What time is it???

Last night I couldn't sleep - I had road crews resurfacing the road by my house and the whole house was shaking and what not. So I did the next best thing, I put on some pleasant music and *tried* to read. Anyway, I ended up thinking about time and dimension. Now I am of the opinion that there are an infinite number of dimensions regardless of what my sences tell me, and I also feel that time is only a usefull way of describe change but that it isn't exactly "real". Perhaps the 4th density beings aren't so much time travelers as they exist in such a way that they can see the expance of "our" time - so they could adjust events along our time line forward and back at the same time for them. Assuming that some 4th density beings also can exist in 4 dimensions. Sticking with the fourth dimensional being (regardless of what density they exist at), living in dimensions A,B,C and D; if they had the means could they not find a way to percieve beings living on lower dimensional states - say three dimensional being living on any of the dimensional combinations that are included in their dimensional awareness - A,B and C; A,B and D or B,C and D? Would it not explain the way higher density beings look in on us?

So then I went along a very different set thoughts. Now we generally say that time is the forth dimension, but let's imagine that forth dimensional being - would they not experience and know change and thus experience a form of time though vastly different from or own, but time nonetheless? So then a thought occured to me - what if time is simply our description of our movement through the dimensions we can't percieve? So then I took it to an extreme - what about a being existing in all dimensions? Time would have to stop, all changes, events whatever would have happened - if everything is done then the concept of time is meaningless. What about a critter being in 0 dimensions (effectively a point), would not time seem to go by exedingly fast, or rather since it would be the only way to describe one's reality - without being able to experience anything but oneself the only experience one could have is that of personal change?

So then I started thinking about light, not just the physical phenomenon of light, but also light in terms of awarness and knowledge. At first I thought about it in terms of the speed of light. I came to the conclusion that the speed of light in a 0 dimensional reality must be infinite since it would take no time at all for it to cross the entire construct of a zero dimensional reality, and in an infinite dimensional reality the speed of light might as well be zero since though the light has filled the entire "universe" at that point, it is rather static - where would it move to since it has aready gone everywhere? But since it ultimately requires time to describe speed I moved onto thinking about it more in terms of awareness. Thinking about that little critter in a 0 dimensional reality the only thing the would have to learn is to become self-aware (which would happen probably instantly), then they would graduate and move to a 1 dimensional reality and be able to experience a fuller reality. Going to the other extreme - awarness would be complete in an infinite dimensional reality and since everything would be known at that point it seems to match what I was thinking about light before in terms of speed.

I know that all this is terribly flawed from a scientific standpoint, it isn't even a theory, but I don't have the skills required to put in in such a way, and even if I did and also if I had access to all the technology that ever has been or will be created by humanity could I actually test it?

But I would welcome comments both from the more scientific oriented members of this forum, as well as those of a more spritual bend. I thought it was a fun little train of thought and figured "hey, even if someone sees it as being completely messed up they might enjoy reading it anyway."

Excellent post.
I have been grappling with the concept of "time" for some "time".
I hope I don't veer to far off the subject.
Forgive me for not being a scientist, but I do have some concepts I'd like to post.
And I also would think that in order to discover truth, ya gotta start with a concept.
We live in linear time.
Linear time is our current situation.
We are learning, growing, and experiencing linear life as a singular, seperate individual. Part of a whole ONE.
If the ONE wants to grow, I would think sending out little pieces though the veil to forget, become individualized, and gather experience.
As we experience, we start to question.
Questions promote growth.
This linear time is for us.
There is another form of time within the higher densities.
I've had many, many dreams on this subject.
Higher density time that is.
4D time is outside of linear time.
They "see" past, present, and future simultaneously.
They can affect the past, and see future results.
But the many paths of any timeline forces much complexity in this.
Much more complex than I can verbalize.
Have you ever seen a chart called Critical Path used by "some" computer geeks?
The Critcal Path starts at a given point.
Each milestone of progress has a multitude of potential events.
Each event then creates a new path.
Each new path contains the same end result destination (desired result).
Problem is, sometimes an unplanned event occurs.
Adjustments must be made, and a new path forms.
Now, please excuse me for my opinions that follow.
So, the 4D dudes have a desired result, but they are working a critical path, and sometimes that path does not end up at their desired result.
I think our FREE WILL throws some monkey wrenches (unpredictability) into their critical path.
So they keep tinkering with the past.
Because of our FREE WILL, I do think the 4D dudes have limitations on what they do.
Try to do.
But then again, with all these apparant timelines, who's to say they haven't "already" reached their desired goal, in the future, on some timeline?
Our future? I again dunno.
Due to 4D tinkering, are we stuck in a time loop? Dunno again.
Perhaps 4th density time is causal, event driven, and non-linear?

Al Today said:

...
4D time is outside of linear time.
They "see" past, present, and future simultaneously.
They can affect the past, and see future results.
But the many paths of any timeline forces much complexity in this.
Much more complex than I can verbalize.
Have you ever seen a chart called Critical Path used by "some" computer geeks?
The Critcal Path starts at a given point.
Each milestone of progress has a multitude of potential events.
Each event then creates a new path.
Each new path contains the same end result destination (desired result).
Problem is, sometimes an unplanned event occurs.
Adjustments must be made, and a new path forms.
Now, please excuse me for my opinions that follow.
So, the 4D dudes have a desired result, but they are working a critical path, and sometimes that path does not end up at their desired result.
I think our FREE WILL throws some monkey wrenches (unpredictability) into their critical path.
So they keep tinkering with the past.
Because of our FREE WILL, I do think the 4D dudes have limitations on what they do.
Try to do.
But then again, with all these apparent timelines, who's to say they haven't "already" reached their desired goal, in the future, on some timeline?
Our future? I again dunno.
Due to 4D tinkering, are we stuck in a time loop? Dunno again.
Perhaps 4th density time is causal, event driven, and nonlinear?

Click to expand...

Sorry to resurrect this old thread, but I was searching the archive for an "answer" concerning just the things mentioned above. Now I know I shouldn't be asking to be given "answers on a silver plate". I should read, research and find answers on my own (otherwise I cannot "grow"), but this thing about the time-all-is-happening-right-now and time concepts in higher densities disturbs me so much I cannot read on until I get my head around this thing.

So, I'm currently reading High Strangeness (2nd ed) and there I bump into this thing again. The C's say that everything is sort of "happening right now" and that in higher densities, e.g. 4th, there is now time - as we know it. But if the beings at higher densities can see both past and future (since there is no time and everything happens now), why would they have to "rearrange" or do any "tinkering" to create any desired result - sort of in their "future"? Can't they just choose to "experience" and choose a future, a chosen time in 3rd density if you will, where all their wishes are fulfilled? Why would they need any "food" if they are not experiencing any causality or "order of things" - in order for their energies to be drained and emptied (that's why they need more) some "movement time" is needed, isn't it? Why would they have a need to "play games" with humankind if they can "see everything" and "every moment in time"?

This is probably explained somewhere in the recommended literature. I just need a "jump start" here, could someone help me out and point me in the right direction?

aragorn said:

Sorry to resurrect this old thread, but I was searching the archive for an "answer" concerning just the things mentioned above. Now I know I shouldn't be asking to be given "answers on a silver plate". I should read, research and find answers on my own (otherwise I cannot "grow"), but this thing about the time-all-is-happening-right-now and time concepts in higher densities disturbs me so much I cannot read on until I get my head around this thing.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure that as a 3D entity we can - completely - 'get our heads around this thing' - until we experience it.  Our perception is SO limited that it's almost impossible to envision something that our physical vehicle was designed to obscure - osit.

aragon said:

So, I'm currently reading High Strangeness (2nd ed) and there I bump into this thing again. The C's say that everything is sort of "happening right now" and that in higher densities, e.g. 4th, there is now time - as we know it. But if the beings at higher densities can see both past and future (since there is no time and everything happens now), why would they have to "rearrange" or do any "tinkering" to create any desired result - sort of in their "future"?

Click to expand...

Perhaps it has less to do with the kind of linearity that suggests 'both past and future' as if it were one line - as if they could see all at once and know the outcome - than it has to do with a constantly changing present, from which all pasts and futures can be observed - but not in any way that would make sense to a 3D mind!  From our vantage, we cannot (by design) completely grasp what this might mean, unless we've experienced it, or a glimpse of it.

aragon said:

Can't they just choose to "experience" and choose a future, a chosen time in 3rd density if you will, where all their wishes are fulfilled?

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone here has a definitive answer for that - in a Universe where anything can be and is possible, then, certainly it would follow that they could just 'choose' such a thing - though that seems to not be the situation in which we find ourselves to be a part.

aragon said:

Why would they need any "food" if they are not experiencing any causality or "order of things" - in order for their energies to be drained and emptied (that's why they need more) some "movement time" is needed, isn't it? Why would they have a need to "play games" with humankind if they can "see everything" and "every moment in time"?

Click to expand...

This is linear thinking again ( which is natural since it's how our minds work!) To my understanding, 'different from time as we know it' does not mean 'no time' - it means time is different from how we understand it or can understand it. From a very basic level, if they need 'food', then they are consuming 'food', so I get your question from that aspect - I think the answer may lie somewhere in the idea that being outside of 'time as we know it' does not mean that everything is 'frozen' as they perceive it - it is just different, much less limited and linear and much, much more variable - open and accessible as it were.

aragon said:

This is probably explained somewhere in the recommended literature. I just need a "jump start" here, could someone help me out and point me in the right direction?

Click to expand...

I don't know that it's explained in detail or conclusively (though I'm sure others will chime in if it is and I've not yet come across it)  - I think this is one of those things that we will understand 'when we get there ' - much like 360 degree awareness - until experienced, it makes no sense and is impossible to 'get our heads around'.   

So, I suppose the question for you now might become how to move forward in your understanding, realizing that until you experience it, there's no real way to 'get your head around it'?  ;)

Apologies for not being more clear in my explanation of my understanding of it - it does not lend itself well to words - at all - but perhaps others can do a better job.

aragorn, anart: I came up with a visual analogue - building upon dimensionally reduced representations so as to get something that fits into our puny 3D-visualization, as follows - might be a clearer explanation, or not, but I'll give it a go:

Picture a series of images (no particular content needed) - an image slide, or row of images, from, say, left to right, simply static for now. This would be various "selections" from past-to-present-to-future. ("time", according to the C's, would be "selective" - somewhat like images that could occur in any order, but for us follow in a fixed, linear order, like a movie playing. the plain "images" imagined held in a row in the visual here would be - as a concept - a small "sampling")

Then, there is the "expanded present" - past, present and future simultaneous, and all being "open" as all can be changed. And as changes occur in the "open" past, present and future, the images in the row are now all animated - there are ongoing changes in the images representing parts of the past, present and future all at once.

There are also (if I've got this right - not certain, for sure!) multiple probable realities "competing" in probability, one being the "wholly real" and the others "potential" at any given moment of expanded present. So we extend the visual into several left-to-right rows of representative images, from top to bottom, the row in the "middle"being the "real" one and the rows above and below being "potential" alternatives, the positions shifting.

Then, there are an infinite number of parallel worlds - the relationships of these to parallel possibilities is a bit unclear to me, so this part of the analogy is a bit suspect - so we extent the visual into the third dimension - depth. Behind this top-to-bottom set of left-to-right lines of representative images are an infinitude of more sets.

And so, pasts, presents and futures all stay "animated" - ever changing. Let's say there is a 4D-being outside of all these "images", growing "hungry". This being then has to get "food" from somewhere. Let's say there is one moment a possibility for establishing feeding. So the 4D being establishes feeding with some "target" in one of these locations, this affecting the other, following images, the probabilities of things happening, and so on. And all the time, things are "spontaneously" changing as well. So where there one moment was a possibility - perhaps one utilized - that possibility might suddenly snap shut (doing what to the potentially previously ongoing feeding? removing it, perhaps, meaning that it in effect never took place? meaning that it has to be replaced, because now the being is "hungrier" again. and so, perhaps, if this is the right idea, the 4D STSers play what you could call a "game" of something along the lines of reverse-whack-a-mole, having to maintain sufficient amounts of "connections" in the ever-fluctuating present), and others open.


Final note - time is cyclical, so instead of rows from left-to-right, you really should have "circles" where the ends meet (or perhaps rather even more complex structures of circles within circles within circles within...). But that would have made the visual a mess, so I left this for last.

anart said:

I'm not sure that as a 3D entity we can - completely - 'get our heads around this thing' - until we experience it. Our perception is SO limited that it's almost impossible to envision something that our physical vehicle was designed to obscure - osit.

Click to expand...

I always find a certain reaction by dogs interesting. When I hold a piece of food in the air above a plate on a table (which the dog can see) and then drop it onto the plate, the dog looks at the ground underneath the table. Maybe that's a good example of at least one of the perceptual differences between 2 and 3D, and maybe it is useful as an aide to at least making a attempt at imagining the sort of conceptual expansion involved from 3 to 4D

aragorn said:

Why would they need any "food" if they are not experiencing any causality or "order of things" - in order for their energies to be drained and emptied (that's why they need more) some "movement time" is needed, isn't it?

Click to expand...

I think that in the higher and lower worlds there are energy exchanges between them and there is an interdependence between these worlds even though they are of completely different realms. But I think their interdependence is ‘specific’ in the sense that the higher world is dependent on how well organized the systems are in the lower worlds to support it. Possibly we are talking about energy exchanges between the worlds and different qualities of energies being exchanged between these realms, and potential differences between these energies.

So I don’t think its so cut and dried. The realms would interact and their different quality energies would ‘mix’ in such a way as to support each other much in the same way that an organized nervous system (such as the central nervous system and the peripheral nervous system connected to it) “supports” the life energy that flows through it which connects the brain with the spinal cord and with the peripheral nervous system into a whole system that is alive. So maybe the higher worlds need the support of the lower worlds so as to renew it’s potential and the specific events in the lower world are given a 'significance' as determined by the higher potential of the higher worlds and the nature of these dynamic energy exchanges?

Hi Perceval;

Perceval said:

[...]
Maybe that's a good example of at least one of the perceptual differences between 2 and 3D...
[...]

Click to expand...

Excuse my denseness, but how so? Do you mean in terms of how difficult it is to overcome our programmed 'assumptions' or 'illusions' about what 'goes with' the particular action?

This thread is "growing" for sure! Interesting replies.

Csayeursost, sounds to me like your representation could be a possible and partial "explanation". I'm just going to "babble" some thoughts that was inspired from your reply:

I remember vaguely the images from my physics books representing the different "coordinate frames" (sorry Ark, don't know the right term here  ;) ) of someone in a moving train and someone observing the train from outside, the latter being sort of "still". So maybe this sort of thinking could be applied here, dunno. As anart pointed out maybe the beings e.g. in the 4th dimension do have "time" of some sort, but it is so different from ours that we can't understand it. So coming back to the different "coordinate frames"; maybe the 4th dimension dudes are outside our "frame", in their own "paradigm/frame" observing our "slideshow" (as represented by Csayeursost). But when they, in order to get "food", must focus in on some point in our 3d time (slide), they loose momentarily the "view" of the whole representation of our time - our 3d past and future.

So they are sort of zooming in and zooming out to/of our  3d world/time, and in their wishful thinking hoping to "fix things" or "get it right" this time. But since they cannot "stay long" in our "time-frame", and when they do they cannot see the big picture (for that they have to "zoom out") they can never get things exactly as they would like it. And that's also why they need human "agents", because then they can stay "outside the 3d coordinate box" - seeing the big picture, and like a puppet master they can try to manipulate things "down here". And didn't the C's say that only 6th density beings/thought centers can see "all time" - the 4th density STS see only what they wish for (not being always correct, thank God!)

Reading these very interesting posts, I have some thoughts I would like to contribute. I've tried to explain my ideas as well as I can, but it seems we, as 3D beings, have a built-in block against visualising 4D realities.

Aragorn said:

The C's say that everything is sort of "happening right now" and that in higher densities, e.g. 4th, there is now time - as we know it.

Click to expand...

I think what the Cs mean is something like the experience of rising into the air above a town: as you ascend you can see more and more of the town, the streets, the landscape the town is situated in, and so on. Similarly with 'time'. From the 4D perspective, our entire 'strip' or 'circle' of time can be seen as one unit stretching off into 4D space (assuming for the sake of this example that 4D space behaves like 3D space). We can only see what is in our 'now' because our awareness is limited by our 3D bodies.

Aragorn said:

But if the beings at higher densities can see both past and future (since there is no time and everything happens now), why would they have to "rearrange" or do any "tinkering" to create any desired result - sort of in their "future"?

Click to expand...

Since 4D beings are outside of and can see all of 3D time, they can also see the outcome of intervening in one part of the strip/circle of time. If these 4D beings are hungry, they would want to maximise the food output from their 'farm' even if they're not particularly hungry at that moment in 'time'. Just look at our farms - we keep production going year round so that we always have stocks of food. 4D beings would find it very simple to intervene in 3D events at one point in our time in order to create an outcome further along the time continuum which would give them more 'food'. All this isn't necessarily in their 'future' or 'past' since they may not have either as we understand the terms. Perhaps a few of them are given the task of intervening at earlier stages in our history, and as the food output becomes greater (using 3D time terminology) more and more of them come and join the feeding frenzy. I'm thinking here of the way our recent history - the past 2,000 years - has led up to the present state of affairs.

Aragorn said:

Can't they just choose to "experience" and choose a future, a chosen time in 3rd density if you will, where all their wishes are fulfilled?

Click to expand...

Others in this thread have mentioned probabilities. It seems possible that at any 'now' moment in 3D time, there are several if not many possible futures available, and the one which comes into being depends on all the factors, visible and invisible, present in that moment and the events leading up to that moment. Perhaps, if the 4D 'feeders' did not manipulate events, things in 3D would revert to a more balanced state and their food source would be reduced.

Aragorn said:

Why would they need any "food" if they are not experiencing any causality or "order of things" - in order for their energies to be drained and emptied (that's why they need more) some "movement time" is needed, isn't it?

Click to expand...

It is theorised that in 4D there is no time as we know it, but that still remains just a theory. I think that it is Ouspensky, in Tertium Organum, who suggests that we think of 4D as 'time-like space'; meaning that what is experienced as spatial - shape, form, size, etc. - in 4D, is experienced in time in 3D. Perhaps 4D beings need to enter 3D space in order to use the experience of time as a framework for their own activities. And once in 3D, they are subject to its laws, hence they would need to feed.

Aragorn said:

Why would they have a need to "play games" with humankind if they can "see everything" and "every moment in time"?

Click to expand...

They play games with us because a) they are predators and that's how they work, b) because they do see every moment in time, and c) this is how they maximise their food source, down on the 'farm' so to speak.

Thanks, Aragorn, for resurrecting this thread. I hope my input is useful.

Time as we know it is probably best thought of as another coordinate that we can travel to. 4D Time travels. 4D can take big jumps in time or space while we currently are limited to small space jumps and have very little control over our time jumps (we can make clocks go slower on the orbiting shuttle relative to earth clocks!)

We as individuals (or clocks on the shuttle) do have our own reference frame clocks. 6D being massless, perceives a whole timeline through the universe all at once (photons don't age). This does not mean they are omniscient, they still have to find the right timelime with the right information, sometimes it may be easier just to ask a 4D STO informant.

4D STS being variably physical probably can't perceive a whole timeline all at once. They probably have to jump around and do trial and error. They also apparently can create some kind of scratchpad universe to play with before actually using it.

Besides the time and space differences between realms there's also the perception differences between beings of different densities. The dog under the table (mentioned earlier by Perceval) might literally be seeing things differently. We might come to the same conclusion as the dog if we saw what the dog saw in the mind's eye. It could be an illusion of sorts created by information lost behind a density related veil.

Just a small question in addition:

Do humans actually SEE 3D or actually 2D? From my understanding
and correct me if I am wrong, but is it that our brain actually calculates
depth (3rd (z) coordinate) by triangulating the from the distance separated
by our eyes?  Try covering one eye, and see if you can actually `perceive'
depth?  The twist is, our brain is still "calculating" based on experience?

In any case, try to grab real quick the handle of your coffee cup and would
you dare without being a little more careful lest you knock coffee all over
the table?  I think some would `hesitate', no?

It was interesting for me, to say the least!

[edit]
I forgot to add: Gooble: "What do dogs see?", one of which I found:
_http://psychlops.psy.uconn.edu/eric/class/dogvision.html

Interesting as well.

Rabbit: It IS interesting and thanks for sharing! BTW: Even
with both eyes OPENED - I've spilt many cups as well, even when
LOOKING at it! Just because your eyes are "there", your brain might
elsewhere? Hows that for eye-hand-mind coordination or "perception"?
Alas, such limitiations but lessons learned (and forgotten so quickly)!
[/edit]

FWIW,
Dan

dant said:

Just a small question in addition:

Try covering one eye, and see if you can actually `perceive'
depth? The twist is, our brain is still "calculating" based on experience?

....try to grab real quick the handle of your coffee cup and would
you dare without being a little more careful lest you knock coffee all over
the table? I think some would `hesitate', no?

It was interesting for me, to say the least!

FWIW,
Dan

Click to expand...

Hi Dan
This reminds me of an excercise that an old director did on first meeting us in his class. He would go around the room , hold out his hand so as to be shook in a greeting gesture (shake hands) and look us directly in the eyes

It was only after he had greeted every one in the room this way that he would reveal that many of us had looked downwards to make sure that our hands would meet .

Some had not looked down and kept eye contact with him all the way.

This was to demonstrate how unsure many of us were about our immediate space and surroundings, and thus also showing us how much we did perceive with our eyes without looking down.

Its one of those things which is fun to do when first meeting someone and shaking hands. The chances are if you keep eye contact both your hands will meet.

As for cup handles , yeh ive knocked over many a cup of something or other so so much for my awareness :)

Thoughts that come to mind regarding time I should of added is, dream time , meaning in a dream evey thing may seem to happen all at once or in fact even in what we would normally call being awake this happens. A bird sings, a car rolls by a tree rustles in the wind and so on all in the same perceived time.All at once!

But

When writing down what one had perceived in that chosen moment it would maybe take ten minuts to write down,Thus back into linear time for an explanation.If that makes sense.

Buddy said:

Hi Perceval;

Perceval said:

[...]
Maybe that's a good example of at least one of the perceptual differences between 2 and 3D...
[...]

Click to expand...

Excuse my denseness, but how so? Do you mean in terms of how difficult it is to overcome our programmed 'assumptions' or 'illusions' about what 'goes with' the particular action?

Click to expand...

What it said to me was there is something missing in a dogs 3D perception, that they cannot deduce that the food is on top of the table, even though they can see the table, maybe they just can't visualise the table top