Big Bang Question

So if there is no beginning and no end, then there can be no us in the middle. But we know we exist. So when we see a beginning and an end, what are we really looking at? If there is no beginning and no end, then is there even a forward and back?

What does this do to our definition of a dimension? How do we define a dimension when we can't terminate the ends at "nowhere"? Does it wrap around at some far point? Does it wrap into the next dimension? How do we terminate the ends without a discontinuity?

What if no consecutive dimensions are perfectly orthagonal? Could this be related to the curl term in Maxwell's equations? Not that I know anything about that... And Dzhanibekov effect?

One thing I noticed recently is that there can be no empty dimensions. If you have any dimension that is zero, then you have no volume, no space. Therefore there must be either infinite dimensions or no dimensions. And we know that there are dimensions. No guarantees that I know what I'm talking about.

The Cs have described us as wave riders and transient passengers. What if our assumptions determine where we "go" next, and that trajectory moves us through a constant transformation of dimensions which reinforces the assumptions that keep us rooted in this representation of reality?

The Cs say we have been brainwashed and programmed not to understand this. We know that one way to do that is to control language. If we stop using a word, we become unable to understand the idea that word represents. So if there is a word that replaces the beginning and end paradox, what would that word be? And what idea does it represent?
 
If we consider the idea of ever expanding circle from Aug 17th 1995 session and the fact that time is an illusion (according to Cs), then expanding effect of the Universe becomes a matter of point of reference. Somewhere in the "future" the Universe will be shrinking though no "real" expanding/shrinking is taking place. No surprise very few people understood space travel, one needs to really think out of the box to achieve it.
 
Mind bending theories abound! I just wonder who I was just prior to being born. It genuinely fascinates me just thinking about it. When does anything start? What is the beginning? What transition is initiated by an ending? The C's give clues but I can't help but think that I am still a prisoner of "time". I look forward to where this thread leads, sounds promising to me. But then, it didn't really start, did it?;-D
 
It strikes me that perhaps there is an analogy to be made with a CRT screen. The electron beam scans across the screen in a sawtooth pattern to create the whole image. Each line has a beginning and an end, where it retraces and begins the next line. Imagine a lifetime is one line. If you think the part between the beginning and end of one line is all there is, then it doesn't make any sense. But a whole collection of lines creates an image. The Y scan is also a another sawtooth, but slower. And a collection of images makes a scene. A collection of scenes makes a movie. And you can just keep going from there.

To us there is little difference between the X and Y dimensions of the screen. If we scanned vertically instead of horizontally it would make no difference. Similarly there is no significant difference between X Y and Z dimensions in every day life. Physics doesn't care about direction, the X dimension behaves no different than the Y dimension. So our 3 spatial dimensions, like the 2 dimensions on the computer screen form a frame within which we perceive the world. But if there is a 4th dimension it is very different from the first 3 we are familiar with; like the consecutive frames of a movie scene, our 4th dimension doesn't operate on the same rules as the preceeding dimensions which form the homogeneous frame of our experience.

So if the first 3 dimensions are our frame of experience, the 4th dimension contains a whole set of 3D frames, of which the astral and ethereal realms may just be a subset of those frames. And then the question is, how many dimensions are there above the 4th before there is a new superset of frames? If the 4th dimension contains the superset of dimensions relevant for this reality, than does the 5th dimension contain that as well as all the supersets for every other reality? And why do those supersets sometimes bleed together and interfere?
 
Last edited:
Ark's conformal math with two time-like and four space-like dimensions can be viewed loosely as a time disk and a space hypersphere. The surface is very loosely our one-dim time and three-dim space. Time travel is very loosely taking shortcuts through the inside of the disk/hypersphere. Back in 1999, the Cs described the universe as an octagonal complexigram. The inside of these disks/hyperspheres would very loosely be a complex space. My use of a Doctor Who signature is actually based on this. To get up to octagonal maybe you need something like six space-like (two more to handle EM/color charges in a Kaluza-Klein-like way).

 
If we consider the idea of ever expanding circle from Aug 17th 1995 session and the fact that time is an illusion (according to Cs), then expanding effect of the Universe becomes a matter of point of reference. Somewhere in the "future" the Universe will be shrinking though no "real" expanding/shrinking is taking place. No surprise very few people understood space travel, one needs to really think out of the box to achieve it.

In a later session the C's mentioned that part of our illusion is our perception of linear time. So maybe the reality is that time does exist, but it's cyclical rather than linear.

21 Dec 1996
A: Well, as you know, electrical energy can have nearly endless applications. Examples... radio waves, neuro-transceiver for thought pattern programs facilitated through electromagnetic wave transmission, etc. Method used for creation and maintenance of program illusions, such as the perception of linear time as reality.
 
I have been working on a program to generate arbitrary-dimensional arrays and working out how to logically deal with arbitrary dimensions has got me thinking a lot on this topic. It seems to me that there are sets of dimensions which are continuous with each other, like the 3 we inhabit, analogous to the 2 dimensions on your computer screen which are discontinuous with the 3rd dimension of movie frames. There are adjacent dimensions to us like the ethereal and astral which also have sets of 3 dimensions, but are considered higher realms and seem to be more continuous with the higher dimensions than ours. So it seems there is a scheme of curtains and barriers between different planes and realms which keep things separated.

Our 3 familiar dimensions are continuous. We can move through any 2D planes but we cannot move through 3D planes because our 3 dimensions are discontinuous with the 4th dimension. But not entirely discontinuous; exceptions sometimes occur.

Are the astral and ethereal planes in some sense less discontinuous than ours? If they are less discontinuous, then is it because those dimensions are more continuous with the 4th dimension than our dimensions are? Does the discontinuity of our dimensions create the experience of solid physical reality?

Does discontinuity break dimensions up into subsets or are dimensions discontinuous because they are broken up into sets, and the discontinuity has independent behavior?

A plane is a set of continuous spatial dimensions. A realm is a superset of continuous planes which are sort of a unit and separate from the other supersets, or discontinuous with them. What is a realm border curtain?

The astral and ethereal realms are adjacent and slightly continuous with our dimensions. Both are contained within the 4th dimension. But if they are higher realms that implies that they are more continuous with the 4th dimension or higher.

Our assumptions keep us rooted in this density and this representation of reality. This implies that our assumptions play a role in determining the continuity of our plane with other planes. What if a change in density means a change in our relationship with the dividers that keep planes and realities separate?

So what happens if we leave our house in the US and end up in a department store in Russia? We have somehow crossed the discontinuity between our plane and the higher dimensions. Did we only move in space or did we also move into another reality (moreso than usual)? Is just the 4th dimension enough or did we have to cross multiple discontinuities?

Or perhaps we moved into a different reality and there was no need movement through the 4th dimension in the previous reality? We crossed the discontinuity of the 5th dimension but not the 4th dimension?

IN the CRT display it is the design of the electronics in the monitor and computer system that make the X and Y dimensions continuous with each other, and the 3rd dimension of movie frames slightly continuous with the X and Y dimensions. So is there an analogous design which results in the dimensions in our reality being weakly or strongly coupled?

A math question I have is how do you deal with the problem of physical space not being on a grid? I know it sounds silly but we talk about X Y and Z dimensions but there is no 3D grid. It doesn't matter if you turn 45 degrees or 45.15151515~ degrees, there is no grid to align or misalign with. Our dimensional space has no directionality. How do you create a model of space without a grid?
 
But going back to that session, my monkey brain is still asking what's the point? We just slosh back and forth and repeat cycles? We grow to become one with the creator in 7d, only to devolve and experience the other path in the next cycle? We go through all the suffering, just so we can do it all again? Yeah it kinda boggles the mind.

Well, maybe the problem is in the use of the term "we." What or who are "we"? It seems that what in the current phase of our development we identify as the "I", in previous fases (1D, 2D) did not exist as such; therefore it is logical that what we identify today as "I", in the subsequent phases of development (say 4D for example) tend to be changing and expanding.

It is an impenetrable abstraction (at least for me), but I can suppose that in communion with the One (Cosmic Mind, 7D, whatever) this idea of the "I" will not only disappear but will seem ridiculous and hilarious. So trying to imagine how we're going to feel in 7D, or what's the point of repeating all this again, or thinking about how "boring" will be to go through this whole cycle again, at least for me, is meaningless.
 
In a later session the C's mentioned that part of our illusion is our perception of linear time. So maybe the reality is that time does exist, but it's cyclical rather than linear.
There's also a concept of time cycles which is different than cyclical time:

February 5, 2000
Q: It's really sad that Santilli is involved with such flakey people! (F) Hasn't he always been? (L) He is certainly influenced by the wrong people! And I don't think we want anything to do with him at all. (A) Now, we we were talking about Kaluza Klein, and you mentioned the Germans "exploring the loop of the cylinder" in relation to time travel. I don't know what this means but I have the idea that it is related to extra dimensions, hyperspace. Now, we asked a question at some point and you said that a cylinder is really a double loop. You then suggested that we meditate on the true meaning of this sentence. Now, I don't know how to meditate, but I do know how to do math. So, I drew three pictures here: one is a real cylinder, two is a which is a kind of cylinder inside a cylinder, and three, like a torus. Laura said that it wasn't any of these, that it should only have one side like a cylinder/mobius strip - no left and no right. So, this could be option 4, something like a Klein bottle or option 5, something called a twisted torus. Is it 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5? Or 6, none of the above? Is it one of these?

A: Selection 3.

Q: 3 is the torus. (L) What is a loop of the cylinder? Yes, there is one loop and then there is another loop. One loop is probably what we call time - cyclical time.

A: Time cycle.

Q: What is the second loop?

A: Included, but not inclusive.

Q: I guess that means that it is included, but is not the whole thing. It covers that, but that isn't the whole thing. What DOES it mean?

A: Yes.

Q: Wait, I asked what is the second loop. The second loop is included but not inclusive?

A: Remember, you do have cycles but that does not necessarily mean cyclical. 3 Dimensional depiction of loop, seek hexagon for more. Geometric theory provides answers for key. Look to stellar windows. Octagon, hexagon, pentagon.

Q: Are those the different levels of density?

A: No, but it relates. Geometry gets you there, algebra sets you "free."
 
Our 3 familiar dimensions are continuous. We can move through any 2D planes but we cannot move through 3D planes because our 3 dimensions are discontinuous with the 4th dimension. But not entirely discontinuous; exceptions sometimes occur.
Yeah it's kind of like gravity sometimes can do 4th spatial dimension things even though we only have three large space dimensions. You can do 4 dimensional mobius strip math to show left becoming right which I think relates to that 4th density bleed-through road in New Mexico that people have driven off of because they can't judge the left-right curves of the road.


So what happens if we leave our house in the US and end up in a department store in Russia? We have somehow crossed the discontinuity between our plane and the higher dimensions. Did we only move in space or did we also move into another reality (moreso than usual)? Is just the 4th dimension enough or did we have to cross multiple discontinuities?
Yeah Ark's 4-dim space and 2-dim time conformal gravity can take shortcuts relative to our 3-dim space and 1-dim time.

A math question I have is how do you deal with the problem of physical space not being on a grid? I know it sounds silly but we talk about X Y and Z dimensions but there is no 3D grid. It doesn't matter if you turn 45 degrees or 45.15151515~ degrees, there is no grid to align or misalign with. Our dimensional space has no directionality. How do you create a model of space without a grid?

From 1999:

Q: (A) Yes, so my question relates to the geometric model
of gravity and consciousness.
A: Picture an endless octagonal... in three dimensions.
Q: (A) A lattice, you mean?
A: Okay.

Here is one way to do the grid:

 
Having not read all the way through the thread, is there any connection with the ever cycling nature to spherical cow metaphors and the hairy ball theorem?

It is mind-boggling!
 
So if there is no beginning and no end, then there can be no us in the middle. But we know we exist. So when we see a beginning and an end, what are we really looking at? If there is no beginning and no end, then is there even a forward and back?

Maybe us knowing we exist is a consequence or extension of the universe knowing it exists? Consciousness?

A very interesting thread.
 
What about a figure 8 energy/consciousness pattern of matter/antimatter with the nexus of the infinite void.

As the matter side is growing to old age the antimatter side is aging back to youth and each grand cycle meets at the nexus of infinite void of the union of the ALL as ONE. The matter flips to antimatter and vice versa.

What is mind boggling is that there are infinite universes so there are infinite cycles of the same pattern occurring at infinite cycles of time.

Is the ALL increasing or is it a steady state?
 
An ant traveling across a piece of paper cannot move in the 3rd dimension because molecular forces are keeping it attached to the paper. The 3rd dimension is continuous with the ant's space but the ant cannot tell because it is tethered to a 2 dimensional plane. It may walk off the edge of the paper and fall onto the ground but the experience is brief and it finds itself somewhere completely different with no idea how it got there other than it was moving in a completely different way. At best it will realize that if it moves far enough in any direction, something very unpleasant will happen.

In a way, the 3rd dimension is inaccessible to humans because we are held to the ground by gravity. We can fly but it takes a huge effort to work against gravity. So what if we cannot move through 4D space because we are tethered to a 3D plane? And what if that is the effect of gravity in the 4th dimension?

How much of our 3D restriction is due to our attachment to a 3D plane and how much of it is due to an actual discontinuity with the 4th dimension? Are they separate phenomenon or are they the same phenomenon?

If we are tethered to a 3D plane with gravity that implies a discontinuity of sorts. There is a solid 3D ground and a 4D gravity which keeps us pinned to it. It is important to note that in this sense the 4th dimension is only one dimension. We can move "up or down" in the 4th dimension but not sideways or forwards. If you add another dimension than you get a 2D plane of 3D planes, or 5D space where the first 3 dimensions are discontinuous with the last 2 dimensions.
 
If we are tethered to a 3D plane with gravity that implies a discontinuity of sorts. There is a solid 3D ground and a 4D gravity which keeps us pinned to it.
A description I've seen is that 4D part gets scrambled by the use of 3D gravity similar to the scrambling of the poles of particles ruining the magnetic force. This might relate to the Cs mentioning the gas giants as 4th density aka they are farther from the sun and closer to being out of the solar system. Perhaps also relates to the sun's twin helping to get to 4th density/dimension.

It is important to note that in this sense the 4th dimension is only one dimension. We can move "up or down" in the 4th dimension but not sideways or forwards. If you add another dimension than you get a 2D plane of 3D planes, or 5D space where the first 3 dimensions are discontinuous with the last 2 dimensions.
From 11/14/1998
Q: (A) To prism?! Visual spectrum? I don't know what it
tells me. I never came across any relation to prism. But,
what is this 4th dimension? Is it an extra dimension beyond
the three space dimensions, or is it a time dimension?
A: Not "time," re: Einstein. It is an added spatial reference.
The term "dimension" is used simply to access the popular
reference, relating to three dimensions. The added
"dimension" allows one to visualize outwardly and inwardly
simultaneously.

The Cs described the extra spatial dimension as inward/outward. Via conventional mobius strip math, you could kind of get x-ray vision of sorts because you can kind of skip over blockages in our 3-dim space.
 
Back
Top Bottom