visibility of the 4th density

[celtic]

I look at it this way 1,2 and 3 are physical reality's with different perceptions of reality. But fourth density is not just physical but ethereal as well so it could be
possible that 1,2 and 3 density beings are better able to live amongst each other because they are familiar with the same illusion of physicality.

But fourth density is closer to being pure ethereal beings who can vary from physical and ethereal so it probably would be alot harder for them to live in a physical
reality if they are ethereal and physical. But since 1,2 and 3 is stuck in the illusion of matter and time we can live in the same space time continuim. But fourth you
are on a level where you can select to be ethereal and physical therefore another dimension.

So just as we can't percieve spirits because of their ethereal environment this might be the same for fourth density beings.

 

[Guardian]

I look at it this way 1,2 and 3 are physical reality's with different perceptions of reality. But fourth density is not just physical but ethereal as well so it could be possible that 1,2 and 3 density beings are better able to live amongst each other because they are familiar with the same illusion of physicality.

I wonder if, as things speed up, line up, etc., the densities aren't starting to overlap more and more?

 

[3DStudent]

Neither I can understand what they mean with the prism reference and "the added dimension allows one to visualize outwardly and inwardly simultaneously".

I took this to mean that the 4th density beings are able to manifest things (visualize outwardly). While we of course only visualize inwardly. But of course, I don't know for sure, FWIW.

Finally, saying that 3D is the step above 2D in evolving through the densities does not imply saying that 3D is superior; for the point of All is lessons and learning, and existence being a school, being more "aware" and "evolved" does not imply superiority. (for is a third grader superior to a second grader? no, simply further along in his studies)

I agree with what you posted Psalehesost, nice thoughts on the stupidity of densities. It seems that it is simply the evolution of entropy along the STS pathway. And about the superiority thing, this I think is simply a part of creation that is at a certain stage. And we usually ascribe time as the factor that determines these things, as in 1 year olds are babies, 5 year olds children, etc., to use a human example. But it is just the slideshow, that the C's have mentioned, osit.

And you mentioned that superiority thinking is STS, and of course STO accepts individuality of all forms of life, so all are valid. And the C's said nobody is neither special nor worthless, so all are equal in this aspect.

 

[Nawd]

The way I personally took the prism effect or reference, was to mean (this is strictly my opinion here); was that the different colors sort of mean different frequencies.
So being we are 3D, we couldn't see forth because we are not even the same fequency thus would have to depend on 'crosses' between frequencies (accidental or not), in order to witness something we don't normally see and can't, because we are divided like the colors that a prism are. Sometimes crossing creating new colors, but not primary ones.

Sorry if that makes no sense, it is hard to express.

Neither I can understand what they mean with the prism reference and "the added dimension allows one to visualize outwardly and inwardly simultaneously".

I took this to mean that the 4th density beings are able to manifest things (visualize outwardly). While we of course only visualize inwardly. But of course, I don't know for sure, FWIW.

Finally, saying that 3D is the step above 2D in evolving through the densities does not imply saying that 3D is superior; for the point of All is lessons and learning, and existence being a school, being more "aware" and "evolved" does not imply superiority. (for is a third grader superior to a second grader? no, simply further along in his studies)

I agree with what you posted Psalehesost, nice thoughts on the stupidity of densities. It seems that it is simply the evolution of entropy along the STS pathway. And about the superiority thing, this I think is simply a part of creation that is at a certain stage. And we usually ascribe time as the factor that determines these things, as in 1 year olds are babies, 5 year olds children, etc., to use a human example. But it is just the slideshow, that the C's have mentioned, osit.

And you mentioned that superiority thinking is STS, and of course STO accepts individuality of all forms of life, so all are valid. And the C's said nobody is neither special nor worthless, so all are equal in this aspect.

 

[okiron]

"However I am quite perplexed, as Ark seems to be. I am trained in physics and simply cannot grasp what could this "added dimension" be, provided it is really a dimension. Neither I can understand what they mean with the prism reference and "the added dimension allows one to visualize outwardly and inwardly simultaneously".

hmmm It almost sounds like me (3D) being aware of my physicality;the feeling, the touching, the tasting, the hearing, the smelling and my immediate environment; as far as i can see, but at the same time, envision this whole scenario like virtual reality(4Th dimension) all in my mind's eye simultaneously. Seeing how difficult this is to do, I just can't fathom to began to understand how it must be like for 4D beings.
okiron

 

[abstract]

That man has never watched beavers build a dam.

Is it not true that beavers build dams because it is instinctually a part of how they operate in nature?

Why does a spider spin a web? Why does a bird build a nest? I believe it's instinct, plain and simple though i could be wrong, i could have missed something COMPLETELY. Not that i'm attacking your point of view, guardian. :)

I just simply believe...or rather, it is my subjective opinion, that beings, no matter what their level, do what they do because they are meant to do so....again, maybe i missed something?

 

[Freelancer]

"However I am quite perplexed, as Ark seems to be. I am trained in physics and simply cannot grasp what could this "added dimension" be, provided it is really a dimension. Neither I can understand what they mean with the prism reference and "the added dimension allows one to visualize outwardly and inwardly simultaneously".

Okiron, I don't understand why this confuses you. If the fourth density is represented by four spatial dimensions, then an observer would actually be able to perceive a three dimensional object both from inside and outside simultaneously.

Think of a two dimensional example:

When you look from a three dimensional standpoint at a two-dimensional figure, like a square, for example, you simultaneously see what is inside and outside it. Granted, the observer would have to be outside the square's plane for this to work.
Same would work for 4D to 3D.


As for the question why we can't see the 4D objects and beings, there is a reference from the RA material about this:

Questioner: Is an entity in the fourth density normally invisible to us?

Ra: I am Ra. The use of the word “normal” is one which befuddles the meaning of the question. Let us rephrase for clarity. The fourth density is, by choice, not visible to third density. It is possible for fourth density to be visible. However, it is not the choice of the fourth-density entity to be visible due to the necessity for concentration upon a rather difficult vibrational complex which is the third density you experience.

Even though we can't perceive four spatial dimensions (at least, not yet), there is a possibility that we could see projections of 4D objects, if they happen to intersect with our space (kind of like their shadows), but perhaps that reference from the RA material explains why we don't see them either.

 

[Brewer]

That man has never watched beavers build a dam.

Is it not true that beavers build dams because it is instinctually a part of how they operate in nature?

Why does a spider spin a web? Why does a bird build a nest? I believe it's instinct, plain and simple though i could be wrong, i could have missed something COMPLETELY. Not that i'm attacking your point of view, guardian. :)

I just simply believe...or rather, it is my subjective opinion, that beings, no matter what their level, do what they do because they are meant to do so....again, maybe i missed something?

I suppose it is largely instinctual but animals will observe and learn to use things not of their natural world. Crows in Japan use traffic to crack nuts...

http://www.pbs.org/lifeofbirds/brain/index.html

They even make use of the stop lights!

Not sure whether people taught them this

Monkeys in Bali will steal your camera or sunglasses and hold them ransom till you give them some peanuts. Some start destroying the items if you're not quick enough!

I go scuba diving, octopi are very smart, they can open jars. Squid are pretty clever too.

I've dived with seals, they're very playful, they like hang head down and look at you with their huge brown eyes, very cute! All of a sudden they charge at you with their jaws agape right at your face then turn away mm away from your mask. They know which parts of your body and dive gear to bite and nudge without doing any damage to you or your gear. They're great fun!

I had a cat that could lift and slide bolts open to open the laundry hatch, no one taught her how..

I had a dog that taught itself how to open gates by getting on it's hind legs, supported itself with one fore paw and with the other would use the handle to pull open the gate.

I've kept chickens, ex battery hens, they have distinct personalities.

 

[Brewer]

A question..

Are people who see 'ghosts' or 'spirits of the (3D) dead', could these ghosts and so forth simply be 4D STS entities masquerading as such?

Thanks

 

[Peam]

I remember reading it years ago, but he lost me when I got to the part where he says animals can't form concepts because they don't have "speech, " the ability to understand levers and fulcrums, etc.

That man has never watched beavers build a dam.

Is it not true that beavers build dams because it is instinctually a part of how they operate in nature?

I agree with Abstract. I don't think Beavers have the ability to understand levers and fulcrums just because they build dams.
Just as Bees build hexagonal honeycombs, I wouldn't go as far as to conclude that they have a good understanding of geometry.

 

[vinny]

I agree with Abstract. I don't think Beavers have the ability to understand levers and fulcrums just because they build dams.
Just as Bees build hexagonal honeycombs, I wouldn't go as far as to conclude that they have a good understanding of geometry.

and flowers don't necessarily have a mathematical understanding of the fibonnacci sequence / golden ratio, that appears in nature.

 

[Guardian]

That man has never watched beavers build a dam.

Is it not true that beavers build dams because it is instinctually a part of how they operate in nature?

Well yeah, kinda like how human animals instinctual build a home for their families....I just think beavers do it better ;)

I've watched them intentionally CREATE and use the levers and fulcrums they need to move large logs. I've watched one beaver call another beaver over to help him when he needed more weight on a lever. Even before their construction project got to that far, I watched them search for the perfect spot to build. At one point the male and female had a heated discussion over where they should start. They even use small twigs laid in a pattern on the ground to show each other what they want to do. They develop a design (unique to each location) plan extensively in advance, discuss and occasionally argue over who has the best idea, and they build together using tools fabricated from their environment. In short...they have a concept and they talk about it (in their own language) before acting on it....just like human animals...although I get the impression the beavers are more polite to each other than your average human construction workers.

Why does a spider spin a web? Why does a bird build a nest? I believe it's instinct,

How do you separate their "instincts" and a human's desire for food, a home, security, a safe place to raise our young, etc.?

Not that i'm attacking your point of view, guardian. :)

Well if we all had the same point of view, Internet forums would be incredibly boring :)

I just simply believe...or rather, it is my subjective opinion, that beings, no matter what their level, do what they do because they are meant to do so....

I wouldn't disagree with this statement, I just don't see the clear dividing line between humans and other mammals that many other people perchieve.

 

[Guardian]

I agree with Abstract. I don't think Beavers have the ability to understand levers and fulcrums just because they build dams.

Have you ever watched them build one?


Edited to add- Beavers also have a very intricate form of long distance communication. When they are out of vocal range of each other they slap their tales against the surface of the water, using a mathematical code and force of slaps to transmit different information. I was two moderate slaps and a twizzle when they spotted me. Strangers get one VERY hard slap that sounds almost like a rifle shot and can carry for miles over the water.

 

[Nawd]

Maybe we just see animals, insects and the things they create, their behavior and such, because we humans lack these skills.

We can make houses, but we make most of them square, not hut-like, the way the native population did.
We collect the honey, but we don't *make* the honey, doing as bees do perfectly, is not possible.
We listen to birds communicate with sound, sometimes we can even make the sound, but we don't actually *know* what they are saying
Etc.

Humans try and try to not be animals, yet I think we might be jealous of animals, so we study them, but don't dare copy them for whatever reason.

Heck we don't walk correctly, most don't even crap correctly to our evolutionary making.

Just some thoughts, maybe I'm incorrect in my observations.

Cool topic!

 

[Psalehesost]

Why does a spider spin a web? Why does a bird build a nest? I believe it's instinct,

How do you separate their "instincts" and a human's desire for food, a home, security, a safe place to raise our young, etc.?

I don't see why anyone would; "a human's desire for food, a home, security, a safe place to raise our young" is a very clear example of instinct.

As noted in ISOTM, the typical human works like this:

Body reacting to external influences -> desires -> thoughts -> several contradictory "wills"

Apart from a difference in the functioning of the later two, there is little difference between how a human and animal functions; and the typical person works just like an animal with a thinking center plugged in at the end, after the part of their being that governs most of their behavior. Still, the presence of the intellectual center means a greater fluidity of programming and variability of response, though this is all still mechanical. In your example, the only substantial way that a human differs from an animal with the same desires is having more ways, these largely programmed, of acting out desires stemming from the body reacting to external influences.

OSIT.

Then there is also, which is important to keep in mind, the possibility of developing a way of functioning that works the other way:

Body obeys <- emotional power <- thought <- single conscious Will

In this case, there is a much, much greater difference between such a human and an animal - but in almost all cases this difference is reduced to just a far-away potential, typically left altogether undeveloped.

I just simply believe...or rather, it is my subjective opinion, that beings, no matter what their level, do what they do because they are meant to do so....

I wouldn't disagree with this statement, I just don't see the clear dividing line between humans and other mammals that many other people perchieve.

Hopefully there's a fairly clear idea of it (for what it's worth - being just my understanding) above.