You Can’t Think About Time, Only Space
Audio Download = DOWNLOAD Jan Cox Talk 0556 from Cassette
AKS/News Item Gallery= jcap 1989-05-17 (0556)
Condensed AKS/News Items = See Below
Summary = See below
Transcript = See Below (ck edit)
#556 Oct 11, 1989 – 0:58
Notes by TK
Kyroot to :04. There are three possible reactions by thinking machines: definitely true, definitely false, and “insufficient data”. The first two are pertinent, of interest, whereas the latter is impertinent, irrelevant to ordinary intellect. No New Information is forthcoming in the first two: they are spatial only. They are really alternate forms of insufficient data, all information is temporally possible however.
Insufficient data is the prime time for a Real Explorer to access NI, universal info. The Real Explorer can use being lost, dis-located, to access NI. All judgments stand on a spatial location. Once spatial thought is begun it cannot be bootstrapped into new understanding.
In sayings such as “brilliance comes and goes, while mediocrity is forever” are equally true reversed (Plato’s greatness is undimmed by time, where all temporary incompetents have passed unrecorded); to see this is to see the in breath and out breath of life. Things are able to occupy the same place in time where spatially two things cannot occupy the same space. Note that humans can be immobile physically, yet move in space via their TOA/thinking of action.
The Real Explorer needs to have his own operational memory that time cannot be thought about, only space. Thinking about the temporal is like trying to measure without a proper technology of measurement, a faulty or inappropriate measuring process.
And Kyroot Said…
To be extraordinary you must remainù extraordinary.
Once you grasp the substance behind the word “problem” any
idea of solution becomes pretty well forgotten.
A person I met in the Fourth Expansion Zone told me that
their most satisfying hobby was “not talking about themself.”
If it seems like the light is alwaysù in the wrong place, you
may be in the wrong place.
There is an enigmatic unification in pursuing a never ending
What visible authority could ever be infallible, other than
perhaps, one that doesn’t give a goddamn.
I understand that some creatures of the M-V sector were
astounded to learn that on Earth “wishful thinking” was
If you don’t call out their name how do they know you’re
there? If you don’t call out their name how do you know they’re
there? If you don’t call out their name how do they know they’re
there? And almost lastly, if you don’t call out their name how
do you know you’re there? Now do you finally see the super
importance of having a name?
The philosophers in this one softer galaxy have as their
main focus of attention man’s continuing fascination with
explanations and descriptions of the known.
Just saying, “It won’t help,” won’t help.
Question: What is more obvious than things hot or cold?
Answer: Things hot.
One intrepid explorer told me that the extreme thrill of
extreme travel was in meeting people who were un-meetable.
I must agree, there is no doubt: Far away, and long ago
things were older, and more distant.
Over in one of the denser territories I once ran across a
warning sign that read, “Stay Away From The Sleep Wall.”
If a revolution expands beyond the boundaries of its home
planet it is then called something else. (This can also happen
Have any Earth persons yet noticed that it is only at very,
very particular times that they tell themselves “not to worry.”
By a curious skid-of-events, the atmosphere on this one
planet makes it impossible to ever be late. (I understand they
have a waiting list of would-be emigres.)
Heard one guy say that his first thought was always his best
one, and that’s why everybody gets his second one.
A lesson in extraterrestrial economics: Heard this midway
distant creature proclaim, “Having a Ferrari is no crime, paying
for it is.”
And on this one last planet you could get a copyright on
your own life… of course, it had to be original.
Edit (off tape) 556X
Up One Dimension
Man’s present attempts to build logical thinking machines
(computers) have produced so-called machines which, even
operating at their best 3-D speed, can only offer three possible
responses to suggested information. They are: “deffinately
true”, “deffinately false”, and “insufficient data”. (We are not
picking on the machines and we are not picking on the builders —
it has yet to be ascertained whom we are picking on .. I know
people who are seeing this tape in some other locale, and in some
other time frame think they know who is being picked on; that it
is either them or people they think are dumber than they are).
The fact that there are three possible reactions the machine can
produce to any suggested information is one step up from what
they were for awhile.
Under all spacial conditions, “insufficient data”, of course is saying
that there is no additional info possible, there will be no more
data forthcomming, there will be no enlightening, enlarging
response because of insufficient data. But with a certain kind of
more universal intelligence, the very area proclaimed to contain,
“insufficient data” would be the very place that a more radical
intelligence would find things otherwise, to say the least.
Where spacially no new info is possible, all info is
temporally possible. I am not talking about simply pulling
apart, and reversing information trying to get your own intellect
up to the point where you can take any of the three responses and
find them to contain insufficient data. Even when the
information, even when the machinery of Life, of your own, we
will assume, reasonable, sane nervous system at that time sends
back the message, “deffinately false”, you are still looking at
insufficient data. But the key to escaping 3-D limits is in
knowing how the response “insufficient data” has an insufficient data base.
When spacially no new information seems available, or
possible, all information is then coevilly, is then
temporally possible. The expansion of your own personal
information structure, your own data base, is only impossible when
your thinking processes are spacially-based. It is only there
that binary thinking can thrive and breed. That is the only
place that any machine, organization, organism in a 3-D reality
(or even in an unknown, unrecognized 4-D one where they are still
taking the 4th dimension, calling it time and regarding it
spacially), can be limited to only three responses.
It is only when your thinking processes are spacially-based,
which everybody’s are under those conditions, that the structure
is limited, that the information, the data base is limited. It
is only then that your reaction, your brain’s response to any
observation will come back one of the three possibilities (and as all
of you should guess by now, it is generally the first two). The
third, that of insufficient data, is usually only used when you
had no particular interest in the issue and your real response was,
“Who cares?” When a human says he has run into insufficient
data, it would seem by any reasonable 3-D approach to preclude
any immediate profit. But it is otherwise if you know what you
Looked at in a non-linear way, when you reach the point of
responding, “Insufficient data”, to something, you are right at a
prime time, a very opportune moment. When you are faced with
spacially limited info going through your thinking processes; that
is actually the very time when all kinds of things are possible
if you can get outside linear, spacial thinking. If you are
still in search mode and you manage to take even some simple
spacial word or premise and ignite and expand it into the next
dimension, you will have a world of new information to enjoy.
If you can not tell what position you are looking from it is
real hard to tell what side of it you are seeing: the front, the
back, the beginning, the end, the left side or the right side.
It would seem self-evident to ordinary thought that if you don’t
know where you are and you are going back to report to the
king. You will be unable to go back and report the enemies’ troop
movements; you can’t even tell if the they are retreating or
advancing, or trying to get on your flanks.
If you do not have a known position, then whatever you are
looking at is always, to say the least, ambiguous.
From a more universal position, if you could free yourself
from that kind of lineral, internal, spatial position, you could
have access to more universal views, a true plurality, a
multiplicity of views — not just a question of whether you were
regarding the front or the back of something. Your response
then could be, ‘Yeah, Ok, both.” Or, “Am I looking at the east
side or the west side?” “Yeah.” “Did you see the beginning of it
or the end of it?” “How did you guess?”
As long as you do not have a known, fixed spacial position,
you could have access to surveying surprising observations,
views, descriptions, and possibilities.
I would like to ask, rhetorically, how many people begin to
find that there is real energy, more than just a laugh, in being
able to take something you agree with, a phrase you could
appreciate, and to be able to immediately see the exact opposite
of it and realize that if you don’t know exactly what your
vantage point is, you cannot be sure what you are seeing and
which side of the object or issue you are on. If an ordinary
person were to watch a movie and have no vantage point, he would
come away feeling like he’d wasted the price of admission, like
he hadn’t seen anything; like he’d been left blank. In fact, he
might as well have been watching one of the blank walls in the
theater instead of the screen.
It would sound like a new statement of the obvious to say you
have got to know where you are to know what you are looking at;
besides the preposition at the end of the sentence. But you have
got to be able to reverse that perspective point on your own in
any reasonable 3-D sentence. And there will be nothing to figure
out, if you are wired up to persue This activity. You will
immediately see the opposite to be true — but in a way that
would never seep out under ordinary conditions. There is no way
your ordinary intellect would say, “Boy, if you don’t know where
you are, you can tell a lot more about what is going on.” If it
did, you wouldn’t be taking credit for the insight. You would
wonder if you had heat stroke or low blood sugar and whether it
was time to go put a cold towel on your head.
The present thinking machine (your brain) believes it could
no longer fall into the trap of responding to something with
simply, “definately true”, or “definately false”. It believes
that that is too limited, and says, instead, “Insufficient data,
cannot decide; I won’t mislead you by putting my foot into it.”
That is a valid option for it, and would seem to be a fairly
stable, honest statement of local reality.
Your brain will not make dogmatic statements about
absolutely true or false. And that passes as at least a slight
improvement for the machine that in earlier stages continually
made such dogmatic claims. You might say that that is not any
great thinking. But do remember that levels of thinking in the
3-D world are all relative anyway, and give it credit for being
more complex than its predessors several generations back.
See that everyone already knows that you cannot ascertain
points, you can’t make correct, dependable observations and
reports on what you are observing if you do not know the position
you are observing from. Anybody knows that; illiterates
know that, farmers know that, surgeons know that you have got to
know where you are standing in relation to the corpus to know
where the appendix are.
Part of the way to try and escape the hold of the three
choices is to jump off past your struggle with saying,
“insufficient data” when you are trying to appreciate Life’s
use/validity for some person or activity, and what you should
learn from it — that should be mere child’s play to you by now.
If you start treating everything as though you will never know
enough to call it definitely true or definately false, and decide
to just put a comma on it and sit back and relax, you are making
a big mistake. That is THE place that you can jump out of
spacial thinking. And when you are no longer thinking in space
you can then start using the huge expanse of temporally relevant
relationships, forms, possibilities and ideas to start thinking
in the future.