It's Good To Be Back!

If you were to 'go back' 100 years from your current time then the time you experience would be relative to the time that you came from.

The properties of your home-time would still permeate your perceptual facilities, body, etc. Your interpretation of the past-time would be heavily influenced by what you still are.

(e.g., your body, etc., would still be linked to +100-time for a while. Even after you have adjusted, it would still not be the same world as in your picture books, but somewhat different because of the assumptions, etc., you have brought to your perception of it.)

In fact, the world 100 years previous would probably look and feel much like your world of today when you first arrive. It would be a strange, world, indeed. But filled with representations that you can relate to. Much like your dream world.

We perform this feat quite often. We interpret the past-oriented events and energies from our current perceptual framework.

Your memories of past, for example, are actually perceptions of an other now possibility.

It seems much different so you place it in past and give it its own logical narrative. A-B-C=present, etc. (It's the same as we do with space, placing less-relative spaces at greater and greater distances. However, it could be said that, for example, a village in Morocco today is more relative to your 'now' than is your own body 10 years previous.)

To answer your question, 'going back' 10 years would produce a similar effect.

We create the time-line. It's just our brand of logic. Someone else would have a different time-line in their own realm of logic. There is as much logic as there are possibilities.

Evidence of one of these possibilities, such as photos, would certainly be interesting.

But I believe they would create a much less interesting, even technical, kind of debate on the medium rather than the message. I doubt this world needs any more black/white, yes/no camps than it has already.

Something even greater than photos this way comes. I'm going to "push" the current experience into what would be called the distant future.

The world a few very interesting photos or videos would create does not compare to the world an "instructional guide" would create. Why show you a picture when I can just take you there, instead?

Can you imagine a piece of paper that performs the same function as a galaxy filled with supercomputers? Being able to 'teleport' to an other dimension from the extended sound of your own voice? Learning a language 500x more efficient than English and, thus, being able to process information exponentially faster than you currently do as you begin to think in it instead of slow and cumbersome English?

As is said.. "watch this space"

Teleportation?

I received questions from a student about method of execution as well as identification of the elements which he is struggling with.

“So to start with teleportation, well what I call it but using the X model to change perception to another apparent location

1. Would the destination be the elementon?

2. Is my body/mind or destination the Ion structure?

3. Can breathing and heart beat be viable potential energy sources?

4. What are the representations for a geographical location?”

To help answer your questions:

1. The destination is the 'elementon' element. The perspective is a representation much the same way the URL you typed to access this page changes the perspective of the browser. The URL is the unique identifier representing something else. If the URL is too long you could use a link shortener such as http://sh.st/eWGRv to represent the original URL. However, the URL you see in your address bar is itself a representation of the resultant perspective. And the perspective is a representation of something else.

Layers upon layers upon layers of representation.

In your example, the destination is not some where you go. It is a matter of a change in perspective. By combining certain representations together, we change perspectives.

If I were to add a carton of milk next to your computer monitor, your entire perspective would change. Meaning, the carton of milk would have an effect on everything in your perspective.

The destination is also comprised of the other 3 elements (otherwise it would not exist).

However, the main element is representation.

You could think, "What is it filled most with?" in order to determine what element something most is.

"Teleporting" to an empty room of the year 2035 would be much trickier than teleporting to a busy street corner of the same year, though, as it would be more unlikely that the "empty room" group of representations would link with your current ones. (That is to say, more difficult to get there from where you are because there are much fewer links to it.)

2. Anything could be anything. You can use it as such but the result would be different from what you may have wanted. It all depends on your intention. For some purposes, you may want your mind to serve as "potential energy" and in others as "interaction" or "structure".

3. It all depends on perspective. Do you mean the sound of a heart beat, the pulsation, the light, biology, etc? Each perspective may be best served by a different element. As noted in #3, breathing could function as any element. For purposes of changing physical perspective, however, I think breath is more interactive.

Here is the formula: Representation = Structure (Potential Energy squared - potential energy) + Interaction

There's not much you can do with this without the 'what comes next' (my next version).

But it basically says (in one interpretation, and for a specific example) that if you want to time travel to the year 1932 focus, instead, on standing on a street corner with your left arm at a certain angle and legs slightly bent because you are selling newspapers and your feet hurt (structure) the static and air (potential energy) produces ambient sounds and a feeling, especially when the cars drive past you (interaction).

There are an endless variety of 1932's of course. But you may find that each is somehow represented in your 'new' 1932 perspective. You are actually there, as much as anyone 'was' at the time. You have not created the paperboy but are experiencing the value of something that already exists, and interpreting it in your own meaningful way (via your own logic).

The information I release includes the 'bridge' language between English and X (I call it Ec) that can be used as a kind of teleportation device. You can try to imagine the example above now but Ec will be far more effective for this.

Consider it a much needed software upgrade that takes you from 300 baud modems and BBSes to the Internet. Every aspect of your conscious thinking is permeated with the 'sound' of your brain's mother tongue. You can't experience it if it is not represented. You cannot experience the burning sensation of copying your thoughts to the internet until you use and value "xtioghtu", making the representation relative to your experience. (There is no xtioghtu but I used it just for illustrative purposes.) It's as much as the meaning being invented, used, and valued as the device itself. It could be said that there is no difference.

In X each of the above possibilities 3 paragraphs up would be represented in sets, and you would interact with the representations in order to achieve the other perspective. This can then be verbalized to alter perspective, much like what our Ancient Egyptians are doing and pop stars try so hard to do with English.

4. There are no geographical locations. That's more of a cognitive trick. It could be said, for example, that two chairs at 5 feet apart in a corn field are further away from one another in space-time than one of the chairs would be with a pole in a Las Vegas strip club. Both perspectives are logical. However, each is useful for different purposes.

Future humans, so to speak, do not traverse the verse in their "UFOs" thinking of a space as a 1-2-3-place. It's useful when you walk with legs but we should not let our legs do the thinking when we really want to be somewhere.