https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/nav/#flagship-articles
This is an official announcement that I have resolved my uncertainty and now I am certain and now
when I say my 2006 article, I mean the fresco article and
when I say my 2007 article, I mean my main article, in which I combined my 1997 Core theory specification with myth — and images incl branching motifs I didnt recognize,
myth & images; mythemes & art motifs.
I was not branching-literate yet — despite writing at some length about branching versus non-branching — within the domain of Physics!
and had not yet connected that with religious myth.
voice transcription:
A month ago , I finally had the opportunity — or invested the time, to do the research in the amazing Max Freakout archives of the Egodeath Yahoo Group to determine and remember that the core of the 2007 main article was finished and announced in September 2006, but it lacked the introduction, which was separated into the top of the homepage of egodeath.com
url https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/nav/#flagship-articles
whenever I picture the 2007 main article, I always prominently mentally picture the wonderful introduction, which I copied from the homepage into the actual article around maybe June 2007
see my postings on this here perhaps one month ago perhaps February 2023
it was very interesting to find that September 12, 2007 was the first time I posted the word eternalism
and immediately after that I posted my announcement of the final revision of my 2007 main article, in which I copied the broken-up sentences from the mobile version
which I remember that I had used to read aloud the article
I think the zip file is working maybe or the individual MP3 files are working at the homepage of egodeath.com reading aloud the main article –
Miking for 2007 Main Article
miking: CAD M39 Cardioid, 8″ , eq: … 3-band probably bass cut and maybe treble boost
I have definitely concluded that that mic does not have the most “clarity” — which might explain why it was discontinued
and it had other issues as well , that I had to fix and repair
Read Aloud from Mobile Version of 2007 Main Article
I did not read aloud the article from the main messy academic copy of the article but rather from the mobile streamlined copy of the article
That’s where I first tried to read aloud the article and determined:
I did my bad habit of putting sentences within sentences to make everything really clear
so in that mobile the webpages which are a set of five webpages including the introduction as a separate dedicated webpage
and so this is interesting from a communication point of view:
that I first wrote the body of the article in a messy awkward academic long webpage, then I copied that into streamlined mobile webpages a set of 5 shorter webpages
then I copied the resulting streamlined version of the article from the five mobile webpages back into the long awkward academic single-webpage article
messy academic long webpage
that’s how I leveraged the more polished and streamlined mobile presentation back into the long article
as I announced just after my first posting all about Wikipedia articles about block universe eternalism, I posted that I had broken up the sentences in my long article just like in the mobile pages
then after that announcement I posted the —
the Egodeath community gave me a tip about a superdeterminism article in physics, bracketing my announcement of the final version of the main article which turns out to genuinely be 2007
not , as I have been writing, because of uncertainty, I have been writing “2006/2007 main article”
but now I have done the research to determine exactly what was the difference
And what exactly the dates are, and what changes were made at what dates.
I posted those archive links here about a month ago for all that research, maybe perhaps in idea development page 18 – i probably made a dedicated post.
and now I have determined that the reasonable truth of the matter is that it is not 2006, but rather 2007.
the proper version that I certify, the director’s cut that I authenticate, the real version, the genuine main article is September 12, 2007
and it has not changed one single character since then
A good litmus test is:
how would I feel if salvia divinorum magazine had published in print my September 2006 version of the article?
I would not be very satisfied by that
that is not the real version of the article
but I would completely agree if they published in print my September 2007 final draft , which really in every sense of the word truly was the final draft , because I have never changed a single letter
in fact the worst complaint I have about it it’s not with any of my writing; it’s that I went along with the stupid brain-dead academic counterproductive convention of giving the person’s first name initial only
it would have been a much more useful and Unpretentious
this is the worst thing about it
it’s both a pretentious format
the worst thing about my references section is it is simultaneously pretentious and counterproductive and unuseful , because I fail to give the first name of the author
and that really is the only thing I wish to change other than the and the way that the
the content of the article
dammit I believe that a couple paragraphs were lost here thanks to the flaky app
you are on the leading edge, I am sorry to say , of altered state theory
article on both of these were I feel well beyond my decoding level of
My complaint about the contents of the article I have listed it at the copy which is at this website egodeath theory.wordpress.com ego death theory I have listed my Arata their errata there.
The great news is that the images I provided are really excellent I’m thinking of the Eustace window crossing the river And the Dionysus A
rticle on both of these were I feel well beyond my decoding level of
Motifs and mythemes I am not too sore about that they really were pretty far above are pretty far above my level of literacy motif literacy and maybe perhaps miss theme literacy because the word branch does not appear in the article although interestingly at the beginning of the 2001 discussion group which was five or six years before the main article I did post a lot about Branching and nonbranching but not in the context of mythology, but rather, Physics!
metaphysics of time
I determined this also about a month or two ago and posted about it here
So now I’ve done the research on the exact dates of the main article, and what was changed in the final few revisions
and I have learned that it does contain awesome images , but they were above my decoding level they were above my translation level and I had not yet–
Although I had written in some detail about Branching versus nonbranching within the domain of physics and block universe and Freewill branching, I had not connected those ideas at all systematically to religious myth , but merely had the roots of myth in the Egodeath Yahoo Group posts (copied to egodeath.com if before valen 2004) that would later, like 2010, start to become/ develop into my theory of mythology Branching versus nonbranching , which I finally connected to models of time in physics , for example postings of November 2011 and November 2012 , and then the big November 2013 , and then in Christmas 2015 postings about Thomas Hatsis especially salamander and fire
and today I learned something about my half correct interpretation of Christmas 2015 posting at Egodeath Yahoo Group archives
I was half wrong I was not really getting it when I said in 2015
{Fire} means the altered state.
I don’t know why voice dictation is incapable and stupid when it comes to the phrase
I don’t know why voice dictation is incapable and stupid when it accurately transcribes the word ‘altered’, and then changes it to a bizarre garbled non-word instead.
it’s annoying AF.
altered state of consciousness
altered state of consciousness correct.
You enter an altered state of consciousness when ingesting mushrooms.
that was a successful voice transcription
although the app is screwing up now and deleting entire groups of paragraphs oh joy
POS tech
I was misinterpreting or it was a short coming I was falling short when I said in Christmas 2015 and have maybe said this for some years after that that fire means that roasting the salamander and fire means being in the altered state that’s not wrong like so many theories in the world it is not wrong but it is not sufficient or useful either you’re not getting it
you get only partial credit
You don’t really understand although you’re on your way towards understanding but you do not yet understand if you think that fire vaguely means the altered state of consciousness you’re missing the real point —-
the real point is that fire means loss of control the threat of loss of control and a kind of a real actual loss of control
I am restricted and having to do some wonky editing in this half-working mobile app
like I warned you, you are on the leading edge of altered state theory 💥😵
Buildings collapse when you only recognize, half comprehend that fire means something about processing the salamander to make it imperishable
but it is not just unspecified vague immersion in the loose cognitive state, but very specifically, as we see in the villa of the mysteries, the maiden being
scorched and instructed scorching scorched A scorch on society scorch scorch with a whip the prisoner was scorch with a whip
dumb voice transcription
low IQ voice transcription
SCOURGED, stupid voice trans🤬 transcribe this, POS tech!! 💪
for example, after my September 12, 2007 announcement of my final draft, which was interleaved with postings about eternalism / superdeterminism
The really good news with this as an outcome of that fact factual finding , the good side effect is that now I can say :
Cybermonk 2006 means my allegro Wasson plane crawled fresco of the town of Plaincourault France and
when I say Cybermonk 2007 article, this means my main article
that it is now much easier to differentiate which article I mean
This is an official announcement that I have resolve my uncertainty and now I am certain and now
when I say my 2006 article, I mean the fresco article and
when I say my 2007 article, I mean my main article, in which I combined my 1997 Core theory specification with myth and images.
theory specification and I combined it and interleaved it with two things really:
myth, & images; mythemes & art motifs
(because 1997 did not have images)
and some commentary about those images in 2006/2007 , but not yet with literacy about {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedness}, and {non-branching} motifs.
Cybermonk 10:44 p.m. March 23, 2023
The Egodeath theory 