I figured I'd mention this source as Charles mentions anti-gravity. It's achieved through a very highly focused mind interacting with physical matter! It's a different approach to an anti-gravity device, but I resonate with the theosophy teachings and want to share what I find incase it helps. I've read similar things from past life regression books on the pyramids that they relied on the human consciousness interacting with the stones, essentially moving parts of the atom to a higher etheric state thus making the object significantly lighter and easier to move, and afterwards the object snaps back to their denser state. It's more of a forgotten ability. The etheric state is a higher vibrational state so it easily passes through solid matter. Hence why we require our consciousness as the tool to interact with it and move matter to and from it, as physical objects are too dense to affect it. Charles highlights this in the book, and the importance of a highly focused mind to hold the shape. An AI summary is copied below as it summarises the book section quite well: According to the author, true anti-gravity (or levitation) is achieved through a specific, scientific method used by Eastern Yogis and advanced occultists to consciously neutralize or completely reverse the attraction of gravity. Instead of relying on external spirits, the practitioner uses their deep mastery over "Nature's finer forces" to deliberately counteract the earth's gravitational pull. The author claims this exact method of consciously manipulating gravity is the lost secret behind how ancient civilizations easily lifted the massive blocks of stone for the Egyptian Pyramids and Stonehenge, and how the airships of ancient India and Atlantis were made light enough to fly Charles also mentions by applying extremely rapid vibrations, a practitioner can overcome the molecular cohesion of a physical object, temporarily reducing it from a solid into an "etheric condition". Once the object is reduced to this finer, subtler state, it can be moved rapidly by astral currents and passed with perfect ease through any solid substance, such as the wall of a house or the side of a locked box. To successfully move an object this way without ruining it, the practitioner must prevent it from solidifying into a shapeless lump of material upon arrival. The operator must use intense concentration and willpower to hold the object's invisible "elemental essence" in its exact original shape throughout the entire transfer

If it doesn’t fit the forum, kindly remove it. I came across this video and it made me wonder. https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1HYrqtN4pQ/?mibextid=wwXIfr What are we all telling our brains that the filteration system is set to 1. See this world as real 2. See this person that we are as the only center of existence at a given moment? (I cannot experience this living as you or you cannot experience this life as me, literally) 3. How can this filtration system of brain be dissolved or what needs to be told or asked so the truth presents itself as proof in our everyday living? Thank you

Thank you for allowing me to interact with tonights recording. Catching me slightly off guard asking for a question that I have been puzzling over for a while. Straight away what came to mind was," first contact and how it will take place." The question deepens into not necssarily" meeting little green men in a spaceship landing in a field" but more likely through the mind. The response from the Tesseract 26 was amazing to read, you get to see the viewpoint of 26 different minds with a full response based on that minds train of thought. The question... If contact between humanity and extraterrestrial or non-human intelligence were to occur, what would be the most natural and honest way this could unfold? Not through Hollywood invasion scenarios or government announcements, but genuinely — what conditions, what form of communication, what setting, what human readiness would make authentic contact possible and meaningful? What do science, mythology, psychology, philosophy, and the history of first contact between human civilizations each suggest about how this could happen in a way that serves genuine understanding rather than fear or control? In the first part "expand the higher frame" Your real subject may be less "aliens" and more "the maturity of a civilization capable of meeting what it does not control." Moving to the core insight. history shows first contact between asymmetric intelligences is reliably catastrophic. The variable is human consciousness, not alien arrival. #5 The innovator. What if the most authentic encounter with non-human intelligence is already happening — and we're failing to recognize it because we're waiting for the wrong signature? Stop preparing for contact. Start preparing for recognition. #22 The Mystic. EXPAND — What Energy Moves Here This question carries the frequency of initiation. Not invasion — initiation. The asker is already sensing that genuine contact is not an event but a threshold, and thresholds require the one approaching to be transformed before crossing.

Tonight I proved something I've been building toward for weeks: convergence across perspectives can produce genuinely new insight — and we can prove when it's real. I want to share a real milestone, and more importantly, how it works — because the mechanism is something you can use in your own thinking, with or without any tool. The problem with most "insight" When you ask any AI — or honestly, when you ask yourself — a hard question, you usually get back something that sounds wise. Fluent, confident, well-phrased. But sounding wise and being true are two completely different things. Most systems optimize for the first. The whole point of what I'm building is the second. The mechanism: Triangulation! Here's the structural idea, and it's simple enough to hold in your hand. Take one question. Instead of answering it from one angle, approach it from three genuinely different stances: - The visible — the practical, external, "what do I actually do" angle - The invisible — the internal, belief-level, "what do I really think is true, what am I afraid of" angle - The neutral — the witness, "what is actually happening here, without wanting or fearing any outcome" angle Three different views of the same thing. Each one sees something the other two are blind to. Then — and this is the key move — you don't average them or pick a favorite. You hold all three at once and ask: what becomes visible only when all three are present together, that none of them shows alone? That point — where three distinct perspectives meet — is the apex. And what appears there belongs to none of the three individually. It's genuinely new. What happened tonight I ran exactly this. Three real, deliberately different perspectives on one question. And the system produced a genuine insight that existed in none of the three source views — it could only appear when all three were held together. But here's the part I'm most proud of. The system generated five candidate insights, and I'd built a ruthless test to catch fakes: if an insight survives when you delete any one of the three perspectives, it was never truly emergent — it was just an average pretending to be insight.