Now, you might be thinking—infinity is infinity—you can’t live an infinite life amongst 4D souls on the one hand, before the existence of 5D souls, and, then, after that, an infinity amongst both 4D and 5D souls. And, anyhow, how does time, and memory, really work? Don’t events happen in order, and, if they do, mustn’t there have been, at some point, a beginning? But infinity is not linear, and, therefore, time, and memory, as functions of an infinite life, are not either. Therefore every event that will ever happen, an infinite number of events, has already happened, and, so, when reminded, we remember events in an asynchronous order, and the experiences we live out are, as they happen, removed from our memory. Thus, the more we know about a memory, the less we know about the present, and, when living out the present, we know nothing of the memory beyond the occasional feeling of déjà vu—the product of an experience being encoded in some way, shape, or form, in the same way that it is encoded in something we could remember, if we could decode the experience.
The paradox arises when we consider our 5D children. If every event that is ever going to happen has already taken place, then all the 5D children we are ever going to have already existed, before they were born, as a part of the continuum. But the paradox is resolved if we apply our uncertainty principle, and realize that when a child is born, that child, as an adult, is simply unknown to us. Does that mean, in their particular neighborhood, they cease to exist? That they, as adults, are temporarily removed from their communities? Would they be missed? What about their spouse? Have they always been with their spouse? What if they’ve had more than one partner? When did they meet? When will they meet? Are they separated once the one of them is born, or conceived? It seems, instead, that the child, as it grows, gradually begins to remember more and more of the adult it left behind, and the adult, necessarily separated, for the duration of their childhood, from their parents, gradually begins to remember more and more of their childhood, until the child, at the threshold of adulthood, effectively moves out, or shifts from their present, dependent state, into their general, atemporal self.
So what do we mean when we say that 4D souls necessarily lived a potential infinity before they had their first 5D child? That they live in a realm of their own—that they are first and foremost surrounded by their immediate 4D family? We can think in terms of infinite sets—that is to say that the component parts of the set of all integers, for example, are less than the component parts of the set of all fractions, even though the two sets, independently, are equally infinite. We might say, then, that 4D souls compose a set, such as the set of all integers, and the combination of 4D and pure 5D souls compose a set, such as the set of all fractions. So when did this 4D infinite set take place? Not, as we might’ve imagined from our earlier discussion, before the first 5D birth, but, rather, the 4D set is comprised of all the experiences that take place exclusively between 4D souls and their landscape or environment. And the 5D set is comprised of all the experiences that take place, in general, in the 5D universe. Thus, we remember, as 5D beings, both the future and the past as the past—and when we experience that past as the present, we have no memory of it.
Now, you might also be thinking, what if I want to see the landscape, or the view, or the environment that my true love sees—instead of the view of my immediate family and their neighborhood? And, furthermore, what if someone in my neighborhood, in their world, lives at the beach, whereas I live amongst the mountains? What, then, do we see, when we look out upon our neighborhood? I think, if we want to see what our true love sees, or what anybody sees, looking out, from their home, we call, or tune to the channel that is created when we project what a person actually looks and sounds like onto the idea that we get of that person, or the feelings that we have for that person, when we think of them. A coordinate shift takes place—in which their 5D grid replaces our 5D grid, and, for as long as we want, we see what they see. The catch is that seeing another person’s view is like traveling to some fantastic place—eventually you long for your home—the coordinate structure that most effectively magnifies who and what you are, making you heard, and defining you as the yin to another person’s yang—or the pieces of the puzzle that complete the picture, or the union, of two invested souls.
So, just like traveling, when you shift, you take what you absorb from your travels, and, instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, you integrate the whole picture, making the best of both worlds. But what if your family lives at the beach, and your lover’s family lives in the mountains? What landscape, then, from you to them, do you see? What landscape do you share? Would the landscape be half your home and half their home—surrounding the home you share? How would you blend the beach with the mountains? The two are polar opposites. Imagine, then, that your family, and you, prior to meeting your spouse, lived directly on and around the ocean, whereas your lover’s family, and your lover, lived in the foothills, or on the side, of a mountain. What do you see? And what about your family? They do not live at all in the mountains, whereas you, on the other hand, do.
I think the beach, ahead of you, would be balanced out by the mountains it replaced, and you would live, then, on the side of a mountain, with your partner. As for your parents, you would see the projection of their home between you and the beach. But the landscape you see would not be the landscape you would see if you walked or shifted to their home directly. Instead you’d see your home through the lens of the potential energy field that surrounded both you and them—instead of seeing your home in the mountains, you’d see your home on a flat landscape defined by the shore. So, as we walk from our home to our family home, at the beach, the landscape shifts once we leave our property, and the mountains behind us appear as hills, for an interim, and then, confined by the dominant influence of our family home, we see nothing but the shore. So what if we walked backwards—would it be odd to see mountains changing into hills? How would that work? Would it happen gradually or suddenly? Well, that would depend on the strength of the potential—and how it diminishes with its radius. Now, based on mathematical analysis, we imagine that the potential diminishes, in 5D, with the square of the radius, so the change would happen quickly, since, once you left your property, not only would the potential diminish with the square of the radius, but the two opposing potentials would be superimposed, and the one would be subtracted from the other.
I think, then, that what you see, in the distance, is not the same thing as what your partner sees. This is because the potential of your neighbors interacts with your potential, and changes the landscape. So whereas you might see, at the edge of your property, an accelerated shift to flatter ground, your partner would see more foothills—if that is, their family also lived in the mountains, or, if they didn’t, you would see some combination of the two potentials—dominated, naturally, by the potential that embodies your property. So, if your partner’s family lived in the mountains, I don’t think they would see the beach. They would see the mountains, if, that is, they already lived in the mountains. Your influence would be felt on you and your partner’s property, where you lived, so, for example, trees might shift, or a pasture, or a greater pasture, might appear. But the landscape, towards the far end your own property, would not look the same as the landscape your partner sees. Which is why, at some point, you might like to travel to their point of view.
Now, since our family home, from a distance, would look different from our family home, close up—indeed, as our neighbor, it would appear to be further from the ocean than it really is, and the yard itself would be shaped differently—perhaps you’d see your family home closer to the base of your mountain—we would not see our parents if they left the house. We would only see the landscape that lives as a function of the view from our property—which would effectively paint over whatever your parents might have been doing in the yard that they actually live in. Likewise, if your brother lived in your neighborhood, but he also lived at the beach, and you and the rest of your family lived in the mountains, then you probably wouldn’t see the ocean, but you might see their home further away, in the valley, instead of in the foothills. Then, as you approached his property, the mountains would disappear, and you would find yourself at his home, on his property, as he sees it.