Dolores Cannon says we are in 5D already

[keith]

If you believe that the astral plane is the fourth dimension, may I ask what are the first three sub-density/dimensions/planes by your definition?

Coincidentally, I was just writing about it in one of my diaries. I have no doubt that this physical plane is the third sub-density / plane. The mystery lies in the first two sub-planes of the third. I still don't have a definition for them, but I suppose they are analogous to the first and second density, just like our first two bodies.

A hypothesis of mine is that they would be the first and second density themselves, since in space / time there is apparently a relationship between environment and consciousness (Ra said that the sub-planes of the physical plane are not vibratory bands as in the astral plane for example, but levels of consciousness of incarnated entities). However, there are some inconsistencies for this hypothesis. The main one is that as the densities are octaves, the vibrations of the third density are of a true yellow color and two octaves above the first and one above the second density. Thus, the mystery remains.

Perhaps I understood wrongly but it seem to me from your description and excerpts, that the fourth dimension is an additional space dimension which allows the observations to be made, and thus allowing the tesseract to be observed. This would also only be possible if the first 3 dimensions are thus also space. And this seems to be identical to the "scientific" view of dimension.

Yes, that's right. However, I would say that more than spatial dimensionality is added to each dimension. At least in terms of inner planes of the third density, time also changes, being spherical and non-linear. I have no idea if in space / time of the fourth density time is linear, but Ra said that there is only past, present and future in the third density, which makes me think that time in the fourth density is much more fluid than in the third .

I think there are some major differences in our beliefs - while I see the densities as a subset of space and time, I believe you see space and time as a subset of the densities (7 times more space and time than mine?). The statement by Oxal that you quoted seems to point a structure more similar to that of your view. I think this approach is quite consistent as well. However, text such as Ra's reply in 11.4 suggests that we are able to interact with first and second density objects and I conclude from this that we can share the same space with them:

11.4:
Ra: I am Ra. There is a sphere in the area opposite your sun of a very, very cold nature, but large enough to skew certain statistical figures. This sphere should not properly be called a planet as it is locked in first density.

 As such, I wonder if these are just different valid points of view given the limitations of third density. And I thank you for sharing this different point of view.

From the second part of your reply, it looks to me that you have merged the concept of the sub-densities and the dimensionality of space and time together, implying that the first sub-density has sort of only one spatial dimension, which I find it hard to believe. I would agree that from the view of your definition, the first 2 sub-planes would seem to coincide with the first 2 densities. But as the first two densities has also at least 3 spatial dimensions (e.g. planets, elements, plants, animals), there seems to be a contradiction when combining space, time and sub-densities in this manner.

While our physical plane is in space/time, according to Ra 21.7 ("These particular entities were incarnate in time/space third density, that is, the so-called inner planes"), the inner plane is in time/space, my guess is that they may not even be on adjacent planes. My guess is when people goes to the inner plane, they didn't go to a "higher dimension" but instead moved from space/time to time/space. 

At least in terms of inner planes of the third density, time also changes, being spherical and non-linear. I have no idea if in space / time of the fourth density time is linear, but Ra said that there is only past, present and future in the third density, which makes me think that time in the fourth density is much more fluid than in the third .

I am not sure what do you mean by linear, do you mean one dimensional as is suggestive in the transcript? My understanding that the inner plane is in time/space where time is 3(6) dimensional and thus may be seen as spherical and is the same for time/space all densities.
I do not understand the exact meaning of Oxal's description of "Space may be thought of as linear, if time is thought of as volumetric. Or you may reverse the process, as you do within your limitation, and consider space volumetric and time linear." but I interpret this linear definition as a degree-of-freedom concept - analogous to a narrow pipe in 3rd density, one is in 3D space but can only move forward or backward (1 degree of freedom, linear movement). In space/time, my thinking is that time still flows in 3 dimensions but only forward/backward, perhaps in a spherical expansion visually, the additional 2 dimensions allowing the occurrence of all possibilities of events.