TC: “No Marildi, not ‘we’ but YOU! I understand the subject just fine having learned in an ACTUAL engineering class room with well known professors, and with the correct math and experimentation (the Labs) behind it.”

The subject we were talking about was LRH”s model of MENTAL mass, and I highly doubt any soch model was what you studied in an engineering class or in “ACTUAL electromagnetics texts,” to quote you again.

That was my whole point about us complicating the subject: We were mixing it with physics laws, whereas per LRH’s theory “theta is thought; an energy of its own universe analogous to energy in the physical universe but only occasionally paralleling electromagnetic-gravitic laws.”

Furthermore, ven in physics, the word “mass” creates confusion among physicists and gives opposite answers to the question of whether photons or electrons, for example, have mass. See the article here: https://profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/particle-physics-basics/mass-energy-matter-etc/more-on-mass/the-two-definitions-of-mass-and-why-i-use-only-one/

It’s more than fine with me that we don’t engage in blog exchanges in the future, as we obviously see things differently and you usually end up being rather insulting,

“Hi Peter,”

“As I indicated to another poster (Mimsey), I can’t get into long discussions right now, but I’m glad you posted this reply. Because I think we all may have complicated the subject of mental mass.”

No Marildi, not “we but YOU! I understand the subject just fine having learned in an ACTUAL engineering class room with well known professors, and with the correct math and experimentation (the Labs) behind it. Also from ACTUAL electromagnetics texts as opposed to isolated websites with general references. I didn’t learn this from con men want-to-be scientists.

“LRH simply said that it was condensed energy and that it had to do with density – that’s all. This is actually parallel to condensed energy in the physical universe being what comprises matter.”

I suggest you enroll in a real physics course before making such assertions and blindly believing everything LRH said.

“As for the meter, the tone arm “registers density of mass (ridges, pictures, machines, circuits) in the mind of the preclear.” (UEM)

More and more abstractions and gibberish from el con “scientist”, I am afraid. “Energy density” being “machines” and “circuits” ? This is what energy density ACTUALLY is :

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density

LRH’s definition is just gibberish. But I would never expect you to understand and/or accept that. As I have told you before, debating with you about Scn/LRH is a very tiring and frustrating endeavor. You find no possibly truth in no counter argument brought about by others actually trained in the sciences, and this is something I’ve seen you doing time and time again at different blogs. Most posters just give up out of frustration. You never seems to get the central point. So I won’t be engaging you in public arguments again. You do not have to agree with anyone, you know. But disagreeing with EVERYTHING and not acknowledging actual VALID points brougt about as your normal operating basis when someone is bringing up valid points against something from Scn/LRH? Now, that’s being fixated. I think that I’ll put you in the same category of those MS2 people. That way I will know better than to engage in dead-end debates with you.

“Also as you probably know, some people can perceive mental mass – their own or that of others. This could be another subje ct of experimentation for you, or whomever.”

No, I do not “Know” that others can perceive any “Mental mass”, Marildi; I KNOW THEY say that they do, two DIFFERENT things. Intuitive healers frequently talk of being able to perceive DISRUPTIONS in the body’s energy field, which they call, “The Aura”. They also talk about being able to perceive “entities” which they frequently describe as “A presence” or as an energetic manifeatation of some kind. Now, SCIENTOLOGISTS with their NOTs bullshit, and crazy, delusional CBR, are the ones claiming to perceive “mental mass”. I myself, does not perceice any “mass” as such; I perceive fluctuations and changes in my own energy field, not a silly “mental mass”.

I assume that you’ll write back as you always like to have the last word at ANYTHING. Just understand that I won’t reply to it. It is no fun replying to you as much as I try granting you beingness.

ALL my point was – which IS a valid one, you know – that ALL we knew for certain, is that the e-meter seems to react to SOMETHING, which we are not YET sure what it is. That we can safely assume that it react to thought or to what thought causes in the body’s energy field. EVERYTHING else are just weak theories, conjectures, and ASSUMPTIONS from LRH and from you. But as I said before, I do not expect you to be able to understand this as you are mostly “LRH right”.

LIBERATING…yes, indeed.
And thanks for all you do, Chris Shelton!

Your work reminds me of the way I was thinking when I made the move to get out.
In other words,
this stuff is actually a means of breaking OUT.

If there was a way to get the booklet inside…to breach the bubble?
That word of encouragement for the isolated individual inside,
just might bust somebody out right now, today.

So, …you inspire me. If you would let me use your stuff…
Well, would that be cool with you? I love your Fear article most of all.
Once a finished product was ready,
it would then have to be delivered somehow… Maybe just hand them out in front of big blue building, print a couple thousand and mail them in bulk to correspondents near or in orgs all over the world. But, especially LA, Clearwater and Saint Hill, right? I think it would actually work.

I should just do it. I need to get to work.

Hi Peter,

As I indicated to another poster (Mimsey), I can’t get into long discussions right now, but I’m glad you posted this reply. Because I think we all may have complicated the subject of mental mass.

LRH simply said that it was condensed energy and that it had to do with density – that’s all. This is actually parallel to condensed energy in the physical universe being what comprises matter.

As for the meter, the tone arm “registers density of mass (ridges, pictures, machines, circuits) in the mind of the preclear.” (UEM)

Also as you probably know, some people can perceive mental mass – their own or that of others. This could be another subject of experimentation for you, or whomever.

Thank you, Richard. I don’t believe happiness is the result of acquiring abilities nor is it the result of fixing and improving yourself. It’s a matter of discovering the limitless satisfaction derived from simply being conscious. That’s real self-sufficiency. Serious problems sometimes need to be mitigated before that liberating discovery is possible, however.

Beezly: I thought I’d already replied to you but apparently not. Thanks for your kind words! I like your working title for my book, but honestly, I have no desire to write one. Many other good ones have already been written.

rogerHornaday – smile – I think we’ve found a meeting ground. For every monkey that jumps off there are many more ready to jump back on in scn.
Reflecting on positives might be beneficial for some people, but trying to hold onto or grasping for “wins” is not liberating as you say.
As a relative newcomer since watching Going Clear, I’ve appreciated your many cogent analyses of scn falsehoods. One was ripping apart Hubbard’s so called “Axioms” – laughter

Hi dear,

Sorry for the long comm lag in replying.

I got it about the need of “defining our terms”.

Regarding how I think that mass is related to “charge”, I don’t think they are at all. For me, “charge” is some kind of “energy disruption”, not a manifestation of “mass”. That has been my whole point all along.

See, if we take the statement, “Thought has mass” as true, it would defy not only all known physics laws, but even common sense as well. You can’t just have a “mass” parked somewhere in the mind, and not account for it until the picture containing it is “retrieved”, as you discussed with Roger in so many words. Or to think (which I am not saying you necessarily did) that once the memory is retrieved, that the individual himself create this “mass” then.

From a science standpoint, that’s not based on any one known law, and from a common sense standpoint, it is very impractical. You do not need any mass to have a resistance to any flow of energy, be it electrical energy or any other form of electromagnetic energy. You only need a disruption of some kind which affect the energy field, and it’ll respond and register on a meter such as an skin galvanometer. We need not any “mass” for it.

LRH might have gotten it right (but we won’t know for sure after we ACTUALLY experiment on it) in his explanation of memory retrieval activating these disruptions, even though he didn’t say it in those words, but meaning basically the same. But then he came with this bs about “Thought have mass” to explain TA movement; an inconsistency with his other assertions, and a poor knowledge of electrical phenomena. “The TA and needle seems to register some kind of energy disruption of the body’s energy field” would have been more scientific and less self-righteous. Then he would have stayed in the subject of empirical obsevations of observable phenomena instead of attempting to theorize so much about structure, when function was what he was allegedly studying.

The problem with LRH is that he was just TOO prone to theorize about structure when all he had was the accumulation of empirical data, most of which was anecdotal evidence. Should he had stayed at the subject of function more, and less on structure, may be some things from Scn would be worth salvaging. But EVERYTHING must be started from zero, IMHO, as all we have is questionable, not at all proved information in most of what he did, even if this wasn’t the case at some things here and there.

As regards to Thought being capable of influencing matter, that’s my belief as well, though I have not means right now to prove it to others. But I have seen enough changes in myself and others, that does not seems to have any other possible explanation, other than thought controlled/made dissapear, different energy disruptions.

See you around.

You are most welcome, Dave!