Anderz

One thing I noticed about the crystallized ego is that it runs on suffering. So in theory it should be possible to feel good in most circumstances. And that most (maybe all) of the suffering is caused by the crystallized ego. Shunyamurti has a new video that I will take a look at with this idea in mind.

Our civilization is a very young one. And during the first stages of development the akasha is deliberately limiting itself for the purpose of growth and development. And civilizations need to struggle on their own for the most part in their development in order to become unique. Otherwise civilizations would merely become clones of each other without additional creativity. And the akasha is expanding at an accelerating pace, and many more universes are born the further time progresses. Our big bang is just a recent branch on a whole expanding multiverse tree. So the probability that we are one of the newest universes and one of the newest civilizations is high. From a biblical perspective the fall of humanity is the akasha limiting itself into a state of separation. And the Apocalypse, which means unveiling, is the Revelation of the intelligence of the akasha. Similarly in Hinduism, we are currently in Kali Yuga and will enter Satya Yuga, or have already entered that new age: Nothing special happened in 2012, but if Satya Yuga starts very gradually, then it's possible that 2012 actually was the start of Satya Yuga!

Another interesting possibility is that psychedelics activate the intelligence of the akasha. Only temporary and only as a small glimpse yet enough to profoundly change a person's consciousness during the time period when the psychedelics is active. Psychedelics are then similar to water in that they provide a controlled mechanism for moving from ordinary physical matter and akasha in a state of suppressed intelligence to a state of akasha where more of its intelligence is activated.

Oh! Could it be that water is the substance on earth that first will be transformed? A highly speculative idea, but I came to think about how water already has amazing properties and the Bible talks about being reborn out of Spirit and water. In that case, water is the first substance to transcend the Lego brick simple state of ordinary matter. And the reason for that is as Mark Passio said, that material reality is where the rubber meets the road. So one cannot cheat and jump ahead into pixie dust. There has to be an actual and practical transformation that transcends and includes the ordinary state of physical matter.

Then what about compatibility with materialism? Are for example atoms real? Yes, but atoms are in my model more like Lego bricks. Having say 100 different chemical elements is similar to having 100 different kinds of Lego bricks. So the atoms are real. It's just that atoms are a very limited case of what reality is capable of. The intelligence of the akasha can turn a single atom into a 7 foot tall unicorn made of pixie dust.

Conspiracy info tends to get too messy too quickly, so that's a good reason for excluding it. Or else it gets too confusing. I just wanted to throw in a little bit of that to cover all the bases in relation to science. But another thing that I heard Leo saying is that 1+1=2 is only a relative truth. Can't the natural numbers be seen as platonic forms, meaning that they timelessly exist as absolute Forms?

I think that Leo dismisses conspiracy theories too easily. To label people as conspiracy theorists to be burned at the stake figuratively speaking is to miss the deeper manipulation in society. For example modern science was probably invented by the Vatican as controlled opposition, just like how the Vatican created Protestantism as controlled opposition.

@Thewritersunion China will from now on be the spearhead towards globalization with its Belt and Road and Made in China 2025 initiatives. Granted, the U.S. has been the innovation powerhouse for the last century, but that has already served its purpose. China has thousands of years of political experience but it lacks the creative capacity that the U.S. has had. Remember, the U.S. is a fairly recent development historically, stemming from a series of power moves from Ancient Rome to the Vatican to the British Empire and then to the U.S. This has enabled the U.S. to become more innovative, creative and unique than China which ironically is much more conservative than the west ever was. I love the U.S. progress but now it's time for globalization and China is like a cat playing with a mouse compared to the much younger U.S.

@Thewritersunion Globalization.

If Biden wins I will abandon U.S. politics and focus on China. Dinosaur armchair Apple and the rest of U.S. tech is toast anyway with their stone age products.

Here is a statement from the horse's mouth, the editor in chief of The Lancet, one of the most prestigious medical journals in the world:

Another thing Leo hasn't mentioned is alternative research in science. For example the systemic and inherent incentive for the healthcare industry, which by the way probably funds the major scientific research in this area, is to keep people as sick as possible and for as long as possible so that they can maintain and increase their profit. Cardiovascular disease is a huge problem in the western world. Does the healthcare industry benefit from solving that problem? Not at all. So it's beneficial for them to teach an outdated and false model of the cardiovascular system to students who then later become medical doctors. One expert said that the heart is actually not a pump. The heart is more like a break, he said. And compare it with a tree for example. Does the tree have a pump at the bottom to pump water into the leaves at the top? Of course not. Similarly, in the human cardiovascular system the arteries have thick musculature and a high pressure. Veins have thinner musculature and medium pressure. The capillary beds have zero musculature and low pressure. So how is the blood transported from the capillary beds to the veins and then into the heart? If the idea of the heart being a break is true, then the blood is sucked automatically through a capillary effect together with venous valves and musculature movements in the veins into the heart, which in turn causes a vortex movement of the blood and into the elastic aorta to balance the pressure.

Aha! I now have something falsifiable. Akasha is infinite yet its manifestation is always finite. This means that the appearance of akasha is "pixelated" into a smallest possible distance. The smallest distance gets smaller and smaller infinitely fast, yet in our universe the limit is the Planck length. So if it can be shown by empirical measurements that in our universe movements can be smaller than the Planck length then that falsifies my model. It's impossible for akasha to move in smaller steps than the Planck length in our universe.

I'm not sure about falsifiability but I think it's a valid claim to demand that a hypothesis should be falsifiable. This means that a case must be shown where the idea can be proven wrong (or at least strongly indicate that it's wrong). One idea I got is that I can add to my model so that it becomes falsifiable. I don't mean ad hoc modifications, but making the model more specific. One such addition is that akasha is structured as holons. I doubt that I can make the model falsifiable that way but it's a start. I will try to come up with more constraints to add to make my model falsifiable.

The death drive (thanatos) is the crystallized ego being a contracted bundle of akasha. We are akasha which is changeless at its foundation. Death, as in extinction, would mean that we would turn from akasha to something that's not akasha. Impossible. So death is an illusion, but there can be the experience of the body dying so I'm not ruling that out. However in theory it would be possible to overcome even physical death since everything is akasha, for any afterlife would be akasha too, so physical death may be unnecessary.

One curious difference between the akasha model and traditional science is that we ourselves are the akasha. So we can't for example experiment with akasha without experimenting on and with ourselves. And we can't communicate with akasha other than talking to ourselves, haha. This seeming wacky situation is actually consistent with nonduality. And as Leo has pointed out, even in mainstream science what actually happens is that we are doing even that science within our own subjective consciousness perspective, not as something external and objective "out there".

It's useful when a scientific model can make predictions, and some may even claim that it's necessary. One prediction my akasha model makes is that in theory it is capable of producing all kinds of miracles. Shapeshifting a human body into a coffee table for example is possible, literally, physically. Lol, that's even more radical than most far-out New Age ideas, but it's a real prediction. Should more and more miracles manifest in our world, that's consistent with my akasha model. However that is still NOT proof of my idea being correct. Because there can always be other explanations. And it's tricky to falsify the akasha model since the akasha can "play dumb" as in behaving like ordinary physical matter following simple natural laws.

Can I make my idea of akasha match mainstream science? Not exactly, but in the Wolfram Physics Project they use a model that is a simple network of interconnected nothingness one might say. That's exactly compatible with my idea of akasha. What is missing is that the Wolfram model is mechanical in the sense that it follows computational rules. My model of akasha is that it is "controlled" by infinite intelligence. But I can modify the Wolfram model and make it exactly the same as akasha! Instead of having the network expand according to a fixed rule I can have it expand according to infinite intelligence. My model is still purely atheistic because the intelligence is in the structure of the network itself, not some external being or other divine intervention. Does my model remove God from the picture? No, because I can define God as the intelligence of the network of reality. To religious and spiritual people that might seem like a cop out since my model is still atheistic, but I think it's a useful definition of God. And that's why I put the word "controlled" in quotation marks, because it's not an external God controlling things, instead God is the control itself.

In this video Brian Scott reads what Manly P. Hall said about the Akashic record. It's an East Indian term he Hall said. The word akasha means mental matter. I found that very interesting. It's similar to how I have speculated about akasha being all content in consciousness, so in a sense that's mental matter. This together with Leo's videos about science inspires me to examine akasha from a scientific perspective.

Leo missed the legal aspects in his videos about science. Scientists are today's high priests. Given that science and academia can fight off whistleblowers, they are immune from legal prosecution. Why? Because the experts used in court and in legal proceedings are themselves "high priests" from the same crooked gang,

One example of lack of communication between silos in science is that I often hear experts who are not biologists talking about genetics and how that controls our lives. I'm not a biologist but I know that in biology it has been known for decades that epigenetics plays a crucial role. Genes are basically just blueprints for proteins. The Human Genome Project showed that humans have about the same number of genes as a worm.

@electroBeam Okay, I will take another look at Leo's new video. I didn't catch the part about overspecialization.

In a satsang today Roger Castillo had an interesting point about how we are too trapped in doing things according to fixed schedules. It makes us mechanical and slaves to calendar time. Roger recommended doing what we feel like doing. I will experiment with that and question the need to follow calendar time.

My impression is that Leo was talking about how science today is too compartmentalized. I agree that one needs to look at both details and the bigger picture, but in science there is a lack of communication and understanding between separate silos.

One way of looking at it is the form of holons. And holons form holarchies. So depending on the level of the holarchy one is looking at it from, someone becomes a specialist or holistic. For example someone studying cellular respiration in mitochondria is a specialist compared to someone who studies whole cells. And someone who studies whole cells can be seen as a specialist compared to someone studying whole multicellular organisms.