D69
Dagobah Resident
I was thinking today about "generator" word.
I read in one of transcripts very smart sentence by C`s about generating.
I dont know in which transcript it was because i was reading translated version so i assume its somewhere in first few chapters of The Wave.
Anyways , it sounded like this , if i remeber correctly:
"A: there is no such thing as generating , there is gathering and dispersing"
I was thinking about this quote as a key quote. Why ?
If someone thinks about generating(creating) word in a limited way , like for example , sitting in the room with electricity generator(agregate) and fuel tank is outside this room , then from a persons point of view ( inside room ) the word "generator" of electricity works , because this person does not see fuel tank and this person is unable to determine that in fact generating is exchanging one form of energy/matter ( diesel fuel ) into electricity.
This person sees only one side of medal.
Do you agree with me here ?
Now. someone who has different point of view , for example , someone who is outside house with mentioned room , things are totally obvious.
This "outside" person knows that electricity generator has to be refueled and that its not generator. It exchanges energy forms , but NOT generates.
Logicaly thinking , we come to a point where we can say that word "Generator" is strongly dependant on point of view of a person looking at this
"generator"
I guess it was all explained better in The Wave but i just wanted to rewrite it as i understand it.
Now to the key word.
If C`s wrote that there is no such thing as "generate" stuff thing , then it means something.
If a word "generator" strongly depends on point of view and if we already know that there is NO such thing as generating , because we logicaly deduced that it simply cant be - there is always a place where someone sees the whole thing (ex. person outside room) , THEN it means that there is infinite number of "points of view" which in fact means that universe is infinite. There are NO borders.
Of course 3rd density point of view is very limited but with this example it can be deduced something wider
I have no idea how to write it better , plus my explaining engrish skill is poor ;)
Do you agree with this concept ? or i missed something important in my conclusions and I do the "round robin" thing ?
I read in one of transcripts very smart sentence by C`s about generating.
I dont know in which transcript it was because i was reading translated version so i assume its somewhere in first few chapters of The Wave.
Anyways , it sounded like this , if i remeber correctly:
"A: there is no such thing as generating , there is gathering and dispersing"
I was thinking about this quote as a key quote. Why ?
If someone thinks about generating(creating) word in a limited way , like for example , sitting in the room with electricity generator(agregate) and fuel tank is outside this room , then from a persons point of view ( inside room ) the word "generator" of electricity works , because this person does not see fuel tank and this person is unable to determine that in fact generating is exchanging one form of energy/matter ( diesel fuel ) into electricity.
This person sees only one side of medal.
Do you agree with me here ?
Now. someone who has different point of view , for example , someone who is outside house with mentioned room , things are totally obvious.
This "outside" person knows that electricity generator has to be refueled and that its not generator. It exchanges energy forms , but NOT generates.
Logicaly thinking , we come to a point where we can say that word "Generator" is strongly dependant on point of view of a person looking at this
"generator"
I guess it was all explained better in The Wave but i just wanted to rewrite it as i understand it.
Now to the key word.
If C`s wrote that there is no such thing as "generate" stuff thing , then it means something.
If a word "generator" strongly depends on point of view and if we already know that there is NO such thing as generating , because we logicaly deduced that it simply cant be - there is always a place where someone sees the whole thing (ex. person outside room) , THEN it means that there is infinite number of "points of view" which in fact means that universe is infinite. There are NO borders.
Of course 3rd density point of view is very limited but with this example it can be deduced something wider
I have no idea how to write it better , plus my explaining engrish skill is poor ;)
Do you agree with this concept ? or i missed something important in my conclusions and I do the "round robin" thing ?
