Quote:"In mathematics, and more specifically in graph theory, a graph is a structure amounting to a set of objects in which some pairs of the objects are in some sense "related". The objects correspond to mathematical abstractions called vertices (also called nodes or points) and each of the related pairs of vertices is called an edge (also called link or line).[1]" - Wikipedia

"In mathematics, a hypergraph is a generalization of a graph in which an edge can join any number of vertices. In contrast, in an ordinary graph, an edge connects exactly two vertices." - Wikipedia

Quote:"At the lowest level, the structures on which our models operate consist of collections of relations between identical (but labeled) discrete elements. One convenient way to represent such structures is as graphs (or, in general, hypergraphs).

- https://www.wolframphysics.org/technical-introduction/basic-form-of-models/basic-structure/

Quote:82.6 Questioner: That’s what I thought you might say. Am I correct in assuming that at the beginning of this octave, out of what I would call a void of space, the seeds of an infinite number of galactic systems such as the Milky Way Galaxy appeared and grew in spiral fashion simultaneously?

Ra: I am Ra. There are duple areas of potential confusion. Firstly, let us say that the basic concept is reasonably well-stated. Now we address the confusion. The nature of true simultaneity is such that, indeed, all is simultaneous. However, in your modes of perception you would perhaps more properly view the seeding of the creation as that of growth from the center or core outward. The second confusion lies in the term, ‘void’. We would substitute the noun, ‘plenum’.

82.10 Questioner: Why does this partaking in the original thought have a gradient radially outward? That’s the way I understand your statement.

Ra: I am Ra. This is the plan of the One Infinite Creator. The One Original Thought is the harvest of all previous, if you would use this term, experience of the Creator by the Creator. As It decides to know Itself It generates Itself into that plenum, full of the glory and the power of the One Infinite Creator which is manifested to your perceptions as space or outer space. Each generation of this knowing begets a knowing which has the capacity, through free will, to choose methods of knowing Itself. Therefore, gradually, step by step, the Creator becomes that which may know Itself, and the portions of the Creator partake less purely in the power of the original word or thought. This is for the purpose of refinement of the one original thought. The Creator does not properly create as much as It experiences Itself.

(08-20-2021, 09:36 AM)Louisabell Wrote: Hi Anders, I had a question for you. In your travels, have you come across anything pertaining to intelligent infinity having a plenum quality? Was is it? Is this what is "tapped" for work (intelligent energy) on opening the gateway? Curious on your thoughts.

Quote:82.6 Questioner: That’s what I thought you might say. Am I correct in assuming that at the beginning of this octave, out of what I would call a void of space, the seeds of an infinite number of galactic systems such as the Milky Way Galaxy appeared and grew in spiral fashion simultaneously?

Ra: I am Ra. There are duple areas of potential confusion. Firstly, let us say that the basic concept is reasonably well-stated. Now we address the confusion. The nature of true simultaneity is such that, indeed, all is simultaneous. However, in your modes of perception you would perhaps more properly view the seeding of the creation as that of growth from the center or core outward. The second confusion lies in the term, ‘void’. We would substitute the noun, ‘plenum’.

82.10 Questioner: Why does this partaking in the original thought have a gradient radially outward? That’s the way I understand your statement.

Ra: I am Ra. This is the plan of the One Infinite Creator. The One Original Thought is the harvest of all previous, if you would use this term, experience of the Creator by the Creator. As It decides to know Itself It generates Itself into that plenum, full of the glory and the power of the One Infinite Creator which is manifested to your perceptions as space or outer space. Each generation of this knowing begets a knowing which has the capacity, through free will, to choose methods of knowing Itself. Therefore, gradually, step by step, the Creator becomes that which may know Itself, and the portions of the Creator partake less purely in the power of the original word or thought. This is for the purpose of refinement of the one original thought. The Creator does not properly create as much as It experiences Itself.

Quote:"In mathematics, when the elements of some set S have a notion of equivalence (formalized as an equivalence relation) defined on them, then one may naturally split the set S into equivalence classes. These equivalence classes are constructed so that elements a and b belong to the same equivalence class if, and only if, they are equivalent." - Wikipedia

https://llresearch.org/transcripts/issues/2016/2016_0904.aspx Wrote:Now, one could easily suppose that were it the case that in one bright, shining day, all were able to return fulsome love back to the Creator, that the Creator would stand fully exposed to itself, and would know itself finally in Its completeness. However, it has been our experience, (and once again we would like to iterate that our experience is limited), that no knowing ever even begins to exhaust the mystery of the Creator, or the mystery of the creation. It is truly an inexhaustible source. And that inexhaustibility is something which you may sense in a small way in your experiences of love for your fellow creatures. For when you love your beloved, when you love your wife, when you love your husband, when you love your children, when you love your friends, when you love your groups, when you love your planet, you do so in such a way that it does not diminish that which is love. In fact, strangely, it seems to augment that which is love, and once again we face a paradox or a mystery, because a mystery which is so infinite and so completely mysterious, which seemed to be something that could not become more itself, that is to say, more mysterious, by being loved, and yet, it seems to us that this is exactly what happens. It seems to us that the creation does become more, and that the concept of infinity very strangely, incomprehensibly, is susceptible of becoming more. And more than that, it is of such a nature intrinsically that the orientation to more is part of its very constitution, part of its make-up.

(08-21-2021, 05:24 AM)tadeus Wrote: Interesting sentence about infinity i read yesterday.

https://llresearch.org/transcripts/issues/2016/2016_0904.aspx Wrote:Now, one could easily suppose that were it the case that in one bright, shining day, all were able to return fulsome love back to the Creator, that the Creator would stand fully exposed to itself, and would know itself finally in Its completeness. However, it has been our experience, (and once again we would like to iterate that our experience is limited), that no knowing ever even begins to exhaust the mystery of the Creator, or the mystery of the creation. It is truly an inexhaustible source. And that inexhaustibility is something which you may sense in a small way in your experiences of love for your fellow creatures. For when you love your beloved, when you love your wife, when you love your husband, when you love your children, when you love your friends, when you love your groups, when you love your planet, you do so in such a way that it does not diminish that which is love. In fact, strangely, it seems to augment that which is love, and once again we face a paradox or a mystery, because a mystery which is so infinite and so completely mysterious, which seemed to be something that could not become more itself, that is to say, more mysterious, by being loved, and yet, it seems to us that this is exactly what happens. It seems to us that the creation does become more, and that the concept of infinity very strangely, incomprehensibly, is susceptible of becoming more. And more than that, it is of such a nature intrinsically that the orientation to more is part of its very constitution, part of its make-up.

Quote:"Questioner: [The question was lost because the questioner was sitting too far from the tape recorder to be recorded.]

Ra: I am Ra. Consider, if you will, that the universe is infinite. This has yet to be proven or disproven, but we can assure you that there is no end to your selves, your understanding, what you would call your journey of seeking, or your perceptions of the creation.

That which is infinite cannot be many, for many-ness is a finite concept. To have infinity you must identify or define that infinity as unity; otherwise, the term does not have any referent or meaning. In an Infinite Creator there is only unity. You have seen simple examples of unity. You have seen the prism which shows all colors stemming from the sunlight. This is a simplistic example of unity.

In truth there is no right or wrong. There is no polarity for all will be, as you would say, reconciled at some point in your dance through the mind/body/spirit complex which you amuse yourself by distorting in various ways at this time. This distortion is not in any case necessary. It is chosen by each of you as an alternative to understanding the complete unity of thought which binds all things. You are not speaking of similar or somewhat like entities or things. You are every thing, every being, every emotion, every event, every situation. You are unity. You are infinity. You are love/light, light/love. You are. This is the Law of One.

May we enunciate this law in more detail?" - Law of One 1.7

Quote:"Questioner: I was thinking last night that if I were in the place of Ra at this time, the first distortion of the Law of One might cause me to mix some erroneous data with the true information that I was transmitting to this group. Do you do this?

Ra: I am Ra. We do not intentionally do this. However, there will be confusion. The errors which have occurred have occurred due to the occasional variation in the vibrational complex of this instrument due to its ingestion of a chemical substance. It is not our intent in this particular project to create erroneous information but to express in the confining ambiance of your language system the feeling of the infinite mystery of the one creation in its infinite and intelligent unity." - Law of One 18.1

(05-16-2021, 12:20 AM)Anders Wrote: I like to theorize about the fundamental nature of reality. Ra has in the Law of One the concept of intelligent infinity, such as in this question and answer:

Quote:"Questioner: [The question was lost because the questioner was sitting too far from the tape recorder to be recorded.]

Ra: I am Ra. Consider, if you will, that the universe is infinite. This has yet to be proven or disproven, but we can assure you that there is no end to your selves, your understanding, what you would call your journey of seeking, or your perceptions of the creation.

That which is infinite cannot be many, for many-ness is a finite concept. To have infinity you must identify or define that infinity as unity; otherwise, the term does not have any referent or meaning. In an Infinite Creator there is only unity. You have seen simple examples of unity. You have seen the prism which shows all colors stemming from the sunlight. This is a simplistic example of unity.

In truth there is no right or wrong. There is no polarity for all will be, as you would say, reconciled at some point in your dance through the mind/body/spirit complex which you amuse yourself by distorting in various ways at this time. This distortion is not in any case necessary. It is chosen by each of you as an alternative to understanding the complete unity of thought which binds all things. You are not speaking of similar or somewhat like entities or things. You are every thing, every being, every emotion, every event, every situation. You are unity. You are infinity. You are love/light, light/love. You are. This is the Law of One.

May we enunciate this law in more detail?" - Law of One 1.7

The infinite cannot be many, Ra said, and that's logical since something many can be counted. How can you count infinity? Ra also uses terms like Law of Confusion, distortion and illusion. Why? In my opinion because to avoiding revealing some information prematurely to humanity. For example free will is very important in third density, yet I believe free will is an illusion! That's why it's appropriate to use terms such as illusion and distortion.

In one of the Law of One sessions they used a Bible opened to John chapter 1.

Quote:"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made." - John 1:1-3

The Word is the same as intelligent infinity! That's my initial definition of what intelligent infinity is. A word is changeless, and that's why free will is an illusion. Brahman is changeless, and it says in the Bible: "I the Lord do not change." (Malachi 3)

Quote:"Three of the most significant forms of Brahman are Brahma , Shiva and Vishnu. These three gods are key aspects of Brahman, the Ultimate Reality." - https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/z44bcj6/revision/3

Quote:"What about infinity? Infinity is the flip side of zero. Since it’s derived
from a resultant, it’s not itself a thing but is also a resultant. “Infinity”
simply means that, unless there is a sufficient reason to prevent it, there is
no limit on the number of things that can be brought together to create a net
resultant of zero. Zero is the resultant, infinity is the scale of that resultant,
and that scale is unbounded unless there is a reason why it should be
bounded. (In fact, there is possible reason: we live in universe that has a
highest possible number because the universe is based on the circle and the
circle always returns to itself in a finite number of steps if it is defined by a
“flowing point”: a point that has a tiny magnitude. We simply divide the
circumference by the 1-D flowing point, and we always get a finite number,
albeit immensely large. You can’t get true division by zero.)

Infinity is an abstraction. It has no ontological status. Ontologically, it
must be replaced by “Myriad”, the largest possible ontological number.
" - Ontological Mathematics: How to
Create the Universe by Mike Hockney

Quote:"Questioner: That’s what I thought you might say. Am I correct in assuming that at the beginning of this octave, out of what I would call a void of space, the seeds of an infinite number of galactic systems such as the Milky Way Galaxy appeared and grew in spiral fashion simultaneously?

Ra: I am Ra. There are duple areas of potential confusion. Firstly, let us say that the basic concept is reasonably well-stated. Now we address the confusion. The nature of true simultaneity is such that, indeed, all is simultaneous. However, in your modes of perception you would perhaps more properly view the seeding of the creation as that of growth from the center or core outward. The second confusion lies in the term, ‘void’. We would substitute the noun, ‘plenum’." - Law of One 82.6

Quote:"Nature makes no leaps. No discontinuous actions take place. There are no logical gaps. Reality is a logical plenum." - Ontological Mathematics: How to Create the Universe by Mike Hockney

Quote:"Questioner: Could you tell me the difference between space/time and time/space?

Ra: I am Ra. Using your words, the difference is that between the visible and invisible or the physical and metaphysical. Using mathematical terms, as does the one you call Larson, the difference is that between s/t and t/s." - Law of One 41.20

Quote:"As soon as sines and cosines are paired non-orthogonally, they can no
longer be said to exist in the mental, dimensionless domain of pure
frequencies. They have now entered the spacetime domain, hence have
“physical” rather than “mental” signatures. To put it another way, they are
no longer maximally time dilated and length contracted, hence now have
dimensionality." - Ontological Mathematics: How to Create the Universe by Mike Hockney

Quote:"20.6 Questioner: Speaking of the rapid change that occurred in the physical vehicle; the change from second to third density: this, you said, occurred in approximately a generation and a half. Body hair was lost and there were structural changes.

I am aware of the physics of Dewey B. Larson, who states that all is motion or vibration. Am I correct in assuming that the basic vibration, which makes up the physical world as we experience it, changes, thus creating a different set of parameters, shall I say, in this short period of time between density changes allowing for the new type of vehicle? Am I correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct.

20.7 Questioner: Just as a sideline, a side question here: Is the physics of Dewey Larson correct?

Ra: I am Ra. The physics of sound vibrational complex Dewey is a correct system as far as it is able to go. There are those things which are not included in this system. However, those coming after this particular entity, using the basic concepts of vibration and the study of vibrational distortions, will begin to understand that which you know of as gravity and those things you consider as “n” dimensions. These things are necessary to be included in a more universal, shall we say, physical theory." - Law of One 20:6-7

Quote:"Like part of a cosmic Russian doll, our universe may be nested inside a black hole that is itself part of a larger universe.

In turn, all the black holes found so far in our universe—from the microscopic to the supermassive—may be doorways into alternate realities.

According to a mind-bending new theory, a black hole is actually a tunnel between universes—a type of wormhole. The matter the black hole attracts doesn't collapse into a single point, as has been predicted, but rather gushes out a "white hole" at the other end of the black one, the theory goes." - https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/100409-black-holes-alternate-universe-multiverse-einstein-wormholes

(09-01-2021, 10:58 AM)Anders Wrote: Regarding octaves and Intelligent Infinity, Ra says this: "You will recall that we went into some detail as to how those not oriented towards seeking service for others yet, nevertheless, found and could use the gateway to intelligent infinity. This is true at all densities in our octave. We cannot speak for those above us, as you would say, in the next quantum or octave of beingness." (7.17)

The idea of each universe being a white hole of a black hole in a parent universe is however not a new idea:

Quote:"Like part of a cosmic Russian doll, our universe may be nested inside a black hole that is itself part of a larger universe.

In turn, all the black holes found so far in our universe—from the microscopic to the supermassive—may be doorways into alternate realities.

According to a mind-bending new theory, a black hole is actually a tunnel between universes—a type of wormhole. The matter the black hole attracts doesn't collapse into a single point, as has been predicted, but rather gushes out a "white hole" at the other end of the black one, the theory goes." - https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/100409-black-holes-alternate-universe-multiverse-einstein-wormholes

The article mentions our parent universe as being larger, which is true, yet in my model also the Planck length is the same constant in each universe relative to the octave. So if we travel into our parent universe it will be roughly the same size as our universe when we enter it. The same when moving into higher octaves into black holes in our universe, which relative to our universe are smaller while inside the higher octave universes their sizes are about the same as our universe. The size of each universe expands in my model but determined by how much new matter is absorbed by the parent black hole. If the black hole remains stable in mass so does the size of the universe inside it.