ACIM Journal

[Anderz]

Could it be possible that our universe is a computer simulation? In that case we would be living in a third or higher order reality. My take on that is that it's unlikely that it could be some computer simulation that those running it can switch off at any time. Because if as Nick Bostrom I think it was says, that the probability that we are living in computer simulation is astronomically high, then it seems to me that the probability of the universe in which our simulation is running is ALSO probably a computer simulated universe and so on, and what is the likelihood that none of those simulations have been shut down for billions of years? So I think it's very unlikely that our universe is a computer simulation, but okay maybe the past history of our universe can be simulated without the need for actual time to go on for billions of years, so I'm not 100% sure.

Now Leo has a new video where he says he proves that our universe is NOT a computer simulation! I'm very curious about how he has managed to do that and if his proof sounds valid to me so I will check out his new video now.

[Anderz]

The simulation hypothesis seems to be unfalsifiable. In that case I was wrong about saying that Leo says he is providing proof for it being false.

My new take on it in relation to the infinite complexity I described earlier, is that a computer simulated universe is a more complicated hypothesis than infinite complexity itself. Occam's Razor says that the simplest theory is the most probable one. This means that my model is more probable since it's extremely simple and describes complexity directly out of difference observing itself.

Also, it seems to me that our universe is a white hole of a black hole in a parent universe. Our Big Bang is a recent branch in a whole multiverse tree of universes which only needs one root universe to spawn an astronomical and growing number of universes. That too is a simpler explanation than some messy computer simulations.

[Anderz]

And even if it would be that our universe is a computer simulation. I strongly doubt that, but even then my model is still valid since it describes the foundation of reality. Leo says that consciousness is the foundation of reality. Consciousness is that which imagines distinction, Leo said. I have consciousness defined as an on/off state yet the potential of consciousness is the foundation of reality in my model so it's basically the same as Leo said I think.

 

[Anderz]

Leo asked in his latest video what a distinction is made of. Another simple question.  My answer is that reality is difference observing itself. That is the potential for consciousness, so consciousness is absolute in that sense. This means that reality is made of distinction (difference) and not the other way around. So the distinction is the foundation of reality and isn't made on top of some other foundation.

[Anderz]

One curious difference between my model and what Leo has been saying is that in my model consciousness is a property of difference observing itself. And Leo's explanation, if I have understood it correctly, says that difference is a property of consciousness.

If so, which explanation is correct? Maybe they are the same just like how left and right define each other. If not, then I prefer my explanation because Leo's brings in the concept of nothingness which is redundant in my model. Difference observing itself is a platonic form/structure/principle or a "no-thing", but not nothing.

[Anderz]

If reality is based on difference, then what is sameness? Are for example two hydrogen atoms the same? The answer is that they are only the same when we enter the world of concepts, and that's a third order phenomenon. With concepts we can say that the two atoms are the same type of chemical element. Fundamentally the atoms are different. Even two quantum entangled particles are different since they have unique and distinct positions in space.

[Anderz]

Freedom is a result of increasing consciousness. At first it might seem to us that being an independent individual is maximum freedom, but that's an ego mistake. Because the ego is an experience of separation it causes huge amounts of conflict, fear and suffering. So that's actually a very limited form of freedom.

With a collective consciousness we start functioning as a single organism, and that's a huge evolutionary leap of increasing consciousness. With a collective consciousness we are able to function without the ego friction so that results in a vast increase of freedom on both an individual and collective level. More freedom means less suffering and therefore increased capacity for consciousness. With suffering consciousness has less capacity.

[Anderz]

What do I mean by increased consciousness? How can an on/off state be increased? It can't. So what I mean is like what is described by the mainstream Integrated Information Theory of consciousness. The higher value of Phi an information system has, the more consciousness. So it's in relation to second order reality that consciousness can be lower or higher.

And for humanity to significantly increase the value of Phi requires an integration of our separate Phi values as human beings. Notice that the value Phi is not only about increasing the amount of information processing and connectivity. For example the internet is massively connected and has huge information processing power but essentially zero value of Phi I think. So the internet is as conscious as a rock basically.

And even with Ray Kurzweil's prediction of us humans connecting our minds to a big computer cloud, that's still very little if any increase of the value of Phi. A collective consciousness on the other hand results is a huge increase of Phi, or else it would be a collective unconscious with zero Phi value.

[Anderz]

I like how Leo often is talking about absolute vs relative, not as a duality. Ken Wilber pointed out that those who say that "everything is relative", that statement is itself an absolute statement, so they disprove their own claim. Instead of a duality the absolute includes the relative, while the relative does not include the absolute.

Absolute vs relative as a duality only exists on the level of concepts. And even though concepts are always relative in a sense, they can point to the actual absolute which is not relative.

In my model, the fundamental difference is absolute. Sameness on the other hand is always relative, since sameness is a second order phenomenon. And difference as second order is also relative. So there is a distinction between absolute difference which is fundamental and relative difference which is second or higher order.

[Anderz]

There is a difference between unmanifested (first order) information and manifested (second and higher order) information. Take as an example two strings of binary information A=1011010 and B=1011010. That's the same string of information on the manifested level: A = B. But notice that when we look at the deeper connection we see that A and B are concepts represented as text. And clearly the text describing A is different than the text describing B when we look at it as pixels on a computer screen. The text for A is at a different position on the computer screen than the text for B.

Unmanifested information is always different while manifested information can be either different or the same. When information is destroyed such as deleting a file on a hard drive it's only the manifested information that is destroyed. The unmanifested information on the other hand is always indestructible. And interestingly, mainstream physicist Leonard Susskind said that the deepest physical law he knows of is that information is indestructible. Also, unmanifested information is fully interconnected into a wholeness while manifested information can conceptually be treated as separate bits.

[Anderz]

Okay, enough of theory for me at the moment. I will focus on body awareness practice. I have already posted this video where Leo talks about body awareness, but it's useful I think to remind oneself. Even ACIM is only practical on an intellectual level essentially with all the lessons. Eckhart Tolle said that there is an energy field that gives life to the physical body. That sounds like a morphic field that Rupert Sheldrake has said controls biology etc. And Nassim Haramein said that our consciousness is connected within our bodies to the vacuum energy which is a much deeper level than the physical atoms. So it seems that body awareness practice is a method for how to actually connect to the deeper reality and higher consciousness.

 

[Anderz]

Now I remember! Leo's body awareness video reminded me that both the mind and the body need to be relaxed. Eckhart Tolle has useful tips about body awareness practice, but it's only from Leo I have heard about the need for relaxing both body and mind, And I assume Leo means relaxing both body and mind at the same time since they are connected and actually a oneness and ultimately a oneness with all of existence.

[Anderz]

I found another useful video related to body awareness by Leo where he talks about blocks in the body from about 7 minutes into this video:

 

[Anderz]

I discovered that actually, the effort to relax the body also needs to be relaxed! Because that's the ego delusion of individual responsibility and willpower leading to delusional struggle which itself is a tension.

[Anderz]

And now I discovered another thing that can be added to Lazy Yoga. Jesus Christ said something like: deny thyself. The whole ego self is a part of the global ego which is build on deception. So what is needed is to do nothing! Because the whole ego needs to be dissolved. As Jesus said and what ACIM is talking about, the ego self has to be replaced. And even to do nothing is deception, because that again would be ego action and willpower. And even to practice mindfulness as a detached nonjudgmental observer, even that is ego action. So it's about a total relaxation of the separate self. I will take a look at Leo's videos about self-deception which sounds like they could be related to this.

It's important to not throw out the baby with the bathwater, so the valuable things in the ego need to be preserved, transcended and included in integral way, but it's not the ego that is doing it.

[Anderz]

When Lazy Yoga is successful the tensions in body and mind automatically dissolve. It's the collective consciousness of humanity that is doing the job for us. The collective consciousness is itself powered by an automatic process but it's a much larger and more powerful process than the individual ego. The collective consciousness includes the individual so it knows all of the individual egos and how to transcend, dissolve and include them.

[Anderz]

My New Year's resolution is that I will be assimilated by the collective consciousness. 

[Anderz]

Oh, well, if the process is automatic I might as well get back to the topic of theory. The endless string observing itself is the largest holon, like an Omega Point an infinite number of years into the future. That creates an intelligent pull from the future moving creation into larger and larger and ever more complex holons. A collective consciousness, which is a larger and much more complex holon than the individual consciousness, is therefore inevitable. It's not like the horrible hive mind of the Borg in Star Trek, BUT assimilation IS inevitable. Resistance is futile.

[Anderz]

And indeed, I found that ACIM says the same thing:

Quote

"Christ’s vision is the Holy Spirit’s gift, God’s alternative to the illusion of separation and to the belief in the reality of sin, guilt, and death. It is the one correction for all errors of perception; the reconciliation of the seeming opposites on which this world is based. Its kindly light shows all things from another point of view, reflecting the thought system that arises from knowledge and making return to God not only possible but inevitable." - ACIM, What It Says [my emphasis]

Quote

"Would you not offer shelter to God’s Will? You but invite your Self to be at home. And can this invitation be refused? Ask the inevitable to occur, and you will never fail." - ACIM, Lesson 137

 

[Anderz]

ACIM explains how our perception of the world will change. Aaron talks about that in his new video: