It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Al Vereco
As I was reading the last post, I think I suddenly understood some things...
First, if any being was ever to achieve 'timelessness', then of course they would know everything and be everywhere at once, since they live forever and also have infinity in which to do whatever they want, including going back and forth in time. Given this, they would "eventually" discover a populated Earth and could "then" observe it at will. Therefore, somewhere out there IS at least one being which is observing us. Is this what you were getting at, lilblam?
Also, a timeless 'reality' could be visualised (at least in my mind) in this way... The 'time' we experience is a line with one's consciousness/awareness as a point in the center. I'm not sure if this line would be infinite in length or not. I'll leave lilblam to give his thoughts on that. But anyway, we are (or each person is) a point moving along the line of 'time' in one direction, from 'past' to 'future'. We can only conceive of the Line of Time but in reality the line is only part of a larger structure. A plane, or even a cube. If the line was infinite then this plane or cube must also in some way be infinite. This would also be 2-dimensional or 3-dimensional time....... "Timelessness" would therefore be the ability to somehow perceive and experience reality in this 2D or 3D "time", which is All Possibilities...
Wow, I'm confusing myself now!
Therefore, my questions to lilblam are:
1 - Is the line infinite? And therefore, is the plane/cube infinite?
2 - Would "time" be a plane or a cube?
3 - How could we possibly raise our awareness to acheive this timelessness?
4 - On second thoughts: Would a timeless being necessarily live forever?
So what this means is that I am not who I think I am. If I'm a timeless being, that means I am much more than my physical existence. I did not choose to be 'born' in this physical reality so that means there is some other force that has? Would that be the soul or spirit, that's what I think it is. If I am here to raise my knowledge and awareness, which I enjoy doing, what will come of it once I 'pass' from my physical existence? Is gaining knowledge serving some other end, one that passes beyond my physical existence? Does this mean my knowledge eventually goes to someone else, like 'food' for some other beings? These are some questions that I ponder while I've read the posts up to now.
Originally posted by lilblam
Well, you're a timeless being with a very poor perception, but you don't live forever. If there is no time, period, then ALL are timeless beings, just some of them are aware of this and therefore are able to manipulate reality due to that awareness, and others are not. Humans are not yet aware at this density, but patience pays! Does this mean you live "forever"? Well maybe, maybe not. Depends on who is observing your "life" doesn't it?
[edit on 11-6-2004 by lilblam]
Originally posted by IMMORTAL
So what this means is that I am not who I think I am.
If I'm a timeless being, that means I am much more than my physical existence. I did not choose to be 'born' in this physical reality so that means there is some other force that has?
Would that be the soul or spirit, that's what I think it is. If I am here to raise my knowledge and awareness, which I enjoy doing, what will come of it once I 'pass' from my physical existence?
Is gaining knowledge serving some other end, one that passes beyond my physical existence?
Does this mean my knowledge eventually goes to someone else, like 'food' for some other beings?
These are some questions that I ponder while I've read the posts up to now.
Originally posted by Al Vereco
SO many questions!
"There is no line." Yes, in the 'bigger picture' there is no line / time. But the point I was making was that the "line" that we perceive (ie:time) is merely a kind of cross-section of the "plane" which would be 'reality' I guess... (or your 'bigger picture'). IOW: If you have a piece of paper with lines on it, those lines don't exist in and of themselves, but only as a part of the paper (plane). However, if for some reason you can't percieve the paper, then (to you at least) the lines exist as separate entities...
My point is that 'there is no line' but in another sense 'there IS a line'. Like in the Matrix, 'there IS a spoon' because it exists in the matrix, but in reality (the bigger picture) 'there is no spoon'... So things kinda exist but don't exist....
Is this making ANY sense?
The line is real because we perceive it, but it's not real because our perception is limited. Therefore is perception itself subjective...???
Also, when I asked "Would 'time' be a plane or a cube?", what I meant was, not 'time' but the 'bigger picture' / 'reality'. Or whatever it is that our percieved 'time' is part of.....
To put it another way, the line doesn't exist except as the path that the perception (the point) takes. There are many possible routes from place A to place B but the higher perception is that all 'places' exist simultaneously.
"How could we possibly raise our awareness to acheive this timelessness?" - "Gain knowledge." What kind of knowledge? What I mean is: If I decide to learn, say, Hungarian, how would that raise my awareness? Surely this 'knowledge' would need to be somehow useful...?
"Here's an inspiring quote from my 'friends' " Are these "friends" the Cassiopaeans? Do you communicate with them yourself? How do you know that they are real?
Sorry if my questions are vague or confused, but I'm still trying to wrap my head round all of this....
Edit:
"When ALL the lessons of this density are learned, you move to the next density. There are only 7!" Again I must ask: How do you know??
Originally posted by Al Vereco
I'm trying to figure out a 'model' of reality and 'time' that is fairly easy to visualise...
Time as a line doesn't exist, but we perceive time as existing and as being a line, therefore somewhere in Reality must be something that looks like a line (ie:looks like 'time') but isnt. That would mean that time exists - in a way - but it isn't what it seems to be... Or am I just way off base here...?
If there is no line, what is there?
"That's like a 3rd grader asking: 'How can I possibly raise my awareness to understand the world's financial markets, calculus, biology, physics, the human physiology and mind, and astronomy + astrology among many other things?' " ...But these are all things that are taught, not learned by oneself...
"So my answer is, discover the answer yourself!" I suspect that by this you mean, not "figure out the answer yourself" as with a maths problem, but rather "come across the answer yourself" as with something that just happens for no reason and with no searching for it............?
"You cannot know what you'll learn BEFORE you learn it, otherwise there wouldn't be a need for lessons" But you can know ABOUT what you'll learn. For example "Hey, lilblam, do I need to learn Hungarian in order to understand timelessness?" "No" "Fine, then I won't bother learning it" I didn't need to actually learn Hungarian in order to find out that I didn't need to learn it.........
"Now, I'm not saying it's not useful to know the source, but sometimes you have no way of really knowing, and all you have to go on is the 'fruits', and in my case it would be the stuff I write" Well, then how do I now that the things you say, your 'fruits' are true? For example, you say "The Cassaeopians exist" and "There are 7 densities". I haven't seen any logic applied to these statements or supporting arguments, therefore I can't classify these 'fruits' as either ripe or rotten. I can only conclude that the 'fruits' exist, which leads me nowhere.....
"Give it high probability of being true considering the source, and my knowledge of same" In other words: "Trust me! Would I lie to you?"
You never know what you'll learn, until you learn it. You may plan to learn Hungarian, but end up knowing so much more
So what you're saying is: If you don't know where the puzzle-piece goes, leave it on the 'back-burner' until you get more clues. In the meantime, collect more puzzle pieces and see if they fit. Eventually, I will be able to complete the jigsaw and progress to 4th d....?
So discover! ...have faith, and have patience.
I apologise, I must have misunderstood. I thought you mean that I should give it a high probability, etc... when in fact I can do no such thing because I have no way of verifying it. Perhaps my question should have more accurately been "How can I know it is true?", which I think is more or less answered in the above paragraph...
This statement doesn't ask for YOUR trust, I am simply answering your inquiry as to "How do I know it is true?"
Originally posted by Al Vereco
Surely it isn't possible to know "all there is to know", though?
Surely it isn't possible to know "all there is to know", though?
Sure it is! You'd have to expand your awareness infinitely though, because all of reality is infinite.
Originally posted by lilblam
Originally posted by Shugo
Oh no... I just realize it, well majority of your posts do, that's all. I'm not trying to defend anything at this moment.
Because majority of my time is spent thinking about things, which are in one way or another related to religion, even if not directly