How BUAWA defines the OEBUMAOEMMII (27-02-2020)

(Third text published by Yatesbury on FutEnFol's blog)

 

One of your questions concerns the following apparent contradiction:

 

"In this respect, note an unclear passage of D41-15: "Nor would it be at all correct to say that the BUUAWEA [soul] 'does' all this once and for all and in an instant, but this last way of expressing ourselves, without using an almost untranslatable technical vocabulary of UMMO, is the most effective. WOA [the god of the Ummites] grants the soul a prerogative which is transcendent: IT CAN MODIFY ONCE AND FOR ALL THE FORM OF THE OEBUMAOEMII (PHYSICAL MAN: SPACE-TIME)" I have underlined the contradictory elements. Would it not be necessary to understand that the soul can instantly go over the whole course of the pudding-man, and this several times during our life? In this way we would clearly understand that our intention could modify our future. But modifying the future implies modifying other pudding-men and, why not, the past... We would not be aware of it at all, since our level of consciousness is a prisoner of the present. As if this were not already complicated enough, the Ummites involve a collective consciousness, which they call BUUAWUA BIAEEII and which the followers commonly call BB. "

 

To understand this strange paradox, one can use the analogy of chaotic systems and strange attractors, better called "limit sets", a more appropriate term, as will be seen. This is a concept intrinsic to chaos theory which must be defined precisely in order to understand its singular properties and what they imply for chaotic systems. The term "attractor", which includes the notion of "attraction", can lead to a mistaken interpretation of this mathematical concept. The qualifier "strange" refers to the particular and complex shape of the limit sets that describe the evolution of chaotic systems over time. The limit set is an abstract figure that represents the mysterious face of the long-term evolution of a chaotic system. The attractor can only be visualized within what physicists call "phase space". Phase space is also an abstract concept. It can be defined as a frame of reference whose axes (representing the dimensions) express the different variables one decides to study. One of these variables is usually time. Indeed, the time dimension makes it possible to follow the dynamic evolution of a system. It is thus possible to study the position of a moving body in space, as well as its speed or its acceleration. Each point drawn in this space will represent the state or precise position of the system at a given moment. Thus, over time, a multitude of points will be obtained that will draw apparently random trajectories in phase space (which is nothing other than an "imaginary map"), but from which there will eventually emerge, after a certain time, a mysterious and immutable shape proper to the system. This figure, which can have infinitely many faces depending on the system and the variables studied, will group together all the points or trajectories that embody the evolution of the system at each moment. Moreover, one will never see trajectories that overlap (fractal dimension) or that "leave" this perimeter, wandering outside this limit set. In fact, they seem to be "attracted" by this set, which seems to "hold back" their random dispersion. That is why it is called a "strange attractor". Scientists have long known the concept of the attractor. Indeed, a practical attractor to study is that of the simple pendulum. Its phase space is reduced to the study of two variables: its position and its speed. One then obtains a classic orthonormal frame of reference, where the vertical axis represents the different positions of the pendulum and the horizontal axis gives its speed. If we release the pendulum, it will swing until the frictional forces of the air stop it. On a traditional graph one would see the oscillations of the pendulum lose amplitude until they disappear. In phase space we see that the circular trajectory of the pendulum, which progressively loses its energy through friction, is reduced to a spiral converging towards a fixed point, that is, the stationary state of the pendulum. This is therefore the point of origin of this orthonormal frame of reference. In this basic case the attractor is a simple point. The trajectory of the pendulum really seems "attracted" by this point, which embodies the stability of the object. In this case the attractor is not called "strange", because the system does not follow a complex or chaotic behaviour.

 

This simple system remains linear and predictable. If the movement of the pendulum had been maintained by a small motor, as is the case with clocks, then the trajectory of the point in phase space would have been circular and invariable, the limit set then being a simple circle. This preamble is important for understanding what follows and the link between B / BB and time. Another way of understanding the concept of the limit set and its relation to chance is to study what the mathematician Michael Barnsley calls "the chaos game". It can be played with a computer and a random-number generator, but a simple sheet of paper, a pencil and a coin are enough. Choose a central point on that sheet (which will be the phase space), and then invent two rules. For example, the first rule could be: "Move four squares to the right." And the second rule could be: "Halve the distance to the centre". Apply rule 1 when the coin comes up tails and rule 2 when it comes up heads. Toss the coin about 50 times while applying your rules and observe the result. You will notice that the distribution of the points seems to be random. In fact you only obtain an amorphous and diffuse cloud of points. Extend the experiment and imagine the system after 500 tosses. You will then see that the game no longer produces a set of disordered points, but that a shape emerges whose precision seems to become ever sharper. After 5,000 tosses (or what are called "iterations" in mathematics), the set of points culminates in a singular bounded space that contains them ALL. Despite the infinite number of iterations, no point ever overlaps another; all are concentrated in this strange perimeter. This figure can have an infinite number of shapes, and you will understand that what determines it are the two starting rules you have set. So here the randomness of the tosses is only a "tool" that makes it possible to build the limit set which is already present, underlyingly. This shows a form of hidden order within chaos itself. It is the starting rules that mark out the path of the system's strange attractor. Any strange attractor that emerges in phase space after several thousand iterations is the product of the application of these initial rules. You can see, then, that if a set of points or trajectories materializing the evolution of a chaotic system generates a complex figure such as a strange attractor, it is because there are elements common to all these elements. In "Barnsley's chaos game", these are the two rules established at the beginning. It is the mathematical "signature" or "fingerprint" of the system. That is, an invisible mark that directs all the trajectories of the system towards that mysterious shape. In other words, one perceives that if the graphical representation of the evolution of a system tends towards a specific configuration, it is because there is a common and invisible characteristic at each point of this diagram. One understands immediately that, in this example, the two initial rules are an analogy of the "soul", the successive iterations represent the flow of time and the limit set symbolizes the "pudding-man". The limit set "is already there" (in germ, in the initial rules) without being "there yet". Free will is embodied in the "choice" of the two initial rules, which condition the appearance of the limit set, whose emergence results solely from the passage of time. The role of the collective sphere (BB) is to "coordinate" the emancipation of these different "pudding-men". One would say, in the previous example, that it modulates the limit sets to avoid the "overlapping" of one on another. But the collective mind can only do so when the limit set emerges, that is, in time and space. It orients, modulates, attenuates or accentuates certain directions taken by the individual souls. That is why the collective mind can, and must, "process information". It needs the tool of TIME, embodied in the iterations that actualize the limit set of this example.

 

SYNCHRONICITIES may be a particular manifestation of its influence. How can they be explained in terms of temporality? You might also ask: if the individual soul proposes its two initial rules in this didactic example, how can it know whether its limit set will be suitable and will not interfere with that of its neighbour? In reality, it "already" knows what its limit set will be like. What it cannot know is what those of its neighbours will be like. To "know", it must be "instructed" or "informed" by the collective mind, which has a "global" view of all these sets. Chronological time is an "orthogonal" time for the collective mind. It sees "everything, all at once, instantly". It perceives the finality, the totality, of a limit space, even though this can only emerge through chronological time. If this limit space "invades" the neighbour, the collective mind may come to "harmonize" it or "orient" it so that coexistence is serene. If the limit space changes shape, then the two initial rules have also changed. Remember that for the soul time does not exist, so the process is also "immediate". But the soul remains free. If it does not wish to submit to the proposals of the collective mind, it can keep, and will keep, the unsuitable shape of its attractor. That is why such a soul can be "compared" with its mirror (ideal) soul at the moment of the death of its physical body. Therefore "synchronicities" can be perceived as elements of harmonization, guidance or influence when they really modify the existence (the trajectory) of an individual. In reality, "everything has already been played out", as you will have understood. If the individual voluntarily changes his trajectory, it is because his soul has "already" taken into account the influences of the BB. The "trajectory" of a life can change following many events: through a "revelation", a "discovery" or the "understanding" of buried elements that limit a person's existence... It can also be modified in the event of imminent danger, when the death of one of one's parents is announced or when a close relative suffers serious disorders. That is why "synchronicities" can show so many different faces. There is no "reverse causality" in the physical sense. On the macroscopic scale, the orientation of the arrow of time is immutable.