08-07-2011, 03:48 PM
(08-07-2011, 02:55 PM)abridgetoofar Wrote: Not sure I completely understand the reason for the question. It seems completely reasonable to me that the planet went through a natural cycle which may have included loosing its water (supported theory) or some other sort of natural cycle which would lead to making it unable to support lower density life.
Of course, 4D might be able to survive on the surface, but considering they must still eat living 2D food stuffs, since 2D food stuffs cannot be cultivated on Venus, it cannot "support" 4D life.
Like stars, I don't view the life cycles of planets as infinite...
How do you know 4d eats 2d? That would be incompatible with 4d. --at least pos 4d
(08-07-2011, 03:01 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(08-07-2011, 12:06 PM)unity100 Wrote:So the environment of the planet must support the mind/body complex requirements for an entity to thrive. The planet itself acts like an attractor for the intelligent energies of the sun according to the conditions provided. An entity has an increasingly conscious appreciation for this intelligent energy as its energy spectrum expands - by a quantum leap for each succeeding density. A planet, on the other hand, does not. What energy it's capable of supporting is subject to the deterministic fate of its natural evolutionary life cycle or influence from non-deterministic source. 2D requires growth conditions to maintain and nurture form, 3D requires the same 2D growth conditions plus a collective consciousness, 4D requires the same 2D growth conditions plus an unattached understanding.(08-07-2011, 06:01 AM)zenmaster Wrote: Is this some kind of leading rhetoric, as everyone knows the answer.
lets hear yours then.
4d and above the sub-Logos deals mainly with 1d consistencies. (so called gravity, rotation of planets, etc..) 5d/6d are mainly independent of sub-logos archetypes...mind you not of galactic archetypes.