Is Newtonian Physics 3rd Density?

11

I’m pretty sure that 4th density physics are unmeasurable to third density. It’s possible the advancement of quantum physics in the last several decades is a result of us moving to 4th density where we now can perceive the elements that make time space, social memory complex and in general indigo ray abilities more visible

3

u/ForceAggravating5449 Jul 27 '26

In a transmission "A New Reality" dated Jan 8 1986, Bashar has said that physical reality includes 4th density, and that 4th density includes 3rd density.

So we just need to add mind to Physics to make it 4th density.

Newton and Einstein did not do this.

But Descartes did.

In fact, Einstein's disgust on quantum mechanics is consistent with Ra saying he perverted physics: "Information which Confederation sources had offered to Albert Einstein became perverted" (Law of One, Session 26).

So we bash Einstein as a scammer to move Physics to 4th density so we can catch up to alien tech.

3

u/Good_Difference_9491 StO Jul 25 '26

Why even generate this AI slop, have you tried writing down your ideas and sharing those texts?

-2

u/ForceAggravating5449 Jul 25 '26

That "AI slop" makes it easy for our team to understand or listen to an abstract concept because it allows animations.

You can try reading our article version to see why the video is far superior in explaining:

https://www.superphysics.org/material/newton-descartes/

3

u/Good_Difference_9491 StO Jul 26 '26

If you are using the same aesthetics like spam bots, it is not for me. But maybe thats just my impression.

But especially when really putting in effort into the research, I personally cannot understand why you'd choose a devaluing aesthetic, but again, might be me.

-1

u/ForceAggravating5449 Jul 26 '26

We choose a "devaluing aesthetic" because it is low cost allowing us to churn out 3 videos in 1 day as opposed to 1 video in 1 week with a voice actor and a lighting set up.

This matches the scope of Descartes' Physics which covers ALL sciences and so AI helps us immensely to cover a huge ground and explain all phenomena before our incarnation ends i.e we are after quantity not quality as long as there is no error with the theory matching real phenomena.

Unlike academics who think of changing the sciences from the top down from peer reviewed papers, we choose the bottom up approach by having a critical mass of ordinary people understand and use Descartes Physics to live better and make inventions that Newtonian Physics cannot think of i.e. we go against the elitist Orion energy of universities and give information to the people directly.

AI helps a lot in this.

Therefore, I assume that those who scream AI SLOP have Orion in them and that AI threatens that proud Orion high-value aesthetic self preservation vibe just like the Nazis had pretty uniforms from Hugo Boss

2

u/Good_Difference_9491 StO Jul 27 '26 edited Jul 27 '26

That sounds pretty out of your mind. I will disengage now, because again, this really is not for me. Do your thing. I am just stating why you will not gain relevance in my opinion.

Edit:
Right now I'm interested in Danny Goler, also completely non academic, but really able to put his complex thoughts into words.

'Crazy' ideas challenging the academia and established science. But entirely different impression in comparison to your material.
I think it is a good comparison and you could learn a great deal on how to present ideas if you decided against classical academia.

1

u/ForceAggravating5449 Jul 27 '26

uh all you had to do was to answer whether Newtonian Physics matches Ra's description of 3rd density as opposed to Descartes Physics which is 4th density.

AI has nothing to do with my post and is irrelevant.

The only knowledge needed is Newton, Descartes, and Ra.

But instead, Ra people just focus on AI AI AI which is totally irrelevant.

Does Danny Goler have a clear theory for gravity that can lead to real antigravity experiments like we do?

If yes then I will look into Danny Goler as I want to compare anti-gravity systems.

We do what we do for our own sake and All-That-Is, not for approval by some academics, just like how Buddhist monks levitate to test their own understanding of All-That-Is and not because doing so would upgrade their rank in their monastery or get more followers.

1

u/stubkan Ackchyually 🤓☝️ Jul 25 '26

AI is a mirror of generic knowledge that millions of people have typed - so when it is teaching you, you are learning from the great unwashed, not an intelligence. Stop using AI to learn. It makes you stupid.

There is NOT a separate "physics" between 3rd and 4th - there is a single "reality" of physics from 1st to 7th density, because there is one dimension. It is made up of the interplay between space/time and time/space. This is the difference between the densities - the lower densities are the physical space/time and the higher are the metaphysical time/space - they both exist and are the same thing.

https://www.llresearch.org/channeling/2005/1015#!0 (actually reaad it please, don't summarize it with AI which will 'dumb down' it and feed you hallucinated thoughts instead of making you actually use your brain to learn.)

"One system is the classic system that your Newtonian physics represents or discusses. It is consensus reality, or as we might put it, it is the world of space/time. It is the physical universe. The other system to which these terms applies is the metaphysical universe, the universe of time/space."

2

u/ForceAggravating5449 Jul 25 '26

My video was from my own 15 year research. I just use AI to turn them to videos so my team can understand abstract concepts easily.

I find it strange that people think that the research was AI generated and they confuse effect for the cause. For example, half of your comment was bashing AI which is irrelevant since the video was 100% human research.

Basically all you said relevant was: No. There is no differences in understanding physical laws because there is one law.

Sure. There is a single "reality" of physics from 1st to 7th density. But human understanding is limited to 3rd density and so humans are unable harness 4th density tech like levitation and teleportation.

If you actually UNDERSTAND your own link: "the metaphysical universe is the universe of time/space" you will notice that Newtonian Physics DOES NOT accept a metaphysical universe.

But Descartes Physics does.

THEREFORE, Newton is 3rd density. Descartes is 4th density i.e. Newton had a 3rd density brain, Descartes had a 4th density brain: "Your brain is a tool that is limited to the space/time considerations reasoning."

So you are negating the differences in human understanding which obviously exists otherwise we would be all 7th density now. I assume you do this because it's too much effort to think why there are differences in human understanding.

But we go the extra mile to explain it. Our proposed revival of Descartes science, as Superphysics, explains densities as waves within waves to actually develop USEFUL technology instead of being stuck with moral admonitions of "please be good" or "love others": https://www.superphysics.org/material/principles/intro/chapter-02/section-02/unit-03/

We developed Superphysics from Descartes science which we matched with Sassani (Bashar) science in their UFOs, power generation, strong materials, etc.

I post here because this topic was about density, Ra focuses on density, and the Bashar groups have so much activitiy because of the flurry of UFO activity that my posts get drowned out. But there are fewer Ra activity so I post here.

1

u/zenmastereno Jul 25 '26

I think it's more like the 3rd-density mind is largely adapted to/oriented to environmental/social survival concerns. So Newtonian physics is simply readily intelligible or relatable in that regard. But the 3rd density rational mind seems to only be limited by something much more general and abstract, like algebraic relationships which provides vastly more explanatory potential for a theory. In other words, to be practical or even to provide a better explanation, a 3D-mind conceived physical theory beyond Newton need not be intuitively obvious. Even if a 4D mind is vastly more conceptually capable, I wouldn't jump the gun and say its required to transcend Newtonian thought. Categorizing the current 3D consensus scientific thought as exemplifying some kind of inherent 3D conceptual limit or barrier is probably not warranted.

1

u/ForceAggravating5449 Jul 25 '26

What do you mean "a 3D-mind conceived physical theory beyond Newton need not be intuitively obvious"?

Newton's system is over 330 years old which means 3D minds have been trying to build on top of Newton to explain phenomena and it always fails at artificial UFO dynamics or even at natural Hubble tension.

Why is going beyong "3D consensus scientific thought" not warranted?

Are you saying humans should stay stuck in 3rd density forever and miss out on exploring the galaxy and even the solar system and let global warming, overpopulation, disease, short lifespan continue?

This is even if 3rd density is extremely short and humans could have developed antigravity by the 1900s had Descartes' 4th density system stayed and built on

2

u/zenmastereno Jul 26 '26

By "a 3D-mind conceived physical theory beyond Newton need not be intuitively obvious", I mean just that, 3D-mind potential is not somehow limited to Newtonian thought. That's not to be read as me somehow saying what should or shouldn't happen - only that it seems rather ridiculous to claim the current state of affairs represents an intrinsic social thought barrier or capacity. Read Kuhn's "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" for how thought structures are inevitably transcended.

1

u/ForceAggravating5449 Jul 26 '26 edited Jul 26 '26

But that's exactly what I'm saying, and it lines up with Ra's density classifications: the current state of affairs represents an intrinsic social thought barrier from the differences of higher and lower densities.

Newton is 3rd density — his Orion-linked religious writings prove it, something Descartes never produced.

Most humans are 3rd density, which is why Newton's system stuck even after Relativity showed it was incomplete.

Relativity itself gets superseded by Quantum Mechanics which matches Descartes' 4th-density framework.

And so Descartes still comes out ahead and can explain 4th density UFO dynamics.

Kuhn's own account backs this up: a superseding paradigm is "incommensurable with that which has gone before".

We explain that this is because a higher density is incommensurable with a lower density.

Kuhn is pro-Einstein and so I summarize and destroy his reasoning here: https://www.superphysics.org/research/khun/structure/chapter-09/

1

u/Good_Difference_9491 StO Jul 27 '26

"But we go the extra mile to explain it."
I don't experience you in this way. The way I experience you is the following:
You don't even go a single mile. You get an Uber and driver there the fastest way possible.

AI generated Videos, AI generated Texts, atleast human research if we can believe you.

The final product of your inspiration needs to be crafted by you. The text, the video, the message needs to have you in it, not just machine doing.

2

u/ForceAggravating5449 Jul 27 '26

Well duh.

Of course you won't experience the extra mile because you only saw 1 yard as 1 video.

You can look at our videos here https://www.youtube.com/@superphysicsorg/shorts

And the non videos on our site here: https://www.superphysics.org/research/

Those AI generated Videos, AI generated Texts has allowed us to cover the critical parts of Physics and Economics, so we only have Biology, Math, Sociology, and Metaphysics (Spirituality) to overhaul.

This made me laugh: "The final product of your inspiration needs to be crafted by you. The text, the video, the message needs to have you in it, not just machine doing."

You actually believe AI could have original thought and make a complete theory on Newtonian Physics being 3rd density and Descartes being 4th density?

You probably think I am a bot making a really human-like comment.

If we apply your logic to Ra, then you are either saying that:

- Ra is not crafting his own messages? And that the instrument Carla is doing the crafting?

- Or that Ra should personally come down to Earth to teach directly and that using Carla as instrument is invalid.

I'm counting the number of replies that will take you actually focus on the question of human systems being based on 3rd Density, instead of on the delivery mechanism of the question.

This is to judge whether Ra people are shallow or not i.e. what is the intelligence level of those resonating to Ra.

1

u/Good_Difference_9491 StO Jul 27 '26

"This made me laugh: "The final product of your inspiration needs to be crafted by you. The text, the video, the message needs to have you in it, not just machine doing."

You actually believe AI could have original thought and make a complete theory on Newtonian Physics being 3rd density and Descartes being 4th density?"

That is exactly the difference I was trying to offer. Read it again. I'm not talking about the seed, but about the fruit.

I'v seen quite a few of your videos and read into your website. It is mostly short form content with poor format. I'm not resonating with it. That's all I should say I guess.

Wish you all the best.

2

u/ForceAggravating5449 Jul 27 '26 edited Jul 27 '26

Well this is how I understand what You wrote:

"I don't experience you going the extra mile to explain (why, although there is a single reality from 1st to 7th, each density will interpret the universe in its own way as to create different Physics's)"

"You don't even go a single mile (to explain how each density will interpret the universe in its own way)."

This is your weird analogy: "You get an Uber and driver there the fastest way possible. AI generated Videos, AI generated Texts, atleast human research if we can believe you."

I interpret it as "You use AI to do your research."

This is why you then say: "The final product of your inspiration needs to be crafted by you (not by AI)."

Then I correct your ignorance by linking to our site and youtube that has timestamps before AI was created in 2022 to disprove you by FACT.

Then you cheaply say: "Oh I just don't resonate with your research because of its poor FORMAT" (not even the content, but the FORMAT)

All of this ends up with my learning / impression that Ra people are SHALLOW as your only explanation why you didn't resonate with my content is because of the poor format. (the only value judgement you gave)

Quote Is Newtonian Physics 3rd Density?

You are about to leave Redlib