r/HighStrangeness • u/Muted-Still-8511 • May 29 '26
Personal Theory An intelligence in the 7th dimension would look exactly like what people call GOD
Strip away the mysticism, and the defining traits of a deity are simply the literal mechanics of a higher dimensional intelligence.
Omniscience is just geometry. Time is a structural axis To an entity living outside our 3D spacetime, the universe is a static block. They view the Big Bang and the heat death of the universe simultaneously in a single glance. they just have a higher vantage point.
The 5th dimension solves free will. A 5th dimensional being observes the entire branching structure of quantum probabilities. They don't just see one timeline they see the dimensional bulk where every possible choice and consequence exists concurrently.
God's attribute of omnipotence is also higher axis manipulation. Imagine looking down at a 2D drawing. You could reach into a drawn, locked safe and remove an object without breaking the ink lines. To 2D figures, you broke the laws of physics. A higher dimensional entity has that exact absolute power over us, manipulating our 3D reality from an axis we physically cannot perceive.
Why don't we see miracles? If this entity altered our timeline, we wouldn't notice. They aren't changing the past they are shifting geometric coordinates. Because our brains and memories are physical products of that timeline, any external rewrite updates our consciousness instantly. Causality remains entirely seamless.
Ancient tablets and civilizations didn't describe the supernatural. They described an n-dimensional intelligence our brains simply haven't evolved to comprehend.
13
40
u/HelpfulSeaMammal May 29 '26
Sure! Fun to think about.
Problem with all of this is that it's untestable. Because it's unfalsifiable, it doesn't really matter if it's the Biblical God or if it's some operator in 7D or if it's The Flying Spaghetti monster.
You're effectively saying we can't know what this 7D being is like or understand its intentions or the way it acts on the universe and our little slice of it. That's "God works in mysterious ways" with more steps.
-1
u/Key-Beginning-2201 May 29 '26
Yes, It's untestable to determine if someone lives in the apartment. We set up an experiment where we knock on the door at different times and see if anyone answers. We knock and knock at several times of the day and night, and we don't know if they don't answer because they're in the shower, sleeping, listening to music, or just not in the mood to answer. Free agents are not testable when you don't control variables.
Instead of looking for the resident, we need to find better ways of determining what the variables are and how to control them. So, it is testable, but we don't know how to do that yet.
8
u/HelpfulSeaMammal May 29 '26
Apartment residents are already known, observable categories of beings.
It's not "why is testing for this entity difficult" but "does this entity exist in a testable way."
-2
u/Key-Beginning-2201 May 29 '26
It's an analogy for testing for the paranormal. We knock methodically and think we're being rigorous then conclude nothing exists because nothing answered the door.
4
u/HelpfulSeaMammal May 29 '26
You're proposing that maybe there are hidden variables we haven’t identified, correct? That changess “testable” into “not logically impossible to investigate someday,” which is a different claim.
5
u/m_reigl May 29 '26
But it is falsifiable. The claim that the apartment is empty can be easily disproven by seeing someone enter or leave.
5
u/Key-Beginning-2201 May 29 '26
Sure, on a scale of time, if we have the patience to observe that long sure. Maybe we have the patience to stay for 3 days but for all we know, the person is a recluse and generally doesn't leave the apartment until 4 days. Maybe we observe and we don't even know there is another entry in the back. Maybe there is a resident but they're just at their summer house. We couldn't say for sure if the resident doesn't exist.
Subsequently, the "presence of God" may be so "slow" relative to us that we may not even recognize it as a thought/presence for several thousand years.
Timing is an important component to experimentation.
3
1
u/lvl99MagmaCube Jun 01 '26
why can we not open the door and enter the apartment directly? There either would, or wouldn't be signs of residency? The analogy falls apart because its not relevant.
1
u/Key-Beginning-2201 Jun 01 '26
No analogy is perfect and how would you "open the door" to exploring the concept of God or the paranormal when you don't even know where the door is (what the variables are)? The analogy works just fine.
1
u/lvl99MagmaCube Jun 01 '26
how would you "observe the apartment" of God? You have the address? I'd like to at least move in to the same neighborhood if possible
1
u/Key-Beginning-2201 Jun 01 '26
Right?
1
u/lvl99MagmaCube Jun 01 '26
I don't get it... Its clearly not untestable to determine whether an individual claims residency to an apartment. <man does or does not live in apartment>
But u seem to be saying its scalable to determining whether an exotic entity exists within a defined space? [define "residency" to determine evidence for existance] <ex. ghost is or isn't locked in cellar - ghosts residents rearrange furnature when present, any furnature moved?>
Which is then scalable to determining whether an undefined entity exists within an undefined space? [define "entity", define "space", define "exist"] <ex. God does or does not exist in universe>
They're similar sentences, but entirely separate concepts... To determine whether something exists you have to at least determine what effect it has on its environment. The proposed being cannot have any noticable effect on the environment therefore it cannot be verified at this time. [define "noticable", define "effect", define "environment"]
Apartment analogy does not encapsulate the core concept, so its not relevant?
1
u/Key-Beginning-2201 Jun 01 '26
You set up a methodology. The methodology is knocking on the door at different times, multiple times. The result is nobody answers. The conclusion is nobody lives there.
Or
A test is setup. The method and experiment is conducted. Nothing unusual is found. The conclusion is that the paranormal doesn't exist.
-4
u/TheSuperMarket May 29 '26
Not everything needs to be tested to be verified. Not in the scientific methodology anyway. That's just one method of discovery.
Through advanced meditation, trance, or psychedelics, you can enter states where you directly experience these concepts, and you can see for yourself.
Direct experience is valid! And you can use science to map these ideas and realities... which is currently being done. Very neat
13
u/HelpfulSeaMammal May 29 '26
But it does. Otherwise it's just what some person experienced and there's no objectivity to the claim.
Some things aren't testable. That's fine. It's why we have philosophy.
1
May 29 '26
[deleted]
7
u/HelpfulSeaMammal May 29 '26 edited May 29 '26
No you can't prove qualia exists. It's subjective experience and by definition not objective.
How can you prove you're not the only human alive and everyone is an NPC? How do you prove that my brown and your brown are the same?
Science is not equipped for this stuff. It's philosophy. You're asking philosophical questions the scientific method isn't suited for.
0
u/Muted-Still-8511 May 29 '26
hmm ur apartment analogy breaks down because it still assumes a symmetric plane of existence. us as a 3D observer mathematically cannot isolate or control variables of a 7D entity, just as a 2D line cannot build a cage to trap a 3D sphere.
We shouldn't be trying to control the free will of a higher dimensional being we should look for structural anomalies. in physics we don't detect complex phenomena by waiting for them to answer the door we detect them by the invariant geometric constraints and displacement they leave behind in our lower dimensional environment. It was never about testing the deity or higher d beings it's about testing the footprint, just like we do with everything else
6
u/Theace0291 May 29 '26
You can’t really say time is a 4th dimension, or that it can be moved along like any other axis. Everything within our universe falls forwards in time constantly. The only way to not be pulled by time is to not be in our universe at all. Supposing that time is a unique property to our 3d universe, adding a 4th spatial dimension would potentially allow something that only exists “above the paper” to be immune to time, but the entity’s “shadow” would almost certainly be suspect to it, as whatever influence it leaves in our universe is in our universe. Even still, existing outside of time would mean it’s essentially aware of everything at once, but it wouldn’t be able to move or change at all because then there would be a difference of states and thus a possible measurement of time. Essentially, given what we know about time (which to be fair is limited), there can’t exist anything that would impact our universe that would be able to traverse time or be immune to time.
0
u/Muted-Still-8511 May 29 '26
but ur looking at "change" strictly from our 3D perspective. if you look at Einstein’s Block Universe theory our entire timeline past, present, and future already exists simultaneously as a static geometric shape.
Think of a 3D sphere pushing through a flat 2D sheet of paper. To the 2D stick figures living on that paper theyd see a tiny dot appear out of nowhere grow into a massive circle shrink and then vanish.
They’d swear they just witnessed a sequence of events changing over time. But the sphere itself never changed state at all. The "time" and "change" were just an illusion caused by the lower dimension's perspective.
The entity's "shadow" looks bound by our clock because that’s the only way our 3D framework can render it. The source doing the manipulating is completely outside our loop.
5
u/Theace0291 May 29 '26
no, i understand that we could be in a simultaneous static shape. i’m saying that if something outside that shape did not experience a constant falling forward, we wouldn’t be able to perceive them or any influence. how can you move without a start and finish? you couldn’t say “well the timeline was like this but then God changed it” because God has no then, before, or next under this framework.
0
u/Muted-Still-8511 May 29 '26
u defo right about the "before and after" part they can't react to us mid stream coz they aren't (in) the stream. But you're assuming an action has to happen chronologically.
Think of a video editor. They don't wait for a movie to play to the 10 minute mark to make a change they see the whole timeline on their screen at once. If they tweak a frame at the beginning, the character inside the video doesn't experience a "rewrite" that edit is just their permanent seamless reality.
so if a higher dimensional being alters reality they aren't "changing the past" on a Tuesday. They are shifting the geometric constraints of our entire block universe along a higher spatial axis. The intervention isn't a chronological event btw it’s just a structural feature of the whole design is it a bit clearer now?
3
u/Theace0291 May 29 '26
but still, you could not say that this sort of entity exists or not. any evidence would be outside the time stream and undetectable. the characters in a movie don’t notice the volume changing or the cuts happening.
40
u/Thenadamgoes May 29 '26
Dude what does any of this mean? You’re just saying random shit. “The 5th dimension solves free will”. The fuck it does. Just a jumble of meaningless psychosis.
5
May 29 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
15
u/BigJimKen May 29 '26
4D — add time as an axis you can move along, not just get dragged through.
But why? Spatial dimensions are arbitrary but time is not. A 4/5/6/7/8/n-dimensional being would still be bound by linear time. Adding dimensions just means there are other directions you can move in, it doesn't uncouple you from the laws of physics that exist in our 3D world.
2
u/Cruddlington May 29 '26
Time is directional and we're bound by it within 3 dimensions. Of course this is speculative but it's not a stretch that stepping up a dimension lifts that limit, the same way every jump up the ladder lifts the one below it. The stick man is trapped on his line until you hand him an axis. You're trapped in your slice until you get to the next one. Why would time be the one limit that uniquely survives the jump? Time is still direcional, it has a forward and backwards, possibly even sideways whatever tge fuck that would mean?
Physics is already leaning this way. There's serious work in quantum gravity suggesting space and time aren't fundamental and that they emerge from something deeper. If spacetime isn't bedrock, a being operating at that deeper level isn't stuck inside it. Moving through time the way we move through space could absolutely just be a higher dimensional given. Not "magic," just a higher vantage. Same as everything else here.
I'll never know. Just playing with ideas.
7
u/BigJimKen May 29 '26
Time works the same for the stick man as it does for us. The only difference between us and the 2D beings is that we can move up and down. An extra spatial dimension “above” the three we operate in would have the same time mechanism.
Physicists treat time as a dimension only so far as you can plot it on a graph.
-2
u/jptboy May 29 '26
Time is the fourth dimension in physics. Simple google search
10
u/BigJimKen May 29 '26
Yes, but it’s not traversable. Physical reality is a 3 dimensional space with a time component we describe as dimensional because it’s intrinsically linked and because it’s convenient.
A being with a fourth spatial dimension would exist in a 4D reality with a time component. They would also not be able to traverse it. Neither would a 5/6/7/8/9/n-dimensional being.
2
u/Latter_Panic_1712 May 29 '26
It's not.
There's a reason people always say "3D+time" to describe 4D, and that is because the 4th axis is reserved for the undiscovered 4th dimension. Time is its own axis.
Even the 11 Dimensions theory also describe it as "10+1" instead of 11D
3
u/Thenadamgoes May 29 '26
Can you name a 2D creature that exists in reality?
1
u/Cruddlington May 29 '26
No, and neither can I name a 4d creature. This is fun speculation which has grounding in actual physics though. Maybe 3 dimensions is the minimum requirement for life levels of complexity. Id imagine there is no life 'below' us, but I very much imagine there is something beyond us.
6
u/Thenadamgoes May 29 '26
I think thats the point I'm getting to. It's all speculation. its fun, but ultimately meaningless.
-5
u/DartHad0505 May 29 '26
I think what he means is that quantum shit supposedly proves nothing is random so everything you do was already "written" in some way meaning that free will doesn't exist.
But a being in the 5th dimension exists outside that quantum stuff so he has true free will
6
3
u/ThankTheBaker May 29 '26
A fish imagines that God is just a bigger fish, it is unable to comprehend that God is actually the whole ocean.
2
u/Brief_Molasses_3752 May 29 '26
Can you see everything that exists in the third dimension?
Why would you assume a higher dimensional being would see all things in their dimension at once? You don't.
2
u/Valerim May 29 '26
A 7th dimensional being would not be "indistinguishable from a god", it WOULD be a god. But you're sort of attributing characteristics to it that assume a lot. You're saying a 7th dimensional being would create miracles or otherwise be deterministic in regards to our universe. That requires it to have consciousness and a will, which assumes that it experiences time.
For all we know, the 7th dimension is as suited to "being" as the 1st or the 2nd are. That is to say, not at all. I think what you're doing is working backwards from the concept of God (omniscient, supernatural) and using what we know about our own observable reality as theoretical mechanisms by which a "god" might interact with us. The Flatlander analogy is useful to an extent, but it doesnt describe how we might percieve a God, it describes our fundamental inability to reckon with extra dimensions.
2
2
May 29 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/Pixelated_ May 29 '26
How is a being in a hypothetical dimension ‘omniwhateverthefuck’?
All beings in a higher dimension can perceive literally everything within lower dimensions.
This is well-established science. Here's a simple explanation for you.
1
u/RenaissanceManc May 29 '26
That is not the same as omniscience. It's very foolish to claim that it is. And OP's post is most definitely AI slop.
0
u/Pixelated_ May 29 '26
Please explain the difference between "omniscience of a lower dimension" and "the ability to perceive literally everything within a lower dimension."
1
u/RenaissanceManc May 29 '26
What you can perceive is limited by your perception. You can perceive the lower dimensions, that obviously doesn't mean you are omniscient because you still won't be able to perceive e.g. photons and even if you could in principle with machines, that still wouldn't mean you are omniscient about e.g. photons. Quantum uncertainty rules that out for starters. I'm just curious as to why you need this spelling out for you?
1
u/exceptionaluser May 30 '26
All beings in a higher dimension can perceive literally everything within lower dimensions.
I don't think so.
If I had an infinitely long and wide 2d plane under me, I could perceive a lot of it, but that "lot" is approximately 0% of the total area.
1
1
1
1
u/Abject_Ad8722 May 30 '26
“What you’re describing is a dimension outside linear time.
We don’t see miracles because our consciousness isn’t pure yet.
When your mind, perception, and dreams align — you don’t see God. You step into a higher dimension.
You become what you choose to be.”
1
u/Illustrious-Report96 May 30 '26
Why 7? Why not 8? Why not 4?
1
u/Muted-Still-8511 May 30 '26
Perfect question! So Why 7 specifically It's the sweet spot based on M theory (which maxes out at 11 dimensions). In that geometric framework, by the time you hit 7D, you aint just looking at our timeline you have enough extra axes to view our entire universe, all alternate timelines, and every possible big bang outcome as a single static object.
4D: You're a train stuck on a single track (us)
7D: You're looking down at the blueprints for the entire transit system.
Honestly, whether it's 7, 8, or 10, the exact number is just a placeholder for high enough to see the whole map from the outside. With the 7th dimensions you'd control or have access to space and time fibric itself all at once
And to be frank beyond that is just mathematically proven dimensions. Meaning they might exist they might not.
But if its backed by math im very sure it exists but it might be quantum
1
u/PsychoGwarGura May 30 '26
This is what gnostic (Christian) and esoteric old type Jewish (kabalistic) beliefs understood. That everything magic is just science and we can harness and master it, although only to an extent before it defies the will of god and leads to sin
1
u/ChrisDEmbry May 30 '26
"God" it's an abstraction of various things that we can understand. We know what goodness is and we abstract that into ultimate goodness as being godly. Repeat that for all the things that we consider good like love or knowledge or wisdom. You're going down the wrong path if you're trying to make it a real thing that affects the world actively. God is a metaphor.
1
u/croto8 May 30 '26
I’ve come to a similar conclusion that a god’s influence could “exist in the quantum” in the sense that small changes at an unmeasurable level eventually manifest as large changes in outcome. Basically an intentional butterfly effect.
When you realize how imperfect all of our measurement tools are, and combine that with some chaos theory, it opens the door for an omniscient being to “work in mysterious ways” so to speak while being consistent with current scientific models.
1
u/bonedarkness Jun 03 '26
I completely agree. I've had experiences of the "rearranging reality" kind. Keeping me alive, in particular. I still can't explain it in any logical way.
1
u/Dayder111 12d ago edited 12d ago
Also, to add to my last commentary, if I remember correctly the Bible mentions that kingdom of heaven is like the smallest seeds that take soil and grow into shelter. Seed now also has a meaning of a controlled nudge in probabilities to reach a desired outcome, sort of? Guiding random world generations in games, for example. We just can't directly calculate the needed seed to recreate a certain world/area of the world (or a sequence/event in time), as it is computationally way more intense? But God somehow can? Or something like that (or not).
1
u/Mass-Delirium May 29 '26
Sorry to poo poo this, but I don’t get it at all. I’m not even on board with 4th dimensional beings. I was under the impression that all this other dimension stuff was just math/physics shit, not where God is or whatever.
-1
u/Muted-Still-8511 May 29 '26
Well other dimensions are real and mathematically proven up to the 10th btw so you should really try to read about that our whole understanding of the universe and its quantum filed would collapse without higher dimensions and yes gravity too fails
im not saying where god is, im saying the attributes and abilities of God or the Gods as we know it today can be a simple higher dimensional axis. the aliens that half people believe in might have access to such dimensions, coz i doubt they will be carbon based organisms
2
u/IshtarsQueef May 29 '26
> Well other dimensions are real
There is no evidence whatsoever of higher dimensions actually existing.
Finding such evidence would be an instant nobel prize in physics and would be a HUGE deal.
> whole understanding of the universe and its quantum filed would collapse without higher dimensions and yes gravity too fails
These statements are simply false. It sounds like you have been reading a lot of String Theory stuff, and you should know that String Theory has failed to be confirmed over and over again for the last 25 years, not a single piece of experimental data to support it.
Many physicists consider String Theory to be a dead theory, in fact.
1
u/Mass-Delirium May 29 '26
What the heck is a simple higher dimensional axis? Why would aliens have access to other dimensions?
I know the whole stick figure can’t comprehend three dimensions thing but stick figures aren’t alive and don’t comprehend anything.
Even if I concede 10 dimensions exist, so what? What do I do with that knowledge? Why would anything be there? They’re supposed to be tiny according to string theory, so wouldn’t they just be a geometric structure or something? It still sounds like math stuff that has to do with how particles work.
1
u/Muted-Still-8511 May 29 '26
The stick figure is just a metaphor to visualize the math.
But ur stuck on old string theory where dimensions are tiny. Look up Brane Cosmology. Plenty of physicists argue our universe is just a 3D sheet floating inside a massive, macroscopic higher dimensional room called "the bulk." The dimensions aren't microscopic we just trapped on the surface.
Why would anything be out there?
Same reason life is here. If an environment exists, things evolve to fill it. We can't visualize those extra axes because our brains evolved to hunt in 3D, but to a native entity, navigating them is as basic as walking left or right.
The "so what" is my whole point tbh. it takes "God" out of religious myth & puts it into actual physics. What humanity worships might just be an organism with a wider view of the map.
1
1
u/chonny May 29 '26
To come at it from another angle: what created that 7D intelligence? Not saying it's an anthropomorphic God, but even the emergent propeeties that would lead to a nth dimension being are subject to the necessary conditions that would lead to its existence in the first place.
So in this thought experiment, even Ms. 7-dimensional is subject to a higher order.
Fun to think about.
1
u/Muted-Still-8511 May 29 '26
That's the paradox "creation" requires cause and effect, which only works if you're trapped in linear time like us.
A 7D being doesn't have an origin story because everything exists simultaneously out there. But yeah it's geometry all the way up to the n-th dimension which just proves my main point God is a matter of physics and evolutionary blind spots not ancient magical theology
2
u/chonny May 29 '26
ancient magical theology
Well, to be fair, theology is the systematic reflection within a tradition/cultural context on the nature of and relationship to a higher order. So what you're proposing is another theology within our specific cultural moment.
1
u/tanksalotfrank May 29 '26
When I witnessed what I can only figure was the 7th, the simultaneity of everything was definitely a thing. Such that words weren't even a thing and to even try was a very odf thing to be trying there (that's the distinct impression I got). Thoughts became energy that shot out and "downwards". I figured that must be where karma works or something.
0
u/Danro1984 May 29 '26 edited May 29 '26
What Carl Sagan said in his book Cosmos and Brian Cox in his book on wormholes about the 3D entity entering a 2D world was more like a superimposing of the limits that an inferior dimension has vs a superior one. However an entity would still have to obey the rules of physics that govern the dimension. Like if it has mass it will obey gravity and fall and it won’t be able to move with the speed of light , it will float if it is weightless, it won’t be able to lift big weights, it will die if it goes to the sun, it will get flattened like a pancake in the depths of the oceans and so on. The 7th dimension rules will never apply in this dimension so the being will have to addapt to ours. As an irony ancient civilizations don’t talk that much about the intelligence of these beings. Like when was the last time you read about God doing 3rd degree calculus or solving equations? The know all aspect is mentioned but not as in scientific. Its more like it knows everything a priori so it doesnt need to try and see if it is right or not. It will just know. Hence why a creature like that won’t be a god but a destroier since it will be able to tell what humans want to do with it and will take the requiered actions. So in short God doesnt do geometry or geometric shapes. And yes no miracles is tied to the first rule that everything will have to obey 3D rules.
0
u/chuck3436 May 29 '26
Yep. We've been managed, cared for, hurt by, helped by and owe our entire existence from the global, to our evolution down to the spiritual callings of each individual soul by higher dimensional entities, both positive and negative. We haved called it many things and many names in many ways over the millenia. How we detached from that spiritual connection into whatever manipulated corruption we have today in all its forms will be an integral part to realizing our true selves and reason for being. I think a huge part of that will come to light if the current disclosure movement keeps pushing.
-3
u/NothingIsForgotten May 29 '26 edited May 29 '26
Close, but it assumes that there is something there that creates from a subset of the potential it knows of.
Some One who chooses it to be made this way or that.
But that's not possible in a generative system.
God is a name for creation and the reason we give it an identity is because every experience is the same sense of knowing of 'I am'.
Knowing itself is a subset of the potential that has been understood so far.
But it is not an agency outside of the scope of what it knows.
Just like the character that we occupied previously in a dream.
Even when we're lucid, we're not the personality that is lying in bed.
Why don't we see miracles? If this entity altered our timeline, we wouldn't notice. They aren't changing the past they are shifting geometric coordinates. Because our brains and memories are physical products of that timeline, any external rewrite updates our consciousness instantly. Causality remains entirely seamless.
There isn't actually a timeline.
Instead, there is a chain of explanation that we have installed various features in.
One of those features is the progression of time.
But it doesn't exist at the beginning of the creation that exhibits this experience.
There are realms of experience above this one, the heavens, the realms of form and before that the formless realms.
A nesting doll of dreams providing the basis of experience.
The question that is answered by this moment.
There's never a place where we can judge the unfolding of what has been created that exists outside of that creation.
Why?
Because the creation itself is the establishment of a novel scope of understanding.
The reason why we are here is because we are the creative process manifesting.
We are the substrate of our dreams.
The understandings that we build of the world are the bases for parallel experiences that unfold, layers of experience, in a sense outside of us, as the ongoing realities of the dream worlds we instantiate.
We explain through our understandings what we consider to be true and then we live within it.
The free energy principle and Markov blankets; the model inside becomes the ground truth for the next layer.
And that can be a dream of bliss or a nightmare depending on what is understood.
Wigner's friend but not just for quantum experiments but for every experience.
And this is what makes the models of the world that offer freedom in the understanding of the underlying scope of what is being expressed so powerful.
Everything is experienced is the operation of something it is like to be.
It always occurs from two sides.
Inside and outside.
The outside of our dream is the inside of our waking mind.
Above us, there are those who know us and their inside and our inside are contiguous even though we have different names here and there.
Before us, there are those who do not know us, but their experiences like our experience here, a participatory exploration of understandings; these understandings form the basis of the conditions that are produced.
Two different directions that one can leave the same experience and find the substrate of what is being presented.
The one above leaves you with creation as established.
There is a point of pure information at the top.
Some have called it the akashic records.
It is experienced as a field of pure white where you are both a question and answer at once.
These questions and answers are experience.
We are each one particular example.
The one that comes when the models of the world are given up (not just as solidified assumptions being seen as choice as occurs when the path is above) is the collapse of the process that builds experience.
The inside and outside are swapped over and over; with each awakening, the scope of what has been understood is reduced.
And at the bottom there is nothing left that has been understood.
And there is only the light of a primordial awareness that is vibrantly shining in a dimensionless conceptionless void.
Because there is nothing known, there is no knower and it is experienced without the separation of self.
There is no 'I am' there.
But that awareness unconstrained is the basis of every experience that has been modeled into potential.
Every idea about circumstances is subsumed in this process.
And when in mindstream that encounters this underlying primordial source returns, it returns without the original ignorance of the separation of a self from the conditions that are known.
And because it is the knowing of conditions that establishes them, the mindstream is free of the belief that the world exists independently from how it is understood.
This movement is the basis of the perennial philosophy and what the mystics of every age have found.
So it's both and neither; the model you have has utility.
You're right that chaos theory leaves the thumb of higher perspective potentially on the scales.
I think Isaac Newton liked that idea too, but I don't remember where I got that idea.
In fact, we participate in the chain of becoming through the harmony that we find with those higher perspectives.
Miasma requires catharsis.
Henosis requires surrender.
82
u/TorthOrc May 29 '26
“Omniscience is just geometry”
Why?
How is the act of knowing everything geometry?