(08-07-2011, 02:55 PM)abridgetoofar Wrote: [ -> ]Not sure I completely understand the reason for the question. It seems completely reasonable to me that the planet went through a natural cycle which may have included loosing its water (supported theory) or some other sort of natural cycle which would lead to making it unable to support lower density life.
Of course, 4D might be able to survive on the surface, but considering they must still eat living 2D food stuffs, since 2D food stuffs cannot be cultivated on Venus, it cannot "support" 4D life.
Like stars, I don't view the life cycles of planets as infinite...
first of all, even with our current science, water being a requirement for life to exist is debatable, even if not waning.
but more importantly, ra says the materials used for life is totally dependent on what materials available in an environment, upon a question don asked about there being some cells on the planet based on a different element.
this means that water is not a requirement for life. life can happen with whatever materials available on a planet.
'life cycle of a planet' is something debatable in itself and part of the question here. the question is what is that life cycle.
(08-07-2011, 03:01 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]So the environment of the planet must support the mind/body complex requirements for an entity to thrive. The planet itself acts like an attractor for the intelligent energies of the sun according to the conditions provided.
there is no reason for there not to be a 2d life, and a 3d life, even a 4d life, based on the above points i replied to abridgetoofar.
even if we look from the narrow lens of our current science, merging it with Ra information - venus has supported life at a certain point in time, we know that it was capable. now, the temperatures are higher and the environment may be more volatile. however, even from the viewpoint of our science, which has just discovered that bacteria may live in scorching depths in thousands of meters into the crust of earth, or boiling volcanic pools or frozen ice, there has to be an array of species or versions of such species even from our ecosystem that venus could support. that is even totally leaving out the marvels like the animal tardigrad.
and that is totally leaving out the fact that, other species from other environments could be introduced, or logos or any other intervening source could just create/tailor a spectrum of life forms to inhabit that planet. (actually we are told that what logos provides to planets, is exactly this).
however despite all these there is no life of 2d, 3d in venus. we know also that 4d life does not exist, from Ra.
Quote: An entity has an increasingly conscious appreciation for this intelligent energy as its energy spectrum expands - by a quantum leap for each succeeding density. A planet, on the other hand, does not. What energy it's capable of supporting is subject to the deterministic fate of its natural evolutionary life cycle or influence from non-deterministic source. 2D requires growth conditions to maintain and nurture form, 3D requires the same 2D growth conditions plus a collective consciousness, 4D requires the same 2D growth conditions plus an unattached understanding.
firstly your look into the concept 'planet' is shortfalling because as per Ra material we know that a planet becomes an entity approximately mid 4th density. but more important is your proposition that a planet's fate is deterministic. that contradicts with what Ra told about 'recent events putting earth in a positive 4d continuum'. also the fact that we were told logos provides the basic energies of lower densities for life to exist on a planet, and all the rest catalyst, entities create themselves. the latter is a bit far-fetching, since it basically means that after the energies and systems are provided for survival, entities create the rest of the catalyst.
however especially due to these, there is no reason why 2d, 3d, or 4d cycles should not be run on a planet which can support life in any form.
which brings us to the below :
(08-07-2011, 02:19 PM)Raman Wrote: [ -> ] (08-07-2011, 01:36 PM)unity100 Wrote: [ -> ] (08-07-2011, 01:29 PM)Raman Wrote: [ -> ]Or 2d/3d/4d are not activated.
But it there is 2d, 3d will be aware of it unless hidden by some state and purpose, in this case you could be right. This would help maintain veil in 3d earth as well as prevent planetary 'colonizations' by earth's 3d entities.
ra already says venus is a 5d/6d planet and 5d/6d experiences are possible on it. not any other density.
That is what I think, which leaves 1d, 5d, 6d activation. Also, goes with the 'relatively young surface' of the planet.
That leaves planetary spheres with 1d being base (red ray) foundation:
1d base (last density previous octave)
2d compatible ---> at least 3d and 4d (although not clear current 2d compatible)
3d compatible ---> with 2d + potential incarnational nexus from higher densities r/t veil
4d compatible ---> with 2d (some type depending +/-) and 3d when able to hide
5d compatible --> with 6d and viceversa.
4d and above able to interact (4d potentially) with lower densities. 4d being a bridge more light (electrical than 3d); 5d able to manifest physicality or light; 6d and non-physical although able to manifest it.
Feel free to correct oversights, etc...
like raman speaks about here, i am thinking that there are some kinds of limitations on what densities can manifest on a planet at any given time. otherwise, it would be rather pointless to leave venus unpopulated - unless there were things we dont know. (like maybe a devastating war or a disaster rendering the planet uninhabitable).
if there wasnt such a disaster or war, then there would be no reason for any other density to not be on the planet, if not for compatibility.
now lets think about something else - mercury is closer to sun than any other planet. and lets assume there may be no early 2d life that can live on this planet. alright. then, why isnt mercury inhabited by any 5d/6d entities, just like venus ? since apparently, 5d/6d existence doesnt seem to need presence of 2d on a planet, or a 3d. especially considering that by 6d, entities can go visit sun for extended durations and live on it.
this seems to imply that there are requirements other than just predetermined cyclic stuff for a planet to sustain life, since mercury is not inhabited by higher density entities.
this may be due to numerous reasons. but the most probable seeming one, is the 'continuum' ra speaks about planet earth. through the actions and energies/vibrations manifested on this planet, this planet has entered a 4d positive continuum.
this would mean that what the entities do on a planet, determines where it will go in regard to contiuum, and, this may as well be valid for the early progression of a planet - ie, for a planet to progress towards higher densities, a 2d must manifest, moving into a 3d, and then to higher densities so that the energy needed to support any given density life on a planet come into being on that planet.
this kinda means energies just dont randomly received and used by planets but the entities living on it effect that - else, mercury would be at least 5/6d inhabitable.
........
despite we are told that when the 4d entities are able to hide their presence from 3d, 3d cycles can continue on a planet,it doesnt seem that this can take place forever, as can be deduced from the above points. meaning that it seems 3d life will eventually have to totally end on any given planet. and this may be true for 2d life too.
![[Image: venus1AP2911_468x351.jpg]](http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/11_04/venus1AP2911_468x351.jpg)
The answer is that we can't see through the planetary sphere's fifth density vibrations into the parallel existence of lower density life on the planet.