Bring4th

TIME

http://www.llresearch.org/transcript...1973_0800.aspx

Time, my friends, is in your mind. There is only now, and there is only here. The reason that there appears to be a reciprocal nature between space and time in your world is because your world is, shall we say, designed to produce this illusion. It is an illusion necessary for certain catalytic actions that you enjoy in your present state for the purpose of your continued spiritual growth and evolution.

I will leave you now. I am Hatonn. I leave you, my friends, in the love and the light of the One Who is All. Adonai. Adonai vasu borragus.

I am Oxal. I am with this instrument. I have been called for the purpose of speaking to you on the nature and reality of time. Time is a field, like unto your electric field, your magnetic field. But what is a field, my friends? A field is an effect. A field is in your minds. A field has different effects at different distances. So does time. As you have recently stated, time and space are dependent, one upon another. It has also been stated that they are totally independent, and have no relationship. Both of these statements are true. It simply depends on your point of view. The people of your planet at present do not appreciate the number of dimensions that are available for one to experience the creation. All of these dimensions are made up of a single place and a single time, and, for that matter, a single dimension, which has no dimension. But it is necessary to go from where you are to where you will be.

Therefore, we shall speak of time as you know it and try to lead you to that place where you will know it.
Time is a field. It is space-dependent. Space is a field and is time-dependent. For this reason you recognize a reciprocal nature. The relationship between the two is the third power [of] displacement in either. This may be recognized by a simple equation or formula. There are three dimensions: therefore, the numeral “3” is used, both as a power and as a constant. T3 divided by 3 is equal to S3. S3 divided by 3 is equal to T.

Your present constant, that which you call the velocity of light, is the basic speed of the field. The permeability of that which you know as matter is dependent upon this constant. In other words, my friends, the densities of which your world is composed, and the densities of the other planes of existence as you know them, are time-dependent. Their permeability is a function of apparent speed.

Space may be thought of as linear, if time is thought of as volumetric. Or you may reverse the process, as you do within your limitation, and consider space volumetric and time linear. Either is true. And either may be perceived to be true, depending upon the limitations of your thought. It is possible to move linearly in space and volumetrically in time, all with the same movement. You can be aware of what you call the past, the present, and the future, simultaneously.

I am Oxal. I will leave you at this time. Adonai vasu borragus. It has been a great privilege. Peace be with you.



A long time ago I wrote the following notes/article to understand Oxal's words. Although time is an illusion we do in practice exist in 6 different dimensions.
Though time is an illusion, it's still quite complex and sparked some interest for me.
I hope these notes may spark some thought and discussion regarding space/time time/space and it's influence upon us.



[[

I write this to try to fundamentally understand what Oxal speaks of.

(Elementary math: In arithmetic and algebra, the cube of a number n is its third power — the result of multiplying it by itself three times. n³ = n × n × n.)

From the text we gather:

T3 / 3 = S3 Time in 3 dimensions has the relation = Space in 3 dimensions
S3 / 3 = T Space in 3 dimensions has the relation = Time in 1 dimension

This does not make sense. It might either be a typo (from L/L Research) or not, as: "The relationship between the two is the third power [of] displacement in either."
May it be?:

T3 / 3 = S Time in 3 dimensions has the relation = Space in 1 dimension. This is another reality, Time/Space
S3 / 3 = T Space in 3 dimensions has the relation = Time in 1 dimension. This is our 'physical' reality, Space/Time

Please correct me if I'm wrong at the Time/Space | Space/Time definitions.



My subjective conclusions of time-dimensions:

Time is here projected upon 1-dimensional space, since that is the only way I can understand time, and the way Time/Space must be defined.

Space/Time is defined by time, we can move around in our 'physical' reality but all changes takes linear time.
Time/Space is defined by space, we can move around in 'time' but it's made up by the frozen moments of the 'physical'.

I say 'physical' because there are no real physical objects, only signals translated by our minds.

While moving inside time-dimensions you may not influence the physical world [space] only perceive, it seems.

T1 = Time is X. 'Time' is= linear, as in our currently perceived world. An arbitrary X can be picked from [all time divided by infinity]: every physical moment frozen. You exist subjectively in X and may only move forward or backward or standing still in the linear 'time'. In our current reality we seem to move forward.
Thus you cannot really perceive true time as it really exists [only from memory]. This you can do in:

T2 = Relative Viewpoint is Y and 'time' is X. Time is actively perceived as linear from an arbitrary viewpoint. Your perception of time is altered depending on Y's relation to X.
You may perceive an infinite amount of X from an infinite amount of Y. You may now exist in Y while observing X, but you may only exist in 1 Y at the same time (alike to T1 being limited to 1 X at the same time).
Thus you can perceive all 'time' subjectively.

T3 = Relative Viewpoints are Y, Z and 'time' is X. Time is actively perceived as linear from two arbitrary points, id est may be perceived as backward and forward simultaneously = You exist in all time simultaneously. You may perceive an infinite amount of Y relating to an infinite amount of X. You may now exist in Z observing Y observing X.
Thus you can perceive all 'time' objectively since you can see all subjective variations of Y.

I do not know what Z is, or what happens when you alter the viewpoint of Z.
This would require a 4th dimension. I cannot understand a 4th dimension.


As from the T1 definition: 1-dimensional space is the essence of 1 point of all physical moments frozen. They are infinite in every moment that space exists.
As from the T2 definition: "Y" here becomes something able to understand these "essence of physical moments frozen". You can see it from different viewpoints, you see can see how all time affects 1 reference point.
As from the T3 definition: "Z" here is something to understand that there exists more than 1 reference point simultaneously, you see ALL the "essence of physical moments frozen" from ALL ways. Here you understand True time.

]]

Greetings Ayadew,
Interesting highlight!

(09-07-2009, 12:38 PM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]TIME

http://www.llresearch.org/transcript...1973_0800.aspx

Time, my friends, is in your mind. There is only now, and there is only here. The reason that there appears to be a reciprocal nature between space and time in your world is because your world is, shall we say, designed to produce this illusion.

I am Oxal. ... Time is a field, like unto your electric field, your magnetic field. ... A field has different effects at different distances. So does time. As you have recently stated, time and space are dependent, one upon another. ...

Therefore, we shall speak of time as you know it and try to lead you to that place where you will know it. Time is a field. It is space-dependent. Space is a field and is time-dependent. For this reason you recognize a reciprocal nature. The relationship between the two is the third power [of] displacement in either. This may be recognized by a simple equation or formula. There are three dimensions: therefore, the numeral “3” is used, both as a power and as a constant. T3 divided by 3 is equal to S3. S3 divided by 3 is equal to T.

Your present constant, that which you call the velocity of light, is the basic speed of the field. The permeability of that which you know as matter is dependent upon this constant. In other words, my friends, the densities of which your world is composed, and the densities of the other planes of existence as you know them, are time-dependent. Their permeability is a function of apparent speed....

[[

From the text we gather:

T3 / 3 = S3 Time in 3 dimensions has the relation = Space in 3 dimensions
S3 / 3 = T Space in 3 dimensions has the relation = Time in 1 dimension

This does not make sense. It might either be a typo (from L/L Research) or not, as: "The relationship between the two is the third power [of] displacement in either."
May it be?:

T3 / 3 = S Time in 3 dimensions has the relation = Space in 1 dimension. This is another reality, Time/Space
S3 / 3 = T Space in 3 dimensions has the relation = Time in 1 dimension. This is our 'physical' reality, Space/Time

Please correct me if I'm wrong at the Time/Space | Space/Time definitions.

]]

T3/3 = S3
=> 3xT3/3 = 3xS3
=> T3 = 3xS3

S3/3=T
=> 3xS3/3 = 3xT
=> S3 = 3xT

Does it confirm the equation given by Oxal ("The relationship between the two is the third power [of] displacement in either")?
I maybe wrong though ??? My Algebra years are far behind.

Help! Is there a mathematician in the room, for bringing some light upon the 'matter'?

Announcement: Matter in need of light for grounding its existence!

W.

He said the word "power", so it sounds like he meant:

T^3 / 3 = S^3

You can write this however you want:

T^3 = 3 * S^3

He also said the word "displacement", which makes me think the correct form of the equation is actually the change in each parameter so:

(T2 - T1)^3 = 3 * (S2-S1)^3

So by this formula, this is implying the constant 3 has units of [sec]^3/[m]^3 (using standard SI units from physics). I would be interested in hearing a more detailed description of this relationship, and what it actually means.

(09-07-2009, 12:38 PM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]... As you have recently stated, time and space are dependent, one upon another. It has also been stated that they are totally independent, and have no relationship. Both of these statements are true. It simply depends on your point of view. The people of your planet at present do not appreciate the number of dimensions that are available for one to experience the creation. All of these dimensions are made up of a single place and a single time, and, for that matter, a single dimension, which has no dimension. But it is necessary to go from where you are to where you will be.

I guess if you consider all locations in (space x time) to be orthogonal, then each is its own dimension and one can move backward, forward, around, etc. not being constrained by what we experience as velocity, acceleration, viscosity, inertia, etc.

If you do not have the viewpoint (outside of "space" and "time") for that, then more things are linked (not orthogonal) and one thing depends on the other.

(09-07-2009, 12:38 PM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]... The relationship between the two is the third power [of] displacement in either. This may be recognized by a simple equation or formula. There are three dimensions: therefore, the numeral “3” is used, both as a power and as a constant. T3 divided by 3 is equal to S3. S3 divided by 3 is equal to T.

This cannot be taken literally in our environment. One could solve the two equations simultaneously to find T = plus or minus 3, which makes no sense.

(09-07-2009, 12:38 PM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]Your present constant, that which you call the velocity of light, is the basic speed of the field. The permeability of that which you know as matter is dependent upon this constant. In other words, my friends, the densities of which your world is composed, and the densities of the other planes of existence as you know them, are time-dependent. Their permeability is a function of apparent speed.

There is the relationship from electromagnetic wave theory (e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagn...e_equation )

c = 1 / sqrt(epsilon mu)

where c is the speed of light and mu is called the magnetic permeability ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeabilit...gnetism%29 ) . epsilon is correspondingly called the electric permittivity.

mu and epsilon are dependent on the material or medium. They have values (not zero or infinity) in 3-D "free space" as well. The speed of light is different in free space or in air or in glass. Perhaps mu, and maybe also epsilon, are what they mean by permeability.

(09-07-2009, 12:38 PM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]Space may be thought of as linear, if time is thought of as volumetric. Or you may reverse the process, as you do within your limitation, and consider space volumetric and time linear. Either is true. And either may be perceived to be true, depending upon the limitations of your thought. It is possible to move linearly in space and volumetrically in time, all with the same movement. You can be aware of what you call the past, the present, and the future, simultaneously.

So they seem to say that past can be seen as a dimension, present as a dimension, future as a dimension. But we're stuck seeing only the present and cannot control our progress in it. We can remember some of the past and cannot see the future. I read elsewhere, maybe Ra, that in time/space time is volumetric and space is linear. (Here in space/time, space is volumetric and time is linear.) In time/space one can move about in time but not in space. That might be why "ghosts" inhabit a fixed location, like a "haunted house". They can move in time but not (or at least not voluntarily) in space.

I think that as far as it goes, this agrees with ayadew's interpretation.

Here I have some comments on ayadew's interesting interpretation of Oxal's remarks:

(09-07-2009, 12:38 PM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]...
... It might either be a typo (from L/L Research) or not, as: "The relationship between the two is the third power [of] displacement in either."
May it be?:

T3 / 3 = S Time in 3 dimensions has the relation = Space in 1 dimension. This is another reality, Time/Space
S3 / 3 = T Space in 3 dimensions has the relation = Time in 1 dimension. This is our 'physical' reality, Space/Time

Please correct me if I'm wrong at the Time/Space | Space/Time definitions.

I read this the same way you do. But an expression like T3 / 3 = S is interpreted without really dividing by 3, and it's not an equality but saying the dimensions are T^3 x S . Equality seems like something Oxal would understand -- Oxal's my favorite channelled geek -- so I am surprised that we have this difficulty.

(09-07-2009, 12:38 PM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]My subjective conclusions of time-dimensions:

Time is here projected upon 1-dimensional space, since that is the only way I can understand time, and the way Time/Space must be defined.

Space/Time is defined by time, we can move around in our 'physical' reality but all changes takes linear time.
Time/Space is defined by space, we can move around in 'time' but it's made up by the frozen moments of the 'physical'.

I say 'physical' because there are no real physical objects, only signals translated by our minds.

I may not be sure what you mean by that sentence. Somehow there's enough agreement that we all agree on physicality. If I'm going to drive into a ditch, my wife next to me can see the same ditch and tell me to avoid it. It seems quite inefficient to tell us all a story simultaneously, keeping everything synchronized, rather than just allowing physicality to exist under our 3D physical rules. Occam's razor and all that.

(09-07-2009, 12:38 PM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]While moving inside time-dimensions you may not influence the physical world [space] only perceive, it seems.

Likewise in space-time S^3 x T, by moving in space one cannot affect the movement of time. Except perhaps for relativistic effects (time in an accelerating frame slows down as perceived from a non-accelerating frame.)

(09-07-2009, 12:38 PM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]T1 = Time is X. 'Time' is= linear, as in our currently perceived world. An arbitrary X can be picked from [all time divided by infinity]: every physical moment frozen. You exist subjectively in X and may only move forward or backward or standing still in the linear 'time'. In our current reality we seem to move forward.
Thus you cannot really perceive true time as it really exists [only from memory].

Can you move backwards or stand still? Bigger question: why in the one-dimensional view can one not control the movement in the one dimension?

(09-07-2009, 12:38 PM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]This you can do in:

T2 = Relative Viewpoint is Y and 'time' is X. Time is actively perceived as linear from an arbitrary viewpoint. Your perception of time is altered depending on Y's relation to X.
You may perceive an infinite amount of X from an infinite amount of Y. You may now exist in Y while observing X, but you may only exist in 1 Y at the same time (alike to T1 being limited to 1 X at the same time).
Thus you can perceive all 'time' subjectively.

Can you perceive only a moment of X from each moment in Y? Or can you see all of X from the vantage point of any moment in Y? And the question from above, repeated: why in the two-dimensional view can one not control the movement in the two dimensions?

(09-07-2009, 12:38 PM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]T3 = Relative Viewpoints are Y, Z and 'time' is X. Time is actively perceived as linear from two arbitrary points, id est may be perceived as backward and forward simultaneously = You exist in all time simultaneously. You may perceive an infinite amount of Y relating to an infinite amount of X. You may now exist in Z observing Y observing X.
Thus you can perceive all 'time' objectively since you can see all subjective variations of Y.

But here you do have control. Why in the three-dimensional view can one control the movement in the three dimensions?

(09-07-2009, 12:38 PM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]I do not know what Z is, or what happens when you alter the viewpoint of Z.
This would require a 4th dimension. I cannot understand a 4th dimension.

I may not understand your model. To me, the difficulty would come in T2: what is two-dimensional time. As for four dimensions T^3 x S, we are used to four dimensions S^3 x T and there would be some analogy. T^2 x S seems just as unfamiliar to me as T^3 x S .

(09-07-2009, 12:38 PM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]As from the T1 definition: 1-dimensional space is the essence of 1 point of all physical moments frozen. They are infinite in every moment that space exists.
As from the T2 definition: "Y" here becomes something able to understand these "essence of physical moments frozen". You can see it from different viewpoints, you see can see how all time affects 1 reference point.
As from the T3 definition: "Z" here is something to understand that there exists more than 1 reference point simultaneously, you see ALL the "essence of physical moments frozen" from ALL ways. Here you understand True time.

Perhaps your final comments contain some answers to my questions but please explain further.

Greetings all,

I have given the topic of T/S and S/T a good amount of attention, concentration, and meditation over the past few years, and I'd like to propose a new way of looking at these stages of existence, that came to me in a daydream while I meditated early this morning.

First I would encourage everyone to peruse some earlier discussions our forum members had along these lines, in the Dewey B. Larson Thread on the Science and Technology Forum. It has not been visited much recently, but contains some interesting discussions and some added detail to what I am about to propose.

First, one needs to remember that in S/T, time is scalar, not a vector. So when we view time as a scalar, it gives the appearance of having a past, present, and future. In reality past, present and future are simply points along the scalar line of time. I think that people make a mistake assuming that they are the underlying axes of 3-Time.

Consider that in 3-space we have coordinate axes that we call x, y, and z that represent relationships and displacements in 3-space. Consider now that in 3-time there are also coordinates that I will call by the Greek letters phi, chi, and psi representing points in 3-time. Rather than assigning phi, chi and psi the relationships that we see in scalar time of past, present, and future though, I suggest that we consider them as representing relationships and experiences in consciousness. So in this model of 3-time, the axes of time represent experiences whereas in 3-space the axes represent displacements.

Let's now go a step further and assign different perspectives on the three temporal positions of phi, chi, and psi. Consider that displacement along the phi axis represents the experience between the self and other selves at any given scalar space, chi is the experience between the self and the self at that point in space, and psi is the experience between the self and the environment at the same point. The stronger the experience of the entity along any axis, the greater the resulting magnitude of its appearance on that axis.

By this definition, a strongly harmonized relationship between two entities at a given space would manifest a large magnitude along the phi axis. A strong experience with the environment, would manifest a large magnitude on the psi axis, and strong concentration or meditation would manifest as a large chi magnitude.

This may give us some insight as to how time appears malleable in s/t. Consider when you are in a traumatic event such as a car crash. Time seems to slow down as your concentration is focused on the environment. Similarly, time can speed up when you are blissful meditation.

By looking at vectoral time in this way we can see how some of the experiences of t/s that Ra describes may be possible. When a group such as Don, Carla, and Jim are joined together in an effort to help others within our 3D existence, this would manifest as large magnitudes in phi and psi dimensions. One can now visualize how entities existing in t/s could easily recognize the existence and the significance of just such a group.

This is just a primer for some thoughts along these lines that I have been formulating recently, and I will be the first to confess that they are still half-baked, but I wanted to share them here to see if the idea resonates with others. If so, I would like to explore this further in future postings, and I welcome additional thoughts to help me refine the concept.

As a final note, I also see a relationship between my chi axis and the oriental concept of chi, as well as the psi axis and our concepts of supernatural or magical occurrences.

Does this resonate with any readers? What say you?

Love and Light,

3D Sunset

Hello all. Thank you for your comments and appreciation of the subject.
Perhaps I should refine my model.

Quote:I may not be sure what you mean by that sentence. Somehow there's enough agreement that we all agree on physicality. If I'm going to drive into a ditch, my wife next to me can see the same ditch and tell me to avoid it. It seems quite inefficient to tell us all a story simultaneously, keeping everything synchronized, rather than just allowing physicality to exist under our 3D physical rules. Occam's razor and all that.

In this reality we exist on the same linear plane that is time. Another plane of time would be a different reality, because the physical environment is bound to the linear time.
Each moment in linear time is bound to a specific physical 'happening' which we percieve.

Quote: Likewise in space-time S^3 x T, by moving in space one cannot affect the movement of time. Except perhaps for relativistic effects (time in an accelerating frame slows down as perceived from a non-accelerating frame.)

I am ayadew. This is correct. ()

Quote:Can you move backwards or stand still? Bigger question: why in the one-dimensional view can one not control the movement in the one dimension?

You can move backwards or stand still. The problem is that we do not normally, for some reason we move in time at a set pace.
Remember though, this is our brain's interpretation. You can manipulate this through drugs, meditation techniques etc. You can with them go back in time or to future. You can speed up or slow down time. You can also move to another linear time, ie: possible outcomes, possible future.

Quote:Can you perceive only a moment of X from each moment in Y? Or can you see all of X from the vantage point of any moment in Y? And the question from above, repeated: why in the two-dimensional view can one not control the movement in the two dimensions?

In this realm, 2D Time/1D Physical, you would see all possible simultaneous linear times, but subjectively (Y). See it as a specific mentality towards the infinity of simultaneous realities. You can only have one at a time. See is as observing 1 version of linear time's future/past/present simultaneously.
I cannot picture this reality in words or imagination, so it's hard to describe. In 3D Time/1D physical you'd see all time objectively (Z). This is only metaphor.

Quote:But here you do have control. Why in the three-dimensional view can one control the movement in the three dimensions?

From Z (3D time) you can control all linear times simultaneously, moving forward through all times at the same... time. You see all time that ever existed unfolding simultaneously. Thus you ARE time. In this reality, we ARE physical. Do not attempt to compare time to physical though. They are fundamentally different.

This is more easily pictured. This is 'ultimate' control of time. It's objective time, not subjective.

Quote:I may not understand your model. To me, the difficulty would come in T2: what is two-dimensional time. As for four dimensions T^3 x S, we are used to four dimensions S^3 x T and there would be some analogy. T^2 x S seems just as unfamiliar to me as T^3 x S .

In our reality, there is no 4th dimension. In physical reality, see time as a dimension that is not part of the 3D physical. It is not accumulative. See instead, as described above, the physical dimension bound to the time dimension. Not that time is another dimension inside/part of the physical dimension number of dimension.



In 4th density, we will be 6th dimensional beings. We will be physical and time. Thus time as we see it now becomes unimportant. We become timeless. Time and it's infinite variations in possible past/future/present becomes a plaything of the self. We become that which underlies this reality, more dense with light. This makes fundamental sense to me.
It stretches your mind to imagine what dimensions higher density (5+) entities exists in. Thus look forward to some intellectual orgasms in 4th density.

(12-18-2009, 12:18 PM)3D Sunset Wrote: [ -> ]... First, one needs to remember that in S/T, time is scalar, not a vector. So when we view time as a scalar, it gives the appearance of having a past, present, and future. In reality past, present and future are simply points along the scalar line of time. I think that people make a mistake assuming that they are the underlying axes of 3-Time.

Actually I don't recall seeing it described that way before, nor thought of it that way myself, but that was how I tried to make sense of Oxal's description. Perhaps there's another interpretation, because I'm not especially satisfied with it. Why should the single moment of the present deserve a full dimension, the same as all the past (a half-line in a scalar interpretation of time) and the future (another half-line.)

(12-18-2009, 12:18 PM)3D Sunset Wrote: [ -> ]... Let's now go a step further and assign different perspectives on the three temporal positions of phi, chi, and psi. Consider that displacement along the phi axis represents the experience between the self and other selves at any given scalar space, chi is the experience between the self and the self at that point in space, and psi is the experience between the self and the environment at the same point. The stronger the experience of the entity along any axis, the greater the resulting magnitude of its appearance on that axis.

It makes some sense, because "attention" or "experience" is something tied to a given moment. At one moment one's experience can be one thing, at another moment it can be another thing. Therefore it's possible to map each moment (point in time) in terms of how one (or someone at a given spatial location) experiences that moment. A possible decomposition is self / others / environment, and other such decompositions are possible as well.

(12-18-2009, 12:18 PM)3D Sunset Wrote: [ -> ]First, one needs to remember that in S/T, time is scalar, not a vector. So when we view time as a scalar, it gives the appearance of having a past, present, and future. In reality past, present and future are simply points along the scalar line of time. I think that people make a mistake assuming that they are the underlying axes of 3-Time.

Indeed, this is part of my model, and I agree with your interpretation as described in the post below yours.

(12-18-2009, 12:18 PM)3D Sunset Wrote: [ -> ]Consider that in 3-space we have coordinate axes that we call x, y, and z that represent relationships and displacements in 3-space. Consider now that in 3-time there are also coordinates that I will call by the Greek letters phi, chi, and psi representing points in 3-time. Rather than assigning phi, chi and psi the relationships that we see in scalar time of past, present, and future though, I suggest that we consider them as representing relationships and experiences in consciousness. So in this model of 3-time, the axes of time represent experiences whereas in 3-space the axes represent displacements.

In time/space we are observers - the dreamers. We do not influence physical reality, only watch through consciousness on different levels of complexity. Your ideas here would also be congruent with my model.

(12-18-2009, 12:18 PM)3D Sunset Wrote: [ -> ]Let's now go a step further and assign different perspectives on the three temporal positions of phi, chi, and psi. Consider that displacement along the phi axis represents the experience between the self and other selves at any given scalar space, chi is the experience between the self and the self at that point in space, and psi is the experience between the self and the environment at the same point. The stronger the experience of the entity along any axis, the greater the resulting magnitude of its appearance on that axis.

Interesting! What would you define as 'stronger'? More involved, conscious of all current factors that makes up the experience?
So, a specific coordinates of phi,chi and psi will result in a specific experience of the other self, self and environment. I must say this makes much sense, but is it possible to, by this definition, also assign all of them scalar values such as described in my model?

Phi - Self to Other-self - Time 1 Dimension X
Chi - Self to Self - Time 2 Dimension Y
Psi - Self to Environment - Time 3 Dimension Z

This doesn't seem to work. May I suggest that Phi/Chi/Psi exist in each time-dimension, thus making up 3 different Phi/Chi/Psi, totaling 9? Hm.
If Phi/Chi/Psi is the heart-plane, consisting of feelings, then the scalar planes in my model may be simply the interpretation of the 5 senses.

Or maybe Phi/Chi/Psi are only linked to the physical plane; keeping the scalar 3 dimensional time model.

(just throwing ideas here, havn't really thought this over )

(12-18-2009, 12:18 PM)3D Sunset Wrote: [ -> ]By this definition, a strongly harmonized relationship between two entities at a given space would manifest a large magnitude along the phi axis. A strong experience with the environment, would manifest a large magnitude on the psi axis, and strong concentration or meditation would manifest as a large chi magnitude.

What would you define as 'magnitude'? Alike to 'stronger', is it the same thing? Is this a vector perhaps?

(12-18-2009, 12:18 PM)3D Sunset Wrote: [ -> ]This may give us some insight as to how time appears malleable in s/t. Consider when you are in a traumatic event such as a car crash. Time seems to slow down as your concentration is focused on the environment. Similarly, time can speed up when you are blissful meditation.

Ah, here it is in action! :idea: I must say, when you introduce this idea my model is clearly faulty. It only contains the experience by the '5 senses' as described above.

(12-18-2009, 12:18 PM)3D Sunset Wrote: [ -> ]By looking at vectoral time in this way we can see how some of the experiences of t/s that Ra describes may be possible. When a group such as Don, Carla, and Jim are joined together in an effort to help others within our 3D existence, this would manifest as large magnitudes in phi and psi dimensions. One can now visualize how entities existing in t/s could easily recognize the existence and the significance of just such a group.

Perhaps your 'magnitude' cannot be detected in this reality, then. I must say that this idea makes much sense though.

Great post 3D Sunset, thank you

(12-19-2009, 05:39 AM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]In time/space we are observers - the dreamers. We do not influence physical reality, only watch through consciousness on different levels of complexity. Your ideas here would also be congruent with my model.

I agree, the time aspect of phi, chi, and psi are created in s/t but can be viewed in t/s. There is more to this relationship than I've expressed so far. I need more time to formulate it and see how to present it.

(12-19-2009, 05:39 AM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting! What would you define as 'stronger'? More involved, conscious of all current factors that makes up the experience?

To me, it is a reflection of the amount of attention we are paying. In any given moment, it seems that we are providing some amount of attention to each axis, with each possibly approaching, but never achieving either zero or infinity. What is interesting is that for this to work, each resultant group of points must also map to a specific point in the scalar time of s/t. As such, you can see that you have at most two degrees of freedom within the system. If you choose to focus on phi and psi for example, then chi will be determined such that it maps to the proper point in s/t. If you focus on only one axis, then the other two will somehow achieve a balance to result in the proper scalar time.

(12-19-2009, 05:39 AM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]So, a specific coordinates of phi,chi and psi will result in a specific experience of the other self, self and environment. I must say this makes much sense, but is it possible to, by this definition, also assign all of them scalar values such as described in my model?

Rather, I would see a specific set of coordinates describes a specific state of consciousness at a specific point in s/t.

(12-19-2009, 05:39 AM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]This doesn't seem to work. May I suggest that Phi/Chi/Psi exist in each time-dimension, thus making up 3 different Phi/Chi/Psi, totaling 9? Hm.
If Phi/Chi/Psi is the heart-plane, consisting of feelings, then the scalar planes in my model may be simply the interpretation of the 5 senses.

Or maybe Phi/Chi/Psi are only linked to the physical plane; keeping the scalar 3 dimensional time model.

(just throwing ideas here, havn't really thought this over )

There are many possible applications of the concepts, and frankly it is all new to me as well. The idea really emerged as a thought bubble that I was handed while meditating. The outer layer of the bubble contained the recognition that I had some months ago that time was really an expression of experience. As I began to peel the bubble, these other concepts emerged. On my Larson thread, I was trying to find a way to see how s/t and t/s relate. This led me to some interesting concepts (insights?) that I shared there and am now expanding here. I am open to all thoughts.

(12-19-2009, 05:39 AM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]Perhaps your 'magnitude' cannot be detected in this reality, then. I must say that this idea makes much sense though.

That is my supposition. My original quest was to try to visualize an environment in which our consciousness is visible (understanding that visualizing t/s is really impossible, I somehow can't help trying to find analogues that help) as appears to be the case in Ra's descriptions of t/s.

Another thought I recently had, was that perhaps the self to others axis should be called omega, rather than phi. This idea resonated with me on a couple of levels. In much the same way that chi and psi have other compatible connotations in metaphysics, so to does omega (the end). This also gives us chi, psi and omega (the final three Greek letters) as analogues to x, y, and z (the final three letter of the western alphabet).

Thanks for the feedback and ideas,

More to come in a few days,

Love and Light,

3D Sunset

Greetings Ayadew and 3D Sunset,
and thank you for the reflections about Time and Space.

If I may offer only a few words, it would be that:

1/ The distortion of time as we perceive it through our senses, is related to the Veil. Beyond the Veil, there is no time, only Eternity.

2/ The distortion of space as we perceive it through our physicality is also related to the Veil belonging to this physical plane of such vibratory level. Beyond this, there is no space, only Infinity.

Energy in Eternity and Infinity = Pure Consciousness.

This is the Law of One.



Light/Love

(Oh, and, the distortion of Love as we experience it, is a binding principle of all that exists. Obviously, binding is excluding of the principle of Separation per se; hence the two dictinctive paths starting from low vibratory frequency to reach the Light. No jugement or blame needed here, only choice.)

Whitefeather

Keeping the light on in the dark

Indeed, linear time is a construct of our brains, for it is inherently linear. If you look at an autistic person for example (according to Kryon) they have a non-linear brain, capable of seeing the 'problem' and 'solution' simultaneously - ie, having a math problem presented to them and instantly presenting a solution because they see them as simultaneous. There is no linear 'time' progression in between where the problem is being 'solved'.
It's difficult to imagine such, since we're limited intellectually to the boundaries of the mind, but you can feel it..

Greetings Ayadew,

Hum, interesting theory than that of Kyron about autistic people.
The experience of perceiving more than the linear aspects of things brings us closer to the experience of touching Intelligent Infinity.

I'd like to add that linear space is a construct of our senses rather than of our brain, I would say; that would include the five senses plus the synesthesie.

As for linear time, it seems to be more a belief, like a distortion, an imaginative stuff created by 3D beings to explain the mind blowing concept of eternity. Actually we all live in Eternity and, we access it though the awareness of the present moment. Hence the often repeated pointing out by Q'uo and Ra about finding the love in the moment
For it is in the present moment that everything can be changed, healed, created, chosen, whether a response to a catalyst or a state of mind, heart or bliss.
Same for anger or depression, these can be changed and healed at the exact moment when they occur and present themselves to our feelings. When we understand this, we grasp the wonderful opportunities represented by calalystic events.

The infinite possibility of the present moment is actually what is veiled.
Our outer and/or inner responses in the moment make us who we truly are.
And who are we?
We are love in the making, life in the living and light in the enlightening!!!

Enjoy life!
Take care and thanks to your many postings.
See you then and there ... or should I rather say 'here' and 'now'?

L/L
Whitefeather

Hey Whitefeather, good thoughts! Indeed, to become less linear is to becomes more infinite, but you also becomes more disconnected with the lessons of this world. It is linear for some fundamental reason which I cannot fathom, yet it does create a multitude of complexity, with the most obvious one being a great 'mystery' where all was 'created from' a 'long time ago'. The truth is, in the non-linear reality, that it was never created. It just IS. <- Pretty hard to understand intellectually and with the linear mind.
The word "eternity" holds then no meaning as it implies endless time. We are sadly wired to think in terms of time, so eternity is the best word I guess.

I understand "Finding the love in the moment" better after your explenation.. thank you

Hi Ayadew,
Thanks for your interesting postings.

(01-06-2010, 09:21 AM)ayadew Wrote: [ -> ]Hey Whitefeather, good thoughts! Indeed, to become less linear is to becomes more infinite, but you also becomes more disconnected with the lessons of this world.

How so? I was thinking along the line that, as we sense and feel eternity more 'present' (hum haha), we also sense and feel all aspects of the self more connected with everything as well as with every other-self. Do you see what I mean? I am trying to say that there is no feeling of separation while connecting with eternity. Even information and energy flow freely.

Quote:... all was 'created from' a 'long time ago'. The truth is, in the non-linear reality, that it was never created. It just IS.

I so agree with you. This is Eternity.

Quote:The word "eternity" holds then no meaning as it implies endless time.

I think that we agree ... but for the wording; I would use the term 'boundless time', meaning 'one time including all time(s) through densities, octaves and dimensions'.

Quote:I understand "Finding the love in the moment" better after your explenation.. thank you

Then I am happy here on the spot and, for Eternity.

Love and Light Here and Now,
Take care,

Whitefeather