How do humans change the cycle for 1D and 2D?
- Thread starter T.C.
- Start date
axj
The Living Force
I try not to form beliefs, as those limit objective perception. It seems better to acknowledge that I do not know and then maybe look at which theories seem most probable.
The C's have said that writing down the number of previous big bang iterations would take years, which does imply a finite number. Yet, in a more recent session they also said that the number of previous Grand Cycles has been indeed infinite:
Maybe the Big Bang iterations (finite number) are not the same as the Grand Cycles (infinite number)? It could mean that the big bang iterations started at some point, yet other types of Grand Cycles may have preceded those.
I don't think such negative generalization about beliefs is a good example of objectivity.
Session 28 October 1994 said:
Sincere belief provides a willingness to try, to test. So, it helps learning. Maybe you should distinguish beliefs from prejudices.
Emotions can also be claimed to be limiting objective perception but that, again, would be a prejudiced generalization, apparently:
Session 9 September 1995 said:
axj
The Living Force
It depends on how you define 'belief'.
To me beliefs are basically unquestioned assumptions that we convinced ourselves are true - which limits or interferes with gaining knowledge through objective perception. Most beliefs come from social conditioning and they seem to be basically mental programs.
What you are talking about I would call faith or trust. Or I guess you can call it 'sincere belief' and the programs 'prejudices'.
Well may be, as been mentioned by multiple sources, if one polarises to STO that they instantaneously poof off from our reality… where do they go? Why can’t they stay here and keep being STO? (That kinda debunks the Jesus as all loving theory too)
super ancient ancestors, who created them, and who were they before they were super ancient, when they were just brand new?
It sounds like I’m implying that at the time of the Big Bang that there was only a contemplation zone full of baby spirit sparks… and all if the other densities were not thought up yet or were uninhabited…
Geeze I love this thread, it’s such a weight off to throw ideas around and know that we are probably never gonna figure it out
I asked AI to answer some of this according to Ra.
-The statement "veil is only worn in third density" is a concept from the Ra Material (The Law of One), and it is an accurate representation of this teaching: entities in the third density "wear the veil" of separation and unawareness between densities, which begins to be pierced as they evolve toward higher densities. This "veil" is a fundamental aspect of the third-density experience, making the choice to embrace the Law of One and the path of love essential for its dissolution.
The Veil in The Ra Material
- Separation:
In the third density, the veil creates a sense of separation from other densities and the higher aspects of consciousness.
- Evolution:
As entities in the third density evolve spiritually, they can begin to dismantle this veil and experience higher-density perceptions, even while still in their third-density physical form.
- Conscious Choice:
The process of piercing the veil is initiated through a conscious choice to accept the responsibility and honor of the Law of One, which involves a deeper understanding and use of "light" and love.
- The veil acts as a barrier to understanding the true nature of the self and the interconnectedness of all things.
- As an entity's higher-energy centers (chakras) become activated and "crystallized" through their compassionate activity, they are better equipped to begin dismantling the veil.
- This dismantling allows for the seeing of "one," as the separation that the veil creates begins to dissolve.
Me again, it mentions a conscious choice has to be made to piece the veil, 1&2D can’t consciously choose so that leaves me thinking that unless there is a 3D consciousness present that they can only exist in a long wave cycle.
I'll try to write about an example of a way something can have been created "after" something else, and ALSO have "always" existed:
Computer programming is a hobby of mine, and I sometimes make small computer games, mostly arcade games (think 'Space Invaders' except not as simple - little characters ("sprites", in game parlance) moving around doing stuff). Usually one of the sprites is controlled by the player, and all the others are controlled by the computer, moving in patterns or according to algorithms or programmed behaviours.
Generally the way a program like this works is: when the program is loaded, first of all it substantiates ("spawns", in game parlance) all the sprites - reserving a bit of the computer's RAM for the information needed to maintain each sprite. I guess this is sort of like "the big bang" from the point of view of the sprites.... Then after that it continually runs a loop, over and over again, checking each sprite to see its status, performing whatever logic operations are needed to control that sprite for the current iteration of the loop, etc, and then drawing the sprite onto the computer screen. And maybe destroying a sprite, or spawning new sprites, if required by the game logic.
Generally that loop is cycled through 60 times per second, as 60 hz is (or was) a (pretty much arbitrary) standard in computers and tv screens etc.. 60 hz is fast enough to trick the human eye into seeing smooth, seamless motion when a sprite moves across the screen, although the sprite is actually being moved in very small steps.
So the loop is cycling relatively quickly, and each sprite is moving in some tiny increment with each cycle, and being drawn onto the screen at its new position. In between cycles, the visual image of the sprite on the screen doesn't actually exist, except in potential.. all that exists is the information in RAM to say where that sprite will next be displayed..
So anyway.. From the point of view of the sprites, "time" started when the program was loaded (and also, all of creation is being continually created and destroyed with every iteration of the loop). And from the sprites' POV, me the programmer, or whoever is playing the game, would be "outside of time". I can stop and restart the program at any time, or rewind time, or speed up time, or change code which changes "the past" and therefore the future, inside the game world.. Or pause the game and edit some of the information in RAM to alter how any given sprite will behave.
[An aside: My games are not exactly deterministic, I usually use pseudo-random numbers or unpredictable inputs, and many interacting sprite logics, which lead to emergent behaviours.. So actually I cannot look and see exactly what will happen in the future of the game world, I have to let it run its course to see the end result...]
At the level of the game's source code, all the sprites came into existence at the same time (or have always existed) - the information needed to create them is all there in the source code on my hard drive. Every possibility of the game world exists in potential, right from the start.
But at the level of the sprites themselves, they came into being at different times, and have different lifespans, etc..they're born and live out their lives, have "children", die, etc...
.. This doesn't really answer any questions, and not at all TC's original one. But I find it interesting to think about and thought someone else might too...
~
I've never been able to get a handle on the long wave/short wave thing.. Calling them long and short wave cycles makes it sound like they are different frequencies of the same wave, like it's a spectrum. But since the C's say it's one or the other, and those are the only two possibilities, that makes it sound like no, they're sort of separate things, so to say.. Which is what made me wonder if a short wave cycle is like a phasing or interference pattern, i.e. a distortion, IN the wave which makes up the long wave cycle. Which would mean you can have a long wave cycle without a short, but not a short without a long..
Computer programming is a hobby of mine, and I sometimes make small computer games, mostly arcade games (think 'Space Invaders' except not as simple - little characters ("sprites", in game parlance) moving around doing stuff). Usually one of the sprites is controlled by the player, and all the others are controlled by the computer, moving in patterns or according to algorithms or programmed behaviours.
Generally the way a program like this works is: when the program is loaded, first of all it substantiates ("spawns", in game parlance) all the sprites - reserving a bit of the computer's RAM for the information needed to maintain each sprite. I guess this is sort of like "the big bang" from the point of view of the sprites.... Then after that it continually runs a loop, over and over again, checking each sprite to see its status, performing whatever logic operations are needed to control that sprite for the current iteration of the loop, etc, and then drawing the sprite onto the computer screen. And maybe destroying a sprite, or spawning new sprites, if required by the game logic.
Generally that loop is cycled through 60 times per second, as 60 hz is (or was) a (pretty much arbitrary) standard in computers and tv screens etc.. 60 hz is fast enough to trick the human eye into seeing smooth, seamless motion when a sprite moves across the screen, although the sprite is actually being moved in very small steps.
So the loop is cycling relatively quickly, and each sprite is moving in some tiny increment with each cycle, and being drawn onto the screen at its new position. In between cycles, the visual image of the sprite on the screen doesn't actually exist, except in potential.. all that exists is the information in RAM to say where that sprite will next be displayed..
So anyway.. From the point of view of the sprites, "time" started when the program was loaded (and also, all of creation is being continually created and destroyed with every iteration of the loop). And from the sprites' POV, me the programmer, or whoever is playing the game, would be "outside of time". I can stop and restart the program at any time, or rewind time, or speed up time, or change code which changes "the past" and therefore the future, inside the game world.. Or pause the game and edit some of the information in RAM to alter how any given sprite will behave.
[An aside: My games are not exactly deterministic, I usually use pseudo-random numbers or unpredictable inputs, and many interacting sprite logics, which lead to emergent behaviours.. So actually I cannot look and see exactly what will happen in the future of the game world, I have to let it run its course to see the end result...]
At the level of the game's source code, all the sprites came into existence at the same time (or have always existed) - the information needed to create them is all there in the source code on my hard drive. Every possibility of the game world exists in potential, right from the start.
But at the level of the sprites themselves, they came into being at different times, and have different lifespans, etc..they're born and live out their lives, have "children", die, etc...
.. This doesn't really answer any questions, and not at all TC's original one. But I find it interesting to think about and thought someone else might too...
~
I've never been able to get a handle on the long wave/short wave thing.. Calling them long and short wave cycles makes it sound like they are different frequencies of the same wave, like it's a spectrum. But since the C's say it's one or the other, and those are the only two possibilities, that makes it sound like no, they're sort of separate things, so to say.. Which is what made me wonder if a short wave cycle is like a phasing or interference pattern, i.e. a distortion, IN the wave which makes up the long wave cycle. Which would mean you can have a long wave cycle without a short, but not a short without a long..
Great points.
Gets me thinking more what ethereal/long wave might mean.
-no incarnations, karma or dharma.
-no need to consume as life force/chakras/energy centres function differently. Rest/sleep as required. (I hope so, I love naps)
-unfettered connection with 5D higher self.
-body can be as solid as a rock or have no form other than energy signature
-thoughts and emotions directly and instantaneously create reality
- learns through observation of others or self experiences in shortwave cycle illusions
…
Remember in the Matrix movie where that dude wanted to stay plugged into the system so he could eat a steak, I think Third density STS is all about hedonism, actually that’s pretty obvious and super appealing. I can see why the Lizzie’s want to hybridise human genetic so their soul’s have a perfected physical vehicle to jump into. I don’t even blame them for wanting that. They can’t reincarnate any other way, so it’s not only about survival of their species but using the best tools available for maximum pleasure, us humans!
Check out those videos I´ve posted, the links from The Wave re. Tree of Life and also the material regarding the Big Bang.
I.e.
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.
Cassiopaean Session Transcripts Search
cassiopaeatranscripts.org
Q: (L) How many levels of density are there?
A: 7
Q: (L) When you reach the seventh level, how would you describe that if 1st level is light?
A: 7th is core of existence.
Q: (L) Well, if seventh density is the core of existence, would that mean that 1st density is the outer edge of existence?
A: Base.
Q: (L) When one has reached 7th density, then what does one do?
A: When one reaches 7th all do.
Q: (L) Are there any beings on 7th level?
A: Time does not exist.
Q: (L) When light is transferred to electrical energy, does it actually change density?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Is it from 1st to 3rd when it becomes electricity?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Once again, are there any beings on 7th level?
A: Big bang.
Q: (L) Big bang is at 7th level?
A: Close enough.
Q: (L) So, when we all reach 7th level we will all blow up? We will all become one and it will all start all over again?
A: Close.
Cassiopaean Session Transcripts Search
cassiopaeatranscripts.org
Q: (A) Was there a big bang?
A: There are many of them!
Q: (Perceval) How many? (Laughter)
A: Got a few years to take down the number?
Cassiopaean Session Transcripts Search
cassiopaeatranscripts.org
I have, did again and will again. I understand the concept of all things containing all there is in the infinite now.
I’m just not satisfied that there was not a beginning, C’s said that there is a number of cycles though it would take years to write it down.
If earth (for example) and its inhabitants are a reflection of all that is then a seed had to grow from somewhere to become a flower, only if we didn’t see it grow then we can assume it was always a flower?
I guess I won’t know but I suspect there’s more to the story and I just can’t understand it.
Yes, the thread went off in whatever direction...
I´ve never thought about it much and took what the Cs said as it were.
But once you actually start looking into it and research the transcripts and the books, it is a tangled topic.
I´m also not happy with my reply; that was my musings that I´ve gathered over those 2 days of thinking and re-reading on the topic, but I comfort myself that the Cs also said on many occasions about many things that they will be more understandable once we level up; perhaps it´s like explaining trigonometry to kids in kindergarten, so perhaps it is enough to know about how things work in general and leave the math to more advanced ones. It does clash with my ego - I should be able to figure it out! - but what can we do; gather more knowledge and do our best.
To an STO realm? A question I have is what it is that distinguishes returning to 3D STO from graduating to 4D STO?
session-11-march-1995 said:
"Returning to 3D STO" implies returning to "long wave 3D", where we were before. But graduating to 4D STO implies "short wave 4D STO", if I get it right. Also, we were apparently in a problematic situation in our long wave 3D experience, which eventually resulted in our "fall". Ra offers some details about that. Graduating to 4D STO sounds more attractive to me than returning to 3D STO.
Or, do the C's mean becoming STO in this 3D STS environment? But I think they also said things to the effect that one would immediately graduate to 4D STO if one achieves an STO profile? I got myself in confusion.
Last edited:
