»about the fractal structure«

Ogami Itto wrote:

Okay. Almost all of this color-coordinating is conjecture, and up to individual interpretation.

Correct

Quote:

However, we are leaving out the fact that the "orgasm-dessert" glows gold.

It might seem a little bright, but it is defenitely green.

Quote:

Did we ever see Merv in code? I can't recall, but I don't believe so.

No we did not. I think that's too bad

Quote:

Two things that haven't been brought up here: 1) Neo is green, but brighter than the other code. 2)The gold froms that Neo sees in M3 is the energy of the machines-but, at the end(post ultra-burly), Neo is seen as that gold energy as he is carried away. This insinuates that he is a machine/bacame a machine/or is full of nano machines at that point.

If he might seem brighter green (which I haven't noticed yet), then this is because he has now a more direct connection with the Source (he touched it at the door of light to the Architect).

In the Real World he glows because he has become part of the Source again: forever.

I believe that, in keeping with the Jesus part of the Mythology/Symbology synthesis that IS the Matrix, Neo is human and machine all along. Jesus is the son of God(half man/half God=God in human form), Neo is the son of the Source(half man/half Source code=AI in human form).
The Animatrix show the physical mastery the machines have gained over the human body(in The Second Renaissance). I believe Neo was grown, but the Source itself put a program in place of a human mind. A 'trick' that Smith gained, almost subconsciously(if he is capable of that) from an intimate contact with Neo's "mind." This is one of the "tip-offs" to this idea. A clue to Neo's machine heritage. This is why Neo is connected at such a base level to the machines and has such a natural depth of understanding their programs.
The fractal represents how so many sci-fi and mythologial concepts are creating this "other," separate thing which is the Matrix films/world.
It is a whole object made up of smaller versions of itself.

The fractical could mean

1.) There is a MwM
2.) That Characters are just "Groups" and the Real ingridient is "Green Dots" Atoms / quarks / gluons or some other subatomic particle. Then, many subatomic particles group to create a proton / newtron. These Groups then form other groups (many atoms in a piece of metal), which forms a car Group (Many Pieces of metal and other things in a car) Many cars in a city, (Piece of metal can be displayed as a char, car can be displayd as a char, a whole city can be displayed as a char, the whole world, the universe Bla Bla Bla .... (this also explains the cars e.t.c that becomes a char ....

3.) The endlessness of the mind
4.) the different aspects of truth and real (all different views of the same thing)

5.) I am nuts

Not nuts. Thats all good stuff, Architect.

Ogami- I agree absolutely. There is that similarity between Neo and Jesus. However I dont think that the Source chose to give the One code to a human. The system itself had no choice but to do this because it was running under the choice (99%/1%) solution that the Mother of the Matrix presented.

I am not nuts

Ogami Itto wrote:

I believe Neo was grown, but the Source itself put a program in place of a human mind. A 'trick' that Smith gained, almost subconsciously(if he is capable of that) from an intimate contact with Neo's "mind." This is one of the "tip-offs" to this idea. A clue to Neo's machine heritage. This is why Neo is connected at such a base level to the machines and has such a natural depth of understanding their programs.

very brilliant idea

You have given a really good idea which explains "code u (Neo) carry". But the only problem is a human mind is NOT born but grown. Unlike Smith's mind which had already grown (ie) say Smith is 100 years old. His mind had acquired the knowledge for 100 years and has become what it is - Smith. If the source decides to "copy" the mind, what does it mean ? Means that the source "copies" the same "mind" to all humans, but they differ only after their birth ? That is, based on the environment in which the people were raised, they differ (and become unique) ? I'd like to hear more on it.

btw, I'm not buying if your theory is "code injection" theory. I assume that u mean that all humans are injected with the same "mind". Correct me if I am wrong.

Quote:

Means that the source "copies" the same "mind" to all humans, but they differ only after their birth ? That is, based on the environment in which the people were raised, they differ (and become unique) ?

i would say that it makes sence to me.

there is one flaw to it though.

why would the machines NEED to copy the same mind to EVERYONE.

i believe that no one else is copied EXCEPT Neo.
as there would be no "purpose" for doing so.

where as the machines would NEVER risk neo's mind to "develop" on its own.
"its to risky"

yes individualism of neo is gained, "like the love for trinity" and even his "love for noodles"
but his BASIC "mind" was designed to "go a certain way"

and the machines have to let SOME "illusion" of choice for neo.
Otherwise he would know that hes being controlled. (or at least other people would know)

Quote:

why would the machines NEED to copy the same mind to EVERYONE.

Well, that theory is based on the real world. We humans are not different from each other when we were just born. There may be very few differences. But our surroundings and what we learn in our life time makes us who we are.

Neo is NOT chosen by the machines. No one knows who the One can be. Neo is the result of a flaw in choice. Neo is an ACCIDENT. To find Neo, the machines use Zion. (chk this page

Quote:

1. anomaly, anomalousness -- (deviation from the normal or common order or form or rule) 2. anomaly, unusual person -- (a person who is unusual) 3. anomaly -- ((astronomy) position of a planet as defined by its angular distance from its perihelion (as observed from the sun))

there is a DIFFERENCE between an anomaly and an accident

Quote:

.ACCIDENT: An unexpected and undesirable event, especially one resulting in damage or harm: car accidents on icy roads. b. An unforeseen incident: A series of happy accidents led to his promotion. c. An instance of involuntary urination or defecation in one's clothing

the archietect said that neo was "not unexpected"
notice the word UNexpected in this definition.

Neo is like a glitch in a game (an anomally) that can be repeated but wasnt INTENTIONALLY put there by the programmers.
*thats what it is*

but anomallys CAN and HAVE been reproduced *like when you find a glitch in a game*
you do the same steps and same glitch will happen.
(which is what happens in the matrix- its a revolution)

what does that mean?
while the FIRST neo wasnt "expected" the other ones were. (obviously) and the FIRST neo wasnt probably as "proficient" in his awakening.
(i.e. the first matrix)-it failed.
which is why the ORACLE came to pass and which is why NEO (his christlikeness abilities in dodging bullets) was needed to give an illusion of a savior.

our surroundings and our experiances DONT make us who we are.
its our CHOICES that do.
the surroundings and experiances simply "influence" them.

you dont have to do ANYTHING except die.

Raks,

I used "accident" in the sense that Neo being the One was not intentional, but an accident.

As for "choice", I wrote abt them in another post. Read it if u r interested. (

there is alot more to the human brain that even those things.
but basically your right.

Quote:

So, technically you can give the knowledge to a person, but you cannot force him to make a choice. (ie) You can teach kung-fu to Neo. But only Neo has to make a choice whether he must fight Smith or run away in the sub way station

you can lead a horse to water,but you cannot force him to drink.

TRUE.
but control is NOT an illusion "acording to the w-brothers"
and choice can be controlled (not forced) like this:

1. lets say your a robber and you have a gun and you goto the store with 2 inentions.
A. to get the money.
B. to kill the clerk.

now when you get there and hold the store up you say this: "give me the money or ill shoot you."
now if the clerk gives the guy the money then the guy "gets what he wants" cause he will eventually shoot him afterwords.

and if the clerk says "shoot me" then he still could "break into the register"
then he gets what he wants.

now the flaw, is the fact that the clerk COULD fight back and/or have a gun of his own.

it is this flaw that the w-brothers think that "doenst exist"

while ill agree with you in the "real life" the w-brothers do not.

(its a shame that they believe in this way)

Quote:

now the flaw, is the fact that the clerk COULD fight back and/or have a gun of his own.

I'm not sure what u r saying. But I dont think there's any flaw. In either case, the "outcome" of the event depends on the choice of the clerk too. That is, the clerk can give him the money or sacrifice his life OR fight back with his own gun.

(I'm planning to write a detailed post on choice... I dont get enough time, may be I'll post it next week)

Scientheist - I know I don't like your theories, but I know that if I could believe certain things I'd be able to accept (most of) the rest. In fact, there is proof of this in other people who have debated with you and have often come to common ground.

I don't know how much you have read of Raksasha's posts elsewhere, but he has this obsession with "logic" i.e. his logic is perfect and anyone else who doesn't share is view isn't.

He writes as long and disorganised posts he can. They've been comparatively tiny in this thread. These posts are made longer by over-quoting (unfortunately this means that he often takes a small part of what someone says and judges that, rather than looking at the main point of their argument).

He has a view on religion which prevents him from accepting other views. I personally ended up very upset after he basically tried to dismiss me from my own faith in another thread.

To put it simply: not being sure what Raksasha is saying is the norm.

Quote:

I'm not sure what u r saying. But I dont think there's any flaw. In either case, the "outcome" of the event depends on the choice of the clerk too. That is, the clerk can give him the money or sacrifice his life OR fight back with his own gun.

yes i know. in real life it does depend. but the wachowski's are to nieve to see it that way.

they think that we can be FORCED to choose 1 way or the other, and that the 3rd option we will not choose. (like fighting back or dieing). They think that humans will enevitably "pick the path of least resistance". MOST humanists believe that its human nature to do so and we have no choice in the matter.

Raksasha69 wrote:

you can lead a horse to water,but you cannot force him to drink.

Basically, you could just attach the horse and leave him there. After a while, you can be sure that the horse will drink water. That's control : you create a situation in wich you'll leave no other choice than obeying you or dying.
Wich is basically how the matrix works. So you see, the only think that you can really choose in this world is to live or die.

I must agree with "apocryphy"

Also, not to bust someones balls, but some idiot mentioned god is half human - half god.

Who da hell told you that? That is a false dogma, Monothelitism (Μονοθελητισμός) God is 100% human and 100% God

This mayu mean that 1 + 1 = 1 (even though logic says it is 2)
But, logic also tells us you cannot add 2 differect items.

You can add 1 cup water to 1 cup water and get 2, but if you add 1 cup water to 1 cup white spirits, you will get 1 1/2 cups liquid ...

Um... I think that depends on whether you are talking about jesus or not. Some religions would say God only occaisionally manifests Himself as man, while others would say God never becomes man at all!

Yes, you are right.

In Christian :


God (3 faces in one face)

God - father (only god)
God - Son (100% God and 100% son)
Holy Spirit (irrelevent)

Happy ?

Um... I think most Christians (who believe the spirit works within them) would consider that last point to be a bit fishy.

Other than that, great!

The person was talking about Jesus, not God. He/she was saying that Jesus was both human and divine; both mortal and godly. Similarly, Neo was both human and made of code (the anomaly code)

We're really off topic now