Will post proof orgone is 'spirit energy', obtaining the equipment.
Plans change… the instrumentation can't measure the flux.
I don't think it is readily apparent to people the reality of the psyche.
Why are people able to abstract some simulation of reality? The bottomline is how it redounds to the senses. Collectively, how well is sensory input organized? Conversely, can information be overly organized so the fluidity of response is baffled?
We have a 'self-definitional crisis'. This is the transition to synchronous reality, but the nature of interaction and, thereby, transference is different. Namely, a synchronous reality has a basis of unconditionality, preassuming partially correct biases while leaving room for an undefinition proposition toward the bodily environment within a set of social interactions.
I think memory is the continuity which has a variable of intensity and scope, but the energy which it is built is scalar in nature. The foundation, though, is shaped by the biases held by humanity thus far.
"divide and conquer".
Let's assume various substrates or gradients of what is essentially perception. Does evolutionary biases thus far create specific and extremely terse eye movements to convey an orientation to the psyche forces which sets to buttress outcomes. The obvious example is sexual attraction. When a male or female looks at a male or female are there eye movements, beyond conscious perception, which inform conscious perception of the interaction? What determanistic qualities of foregone interaction create an inertia upon the current stimulus?
Does emotionality have a basis in empirical reality? This is likely to be proved the case. Emotionality and vitality without cognitive biases seems to be orgone.
https://psychologydictionary.org/thought-transference/
>THOUGHT TRANSFERENCE. an alleged phenomenon wherein the cognitive activities of one individual are transmitted without physical means to the mind of a different person. With mind reading it is one of the two primary types of telepathy. THOUGHT TRANSFERENCE: " Thought transference is believed to be an authentic trade more than most are aware of.".
If you think of the actions of others in a constructive manner to what extent by thought transference is a positive effect without direct affluence effected? Is this a 'social memory complex'? Is it an intrinsic coherence of thought transference aimed to create invariable bounds and outcomes.
In the same way words mean things does perception of vitality offer subtle associations and potentially greater breadth?
pics from Function of the orgasm
People in Trouble p50
"The basic problem of Karl Marx was not whether surplus value is or is not produced. The problem involves the nature and orgin of surplus value and the question of who manipulates it. Surplus value is produced because of the particular character of living productive power. A determination of the nature of living productive power, and through this the orgin of surplus value, then leads to the sociological question of who acquires surplus value. It is always appropiated by the owners of the social means of production, by the individual capitalist; in state capitalism, by the state; and in free work democracies, by the society of workers".
p127
"Since approxiamately 1928, sex-economy has been aware of the fact that Karl Marx's living productive power is identical with what orgone biophysics refers to as the 'work function of biological energy'".
If all forms of transfer are ultimately a transfer of energy…..
I find it reasonable to infer the DOR = LOOSH.
I also believe the study of the tarot is a psyche-system for manipulating the proto-plasmic currents of the ether. The pyramid, obviously, concentrates this ether-like energy. The tarot is then the system to articulate the psychic processes of it's perception.
Once a sufficient clarity of the body currents is developed the natural development is understanding the interference of perception upon reality. Something like this without the cultural ethos is 'spirit'.
A fixed frame of reference when all processes are cyclical doesn't really make sense. Taking this into consideration there is an undue amount of psychic pollution/enthalpy.
DOR is deadly orgone
Here's a good place to start –http://www.orgonelab.org/ – Best information is in books. Haven't looked into the various Journals about his work, yet.
>>Could you explain this a little more - specifically the second part?
I don't know what you've read. In James Demeo's book, an attribute of orgone is describe as "the medium through which electromagnetic disturbances are transmitted" (Orgone is not EMR). Think about all the various transmissions and signals done with our technology. it's a mish mash. The body though regulates itself thru orgone.
To conceive of higher energetic states requires integrity of consciousness. Using technology as an intemediary of information- access baffles the subtle-thought processes which serve to build higher states. Personally, I think it is somewhat intentional. It has to do with the compartmentalization of energy/infomation. It's damning though because the increase in consciousness has happened in par with the increase in distractive and cognitive-useless activities.
The EMR of today's tech is the most obvious example of pscyhic pollution. It's part of the course to our culture of hiding bodily distortion from the self inlieu of an unencumbered relationship to outer experience.
>Seems to me like this could be considered a function of ether as well
There's a lot of different concepts about the ether: orgone, chi, prana – all similar; understanding is based from application.
—
>In reference to DOR, does orgone then have a polarity? If so, the polarity can determined by thoughtful intention I imagine? Are there other ways can polarity be determined?
Don't think orgone has a polarity.
> Could it be said that orgone is what facilitates that "awareness"?
yes, if it is understood beyond conscious processes. Did you check out the cloudbusting part of the website? Demeo has impressive results.
Something else to check out
>https://phisciences.com/about-dr-g-patrick-flanagan
If there's one book I'd get, it'd be "Just Breathe" by Dan Brule. It's not overt in his work. The concept of breathing rituals underpins intiatic science. With the proper discipline it's possible to initiate yourself into any understanding or application of psychic forces.
The pyramids and other devices merely accentuate the inner disciplines.
>it seems like it could be called "emotional energy" in the simplest of terms?
Well no, objective reality of energy may or may not be within the bounds where one could react emotionally or consciously to it.
What's the difference between 'thinking reality' and 'thinking about reality'? Isn't every thought a movement of vital energy? We use words to represent thought, so compulsively, that sensing the drawing from the spring is lost upon people.
Maybe people are orientated towards deficiency because they have had their natural joy stepped on and rejected as young children, being forced to face backwards ways of thinking.
Assuming you can think about reality means there is something sterile or separate from the effect of shifting vitality as tension between the mind and body. To operate as if you 'think reality' means appreciating the unknown as motivator and limiter of how to draw from the spring.
Frankly, words get in the way. Perhaps, this is why ETs are telepathic. Whether it is an biological adaptation or technological, idk.
Curious, do you guys see orbs or an orb? Not as a something coming and going, but as the basis of your perception ( or a regular part of it). Not though in a disruptive way to normal mundane living.
>non of that shit happened until we became the change we wanted to see in the world.
I wonder what would happen if people just sat and thought about god or potential reality minus the emotional complexes. We have this concept of infinity. Who just sits around and thinks about things with an infinite nature?
Blah disclosure blah blah deep state blah secrecy blah blah blah kings chamber blah blah blah blah national security
I wonder how many people think about what's happening to them rather than the actions which can happen by them or thru them.
>Do you have some REAL information to prove the information they provide is incorrect?
That's not how common sense works. Someone asserting something provides evidence to back their claim. Else, who gives a shit?