************* The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] ************ ОК. Leave and forget this examle of ordinary algebra. But If you change x to y, you will get always one: XY + X(1-Y) + Y(1-X) + (1-X)(1-Y) =1 and YX + Y(1-X) + (1-Y)(1-X) = 1 Yes. It is a Boolean algebra, Just ordinary algebra proves that: The changing the order of items does not change the sum x=3, y=2 then 3*2 + 3(1-2) + 2(1-3) + (1-3)(1-2) = 1 and X=2 y=3 then 2*3 + 2(1-3) + 3(1-2) +( 1-2) (1-3) = 1 Funny, isn't it? It's not so seriously. Let's leave it to mathematicians.
16.08.2014, 20:26, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>: > Send Trom mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Trom digest..." > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Trom Digest, Vol 121, Issue 22 (Pete Mclaughlin) > 2. Re: Trom Digest, Vol 121, Issue 20 (Pete Mclaughlin) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 08:42:21 -0700 > From: Pete Mclaughlin <[email protected]> > To: The Resolution of Mind list <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [TROM1] Trom Digest, Vol 121, Issue 22 > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Hi Svoboda > Unfortunately no. > This is Boolean algebra which is used to make logical analysis. The only > numerical values allowed are zero and one. > > X can be any pustulate or thing. Y can be any postulate or thing. When these > postulates or things are used the equation equals 1 which is everything in > the universe. > > Sincerely > Pete > > Sent from my iPad >> On Aug 15, 2014, at 11:10 PM, Svoboda Vladimir <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> ************* >> The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] >> ************ >> OK, Pete. I'll add the algebra theme. >> >> The changing the order of items does not change the sum, if we say about >> logical note : >> >> XY + X(1-Y) + Y(1-X) + (1-X)(1-Y) =1 >> >> If you change x to y, you will get one. >> >> In ordinary algebra if we take x=3, and y=2, any numbers, or take x=2 and >> y=3, and deliver in equation, then we get the unit. >> Universe is always unity. >> >> Is it OK? >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Trom mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 09:25:51 -0700 > From: Pete Mclaughlin <[email protected]> > To: The Resolution of Mind list <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [TROM1] Trom Digest, Vol 121, Issue 20 > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Hi Jesus > > Thanks for your reply. You are right that I am making these changes because > of my cognition that everything I do, all the junior goals I pursue are only > being done so I can be known by others or to know what I have created. The > most important of these two is to be known by others. > Dennis makes this point also where he says that we will keep running the > junior goals until we realize they are just efforts to be known at which > point the charge will move to the basic goals package. > > By changing the name of the basic goals package to "to be known" I am nudging > the student toward an earlier recognition of this realization. TROM becomes > very easy to understand once you realize that everything you do is an effort > to "be known". > > However I am up against the bank. People are emotionally invested in > believing their game is what is important and has nothing to do with being > known. > > As Paul pointed out recently "you can lead a horse to water but you cannot > make him drink" > > There have been some complaints in the past that TROM is to hard to > understand as written but if the real problem is hat students are not willing > to change their minds until they expend a great deal of effort studying the > material then my changes to the manual will not improve the situation. > > I am bringing up these points for discussion to test this theory. So far it > looks like I should make no changes as change upsets people who won't change > their minds till their good and ready to do so anyway. > > Sincerely > Pete > > Sent from my iPad >> On Aug 16, 2014, at 3:47 AM, Jesus Garcia <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> ************* >> The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] >> ************ >> Correction: "know" in the last sentence should be "now". >>> On 16 August 2014 12:42, Jesus Garcia <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi Pete. >>> Understood. Words are symbols that represent something and they are not >>> the thing itself. Still we need to agree on the meaning of those symbols if >>> we are to understand each other. >>> >>> To answer your question first, yes, it makes it clearer why you want to >>> change the label of the package and no, I do not agree that the change >>> would be helpful. >>> >>> I understand that your decision stems from the cognition you had doing >>> level 5. Nothing to say about your cognition. >>> It is the conclusion that that cognition applies to everyone what makes me >>> a bit uneasy. Dennis has done a great deal of work to get to the point of >>> producing TROM and any correction should be done in a separate work. I have >>> no way of knowing if your corrections are correct other than evaluating >>> them using the knowledge and experience I have so I prefer to listen to >>> both and make up my own mind. >>> In this case, if I am not mistaken in some way -which has been known to >>> happen- I see that you take the goal "to be known" stemming from the >>> cognition "I create effects so others will notice I am here" and propose to >>> substitute the following, from the THEORY section: >>> "1. The purpose of bringing an effect into existence is to make it known" >>> I personally can think readily of a few purposes for "bringing an effect >>> into existence", one of them being "to be known". They are not more or less >>> important saving for the fact that each one of us attached importance to >>> that goal at some point; and this is what makes them important to us, >>> individually. >>> However, "to make it known", at this point and from my state of awareness, >>> seems to be the more basic one; so I do not see a reason to change that. It >>> is workable and it makes sense. >>> I hope I did not invalidate any cognition while expressing my thoughts as >>> it was not my intention. >>> >>> On a related subject, "to bring into existence", "to make known", "to >>> create" all seem to be complimentary goals to "to know", "to see", "to >>> perceive". They make a pair that I see as inseparable, that is, one cannot >>> exist without the other. >>> Together with the negatives "make not known" and "not know" I see games. >>> I see that when we introduce force, must, importance, win-lose, conviction >>> etc., it means introducing charge, energy. >>> I believe I am not saying anything new when I say that once the emotional >>> charge is off the goal, everything looks much better. When the being has >>> the choice to play or not any game, the problems disappear. It does not >>> matter how degrading the game seems, as long as you play it WILLINGLY and >>> CONSCIOUSLY, that is FREELY; and for me, know, this means free of emotional >>> charge, of energy blockage and opposing goals. >>> >>> Have a nice day >>> >>> Jesus >>>> On 15 August 2014 15:31, <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Send Trom mailing list submissions to >>>> [email protected] >>>> >>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >>>> http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom >>>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >>>> [email protected] >>>> >>>> You can reach the person managing the list at >>>> [email protected] >>>> >>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >>>> than "Re: Contents of Trom digest..." >>>> >>>> Today's Topics: >>>> >>>> 1. Re: Feedback on "Mus be Known" (Pete Mclaughlin) >>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> Message: 1 >>>> Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 06:34:43 -0700 >>>> From: Pete Mclaughlin <[email protected]> >>>> To: The Resolution of Mind list <[email protected]> >>>> Subject: Re: [TROM1] Feedback on "Mus be Known" >>>> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >>>> >>>> Hi Jesus >>>> The words used to describe the postulates are not the postulates. The >>>> words are only labels that we use so we can communicate about the >>>> postulates. >>>> >>>> In reading over your statements I see that you are saying the to be known >>>> and to know postulates are all about creating stuff as in inanimate >>>> objects. >>>> You end with a confusion on whether to know is actually the creative >>>> postulate. >>>> >>>> Dennis did spend a lot of time talking about creating effects in the TROM >>>> manual and this is misleading. >>>> >>>> The cognition I had that started my effort to change the label for the >>>> basic goals package to "to be known" was that creating effects is only >>>> being done so that I can get others to know that I am here. >>>> >>>> This is the most important thing to learn from the level 5 of TROM. I >>>> CREATE EFFECTS SO OTHERS WILL NOTICE I AM HERE. >>>> >>>> I want to be known and I want others to know me. >>>> >>>> Creating stuff doesn't matter except as it serves this purpose. >>>> >>>> So "to be known" means I want to be known by others. This is the most >>>> important goal and why it is the purpose behind all the other goals a >>>> person has. >>>> >>>> Does this make it clear why I want to change the label for the basic >>>> goals package to "to be known" and do you now agree the change would be >>>> helpful? >>>> >>>> Sincerely >>>> Pete >>>> >>>> Sent from my iPad >>>>> On Aug 14, 2014, at 1:33 AM, Jesus Garcia <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> ************* >>>>> The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] >>>>> ************ >>>>> Hello Peter. >>>>> >>>>> I am answering your call to give feedback on the clearing up of the >>>>> concept "To Be Known". >>>>> >>>>> I believe It is of the utmost importance to understand the goal package >>>>> "To know"; it is not coincidence that it is the core of TROM. This >>>>> understanding is also the end result of the practice of TROM. I also >>>>> found it difficult to understand; steep gradient indeed. >>>>> >>>>> I will try to explain why I think your addition to the book is >>>>> unnecessary and also resolve the misunderstanding, at least to the point >>>>> that I found allowed me to work with TROM and get results. I will try to >>>>> do this within the confines of the TROM manual. If this is of any use to >>>>> you or any other TROM colleague, I will be quite content. >>>>> >>>>> You have written the following heading: What is "Must be known?" and >>>>> then go and define the "to be known " postulate. I have not been able to >>>>> find the "to be known" postulate in the manual, so at this moment I am >>>>> not going to work with this specific set of words, as I would like to >>>>> keep to the manual as strictly as I can. >>>>> >>>>> From the first addendum of the manual: >>>>> >>>>> - "BE KNOWN >>>>> >>>>> This is the creative postulate; the postulate that brings the effect >>>>> into existence. His PD postulate that goes with it at the other end of >>>>> the communication line is ?know?. This twin postulate structure is still >>>>> present even if the effect is only being created for the benefit of the >>>>> creator; in this case he merely responds to his own PD postulate and >>>>> knows his own creation." >>>>> >>>>> From the section "Theory": >>>>> >>>>> - "Life is a spiritual quality. It has four basic abilities: >>>>> >>>>> 1. It can bring things into existence." >>>>> >>>>> - "1. The purpose of bringing an effect into existence is to make it >>>>> known." >>>>> >>>>> " The four basic actions of life each have a twin postulate structure: >>>>> >>>>> 1. The postulate bringing the effect into existence, and the postulate >>>>> that it shall be known. >>>>> >>>>> 3. The postulate to know the effect and the postulate that it shall be >>>>> made known." >>>>> >>>>> From the second addendum: >>>>> >>>>> - "Purpose, Intention, Goal and Postulate can be regarded as synonyms. A >>>>> game is a contest in conviction." >>>>> >>>>> Ok then! >>>>> >>>>> What I understand here is that "BE KNOWN" is the creative postulate, the >>>>> postulate that brings the effect into existence, same as "TO MAKE IT >>>>> KNOWN". I have used "TO CREATE" in level 4 and run very well with it. >>>>> >>>>> I believe "BE KNOWN" here has a specialized definition whereas "shall be >>>>> known" in the twin postulate structure above is the Passive Form of the >>>>> Simple Future of the verb to know. >>>>> >>>>> I would like to keep it simple so I will not engage in further >>>>> explanations. See if it makes sense. >>>>> >>>>> From the section "THEORY": >>>>> >>>>> - " All games contain conviction. Conviction, by definition, is an >>>>> enforcement of knowingness. Enforcement of knowingness is called >>>>> importance. Importance is the basis of all significance. Essentially, >>>>> importance is a "must". >>>>> >>>>> In games of play our four basic abilities become: >>>>> >>>>> SD: Must be known PD: Must Know" >>>>> >>>>> So we have games, we have conviction, enforcement, importance and MUST. >>>>> Then "Must be known" is here as the specialized definition, meaning "must >>>>> make known" and "must bring into existence". It fits all right, as the >>>>> twin-complementary postulate is "Must know". >>>>> >>>>> Again, see if it makes sense; this is just a theory. >>>>> >>>>> This is all I have to say at this point of the definition of "must be >>>>> known". >>>>> >>>>> I would like now to get into the "To know" package. >>>>> >>>>> From first addendum: >>>>> >>>>> - " KNOW >>>>> >>>>> This is the postulate that permits the being to know the effect. His >>>>> matching PD postulate at the other end of the comm line is ?Be Known? - >>>>> so the effect is there for him to know. >>>>> >>>>> Cause is the action of bringing an effect into existence, taking an >>>>> effect out of existence, knowing, or not-knowing. That which is brought >>>>> into existence, taken out of existence, known, or not-known is called an >>>>> effect. >>>>> >>>>> When two or more beings adopt complementary postulates regarding a >>>>> creation they share that creation, which is now a co-creation. They are >>>>> said to be in agreement regarding that creation. Thus, agreement is a >>>>> shared creation. >>>>> >>>>> Beings, by means of their willingness to create complementary postulates >>>>> (affinity) and by actually creating complementary postulates >>>>> (communication), achieve co-creation (reality). Thus understanding is >>>>> achieved between beings." >>>>> >>>>> Here again, in the first paragraph, ?be known? is a specialized >>>>> definition. "KNOW" is the perception of the effect made known at the >>>>> other end of the comm line. It is the duplication, the acknowledgment of >>>>> having seen the creation (effect). >>>>> >>>>> See above " The four basic actions of life each have a twin postulate >>>>> structure:" >>>>> >>>>> Of the four it is only the first and the third ones which bring into >>>>> existence communication. In the first the action of bringing an effect >>>>> into existence (with its postulate) and the action of knowing the effect >>>>> (with its postulate), both of them self-determined, are absolutely >>>>> necessary to have communication, therefore reality; in other words, >>>>> co-creation. >>>>> >>>>> In the third we take the point of view of the PD postulate(although the >>>>> actions are the same) and if we take notice of the tense of the verbs we >>>>> could understand that first there is the postulate "to know" and then the >>>>> postulate that it shall be "made known". >>>>> >>>>> May be we believe creation is the first action, prior to anything and of >>>>> course, prior to the perception of that being created. But what if "TO >>>>> KNOW" were the postulate of creation? >>>>> >>>>> There is an intriguing sentence in the second addendum: >>>>> >>>>> "The main list of life goals, headed by ?To Know? and continuing with >>>>> ?To Create? etc., form a scale of increasing condensation, or solidity." >>>>> >>>>> It may very well be that our confusion with the "TO KNOW" package means >>>>> we still have some more work ahead of us. >>>>> >>>>> In the second addendum Dennis says: >>>>> >>>>> " Knowing >>>>> >>>>> If one were to inquire into the nature of the quality or ability that is >>>>> closest to life itself one would eventually arrive at the subject of >>>>> knowing. Life can know. All else is the subject of methods or systems of >>>>> knowing. >>>>> >>>>> The basic law, or agreement, of this universe is that one will only know >>>>> that which is brought into existence to be known. Thus, this universe >>>>> sets a limitation upon knowing as only being possible for the class of >>>>> things which are brought into existence to be known. >>>>> >>>>> This law is peculiar to this universe. A being can only operate, i.e. >>>>> play games within this universe while in agreement with this law. Once he >>>>> starts to know outside of this law he is operating outside the universe. >>>>> >>>>> The action of bringing something into existence so that it can be known >>>>> is called creation. Thus, in this universe knowing is limited to those >>>>> things which have been created in the universe. >>>>> >>>>> It should never be considered that knowing is by nature limited to those >>>>> things which are created to be known. Life can know; it can know >>>>> anything, whether it has been brought into existence to be known or not. >>>>> In order to operate in this universe life considers, or agrees, that it >>>>> will not-know until something is brought into existence to be known. >>>>> >>>>> This limitation upon knowing is the basic law, and the only basic law, >>>>> that governs this universe. Other universes can be constructed upon other >>>>> basic laws, but they would all be some type of limitation of knowing, for >>>>> while knowing is unlimited any type of universe or game is impossible. >>>>> Bear the basic law of this universe in mind as you do the Practical >>>>> Exercises, for all the games you have ever become trapped in in this >>>>> universe have been based upon the basic law of the universe. " >>>>> >>>>> It seems to say that "TO KNOW" is senior and more basic than "TO BRING >>>>> INTO EXISTENCE". >>>>> >>>>> Definitely all seems to come down to knowing and creating. >>>>> >>>>> Have a nice day >>>>> >>>>> Jesus Garcia >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Trom mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom >>>> -------------- next part -------------- >>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >>>> URL: >>>> <http://lists.newciv.org/pipermail/trom/attachments/20140815/fb05efa8/attachment.html> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Trom mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom >>>> >>>> End of Trom Digest, Vol 121, Issue 20 >>>> ************************************* >> _______________________________________________ >> Trom mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.newciv.org/pipermail/trom/attachments/20140816/d847ac91/attachment.html> > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Trom mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom > > End of Trom Digest, Vol 121, Issue 26 > ************************************* _______________________________________________ Trom mailing list [email protected] http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
