Quantum Realm Perspective
What we're talking about is well beyond even the divisions of multidimensionality. That whole “family” of concepts is run of the mill for us. All the hackneyed syntax that the mystics and new agers are constantly throwing about as the buzzword du jour is already obsolete, self-limiting, and a good portion don't even know what the terms actually mean.
The point to be stressed is that Jung, for example, was talking about what is now referred to as the quantum realm only couched in depth psychological terms, and those terms are every bit as accurate and valid as any term used by a quantum physicist or mystic in describing the "unseen" and "unknowable."
Jung's work is still as much or even more pioneering than the most "out there" quantum theorist because it takes into account consciousness as the central issue where quantum theorists are still trying to rule consciousness out.
So, believe it, understanding depth psychology is every bit as important as understanding any brand of mysticism or doctrinal science as a partial means of accomplishing what we must accomplish.
Besides, the learning, the terms, the meanings, are all embedded in this dataflow that we refer to as the world, and therefore have to be regurgitated and, in a sense, redefined, in order to transmute understanding.
The mystics are just talking about the same thing in a dozen different ways and generally within the confines of a cultural milieu, and in many ways not doing quite as good a job as either Jung or the quantum theorists, which is why the vast majority of the population still adhere to a gestalt of ideas that are not considered "mystical."
The migration of the collective consciousness towards quantum theory, as brought about by things like "What the Bleep Do We Know?" and "The Secret" gives expanding currency to these explanatory methods, and what those things are doing for us is making the ground fertile for the presentation and comprehension of ideas that go well beyond what is presented in those movies while at the same time using their concepts to expand upon. We're way ahead of that stuff.
Quantum theory, explained in simplistic terms, uses "data" as its most central unit of discussion, and the reason it makes sense is that we live in a digital world and minds are being conditioned through sensory input and input from the human collective consciousness. Everybody in the West has a mouse in their hand and are learning on multiple levels what "data" and "digital" mean, even if they don't quite get it on the surface.
Eastern thought, especially that which seeks to AVOID definitions and/or assigned meanings as the path to true understanding, is VERY useful when you're talking about sitting in a cave and not in front of a computer in the process of launching a global business model phenomenon. Tell me how to translate Zen thought into widgets under a mouse click and we might have an additional function in what we're building.
To appeal to the widest possible audience we need to speak the language of every camp. That's why we're talking about a new terminology. Barbara Hand Clow, bless her heart, is well behind the times according to what we're going to build. Carl Johan Calleman is doing what all science does, and that's find precisely what it's looking for and thinking they've discovered it instead of KNOWING that they created it in the process of looking for it.
The number of dimensions we operate on is infinite, that is if dimensions even exist under the definition of that term, and I can make a very good argument that they don't.The transfiguration of the species...that's what I'm talking about. It's what we do for a living. How to do that on an ever-enlarging scale is the task at hand. Communication is at the foundation of how that is accomplished, thus throwing some ideas out in this thread on both terminology and concepts.
What we're building is breathtaking in scope and will be a central "mechanism" at the vanguard of how this world is going to change, which is through the people and in no other way. As I know you don't have a vantage point of that yet (obviously because we haven't explained what we're building), it's impossible to catch the vision and therefore you're just going to have to "trust me" on this for the time being.
The need for the terminology is that what we're going to be introducing to the world in the next few months is going to spawn an entirely new culture, and that culture has to have a means of communication to simplify an understanding of what the creative process is, how it is accomplished, that everybody has it in them to do it, and that not only is it their prerogative, but it's their responsibility and...hey, the're doing it every second of every day of their entire lives anyway.
Meanwhile, the creative process is triggered through interaction like this, and any terminological ideas the members of this forum have are appreciated. Let me give some examples of what is needed: 1. a term which stands in place of: quantum realm, subconscious, super conscious, unconscious, potential, hidden domain, thought realm, another dimension, zero point field, A field, etc.
While this "field" or "domain" is just consciousness, differentiated or not, consciousness is a term that is already assigned a variety of meanings. We need a new term. The "invisible thinking stuff of which everything in existence is composed" is just too big a mouthful.
Get my drift? Because we in fact live in a computationally generated virtual reality, I've heard the term "The Virtual" used, and I like it, but it's already being used.2. a term for self-existent creational environment.3. a term used in place of both yes and no.
A term that means both yes and no.I can't think of any other definitions at the moment that require terms. Maybe we can add to this thread the need for definitions, and then we'll go fishing for the terms for those definitions.
This post forces me to start on a document that describes what my vision is, because once that is read and understood I think it could be considerably clearer as to what is required almost as a specification.