Why is there no 2d, 3d or 4d life on Venus ?

[unity100]

despite the information in the material regarding the possibility of a 3d cycle being possible after a 4d society learned hiding themselves from 3d entities, and lack of anything pointing to any kind of disaster/wars happening in venus, there isnt any kind of 2d, 3d, or 4d existence in venus. ra says the planet is 5/6d at this moment.

why isnt there any lower density manifestation on venus ?

[zenmaster]

Is this some kind of leading rhetoric, as everyone knows the answer.

[Crown]

I dont know, i guess Don never got to ask that question... I'd assume that the planet sphere has reached a certain level of existance. It is experiencing 5th and up. If it was 3rd density activated tens of thousands of years ago, then naturally, it will continue changing. I just dont understand why second density has to be deactivated.

[zack231]

The way I see it is that there comes a time on a planet where there is no longer any need for 2nd and 3rd density experience keep in mind Ra's race began a very long time ago with Ra estimating the end of Ra's 3rd density cycle to have been 2.6 billion years ago and thats just when it ended... Ra said that earths 2nd density lasted 4.6 billion years.. So you can only assume Ra's second density was roughly the same if not longer considering there transition was completely natural and derived from free will unlike the beginning of Earths 3rd density which was begun when Mars' civilisation was destroyed. So you get the picture that Ra's race is very very old and that planet Venus is very very old also and began to develop life much sooner than that of earth. It seems like Venus which scientists now agree probably had water on it over 2 billion years ago and may have looked just like earth, but has all but died out overtime due to a lose of the atmosphere..

Now remember that we can only see our spectrum and those below it so what we are seeing is died out 3rd density planet in our perceivable spectrum of the illusion, we have no Idea what it looks like 5th density for we cannot perceive it, so what we are seeing is 3rd density venus.. Remember Ra said that there are seven earths all existing but with 4th, 5th and 6th in potentiation. So the same would apply to venus each one still existing within each spectrum of light or density, venus is now a 5/6th density planet with first, second, third and 4th still existing within each individual spectrum of light or density.. Therefore we are seeing the 3rd density venus which has become uninhabitable for 2nd and 3rd density experience due to its loss of atmosphere which is obviously the building blocks for 2nd and 3rd density experience..

So the reason there is no 2nd or 3rd density enitities visible on venus is because it has become uninhabitable for 2nd to 3rd density life, but is inhabited by 5th density entities but again we cannot seem them or the 5/6 density version of venus as it is above our spectrum of light..

Any way thats just my personal opinion.. I hope it helped in some way

Here is a link to an article on how scientists now believe Venus once looked just like earth including continents, oceans and could have been inhabitable billions of years ago "Billions of years ago, Venus would have had conditions very similar to those on Earth and may even have been habitable, scientists now believe."[font=Arial]
[/font]
which lines up very we with when Ra said 3rd density ended on their planet:

http://www.universetoday.com/23651/venus...ts-oceans/


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...-life.html

---

I dont know, i guess Don never got to ask that question... I'd assume that the planet sphere has reached a certain level of existance. It is experiencing 5th and up. If it was 3rd density activated tens of thousands of years ago, then naturally, it will continue changing. I just dont understand why second density has to be deactivated.

You are not thinking logically look at venus it is completely dried up 2nd and 3rd have not been deactivated its just that Venus is no longer possible of 2nd and 3rd density life because it is all dried up and the atmosphere has been destroyed.. This is due to the fact that because venus is that little bit closer to the sun it was always destined to burn up and lose its atmosphere as the sun began to increase in heat which scientists say it has been over time... So Venus could have still had 2nd and 3rd activated if it where not for its position and loss of atmosphere hence loss of water hence no life..

We are One

Love and Light

---

Also keep in mind that scientists have not actually seen the real surface of Venus as it is covered in a very thick permanent cloud over the entire planet.. They use a special from of camera to map out and predict and then create images of the surface of venus therefore maybe there is some 2nd density life that somehow evolved to these conditions and we do not know, as we cannot see the actual surface.. but of course its almost impossible that their is 2nd density life running around on their as the planets atmosphere is destroyed.. Here is an artists impression of the surface of Venus which scientists is plagued with constant storms:

"Our new data make it possible to construct a scenario in which Venus started out like the Earth - possibly including a habitable environment, billions of years ago - and then evolved to the state we see now."

Yes I know I have an obsession with Venus I have studied it well

[Oceania]

that's incro!

[unity100]

Is this some kind of leading rhetoric, as everyone knows the answer.

lets hear yours then.

[Raman]

I will find most interesting to find what kind of 2d is manifested in a 4th density planet as well.

---

How can Venus surface be relatively young?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus

[3DMonkey]

The answer is that we can't see through the planetary sphere's fifth density vibrations into the parallel existence of lower density life on the planet.

[Raman]

The answer is that we can't see through the planetary sphere's fifth density vibrations into the parallel existence of lower density life on the planet.

Or 2d/3d/4d are not activated.

But it there is 2d, 3d will be aware of it unless hidden by some state and purpose, in this case you could be right. This would help maintain veil in 3d earth as well as prevent planetary 'colonizations' by earth's 3d entities.

[unity100]

Or 2d/3d/4d are not activated.

But it there is 2d, 3d will be aware of it unless hidden by some state and purpose, in this case you could be right. This would help maintain veil in 3d earth as well as prevent planetary 'colonizations' by earth's 3d entities.

ra already says venus is a 5d/6d planet and 5d/6d experiences are possible on it. not any other density.

[Oceania]

we can see the 5th density?

[3DMonkey]

we can see the 5th density?

We can see it through our 3D lens. It's all around us. All densities are. Like, when Ra looks at us, they see our light vibrations rather than flesh and bone. It's really trippy for them.

[Oceania]

so they're gas?

[3DMonkey]

so they're gas?

Technically, no. But, yes, they are something like gas.

'So, you're blood?'


EDIT: I just want to make sure that everyone knows I am not engaging in mindless banter here. I believe there is a perceptual quality to what is or isn't on the planet Venus. The discourse between Oceania and I is about discovering what that quality is.

[Oceania]

i'm not all blood. fawlty analogy.

lol you're paranoid about banter police. i don't think there is a distinction between gas and something like it.

[Raman]

Or 2d/3d/4d are not activated.

But it there is 2d, 3d will be aware of it unless hidden by some state and purpose, in this case you could be right. This would help maintain veil in 3d earth as well as prevent planetary 'colonizations' by earth's 3d entities.

ra already says venus is a 5d/6d planet and 5d/6d experiences are possible on it. not any other density.

That is what I think, which leaves 1d, 5d, 6d activation. Also, goes with the 'relatively young surface' of the planet.

That leaves planetary spheres with 1d being base (red ray) foundation:
1d base (last density previous octave)
2d compatible ---> at least 3d and 4d (although not clear current 2d compatible)
3d compatible ---> with 2d + potential incarnational nexus from higher densities r/t veil
4d compatible ---> with 2d (some type depending +/-) and 3d when able to hide
5d compatible --> with 6d and viceversa.

4d and above able to interact (4d potentially) with lower densities. 4d being a bridge more light (electrical than 3d); 5d able to manifest physicality or light; 6d and non-physical although able to manifest it.

Feel free to correct oversights, etc...

[3DMonkey]

Like when we dream. We aren't "seeing" anything. There are simply waves of energy, electricity, bouncing around. There is nothing there but electricity and slimy goop of brain tissue. Yet, we "see". Hmmmmm...... Same thing with Venus.

[Bring4th_Austin]

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...

[zenmaster]

Is this some kind of leading rhetoric, as everyone knows the answer.

lets hear yours then.

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.

[Raman]

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

---

Is this some kind of leading rhetoric, as everyone knows the answer.

lets hear yours then.

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.

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.

[Bring4th_Austin]

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

2D material...not animals, or plants you have to kill. I'd imagine it would be incompatible with 4D.

43.18 Questioner: The mechanism of, shall we say, social catalyst due to a necessity for feeding the body then is active in fourth-density. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This is incorrect. The fourth-density being desires to serve and the preparation of foodstuffs is extremely simple due to increased communion between entity and living foodstuff. Therefore, this is not a significant catalyst but rather a simple precondition of the space/time experience. The catalyst involved is the necessity for the ingestion of foodstuffs. This is not considered to be of importance by fourth-density entities and it, therefore, aids in the teach/learning of patience.

Read, living foodstuff. Probably fruits and other 2D material which can be cultivated without destroying life. More symbiotic than a 3D relationship with foodstuff.

Also,

43.20 Questioner: I’m guessing that it is not necessary to ingest foodstuffs in fifth-density. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This is incorrect. However, the vehicle needs food which may be prepared by thought.

So we know that 5D is the first density which we can prepare food by thought, which means living foodstuffs for 4D come from somewhere external.

[Raman]

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

2D material...not animals, or plants you have to kill. I'd imagine it would be incompatible with 4D.

43.18 Questioner: The mechanism of, shall we say, social catalyst due to a necessity for feeding the body then is active in fourth-density. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This is incorrect. The fourth-density being desires to serve and the preparation of foodstuffs is extremely simple due to increased communion between entity and living foodstuff. Therefore, this is not a significant catalyst but rather a simple precondition of the space/time experience. The catalyst involved is the necessity for the ingestion of foodstuffs. This is not considered to be of importance by fourth-density entities and it, therefore, aids in the teach/learning of patience.

Read, living foodstuff. Probably fruits and other 2D material which can be cultivated without destroying life. More symbiotic than a 3D relationship with foodstuff.

Also,

43.20 Questioner: I’m guessing that it is not necessary to ingest foodstuffs in fifth-density. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This is incorrect. However, the vehicle needs food which may be prepared by thought.

So we know that 5D is the first density which we can prepare food by thought, which means living foodstuffs for 4D come from somewhere external.

Could be created by other means,

[Bring4th_Austin]

How could living foodstuffs be created by other means? I guess you're right, but I'll use Occam's Razor to take the simplest route and say it's most likely that 4D entities sustain themselves off of fruit and other 2D material which provides foodstuffs naturally and in a symbiotic relationship.

[unity100]

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...

first of all, even with our current science, water being a requirement for life to exist is debatable, even if not waning.

but more importantly, ra says the materials used for life is totally dependent on what materials available in an environment, upon a question don asked about there being some cells on the planet based on a different element.

this means that water is not a requirement for life. life can happen with whatever materials available on a planet.

'life cycle of a planet' is something debatable in itself and part of the question here. the question is what is that life cycle.

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.

there is no reason for there not to be a 2d life, and a 3d life, even a 4d life, based on the above points i replied to abridgetoofar.

even if we look from the narrow lens of our current science, merging it with Ra information - venus has supported life at a certain point in time, we know that it was capable. now, the temperatures are higher and the environment may be more volatile. however, even from the viewpoint of our science, which has just discovered that bacteria may live in scorching depths in thousands of meters into the crust of earth, or boiling volcanic pools or frozen ice, there has to be an array of species or versions of such species even from our ecosystem that venus could support. that is even totally leaving out the marvels like the animal tardigrad.

and that is totally leaving out the fact that, other species from other environments could be introduced, or logos or any other intervening source could just create/tailor a spectrum of life forms to inhabit that planet. (actually we are told that what logos provides to planets, is exactly this).

however despite all these there is no life of 2d, 3d in venus. we know also that 4d life does not exist, from Ra.

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.

firstly your look into the concept 'planet' is shortfalling because as per Ra material we know that a planet becomes an entity approximately mid 4th density. but more important is your proposition that a planet's fate is deterministic. that contradicts with what Ra told about 'recent events putting earth in a positive 4d continuum'. also the fact that we were told logos provides the basic energies of lower densities for life to exist on a planet, and all the rest catalyst, entities create themselves. the latter is a bit far-fetching, since it basically means that after the energies and systems are provided for survival, entities create the rest of the catalyst.

however especially due to these, there is no reason why 2d, 3d, or 4d cycles should not be run on a planet which can support life in any form.

which brings us to the below :

Or 2d/3d/4d are not activated.

But it there is 2d, 3d will be aware of it unless hidden by some state and purpose, in this case you could be right. This would help maintain veil in 3d earth as well as prevent planetary 'colonizations' by earth's 3d entities.

ra already says venus is a 5d/6d planet and 5d/6d experiences are possible on it. not any other density.

That is what I think, which leaves 1d, 5d, 6d activation. Also, goes with the 'relatively young surface' of the planet.

That leaves planetary spheres with 1d being base (red ray) foundation:
1d base (last density previous octave)
2d compatible ---> at least 3d and 4d (although not clear current 2d compatible)
3d compatible ---> with 2d + potential incarnational nexus from higher densities r/t veil
4d compatible ---> with 2d (some type depending +/-) and 3d when able to hide
5d compatible --> with 6d and viceversa.

4d and above able to interact (4d potentially) with lower densities. 4d being a bridge more light (electrical than 3d); 5d able to manifest physicality or light; 6d and non-physical although able to manifest it.

Feel free to correct oversights, etc...

like raman speaks about here, i am thinking that there are some kinds of limitations on what densities can manifest on a planet at any given time. otherwise, it would be rather pointless to leave venus unpopulated - unless there were things we dont know. (like maybe a devastating war or a disaster rendering the planet uninhabitable).

if there wasnt such a disaster or war, then there would be no reason for any other density to not be on the planet, if not for compatibility.

now lets think about something else - mercury is closer to sun than any other planet. and lets assume there may be no early 2d life that can live on this planet. alright. then, why isnt mercury inhabited by any 5d/6d entities, just like venus ? since apparently, 5d/6d existence doesnt seem to need presence of 2d on a planet, or a 3d. especially considering that by 6d, entities can go visit sun for extended durations and live on it.

this seems to imply that there are requirements other than just predetermined cyclic stuff for a planet to sustain life, since mercury is not inhabited by higher density entities.

this may be due to numerous reasons. but the most probable seeming one, is the 'continuum' ra speaks about planet earth. through the actions and energies/vibrations manifested on this planet, this planet has entered a 4d positive continuum.

this would mean that what the entities do on a planet, determines where it will go in regard to contiuum, and, this may as well be valid for the early progression of a planet - ie, for a planet to progress towards higher densities, a 2d must manifest, moving into a 3d, and then to higher densities so that the energy needed to support any given density life on a planet come into being on that planet.

this kinda means energies just dont randomly received and used by planets but the entities living on it effect that - else, mercury would be at least 5/6d inhabitable.

........

despite we are told that when the 4d entities are able to hide their presence from 3d, 3d cycles can continue on a planet,it doesnt seem that this can take place forever, as can be deduced from the above points. meaning that it seems 3d life will eventually have to totally end on any given planet. and this may be true for 2d life too.

[Bring4th_Austin]

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...

first of all, even with our current science, water being a requirement for life to exist is debatable, even if not waning.

but more importantly, Ra says the materials used for life is totally dependent on what materials available in an environment, upon a question don asked about there being some cells on the planet based on a different element.

this means that water is not a requirement for life. life can happen with whatever materials available on a planet.

'life cycle of a planet' is something debatable in itself and part of the question here. the question is what is that life cycle.

With this thinking, you should expand your question. Why doesn't 2D-4D life exist on Mars, since life uses what is available? Just because the biosphere was destroyed to support life like ours, doesn't mean it can't support life in the manner you're talking about. Why not Jupiter? Why not Uranus? Why not Pluto? Why not on the Sun? Why not in the middle of outer space where there is no planet?

You can debate the fact all you want, but it is readily observable in my perception that life requires some sort of environment other than "what materials are available," despite what Ra says. I don't feel like it's too much of a stretch to say that requirement is for the 1D elements to be able to interact with each other.

[Raman]

Besides the point that Mars (and of course Maldek) development was arrested due to 2d/3d destruction there is the possibility that Mars can support 2d then 3d then...once 'healed'.

There is a crucial point though: starting in 4d the sub-logos does not provide sustainability of life as 2d/3d. Could at the beginning as transition, but if 5d can make 'foodstuff' by thoughts why 4d cannot construct something of that sort but less sophisticated? After all, green ray is the first ray to manifest from thought forms. This means, 2d is compatible but no necessary to survive.

It seems the so called 'quantum jumps' or states affects not only 1d in the planet but the planetary logos itself. Then a 5d planet's vibration is too 'high' to support 2d/3d or even 4d. Otherwise we would see 2d in Venus, Jupiter or even the moon. But notice as the base ray or 1d always remains....as original, barren...

---

By the way, is there a reason why this thread is not public?

---

Let me expand of this: the Venus (or any other 5d/6d planet) we see is what the sub-Logos provides for us 3d to see: only 1d. This is because 4d and above are outside the realms of the sub-Logos except providing the base red ray or 1d and with that the physical laws pertaining to maintaining a solar system in place.

[3DMonkey]

Let me expand of this: the Venus (or any other 5d/6d planet) we see is what the sub-Logos provides for us 3d to see: only 1d. This is because 4d and above are outside the realms of the sub-Logos except providing the base red ray or 1d and with that the physical laws pertaining to maintaining a solar system in place.

It makes sense for Venus too because the atmosphere is so dense that we can't see the surface.

[Raman]

Fast search and quick example/link

When the data from the Magellan mission did come through though, it surprised many scientists, as there were only a tenth the amount of craters that would be expected had Venus been as old as we thought it was, and the ones which were there were all found to be relatively fresh. There are now two theories for this - one is that volcanic eruptions destroy craters as fast as they are made so there will always be a constant number of craters on Venus, and the other is that 500 million years or so ago, volcanic eruptions resurfaced the planet, destroying all previous craters. Another thing these space probes found was that at least 85% of Venus is covered by volcanic rock! These are mostly from lava flows and form the planet's vast plains.

http://www.solarspace.co.uk/Venus/venus.php

---

let me give you another link:

http://planetary.org/explore/topics/venus/facts.html

Notice the pics. Magellan has produced seemingly good pics of the surface.

---

But main thing is that the surface IS TOO YOUNG....

[Bring4th_Austin]

Besides the point that Mars (and of course Maldek) development was arrested due to 2d/3d destruction there is the possibility that Mars can support 2d then 3d then...once 'healed'.

That's completely aside from the point. It shouldn't need to be "healed" in order to support life following Unity's theory of life being possible to matter the environment. The fact that it may support life again doesn't support that theory because it should be able to support life now. Same with every other planet in the solar system, following that theory.

The grand point being, while life may use what is available, it doesn't mean that every environment can support life. The environment on Venus naturally progressed (I assume) to a point where it could not support 2D life, just like Mars can't support 2D life, just like Jupiter can't, etc etc.

There is a crucial point though: starting in 4d the sub-logos does not provide sustainability of life as 2d/3d.

Says who?

It seems the so called 'quantum jumps' or states affects not only 1d in the planet but the planetary logos itself. Then a 5d planet's vibration is too 'high' to support 2d/3d or even 4d. Otherwise we would see 2d in Venus, Jupiter or even the moon. But notice as the base ray or 1d always remains....as original, barren...

Ra says there will be a point on a 4D planet where it will support both 4D and 5D life. I'll dig up the quote if you really want.

[Raman]

That's completely aside from the point. It shouldn't need to be "healed" in order to support life following Unity's theory of life being possible to matter the environment. The fact that it may support life again doesn't support that theory because it should be able to support life now. Same with every other planet in the solar system, following that theory.

The grand point being, while life may use what is available, it doesn't mean that every environment can support life. The environment on Venus naturally progressed (I assume) to a point where it could not support 2D life, just like Mars can't support 2D life, just like Jupiter can't, etc etc.

You are comparing Venus and Mars? Main thing densities are sequentials. And densities from 4th to 7th choose not to be visible. However, why we cannot see 2d or 3d in Venus? Most probably because they are not there.

13.20 Questioner: Is there any physical difference between first and second density? For instance if I could see both a first and second-density planet side by side, in my present condition, could I see both of them? Would they both be physical to me?
Ra: I am Ra. This is correct. All of the octave of your densities would be clearly visible were not the fourth through the seventh freely choosing not to be visible.

There is a crucial point though: starting in 4d the sub-logos does not provide sustainability of life as 2d/3d.

Says who?

Well archetypes (once the choice is made) and veils are for 3d. 4d can use technology to go to other systems as evidenced by Orion/Confederation. There is an increase in freedom from the sub-Logos. Starting in 4th density entities are able to grasp the true nature of the sun. Also they are very independent (starting in 4th).

It seems the so called 'quantum jumps' or states affects not only 1d in the planet but the planetary logos itself. Then a 5d planet's vibration is too 'high' to support 2d/3d or even 4d. Otherwise we would see 2d in Venus, Jupiter or even the moon. But notice as the base ray or 1d always remains....as original, barren...

Ra says there will be a point on a 4D planet where it will support both 4D and 5D life. I'll dig up the quote if you really want.

So it seems that we can add 4D compatibility to those, but I remember a quote stating that 4D entities need to be left to themselves. So I am assuming that this compatibility will happen very late into the 4D cycle.