Aliens are travelers not from space, but from another dimensions.

............................................
>hey guys, here's something you've been told time and time again

thanks friend.

File: alien_ayy.jpg (14KB, 174x269px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 174x269px

Some are this way. But if you believe what they tell you, the whole 3d printing flesh, turn into cyborg ordeal was a mistake. And the reason they're hanging out on Earth is so that they get can flesh samples and into being organic again. Let that tempt your desire to rush into transhumanism.

Hypothesis: stinky, primitive humans are actually one of the most advanced forms of life in existence. We are our own worst critics.

I doubt you can even explain the 4 Dimensions of our Reality.

>>18099629
You don't even know what 'dimension' means you faggot.

Fuck off back to /b/ you retard.

>>18099834
I doubt you could either but OP is still a faggot.

>>18099834
You can understand it as a rotational in 5 dimensions, where the 5th dimension is probability.

Thus saying they are from another dimension means that they are from another set of 4d space/time dimensions, which are not necessarily orthogonal to ours, but rotated along the 5th dimension, which is probability, therefor out of phase with our reality as we are aware of it.

>>18099834
>4 dimension of our reality

Common mistake. Don't beat yourself up. Just do yourself a favour... Don't pretend you know Physics.

>>18099847
You're an idiot.

Explain the Lorentz transformations and why they apply to inertial reference frames.

>>18099847
Explain how an electron moves through 4 dimensions.

>>18099847
Ok an easy one.

Explain why Newton was wrong.

>>18099850

Time + the 3 Spacial Dimensions

File: animoot_tttss.gif (3MB, 640x268px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x268px

>>18099859
It's just a necessary consequence of the speed of information being equal between two observers with different velocities. Each sees the other as receiving the information at different rates, and in different orders in some cases. So, as an object approaches the speed of information, the rate at which time resolves for that object necessarily dilates according to the ratios of the legs of a circle, if velocity was the angle of space/time; the more you go through space, the less you go through time.

I think Ernst Mach was the first to carry this idea forward to the greater scientific community, but Einstein got the credit with one his publications during his infamous annus mirabilis.

It's proven unnecessary the day that the speed of information is shown to be unequal between two observers. To my knowledge, this has not occurred yet.

You can use bastardizations of the formula to calculate situations where there are multiple speeds of different information propagation velocities, such as sound through a medium, instead of light through whatever medium it is you want to believe that space/time is comprised of. (Even if you think that the medium light propagates through is "nothing.")

Pic related--it's two information signals propagating at different velocities.

>>18099868
It's a lot more complicated bro. Sorry, I get angry easily.

In short: It's impossible to describe Quantum Mechanics, and even more so Relativity, without using abstract math. It can't be visualised as some funny form of classical physics (like the people ITT have tried to do). Our brains can only handle 3 dimensions. Period. We're hardwired that way. Any attempt to explain 3+ dimensions using words is stupid.

Try to imagine 1 dimension. You can't. You will always see a line embedded in a 3D plane.

>>18099896
I like you.

>>18099629
nsala malekon

File: animoot_ts.gif (2MB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x400px

>>18099911
Now consider that the 5th dimension is simple the probability wave of a certain variety. Anything goes. Let's say, 1hz frequency of circular polarized electromagnetic radiation.

Quantum mechanics indicates that only certain kinds of sensors can pick up certain kinds of radiation. You need an experimental apparatus designed to detect circular polarized light of 1hz frequency in order to have any effect on such a signal.

If the detector is perfectly made, it has a 100% chance of absorbing the signal. (We're supposing that the detector includes whatever series of reflectors is necessary to ensure that all of the waveform makes it to the detector in this idealized thought experiment.)

In a sense, each detector is viewing a reality comprised of only one kind of signal--in practice its more fuzzy than this, but please roll with it for now--so what you can do is create a reference frame of a specific type of signal, as it propagates through 4d space/time, where the 5th dimension is the probability of detecting a signal of that specific type, relative to the detectors which are attuned to absorb that specific type of signal.

That is all that is meant when I mean that the 5th dimension is probability. "Probability of what?" Is the question that determines the rotation of that 5th dimension. SO. What you can do is create these situations where you have mutually invisible signals bouncing back and forth between different kinds of detectors that are specifically designed to detect only one kind of signal. If you do this in a triangle with at least three shapes of mutually invisible signals (in the sense that each detector in the corner of the triangle can only absorb the shape of one of the three signals) you can kind do some funky things with space/time, such as offsetting the spatial divergence of the waveform, relative to different detectors.

In other words, they see universes with different outcomes to quantum probability events.

>>18099868
Time is 4th dimensional but is not the 4th dimension.

Think of the second dimension as paper. A stack of paper is all of the 2 dimensional planes. We 3rd dimensional beings can

see the stack of paper as we are outside it. to the 4th dimension we are that stack of paper. At least one slice of it

anyway.
Time is one 3rd dimensional slice of of time at a time.
Imagine you are born then you grow up and die.
At any given moment you are looking at 1 3rd dimensional slice of yourself. if you merged all of those slices together

(units of time) you would get one 4th dimensional shape of your entire life.
even when you are dead part of you is immortalized in the 4th dimension.
Just a wild theory though.

>>18100000
sheeeeeiiit nigga.

>>18099949
lsd is a hell of a drug

>>18100000
That part thats immortalized is in the akashic records. Its like layers of sediment in the mud. Just woven into the fabric of space and time as the photons of your life eternally spread into infinity.

File: 1467098146867.jpg (125KB, 752x581px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 752x581px

>>18100000
Nice slice of three dimensional repeating digits.

File: 1473093381321.jpg (21KB, 290x400px)

21KB, 290x400px

>>18100024
If you ask me, the craziest drug is called "Human Experience." Maybe you've tried it.

>>18100036
if you add lsd it clears up some of the questions being human has left you. well psychedelics n general.

>>18099629
FINALLY. Today OP was not a fag.

>>18100056
To be fair, from their perspective that would make YOU the interdimensional "demons" or whatever.

>>18100075
Not when they intentionally come into our reality and interact with us.

Of course, God only knows how our own thoughts and consciousness effect them without us knowing.

File: 1471403521469.jpg (51KB, 636x458px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 636x458px

>>18100091
It's not your reality, in the sense you mean it.

Earth doesn't own this dimension. (And by dimension, I mean dimensional orientation.) Furthermore, people on your planet have been engaging in illegal nuclear fission detonations, without getting permission from those who DO own this dimension. (And by dimension, I mean dimensional orientation.) These detonations do more than just damage your own planet. There are repercussions that echo throughout the rest of universe.

>>18099629
Yeah. It's written that when Buddha meditated and got connection to some "spirit", after years that spirit friend told him that he will try to appear on Earth in psychical form. And the day when it happened Buddha and his friend saw him. He was golden and when he appeared they could hear sound that sounded like all the possible music ever heard playing same time. That creature was an alien and he wanted to learn from this world. I don't know if I remember correctly, but I think that the alien could only speak with Buddha with telekinesis. Not actual speech.
Buddha later told that aliens think human specie are pretty ugly looking, but interesting. Some of them are really curious to learn from humans, some of them don't care. They are astral travellers from all over universe and dimensions. Buddha got to know lots of them, and I think he managed to astral project himself somewhere away from Earth after reaching nirvana.

>>18100091
I almost dreamed a weapon that could kill a star into existence around an alien sun. They paused time and had me meditate next to the star for a very serene contemplation of my thoughts until I found a way to undo it.

>>18100108
dude are you actually saying a nuclear bomb does more damage than a super nova blast?
da fug?

>>18100123
It depends what was caught in the blast wave, and whose schedule it was on, when it was detonated.

>>18100113
I don't think nirvana is really directly connected with the astral realm. That being sounds similar to how Ra supposedly appeared to ancient peoples, as a being that projected words and thoughts in many languages through its aura all at once. That sounds like an interesting story I would like to see your source.

>>18100130
Here
http://blog.world-mysteries.com/ancient-writings/a-description-of-an-alien-visit-in-the-buddhist-lotus-sutra/

>>18100047
But are the answers you get from them real, or just drug induced nonsense that's false

>>18100225
The best part is we'll never know. Isn't life great?

File: CG Jung.jpg (8KB, 400x223px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 400x223px

Aliens are archetypes.

op here

>>18099906
best answer so far. If you ever fiddled with fractals and biomechanics you are able to understand this.

When we imagine a 4th dimension, we need a set of external rules to support the theory, because we can't do it with our sensorial conditioned minds. Be it in math, could be some aberration (like the root of -1) thats fixed afterwards (^2). The simplest way to make a Mandelbrot set. Now why nature is based on fibonacci and finite fractals that i don't know. Looks like nature itself access this dimensional warp by default.

http://algorithmicbotany.org/papers/#abop

>>18099862
If you can't understand quantum tumbling just go watch some youtube videos.

>>18099949
Thats awesome. I can make a very clear image of what you wrote. Are you a teacher or something?

>>18100000
Check'd
Respect the wizard.
Thats how my math teacher explained to me when i was still at school. Pretty accurate.

>>18100108
I think earth "owns" this dimensional orientation (or vice-versa), and that we won't find any other lifeforms by traveling only thru space itself.

>>18099828
human beings are pretty much bleeding edge technology.

But the fact that we still need to attach our consciousness to the natural phenomena of lifeforms to climb the spiritual evolutive ladder means we are just beginners on existence. Like kids going thru school.

File: epicurus.jpg (313KB, 2000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

313KB, 2000x1000px

>>18100930
dude, how would you have consciousness without a body?

>>18100956
you can call it your soul, if you will
the non-mechanical part of you

File: 1470311390347.jpg (14KB, 245x246px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 245x246px

>>18101022
How can something immaterial exist?

>>18101126
How can it not exist? Limited by your 5 dampened input senses makes it really hard to prove hypothetical situations without using rule breaking resources.

Like trying to prove IR or UV emissions in middle ages.

>>18099906
What if we pictured velocity as a tangent or cotangent distance/time where one dimension was the adjacent or the opposite side of a triangle

File: 132414.jpg (249KB, 486x503px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 486x503px

>>18101205
Ok. so it is just your opinion then.
Anything true can be proven by logic.

File: qjU7tnV.gif (3MB, 384x288px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 384x288px

>>18101205
>How can it not exist?
Also this is not how it works.
It is you who claim something immaterial exists, thus you who provide the argument for it and proove it. not the other way around.

>>18101252
>>18101288

http://epicurus.net/en/herodotus.html

not my opinion, but i wish i had articulated something to be known and respected by human history like Epicurus.

>>18101317
It is only your opinion.
Until you can argue for it and it has been tested through by logic and reasoning it is only your opinion.

>>18101380
No, materialistic hedonist, im saying that this is not my personal opinion - its something 2500 years old you can read on the portfolio of a very respected philosopher.

My only opinion here is that you have a very thick skull and a very small penis, along with your very limited prefrontal cerebral cortex that can't do abstract thinking.

>>18101418
But Epicurus is even a materialist.
I have studied his teachings very thoroughly. Have I missed something?
Is there not only bodies and space?

>>18101205
energy has no matter to it and that exists. that's how we got something from nothing in the big bang. it was lots of energy and it eventually converted some of the energy into mater.

>>18101450
I don't think this theory has any basis in reality.
Isn't it unfalsifiable?

>>18101450
absolutely. but what does existing means?
Isn't existing things just converted perceptions that we can comprehend within a 3-dimensional state, in a portion of time, otherwise our minds can't really grasp in natura?
e.g. where do strong interaction comes from? Why quarks and gluons keep themselves together with such big power that grams of the residue of the residue of the residue can make atomic bombs?
How can electrons jump dimensions, ignore space or time in quantum tumbling?
How can photons be separated thru space and still react to one another when they have respective states changed?

All this defies our understanding of space and time, even our understanding of existence, but we don't deny it exists. Years ago they were just a bunch of lunatic theories - along with a lot of other ones who got rejected thru time.

>>18101438
Epicurus was the first one (after the egyptians) to denote the existence of subtle meta-matter. The link on my reply pointed right to this text, but ill post again:

http://epicurus.net/en/herodotus.html

>>18101533
>Epicurus
I agree with his views. Very much so.
That is why I argue for his positions.
So why do you claim that something immeterial can exist?

File: archdruid.jpg (81KB, 700x320px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 700x320px

>>18101533
Implying this is what you are referring to in the text:

>-
>Again, there are outlines or films, which are of the same shape as solid bodies, but of a thinness far exceeding that of any object that we see. For it is not impossible that there should be found in the surrounding air combinations of this kind, materials adapted for expressing the hollowness and thinness of surfaces, and effluxes preserving the same relative position and motion which they had in the solid objects from which they come. To these films we give the name of “images” or “idols.” Furthermore, so long as nothing comes in the way to offer resistance, motion through the void accomplishes any imaginable distance in an inconceivably short time. For resistance encountered is the equivalent of slowness, its absence the equivalent of speed.
>-

Then the images or idols, must naturally consist of bodies themselves, thus being material.

Now imagine bodies as a point of focus.
Like a liquid prism.
They are each impressed by the greater whole and each expresses different aspects of their own existence relative to one another unto the greater whole. Both outwards and inwards in all directions.

They are of all different sizes and shapes and are related and integrated in a never-ending complexity into one another.

The bigger bodies, like galaxies, are generally slower moving/spinning, relative to their smaller bodies, like stars and planets.

The less resistance, the faster it moves.
The more resistance, the slower it moves.
Bodies can be infinitely small and infinitely big.
The infinitely big bodies, moves infinitely slow.
The infinitely small bodies, moves infinitely fast.

All bodies consist of smaller bodies, and are themselves part of larger bodies.

There is nothing but bodies and space.

This is not saying that something could have a body so subtle that it would be inconcievable for us to sense. But in theory it MUST have a body to exist.
Anything that is not body is void.

>>18101800
nice reply

what about energy?
what about anything that behaves exclusively as waves?

but i get your point, and, you are right. It's just that i believe these bodies don't have electrons flowing around a nuclei, thus not creating a tiny electromagnetic field, a requirement for us to interact with it as we do with tangible matter.

>>18102447
The difference between matter and energy is not one of substance, but one of perspective.

For every bit of matter, there exists a set of perspectives such that the matter appears to in fact have been energy all along. Likewise, for any coordinates of energy, there exists a set of perspectives such that the energy appears to crystallize into matter.

Whether or not such crystallizations are stable is more complicated question, but not one physicists haven't already answered. I can provide you links which will begin the train of thought which leads to those answers if you like. Ultimately, it's just a question of ascertaining electron orbitals, and cross referencing that with environmental conditions.

>>18101549
>So why do you claim that something immeterial can exist?
Isn't the immaterial just whatever can't be directly examined by physical instruments from our dimension? It could still be material in another dimension, but we have no way of proving it exists.

File: Ln3bk3h.jpg (39KB, 400x310px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 400x310px

Aliens are just humans from the future that have time traveled back to give us bits and pieces of help with our society you dummy.

is def

this is the best thread i've ever seen on /x/

thank you guys very much

it's my birthday tomorrow, you both gave me an early birthday present by letting me sit in on this conversation

btw: Epicurus was from Samos, just like my great grandma! So was Pythagorus. A very nice place to visit should you be in the neighborhood. And only a ferry ride away from Ephesus, a cool old center of culture and worship in Turkey.

here's a question for you both:

Mystical thinkers throughout history have either proven by logic or been inspired by mystical experience the existence of extra-dimensional beings- in other times they appeared as angels, or djinns, what have you. In fact, the course of human history has consistently been altered by contact between historically significant figures and these ethereal figures.

Now, this 'superspectrum' (as John Keel refers to this consciousness-energy which appears to have interacted with humans all through history, most recently through the archetype of aliens) seems to be getting closer to scientific reality.

Do you guys think that as our understanding of the science behind mystical experience becomes more widely accepted and understood, it will have an influence on our reality?

Is that the apocalypse referred to in every culture's sacred stories and creation myths? The return of the sky people? Who may have only been telling us they were from the sky because we couldn't understand where they were actually from?

and, if that's the case- if extra-dimensional entities started this whole historical cycle, what does it mean if they're finally coming back?

>tfw born during age of divine dimensional transcendence
>tfw no extradimensional spirit guide waifu with whom to dance among the glowing omnidirectional paths of the 13th dimension

>>18102447

>what about energy?
Energy could be described as the equivelant of the resistance met by a body.

>what about anything that behaves exclusively as waves?
Waves consist of bodies interacting with eachother.
I don't think it would be possible to quantify anything as solid thoug.
Everything is fluid, and is related to everything else.
We could imagine each point of focus to be an inversion of space. It being inside out, like a toroidal field of movement.
There would not really be any mass to it, but only charge of energy in relation to other fields.
so anything could be described to be part of a wave as much as a part of a field as much as a part of a body.

>It's just that i believe these bodies don't have electrons flowing around a nuclei, thus not creating a tiny electromagnetic field, a requirement for us to interact with it as we do with tangible matter.
Im not sure I understand what you mean.
What do you think is happening ?

>>18102693
>Isn't the immaterial just whatever can't be directly examined by physical instruments from our dimension? It could still be material in another dimension, but we have no way of proving it exists.

What is our dimension?
How do you define dimension?

File: harmonic_orbit.gif (704KB, 350x300px) Image search: [Google]

704KB, 350x300px

>>18103774
Hi. Not-anon-you-replied-to-here. I'm Dimensional-Orientation-san.

Here's a picture. Sometimes the dimensional orientations "kiss."

>>18103765
>Do you guys think that as our understanding of the science behind mystical experience becomes more widely accepted and understood, it will have an influence on our reality?
Defenitetly. I think it is enevitable.

>Is that the apocalypse referred to in every culture's sacred stories and creation myths?
That is my interpretation of it also. A new beggining.
The return of the sky people? Who may have only been telling us they were from the sky because we couldn't understand where they were actually from?
Yes, They are "angles" of our own being.

>and, if that's the case- if extra-dimensional entities started this whole historical cycle, what does it mean if they're finally coming back?

Just means that we are ready to handle what they have to offer I guess.

-
But I wouldn't call anything extra dimensional.
I don't see how something could be outside of what is.

>>18103782
I don't get it
What is this?

File: Face_fall_anime_boobs.jpg (41KB, 600x337px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 600x337px

>>18103814
It's just a model for what "from another dimension" means. The blue sphere exists on a flat, rectilinear plane. The red sphere exists on a flat, spherical plane. They exist in separate universes, and most of the time are invisible to one another. But once in awhile, their paths intersect, and they find themselves right on top of one another. Super *embarrassing*

>>18103828
How does this have any basis in reality?

File: Door.jpg (74KB, 2560x1600px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 2560x1600px

>>18103853
Well. If you're asking for examples in history about alternate dimensional orientations exchanging energy with each other, you'll have to find your own. There's rules about this sort of thing. I gave you the equation in geometric form. It's up to you to decide if the observational data that you're aware of in your universe matches the description I've laid out.

>>18103862
There are too many unknowns in your description for me to be able to relate it to anything I know of.

What are the spheres?
What is a seperate universe?
Why are they invisible to eachother?
How do their paths intersect and why?

>>18103919
>What are the spheres?
There is only one sphere, and one plane. The sphere is just a 2d model. I wanted to use a 3d sphere, but the technical limitations of your communication device does not allow projection of 5d space/time manifolds.

>What is a seperate universe?
It is a universe with a different dimensional orientation, as per the image.

>Why are they invisible to eachother?
For the majority of the orbit's duration, they are not adjacent. In this model, we are supposing that wavefronts move through adjacent points, much like wavefronts in our 4d space/time model of the universe.

>How do their paths intersect and why?
The picture is self explanatory. Their paths intersect, because they're intersecting paths, and the way they do that is by intersecting.

I don't understand what you expected out of this question.

Aliens hmmm well what is there to say. they like to watch. they tend to remedy situations. and they expose idiots. also they like to advance things.

>>18103926
>There is only one sphere, and one plane.
Your illustration clearly shows two spheres. a red and a blue one.
So why do you say there is only one?


>I don't understand what you expected out of this question.
What I'm trying to get at is, how are they linked together if they are?
and what happens when they intersect?

>>18103926
and what does the spheres represent?

>>18104018
I thought you were referring to the geometries the red and blue dots were traveling within.

They should have been called dots from the beginning. That was my error.

>>18104018
>how are they linked together if they are? and what happens when they intersect?

All that happens is that they are able to exchange energy. The point of this was to demonstrate a plausible geometry where material neither "didn't" exist, nor "did" exist, but oscillated between existing and not existing.

>and what does the spheres represent?
Anything. Particles if you like. Worlds. Doesn't matter.

>>18104114
>They should have been called dots from the beginning
oh okay.


What I get from this modern science is, that if you have a problem in your theory, then no problemmo, just make up a new place outside of existence called a dimension, that noone really knows what is, and call it a day.

Maybe instead of just stacking new dimensions on top of eachother, they could re-examine their theory and conclude that it doesn't work, and that they don't know how the universe works.

nonexistence can not make something appear.

nothing is nowhere, it is NO THING.

there is nothing outside of existence.

I see no basis for these socalled dimensions in reality anywhere. Can you point me to anything(X) in reality where you would need some dimensions for X to happen?

>>18104152
>What I get from this modern science is, that if you have a problem in your theory, then no problemmo, just make up a new place outside of existence called a dimension, that noone really knows what is, and call it a day.

What you're describing is parallel dimensions. These are different from the concept of dimensional orientations. Dimensions which are simply oriented out of alignment aren't parallel. They intersect. These points of intersection would, theoretically, be places to falsifiably test for the positive existence of intersecting dimensions.

I cannot name the specific coordinates of any such intersections relative to Earth, if indeed they exist at all. But they would be places where energy from our universe appears to vanish, only to reappear elsewhere without necessarily visiting all of the places in between.

>>18104158
Ok, so parallel dimensions doesn't exist, and there is nothing outside of existence.

Dimensional orientation is just a tool for practical uses like building stuff. As to be able to know where some point is relative to some other point in a fixed system, like in mathematics.
The problem is that the universe is not a fixed system.
It is always changing, and you can't really point out a physical point in existence, as you would have no means of defining its position precicely in relation to any other position, because nothing is stationary, and any point in space is infinitely precise.
You would only be able to define an approxiation. Never an exact position.

>>18104207
Parallel dimensions might exist. But they are structurally different from dimensions which merely have alternate orientations, in that parallel dimensions have no points of intersection. (Other than an orthogonal direction that would be unobservable from the perspectives of those in lower dimensions.)

Dimensional orientation is a method of navigating to parallel dimensions, since sets of dimensions with alternate orientations intersect. Thus, with two steps, you can enter a parallel dimension that otherwise does not exist from the perspective of the original dimensional orientation from which you began.

>>18104218
But the real question is; Why would you need to postulate the existence of parallel dimensions in the first place?

>>18104225
That's not what the word "need" means. Or what the word "postulate" means. Either way.

>>18104279
Ok. maybe i used it wrong idk?
I'll phrase it an other way then.

Is it necessary to assume the existence of parallel dimensions in the first place?
If it is, then why?

>>18104290
>Is it necessary to assume the existence of parallel dimensions in the first place?
No. Scientific inquiry of any kind was never necessitated. It was always hypothesized.

Kurt Gödel's incompleteness theorems in response to Bertrand Russel's attempt to formulate a complete, valid theory of mathematics was the nail in the coffin for the scientific reductionism. If you're still using the mindset that mandates ignoring all unnecessary theories until evidence compels you otherwise, then you're still operating under 20th century scientific doctrine, which isn't necessary.

The sleeping beauty problem can help elucidate why scientific reductionism is insufficient to catalogue all of the known information about nature, particularly if you can draw parallels with probability, game theory, and therefor quantum mechanics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Cqbf86jTro

>>18104338
I'll anticipate your response.

Recent barriers to communication have come to light with the advent of quantum mechanics that indicates the rules of the universe are stuctured in fractal form. What this means, from within one set of self consistent rules, a version of the universe appears that vaguely describes everything in reality, but with a limit as to the amount of information that can be ascertained for any given frame of reference.

Meanwhile, an entirely different set of self consistent rules, which contradict the precious set, also describe a version of the universe, perhaps with better clarity than the previous set of self consistent rules. Both sets of rules are correct, from within their own perspective. They both contradict each other. They both describe complete universes. Yet, one set may not have the same limits of information as the other.

In mathematical terms, the rules of reality appear to be in a fractal form, such that each iteration is isometric with the next. The terminology that deals with the next higher fractal of reality largely borrows from spiritual literature. This can be a bit confusing, if you take the terms literally, as would most of math or science if you ever actually took THOSE terms literally.

I arrived at a realization of higher forms of reality by not needing to be told them, and not needing a reason to go looking for them. I hypothesized possible scenarios, looking for the text between the lines so to speak, and then used experimentation and practical application of these theories, sometimes with humans themselves as the scientific apparatuses.

I cannot prove to you that a higher existence exists, if you are content to disbelieve such a possibility. All I can do is show people how a mindset which experiences a higher reality works, and if they choose to adopt it, then gain the extra perception and bypass the limitations of information propagation that their previous mindset was defined by.

>>18104338
>No. Scientific inquiry of any kind was never necessitated. It was always hypothesized.

Ok.
My bad for not formulating my question clearly enough.
i'll try again:

Is it necessary to assume the existence of parallel dimensions in the first place, if we are to formulate a consistent, valid theory of how the universe works?

Like the theory that I propose.

I have found a very important mistake in my proposition. I will clarify

>>18101800
correction->
>This is not saying that something could "NOT"* have a body so subtle that it would be inconcievable for us to sense. But in theory it MUST have a body to exist.
Anything that is not body is void.

>>18104436
No. There are consistent, valid theories of how the universe works, that don't take into consideration parallel universes. These theories have less predictive power, and contradict valid consistent theories which do take into consideration parallel universes.

If you volunteer not to take into consideration parallel universes, then many of the things which occur for predictable, visible reasons with a theory of parallel universes, instead appears to happen unpredictably, and through invisible interactions. For that matter, if you're willing to assign "random chance" as a feature of your model of the universe, then you can convince yourself that any theory is consistent and valid, on the basis that "it just happened to be that way."

It really depends how much you want to leave to chance.

>>18104360
I would hypothesize that certain chemical and electrical configurations in an organism would determine the sort of consciousness they would have and the reality that would be available.

For instance we know that certain drugs alter consciousness in certain ways. Maybe its due to the inherent chemical and electrical properties of a molecule that determine the dimensional resonance of it. At a basic level your body is coded from pentagons and hexagons in the dna. These are held together by 3 or 2 molecular bonds. But when its stripped into rna, the bonds on the rna can form many types of connections to other molecules or atoms. The dna codes a self similar fractal in the body that is translated by rna into the cells. Information can be codes by the ways proteins are folded or what their configurations are. Environmental conditions change the ways these bonds form and interact. When a chemical bond is formed there is energy released. Maybe this energy can communicate with the cell walls or nucleus by releasing photons or some kind of em wave that resonates and corresponds to chemical or molecular configurations. Perhaps there are complex em waves built from simpler wavelets that can alter and shape molecular formation. What I surmise about entanglement is that molecules of the same shape or type are more likely to share information than molecules of different types.

>>18104458
>If you volunteer not to take into consideration parallel universes, then many of the things which occur for predictable, visible reasons with a theory of parallel universes, instead appears to happen unpredictably, and through invisible interactions.
I volunteer!
What things can not be predicted by a theory excluding parallel universes, that would otherwise be able to be predicted with an including theory?
Can you give an example?

>>18099906
>You will always see a line embedded in a 3D plane.
Confirmed for dipshit. We do not see in 3D.

You get the impression of 3 dimensions due to stereopsis. Coincidence of images in the visual cortex.

>>18104484
Yes. Without theories of parallel universes it is impossible to predict the trajectory of matter / anti-matter reactions.

>>18104491
>trajectory of matter / anti-matter reactions
What is anti-matter, and
What anti-matter reactions more specifically?

Op is 100% correct but will be mocked and derided by the 4chan cognoscenti.

For discussion of this topic unimpeded by trolls check out www.nrgiseternal.com

>>18104515
>>18104491

And what is its applications?

>>18104515
Anti-matter is matter with a reverse time component. When matter and anti-matter occupy the same spatial locations, their waves completely annihilate, and the resulting shockwave is converted into EMF radiation.

>And what is its applications?
It is a 100% efficient fuel. Also, If one is able to predict the trajectory of matter / anti-matter reactions, it follows that matter / anti-matter pair production can be mediated in such a way that they form stable materials out of the ambient energy of the universe. Furthermore, understanding these mediations gives rise to equations that allow the conversion of any material into any other, with ambient EMF emitted or absorbed to make up the difference.

For a civilization that has mastered the applications of matter / anti-matter reactions, physical reality is literally a toy to them. Anything they could desire, at their fingertips. Infinite energy, infinite food, the ability to sculpt entire realities in real time. Successful application of matter / anti-matter reactions effectively solves the universe, and give rise to the next piece in the puzzle; the multiverse.

File: Captura de Tela 2016-09-07 às 16.55.31.png (268KB, 631x354px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 631x354px

op here
>>18104515
>What is anti-matter

in a quantum level, matter is polarized. Lets say, a neutrino loses a boson W+ and turns into an electron, which is negatively charged. If instead, the neutrino receives a W+ boson, it turns into a positron.

A positron is, essentially, also matter - but it rips the space-time fabric in a opposite way our matter is configured, so they tend to cancel one out.

I like to think of it as having a anti-height, anti-width, anti-depth, anti-time, anti-quarks with anti-colors and so on. Anti-matter is a reality, and it denotes that multidimensional planes are something very, very real.

If you follow the same theory, just a theory thou, but einstein grade stuff, you can mathematically prove the existence of another planes, and even use them with practical applications, like calculating fractals, a very simple example. Thats also how a lot of things are proven in physics.

More important than the language itself, the denominations or tangible/intangible is having the perception that there is very precise order in the chaos.

ITT: people trying to sound a lot smarter than they are.

>>18104630
you'll get there

>>18104457
I get your point and I agree. It MUST have a body of some sort. There must be something measurable, and in some scale, tangible.

But since it is inconceivable for us to sense in our current state, you can call in intangible.

File: 1473194584940.gif (494KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

494KB, 200x200px

>>18104360
thats... i mean... i love this guy

>>18104613
ITT: aliens be like I say because why not

>>18104152
>Can you point me to anything(X) in reality where you would need some dimensions for X to happen?

Are you into programming? Look for a tutorial on how to draw a Mandelbrot ou Koch set. They are relatively easy to accomplish and are the simplest way to understand how to use a hypothetical dimensional plane to make something happen, in this case, complex numbers. There are many finite fractal examples in nature.

But still, it goes well with saying that if something exists, it does have a body. We just can't grasp how it works, or feels, os taste. But there is also those who say that the void doesn't exist; Its the only inconceivable thing in the universe. I wish i knew more about this theory, but i don't.

>>18104588
I don't know enough about it to be able to identify if this could not be described in materialistic terms, without the use of parallel universes.
I'll have to read up on it.
I'm studying electricity at the moment, and just crossed the theory of counterspace, which I'm reading into and trying to understand. I'm pretty sure it can explain the things you are talking about without the use of extra dimensions. but I don't have a good enough understanding of it to be able to argue against what you have presented.

>>18100225
they're good enough for me. that's all that really matters innit?
plus many things have been discovered on psychedelics.
hell the periodic table came to someone in a fucking dream.
Maybe it is all drug induced nonsense however i must say it did a good job of showing me the 4th dimension.
you have to be smart in the first place also.
when a person who is asleep, out to lunch, lost in a daze, or stupid takes acid. theyre just a giddy retard for 9 hours.
but if you are smart enough to actually interpret the information you might actually come up with something that works.
its kinda like reading the bible.
some lads take it word for word and some use it as a tool to better their lives and maybe bring a little comfort to the human mystery.
Like i always say though.
none of it matters anyway
>>18104489
we still only see in 2d no matter what. if you were to actually look at say someones house in real 3D you would see everything in the house, everything inside the people in the house, and it would be from every possible 3D ANGLE AT THE SAME TIME. sorry about caps not retyping. lazy as fuck today.

>>18104360
This is for you
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylITtfio9Mg

>>18099629

A few nights ago I slept over at a friend's house out in the country right on a lake. That night I dreamt of at least one but I think two separate UFOs visiting me. They were actually really small, probably about half the size of a normal car. But it was understood in the dream that it would be possible for me to go in, and actually for there to be enough space to fit almost anything without trouble. It was like the UFO was a portal to a more expansive area of space. Like I said it was small, and there were bright white ribbons of energy and flares swirling all along the outside of the oval shaped craft. These trails of light originated in the center and it sort of slowly sparkled from this area. It was overwhelmingly positive and there was absolutely no feeling of fear. Was I visited?

File: animoot_tsss.gif (455KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

455KB, 500x500px

>>18104702
But there is also those who say that the void doesn't exist; Its the only inconceivable thing in the universe. I wish i knew more about this theory, but i don't.

Just switch your thinking from space being something that a body is *in* to space being part of the body's frequency equation.

What if greys are just biological drones sent to scout.

>>18105893
It's obvious that our bodies and space are 2 of the same.

We are part of the universe, not just objects floating in a void.

>>18105893
Hey im one of those can't think about void people.
Took a lot of acid.
the start/ending of the universe would most likely lead to a void.
but a void simply can not be.
thats why even our laws of physics break down at the start/end of the universe. a void would most likely be infinite however this cant happen either. Dreamless sleep and death are the closest you are getting to the void. however even in a dream 8 ours of nothing feels like an instant. there is no substance. no mass or energy or any spatial dimensions. therefore it can not exist.
Try thinking of the void. you cant. sure you can think of nothing but there is still black/grey/whatever you have in mind.
The great computer that is our universe...
>no not an actual computer I'm not that far out yet
...was not around when nothing was around. therefore the universe can not compute it. if that makes any sense.

>>18105959
TL;DR the void and this universe are two separate entities that converge in the middle almost like the infinity symbol. the middle is where they separate.
just like we can't conceive the void they can't conceive us.

op

About void; The spirits book, by Allan Kardec page 152, question 236.

...such worlds are, then, void of everything like the beauties of nature?

"The inexhaustible richness of creation is manifested by beauties of immensity that are no
less admirable than the terrestrial harmonies which you call the beauties of nature."

"Nothing in nature is useless everything has its purpose, its destination. There is no void, every portion of immensity is inhabited. Life is everywhere. Thus, during the long series of ages which preceded man's appearance upon the earth, during the vast periods of transition attested by the superposition of the geologic strata, before even the curliest formation of organized beings, upon that formless mass, in that arid chaos in which the elements existed in a state of fusion, there was no absence of life."

Man i love this book

>>18099629
Fuck off space niggers

>>18105893
The void is both completely empty and completely full

>>18106347
There is void.
Depends on how you define it.

>>18099629
I had some shrooms a few weeks ago and what you're saying is pretty much true. Although they do actually come from space as well, and they're lizards.

>>18107820

What kind of lizard did you see?

>>18107892
Didn't really see them in any visual way. They were more of a presence, just hanging around. They introduced themselves (non-verbally) as transdimensional lizards from space, although these were obviously not their own words but rather just sort of implied -- they did however seem intent on me knowing who they were, and they expected me to introduce myself as well. Sort of like the connection one can feel to deities in a buddhist temple.

They were also clearly from very far away, but i'm not really sure how physical distance really applies here.

I do realize that this all sounds pretty stupid and that drugs do funny things to people, but even in an everyday state of of consciousness, it doesn't really seem all that strange to me, and the experience was very real, as opposed to many other "pure hallucinations".

Funny thing about these guys was that they had a distinctly otherworldly feel to them. I've previously hung out with some ancient Egyptians and bacteria and stuff, but these were a totally different thing. They had a non-organic, almost synthetic approach to consciousness. Not in a threatening way or anything, but just sort of hanging around, observing me.

Pretty neat.

>>18107820

MY DOCTOR DID ALL THIS WORK ON ME...

...MY SKIN IS SO YOUNG AND VIBRANT!