This is a question for David about “Time” being three dimensional.

I understand how we have 3 dimensional space. You have an “X”, “Y”, and “Z” axis, where the axes intersect at a common point; also no one of these axis lines are considered the opposite of any of the other two, in direction. This common point or intersection is would be your location in space. This kind of model will let you triangulate on any other given point in space out to infinity.

What I am trying to picture in my mind is that “time” should follow the same basic rules, or model, to be three dimensional; whereas there needs to be an “X”, “Y”, and “Z” axis intersecting at a common point so that no one of these axis lines are the opposite of any of the other two, in direction. This common point or intersection is would be your location in time. This kind of model will let you triangulate on any given point in time out to infinity.

I hear people say that “time” has 3 dimensions by saying “past”, “present”, and “future”. This is where I have a problem because these three words imply a liner line at best; “present” being the zero point on the line and “past” being negative with “future” being the positive. In a three dimensional model I have always understood that you need (like I’ve stated above) 3 directions of movement not opposite of each other but in “3 different directions”. If time and space are directly linked in some way as according to the current Einstein model at best “Time” could only be 1 dimensional or “first density”.

I also understand the information you gave in one of your episodes where time is described as layered. This would only bring you to a 2 dimensional or “second density” level, where the “Y” axis would be which layer in time you would be at. (You might also refer to this “other layer of time” as a different “reality”) The intersecting point of this “Y” axis with the “X” axis would be at the “now point in time ”, or the “present time”, just so we can keep terms consistent in this model. The “X” axis would still be your past, present and future; with the “present time” again being the intersecting point of where you would be in time, and the “Y” axis would give you which reality you would be in.

I can’t seem to picture this 3 dimensional model for “time”. We have now used the forward and backward direction with “X”, and the up and down direction with “Y”; What would be the “Z” direction? If you are at a point in time you should be able to triangulate with 3 coordinates to give you a location in “time” that you want to achieve ( That is if time is 3 dimensional like it’s thought in the Larson model.) I would think these coordinates would have to exist. What would an “X”, “Y”, and “Z” model for time look like? In other words how would you label or what would you call the 3 coordinates needed to get you to that next “point in time”. No mater ware you are in density you still have to follow the same laws of physics.

Now if Time stood still and did not have a flow we would never have any reason to reference it, under any circumstance. Then for all intense purposes Time does not “need” to even exist for it serves no purpose. Could this indicate that time is only 2 dimensional and is just a leftover from second density reality.

I've seen every episode of "Wisdom Teachings" on Gaiam TV and am looking forward to many more in the future.

Thanks, Kim

:) ]]>