Xonas Pitfall

This imbalance is referred to as baryon asymmetry. The word “baryon” refers to heavy subatomic particles like protons and neutrons, the building blocks of atomic nuclei. Experiments and observations suggest that for every billion particle-antiparticle pairs created in the early universe, there was one extra matter particle. That one-in-a-billion surplus survived the mass annihilation event and became the matter of our cosmos. But how did this happen? The process that might have caused it is known as baryogenesis. The Russian physicist Andrei Sakharov outlined three necessary conditions for baryogenesis: violation of baryon number (meaning some reactions need to produce more baryons than antibaryons), violation of charge and parity symmetries (C and CP violation), and conditions that prevent the system from returning to equilibrium. Without all three, the symmetrical conditions of the early universe would have persisted. Now, the key suspect in this mystery is the weak force - one of the four fundamental forces of nature. Unlike gravity, electromagnetism, or the strong force, the weak force behaves differently when it comes to matter and antimatter. It shows CP violation. This has been directly observed in certain decays of subatomic particles like kaons and B mesons. The weak force also exhibits what’s called parity violation, meaning it doesn’t treat left and right the same. For example, neutrinos - ghostly particles that only interact via the weak force - are always left-handed, while antineutrinos are always right-handed. This strange handedness, or chirality, breaks mirror symmetry and hints at a deeper imbalance in nature that could explain why matter won out. Neutrinos are especially interesting here. They might hold the secret to understanding how the universe tipped the scales in favor of matter. Experiments like T2K in Japan and NOvA in the US are examining how neutrinos oscillate - that is, change type - as they travel. These oscillations seem to happen differently for neutrinos and antineutrinos, which is a form of CP violation. If confirmed, it could be the mechanism responsible for the matter-antimatter asymmetry. Neutrinos are also unique in that they might be their own antiparticles (a concept known as Majorana particles), which would allow certain rare processes to occur that violate the conservation of lepton number, another potential pathway to baryon asymmetry through a process called leptogenesis. In parallel, other experiments like LHCb at CERN have found CP violation in particles containing bottom quarks, while experiments like ALPHA and BASE at CERN trap and study antimatter directly to see how it compares to regular matter under different forces, especially gravity. These tests have so far not shown any obvious differences beyond the weak interaction, which seems to be uniquely asymmetric. Theoretically, physicists have proposed various extensions to the Standard Model to explain these observations. Some of them invoke supersymmetry, extra dimensions, or new particles that might have existed briefly in the early universe. One such idea is the Affleck-Dine mechanism, which suggests that scalar fields tied to supersymmetric particles could have caused matter to dominate over antimatter. Others look at how quantum fluctuations during the inflationary phase of the universe might have set up slightly different conditions in different regions, leading to small imbalances that had big consequences. Despite these advances, the full explanation is still out of reach. We have experimental evidence of CP violation, but the amount observed so far in the known particle interactions is not enough to account for the enormous asymmetry in the universe. This suggests that there must be other, yet undiscovered, sources of asymmetry. That’s why research in particle physics and cosmology is so active in this area. Scientists are hoping that more precise measurements of neutrino behavior, the discovery of new particles, or anomalies in antimatter experiments will eventually reveal where the universe broke the perfect symmetry it should have had - and why.

Promise I’m not! But I guess the only way to prove that is with time. Either way, hope you enjoy my threads!

Pure transparency, this was one of my deepest awakenings. It felt like a clear, transparent overlay had settled over everything, or everything else had been completely cleared out, like a vacuum emptying the room. My consciousness and awareness felt incredibly real, and I kept screaming, “Awakening! Awakening! Awake! I’m awake, I’m so awake, so awake!” Not white, no color, and not a void either. It’s the same room, the same visual field you’re seeing now, but everything feels so much “realer,” “purer,” with heightened awareness. The best way to describe it is to compare how you feel when you’re painfully sleepy and drowsy versus after a perfect nap when you’re fully awake. Even though your surroundings haven’t changed, your experience is way more alert and clear.

@Someone here I’m not Keryo! It seems like Keryo has been away from the forum for a while, but I do think they’re very cool! Hopefully they’ll come back soon. I’m just a new little mouse here

@Mellowmarsh I don’t know for sure! I’m just sharing what my experience was like. On one trip, I couldn’t stop drawing triangles with eyes in the middle, or single-eye creatures like the ones I mentioned earlier. That was when I was going through my awakening to no-self. I’m sharing this here so others can compare with their own experiences. That’s all. It’d be interesting to see if there are any commonalities or patterns, even though these experiences are supposed to be very personal and subjective.

@Someone here Thanks! And just to be clear, I’m not saying this is what God looks like or what God is. Like you said, God is everything and has no image or form – that’s why Islam doesn’t promote imagery, especially idol worship or anthropomorphic depictions. As said above, I’m just pointing out that some images act as powerful symbols or pointers. They can evoke something deep or even help trigger or confirm an awakening. So if you ever decide to trip and see anything that visually points you to God, definitely share it here, yay!

The mask from Majora’s Mask in The Legend of Zelda!

These goofy, mind-fuck old school cartoony 2D styles with bright saturated colors also feel like God - they encapsulate the playful, yet insane nature, pretty well! There’s also a remembrance of childhood before our ego was fully formed, so probably it triggers some memory of a less filtered conscious experience.

@Mellowmarsh No worries! I don't think it's too similar – your topic seems much broader in scope. This thread is more focused specifically on the visual imagery and representations that often come up during psychedelic trips or moments of insight that people associate with God. Yours feels more philosophical and wide-ranging, so I don't see any conflict at all!

Another one that comes to mind is the triangle-headed creature with a single eye in the center – kind of like an Illuminati symbol, but much goofier. Bill Cipher from Gravity Falls is a great example, and it also reminds me of the characters from the game Patapon. This kind of imagery probably captures the “observer” aspect of God for me. It can be a powerful symbol for ego death or stepping outside the self to witness reality from a more expanded, non-personal perspective.

The first one is a classic - the ever-escalating spiral. I’ve seen quite a few variations of it, and each time I do, it seems to unlock a new layer of understanding. I remember one specific moment where a spiral helped me zoom out of my immediate surroundings. In that moment, I grasped God as an infinite “object,” containing not only my present experience, but all possible realities spiraling outward from a single point of origin. It was a single, continuous spiral, not multiple expanding ones like in some images above. I could see through it, almost like it had a 3D or even 4D quality. It wasn’t just in front of me, it was moving through me, pulling my present moment into itself. The whole thing felt incredibly trippy, with stripe-like patterns in black, blue, and purple.

@Natasha Tori Maru Honestly, anything is welcome as long as it's presented in a thoughtful way without too many assumptions. The whole point of the thread is to help bridge the gap between the paranormal and the rational, so even simple observational notes are a great fit. Excited to see what comes through - thank you!

Russel Targ's book "The Reality of ESP" https://virtualmmx.ddns.net/gbooks/TheRealityofESPAPhysicistsProofofPsychicAbilities.pdf

You're making the mistake of projecting time onto God. God doesn't "become" or "choose" - God just is. As an infinite being, God already contains all possible expressions - every "sub-infinity" is already fully realized within the absolute. Think of it like this: imagine an infinite set of numbers between 0 and 1. Let's say, as a human ego, you’re the number 0.896532 and asking, “Why is God biased toward 0.8 and 0.9? If he is so 'unbiased' and infinite, shouldn't we see all numbers?” But that question only makes sense from your limited position. From the perspective of infinity, God is the entire interval 0 - 1, and everything in between. The bias you're perceiving is just a reflection of your temporary vantage point. Does this make sense? Maybe I’m misunderstanding your point, and we agree. Infinite absolute is pure, undifferentiated noise or unlimited possibility. For infinity to be truly infinite, it has to include the finite, too. The infinite is only made complete when experienced through limitation. When you limit infinity, you divide it. When you divide infinity, you get two sub-infinities. Now you’ve got two infinite branches, each waiting to be fully explored. Every sub-infinity must be realized. If every sub-infinity isn’t realized, then something is left out. If something is left out, then God isn’t truly infinite. If God isn’t truly infinite, then the absolute isn’t complete. Bias isn’t a flaw - it’s a necessary property of infinity.

I think this is one of the clearest breakdowns of materialism, physicalism, and rationalism I’ve come across. He still refers to it as analytical idealism, so he’s not avoiding the label – and that’s important. There’s nothing inherently wrong with calling it idealism, as long as the approach is grounded in rational analysis and argumentation.

I really like your argument actually! But there are a couple of assumptions to think about... 1. Assumption: Evil/selfishness is inherently infinite if left unchecked. Selfishness, by its nature, is self-consuming. An infinitely selfish being would, paradoxically, collapse under its contradiction - selfishness seeks to preserve the self, yet in doing so, it must eventually destroy everything else, including the conditions that make its own existence possible. It's like a fire trying to burn infinitely - it eventually runs out of fuel. So, rather than being infinite, selfishness is inherently self-limiting. Think of a game where everyone plays fair, then one player finds a cheat like aim assist. At first, it feels powerful - they win easily. But soon, all the real players quit, and they're left alone with bots. No challenge, no meaning. Or worse, everyone starts cheating, too, and the game becomes a mess. The system breaks, and nobody enjoys it. That’s how selfishness works - it might win short term, but it destroys the environment it needs to keep going. Even visually, imagine cutting a circle in two, one part bigger. The bigger half might feel superior, but if it keeps absorbing the smaller half, eventually there's nothing left to feel "bigger" than. It collapses into meaninglessness. In both cases, selfishness backfires. It relies on others to define itself - to feel "greater," there has to be someone "lesser." But when selfishness takes over completely, that contrast vanishes. It’s like a parasite that kills its host, only to starve afterward. By nature, selfishness is a dualistic concept - it defines itself against the other, not with it. Because it can’t recognize the other as part of itself, it’s ultimately self-defeating and bound to collapse. 2. Assumption: The selfless being wouldn't act to stop destruction. Selflessness doesn’t mean inaction. It can mean compassion, protection, and defense without personal gain. A truly selfless being might actively oppose harm, not for itself, but for the good of others. So the idea that selflessness must be passive isn't necessarily accurate. A truly selfless being can embrace and embody evil and selfishness when necessary, not out of desire, but out of understanding. It can take on darkness to protect the light. That’s why we admire heroes: not because they’re perfect, but because they’re willing to be fierce, even destructive, when the cause is just. True selflessness isn’t weakness - it’s the strength to become what’s needed, even if that means facing or becoming the very thing it stands against. - This is also why, for example, Stage Red in Spiral Dynamics doesn’t function better than Stage Orange. In Stage Red, power dominates - it's all about strength, selfishness, control, and survival of the strongest. But in that environment, the biggest "dogs" end up consuming each other, and everyone else is left at the mercy of whoever holds the most power. The weaker or less aggressive individuals, who might actually have better ideas, systems, or caretaking abilities, get pushed out or silenced. In contrast, societies that balance both selfishness and selflessness tend to thrive over time. They make room for competition and innovation and for cooperation and care. Without that balance, all you get is short-term dominance and gains that eventually collapse or burn out. In other words, it’s a system built for collapse. It may deliver quick results through force or dominance, but it lacks the stability and inclusiveness needed to endure over time. Without balance, it can’t sustain itself or dominate over anything long-term.

@Vynce I’ll try to explain the way it makes sense to me: Because God is everything - all the past, present, future - all things that were, are, and will be realized. The best way to illustrate this is with the idea of evolution. Imagine a chain of evolution: You start with a jawless fish like Haikouichthys → then comes Osteostraci, armored jawless fish → mutation leads to jawed fish like Placoderms → then bony fish like Eusthenopteron (has limb-like fins) → mutation gives rise to Panderichthys (transitional fish with flatter body for shallow water) → next is Tiktaalik (famous “fishapod” with wrist bones and a neck - bridge between fish and amphibians) → then Acanthostega and Ichthyostega (among the first true tetrapods - four-legged animals) → then Temnospondyls (early amphibians) → leading to early reptiles like Hylonomus → lizards, snakes, and dinosaurs, etc. Each generation carries mutations. The ones that can’t survive get filtered out. The ones that can survive, self-preserve, and move forward. And this entire process - all of it - is God. Or at least a slice of God. God isn’t just the fish, or the Osteostraci, or the Placoderms, or the final lizard. God is the whole evolutionary chain. Every failed mutation, every success, every transition. The entire thing is part of the Whole. Now, where are you here? Let’s zoom in on you for a moment. You're a single spark of consciousness in a vast evolutionary chain stretching across billions of years. Let’s say you’re the moment when Tiktaalik, a fish with primitive limbs, first crawled onto land and began the journey toward amphibians. Maybe in your life, you feel out of place. Struggling. Overwhelmed. Maybe you’re rejected by your peers, and less equipped to survive in your environment. To you, that feels like suffering - like failure. But in the grand scale of nature, that is progress. Evolution is built on what survives - and what doesn’t. So when you ask: “Why me, God? Why did you make me this way?” You’re asking from one tiny point in an infinite unfolding. God wants to experience what it’s like to be: The fish torn apart by predators The one that escapes The amphibian that dies trying to adapt The reptile that thrives The hominid that invented fire The human who feels lost The human who discovers meaning You are one expression in that eternal process. And if you ask: “Why create all these flawed forms? Why not skip to perfection?” Because then it wouldn’t be everything. God would be leaving something out. That’s not infinity - that’s limitation. To be truly infinite, God must also be the flawed, the broken, the forgotten - and live through all of it. If God created pain but avoided living it, that would be hypocrisy. But God doesn’t avoid it, he lives through it with you. You are God, consciousness experiencing itself, right here, right now, this precise chain of life unfolding in this exact timeline. To answer your question, it's really about what kind of answer you're expecting. Somewhere across billions of years of evolution, your specific bloodline went through genetic filtering, and the schizophrenia-related traits weren’t passed on. Because you're a limited, condensed expression of consciousness, you're now living the unique version of life without schizophrenia. Another way to look at it: imagine God watching a horror movie. At some point, He decides that watching isn’t enough - He wants to experience it. Not just from the perspective of the main character, but also the one who gets killed, the haunted house, the knife, the wind, even the doorbell. Every angle. But to actually feel what it's like to be those things, He has to forget He’s God. Otherwise, it's just acting. So he fully steps into each role, one at a time - including yours. In this moment, you're one of those roles - the person without schizophrenia. That’s not bias. It’s just the specific perspective being lived right now. It feels biased because you only have access to your own experience. From where you stand, it feels absolute. But that's just a limitation of being you in this form, at this moment. The truth is, you could’ve been any other conscious experience. You just happen to be this one right now. Out of all possibilities, this is the version of reality you're living. God is all of them, so He is unbiased. You are just biased because you are you now! Haha, I'm going in circles, but I hope that makes sense!

Anticipating sexual fulfillment with a reciprocating other. Anticipation means it is not certain, guaranteed, or yet to happen. For example, someone may glance at you in a way that suggests interest, creating a possibility that something might happen. This uncertainty spikes dopamine and builds tension. Even during a sexual act, like a striptease, you continue to anticipate what will happen next, so the tension remains until the fantasy or act is fully realized. Once fulfillment occurs, the tension fades. That’s why anticipation is essential - without it, the tension doesn't exist. The best way to picture this is two people naked, looking at each other. You can feel the tension building in that moment before they kiss or fuck. Sexual desire or fantasy means the tension is rooted specifically in sexual interest. For example, if your partner does something sweet or meaningful that fulfills an emotional need, such as caring for you while you were sick or making you breakfast, you may appreciate it, but it will not create sexual tension unless it connects to a sexual desire or fantasy. It might sound obvious, but a sexual context is essential for sexual tension to arise. Fulfillment means the person involved must be someone who can realistically fulfill the sexual desire or fantasy. This includes matching your preferences in appearance, personality, orientation, or other factors. You might find someone physically attractive, but if they don’t fit your personal criteria (type of banter, teasing, spontaneity, playfulness, mystery, looks) or sexual orientation, the tension will be weaker or nonexistent. Reciprocation means there has to be some form of mutual exchange or signal that suggests the possibility of the fantasy becoming real. For example, if you are attracted to a celebrity who shows no sign of interest, you may feel lust but not sexual tension. Sexual tension usually needs direct personal interaction - in person, by phone, video chat, sexting, or other communication where there is some mutual exchange and reciprocation, either one-on-one or with more people. You can anticipate sexual fulfillment when you’re alone, like during masturbation, but that doesn’t create tension in the same way. It’s more about self-pleasure than desire or lust. That’s why sexual tension requires at least one other person who is reciprocating and desired. Plus, both people need to be able to match and respond to each other’s energy and style of tension and play. Maybe something like this?

Yeah, no worries at all, haha! I'm still struggling to fully understand it myself, or I guess, embody it. I can grasp it logically, but of course, my ego doesn’t like it too much, teehee. I guess it's only natural! The most practical advice I can give is to explore this through direct experience. A decent dose of a psychedelic, paired with deep contemplation, can help. Read blog posts (even this one!), watch Leo’s episodes on love, self-bias, infinity, and just let your mind wander. Let the questions stay open for a while, and eventually something will click. I know that before I had those experiences, none of this made any real sense to me either. I just didn’t have the consciousness to see it. But to try putting it into words here, it all comes back to infinity. If God only created you in a "fully evolved" state, then it wouldn’t have created you as you are now. If it only created love and not evil, then it wouldn’t be all-loving, because true, infinite love must include even what we call "unlovable." So when people say “collapsing into One is Love,” it means that in total Oneness, in absolute infinity, everything is included. Nothing is left out, not even suffering or evil. That kind of unconditional inclusion is Love. But the ego doesn’t like that, because it wants to protect itself. It wants to separate what’s "good" from what’s "bad." So when it hears that God doesn’t share that judgment, it resists. That’s the tension. The issue really comes down to comprehending and accepting infinity - all of it. All experience, all being, all contrast. Love, in this context, isn’t sentimental or nice. It’s total inclusion, complete connection. It's the willingness to be everything, even the parts we fear or hate. And that’s something hard for the ego to accept, because the ego runs on division - on protecting a self from the rest. A good metaphor here is the saying, "a face only a mother could love." It means that even if someone is seen as ugly or flawed by the whole world, their mother still loves them deeply simply because they are hers. She brought them into existence, watched them grow through every stage, witnessed their struggles and triumphs, and knows every small habit, fear, and strength deeply and intimately. You can imagine God like that. Everything is its creation - there’s nothing to reject, nothing to be ashamed of, nothing to judge. It understands why someone did what they did. It saw the entire path, the whole chain of cause and effect. It was there, as all of it. It knows how limited that consciousness was. It is that consciousness. So, from God’s perspective, even the darkest evil is still understood. Still part of the whole. Still held in love. Some forms of evil are truly a “face only a mother could love” 😅 - and we, in our limited human forms, are not that mother. Not yet. But God is!

I'll try my best to explain it, but it's tricky since it's very paradoxical. I'm sure most people, by now, get the paradoxical nature of infinity, oneness, and consciousness. Since it's an "infinite object," it has properties that contradict themselves. Unlike a cat, which is a finite object - it is a cat and not what is not a cat. Infinity includes both the infinite and the finite. If I'm infinite, then I must include all that I am - and all that I am not. The same logic applies to love, or to God as "all-loving." If you are "all-loving," then you must also love that which is all-unloving - aka pure evil. The "form of projection of the ego" is the only way evil can exist. It cannot exist without finite forms, because if all finite forms collapsed, there would be no limited perspective for evil to be done onto. It has to be real suffering from the POV of the ego, because if it weren't real, then there would be no way for it to exist. Imagine you weren’t attached to your arm, and I pulled out a chainsaw and split it in half - you wouldn’t care, because you aren’t attached to it. And if everyone in the world were like that, then "fear of having your arm cut off" or "the evil of having your arm cut off" would never exist. But since God has to actualize all possibilities, somehow it has to create an attachment to an arm. So yeah, from your human POV, God is both benevolent and psychopathic - both very loving and very evil. Your human self actually helps God become both all-loving and all-evil, because you are the final "ingredient" It needs to complete its infinity. Since it is "One" - and love requires another, and evil requires another to be done onto - It creates limited forms: planets, atoms, humans, bugs, ants, etc. There is no “horror” to conquer, because that horror is a part of It. It is that horror. It has to be - otherwise It wouldn’t be truly all-loving, infinite, or all-encompassing. The real point is simply to experience life. But the way we've structured society causes us to constantly search for purpose and meaning. That’s mostly our ego - it clings to meaning, because the more meaningful we feel, the more valuable we believe we are. If we’re valuable, then maybe our identity can survive beyond our lifetime, or we can secure a sense of survival now. But the actual point is just to fully live it - to experience everything, and to enjoy whatever beauty you find. That is the reward. That is the present. And if we do want a "purpose", one of the most meaningful is to help enhance that exact experience - to increase our capacity for beauty, understanding, and connection. Whether that’s improving health, advancing science, creating art, writing poetry, loving someone, loving many, inspiring others, or simply speaking in a way that makes life feel more alive and magical - that’s where the deepest purpose can be found. Whether that impact is small, just on yourself, your pets, your closest people, or something that reaches the whole world, is entirely up to you. The universe is structured in such a way that no matter what you do, you’re always fulfilling your purpose. Because the only true purpose is to fully experience and appreciate the present moment - the life you have, right now.

@Oppositionless To be "One" is to unite everything, to connect everything. And to truly connect is to love. To hold something in your consciousness with the full intent to experience and understand it is, in essence, to love it. The deeper your desire to understand something, to take it in as part of yourself, the less judgmental you become. You grow more accepting, more compassionate, more loving. Think about the people closest to you. Why are they called “close”? Because they probably see and understand you more than others, because you have more experience with them than with others, because they probably care for and love you more than others. The more "connected" you are, the closer you are. The closer you are, the closer to One you are - merging together. We usually call this process "love." Oneness requires ultimate connection and a lack of separation. The process God uses to fully "merge" or bring parts "closer to each other" until they unite is Oneness, Love, Union, or even Sex. Even the physical act of sex is a symbol of this: getting as close as possible - literally under someone’s skin, inside their body - to create pleasure. To Love them properly and fully. Think about what we mean when we say someone is “close-minded” or refuses to empathize. We often say, “He can’t see the other person’s point of view,” or “He can’t put himself in their shoes.” In other words, he can’t imagine being close to that person, can’t imagine being them, can’t merge his perspective with theirs. He’s stuck in his own experience, focused on his Self, not the Other. He’s failed to connect the two into one shared understanding. And because of that, he is less empathetic, less compassionate, less loving. He lacks the Love to merge, to connect, to understand. However, God has an infinite supply of that! Hence the label "All-Loving" or "God is Love."

@Thought Art I 100% agree with that! Mysteriously beautiful!