Thursday, June 4, 2020
5:50 a.m. John Dorsey Wolf, I got the sense, listening last night to the record of our ILC meeting on Monday, that you may wish to participate in some way. True? Or was it merely that the mention of your name brought up memories?
Perhaps it is enough if it reminded your group of some of the richness available in the archives of the Voyagers Mailing List, TMI Explorers, and the current Explorers group. You should consider making sure that these archives are preserved somewhere for future study, as the passage of time will bring some of it to a very different appearance.
I suppose we can rely on NSA to have copies.
Yes, but copies available to your selected public would be more valuable. I know it was a joke, but there is truth in the need to have it accessible.
Are you thinking of this as for historical – call it archaeological –purposes? For contemporary research? Or what?
Archives are not kept for only one reason, nor for any one group. But it would be well to see to it.
As I suppose you know, we have been thinking about how to preserve my own personal researches. Hardly of historical significance, but, as you say, perhaps of interest to some, for whatever reasons, and it would be a shame to have it scattered needlessly, merely from lack of a little foresight.
May I suggest, store the materials in more than one place where possible. Electronic records, unlike physical journals, can be endlessly and easily multiplied. Not a bad precaution, to do so.
Out of country, I get. Is that me or you?
“What is the source of the message?”
Very funny. Say, it’s good to talk to you again, John. Hated to lose touch with you, so soon after meeting you in the flesh. Are you by any chance in touch with Mike Twomey? He was also mentioned, he in connection with VML.
Yes, in fact there is a VML – TMI Explorers – Explorers subset of TMI here.
I recognize that you aren’t joking and I have a vague sense of what you mean. Say more?
There’s a DeMarco’s Writings subset, too! And, in effect, a subset for anyone who contributed toward a common goal. You understand?
I wish you’d spell it out.
“As Above, So Below.” The structure of the non-3D part of the world (you might wish to stop thinking of non-3D and 3D as separate worlds) resembles the 3D part, only it is free from space-and-time limitations of the 3D. So, here, birds of a feather flock together regardless of chronology or geography. In effect, non-3D consists of endless Special Interest Groups. [This refers to very early Internet organizations. Pre-Windows, if I remember rightly.]
Forming and re-forming? Assembling and dissolving?
It might be seen that way, from a 3D perspective. But what looks like replacement to 3D looks like alter-egos to non-3D.
You’re touching on something the guys tried to explain to me long ago, that I could only sort of get. Can you clarify it for me?
It isn’t hard, but it requires that you see things differently. Let me use one of your old sketches about the difference between 3D and non-3D. Showing that all times continue to exist outside 3D, you drew multiple overlapping orbs, each of which represented a different moment of time. One was not replaces by the next in terms of the first ceasing to exist and the next taking its place (until it too would cease to exist). That’s how it seems, but in fact it is closer to say that one moment became accessible to the 3D world, then became inaccessible to it as the next became accessible.
And the us within each moment continued to exist with that moment, and was sort of added to, rather than replaced, in the next.
That’s why all moments of your life are potentially accessible. It is why spiritualists sometimes contact what you call the In-Process version of someone rather than the full version: John F. Kennedy as he was in 1938, say, as opposed to the full span of his life or as opposed to John F. Kennedy in 1948 or 1928.
That seems to mean that various versions of us continue to exist and presumably continue to pursue whatever it is that we were pursuing at a given moment.
That would be to put a non-3D situation into 3D terms and try to make sense of it. Better to do something more practical.
You engineers! All right, so the SIGs –
Think of the various SIGs as libraries, continuing resources. But use them or not, in effect they have a shelf life, a “best used by” date. This is not because things change here; it is because the logical and emotional links to 3D manifestations depend upon the 3D, and 3D changes moment by moment. Thus, links to ancient Greek or Egyptian wisdom once were active and now are not. If one were to forge the link, he would find the societies there, as that moment of time is there. But how easy would it be to forge the link?
Like Carl Jung studying alchemy, I think you mean. It required a classically educated multi-lingual man of certain sensibilities and interests even to assemble the materials, let alone to apply their inner sense to his own personal and professional problems.
That’s right. So your age can still forge links to the psychic investigators of the 1800s and 1900s fairly easily, but in one sense it gets continually easier (as your assumptions approach theirs) and gets continually harder (as the surrounding understanding of context gets more tenuous).
Hmm. So we may wind up like the old spiritualists? Requiring a control to get us into contact with those we are too far from to forge links to?
It isn’t a bad model. It makes some things possible that otherwise might not be.
And are you, and Mike Twomey, say, available to act as such controls?
That’s why I brought up the idea of SIGs.
That would be great.
Let’s look at SIGs a little, because there are advantages that may not have struck you:
- A common interest as a bond.
- Different types of people, as a means of access. Engineers and quilters, business owners and writers, all sorts. You get the idea.
- More opportunities for a personal link, as one person may know one, and other another.
So you’re saying there would be advantages to group-to-group contact, to maximize the number of potential links.
Yes. In effect, you are producing multiple querents, multiple responders, and multiple “controls.” As the 3D group (not just the one you are forming at the present, but any such group) learns to function as a unit, its ability to take in wider and wider perspectives and blends of perspectives increases.
I was about to make an engineer joke when it occurred to me, just this variety of talents and mental habits is one of the advantages you are talking about.
Yes, exactly. You get the advantages of multiple points of access without the fragmentation that arises if each goes off on his or her own.
Well, thank you, John. I hope you will contact Dirk and Dave and Nancy and others who knew you either electronically or in our one weekend, to broaden the contact.
That’s the idea, yes. People say they wish they had your access, but what they mean, though they don’t know it, is they wish they had your openness to the access. So, announcing that I hope to contact various members of your ILC group and the Explorers group in general may help them at least overcome the fear that they’re making me up!
This is all starting to feel somewhat orchestrated, which I guess should come as no surprise, and certainly is welcome. At your service, guys!
Thanks for listening. Contact almost always begins as what seems a vague stirring, an impulse, on the 3D end. Listen, heed, and the door opens wide.
Yeah, I’m thinking of installing a screen door so the bugs won’t get in.
You have the NSA for that.
I’ll concede you the last joke. Thanks, John, and I hope that I and the engineers among us will hear from you often and in depth. Give our best to Mike. Till next time.