Other dimensions?

[liveandlove]

No worries, I'm at peace!   I just wanted to make sure I was well understood. I find that speaking through the web is always more delicate than in "real" life since you never really get the tone of the people you exchange with. 

I'm all for contributing to a thread on different terminologies... I'll probably be more happy to read you than becoming a very active author, though!   But I'm more than willing to share my views. Who knows where it could lead? 

Cheers!

[liveandlove]

I'm with ya, LAL!  May I call you LAL?   

You can call me LAL all you want! LOL 

[Stookie]

IMO an individual has to figure this stuff out on their own no matter the situation. A forum or teacher or guide is just that - a guide to push them in the right direction. And as we're all different, we all need to be pushed in a different direction. I don't think there ever will be a common language in this, as every individual can (and do) interpret the same words differently.

Most of what I do in my spiritual life I don't speak much of here because it's very different from what the majority of people on here are attempting - terminology and all. I'm not out to confuse, but to help people find their particular individual path.

Like for me, diagrams that illustrate consciousness are ridiculous. You can't "map" it. But it might help others in ways I don't get, so it's not for me to say it's wrong.

[Naykid]

You can call me LAL all you want! LOL 

Thanks. 

[Bacterio]

IMO the word "dimension" is missused. I don't want to give a lecture in maths because some of you would probably ask a moderator to ban me, but talking about dimensions is a serious subject that can lead to a huge philosophical discussion quite useless (a priori) to explore the consciousness.

Just think about a fourth ot fifth dimension...wow!!!...how can you perceive it?. In conscioussnes exploration I think we are limited by our three dimensions perspective. We are beings living in a 3D world. I can't imagine jumping to a 4 or 5 dimensions world as if you where moving in a  storey building.

[Capt. Picard]

You are correct Bacterio, the proper deffinition of dimension really has very little to do with astral projection, or maybe it does since we cant percieve 5th dimension and up. I for one wouldn't have minded the math talk, but for whatever reason believing in any type of science and math means you're like a die hard fundamental skeptic around here and people try to critisize you, just a case of people fearing what they can't understand. Anyways, I sort of agree with Stookie that counciousness can't be mapped, it is too big and varied, but I still like the monroe/frank focus models, from my experience, they are a somewhat accurate set of guidelines for the more common out of body states, and I believe they genuinely formed them around their common observations.

[liveandlove]

I brought this up because when I AP, I am not in the same "world/realm/pick the word of your choice"... I go to different places that I refer to as "other dimensions" (simple terminology that works for me!)... Simply put, I wanted to know if some believed that those "dimensions" were also part of the astral... (I haven't read Frank and Bruce's litterature so I know just about nothing about Focus and phasing, so sorry if I don't use that terminology... these words are just chinese to me!!!)  I thought it was a very basic question at first. I didn't think it would generate a whole debate on the definition and interpretation of the *word* dimension. 

Bacterio: If there is a mathematical model that explains dimensions and that could help us all better understand your point, I'd be more than open to hear about it.  I'm no math engineer but I've got a fair IQ!   I also don't see why "one of us" (whatever that means...) would ask to get you banned... unless of course, it's brought up in a closeminded, unrespectful manner, which would be immensly surprising to me!

As far as mapping goes, I guess it helps us communicate our respective, complex, spiritual, unexplainable schemes with one another. If it can help us communicate, why not use them? I dare hope no one's ridiculous enough to present a map of universal dimensions as hard evidence.. Maps might not be perfect, but if  they help us better understand and share more effectively, I don't see the harm...

Cheers! 

[Bacterio]

Bacterio: If there is a mathematical model that explains dimensions and that could help us all better understand your point, I'd be more than open to hear about it.  I'm no math engineer but I've got a fair IQ!   I also don't see why "one of us" (whatever that means...) would ask to get you banned... unless of course, it's brought up in a closeminded, unrespectful manner, which would be immensly surprising to me!


Cheers! 

There isn't a "mathematical model" to explain dimensions...mathematics works around and with infinite dimensions and physics too (as long as they use mathematical models!). Actually you will not find answers in maths but in philosophy working with the implications of them. Until the 18th century it was no sense talking about more than 3 dimensions in mathematics (euclidean spaces), but now think how working with "n" dimension have changed the world

Only to define what a dimension can be I would need 3 pages. To start, physical space is not the same as mathematical espace. For physics and scientist the space is related to material reality but in mathematics space is a wider concept. Limiting the concept of dimensions to a physical reality leads us to think the fifth dimension doesn't exist.

I recomend you read the Allegory of the Cave (Plato) and think about it...it seems to be useless for astral projecting but can help you once you decide to explore.

[zareste]

There is no fourth dimension, simply. Mathematical dimensions are only a method of measurement, so you can create as many as you want, but you can't live in one. Physical reality doesn't work that way.

So when people see a 'dimension', it's not an objective thing. They're just seeing something they haven't seen before

[Bacterio]

There is no fourth dimension, simply. Mathematical dimensions are only a method of measurement, so you can create as many as you want, but you can't live in one. Physical reality doesn't work that way.

So when people see a 'dimension', it's not an objective thing. They're just seeing something they haven't seen before

I don't agree mathematical dimensions are only a method  of measurement.

[liveandlove]

I recomend you read the Allegory of the Cave (Plato) and think about it...it seems to be useless for astral projecting but can help you once you decide to explore.

I've read the Allegory of the Cave before.  I don't exactly understand your point though... Can you clarify the part where you say "it seems to be useless for astral projecting but can help you once you decide to explore"

I must say I do agree with Zareste: "So when people see a 'dimension', it's not an objective thing. They're just seeing something they haven't seen before".

I guess we all know that "OBEs and the astral", "dimensions", the "become more conscious" and the "bringing our frequency to a higher level" are all terms that mathematiciens would have a hard time make proof of.  Hopefully they will one day, though!   In that sense, all we can speak of is through experience. We could make a parallel with emotions. One cannot objectively understand what love, joy, sadness or fear is.  One can only experience it.  Yet, it exists... 

Cheers!

[soli]

lol, objectively similar subjective experiences should be enough proof for anything, otherwise nothing could ever be "proved". The problem is when one can not subjectively experience what is objective all they have to go by is the words of others, which draws much doubt. If everyone could phase, it wouldn't be an issue, and until the majority can, it will never be widely accepted as a "truth". The real question is even with objectively similar subjective experiences as means of proof why is it still felt that one's experiences need to be proven to those who have yet to subjectively experience them.

[personalreality]

Like for me, diagrams that illustrate consciousness are ridiculous. You can't "map" it. But it might help others in ways I don't get, so it's not for me to say it's wrong.

lol stookie

[personalreality]

i like to create visual representations in my mind, it helps me contemplate depth in different ways.

[zareste]

I don't agree mathematical dimensions are only a method  of measurement.

okay

[Stookie]

You can't measure or put infinity on a piece of paper. Consciousness is infinite. You can't box it in. You can't view it or comprehend it. You can only experience it. No matter how much learning you do, that experience will never be found in words or books or thoughts. Just descriptions of something indescribable.

[liveandlove]

You can't measure or put infinity on a piece of paper. Consciousness is infinite. You can't box it in. You can't view it or comprehend it. You can only experience it. No matter how much learning you do, that experience will never be found in words or books or thoughts. Just descriptions of something indescribable.

But do you agree that, although imperfect, it can help us better communicate our views with one another and hence, better share our experiences and deepen our understanding of it?

Cheers!

[Stookie]

Absolutely, we need communication. I suppose I say this because a lot of the concepts I had learned before I had any experience, I now see I had completely wrong. But you still have to get there some way. I guess that's why the most simplest things can also be the hardest. But I do believe that practice and experience are more important than the learned concepts - they are likely to change as you do.

[Psilibus]

But do you agree that, although imperfect, it can help us better communicate our views with one another and hence, better share our experiences and deepen our understanding of it?

Now we are getting to the point of agreement. I have been researching through all of the old material I read over twenty years ago. It is amazing to see the correspondence between the "occult" and recently expressed knowledge. It is the same. I always knew and believed my past education but the years put it in doubt. I will be posting some links and whatnot to help create terminology suitable for learning. I will not do this alone for sure because constructive criticism will keep it real for sure. Any others who participate will become teachers as well. That's what were here for right? Or are some here to tout there superiority? I don't think so. I feel there is a talented team here who cares about this art.
http://thesilvercord.com/hu/books/astralworld.html?
http://thesilvercord.com/hu/books/ophiel.html?
Amazing I could find these online. Some of my early 1970's reading. Don't get lost in the "occult" feel. That is a mistake. Many of the masters you meet in the astral have gone before and learned to practice in secret. The rules have changed. The world can change. It must or the conspiracy theories that permeate some of the other forums will come to fruition simply through the energy put into them. I will post more links if anyone is interested. I have read these last to front to back. I create the time. I will begin some Rosicrucian reading soon and reread Monroe, etc. 

Practice everyday and enjoy!

[kurtykurt42]

You guys baffle me...

Perhaps if you spent more time studying and working on mathematical models, rather than criticizing and critiquing others maybe you would comprehend the logic behind dimension.

Oh boy, there goes my karma...

[personalreality]

KURT!

Hi.

[Psilibus]

Dimensional mathematics models and there goes the karma? Ewwwww. "Studying" and "working" math? Ewwwww.

[shineling]

I hope there is room for the golden child in whatever form and system that ends up becoming the paradigm. He doesn't understand the forms although he or she is adept in the full knowledge. He is just free.... and lives spontaneously in the moment.  I think he would cry a little if you tried to hunker him down to a study desk. 

[Psilibus]

Eddie Murphy?

[Capt. Picard]

In all fairness, Im not sure anybody actually critisized mathematics in this thread, it was just stated that it probably would be met with criticism, which would be some what consistent with stating your "beliefs" in math or science on this forum. I have this theory that those people can't understand mathematics and so find it easier to dismiss it all as dogmatic fundamental skeptic science.... Welcome back Kurt.