Some of the data released by Hubbard indicate that "anything" may be a
                       communication, going from a location across a distance to another location. To
                       paraphrase him, a communication is the idea or action of moving matter and/or
                       energy across a distance from a source location to a receiving location, with the
                       intention of  it being duplicated and understood at the receiving location. This is
                       misleading to some people because, though implied, two important items have not
                       been explicitly stated: the persons involved.

                       He cites the example of throwing rocks as communications. If the rocks are
                       thrown by one person at another person, then communication has occurred. It has
                       occurred because the first person means something by the act of throwing the
                       rocks, perhaps "I hate you" and the second person rather quickly gets the
                       message while he's busy ducking. (To be fair, Hubbard probably understood that
                       two beings had to be there for communication to occur. Some people may not
                       have duplicated that intention of his, so I'm making a point of it.) Only a person can
                       duplicate a communication. And only if duplication has occurred, has the action been
                       a communication.

                       But if the rocks are thrown by a person at a boulder, then no communication
                       has occurred. The boulder is not a person, not a "thetan." The boulder will not
                       duplicate the intended meaning, unless there's someone hiding inside it! If no one is
                       there, the rocks are meaningless! (So to restate the classic problem: "if a tree falls
                       in the woods and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?" The answer is
                       yes, it makes sound waves travel outward through the air, but those sound waves
                       don't make a "crashing sound" because no one was there to hear it and interpret its
                       meaning as "CRASH!")

                       I want to make a very strong point here about MEST versus theta. Material in motion,
                       whether rocks or energy, is an apparent one way flow, a one direction motion. It is not
                       communication. Communication requires duplication of meaning or intention, by theta
                       at both ends of the comm. Because of this, all true comm lines, all theta communication
                       is TWO WAY. Any time a material object or energy produces a backflow, then
                       duplication has occurred and theta is involved on both of the apparent ends of the
                       comm line. I say "apparent" because all separation of theta from itself is an
                       illusion and a lie. But matter itself is a form of theta, in which the awareness is asleep.
                       So with any comm line which has a thetan at one end and matter at the other, a funny
                       thing happens: there's a slight backflow from the matter. (In fact if you communicate
                       enough to matter you will eventually wake it up. It will come uptone into the effort
                       band or even higher. This can have pleasant, unpleasant, or even ludicrous results,
                       because the material object can function when it shouldn't, or misbehave when used,
                       or act in bizarre ways.

                       Duplication is the cause of the two way phenomenon. This is very important fact in
                       magick, in auditing and in society in general: anywhere there is theta, all comm lines
                       will be two way.

                       But what is meaning in communication?

                       It is usually assumed that words, whether spoken or written have intrinsic
                       meanings. This is false. They only have the meanings which are assigned to them.
                       A word is a symbol, nicely defined as "mass plus meaning." One of the most
                       basic abilities of a person is to tag a significance onto a piece of matter/energy.
                       My high level thought experiments (visualizations) and "goings" (I have no idea
                       what else to call it when I reach "up/out" and look around my universe at a
                       brighter level of awareness.) indicate that meaning is a postulate.

                       What is a postulate? A postulate is a decision about the state of reality itself.
                       It can be a postulate concerning personal reality or our group reality (the
                       universe), either one or both. This decision, this postulate has a direct effect on a
                       person's life and surroundings. An example would be a man deciding that "all
                       women are bad", with the result of getting involved only with "bad" women from
                       then on. An example of a, *ahem*, more positive postulate would be a woman
                       deciding that she was going to be a successful florist, then having a long lost uncle
                       unexpected show up and give her a loan of $10,000 as seed money to start her
                       business.

                       These things do not happen by "accident." It is my experience that there are
                       no accidents, only hidden causes.

                       A strong, confident postulate attaches a significance to most or all of
                       surrounding reality. The more reality it attaches meaning to, the wider effect it
                       has. So this is the basic function. A sub- or specialized postulate action is the
                       attachment of a limited meaning to a word or action in order to communicate.

                       All communication is apparently telepathic. A person can write or speak millions
                       of words, but if that person does not intend meaning into them, and the
                       listener/reader does not intend to understand, then no communication happens.
                       This is most noticable when for instance an adult is reading out of a book to a
                       small child. If the adult just sets the whole action onto a circuit, and reads
                       mechanically in a dead voice then the child gets bored, attention wanders, no
                       communication is occurring. If on the other hand that adult reads the story with
                       full attention and intention, and turns it into a "live" story happening right now,
                       then the child will be rapt and excited. Communication is happening.

                       Telepathy is "duplication." There is no telepathy really, any more than there is
                       any other sort of material universe communication. They are all duplication on
                       an apparent via which doesn't exist. The person who is communicating intends his
                       meaning, and the other person creates that same meaning at their end exactly as it
                       is. The ends of a comm line are apparancies, not realities. There doesn't seem to
                       be any need for a via either. No words. No rocks. No books. Just the same thought
                       occurring at two apparent locations with nothing having passed through the
                       intervening space.

                       The subject of General Semantics is extremely nitpicky on the subject of
                       precisely picking and using words accurately -- both to get the meaning across to
                       others, and to avoid confusing oneself with sloppy, inexact thoughts about
                       reality. Technically, the practisioners of G-S are correct! But the only reason
                       there is a need for G-S is because communication -- both with the parts of oneself,
                       and to others -- is filtered through so many physical vias that mistakes of
                       duplication often occur. A positive, powerful communicator (person) however,
                       can often use spoken language so badly that a G-Ser might cringe at every
                       statement, and still manage to get his point across perfectly. Because the words
                       used, though important to almost everyone, are not really necessary. To beat back
                       into life an old Zen saw, the words are like fingers pointing at the moon. They
                       only point to where a person should look and what to duplicate there. They aren't
                       always necessary. Communication can occur without words. Communication can
                       occur without any via. This is of course a violation of the communications
                       formula as laid out by Mr Hubbard. Hubbardís formula should really be titled
                       "How to communicate on a via." Because though attention and intention are usually
                       necessary, the communication particles (words, rocks), motion and distance are
                       not. Even attention and intention can be dispensed with at Static (static is "one"
                       beingness). This is because attention is actually some of your own beingness
                       (as is also the "tag" of meaning assigned to a thought or symbol) in that you
                       are putting a little bit of yourself out there when you place attention onto
                       something; and intention is a type of postulation, which is decision, which is
                       beingness projected, separated or placed.

                       Therefore a somewhat truer communication formula would be:
                       ATTENTION AND INTENTION CREATING DUPLICATION.

                       And the real communications formula is this:
                       DUPLICATION (by theta of itself, which is the static)

                       That's how communication is really done. We still are all doing it that way,
                       despite any illusions to the contrary.

                       Ouran