1) i wouldn't say in front of us. I would say we are immersed in it. One way to visualize it wouldn't be to make a plain observation (without any preconceived notions of space) of what is transpiring as you drive a car. Pay close attention to what you are experiencing. It will not be what you learn in a classroom. It is something different.

2) Can't say if I agree or disagree. The fields are oscillating in duration (the mind experiencing the changes). Past memories are also stored in the field that can be reconstructed as memory by a brain wave. So it is all there. There is no freezing duration. It is in constant flux, even memories since memories are affected by new memories. Robbins had some pretty good videos on this since he is only investigating the nature of perception. He answers all questions on his Youtube video.

3) This I categorically and able to respond to as No. There is no future. There just Memory pressing into the present creating a new Memory. The Holographic field is evolving as the Mind evolves. There two are the same.

4) Again, I would refer you to Robbins for a more comprehensive answer, but the field is holographic in nature since the images are reconstructed from the holographic field, much as light reconstructs a holographic image from a hologram. The general concept is the same.

1. Tick
2. What is a memory, how does it form and at what point is it projected back out into the matter field? If it is stored, how and where is it stored?
3. Good, I had a whole bunch of arguments lined up on that one. :)
4. I get the point of the hologram. But my question is what are we in all of this? How do we form the ideas that project out if we are a hologram generator? What is the substance of us?

2. What is a memory, how does it form and at what point is it projected back out into the matter field? If it is stored, how and where is it stored? — MikeL

I would say my best description would be that it would be exactly the same as anything else but reconstructed with a different frequency thus only accessible to ones on mind.

4) The holographic field can be considered a single canvas which we are all sharing and creating together. In a way it is a our creative hobby. Artists have direct experience with this feeling.

But if we are painting on the canvas we are separate from the canvas, so what is the substance of us? If we are in the canvas, then what separates our mind from it so that we may have perspective over it? What is the substance of us?

But if we are painting on the canvas we are separate from the canvas, so what is the substance of us? — MikeL

If you study the arts, sports, music, health practices, etc, you will find there is no discontinuity between your mind and the canvas. It is literally all one.

And yet I can walk down the street and bump into someone.

I get the idea of being connected to nature and life. When you stand on top of a high mountain and stare out you can feel every atom inside you wanting to explode and merge with nature. When you go dancing you come alive.

How do you reconcile this idea of an energy flow between all things with the physical realities of our observable world (our 4n). It seems like you are saying that rather than being an emergent property of the matter field you are denying the existence of our semiotic world. You make the argument that it is pointless to pursue ground based reasoning of our world when it seems that such an approach does yeild results (being it produces a logical path of causality and predictability).

And yet I can walk down the street and bump into someone. — MikeL

Of course, there is substantiality that we "feel". Remember, we are basically empty but we feel substantiality. Two painters sharing a canvas doesn't mean they will not bump into each other.

How do you reconcile this idea of an energy flow between all things with the physical realities of our observable world (our 4n) — MikeL

It is all exactly as it is. However, as one gains skills in observation and sensitivity, new things are discovered. It takes practice. Nothing is automatic. A skilled artist sees and feels much more than an under ones. Artists make the best philosophers.

If course, there is substantiality that we "feel". Remember, we are basically empty but we feel substantiality. Two painters sharing a canvas doesn't mean they will not bump into each other. — Rich

What is our substance? Two painters bumping into each other share a different substance to the canvas. If we are in and part of the matter field, how do we generate and isolate feeling and thoughts to ourselves given that all memory and experience is shared?

I can move spatially and the memory goes with me even though it is supposed to be deflected back out into the matter field.

Difference in substantially is a continuum of energy starting with quantum and moving up the ladder to diamonds. There Mind creates substantiality.

The concept of movement and spatiality has to be inspected more closely. I began to allude to this in a different thread. Very close observation may reveal more about the nature of movement. Actually studying the arts help also.

There Mind creates substantiality. — Rich

Is there just one mind? Is there one mind that is infinitely divisible? Are there completely separate minds? How do we get a union of minds (squillions of quanta) to create the solitary being? Why is there separation of mind between beings?

Is there just one mind? Is there one mind that is infinitely divisible? — MikeL

I would say it is an ocean with waves.

Ok, the fluctuations of a field creates particles or energy knots. But how do we relate waves back to the single being composed on may particles within the wave and then to the multiple single beings that interact, as discreet entities?

Shekdrske's Morphic Resonance for field theory may provide some insight into this question.

Nah, it doesn't. I've already watched it based on your recommendation. It is an interesting concept with appeal, though one whose finding and conclusions I am a little skeptical of - but know no different either way.

I can't see it's usefulness in this particular instance of waves and being, but I'll keep thinking about it.

I came away with a different idea. It pretty much explains the hierarchy of life. They is not one body. The human form is comprised of a multitude of life forms. Don't discount Sheldrake. He's has studied the problem deeply. You have study each level problem deeply so so that it builds up naturally.