Thursday 15 May 2008

A Thought About The Virgin Life

Want to throw something I've been mulling over all day into this fine mix of minds!

Q. Could there be only ONE virgin life from which every eventuality stems from?

One particle of consciousness on the objective consciousness field from which bursts forth every conceivable outcome at the point of death? The Bohmian IMAX is therefore not a return but a continuation? It also seems more ‘efficient’, there isn’t trillions of VL’s creating numerous returns but one VL creating all the eventualities? If it all comes back to one VL, then precog, déjà vu etc stems from the same trunk from which all the branches grow? This also puts me in mind of the Big Bang Theory.


Karl Le Marcs said...

Johar: Right, let's have a go at this one!!

You'd probably expect me to say "No", and I am going to. But then if everyone and everything is a product of your own mind then why ask me?

"One life from which every eventuality stems from" is dangerously deistic and philosophically deeply solipsistic.

Bishop Berkeley said something similar (but given his ecclesiastical ties (not neckwear with crosses on) his branch of idealism did tend towards the theological nonsense).

I have difficulty in conceiving (stop giggling) how one subjective consciousness, manifesting into being everyone and everything that has ever existed, is more "efficient" than the supposition that we are indeed all subjective consciousnesses collapsed from the consciousness field.

Indeed if we accept your idea of just one subjective consciousness then why have an objective consciousness field anyway!!

And without other subjective consciousnesses then Quantum Theory and Relativity crash and burn as both require subjective observation, in Quantum Mechanics to collapse the wave function, and in Relativity to be that to which the observation is relative.

And................... (ok I'll stop there for now)

It's enormously (private gag to JoJo) gratifying to see you adopting not just Tony's terminology but also my own into your thinking, and surely that itself points to the objectiveness of ultimate consciousness!

johar said...


I think we have our wires crossed.

What I meant was, one VL for EACH subjective consciousness, not one for everyone and everything!

I am one VL living one of the trillions of permutations that the original created. Each of my Bohmian IMAX continuations contains the eidolon/daemon dyad. The daemon is the biofeedback, if you like, to the main trunk of my existence, existing on the objective consciousness field, therefore having access to innumerable experiences, lives, people etc. And the same applies to each and every one of us.

Is that clearer?

I'm glad you are enormously gratified Karl, I'm just wondering what I'm talking about! My head is tingling from exertion!

rac said...

I've come to think of consciousness as a universal force much like gravity and magnetism. I believe we as conscious beings are both consumers and contributors to this evolving cosmic energy. If one considers consciousness in terms of the electromagnetic spectrum then perhaps we as individuals occupy a set frequency within that spectrum (think radio station). In mathematical terms, Pythagoras said the number One is the only number which truly exists, all else is a division thereof.

Karl Le Marcs said...

Erm, you said "there isn’t trillions of VL’s creating numerous returns but one VL creating all the eventualities?". How is that now "one VL for EACH subjective consciousness, not one for everyone and everything!"?
The two statements are completely opposing each other!
*scratches head*
(must get these nits sorted out!)

The Daemon is, and Tony will correct me if I'm wrong, NOT an objectively aware element of consciousness but a subjectively aware one, meaning it has prior knowledge of the life the Eidolon lived before, not unfettered access to consciousness outside of the Eidolon.

So in CTF the Daemon is the part of subjective consciousness that has lived a life before, and in my theory this subjective consciousness is collapsed from the consciousness field by our sentience.

So no, in answer to your last question, it's not much clearer!


Email me off-blog to prevent anyone else from feeling they can't jump in and comment on your question.

Karl Le Marcs said...

Robert, that's pretty much what I assert in my theory yes.

johar said...

Ok just to clarify and then I need an aspirin:

Tony said: I accept that there had to be a first life when the Bohmian IMAX was recorded. Indeed in order for every possible outcome of a life to be available within the expanded Bohmian IMAX then there needs to have been trillions of Virgin Lives for every Daemon-Eidolon Dyad. One or other version of each of us has a Virgin Life that involves each and every life eventuality.

This is what I meant by trillions of VL's living out every eventuality for ONE life. I suggest the possibility of just one VL per person that creates all the permutations.

RAC: Pythagoras said the number One is the only number which truly exists, all else is a division thereof.

That suggests to me one life (VL) from which everything else comes from which is what I've been hypothesizing.

Karl Le Marcs said...

You're confusing me, which isn't easily done sometimes!

You now say: "I suggest the possibility of just one VL per person that creates all the permutations", which is precisely what my original concept of the Virgin Life was all about in the first place.

My very use of the term "Virgin" was to imply that it was the first time, so we can all only have ONE Virgin Life, from where-on-in we then enter the Daemonically guided returns.

So now you seem to be in full agreement with my original concept of the Virgin Life, which is different to your initial question.

*reminded of the oozalum bird in Carry On Up The Jungle*


rac said...

Karl: Good, then I must be headed in the right direction. I just have to think in terms us kids on the short bus can understand. To be quite frank, you often operate at levels my feeble intellect has difficulty comprehending.

Johar: I would have to agree with you... and Karl too. I think it all depends how you look at it. A genuine paradox indeed.

johar said...

Oh Dear, I seem to have caused mayhem and confusion.

If anyone else has a grasp on what I may be trying to say and can say it better than me, please post as I don't seem to be explaining myself very well at all.


Karl Le Marcs said...

Robert, I sometimes operate at a level that even I have trouble keeping up with - and that becomes really confusing!

rac said...

Inarguably the concept of a single consciousness is older than antiquity itself. Sages have long had experiential knowledge of this realm of the mind. One could even claim the story of Geneses refers directly to this ideology. As humanity has evolved so has our understanding of the Universe. What once was viewed as original sin is now described in terms of quantum mechanics. Makes me wonder what tomorrow will bring. Whatever it is, I suspect this group will play a role in it.

Karl Le Marcs said...

RAC: *nodding*
It is 'inarguably' thus; therefore I agree, Robert.
I think the evolution of Objective Consciousness is time immemorial and the evolution of Subjective Consciousness within is progressive through ITLADian recurrences from the Virgin Life.
I hope to play a minor role in bringing tomorrow into being.

johar said...

Ok, I think I have a handle on where my train of thought came from regarding this post so here goes:

I was thinking about the computer game Tony talked about regarding his Alex Shane post. I got to thinking that the game is just one recording but contains all the possible outcomes. From that I made the analogy that if our VL was the game, it would contain all the possible lifelines within it.

However, if I look at it from another perspective, the game requires a player to activate it. From that I surmise that the game is, in fact the objective consciousness field, the player is the sentient being that brings each and every game into play, hence the theory that we have trillions of VL's to initiate each run.

I got tangled up in my own thought processes there, I think!

Karl Le Marcs said...

Johar: You have emailed me many questions regarding ITLAD and my own theory of Consciousness over the months and you have shown an astonishing grasp but yes, you seem to be doing my old trick of 'over-thinking' which often leads one to being tied in ones own knots!!

Karl Le Marcs said...

One 'game' would infer one 'player' which takes us into Plato's "Prime Mover" concept and ultimately to Creationism.

"One man, one goal, one mission
One heart, one soul, just one solution
One flash of light, yeah one God, one vision

Just gimme gimme gimme Fried Chicken!

We are all of once consciousness but experiencing itself subjectively, I assert as collapsed particles of consciousness from the objective consciousness field waveform.

To suggest One Game, One Player, One Vision is to suggest that none of us have any objective reality at all, as we would all be existent within the Bohmian IMAX of just one subjective consciousness, which is plainly wrong (in my humble opinion of course - that being my separate subjective consciousness to your own, thereby supporting my assertion)

Or something like that
*flounces off*

johar said...

The 'game', represents the objective consciousness field or Akashic records and contains all the thoughts, memories, histories of what has been and what will be for everyone, it's infinite in it's possibilities. The sentient being collapses the wave function of one particle of that game and begins a VL for one strand of the permutation.

I've back pedaled as I realised the original idea was wrong and I was looking at it from the wrong perspective.

To err is human etc etc....

Karl Le Marcs said...

Err !!


rac said...

Quote of the day: "We are all of one consciousness but experiencing itself subjectively, I assert as collapsed particles of consciousness from the objective consciousness field waveform."

Pure poetry Karl. ;-)

Karl Le Marcs said...


Thank You Robert

*bows respectfully and polishes monocle*

Hurlyburly said...

Decafe for everybody...

Karl Le Marcs said...

Now, where have I heard that before?


Hurlyburly said...

It's the joke that keeps on giving...

Much like Lynsey Lohan.

I've been away for a bit and it's really hard to catch up on so many huge topics, as i've said to you before, my responses are usually very breif or fairly substantial!

Much like.... wait.

Karl Le Marcs said...

And did you find "a bit" while you away or is that why you have returned (given the Virgin Life discussion)

johar said...

KARL!! Enough with the innuendo!

I think this is a thread that's come to the end of it's spool, so thank you and goodnight.




Karl Le Marcs said...

Is this "have a go at Karl" day??
Have I missed a meeting??

johar said...

Oh didn't you get the memo, dear!

It was a gentle ribbing only.

Karl Le Marcs said...

Hmmmm, well one begins to wonder why one spends so much time trying to help on occasion!

Hurlyburly said...

Shut up Karl...

Sorry my memo go here late! ;0)

Johar, i think your question stems from the nature of infinity and the way in which this would somehow make things a lot easier to comprehend in many ways? You have one concrete life from which subtle variations branch off from rather than just a vast amount of possibilites?

johar said...

Yes HB,

That's exactly what I meant! Maybe I was just trying too hard to simplify things and got my perspective wrong.

Thanks for putting in a nutshell what I have been rambling on about for far too long.


Karl Le Marcs said...

Hurlyburly and Johar:

Precisely the whole concept behind my Virgin Life ideology!

Please read my original Virgin Life post and subsequent comments here:

Virgin Life Thesis

johar said...

Ok, Tony theorized trillions of VL's per person which represents every possible outcome. I suggested ONE VL per person that records all the possible outcomes in the first life. From that first recording, upon death, all the possible outcomes stream from.

*I predict a riot*

Karl Le Marcs said...

Johar: "trillions of VL's per person" ????????
There can only be ONE Virgin Life for us all individually, hence the virginity!

So of course there is only one Virgin Life per person, which is what we have as our first run-through. Then at the point of death our brain goes through the glutamate flood, which drops our perception 'out of time' and we enter the Bohmian IMAX where our past life review is replayed to us in real time in a holographic, multi-sensory, multi-dimensional way that is indistinguisable to us as any different to 'reality'.

So at the end of our Ultimate Life (that being the one at the end of our recurrences where there is no space-time left for another recurrence to be replayed) THEN all of our outcomes have been replayed and we lose sentience, cease to observe or receive empirical input, and we un-collapse our particle of consciousness which then returns to being a waveform (as Quantum Mechanics tells us).

johar said...

Tony said
'I accept that there had to be a first life when the Bohmian IMAX was recorded. Indeed in order for every possible outcome of a life to be available within the expanded Bohmian IMAX then there needs to have been trillions of Virgin Lives for every Daemon-Eidolon Dyad. One or other version of each of us has a Virgin Life that involves each and every life eventuality.'

Is this where I'm going wrong?

Karl Le Marcs said...

What is wrong with what Tony said?
His "trillions of Virgin Lives FOR every Daemon-Eidolon Dyad" means we all (trillions of us) have a Virgin Life from which the Daemon-Eidolon Dyad is born within our consciousness and which then is in action during our subjectively replayed holographic, multi-sensoral BOHMian IMAX which is indestinguishable to us as reality. All these Virgin Lifes that people lead therfore create a Daemon for the replays. The numbers are the same - Trillions of Virgin Lifes generate Trillions of Daemons.

So to answer your final question, yes, it could well be, but also read my emails to your re the field.

johar said...

I'm not suggesting there is anything wrong with what Tony said, Karl, I'm questioning my interpretation.

I read it as trillions of VL's PER PERSON playing out every eventuality.

'One or other version of each of us has a Virgin Life that involves each and every life eventuality.'

I was simply after clarity and got into a knot.

Karl Le Marcs said...

Johar: JoJo, I'm trying to help you untangle that knot!

A "life" is subjective, and thus a Virgin Life can only logically exist once for every person.

From this Virgin Life then stems the many, many, many recurrences within the Bohmian IMAX.
(and this is the same for every individal person - One VL each, then the recurrences).

From this Virgin Life, we then experience a multitude of recurrences and then I assert we reach our Ultimate Life, and at the end of that life THEN all our subjective lives eventualities have been played out and we return to universal consciousness.

johar said...

I'm still not sure I'm getting it, I would like to hear Tony's comments as well at some point.

Karl Le Marcs said...

Johar: Email him and ask him!

I'm sorry if I'm not helping. I rather thought I was!

And email me with why you are "still not sure I'm getting it", and I'll try to help off-blog.

SM Kovalinsky said...

I am too tired to backtrack in terms of semantics and definitions, but did want to add with regard to all terms Le Marcsian: K., You are a superb logician, unbeatable, and your dexterity with these things will win the day: the argument will never be lost on your side.

Karl Le Marcs said...

Susan Marie: CRIKEY !!!

How can I argue against that?

*leaves room scratching head to enjoy something lush from my Quantum Fridge*

SM Kovalinsky said...

No argument is needed. KLLM: Having read through the exchanges, I see your definitions are precise and clearly executed by you: It is always a problem with words, meanings, semantics, which may have the best of us running on circular arguments. Patience, then, and I think all will come clear. But I do mentally salute you for being such "an old Professor" at the tender age of 37!

johar said...

Well said Susan Marie,

Whilst we are all unique, Karl is a stand alone design and his patience is admirable!

Thank you for all your help, Karl, it has been invaluable.

Karl Le Marcs said...

Susan Marie: Thank You !!

Coming from one with a philosophical mind, such as yourself, that is hugely gratifying.

All I do is try to help.

Karl Le Marcs said...

Johar: You are enduringly welcome.

SM Kovalinsky said...

JOHAR: Please see that I know whereof I speak: I spent years in academia, running myself in circles with definitions and was a true vexation to my venerable professors: I still get hooted off the floor at meetings for my mania for clinging to things which I can see, but don't fit in with the law of the logic. I am very much your ally! K. is human dynamite, and very few can tangle with him---I stand clear most of the time!!! But "JoJo" you are often ahead of me with the quantum theory--takes me too long and I leap when I have it clear, which is seldom enough!!! Thank you for all your sweet comments.

Karl Le Marcs said...

*dons bright yellow hard-hat and oversized gingham jacket*




Susan Marie: Those that hoot you off are functioning with a great loss.

And Quantum Theory is not all it's quarked up to be!


SM Kovalinsky said...

Well, KLLM, that is a compliment indeed, and coming from so explosive a logician, "so capital a king", who might well be hooting me off the floor at some symposium. But I will let it stand, as sweet praise --and i am off to bed before i have a seizure from 57 hours of no sleep.

Karl Le Marcs said...

Susan Marie: I would never DREAM of "hooting" you off the floor at a Symposium or any such place Dear Lady, and those that do so know not of what they hoot!
Or Some Such!

And anyway, it may well be me that gets hooted off given gags the quality of my last one!!

Karl Le Marcs said...

*Taxi for original topic please*

SM Kovalinsky said...

I am sure the original purpose can easily be regained: I thought the "gag" was very charming and clever, and very nice comic relief to foil my style of discourse, and always welcome. I think I am the one who tends to be a bit "into the air". . .

Karl Le Marcs said...

Susan Marie: *bows respectfully*

"Into the air" thinkers are much needed though Susan Marie; things have a different look from up there and a fresh perspective can be illuminated on to us on the ground.

Humour and deep-thinking are required in tandem, to provide balance and I aim to provide an "A-Ha" moment of inspiration or clarity from a "Ha-Ha" moment of dubious gags.