Collecting the C's answers on cosmology, consciousness and origins

[John G]

I had that thought in mind. Should we set up a simple Excel file, with simple categories referring to "C cosmology"? As I stated, when looking at what cosmology is, on Wikipedia, it provides:

• the observable universe's origin
• its large-scale structures
• its large-scale dynamics
• the ultimate fate of the universe
• the laws of science that govern these areas

We may add: "super quotes".

Such a doc could be sorted out according to those big categories, it looks quite efficient:

---

the observable universe's origin
- C's, engineering of races, transfers of races

its large-scale structures
- densities
- The Information Field
- various cometary belts, Planets
- (...)

its large-scale dynamics
- polarities (STO, STS) in terms of "being"
- information exchange with the Information Field
- graduation, motions between densities
- entropy, negentropy
- prayers
- anthropo-cosmos (planet Earth only?)
- planet orbits
- (...)

the ultimate fate of the universe
- wave, 300'000 year cycle, graduation, cyclical motion, 1D to 7D
- (...)

the laws of science that govern these areas
- each density has its own law for "being" (physicality slowly vanishes along the scale), STO / STS allows specific "accesses" and motions
- free will, law of One, gravity, magnetism, electromagnetism, spirituality
- (...)

super quotes
- that we like
- that are useful to understand
- (...)

---

I found it not hard to sort out principles with this. The idea to go as the Casswiki is perfect too IMO.

I am hesitating where to put "the 3600-year cometary cycle" and "periodic, a-periodic, semi-periodic comets".

For the topic here the idea seems to be to get all the session raw data but that could perhaps be organized in an Excel/Casswiki-like way. The best you can do right now is that search people have been using. You can with that search look quickly at the whole session easily if needed after the search gets session excerpts. The problem is the keywords you search on will not be in the session when the session deals with it without mentioning it directly. Remembering related words to search on helps aka why Approaching Infinity mentioned "good memories" along with "search skills".

 

[John G]

We may add: "super quotes".

You could perhaps add some artificial intelligence superquotes somewhere too like for example the end of Casswiki's Hyperdimensional physics has:

Generally, gravity is the only force that bridges between these ‘branes.’ Some anomalies in the motion of spacecraft suggest the presence of invisible sources of gravity and indirectly could indicate a very weak interaction with other ‘branes’ or universes. These may variously consist of matter or antimatter. One explication for the relative weakness of gravity is that it would act along more dimensions than the 3 visible space dimensions.

General relativity is expressed in 3+1 dimensions but allows for anomalies in the structure of space-time, such as direct connections between otherwise separate points and closed folds of space. At a point in the late 1930’s, Einstein worked in a unified field theory involving a physically real 4th space dimension a la Kaluza-Klein. This work was not continued by Einstein, at least not in public, but the Cassiopaea material suggests this was completed by others and resulted in a unified field theory with technological applications.

The Cassiopaea material discusses hyperdimensional physics in the form of various clues but these are difficult to understand without much background. In general the material favors the existence of a 4th space dimension forming a double loop. This 4th dimension becomes perceptible from the 4th density onwards and allows a sort of simultaneous viewing of objects from the outside in as well as inside out.

To which AI could add related to the "difficult to understand without much background":

What “degenerate metric at infinity” means​

• In conformal (or conformal gravity) constructions, “conformal infinity” is usually where the physical metric becomes singular or is only defined up to an overall conformal factor, and the induced boundary metric can be degenerate (rank‑deficient). This shows up in various contexts where the boundary metric loses invertibility or has null directions.
• For a degenerate metric gg, one cannot uniquely raise and lower all indices, and certain directions become null: distances along these directions vanish, and the usual Riemannian machinery has to be modified (e.g., via pseudoinverses or additional structure like torsion).

So at conformal infinity, the “metric part” of your Born‑reciprocal structure becomes weaker or partially collapses.

Interaction with a symplectic phase space​

A symplectic form ωω on phase space is, by construction, nondegenerate; it remains invertible even if the metric degenerates.

• In a Born‑reciprocal setup, one typically has:
  
  • a nondegenerate symplectic form ωω on the full 8‑dimensional phase space, and
  • a metric GG (here of type (4,4)(4,4)) tying together the coordinate/momentum split in a way compatible with ωω.
• At conformal infinity, the spacetime part of GG becomes degenerate, but ωω can still remain nondegenerate on the full phase space. This means:
  
  • the canonical commutation/Poisson structure survives;
  • but the notion of “length” or “energy” in certain directions degenerates, so the subgroup of transformations preserving both GG and ωω shrinks to those that preserve the null directions of GG as well.

In other words, the intersection group “symplectic ∩ orthogonal” becomes a “symplectic ∩ degenerate‑metric” group: still symplectic on phase space, but constrained to preserve the degeneracy locus of the conformal boundary metric.

 

[palestine]

Remembering related words to search on helps aka why Approaching Infinity mentioned "good memories" along with "search skills".

I see that you would be more on a "free style" way of checking things. I find it good and that's what always provide the best results IMO.

I understand admins would like some substance before all, so I think that I will leave the Excel sheet & things, and focus on finding relevant information.

 

[Thassa]

Laura and I would like some help for a couple projects we'll be working on. We need to collect all the C's excerpts on the above topics. Any help would be appreciated!

So those of you with good memories or search skills, could you copy and paste the relevant bits here? This will include topics related to keywords like: 7D/God/Prime Creator, information, consciousness, matter, the ultimate nature of reality (we wouldn't exist if someone didn't "dream us", for example), and anything else related that I might be forgetting right now! Some of the references to other densities (1D to 6D) will probably also be relevant.

I guess I'm have been doing since last year EXACTLY what you want!

T

Thread 'My collection of the most interesting C's quotes'

Saturday at 6:24 PM

Hey there!

I'm making a compilation of all answers/questions that give direct information on History, Physics, Chemistry, personal development, or that are somehow thought-provoking.

Cassiopaean Session Transcripts Search is great, but it doesn't tell such things apart. That's why I'm reading ALL sessions, from the very first one, and marking ALL answers


It's not finished yet. I'm still on the year 1998. Here's what I have done so far.

Highlights are what's in the sessions.

Notes are comments of mine (often, but not always, I leave some notes)

I hope you all find it useful.

• Thassa
• Replies: 0
• Forum: The Cassiopaean Experiment

• 

 

[Sindy-T.S.R]

Imagination

Based on the comments made by the cass, I see Imagination as a cognitive process or bridge that allows us to reach a specific point, whether sought or not, or an idea.

Here's a summary generated by Grok:

Imagination, as a creative approach, refers to the mental capacity to generate novel and original ideas, images, or scenarios that are not present in immediate reality, serving as the foundation for innovation and problem-solving. From a psychological and neurological perspective, this process is not mere fancy, but a complex cognitive function that integrates elements such as divergent thinking and the connection of disparate ideas. Below, I explore these aspects based on current scientific evidence.

Psychological Perspective​

Psychologically, imagination is defined as the ability to create vivid, original, and transformable mental representations that go beyond direct sensory perception. In the context of creativity, it is considered an essential component for producing ideas that are “new and useful,” according to standard definitions in psychology. For example, it involves processes such as divergent thinking (generating multiple solutions to a problem) and mind-wandering, which allow the combination of prior knowledge in innovative ways.

Studies highlight that creativity arises from the interaction between cognitive control (planning and problem-solving) and spontaneous imagination. Researchers like Adam Green emphasize that, rather than focusing only on the creative product, it is key to examine the internal process, where imagination acts as a bridge between the known and the possible. In addition, creative imagination includes elements such as vividness (detail in mental images), originality, and transformative capacity, especially in adolescents, where a pivotal development is observed. From this view, creative experiences—such as in art or music—not only foster innovation but also improve well-being and delay cognitive aging.

Psychologists like Robert Sternberg stress that imagination is nourished by memory, intuition, and the ability to connect remote ideas, which explains why creative people balance rich imagination with a firm anchor in reality.

Neurological Perspective​

Neurologically, creative imagination does not reside in a single brain area but emerges from the dynamic interaction among multiple neural networks. There is no single “creativity center”; instead, it involves regions such as the prefrontal cortex (for decision-making and problem-solving), the temporal and parietal lobes (for mental simulations), and connections with dopamine systems that reinforce novel associations.

The key networks include:

• Default Mode Network (DMN): Active during mind-wandering, imagination, and future planning. It is crucial for generating spontaneous ideas and simulating alternative scenarios.
• Executive Control Network: Handles focused attention, planning, and idea evaluation, cooperating with the DMN to refine imagination into something useful.
• Salience Network: Detects relevant information and mediates between the other two networks, facilitating the “balance” between free imagination and rational control.

Neuroimaging studies (such as fMRI) show that during imaginative tasks there is greater activation in the DMN compared to factual descriptions, and that creativity involves increased connectivity in hubs vulnerable to aging. This suggests that creative experiences improve brain efficiency and delay biological brain aging. Additionally, the frontopolar cortex is specifically associated with creative thinking, and optimal levels of dopamine and neural connectivity are essential for fluid imagination.

In summary, imagination as a creative approach is an integrative process that, psychologically, fosters innovation through flexible thinking, and neurologically, depends on the collaboration between brain networks to balance spontaneity and control. Cultivating this capacity not only drives creativity but also promotes long-term brain health.

Sesión 28 de diciembre de 1994​

Q: Hello.

A: Hello. Wonderland.

Q: (L) What does "Wonderland" have to do with anything?

A: It just popped to mind.

Q: (L) Since this happens from time to time, an odd word or phrase pops to mind as the connection is made, is this because that particular thought is occupying the point in space\time where the connection is made?

A: Laura, such an active imagination you have, my dear!

Q: (V) I think they just mean they see all the Christmas cheer and so forth... (L) Well, why do these little phrases just "pop" in... ? It's curious.

A: Why not?

Session 17 June 1995​

Q: (SV) Forever. (J) Back to itself. (L) We don't know that.

A: Oh, someone said "Back to itself."

Q: (J) Like a snake taking hold of its own tail.

A: Why don't we know that?

Q: (L) Because we don't. It is conjectured that space is curved...

A: "Because we don't know. Now, why don't we know?

Q: (L) Because we haven't been there.

A: Had Columbus been outside of Italy and Spain?

Q: (L) Okay, we are going to assume that if it keeps on expanding it will eventually come back to itself...

A: No, no, no wait! We asked a question!

Q: (L) Well, of course Columbus had an idea that there was something but he hadn't been there, no. But he went and checked it out.

A: Did he have just an idea?

Q: (L) Well, pretty much, I guess.

A: Hmmm. That's not the way we remember it. The way we remember it is that he had instinct and imagination and when he married his instinct with imagination, it became reality. And, when it became reality, he had created a reality which he was fully confident would be manifest in the physical third density reality. It wasn't that he was confident. He knew it to be so. He didn't stop himself by adding prejudice to the equation which is what you are doing when you say: "Well, we don't know what happens because we have never been there!" Think logically, please. We have told you so many times that everything is a grand cycle. If it's a grand cycle, we have told you about circles within circles. We have told you about cycles. We have told you about short wave cycles and long wave cycles. Now, after all this information that you have asked of us, which we have more than happily given to you, would you expect that a straight line would just go out forever and ever and ever as a straight line? How could it possibly do that? What happens if you take, on your third density earth, and you draw a straight line to the East or to the West or to the North or to the South...

Session 14 October 1995​

Q: (TK) Wars all through the ages. How many are we talking about? (L) What kind of a number are we talking about here?

A: Since your imagination center is on low frequency tonight, suppose we have to spell it all out for you, but at least it is fun to watch the impact, like "A ton of bricks" falling on your heads!!

Q: (L) Go ahead, spell it out for us. How many are we talking about here?

A: W.W.II, 72,355, still alive where????

Session 3 February 1996​

Q: (L) Okay, now, there are a lot of current teachings that say that the 'dregs' of other planets are being sent to Earth to 'refine' them, so to speak, and that this is why the human race is so divided and antagonistic... that the interactions are supposed to result in annihilation of the weak and survival of the strong in both physical and spiritual terms.

A: First of all, confusion abounds here due to incorrect interpretations of the last subject discussed. Dimensions are not densities!!!! Dimensions are strictly the result of the universal consciousness as manifested in the imagination sector of thought. Density means level of development as measured in terms of closeness to union with The One... Cycle. So, obviously, the "chupacabras" is a manifestation of human consciousness, and, human beings are a manifestation of the Chupacabras consciousness. Get it? Now, a shocker for you: You would not exist if someone didn't "dream you up."

Q: (L) Who dreamed me up?

A: Not important just yet. You literally are the "figments" of someone's imagination, and nothing more!!!

Q: (L) You mean God dreams and brings us into existence?

A: Remember, "God" is really all existence in creation, in other words, all consciousness. This is because all existence in creation is consciousness, and vice versa.

Q: (L) So, the issues of racial superiority that are brought up in the Urantia book can be answered by 'anything is possible?'

A: Close, but remember, all there is is lessons!

Session 8 August 1998​

Q: (A) I have the idea that one should go with a given question and then come out with an answer instead of waiting and waiting...

A: My dear Arkadiusz, by now, you know imagination is the bridge to the Akashic.

Q: (L) So, you are saying that his idea is a bridge to the Akashic, and when he gets such ideas, they are important clues?

A: Good!

Session 31 October 1998​

Q: Well, obviously, we would have to have a LOT of bucks to do any of this so it is out of the question at present. Now, Mike wanted me to ask about this time when remote viewing was effective. Is this in fact true, and if so, why?

A: Remote viewing requires the accessing of the imagination situation.

Q: How does that relate to the time of day?

A: When it is 03:33 at 33 degrees, what is it at 66?

Q: I guess what this means is that when it is one time in one place, it is a different time someplace else.

A: Hours are determined by those who set them.

Q: Indeed. So, it works if you think it does?

A: Constraints produce restraints.

Session 10 July 1999​

Q: (L) Well, Jack channels! [laughter] (A) Today, on this list there was a guy by the name of Boyd who talks about his shamanistic experiences in talking to rocks. He doesn't sound whacko, but he talks to these stones on a daily basis and these stones talk to him, and these rocks have consciousness, they have memories. I wrote to him, but I would like to know if his experiences are authentic and not just his imagination?

A: That is a very broad question, which assumes limits or barriers where none may exist.

Q: (L) Is anyone able to tune into the consciousness of rocks?

A: What if they are really tuning to a consciousness through the rocks?

Q: (A) To A consciousness? Whose consciousness or what consciousness? Universal consciousness?

A: Another.

Q: (A) Another consciousness. (L) Do rocks have consciousness?

A: Refer to material re: 1st density.

Q: (L) Yes, well it has been previously said that 1st density does have consciousness... that even rocks have consciousness and can learn. That brings us back to Boyd, is he, can he, does he tune into the consciousness of rocks and/or other consciousnesses THROUGH rocks?

A: The latter is closer.

Q: (L) So, the consciousness of a rock might not be amenable to communicating.

A: Right.

Q: (L) What other consciousness might a person tune into through a rock? ANY other or a specific other?

A: Closer to former.

Q: (A) If there is consciousness, it means that there is a consciousness unit, and this consciousn unit can be within or associated with some body of some density. Can one tune to consciousness that resides, so to say, in higher densities than third, using rocks? Is it possible?

A: Close.

Q: (A) So, you can tune to dead dudes or Cassiopaeans. (L) Is the consciousness of human beings something that has cycled from minerals to plants through animals to evolve into consciousness of 3rd density mind, as we understand it?

A: In a roundabout way.

Q: (L) Was each of us, sitting here, at any point in the remote past, using time loosely, a critter, so to speak, or a plant or a tree?

A: You still be a critter, baby!

Q: (L) So, leaving out time, the stream of consciousness that makes us as individual units, branches out and extends into lower densities, or connects to them like a tree?

A: Maybe.

Session 20 August 2011​

Q: (Bubbles) So if we wanted to have a haunted house, we'd just need to have a bunch of mirrors in facing the windows. (L) Not that simple! So these problems started after I moved the furniture around, didn't they? (Ark) It's possible. (L) After I put the dressing table where I put it. (Ark) What about the gravitational anomaly?

A: Imagination!

Q: (Ark) Because the bed feels like it’s at an angle and it isn’t. We measured. (L) I don't think they're saying that we imagined it. I think they're saying that our imagination creates it because the awareness of the energy.

A: Yes

Session 4 April 2015​

(Galatea) What star or constellation are you closest to right now?

A: We ride the Wave and thus are much "closer" than you can imagine. At the same time, imagination is the most direct way to comprehend that we are only a thought away.

Q: (L) So, you're saying that distance is not a viable concept. Is that what we're getting at here?

A: Yes

Q: (Pierre) Thought transcends distance.

(L) Thought transcends distance, and we are quantumly entangled or something...

A: Yes

Q: (Chu) There's no time, there's no space...

Session 16 July 2016​

Q: (Joe) What they said before was that this kind of fantasyland dreaming about something that isn't objectively true, that seems to allow or anchor some other actual negative energy. So, your dream doesn't necessarily have to be negative.

A: It allows the insertion of what amounts to a feeding tube.

Q: (Andromeda) So basically it's like a wrong use of imagination, whether positive or negative, if you're not anchored in reality. It leaves an opening for something to attach.

(L) Okay, so somebody's dreaming and sending out the STS signal since they're living in la-la land. Then there's the insertion of this feeding tube, and what then happens? What is the mechanism?

A: It can activate subconscious programs and also utilize the connection to enhance physiological processes that excite those in the environment to interact in ways that enhance feeding.

(...)
Q: (L) What if everybody just began to build a spiral of energy? On, say, Wednesday night at such-and-such a time, we'd all gather together with our crystals that provide the link-up. And then, just basically maybe sing some songs to connect chakras just to see what happens? I guess we should experiment with that.

A: Yes!

Q: (Galatea) Would it be a good idea for us to meditate and envision a better reality with our crystals?

A: Try to avoid defining how it might happen, but, yes!

Q: (L) Everybody could visualize themselves in a "new world", but without trying to define what it is or how it happens. Don't limit it or anticipate.

A: Soon we will provide inspiration! Continue the project for now but with all awareness!

Q: (L) Okay.

(Galatea) I wanted to ask something. Since they mentioned dissociation and living in la-la land, where does that leave imagination and creativity? Or is that a whole different animal?

A: Whole different animal!

Q: (Galatea) So being imaginative is fine?

A: Yes

Q: (L) Well, that kinda leads to another question: What is the difference between wishful thinking and imagination?

(Pierre) When you imagine, you're aware of it.

Session 14 October 2017​

(L) So, I would like to know in what sense is this Enneagram a useful tool?

A: Even lies have a bit of truth. Gurdjieff used his imagination and mediums to construct his system. In a project of that sort, it is not unusual to get some truth. Otherwise it would make no sense at all! The Enneagram system is accurate enough for 3rd density systems with no input from awareness.

Q: (Joe) No input of awareness from people, or... Just a cold reading of someone.

(L) So the Enneagram is kind of the way the mechanical system works.

(Joe) No input from the person, and no input from people who might know the person...

(L) I think they're talking about the Enneagram being 3rd density systems.

(Joe) Okay.

(Pierre) The Enneagram the way the C's define it finally, is similar to the whole cosmogony that Gurdjieff developed, this mechanistic cosmogony. I find two major flaws in it. First, everything is reduced to mechanics. There's no more soul, consciousness, or spirit. Plus there's a breach of free will in his way of trying to spread this knowledge. Not hypnotizing people without their informed consent is of prime importance, and he did not respect the free will of his followers.

(L) So, Gurdjieff had the idea that human life exists to feed the cosmos, that the living system exists to feed His "Allness" or whatever... the great cosmic cycle or system. Is that the case?

A: No!

Q: (L) And I guess since you have already told us that the universe exists because it's a school and free will is the most important law, and learning and growing is the purpose we won’t get distracted by re-asking those questions; but why would Gurdjieff say something like that?

A: He observed life and that was the materialistic interpretation he put on what he perceived. However, as we have explained, such matters reflect the nature of 4D STS and its need to survive against its own diminishing nature. It acts as a catalyst for growth at 3rd level.

Q: (L) So you're suggesting that Gurdjieff observed the way life was and the craziness and the manipulations and how people get into wars and kill each other and hurt each other and the pain and suffering and misery, and he thought that it was all designed as a big feeding system for the Great Sun Absolute, when what he was really perceiving was just the 4D STS manipulations of our reality which acts as a medium for our growth. Is that what you're saying so to say?

A: Yes

Session 30 March 2002​

Q: (B) Somebody else was a French Horn too. (L) RO was a French horn too. Two French Horns, huh? We have to find somebody who's a Bassoon. (Atriedes) I have somebody who's a buffoon. (B) Bassoon, not buffoon. (Atriedes) I know somebody who plays all the Bassoons. (V) This question maybe has been asked in other sessions where I wasn't here, so forgive me if that's the case. What is the difference between creative visualization and imagination?

A: Not much.

Q: (V) Okay. I was going through some of the transcripts and reading, and I found the statement in there that said "consciousness is the half-life of energy" and I thought this was just so interesting. Let me ask this: is that half-life, because with chemistry and chemicals they know exactly what the half-life is of certain, say uranium, that it has so many years until it changes into what ever it changes into...(L) But it is statistical. (V) Statistical. Okay. What is the time span or frame of reference where its energy degenerates, morphs, whatever the word is, into consciousness?

A: You are assuming that physical understanding applies. In this case the better question would be: What is energy?

Q: (L) What is energy? {asking Ark} (A) Don't know. (L) What do you mean, "don't know?" (A) Nobody knows. (L) Oh! I see what they're saying. Energy can't be compared to a physical process such as the half-life of an atomic element or something. (V) Alright, and also maybe this is my assumption as I am relating energy to thought processes.

A: How do you know that "thinking" is energy?

Q: (V) Well, I don't think that I know that it is, I'm just postulating and thinking about it.

A: How about "utilization?"

Q: (V) Okay, what is energy? I know the atom and the nucleus, and I basically understand the physics of energy, but is that what you're talking about?

A: Take an example: Light is an energy expression of gravity. Utilization of gravity "generates" light.

Q: (A) The point is that we can't define concepts. We can show simply how they work in certain, how you say...(B) Framework. (A) Okay: framework, by relating them to other concepts and by pointing out that this is the correct use of this word and this is the incorrect use of this word. And this is not mathematics. In mathematics everything is defined in terms of primitive concepts. Here, we don't know what are the primitive concepts. So we say" now here is light and it's an expression of energy. Now what is so particular about light? You can think about what you learn from physics. From physics you know that light has no mass, it is pure quantum of energy. What it means, we really don't know. We know that when light is absorbed, it has a physical effect, but in the meantime where does it go? It is not mass. It's something that can hit you like energy; but not a piece of a solid something; it is pure energy. And then we know something from the Theory of Relativity, that when light travels a distance from one point to another point in the 4th dimensional Einstein space, the distance measured in this 4th dimension is zero. If you sit on a ray of light you are instantaneously everywhere. Time does not flow for light which travels. That's energy. For a mass, time flows. Mass understands what is time. For light everything is instantaneous. So we learn a little bit of what energy is even if we can't seem to define it, right?

A: And, as you already guess, consciousness "precedes" light as an energy expression. So the question is: How do your quantifications apply?

Q: (A) I have a test question for Cassiopaeans. Which is true of the following two possibilities: a) In certain circumstances energy can create consciousness. b) In certain circumstances consciousness can create energy.

A: B: consciousness can create energy.

Q: (V) And isn't light also information?

A: Light is utilization.

Q: (V) Okay, light is utilization. How is that done? Is this a process? Maybe I would understand it better if it said "the utilization of light."

A: What would you utilize light for?

Q: (V) Well, to raise consciousness. To raise awareness.

A: How would light raise consciousness?

Session 24 August 2002​

Q: (S) Oh my god! My son J** went to space camp. (SB to LA) I went to a camp too. Did you go to a camp? (LA) NASA puts on a Space Camp for the kids. I went as a chaperone. (SB) The one I went to was sponsored by the state of Georgia but it was called Exploration Camp and the second year I don't remember anything.

A: Read Dolan and use your imagination to perceive just how such programs can be utilized. Just knowing the capabilities that you suspect with good reason regarding Flight 77, should give you some concept of how the Consortium operates. Imagine a "group" going to Space Camp on board that plane. Handy, eh?

 

[palestine]

I guess I'm have been doing since last year EXACTLY what you want!

Hello! I think they want things ultra-specific, something like the quotes that have the explicit mention of the words they provided (more or less). The idea would be than to ultra restrict the picking to some.

They, too, said about "the C cosmology". Somehow, all the quotes can work, but I remember that sometimes the C's provide very specific quotes, if we consider "the cosmology". This skims much and much if we want to be on point. What we could suggest would be sentences like when the C's explicitely say "the Universe works ... and not ..." - things like that. For example, all the quotes about the densities would work, but they would need to be "technical" (I suppose). So that's when you get some bit of knowledge with added value in terms of "how it is working".

That's how I understood it!

The best would be to skim your doc and take the very precise quotes that you find out. Well, at least that's how I understood the request, so in case...

That's because if we feed them a big huge doc and they have to go through, chances are that this will provide them with extra work! So if there is anything we could do, that's it

 

[John G]

For example, all the quotes about the densities would work, but they would need to be "technical" (I suppose). So that's when you get some bit of knowledge with added value in terms of "how it is working".

Laura had 400 pages via Langan, Davies and Whitehead so it would be technical and a lot of technical. Sticking to algebra with those three would seem safer to me but it likely got into axioms, logic, set theory-like things and I have no idea how Langan's logic works and for Whitehead I like to slide over to Grothendieck since Grothendieck made his own simplified version to avoid the kind of comments Laura made about Whitehead in the session. Logic might kind of be an algebra thing too since the Cs link information/consciousness to fractals and when I did a search on Clifford algebra and fractal, an Ark paper comes up first (google for me might have my interest in Ark's work built in).

 

[JeanSchemit]

Hello,

I understand the term "cosmology" as "what is / how is" "the [objective] Universe" ("as taught by the C's").

Such a notion - a cosmology - would be about:

• Structure (densities)
• Polarities (STO / STS)
• Laws (free will, gravity)
• Interactions / Actions / motions
• "Protagonists" (Human on earth, ?, ?, etc)

Some quotes one can refer to:

Session 16 July 1994


Big descriptive quotes

Session 22 October 1994


Session 10 June 1995


Session 12 August 1995


STS vs STO

Session 12 November 1994


Session 17 December 1994


Cosmological battle + C's <> Pleiadians

Session 26 November 1994


Session 3 December 1994


Session 10 December 1994


Session 11 January 1995


5th density

Session 26 November 1994


6th density

Session 26 November 1994


Session 10 June 1995


7th density

Session 26 November 1994

26 November 1994
Q: (T) Are you also the Pleiadians?

A: No.

10 December 1994
A: We are Marciniak's Pleiadians. We are where we are.

11 January 1995
Q: (Susy) Are you from the same group as the Pleiadians?

A: Same. When at Pleiades, Pleiadians, when at Cassiopaea, Cassiopaeans. Light beings.

Sometimes it's yes/no, sometimes it's that we are related or it's based on our position in the cosmos. Can someone ELI5 why there are so many inconsistencies? Thank you

 

[John G]

26 November 1994
Q: (T) Are you also the Pleiadians?

A: No.

10 December 1994
A: We are Marciniak's Pleiadians. We are where we are.

11 January 1995
Q: (Susy) Are you from the same group as the Pleiadians?

A: Same. When at Pleiades, Pleiadians, when at Cassiopaea, Cassiopaeans. Light beings.

Sometimes it's yes/no, sometimes it's that we are related or it's based on our position in the cosmos. Can someone ELI5 why there are so many inconsistencies? Thank you

Well that November 26, 1994 session also had:

Q: (T) Are you connected to the Pleiadians?

A: Yes and so are others.

It's kind of semantics based on where they are "living" at the time but there's also always a connection and where they live can change or something like that; the art of understanding massless particle beings isn't a totally exact science yet.

 

[palestine]

@JeanSchemit

Yes answers are sometimes frustrating. The trick is to gather the data we have about it, and check if something works, logically, "according to the big scheme". At least we have a cosmology (STO, STS, all those principles that C's wanted to convey in the first place)
and so when you have an uncertainty, I would try to see if it "fits", how it fits.

But sometimes it's difficult and we have to let it on the side until new data comes by.

I would be tempted to tell you that there are very solid concepts that we can rely on. If a concept is vague or may require clarification, it's best to not take it for granted, as such. I would just "consider it" without forcibly making it a big milestone. And focus on the "solid" things. Can be frustrating - but the basics have been covered and the trick is to work from there.

That would be my way! How are you approaching the phenomenon of "session quote uncertainty"?!

 

[Thassa]

Hello! I think they want things ultra-specific, something like the quotes that have the explicit mention of the words they provided (more or less). The idea would be than to ultra restrict the picking to some.

They, too, said about "the C cosmology". Somehow, all the quotes can work, but I remember that sometimes the C's provide very specific quotes, if we consider "the cosmology". This skims much and much if we want to be on point. What we could suggest would be sentences like when the C's explicitely say "the Universe works ... and not ..." - things like that. For example, all the quotes about the densities would work, but they would need to be "technical" (I suppose). So that's when you get some bit of knowledge with added value in terms of "how it is working".

That's how I understood it!

The best would be to skim your doc and take the very precise quotes that you find out. Well, at least that's how I understood the request, so in case...

That's because if we feed them a big huge doc and they have to go through, chances are that this will provide them with extra work! So if there is anything we could do, that's it

My list often mentions ''3D worries''
Things like Denver Airport, HAARP, Bob Lazar, Lizzies' goals, alien species, pyramids...
Things that are interesting, but are not about the Universe prime essence!
Thus I am sifting my list and trying to do another list that cut all these ''3D worries''. Maybe this is rather what you seek.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

''Regarding the “Fall” in Eden and the loss of the Edenic state, how long ago did thathappen? A: 309000 years ago approx.''

''Q: (L) Okay, who created the Cassiopaeans? A: Your super ancient spiritualancestors. Q: (L) Do these beings have a name? A: No. Q: (L) What are they called?A: Transient Passengers. Q: (L) Where are these “Transient Passengers” From? A:Too difficult to explain on this medium; lengthy.''

''Q: (L) What is the “expanded” present? A: The real measure of time.''

''Remember, free will is the most important law of consciousness in creation.''

''Q: (L) Who created the Lizzies? A: Ormethion. Q: (L) And who is this individual? A:Thought center. Q: (L) Located where? A: Everywhere.''



''Q: (L) Is there only one ultimate creator of the universe
A: All is one. And one is all.
Q: (L) From the one what was the first division?
A: Mass division and disbursement.
Q: (L) Was this simultaneous?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Was this what we refer to as the "Big Bang?"
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Is there any reference to this event in terms of time?
A: Always.
Q: (L) Can we say that all that exists in the material universe is, say, "x" number of years old?
A: No. It is the eternal now. Not only did happen, is happening and going to happen. The expanded presence.''




''Q: (L) Is the ultimate creator self-conscious and self-aware?
A: Yes and no.
Q: (L) These events that occur in our universe just sort of happen?
A: Close.
Q: (L) Are there other universes besides ours?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Are these other universes also spun off from "our" ultimate creator?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Are these universes countable?
A: Counting is artificially limiting concept.
Q: (L) Are the numbers of universes limitless?
A: In a sense.
Q: (L) Do universes ever crash into each other?
A: Too complex.''


''There is no need to fear the absorption of false information when you are simplyopenly seeking to acquire knowledge.''


''you mentioned the creators of your group as the super ancient ancestors calledthe transient passengers, what is the meaning of this term and who are thesebeings? A: Transient passengers are not beings. Transient Passengers are unifiedthought form. Q: (L) Why are they called transient passengers? A: Because theytransit all forms of reality. And they spring forth from the Unified form ofexistence.''


''So you are saying that the Fall in Eden was also the beginning of time? A: Yes.''

''What do you guys do for fun? A: All is fun when perceived correctly.''

''Q: (L) What is the “philosophers stone?” A: Idea center. Q: (L) How can this ideacenter be accessed? A: Many ways: meditation is the best. Q: (L) Is there anyvisual image of the philosopher’s stone that one could use to access it inmeditation? A: Yes. Diamond or prism. Q: (L) Was there or is there such a thing asa literal, physical, philosopher’s stone that can transmute lead into gold? A: No. Q:(L) Was anybody ever able to transmute lead into gold by any means? A:Everybody is able. Q: (L) How? A: You must discover this yourself''


''What are the implications of the fact that the Lizzies worship the physicaluniverse? A: Self service. Q: (L) What do they see in the physical universe that theyfeel is superior to the spiritual universe? A: All who serve self yearn for physicality''

''The Lizzies work independently and in opposition to the Cassiopaeans? A:Independently, not in opposition.''


''So it is necessary to have the darkness in order to have the light… A: Yes. Q: (L)And it is necessary to have the Lizzies in order to have the Cassiopaeans… A:Close.''

''So at the closing of this grand cycle everything will just start all over again? A: Notexactly; you see, there is no start.''

''When one has reached 7th density, then what does one do? A: When one reaches7th all do.''

''So, when we all reach 7th level we will all blow up? We will all become one and itwill all start all over again? A: Close. Q: (L) Well, that’s not a pleasant thought! A:Why? There is no time, you dwell there eternally. 7th is the light you see at deathof the body.''


''The universe is nothing more than a learning laboratory.''


''When you are fighting, is it any way at all possible for us to detect the battle? A:First: We don’t “fight.” Second, yes; it’s nature as in meteorology and earthchanges. Q: (T) Your form of confrontation takes the form of physical changes inthe atmosphere and environment of the planet? A: And in space.''



''Is there some intermediary between the 6th level Orions and the 4th level Lizzies,such as a 5th level force or being? A: 5th level is contemplation zone for both“sides”.''



Are the 6th density Orions, also known as Transient Passengers, are they thesame TPs that have been referred to as the ones who genetically engineered us orput us here? A: Close. They are Wave riders. Q: (L) Are those groups that ride thewave, is riding the wave part of the definition of Transient Passengers? A: Yes.


Are the 6th density Orions known as Transient Passengers? A: Yes. Q: (L) So thereare Transient Passengers that are STO as well as STS? A: TP is “wanderer”. Q: (L)And what is a wanderer? A: TP. Q: (L) Well, the idea of the Wanderers, according tothe Ra Material, is 4th or 5th density beings that have chosen to come back into3rd density to help us. Would that be the same kind of Wanderer? A: 5th or 6thdensity.

Is STO a means to an end for STS? A: No. STO is balance. STS is imbalance. Q: (T)How can you be STS through STO if STS is imbalance? A: STO flows outward andtouches all including point of origin, STS flows inward and touches only originpoint.


could you tell us the nature of a Black Hole?] A: Grand Scale STS. Q: (L) Is it like abeing that has achieved such a level of STS that it has literally imploded in onitself in some way? A: Close analogy.


Black Holes are a natural force reflection of Free Will consciousness pattern ofSTS. Notice that Black Holes are located at center of spiral energy forces, all elseradiates outward.


All in creation is just that: a radiating wave.


The subconscious is part of the soul? A: One and same. Q: (V) Is the higher selfthe same as the soul and the subconscious? A: Yes.



They will point us in the right direction, but then we are supposed to go out and doit. If you don’t learn it on your own, you don’t really learn. You have to go out andfall off the log a couple times to learn to walk the log.

If we could see the apple in its true, 4th dimensional state, we would seesomething, probably more like a long, red tubular type thing that goes onto infinity.Is this a correct assessment? A: Close.

Yes, look at what happens to those who are in sensory deprivation chambers. (T)Exactly. (L) An imploding infinity, so to speak. A: If you were out in space, youmight sleep for thousands of years or remain “awake” for millions of “years.


A: Thought forms are all that exists!

If, for example, you think of yourself being a princess in a tower, a castle wouldmanifest and you would be in a tower, and if you wanted your hair to hang down tothe ground, it would hang down too. A: That is 5th level stuff.

So, acceptance of experience in the sense of just allowing things to happen andresponding in a balanced and helpful way is an STO response or experience in 4thdensity, is that correct? A: Close.



In 4th, you can “see” sounds and “hear” colors, for example.



What is the “ultimate secret” being protected by the Consortium? A: You are not incontrol of yourselves, you are an experiment.

So, in other words, if you’re a 4th density being, everything is more or lesshappening, excuse the term happening, everything is simultaneous, and if youwish to discuss or communicate or have any focus upon any particular aspect ofthis unified dimension, then what you do is you kind of extract it out, project it into3d… A: Close. Q: (L)… like a movie. A: But you will not understand fully until youget there



What are your thoughts towards us, or your attitude or emotions, as you knowthem towards us? Individually or as a group? A: Love.




no need to steer, no need to drive, just ride!



You have said on occasion that free will is the most important law ofconsciousness in creation. Why can we not exercise our free will and refuse to beabducted and experimented upon? A: Those who abduct are exercising their freewill in doing so. Q: (L) Why does their free will have precedence over our free will?A: Why does your free will have precedence over density 2 and 1 beings?

What is the Lizard’s Achilles heel? A: STS. As in “wishful thinking” which blocksknowledge.



Well, if there is no time as we are told, and there is free will that is so important,how can this be? If there is no time and everything is connected, past, present andfuture, and everything is just a random collection of thoughts and experiences,and everything is supposed to be fluid, then there can’t ever have been free will. Ifthere is free will, and there is no past, present or future, and everything is all thesame point in space time experience, the key is the free will, but there is noanswer



Jupiter is already a star. Q: (L) Why do we not perceive it as a star? A: You are stilllearning. Earth is a star to be. Q: (F) How the hell can that be? (L) If a planet… A:Every thing cycles fully. Q: (L) If a star is a transition point from one dimension toanother, when the earth moves into 4th density, is it going to appear as a star tothe people in 3rd density? A: “Gas planet.” Q: (L) It will appear as a gas planet? (J)Just as Jupiter appears to us. A: Jupiter is level 4 density. Q: (L) To whom doesJupiter appear as a flaming sun, at what level? A: 5, 6, and 7. Q: (T) What does itlook like in 4th? A: Earth. Q: (T) Jupiter looks like Earth and Earth looks like Jupiterin 4th density? A: No. Q: (L) What does Earth look like in 4th density? A: Invisible.Q: (J) Huh? (L) What do you mean, invisible? A: Only visible upon request.Variability of physicality. Q: (L) Okay, does this mean that to the Lizzies and Orionsthe earth is invisible? A: When they are not thinking about it.


(TO BE CONTINUED. My list for sure has more, but I still haven't re-analysed it all)

 

[palestine]

My list often mentions ''3D worries''
Things like Denver Airport, HAARP, Bob Lazar, Lizzies' goals, alien species, pyramids...
Things that are interesting, but are not about the Universe prime essence!
Thus I am sifting my list and trying to do another list that cut all these ''3D worries''. Maybe this is rather what you seek.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

''Regarding the “Fall” in Eden and the loss of the Edenic state, how long ago did thathappen? A: 309000 years ago approx.''

''Q: (L) Okay, who created the Cassiopaeans? A: Your super ancient spiritualancestors. Q: (L) Do these beings have a name? A: No. Q: (L) What are they called?A: Transient Passengers. Q: (L) Where are these “Transient Passengers” From? A:Too difficult to explain on this medium; lengthy.''

''Q: (L) What is the “expanded” present? A: The real measure of time.''

''Remember, free will is the most important law of consciousness in creation.''

''Q: (L) Who created the Lizzies? A: Ormethion. Q: (L) And who is this individual? A:Thought center. Q: (L) Located where? A: Everywhere.''



''Q: (L) Is there only one ultimate creator of the universe
A: All is one. And one is all.
Q: (L) From the one what was the first division?
A: Mass division and disbursement.
Q: (L) Was this simultaneous?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Was this what we refer to as the "Big Bang?"
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Is there any reference to this event in terms of time?
A: Always.
Q: (L) Can we say that all that exists in the material universe is, say, "x" number of years old?
A: No. It is the eternal now. Not only did happen, is happening and going to happen. The expanded presence.''




''Q: (L) Is the ultimate creator self-conscious and self-aware?
A: Yes and no.
Q: (L) These events that occur in our universe just sort of happen?
A: Close.
Q: (L) Are there other universes besides ours?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Are these other universes also spun off from "our" ultimate creator?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Are these universes countable?
A: Counting is artificially limiting concept.
Q: (L) Are the numbers of universes limitless?
A: In a sense.
Q: (L) Do universes ever crash into each other?
A: Too complex.''


''There is no need to fear the absorption of false information when you are simplyopenly seeking to acquire knowledge.''


''you mentioned the creators of your group as the super ancient ancestors calledthe transient passengers, what is the meaning of this term and who are thesebeings? A: Transient passengers are not beings. Transient Passengers are unifiedthought form. Q: (L) Why are they called transient passengers? A: Because theytransit all forms of reality. And they spring forth from the Unified form ofexistence.''


''So you are saying that the Fall in Eden was also the beginning of time? A: Yes.''

''What do you guys do for fun? A: All is fun when perceived correctly.''

''Q: (L) What is the “philosophers stone?” A: Idea center. Q: (L) How can this ideacenter be accessed? A: Many ways: meditation is the best. Q: (L) Is there anyvisual image of the philosopher’s stone that one could use to access it inmeditation? A: Yes. Diamond or prism. Q: (L) Was there or is there such a thing asa literal, physical, philosopher’s stone that can transmute lead into gold? A: No. Q:(L) Was anybody ever able to transmute lead into gold by any means? A:Everybody is able. Q: (L) How? A: You must discover this yourself''


''What are the implications of the fact that the Lizzies worship the physicaluniverse? A: Self service. Q: (L) What do they see in the physical universe that theyfeel is superior to the spiritual universe? A: All who serve self yearn for physicality''

''The Lizzies work independently and in opposition to the Cassiopaeans? A:Independently, not in opposition.''


''So it is necessary to have the darkness in order to have the light… A: Yes. Q: (L)And it is necessary to have the Lizzies in order to have the Cassiopaeans… A:Close.''

''So at the closing of this grand cycle everything will just start all over again? A: Notexactly; you see, there is no start.''

''When one has reached 7th density, then what does one do? A: When one reaches7th all do.''

''So, when we all reach 7th level we will all blow up? We will all become one and itwill all start all over again? A: Close. Q: (L) Well, that’s not a pleasant thought! A:Why? There is no time, you dwell there eternally. 7th is the light you see at deathof the body.''


''The universe is nothing more than a learning laboratory.''


''When you are fighting, is it any way at all possible for us to detect the battle? A:First: We don’t “fight.” Second, yes; it’s nature as in meteorology and earthchanges. Q: (T) Your form of confrontation takes the form of physical changes inthe atmosphere and environment of the planet? A: And in space.''



''Is there some intermediary between the 6th level Orions and the 4th level Lizzies,such as a 5th level force or being? A: 5th level is contemplation zone for both“sides”.''



Are the 6th density Orions, also known as Transient Passengers, are they thesame TPs that have been referred to as the ones who genetically engineered us orput us here? A: Close. They are Wave riders. Q: (L) Are those groups that ride thewave, is riding the wave part of the definition of Transient Passengers? A: Yes.


Are the 6th density Orions known as Transient Passengers? A: Yes. Q: (L) So thereare Transient Passengers that are STO as well as STS? A: TP is “wanderer”. Q: (L)And what is a wanderer? A: TP. Q: (L) Well, the idea of the Wanderers, according tothe Ra Material, is 4th or 5th density beings that have chosen to come back into3rd density to help us. Would that be the same kind of Wanderer? A: 5th or 6thdensity.

Is STO a means to an end for STS? A: No. STO is balance. STS is imbalance. Q: (T)How can you be STS through STO if STS is imbalance? A: STO flows outward andtouches all including point of origin, STS flows inward and touches only originpoint.


could you tell us the nature of a Black Hole?] A: Grand Scale STS. Q: (L) Is it like abeing that has achieved such a level of STS that it has literally imploded in onitself in some way? A: Close analogy.


Black Holes are a natural force reflection of Free Will consciousness pattern ofSTS. Notice that Black Holes are located at center of spiral energy forces, all elseradiates outward.


All in creation is just that: a radiating wave.


The subconscious is part of the soul? A: One and same. Q: (V) Is the higher selfthe same as the soul and the subconscious? A: Yes.



They will point us in the right direction, but then we are supposed to go out and doit. If you don’t learn it on your own, you don’t really learn. You have to go out andfall off the log a couple times to learn to walk the log.

If we could see the apple in its true, 4th dimensional state, we would seesomething, probably more like a long, red tubular type thing that goes onto infinity.Is this a correct assessment? A: Close.

Yes, look at what happens to those who are in sensory deprivation chambers. (T)Exactly. (L) An imploding infinity, so to speak. A: If you were out in space, youmight sleep for thousands of years or remain “awake” for millions of “years.


A: Thought forms are all that exists!

If, for example, you think of yourself being a princess in a tower, a castle wouldmanifest and you would be in a tower, and if you wanted your hair to hang down tothe ground, it would hang down too. A: That is 5th level stuff.

So, acceptance of experience in the sense of just allowing things to happen andresponding in a balanced and helpful way is an STO response or experience in 4thdensity, is that correct? A: Close.



In 4th, you can “see” sounds and “hear” colors, for example.



What is the “ultimate secret” being protected by the Consortium? A: You are not incontrol of yourselves, you are an experiment.

So, in other words, if you’re a 4th density being, everything is more or lesshappening, excuse the term happening, everything is simultaneous, and if youwish to discuss or communicate or have any focus upon any particular aspect ofthis unified dimension, then what you do is you kind of extract it out, project it into3d… A: Close. Q: (L)… like a movie. A: But you will not understand fully until youget there



What are your thoughts towards us, or your attitude or emotions, as you knowthem towards us? Individually or as a group? A: Love.




no need to steer, no need to drive, just ride!



You have said on occasion that free will is the most important law ofconsciousness in creation. Why can we not exercise our free will and refuse to beabducted and experimented upon? A: Those who abduct are exercising their freewill in doing so. Q: (L) Why does their free will have precedence over our free will?A: Why does your free will have precedence over density 2 and 1 beings?

What is the Lizard’s Achilles heel? A: STS. As in “wishful thinking” which blocksknowledge.



Well, if there is no time as we are told, and there is free will that is so important,how can this be? If there is no time and everything is connected, past, present andfuture, and everything is just a random collection of thoughts and experiences,and everything is supposed to be fluid, then there can’t ever have been free will. Ifthere is free will, and there is no past, present or future, and everything is all thesame point in space time experience, the key is the free will, but there is noanswer



Jupiter is already a star. Q: (L) Why do we not perceive it as a star? A: You are stilllearning. Earth is a star to be. Q: (F) How the hell can that be? (L) If a planet… A:Every thing cycles fully. Q: (L) If a star is a transition point from one dimension toanother, when the earth moves into 4th density, is it going to appear as a star tothe people in 3rd density? A: “Gas planet.” Q: (L) It will appear as a gas planet? (J)Just as Jupiter appears to us. A: Jupiter is level 4 density. Q: (L) To whom doesJupiter appear as a flaming sun, at what level? A: 5, 6, and 7. Q: (T) What does itlook like in 4th? A: Earth. Q: (T) Jupiter looks like Earth and Earth looks like Jupiterin 4th density? A: No. Q: (L) What does Earth look like in 4th density? A: Invisible.Q: (J) Huh? (L) What do you mean, invisible? A: Only visible upon request.Variability of physicality. Q: (L) Okay, does this mean that to the Lizzies and Orionsthe earth is invisible? A: When they are not thinking about it.


(TO BE CONTINUED. My list for sure has more, but I still haven't re-analysed it all)

Nice!

See: admins came by and asked about something. All we can do, as members, would be than to read it closely and discern what they mean - what they want. That is what I tried to explain to you in my previous post.

I find your last post, spot on. This would be it, from my understanding.

But that is my opinion and we shall see when, one day, an article is written by the admins - what they picked up from the quotes!

If I may, without judgment neither criticism:

Jupiter is already a star. Q: (L) Why do we not perceive it as a star? A: You are stilllearning. Earth is a star to be. Q: (F) How the hell can that be? (L) If a planet… A:Every thing cycles fully. Q: (L) If a star is a transition point from one dimension toanother, when the earth moves into 4th density, is it going to appear as a star tothe people in 3rd density? A: “Gas planet.” Q: (L) It will appear as a gas planet? (J)Just as Jupiter appears to us. A: Jupiter is level 4 density. Q: (L) To whom doesJupiter appear as a flaming sun, at what level? A: 5, 6, and 7. Q: (T) What does itlook like in 4th? A: Earth. Q: (T) Jupiter looks like Earth and Earth looks like Jupiterin 4th density? A: No. Q: (L) What does Earth look like in 4th density? A: Invisible.Q: (J) Huh? (L) What do you mean, invisible? A: Only visible upon request.Variability of physicality. Q: (L) Okay, does this mean that to the Lizzies and Orionsthe earth is invisible? A: When they are not thinking about it.

<>

Jupiter

Jupiter is already a star.

Q: (L) Why do we not perceive it as a star?

A: You are stilllearning. Earth is a star to be.

Q: (F) How the hell can that be? (L) If a planet…

A:Every thing cycles fully.

Q: (L) If a star is a transition point from one dimension toanother, when the earth moves into 4th density, is it going to appear as a star tothe people in 3rd density?

A: “Gas planet.”

And:

Q: (L) Why do we not perceive it as a star?


A: You are stilllearning. Earth is a star to be.

<>

Q: (L) Why do we not perceive it as a star?


A: You are still learning. Earth is a star to be.