Reality by Nicholas Hosein (my new book)

[Ostronomos]

I think the easiest book to write is a philosophical text.  

Case in point:: Believe it or not, this guy once took a college philosophy course. Lectures were boring as hell but I loved the smaller seminar groups. Professor H led my group and he got around to telling us he was writing a book, blah, blah, blah. I asked him why it was taking so long and mentioned that a book on philosophy could be written during a weekend. He scoffed, I laughed, he challenged and I wrote the book on a weekend. It was a huge hit with the philosophy department, they talked about it for weeks on end, maybe they still use it.. Top marks for you know who.

It was simple really. I took a stack of blank typing paper, 50 sheets in all. On the the first page was the title, ? in this case. That was followed by 48 blank pages. On page 50 was typed the letter I followed by a period (.). A one word book, 50 pages long(48 of them blank) complete with a question mark for a title, the 50th page containing a capital I plus a period for the ending.

The most popular analysis was that the title represented every question that could ever be asked with a lot of emphasis on the beginning, the blank pages was the sum of our knowledge (again centred around beginning), 'I' was the self and the period represented the one thing the physical self knows ...... it will end.

One symbol, one word and one punctuation mark was all that was needed.

Although there is evidence that the 'I' has an end, this does not mean we should waste our lives in the futility of the acceptance that death is final. There is a great deal of knowledge to be had and with the advancement of technology we may one day find ourselves cheating death.

---

"I want to contain the universe in my head", a comment on Christopher Langan

Christopher Langan is well know for making that statement. He is said to have authored the CTMU, a logical proof of the existence of God. Although I myself have demonstrated that God can configure Himself as reality, mapping Himself perfectly isomorphic to reality as a mind, certain questions continue to elude me. I have ascertained answers regarding life after death based on experiences, both mystical and material alike, that were in opposition to each other. Such that I am increasingly finding myself on a middle-ground. Langan holds that there is indeed a life after death. I can see how this is possible. Consciousness is known to affect photon particles and so has an external reach. But at the same time, the identity construct has been shown to be an illusion. If there is more to our subjective reality than the identity, and much more at that, then it may mean that life after death is real. If a God can exist as a disembodied consciousness that maps itself onto the universe, then why does the death of the body have to be the end of life? If consciousness is not brain dependent, then this may indeed be the case. It has been shown that death is the ending of thought or the cessation of life. It is the ending of the egoistic duality. If fatality is truly contradictory to the universe's benevolent self-designing tendency, then built-in mechanisms for survival may indeed be part of the essential nature of the universe. Humans act towards self-preservation. But then, so does God. For instance, when the universal mind of God is generated by the observer's consciousness, feedback on the status of one's well-being is ascertained. Such as for example if one's life was in the balance and their consciousness were to generate God's mind. It is because the life of every human being as an individual is tremendously important, even glorious. As dictated by their spiritual being. And God's feedback is always welcome, as it is always of great importance.

Returning to the question of life after death. I am going to maintain that the middle-ground applies to reality. Such that under certain conditions there exists disembodied consciousness and no disembodied consciousness. At least from the Classical perspective of Physics. From the Quantum perspective their is indeed an after-life. Such that when the body and brain shuts down, the information residing in the microtubules of the brain transcends from one universe to another. As claimed by Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff.

[Zinjanthropos]

Although there is evidence that the 'I' has an end, this does not mean we should waste our lives in the futility of the acceptance that death is final. There is a great deal of knowledge to be had and with the advancement of technology we may one day find ourselves cheating death.

You're missing the point. You are an author. It is your job to capture the reader's attention. So far you have failed miserably. Most of us don't sit with a thesaurus or dictionary while reading a book. Although you may think the subject matter is thought provoking as anything befitting a genius or MENSA member, it does not speak to the general public. Even academia whinces when claims are made that have never been proven or peer reviewed.  You call it logic and therefore feel exempt from such criticism whereas most of us see it as nonsense hidden amongst a linguistic morass of flotsam & jetsam afloat upon the Sea of Incredulity.. One sentence, as mentioned earlier, is enough of a reason to put the book down....forever. 

Not saying it won't appeal to everyone. Some may be willing to lie and not hurt your feelings. Other than that, make sure family gets a copy.

And change the title. Has Reality for Dummies been taken?

[Ostronomos]

Although there is evidence that the 'I' has an end, this does not mean we should waste our lives in the futility of the acceptance that death is final. There is a great deal of knowledge to be had and with the advancement of technology we may one day find ourselves cheating death.

You're missing the point. You are an author. It is your job to capture the reader's attention. So far you have failed miserably. Most of us don't sit with a thesaurus or dictionary while reading a book. Although you may think the subject matter is thought provoking as anything befitting a genius or MENSA member, it does not speak to the general public. Even academia whinces when claims are made that have never been proven or peer reviewed.  You call it logic and therefore feel exempt from such criticism whereas most of us see it as nonsense hidden amongst a linguistic morass of flotsam & jetsam afloat upon the Sea of Incredulity.. One sentence, as mentioned earlier, is enough of a reason to put the book down....forever. 

Not saying it won't appeal to everyone. Some may be willing to lie and not hurt your feelings. Other than that, make sure family gets a copy.

And change the title. Has Reality for Dummies been taken?

I am an amateur author who is doing his best to explain his assertions. Your assertion that it does not capture the attention of the reader is noted and appreciated. However, I shall plunge forth into the unknown with this book just to say that I have written a book. The overall content of the book is rarely meant to entertain, rather to educate. As it is knowledge of such great importance that humanity should receive it. That is my take on the content.

[Ostronomos]

Although there is evidence that the 'I' has an end, this does not mean we should waste our lives in the futility of the acceptance that death is final. There is a great deal of knowledge to be had and with the advancement of technology we may one day find ourselves cheating death.

You're missing the point. You are an author. It is your job to capture the reader's attention. So far you have failed miserably. Most of us don't sit with a thesaurus or dictionary while reading a book. Although you may think the subject matter is thought provoking as anything befitting a genius or MENSA member, it does not speak to the general public. Even academia whinces when claims are made that have never been proven or peer reviewed.  You call it logic and therefore feel exempt from such criticism whereas most of us see it as nonsense hidden amongst a linguistic morass of flotsam & jetsam afloat upon the Sea of Incredulity.. One sentence, as mentioned earlier, is enough of a reason to put the book down....forever. 

Not saying it won't appeal to everyone. Some may be willing to lie and not hurt your feelings. Other than that, make sure family gets a copy.

And change the title. Has Reality for Dummies been taken?

I am an amateur author who is doing his best to explain his assertions. Your assertion that it does not capture the attention of the reader is noted and appreciated. However, I shall plunge forth into the unknown with this book just to say that I have written a book. The overall content of the book is rarely meant to entertain, rather to educate. As it is knowledge of such great importance that humanity should receive it. That is my take on the content.

A thought provoking example of  the undoubted knowledge of life after death would be me walking through Ontario Shores two years ago with a neck bone injury and feeling the injury bordering on fatal then suddenly seeing the light in the hallway drop down to a sad and gloomy color as a sign of acknowledgement by an unknown source of intelligence (we all know it was God) and relaxing and not putting so much pressure on the injury by bending forward and walking.

[Ostronomos]

One Quantum World or Two?

Everything is Quantum. It is just that effects are most pronounced in extreme conditions. We must venture into the extremes in order to experience the Quantum effects of nature. Quantum Mechanics is essentially a metaphysical theory. For it defies common sense of the everyday world and assumes a physical account of phenomenon that escapes everyday experience. The experimentally verified phenomenon of the Quantum world demands that we abandon our common sense interpretations of the world. For example, we do not exist in multiple places at once, yet in Quantum Mechanics, a single particle can assume multiple locations at once. These phenomenon require us to adjust our understanding of the nature of reality and to adopt an original perspective of reality. If the world of the Quantum suddenly became intertwined with our everyday Classical experience and preconceptions, there would be no obstacles to accepting its weird implications. But this is not the case, we are living with the belief that Quantum phenomenon are strange exceptions or even glitches in reality. But this consensus reality is not what it appears. It is the Quantum perspective that should be adopted and the Classical view abandoned. This is because the dominant experience of everyday reality exists as an indistinguishable blend of phenomenon that is only effective descriptions at the macroscopic scale. It is in other words in a sense not real. There is a level of reality that should be pierced in order to see the ultimate truth. Most people do not get to see it in their lifetimes. The implications of Quantum Mechanics, although believed to be restricted to the sub-atomic world, are vast and wide. It broadens our understanding of reality as we are asked to revise our perspectives. The observer plays an essential role in the creation of reality and is the center of the metaphysical world. When I refer to the metaphysical world I refer to the world of God. We are otherwise blind to it and this consensus reality is a blind and ignorant one.

[Ostronomos]

Chapter 2

Reality as God

God exists in a higher dimension (90 degrees to our ordinary one) which is why we are cut off from Him. With our access to this God comes access to all manner of supernatural entities. It is quite possible to interact with this God. However not everyone is granted this capability. An equation that proves God's existence would look incredibly simple and elegant. Let's try it: Reality = 1 × God. We can make extensions to this equation by stating that reality is a subset of God. Careful thought would reveal that this makes God identical to reality. Yet another equation that links reality with God is an equation that relates the ability to see the two. Since both reality and God are hard to see they would be inextricably interlinked. We rarely see God because reality is hard to see, G <-> S <-> R. Where S is sight, And so we have a mapping between reality and God.

The demand for proof reveals that God is hidden and so has a passive role in existence. But if God were recognized or sensed and accessed would this necessarily make him obvious to sight? It would not. He would still elude us in terms of sight. He must be sensed spiritually. Subjectively. In such an event the observer's subjective reality becomes a beacon for supernatural activity. All manner of demonic forces may attack depending on whether or not one rejects them with mere thought. This is the world outside the Matrix. A hazardous existence it is when one walks the fine line in which worlds are balanced by one's internal state. Double jeopardy in every sense of the word.