[ kaitensushi ] [ lounge / arcade / kawaii / kitchen / tunes / culture / silicon ] [ otaku ] [ yakuza ] [ hell ] [ ? / chat ] [ lewd / uboa ] [ x ]

/hell/ - internet death cult

IROM OTNEMEM
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

• Files Supported: webm, swf, flv, mkv, mp4, torrent, 7z, zip, pdf, epub, & mobi.
• Embeds Supported: youtube, vimeo, dailymotion, metacafe, & vocaroo.
• Max. post size is 10MB / 4 files.

Remember to keep it cozy!

Captchas didn't work. Sticking to janitors while we try to think of something else.

File: 1477509512316.jpg (12.3 KB, 216x252, image.jpg)

 No.461

Hey sushi rolls, ever heard of Fotamecus? He/it's basically a spell/spirit/mindmeme/whatever that can speed up or slow down time for you. He's been really useful to me in my life lately.

 No.462

I think this should be in /hell/… it's about daemons after all.
I'm highly interested in the subject but I'd be afraid I'm invoking something that's beyond my power to keep at bay… you know, usual business when invoking spirits and such.
Anyway. How do you invoke him? And what's the deal? What does he get in return?

 No.463

>>462
http://www.chaosmatrix.org/library/chaos/texts/fotamec1.html Found full history and info about Fotamecus in the Chaos Matrix library. It's a servitor, a sigil which has obtained consciousness, and has its roots in chaos magic in 1996. Interesting read.

I can hardly even see orichalcum yet, way too early for me to be playing with things of this level. Also hail eris.

 No.464

File: 1477553267154.jpg (52.92 KB, 1057x611, 1465802701234.jpg)


 No.465

I wonder how many people actually, genuinely, believe in this sort of thing.

 No.466

>>465
They do, you don't.
Who's right?
It doesn't matter

 No.467

Post scientific evidence that this real or fuck off.

 No.468

>>467
Post scientific proof that this discussion can't be fun or fuck off.

 No.469

>>467
>>468
this isn't comfy at all

 No.470

>>468
Please fuck off and take this smug, retarded drivel to 4chan where it belongs.

 No.475

Though it could be considered controversial, I'm not particularly averse to this topic and don't think it's uncomfy by default, and it could have been a comfy discussion in a more accepting place. Really unfortunate to see sushichan act up like this. Sorry a couple angry shitposters ruined this thread. I think it's best to move it here for now since in any case it's a topic that incenses the userbase for some fucking reason.

I don't like things ending up like this and I'm going to keep an eye on this sort of stop-thinking-things-i-don't-think behavior in the future.

>>467 You are warned.

 No.476

>>475
Demons belong to /hell/, right.

 No.477

Just for the record, I did find this to be comfy reading and it led to a lot of research on the occult. Thanks, OP and >>463.

 No.478

>>475
thank you fam

Let's try and get back this thread on track because it's a nice subject
Anyone here (besides the OP) ever experimented with any of this? Either Chaos magick or actual daemonic bznz?

 No.483

Old school western occultist here. It's great to see people taking an interest but do be a little careful with the chaos magic stuff. They have a reputation in occultist circles for being a little naive. Some things I noticed, if you do time manipulation yourself, as opposed to via this thoughtform, you don't have to "pay back" the time. I think the guy who created it thought that you did and so it thinks that you do but it's not actually a requirement. Same goes for the idea of making a thoughtform "viral." They're already like that due to their nature as non-physical things. If they are identical they are the same thing. There is no difference between there being two of them and there being one in two places, which is pretty easy for non-physical things. It seems they went to a lot of effort to work around things that weren't really a problem in the first place. Also, putting a lot of power through a sigil shouldn't make it a thoughtform unless you want it to but it is an easy mistake to make.

When making sigils please take care and do some research. Don't just fill it with vaguely occult symbols without knowing what they mean. They're quite similar to sigils themselves. They have a meaning and a purpose and it's not good for them or your sigil to just throw them in. The symbols used in this sigil are pretty out of place for time manipulation. It is a minor thing, those symbols are millennia old and there are people looking after them but I wouldn't be surprised if the thoughtform is occasionally a little unreasonable. Also if you do create a thoughtform using a pretty feminine sigil don't call it a he.

>>462
>I'm invoking something that's beyond my power to keep at bay
Very wise. The first rule of magic is never summon anything bigger than your own head. Sorry, I mean, errr, do not call up what ye cannot put down. This is a little thing though and not much trouble.

>what's the deal? What does he get in return?

Probably nothing. He's a thoughtform, he was created for this purpose. I would be polite and show him a little appreciation though, most thoughtforms won't really care but that sigil has emotional connotations.

>>476
Fun fact: Daemon is a very general term that's been used to describe pretty much everything. Cacodaemon is the proper term for the nasty sort.

>>481

>that fucking book irreversibly twisted my mind
Good book eh?

>You can't well cast magic if you can't clear your mind

You can. You probably have. You just generally shouldn't if only because there's not much point and it can be a little dangerous.

>These abilities are highly abnormal and usually inaccessible to human consciousness

Now this is just poppycock. It's the most normal thing in the world. Everybody is doing it and not only is it accessible to you it's your birthright. You are conscious therefore it is yours.

Magic is the reunion of two opposing concepts. Power and will. The infinite and the infinitesimal. Will without power is impotent. Power without will, blind. You can work powerful magic without much will but good luck guessing what's going to happen. Power is the part that a lot of people have trouble with and for good reason. It's almost impossible to explain how to access your power. It's like trying to explain how you move the muscles in your arm. You just do. Keep meditating, it is the most important thing, specifically the clear mind stuff for power. Your power has been calling out to you since the day you were born. Be quiet and listen. You'll know when you hear it. It's like the best orgasm you've ever had.

On that note you can access your power via orgasm, part of the feeling of an orgasm is the fact that it briefly connects you with your power. Generally this isn't done because the sexy aspect gets in the way. Alan Moore included a sigil in the back of one of his Promethea comics (already filled with occult stuff, particularly hermeticism and quabalah, great read) and asked readers to masturbate over it with the intention of making sure it didn't get cancelled.

>a secret occult board

How appropriate. Occult means secret after all.

Wanna know a secret? Magic sucks. It's just a toy. Something to keep us childish humans occupied while we grow up. Wisdom is our path and our goal.

 No.486

File: 1477949035361.png (142.2 KB, 1788x786, post.png)

>>483
Since you went and time traveled to respond to my post I'll put it back here. I got paranoid and removed it a while earlier.

Thanks for the thoughts.

 No.530

>>483
Wow, thanks for sharing!

›When making sigils please take care and do research.
I didn't create Fotamecus or that sigil, and that sigil was supposed to be a diagram of what it does.

 No.534

Can anyone with "practical" experience explain to a complete noob how you did something supernatural (I guess that's what occult is about)? It's fine if you leave out the "sensitive" details, just describe what you achieved. I suppose asking for proof would be a bit too much due to the nature of the thing, but it would be great if you gave some. And yes, I am skeptical, but also open minded. I'm not religious but not atheist either, I guess the closest would be spiritual. While I do believe that there most likely is a division between the mind and the "will" (soul, point of view, whatever you want to call it), I'm just not convinced that you can affect the physical world without using any physical means.

>>486
Could you post those links for convenience?

 No.535

>>534
https://zalbarath666.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/peter-j-carroll-liber-null-psychonaut.pdf
http://www.chaosmatrix.org/
http://www.chaosmatrix.org/library/chaos/texts/chaoism.html
http://bluefluke.deviantart.com/art/The-Psychonaut-Field-Manual-THIRD-PDF-EDITION-530005584
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/downloads/Principia%20Discordia.pdf

Also recommend the Liber LS as a good intro. It's got a fresher take on things than the Liber Null and is less dry with a more modern feel. Concerns the philosophies of the DKMU collective. Don't skimp on the Liber Null though.
http://chaos.seisat.su/files/text/DKMU/DKMU%20-%20Liber%20LS%20(PDF%20Edition)%20-%2013mb.pdf

And a lot of my pdf collection is stored at http://chaos.seisat.su/files/text/

I would first read the Liber Null, keeping in mind that its philosophies are not absolute, and arguably dated and overly stringent (though generally good advice nonetheless). Then read the Liber LS to get a much fresher, avant-garde perspective. Or if you do better with short concise info presented colorfully, read the Psychonaut Field Guide before either of those, but I would DEFINITELY NOT use it as a primary source, only to get your feet wet in the concepts of modern magic.

And, keep in mind that magic is more about potentiality than physical effects. You're very unlikely to shoot a fireball or even make a pen spin, but you can adjust the probability of events happening, especially ones that had a fair probability to start with. The effects are most visible over time, much like flipping a coin 100 times and having it land on heads 75 of those. You won't succeed every time, but with practice you will succeed more than half of the time, or even most of the time.

 No.536

>>534
Ok, I'll jump in and ask for proof instead.

Someone show me proof, from a reliable source (not just a rando website with walls of text and no actual statistics), that magic works. At all. If it does work, this shouldn't be difficult.

 No.537

>>536
How would I prove that the probability of something has changed? Only observation over time can increase the probability that probability has changed. Even then, if I were to flip 100 coins and it landed on heads 90 times, you could still call it a fluke. You will never find "hard evidence" because there isn't any. Nobody's shooting fireballs from their hands. I had some really interesting experiences happen to me, I got curious, I read a ton of books which all lined up with each other on way too many points, I read hundreds of accounts from people, I talked to dozens, and it became kind of more bizarre to think they were all in on a joke together or all had schizophrenia, than to accept the possibility that it was a real thing. Then I decided why not try it out, and ~3/4-4/5 of the things I wished for happened. Coincidence? Sure, maybe. But if it keeps working out, then does it matter if it's coincidence? Only from the perspective of someone who cares more about "truth" than result. If there are results I'll keep doing it, because I can't prove it's not my actions that are making it happen. May as well keep trying and see if the coincidences become even more unbelievable. That's where the magic is.

The basis of the scientific method is that results can be reproduced 100% of the time if the conditions are identical. Magic cannot be reproduced identically, and doesn't even work much of the time. If you could find proof, there would already be no discussion here. It's something you have to see for yourself, and if you're of the mind to decide that some things in this world are absolutely true and others are absolutely false, then you're already wasting your time and will explain away to yourself everything that appears without fail. It's only through systems we created for ourselves that we can prove things beyond doubt. If you stop thinking within those systems for a while and just observe, you'll see some wild shit.

That probably sounds like a bunch of religious phooey, but I'm not sure I have the time or patience to lay out in excrutiating detail the last five ridiculous years of my life for you, and even if I did, anything dissimilar to something you've seen in your own life would be lost in translation. Experiences can't be relayed, only explained in the context of things the other person experienced. If you don't try for a bit to believe it you won't see it. And if you're the type to only lend an open mind to certain things and not others, you also won't see it. There's really nothing I won't lend a little belief to anymore, after the absolutely unrealistic bullshit of a five years I've been through. My mind is ripped open.

Anyway it's just what I've personally experienced that has led me here. I'm not really trying to prove anything to you, nor do I care whether you believe it or not. This thread is for people who want to talk about it. As long as you're not like >>467 then it's fine. Though, this thread is so dead you're probably better off talking about it somewhere else.

Your admin is not so secretly insane. Sorry I couldn't help.

 No.538

>>537
>Only observation over time can increase the probability that probability has changed.
Yes, that's how the scientific method works. Things are observed and the frequencies of occurrences show, with statistical significance, that a hypothesis is the case. If you could reliably make a coin give heads 90 out of 100 throws, then you would have statistical proof.

>But if it keeps working out, then does it matter if it's coincidence?

If it keeps working then there is a point at which it merely being coincidence becomes an untenable hypothesis. This is, again, how science works.

>The basis of the scientific method is that results can be reproduced 100% of the time if the conditions are identical.

I guess then quantum mechanics is all bull then, as it's inherently nondeterministic.

>That probably sounds like a bunch of religious phooey

You're right, it does.

>If you don't try for a bit to believe it you won't see it.

This is my issue with magic, religion, homeopathy, and other 'alternative' science/medicine ideas. Confirmation bias is very powerful.

 No.539

>>538
All fair points, and I understand where you're coming from. I don't particularly want to turn this into a debate thread, and I would lose anyway by having no actual evidence, but there was one point I want to comment on, because it probably looks like I'm just weaseling out of making a real argument.

> If it keeps working then there is a point at which it merely being coincidence becomes an untenable hypothesis. This is, again, how science works.


But see, I've seen this claim made a bunch of times: Once you've seen it work again and again to the point where it's way past just improbable and into the realm of significant, that's at least strong though circumstantial evidence that something is going on, right? But these claims are there and nobody believes them because the guy could have just faked the whole thing. In fact someone presenting evidence like this would generally be assumed to be a total quack, because the field is considered a joke by the scientific community.

So I'm actually not sure what evidence you would have accepted when you asked for some. Videos can be and are faked just as easily as data points in someone's research. It's not like you could make a mountain explode or something because that's already too improbable to be worked with. Less huge events are also easily faked. Even if I had provided something, would you have accepted it, and on what grounds? What would have been enough for you?

I haven't exactly been playing with this for years. Reading yes, but I only started trying to use it a few months ago, so I don't exactly have a ton of personal records, nor anything convincing.

The problem is anything I could have produced would still be judged by the bias of the person reading. Scientific facts are proven by multiple people or labs producing the same result, or as you corrected me, the results being within an expected range or having expected attributes. But what if all of those labs were faking it? Highly unlikely, but your so called fact wouldn't actually be true. But thousands of people have claimed to produce magical results, and there are even videos (though I put less stock in those). But those must all be fake, so it doesn't matter, according to just about everyone. I can't even tell you which ones aren't fake, just that I think there's too much for too long to be just a joke.

We aren't going to have any facts until the topic is taken seriously and approached by more respectable researchers who, more importantly, know what they're doing. I don't see that happening any time soon. It would also be more easy than not to get negative results because you or your test subject just weren't good at it, and whether or not someone is performing properly is pretty much impossible to determine until a result happens, therefore biasing the experiment towards failure. That's why I think it's mostly useless to argue about this.

As for my, well, beliefs on the matter, think of it this way. At this point I have seen enough circumstantial evidence that I've decided to perform experiments and research this field, and am keeping an open mind to it. I won't presume to tell you what is or isn't true, only the mindset I'm working with. And for people who ask, I'll pass around my reading materials and conclusions I've made within the context of those materials. I'm not trying to tell you that my research is finished and magic is definitely real for so and so reasons, only that my intuition tells me it's worth investigating so I'm giving it a serious shot.

 No.540

File: 1482862671334.png (157.07 KB, 340x290, AI.png)

Without love, it cannot be seen.

 No.541

>>536
It sounds like you want some harry potter type of "magic" but it might help to think of magic as something that happens or is happening that you simply cannot understand. Think of showing one of those new LED pocket lights that throws out blindingly bright light to someone from even a few hundered years ago. It would seem like harry potter type magic.

This is something that is best you prove to yourself as that is the only true way to "know" something rather than mearly being "informed" of it.
>from a reliable source
>implying

Now then on to the "real" stuff.
Animals are more sensitive than most of the mindless drones you pass in your daily travels. Try projecting thoughts or feelings either from yourself or directly at the creature. See if the reaction matches your projection. Though you can also do the same with humans and have some real fun or not fun.

An anecdote that will "inform" you but not let you really "know" what is being said. One time when looking at a setting sun while in a certain state of mind I noticed it had some auras/rings around it. I wrote about it in a non dated journal for dreams and random thoughts. Some time later I was reading a book on shamanism where there was an illustration of a shaman tripping on ayahuasca as viewed by another shaman tripping on ayahuasca. The illustrated shaman had auras around his head. Even though the drawing was crude it had striking similarity to the auras I saw around the sun. Sure enough I go back to that journal entry and there it was describing something very similar to the illustration in the book. What does it mean? Something or nothing, it doesn't really matter to me currently but I found it funny how similar those two things were.

 No.542

>>534
>I'm just not convinced that you can affect the physical world without using any physical means.
Entirely sensible. Theoretically physical magic is possible but it's not worth the effort by a long shot and so you basically don't see it. If it wasn't for the fact that I once met a guy who could do very weak magnetic fields I'd be very skeptical about the whole thing too. You can find a lot of accounts of people doing similar stuff, though I'm not sure how well it's been studied.

But you won't find many magicians who care about that. We are priests and mystics. Enlightenment is our goal, not parlour tricks. For most of my life I was a scientist, epistemologically speaking, and I've by no means abandoned that. I still accept the possibility that maybe this is all "just in my head" but then what isn't? Magic is a lens through which I may view myself. If it's physically real or not is entirely besides the point.

That said, mental stuff is a lot easier but then also a lot more difficult to provide proof of. My own "proof" (really I don't have proof but then I don't really believe anything) came from my teacher being able to discern my emotional state from the other side of the country but I certainly don't expect you to believe me. Frankly, if you believe magic is real because of what some sushi roll on an imageboard told you you're a gullible idiot. Trust in your own judgement.

Magic, to me at least, isn't about where you end up. It's not the answers that you get. It's the questions that lead you there. If you look at the world with open eyes and an open mind and come to the conclusion that it's all a deterministic (or probabilistic if you like the current conception of quantum mechanics) representation of abstract mathematics, fine. Great even. That's your answer and it's better than any I could provide to you. When I look at people like Newton or Einstein I see better magicians than I ever saw in magnet man.

>>538
>'alternative' science/medicine ideas
Bit of an aside but be careful with alternative medicine. In general be wary of those who go after your wallet, especially if you are sick and desperate. The science behind placebos is very interesting however.

 No.1081

File: 1503072980641.jpg (105 KB, 853x817, _20150801_131041.JPG)

by spell/spirit/mindmeme/whatever do u mean uh yaknow drugs?

 No.1084

>>540
so, which one has the dick?
and which one gets it

 No.1089

>>1084
both of them



[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ kaitensushi ] [ lounge / arcade / kawaii / kitchen / tunes / culture / silicon ] [ otaku ] [ yakuza ] [ hell ] [ ? / chat ] [ lewd / uboa ] [ x ]