Now this is the third hour of December the fifth, afternoon. We have been covering aspects of interrelated cycles of action and we have found that by postulating or by acquiring or by assuming a new type of cycle called the tone scale that we can bring into relationship human experience, experience of a thetan and the conditions of space, time and energy so that by working one we can attain another.

We have set up an arbitrary crossroad by saying there is a tone scale. Now by the Introduction of that we put up a crossroads. And that must be a pretty good crossroads because since 1950 it has been producing very good results; it is something that is accumulating data and simplifying data.

As the slide rule is to the engineer which is an arbitrary after all – it’s a logarithmic scale – so might be said the tone scale is to an auditor. It solves problems for him. And the better he knows how to use it, the better an auditor he is. This tells him that in creative processing the mock-ups which he addresses to the preclear can go higher and higher and higher in level with great variety.

If he did not give that variety he would not maintain the interest of the preclear; furthermore, if he doesn’t have an existing coincidence or association between human experience and thetan’s experience and space, energy and time he would not be able to remedy aberration really in terms of the MEST universe. Here we find somebody in the MEST universe and we want to know how we can either one, improve his status in the MEST universe, two, make him into a thetan and improve the status of the thetan in the MEST universe, or three, make it possible for him to create uh… items and objects and so forth in the MEST universe, or four, make a universe of his own, or five, handle and control universes, or six, skip it.

Now he has all those various choices and uh… essentially we are studying choice and intention. Now you want to know what lies above 40; one of the things which lies above it would be intention. Now if the intention is to have objects; well, one would go through uh… whatever he had to go through to make the object. Or he’d just postulate there was an object there and have an object; or if one wanted action, his intention was action, he could have action. If his intention is just to have lots of space, he could have lots of space.

Or if his intention was to continue along a subject known as progress, he could follow the cycle of action through from space to having an object. In other words, his intention in each case continually one after the other could be a selective thing.

Now there’s great lucidity in this. There’s great fluidity. He has set himself up to agree to the arrival into the possession of an object by the adoption of a cycle of action. And he has even gone so far as to think he has to have an object to have a memory. He has… manufactures in homo sapiens facsimiles, engrams, secondaries, locks, data, facsimiles, pictures, books, all that sort of thing, words, all these things. Now in order to… to – he’s gone into this scale.

Now it’s gotten into a gradient scale and a new scale here, quite Important – the scale of automaticity. I’ll have to cover that scale. And he’s gotten everything to a point where it’s all automatic. So it’s all got to be made for him, so it’s all got to be pre-existing objects before himself. He exists before any object exists, but he’s got it so twisted by this time that the object exists before he exists.

And uh… he boy, he’s… he’s starting low and diving full throttle.

And this then is a number of choices. So intention exists above 40.0. Other things can exist above 40.0 too, but intention exists.

Now he could simply say I have action. A magician, uh… the magic cults of the 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th centuries in the Middle East were fascinating. The only modern work that has anything to do with them is a trifle wild in spots, but it’s fascinating work in itself, and that’s work written by Allister Crowley, the late Allister Crowley, my very good friend. And uh… he… he did himself a splendid uh… piece of aesthetics built around those magic cults. Uh… it’s very interesting reading to get ahold of a copy of a book, quite rare, but it can be obtained, THE MASTER THERION, T-h-e-r-i-o-n, THE MASTER THERION by Allister Crowley. He signs himself The Beast, the mark of the beast six sixty-six. Very, very something or other, but anyway the… Crowley exhumed a lot of the data from these old magic cults.

And uh… he… he, as a matter of fact, handles cause and effect quite a bit. Cause and effect is… is handled according to a ritual. And it’s interesting that whenever you have any of these things you can always assign a ritual to it and that ritual is what you do in order to accomplish this. Or how you have to go through and how many motions you have to make to come into the ownership of that. And that’s a ritual.

Or how many motions or words you have to say in order to be something else. Now that’s a ritual. And that is a… each ritual is a cycle of some sort or another. Now you can have cycles that start low and end high, but because homo sapiens has agreed to a cycle that starts with space and ends with matter, when homo sapiens starts into a cycle of action he finds himself up with his hands full of gold and with shackles on every limb.

Now he continually knows completely that all he has to do is start low and go high. He… he knows that. Uh… he said, „Well, now all we have to do is go up this gradient scale – ta-da-da-da-pa-ba.“ And he hasn’t had a route that led through anything to reverse this cycle because he had agreed so heavily to having the cycle of action which is this MEST universe itself, he can’t bring himself to completely reverse this without backtracking the agreement cycle merely because he’s ethical and his word is good.

However bad he may seem to you at this level on the tone scale, he isn’t bailed out of it for one reason and that is his word is good.

Now when he backtracks this cycle of action he just has to back it up and you’ve got to start low and arrive high, and in Scientology we have as far as I know in this universe a… as far as I know the first time we have a cycle of action which starts low and goes high and gets there. And doesn’t start with the low we have and then denies its existence and just tries to wipe that out and sails off someplace else.

There’s something like a cul-de-sac, a blind alley, a box canyon; you come galloping into the MEST universe full of vim and vigor and all of a sudden crash – here you are at the bottom of the tone scale, the cycle of action.

Now we have a cycle of action which goes backwards. It starts with stop, which is homo sapiens, and ends with intention, which is your thetan bailed out all the way. Good workable cycle of action. What you’re studying, if the truth be known, is a cycle of action which can apply because it is very carefully based upon the reversal of the cycle of action which made the MEST universe.

And in order to make this new cycle of action the cycle of action originally agreed to broadly and generally had to be completely understood. Now that we’ve got that cycle of action we can turn it backwards. But it isn’t backwards; it’s forwards and upwards, because our sole motive here isn’t simply the reversal of a cycle of action. We’re trying to establish a cycle of action in this universe which will work for individuals. And it works; Scientology 8-8008 is a design of a new cycle of action.

That’s a design right there. It tells what the cycle of action goes to: an unapplied infinity, a potential, and it tells how you get there and it says you go up tone scale, and you see MEST universe is infinity at the bottom of the tone scale. It’s all a motion, it’s all a matter. It’s all somebody else’s and none of your own. You see, actually motion becomes an all-motion becomes a no-motion and that’s matter, so you’ve got… you start there at the infinity which is the MEST universe, and the MEST universe is never more real than from four down.

And you go back up the line of that and you’re going upscale all the time, and you’re getting upscale there and the MEST universe ceases to be, completely, at 40.0. Just isn’t. For the preclear, you say you’re bringing him up tone scale. You’re bringing him up to the point where the MEST universe is going to be zero.

He… you could stop him or he can stop himself at about 20.0 and he’s got a choice. He can be… he can contact the MEST universe, he can have the MEST universe, or on the other hand, over here, he can have a universe of his own or be part and parcel of another universe, or all those choices which I gave you the first part of this hour.

Now, uh… we’ve got that cycle of action. Now it tells him quite additionally that his additional cycle of action depends upon these cycles of action, and that he has a pattern for the construction of his own universe, which he can do with pretty much as he likes, but it doesn’t define what the infinity of his own universe would be and it doesn’t say that it has to be an all-motion thing at all.

But it tells him that he can raise his own universe from zero and take it through to infinity. So we’ve got this cycle of action. Now that’s a cycle of action which would graph like this.

So of course infinity would be all possible cycles of action, and when you say infinity of his own universe, he could make it any cycle of action, so the first infinity means all possible cycles of action or any other type of pattern or any other type of ridge, or any other type of intention which he cares to engage in.

Now we find the MEST universe is most real down here at uh… 0.0. Boy, there’s… you’re really real when you’re dead. And uh… that goes on up the line up here – that would be infinity. And that goes on up the line up here to 20.0 which would be halfway between infinity and zero. Up here and it’d go on out and at 40.0 you would have for the MEST universe, that’s zero phi, infinity phi, you would have 40.0 up here at the top. That’s out. You understand that – I mean, that’s… that’s out of the universe.

Now that goes from here then for zero of his own universe; we just have to reverse this thing, and let’s say his own universe has a tone scale on an entirely different principle. You have a tone scale on this principle which takes us from a 40. uh… 0 of his own universe to a zero of his own universe or a zero of his own universe. And I don’t care which way you put it.

So, we’ve got this… this thing lying from a zero or nothing but space or something for his own universe (he makes it out of space) down to there. And this, of course, for his own universe, could be called infinity. And for his own universe up here could be called a zero.

Well, it doesn’t matter how… how I draw this. If you have any curiosity about that second graph, it’s because you’re trying to relate it to the first tone scale graph. And he could… he could design a tone scale for his own universe which would be a beauty. Uh… it could do anything, torsional space or quadrupeds, or anything you want, but he doesn’t have it now, that’s a cinch, he doesn’t have it now, so perhaps it’s best to draw this thing this way. So it should go… and this would be „0“ because certainly at 40.0, at 30… 40.0 he can start toward the infinity of his own universe, can’t he?

And uh… at uh… zero here, zero point zero on this tone scale he doesn’t have one, does he, because at zero a man’s hopes, dreams, illusions and all those things which he graces the MEST universe with are dead, they don’t exist. Death comes about only when one is no longer able to place any of his own force, dream, hope, intention, upon the MEST universe.

If you want to kill a man, the most effective way of killing a man may be with a shotgun, but that shotgun is telling him in a terribly brief instant that he has met something in the MEST universe which he cannot overcome in terms of force. And if he’s met that, he is dead. Very simple.

Or you simply start in on him and start working on him when he’s very small and you say, „You shouldn’t imagine such things, you shouldn’t do such things, da-da-da-da da-da-da-da da-da-da-da, you gotta work, you gotta work hard, now that you’re married you gotta work hard, and you’ve got to do this, you got to do that, and we expect certain things of you, we… and so on, and you got to go through this and you got to go through that; you can’t do this and you can’t do that, you can’t do this and you can’t do that.“ So that it gets up to the point of restriction.

Had this mathematician one time, I told him about this, and he right away figured out something that was called an abstrict, and he found out that every time anybody spoke to him they were trying to lay a restriction upon him, of one sort or another. It had to do with a restriction.

And so he suddenly realized this and with this clear, brilliant recognition suddenly went up the pole, got up there to eight hundred thousand feet with no parachute and was quite somebody for quite a little while. He was a problem. He uh… grabbed ahold of a girl who was married because he loved her and he convinced her that this was the case. And she said, „By golly, that is the case,“ and picked her up by the nape of the neck and went to another state and they’ve lived happily ever after, and they married. You just don’t do that in this universe, you know.

You don’t take this girl and she’s married and she’s all pinned down and she’s got an identity and so forth, and you don’t suddenly say, „Now look, do you know that everything here that everybody’s saying to you is really an attempt to restrict you in some way or another? Now look, we can have a pretty good… pretty good time of it here and why don’t you just come down to the train and pick up the kid and we’ll leave.“ He’s known her for maybe 24 hours.

And uh… they do; they’ve been very happy. You see, you’d expect this, you’d expect this; the MEST universe would tell you anything that starts like that will wind in disaster. Uh-uh. Anything which starts the other way is what winds up in disaster.

You know, you… you meet somebody and then you know them for a long period of years, maybe three years, you have an engagement. And then he works very hard at a job in order to save up enough money to put the down payment down on a house and uh… then they finally get married. And with everybody’s consent and everybody’s approval, and then they have some children with everybody’s consent and everybody’s approval, and then they… they… they work harder and harder and they send the kids to college. And when the kids get through college, they say to hell with the old folks. And uh… so on, and they finally wind up footsore and weary but with this righteous feeling of, „Well, we did our best, and we have helped them all out and now we two can pass away.“

That’s practically what MEST says all around sort of thing: We helped you out, we went to the end of the trail. You say, „I got that sad, sad remorseful feeling.“ Of course, there isn’t a piece of MEST in the MEST universe that hasn’t been abandoned so often it’s got that written all over it.

So, we’ve got here then Scientology 8-8008 in the form of an action cycle, which gives us a process. And it said, „This is a track and if you go on this track, now these are your potentialities. And if you like the other track and if you think this MEST universe is a wonderful place that you want to agree and agree and agree and agree and agree, brother, it’s yours.“

They give… if you just like this universe, that’s up to you. That’s thoroughly up to you. In view of the fact that there you are at… at uh… 2.5 or 3.0 on the tone scale and there you are at 3.0 on the tone scale and you are perfectly agreeable, you think everything that’s happening is all for the best. And you’re perfectly happy, and it’s all working out the way it should work out and if you can find a fellow who is like that and who doesn’t want to take this road, I’ll give you a lot of MEST as a reward, because I have not been able to find him. But he exists as a myth and an illusion.

Now a magician – getting back to cause and effect and Allister’s work – a magician postulates what his goal will be before he starts to accomplish what he is doing. The old magician was the great-great-great-grandfather of your modern stage magician. Your stage magician doesn’t even know the old magician even existed.

And the stage magician gets up there and he waves this around and he has a hat and he has a wand and he has his bric-a-brac of various sorts, and he doesn’t really know where it came from. This is a great joke on him. These are pieces of ritual out of the 8th, 9th, 10th centuries and they – each one of them means something terribly specific and the most awesome ritual in the world is associated with their use. And the magician was very ritualistic and he would very carefully postulate what effect he was trying to achieve before he would be cause for that effect. That’s the first thing he’d do: What am I trying to do?

Then he would make a statement of what he was trying to do and having made a statement of what he was trying to do, he would just then initiate the steps necessary to accomplish it. If one did not do this, one would inevitably fall into this trap: he would become the effect of his own cause. Because what he had eventually accomplished would seem surprising to him. And might seem desirable as an effect upon him.

So he carefully stayed out of that rat race; he had nothing further to do with it and at any time that he achieved this effect, then he would say, „You see, I achieved that effect.“

It uh… he was, still cause to that effect, but a fellow who just flounders around and says, „Well, I think I’ll do so-and-so and so-and-so and we’ll leave it ail up to luck. And, what do you know, what happened – I finally wound up so-and-so and so-and-so and isn’t that cute of me?“ He gets over to a point of where he’s being continually the effect of his own cause. And sure enough, then and there we get a time illusion, because he becomes a thing more and more. He’s an object, more ‘n more ‘n more ‘n more an object.

And of course he can now only inevitably go down this tone scale until you get an infinity of MEST universe and a zero of personal cause, so you start out being at cause, be sure you don’t wind up as an effect, and the only way you can wind up as being an effect is forget that you wound up this effect over here. You did it. Nobody else did it. You did it. And as long as you know you did it, why, you’re all right.

Now because a person suddenly says, „Well, all right, I take full responsibility for everything I’ve ever done and I’m to blame…“ well, you see, he didn’t postulate what he was trying to do in the first place, so you’re picking your preclear up where he sits as a sort of a pawn.

He’s just been shuttled around here and there and so on. He never really had any intention clearly stated anywhere along the line. Now it’s up to you, it’s up to you to get him to state an intention – what is he trying to do? What does he want to become?

You make him state it. If you state it for him and if you do… if you state it for him, then be sure to remember that you stated it for him. Be sure you know when he is finally super-cleared or something of the sort, that you did it. And if he suddenly comes around and blows your house down as a result thereof, you have introduced some randomity that you did. But you shouldn’t be in a situation where it would upset you any to have your house blown down.

If you’re going to go up into altitudes like that, somebody comes around and blows your house down, .so you put the house together again. Boom, you say the house is there. You say, „What’s the matter, boy, you losing your force?“

Now here… here we have all up and down the scale, then, these various gradients, these cycles of action, and we find a cycle of action comes about because an individual does what? He starts in doing something and uh… he doesn’t say what he’s doing.

Like the parson in the church, he asked the congregation if they liked his argufying and spewdifying and the whole church looked at him and kind of doubtfully. And finally the deacon said, „Well, we’re very fond of your argufying and spewdifying but you don’t show wherein.“ And the whole point of it is the fact that here’s your guy going into action action action action action and he just don’t show wherein at all. He… he’s just in action.

He takes somebody else and something else and… and uh… he gets kicked here and he says, „Well, it’s probably…“ He… he goes down and he eats a decayed whale upon the beach and he gets a terrible bellyache and he sits down, upon the sand a la Kipling and he says, „The gods have afflicted me.“

And every time he says, „I’m an effect, I’m an effect, I’m an effect, I’m an effect,“ or realizing that he did it, „I’m to blame,“ he digs himself further into the MEST universe cycle and that cycle goes from space to object, and an object is matter and things handle the object – the object doesn’t handle other things. So there’s your cycle and it is a cycle of failure to postulate cause and recognize that one is the effect of cause. Now you can start any time to do that because it’s not in existence in time.

It only becomes a time flow when one begins to abandon responsibility for the causes he postulated. And you start… the worst thing that could possibly happen to your preclear, one of the things that… that’s really nice and hot to run on homo sapiens, wonderful thing, are the times he denied that he had said it when he had. The times when he denied himself, and when he denied himself, he was dead. And a lot of little mites dance around in this society around people and they want to say, some of them say all the time, „Admit you didn’t say that.“

„You have broken my heart, what you said was so terrible and so forth. Now tell me you didn’t say that. You didn’t mean that, did you?“

He said, „You are easily the um-hum-hum-hum-hum!“ And then they don’t… they don’t go around saying, it’s „I feel bad because he’s postulated that I am that, or has tried to direct me.“ No, they say, „Tell me you didn’t mean it.“ Or the whole argument will resolve around and finally when „peace“ is made, it will be on these lines: „I didn’t mean what I said.“

Oh yes he did! If he said, „I meant what I said and I meant every word of it. Just now I think you’re lovely and charming,“ he doesn’t deny himself. You see that that in essence is honesty with himself; he has not abandoned his own beingness. Because at the moment he said „You are easily the um-hum-hum-hum-hum,“ that was beingness and it was beingness before and it was beingness afterwards, but all of a sudden he’s taken a violent action point of beingness and intention. Then a little while after that he said, „No, that wasn’t I…“

So he’s saying „Any time I administer force or use force even in the shadow of a communication line, that isn’t I.“ And what do you know, he suddenly winds up as not being himself. He doesn’t know who he is.

And he’ll come around and ask you pathetically… he’ll ask you the most pathetic question. He’ll… he’ll say, „It… which… well, could you tell me… well, if I could just find out who I am, I think I would be all right.“ And he’ll pull that on you just continually: „If I could just find out who I am.“

And the big joke is, he’s him. He’s asking, for instance, he’s asking on this astonishing thing. He’s saying, „Will you please tell me what names I have been assigned in the past, would you please give me a list of the effects I have been? Will you please give me a list of the times when people have assigned me an identity, in other words, when they have made an object out of me by giving me a name and a location? And they have given this to me and I have these things now, so I now am.“ Oh no he isn’t. That’s the moment when he’s not. He’s not himself at all, he is a name.

One of the slippiest tricks again in Kipling that you can get a preclear to do uh… is just start repeating his own name. Tell him to repeat his own name. Repeats his own name, repeats his own name, „Well, who am I?“ And he gets this horrible funny state of being but not identified. And oh… it’s an interesting experiment.

If you get a little kid to do this, you’ll talk him right out of this universe. You just say, „Now what did you say your name was – Johnny Jones? Okay, now just start saying Johnny Jones.“

The kid says, „Johnny Jones, Johnny Jones, Johnny Jones… The hell. Who am I?“ You’ll just desensitize it. It wears his name out because that’s just an identity.

And therefore it’s an object so therefore it can be used up. The one that can’t be used up is his own beingness. Who is he? He’s him – that’s who he is. And as far as beingness is concerned, he’s who he decides he is, he’s not who somebody else decided he was.

And every time he decides to be somebody that somebody else decided he was, he gives up his own beingness and becomes an object.

Uh… the… the idea of naming is great magic in itself that the boys didn’t cover in this dissertation at all. I’m not giving you data out of that area. It’s just the… those boys were very cognizant of that one point. When thou dost not make a statement and clear intention of what thou art trying to become, thou unbecomest, Bud. Do not be hoist by thine own petard. Do not uh… suddenly pretend that you didn’t have anything to do with bringing about what you have now found yourself surrounded with.

That gives you time, you see, the upset of cause and effect, the upset of it buries time. But the use of cause and effect brings it into being. And cause and effect, as it is deserted, brings about various states of being. And force, as it descends on the tone scale in the MEST universe, partakes more and more of solid character. And it gets solider and solider and solider and solider and solider, and down at the bottom of the tone scale, your preclear couldn’t quite know what to do with it to handle a force band.

Uh… to handle a piece of force he’d think you needed a derrick, really. You’ve at least got to have a wire. You’ve got to have a wire with great big insulators. And you’ve got to have all sorts of things in order to get force from one place to another.

It wouldn’t occur to him that what he would do with the middle action of the band in action, he would say, „Let’s see, they want some force flowing along this line or something of the sort. All right. Kerrrwhap!“ He’s got force flowing along that line, oh, but, brother. Or if he were a little higher on the tone scale, he’d say, „Oh they need some force there? Well, okay, it’s there.“ And it would be there. Zong, zong, zong, zong.

Silly, it sounds to you, uh… perhaps, but there’s nothing easier to fool with than force; but there’s nothing more incredible than force, down at the bottom of the tone scale. Oh boy, is anybody in effect of this stuff. You know, you take a lousy little hundred and ten A.C. and you hook it into the mouth of a homo sapiens and he’ll complain.

Now this force as it goes down scale is descriptive of certain states of being and the first one is how much agreement as you go down from… from 40 down, is how much agreement has a person had or used; and the next one is how much communication does he enter into; and the third one is what is his state of affinity or emotion? And up here it’s sensation, way up here, and then it becomes affinity as we call the emotional band.

Right in here… we’re quite, of course, very accustomed to what homo sapiens uses as part of an emotional band and the fellow really doesn’t think that a person has other emotions than this. He thinks that he knows something about „the emotion, spirit of play.“ He’s a complete foreigner to it.

He… he knows that it’s lots of fun to go out and play a game. And sometimes when he is 30 or something like that, he’ll go out and play catch with his boy or something of the sort, you see. And he knows what play is – It’s something you work at. And he has the spirit of work down pat, well, that is the emotion called effort. But the spirit of play he doesn’t know too much about.

And you suddenly spring a preclear into the spirit of play and he says, „My God, where the… where’s this been? I’ve got a ghosty feeling that when I was a little kid I used to feel this once in a great while, once in a great while, something like this, but this is really something.“ And he will suddenly recognize that this has more intensity to it than sex.

Ho, sensation – spirit of play – so we have those various things that come down tone scale from here to here and those things, the communication ability and the agreement level, and the uh… communication, agreement, and emotional or sensational state, the three of them exist at any level; they are a constant. They are interdependent at a constant and we get the triangle ARC.

Now ARC, ARC in the past we used as an interrelated experience. We knew that affinity was related to communication and that these two were related to agreement, that you could not go into communication with something without at least partially agreeing with it. You agreed with anything to some degree that you went into communication with and to agree with something you have to go into communication with it. You had to agree or disagree with something, and that was very certain. Disagree with it or agree with it in order to be in communication with it. You had to have something about that.

And so you had your communication uh… band over here was dependent upon the emotional band. The amount of uh… communication you would enter into and the type and variety of that communication was established by the sensation. Uh… the emotion, the affinity, the way you felt about this and uh… so you… you have your interconnected things there.

You couldn’t agree with somebody without going into communication with him and having some emotional upset, even if it was something you were fondly calling no emotion about it: „I didn’t get upset about it, I held myself in; I can control myself beautifully. I had no feeling about it.“

Oh yeah? Well, that’s a sensation. So, we had ARC ARC ARC, so at any point on this from zero, zero from minus eight-point-zero right on up at any level, we have an ARC and an ARC and an ARC and an ARC, and for any level of that tone scale, we’ve got ARC.

Well, looks like we have to get into something a little hotter. We haven’t tied… I just say there’s ARC at any point of that tone scale and we don’t tie those things in any closer to the MEST universe than just ARC. So we better tie those in.

And we’d better tie them in, but good. And that doesn’t take me forever to tie them in, fortunately, because I finally hooked them up into terms of conditions of energy. And ARC comes to mean, suddenly, conditions of energy.

Now, we had better look at energy and find out what are the three component parts of energy, if we’re going to do that. And we found that energy requires space and it’s a particle and it’s action and it becomes an object. We found that doesn’t… energy, but what do you know, there’s three varieties of that happening.

There’s the big variety of their being, just a… a flow and then there’s a dispersal and then there’s a ridge. Now, we get here a flow, there’s… these are the three kinds of energy. Three actions of energy, that’s a flow. Now you understand that that could be a smooth wave as it is, a sine wave or something of the sort, or it could be a noise wave.

Or it can be… it can be a complex wave here. Something that goes like this, it doesn’t matter what kind of a complex wave it would be. Any one of those things are flows. And it really doesn’t matter whether that is a small wave or a great big wave like this.

Anything like that is a flow and your flow goes from this point to this point, point one, point two. You see, now we could say that an effort flow was a… a big heavy wave that went like this and that it was an effort flow, so it… there was… did you ever notice, by the way, that somebody trying to pick up something heavy trembles? That he’s got a shake to it, he can’t hold it very stable and you get this kind of a noise wave going along with an effort band. You get a noise wave going along with it. You get a tremble that would go along with it.

Now all of these things can be graphed on a cathode ray tube, kinephotometer, uh… numbers of other ways of doing it. Uh… they could follow magnetic patterns on pieces of tape. You can measure these things with meters.

It doesn’t matter whether they’re a wave of the sea, a… a rarefaction condensation wave such as that passes through air, whether or not it’s the passage of a particle as in an X-ray machine, because that is a very… that’s an interesting one. That’s a… a particle going bzzzzzzzt like this in a motion and it’s flying from here to there. The bottom here is a particle.

In other words, to have a particle you would say it’s… it’s going vrvrvrvrvr and then we sent it going zzzzzzzzzt. So it’s a specialized kind of a wave, and therefore when the professors stand behind their benches in physics classes and they say, „Well, tell me, is it a particle or is it a wave?“ they’re full of beans. They’re just full of beans.

A straight line is inevitably a type of wave. You couldn’t possibly have a straight line that wasn’t a wave. Because a wave essentially is a path of flow, and you wouldn’t have… you wouldn’t have any better or more useful definition than to say a wave was a path of flow, or a pattern of flow and, by God, the day that you can take a straight line out of the category of patterns, I haven’t seen yet.

So, is it a particle or is it a flow? They’re just obfuscating themselves. You know they keep changing their minds about it, which is the most humorous of all.

One day, one year, it’s fashionable to say… it’s fashionable to say X-rays are flows, and the next year it’s uh… fashionable to say X-rays are actually particles in motion, which are travelling in straight lines. And the next year they change their minds again. They say a photon is travelling in a straight line so therefore it’s a particle flow – it is not a wave motion.

Oh, no, I mean, these are not workable definitions and that’s all you want in a definition. Anything that’s flowing on a wave is a particle flow. You take an electric line and it has electrons in it and those electrons are going brrrr. They’re a particle of flow.

They’re going like mad in there, and you get the number of inches which an electron moves on that electrical flow that’s coming in there now during a day, you can measure it with a tape measure.

It isn’t flying down that line like water through a pipe; it’s being kicked and it’s uh… like a… you rack up a flock of billiard balls here… in order to have billiard balls you gotta have things that are in motion. They’re not statics.

We’re studying statics and kinetics, only we’re really studying statics and kinetics. And the old boys really just pretended they were. They said, „You see this object; it is sitting there, isn’t it?“ All right, there it sits and therefore it’s a static. And you say, „Oh, no, where do you get this?“

That thing has eight motions already if it’s on the surface of earth. Well, there’s the motion of the earth going around the sun; there’s the motion of the variation of the position of earth with relationship to the sun called the orbit. There’s the rotation uh… it… it, by the way, is a changing motion, it’s not a… a stable motion; and there is in addition to that the spin of the earth around its axis; and that ball sitting there statically, motionless, you see, is travelling already, being on the surface of the earth, by one motion alone: it’s travelling at almost a thousand miles an hour.

Any time you can show me something that’s going a thousand miles an hour and say that thing is standing still, you’d have to be a better magician than a physics professor. Because a static would simply mean something by definition that had no motion in it.

They define the word STATIC as something without motion. That’s great. Kinetic is motion, something that’s moving, or a potentiality of motion. You look right there in Webster’s and you look in the physics books and you look everyplace and it says a static is something that isn’t moving and a kinetic is something that’s moving, or can move, and there it is.

And then they show you a ball which is sitting on the surface of the earth moving in eight different directions simultaneously. There’s the tip of the solar system, there are all sorts of motions with relationship to other spaces. Completely in addition to that, let’s take this billiard ball and look inside of it – its own structure – and we find out that we could actually trace the pattern of molecules and atoms through that billiard ball and they’re going like mad inside the billiard ball, and the particles which make up the molecules and atoms of each of the molecules and atoms are going like mad in the molecules and atoms, and yet somebody tells you that thing is not in motion. Well, brother, it is in motion.

Cause that’s motion itself and by definition motion, so when we study a static for heaven’s sakes, a static would have to be something that had no wave length. It would have to have no volume. It would actually have no location in space. This would be your static. And it would be nothing there. And that would be a static.

So we’re studying a static and a kinetic – just above 40.0 we have a static, a real static. And when we get down to MEST down there, low part of the scale, we’re studying a kinetic. So we’re studying the science of static and kinetics in Scientology. And that science has not been outlined in the subject of physics. Hummm.

It’s very, very amusing, it’s very amusing, the limitations which homo sapiens puts upon himself. He… he sets out to study the science of static and kinetics and then he doesn’t define a kinetic and he doesn’t define a static. Except he put. it in the dictionary: it’s exactly what they are, and then he never tries to study them.

Yeah, he says… he’s said all this time what a static is and then he’s never studied a static. All right, let’s take a look at this then. We find out that this flow is a characteristic and that this flow can exist at any level of the whole wave scale, and the wave scale can go from a wave length of one over infinity down to the wave length of infinity.

But the second you say it has zero, it becomes a static and does not become a wave motion. That’s simplicity, isn’t it? So we’re studying from static to kinetic, and we’re really studying it here. We’re finding out some terribly interesting things, all of which could have been found out much earlier.

That’s a flow. Now an aesthetic wave would be a flow, an emotional level could be a flow, effort could be a flow, electric lights are a flow, supersonic is a flow, uh… X-ray machines are a flow, uh… the uh… path of wave motion through the ocean is a flow, the path of wave compaction, rarification as you go through a block of ice is a flow, doesn’t matter what wave length. A radio station sitting out here madly emanating electronic magnetic waves uh… is establishing a flow and those are all wave lengths because they are all measurable in terms of wave length.

In physics you try to divide these things into… into rarification and condensation formations and actual flow formations. And yet they show you what they have as actual flow formations or rarefaction condensation formations. That’s what’s interesting.

Rarefaction condensation takes place in an electric light line in order to get electricity to flow. Okay, you see, another thing, funny part thing part about radio, it’s going through space where there is nothing and it’s doing rarefaction condensation to go through space where there is nothing.

That’s why the old boys said there has to be such a thing as ether. Doesn’t have to be anything like ether. All you have to do is put out a big, big fan of ion beams of some sort or another, throw out ions of some sort which they probably have not described adequately yet, and then you just rarefy… fy and condense these… these uh… ions as you go through and you have a perfectly adequate wave flow.

See what we mean by flow? All right, let’s put flow under one heading. How does it… what is it in experience? It’s communication. Let’s go on to the next one.

We have here a ridge. A ridge is formed from two flows. And these two flows hitting will pile things up. If you were to take a stroboscopic picture of throwing a bucket of water against the side of a house – you would find that at the moment it hit the side of the house that there was a great big gob of water standing there. There was a lot of water there. It’s standing there in a mass. The water stops flowing when it leaves the lip of the bucket and it hits the side of the house and it goes kaplash.

And then it stands there in a mass for an instant and then… then trickles on down the wall, pulled by gravity, not by any… any necromancy, it’s just pulled by… by the agreement called gravity and uh… this goes down the wall and what do you have left? A dry wall? No, you don’t. You have a wet wall. And that wet wall is a remaining part of a flow which is impinged upon the wall of the house and which in itself is embryonically a ridge.

Now if you were to take two buckets of water and you were to throw them at each other, you would have two flows which would be meeting in mid-air and if you’d have a stroboscopic camera there, you would be able to study the pattern they made and the wall they made when they hit each other. The two flows hit each other and they make a wall.

Now if we take electronics, the boys just got wise to this not too long ago. Uh… the… very, very, very new, newer than our material, uh… no coincidence in this at all, I mean the fact that we’ve been studying ridges like this and been talking about electronic densities, because this… this other stuff, really there’s no relationship, because there’s some very old writers who suppose something like this might happen. Well, we can prove it happens.

You take an electronic beam of some sort and you pour it in from the right, which is flow A here, and you take an electronic beam and you pour it in from the left and we call that B. And if you hit them one against the other – crash. They stand for a moment. You turn the beams off and they’ll stand there. Isn’t that peculiar? You’ve got a persistence of crash. Good name for it – just a persistence of crash.

Now if you have a whole lot of electronic beams with lots of horsepower in it and a whole lot of electrons, that means a whole lot of force in it, and they hit each other and they ran and ran and ran and ran and ran and ran and ran, the persistence of crash would eventually become matter.

And that persistence of flow hitting each other would take on the emotional aspects of such things as apathy, anger, conservatism, in other words, those things which hold. The formation of matter could well be accounted for by electronic flows in space hitting hitting hitting hitting and this persistence continuing and continuing until at last you have something which is in apathy and that something which is in apathy is a ridge, which becomes matter.

So we have that flow hitting that flow. Now there are numbers of ways you could make ridges. You have here what is called a dispersal. A dispersal is a specialized kind of flow. But that’s your next type here. There is where you’re getting an outrush from, and oddly enough, we will just have to classify under dispersals implosions. This is an ex- and this is an in-.

Here… here everything is dispersing down to a point because it’s particles which are dispersing, you understand; this is not a picture of a… we’re not… that’s not the name of a pattern so much as the name of the behavior of particles in space. And those are going from where they are at a mad rush and they could be coming down to this point in the middle and that would be implosion and they could be going out from this point and that would be an ex – dispersal.

You could probably call it an impersal and an expersal, if you wanted to invent a lot of words – we don’t happen to need the language.

Now where that… let’s say two dispersals hit each other, and they hit each other. Materials rushing out here like mad and so on. And here’s another one bang bang bang bang. We… we get this thing exploding out from the middle here and where they hit in the center area, the impact of energy together will again make a ridge.

But… what is that? That is just the number of flows at random hitting one to the other. Now we could combine an implosion and an explosion in such a way as to get a turbulence. Ah, now we’re getting someplace, aren’t we? We can get a turbulence of electronic flow and we get a consistent turbulence of electronic flow; you get a ridge.

The three actual levels of energy behavior are flows, ridges, and dispersals. But a dispersal as you can see is a specialized multiple flow. It’s just because a flow is parallel that you can call those the three.

Now a flow comes along here and a flow comes along this away and it’s behaving itself very nicely and it all of a sudden hits an existing ridge. And it’ll go splash. See, it’s going in that direction and it goes splash back this way and leaves a certain amount of its energy residual here on a ridge. Ridges are best formed when two flows hit, but we’ll say there’s just something there already and it hits that and you get that thing flowing. So we’ll see here that the actual pattern of progress of electronic current is from a flow to a dispersal to a ridge.

Let’s see, you get a dispersal at the moment of impact of the flow. So you could categorize this as the three types of flows here which… I mean three types of the characteristics of energy; I should be very precise about this, flow, dispersal and ridge.

Energy as it begins to form goes into flows, dispersals and ridges. At the top of the tone scale, you have the unimaginably very, very, very tiny flow dispersal ridge which makes, what do you know, a particle. A particle consists of a flow dispersal ridge, flow dispersal ridge, flow dispersal ridge, and is itself then a particle. And it’s doing all sorts of weird things inside itself.

Now your next step down from a particle you would start coming in wider space, and this wider space would be particles which were doing flows dispersals ridges, flows dispersals ridges, flows dispersals ridges. When I was talking about harmonics a little earlier, I was talking about less and less heavily formed ridges, up the scale.

A ridge is fairly light at the beginning. Now we get the ridge itself – doing some flowing and some dispersing and a new ridge, and we come down tone scale. So we plot the tone scale from 40 down in terms of flow dispersal ridge, what do you know? uh… as being that pattern which is coming down there. Now we have a flow dispersal ridge, new tone, and we get a flow dispersal ridge and we get a flow dispersal ridge. Get that! Now you see that gradient scale?

You’re looking at the construction of matter. Flow dispersal ridge, flow dispersal ridge, flow dispersal ridge. Now you’re also looking at postive-negative plate voltages. Every time this thing hits you get a ridge at one potential positive, let’s say – that’s have us. And the next one down from that is don’t have us, and the next one is have us and the next one is don’t have us, and you get a continual interchange of energy flows, dispersals and ridges up and down the tone scale; that’s why you have these dichotomies.

Positive-negative poles make electrical flows and they can make them at any level of the tone scale. And why then is this so important? This is terribly important because it’s the… we treat those things in the human experience as sensation and we therefore have the gradient scale of sensation so when we look at this… this flow dispersal ridge proposition we are getting then sensation continually all the way down the line as different things, different things, and more and more solid things. And any sensation could be categorized as a… as a dispersal or as a ridge or as a flow.

And what is agreement? And what’s reality? That is the direction of the flow. Reality is the direction of flow; if your disagree is flowing out, your agree is flowing in. If it’s flowing in you get reality of agreement, if It’s flowing out you’ve got a reality of disagreement. Then direction of flow is reality whether it’s a flow, dispersal or a ridge, is it affinity, and whether or not it is at one point or another on the band scale, which I showed you is at right angles to this, tells you what kind of communication it is.

At the level of light it’s sight. At the level of… of sound it happens to be hearing. At the level of tactile it’s another thing. At the level of effort it’s another thing, and each one of those is being used as a… as a perception band, and the perception band is present at each level of these things. But where it’s a ridge it’s blind. Where it’s a flow it can be seen, where it’s a dispersal it’s scattered and changing.

And so as you go up tone scale with a preclear you’re getting these three conditions in terms of perception all the way up the tone scale and they’re getting less and less and less. But they turn from excellent to poor for each band and then they’ll turn good again.

And… but they’ll turn better and then they turn poor, and then they turn better than that and then they turn a little less poor, and then they turn much better than that and what are you studying then when you’re studying communication? You are studying what point of the tone band and whether or not the affinity of it is a flow, a dispersal or a ridge.

And those three interactions which we’ll cover much, much more thoroughly are then the three characteristics of ARC as measured up against space, energy and objects and we have then human experience.

That will be all, thank you.