Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

The Omniverse


spiratio

Recommended Posts

Disclaimer: the information that will be presented in this thread and subsequent links, contains sensible tho diverse notions that cannot be refuted... Each is to discern what is beneficial to their awareness for themselves. If you are such a person that is anxious about the idea of consciousness being the fundamental cause and factor in all things created (and please understand I am not implying a vengeful god that's going to come and get you) then for your own sake forego reading this material. It is not my intention to start debate here but simply to offer what I have to share with those who already accept it on some level.

When looking into the greater scope the notions presented become far more grandiose. I will urge all who come across this to take note that when something is known the knowledge of it cannot be undone. Even if it is a compilation of epiphanies that cannot be proven through the rigour of conventional science, but which have thought provocative implications about how and what consciousness's roll is in the way that our existence is explored with regard to the purely mental processes of thought based esoteric experiments.

If this is not your cup of tea then you will be much better off psychologically, by not reading any of this thread. Given the implications of the notions presented introduce thoughts that may be uncomfortable for some to consider, then it is only responsibly wise for myself to advocate that due to the fact that the notions that are extrapolated upon are irrefutable, then it would be best that those who don't wish to have an unwanted irrefutable concept of consciousness based reality to become part of their mental inventory, then they best stick with focusing on how they prefer to assume reality is. For the same principles that are described work in both head spaces. Only one pays direct attention where as the other utilises them passively so as to function at its optimum; implying the latter is reductionist scientific methods.

There are sections within the following which are highly non linear. As such certain phrases and paragraphs covered earlier may need to be revised in order to grasp the context of what a later facet deal with. This even occurs within a single given paragraph at times whereby the end compliments the beginning in way that when it is reread the begging is understood in a higher manner and vice versa. Thus some notions may appear nonsensical at first, however upon finishing the paragraph they take shape.

Regardless of whether one agrees with the information presented, I thank all who taking the care to read this disclaimer. So as that oneself may be capable of identifying the outlined precautions and thereby be better able to manage mental health and or faculties in context of these writings

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The Omniverse

Synopsis

The Omniverse concept has been notioned by many philosophical writers and fringe theorists alike, whom contend with string theory, as well as the esoteric science's of modern mystics from the last century. There are also some aspects mentioned throughout the various ancient Hindu scriptures. This synopsis will extrapolate upon the wickipedia entry on the subject thereby setting the context for the following alternate interpretation.

The Omniverse is the cosmology of which centres upon the notion of an all encompassing hyper-dimensional hub, by which all possible universes with all possible laws of physics occur. In the physical context, the limitation of the definition "universe" is that it only has one set of "physical laws and constants that govern it, whereas the Omniverse is expanded to include multiple sets of physical laws and constants, each expressed as a wholly or partially separate universe. The later being universes which overlap into one another, like two TV channels being played simultaneously on the same TV, of which broadcast the exact same show, except each show has the potential to diverge into alternate possibilities of expression.

1.1 The Hierarchy within the Omniverse

Universe: The inside description of a context that is relative in size/structure (attributes/modes) to the known universe that we inhabit. A Universe, also known as a Cosmos, is a particular individual space-time organization with a specified number of dimensions of space and time and definite and specific laws of physics. Other Universes (other Cosmoses) may have different numbers of dimensions of space and time and different laws of physics than ones own Universe (Cosmos).

Multiverse: The part of infinity that directly joins a given universe with all possible alternate configurations of that universe i.e. the field which spans a given cosm and all its subjective alternate cosms.

Metaverse: In string theory, the part that is along with, after; over also denoting change in the multiverse that houses the branes or film that each universe is said to be attached to and hang like individual sheets in a hypermagnetic wave with rhythms of hypercosmic strings going up and down that has a third element causing up, down, backwards, forwards, motions inside the Xenoverse.

Xenoverse: the unknown alien elements that are beyond and part of the metaverse and multiverse structure. Compared to a patchwork quilt hanging on a line to dry in space that is multivariate inside the Omniverse. While the Omniverse is said to be the outside ring beyond all that is known, the xenoverse on the other hand is the hypermacrocosm within the Omniverse that is unknown beyond the metaverse—the unknown sets of laws that govern how branes behave to create metaverses, the laws of which govern the creation of multiverses.

Hyperverse: Multiple xenoverses, probably a quarter of an Omniverse which they are relative of [sort of like saying that the hyperverse is a harmonic membrane of xenoverses which contain the rest of the omniverse, so the other three quarters exist within the hyperverse but are not really innately characterised by its laws directly, as it is more so akin to a field which holds the xenoverses together... The xenoverses then hold the metaverses together which in turn govern and arrange the multiverses various laws of physics (also known as codes of creation; infinity codes) Thus the omniverse holds the hyperverses within it of which span its whole volume but their laws only govern the arangment of xenoverses, as such the laws that are attributed to the hyperverses are only a fraction of the total volume of that which they contain. So it is like levels within levels, each of which are governed by the level which proceeds them but in turn each level above has lesser relation t subsequent levels below the level that they govern directly].

Omniverse: All possible attributes and modes are in play, multiverses are categorized by the attributes/modes active in its child universes. Some or all possible modes of existence are actualized. If we take the point of origin as our being as a point in measurement, then we can generate the following hierarchy: 1. our location in space-time, 2. this universe (cosmos), 3. the multiverse, 4. the metaverse, 5. the xenoverse, 6. the hyperverse, 7. the omniverse.

One can think of the omniverse as a tree structure: the omniverse is the trunk, the metaverse is the set of laws that govern the formation of branches, each multiverse is a branch, and each universe (cosmos) is a leaf.Alternatively, the omniverse can be illustrated as a forest in which a metaverse is the set of laws that govern the cosmic ecology that determines the distribution of trees in the forest, a multiverse is a tree in the forest, a universe as a branch on that tree, and all further branches and leaves are further subset horizons within that universe.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

1.2 A Holistic Interpretation

The Omniverse can be expanded into greater perspective by contending that space is fractal - holographic; holograms are pictures made of smaller replicas of themselves on a film strip, which are like a prism. When a laser is shone through the film strip the many small pictures all superimpose into the laser beam and are refocused as a single image upon a receptive surface.

To say the universe is holographic is to infer that cosmoses are made of subjective micro-cosmoses, like wise the micro-cosms are made of subsequent micro-cosms add infinitum i.e. the quantum foam, or rather macro-quantum foam (as above so below, as below so above). Each cosmos is defined as a static hypersphere whereby space implodes rather than explodes i.e. an Imploversial Scope. Thus each level has just as much potential of complexity as the others, because space has infinite resolution, like pixels on a computer screen but an infinite number of sizes/levels of resolution all of which are accessibly reorganised into quantified cohesion at every possible level into infinity. So, essentially a universe/cosmos can sit in the palm of your hand and still be just as full of energy as your own objective universe.

Thus in contrast with the string theory approach of explaining the Omniverse, the holistic approach of Imploversial physics can yield a greater level of comprehension. This being because the quantum foam of any cosmos is made of subjective microcosms/quantum components, these components are repulsed by one another equally like a positively charged colloidal silver solution. Thus they are statically suspended by one another in space, but they each have a variate rate of depth charge (implosive expansion). This in turn creates contrast and clusters who's function is similar to a 3D grid of LED lights, whereby movement of particles as independent singular things is as illusory as LED lights consecutively switching on and off in progression producing the impression of a single light (or lights in unison) moving across the grid. This is called the scalar effect

Therefore from the macro-quantum perspective, microcosms arrange themselves into clusters – multiverses, which can be thought of as particles of matter in the quantum foam of a single cosmos within. Likewise a single cosmos can be thought of as containing the membranes of metaverses and xenoverses etc which are the various multidimensional fields that serve as nexus conjunctions for the transferral of holographic information i.e. scalarly morphing depth charge contrast between the quantum components (micro-multicosms) that comprise particle clusters in a single given cosmos. Thus a given cosmos also contains micro-versions of all the hyper-macrocosmic fields of the Omniverse, i.e. as above so below.

This means that all possible laws of physics can be exhibited within a given cosmos, it is only the accepted model of mainstream physics which defines the generally perceived limitations of an individuals everyday reality. Therefore the consensus reality is nothing more than a widely held belief which filters out the awareness of other laws of physics at play.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

1.3 The Quantum Measurement Problem

In quantum physics, all measurements require a conscious observer. Yet to explain consciousness, science theorises that it involves the interplay of smaller and smaller particles ( neurons, molecules, atoms, quarks, photons, electrons, etc. ) The existence and state of these discrete elements is dependent on quantum theory which requires a conscious observer to collapse the equation. All the whilst the actual essence of the conscious observer or "consciousness" its origin of eminence, remains unexplained (i.e. "the black box ".)

Since consciousness is unexplained by physical theory but remains present in our understanding of physical theory, it is the mother of all things ( even the unconscious since it cannot generate the "conscious" ) The measurement problem is resolved by unifying the observer and observed into a single system that is not compatible with traditional reductionist science - breaking things down to understand them )

The unification is achieved by accepting that there is only a single universal consciousness that all seemingly separate individuations are a part of. ( “God” or whatever one so wishes to call it ).

Quantum theory cannot resolved the measurement problem

because it is a metaphysical issue. However what it does reveal, is that science is still unable to falsify the perspective of mystics regarding their take on the deep mystery surrounding existence and the purpose of individuated experience.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2.1 The Tetra Dimensional Torus of Existence & Omnified Cosmologies

As of 24/02/11 it has been announced by the International Science Grid that NASA has a mathematician Grigor Aslanyan, a doctoral student at the University of California at San Diego who is solving data that suggests the universe is a torus - see Grigor Aslanyan: Universal Torus.

A Double Torus

th_dualtorus2.gif?t=1315635741

The torus field of a cosmos is double because reality is polarity based.

It is believed the dimensions of a Torus could be arranged in 3 different variations.

a. Infinite in 1 dimension and finite in 2.

b. Finite in 1 dimension and Infinite in 2.

c. Finite in all 3

If a torus becomes infinite in all 3 dimensions it is no longer a torus and instead collapses back into the transcendent semi-formlessness of the 4D Hypersphere to which it is the infinitesimal potential of (in 3D space). I feel that this is actually happening in every moment at an unfathomable rate. Thus producing the heart beat of the cosmos which governs the rate of implosion

I feel that these fundamental arrangements of a Torus' 3 dimensions, are the hint that there are 3 different prime cosmic codes of creation. The rest are various combinations of the base 3 with varying degrees of limitation, yet one can perceptually navigate through the hierarchy via the art of lucid dreaming/waking. Lucid waking is when one experiences everyday life with the same euphoria as a lucid dream, the beauty of this however is that it can only be attained when one is enlightened enough to be unable to bring to harm another unjustifiably. Thus eliminating human error via solipsism – the belief that oneself is the only conscious being in the universe and all others are figments of their imagination.

Here are the implications in rhetorical format.

What if Quantum physics has more or less unveiled to some extent, that beliefs and perceptions of the world are what determine ones objectively reality. Would that mean they also determine which Torus code of the cosmos oneself is in?

Perhaps people are only capable of perceiving and therefore believing anything that is a possibility to begin with.

If you entertain alternate cosmos's/timelines and universes etc. as well as infinite combinations of all possibilities.

Then the same continuum of events exists in all three models of reality...

The conundrum is that when scientific "proof" of one version of reality is confirmed it tends to warp peoples assumptions of reality in a biased manner, which creates/tunes the consensus perspective to that bias as a default for all who do not question it or have the opportunity to know of other perspectives.

The oldest perceptions of the world have the highest residual imprint in the Akasha (the cosmic records: space is like a field of information of all that is possible and all that is experienced)...

This is why in some places the scientific data doesn't fit the model because some areas have higher frequencies of residual consciousness and perception from the ancient past and so the reality codes warp when one enters these zones....

Experiments have shown the human EMF is 500 times stronger around the heart than it is around the head.

The following paragraph is an excerpt from: The Heart, Mind and Spirit by Professor Mohamed Omar Salem

The heart’s magnetic field:

Research has also revealed that the heart communicates information to the brain and throughout the body via electromagnetic field interactions. The heart generates the body’s most powerful and most extensive rhythmic electromagnetic field. The heart’s magnetic component is about 500 times stronger than the brain’s magnetic field and can be detected several feet away from the body.

It was proposed that, this heart field acts as a carrier wave for information that provides a global synchronising signal for the entire body

(McCraty, Bradley & Tomasino, 2004)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
  • Replies 17
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • spiratio

    9

  • 8th_wall

    5

  • Clarakore

    2

  • ouija ouija

    1

I'll be honest with you: my brain was struggling with the disclaimer never mind the main body of the post!

I found the rest of the post difficult to understand but some parts interested me .... I'll give it another go tomorrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice post. Not the easiest thing in the world to just reply to so I'll just chuck some thoughts out as they come to me while reading it.

Therefore from the macro-quantum perspective, microcosms arrange themselves into clusters – multiverses, which can be thought of as particles of matter in the quantum foam of a single cosmos within.

So each microcosm i.e micro cosmos (or micro universe) has the same "potential" as one another (at various depths) however its physics are limited by conscious observation? I'm unsure of how much of a role observation actually plays in these things but I'll read more before saying anything.

It is believed the dimensions of a Torus could be arranged in 3 different variations.

a. Infinite in 1 dimension and finite in 2.

b. Finite in 1 dimension and Infinite in 2.

c. Finite in all 3

Wrapping my mind around this attempting to visualize implication on the universe. So if it were infinite in 1 dimension and finite in two the torus would have a sausage like shape extending to infinity but this would indicate an expanding universe slowing down for the rest of eternity, approaching a point but not quite getting there?

If it were finite in 1 and infinite in 2 it would be hyperbolically expanding i.e forever speeding up.

If it were finite in all 3 it would be cyclically expanding for the rest of forever (assuming no "outside" dimensionally or otherwise interactions occur.)

If a torus becomes infinite in all 3 dimensions it is no longer a torus and instead collapses back into the transcendent semi-formlessness of the 4D Hypersphere to which it is the infinitesimal potential of (in 3D space). I feel that this is actually happening in every moment at an unfathomable rate. Thus producing the heart beat of the cosmos which governs the rate of implosion

I'm pretty sure I understand the infinite in 3 dimension thought. It's like saying if you had a line infinitely long (1 dimension and x directional) which had an offset in the y direction (time in this case) which was also infinite and in the nature of time continual then the line itself would completely geometrically define what would be the entirety of a 2D plane.

For a 3D construct to encompass the entirety of 4D space (there is no time direction here, which is simply rate of change) it would indicate no change. (I.e if the hypersphere already exists there is no "heart beat of the cosmos" as there is no change) The only way I see there being a rate of change is if this construct is in the process of creation (which would probably take the same amount of time that entropy renders everything massless to achieve true infinity)

I feel that these fundamental arrangements of a Torus' 3 dimensions, are the hint that there are 3 different prime cosmic codes of creation. The rest are various combinations of the base 3 with varying degrees of limitation, yet one can perceptually navigate through the hierarchy via the art of lucid dreaming/waking.

You mean as in an xyz graph where base 3 implies the coordinates? :S Also prime cosmic codes of creation are you implying the uniqueness of each x y or z direction? Also navigating through the hierarchy if lucid dreaming then the hierarchy itself would be subjectively limited by ones own knowledge and truths.

I don't personally believe in out of body experiences (which would be subjectively navigating objective reality not subjectively subjective reality) but that's beside the point.

The point being I don't think that the hierarchy being navigated would be complete. It's like we might have the potential to understand the entire thing or that which is true but we don't yet know everything and as a result are limited to what we can navigate.

Lucid waking is when one experiences everyday life with the same euphoria as a lucid dream, the beauty of this however is that it can only be attained when one is enlightened enough to be unable to bring to harm another unjustifiably. Thus eliminating human error via solipsism – the belief that oneself is the only conscious being in the universe and all others are figments of their imagination.

Lucid waking would be pretty sweet. Not sure how it eliminates human error though :P. So you're implying solipsism is the cause of human error and eliminating it via enlightenment would be the ideal?

What if Quantum physics has more or less unveiled to some extent, that beliefs and perceptions of the world are what determine ones objectively reality. Would that mean they also determine which Torus code of the cosmos oneself is in?

Perhaps people are only capable of perceiving and therefore believing anything that is a possibility to begin with.

If you entertain alternate cosmos's/timelines and universes etc. as well as infinite combinations of all possibilities.

Then the same continuum of events exists in all three models of reality...

The conundrum is that when scientific "proof" of one version of reality is confirmed it tends to warp peoples assumptions of reality in a biased manner, which creates/tunes the consensus perspective to that bias as a default for all who do not question it or have the opportunity to know of other perspectives.

The oldest perceptions of the world have the highest residual imprint in the Akasha (the cosmic records: space is like a field of information of all that is possible and all that is experienced)...

This is why in some places the scientific data doesn't fit the model because some areas have higher frequencies of residual consciousness and perception from the ancient past and so the reality codes warp when one enters these zones....

Everything here lends to the idea that observation is a force. Perhaps it is but nevertheless the only effects it could have on reality is at the quantum level. The effects observation has on the macro world is probably less than gravity has on subatomic particles. There are other forces that simply hugely "outweigh" observation.

Possibly one way to argue would be that the force would intensify the longer the belief is held over a period of time however I believe we enter the realm of probability at this point where if enough time passes with data collected things can just be represented with a bell curves to explain away the unlikely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Nice post. Not the easiest thing in the world to just reply to so I'll just chuck some thoughts out as they come to me while reading it.

Therefore from the macro-quantum perspective, microcosms arrange themselves into clusters – multiverses, which can be thought of as particles of matter in the quantum foam of a single cosmos within.

So each microcosm i.e micro cosmos (or micro universe) has the same "potential" as one another (at various depths) however its physics are limited by conscious observation? I'm unsure of how much of a role observation actually plays in these things but I'll read more before saying anything.

It is believed the dimensions of a Torus could be arranged in 3 different variations. 

a. Infinite in 1 dimension and finite in 2. 

b. Finite in 1 dimension and Infinite in 2. 

c. Finite in all 3 

Wrapping my mind around this attempting to visualize implication on the universe. So if it were infinite in 1 dimension and finite in two the torus would have a sausage like shape extending to infinity but this would indicate an expanding universe slowing down for the rest of eternity, approaching a point but not quite getting there?

If it were finite in 1 and infinite in 2 it would be hyperbolically expanding i.e forever speeding up.

If it were finite in all 3 it would be cyclically expanding for the rest of forever (assuming no "outside" dimensionally or otherwise interactions occur.)

A. You got the basics of it … the inversion factor is harder to articulate in brief than it is to imagine, I will post a diverse laymen explanation of the Torus dimensions after this post.

If a torus becomes infinite in all 3 dimensions it is no longer a torus and instead collapses back into the transcendent semi-formlessness of the 4D Hypersphere to which it is the infinitesimal potential of (in 3D space). I feel that this is actually happening in every moment at an unfathomable rate. Thus producing the heart beat of the cosmos which governs the rate of implosion

I'm pretty sure I understand the infinite in 3 dimension thought. It's like saying if you had a line infinitely long (1 dimension and x directional) which had an offset in the y direction (time in this case) which was also infinite and in the nature of time continual then the line itself would completely geometrically define what would be the entirety of a 2D plane.

For a 3D construct to encompass the entirety of 4D space (there is no time direction here, which is simply rate of change) it would indicate no change. (I.e if the hypersphere already exists there is no "heart beat of the cosmos" as there is no change) The only way I see there being a rate of change is if this construct is in the process of creation (which would probably take the same amount of time that entropy renders everything massless to achieve true infinity)

A. The 3D cosm does encompass the entire volume of the hypersphere but the two are dimensionally separated... the way to envision this is that the hypersphere is infinite in eternal time. i.e. it has all points of depth into infinity accessed by it simultaneously in every passing moment. It is self similar and changeless.. Just as there are microcosms inside cosms there infinite micro-hyperspheres which make up hyperspheres. But an infinite number exist within each at every given moment. Each Hypersphere holds the blue print potential of all possible things by proxy that every micro hypersphere within itself holds the informational potential of all possible things (like how each cell in ones body knows what all other cells are doing their a hive of information) each knowing the roll of every other and all being able to adapt and share the information or roll of others because they are self similar at the penultimate level of reality.

Because a hypersphere is infinite it can house an infinite number of wavelength velocities into infinity. So 3D expressions can cycle through those hypersphere's as energetic fields at different rates producing tangible things of many different varieties. The way they work is scalar based tho so the fields do not conduct and produce kinetic energy. Its consciousness which is limited to an extent who's role is to collapse possibilities into and out of existence via the 4th dimension, this happens because living beings cannot perceive all of a hypersphere (quantified infinity) so only portions of the collectively observed micro-hyperspheres can be perceived i.e. toroids which vortate in accordance to expectation. A way to think of this is that 3D objects are to a hypersphere like how if sand could slipping through ones hand so fast it went by unnoticed i.e. undetectable. So the hypersphere is like self awareness but at a frequency beyond all other things so it knows not of things – even tho it holds the blue prints they are only informational potential and they are all known at once so definition is cancelled out. Consciousness' role in the observer is to extract the difference of contrast (potentials of all possibilities) into the 3rD dimension.

When the 4D hypersphere's 3D toroids/components are active they que the finite possibilities (comprehensive of 3D consciousness) and they spring out into defined form in linear time and then dissipate but at an incomprehensible rate. Same as quantum physics implies that particles pop in and out all the time in supperpositional states. Well since the cosmos is also existing by proxy of a Hypersphere at a higher level then the cosmos as a quantum component for the higher reality is also popping in and out.

Because the 4thD functions in eternal time it means that the cosmos can collapse for a really long time and spring out whilst the perception of the length of time is unnoticed by those within. Linear time carries on as if nothing happened. This is why the scalar function described in the OP works because of the no time factor in between the collapse and inflation of the quantum components/ microcosmoses, which defines the frequency of matter and particles for their objective reality whilst having no effect on the tents of the subjective cosms within themselves.

I feel that these fundamental arrangements of a Torus' 3 dimensions, are the hint that there are 3 different prime cosmic codes of creation. The rest are various combinations of the base 3 with varying degrees of limitation, yet one can perceptually navigate through the hierarchy via the art of lucid dreaming/waking.

You mean as in an xyz graph where base 3 implies the coordinates? :S Also prime cosmic codes of creation are you implying the uniqueness of each x y or z direction? Also navigating through the hierarchy if lucid dreaming then the hierarchy itself would be subjectively limited by ones own knowledge and truths.

I don't personally believe in out of body experiences (which would be subjectively navigating objective reality not subjectively subjective reality) but that's beside the point.

The point being I don't think that the hierarchy being navigated would be complete. It's like we might have the potential to understand the entire thing or that which is true but we don't yet know everything and as a result are limited to what we can navigate.

A. Well its all subjective to the observer but if a holistic model of reality can be explained and comprehended which describes phenomena of superpositional states of consciousness (i.e. all states and possibilities existing as static potential in every moment, then position of self both physically or spiritually would be something that is defined by state of mind an intent. o technically ever moment is an out of body experience where by consciousness is transferred to the holographic imprint of potential that resonates with decisions made which lead to it.

Lucid waking is when one experiences everyday life with the same euphoria as a lucid dream, the beauty of this however is that it can only be attained when one is enlightened enough to be unable to bring to harm another unjustifiably. Thus eliminating human error via solipsism – the belief that oneself is the only conscious being in the universe and all others are figments of their imagination.

Lucid waking would be pretty sweet. Not sure how it eliminates human error though :P. So you're implying solipsism is the cause of human error and eliminating it via enlightenment would be the ideal?

A. I mean to eliminate solipsism in the dream state, most believe they are the only aware individual in all their dreams – not saying thats not the case for some dreams however. If one were to experience everyday life as a dream and believe there were no consequences then there is room for human error via solipsism, so by having an attitude that treats others in dreams as sentient and with care then the universe lifts the veil for the individual in waking life and they experience it as a dream. Its what and all the ancient sages accomplished because they expressed the attitudes which are resonant

What if Quantum physics has more or less unveiled to some extent, that beliefs and perceptions of the world are what determine ones objectively reality. Would that mean they also determine which Torus code of the cosmos oneself is in?

Perhaps people are only capable of perceiving and therefore believing anything that is a possibility to begin with.

If you entertain alternate cosmos's/timelines and universes etc. as well as infinite combinations of all possibilities. 

Then the same continuum of events exists in all three models of reality...

The conundrum is that when scientific "proof" of one version of reality is confirmed it tends to warp peoples assumptions of reality in a biased manner, which creates/tunes the consensus perspective to that bias as a default for all who do not question it or have the opportunity to know of other perspectives. 

The oldest perceptions of the world have the highest residual imprint in the Akasha (the cosmic records: space is like a field of information of all that is possible and all that is experienced)... 

This is why in some places the scientific data doesn't fit the model because some areas have higher frequencies of residual consciousness and perception from the ancient past and so the reality codes warp when one enters these zones...

Everything here lends to the idea that observation is a force. Perhaps it is but nevertheless the only effects it could have on reality is at the quantum level. The effects observation has on the macro world is probably less than gravity has on subatomic particles. There are other forces that simply hugely "outweigh" observation.

Possibly one way to argue would be that the force would intensify the longer the belief is held over a period of time however I believe we enter the realm of probability at this point where if enough time passes with data collected things can just be represented with a bell curves to explain away the unlikely.

Well depending on how detached from collective consciousness oneself is anything is possible, however if one views alternate physics it does not mean others will be able to see them as well. And there is a damping effect - collective belief hampers others unless they have a lot of energy able to counter the collective damping effect in their location and consciousness (the know-how) to perform unbelievable feats. The denial factor is the other which works in the manner that if one does not believe something is possible they will filter out any data related to those things. This has been allegedly proven to be possible via hypnotism whereby individuals can filter sensory data to see through objects that they 100% do not believe are there

However there are alternate-physics which are purely based on perception orientation, an example is how some indigenous tribes still view the world as flat. Even tho majority of people believe the world is round this is easy for those people to maintain that perception because it doesn't require them to be able to see anything that others can't see. So there is no immediate resistance in the collective group perception which inhibits tribes form seeing the world as flat. Also toroidal physics and stringtheory can explain the potential physics of a flat earth cosmology with bending light (an assumption either way as to whether it is straight or bent -- neither can be proven) The Astronomical optical “evidence” is not a good enough argument against flat earth theories which use bending light when illusions can be produced by the notion that what one sees is not exactly where one is looking but rather on the other end of the bent ray.

I'm not defending flat earth theory as it stands for most over there at TFES. I'm saying its possible that both realities are true as well as the concave earth theory, that to can be explained via strings theories principles and toroids

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Note a line "_____" denotes a retention rest point to avoid info overload.

All matter and energy is vibration -- wavelengths of "quantified source-energy" ... so its made of energy... but i feel your post is more so saying "what is the cause for this energy".

If one considers the imploverse approach i.e. the cryodynamic interpretation of the "big bang" being akin to the shrinking atom theory -- a great mass of neutral energy which divides itself into smaller and smaller portions which all shrink at equal pace and eventually generate heat through friction as they interact, and thus form stars etc.. Then dark matter/energy are the portions that occur between each division of the original mass of energy (quantum foam), the mass/energy is shrinking at the same pace but the overall division which causes the initial splitting up of the original mass becomes less frequent (slows down) as the cosmos expands (shrinks inward). Thus as the particles increase in number they shrink further inward between each moment of division of the quantum foam. So there begins to be a larger amount of intergalactic space occurring...

Note: division of the quantum foam isn't literally a splitting of the component but rather the shrinking of those which already exist so that others may pop into the cosmos at a greater level of infinite depth via 4D hyperspace; superposition.

The duration of divisions over time:

i.e. (note: dots are because the forum script erases consecutive spaces)

Moment

length:...........|-|--|----|--------|----------------|

......................0.2..4.....8.............16

no. of parts_/

of Q-foam:

the no. of parts of Q-foam increases the size of the cosmic playing field for mass atoms-galaxies etc. to form complexity on. With each increase (division of the existing Q-foam components i.e. Cosmic Mitosis ) the length of time that mass and energy has to play on the new threshold of the Q-foam's resolution, is extended as the Q-foam playing field continues to shrink at the same speed as it has been shrinking from the get go, whilst the frequency of division slows...

So, the larger amounts of mass/energy are occurring inside greater levels of depth that are surrounded by a void of intergalactic and hyper space (dark energy).

____________________________________________________________________

Initially one would expect the larger amount of intergalactic space to occur on the outside of the inward accelerating mass and energy. But because Imploversial physics rest on the notion of the shape of a cosm being a toroid, this means that the central band of the donut shape is where the expansion inward is directed i.e. think of a circle which is one end of a tube and take the middle point of the circle and extend it as a line down the length of the tube. Now wrap the tube into a donut -- this is what "the central band of a torus" implies. Then buff the donut out into a sphere shape.

The singularity point (donut hole) is not a separate space from the rest of the toroid shape it overlaps into it but is a higher frequency and feeds the space with energy from outside the cosmos (the push or thrust of expansion) because its energy is higher frequency "dark energy" it propagates around the toroidal donut shape faster than any other frequencies of mass and energy within. So it pushes energy inward toward the inside side of the central band and the outside of it at a more or less equalised rate... so the cosmos expands into the very central band...

This gives a better picture than a sphere pushing energy into the centre, which would imply the interstellar dark matter/energy as being on the outer regions of the sphere as it slows its pace all the whilst mass and energy shrinks faster into the middle...

For toroidal physics its the same principle but shrinking into a ring which provides the reason for why clusters of mass are shrinking but with larger distances occurring between them rather than being clumped together. This is because each part of the central ring behaves as a single point with mass and energy expanding out to some extent which eventually slows but the shrinking of its components continue inward faster and thus cause the large interstellar gaps between each point on the ring... since creation is a continual thing there are different toroidal-tube-centric (if you will) layers - rather than spherical onion layers - or intervals between the progressive levels of galactic mass and energy shrinking on the way inward.

This however is one explanation for a toroidal cryo-comsos, there is actually 6 more variations but this one fits best as the inversion of contemporary assumptions.

___________________________________________________________________

Here is the table of finite/infinite variations of dimensions:

key: e = envelope

v = volume

s = singularity

I = infinite

f = finite

Va = variation a-g

Va (e) (v) (s)

a ... I .. I .. f

b ... f .. I .. I

c ... I .. f .. f

d ... f .. f .. I

e ... I .. f .. I

f … f .. I .. f

g ... f .. f .. f

The description in this post is the result of a toroid that is finite in 2 dimensions -- the envelope and the singularity -- whilst infinite into the depth of the central-ring i.e. the dimension of volume i.e. Va f. In other variations the volume can be extended infinitely into the outer (envelope) or inner ("singularity") whilst sharing/overlaping the infinitism of the central ring -- this accounts for 2 more variations.

The others are a result of the central-ring being finite whereby volume expands either into the donut hole (singularity) whilst the envelope shares finitism with the central ring, or the vice -- expanding outward to the envelope i.e. shrinking into depth faster than the rate which it travels toward the envelope -- so the envelope is never reached)

This diagram can help visualise this

4DHS-ToOG.png

The concentric bands (like the rings in a cross section of an onion) are symbolic of the space shrinking faster into depth than it is travelling outward from the middle. The White ring between the concentric bands and the circular boundary is symbolic of the portion of hyperspace which matter never travelles past... how to visualise this is to imagine concentric bands moving outward toward the middle - like watching the ripples from a rock dropped in a pool of water. However as they move outward from the middle toward last band before the outer boundary (the band before the white part of the diagram) the space between the first and last bands shrinks (increased resolution) so the first band out form the middle appears to remain in the same place even though its moving via the shrinking of space. The distance of the outer limit is extended as the next level of depth increases by one band which springs forth. The distance between the new band at the limit and the one prior is perceived to be half as much as the last but in reality its the same radial distance (shrunk resolution) as this continues the perceived distance implied distance (by the diagram) of each proceeding band gets smaller and smaller until they are infinitesimal and imperceivable to the hypothetical viewpoint.

This is synonymous with the Axiom proposed by the Greek philosopher Zeno, being that movement is an illusion. i.e. Between any two points (A and B ) there is always more points of space to be crossed before one can reach point B. Therefore one must at some point reach a point that is half the distance from A to B. so there is point C between A and B. Thus because point B is then further from A than point C the label C is swapped with B. So the initial point B is now C and vice versa. This can be repeated infinitely because now there is a halfway point between the new point B and the original A and the whole process as described repeats endlessly. Thus Zeno's Axiom is synonymous with the principle of infinite depth of measureless space.

Note: This axiom is resolved via the scalar principles whereby energy and matter move via the supper-positional info of all possible expressions existing everywhere as imprints of depth charge potential in the components of the quantum foam. And thus like a grid of LED lights switching on and of in succession produces the illusion of things moving across all points in space total objects, when really its morphic recalibration of Quantum components depth charge frequency which produced particles via contrast and their movement.

This image is the inverse, the same principles apply but the other way round

4DHS-ToIG.png

These images can be treated either as a cross section of a sphere or the cross section of a torus (in a torus cross section there would be two instances of the image side by side tho)

this accounts for 2 more variations (thats 5 in total so far)

The 2nd last is if the cosmos is finite in the central ring and infinite in the envelope and the singularity simultaneously. This would produce a very strange effect if it were observable since its the exact inverse of dimensional orientation of the main description in his post. So there would be a ring of static unchanging depth at the cosms centre rather than the the envelope. Again the envelope is still a fundamentally static size (in inter-cosmic hyperspace, as with all variations) but the resolution of the Q-foam upon the inside surface is shrinking into depth faster than its travelling outward toward it, so it never reaches the envelope. Like wise is the case for the singularity.

The last variation is when the cosm is finite in all 3 dimensions... this would mean a finite amount of potential for the cosm to divide its energy into, the dark energy would not appear to expand in this case as matter would not shrink. Instead it would divide and compress into portions leaving large static pockets of dark energy.

Its probable that a cosmos may undergo transitions between any of these variations as it progresses due to influence from circumstances outside of the cosmos i.e. in the multiverse.

Edited by spiratio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

edit: some how I managed a double post in between editing.

Edited by spiratio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has given me a lot to think about man. I have some thoughts on some things but not all of it :P.

The intuitive repercussions of different dimensions are difficult to work with outside of pure mathematics. I believe that we as humans observationally operate in the 4th dimension from the 3rd's dimensions perspective with 5 dimensional capabilities.

What I mean when I say this is that we live in time but view everything as 3 dimensional. (You might read into this as we "break down the 4 dimensional state with 3 dimensional observation" as any higher dimensional construct when viewed from a lower dimension will exactly conform to the rules of the lower dimension) 5 dimensional capabilities refer to probability. I.e being able to conceptualize various realities stemming from one time line.

I'm trying to wrap my mind around how different dimensional states experience process though. For example when I think of the 4D hyperspace I am conceptualizing time in its entirety. In other words there is no "process" or "change" function occurring. It's completely static. As a result it becomes unclear to me why there is "change" at all.

Is "process" separate from time? I'm very recently changing my thinking of time as a dimension. In fact I'm starting to see why time might actually be an illusion or at least we the definition of it should be altered. Might make a new thread and see what people think.

I also have a problem with observation breaking down the wave function which you mention a few times. I'm uncertain of how much "breaking down" is actually going on. Worded like this it implies that observation is a force. I believe that it's a geometric (higher or lower dimensions) repercussion of dimensions interacting with one another.

As I said above we could view observation as breaking down the entirety of a 4 dimensional state and representing it in 3 dimensions. This does not however imply that the entirety of a 4 dimensional state isn't still there. It's because that is the only we we CAN view a part of it based on our position relative to it. The entire thing might still be there mathematically speaking.

Similarly "breaking down the wave function" might only be the result of how we are geometrically positioned within some higher dimensional state. The coordinates from where observation occurs results in how a state is viewed.

Edit: Thanks for the toroidal post. It's opened up my thinking regarding the universe a bit.

Something that confuses me still regarding viewing the universe as though is based upon the curvature of space. I thought that based on the CMB data space was thought to overally be extremely "flat." I.e very little curvature.

I wiki'd something that had a "flat toroid" though? Could you clarify how space curvature's apparent flatness support toroidal theory?

Unless I'm thinking of the toroid incorrectly. Should I be thinking of the toroid as 4 dimensional where every "slice" is 3 dimensional? Also doesn't that in itself imply a cyclic universe?

Edit2: Also some thoughts on intent. I think determinism can not exist if intent does. I think true intent is derived out of absolute uncertainty. If our displacement becomes certain within the Omniverse then it stands to reason that laws of governance can be derived and result in determinism rendering intent an illusion.

I remember reading that the greater the certainty of an electron's velocity the greater the uncertainty of it's displacement. Is this result due to "rudimentary" measuring methods or is it absolutely impossible? This in itself could be an argument against determinism and supporting intent.

Edited by PsiSeeker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a light trying to switch on in my head regarding time.

Time is continual but it's absolutely subjective. It's also universal. There is only one rate of time that can be subjectively experienced. Different rates of time can be objectively observed but only when comparing them is it obvious that there is a difference in transition. The difference in transition would depend on the object's mass.

Time therefore is rate of change that only exists when there is rate of change. Assume there is probability of change. Once there is probability of change then time must exist as those probabilities. If there is an objective clock to some state then many eternities could pass for the clock before a change occurs for said state however subjectively change would appear to be continual and absolute for the state. There wouldn't appear to be any hiccoughs. Intent would appear to be the navigating factor of these probabilities. Determinism therefore doesn't exist if one considers all possibilities of various 4D hyperspaces.

It is for this reason then that 4D hyperspace might not be static. 4D hyperspace doesn't encompass every time line for an object or a series of events, only one. And because there is more than one possibility there is time or rate of change.

Observation or intent then could be a force (and not deterministic) but only when considering the entirety of all possible 4D hyperspaces for an observer. Observation or intent would have no measurable effect on a single 4D state or less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has given me a lot to think about man. I have some thoughts on some things but not all of it :P.

The intuitive repercussions of different dimensions are difficult to work with outside of pure mathematics. I believe that we as humans observationally operate in the 4th dimension from the 3rd's dimensions perspective with 5 dimensional capabilities.

What I mean when I say this is that we live in time but view everything as 3 dimensional. (You might read into this as we "break down the 4 dimensional state with 3 dimensional observation" as any higher dimensional construct when viewed from a lower dimension will exactly conform to the rules of the lower dimension) 5 dimensional capabilities refer to probability. I.e being able to conceptualize various realities stemming from one time line.

I'm trying to wrap my mind around how different dimensional states experience process though. For example when I think of the 4D hyperspace I am conceptualizing time in its entirety. In other words there is no "process" or "change" function occurring. It's completely static. As a result it becomes unclear to me why there is "change" at all.

Is "process" separate from time? I'm very recently changing my thinking of time as a dimension. In fact I'm starting to see why time might actually be an illusion or at least we the definition of it should be altered. Might make a new thread and see what people think.

I also have a problem with observation breaking down the wave function which you mention a few times. I'm uncertain of how much "breaking down" is actually going on. Worded like this it implies that observation is a force. I believe that it's a geometric (higher or lower dimensions) repercussion of dimensions interacting with one another.

Depends which dimension one is observing from... There are many mysteries, some not so much needed to be figured out logistically.

As I said above we could view observation as breaking down the entirety of a 4 dimensional state and representing it in 3 dimensions. This does not however imply that the entirety of a 4 dimensional state isn't still there. It's because that is the only we we CAN view a part of it based on our position relative to it. The entire thing might still be there mathematically speaking.

Similarly "breaking down the wave function" might only be the result of how we are geometrically positioned within some higher dimensional state. The coordinates from where observation occurs results in how a state is viewed.

Edit: Thanks for the toroidal post. It's opened up my thinking regarding the universe a bit.

Something that confuses me still regarding viewing the universe as though is based upon the curvature of space. I thought that based on the CMB data space was thought to overally be extremely "flat." I.e very little curvature.

I wiki'd something that had a "flat toroid" though? Could you clarify how space curvature's apparent flatness support toroidal theory?

Unless I'm thinking of the toroid incorrectly. Should I be thinking of the toroid as 4 dimensional where every "slice" is 3 dimensional? Also doesn't that in itself imply a cyclic universe?

I feel the answer is yes and no, both, depending on the infinite/finitisms of the arrangements. But essentially a toroid is a portion 4D construct dipping into 3D space so what typically is perceived as local 3D Euclidean space (equal reference points as in measurable by a grid of cubes) is in fact warped by the half dimensional step between the 3rdDimension and the 4th i.e. the event horizon which casue s the donut hole... even though it itself is overlapping into the donut space so as to make a spherical total when viewed as a whole object.. the event horizon is just the part which capitalises on dark-energy or the force which is warping the shape and implosive depth progression of space... its a vortex but the vortex itself is full to the brim with dark energy so to speak which propagates throughout the toroid shape.

This

th_torus.gif

Is Synonymous with this

200px-8-cell-simple.gif

Edit2: Also some thoughts on intent. I think determinism can not exist if intent does. I think true intent is derived out of absolute uncertainty. If our displacement becomes certain within the Omniverse then it stands to reason that laws of governance can be derived and result in determinism rendering intent an illusion.

Or it could simply be a mass effect of belief in one version of reality which defines a default consensus that occurs when people are unaware of the implications of intent and that lack of which will cause their perception to collapse into that which is popularly believed... mass effect. If one is a perception seek er they can desynchronise from the mass effect and choose their own view point and or possibly utilise other unknown laws of thermodynamic/cryodynamic physics.

I remember reading that the greater the certainty of an electron's velocity the greater the uncertainty of it's displacement. Is this result due to "rudimentary" measuring methods or is it absolutely impossible? This in itself could be an argument against determinism and supporting intent.

I'll post something else of regarding the argument against determinism and quantum leaps... after this post...

Ok, the flat aspect of a toroid...

th_dualtorus2.gif?t=1315635741

A double toroid consists of two donuts attracted to one another like tow magnets... tho they are quantum-entangled into each others domain... where they meet at the equator energy is pushed inwards and outwards at the same time, it forms a disk-like plane Synonymous with the formulation of a galaxies spiralling-disk. In this line of thinking, that is where all the visible matter of a cosmos accumulates.

Also there is another mode and it regards your question of how curvature of space works.

Imagine the envelope of the cosmos or even just an onion-like layer as in a shell-like segment of a sphere inside the middle of the toroid. If you recall the middle ring of the toroids horizontal plain, its described in earlier posts as the circle at the end of a tube with a centre point which extends as a line down its length... then its bent into a donut.

Think of the ring as the area in which a spherical shell extends out in both directions.

Now fatten it a bit so the shell is akin to the depth volume of the space of the toroids equator disk but in a curved shell... So it curves over long periods on the astronomical scale but to observers it is locally flat...

Another fun way to view this is akin to the bending light analogy, of which the concave earth's cosmology uses to explain astronomical observations as being optical illusions i.e. what one sees as luminous objects in space and the sky lay on the other end of a bending light.

th_univlook.jpg?t=1315789844

So the setting sun on the horizon is actually a projection of the sun disappearing behind the singularity which pulls the rays toward itself and thus they no longer reach the surface of the earth.

So with this idea take another kind of the inverse (remembering toroids have 7 types of infinity variations – so there is indeed more than one inverse (I know inverse strictly means an absolute invert of its vice but for lack of better words I'll say there are different types...)

So, imagine a curving space which causes light to appear uncurved due to an inverse wavelength of light that unfolds as an opposite grain (if you will) to the curving space. So that the spaces curvature and the lights curvature are inversions of each other and neutralise the effect of perceiving the space as curving.

SO, instead if the hubble could see forever and ever eventually the image data would come back to the same point that it first received from and it would be observing itself from as far away as the distance of one complete circuit. And it would continue on like a hall of mirrors effect..

This diagram is the polar geometry by Ernst Brathel a German flat earth theorist of the 1800's who devised the concept of the maximal sphere (image below) of which descries this effect for the flat earth... so the earth is considered flat in a spherical space rather than round in a flat space.

Kugelschar.jpg

There are 2 layers of graduating concentric circles/spheres, both concave and convex, one above and one below the straight horizontal line/plane.

The graduating circles/spheres represent the effect that as one progresses along the straight line it continually approximates the local flatness of the progressing concentric sphere's i.e. the points of spherical space which collapses against either side of the straight plane.

In reality there is no gap between each concentric sphere – metaphorically speaking they are stacked tightly upon each other so as to blend as a continuous spacial field.

you can check out the discussion here

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=52576.0

there are also links to the concave earth hypothesis and a thourough description of all its facets in my first post of that thread here -

Edited by spiratio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

double post

Edited by spiratio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't read through this thread at all so won't be surprised with any lack of responses. Sorry, I visit forums for more casual discussions and not journal length posts to learn about every facet of any given subject but I do understand some desire this.

My question are, can we in theory be able to visit other parts of the omniverse outside of our own universe, can we time travel, can we meet our other selves, and most importantly if we cannot do any of that can we at least influence or send messages to other parts of the omniverse especially to our past or other selves without ever leaving where we are now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
So, essentially a universe/cosmos can sit in the palm of your hand and still be just as full of energy as your own objective universe.

Ok..I am not going to pretend I am smart and all so the quality of my replies will be infantile at best but...

there is something a bit unsettling about this comment.

Sadly it seems to coincide with humanity's obsession with the concept that everything must have an observable, quantifiable and physical barrier.

This is perfectly applicable in a closed system such as the body and even though there is a manner of "interconnectedness" via blood capillaries and cellular membranes transporting nutrients and waste, the same cannot really be applied to a universe.

However it seems that what we are really trying to say is that these universes are separated only by a variance in frequency, is that pretty much it?

My question are, can we in theory be able to visit other parts of the omniverse outside of our own universe, can we time travel, can we meet our other selves, and most importantly if we cannot do any of that can we at least influence or send messages to other parts of the omniverse especially to our past or other selves without ever leaving where we are now?

Well..I pondered that myself too. Again we are dealing with a frequency issue. If every object, regardless of size, resonates at its own particular frequency then it stands to reason that we would only be able to interact with things that possess a compatible frequency.

In a strange way I think of the anime called "Digimon" (please bear with me before you tell me I'm an idiot)

The only reason the digimon and humans could travel to each others realm was because they were so close to one another in frequency compatibility. Distance would be of little issue so long as a link to both realms could be established, stabilized and maintained relatively easily.

If everything relies on frequency in order to coexist then I am thinking that the perceptions one realm would have of the other may be skewed so to speak.

I guess it is sort of like looking at a video of the sun and seeing plumes being warped by magnetic fields. You're not really seeing the fields directly but you see effects which closely represent its real form.

(Ok, that sounded disjointed, didn't it?)

Theories are nice and they look really good on paper but what about practical and repeatable experiments?

If that can be proven even in preliminary tests then where would one go from there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could imagination or meditation allow us to become compatible with these other frequencies?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question are, can we in theory be able to visit other parts of the omniverse outside of our own universe, can we time travel, can we meet our other selves, and most importantly if we cannot do any of that can we at least influence or send messages to other parts of the omniverse especially to our past or other selves without ever leaving where we are now?

..

Could imagination or meditation allow us to become compatible with these other frequencies?

Form my own personal experiences of esoteric mystical states and dreaming, I can say at the very least, yes it is thoeretically possible to do all of the above. I know for one that experiencing the alteration of ones internalised mapping of the earth's shape is possible as it produces very divergent sensations of orientation awareness that are in a 6th sense sort of way, tangible to the psyche.

If one has only ever entertained a convex-earth Copernicanised world-view, then they do not have any reference of contrast as to how the psyche internally maps non-physical feelings derived from logistic understandings of the earth's shape - assumed to be absolute and unchanging.

In other words the way one views the earth determines the kind of internalised/projected information one feels/perceives as orientational boundaries and/or non-boundaries in a non-physical manner of mental sensations - akin to walking around with eyes shut... one will begin to get nonphysical sensations of intuited boundaries or knee-jerk reactions - mental sensations regarding fabricated assumptions of borders which do not exist.

Even if one does not believe that alternate cosmologies/world views exist – as realities unto themselves -- such as the concave or flat earth ones... this does not mean that they are not a valid perception to seek the experience of... In my own experiences of entertaining these world views the worth of the implications of freeing the self from Copernicanism perception as an absolute became known to me. Thereby in allowing boundaries to become flexible and changing the understanding that connections to alternate selves in realities where these cosmologies are entertained by the masses became know to me. The dream state became richer in lucidity once understanding that the degrees of separation that prevent one form becoming lucid in full swing are more or less due to the inability to maintain resonance with the worldview of the cosmos visited.

This is no to be taken lightly however... there are levels of intensity that come with lucidity that is not otherwise experienced by the average dreamer, such as vividity of sensations both good and bad... sometimes one may feel pain as real as it exists in their waking life reality.

It also enables one to access the Akashic record of their past lives/alternate parallel lives in which these other world views were expeirinced... this can occur both during meditation and even full blown internally perceived visions whilst awake, sort of like a portal in ones minds eye which sees another world/timespace continuum akin to remote viewing. So there is lesser emphasis on these alt realities than the everyday perception that one seeing it from. Thus operating machinery or driving a car is still possible and if one has to focus on other daily tasks the clairvoyant sensations fall to the back with less emphasis but if one stops and focuses they will get tremendous insights about themselves as a soul.

there are some interesting variations of each as overlapping cosmologies that also parallel other ancient philosophers – some where the earth is seen as a bowl and others where the earth is flat but with an underworld or hollow earth beneath.

When you start to dream about places and receive visions of past lives the relation to them as having been experienced can be unmistakable as well as unbelievably novel, like nothing one would have ever been able to imagine based solely on what is known in their current everyday waking life.

If one understands the mathematics and alternate interpretation of alternate world-views and why they are mathematically irrefutable, and therefore entangled in a macro equivalent of the quantum measurement particle/wave problem... then there exists the same consensus reality in all three prime models of the cosmos...

If infinity is infinite, surely it is infinite in every possible way imaginable, thus these notions fall under such a category of probables that all three models are operating simultaneously and enmeshed to various degrees.

The following link is the original rendition of the 3rd part of the OP which delves more so into the practical aspect rather than the technical along with substantial evidences that support this way of contending with reality.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=49832.msg1223171#msg1223171

P.S. Ryu, your articulations are leaning toward the notions presented, and its not hard to understand your thoughts they do make sense ;)

Edited by spiratio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree that the 4d cube is synonymous with the toroid and I'll explain why.

As I'm reading it the thoughts (most probably incorrectly but I love thinking about these things :P) that are occurring to me is that dark energy (as we experience it in 3 dimensions) is 4 dimensional matter. So the 3D shadow we see of the 4D cube (keeping in mind that the 4D cube is "static" in its own dimension) is symmetrically rotating due to dark energy (it's derived that it's 4 dimensionally static due to its motion being cyclic in 3 dimensions with no singularity.)

The toroid is making my mind feel fried. The closest thing I can come up with is that the toroid is a 4D sphere rotating in it's own dimension. (Because it has 1 temporal dimension with 4 physical dimensions we need 5 dimensions to define it.) In 3 dimensions we experience it as a sphere with a singularity creating the toroidal shape.

If it is being rotated through 4 dimensions with 1 temporal dimension then we can view it in 5 dimensions as "probability space." The central part of the toroid would be the "pin point" representation of all possible 4D states of the sphere where only one state is represented at a time as the cylindrical part of the donut in 3 dimensions. (i.e the band of the toroid is 1 possible representation of one of an infinite number of 4d state.) All other possible states is "stored or lost or undefined" in the center of the circumference of the toroid as dark energy which drives the cyclic nature of the toroid. (I.e the centre of the "hole" of the donut.)

Thus the reason I believe that they are not synonymous is because the 4 dimensional cube has no temporal dimension (i.e it is static due to no singularity in 3 dimensions) where as the 4d sphere has a temporal dimension (due to it having a singularity in 3 dimensions.)

I'm trying to repeat some of what you're saying in my own words to create as much rapport as possible. (So sorry if I'm being redundant sometimes xD) I've been waiting for someone to talk to about stuff like this for a few years now.. It's mindblowingly refreshing :).

Edit: I would like to return with more opinions on your main post when my own personal understanding of some of the things you are proposing is more complete. It feels like you're saying some fairly meaningful things especially when referring to stuff such as the "heartbeat of the cosmos."

Edited by PsiSeeker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edit2: Also some thoughts on intent. I think determinism can not exist if intent does. I think true intent is derived out of absolute uncertainty. If our displacement becomes certain within the Omniverse then it stands to reason that laws of governance can be derived and result in determinism rendering intent an illusion.

Or it could simply be a mass effect of belief in one version of reality which defines a default consensus that occurs when people are unaware of the implications of intent and that lack of which will cause their perception to collapse into that which is popularly believed... mass effect. If one is a perception seek er they can desynchronise from the mass effect and choose their own view point and or possibly utilise other unknown laws of thermodynamic/cryodynamic physics.

I'm thinking of the three worlds Plato described. Conceptually I recall these as

1. The world that IS (absolute true objectivity.)

2. The world we perceive (pure subjectivity.)

3. The world/s within which we are in collaboration (subjective consensus within any/many populace/s.)

Honestly I've retyped my reply several times as I'm trying to figure out what you're saying. It's... Different to think of things in terms of different variations of reality. When you imply that it could simply be a mass effect of one version of reality that defines one consensus of reality i.e mass effect it still falls within the 3rd category of Plato's worlds. It's difficult to tell within which world you are until you enter the world of collaboration.

We each attempt to define that which is absolute true objectivity, some/all of us defend it (i.e mental patients' view of reality, not believing they are mental.) However most of the time it is easy to "observe someone in denial" as we can "see" someone in the second described world from the third. It's phenomenally difficult to tell if you are in the 2nd or 1st world without considering the 3rd world since the 2nd world subjectively looks like the 1st world.

This however still comes back to determinism or intent in a round about way. Determinism I think will always subjectively exist within Plato's 2nd and 3rd worlds. One can only make do with what one can interact with after all. It's unclear when taking into consideration Plato's 1st world however. Why is there this uncertainty to begin with? As soon as one has true absolute uncertainty then determinism can not exist.

Ignore the following of you wish. This was some of the thoughts/concepts running through my head as I was thinking about what you said. Decided to keep it there if you were interested. It is redundant/irrelevant most of the time.

Reread what you're saying and I think I see what you're implying. I.e implying that people are often sheep of some other person's most often outdated idea/s based upon mass effect/consensus instead of formulating their own ideas. Personally I don't think everyone is capable of accurately doing so. (Myself included) Accurately in terms of what actually "IS" reality. There are those that stray closer to true objective truths than others in my opinion. All are contained "within" absolute objective truth though imo.

I'll post my first perception when I read what you wrote in any case though :).

I believe that objectivity is the result of subjective consensus within a diverse populace.

This goes back to what you're saying. If there are a set number of laws used where some laws are not known however not required for what is being described then one can come up with accurate "objective" predictions for a portion of reality that appears to be correct.

I.e Newton making motion predictions for the universe without being aware of Einstein relativity.

One wonders if true objectivity is currently a tangible thing however. Mass effect has tremendous influence however only in the realm of memes. The realm of memes reminds me of Plato's concept of the three worlds. (My memory is shod, conceptually I recall his three worlds as... 1. The world that IS (absolute true objectivity.) 2. The world we perceive (subjectivity.) 3. The world/s within which we are in collaboration (subjective consensus within any/many populace/s.)

This having been said you seem to imply that reality is effected by mass consensus or perhaps you're isolating (but containing) the human effect on reality by ascertaining that absolute objectiveness is the world of memes -> i.e implying that absolute objectiveness is achieved by the 3rd described Plato world above. This is where I digress. I believe that the 1st world is the absolute true world which we can not touch as we are now. For if we were able to perceive it's true nature then there would be no need for two other worlds of perception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Psyseeker,

I didn't mean to imply that the toroid is exactly the same in functionality. But that it is synonymous with the tesseract when viewing the motions of which they flow. Its a little tricky with viewing the gif-animations cos their axis are opposite directions but if you can get your head around that to compensate; literally too if you turn your head sideways :P or the screen

Now I personally don't think that the tesseract (hypercube) is the literal shape of the 4th dimension it is a facet of the grand scheme tho any "thing" is . Rather, it is symbolic of how the 4th D evades the ability of the mind to get a hold on a static point of reference of higher dimensions. Even the math of a toroid does not accurately depict how the reality of two vortexes forming a toroid function once the element of variate infinity is thrown into the mix.

see this page on dimensions http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=16818.140

Unseelie,

in case you missed it there is an answer to your questions which incidentally is an extrapolation of Ryu's speculation/inquiry as well in the last post of page 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.