Well we know as remote viewers that some of the theories presented below are indeed
based on fact if you subscribe to the Masking/ entrainment/ Hijacking or retro tasking concepts. The author presents a somewhat similar but generalised idea with her Hacking
(PSI HACKING ?) theory at the end of the article.
http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/intro02.htmThe Cassiopaean Experiment
Introduction:
Open Your I and Seek
On July 16, 1994, Fragments of Comet Shoemaker-Levy began a series of collisions with the planet Jupiter, an extremely rare cosmic event.
On that same evening, a hypnotherapist who lived in a small town on the Gulf Coast of Florida, was conducting her weekly experiment in accessing what might be called "higher levels of consciousness" which she theorized existed as a field of symbols and dynamics similar to the theory of Archetypes proposed by Carl Jung. It seems that a very different "rare cosmic event" was about to occur. After thirty years of study and two years of dedicated experimentation, detailed in Laura's autobiography, Amazing Grace, the communications began with a source identifying itself as "the Cassiopaeans."
"We are you in the Future," they said. "We transmit "through" the opening that is presented in the locator that you represent as Cassiopaea, due to the strong radio pulses aligned from Cassiopaea, which are due to a pulsar from a neutron star 300 light years behind it, as seen from your locator. This facilitates a clear channel transmission from 6th density to 3rd density."
What is important to note at the outset is this: the Cassiopaeans are NOT "aliens," nor are they "discarnate entities." From the very first contact:
Q: (L) Are you an alien from another planet?
A: Alien from your perspective, yes.
It is only in the context of the subsequent ten years of researching the material received in this communication that it can be said that the contact is best described by Eugene Canseliet in his Preface to the second edition of Fulcanelli's Alchemical Masterpiece, The Dwellings of the Philosophers:
According to the meaning of the Latin word adeptus, the alchemist has then received the Gift of God, or even better, the Present, a cabalistic pun on the double meaning of the word, underlining that he thus enjoys the infinite duration of the Now.[...]
'In the Kingdom of Sulpur there exists a Mirror in which the entire World can be seen. Whosoever looks into this Mirror can see and learn the three parts of Wisdom of the entire World.
What can be theorized about:
"We are you in the future"Ark comments:
This is what "they" declare : that "they" - The Cassiopaeans - "6th density Unified Thought Form Beings of Light" - are us in the future. What a bizarre literary expression? What a bizzare concept. Or is it?
Is that possible? Can such a statement find, if only approximately, a place in accepted theories? Or it is in an evident contradiction with everything that we - that is, physicists - know about Nature and its laws?
Putting aside for the moment the issue of whether existence in a pure state of consciousness is possible, is travelling in time possible, even if only in theory?
Is sending and receiving information from the future or sending information into the past allowed by our present theories of relativity and quantum mechanics?If information can be sent, does this also imply that physical matter can be "sent," via some sort of TransDimensional Remolecularization? And if so what are the laws, what are the restrictions? What are the means?
Well, frankly speaking, we do not know, but we may have a few clues.
In considering the general theory of relativity science usually utilizes a four-dimensional space-time continuum. In classical general relativity, the metrical properties of the continuum are intrinsic to the continuum, but a fifth dimension in which our normally sensed space-time is embedded can also be used to account for the curvature and properties of physical space.
In the space-time continuum one can say that all parts of the four-dimensional world exist simultaneously, in the sense of a mathematical formalism, and this would naturally lead to a complete collapse of the philosophical ideas of causality.
However, many scientists who work with these ideas do not think that this continuum is 'real' in a physical sense, such that physical entities could move back and forth at will in and out of time as easily as changing direction in three-dimensional space.
We, on the other hand, think that it is not only possible, but extremely likely based upon certain observations.
In relativity theory, time intervals between events are not completely fixed relative to moving systems or frames of reference. This has led to some speculation that there may also be analogies between precognition and anomalies. However, "time dilation," the contraction of time intervals between moving reference frames, is too small to account for precognition and would still require any information transfer to travel faster than light, and the special theory of relativity, when narrowly interpreted, does not allow for physical travel backwards in time but relegates this concept to an imaginary mathematical formalism.
Even though it is almost forbidden to question Einstein's restriction on superluminal travel, Einstein did, at one point, propose to consider the hyperdimensional world as "real." In 1938, with P. Bergmann, he wrote a paper entitled On a Generalization of Kaluza's Theory of Electricity:
So far, two fairly simple and natural attempts to connect gravitation and electricity by a unitary field theory have been made, one by Weyl, the other by Kaluza. Furthermore, there have been some attempts to represent Kaluza's theory formally so as to avoid the introduction of the fifth dimension of the physical continuum. The theory presented here differs from Kaluza's in one essential point; we ascribe physical reality to the fifth dimension whereas in Kaluza's theory this fifth dimension was introduced only in order to obtain new components of the metric tensor representing the electromagnetic field."
Einstein was somewhat nervous about this idea, but he followed it anyway, writing in his paper:
If Kaluza's attempt is a real step forward, then it is because of the introduction of the five dimensional space. There have been many attempts to retain the essential formal results obtained by Kaluza without sacrificing the four dimensional character of the physical space. This shows distinctly how vividly our physical intuition resists the introduction of the fifth dimension.
But by considering and comparing all these attempts one must come to the conclusion that all these endeavors did not improve the situation. It seems impossible to formulate Kaluza's idea in a simple way without introducing the fifth dimension.
We have, therefore, to take the fifth dimension seriously although we are not encouraged to do so by plain experience. If, therefore, the space structure seems to force acceptance of the five dimensional space theory upon us we must ask whether it is sensible to assume the rigorous reducibility to four dimensional space. We believe that the answer should be "no," provided that it is possible to understand, in another way, the quasi-four dimensional character of the physical space by taking as a basis the five dimensional continuum and to simplify hereby the basic geometrical assumptions.[…]
The most essential point of our theory is the replacing of …rigorous cylindricity by the assumption that space is closed (or periodic).[…]
Kaluza's five dimensional theory of the physical space provides a unitary representation of gravitation and electromagnetism. […]
It is much more satisfactory to introduce the fifth dimension not only formally, but to assign to it some physical meaning. [Einstein, A, Bergmann, P., Annals of Mathematics, Vol. 38, No. 3, July 1938. emphases, ours.]
Notice particularly Einstein's remark about the assumption that space is "periodic." We believe that Einstein was following a path that was later to prove very fruitful even if, shortly after, Einstein publicly repudiated this idea.
Kurt G�del, after he became famous for his work on foundations of mathematics, went on to study the Einstein general theory of relativity and made an important contribution to physics: he discovered a class of otherwise reasonable cosmological solutions of Einstein field equations - except for one point: they contained causal loops!
At first these Causal Loops were dismissed by relativists as being "too crazy". The arguments against these model universes even became rather personal, commenting upon the state of mind of the inventor! (A not terribly unusual phenomenon in the heated debates within so-called "ivory towers" of academia.)
A "Causal Loop" means the same thing as "Time Loop." It can be described as going into the future and ending up where you started at the original time and place.
It is called "Causal" because, in Einstein's Theory of Relativity, Time is a relative concept and different observers can experience Time differently, so the term "causal" is used to avoid using the term "time."
But, little by little, it was realized that causal - or Time - loops CAN appear in other solutions of Einstein field equations as well - usually they correspond to some kind of "spinning" of the universe.
Causal loops make time travel not only possible, but probable.
At the same time, causal loops can lead to unacceptable logical paradoxes, and physics does not like such paradoxes at all - they are a serious problem!
Paradoxes must never be ignored. They always indicate that some important lesson is to be learned; that some essential improvement or change in thinking or theory is necessary.
The same holds true for the paradoxes involved in the idea of receiving information from the future. We cannot simply go back into Saturday and tell ourselves the winning lottery numbers of Sunday. If this were possible, then it should also be possible for some future, future, self to tell a future self NOT to tell! Thus we have a paradox: we, in the future, have intervened into the past making our communication from the future impossible!
A paradox: if we communicated, we have not communicated, and if we do not communicate, then we have communicated!Impossible in a linear, non-branching universe!
Is there a possible escape from the paradox, an escape that leaves a door open, even if only a little - for our anti-telephone?
Indeed, there is, and not just one, but several ways out.
First of all - the evident paradox disappears if we admit the possibility that the communication channels are inherently noisy; that is a normal situation when we deal with quantum phenomena.
So, if the communication into the past is a quantum effect - we are saved from evident paradoxes. Quantum Theory can be useful!
Sending a signal into the past, we are never 100% sure if the message will be delivered without distortion. And conversely, receiving info from the future we are never 100% sure if this comes from an authentic broadcast or is a spontaneous and random creation of the receiving end. If this is the case, and if certain quantitative, information - that is, theoretic relations between receiving and transmitting ends are secured to hold - then there are no more paradoxes even with reasonably efficient information channels.
In fact, the subject of communicating with the past or receiving information from the future IS being discussed in physics even in terms of the flat, not-curved-at-all space-time of Lorentz and Minkowski. Hypothetical faster-than-light particles - tachyons - can serve as the communication means. They make an "anti-telephone" - a telephone into the past - possible.
"We are YOU in the Future."In other words: there CAN be broadcasts from the future to the past, but there will be few "receivers," and of those few, even fewer that are properly tuned. And even those that are properly tuned may be subject to "static." Even if there is no static, those receivers that can receive pure information will experience the static of "non-belief" and distortion after the fact.
There is also another aspect of such an information transfer which is that the probabilities involved are connected with a CHOICE EVENT; with the choosing of one among many possible futures.
It may happen that branching of the universe corresponds to each such event. Branching of the universe into an infinite tree of decisions has been discussed within quantum measurement theory - it even has the name of "Many Worlds interpretation of quantum theory." Two of the well-known physicists who consider the many worlds interpretation more than just an exercise in theorizing are John Archibald Wheeler and David Deutsch and you may wish to obtain their books for a deeper understanding.
The Many Worlds Interpretation has one serious weakness: it has no built in algorithm for providing the timing of the branchings. Thus it is a certain framework rather than a complete theory.
There is, however, a theory that fills in this gap in the Many Worlds Interpretation - and this theory I know quite well, and in fact I know it better than most others for the simple reason that I developed it in collaboration with Philippe Blanchard (University of Bielefeld ) in the last six or so years as an integral part of the Quantum Future Project. It is called Event Enhanced Quantum Theory (EEQT for short notation). (A complete list of references and much more info on this subject can be found on my "Quantum Future " project page on the internet).
The fact that our generally accepted theories of the present do not prevent us from thinking that time travel is, perhaps, possible, does not necessarily imply that we do know how to build the time machine!
On the other hand, it is perhaps possible that the time machine already exists and is in use, even if we do not understand the principle of its work, because it goes much too far beyond our present theoretical and conceptual framework. It is also possible that some of the machines we think are serving a totally different purpose do, in fact, act as time machines. Many things are possible...
And so, we have a much better understanding of the "great work" of Alchemy, and Canseliet's comments:
According to the meaning of the Latin word adeptus, the alchemist has then received the Gift of God, or even better, the Present, a cabalistic pun on the double meaning of the word, underlining that he thus enjoys the infinite duration of the Now.[...]
Through this "Gift of God, " - the Present (an obvious pun) - it seems that Laura was allowed to look into the "Mirror in which the entire World can be seen" - a field of symbols and dynamics.
"We are YOU in the Future."Now, back to superluminal communication, or "channelling" in general and the Cassiopaeans in particular: the fact that sending information into the past is possible does not necessarily imply that any information that pretends to be sent from the future is such indeed!
But, if we generally accept that extraterrestrial life is possible, and we use all of our knowledge and resources to search for life beyond our Earth, then we also need to include the understanding that receiving information from the future is equally possible. With this perspective, science should search for any traces of such information.
But, what kind of information channels are to be monitored in search of such broadcasts? What kind of antenna arrays do we need? How must we direct them into a particular "future time"? Say, into the year 3000? Or 30,000? Or 300,001?
My answer is: nothing like that is necessary. All that we need we already have, namely
OUR MINDS. And indeed, assuming that the knowledge and technology of the future is (or CAN BE) much more advanced than ours, then it is only natural that any broadcast from the future will be addressed directly into the mind.
Even today there are techniques of acting directly on our minds. (See the Quantum Future School Timeline Project) They are not always used for our benefit; nevertheless they do exist.
But if communications from the future are possible, why don't we receive these broadcasts on a daily basis? If our minds can serve as receivers, then why aren't we all aware of the transmissions? I think that the answer has to do with
multiple realities and branching universes, and perhaps any civilization which would receive messages from the future on a daily basis has ceased to exist because communication through time is a very dangerous game. You produce paradoxes and these paradoxes remove the paradoxical universes from the repository of possible universes; if you create a universe with paradoxes, it destroys itself either completely or partially. Perhaps just intelligence is removed from this universe because it is intelligence that creates paradox. Perhaps we are very fortunate that even if we can receive some of these messages from the future, we still continue to exist.
Suppose our civilization were to advance to the point where everyone can communicate with themselves in the past; they have a computer with a special program and peripheral device that does this. It becomes the latest fad: everyone is communicating with themselves in the past to warn of dangers or upcoming calamities or bad choices, or to give lottery numbers or winning horses. But, what is seen as a "bad choice" or "calamity" for one, could be seen to be a "good event" or "benefit" to someone else! So, the next step would be that
"hackers" would begin to break into the systems and send false communications into the past to deliberately create bad choices and calamities for some in order to produce benefits for themselves or others.
Then, the first individual would see that false information has been sent and would go into their system and go back even earlier to warn themselves that false information was going to be sent back by an "imposter" and how to tell that it was false.
Then the hacker would see this, and go back in time to an even earlier moment and give false information that someone was going to send false information (that was really true) that false information (that was really false) was going to be sent, thereby confusing the issue.
This process could go on endlessly with constant and repeated communications into the past, one contradicting the other, one signal cancelling out the other, with the result that it would be exactly the same as if there were NO communication into the past!
There is, also, the very interesting possiblity that the above scenario
IS exactly what is taking place in our world.
It is also possible that, whenever a civilization comes to the point that it can manipulate the past and thereby change the present, it would most probably destroy itself, and probably its "branch" of the universe, unless there comes a cataclysmic event before this happens which would act as a kind of "control system" or way of reducing the technological possibilities to zero again, thus obviating the potentials of universal chaos.
In this way, cataclysmic events could be a sort of preventive or pre-emptive strike against such manipulations, and may, in fact, be the result of engineered actions of benevolent selves in the future who see the dangers of communicating with ourselves in the past!
So, the probability is this: if there IS communication from the future, it
MAY, in fact, be constantly received by each and every one of us as an ongoing barrage of lies mixed with truth.
Thus, the problem becomes more than just
"tuning" to a narrow band signal, because clearly the hackers can imitate the signal and have become
VERY clever in delivering their lies disguised as "warm and fuzzy" truths; the problem becomes an altogether different proposition of believing nothing and ACTING as though EVERYTHING is misleading, gathering data from all quarters, and then making the most INFORMED choice possible with full realization that it may be in error!�
What is important here is this: we can't prevent hackers from hacking. But, what we can do is make every effort to prevent them from hacking into OUR systems by erecting barriers of knowledge and awareness. Hackers are always looking for an "easy hack," (except for those few who really LIKE a challenge), and will back away as you make your system more and more secure.
How do you make your computer (or yourself) immune to hackers?�
It is never 100% secure, but if all preventative measures are taken, and we constantly observe for the signs of hackers - system disruption, loss of "memory," or energy, damaged files, things that don't "fit," that are "out of context," - we can reduce the possiblity of hacking. But, we can only do this if we are AWARE of hackers; if we KNOW that they will attempt to break into our system in the guise of a "normal" file, or even an operating system or program that promises to "organize" our data for greater efficiency and ease of function or "user friendliness," while at the same time, acting as a massive drain on our energy and resources - RAM and hard drive.�
As a humorous sidenote: we could think of Windows Operating system as the "ultimate hacker from the future" who, disguised as a sheep, is a wolf devouring our hard disk and RAM, and sending our files to God only knows where every time we connect via the internet!
And of course, there are viruses. Whenever we insert a floppy disk or CD into our computer, we risk infection by virii which can, slowly or rapidly, distort or destroy ALL the information on our computer, prevent ANY peripheral functions, and even "wipe" the hard disk of all files to replace them with endless replications of the viral nonsense.
The human analogy to this is the many religions and "belief" systems that have been "programmed" into our cultures, and our very lives, via endless "Prophet/God" programs, replacing, bit by bit, our own thinking with the "dogma and doctrines of the faith."
Enough of the computer analogies. I think that the reader can imagine any number of variations on the theme and come to an understanding of how vulnerable we are to "disinformation" in the guise of truth from either the future, the past, or the present.
Author
