"rise" into the fifth dimension -- what does it mean?

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 11:48 PM
link   
in the development of the human psyche, certain aspects can be likened unto dimensional viewpoints. as the human ages from infant onward, they temporarily reside within these viewpoints. most people get stuck somewhere along the way, but ultimately every soul will attain what can be called the "leading edge" of consciousness. in our current day the leading edge is at level 7, which is actually a 1 dimensional form of consciousness.

the following outline is based on "spiral dynamics", the work of Ken Wilber, and my own concept.

SELF CONSCIOUSNESS
(1) 1 dimensional = survival, instinctual.
(2) 2 dimensional = emotional, magical.
(3) 3 dimensional = ego, rationality.

(4) 4 dimensional = society, conventionality, a timeline of 3D interaction

OTHER CONSCIOUSNESS
(5) 3 dimensional = intellect, the sciences.
(6) 2 dimensional = pluralistic relativism, cultural equality.
(7) 1 dimensional = global identity, unity.

(8) 5 dimensional = starchild ?, death ?


which can be plotted as follows:




granted, this diagram probably creates more questions than answers. for simplicity's sake, i have included only a skeleton of information. i have successfully mapped everything from physical sciences and religion to tarot and cosmology onto this model. it is comprehensive.

for purposes of this thread, in an attempt to understand what is meant by a the "dimensional shift" in consciousness, i will speak briefly on the upper triangle portion. to gain the proper perspective within the diagram, you must view it as a 3-dimensional rendering....such that the upper triangle (5th dimension) stands perpendicular to and above the lower section. i have given directional cues on the diagram to help achieve the proper perspective. it is drawn in an imaginary space, so do not try to understand it as a literal 3D space.

keeping this in mind, i hope it becomes at least somewhat clearer what is meant when metaphysicists speak of "rising" into a higher dimension of consciousness.

please feel free to ask any questions with the understanding that the potential for complexity of conversation is quite high.

(for an example of this model in application, CLICK HERE)




[edit on 16-10-2009 by tgidkp]




posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:02 AM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 


lawofone.info...

That is the progression of conciousness/being to Unity.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:10 AM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 




"rise" into the fifth dimension -- what does it mean?

i hope it becomes at least somewhat clearer what is meant when
metaphysicists speak of "rising" into a higher dimension of consciousness.


Perhaps, but not every source entirely agrees on where to "draw the lines" when they speak of densities, dimensions, etc. According to some schools of thought, "rise into the fifth dimension" could possibly be interpreted as a euphemism for "to become dead."




[edit on 16-10-2009 by LordBucket]



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Psychonaughty
 


from a quick perusal of that link i can say that the "law of one" does seem to correlate in certain ways to what i have given.

it seems to me, tho, that rather than double back into a pyrimidal shape, the geometry of the "law of one" seems to extend only into one direction. as a model of reality, that does not seem terribly useful.

i will look more at this. thanks!



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:16 AM
link   
reply to post by LordBucket
 


there is always disagreement, but naturally I am right.

5th Dimension as death does not necessarily contradict my model. 5D certainly represents a living consciousness much different from our own. death? yes, perhaps.

thank you.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:37 AM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 


I ask that you read it, many times, for it is too complex and sensual to be of any type of frabrication. It's also complex if you actually read all of the books literally life changing literature.

BTW: The law of one is not linear it is cyclical, as the first density arises from the eighth density in a complex fashion.

[edit on 16-10-2009 by Psychonaughty]



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 01:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Psychonaughty
 



The following is the "complex fashion" you are speaking of. drawings are my own.









i am very much interested in more reading on the law of one, although i have to admit that the link you took me to was a bit too difficult a read. do you have a summary of some kind?


best.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 04:09 AM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 




it seems to me, tho, that rather than double back into a pyrimidal shape,
the geometry of the "law of one" seems to extend only into one direction.
as a model of reality, that does not seem terribly useful.


You seem to be implying that the more dimensions your model needs to describe reality, the better it is. I don't think I agree with that reasoning. The value of any model is in how well it describes what it is modeling. Not how arbitrarily complex it is.



that does not seem terribly useful.


I see.

Please explain to me how your model is useful.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 05:26 AM
link   
reply to post by LordBucket
 


You seem to be implying that the more dimensions your model needs to describe reality, the better it is.


actually, a continuously increasing model would necessitate more non-intersecting dimensions than what i have shown. in such a case, more dimensions would equate to a worse model.

in effect, i am saying that a continuously increasing (linear) model does not compute with the way that i personally perceive reality. it is not workable, and thus not as useful, IMO.

i am not attempting to be arbitrarily complex....there is a REASON that my model has a pyrimidal shape, and exists in an imaginary 3d space. it is my hope that the model can speak for itself in an intuitive way.


p.s. Psychonoaughty has already stated that the Law of One is cyclical, not linear. so the argument is mute.



Please explain to me how your model is useful.


i do recognise the possibility that *I* am the only one that this means anything to. if you can think of more specific questions, it would help. i could go on for days, but i am not sure anyone would care.

[edit on 16-10-2009 by tgidkp]



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 05:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by LordBucket
reply to post by LordBucket
 

According to some schools of thought...



i apologise for my AUTHORITATIVE tone. i fully intend an air of discussion, to clarify as nearly as possible what is meant by "rising into a higher dimension". it is one of those phrases that gets tossed around and i, personally, would like to come to a scientifically comprehensible agreement about what it means. ...get everyone on the same page, so to speak.

the OP is intended only as a jumping off point: MY jumping off point.

please, everyone, feel free to insert your own jumping off points.





[edit on 16-10-2009 by tgidkp]



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 06:43 AM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 


You don't rise into a fifth dimension, you rise into a different plane of existence. The two are inherently different and not translatable across each other in any way. Learn the difference before you use loaded statements like 'rise into the fifth dimension'. And they say T.V. is the problem...



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 




p.s. Psychonoaughty has already stated that the
Law of One is cyclical, not linear. so the argument is mute.


If I were to state that the english language is cyclical, would you similarly conclude that it is irrelevant, and stop using it?

Why not review the material yourself and come to your own conclusions?



if you can think of more specific questions, it would help.


Sure. What is the nature of the change in consciousness you are describing? Please do not use the words "dimension," "density" or any numbers in your answer.




actually, a continuously increasing model would necessitate more non-intersecting dimensions than what i have shown. in such a case, more dimensions would equate to a worse model.

in effect, i am saying that a continuously increasing (linear) model does not compute with the way that i personally perceive reality. it is not workable, and thus not as useful, IMO


I hadn't realized that your model involved any non-intersecting dimensions at all. And, looking back at your original image with the understanding that you do perceive it this way...it makes even less sense to me.



a continuously increasing model would necessitate more non-intersecting dimensions


1) No. "Continuous increase" can be mapped in a single dimension. Counting in your head should be example enough, but try thinking about temperature. If the temperature increases from 1 degree to 2 degrees, you do not need to add anything to the concept of temperature. Nor do you need to add anything if the temperature increases by any amount. The range of "temperature" exists in a single dimension. In fact..."range of increase and decrease" is kind of what a dimension is.

2) "Non-intersection" is not...correct. You appear to be attempting to conceptualize each individual dimension as a discreet, three dimensional block. This seems a very odd way of looking at it to me. If you stack sheets of paper on top of each other, true, they do not intersect. But these are not additional dimensions. Try thinking of it this way...imagine being "stuck" in a single frame of your life. Say...the moment you turned one year old. Imagine your entire consciousness confined to that exact instant. Now...imagine "ascending" in consciousness to becoming aware of the entirety of your life as a single object. Now, examine these two states of consciousness relative to each other. Do they intersect? Well, I would say yes. The "sum total" does contain the single instant. Something has merely been added to it. It is true that the instant of turning one does not intersect with the instant of turning two. But the transition between those two states is not the sort of ascension that I think either of us are talking about. For example, in your model, when one "ascends" from the second to third dimension, one does not completely abandon and forget everything that existed in the second dimension, right? Becoming rational does not mean that emotion ceases to be part of your experience. No...these things are added to one another, with each subsequent "dimension" (as you're calling them) being added to the experience of the previous one. If true...then your dimensions do intersect. Right? If so...how does your model make any sense?

3) Finally, I think you misunderstood the concept referred to in the first place. Instead of imagining the "density" model described in the law of one material as a "dimension" try visualizing it as a range of frequency. "First density" refers to a certain state of being. "Second density" refers to a slightly more conscious state of being. But both of these densities, as well as the others can be described as existing along a single "dimension." Metaphorically, first density might correspond to the range of zero to 10 hertz. Second density might correspond to the range of 11 to 20 hertz. Etc. First and second density beings standing next to one another would not necessarily exist in "different dimensions." The whole reason it's called a "density" is because of the frequency. Imagine looking top-down on a sinewave with only the wavecrests visible. It's going to look like a dotted line. The greater the frequency of the wave, the greater the density of the dots. No "additional dimensions" need to be added to describe the transition from 10 to 20 hertz. Or to 30. Or to any number. All possible frequencies exist along the single axis, the single "dimension" that is referred to as "frequency."



when metaphysicists speak of "rising" into a higher dimension


Personally I think the whole thing is a misunderstanding of symantics. "Dimension" is being used metaphorically. You might as well say that when someone advances from third grade to fourth grade, that they're "rising to a higher dimension." Sure...that's literally correct if you conceive of each school grade as a dimension. And you could draw all sorts of pretty graphs of each sucessive grade as neatly stacked boxes on a chart. But it's a needless obfuscation that would convey very little idea of what it would actually mean to go from third to fourth grade.


[edit on 16-10-2009 by LordBucket]



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by tgidkp
in the development of the human psyche, certain aspects can be likened unto dimensional viewpoints. as the human ages from infant onward, they temporarily reside within these viewpoints. most people get stuck somewhere along the way, but ultimately every soul will attain what can be called the "leading edge" of consciousness. in our current day the leading edge is at level 7, which is actually a 1 dimensional form of consciousness.

the following outline is based on "spiral dynamics", the work of Ken Wilber, and my own concept.

SELF CONSCIOUSNESS
(1) 1 dimensional = survival, instinctual.
(2) 2 dimensional = emotional, magical.
(3) 3 dimensional = ego, rationality.

(4) 4 dimensional = society, conventionality, a timeline of 3D interaction

OTHER CONSCIOUSNESS
(5) 3 dimensional = intellect, the sciences.
(6) 2 dimensional = pluralistic relativism, cultural equality.
(7) 1 dimensional = global identity, unity.

(8) 5 dimensional = starchild ?, death ?


which can be plotted as follows:




granted, this diagram probably creates more questions than answers. for simplicity's sake, i have included only a skeleton of information. i have successfully mapped everything from physical sciences and religion to tarot and cosmology onto this model. it is comprehensive.

for purposes of this thread, in an attempt to understand what is meant by a the "dimensional shift" in consciousness, i will speak briefly on the upper triangle portion. to gain the proper perspective within the diagram, you must view it as a 3-dimensional rendering....such that the upper triangle (5th dimension) stands perpendicular to and above the lower section. i have given directional cues on the diagram to help achieve the proper perspective. it is drawn in an imaginary space, so do not try to understand it as a literal 3D space.

keeping this in mind, i hope it becomes at least somewhat clearer what is meant when metaphysicists speak of "rising" into a higher dimension of consciousness.

please feel free to ask any questions with the understanding that the potential for complexity of conversation is quite high.

(for an example of this model in application, CLICK HERE)




[edit on 16-10-2009 by tgidkp]


Firstly, this is not a theory. It's a guess at worst, an hypothesis at best.

Tell me, how would you disprove your hypothesis?



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 08:43 AM
link   
reply to post by xelamental
 




how would you disprove your hypothesis?


More to the point, how would you disprove it?

Other than by quoting a massive block of text and dismissing it, that is.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by LordBucket
reply to post by xelamental
 




how would you disprove your hypothesis?


More to the point, how would you disprove it?

Other than by quoting a massive block of text and dismissing it, that is.


Hypothesis: A tentative explanation for an observation, phenomenon, or scientific problem that can be tested by further investigation.

The whole point in coming up with an new theory is thinking of ways to prove it. The best way to do this is to try and disprove.

People who don't do this, are simply not interested in the truth.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 09:26 AM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 


You are going to have to read the entire books if you want to understand.

Different densities of conciousness refer to the light vibration that a being can interpret or be of.

We all, as beings and different distortions of the Infinite creator, strive to join back with the creator for absolute infinite conciousness and being.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Psychonaughty
 


What do you mean by light vibration? I've never heard of light being in vibration or a vibration in itself. Where did you find this sort of terminology in reference to light? You do know what light is and is not, right?



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 12:58 PM
link   
To open the mind and experience the light within

that is the goal of yoga, Samadhi is the state of meditation by which the yogi is no longer aware of anything but his own mind. It is a state of unmatched beauty and oneness.

Yoke with the true spirit that animates your body

go here for more information sites.google.com...

or you can email me at julianmalizia@gmx.com



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 01:04 PM
link   
You don't really rise into a dimension.

The dimensions exist already, it's a matter of being able to "interact" with another dimension.

Of course it would be a completely different plane of existence making your models obsolete.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by FouL-LiveR
 


What do you mean by 'interact' with another dimension? Suppose the universe is an eleven dimensional universe, all matter would already be interacting accordingly based on the physics of an eleven dimensional universe. It's not like matter is cut off from the other dimensions as if they are some how separate physical spaces. Please people, learn something. :/





new topics
top topics
 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join