EIGHTH DYNAMIC 2

lexmark

Patron with Honors
In my studies of consciousness within quantum physics there is no doubt in my mind that there is an 8th dynamic or a creative power which some call God. When I mention God do not under any circumstances confuse it with the God of the religions of the world. My original 2 posts “Scientology is obsolete” and “The 8th Dynamic” in which I introduced quantum physics has brought about a fair amount of interest and response. Many of the responses have been written in a manner which is difficult for the ordinary guy to understand such as the observer effect, uncertainty principle and particle physics. This is a complex subject and I will try and keep my writing as simple as possible.

Hubbard labeled it as the 8th dynamic but he did not create it. Goswami labeled it as “Monistic Idealism” it could also be labeled the “Science of Consciousness”. In this science people are more important than material objects. Putting mirrors in space to combat global warming could just as well be done by taking responsibility for the planet like gaining an understanding that it is our actions that are causing this phenomenon. If we decide to stop burning fossil fuels and all the other actions that go toward climate change we could change it. What I write here is not just my opinion or think, it is based on actual experiments by various scientists. I will try and give the experiments wherever I can.

There are six billion of us on this planet each having our own ideas and thoughts. These opinions and thoughts are part of Consciousness, many of these opinions and thoughts are wrong and are ego produced. In our religions the image of God as a human being up in heaven is incorrect. There are many scientific books on this subject by various authors; I have chosen one of these scientists as I have a few of his books and because I like his material. He is Dr. Amit Goswami, professor of theoretical physics at Oregon University. Another author Rupert Sheldrake, one of the world’s most innovative biologists and writers is best known for his theory of morphic fields and morphic resonance, which leads to a vision of a living, developing universe with its own inherent memory. Goswami has introduced the concept of Quantum Consciousness meaning consciousness outside of time and space. It appears that it is this consciousness that guides evolution and is involved with the process of our evolving universe and life within it. As I understand it, it is this quantum consciousness that is God or the 8th dynamic or however you wish to label it. The subjects by these scientists are varied such as reincarnation, a spiritual universe, quantum healing and much more. Some other things I will introduce is: THE OLD PHYSICS AND ITS PHILOSOPHICAL LEGACY: QUANTUM PHYSICS AND THE DEMISE OF MATERIAL REALISM: SCIENCE DISCOVERS TRANSCENDENCE: WAR AND PEACE to name a few.

Forget about Miscaviage he is probably riddled with misunderstoods, fixed ideas and false paradigms. He will carry on with what he is doing regardless. Maybe LRH perceived that there was an 8th dynamic but did not have the information that science has now provided. I do not propose that I am a genius or anything of the sort. The writings of some of these scientists are complex and difficult to get a grip on so maybe we can together and create the technology of the 8th dynamic. What I have so far studied renders our politics and economics obsolete, not to mention Miscaviage scientology.

Travers Harris
 

Gilbert

Patron with Honors
God is beyond definition and therefore the most scientific definition of God is the underlying basis of all reality. God is infinite though we can perceive God from a limited viewpoint. So from our limited perspective God has a beginning and an end, but in ultimate truth God is infinite.
 

Veda

Sponsor
Maybe LRH perceived that there was an 8th dynamic but did not have the information that science has now provided.

Hubbard didn't care about the so called 8th dynamic. With a little inspiration from Jack Parsons he re-wrote Aleister Crowley's 'Naples Arrangement' which, at the very beginning, posits two types of (or aspects of) no-thing(s), a 0- (exclusive), or boy zero, and a 0+ (inclusive), or girl zero, (which create "tension") from which (supposedly) derive consciousness/phenomena.

Hubbard didn't include it in his version of the 'Naples Arrangement' ('The Factors'), so Scientologists don't know about it.

Meanwhile, those with Hubbardian mind-control electrodes still stuck inside their heads are running in circles trying to make sense out of Hubbard's ego-trip that he designed to last "10,000 years."

Momentarily allowing myself to be Scientologically lobotomized, the 8th dynamic is not (as Hubbard said on a tape), "the rest of it." The 8th dynamic would be the source of the 7th dynamic. But that's not acceptable, since Hubbard was (or presented himself as) a "dualist" (in the non-Western Vedic sense) and wrote (again plagiarizing Crowley) of a "multiplicity of infinite minds." (Which inspires awe in Scientologists, and also strokes the egos of Scientologists everywhere.)

A "multiplicity of infinite minds" makes "God" unnecessary, and makes anyone claiming there is a God into a would-be oppressor (unless he's a PR person talking to 'wogs'), that is if one uses "God" to mean that from which the 7th dynamic derives - for each sovereign individual "thetan" ("with a lisp" :)) is his own Alpha and Omega.

That this "thetan" might just be quiver resulting from a tickle in the primordial yin/yang, the origin of which is unknowable, is an insult to "Mighty Thetans" everywhere.

Which brings us back to a posited multiplicity of 0- and 0+ consciousness/phenomena whatevers, sitting in bodies, surrounded by behavioral patterns, including language which they did not create, and - in the case of Scientologists - the added influence of those Hubbardian electrodes.

I recommend a brisk walk along the beach.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ak3z2Pm7Iwg
 
Last edited:

lexmark

Patron with Honors
Maybe LRH perceived that there was an 8th dynamic

I do not care about Hubbard, he is no longer with us.

The rest of what you wrote does not make much sense
 

lexmark

Patron with Honors
God is beyond definition and therefore the most scientific definition of God is the underlying basis of all reality. God is infinite though we can perceive God from a limited viewpoint. So from our limited perspective God has a beginning and an end, but in ultimate truth God is infinite.

I think you are wrong, science is already understanding the concept of Quantum Consciousness
 

lexmark

Patron with Honors
Hubbard didn't care about the so called 8th dynamic. With a little inspiration from Jack Parsons he re-wrote Aleister Crowley's 'Naples Arrangement' which, at the very beginning, posits two types of (or aspects of) no-thing(s), a 0- (exclusive), or boy zero, and a 0+ (inclusive), or girl zero, (which create "tension") from which (supposedly) derive consciousness/phenomena.

Hubbard didn't include it in his version of the 'Naples Arrangement' ('The Factors'), so Scientologists don't know about it.

Meanwhile, those with Hubbardian mind-control electrodes still stuck inside their heads are running in circles trying to make sense out of Hubbard's ego-trip that he designed to last "10,000 years."

Momentarily allowing myself to be Scientologically lobotomized, the 8th dynamic is not (as Hubbard said on a tape), "the rest of it." The 8th dynamic would be the source of the 7th dynamic. But that's not acceptable, since Hubbard was (or presented himself as) a "dualist" and wrote (again plagiarizing Crowley) of a "multiplicity of infinite minds." (Which inspires awe in Scientologists, and also tickles the egos of Scientologists everywhere.)

A "multiplicity of infinite minds" makes "God" necessary, and makes anyone claiming there is a God into a would-be oppressor (unless he's a PR person talking to 'wogs'), that is if one uses "God" to mean that from which the 7th dynamic derives - for each sovereign individual "thetan" ("with a lisp" :)) is his own Alpha and Omega.

That this "thetan" might just be quiver resulting from a tickle in the primordial yin/yang (or yang/yin), the origin of which is unknowable, is an insult to "Mighty Thetans" everywhere.

Which beings us back to a posited multiplicity of 0- and 0+ consciousness/phenomena whatevers, sitting in a body, surrounded by behavioral patterns, including language, which he did not create and mostly uses (or is used by) unconsciously, and - in the case of Scientologists - a 0-/0+ with Hubbard electrodes inside his head.

I recommend a brisk walk along the beach.

Hubbard is gone and I do not much care about him. The rest of what you wrote does not make much sense
 

Veda

Sponsor
Really? I thought Hubbard was healthy and vigorous and about to celebrate his 100th birthday next year. I should read the newspapers more. Was it on the news?

The psychological-political operation/"religion"/fan(atic)-club Hubbard started is still around, and those zapped by him are still around, and you're reading their stuff and, apparently, being influenced by it.

And, I didn't expect you to understand what I wrote. It was just a typing exercise. :)
 
I think you are wrong, science is already understanding the concept of Quantum Consciousness

I think you are reifying a mixure of abstracts.

First, what do you men by "science?"

Plus, you are making a leap in that it is your opinion that Quantum Consciousness (something else you are reifying) is equivalent or parallel to God.

So it seems you are packing the definition that God is Quantum Consciousness, as you do not want to use anyone else's defintion of God other than yours.

You are claiming your synthetic judgment is an analytic judgment (in Kantian terms).

It doesn't hold up.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

lexmark

Patron with Honors
I think you are reifying a mixure of abstracts.

First, what do you men by "science?"

Plus, you are making a leap in that it is your opinion that Quantum Consciousness (something else you are reifying) is equivalent or parallel to God.

So it seems you are packing the definition that God is Quantum Consciousness, as you do not want to use anyone else's defintion of God other than yours.

You are claiming your synthetic judgment is an analytic judgment (in Kantian terms).

It doesn't hold up.

The Anabaptist Jacques

Quantum Consciousness is not my definition it is a valid scientific definition. See An interview with Dr. Hameroff regarding the aspects of quantum physics and consciousness entitled Quantum Consciousness (Stuart Hameroff) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4y8mTRqXAo
 
Quantum Consciousness is not my definition it is a valid scientific definition. See An interview with Dr. Hameroff regarding the aspects of quantum physics and consciousness entitled Quantum Consciousness (Stuart Hameroff) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4y8mTRqXAo

This was an excellent video. Thanks for posting it. I personally accept what he said.

However, what you said is not supported by what he said.

I did not say Quantum Consicousness was not a scientific definition.

What I said was that you were reifying it and defining God according to your definition of Quantum Cosnciousness.

That is packing the definition that God is Quantum Consciousness.

You are claiming your synthetic judgment (What Quantum Consciousness is) is an analytic judgment (By defining God as Quantum Consciouness)

It just doesn't hold up.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

La La Lou Lou

Crusader
My big question is who is science.

Science is telling us that there's global warming because of our evil lifestyle.

Science apparently is now telling us that world is perfectly fine, use more cars.

Science also tells us that we will all live to be 100.

Science tells us that in 1900 most people slept over 10 hours a night, and now sleep about 6.

Who is this Science guy and why can't he make his mind up.

Raw information and stats are great, they are collected by intelligent people trying to find the patterns that can reveal truths. It's how the data is interpreted that matters. There are too many people claiming to know from a few raw facts what will happen in the future. One can attempt to predict but one can never be sure, no scientist can ever say that his idea is the final understanding.

There are things that cannot be explained at the moment. That could be the action of a 'god' or it could be that we just don't understand things fully yet. I don't see any point in making big sweeping statements like they've just found god in a test tube in the hadron colider in Switzerland.

I would like to see a little more old fashioned scientific scepticism and humility. There's too much ego in the science labs these days.
 
My big question is who is science.

Science is telling us that there's global warming because of our evil lifestyle.

Science apparently is now telling us that world is perfectly fine, use more cars.

Science also tells us that we will all live to be 100.

Science tells us that in 1900 most people slept over 10 hours a night, and now sleep about 6.

Who is this Science guy and why can't he make his mind up.

Raw information and stats are great, they are collected by intelligent people trying to find the patterns that can reveal truths. It's how the data is interpreted that matters. There are too many people claiming to know from a few raw facts what will happen in the future. One can attempt to predict but one can never be sure, no scientist can ever say that his idea is the final understanding.

There are things that cannot be explained at the moment. That could be the action of a 'god' or it could be that we just don't understand things fully yet. I don't see any point in making big sweeping statements like they've just found god in a test tube in the hadron colider in Switzerland.

I would like to see a little more old fashioned scientific scepticism and humility. There's too much ego in the science labs these days.

Don't confuse people using the word science when stating a conclusion they made against what science really is.

Science is the acepted judgements of parts or the whole of the community of scientists.

Science is a collective thought activity. It has paradigms by which it operates.

Eventually, if evidence no longer supports the hypothesis upon which the paradigms are based, new scientific paradigms come into existence.

But people and the media use science as if it an authority figure rather than what it really is.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

Veda

Sponsor
I've seen these videos, or some of them, before. Interesting for sure - but the topic is consciousness, not "God."
 

EP - Ethics Particle

Gold Meritorious Patron
A good, thoughtful post.

In my studies of consciousness within quantum physics there is no doubt in my mind that there is an 8th dynamic or a creative power which some call God. When I mention God do not under any circumstances confuse it with the God of the religions of the world. My original 2 posts “Scientology is obsolete” and “The 8th Dynamic” in which I introduced quantum physics has brought about a fair amount of interest and response. Many of the responses have been written in a manner which is difficult for the ordinary guy to understand such as the observer effect, uncertainty principle and particle physics. This is a complex subject and I will try and keep my writing as simple as possible.

Hubbard labeled it as the 8th dynamic but he did not create it. Goswami labeled it as “Monistic Idealism” it could also be labeled the “Science of Consciousness”. In this science people are more important than material objects. Putting mirrors in space to combat global warming could just as well be done by taking responsibility for the planet like gaining an understanding that it is our actions that are causing this phenomenon. If we decide to stop burning fossil fuels and all the other actions that go toward climate change we could change it. What I write here is not just my opinion or think, it is based on actual experiments by various scientists. I will try and give the experiments wherever I can.

There are six billion of us on this planet each having our own ideas and thoughts. These opinions and thoughts are part of Consciousness, many of these opinions and thoughts are wrong and are ego produced. In our religions the image of God as a human being up in heaven is incorrect. There are many scientific books on this subject by various authors; I have chosen one of these scientists as I have a few of his books and because I like his material. He is Dr. Amit Goswami, professor of theoretical physics at Oregon University. Another author Rupert Sheldrake, one of the world’s most innovative biologists and writers is best known for his theory of morphic fields and morphic resonance, which leads to a vision of a living, developing universe with its own inherent memory. Goswami has introduced the concept of Quantum Consciousness meaning consciousness outside of time and space. It appears that it is this consciousness that guides evolution and is involved with the process of our evolving universe and life within it. As I understand it, it is this quantum consciousness that is God or the 8th dynamic or however you wish to label it. The subjects by these scientists are varied such as reincarnation, a spiritual universe, quantum healing and much more. Some other things I will introduce is: THE OLD PHYSICS AND ITS PHILOSOPHICAL LEGACY: QUANTUM PHYSICS AND THE DEMISE OF MATERIAL REALISM: SCIENCE DISCOVERS TRANSCENDENCE: WAR AND PEACE to name a few.

Forget about Miscaviage he is probably riddled with misunderstoods, fixed ideas and false paradigms. He will carry on with what he is doing regardless. Maybe LRH perceived that there was an 8th dynamic but did not have the information that science has now provided. I do not propose that I am a genius or anything of the sort. The writings of some of these scientists are complex and difficult to get a grip on so maybe we can together and create the technology of the 8th dynamic. What I have so far studied renders our politics and economics obsolete, not to mention Miscaviage scientology.

Travers Harris

The two snippets below from the OP jumped out at me:

"There are six billion of us on this planet each having our own ideas and thoughts."

"...so maybe we can together and create the technology of the 8th dynamic."

Personally, I appreciate Lexmark's OP very much and, as as aside, I have forwarded Sheldrake and "Morphic Resonance" at various times here on the board to little avail :grouch: hopefully, such things will gain traction as things evolve.

EP
 
Last edited:
The two snippets below from the OP jumped out at me:

"There are six billion of us on this planet each having our own ideas and thoughts."

"...so maybe we can together and create the technology of the 8th dynamic."

Personally, I appreciate Lexmark's OP very much and, as as aside, I have forwarded Sheldrake and "Morphic Resonance" at various times here on the board to little avail :grouch: hopefully, such things will gain traction as things evolve.

EP

That stood out for me too. I was going to ask "What is a technology of the 8th dynamic."

I don't like using Hubbard's terms becasue they are loaded with accepting earlier premmises.

But a technology of the 8th dynamic?

What is that supposed to mean?

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

La La Lou Lou

Crusader
Anna B that's right, and my point. Someone collects ice samples from the Antarctic graphs out the carbon absorbed by the ice at different times. Someone else collects mud samples from an undersea rift valley, and charts out the carbon absorbed by the mud on the sea bed at the same times. Then a journalist comes along and the compares the two sets of data. He can see a similar pattern in the graphs, and decides that this means that grey aliens are behind the mysteries of the Bermuda Triangle and says in his article ''Science shows....''
 

Gilbert

Patron with Honors
Honestly I don't think you can approach the 8th dynamic the same way as the other 7, basically because the first seven are internally true whereas the 8th must be universally true. The best thing I think one can do is clear up their misconceptions about God.
 

Challenge

Silver Meritorious Patron
You guys are a lot smarter than I am.
I read Amit Goswami's " The Self Aware Universe. What I got was that ultimately, it boils down to what you, the observer, want to see.
Goswami puts forth a theory which he calls " Monistic Idealism". He writes about a "brain-mind".
I don't understand much of Amit Goswami's writing, but I do love to read it.

Challenge
 
Top