Thread: *~* V-WILD : The foundations *~*

What if inputs into visualization faculty in time t would be one of this messages?

OUT(x) = Output from Visualisation faculty in time x
INP(x) = Input into Visualisation faculty in time x

//simple messages
INP(t) = ACCEPT(OUT(t-1))
INP(t) = REJECT(OUT(t-1))
INP(t) = ALTER(OUT(t-1))

where ACCEPT, ALTER, REJECT are basic messages sent to visualization faculty from consciousness
ACCEPT - Consciousness accepts output from visualisation faculty
REJECT - Consciousness rejects output from visualisation faculty
ALTER - Consciousnes requests change in output


//complex messages
FOCUS(OUT(t-1)) = ACCEPT(OUT(t-1)) AND ALTER(OUT(t-1))
SWAP(OUT(t-1)) = REJECT(OUT(t-1)) AND ALTER(OUT(t-1))
LEAVE(OUT(t-1)) = ACCEPT(OUT(t-1)) AND NOT(ALTER(OUT(t-1)))
LEAVE(OUT(t-1)) = REJECT(OUT(t-1)) AND NOT(ALTER(OUT(t-1)))

complex messages would be:
FOCUS - Consciousness accepts previous output as reference and requests alteration of next output, yet still remaining in context of previous output. This simply means, if you take a look at something withing generated scena. If you touch something what is in the scena generated in previous step. (Equivalent to observing)
SWAP - Consciousness does not accept previous output as reference, trying to force changes into next output which are not compliant with generated state, forcing Visualisation faculty to restart generating scene. This simply means, that you simply eighter dont agree with what you see or you would like to see something else and you try to force yourself to see what you expect. (Equivalent to direct control above visualisation)
LEAVE - Consciousness has two ways how not to alter next output:
1. accepting the input as reality and letting it be (Equivalent to accepting the generated reality as your current reference reality)
2. not accepting the input as reality and letting it be (Equivalent to knowing, that generated output is not real, yet letting continue, go with the flow)

This complex messages if sent to the visualisation faculty cause change stability of input in next steps:

INP(t) = FOCUS(OUT(t-1)) => STABILITY(OUT(t+1)) > STABILITY(OUT(t-1))
INP(t) = SWAP(OUT(t-1)) => STABILITY(OUT(t+1)) < STABILITY(OUT(t-1))
INP(t) = LEAVE(OUT(t-1)) => STABILITY(OUT(t+1)) >= STABILITY(OUT(t-1))

It simply show, how visualisation faculty responds to some messages sent from consciousness. This helps to describe the stability of next output according to reaction to previous output. Generally speaking, if consciousness communicates in a way, which does not radically change context currently being generated in visualisation faculty, visualisation faculty tends to provide more solid and stable imagery. And vice versa, if the consciousness requires constant swapping of context, changing the topic of visualisation or negating facts previously generated, stability shrinks, and the process must start anew.

According to my observations: How LEAVE message affects affects stability of visualisation construct depends directly on current awareness level and time of the day. In REM, visualisation faculty has pretty significant inertia leading to self stabilisation of the scene.

more on this here >> http://www.dreamviews.com/community/...ad.php?t=61525

I hope, this does not lead to misunderstanding. This should be some kind of state machine view on visualisation, which can easily be extended to other aspects of visualisation, not only stability of result.