Free Zone America Forum 2001 : Second law or am I GOD

Second law or am I GOD

Author: Bruce
Posted: Thur Oct 04 2001 04:13 am

Hello Freezoneres,
I have been wondering about whether we (the am) can actually create energy. As in the potential to drive our postulates. Hubbard says CREATE CREATE CREATE, but am I really taking energy from god ? . This contradicts the second law of Dynamics. I understand that energy can neither be created nor destroyed ( ?????) . This fits well with the havingeness expressed by Mr. F. Funchs's transformational Processing. Personally this has gotten me to the other side of NOTS (ala Hilton processing). Is it the ME that can actually create energy from nothing. Where does energy have to be in order to be manipulated ? to be used ? Is energy able to be created from nothing. I understand that processing principles tell me that this is so, but is it ?

Could someone tell me if I can create energy, or if I am 'transforming' it from 'theta' stocks. The Is of the thing is why the universe is expanding or am I just strealing non-optimumally used energy from others. Am I a potential with no reliance on others when it comes to driving change.

Author: John
Posted: Thur Oct 04 2001 03:34 pm

nope, E = mc² is quite clear.
LRH believed he was God, and so he wanted to believe that he could create universes. If you want to know more, e-mail me, because I am getting ready to check out of this board, this place gives me the creeps.

johnreese@earthlink.net

Author: 1 Flew Over
Posted: Thur Oct 04 2001 05:06 pm

And so continues the gospel acording to John

Author: John
Posted: Thur Oct 04 2001 06:01 pm

well, according to Einstein anyway.
what did you teach again?

Author: Ed Rhett
Posted: Thur Oct 04 2001 07:49 pm

Bruce,

That was the second law of thermodynamics, I believe. And Einstein was right, I suppose, about E=MC Squared. That is true for converting matter into energy.

As far as creating energy by postulate, see "The Creation of Human Ability". This doesn't mean you can create enough to measure at the present time. A 4 minute mile might be easier. This is just one of the things that seems possible to me, which hasen't been proven to my complete satisfaction yet.

And John, we all know you are well read, but what have you produced. We know, for example, that LRH wrote a lot of books that sold. What have you written, that sold?

Myself, I am an electrician, I am working on a school building. I try to run about 200 feet of conduit a day, and usually get close to that or do more. What have you done?

Author: shogun
Posted: Fri Oct 05 2001 02:04 am

Converting matter into energy? Such as converting gasoline into a useable fuel in an automoble enigine? How about food products into gas (from the backside)? John...help. :-)

Author: VAST
Posted: Fri Oct 05 2001 04:10 am

Hello Bruce. Thank you for your post. I understand your comment about getting to the "other side of NOTS"( ala Hilton processing). However, if you are still asking a question like that, you may not be on the right bridge. From my own experience, the "NOTS" case is completely handled "by the roots", so to speak, on EXCALIBUR. This IS the completion of other-determined case. Your question and many others will be answered on EXCALIBUR. If you decide to audit EXCALIBUR, I STRONGLY urge you to get properly trained by a qualified RONS ORG terminal. Also, you should have a case research interview to ensure you are properly prepped to run it. Anything else I would consider adventurous at best and likely foolish. Now, I have a question or two for you. Are you auditing your own bridge without a C/S? Have you been reading and studying different areas of data on the internet and been auditing them by yourself?

Author: John
Posted: Fri Oct 05 2001 05:56 am

ED,

Yes, LRH did sell a great deal of books, and many of them are science fiction. As for my accomplishments in postulating physical theories, a great deal of them are here on this discussion board, and most of them are based on ideas that were proven long ago. Some of it is speculation (theoretical physics), but a good deal of it has already been written. As far as auditing, I would like to get into that, but again, you have to have a proper foundation.

Author: eGOmania
Posted: Fri Oct 05 2001 07:44 am

Tell me again john, what are the names of those drugs your taking? Did you know that psycho-therapy deals with the psyche?

Author: John
Posted: Fri Oct 05 2001 08:07 am

If you want to know about my illness...

http://my.webmd.com/content/article/1680.50543

If you want to know how it's treated...

http://my.webmd.com/content/article/1680.50552

Psych- or psycho-[Gr. psyche, breath, principle of life.] Soul; mental activities; brain; psychological methodology. psychiatrist, n. A physician specializing in psychiatry.-psychiatry n. That field of scientific thought and practice in medicine and psychology which aims to discover and/or correct mental illness.

Author: eGOmania
Posted: Fri Oct 05 2001 08:09 am

duh!

knock-knock. anybody home?

Author: John
Posted: Fri Oct 05 2001 08:19 am

Do you really think that I am not aware of the meaning of the word psyche? I used to drill people about it back when I was into this crazy cult crap.
Notice that the word psyche is greek. There were of course two schools of thought debating over where the soul was located, and eventually, the brain won. The celts used to collect the heads of their victims, because they knew that's where the essence of the person was, rather than the heart. Now, be a good little boy and run along. The human brain is far too complex for you to look at. It may shock you and give you nightmares, because old elron hubbard didn't know jack shit about the human soul.
>duh!

Very good, have a treat.
nighty night

Author: eGOmania
Posted: Fri Oct 05 2001 08:29 am

hey sweet-cakes, didn't you get it?
knock-knock anybody home?

"don't know jack shit" is right on!!!!
Freud would be proud!!