SECTUAL

Contrary to popular belief, you don't need to take psychedelics to see "what the matrix looks like"...

So I'm talking about a few components of the matrix that you can see with your eyes.

One way to see things without psychedelics is by sleep deprivation. But I tend to notice this method causes a perception of more 'low level' entities and 'sights' in general, therefore it is not the best way to go about things.

Being sleep deprived is an altered state wherein you're not in your full mental capacity, and that's useless for a clear understanding of what you're going to witness when you see the matrix.

So there are better ways to go about it. Basically if you lay in the dark, with maybe a tiny nightlight, and you don't blink for awhile, you'll be able to see the 'lattice'...

https://imgur.com/a/swaznsl

It's the invisible 'framework' all over everything... this is a picture I tried to edit to show what it looks like:

https://i.imgur.com/J6QYzzb.jpg

Original:

http://wimsattdirect.com/images/Images_1...2500_1.jpg

And eventually your eyes will go through this phase of adjustment to the dark wherein you'll be able to see the 'pixels'...

Then once you're used to seeing the pixels in the dark, you'll be able to notice them more prominently during the day too, especially in any situations where light is a little lower, and depending on the color of whatever you're looking at.

These realizations seem to go in phases...

The 'lattice' seems far off, it seems a little more 'distant'. But the 'pixels'... it seems like those are like right up on your eyeballs. RIGHT UP ON THEM.

In the dark one night, I came to the conclusion that the matrix is illusory to the CORE. It is literally a projection. It takes place on the 'screen' of your senses, your eyes etc.

The more that you look at the 'pixels', the more you'll notice they seem closer and closer. They're not right in front of your eyeballs, they're not on your eyeballs, they're not directly on the inside of your eyeballs... honey, they ain't even REAL.

The images that they comprise, the reality that you see... is a projection coming from your core and even the pixels are illusory.

None of what we see or experience 'out there' is even real.

Waking life is another form of dreaming.

Existence is layers upon layers of these same principles and archetypes, from micro to macro, infinitely.

(03-07-2018, 09:32 PM)Trix Wrote: [ -> ]The more that you look at the 'pixels', the more you'll notice they seem closer and closer. They're not right in front of your eyeballs, they're not on your eyeballs, they're not directly on the inside of your eyeballs... honey, they ain't even REAL.

I´ve thought about these billions of pixels, someone described them as like "static" and I somewhat agree, although I feel as they are red and blue in color and not black and white.

I totally can´t see their color btw, I just sense that´s the color - could be totally wrong on this.

When you google this effect, a lot of people appear to not see them, as they think you´re referring to floaters lmfao.

I can see the "static" in the dark. It's not the same as floaters, which look like amoeba under a microscope.

(03-07-2018, 09:32 PM)Trix Wrote: [ -> ]Being sleep deprived is an altered state wherein you're not in your full mental capacity, and that's useless for a clear understanding of what you're going to witness when you see the matrix.

So there are better ways to go about it. Basically if you lay in the dark, with maybe a tiny nightlight, and you don't blink for awhile, you'll be able to see the 'lattice'...

Oh and I´m going to try this. Never seen it. But I trust the Universe will allow me the view if I go in for it right? lol we´ll see.

In a couple of days time I´ll sleep deprive myself and try it...

(03-07-2018, 09:55 PM)Crille Wrote: [ -> ]When you google this effect, a lot of people appear to not see them, as they think you´re referring to floaters lmfao.

Very interesting isn't it?

It goes to show you how people don't even think about it, because they've not been given permission to, essentially.

I've always said that the adaptability and the programmable nature of humanity is its greatest downfall and its greatest power.

(03-07-2018, 10:00 PM)lulwut Wrote: [ -> ]I can see the "static" in the dark. It's not the same as floaters, which look like amoeba under a microscope.

So we have two votes for "static" as a term to describe what I referred to as "pixels"...

I'm just glad you guys get what the heck I'm talking about!

(03-07-2018, 10:03 PM)Crille Wrote: [ -> ]In a couple of days time I´ll sleep deprive myself and try it...

I said it's not the useful way to do this because you're exposed to a lot of that 'in between' material that you see in dreams/just waking/just falling asleep... and that type of stuff can feel icky. In no way do I recommend this method, and that's not even to mention the fact that it's retarded.

(03-07-2018, 10:04 PM)Trix Wrote: [ -> ]So we have two votes for "static" as a term to describe what I referred to as "pixels"...

I'm just glad you guys get what the heck I'm talking about!

Well, I don't know that I'd describe it as pixels. It seems more like the optic nerves are being marginally stimulated. Like right at the threshold of on/off. Not enough to produce a picture, but not little enough to produce total blackness either.

When I think of pixels, I think of a definite image that's broken up into dots or something.

Yeah static is a better term.

At times I've also noticed the heartbeat making some very interesting patterns and sequences of varying 'intensity' in the static (I hesitate to call them 'flashes' because that sounds like a problem, LMAO).

It all just reminds me of some kind of computer program when I see it. It looks... so deliberate and seems to have some kind of a function in its patterns and sequences.

Oh... No I agree with pixels. I see them as billions of individual pixels all beside each other. Static is just a nice way of describing it to someone who thinks about floaters.

And lol, it might be retarded to sleep deprive, but I´m just curious if I can see anything close to what you describe as the lettice. In the name of science!

I think all of the little static dots are just rod cells in the retina turning on and off. Those are the ones responsible for night vision. The cone cells that produce color vision work best in brighter light.

The only function of employing sleep deprivation is to make the senses even more susceptible to an unfiltered kind of perception.

You can do it without being deprived of sleep if you're just really patient and get comfortable and allow yourself to sort of become sleepy...

To see the static, stare at a blank wall without blinking for as long as you can...

You'll start to see it super well and may even see the vibrational field of the wall, it'll start to look NOT solid.

You don't have to do that in the dark.

But to see the lattice, you should be laying down in an almost totally dark room with only enough light to barely make out doorframes or large objects in the room...

Eventually you'll start to see it.

It appears green to me.

I've heard some people say the color depends on what vibrational frequency you're on as a person re: your consciousness, but I don't agree with that...

I think it's fucking green and everyone sees it as green, that's why it's depicted everywhere as fucking green, LMAO.

Like for example, I made this thread and this video on my Subscriptions feed on YouTube is basically new within the hour and it's got a depiction of exactly what I'm talking about:

It's only upon reading the title and embedding it in this thread that I realize how synchronistic this truly is... I'm gonna watch it.

(03-07-2018, 10:16 PM)lulwut Wrote: [ -> ]I think all of the little static dots are just rod cells in the retina turning on and off. Those are the ones responsible for night vision. The cone cells that produce color vision work best in brighter light.

Indeed that's the incredibly physical, scientific, logic based explanation humans have come up with to describe what the hell is going on...

Dude that video is fucking three hours long and his voice is totally annoying, no way I'm listening to that shit but it's fine... the synchronicity there is just a placemarker.

I just went into a dark room and saw what you're describing. It's like a bright chain link fence or honeycomb against a dark background. The pixels are the dark polygons between the outlines, right?

Yeah you're totally right, I've heard other people describe it as the honeycomb shape as well...

The 'pixels' are just the static... the tiny dots that everyone sees when you turn the lights off before your eyes adjust to the dark.

It's interesting you mention the darkness between the green lines in the lattice...

I've never thought about it. I've never pondered the boundaries of the lattice and why it's even that shape.

I thought they were hexagonal like a honeycomb at first, but then it looked like they had a lot more than 6 sides. The shapes aren't very distinct.

Now let me ask you this...

You gave the 'scientific' explanation of what the static (pixels) are...

But what would be the scientific explanation of the 'fence'?

Why would it be in that shape?

If it's all 'optical illusion' due to rods and cones or whatever...

Why be in that shape?

See...

When I first noticed the lattice, I never associated it with any function of my sense of vision...

I never interpreted it as anything but the framework which is on/within all matter.

That was my immediate understanding of it when I first saw it.

I trust my own perception and interpretation of it more than I'd ever trust any 'scientific' explanation.

(03-07-2018, 10:30 PM)lulwut Wrote: [ -> ]I thought they were hexagonal like a honeycomb at first, but then it looked like they had a lot more than 6 sides. The shapes aren't very distinct.

To me, it was very sharp delineation between the green lines and the dark spaces...

Exactly like a chain link fence...

http://www.psdgraphics.com/file/chainlin...exture.jpg

Definitely a diamond kinda shape.