Noetic Aether: Synopsis

[@Formscapes]

Check out my recent discussion on the Demystifysci podcast! kzbin.info/www/bejne/pWacfH6qm9agnpo

[@2013Arcturus]

My man over here cranking out mind bending philosophy like it was Minecraft playthroughs. 🤯

[@ReallyJustJay]

Why does this You Tube series feel like the most important philosophical undertaking of my lifetime? I know it's a summation of arguments and observation that have been with us for generations..but it's such an expansive and deftly woven summation. You are built so fkn different bro

[@matthewburford1044]

Thank you for taking the time to make this series. What little faith I have in humanity is somewhat renewed by efforts such as yours. Thank you again.

[@jamessekatawatrent1754]

watching this series feels like we're approaching a convergence point of a lot of the ideas this audacious man has been trying to articulate on this channel thus far. And the coolest part is we have front row seats watching the unfolding of this undertaking. Can't wait for even deeper nuances in upcoming videos.

[@jordanhiggins4496]

Because it is! 🤘🏻

[@Akaeus]

I only wish I could have come up with your Syncretic Summation of all these ideas because this is exactly what I have known for years, as probably many others have as well, and it's exciting to hear it all be explained so precisely, eloquently, Philosophicaly and scientifically

[@BracaPhoto]

Our past trauma affects how we respond to the present - there is a "memory" of it - everytime we pass that on to another individual they are more likely to respond in the same way We could die and come back 1000 years from now - the memory of that interaction will still be there in "humanity" - repeating the same failed patterns Makes sense - it really does

[@templar1111]

New age often preaches raising vibration and letting go of limiting beliefs to attract success, but no one explains the physical science behind it this clearly.

[@mithras666]

Because it's a faith-based "science" for them, just believe as hard as you can and "the law of attraction" will make it happen for you. This is completely different, i have no idea why Formscapes liked your comment tbh...

[@jesuscristo1381]

because there is no science on that

[@lilfr4nkie]

⁠​⁠​⁠@@mithras666 philosophical science* pretty sure the law of attraction is used in metaphysics.

[@tsenotanev]

.. in fact there are lots of other pretty clear explanations of how it works ... besides this one, lets say ...

[@sorrychangedmyusername3594]

Just like Biophotomodulation. It just works, ever since the primitive ages, and it is always there.

[@thedapperdrafter1168]

I am a simple man, I see someone who pours out a truly beautiful exposition of genuinely interesting, novel (at least to me), and actually digestible (even when au sujet du things of great complexity)

[@jamesrossiter6319]

If you say Simple Man all I hear in my head is Lynard Skynard.

[@ciaragoering]

you forgot to finish the comment i think

[@Odihmantich]

@@ciaragoeringI think what his meant to say that in the described situations he forgets to finish his comments 😅

[@thedapperdrafter1168]

No I said all I meant, I see good content. XD

[@moogzoliver]

Experiment: Mental State and Positron Emission Hypothesis: Focuses on the "vacuity" aspect of electrons. If consciousness can influence the probabilistic nature of particles, imagine focused meditation altering the probability of a positron (electron's antimatter counterpart) being emitted during radioactive decay (where a proton transforms). Method: Select a radioactive isotope with known positron emission probability. Divide participants into two groups: a meditation group focusing on a specific intention (e.g., increasing or decreasing positron emission) and a control group. Track positron emission rates in both groups over time. Challenges: Difficult to isolate and control for other factors affecting decay rates. Ethical considerations regarding the potential influence of consciousness on radioactive processes.

[@plantstho6599]

Positive criticism: you need more clear visuals to drive your points home. Everything else you got goin on is good so far. I'd offer help, but I'm in a weird life phase where I feel like I'm supposed to make some big shift to a new way of living, but I have no idea to what.

[@ChrisPettis19]

I agree. From what I understand so far the theory is compelling but I find myself needing more visuals to fully understand certain concepts

[@bryanalltogether]

If possible, it would be amazing but I can imagine it getting weird like how alchemical art gets weird when describing a subjective experience, like a woman, a dude, a snake, the moon, some weird bird stuff.

[@ssevkin]

Totally

[@JohnAdamson-e4s]

Check out Nervous Nerds' Dao De Jing. It is best to watch both this post and Noetic Aether, in the background, constantly, for days. It looks to me like you are getting ready for a rebirth. This is the perfect time to take my advice. It could be extremely helpful for you.

[@apartmentdfilms]

Just finished watching your morphogenetic previous video, SO READY FOR THIS ONE! ⚡️

[@DanielEngsvang]

Terence McKenna would have been really proud and intrigued with your work. And most philosophers today should be able to find personal inspiration with this also as you are not afraid of the truth that "To come up with a really Good theory one must get through a hundred "half-baked" ones in order to realize it, and doing so in an open discussion seriously speeds this process up and that is why we are so extremely many people here on earth and not just a whole bunch as then we would never have been able to throw our ideas back and forth quick and efficient enough to evolve in a satisfying speed compared to our inherently restless mind "- Daniel(Quoting myself 🙂🥰😄)

[@3zdayz]

Zeno's paradox also apparently forgets to mention that the velocity increases of the number of divisions crossed. Therefore the arrow has infinite velocity and will instead arrive instantaneously instead of not at all

[@TheDailyMemesShow]

I love how you explain things - it's not just reading random words, you give words meaning by conveying ideas in an 'interactive' way, if you will. Actually, there was a philosopher (don't remember his name, sorry) who used this didactical device very effectively.

[@tinfoilhatscholar]

Dear Sir, i must say, i believe you have uncovered the divine and sacred secret of Nature, that of implosion energy. It happens to be V. Schauberger's birthday today, and I have confidence that his spirit smiles at continuation of his work, and in such a beautifully articulated manner at that. You have my applause, and most certainly, you have my attention. (The cycloid spiral space curve and centripetal energy of Creation)

[@happyshillmore]

Pretty amazing that you've included eric dollard as a reference link. I remember wen that video came out & being exposed to the concept of a "counterspace," whittaker's book and the forgotten geniuses of the past (Steinmetz, Heaviside, Alexanderson, etc). This Noetic Aether conceptualization & geometric space being the projection resolves a variety paradoxes. Such as the nature of differentiation & boundary conditions i.e. separateness, nothingness & media across which information is communicable. Describing a particle behavior without including its relationship to what it's embedded in always results in error that physics has gone to great creative lengths to compensate for.

[@tinfoilhatscholar]

Formscapes is one of few today who I genuinely credit the title: Philosopher. Excellent work and much appreciate it.

[@darylleborgne3061]

This man is as defined. I like his sharp cuts of edgeless points made from slices of creative language that explains such matters of life and science as modern day alchemy, pan fried and cooked to a golden brown perfection! In less words, I second this

[@lilfr4nkie]

@@darylleborgne3061precisely! God every time I listen to his content, I just can’t help but think how glorious this would be going over it with Curt Jaimungel? I would literally be able to die peacefully.

[@usurpvision]

I'll get back in your comment section when I finish watching Evangelion. This side-quest you put me on has got me jumping through the hierarchical rungs my guy.

[@mvondoom]

ha! i took that option too, but felt pretty satisfied after a few evangelion episodes that it was ok to return to the main thread...

[@brindlebriar]

The implicate order giving rise to the explicate order reminds me of a very strange Gnostic idea that has haunted me: That of the Primeval Light _!accidentally!_ - not purposefully - giving rise to the shadow(which self-organized into the first father of the Archons, Yaldabaoth. This first Archon then generated out of itself, the other Archons.) All of this shadow-substance, which I've heretofore interpreted as 'physical reality,' might better be characterized by the term 'explicate order.' Now, if that's _not_ just a coincidence, but if, rather, the Gnostics were onto something, somehow, then something else they describe might give us a _further_ clue about Implicate and Explicate order, which is this: The 'event' that _caused_ the Primeval Light to accidentally generate what we'll now call 'explicate order,' was the 'entification'(becoming an entity) of itself - the manifestation of Pistis Sofia(a 'personhood') as _embodiment_ (more accurately, as one possible embodiment) of what had previously been abstract. Not a _physical_ embodiment, but a 'body of light' anthropomorphic and beautiful, whereas previously, the 'Primeval Light' seems to have been formless - or encompassing all forms equally. So the 'embodiment' of Light _caused_ it to 'cast a shadow' of 'explicate reality.' ... which can also 'entify,' and did so. So perhaps, somehow, as implicate order becomes a 'being' or 'beings,' - think, locuses or vorticies of self-aware possibilities - that causes the condensation of the possibilities into determined actualities(as described in the video), thus creating explicate order. *Or,* alternately, and perhaps a better interpretation: the 'entification' of the implicate order(Primal Light becoming Pistis Sophia) causes a corresponding 'entification' of the already existing explicate order - i.e., causes the manifestation of Yaldabaoth. Incidentally, I've always felt a sympathy for poor Yaldabaoth, the inadvertent 'evil God,' who is described as proud in his ignorance, boasting, 'I am all that is; there is no one but me.' But how could he possibly know of the implicate order that generated the explicate order that generated him? The poor creature simply found itself existing, and found no one else, having explored the length and breath of the explicate order. So it generated (potentially _determined)_ beings of matter out of itself. Then, all of these 'Archons' having been generated out of explicate order will have had a much lower array of possibilities open to them(lacking the array of implicate possibilities). Thus they'd have less Free Will(assuming the array of implicate possibilities can be conceptualized - once entified - as 'choice.') The texts then describe the Archons finally glimpsing - or perhaps conceptualizing - the implicate order in the form of a visitation by Pistis Sophia. They put it poetically, 'they saw the reflection of Pistis Sophia upon the surface of the waters of the deep'(or something like that - I can't remember exactly.) Once seeing 'her,' they feel in love with her, but also into envy, fear, and jealousy. They saw that 'she' was greater than they were. And, just like our scientists would, they immediately wanted to possess her. This is even characterized in the text as a desire to 'rape' her. In order to try to 'capture' her so they could 'rape' her, they created the first Adam(man) in the image and likeness of the 'Adam of Light,' of which nothing further is said, but which I interpret to be _another_ entification of the Primeval Light, alongside Pistis Sophia - a male manifestation. This shape was meant to _lure_ Sophia, so they could capture her. We were created as bait. The texts seem to suggest(as I interpret) that this first 'shape of Adam' out of matter, had at first no intelligence or spirit. The Archons, then, _did_ mange to impart intelligence to it, so that it could talk, but still had no spirit. Pistis Sophia _did_ come down, then, to the Adam(or rather she sent her daughter Zoe(Life).) But instead of getting captured and raped by the Archons, she _infused their Adam_ with Spirit. (Then she turned herself into a Tree(tree of life??) to avoid getting raped.) Upon _discovering_ that the 'Adam replica' they had created was now infused with 'spirit'(which the Archons did not themselves possess - something of the implicate order), they became afraid of their own creation, 'man,' and jealous and resentful of him. They saw that their own creation was now 'above' them in some way, superior. And they have been the enemies of man ever since. That's roughly the tale, translated into this terminology of implicate and explicate order - as I interpret it. [I'm referencing the "Nag Hammadi" texts: "The Hypostasis of the Archons," and "On the Origin of the World," which seem to tell approximately the same story.] This framework makes it much easier to interpret those texts, which are otherwise quite vague, confusing, and seemingly contradictory. In other words, this 'Implicate/Explicate Order' framework _might_ function as a Key to those texts.

[@Formscapes]

Atom/Adam Christ = "second Adam" Atomic mushroom cloud = crucifix Plutonium & Uranium = duh Etc etc

[@Stevie_D_Pre]

Always glad to see another formscapes video up. Hope you know your work is appreciated by many

[@Allplussomeminus]

I was so immersed in the video that my F Zero 99 race started and I was in last. I ended up finishing in 9th while listening.

[@wizkidgamer9942]

I'm telling you man, you're gonna light the world on fire with this stuff, and I for one am 100% for it

[@ProtoGJB]

You know its going to be a good week when you only gotta work Monday and Tuesday and when you check your sub feed you see the next installment of Noetic Aether theory 🤘🤘

[@enrique_villegas_111]

Beautiful! We and fundamentally everything is energy.

[@azurebrown3756]

Teacher, thank you for all your hard work.

[@sambrown6939]

Bumping this in the work truck. Thank you for sharing your thoughts, and for all your hard work

[@jamesmccusker2260]

That was a conclusive leap to certain materialism.

[@elinope4745]

There are plenty of videos out there by some pretty awesome people explaining U1, SU2, and SU3 symmetry. This will help you a lot with understanding magnetism, especially SU2. These are all types of circular symmetry that underlie the physical forces, with the SU2 symmetry being the symmetry of electromagnetism (it arises and is a result of spin and an exclusion principle). Anyhow it would have been nice had someone given me this tip when I was young and was trying to understand everything about everything.

[@Formscapes]

Cool. Now tell me what magnetism actually is

[@elinope4745]

@@Formscapes waves, it's all waves in the end 👋

[@HereToSuffer247]

​@Formscapes magnetism is a polarized pattern of force that can affect, and is produced by polarized objects.

[@MrMercerFrey]

Once again you open my mind to new areas of conceptualization. Thank you.

[@the_eternaldream]

Reality is a reflection. Consciousness is the technology of creation. They are all connected within the living universe. Untill unification births another macroverse.

[@triskelionchi3747]

You are putting into words what I have felt intuitively as a connected knowing with the rest of the universe. I never really came to have my sense of being feel as though it were something other than the rest of all that is. So when you talk about a lot of this stuff its like hearing someone describe the operation of my hand, what its made of and why it moves. You might know what it is the have or work with a hand, yet know absolutely nothing about the particular mechanics of how it works. Fields of intelligence so deep that it makes room for evermore awareness to take on evermore and increasing forms of novelty, complexity, intensity and uniqueness, towards the syntropy we experience as beauty.

[@lilfr4nkie]

I see we have new Formscapes.. very well then.. 😌onward.

[@The.Watcher.2024]

Oh cool, an atomic theory. Any testable predictions (that differ from standard predictions)?

[@AlexanderofMiletus]

Actually first. This is wild.

[@montmi]

How does this phenomenon which you described compare with teleology? You go into much more detail than material I have read on teleology, thank you!

[@Formscapes]

Teleology once referred to four distinct types of causation; formative, final, material and efficient. In modern parlance, we have relegated "cause" to refer only to material and efficient causation, while "teleology" (which has been effectively banished from science) is used to refer to formative and final causation. What I'm calling Noesis could be understood as formative causation - the feelings of formative elements that then ingress so as to give shape to the evolving system. Final causation would be the feelings of ultimate value which are implied within that decision making. We could also describe that as Noesis - feelings of form - or we could use Chris Langan's "Telesis" to refer specifically to feelings of values or ideals.

[@montmi]

@@Formscapes thank you!

[@SholupToklo]

Light falls toward the gravity of accumulated observation

[@rosebrandt6264]

After listening to this video I got an AI bot that offered to summarize and explain it to me. I don't know if you added that or if it was KZbin, but it was very helpful and surprisingly accurate. I'd love to see that for all your videos to help reinforce and retain your message.

[@Formscapes]

Yeah I have no idea what that's about tbh. Must be a new youtube thing. You could just feed the scripts into ChatGPT and ask it to break things down I guess.

[@jamessekatawatrent1754]

Exceptional articulation as always. I have been thinking about ways to create a model of this Noetic Atom using Genetic algorithmic theory to incorporate the elements of evolutionary computing like probabilistic fitness, memory of processes and inheritance of process traits from past events to be participants in this creative self-generation of the universe. The assumption of course being that this creative process is intrinsically mathematical given the fact that mathematics indeed approximates models of our experience of reality and we optimize this experience through genetic evolution which itself is highly mathematical.

[@gort0338]

The implicate order is 30,000 gems, and in each gem you can see reflected all 29,999 others.

[@AcousticJuice93]

God is real.

[@Theoramma]

Do you have any plans on discussing your theory further with Dr. Sheldrake? He recently had a discussion about matter as frozen light on youtube that compliments your theory really well.

[@Formscapes]

Quite likely. I've exchanged a couple emails with him and Alex Gomez-Marin about the serendipity of our recent interest in these topics but I'm not sure if Sheldrake is caught up on the most recent stuff I've been working on. Me and Alex have a whole other project we are about to start working on so who knows.

[@Theoramma]

@@Formscapes Excellent! I'm looking forward to it! I think Noetic Aether is approaching a truth that academic science isn't quite ready to consider. Possibilities arising from an indeterminate medium isn't deterministic enough for them I feel. I think that new theories like yours will receive similar criticism as some of the most innovative inventions of the past: "The Automobile will never replace the horse!"; "What use could the average person have for a home computer?"; "If men were meant to fly, God would have given them wings!"

[@bradleypage2161]

WOW!!! thank you

[@greeneggsandhamsamiam6154]

If you ever decided to write all these as a series of books, I'd buy them

[@Formscapes]

I'm planning on doing an illustrated coffee-table style book, hopefully soon-ish.

[@bdcavedweller]

excellent thank you!

[@CrustaceousB]

Only 5 minutes and then I had to pause to essentially have a personal revelation. Love your videos brother. Your insights inspire me💪

[@The.Watcher.2024]

What was the revelation?

[@jamesmccusker2260]

Beautiful work man

[@MadnessSpeaks]

This is amazing

[@tybg-]

WE HAD FREE ENERGY

[@ChunskieFartFilms]

Took too much acid, haven’t stopped thinking this since. Cool to hear someone ranting the same crazy shit I’m thinking about daily.

[@JohnAdamson-e4s]

Hey Kehlan. Check out Nervous Nerds' Dao De Jing post. He has, by far, the best translation. Like you, he is able to present very dense, seemingly contradictory material in an incredibly clear, concise manor. Also like you, his site is high quality and beautiful. After I watched your Noetic Aether post 24/7 for about a week, I did the same thing with the Dao post. Now, both concepts are even more clear. Well done. Thank you.

[@dsauce8780]

Seems like in a lot of ways this is what miles Mathis has been writing about for a long time.

[@TheDAT9]

The graphics were good, but I didn't understand most of what you said, and anyway it doesn't matter. I will achieve understanding when I return back to a higher plane of existence.

[@Formscapes]

The last video was a far more detailed explanation of the same ideas if you haven't seen it yet.

[@das_it_mane]

Brother, if you come up with equations and then prove them experimentally to back this up, you'd be a god

[@Formscapes]

Currently the bar is simply explaining known phenomena. Modern science can't even do that for the bar magnets on your refrigerator. If equations and predictions are what you find impressive then do you. I want to understand. Controlling and manipulating is secondary to that. Math will enter the picture when the theory is dam well ready for it to do so, and not a moment sooner.

[@Galizur-Raziel-777]

This vacuity fluctuation concept is interesting, however if it was the explanation for positive and negative polarities, why wouldn't two negative poles pull towards one another and merge, both being instances of vacuity? Perhaps I'm missing some aspect of the theory here? Also, how might this relate to plasma?

[@Formscapes]

vacuity is not negative magnetic polarity. Negative magnetic polarity is the **inflow** of the field, while the positive pole is the outflow. The interaction of density and vacuity is what allows for things like circulatory flows. When two negative poles come into contact, it is the constructive interference which keeps them apart by increasing the density of the field between them and thus amplifying the repulsive potential.

[@Galizur-Raziel-777]

@@Formscapes Okay okay, I *think* I get it, kinda. You also mention atomic nuclei being essentially stabilized fluctuating vacuity instances, and this reminds me of the idea that space could be the actual plenum, and what we call matter is actually instances of vacuity. So essentially, space-time would be like an ocean, and matter like bubbles in the ocean, in a crude metaphor. If this were the case, it would be precisely the opposite of the way it seems to be to us, that is, the bubbles (particles) in the ocean of space, though actually instances of ocean-emptiness, appear to be the solid objects on an empty background, simply because of the figure-ground relationship. Because density makes up the ground, and emptiness the figures, it appears to be the opposite of what it is, the ultimate cosmic illusion. Could also be related to gravity, potentially, as the inflow of spatial-plenum into atomic-vacuity, with larger instances of vacuity having a greater pull, and pulling toward one another. I realize this isn't as sophisticated as what you're discussing but what do you think of this basic conceptual flip? Thanks for engaging, aren't many people I could discuss this with.

[@VoldraLightningfrost]

Dear Formscapes. I am intensely su!cidal, and the chances of me doing it feel very high right now. Can you please cover the topic in esoteric and metaphysical terms? You may save lives

[@Formscapes]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/qZPQhJSerdKSgZo kzbin.info/www/bejne/fWicdnuMn7Garbc

[@dylanscott7253]

Amazing as always, much respect

[@MISSICSART]

Oh This is just what I hoped to see!! Thank you! Material Ladder: kzbin.info/www/bejne/bajQgoKFftCpbc0

[@bretrohde7300]

Excellent! You are building nicely upon Whitehead’s work. Your well-developed theory is developing well. Carry on!

[@KaliFissure]

Superfluids self excite to maxima. THIS is what is difficult to see since we live in this world of friction and grain

[@AugustMoon67]

Sensible to put forward one's own models rather than just moan about the imperfections and faults with previously established ones. But once one starts to reject the generally established view one needs to specify exactly what one wants to keep, and what is to be rejected. A problem those who accept everything needn't worry about. In this case I'm baffled by statements like this: 25:13 "Moving forward the terminology we will be using will in many ways differ from the terms which are typically used in discussing the nature of the atomic realm, and this is an intentional decision. Terms like proton, electron let alone quarks and gluons are themselves the result of an enormous amount of confusion, and in so far as we will be using these terms at all we will be contextualising them in a very specific way, so as to avoid ambiguity." Yes, but the existence of atoms has been controversial too, and only a century ago many heavyweights rejected their possibility. Formscapes takes them for granted, without motivating this certainty. With my father working as a nuclear physicist at CERN I never felt any doubt that the amazingly big machinery I saw at visits there actually helped observe something. And if this something could be described as "particles", so be it. If better conceptions will emerge in the future it will surely be at least related to the present ones.

[@Formscapes]

Calling atomic theory itself into question is actually part of the plan here, but there is a great deal of groundwork which has to be established beforehand. There is certainly at least some truth to atomic theory, for a few reasons. There must be a "most primordial" self-perpetuating organic system, which we could correlate with the atom. We can thus infer that these systems must be, in some sense at least, indivisible "holons" with discrete properties. Nonetheless, there is a massive question left hanging by all this; does matter actually behave as a swarm of discrete, atomic organisms in nature, or does it only appear to be so under the very artificial conditions created by scientists who wish to understand the world by cutting it up into ever smaller bits? When we ask a question like; "how many individual atoms might we cut up this piece of aluminum into?" that may very well be a question with a genuine answer. But when we ask a question like "How many atoms are comprising this piece of aluminum before we begin carving it up?" the answer might very well be one, or zero, or it may simply be a badly framed question to begin with. In probing the atomic world, I think it may very well be the case that we are not in fact probing into the world of matter as it currently exists within our present epoch of cosmic evolution, but rather that we are - unwittingly - probing into the deep history of cosmic evolution.

[@barrypickford1443]

Studying a single bolt/screw etc that is part of a car will not open up the world of possible explanations for the infinite journeys the car could take and for why. Prolly a brain fart on my behalf here but it’s how I feel about science/physics at times But for positivities sake I will leave it like this: exploration is a journey in itself. We will continue to delve deeper no doubt ❤

[@StephenHutchins]

Okay we need an official reading list of preliminary ideas/theory to fully understand your theories. I want what you’re smoking

[@juno_lake]

For a very grounded introduction of the temporal implications Formscapes brings forth I recommend reading Scholastic Metaphysics: A contemporary introduction.

[@phonic1451]

Another most enjoyble presentation

[@DanielEngsvang]

I believe that "in short": 1. Consciousness does NOT originate in the brain of any organism but rather "controlled" from there. 2. "We"(Consciousness) sure has a plan with all of this diversity of life that we see everywhere really. 3. Things evolve mostly because there is a kind of "Field" residing in higher dimensions that are intimately connected to ALL things(Life and Molecules and so on) 4. The Universe is Not expanding into "Nothing" as there is no such thing as anything "outside" of it in that sense, it expands into Consciousness itself in my ignorant opinion(A romantic idea at least) 5. The "Real" and true nature of Reality(if you like) lies in higher dimensions and we can therefore only measure the very effects of these phenomena here in the comfortable but lower dimensions(Subjective experience in 3-D(Simplified). 6. And the very eternal and ever present "Motivation" behind all of creation is also something that we can't simply believe that we can "Pin point" and put down into simple Human language, Right?, as this would be more than perversely arrogant before ignorant to believe even by "Human standards". 7. And no matter how advanced our technological capabilities will ever become(even as a thought experiment) will never be able to actually connect Consciousness to technology, but they may seem somewhat "Conscious" in time but i seriously believe that there is impossible to connect a Fully artificial/mechanical entity to this "Field", just like how i personally NEVER will be able to access the Internet with only my brain/body, even though i am sitting here leaning my head towards it, and that is because i am a fully biological organism, and the same goes for my computer here. as It can absolutely access the internet otherwise i would not be here rambling about my "eccentric ideas", but this is because it has the proper hard ware installed(Physical antenna + electronics needed to receive these frequencies(Simplified), and with a little help from the software(programming) 8. And there is this thing about Capitalism also, No i am joking, i won't even go there 🙂😇🥰😂

[@priceyindividual2995]

I love it when I get to a Formscapes video this early

[@TheRealMortyII]

Wow bro... I'm just about to read Kant's "Philosophy of Material Nature." This is everything I would expect a nounenal explanation of physics to be. I hope I can catch up

[@42musicband]

I wonder, considering you're all correct and will manage to create a new framework of understanding the reality - what are the chances of you being acknowledged by society and if so - in what way. Have you thought about that?

[@Formscapes]

Nah I really don't care lol. I'm doing this for me not "society"

[@elinope4745]

Presumption is foolish, nothing gives you right to it.

[@balefirefury]

you must have felt the morphogenetic field ripples that I just got done with your last vid earlier today. (BTW starting to see you blow up on reddit, saw you mentioned in 2 separate thread today. weird)

[@timefluidscribbler]

“Matter IS frozen light” might be my favorite takeaway from this segment

[@infensus1992]

Grats on 50k subs!

[@valentinogaming9116]

Amazing 👏 bravo 👏 🙌 👌 tha k you so so very much ❤️ I loved the articulation just perfection in my eyes. Namaste 🙏 👋

[@SpaceDruid999]

So is vacuity/negative energy essentially a noetic ecological niche that has been left as-of-yet unfilled by compatible conscious expressions? Almost as if the organism that is the universe has a craving to experience something? A song yet unsung? Code yet unwritten? Can we, the experienced, inject our own will into the void and change the inertia, or create a new song by forcing the rest of the orchestra to adapt?

[@Formscapes]

Thinking of vacuity as a craving is a great way to regard it, yes. Density, conversely, could be regarded as a will to release or growth. yang/yin, feminine/masculine. As for how human consciousness might interact with these dynamics, I would refer you to my parapsychology documentary

[@SpaceDruid999]

@@Formscapes I've watched it before along with your documentary on the possible functions of magic, but I'll definitely give them another go with what I've just listened to held in context. Thank you.

[@timefluidscribbler]

4:15 was this taken by you? The hand just like a bough!

[@hobonickel840]

What you refered to @56:00 was neuromorophic computing and it's through mnemonics this first be it very slow form of computing has progressively gained speed in shaping the network of our modern civ... Based on my own strange and humble observances sailing on the ocean of algorithms within the electromagnetic spectrum of light, making up our reality, as well as an attentive shortcut formula for channeling universal synchronicity, I must ask you to please take a long look at the somewhat occulted work of William Sidis, more importantly, regarding "reversals" ... and just for fun take a peek at a intriguing shadow (on the artificially created spotlight illuminations of mainstream influences) known as Richard Martin Edler von Mises, the odd but vastly unrecognized brother of Ludwig von Mises. "I can give the pieces that fit, I can't place them together and I can't be their eyes to see" A mind full of wonder will have less room for fear (π√ "Trep") ... Always in jest, Clerk's demon, a self-aware idiot and Observer.. Cheers

[@emmanueldiechristengemeins9271]

nice

[@thehipponugget3287]

Very interesting ideas! I have alot quite alot to say about it. For starters, have you ever heard of Dialect and their work? I think your theories would complement eachother. Both of you have the same problem tho, in that you're never going to be taken seriously if you don't speak the modern language of physics. The difference between interpretation and theory is equations, or at the very least simulation. From the sounds of it this potential field should be modelable, not perfectly but enough to put some numbers to things. I understand that the whole point of this theory is to escape scientific dogma, but the fact remains that precise predictions are very helpful and there would be great benefit to convincing the larger scientific community, instead of just us weird philosophers. From the sounds of it your model should be most similar to bohmian mechanics, minus the corpuscles, but I'd love to see the mathematics of the larger scale worked out. If you can get even a basic working of gravity from the same equations you describe atoms with it'll massively help the credibility. I'd also like to see more on some of the testable predictions you've mentioned, specifically in a previous video you mentioned that the jets of black holes should be made predominantly of neutrons. If you could get a sim working of a basic rotating black hole and incoming light to generate these neutrons that'd be another major credibility boost. You glossed over the other subatomic particles as "confusion", but I think your model could still handle them. Specifically, I think color charge could be sortve magnetic monopoles, but only on one axis; say red would be expansion along the x axis, anti red would be contraction, green and anti green on the y, etc. Perhaps even electrons/positrons are expansion/contraction along the time axis, unifying every single matter particle into a single flow shape in potential. Add in the higgs field as a single direction in this 4d space collapsing into time, and it'd definitely be pretty enough to turn heads!

[@thehipponugget3287]

Oh also, I know you don't like the idea of true infinity, but I think projective geometry could be the answer to the flat infinite spacetime but ultimately looping universe. A very basic addition to the way we handle numbers allows for points at infinity to be described, and these points naturally loop from positive to negative. In that sense, spacetime could be the projective quaternion plane

[@Formscapes]

"you're never going to be taken seriously if you don't speak the modern language of physics." Luckily I don't give a single, solitary fuck about whether physicists take me seriously or not

[@Formscapes]

There are true infinities everywhere. It's just that infinity is not a number, and thus cannot be used to enumerate actual entities in nature. There cannot be infinity stars because infinity is not an amount.

[@Formscapes]

Projective geometry is something I've been looking into lately so that'll probably be coming up down the line. Apparently alot of theorists have used projective geometry as a way to conceptualize counterspace, which is promising.

[@SPGHTTFRT]

Fucking magnets, how do they work?Has now taken on a new layer of meaning

[@joebotz1243]

Like a radio

[@sandsstandsmans6624]

Magnetic fields exist and can be detected in spaces with no matter. They're not energy(the way we currently understand it) but can create energy. It makes almost more sense to say it's the thing that everything else is made of. 😂

[@pravdaseed64]

This video add 🌀 Value 🌀 🔆2 Utube🔆 ❇️ Thanks ❇️

[@4pfdattu605]

Is any of this inspired by Martin Hedgier?

[@Formscapes]

Yes. I discuss Heidegger at length in other videos.

[@mannnyfletcher]

its just so strange because thats how the universe works. like it could be any other way. but thats how it works. what is making it work that way?? is it truly just ordered chaos?

[@kevinhowe3280]

Man i love this channel

[@foolaround]

your thesis is in big sync with the theory Terrence Howard defends in the Joe Rogan experience. Are your last several videos on the Aether related to it, trying to catch the viral wave around the JRE episodes or it's a crazy coincidence? Thank you for your content by the way, I deeply enjoy it

[@Formscapes]

There are no such thing as coincidences. These ideas are really in the Zeitgeist right now and there are reasons for that. But the way Howard is trying to go about things is very, very different from what I'm doing for a number of reasons.

[@foolaround]

@@Formscapes yes , no question about that the methods are completely different. Still ,I was curious if the video trilogy direction was partially provoked by the JRE. Anyway, I think public debates against more renowned figures is very beneficial and effective. I hope I see you in such debates in the future

[@bentuovila5296]

One of the questions that morphic resonance raises is the pripagation of the field of influence. Does it move at the speed of light? Does its gave a range? Could the formation of synthetic crystals elsewhere in the universe affect them here?

[@Formscapes]

There is no propagation of anything. There is nothing that moves. Morphic influences occur within the implicate order, not the explicate order. Space is entirely irrelevant. I discuss this much more thoroughly in my video about morphic resonance.

[@bentuovila5296]

Thanks I will check that out! Does this imply we are the only species in the universe to have synthesized these substances?

[@Formscapes]

​@@bentuovila5296 unless the effects diminish over time, and such substances were created many billions of years ago, then yes. In my opinion, we have very good reasons to believe that human life is the only life in the cosmos to have developed technological artifice. The copernican principle is simply wrong. The earth is the central stage of the cosmic drama.

[@mutungasensei402]

💯🔥🔥🔥

[@andymurray8620]

Are you working on the book? Seriously - if I may recommend an approach, just take your scripts and use them as a jumping off point. I have many thoughts but the first is about the potential to start breaking up some scientific dogmas - I haven't even completely wrapped my head around Noetic Aether yet, but it seems like it could have a similar impact as Process Philosophy, if not a greater one. I've had to restart the first video a few times. Admittedly I keep putting it on at bedtime and haven't given it 100% focus for the entire runtime - so it is no wonder I haven't followed the empirical breadcrumb trail, like I'm able to with all of your other videos from beginning to end. I'm determined to get there though. EDIT: This synopsis was very helpful; I am getting closer - I don't know if I am all in yet but dude, you've got a Unified Theory. I can't help but laugh and imagine "Professor Dave" watching this. I kinda want to drop this link in one of his video's and be like, "Remember Formscapes? Where's *your* Grand Unified Field Theory?"

[@Formscapes]

Yeah that's the plan; weave some of the scripts together to form the backbone of what will basically be the manifesto of Noetic Science. Gotta figure out how to get it published and printed though.

[@AstralApple]

​@@FormscapesHello sir, I am a big fan. If you want to team up with me we can collab. I am a 34-year-old college student looking to publish some scientific material as fast as I can. Realistically within the next year or so. My mentor says my philosophy is indubitably at a master tier. Hopefully I will publish my first video as part of a video series later today 🤓 My mentor helps me understand mythopoesis which incorporates a lot of your "archetypology" theory. I love that word you used "archetypology" by the way!

[@andymurray8620]

@@Formscapes I was just talking to my daughter earlier - we end up talking about all kinds of "deep" things - she's one of the few people I have who will sit and listen to me drone on and on. Anyways, I actually brought up morphogenetics. I think it is one of those things that everyone just kind of assumes we have "figured out." I asked her how, when a tree or flower grows, or a human for that matter - how does it "know" what shape or form it is going to take? How do the cells seemingly have a blueprint of "where" to build? I guess the half of a point I am at risk of getting to is: it is easy to forget how often many things are taken for granted. Most people don't stop to think of that. I don't think the average person realizes we've never "seen" an electron either. Sometimes, taking the time to point out these most simple of facts (and many more) as a sort of groundwork, might be helpful in your overall "teaching method."

[@jamessekatawatrent1754]

@@Formscapes And I believe it can also help if we as the community start to take on some side quests like formulating rigorous mathematical frameworks to model some of the core concepts articulated in this ongoing exposition. Borrowing insights from James Clarke Maxwell equations. One idea is the algorithmic modelling of these Noetic processes. Instead of creating distinct and ever self-defeating maps (a tendency of mainstream and institutional science), we can focus on finding out how the territory encodes the maps we encounter in our direct experience of the universe thus giving us an ever increasing control and understanding of the maps we find ourselves in.

[@agdnetto]

What a treat!

[@JovanMuncanovic]

Reject new age, embrace Orthodoxy!

[@The.Watcher.2024]

Wait: what does morphic resonance have to do with the first half of the video? The first half of the video seemed mechanistic; but then the morphic resonance part seems to go in the opposite direction

[@Formscapes]

Because noetic fields are morphogentic fields, and because Sheldrake's arguments pertaining to bonding behaviors relate directly to what I'm arguing about the nature of atomic "orbitals"

[@The.Watcher.2024]

@@Formscapes why call noetic fields something other than morphic fields? (I assume theyre not identical? What would a non-morphic noetic field be? Also, why the word "noetic"?)

[@Nalhek]

​@@The.Watcher.2024 The reasoning for the term noetic is discussed within the first few minutes of the video. The term is used such that the term Noematta can stand in for "conceptual prehension" as used within Whitehead's work, and such that a connection to the Hellenic conception of "Nous" is emphasized (and also Husserl's use of "Noema"). The term encompasses field phenomena in general. All fields are Noetic/Morphogenetic.

[@The.Watcher.2024]

@@Nalhek in other words.. noetic to reference things basically no one is familiar with?

[@The.Watcher.2024]

@@Nalhek also, what's a noetic field if al fields are noetic...?

[@dorothygorska-tyas6958]

Visually & aurally sublime. ♡

[@TheDarkInformative]

23:23 This is my idea of the Universe as a tube..

[@ConceptuallyExperimental]

Great video! Can you possibly do a short comprehensive episode on infinite space pls and thank you

[@kellyryanobrien1]

Just experiencing the aether consciousness coming in strong as I see this

[@PD-nk1rz]

Dregs swell in silence silted density portends I am not prepared to descend yet I will stand watching my tar bloom puncture wounds beneath my feet tendrils a mycelial rise like fascia into mine that climbs to condemn no to smother the shinned dread I fail to apprehend still I contend a bubbling gasp forever. Cleansed.

[@BracaPhoto]

This reminds me that most of what we see is what IS NOT 😮 EX: When we see a yellow flower that flower is every color BUT Yellow - Yellow is what it reflects - not what it is The same with a photon - we can only see it when it dies on our eyes or a sensor We cannot see what something currently IS - Only what it is not- kinda 😂❤😢😢❤😂

[@AshleyGraetz]

"born to suffer."

[@KaliFissure]

The physics requires imaginary dimension because literally there is antimatter universe right there on the other side of singularity surface. Neutron. Event horizon.

[@mattb4251]

Really just sounds like you're trying to rename quantum field theory.

[@Formscapes]

Then you are not seeing the implications. I'd recommend watching the last video, which is much more detailed.

[@trevconn123]

Fantastic episode! It would be awesome to hear an episode with someone like Dr. Robert Gilbert, Dan Winter, or preferably Generation Zed. Your channel is a breath of fresh air!

[@LouisCortina]

Love your work friend. Thank you for this piece 🙏

[@Descending-melodies.]

I dont need religion nor gods to mystify reality. Reality is already mystical enough as it is

[@BlueAngel1979]

All very interesting, but gravity, or in other words electromagnetism, doesn't need any medium in order to act upon mater. It's a core in specific point in space from which propagates the electromagnetic phenomena through its two poles, one negative and one positive. In similar way such as a battery, contains energy and this energy has a certain range of activity (not field). The intensity of electromagnetism could be defined by the speed which a celestial body rotates around its axis, the faster it revolves the stronger the energy in its core. Gravity is electromagnetism and the universe doesn't need time in order to exist and function, time, unlike electricity and gravity, exists only as a human notion and invention. In other words, the perception of time creates a sense of order in our lives by inventions like watches, clocks and calendars we are providing a schedule, a chronological order if you will, for past and future events. However, there is not any actual energy in the sense of time.

[@Heaven351]

Nah , it needs medium , even in condensed matter physics and quantum field theory - these so called fields are space filling ether vibrations having a fluid like behaviour. But they call it Field but in reality those fields are aether ( ether) perturbations