12-02-2015, 01:09 PM
You caution against Complexity, but I see a very Complex Existence.
I think it's fair to remember that as long as the Complexity is utilized Simply is where we have a fine ground for possible actual designs. Where the polar opposites work together, Complex Simplicity, Simple Complexity. Sacred Geometry is a perfect example.
Plus a 15D system isn't any more odd sounding than an 8D system, I'm not saying we're a 15D double-Octave, just that Octaves interact with each other, they may very well be considerable as such 'Higher' Dimensions from our 3D viewpoint possibly. Where the 2D of the next Octave is our 9D as an example.
So in that way 15D is just 8D with each Density holding the Identifier of it's present Octave and the Octave it is interactable with.
Technically I could get more complex and say it's a 3-Octave system of 22 Densities similar to the 3D Archetypical design and still be semantically 'accurate' in terms of describing each one as 1-7 with one Eighth creating the 22nd, with the prior Octave being 1-8, and the current and next being the next sets of 1-7 formulating Densities 1-8, then 8-15, then 15-22.
But I'm not going to because that would be like trying to contest 'more whole pictures' against Blatz, which is probably not the best mannerism to go about figuring out such things. I simply wish to iterate, our Creation is design way beyond Ra's 6D capacities to 'view', or maybe not 'OUR' Octave/Universe/Creation but the 'whole' Creation of various Universes and Octaves. For all we know, later on down the line, our Octave System will make more sense exactly as it is, but described in clusters of settings rather than individuals. We could be a in 2 or 3 Octave Creation or a 1 Octave Creation. We could be in the ONE Universe or One Universe of Many.
The Ra Material says a lot of things, that doesn't mean I should relay my entire Creative Thought Processes regarding that Materials described Mechanics into the only system as described by an also Limited Personality, albeit a massively less limited one than ours.
OR, in my human arrogance, I am completely wrong and just unaware of it defending concepts and complexes that have no real generation in reality beyond in Thought.
I don't know, I"m just having some intellectual fun with Blatz on expanding our concepts of how things might work o:
I think it's fair to remember that as long as the Complexity is utilized Simply is where we have a fine ground for possible actual designs. Where the polar opposites work together, Complex Simplicity, Simple Complexity. Sacred Geometry is a perfect example.
Plus a 15D system isn't any more odd sounding than an 8D system, I'm not saying we're a 15D double-Octave, just that Octaves interact with each other, they may very well be considerable as such 'Higher' Dimensions from our 3D viewpoint possibly. Where the 2D of the next Octave is our 9D as an example.
So in that way 15D is just 8D with each Density holding the Identifier of it's present Octave and the Octave it is interactable with.
Technically I could get more complex and say it's a 3-Octave system of 22 Densities similar to the 3D Archetypical design and still be semantically 'accurate' in terms of describing each one as 1-7 with one Eighth creating the 22nd, with the prior Octave being 1-8, and the current and next being the next sets of 1-7 formulating Densities 1-8, then 8-15, then 15-22.
But I'm not going to because that would be like trying to contest 'more whole pictures' against Blatz, which is probably not the best mannerism to go about figuring out such things. I simply wish to iterate, our Creation is design way beyond Ra's 6D capacities to 'view', or maybe not 'OUR' Octave/Universe/Creation but the 'whole' Creation of various Universes and Octaves. For all we know, later on down the line, our Octave System will make more sense exactly as it is, but described in clusters of settings rather than individuals. We could be a in 2 or 3 Octave Creation or a 1 Octave Creation. We could be in the ONE Universe or One Universe of Many.
The Ra Material says a lot of things, that doesn't mean I should relay my entire Creative Thought Processes regarding that Materials described Mechanics into the only system as described by an also Limited Personality, albeit a massively less limited one than ours.
OR, in my human arrogance, I am completely wrong and just unaware of it defending concepts and complexes that have no real generation in reality beyond in Thought.
I don't know, I"m just having some intellectual fun with Blatz on expanding our concepts of how things might work o: