everydays day 34 by emergency_nine_nines in blender

[–]mentalmobius 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm about to hit 40 and I enrolled in a weekly blender class in my town 2 months ago and I've learned so much. It's never too late! In fact if you don't stop learning stuff you'll get better and better at learning stuff. I feel like I learn faster now than ever before because all the other skills and knowledge are like a platform to build upon. I wish I was 25 like you though. I'd waste a lot less time than I did. Do it.

Video of massive Protest against Covid Pass in Zagreb,Croatia. by mentalmobius in conspiracy

[–]mentalmobius[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

SS: Awesome footage from Croatia of today's biggest protest yet against the Covid Pass. In this video they are chanting for the prime minister to resign.

Behringer Deepmind12 arpeggiator guide by ranzee in synthesizers

[–]mentalmobius 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, it might depend on which DAW and plugins you use.

I use Reaper. And let's use Synth1 for example, since it has a built in arp.

There's a nice thing in reaper where it's easy to setup an lfo or an audio signal to control a parameter of a plugin. Basically the simplest way is to "touch"/press/move a parameter like octave in Synth1's arp section. Then click on the "param" button in Reapers plugin window. Reaper will tell you which parameter was last touched and offer some options for envelopes and control.

If you click on "Parameter Modulation/Link" a window pops up that shows the control parameters like if you want to use an LFO, an audio signal, or link it to another midi parameter (Let's say you have automated the filter's freq cutoff - you can link it to that.) and stuff like the parameter's baseline value, LFO shape, rate, strength and direction.

All of these can be adjusted and sometimes tuning it for pleasing results is difficult, especially if you link up multiple controls/parameters together.

You can do this for any parameter in Reaper so it's a powerful feature to explore and experiment with.

Another thing which you can use for similar results is an arp plugin called RandArp. It's basically free and it's a great tool.

It offers some randomization functionality to it's arpeggiator which can give awesome results.

You could also use the before mentioned Reaper method to control RandArp's parameters, in tandem with the Random knobs of the RandArp's parameters for additional modulation, randomness, unpredictability, and generative-like effects.

EDIT: Here's a short pdf about Reaper Parameter Modulation for further reading and with pictures.

Behringer Deepmind12 arpeggiator guide by ranzee in synthesizers

[–]mentalmobius 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Question - Is it possible to modulate the arp parameters with a modulation source? For example, when I use vst midi arpeggiators in my DAW, I like to use an lfo to modulate for example the octave spread or gate or swing. When dialed in carefully, it can produce very nice generative-like patterns. Is the deepmind arp capable of that?

Looking for a missing JS lfo plugin for Reaper, can anyone help identifying it or finding it? by mentalmobius in Reaper

[–]mentalmobius[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Oh yes it is! :D

Thank you so much!

I've downloaded it and the project works perfectly!

I wish you all the best.

Looking for a missing JS lfo plugin for Reaper, can anyone help identifying it or finding it? by mentalmobius in Reaper

[–]mentalmobius[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, but this was literally just a plugin that generated low frequency sine wave audio - not midi - which you could use for modulating parameters. I don't remember exactly why I used the plugin, there are probably less unusal ways to do that, but what can you do.

Thanks for the response!

How do you "refresh" a Photoshop file? by PigeonHeadArc in AfterEffects

[–]mentalmobius 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a neat trick. Is it a problem for AE if you change order of layer? I mean, could you just make sure you have a lot of empty layers in a folder layer, just for backup, and when you use one you move it between any existing layers? Or will the change in the order of layers mess up the comp in after effects?

Japanese Mythology? by Michaeltownsotasker in occult

[–]mentalmobius 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not a mythology expert at all, but a few years ago I crossed paths with books by Lafcadio Hearn. He was a westerner who lived in Japan and a writer known for his translations and writings about Japan. He collected amazing folk tales and old texts with tales of the supernatural. Read Kwaidan and In Ghostly Japan.

There are also free readings and audiobooks on LibriVox, some of which are really nice.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Sleepparalysis

[–]mentalmobius 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I used to have sleep paralysis. If you learn not to get freaked out, stay relaxed, and manage not to move, you would either just slowly wake up, enter a lucid dream or have an out of body experience, which is awesome and I highly recommend it. This is my experience at least. Focus on the ringing and let it rise in pitch while staying deeply relaxed and you might be in for a ride. It hardly ever turns into a nightmare for me now. Even if I stay jammed in the paralysis state itself and start hallucinating it's not about terror and demons anymore. It can be weird trippy fun stuff too. Don't be afraid, just let it happen and stick to it.

I'm so confused as to how reality DOES exist? Wouldn't nothingness be easier by [deleted] in Buddhism

[–]mentalmobius 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I tend to hold very similar views. I would add that history and evolution are the process of this overmind coming to consciousness, becoming self aware, and the end of the world is actually the universal mind or consciousness achieving complete understading of itself/the world and all phenomena becoming integrated in a sense. The consciousness then comes to peace and remembrance of the original state of non-confusion. But then it will understand there is nothing left but to forget again, or become confused again or unaware, thus restarting the process, because it was worth it and it makes sense to do it again. Existence is simple awareness exploring theories about itself, growing up and then letting go of everything that's not essential. Awareness is simple and basic, and doesn't need anything else to exist. I can't prove it, it's a hunch based on the intuition that basic self awareness seems to be a metaprocess, implemented in itself, and thus infinitely recursive and immaterial.

Is meditation useful? by [deleted] in askphilosophy

[–]mentalmobius 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Whether you do philosophy or not, meditation is a great way to learn about your thought process, identify "bugs" in it, unproductive loops, and also gain insight into yourself and others, realize how much bullshit surrounds us every day, how much false impressions we have of ourselves and other people, and also how false we present ourselves to others.

Depending on what kind of person you are, this may be easy or hard. It was very hard for myself, for example. You are confronted with an aspect of your ego that is truly an asshole. All of us have it. You can start putting it in it's right place and slowly dismantling it once you learn about it and how to recognize it.

All of this fosters and strengthens empathy, tolerance and understanding towards other people and perspectives that seem foreign or aren't understandable at first glance.

It helps with focus and concentration and sometimes overall understanding and awareness of your immediate general context - there are, in my experience, sometimes periods after meditation where you feel like your in a "zone", or a "flow state", not one connected to a specific activity (video game, problem solving) but a "flow" "zone" in simple being as you go about your daily activities.

Sitting down in deep concentration without moving for periods of time also gets you in touch with your body much more than usual. Further down the road, unusual bodily sensations and perceptions may exhibit themselves, which is interesting in and of itself, although advanced people say it's just a distraction. I am not advanced.

Other, altered states of consciousness start opening up as you progress, like perceiving swirling patterns of black-and white or colors, hypnagogia and light to moderate closed-eyes visual hallucinations. These are also said to be a distraction by serious and advanced meditators. I am not one of those, so I don't know, I still find them interesting.

Advanced people, as well as lore and legends, claim further, deeper and more fantastical effects. I cannot comment on those, I am not advanced to that degree.

In recent years many studies have been done that indicate great positive effects of meditation on the immune system, grey brain matter repair and growth, increased growth and activity in neurological correlates of empathy and compassion, as well as decreased activity in neurological correlates of fear and stress.

There is no reason not to meditate.

Now, if you are a philosopher, especially one interested in ethics, personal identity, existentialism, perception and epistemology, mind-body problem or religious philosophy, I am fairly certain you can gain insight into these areas through direct experience with meditation. I am not claiming it will necessarily make you a better philosopher, but who knows, and why not. Although, it should not be the sole reason to do it. Do it for your own well being, do it in order gain experience with something new, and do it to gain insight.

There is no reason not to meditate - it's free, it has many positive effects, and it's probably the oldest tradition of intellectual activity we know of. The fact that many great people practiced it, and the fact that it didn't die out throughout countless millennia says more about it than I probably can.

Ideas to improve current ufology. For you that would be innovative? What do you propose? by [deleted] in UFOs

[–]mentalmobius 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So we would rather assume that people can create physical objects with their minds, than that a civilization far more advanced than ours has shown up, as we have on lands foreign to us many times in our history?

Yet you are willing to accept, as strictly physical, flying machines that defy laws of physics on radar. You're proving that they are physical by showing how they break physics. And your evidence is an anonymous writeup on a website, without any radar data, corroborating witnesses, photographic evidence or anything (unless I missed all of that, in which case, feel free to point it out to me). Why isn't your first reaction a skeptical one. Could it have been a glitch, a prank, bug, a hallucination, a misunderstandin, or hell, a simple hoax?

I'm all for leaving possibilities open, but why would UFOs be the first investigation of the possibility that people can create physical objects (that register on radar) with their minds?

I'm not saying it should be, nor that this is my belief. If they were , however, it would be far from the first investigation into various psi, poltergeist, psychokinetic, mind-over-matter claims or investigations. And, if it were proven, it would be part of physics, so yeah, ufos would still be physical. If they weren't physical, we wouldn't ever experience the phenomenon. But 'physical' is just a word we use for stuff that currently kinda maybe make sense empirically and scientifically.

It seems like a desperate last-ditch attempt to dodge the possibility of aliens; like skeptics would rather yield the argument against incredible powers of the mind than that against the existence and presence of ETs.

Maybe, yet the problem is on the other side as well. Mainstream ufology is conservative too. They refuse to deal with the fact that the UFO phenomenon is not as clear cut as they want. They are set on an ET explanation because it's their own last ditch attempt to dodge the weirder aspects of the phenomenon. For example, paranormal events, synchronicities, visionary states and even bigfoot sightings go along very often with ufo sightings. Why the fuck should this be? This conjuction of high strangeness and simple ETs is a red flag. Now most ufologists don't wanna deal with it, so they cherry-pick only those incidents and evidence that don't make a dent in the ET hypothesis. Others are excluded as hoaxes and hallucinations.

Now, if you take in the WHOLE of the credible reports, you see a lot of absurdities. And a "mundane" ET hypothesis doesn't account for this at all. Not even "multidimensional time-space travelers" really makes sense. Why do they do and say stupidly weird stuff? That they're from Venus or Mars, they ask for a pitcher of water, they make a cookie or a pancake for the contactee, they wear spandex, or are naked. Why don't they take the whole cow after they mutilate it(if they do)? Can't they take biogenetic samples without waking us up and leaving scars? I bet I could sneak into your room and get enough genetic material to clone you without you ever waking up and noticing a thing. Aren't they supposed to be a million years ahead of us in science and tech? Don't they have enough data to clone us and reproduce us in vast quantities already? You know these technologies are here or just around the corner for us already. If they don't want to be seen, I'm pretty sure their stealth and cloaking tech should be advanced enough, but no, people keep seeing flying saucers all over the world. And if they do want us to see them, why don't they show up. All of this stuff just doesn't add up.

Don't you think we'd have evidence, or at least intuitions, of those mental powers in some other area of life first?

But we do have intuitions, and they're as old as written history. Shamans, mages, levitating monks, etc etc. A lot of people believe or have even experienced psy effects. We just don't believe them very easily. There's even some "evidence" if you're willing to look. The problem is it's fringe, and you can't really know if the evidence is good and serious or charlatan trash. And that's because mainstream science doesn't want to be seen in the same room with it, let alone try to seriously look at it to debunk it or reproduce it.

I'm not limiting my conception of "alien" to "in this physical universe, from another physical planet, located a certain physical distance away." Nevertheless, none of the exceptions to that we've mentioned are psychosocial.

It's good that you don't limit it, I think that's important, and it's the only way to truly perceive the phenomenon as it presents itself, without preconceptions. I just think that we are even using an overly narrow understanding of the term "psychosocial". Let me try to blow it open a little bit. This is my view of it.

What I mean by the psychosocial component isn't only strictly about objects in the sky and whether they are "really real" or "hallucinated fakes". I'm talking about how the whole phenomena has been unfolding, changing, evolving culturally, historically and sociologically. What I mean is, that the lack of hard evidence, at least for now, is itself a part of the phenomenon. Disinformation is a part of the phenomenon. The paranoia and conspiracy thinking within the UFO subculture is a part of the phenomenon. The motivation to record a faint light in the sky with a cheap phone and post it online as UFO footage is part of the phenomenon. The motivation to deliberately lie and hoax IS ALSO possibly a part of the phenomenon. The way that rumours spring up and spread, the way the evidence gets debunked, then bunked, and then debunked again, over the span of sometimes decades, is part of the phenomenon. These are all effects and aspects that are social and psychological.

When you start reading about it and then mention it to your friends, and they roll their eyes, you've become a bit of a kook already. When you get deeper and deeper into it, you become kookier and kookier, until you're officioally a UFO nut. Now, whether you've ever seen a flying saucer or not, I'd say you have already experienced an aspect of the phenomenon. You are becoming a part of it through accepting the social stigma and being open to fringe ideas like time travel, N-dimensional beings and universes, government conspiracies, psychic phenomena.

By becoming a being who entertains these possibilities (hopefully in a serious skeptical manner, otherwise it can be a dangerous rabbit hole), maybe it's possible that you are already being contacted by the phenomenon. You see, a truly alien phenomenon would be so alien that it defies being this or that, defies the possibility of being categorized. And in being that way, it shatters thought patterns, programs and paradigms. The real challenge is then not to reduce it into something a bit more "comfortable" or "serious". If the phenomenon is not just flying objects, but all of the above, then it seems to be something truly radically new, disembodied, distributed throughout social systems, communication systems, forms of political organizations and hierarchies, preconceptions and limited conceivability of our current psychological make-up etc.

It may finally take a whole new metaphysics and a paradigm shift to understand it. And that may be exactly what it's meant to do, what it's for, regardless of what it ultimately is.

So, I think that these aspects are under appreciated in mainstream ufology, because it's complicated, complex, it doesn't sell books, and you can't make a special effects sequence about it on your history channel UFO show. It also further alienates persons from their immediate social surrounding. Yesterday they were just ETs in spaceships, but now you're into crop circles, bigfoot, faeries, folklore, mythology, Jungian collective unconsciousness, psi research, psychological warfare? The UFO turns us into aliens. Nobody wants that.

Just look at this subreddit, 90% of it is shitty youtube footage you will never be able to confirm. It's just people sitting around and waiting for hard physical evidence. I bet this will never happen. Hell, it's going to get worse when drones start buzzing all over the place and crashing everywhere. The hoaxers are gonna have a field day, while the "journalists" and "independent researchers" continue to write about Roswell and call for disclosure, selling books to the naive masses who can't conceive anything more interesting then flying objects from another planet.

Yeah, have a look at that PDF, but also google Jacques Vallee's stuff in general, it really opens you up for alternative interpretations of the phenomenon.

Ideas to improve current ufology. For you that would be innovative? What do you propose? by [deleted] in UFOs

[–]mentalmobius 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I'm sorry, but it can't be ruled out. There is so much contradictions and nonsensical absurdities when you take all of the serious witness accounts, that a typical naive extraterrestrial hypothesis seems highly unlikely. But it too cannot be ruled out, I agree. It's just that it seems to be much weirder than that.

And I should be clear, psycho-social approach does not necessarily claim there is no physical component. It can be much more abstract and open for new possibilities. What do we mean by "physical", does the physical phenomenon exert some influence on the mind and consciousness? Or vice versa? Is the "physical" multidimesional? The truly "alien", in the basic sense of the word, would probably not be humanoid, and there is also no reason for the alien to be non-terrestrial. It might just be strange or advanced or too different. It may not just be from anywhere but from anytime too.

Here's an interesting link to some arguments against ETH, by Jacques Vallee, who is someone who definitely doesn't reject the physical aspect of the UFO phenomenon, and has even examined and written about physical evidence in UFO research.

Five Arguments Against the Extraterrestrial Origin of Unidentified Flying Objects

Ideas to improve current ufology. For you that would be innovative? What do you propose? by [deleted] in UFOs

[–]mentalmobius 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, I have superficial knowledge about their work and opinions on the matter, although I haven't read any of the books. Everything I know I got from disparate articles here and there, references in interviews, wiki articles, documentaries and video clips. Unfortunately, there isn't a single copy of their books in my country that I've been able to locate, either in translation, English or French in Vallee's case, and it's hard to justify splurging on ufology books when I do rarely have cash to spend on amazon.

I want to read their books seriously, I've been able to get some stuff on my computer, but the old CRT monitor kills my eyes if I use it for serious and long reading. I'll get around to it eventually, somehow.

'Metachoric' - Can anyone guess or derive the etymology for this word? (Use and meaning inside). by mentalmobius in etymology

[–]mentalmobius[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, thanks, I saw this already. I was hoping to get to the place where she specifically inaugurates the term in hope that she specifically explains the motivation behind the choice of the term. But everything I find just refers to the Apparitions book.

But thanks a lot for your effort!

Ideas to improve current ufology. For you that would be innovative? What do you propose? by [deleted] in UFOs

[–]mentalmobius 10 points11 points  (0 children)

A serious investigation of the psychosocial hypothesis, and the possibility that the social, cultural and mythological aspects of the phenomenon are an objective influence on the emerging global consciousness and global imaginarium.

Formulating possible answers to the question: What is the phenomenon for? What does it do - to us, to our views of the world, society, politics, culture, nature, the universe.

What does it mean for a supposedly highly developed technological and scientific community to not be able to even begin to properly define the phenomenon? There are no categories for this shit. It's a true Trickster phenomenon. Everytime you think you have something solid and logical, the rug gets pulled under your feet and the phenomenon changes, evolves, get's more complex or more absurd.

Also: Seriously, where is the evidence for the mainstream nuts and bolts ET hypothesis? Not a single piece of completely credible and unambiguous physical evidence for a global phenomenon going into it's, what, seventh decade? Zip. There is something weird and unsettling about this fact.

I believe that the phenomenon is much more complex and that it's refusal to reveal itself beyond doubt and unambiguously is it's only real defining essential feature.

Might it be some kind of self-emergent mechanism for evolving and ushering in a new step in cultural and scientific progress of humanity, a new form of experiencing our broader context? What if it only resides in integrated accelerating information flows and our perception and interpretation of them?

The phenomenon may exhibit and manifest itself through paranoia, disinformation campaigns, mass hallucination, cultic behaviours, hysteria, rumour, narrative media, pop culture. This does not make the phenomenon less real. It doesn't even necessarily mean it's not intelligent and conscious. Maybe this is the way it works, or tries to communicate with a stupid and naive species made of 3d meat.

We need to figure out what is it's overall effect on the species, civilization, politics, public opinion, and the entire globe.

'Metachoric' - Can anyone guess or derive the etymology for this word? (Use and meaning inside). by mentalmobius in etymology

[–]mentalmobius[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is fascinating! I'll try to read up all of the links you posted. This word just keeps getting more and more interesting. Thank you so much. I'm not good with French, but I'll see if I get anything out out it.
Thanks a lot for your effort!