Philobster

A hermetic Theory of Everything: https://youtu.be/8BjCpLh_myY I was watching the documentary "What is a woman?" yesterday. A great documentary that I can recommend to everyone. It made me realize the core problem of the political dilemma. It's actually quite simple. The reason is that the science of the mind and mental phenomena does not exist in the natural science and our modern society. It is a science that has not yet been recognized and understood by mankind. We understand physics as something cold mathematical. But what we do not understand metaphysics through a cold mathematical logic. This is a problem. We often speak politically of universal human rights, but we have no mathematical model to explain the reason at all. Mankind actually does not know why ethics exists and what the scientific root of it is. Many people talk about ethics, but no one can really answer why. So, why equal rights at all? Because it sounds nice and our empathy makes us think that it is right? That's not a scientific argument. Science doesn't need feelings. They have no role there. The earth doesn't orbit the sun because it feels good. The apple doesn't fall to the ground because it loves the earth and wants to get to it. My Theory of Everything is about a universal pattern behind things, with which not only the political visions can be analyzed, but also the sciences. There is the exoteric science. In it we find the material concepts such as physics, chemistry and biology. Then there is esoteric science. In it we find the mental concepts, such as metaphysics, alchemy and ethics. In the physical world, things are individually separated entities and the concepts of freedom and independence apply. In the metaphysical world, things are all part of the same structure. There, everything is linked together and the concepts of equality and connectedness apply. Ethics is not a physical science, but a mental one. But the knowledge of mental phenomena is not understood. It does not really exist as a scientific field, which is understood in the same cold, rational and mathematical way as physics. This then leads to the fact that most people in ethics simply rationalize their subjective gut feelings to objective truths and get away with it, because there is no scientifically known model, that works with clear definitions, which are free from emotional subjectivity. If a Flat Earther explains something of physics, then we notice the nonsense, because we understand enough of physics and know models which disprove these wrong conclusions. If someone says there that gravity does not exist and the apple falls on the ground, because there is just down. Then in the science people are smart enough to recognize that the statement is too simple. The apple falls to the ground because of a natural force. Without the natural force it would not fall. This natural force can also be represented in mathematical equations and applied to computer models. If we didn't already understand physics so well, one could get away with wrong statements easily because no one understands that there are natural forces at work that can be rationally understood. We don't understand ethics and the mind the way we understand physics. This leads to the fact that there are many people who can tell all kinds of nonsense there without it being clearly disproved, because we lack the mathematical understanding. The world of ethics and science on the mind is full of Flat Minder who can give irrational lectures on morality and the mind. We are in humanity there on the level of Flat Earthers who give lectures on physics. This is the root of the political problems, the political division and also that there are now strong political movements and ideologues who are totally confused with the question "what is a woman?". In the nature of esoteric and exoteric science we find in the political visions of left and right. Those who follow my work already understand that the duality of left and right is an illusion and that both actually look from two different directions, at one and the same thing. The right wing is rooted in a biological view of society. The left wing in a mental one. Since metaphysics is not understood as a science that is mathematical and logical, like physics, all kinds of problems arise. The idea of a universal human right is currently based on emotions, which are not explained in coldly rational principles that could be applied to computer models. In biology, gender is easily defined. If the human being is considered from the mental perspective, it is not so easy, because the rational science of it, does not yet exist as a scientific field. This leads then to the fact that one is no longer able to explain there what a woman is. One serves the field of esoteric science, but has no clear definitions of what it all means. There is no rational concept for analysis. That's why they go around in circles and work with circular definitions.

A hermetic Theory of Everything: https://youtu.be/8BjCpLh_myY My theory is not only about a passive pattern which is superior to all things, but it is also about mind control & how to actively split the population into inverted perceptions to create two controlled oppositions. In my video "political science is a cult" I criticize the side which is leaning towards globalism and the World Economic Forum. In my video "blueprint for necromancy" I try to criticize both sides neutrally and shoot in both directions. There I describe the left controlled opposition as a cult and the right controlled opposition as anti-cult. What is missing now is a video in which I direct my eyes specifically to the anti-cult to create a harmonic balance. It is important to understand how emotional programming works. It's actually quite simple and we find it in advertising. One shows situations and music that trigger an emotion. Then the product or brand name is shown. If this is done often enough, the emotion is tied to the brand name and every time the logo or product is seen, the emotion is triggered again. For example, you show a happy family, which experiences beautiful moments together and then eat a yogurt. Then you tell how great it is when the family has their yogurt time. If one sees this often enough, one connects this yogurt with the warm and safe feeling of being in a healthy family. Basically, this works much like indoctrinating dogs with a clicker. Every time you give the dog a snack, you click. If this is done often enough, the click sound is enough to trigger the dog's positive emotion. So a connection is created between an emotion and something else that actually has nothing to do with each other. The click sound is not a snack at all, and you don't become a happy family by eating brand-name yogurt together. One brings something under one frame, which actually has nothing to do with each other. This is exactly the pattern of political propaganda and mind control. This is exactly how the controlled oppositions are constructed and controlled. One divides the world of perception and political ideas into two binary categories, always showing people all the extreme and inhumane ideas of one side and the good ideas of the other side. At some point, people then associate positive emotions with one wing and negative emotions with the other. Since everything has two sides and the visions can be divided into a pro-life element and an anti-life element, two oppositions can be created that evaluate these two categories inverted to each other. This video is specifically about the people who are averse to the system. To explain this better, the graphic I show at the beginning of my Theory of Everything is very suitable. So the handling of information. In this example the graphic refers to the current political system. If a totalitarian system is established, one must manipulate the population into the outer left element. It is tried that they follow the state naively and no longer critically question it. But this does not work for everyone. A large part of the population will reject the political system and be critical of it simply out of the nature of things. These will accurately recognize the naivety of many people. They assume that there is an evil intent behind the state and that people there are working together to deprive the population of its right to self-determination. People assume that there is a conspiracy. Conspiracies exist, of course, and there will always be people who, out of egoistic self-interest, try to enrich themselves from the naivety of others. All people who reject the system are a danger for the ruling ones, because they have an interest to change and abolish the current system. This is against the interest of the ruling ones who profit from the current system and hold positions of power. This is where indoctrination & framing of emotions with terms and ideas comes into play. One must try to program the people who are averse to the system an even greater aversion to a new system. The Old Order should be preserved and a New World Order must be prevented at all costs. This can be done by linking the idea of a new world order with strongly negative emotions in the circles of conspiracy theorists. What if the so-called New World Order is not a totalitarian political system at all, but a libertarian one in which individuals are protected from totalitarian control freaks and the conspiracy theorists are manipulated with mind control to program an emotional trigger against a new system so that a totalitarian order can continue to be slowly built in which people have to pay taxes to Epstein psychopaths? Why do you think such videos dominate in conspiracy theory circles and are so heavily promoted there? Do you think they wouldn't try to manipulate the conspiracy theorists? Do you want a system dominated by corruption & sexual predators to be maintained, or would it be better if it were replaced by a new order?

A hermetic Theory of Everything: https://youtu.be/8BjCpLh_myY Philosophers Stone: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosopher%27s_stone Udumbara (Buddhism): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Udumbara_(Buddhism) universal resurrection: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_resurrection Brain Cell Dish: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxBQ1ICEnKE Neuron time lapse video: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/A9zLKmt2nHo Sunrise Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_kgdCGisso Pi Movie: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi_(film) Memories are like echoes that re-light past patterns and structures in the brain. Thoughts are like waves that move through structures that have built up in the past or are building and structuring out of itself at the moment of thinking. Sometimes I observe myself thinking and can see how my memories associate from one pattern to another pattern. I look at my bicycle and the pattern that emerges from the observation is similar to a pattern that emerged in a past observation. The structure of the past observation then associates with something someone said near the time when that structure was building up in the mind. So I associate from the pattern of the current observation to a similar past structure. All events that have happened have been reflected as patterns and have written themselves as structures in the memory of the brain, because neurons have linked up when they observed the event. Parts of the connections and bridges have remained. Memories are echoes that appear when electrical impulses move through structures that were formed in the past. Just as sound waves move through vaults. The sound waves are like the energetic impulses. The chaos. The vault is like the logical structures that have been built The Order. If I think too much about thinking, everything transmutes into non physical structures and waves that move through it. Our mind is like a time travel machine through which we can travel into the past. Not literally, but we look at the echoes of past reaction chains that have structured in the brain. This is what distinguishes a higher developed brain, like that of a human, from a lower one, like that of a bug. If algorithms are very simple, then they have no place to re-light past patterns so that they can take place again. Simple algorithms are also limited in their ability to look into the future through logical reasoning. If consciousness develops higher and higher from a unicellular organism, the frame of perception of time grows, too. The past and future can then be seen. By memories or logical conclusions. I say at the end of my polished Theory of Everything that we are moving towards an event. A knot point in the evolution of conscious life. The birth of a new species. A Genesis 2.0. The second Genesis is different from the first. In Genesis 1.0, it is a sin to eat the apple because life then falls into duality and moves away from God and natural metaphysical unity. In Genesis 2.0, it is a sin not to eat the apple because otherwise life remains in duality and does not find its way back to God. According to Wikipedia, the formula of the philosopher's stone can be traced back not only to Plato, but also to Adam in Genesis. There is also the quote "the first matter of the stone is the very same with the first matter of all things." The concepts of the stone can also be found on the national flag of South Korea, which in my subjective evaluation is the best national flag. Four alchemical elements and the two essences of polarity. 42. I heard that in Kabbalism there are two trees. One has a divine fruit which causes a spiritual rise, the other has a rotten fruit which causes a spiritual downfall. That fits well to my Theory of Everything. The masses eat the rotten fruit of the false tree & inverted metaphysics. Thats why we decay. In the religions this archetypal and rational event is already described. In Buddhism, there one compares this event with the udumbara flower. It is said that this event is so rare that it happens only once every 3000 years. Everything points to this one moment, but only few are lucky enough to realize so early what is happening and what will happen. It is about highly rational events that were mystified because they were not understood. The prophecies in the religions that could be made thousands of years ago are not based on mystical things, but on rational predictions that can be understood if one understands that conditions produce morality and morality changes conditions, which then changes morality again, up to this one point of a collective awakening. The resurrection of the dead. Unconscious minds then become aware of their own nature. The NPC becomes a player character. All the undead are simultaneously brought to the realization of eternal life. The door back to Eden is so wide open that it's hard to miss.

How to divide the masses into two dual extremist opposites to make them mindlessly strive for totalitarian leadership. This video is about how to control and manipulate the masses. I am not explaining this to give tips, but to create awareness of how easy it is to control masses. Immunity against manipulation is built simply by understanding the trick. After all, one doesn't defeat shell players with witch hunts, but with education about how the scam works. Then the problem will solve itself, because the shell players will no longer find any victims and will only be laughed away. For summoning the dead we need a few things. A necromancer, dead people he can summon, a medium and the devil. I could write all this without using such occult rhetoric, but my point is to demystify the mystical and take a rational look at esoteric and metaphysical concepts. I would also like to give a warning. We live in a time in which these processes actively take place. We are all vulnerable to manipulation and the realization of this can be painful. If one believes that one cannot be manipulated politically, it is an indication that one can be easily manipulated into a worldview shift.

I was wondering why metaphysics has such a hard time these days. I have noticed that there are many walls that need to be broken through. The biggest wall is between materialist science and esoteric science. There are many prejudices and fears that prevent these two sciences from coming together. These are the smaller walls that need to be broken down. If these mental walls fall, the big wall between physical and metaphysical worldviews will also fall. Then nothing stands in the way of seeing them as one. A little warning beforehand. I have some strange views and I will say things here that may sound totally insane to some. For example, that modern science is currently at the flat earth level if it comes to philosophy and evolution of mind, perception and morality. With everything that goes with it. Cult behavior. Simply not wanting the truth. Or mocking and fighting scientists who want to explain that mind and morality is not static, but arises under certain conditions and changes continuously. Just as the earth is not a static flat circle, but a globe, which arises under certain conditions and changes continuously. Do not misunderstand. It is not about questioning the whole of modern science. It is only about the fact that something is missing. One stands confused and dual split between physics and quantum physics. What is missing is the third physics. Quantum physics describes the small. Physics describes the large. Metaphysics places itself above it and describes the large and the small as a unity connected by a spectrum. So those are the three types of physics and a few of their scientists. But of course, these scientists are also cross-platform. Isaac Newton, as is known, also dealt with alchemy and the esoteric sciences. After all, everything is about the question of the logical basic structure of our reality. One can quickly switch from one to the other because it's largely the same thing. Many scientists keep metaphysics at a distance, because it can become mystical and religious there very fast. Funnily, they use the term God too if it is about a universal formula for everything. There one speaks then fast of a God particle or the God Equation. They mean this also quite rationally and it is. Such a formula would be the highest law, which unites everything what can exist. Nothing would stand above this law, otherwise it would be no formula of all things. With it such a formula must describe not only physical phenomena but also mental. Well, where would one find such a law? In the physical detail or perhaps rather in a meta-perspective? If it contains mental phenomena, but also can be recognized only by a mind, then it is also mainly about self-recognition. This means inevitably also that one cannot find such a formula by external experiments in the physical reality, but in the inner of the mind. By the mind going into a higher perspective, in which it looks at itself neutrally from the distance. The fear of scientists to lose their reputation if they deal with mystical things is a big problem. Mystical appear to us things that we do not understand and what is unknown to us. But since the unknown tends to be mystified, it can never be recognized if one keeps everything that is mystified at a distance in the search for new knowledge. Actually, we should do it the other way around. If something is mystical, it indicates that there is still a discovery to make. That means one can find a rational explanation where one could not find a rational explanation yet. Real science means to demystify the mystical and not to run away from it. I think I don't need a source here to prove that modern science wants to separate itself very strongly from esotericism. The problem with this is that esotericism doesn't always just mean having a mysterious woman with a crystal ball explain to you for money at the fair that you will soon find your great love. Or to believe that the earth would be flat. Esotericism can also simply mean metaphysics, self-knowledge, ethics and mind. If there would be such a God Formula, then it would have to be metaphysical. It must not only contain physical phenomena, but also the mind, morality and recognition of the self. It would be found where everything is still mystified. Such a formula would be inevitably esoteric. It would be very difficult to explain such a formula without using esotericism. And if one would manage it somehow, then one would miss one of the most interesting syntheses. What if the foundation of many religions is exactly this one law? What if the actual concept of God is often not meant at all like in a cult, but as a rational natural law which also describes the roots of mind and morality? I think that this is the case. I think this very mystified formula has been recognized many times. It is known under the name Philosophers Stone.

Chemistry of Mental Archetypes: When an algorithm recognizes itself. This Theory of Everything is about the unification of opposites. It also includes a universal formula (The Philosopher's Stone) which brings evolution, morality, structures, mathematics, ideologies, states of matter, states of mind, psychology, crowd control, perception, temperatures, religion, hermetic philosophy, and more under a single pattern. PDF: http://philobster.com/ 0:00 Intro 1:03 learn & teach | open & critical 2:37 Order, Chaos and Structures 4:34 Mathematics 5:40 Time 6:17 Possible Realities 7:22 Evolution 8:08 The 4th Synthesis 10:27 States of Matter, Temperatures & Alchemist Elements 11:38 Elementary Forces of Physics 13:04 Flow & Frequencies 13:27 Metaphysics & Physics 15:24 Perception 16:17 Evaluations 17:21 States of Mind 17:56 Collectivist & Individualist Species 19:20 Anti-Authoritarian & Authoritarian 21:11 Moral Judgments 24:14 Economics 27:17 Gun Rights 27:41 Political Visions 34:06 Concepts of Gender 38:47 Archetypes of Political Visions 40:56 Imperialism & Conflicts 43:32 Cycle of Societies 48:09 Four Meta-Planes 49:51 Into the Mind 53:08 Spectrum of Mind 57:09 Consequences of Duality & Polarity 58:39 Path of Enlightened Minds / Left & Right Hand Path 1:00:09 What is the self? Who am I? 1:03:44 Duality happens “as above, so below” 1:05:24 Final Chapter It is a metaphysical theory, from a software developers perspective. It's not about Cern and the so-called God particle. It's not about looking into total detail. We are looking at the big picture from so far above that physics and quantum mechanics actually play only a minor role. Here I will view the mind as an algorithm. A logical sequence of processing information, whose judgments are influenced by evolution and experience. It is a cold look into the mental archetypes. So cold that the human mind seems to be nothing more than a complex calculator. Processes which simply happen out of themselves. So it is not exactly what many understand under metaphysics. Science is about finding knowledge and recognizing. For this, you have to be open, but also critical. Because if you are open but not critical, you become too naive. And if you are critical but not open, you become too dismissive to take in new information. Knowledge acquisition is a zero point from which one can move in two directions into ignorance.

I had some thoughts about the relation of metaphysics, physics and quantum physics. My work is about metaphysics. It is not really about physics or quantum physics, but about universal relations between archetypal concepts. The law which I describe is not a physical law. It is an even higher law of existence, which is superior to all possible realities, which can function according to all possible physical laws. It is a metaphysical law. Physics describes only our reality, but metaphysics stands above everything. In the three principles, different concepts can be found. Past, present and future or static, organic and chaotic structures. I think that if one would solve the puzzle of chemistry and would transfer the physical particles to a simpler principle, then this order would make a lot of sense. Metaphysics is objective, works with equal values and describes universal relations of these values. There, all possible values are viewed as a single unit. From total negativity to total positivity. All states, no matter if logical or illogical, and also no matter how one evaluates them oneself, stand neutrally next to each other. Then one questions how these possibilities stand in relation to each other. That is why metaphysics is objective, because it works with objective values and objective laws. Of course, there is no objective individual value, but when all values are side by side, there is no more variability. The degree to which something manifests itself in this spectrum is variable. But the sum of all possibilities is fixed and unchangeable. As I said, I am not a physicist and know only a few documentaries about physics and quantum physics. But what is described in quantum physics sounds to me as if there would be no objectivity in detail. There events happen which seem to be detached from all laws. So variable in value and in the law. Physics is relative. It describes variable values and objective laws. I have asked myself if the relativity of the time is connected with the calculations. In my analysis, I assume that the things in the nature cannot be controlled centrally, but must happen side by side. If I understood Einstein's theory of relativity correctly, it means that the faster something moves, or the more mass something has, the slower it moves in time. This could be because the more complicated a calculation is, the longer it takes to calculate it. I notice this when I develop games. The more calculations, the slower the game runs. That's why it's very important in game development to keep the code as simple as possible and not include any unnecessary complicated calculation steps. If in reality everything happens and is calculated side by side, places with more energy would move slower in time, because they need longer to be calculated. Where there is less energy and particles, on the other hand, it would take less time to calculate and so move faster in time. I have also heard something about the string theory. This says that particles are actually multidimensional strings of energy, of which we can see only one degree. Would the string also be considered as a spectrum from order to chaos. Or fixed to volatile. Or low and fast, then we could possibly solve the double slit paradox with it. So the particle/wave paradox, would be then no paradox at all, but only a degree shift of an individual string, which is very spread out on one side and moves thereby like a wave and affects several positions at the same time, and is limited on the other side to only one small point. I don't know why the shift takes place and what triggers it. Maybe the reality is easier to calculate if it works only roughly with probabilities and collapses into an individual event only if the information is requested by observation. You may have seen the different patterns that are created when a metal plate on which sand is lying is vibrated with acoustic frequencies. Maybe the pattern of different particles or degrees of a string could be hidden there. If I would not be so poor and without a proper degree, with no more resources than my mind and laptop, I would try to measure & arrange the patterns that arise at different frequencies from low to high. Then I would try to transfer these patterns into a 3D or 4D model and connect them to see if a larger pattern emerges from the sum of all individual patterns and frequencies. Maybe the form of a 4d string and its octaves can be found in it. but i don’t know. I can't verify that and I think universities are busy hiring and paying people to think up reasons why it would be ok to threaten innocent people to force them to take pharmaceutical products against their will...

This video is about the difference between natural science and totalitarian ideologies, such as forced vaccination or the plans made by the World Economic Forum or the Agenda 2030. outro music: Massive Attack - Angel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLzrp24F8pc video material used from: "IN-SHADOW - A Modern Odyssey - Animated Short Film" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j800SVeiS5I In my hermetic Theory of Everything, I call the path that politics and society have taken unscientific. I am also very critical of the state in general. There is a risk that my statements could be portrayed or interpreted as politically radical.Of course I am not a radical and I also warn against all political ideas that strive for quick system changes and revolutions. I reject any form of activism that uses threats and violence. I also reject vigilante justice and witch hunts that seek to impose punishments without evidence.I am not an absolutist and I am not in favor of abolishing the state and the constitution.When it comes to politics, I think we should remain calm. Hasty revolutions are easy to instrumentalize. Instead of reforming towards centrality and thereby splitting the left and right visions and playing them off against each other, we should slowly decentralize and try to find a compromise between the two visions. Left and right sitting at the same table, understanding each other's perspective and wondering what would be the best political action to protect the population from hardship and external control. So a state should be there to protect individuals from being put into emergency situations. A state should not be there to put people in emergency situations in order to reach political goals.My criticism of vaccinations and policy is not directed at making recommendations based on scientific data. It is also not about questioning the whole of modern science. Nor is it about rejecting the State providing vaccines during a pandemic.My criticism is directed at a political science that sees itself legitimized to construct people from above. Laws of nature are not made up, they are discovered.In the natural science it is about to describe logical and generally valid relations behind the things. In this lies the equality of nature. In equations.Pseudoscience would not be to look for equations, but for sameness.For example, if one claims there is a connection between me and Tom Jones because our name gives the same value in kabbalistic numerology. Or that there would be a connection, if one determines that his body size in CM is the same sum, as quantity of moons in an individual solar system. Or that it is the same value which can be calculated in quantum mechanics. Or from the length ratios of the pyramids. If values are equal, it does not prove a logical connection. Correlation is not equal to causality.The research on vaccinations and the recommendations for vaccination were of course not based on numerology, but on scientific studies and prognoses. One is allowed to be wrong. Being wrong does not make you an unscientist.The frame of science is then left, if one makes from it an obligation to the vaccination, in order to reach the condition that all are vaccinated. One takes all the statistics to conclude that it would be the scientifically and objective correct state, when all people are vaccinated.One declares conditions, which are not given in the reality, to the objective truth. Then it is only a matter of thinking up any punishments, orders and artificial consequences to implement these with monopolized violence, so that this state is reached. They create an artificial causality.For example, a scientific causality is the following: " Release the apple. Apple falls to the ground". That is cause and effect. Action and consequence.No scientific causality is "If 50% are not vaccinated, no one in society can visit their family." This is not true. One can of course care for the sick if one is unvaccinated and one can of course visit the family if less than 50% of the population is vaccinated. There is no causality between being vaccinated and being able to care for or visit someone.The scientific proof of this is the amount of money and effort that had to be spent when trying to create these states.As has been seen, this does not happen by itself. It takes central planning, advertising and violence to make artificial consequences work. Only then does the statement "if you're not vaccinated, you can't work" have anything to do with reality. By monitoring people and then punishing them when they do.This must be clearly differentiated from natural science. Such ideologies cannot be associated with Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, or Tesla.

Music/Video at the end: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEltqdsDFlY I don't know if you have ever heard of biblically accurate angels. These are less romantic. They are rather disturbing to many. Beings with multiple faces or wheels full of eyes. The angels do say not to be afraid when they show themselves. But the sight still creates great fear and hardly anyone manages to stand their full glory. I also want to say beforehand that I am speculating here. I can't tell if the angels I'm describing here were meant to be exactly like that. I can badly call Ezekiel and ask him. But for me this makes more sense than the theory from Erich von Däniken, who speculates that the visions of Ezekiel describe spaceships of aliens. Nothing against Erich von Däniken, he is a free mind and that is great. But I think his theory is wrong. The structures which have unfolded before my inner eye fit there quite well. In my visions I saw metaphysical patterns of the highest level of abstraction. Only God stands higher.

I think we should get away from the idea of uploading the mind to a computer. It seems as if the mind is very mystified on the one hand, but on the other hand we have to assume that nothing in the mind is mystical, but everything is clearly definable and mathematical. This is the only way to transfer it to a computer. A computer is not mystical. It is based on pure mathematical logic. Personally, I think that a mind and our whole reality is mathematical and not mystical. Mystical appear things that we do not yet understand. Like in a magician show that loses its magic as soon as one understands the trick. That means that theoretically nothing stands in the way to load the mind into a computer to live forever. But that only makes sense as long as one has a false understanding of one's deeper self. In my Theory of Everything I also describe different levels of what can be understood as the self. In short: The first understanding is the physical body, which some want to teleport. Then the inner thoughts, sensations, experiences, perceptions. So the mind, which some want to transfer into a computer. As third stage the process which observes the mind from the inside. So the soul. Now let's assume we would do that. We scan our mind and transfer it from the brain to a computer. Or that we can be disassembled by a teleportation machine into all individual particles and scanned to send every single piece of information of our body to another place, in order to be reassembled there exactly as we were before. What if your information is sent to two teleportation machines and you appear in two different places? Or hundred? Or when your mind is transferred to a computer. What if you just copy it and let it exist 1000 times? Then which of them are you? From which of the thousand copies would you hear the thoughts from within? Just like the inner thoughts you can hear from within right now. If everyone is in one room and everyone communicates with each other. Would you then observe all of their inner thoughts from within at the same time? I do not think so. Because these are all copies. Clones that have your memory and state of mind as the basis of their development. Then they make their own experiences. But you are dead. You don't hear any of their thoughts. The assumption that one can transfer the self to a computer only makes sense if one defines the self as the mind. I personally think that the mind works mathematically and that it can be simulated. But if a mind would be transferred to a computer, it would be overall just a bunch of information, which partly changed frequently in the lifetime. A psychological framework of data on whether one is more introverted or extroverted, empathic or cold, rational and creative, etc. Then a database of memories, which generates the behaviors that one has adapted through experiences. We would end up simply defining the variables of an empty virtual mind with the values of a person's mental base and then filling the AI's empty memories with that person's memories. In summary: I think it is possible to transfer the mind to a computer and maybe even the teleportation of people, but it would only be a copy whose experiences and thoughts would not be observed by the original individual from the inside anymore. That opens up another question for me. The idea that I could transfer my self to a computer makes no sense to me. But what is with the question if the observation/soul can be detached from the logical chain reactions of our brain and transferred behind other chain reactions in nature? How about looking into a mountain from beyond our physical reality like our soul observes the inside of the brain?