The threshold for probabilities

[Sena]

Thanks to Tob for mentioning this topic in the pantheism thread.

Seth introduces the "threshold for probabilities" in The Unknown Reality, Book One, Session 688, "Man's Early Development". This is the relevant quote:

"In other probabilities, water-dwelling mammals predominate. They farm the land as you farm the water, and are only now learning how to operate upon the land for any amount of time, as you are only now learning how to manipulate below the water.
 The physical universe serves then as a threshold for probabilities, and all possible species find their greatest fulfillment within that system, each of them neurologically tuned into their own reality and their own "time." So the body itself, as it presently exists, is innately equipped with other neurological responses that to you would seem to be biologically invisible. Nevertheless, your consciousness and your beliefs are what direct this neurological recognition. At birth, and before structured learning processes begin, you are far freer in that regard. You could (underlined twice) walk into "yesterday" as well as tomorrow at that point of birth — if you could walk — and indeed your perception brings you events both in and out of time sequence.
Responses to out-of-time events do not bring the infant recognition, approval, or action, however. It immediately begins to learn to accept certain neurological pulses which bring results, and not others, and so neurological patterns are early learned. This can be a frightening process, though it is accompanied by reassurances. The infant sees, out of context, both present and future without discrimination, and (intently) I am speaking of images physically perceived. Nightmares on the part of children often operate as biological and psychic releases, during which buried out-of-time perceptions emerge explosively — events perceived that cannot be reacted to effectively in the face of parental conditioning. The body, then, is indeed a far more wondrous living mechanism than you realize. It is the body's own precognitions10 that allows the child to develop, to speak and walk and grow." (from "The "Unknown" Reality, Volume One (A Seth Book)" by Jane Roberts, Robert F. Butts)

Kindle edition : https://amzn.eu/71qYOBQ

One of the things I find fascinating about this topic is that Seth brings neurology into the discussion. On a personal note, my parents told me that I suffered from nightmares as an infant and toddler. Now i can see a possible explanation.

[Tob]

Thanks to Tob for mentioning this topic in the pantheism thread.

Seth introduces the "threshold for probabilities" in The Unknown Reality, Book One, Session 688, "Man's Early Development". This is the relevant quote:

"In other probabilities, water-dwelling mammals predominate. They farm the land as you farm the water, and are only now learning how to operate upon the land for any amount of time, as you are only now learning how to manipulate below the water.
 The physical universe serves then as a threshold for probabilities, and all possible species find their greatest fulfillment within that system, each of them neurologically tuned into their own reality and their own "time." So the body itself, as it presently exists, is innately equipped with other neurological responses that to you would seem to be biologically invisible. Nevertheless, your consciousness and your beliefs are what direct this neurological recognition. At birth, and before structured learning processes begin, you are far freer in that regard. You could (underlined twice) walk into "yesterday" as well as tomorrow at that point of birth — if you could walk — and indeed your perception brings you events both in and out of time sequence.
Responses to out-of-time events do not bring the infant recognition, approval, or action, however. It immediately begins to learn to accept certain neurological pulses which bring results, and not others, and so neurological patterns are early learned. This can be a frightening process, though it is accompanied by reassurances. The infant sees, out of context, both present and future without discrimination, and (intently) I am speaking of images physically perceived. Nightmares on the part of children often operate as biological and psychic releases, during which buried out-of-time perceptions emerge explosively — events perceived that cannot be reacted to effectively in the face of parental conditioning. The body, then, is indeed a far more wondrous living mechanism than you realize. It is the body's own precognitions10 that allows the child to develop, to speak and walk and grow." (from "The "Unknown" Reality, Volume One (A Seth Book)" by Jane Roberts, Robert F. Butts)

Kindle edition : https://amzn.eu/71qYOBQ

One of the things I find fascinating about this topic is that Seth brings neurology into the discussion. On a personal note, my parents told me that I suffered from nightmares as an infant and toddler. Now i can see a possible explanation.

Yes, thanks. 'Probabilities' do indeed better go somewhere else. Your quote is interesting, as it shows that there are different kinds of 'thresholds of probabilities'. Actually when I was using this term I was not aware that it had been used by Seth. I had the impression that just everything is probable according to his teachings. The term he uses is 'probable', not possible or parallel. And he does not differentiate between probable and possible. From scanning the hundreds of finds at 'findingseth' he once mentioned that 'decisions' are crucial. Which leads to the next question: what exactly is a decision?

The example with the letter seems to be obvious. But what about more subtle thresholds? From the quote you mentioned it seems plausible to assume that the entire physical universe serves as a threshold to something. This would imply a completely different dimensionality and would bring us back to the entirety of the cans of worms.  Worms per se. But, it would also fall under the term of 'threshold of probability. 'Probable' means that it is likely and more than a mere theoretical possibility. But once a probability has been chosen it becomes 'real' in our understanding. In the sense that something theoretical does actually unfold. Be it in a dream or in Jane Roberts' Elmyra.

From what I understood so far from the Seth material, probabilities are tested in dream time and they may unfold 'in other systems of reality' as well. Thus, they have less in common with aliens and life forms, which we do not yet understand, and more with the way energy is used. Time may be running backwards, or there may be no linear time, or ONLY the entirety of ALL POSSIBLE ramifications of one single decision is experienced. He is actually talking about the 'Lumanians' as well. Had they developed differently our societies would possibly/probably/likely/more or less realistically, etc. know no war.

Seth Speaks, Chapter 15: "Because of the nature of probabilities there is also, of course, a system of reality in which the Lumanians succeeded in their experiment with nonviolence, and in which a completely different type of human being emerged."

As far as I know he was talking of three parallel lives of Robert Butts: the child who died, the pilot who died, and Dr. Pietra. In addition there were minor issues with the car which was dysfunctional but could be repaired in no time because of the good moods of JANE (not Rob), and there was an issue with the back door of a house they were visiting informally, which should have been locked, but was open (TES1 and 2). These cases were presented by Seth in 'probability speak'. And there are nearly 100 pages at the end of UR2 which are predominantly devoted to probability issues in the context of their decision to finally buy a house.

[Tob]

One of the things I find fascinating about this topic is that Seth brings neurology into the discussion.

The synapses are key. They 'decide' which of the probable reality frames are materialized. They know more than the brain (NoPR). They follow sequences, e.g. 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, ..., or 6, 11, 16, 21, 26, etc....These probable universes are created - i.e. materialized - and then they collapse. At the rate of 'Planck time' (Tom Campbell). You need just 24 frames or so to get the impression of continuity. 24 frames per second are shown in a cinema or on tv. According to Seth, the blinking universe 'does exist as often as it doesn't exist'. He did not use the word 'Planck time'. I assume this was not part of Jane Roberts vocabulary. The two sequences above generate two different probable realities in physical terms. This is what Seth meant to explain with the Christmas tree analogy in UR.

[Tob]

One of the things I find fascinating about this topic is that Seth brings neurology into the discussion.

The synapses are key. They 'decide' which of the probable reality frames are materialized. They know more than the brain (NoPR). They follow sequences, e.g. 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, ..., or 6, 11, 16, 21, 26, etc....These probable universes are created - i.e. materialized - and then they collapse. At the rate of 'Planck time' (Tom Campbell). You need just 24 frames or so to get the impression of continuity. 24 frames per second are shown in a cinema or on tv. According to Seth, the blinking universe 'does exist as often as it doesn't exist'. He did not use the word 'Planck time'. I assume this was not part of Jane Roberts vocabulary. The two sequences above generate two different probable realities in physical terms. This is what Seth meant to explain with the Christmas tree analogy in UR.

In the above scenario the letter was sent (5,10,15,20, etc) or not sent (6,11,16,21, etc). A decision was implied. According to Seth you can modify your realities by changing the (vibrations of your) belief systems (NoPR). Thus a change in vibrations would be implied. Some may call it then 'shifting'.

[Sena]

From what I understood so far from the Seth material, probabilities are tested in dream time and they may unfold 'in other systems of reality' as well. Thus, they have less in common with aliens and life forms, which we do not yet understand, and more with the way energy is used. Time may be running backwards, or there may be no linear time, or ONLY the entirety of ALL POSSIBLE ramifications of one single decision is experienced. He is actually talking about the 'Lumanians' as well. Had they developed differently our societies would possibly/probably/likely/more or less realistically, etc. know no war.

Seth Speaks, Chapter 15: "Because of the nature of probabilities there is also, of course, a system of reality in which the Lumanians succeeded in their experiment with nonviolence, and in which a completely different type of human being emerged."

Tob, interesting that you make the connection to the Lumanians, who were neurologically different from humans:

"The Lumanians were a very thin, weakly people, physically speaking, but psychically either brilliant or completely ungifted. In some, you see, the built-in controls caused so many blockages of energy in all directions that even their naturally high telepathic abilities suffered. They formed energy fields around their own civilization. They were, therefore, isolated from contact with other groups. They did not allow technology to destroy them, however. More and more of them realized that the experiment was not a success. Some, after physical death, left to join those from the previous successful civilization, who had migrated to other planetary systems within the physical structure. Large groups, however, simply left their cities, destroyed the force fields that had enclosed them, and joined the many groups of relatively uncivilized peoples, mating with them and bearing children. These Lumanians died quickly, for they could not bear violence nor react to it violently. They felt however, that their mutant children might have a resulting disinclination toward violence, but without the prohibiting nerve-control reactions with which they were endowed. Physically the civilization simply died out." (from "Seth Speaks: The Eternal Validity of the Soul (A Seth Book)" by Jane Roberts)

https://amzn.eu/aBUMOwT

[Tob]

From what I understood so far from the Seth material, probabilities are tested in dream time and they may unfold 'in other systems of reality' as well. Thus, they have less in common with aliens and life forms, which we do not yet understand, and more with the way energy is used. Time may be running backwards, or there may be no linear time, or ONLY the entirety of ALL POSSIBLE ramifications of one single decision is experienced. He is actually talking about the 'Lumanians' as well. Had they developed differently our societies would possibly/probably/likely/more or less realistically, etc. know no war.

Seth Speaks, Chapter 15: "Because of the nature of probabilities there is also, of course, a system of reality in which the Lumanians succeeded in their experiment with nonviolence, and in which a completely different type of human being emerged."

Tob, interesting that you make the connection to the Lumanians, who were neurologically different from humans:

"The Lumanians were a very thin, weakly people, physically speaking, but psychically either brilliant or completely ungifted. In some, you see, the built-in controls caused so many blockages of energy in all directions that even their naturally high telepathic abilities suffered. They formed energy fields around their own civilization. They were, therefore, isolated from contact with other groups. They did not allow technology to destroy them, however. More and more of them realized that the experiment was not a success. Some, after physical death, left to join those from the previous successful civilization, who had migrated to other planetary systems within the physical structure. Large groups, however, simply left their cities, destroyed the force fields that had enclosed them, and joined the many groups of relatively uncivilized peoples, mating with them and bearing children. These Lumanians died quickly, for they could not bear violence nor react to it violently. They felt however, that their mutant children might have a resulting disinclination toward violence, but without the prohibiting nerve-control reactions with which they were endowed. Physically the civilization simply died out." (from "Seth Speaks: The Eternal Validity of the Soul (A Seth Book)" by Jane Roberts)

https://amzn.eu/aBUMOwT

According to Tom Campbell there are three databases:

a) a database with all the virtual reality frames of the 'past'
b) a database with all the virtual reality frames of the 'future'
c) a database with the reality frames we have chosen with our 'I' identity during the current lifetime/timeline, which (we think) we have access to with our memory

Reality is reproduced moment for moment for moment by choosing one of the future reality frames. At the rate of Planck time.

According to Seth we can change the past by changing the memory of our cells, by changing our vibrations by changing our belief systems.

According to Bashar we constantly have a new past as we have been making new connections to the rest of creation at the zero points after the collapsing of the universes. At the rate of Planck time.

According to Jane Roberts there is an infinite number of probabilities. The moment a personality (a physically tuned self) splits, there are two identical 'You's, but they have the same history up until that point. From then on they operate independently. In two different realities.

[Tob]

From what I understood so far from the Seth material, probabilities are tested in dream time and they may unfold 'in other systems of reality' as well. Thus, they have less in common with aliens and life forms, which we do not yet understand, and more with the way energy is used. Time may be running backwards, or there may be no linear time, or ONLY the entirety of ALL POSSIBLE ramifications of one single decision is experienced. He is actually talking about the 'Lumanians' as well. Had they developed differently our societies would possibly/probably/likely/more or less realistically, etc. know no war.

Seth Speaks, Chapter 15: "Because of the nature of probabilities there is also, of course, a system of reality in which the Lumanians succeeded in their experiment with nonviolence, and in which a completely different type of human being emerged."

Tob, interesting that you make the connection to the Lumanians, who were neurologically different from humans:

"The Lumanians were a very thin, weakly people, physically speaking, but psychically either brilliant or completely ungifted. In some, you see, the built-in controls caused so many blockages of energy in all directions that even their naturally high telepathic abilities suffered. They formed energy fields around their own civilization. They were, therefore, isolated from contact with other groups. They did not allow technology to destroy them, however. More and more of them realized that the experiment was not a success. Some, after physical death, left to join those from the previous successful civilization, who had migrated to other planetary systems within the physical structure. Large groups, however, simply left their cities, destroyed the force fields that had enclosed them, and joined the many groups of relatively uncivilized peoples, mating with them and bearing children. These Lumanians died quickly, for they could not bear violence nor react to it violently. They felt however, that their mutant children might have a resulting disinclination toward violence, but without the prohibiting nerve-control reactions with which they were endowed. Physically the civilization simply died out." (from "Seth Speaks: The Eternal Validity of the Soul (A Seth Book)" by Jane Roberts)

https://amzn.eu/aBUMOwT

According to Tom Campbell there are three databases:

a) a database with all the virtual reality frames of the 'past'
b) a database with all the virtual reality frames of the 'future'
c) a database with the reality frames we have chosen with our 'I' identity during the current lifetime/timeline, which (we think) we have access to with our memory

Reality is reproduced moment for moment for moment by choosing one of the future reality frames. At the rate of Planck time.

According to Seth we can change the past by changing the memory of our cells, by changing our vibrations by changing our belief systems.

According to Bashar we constantly have a new past as we have been making new connections to the rest of creation at the zero points after the collapsing of the universes. At the rate of Planck time.

According to Jane Roberts there is an infinite number of probabilities. The moment a personality (a physically tuned self) splits, there are two identical 'You's, but they have the same history up until that point. From then on they operate independently. In two different realities.

Session 680:

"Now: When I speak of probable selves, of course I am not speaking of some symbolic portion of the personality structure, or using the idea of probabilities as an analogy. Consciousness is composed of energy, with everything that implies. The psyche, then, can be thought of as a conglomeration of highly charged "particles" of energy, following rules and properties, many simply unknown to you. On other levels, laws of dynamics apply to the energy sources of the self. Think of a given 'self' as a nucleus of an energy gestalt of consciousness. That nucleus, according to its intensity, will attract to it certain masses of the entire energy patterns available to a given identity. In those terms the identity at birth is composed of a variety of such 'selves,' with their nuclei, and from that bank the physical personality has full freedom to draw.

Ruburt's mystical nature was such a strong portion of the entire identity that in his present reality, and in the probable reality chosen — as mentioned when I discussed this — the mystic impulses and expressions were given play. Intersections with probable realities occur when one psychic grouping intensifies to a certain point, so that fulfillment as a self results. Within the entire identity there may be, for example, several incipient selves, around whose nuclei the physical personality can form. In many instances one main personality is formed, and the incipient selves are drawn into it so that their abilities and interests become subsidiary, or remain largely latent. They are trace selves. On many occasions, however, such latent selves will be as highly energized as the 'main' personality. Since physically a certain personality structure must be maintained, traces are made. Therefore, when such situations arise, one or two of the other energized selves will literally spring apart from the timespace structure that you know. From your viewpoint these offshoots of energy become unreal. They exist as surely as you do, however. In terms of energy, this multiplication of selves is a natural principle.

(To me:) Your "sportsman self" was never endowed with the same kind of force as that of your artistic or writing self. It became subsidiary, yet present to be drawn upon, taking joy through your motion and adding its vitality to your "main" personality. Had it been given extra force through your environment, circumstances, or your own intent, then either your artistic self would have become subservient or complementary; or, if the energy selves were of nearly equal intensity, then one of them would have become an offshoot, propelled by its own need for fulfillment into a probable reality. Do you follow me?
 (...)
Think of Ruburt's living area in Adventures (Fn 5) for example. Imagine that at age 13, three strong energy centers come to the surface of the personality — highly charged, so that one person cannot adequately fulfill the desires or abilities presented. You may have a three-way split at age 13. At [age] 40, each of the three selves may recognize age 13 as a turning point, and wonder what might have happened had they chosen other courses. None of this is predetermined. An offshoot probable self might leave your reality at age 13, say, but could intersect with you again at age 30 for a variety of reasons —where to you, you suddenly change a profession, or become aware of a talent you thought you had forgotten, and find yourself developing it with amazing ease.
(...)
Give us a moment ... I told you (in the last session) that in one probability Ruburt was a nun, expressing mysticism in a highly disciplined context, where it must be watched so that it does not get out of hand. Because there is an unconscious flow of information and experience here, you have one of the reasons for Ruburt's caution in some psychic matters, and his fear of leading people astray. There were three offshoots: one, the nun, with mysticism conventionally expressed, but under guarded circumstances; one, the writer who veiled mystical experience through art; and one, the Ruburt you know, who experienced mystical experience directly, teaches others to do the same, and forms through writing a wedding of the two aspects. You have known two of those selves, then, and you were present at Ruburt's birth with Idea Construction.

Fn 5: "Jane is now working on the final draft of her own theoretical work on psychic matters, Adventures in Consciousness: An Introduction to Aspect Psychology. She started Adventures in July, 1971, and has stayed with it through all of her other writing projects. It's first mentioned (as Adventures in Consciousness) in Chapter 21 of Seth Speaks; see the 587th session. In her glossary for Adventures defines the living area as 'The 'paths' our lives follow from birth to death."
------------------------------------------------------------------------

If I understand the above text sequences correctly, Jane Roberts has become an independent offshoot personality (birth of Ruburt) with the drafting of the final version of her own theoretical work. Furthermore, incipient selves and trace selves have been mentioned. Selves 'multiply' and this is a natural principle.

[Sena]

When I speak of probable selves, of course I am not speaking of some symbolic portion of the personality structure, or using the idea of probabilities as an analogy. Consciousness is composed of energy, with everything that implies. The psyche, then, can be thought of as a conglomeration of highly charged "particles" of energy, following rules and properties, many simply unknown to you. On other levels, laws of dynamics apply to the energy sources of the self. Think of a given 'self' as a nucleus of an energy gestalt of consciousness. That nucleus, according to its intensity, will attract to it certain masses of the entire energy patterns available to a given identity. In those terms the identity at birth is composed of a variety of such 'selves,' with their nuclei, and from that bank the physical personality has full freedom to draw.

Tob, this is very interesting. Seth says "consciousness is composed of energy". Energy is a physical phenomenon, as any physicist will tell you. Therefore consciousness is a physical phenomenon. Seth is a physical entity. Seth is generally invisible, although there is a drawing of Seth made by Rob.

To be precise, consciousness is made of energy, but not made of matter. There are different types of energy - Heat, light, sound, electricity. We cannot see consciousness, so it is probably not made of light. Seth mentioned EE units, which are electrical. Is consciousness an electrical phenomenon?

"In the deepest terms, again, your physical world is beginning at each point at which these units of consciousness assert themselves to form physical reality. Otherwise, life would not be "handed down" through the generations. Each unit of consciousness (or CU) intensifies, magnifies its own intent to be—and, you might say, works up from within itself an explosive spark of primal desire that "explodes" into a process that causes physical materialization. It turns into what I have called [an] EE unit,1 in which case it is embarked upon its own kind of physical experience."
—DEaVF1 Chapter 3: Session 890, December 19, 1979

[Tob]

When I speak of probable selves, of course I am not speaking of some symbolic portion of the personality structure, or using the idea of probabilities as an analogy. Consciousness is composed of energy, with everything that implies. The psyche, then, can be thought of as a conglomeration of highly charged "particles" of energy, following rules and properties, many simply unknown to you. On other levels, laws of dynamics apply to the energy sources of the self. Think of a given 'self' as a nucleus of an energy gestalt of consciousness. That nucleus, according to its intensity, will attract to it certain masses of the entire energy patterns available to a given identity. In those terms the identity at birth is composed of a variety of such 'selves,' with their nuclei, and from that bank the physical personality has full freedom to draw.

Tob, this is very interesting. Seth says "consciousness is composed of energy". Energy is a physical phenomenon, as any physicist will tell you. Therefore consciousness is a physical phenomenon. Seth is a physical entity.

I am not sure. In TES 1 and 2 he is talking about 'vitality' as driving force. Later on it is energy and consciousness and activities. There is a basic consciousness which can be found in particles such as atoms and an aggregated consciousness sophisticated structures are endowed with. Patterns play a central role as well. In addition there seem to be pre-physical realities and post-physical realities (below the threshold of physicalization) and antimatter universes.

As far as I understand the material it is clear that Seth is no physical entity. He was entering our physical reality (realities) through the 'one final last point' where our different angles and perspectives (the individual universes) overlap. The point our mathematicians know about but don't understand (Seth).

For the time being I would say it is the CUs creating EEus, creating subatomic particles, creating atoms and molecules, creating all the rest. The role of patterns and gestalts is not yet clear to me. Furthermore, creation is nested. Brings us to the question what are CUs. According to the quotes on 'findingseth' they are inter alia black and white holes. That may be the functional role they play at the interface between F2 and F1.

I am pretty sure that his cosmology is ultimately based on consciousness. Somehow creating or permeating the CUs and everything else.

[Sena]

As far as I understand the material it is clear that Seth is no physical entity.

Tob, I agree that Seth is not a physical entity as we usually understand the term. He is not composed of matter (protons, neutrons, and electrons). But he IS composed of energy, which is a different kind of physical entity. If he were not composed of energy, he would not have been able to communicate through Jane.

The idea that "God" is non-physical is a lie invented by Christian theology to show that God is COMPLETELY different from human beings. Even in the Old Testament of the Bible, God is physical. He spoke to Moses from the burning bush. All That Is is physical by definition because she includes EVERYTHING.

Christian theology is as follows:

So far we've considered the way God, as non-physical being, is simple.  What he is (God) is indistinguishable from that by which he is (his divine essence).  Presumably other immaterial beings would be simple in precisely this way in virtue of their immateriality.  Consider, for example, the notion of angels.  That there is no matter with which to individuate angelic beings implies that there will not be multiple instantiations of an angelic nature.

https://iep.utm.edu/aq-ph-th/

[Tob]

Session 87: "I would like to give you some more material dealing with mental enclosures. These are in some respects a different sort of camouflage, a self-formed, artificial and only partial enclosure, a beneficial psychic device within which the inner self momentarily and temporarily gathers and holds and collects as much psychic energy about it as it is capable of receiving, utilizing, and also withstanding. The mental enclosure in most cases is self-limiting then, since it represents a setting up of barriers on all sides but one. But it is limiting only for the ultimate purpose of intense concentration of energy, resulting in a burst or expansion of this energy that has been transformed and pressurized, so to speak, into new patterns. The side which is open allows free flow of energy from the inner self, but momentarily the outlet for this energy is blocked up. This holding back, this gathering and collection without instant outlet, is one of the natural and constant processes involved not only in the construction of energy into matter, but in the construction of energy into any other form, and it is closely allied to the pause and pulsation that I have mentioned, as atoms and molecules appear and disappear imperceptibly, even while they seem to give continuity to any particular object. You may consider a mental enclosure in its simplest terms to be somewhat like a cube. The dimensions may vary within, but the furthest side will be represented as open or transparent, the line itself being drawn only for convenience's sake. Into the cube then pours psychic energy. The front or foremost line of the cube, like a gate, can open or close; and it points toward the outer world of physical matter. As energy pours into our cube it is momentarily held within it. Mental enzymes help transform the energy into incipient patterns, from which matter, physical matter, can result.
(...)
Now. Such enclosures are the innermost basis of any consciousness, regardless of the type of consciousness. They could be said to represent the inner psychic form even of the most minute cell. They represent the necessary pause, though this pause understand on the physical plane is imperceivable. Nevertheless, the mental enclosures allow for a psychic duration in which energy, which is forever flooding, may be shaped to some extent and transformed, either into the properties of matter or into other forms. We have to some extent touched upon the various ways by which this process is carried out. The process is carried out so quickly as to seem simultaneous on your plane, but the pause and resulting pulsation is always present. This mental enclosure is arbitrary, necessary again, a device used by the self."

------------------------------------
This seems to be a description of the reality production mechanism at the interface between F2 and F1. Psychic energy of F2 is transformed into patterns by means of mental enzymes. The energy is then shaped into matter or into other forms. Psychic energy of F2 may or may not be different from physical energy in F1. In between are patterns formed at/by the mental enclosures. These patterns may materialize in F1, i.e. they are physicalized. Or they fail to be physicalized if they are not strong enough (pre- and post-physical realities). Antimatter universes play a role as well.
------------------------------------

Session 87: "The dimensions of such mental enclosures are governed by the particular ability of the particular consciousness to receive, withstand and utilize energy. This ability is more or less elastic; that is, the ability can expand, and no rigid rules apply to it in a limiting manner. Within it will be found the capsule comprehension of which we have spoken earlier. This is an attribute of energy itself in its pure form, and even when it is, so to speak, broken down or individualized, the capsule comprehension is in no way either lessened or simplified. This point is extremely important. All consciousnesses, therefore, either of a complicated psychic gestalt such as a man or animal, or of simpler gestalts such as an individual cell or molecule, nevertheless operate in and form about themselves mental or psychic enclosures, within which is naturally contained the capsule comprehension which is an attribute of all energy. And in this mental enclosure, also, the energy which is received is then momentarily held and transformed, either into matter or into other aspects. For the record, you realize that when I speak of consciousnesses I do not refer to that conscious ego, but rather to inner consciousness, that then helps form the material image.
(...)
This capsule comprehension I call capsule comprehension, since innate comprehension of itself and its workings is part of what you may think of as the fiber or makeup of all energy, regardless of any given particular form that it might take, or regardless of the camouflage it might form of itself. The comprehension of itself and its workings, being an attribute and everywhere a part of energy, cannot be therefore pointed at, and is in no way distinguishable from energy itself, being a part and not an addition. It is distributed therefore throughout energy, or within it, in much the same way that creative ability is distributed throughout or within, say, a particular personality. The results of it can be perceived in the actions carried out by a given personality, but as you cannot separate creative ability, or take it out of an individual for examination, so you cannot separate comprehension of itself from energy. Now. This comprehension, latent in all energy, is not broken up and distributed piecemeal within individualized consciousnesses, but completely contained within as if it were condensed; and indeed it is condensed into a capsule form. The comprehension is condensed, but the term capsule is merely one that I have chosen. All units of individual consciousness contain this capsule comprehension, and it represents the most minute unit of consciousness about which a mental enclosure, or self, can be constructed. There is no smaller unit, and cannot be, than this."

-------------------------------------
Mental enclosures contain the capsule comprehension (holographic principle) which is an attribute of all energy. The comprehension of itself is inherent to and not distinguishable from energy itself ('I am-ness', self-awareness, etc.).
-------------------------------------

Session 87: "It is the ability of such a unit of consciousness to utilize or create other forms and dimensions of itself that regulates the dimensions of the mental enclosure and of the effective self. You understand that about this mental or psychic enclosure the other elements of self are constructed, the physical image and its extensions into physical environment. This process, in various fields, continually goes on. The entity, each entity, was formed in this manner, it in turn sending out its creations in terms of other personalities, and these personalities sending forth their own psychic as well as physical constructions. When I spoke of energy being transformed within the mental enclosure, I mentioned that it was transformed into matter, but also into other constructions. Certainly all energy does not go into the construction of physical matter, even on the physical level, as you should know; and I have mentioned in the past that dreams are not sterile, but also construct according to the nature of their own properties."

-------------------------------------------
Entities create personalities sending forth their own psychic and physical constructions. Mental enclosures seem to be functional in the creation of dreams as well.
------------------------------------------

[Sena]

This process, in various fields, continually goes on. The entity, each entity, was formed in this manner, it in turn sending out its creations in terms of other personalities, and these personalities sending forth their own psychic as well as physical constructions. When I spoke of energy being transformed within the mental enclosure, I mentioned that it was transformed into matter, but also into other constructions. Certainly all energy does not go into the construction of physical matter, even on the physical level, as you should know; and I have mentioned in the past that dreams are not sterile, but also construct according to the nature of their own properties

Tob, this is very interesting. In addition to the physical constructions with which we are familiar, there are "psychic constructions".


What is a mental enclosure? Seth uses the analogy of a copper tube:

"The system or the mental enclosure, again, is only closed comparatively speaking. An endeavor is made to close one opening from one plane, and keep the alternate or inner communication channel open. As an analogy here, the conscious ego could be said to exist within this copper tube, located at approximately its center. (Jane had picked up a roll of copper tubing that we had not used on the table. Now she touched the left end of the tube as she held it before me.) This end would then represent the extension of the self outward toward the physical universe. This extension, as I have mentioned, is theoretically endless. The world of inner reality would then be imagined as existing at the other end of this tube. And in the same manner that one end of the tube would represent the extension of the self into the world of physical reality, then so too would the other end of this tube represent the extension of the self into the inner world of reality." (from "The Early Sessions: Book 3 of The Seth Material" by Jane Roberts, Robert Butts)

https://amzn.eu/ip0FQiq

[Tob]

This process, in various fields, continually goes on. The entity, each entity, was formed in this manner, it in turn sending out its creations in terms of other personalities, and these personalities sending forth their own psychic as well as physical constructions. When I spoke of energy being transformed within the mental enclosure, I mentioned that it was transformed into matter, but also into other constructions. Certainly all energy does not go into the construction of physical matter, even on the physical level, as you should know; and I have mentioned in the past that dreams are not sterile, but also construct according to the nature of their own properties

Tob, this is very interesting. In addition to the physical constructions with which we are familiar, there are "psychic constructions".


What is a mental enclosure? Seth uses the analogy of a copper tube:

"The system or the mental enclosure, again, is only closed comparatively speaking. An endeavor is made to close one opening from one plane, and keep the alternate or inner communication channel open. As an analogy here, the conscious ego could be said to exist within this copper tube, located at approximately its center. (Jane had picked up a roll of copper tubing that we had not used on the table. Now she touched the left end of the tube as she held it before me.) This end would then represent the extension of the self outward toward the physical universe. This extension, as I have mentioned, is theoretically endless. The world of inner reality would then be imagined as existing at the other end of this tube. And in the same manner that one end of the tube would represent the extension of the self into the world of physical reality, then so too would the other end of this tube represent the extension of the self into the inner world of reality." (from "The Early Sessions: Book 3 of The Seth Material" by Jane Roberts, Robert Butts)

https://amzn.eu/ip0FQiq

Yes. According to Seth, 'ideas' are real. They are more real than camouflage personalities in F1. Brings us back to Plato.

There are 'psychic constructions'. In addition to that there are physical constructions. Not the other way around. F1 is created from F2.

Session 560: "Now your own physical image is the materialization of your idea of yourself within the properties of matter. Without the idea of yourself, your physical image would not be; yet often it is all you are aware of. The initial power and energy of that idea of yourself keeps your image alive. Ideas, then, are far more important than you realize. If you will try to accept the idea that your own existence is multidimensional, that you dwell within the medium of infinite probabilities, then you may catch a slight glimpse of the reality that is behind the word "god," and you may understand why it is almost impossible to capture a true understanding of that concept in words."

[Tob]

"When we are working on such a project here (in your reality), we are working on probable books also, and those are as real as your official one. In ways too difficult to explain now, your probabilities are connected by certain themes, intents, purposes. Some of these appear as subsidiary interests in your own lives, for example. [...] So we have been working on a probable "Unknown" Reality — in fact, on many probable "Unknown" Realities. Not mere versions, but variations.

3. Following Seth's material in these paragraphs, then, there are of course a number of other Janes and Robs busily living out their lives in a cluster of associated probable realities — and all of those Janes and Robs are just as real to Seth as we are. [...]

Now: An artist does the same thing in different terms, when he or she imagines the probable versions that a painting, or a book or a sculpture, for example, might take. (Pause.) The artist does not usually understand, however, that those probable art productions do literally exist; he perceives only the final, physically chosen work. Speaking simply, some of us are able to hold intact the nature of our own identities while following patterns of probable realities in which we also play a part."
—UR2 Section 6: Session 744 April 23, 1975

[Tob]

"When we are working on such a project here (in your reality), we are working on probable books also, and those are as real as your official one. In ways too difficult to explain now, your probabilities are connected by certain themes, intents, purposes. Some of these appear as subsidiary interests in your own lives, for example. [...] So we have been working on a probable "Unknown" Reality — in fact, on many probable "Unknown" Realities. Not mere versions, but variations.

3. Following Seth's material in these paragraphs, then, there are of course a number of other Janes and Robs busily living out their lives in a cluster of associated probable realities — and all of those Janes and Robs are just as real to Seth as we are. [...]

Now: An artist does the same thing in different terms, when he or she imagines the probable versions that a painting, or a book or a sculpture, for example, might take. (Pause.) The artist does not usually understand, however, that those probable art productions do literally exist; he perceives only the final, physically chosen work. Speaking simply, some of us are able to hold intact the nature of our own identities while following patterns of probable realities in which we also play a part."
—UR2 Section 6: Session 744 April 23, 1975

Session 822:

"The individuals who have to one extent or another perceived Framework 2 have, then, described it according to their own brief visits, taking it for granted "that the part was a representative sample of the whole." Plato conceived [of] it as the world of ideals, seeing within it the perfect model behind each imperfect physical phenomenon. He thought of that realm as eternal and unchanging, a perfect but frozen composite that must indeed inspire men toward achievement on the one hand, and on the other reproach them for their failure, since their achievements must necessarily seem puny in contrast. Plato then saw Framework 2 as a splendid, absolute model in which all the works of man had their initial source.
 
Man himself, according to this concept, could not affect that ideal world one whit. He could, however, use it as a source of inspiration. Some ancient religions put the existence of gods there, and saw the spirits of each living thing as existing primarily in that invisible medium of reality. Therefore, Framework 2 has always been represented in one way or another as a source of your world. Christianity saw it as heaven, inhabited by God the Father, His angels, the saints, and [the] deceased faithful. Once scientists theorized the ether as the medium in which the physical universe existed. Framework 2 is the psychological medium in which the consciousness of the world exists.

The word "ego" is much bandied about, and in many circles it has a poor reputation. It is, however, as I use it, a term meant to express the ordinarily conscious directive portion of the self. It is your conscious version of what you are — an excellent description, if I do say so myself (with amusement). It is directed outward into the physical world. It is also aware, however, of some of your "unconscious" activities. It is the you you identify with, so it is as aware of your dreams, for example, as you are, and it is quite conscious of the fact that its existence rests upon knowledge that it does not itself possess.
 
As you have an ego, fully conscious, directed toward the physical world, you also have what I call an inner ego, directed toward inner reality. You have, in other words, a portion of yourself that is fully conscious in Framework 2. The ego in your ordinary world, which again we will call Framework 1, is uniquely equipped to deal with that environment. It manipulates with rules of cause and effect and consecutive moments. It deals with an objectified reality. It can stretch its capacities, becoming far more aware of inner events than it is normally allowed to do, but its main purpose is to deal with the world of effects, to encounter events.

The inner ego is fully conscious. It is a portion of you, however, that deals with the formation of events, that glories in a rather rambunctious and creative activity that your specifications of time and place physically preclude. The unconscious, so-called, is — and I have said this before — quite conscious, but in another realm of activity.

There must be a psychological chamber between these two portions of the self, however — these seemingly undifferentiated areas, in which back-and-forth translations can occur. Dream periods provide that service, of course, so that in dreams the two egos can meet and merge to some extent, comparing notes like strangers who perhaps meet on a train at night, and are amazed to discover, after some conversation, that they are indeed close relatives, each embarked upon the same journey though seemingly they travelled alone. In those terms the undifferentiated area is actually filled with motion as psychological transitions and translations are made, until in dreams the two egos often merge into each other — so that sometimes you waken briefly with a sense of elation, or a feeling that in dreams you have met an old and valued friend."


Session 823:

"[Each of] you, with your beliefs and intents, tell the inner ego which of an infinite number of probable events you want to encounter. In the dream state events from both frameworks are processed. The dream state involves not only a state of consciousness that exists between the two frameworks of reality, but also involves, in those terms, a connecting reality of its own. Here I would like to emphasize that to one degree or another all species of plant and animal life "dream." The same applies to the "psychological activity" of atoms and molecules, and any 'particle'. Period."


Session 97:

"The dream world is indeed a natural by-product of the relationship of the inner self and the physical being. Not a reflection, therefore, but a by-product involving not only a chemical reaction but the transformation of energy from one state to another. In some respects all planes or fields of existence are indeed by products of others. For example, without the peculiar spark set off through the interrelationship existing between the inner self and the physical being, the dream world would not exist.
 
But conversely, the dream world is a necessity for the continued existence of the physical individual. This point is extremely important. As you know, animals dream. What you do not know is that all consciousnesses dream. We have said that to some degree even atoms and molecules have consciousness, and this minute consciousness nevertheless forms its own dreams, even as on the other hand it forms its own physical image. Now, as in the physical field atoms combine for their own benefit and individually into more complicated structure gestalts, so do they also combine to form such gestalts, though of a somewhat different nature, in the dream world. I have said that the dream world has its own sort of form and permanence. It is physically oriented, though not to the degree inherent in your ordinary universe. In the same manner that the physical image is built up of an individual, so is the dream image."


Session 93:

"You must again realize that we speak of the self as being so divided only for simplicity's sake. While the self is whole, it is however compartmentalized for efficiency's sake, but beneath consciousness the doors are open. Again, the conscious self is most necessary. However it cannot be stressed too strongly that consciousness is merely a state of focus, and not a self. Consciousness is the direction in which the self looks at any given time.(...)

That is perhaps the most important sentence of this session, and many others. For the direction or the focus of the self does indeed change, and even in your own daily lives you experience the fact that what is conscious today may not be tomorrow. The self, in this manner, looks about. The direction in which the self looks is not the self. In dreams the self looks elsewhere, and the "I" is a conscious "I", and the working ability is tremendous.(...)

Man is much more than the conscious self, and what he calls the conscious self is merely the whole self as seen through the direction in which the whole self chooses to direct its energies and focus. A man stands in the center of a room. When he looks to the right you say "This is my conscious self." When he looks to the left, we have something else again. You say "This is the dreaming self." The dreaming self, or if you will, the left-handed self, indeed is as important as the so called conscious self. The whole self merely changes direction and viewpoint, and focuses its energies along a particular line."(...)

The conscious mind perceives matter. Yet even then it does not perceive matter directly, but by a very indirect path, and only because the whole self directs a certain portion of its energies in that direction. The conscious self does not perceive, or the so-called conscious self does not perceive, the equally valid dream constructions. You will discover that the whole self is composed of many so-called conscious selves. But neither of those conscious selves are aware of the existence of the others. The dreaming self, dear friends, is not aware of the conscious self. The whole self, the entire inner self alone, holds knowledge of the direction in which it moves. The directions can be likened to conscious selves."(...)

"The inner self constantly changes its focus. I have said that consciousness is merely the direction in which the inner self focuses at any particular time."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


From the above I understand that there are (three) different kinds of selves/ego consciousness-es. The inner self, the outer ego, and the dream self which is somewhere 'in between'. Consciousness is similar to a torch, illuminating different objects in the dark. But consciousness is not the self. Consciousness is merely the direction in which the self focuses at any particular time, i.e.: the inner self 'carrying the torch'. From the description above I also have the impression that the dream reality is somehow positioned between F2 and F1, as shown in the lower diagram (link).

https://www.gestaltreality.com/2013/05/22/the-multidimensional-self/

[Tob]

There are (three) different kinds of selves/ego consciousness-es. The inner self, the outer ego, and the dream self'. Consciousness is similar to a torch, illuminating different objects in the dark. But consciousness is not the self. Consciousness is merely the direction in which the self focuses at any particular time, i.e.: the inner self 'carrying the torch'. I also have the impression that the dream reality is somehow positioned between F2 and F1, as shown in the lower diagram (link).

https://www.gestaltreality.com/2013/05/22/the-multidimensional-self/


Session 202:

"The inner ego is then the "I" of the astral body. The inner ego is then this inner identity. It is closely allied with the entity, and connects a reality that is purely psychic, the reality of the entity, with a reality that is mainly physical, the reality of the physical self."