Production: 1D, 2D, 3D, 4D, 5D, 6D, 7D, 8D? Yes, 8D
We realized a long time ago that the limitations in content delivery in a system are largely our own lack of ability at a specific point in time. Just like Bots we know that over time, the evolution of the content will improve. We find that the industry hasn't figured on spiral pivots and a lot of other ideas to graphically define and improve content. And it also has not occurred yet that they are looking for rho patterning in quanta to develop imagery to a sound level of computing. So if we view our participation within a system at a low level of adaptation, we think simple and value-less concepts rather than adaptational and advanced progressions. In other words we don't project into the future paradigm what we might be able to do. Instead we see wallpaper or bad designs and curtains over windows we don't understand.
Another very important aspect of Content Delivery is the Field itself. We have a little bit of that bewitching idea that football played on a multi-dimensional field would be itself a different game. Perhaps we could add multiple rotations to plays and create a leveraged field. It's the way we limit ourselves that causes us to miss the opportunity to see the future on a grander scale. Somehow we don't think the Owner of the Universe has those kind of limitations.
The same is true in the field of quark motivation. Quonics is the concept that particles can be driven deliberately to achieve all kinds of action. If we think like Mick Jagger 'we can't get no satisfaction from quark reaction,' we don't think about this kind of rolling stone refinement. A smoother and gentler active dimension may be possible with the correct packaging and delivery system.
Could we build out and motivate objects in 6D that walk outside the Active Frame? We are convinced that yes, it's just a puzzle who's pieces we haven't conditioned yet. There is both a Product Maturity Cycle and a Learning Curve to consider. Conquering the METAframe has an interior design to achieve as well.
There are two colliding points of view in the world today. One is that content is driven by some political gyrating hip action of an aging population or that the future is winding down to the mechanical concepts of a maniac. It's a view too old and too new to be true. It sounds like the 60's negative points of view about the future before the computer age took hold.
We could argue that the Quantum Age has a long way to go. And it really does matter that we get up to speed to bring Imagery into sharper focus by learning how to develop the virtual parts of the Lens, METAframe and differentiate the Cube and use of fields.
It's like listening to people in Flagler's day talk about power generation of the future. Shall we stop calling it Cult and start cultivating IT?
We learned a great deal from Rock 'n Roll and music in general. We ought to give the Owner of this world some credit for shaking us loose from an older more staid world of routine ignorance. So that we could learn more about the use of space, time, motion and energy. Our inability to define a workable Green Technology or to cross the bridge to effective Quark-Qubit Theory is inherently human in terms of our rate of progression in working with difficult sciences that require specialized tools and gear. We didn't find a lot of technological advantages until we pushed sound engineering to a place we didn't know it could go.
 |
We are also tied to a view of the Lithic confines of a wall. We haven't yet learned to use shields as in an energy state of confinement. That would mean that we would have to go through the Virtual Wall and find that capability that eludes our progress. Part of this problem is the manifold speed required and the other part is the tensor relation.
 |
| Redefining Content changes the strategic use of IT |
Then the third and most interesting part of the puzzle is encryption layers. And all of this brings us back to glass in the most interesting virtual sense of the word. How do we layer it, how do we package it? How does the Field present it?
We may not be able to do everything with these concepts but emulation is part of the way we recognize a new path. Emulation means taking models and using them to depict the action we want to try to create, and then looking at the formulation.
Why is it that the Media is only making Monsters these days? Because the deformity caused by not having the right quantum speed makes us believe that we face a dark ominous future instead of an expanding market of energy equivalence. Flat may seem oddly mis-shapen. And so what Lens are we using to View it?If we look at our future backwards we can clearly see that what was said in the sixties didn't materialize, and what they are saying now may look like it has a damaged material content but probably does not. We tend to believe Pascal. If he was a rock singer he'd sing: All I got is material loss, from then on its a big ring toss, oh baby. The Plan has always been bigger than us. But we have a place in IT, and it is with an Active Intelligence.
(If only Pascal had been a rock star...)
Also Read:
Also Read:
Disclaimer: Blog material is presented as the basis of discussion material and is not to be construed as advice, counsel or education, and may at times be misconstrued if read in a context different than the writer's intent. No portion of this blog has been knowingly reproduced. Any resemblance to a specific company or entity is purely coincidental
