Messages in NSL #text-walls-info
43 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
There's something called Chaos Magick (the k is important as Aleister Crowley used it to distinguish what we now understand by "magic" from what was called "magic" then, now understood by the term "illusionism" or "stage/performance magic," in which sense it is still used today by performers)
As an aside that I won't get into here, the same principle underlies the supernatural elements in everything from lucky items and amulets to prayer and ritual. Of course, this would span everything from the utmost heathenry to the highest orthodoxy.
However, there is something that validates this seemingly illogical assertion that there may be an unobserved causal relationship between two things: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_theorem
In response to a 1935 paper, John Stewart Bell, writing in 1964, formulated his famous Bell's inequality, along with all of its derivatives and implications called Bell's theorem.
In it, he posited that if the (original) inequality was violated in experiments, quantum mechanics would have to break either the properties of locality or realism (which are today combined as local realism): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_locality
Whereas previous experiments (since 1972) could contradict local realism only with caveats, exceptions, and loopholes, Ronald Hanson's 2015 experiment contradicted Bell's inequality without use of any such potentially-invalidating criteria: an unambiguous proof that local realism is defeated (almost entirely, save for some variations).
And here's the 2016 experiment, repeating the results: local realism defeated.
What does this mean? Well, it means that one thing can affect another with no detectable contact at entire kilometers.
Of course, this has only been proven on a quantum scale yet. What's Chaos Magick got to do with it?
Think. Physically, what are your thoughts? What is in your brain?
That's right, electrons and subatomic particles continuously moving throughout.
If you combine the two, you will find that they have recently-proven common ground.
Why is this not major news already? Why hasn't anyone sounded the horn?
Well, Bell's theorem and all its implications, as well as the implications and significance of its proven violations are a taboo subject in physics.
Anyone interested can read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemological_Letters
There you have it.
It should be unsurprising given the state of modern academia that it is still a largely suppressed topic, the machinations of a heretic and enemy of the Church of Scientism.
However, the only thing defied was the infallibility of the authority of a bunch of crotchety old kikes.
And Heisenberg, kike-lover
and imitator, evidently possessed of an appreciation for the nose both in words and in deeds
So, we have 3 kikes who tried to shut down any wrongthink on the quantum mechanical question as it relates globally to our lives: philosophy and life in general.
Any such inquiries were to be shut down, and it was the findings of a strapping young Celtic lad that shed light on what causality is really like. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/356067413013299201/389142976120487947/john-stewart-bell-2.jpg
Now we know that the foundations of Chaos Magick, and supernatural phenomena derived of similar origin, are completely plausible and may, in fact, be sound.
If it still doesn't make sense how quantum particles demonstrating "action at distance," consider the butterfly effect:
A small change actuated at a distance, perhaps just quantum in scale, brings about a cascade of increasingly larger changes seemingly out of nowhere.
Isn't it just magical?
For more on "action at a distance," you can read this article and carefully note how, in the "quantum mechanics" section, no mention is made of the recent experiments or the significance of Bell's inequality having been provably violated (since quite some time ago, so this is not news). It's pretty much permeated with the dismissal and condescension we could have expected out of Bohr, Pauli and Heisenberg: the kikes we love to hate.
tl;dr @everyone there is now proof that magick - changes to reality brought about at-will and with no detectable contact whatsoever - is completely plausible
Thanks for the resources man, gonna go buy an energy drink and look into the sources now
Very interesting shit so far
Finding a couple things wrong here.
One is from the first link, it's broken, it appears to be an xml file with no XSL styling.
And the second is what appears to be a definition for the word Anthropology, it is not the correct definition at all.
Not even close, checking further now though
It may be the case that we should set up a magick division.
so my b if it has bad pics or something
well now we lost the god damn info wall
That was just an Ironmarch graphic that's already in infographics
nevm i had to reload
43 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.