Is It Blue Beamy?
(www.youtube.com)
Comments (5)
sorted by:
There would need to be testing, that's my theory.
Instead of it all being lights, what if they can also rearrange molecules..
All implies light (singular)...others suggest lights (plural) to rearrange the perspective of each being.
Mole (mass) cule (diminutive)...ones consent to what another rearranges implies aug-MENT-ative aka within ones mind. It's your consent to the suggested word "molecule" which augments whatever you're looking at, hence putting an artificial label on a moving nature.
a) Rearranging implies putting into (life) a line (inception towards death) aka ones response within the range of nature.
b) Ones consent to the suggested word "rearrange" binds one to a range/hring (circle)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/arrange aka circular thinking (logic) turning into a conflict (reason).
What's a beam? A ray of light, which implies the internal separation of all light into each ray. Beam also implies baum (tree) aka the growth of each seeded ray within the soil of all light.
As for blue/bhel - "to shine"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/*bhel- which implies each ray within all light being (life) send forth (inception towards death).
Sleight of hand for those with eyes to see... https://genius.com/Pink-floyd-shine-on-you-crazy-diamond-lyrics
a) A ray within light cannot take anything into "my" possession without distorting self.
b) Theory implies ones oration (ory) of theism (the)...a giving away to tempt others to hold onto.
c) Only within praxis (natural) can theory (artifice) be shaped.
Yes, but do you think it's possible? What are the odds between manipulation and actual 'visitation'?
He always spams this stuff that goes nowhere. It's a dead end. It is a tunnel in the fashion of Wile E coyote.
Eh, he has his moments. Sometimes the run through expands what I wasn't thinking yet.
a) Possi-ble aka "able of potential" implies process (inception towards death) enabling potential (life) aka nature making each being possible.
Beings asking each other about possibilities make it more and more impossible to express each others potential. Anytime one adds another yes or no, one binds self to another, hence putting restrictions upon ones free will of choice.
b) Thought moving through one implies process moving through potential...holding onto thoughts implies potential restricting self with possession.
Always two against one...the two sides one chose from against ones free will of choice in-between.
You starting a sentence with "yes" puts your one and only choice at odds with two conflicting sides (yes vs no).
In nature...two sides (inception towards death) imply one momentum (balance) for each one matter (choice) within. No conflicting sides.
ATION (action) implies the actual; MANIPUL (manually filling) implies the reactive. To react implies by ones free will of choice, which others manipulate by shaping fiction (suggested) within action (perceivable).
Manipulation by another implies manipul ignoring ation willingly. How? By putting manipul+ation together into a synthesis, which distracts one from analysis.
How could one discern self as manipul within ation, when ones consent holds the suggested word "manipulation" together? That's why beings cannot communicate in words without manipulating each other.
If I knock at your door, and you let me in, that's visitation and invitation, right?
Let's change the perspective...if you pay taxes then it isn't your house, and you have no right to invite me into what isn't yours; right?
If home is where the heart is, then how could a heart invite or visit another? Love they say, yet that puts one at odds against hate aka love invites hate and vice versa. Notice also that hate wants to destroy love, while love doesn't want to meet hate...does that sound like a real or a fictitious conflict?
Let's go at change itself...motion changing into matter implies invitation (inception) > visitation (life) > suspension (death).
If one believes in visitation from another, then one fell for the suspension of disbelief aka avoidance of being a invited visitor.
tl;dr: whatever one thinks is possible...one thinks in languages; shaped by others, which ones consent made possible.