Nested Realities. Check out Tom Campbell’s My Big TOE trilogy to parse this meme. Also, read the Kybalion.
— Medium Digital (@mediumdigi) December 21, 2017
Mandela Effect? Are you a Jeff Buckley or Cocteau Twins fan? If yes, were you aware of the intense romance they had in the mid-90s? A fan would have been aware. I cannot say I am the most encyclopedic fan of any band, but I loved both of those artists in the late 90s. Yet, I was not aware of their relationship until a few days ago (it’s 2017). I find this unusual (unlikely?). During the Napster days (2000) I was on a quest to learn as much biographical information I could about my favorite recording artists. I would download copious amounts of music and research bands thoroughly on AllMusic. There are few artists that I hold in higher regard than Buckley or Cocteau Twins. This is music that connects to the spirit and there is no equal.
How could I not know such a titanic fact? I heard about this via The Higherside Chats’ guest Chris Knowles (https://www.
From Wikipedia: In Greek mythology, the Sirens were dangerous creatures, who lured nearby sailors with their enchanting music and voices to shipwreck on the rocky coast of their island.
No voice in modern times (or possibly ever) has embodied the archetype of siren more than Fraser’s. Fraser and Jeff Buckley had a brief, but intense romantic affair in the mid-90s. Both were enamored with each other’s voices. Jeff Buckley died in a drowning accident in 1997.
From Wikipedia: While recording the song (Teardrop with Massive Attack) on 29 May 1997, she found out that her once-close friend, Jeff Buckley, had drowned. “That was so weird … I’d got letters out and I was thinking about him. That song’s kind of about him – that’s how it feels to me anyway.”
Chris Knowles details an unbelievable, yet factual, amount of coincidences in the obscure lyrics of Fraser’s Cocteau Twins music that illustrate details of Buckley’s untimely death.
OK, so that’s all really creepy and weird. But here’s why I’m writing this. I HAD NO IDEA Fraser and Buckley were connected in any way until a few days ago. Yet I’m a fan of both since the mid-late 90s and I SHOULD have known. My good friend who introduced me to Cocteau Twins in the 90s also didn’t know anything about this. What is going on?
I’ve been exploring Simulation Theory for several months. I actually wrote a booklet and just completed a YouTube series on navigating the simulation called Truth Cypher. My project is rooted in the idea that in this (non-computer) simulation conflicting events can be simultaneously accurate. If you’ve heard of the Mandela Effect, where large groups of people remember historical events differently than other groups, it’s exactly that (look this up if you’re not familiar with the concept.)
I’m wondering if the Fraser/Buckley connection is a particularly aggressive manifestation of the Mandela Effect. To be convinced one way or the other, I’d want long-time fans from the 90s to come forward and indicate that they knew about this romance in the 90s (or even early 00s) and have held it in memory since. For my friend and I, this is completely knew information. But it’s of a significantly more intense level than the more humorous Mandela Effect manifestations like the Berenstain/Berenstein Bears naming. (Yes, I’m in the control group that remembers it being spelled Berenstein Bears.)
If this is Mandela Effect, my conjecture is that this strange, compelling and mythologically perfect narrative has only recently appeared in consensual simulation memory. When I watched the Jeff Buckley documentary I got a similar feeling in some scenes than I do from media events like the Las Vegas mass shooting or pick any media terror event. Basically, the narrative is very simplistic and trite. Something feels false. Even Elizabeth Fraser’s performance of Tim Buckley’s Song to the Siren seems script perfect. Her vocals on that rack are unusually conventional, which is unlike anything else I’ve heard her do. However, the rough cut duet of Jeff and Elizabeth singing “All Flowers in Time Bend Towards the Sun” is sublime. It doesn’t change the fact that it’s shocking I had no idea this amazing collaboration existed.
Quantum theory has found that reality is observer dependent. In practical terms, we are the co-creators of consensual reality. Regarding Fraser/Buckley, it’s tempting to think the likes of CERN scientists are reprogramming reality and manifesting instances of the Mandela Effect. But perhaps in the multiverse simulation we (we as in consensual reality we) wanted it to be this way. Maybe even I collaborated in merging this alternate dimension with the one I’d been living in. The narrative simultaneously feels wrong, corny –yet wished for (predictable) like a fairy tale. Maybe most serious fans of these artists have their meeting in memory and I’m in the odd minority of people who’s universe didn’t include their story.
Even more intriguingly (to me) I am inserted into this romance as an observer who affects reality. This is when personal synchronicities with the Buckley/Fraser Mandela Effect harmonize with their story in an unlikely way.
My grandfather died in January of 2015. My daughter, our second child, was born that year on my grandfather’s birthday, November 17. Jeff Buckley was born on November 17. My grandfather was a kind of merman, a great coach and teacher of swimming. My daughter loves swimming. Her name means ocean. She has a very powerful voice. She’s capable of playfully screaming at such a high pitch it creates intense, physical vibrations you can really feel. Like a Siren. Tim Buckley was born on February 14. My wife and I had our first date on Valentine’s Day. Cupid hit hard that day. The archetypal mythological gods seem to be threading me into their story.
My favorite rock band is Roxy Music. One of their albums is called The Siren.
More recently, Bryan Ferry recorded a cover of Tim Buckley’s song to the Siren.
There is no randomness in computing, only complexity that gives the appearance of. In the simulation, coincidences and synchronicities are never random. Furthermore, we use these occurrences to create the narratives of our lives. Can you see how this works? How reality is created? How we are doing it? I’m at my limits to articulate the technicalities of this. It is not done analytically. It is done apart from time. It happens within the intuitive, feminine, spiritual side of the dual mind. The analytical, material, action oriented male side of mind translates the phenomena into experience and story. Yet the meaning can only truly be derived by the former.
When one is creating a website, it is intended as a full experience. I kind of virtual sculpture where one can navigate and reliably find their way back “home.” It’s an ok metaphor for an intelligent (simulated?) universe because, left untended, both virtual and material words eventually descend into natural states of chaos. Here’s the the thing about websites. The designer will continue making adjustments long after launch. Usually these tweaks are imperceptible to the visiter. Sometimes they’re significant enough to subtly affect the user’s experience, but without them consciously noticing what is different. Sometimes these website changes are more drastic. Perhaps a menu link to a favorite site section gets pulled down, making scores of content inaccessible to the user. Maybe the skin of the site completely changes giving off a completely different emotionally visual impression. Does this not sound like our universe? For thousands of years people lived in a flat realm with a mythical dome above. Then, suddenly, the program altered and they found themselves in a complex, different universe. In our simulation, there could be intelligences unconstrained by our concept of time and space that are capable of altering events at any point. History—the past—might be as malleable as the future. This is because our material universe is nested within time agnostic conscious awareness. While I don’t believe we live in a computer programmed simulation, I think the multiverse works very much like one. I believe we are the programmers of the universe. And I believe we are reprogramming the world—backwards and forwards.
Proponents of transhumanism seem to believe they (we?) will one day be able to simulate, or even create, consciousness. According to the originator of the computer reality simulation theory, Nicholas Bostrom, there are only three possibilities for humanity:
1. We’re literally living in a computer simulation
2. There is a strong aversion in advanced civilizations to making “ancestor simulations”—that is, highly evolved civilizations have no interest in making what are essentially video games of their past
3. Something destroys all civilizations before they’re able to advance to the point where they are technologically capable of simulating consciousness
I’m struck by the blind spot regarding consciousness. It almost seems casual to Bolstrom – a given – that we will one day be able to simulate consciousness. Like Musk, he’s simultaneously wrong AND onto something he doesn’t appear to be aware of. 1. Yes, we are living in a kind of of simulation (although not a computer one). 2. is completely uninteresting and irrelevant and need not be discussed. 3. Yes, something may indeed destroy all civilizations (as described in Chapter 2), yet simulating consciousness has nothing to do with stopping it. In The Matrix movies human mind was enslaved but consciousness was not created. It might appear that some of the characters who were not human in the Matrix had consciousness. Despite appearances, true consciousness cannot be programmed. No matter how smart AI becomes it can never be conscious. It would ultimately be psychopathic. Even if programmed to be kind, it would simply be psychopathically empathic.
Perhaps pre-existing consciousness could come to inhabit a computer or robot. One could call it possession. Reading Tom Campbell’s Big Toe. Reality is nested. The material world is nested within the consciousness world. We are the only creatures we know of who have evolved to a point where we have become self aware to contemplate being. Transhumanism ideology reduces consciousness to a material computer. The computer metaphor might work to understand reality, but our consciousness is more powerful than any material computer or AI can ever become.
I’ve come to believe that the stars encode truths about time. The night sky is our celestial map to understanding the base reality simulation. The slow precession of our planet earth takes about 25920 years to complete. This is known as a great year. The year is broken down into 12 ages we know as zodiac signs. We’re currently in Pisces transitioning to Aquarius. Randall Carlson, Graham Hancock and Walter Cruttenden (to name only a few) have done fantastic work scientifically showing how precessional knowledge was woven into ancient sites like Stonehenge and the Giza pyramids. Hancock in particular has demonstrated with innumerable archaeological facts that there must have been a very ancient advanced civilization that was wiped out at the end of the last ice age by a combination of climate change, meteors and deluge. A few survivors of that cataclysm seeded the great ancient civilizations we know. This is a fascinating and fulfilling field of study. For my purposes, it shows that the nature of our base reality “simulation” is cyclical. I also believe it’s spiracle –meaning the cycles gradually move in a forward direction, not in a 2 dimensional loop.
Cruttenden has put forward research to suggest that our sun actually orbits around another star, possibly Sirius. He contends that this is the cause of earth’s precession as our entire solar system moves through the galaxy in a 25920 year orbit. Most interestingly, his thesis suggests that our consciousness is affected by our position to that star. This gives meaning and explanation to classifications like “Golden Age” and “Dark Age”. Our consciousness becomes more aware of itself in “higher ages” because of celestial positioning and our exposure to specific electromagnetic frequencies. If this is true, it would make the cyclical, game-like nature of base reality inescapable. In darker ages we would be more prone to animalistic materialism perhaps as in after the fall of Rome. Higher ages would see a blossoming of art and science like in the Renaissance.
Carlson and Hancock have done significant work showing how cataclysm may be tied to the precessional cycle. That would be further confirmation of the cycle. Like a game, the challenge of cataclysm continues to arise. Catastrophe is not actually a given. Neither is survival. Celestial positioning gives us what can be thought of as the superpowers of higher consciousness to win the game. Even if you’re not sold on this compelling theory, you can at least be sure that we have yet to win this game.
Instead of me trying to convince skeptics of precession, I recommend reading the researchers I mentioned to learn more. For the scaffolding of this book, I am taking their core ideas and building on them as if they were established fact (and they one day might well be).
We discuss Elon Musk’s computer based reality simulation. Musk is way off but the metaphor is spot on and inspired the book and podcast.
Elon Musk answered a question about whether we live in a computer simulated reality (reality simulation).
“The strongest argument for us being in a simulation, probably being in a simulation is the following: 40 years ago, we had pong, two rectangles and a dot,” Musk said. “That is what games were. Now 40 years later we have photorealistic 3D simulations with millions of people playing simultaneously and it’s getting better every year. And soon we’ll have virtual reality, augmented reality, if you assume any rate of improvement at all, the games will become indistinguishable from reality.”
“Even if the rate [of technological advancement] drops by a thousand from right now—imagine it’s 10,000 years in the future, which is nothing in the evolutionary scale. So given we’re clearly on a trajectory to have games that are indistinguishable from reality and those games could be played on a set top box or on a PC or whatever and there would be billions of such computers or set top boxes, it would seem to follow the odds we’re in base reality is one in billions,” Musk said. “Tell me what’s wrong with that argument. Is there a flaw in that argument?”
And finally of interest, Musk says this.
“There’s a one in billions chance [we’re in] base reality,” he said. “I think it’s one in billions. We should hope that’s true because otherwise if civilization stops advancing, that could be due to some calamitous event that erases civilization, so maybe we should be hopeful this is a simulation. Otherwise, we will create simulations that are indistinguishable from reality or civilization will cease to exist. Those are the two options.”
Musk’s simulation theory is based on Nick Bostrom’s
paper titled “ARE YOU LIVING IN A COMPUTER SIMULATION?” http://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html
I believe there are crucial, transcendent truths embedded into Musk’s thinking. I also simultaneously believe Musk is wildly off the mark. Musk is musing that a transhuman, Matrix-like simulated reality is a best-case scenario for the species. He’s also saying there’s a one in billions chance we’re not already in it. I contend that the simulated aspect of reality is an eternal, built-in, pre-existing feature of reality. That’s in direct contradiction to Musk’s technological add-on simulation to base reality. In other words, base reality is like a simulation, but not a computer generated one.
Musk touches on another massive and crucial point. He doesn’t even seem to know it. He says, “We should hope [the simulation is] true because otherwise if civilization stops advancing, that could be due to some calamitous event that erases civilization, so maybe we should be hopeful this is a simulation…” The rebuttal – or debunk – to his theory is encoded right there in his words. Calamity. Cataclysm. Catastrophism. It’s also (I believe) a key to understanding what he might understand as the game-like computer program he thinks is running the reality simulation “we” collectively experience.
I confess I’m no gamer. But I’m old enough to have played a version of Pong on Atari and graduated up to Super Mario Bros on Nintendo (and a few more advanced systems in successive years, but it’s not important). Games are coded reality simulations. If you lose the game, it ends…but you always get to start over. The same applies if you win. In nearly every game there are levels. We can use game levels as a metaphor for the world we find ourselves in right now. We are in a level. Even if we have no direct memory of prior levels, we are certainly not in level one. We actually may be at the final level of the game. It’s not a given that we will win the game. If we lose, we might get to start over. But that’s not a given either.
I become more convinced of the simulation metaphor the more I study this. In computers, my understanding is that randomness does not truly exist. So it is with our reality simulation. Synchronicities and coincidences, even things “just working out” lead us to the game-like nature of reality. To understand the reality simulation is to realize that right action is the way to play to manifest positive effects in the “game”. A nihilist might believe there is no meaning or purpose, but this is self-defeating ideology. We must believe in higher purpose, in reality simulation, in right action, in morality, without knowing materially that the “game” really exists. In essence, we must do what is right without any promise of reward. To have knowledge of reality simulation is irrelevant. The way to play the game of life is the same regardless. Preston Gibbs has done fantastic work demonstrating how astrology and Tarot are connected to the simulation. Please listen to his interview with Greg Carlwood on the Higherside Chats. This reinforces my idea that “mythology is technology” (I *think* I came up with that). The reality simulation can be better understood by studying works that remain from the past such as holy books and Tarot. I believe astrology might be the greatest technical cypher to decoding what is going on in this universe.
I also had some thoughts about how consciousness and seance mediums can work in a technical sense which may have some relevance. https://youtu.be/BMD2Mjc7A4A
Donate BitCoin: 18uR2RTHcesBM31e65hraTkpUduLCPTze6
Truth Cypher is a guide to decoding reality. Why is reality and being so preposterous? What could be going on here? For the first episode we read the preface and add commentary.
Decoding a Base Reality Where Conflicting Events are Simultaneously True
By Medium Digital
“A preposterous theory for a preposterous universe.” – The Author
Download latest draft: http://www.mediumdigital.com/truth-cypher/
I originally called this book Synthesis before the writing of it revealed a more descriptive title. Synthesis is the genre I am working in. Artist would be an appropriate description of my background. I am biased towards the right brained, intuitive way of being. Professionally I work as a designer, which is a discipline that merges the analytical with the creative to communicate in media. The idea for a work of Synthesis came to me from hearing Randall Carlson and Graham Hancock on the Joe Rogan podcast. Neither are traditional specialists or experts in the archeological and scientific fields they valiantly challenge. Carlson is a builder by trade, Hancock is a journalist. On that podcast they described what they do in their books and research as synthesis. Synthesis is an empowering mode that gives uncredentialed people like myself a say in the tremendous issues of our times. As a creative person who has studied a wide array of unconventional topics I believe I’m well suited to synthesize information and offer an intuitive perspective that may have some value in how we collectively live our lives. I had a kernel of an insight. By exploring my own mind in the writing of this book that idea has been clarified for me – and for you. I am no expert. I am allowed to explore, come to conclusions and correct later. I invite you to do so. This book is a stop on the great journey. I make no claims that I am the holder of absolute truth when describing events that transpire. But as you’ll find in this book, I do posit that we all hold within us a universe that is true to us. The problem arises when billions of these true universes overlap and produce what we know of as consensus reality.
Contained within Truth Cypher is a preposterous theory for an even more preposterous universe. In short, two (or more…many more) conflicting facts (or events) can be simultaneously accurate. That’s at least what I’m saying. If you allow this as a possibility, events that don’t make sense can be understood in a different kind of way. I believe this is useful. It’s helped me navigate the emotional rollercoaster of “fake news”, terror events, hyperbole and general hysteria of the day. I wrote a book(let). I’m going to be posting it here on Steemit in chapters. I’m also doing readings of each chapter with my own freeform podcast commentary to explain myself. I’ll be including those presentations as YouTube embeds which are sexed up with intuitive image selections in the videos.
To get right down to it, I’m invoking quantum theory and the observer effect to demonstrate that reality does not unfold in a singular, objective way. Multiple conflicting events are true! Maybe even infinity conflicting events are true. We navigate a multiverse by interacting with other sentients. Each sentient mind is a universe. This is revealed to you with every perspective you encounter. Maybe that seems like a big and wild theory, worth many numerous experiments and scientific demonstrations. Sorry, I’m not going to do that. You can look at your own lived experience to demonstrate that to you. That’s not the point of this project. This project is about how to live in this multiverse, your universe simulation, once you’ve realized what reality is.
If this is new information, Google for the Slits Experiment and contemplate what that means. An open mind is essential to receive new information. I probably won’t be saying anything actually new. Perhaps this mode of synthesis will be a new way to combine ideas as old as our species with more recent theories. We’re going to dive into simulation theory, debunk it, and then build on what’s usable. We’ll reference occult symbology. We’ll go deep into morality and Natural Law. We’ll decode the tiny spectrum of reality we’re supposed to believe is reality. We’ll introduce the Truth Cypher, your tool for navigating and simplifying what seems to be a very confusing realm. We’ll use the Truth Cypher to analyze events.
Do I believe what I’m saying? Well, I don’t know if we live in a multiverse actually. The Mandela Effect got me thinking that maybe we do. Even if I’m not sure about the multiverse, I do believe in the Truth Cypher. It works regardless of what kind of universe this is: simulation, flat earth, prison planet, hologram, whatever. The Truth Cypher will give you permission to free your mind from the consensual illusion, to consider that we could do more and be more. You will come to understand that what you believe is not anywhere near as important as what you do and how you act. And of course, how we act co-creates the universe we find ourselves in it.
Take control. Break free. Wake up. Give yourself permission. Learn more. Contemplate morality. Red pill. Explore the mysteries. Unplug. All is mind. All is love. As above, so below. This is game theory for the real world.
Donate BitCoin: 18uR2RTHcesBM31e65hraTkpUduLCPTze6