and ideas. As such, which is more real: the thought, or the thing? Put another way, what came first in our 3D space, the thought or the thing? Take a beloved cartoon character like Mickey Mouse. We think in our cause and effect 3D earth space that a guy, Walt Disney, had a great idea one day and created Mickey Mouse, however psychedelics provide a different way to interpret the creative process. If we assume the realm we enter on psychedelics to be Plato's theorized divine realm of thoughts, and if this realm is as infinate as it seems to be, then every idea already exists in the timeless sea of eternity, including Mickey Mouse. In other words, Micky Mouse was not Walt Disney's creation per se, merely Walt Disney was a channel or way for the concept of Mickey Mouse to become manifest in this world of 3D space, you dig? Mickey might exist independently of Walt Disney in another parallel Earth or an alien system entirely. Indeed perhaps every thought is alive in some strange sense, as in everything god (used loosely here) thinks has a life as god is a divine creator of all things. This theory offers a partial understanding why things like cartoon elves exist as independent, seemingly self-aware entities in hyperspace.

I hope that all made sense and was applicable.

That's awesome! I've always seen it that way too. Great analogy with Micky Mouse. It's crazy to think of all the possible forms of awareness there are, and so many possible ways to perceive that awareness.:shock:


Its infinite... Check out a description on the 10 dimensions (quantum mechanics)
 
purple_dye said:

M Theory and Bryanton's 10-D variation on it are fascinating mindgasmic stuff.

I find it odd that people who espouse scientific materialism and balk at anything remotely mystical can entertain this stuff, though. How is the idea of 10th dimensional strings giving rise to infinite multiple universes and alternate realities more reasonable than Hyperspace?

In fact, if you understand M Theory or what Bryanton proposes in his blogs... Hyperspace would HAVE to be real. Not only that, but such theories insist on such higher dimensional causal realms where one can access other timelines and other realities.

It brings me back to the old idea that scientists don't require evidence. In fact, evidence can rarely be said to exist for the stuff that theoretical science affirms. Science is a faith based endeavor, in that scientists believe on faith from books without having done any confirmations themselves.

They are not the empiricists they like to believe they are. Rather, they are simply inclined to believe members of their tribe, no matter how far-fetched their conjectures might be... so long as they have an appropriate amount of degrees behind their name, and explain their fantasies in the languages that are deemed appropriate for their priesthood (i.e. mathematics).

Still, they are usually my favorite religious group. At least their pragmatism and progressive streak tends to always land them in the top 3 or so.
 
Hyperspace Fool said:
In fact, if you understand M Theory or what Bryanton proposes in his blogs... Hyperspace would HAVE to be real. Not only that, but such theories insist on such higher dimensional causal realms where one can access other timelines and other realities.

It brings me back to the old idea that scientists don't require evidence. In fact, evidence can rarely be said to exist for the stuff that theoretical science affirms. Science is a faith based endeavor, in that scientists believe on faith from books without having done any confirmations themselves.

They are not the empiricists they like to believe they are. Rather, they are simply inclined to believe members of their tribe, no matter how far-fetched their conjectures might be... so long as they have an appropriate amount of degrees behind their name, and explain their fantasies in the languages that are deemed appropriate for their priesthood (i.e. mathematics).

I never thought of it like that.
 
Hyperspace Fool said:
purple_dye said:

I find it odd that people who espouse scientific materialism and balk at anything remotely mystical can entertain this stuff, though. How is the idea of 10th dimensional strings giving rise to infinite multiple universes and alternate realities more reasonable than Hyperspace?

It brings me back to the old idea that scientists don't require evidence. In fact, evidence can rarely be said to exist for the stuff that theoretical science affirms. Science is a faith based endeavor, in that scientists believe on faith from books without having done any confirmations themselves.

They are not the empiricists they like to believe they are. Rather, they are simply inclined to believe members of their tribe, no matter how far-fetched their conjectures might be... so long as they have an appropriate amount of degrees behind their name, and explain their fantasies in the languages that are deemed appropriate for their priesthood (i.e. mathematics).

Still, they are usually my favorite religious group. At least their pragmatism and progressive streak tends to always land them in the top 3 or so.


Ironically enough, the father of rational scientific materialism Rene Descartes actually had a series of three dreams or visions that he claimed caused him to devote his life to science. I had first heard about this while listening to a Terence McKenna lecture and I couldn't believe my ears when I heard it! Our entire paradigm of science has it's roots literally entrenched in deep mysticism, and most scientists don't even acknowledge this!

Francis Crick, one of the first discoverers of DNA, admitted that the idea came to him after he had a powerful LSD trip. Again, a basic scientific pillar founded in a mystical context. Carl Sagan, a great astrophysicist and promoter of science, wrote several papers about reconsidering the effects of Marijuana. Sagan admitted late in his life that many of his scientific breakthroughs came to him after smoking pot, but fearing his scientific credibility would be jeopardized he wrote these papers under an assumed name Mr. X.

Steve Jobs talked about one of the top 5 experiences of his life was an LSD trip from when he was younger, and one wonders how much that experience helped shape his future career in technology. I wonder how many great minds owe their success to a mystical source?
 
I think many minds owe some of their biggest breakthroughs to psychoactive substances, but unfortunately with the wagging finger of contemporary society, we'll never know. It's a shame people can't be more open. It only reinforces closed-minded thinking.
 
Tek said:
Hyperspace Fool said:
purple_dye said:

I find it odd that people who espouse scientific materialism and balk at anything remotely mystical can entertain this stuff, though. How is the idea of 10th dimensional strings giving rise to infinite multiple universes and alternate realities more reasonable than Hyperspace?

It brings me back to the old idea that scientists don't require evidence. In fact, evidence can rarely be said to exist for the stuff that theoretical science affirms. Science is a faith based endeavor, in that scientists believe on faith from books without having done any confirmations themselves.

They are not the empiricists they like to believe they are. Rather, they are simply inclined to believe members of their tribe, no matter how far-fetched their conjectures might be... so long as they have an appropriate amount of degrees behind their name, and explain their fantasies in the languages that are deemed appropriate for their priesthood (i.e. mathematics).

Still, they are usually my favorite religious group. At least their pragmatism and progressive streak tends to always land them in the top 3 or so.


Ironically enough, the father of rational scientific materialism Rene Descartes actually had a series of three dreams or visions that he claimed caused him to devote his life to science. I had first heard about this while listening to a Terence McKenna lecture and I couldn't believe my ears when I heard it! Our entire paradigm of science has it's roots literally entrenched in deep mysticism, and most scientists don't even acknowledge this!

Francis Crick, one of the first discoverers of DNA, admitted that the idea came to him after he had a powerful LSD trip. Again, a basic scientific pillar founded in a mystical context. Carl Sagan, a great astrophysicist and promoter of science, wrote several papers about reconsidering the effects of Marijuana. Sagan admitted late in his life that many of his scientific breakthroughs came to him after smoking pot, but fearing his scientific credibility would be jeopardized he wrote these papers under an assumed name Mr. X.

Steve Jobs talked about one of the top 5 experiences of his life was an LSD trip from when he was younger, and one wonders how much that experience helped shape his future career in technology. I wonder how many great minds owe their success to a mystical source?


There is an interesting book called "The Dancing Wu Li Masters: An Overview of the New Physics" by: Gary Zukav that compares and contrasts quantum mechanical theory to mystical theory. It shows how similar the two actually are. Parts of the book are pretty heavy but it is written in lay-mans terms relatively speaking. Its a great book. I actually would enjoy reading through it again.
 
Hyperspace Fool said:
Still, they are usually my favorite religious group. At least their pragmatism and progressive streak tends to always land them in the top 3 or so.

LMAO It seems like you hit the nail on the head every time, Hyperspace Fool! :d
 
purple_dye said:
There is an interesting book called "The Dancing Wu Li Masters: An Overview of the New Physics" by: Gary Zukav that compares and contrasts quantum mechanical theory to mystical theory. It shows how similar the two actually are. Parts of the book are pretty heavy but it is written in lay-mans terms relatively speaking. Its a great book. I actually would enjoy reading through it again.


Great book. Loved reading it when it came out. A friend made me read it after we were discussing The Tao Of Physics (Fritjof Capra) one afternoon.

All these years later, it might be time to dust that one off, and peruse it once again. Considering how much more mystical modern theoretical physics has gotten since then, it might even be time for a sequel.$$
 
Tek said:
Ironically enough, the father of rational scientific materialism Rene Descartes actually had a series of three dreams or visions that he claimed caused him to devote his life to science. I had first heard about this while listening to a Terence McKenna lecture and I couldn't believe my ears when I heard it! Our entire paradigm of science has it's roots literally entrenched in deep mysticism, and most scientists don't even acknowledge this!
<snip>

Great examples of the mystical background of science, Tek. Carl Jung actually started his research into the alchemical field based on dreams he had relating to alchemy as well. He actually initially thought he was going mad himself, but his research shined new light on alchemy, and led to the creation of his famous archetypes of human personality. Given, psychology could be argued to not be much of a science to begin with.
 
Hey ARCANUM, did you try that experiment with the DMT entities (asking for lottery numbers)? Please let me know if anything happened. Thanks friend.

EKUMA1981
 
I watched another talk by Marko and he mentions opening up an effective two-way communication system between us and the ultra-terrestrial beings (or DMT entities, whatever you prefer to call them). I don't know how this could be done, but is fascinating none-the-less (maybe using quantum computers??)

I ponder about all the benefits to humanity that this could bring. Just imagine if this did succeed. Imagine all the knowledge flooding into our reality from them! It could literally solve all our problems (world hunger, poverty, disease, etc)

Am I too optimistic?
 
Belief is the death of intelligence.
-Robert Anton Wilson

That being said, I find hyperspace to be no more "real" or "unreal" than what I perceive to be waking, sober reality. Of course, what's real for me could be bullshit for you and vice versa.

Blessings
 
But what do you think about this idea in general, Pup. Does anybody else think this experiment should go ahead, because of the potential benefits? Love to see more viewpoints.
 
Utilizing spice for monetary gain? Let me know how that goes, to me that sounds like suicide. :thumb_dow or atleast a very unpleasant trip. I sincerely hope I'm misinformed on this one.
 
ekuma dont take this the wrong way but the idea of asking a vision for lottery numbers generated by random chance is not only delusional but self insulting.

think about what your saying, basically its that these things are not only gods to worship but are also superior to yourself in some form or manner, they are you ergo everything you see is you now unless you have the numbers already i doubt they will say anything you dont already know somehow.

you find there are many many many MANY people who go off the deep end thanks to stuff like this, and many of the people talking about two way communication and so forth are among this not because it actually makes you nutty (though i cant vouch for the sanity of myself) but the problems begins the moment you try to incorporate what you see over there to what happens here without having a solid frame of reference to ground each to one another, and it goes both ways. in short you cant think about how this benefits you if you really want it to change you, since the things that dont help you normally tell how you deal with adversity.


in the end emuka your speculating about something you have not see nor felt, i dont say that in judgement, it really is in love and concern if nothing else, but they are not here for your entertainment or disposal and in the end all i really can say is this.

when you can in the blink of an eye see the entirety of creation as you know it, watch worlds rise and fall, suns burst to life and die out, entire civilizations reach to the farthest points of their being and fall upon the weight of there own hubris and the plane of existence rework itself into a single living creature and then it looks at you and in those eyes it can see everything you can or would be, and you see your just a tiny glint in those eyes, but in all of that, you are there to see, and then you blink and its gone as soon as it came, and you question what was that.

do you think in all that time with all that you could see, that your really going to waste your time trying to figure out a few petty lottery numbers? money is the trust of a peoples personified into a physical form, technically it is suppose to be their to fill every need you could have in the physical world, but trust can prepare you for this, and the moment you presume you understand what is happening in that world (or for matter also in this world) is the same moment that your ability to actually learn from life dies.

so the only real question i have is this.

when you have lost everything and the fat and pain and the distractions are stripped away, when you are at the edge of life where nothing but you will makes you live, what will you remember? because what every that answer is, that is what will define you, and you wont know until you have been there.

but i will say this, it wont be lottery numbers.

have a good life ekuma.
 
Monetary gain was only one example, Scudge. I did mention gleaning other important info from DMT entities that could benefit humanity. And remember, money is not evil. It's what you do with it that counts. We all need it and it can be used for great projects and purposes. And, I personally believe we won't need it at all in the future. If the technological singularity occurs or something similar and we all become enlightened and wise and equal, money/economics will be obsolete.

It would also be nice to prove the existence of these beings and Hyperspace too, no? OK, maybe it's because I'm part-Ufologist :o) This is the main reason I started this thread... to find ways of proving this phenomenon is real and not a hallucination.
 
has nothing to do with viewpoints towards monetary systems.

This plant I feel is purely for psychedelic face melting.

I do respect your efforts.
 
Once again, there are 2 major obstacles in the whole "let's ask entities useful or provable questions" concept.

1) You only remember a tiny fraction of what you actually experience when you blast off.

2) If entities are, in fact, free-willed independent beings, whose to say that they have any reason to be honest with you, answer your questions, or assist this juvenile race of bipedal anthropods in any way, shape or form?

Considering how poorly we are dealing with the technology and knowledge we already have, I would say it is a good bet that any higher intelligence would be adverse to jump-starting our progress in any meaningful way. We are already teetering on the edge of ecoside as it is.

We wouldn't seriously try to explain our science or philosophy to a bunch of monkeys. We certainly wouldn't hand them a samurai sword... let alone teach them to use them.

We should be happy with whatever scraps of wisdom or convoluted visions they do decide to bestow on us. As it is, they have been known to give a veritable shitload of good (and verifiable) info if you approach them properly.
 
Hyperspace Fool said:
1) You only remember a tiny fraction of what you actually experience when you blast off.

This varies from person to person and from blast off to blast off.

I agree it's useless to ask alien lifeform about our little human matters.
 
Back
Top Bottom