pjrv : Messages : 932-986 of 4038
#932 From: "PJ Gaenir"
Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 12:05 pm
Subject: Thoughts on Time dennanm
Send Email Send Email
The below is a slightly edited version of something I PEM'd to a
friend recently and thought I would share with the list in case
anybody else had thoughts on this issue.
Like anything else I am just 'thinking out loud' - theorizing - not
trying to come up with some grand answer for everybody, just trying
to better understand myself and my RV process.
I've really been thinking lately, working to better grok some things
based on Joe's comments in the interviews and some conversations I've
had with him.
I think I hit on a fundamental crux of it recently, of where my
thinking process is diverging that was leading me to a different end
result... not understanding why concerning RV he didn't believe in
infinite probabilities as an answer for example.
So.... if I believe in probabilities IN A MANNER that requires I
believe things could "shift" between now and the predicted future...
...then this would mean I had to believe in time. Linear time, no
less. Like point A to point B(split) to point C1 and C2.
But if there is no time, then every single point exists at the same
space/time. So C1 is as separate from C2 as a crop circle target is
from a bridge is from a person, as 2086 is from 1910 and 200 BC --
there are infinite Cs, and Ds, and infinite As and Bs for that
matter, no closer or further apart, because all is one.
So target overlay, sure it exists -- EVERYTHING exists -- but it
exists infinitely, and it can be no 'closer or farther away' than
anything else in the all-that-is if all is one.
So if a viewer suffers overlay issues, it's because the viewer's
beliefs, conscious or not, either in overlay itself or in
the 'difficulty' of getting psi data or in their 'vulnerability' to
others' thoughts or whatever, will *assign* any energy "from another
viewer or tasker about the target" as PART OF what they consider
valid data for the session.
In short, it has nothing to do with 'overlay' and everything to do
with viewer psychology.
So, it is our intent that arbitrarily defines the 'identity' of what
we target and separates out the target from the "infinite- everything-
So, the future event target is "what is true for me at the 'time' of
that event because that is my feedback -- even if technically my
body is no longer 'here' as I know it then, my consciousness
always/everywhere exists." Or something. Hell. Actually I was
doing fine with this theory during my lifespan based on feedback
being the criteria, but floundered a little when considering
predictions outside my lifespan or that had no feedback. :-)
Technically, there may be infinite nows, we may be able to change our
pasts, and there may be infinite futures, and we may have free will
to change all of the above, to do the hokey pokey in and out of all
kinds of realities in the now, on our way to the then. But it
doesn't matter what is true 'now' or any other point in time or any
other reality experience. It matters what is going to be
true 'then' for 'me' at 'that' point in time -- that is the three
point coordinate assigned an identity of 'target'.
So it doesn't matter that this target is point C and there are
infinite point C's -- or that I am B and there are infinite point
B's -- we must BELIEVE there is only one point B and C, and that C
is exactly what we are going to experience, and that is the target.
If we believe anything else at all, we are "expanding the scope of
inclusion of our intent-assignation of what constitutes the target"
to include every other possible probability.
Just like how some will expand it to include every other possible
interpretation of a target (like other psychics, tasker, etc.).
ARV displacement is expanding the scope of our intent to define the
target to include, rather than exclude, the other probability(s).
Because we mistakenly think that all events are equally probable
and/or even that all will happen 'somewhere'. In fact, in order to
consistently find the ONE answer that happens, we must believe there
is ONE answer that happens, and only one that can (which is the one
that does/will), in order to (a) find it and (b) isolate it from the
If the only thing that 'defines' what all is involved in a target is
our own intent --
-- then the only thing relevant is our intent --
our beliefs. It is only "us".
Which makes anything no closer or farther away, no more or less
difficult, than the target of a building down the street, a soldier
in 1812, or the team that wins the pennant in 2004. If all is one,
and we're part of the one, and the only thing defining ANY target is
our intent, then the only issue that is EVER an issue -- other than
the obvious interference of frontloading or feedback stuff (which
impinge on the real issue) -- is viewer psychology.
So it's almost an advanced use of 'suspension of disbelief' where one
is instead specifically setting one's own belief systems to be what
they need for life, or anything in their life like RV: Our belief
systems are our bridges, our castles and our moats, our motorcars
and airplanes and spaceships, and we can creatively build them to be
whatever we need to be.
The 3-room hut that religion gives us, the 1300sq' tract home that
our culture gives us, and the infinite-sky-castle that our
metaphysics give us, none are exactly appropriate for RV, though
some are worse than others. If you close potentials down you're
doomed in RV like maybe you can't view at all; but if you open them
up too far, you're equally doomed, where you can't view accurately
The only way to reliably know that there exists one answer to get
clearly via RV, is to firmly believe there is one clear answer and
we have direct access to it and the ultimate "permission" -- it is
part of us, hence AS us, is both accessible and permissable.
It occurs to me, pondering this, that in fact, NOT deliberately
designing one's belief systems to suit RV if one is going to do it a
lot, could be psychologically devastating. The uncertainty
principle alone could totally whack one into a wide array of
cognitive dissonance problems.
But, like my exploring the "Aspect RV" concepts, I've never heard
anybody talk about *specifically and deliberately designing your own
belief systems to suit RV's needs* although now that I think about
it -- similar to Aspect RV -- indirectly, I could read this from
nearly anything Joe has ever said.
And then for awhile, thinking about all of the above, I thought to
myself, "Yes, but the probability schema I had earlier COULD be
true." Then I realized that technically, *everything is true*
because everything exists, in the now.
Consensus reality is composed of people both psychically and
physically agreeing upon what they are going to call true. The
world is like a psychic chaperone for children to learn what is
allowed to be 'true' and what is 'not'.
But that 'truth' is as arbitrary a definition as what 'identity' one
is going to assign as a target.
So... it all comes back to Binah. In the QBL (Kabbalah).
Polarities. Everything exists yet nothing exists, everything is
true yet nothing is true, everything equally means its opposite.
Everything is what we assign it to be, because 'thing-ness' equally
doesn't as does exist, and our perception of thing-ness relies as
much upon our perception as it does any quality in the thing.
That's why the world reflects us. Why we create reality literally.
The thing hanging on my wall is its own energy, I am my own
perceiving-machine, and what I see as the framed print is really the
combination of me+it=reality. They cannot be separated. When I
removed the "me" from the equation, what I get is "it=everything
else in existence which equally exists but which the 'me' does not
Experiences I had during my Bewilderness days told me all this but I
didn't properly absorb it until just now I think.
So when I change the me, I get newMe+it=differentReality. Seriously,
as stupid as it sounds, maybe even objects can be differently
perceived -- or not perceived at all -- or both we and the object
have a need to change its physical relationship to us -- just based
on changes in the Me.
Maybe some statues or all trees really ARE alive as identities like
the egyptians and other ancient cultures thought, not just "in some
other dimension", but even here, depending on the person perceiving.
So a remote viewer could almost think of themselves like a universal
plug set. Like how these little cases have "port attachments" where
the "interface" is modified to fit, accept, and even translate, the
energy coming in from a wall socket in Germany, Japan, England, or
I used this allegory years ago when thinking about myself, and my
communicating with most any kind of person at their level, in a way
they could relate to, sliding into different 'aspects of self' to
better to/from handle their "input", as well as to better learn and
do certain kinds of work or tasks -- a CEO once told me he knew very
few people like me who could slide easily from warehousing to
operations to accounting to sales to administration to database
programming to investor relations and back again without blinking
and do well in all -- different aspects of me did different kinds of
Hilariously, I actually think these "aspects" are what Dr. Charles
Tart calls "state-specific" in some of his research papers. If they
are not invoked, I honestly do not know all the stuff they know,
don't remember it, don't have the personality for it. But invoke
them, and all the learning and experience I had when they were
dominant comes back to the fore. I have really noticed that my
moving out of the kind of management work that required extreme
variety of work and communication, and doing the mommy and
programmer routine, has vastly changed my personality manifested.
I think all this might also apply to psychic work.
Reply | Forward
#953 From: Bill Pendragon
Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 7:35 pm
Subject: Re: Thoughts on Time docsavagebill
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
I was also wondering whwether Joes flat statement that
ARV was easy despite otheres experiences, might derive
from his unusual belief that time doesn't exist. Or at
least no more difficult than other RV.
Moderator's note: Hi Bill. I think much to do with Joe's RV derives from his
'unusual' beliefs about time and space and so forth. I think a good deal of his
beliefs about time/space resulted from (a) immense RV experience and (b) then
deliberate focus upon belief systems and 'concept frameworks' that worked best
for him in that regard. I think over time he custom-designed himself. Since
'he' is the primary element in his RV. -- PJ
Reply | Forward
#986 From: Weatherly-Hawaii...m
Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 2:21 am
Subject: Re: Thoughts on Time maliolana
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
I have many excuses for not writing more about my sessions...(mainly I
haven't been doing much lately)...I go through many cycles myself...some
are emotional...some are physical...some are financial and all lead to
anxiety... which is not always good for RV...
Another excuse I have... is that I would be writing constantly to you
...saying things like...Yeah...that's exactly what I feel ...or happened
to me ...or I thought I was the only one like that...and then I would
seem like somone else we all know...Like I was just kissing up or
Not that I consider myself your equal in Rv intelligence/education or
anything...but experientially I have had some very similiar self
aware-nesses...almost uncanny...and have very similiar thoughts as many
of those you write about...I read them all and then spend time thinking
about it...You are so damn bright...I have to run to keep up!...
And as you know...I have a vivid imagination and love to use my mind...in
as many ways as possible...
I am much more empathic and psychic than my rv sessions prove...except
for negative psi high...hahah...My intuitions/psi... comes to me out of
the blue and many times...I just know things...I have no idea how or
why...but I do...things that are going to happen...but I rarely give
predictions... because I fear looking like I think I am all that (and a
bag of chips)...and being wrong... hahah...My intuition is not as
trustworthy when judging...I have to switch to analytical/intellectual
Dawna...I really get screwed up when I 'feel' so right about a target...I
just know it is the correct one...and it isn't!...Man I hate that!...yet
in regular life...this feeling of being 'on target' /knowing a reality...
is most frequently correct...
Sharing my session work is not a problem...My ego has grown enough to be
willing to expose myself...I just need to do more of it...I can barely
keep up with all the reading and my 'now' site Freevent...and my troubles
with my last baby...and his refusing to grow up!
I am keeping track of my biorythms and it does correspond with my low
ebbs and flows...In physical/intuitional/emotional/intellectual...I
'believe' that I view best when my intuitional/intellectual are
high...and not so well when they are low...I am still checking this
out...No data per se...but the feeling came to me ...that I needed to
watch this process...and that is why I got the cycle clock to go with
sidereal time (when I can get with it at sidereal time!)
I am doing a few sessions again...so I will try to remember to write
about some of them...but they are real boring compared to so many
others... especially yours...
I don't take notes ...at least not that I keep or keep a record...I do
PIA (ARV) and gotpsi and they keep my data for me...I know I need to get
more serious in my record keeping...I do almost all of my writing/typing
on the internet... hahah
I would love it if we could all do an outbounder together...once a month
One thing that is so wonderful about ARV is one gets a chance to analyze/
judge ones own work...it is not always a good thing...especially when the
intellectual cycles are low...but one learns...I hope...
Love & Light & Laughter