small question on linear time

[Asolsutsesvyl]

I have thought a lot about multidimensional time and how reality may change and work, but if you try to straighten out the mystery of time, then space becomes mysterious instead. How is concrete reality given a patterned structure with continuity if what exists in time is wide open to change? Two basic ways of trying to "understand" seem possible:

1. Limiting the thinking to match 3D direct experience and its limits. I.e., the future is open, but the past is fixed. There may exist many parallel timelines, however.

2. Abandoning the entire framework of how we perceive reality, so as to work and experiment with ideas of how it might be instead in higher densities. Abstract explorations from which some ideas may be brought back into approach #1, while the rest remains beyond clear comprehension.

To follow up, I think past lives, or a different time frame, can be accessed with "resonance." In terms of linear 3D constraints within this density, going back in time is prohibited by the parameters of manifestation involved in its construction, but we do have access to the unconscious. In the archetype cards [...]

The general ideas of the future being open while the past is fixed, combined with some fuzzy wiggle room having to do with resonance, reminds me of a different approach I just read of which matches that. Instead of archetypes, the idea is that we are as close to any given past as our present is to a present reachable from that past.

https://montalk.net/matrix/122/timeline-dynamics

The description of choices made throughout time forming a path extending backwards matches my own "graph traversal" metaphor, but Montalk fills in surrounding ideas differently.

Feedback loops may exist between the present and possible futures. Possible futures may exert competing influences to pull us towards them, combining with our choices to shape how a path is forged from here to a later here - a theme I've thought of but not written about myself.

Montalk covers the same general ideas, adding some interesting thinking about how relative closeness vs. distance to parallel realities may also double as relative closeness vs. distance to higher-density beings of both polarities. Their ongoing efforts (STS targeting vs. STO offering) to bring our future trajectories closer to their "locations", merging our timelines with the source of one or another type of higher-density influence, forms a big part of the whole drama of life in this world.

We have only as much "presence" in a reality as the similarity of our reality to it, according to Montalk. But when one person changes track, it also affects others who surround or are connected to that person, in some fluid probabilistic way. So the journey is in part personal and in part collective.