On Feb 19, 7:19 am, Fabrizio J Bonsignore <synto...@gmail.com> wrote: > I board the subway train and find in the car a meaningful character, > not the first time it happens, this time she is who seems to be the > stray daughter of MP and TA from primary school. Since we were applied > Islam and the Qu ran so the outcome has to be no females left in the > generation the encounter is meaningful but the girl already knows that > maybe her mother or aunt or both were tortured. It seems a very > miraculous event I ve been going through for a while but it is very > easily explainable as just solving a system of differential equations. > In this case, all that the mind that effected the synchronizations > needs to output as outcome is very simple: the time at which to wake > me up. All other variables are already known and standard, all _that_ > mind has to know is the time the girl and her tutoress are boarding > the train to calculate at what time to wake me up for me to arrive at > the synchronization and all the control that mind has to have, very > likely an old woman interested in the issue, is (basically) to wake me > up in time. All other variables are known: the distance between the > place I was asleep in the terminal and the train, the distance between > the car and the subway entry, the pace at which I walk, the train > speed, the moment the couple entered the subway and boarded the train, > my route... All this forms a model of the world that is not completely > or truly conscious but unconscious, that mind does not have to know > the exact measurements in terms of meters or have measured the average > speed of subway lines at every moment, which is unwieldy, but the > brain is recording such facts as almost meaningless data constantly > and storing them so they are available to make formal calculus of > consistency and coherency that enable it to solve a differential > equation system the way numerical methods do, and arrive at a simple > quantity-control model it can effect. > > It was already known, even obvious, that I had to be in the zone I was > going to at the time I had to be there. I was awaken _just in time_ to > decide it was not too late to move and be there in time. The control > variable was in this case a man who sit in front of me in the table I > had my head over my luggage and who pretended to make a phone call > then went away. If he had remained in place for longer, I would have > pretended I was still asleep and wait for him to leave, even fall into > slumber again; the moment the man stands up there is time enough to > see it is not to late but just in time, pick the luggage and leave, so > that there is no implicit assumption of social interaction, but that > is very basic and _automatic_ social understanding among Humans. If > both had stayed longer in the same table, it would seem we are > actually friends and sitting together when in fact he just took > advantage of the free chair while I was a socially distant and > disengaged figure. The mind that perform the operation just had to > enact a simple control: *contact* the man at the right moment for him > to engage in his conversation and wake me up. Such mind was most > likely aware of the position of the girl-woman couple when they > boarded and where they boarded the train, probably at a very nearby > station in a line that has very near stations. Then since I woke _just > in time_ to arrive to where I had planned, my next decision is to take > the shortest path to the train. Some minutes earlier I would have > taken a different path and even changed my plans; some minutes late > and I would have missed it completely and stayed in the place to fall > into slumber again. This calculus is also rather simple and very > likely standard (average) among Humans, the relationship between time > to travel, time of appointment, slack time to be late or early, the > probability to change plans at the last moment, etc., so not much > additional information is needed here. > > I take the shortest path and am ready to go into the subway without > wasting time in lines, but that is also a known fact at this time of > the month, so in that respect I am quite predictable, all the > differential equations system still has to produce is the moment to > start my walking. The stairs down to the train are the closest to the > entry and straight into the line direction I have to travel; I come > off the stairs as the train is just arriving. At this point there is a > fifty-fifty chance the synchronization will fail as I can choose to > take either car, one leads to the girl, the other _might_ have > produced a different meaningful encounter as there is a blonde female > hairdo that calls my attention, but the girl s encounter is more > meaningful overall than some possible flirting. > > The same kind of simple control as the man making a fake call to wake > me up just in time can be conceived for the train system, > particularly, since conductors (there are actually live conductors) > can receive telepathic signals. In fact, the train _was_ traveling > rather slowly, but on that end it is conceivable necessary ONLY to > have one person receiving the signal and **manipulating** the girl- > woman system in a standard way. Particularly, assuming the couple > entered the car next to the library, they naturally end in the car > that has the closest path from subway entry to same car, but THAT is > data that is also relatively simple for a mind that is implementing > automatic, numerical calculus to produce two points of control and one > one time variable, since in the end the subway system does have fixed > distance-time relationships. Other assumptions on this freer (more > degrees of freedom) end of the system to take into account when > monitoring the schedule of the girl-woman couple, would have only led > to a different time to wake me up... or to a total abandonement of the > **plan** to synchronize _this time_ and begin immediately the next > possible plan for synchronization. But it is assumed at the outset > that the mind that is _dedicated_ to solve this problem of solving a > system for minimum variable-minimum control under constraints and > fixed relationship data does have the advantage of being dually > (duplex) capturing the signal from at least two of the actors in the > synchronization and most likely of more than two actors, which in this > case instead of adding complexity to the computation can actually > diminish its complexity in several ways, just by adding more fixed > elements to control the situation. > > The unconscious mind can then act in parallel in different subsystems > to solve the different elements in the system, but in essence it can > solve the problem just be RECEIVING and EMITTING a signal > independently of its content to the different, in this case two points > of control (or maybe three, the conductor), and in real time perform > any adjustments necessary. All this effort can be done automatically > in parallel by a massively connected computing process with very > little conscious effort for a mind that is already obssessed > (dedicated) to the problem of connecting people with me. I think it is > an old woman s mind for whom additionally the problem of connecting > people and *finding the girl* is already structural. > > So it can be seen that it is not a big problem, as has been the > possibilitating thesis since the beginning, to perform synchronization > even among parties that are not directly connected, as stream of > meaning, to the **central processor**, not even as signal reception, > as long as there are enough points of control (direct schizophrenics) > and monitoring capabilities (carrying fields) to provide information > over a fixed set of structural relationships like a city and the > subway offer. In other times in the fields it would have been simpler > probably though instead of personal synchronizations the outcome was > mobs, ordered mobs, **commercial** movements, sagas, cities... needing > only a few carrying fields, their control points and dually connected > central processors... > > Danilo J Bonsignore
Hi Danilo you are talking about 'connection' as in telepathy. focus just on this. what are you saying precisely. and where does 'schizophrenia' and 'fields' come into it?