• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

A Fifth Dimension?

You wouldn't be willing to assess that consciousness exists on an entirely different "plane" than time and space? If not, then how is it able to detach itself from and, perceive that these other dimensions exist? If it existed as a dimension, it would have to exist as a higher dimension wouldn't it?

As far as I know consciousness is a function of the brain. And the brain exists in dimensional space. Brain itself isn't a dimension.

Only to the extent that it is more closely related to time. This is where the notion of intuition (as mentioned earlier) comes from by the way. Also, the only thing that we genuinely experience in relation to time is "the moment" ... i.e., the past doesn't exist in that sense, neither does the future.

Actually experiencing "the moment" is experiencing the past. Because it takes time for the signals to travel and it takes time for you to evaluate them. You can't see the present as it is now.
 
While here's something that further delineates the first four elements of the mind -- which, culminates into the 5th, 6th and 7th elements, etc., etc. ...

The Marriage Relationship

1 As I see it there are six elements that culminate into the marriage relationship, which as I'll show, correlate equally well with the six churches on earth. These are the corresponding masculine and feminine qualities, brought into the relationship by the respective bridegroom and bride. The first four can be viewed as the couple's parents—or in-laws—with the bridegroom and bride constituting the fifth and sixth elements. And, as we're not the total by products of what our parents have instilled in us, they can be viewed collectively or, in a spiritual sense (as composites).

2 Both men and women have these tendencies, which have been nurtured by each of our parents. And, as shown by our left and right brains, the two receptacles of this, they tend to balance each other out. The masculine, which predominates in the man (qualities of his father here), represents the rational or intellectual side, which is also the understanding. The feminine, which predominates in the woman (qualities of her mother here), is what makes her a woman, and is the reciprocal of the masculine: the emotional or feeling aspect or, the will.

3 In this respect men and women are opposite human beings, as they approach each other from opposite ends of the spectrum. They aren't diametrically opposed though—or at least they shouldn't be!—for they were meant to be actual reciprocals, ruled by their predominant tendencies, in a state of balance with their lessor tendencies. And here, once a suitable pair is found, they become united—in marriage—and come together as a whole: "And the two shall become one flesh." Genesis 2:24

4 When this occurs, although rare in earthly marriages, the two become—one human being (how it's commonly expressed in heaven). Which is best exemplified by the sperm striking the ovum to form the zygote, the two opposite organisms coming together to form a new one, as fertilization occurs. Whereas the zygote goes on to develop into a baby, to form a new human being or, half a human being. And so it is the birth of a child signifies a true testament to the consummation of marriage which, in the spiritual sense, signifies the birth of new doctrine (more so a boy child): the embodiment of faith or understanding, regarding this pact between God and The Church or, Husband and Wife. For an account of my own experience here, please refer to chapter 5.

Six Elements of Marriage

5 The six elements of marriage are listed as follows:

1) The man's intellect: the masculine aspect of the man or his spiritual father.

2) The man's will: the feminine aspect of the man or his spiritual mother.

3) The woman's intellect: the masculine aspect of the woman or her spiritual father.

4) The woman's will: the feminine aspect of the woman or her spiritual mother.

5) The man himself: the understanding in the relationship or the spiritual husband.

6) The woman herself: the will in the relationship or the spiritual wife.


6 Once these elements have been established, they culminate into a seventh state, a state of coalescence or, the marriage itself. There's also an eighth and ninth state, which correspond to the honeymoon (the 8th) and the life thereafter (the 9th). These two, along with the seventh, correspond to the numbers 21, 22 and 23, as detailed in the last chapter. I'll be addressing this, along with the six elements and their number correspondents, further in chapter 4 and chapter 6.
 
If you're saying that the Universe occurred as a result of the Big Bang, meaning the Universe did not exist prior to that and, that this "thing" which the Universe began to expand into which, is the same thing you refer to as "nothing" that currently exists/not-exists outside of it, what is the Universe expanding into? ... if not nothing and/or something? It would seem to me you've just discovered the existence of a fifth dimension. :eek: :eek: :eek:

No, no and NO. There is nothing "outside" the universe and the universe is not expanding "into" anything. We've been through this.

Fifth dimension ? Do you know what a dimension is ?
 
So guess what? Do you know what else this tells me? That you can't build a Universe from the ground up ... i.e., by allowing it to evolve one piece at time. Meaning, it's an "all or nothing" proposition. In other words there has always been someting here, in "full complexity."

That has to be the greatest leap since Evel Knievel.
 
Originally Posted by Upchurch :


...what is the volume of a dream? or a spirit? How tall, wide, and deep are dreams and spirits?

You think these things exist, right? So, according to your ...statement... above, these things must have substance and, thus, volume.

Not in "this" dimension (of time and space), no.

You really don't know what a dimension is, then. That settles it.
 
So which came first, "volume" as a whole? Or, dimension A + dimension B + dimension C. How can any of these be defined without their reference to "the whole?" Shouldn't the whole exist first, before you can begin to decide it has any dimensions? Or, if not, then what do we have that exists outside of "nothing?"

Dimensions weren't built up by some cosmic designer. They're just inherent properties of our universe.
 
Could it be because the mind itself is the fifth dimension? It seems to be able to conceptualize everything in the first four dimensions -- and then some!

And then some what ? I surely can't imagine more than four. Though I can calculate equations using more than four.
 
No, no and NO. There is nothing "outside" the universe and the universe is not expanding "into" anything. We've been through this.

Fifth dimension ? Do you know what a dimension is ?
You in fact do not know this.
 
You in fact do not know this.
Can't seem to find an outside to the universe. can't point to it.don't even where to begin looking for it. Do you have any idea where the outside of the universe is?

Folks just incase you haven't noticed. Iaachus has gone to la la land on this subject. He can't stick to one single definition of dimension and can't even recognize when the definition shifts. It's kind of like beating a dead horse. It may be fun to do so, but it's getting you nowhere fast.
 
Folks just incase you haven't noticed. Iaachus has gone to la la land on this subject. He can't stick to one single definition of dimension and can't even recognize when the definition shifts. It's kind of like beating a dead horse. It may be fun to do so, but it's getting you nowhere fast.
La-la land is Iacchus' homepage. But the deceased equine beating actually does serve a purpose. Even though Iacchus will never learn anything, many of us will be exposed to the knowledge of other posters on the boards. Threads like this are good for newbies because concepts are dumbed down in order to penetrate Iacchus' armor of ignorance. This allows them to participate without feeling intimidated.

The fun is just a fringe benefit.
 
You in fact do not know this.

No, but I'm following the current, lead scientific theories. Now, arguing for new, competing theories is good, and that's basically what you're doing. Unfortunately since you have SQUAT in the argument and evidence department, obviously, you're not going anywhere.
 
Dimensions weren't built up by some cosmic designer. They're just inherent properties of our universe.

To be fair, Belz, they're mathematical concepts that we use to help describe our universe. In a way, they're kind of like taxonomy in biology, a useful categorization tool.
 
To be fair, Belz, they're mathematical concepts that we use to help describe our universe. In a way, they're kind of like taxonomy in biology, a useful categorization tool.

Well, that's a better way to put it. Which brings up the question of WHY 11 dimensions in some theories.
 

Back
Top Bottom