I channeled this piece from hyperspace after a journey a few months ago:

Assumption 1: Anything that can be imagined exists somewhere in the infinite (or near infinite) universes of the multiverse. (If there are an infinite number of universes, it is guaranteed that all possible places and beings of archetypal imagery (or any imagery, art, film, theater, etc.) exist in at least one of the infinite universes.)

Assumption 2: Higher dimensional information can be encoded into a lower dimensional substrate. (Holographic plates are an example of this principle at work, with 3d spatial information encoded into a 2d plate surface.)

Assumption 3: The brain can be such a substrate, and can assemble higher dimensional perceptions from lower dimensional perceptions. (Research on the structure of the brain suggests that information is stored in a manner similar to how a holographic plate stores information. Other research suggests that the brain assembles the 3rd dimension of vision from information that is sent from the 2d surface of the retina.)

Myth as archetypal maps for subjective understanding of one’s own neural connections (experienced as the landscape of mind).
The human brain is hard-wired to work with myth – archetypal maps by which the internal landscape of mind can be navigated. When a psychonaut, shaman, bard, or other explorer of the inner world begins to work with myth, the archetypal characters and places are crude and undeveloped – not much can be understood or predicted using such simplistic mappings. As the explorer begins to create more elaborate details, interconnecting different elements of their mythos, their brain correspondingly becomes more interconnected. Myth becomes the language by which the internal world of the subconscious can engage in dialogue with the conscious mind, with archetypal imagery as the words, and events occurring within the mythos as the syntactical/grammatical contextualization. Archetypal characters and places become the means by which the explorer identifies and maps neural circuits of different parts of the brain, while events in the mythos symbolize the interconnections between the corresponding neural circuits that are represented by the characters and places. As the mythos develops, the overall story is the aggregate of all neural circuits and connections that have so far been mapped.

Archetypal/mythos mapping as encoding of higher dimensional geometries into the 3d neural substrate.
Holographic plates store information in such a way that the information of the whole plate is equally represented in each part, the entire image is stored in every point on the plate and arises through the interactions of the points, not through the points themselves. That is to say, if you cut a holographic plate in half, each half can still construct the entire image intact, though with less detail. The brain exhibits a similar property in that if large sections of the brain are destroyed, or become disconnected from each other, memories can still be retrieved, though with less detail. It could be said that a 4d spacetime image of events are stored into a 3d neural substrate; in other words, memory is a 4d hologram on a 3d substrate. As in a hologram where each point of the holographic plate is connected to every other point, it is as if each neuron has an “address book” for each other neuron that was activated during a particular experience. The memory is retrieved as the activation of a neuron’s “address book” for that particular experience. Thus, encoding of higher dimensions into a lower dimensional substrate is a function of interconnectedness of points on the substrate.

As the mythos develops, the brain becomes increasingly interconnected and the chasm between conscious and unconscious mind is bridged. Neurally speaking, archetypal imagery are “address books” of neurons, and are 4d informational encodings onto the 3d neural substrate. Extrapolating from what is known about holograms, it could be understood that higher dimensional information is encoded into a lower dimensional substrate by the interconnection of all points on the lower dimensional substrate to each other. Just as an archetypal image itself is an “address book“ of the different neurons involved in encoding the image, so would events in a mythos be an “address book” of the archetypal “address books”. In other words, the individual events in the explorer’s subjective mythos are the extension of neural holography into the next higher dimension, 5d. The overall story arc of individual events in the mythos would correspond to a 6d “address book” of 5d encoded information, and so on.

Inner mapping becomes outer mapping.
As the higher dimensional interconnections of the holographic neural network increase in density and number, consciousness can begin to create higher dimensional schema for modeling reality. As the schema develop, consciousness is able to see the world from a higher dimensional perspective, allowing for exploring other universes in the multiverse or even gaining information from the 3/4d universe in which an explorer’s body resides that would normally be inaccessible (for example, a person in 2d flatland would be amazed by how a 3d person standing above him could tell him what is outside the walls of the 2d flatlander’s rooms). Thus, when a shaman consults the “spirits” (archetypal images) for information about where a lost item is, divining the future, or some other prophetic act, the shaman is utilizing higher dimensional interconnections and schema about the world to gain information from the 3/4d world.

In some sense, the shaman mentioned above is simultaneously projecting his/her consciousness to the universe in which that spirit resides. By the assumptions listed above, anything that can be imagined exists in a universe somewhere in the multiverse. Thus art, theatre, film, etc. all can be conceived of as higher dimensional perceptions of other universes in the multiverse, with the information brought back to this universe. So, I propose that stories such as “Star Wars” actually did exist a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away (in another universe). But the difference between George Lucas and the above mentioned shaman is that the shaman has a two-way dialogue with those other universes, and can request information from other hyperspatial, higher dimensional beings that is directly relevant to this universe.

Bringing it back full circle, images are not inherently real on their own, with respect to the explorer developing an archetypal mythos. When an explorer -begins- to develop their mythos, they are imagining things. But as the imaginings become more elaborate and interconnected, they begin to touch something real, as the explorer truly does peer with his/her own consciousness into other universes.

Spiral Eye’s channel explained archetype. My research into archetype confirms that common sense, conscious mind, and language, are inadequate to describing archetype, thus I used graphics, tables, lists and hundreds of examples in art, built sites, alphabets, icons, the Periodic table, and other natural and cultural re-expressions to demonstrate the underlying regularity in apparent diversity. Archetype is the underlying potential that guides all expressions in nature and culture, and has five layers, including clusters of optional features, in a fixed sequence and spatial projection (which is scrambled in myth and experience), and perpetually arises in the energy-matter flux and via inspiration. Archetype is not learned or taught, and never changed. From my research, I could clarify some of your inspired text that I quote below. Followed by my comments:
Spiral Eye “The brain… can assemble higher dimensional perceptions from lower dimensional perceptions.”
But perception mirrors archetype. Meaning itself is archetypal.
Spiral Eye; “The brain… stores information similar to a holographic plate.”
Local variations of archetypal meaning are projected onto abstract surfaces. I have extended the study of the two hippocampi in the temporal (side) lobes of the brain. Hunters and aboriginal song-line poets allocate certain symbolic features to areas. Camps, campuses, towns and cities are ‘canvases’ of archetype. Birds, dogs and goats add sounds and smells to the visual landmarks and directions that we rely on. The small ‘horn’ at the back of the right hippocampus uses more energy at intersections with many options, and less at T-junctions. It tracks position. The prefrontal cortex, behind the forehead, co-ordinates direction and maps out optional routes in advance. John O´Keefe of University College London, and the Moser team, jointly won the 2014 Nobel Prize in Physiology for discovering place cells in the ento-rhinal cortex that activate at known locations, and grid cells in the hippocampus. They form a coordinate system, or personal cosmology.
Neurotrophic molecules bring oxygen and omega-3 fatty acids from nuts, olive oil and fish. They make 700 new brain cells daily. These neurons remain small and immature, unless experience or exercise over months ‘roots’ them down. Anxiety and lethargy shrink the hippocampi. See more on this in Stoneprint Journal 4: The stoneprint tour of London, available on Lulu here:
http://www.lulu.com/shop...ck/product-23561091.html


[]The right hippocampus (foreground) receives innate, internal and sensory impulses at the rear (left), via ‘place’ cells in the etno-rhinal corex, and via fornix (‘wishbone’ loops), cingulate cortex (thick loops), and septum (thin loops). They function subconsciously.

[]Tentative model of hippocampi grid cell direction co-ordination, using axial opposites in flattened projection (after Furter 201. ‘Grid’ cells in both hippocampi (seen from above) re-integrate associations with position and direction; and replay it via digital extensions at the front to the pre-frontal cortex during rest or sleep. Some replays become conscious and subconscious memory.

There is a rigorous, universal structure in artworks, building sites, alphabets, other cultural sets, and in hyperspace. The “items of distinction” is the lexicon, and their spacing is the ‘grammar’ of the unspoken, economically negotiated canvas of society. Hyperspace is also a canvas for archetype. The invisible structure is the fingerprint of nature and culture in collusion.
Roger Bacon wrote of science (New Instrument, 1620): ‘It is new, but copied from a very ancient pattern; the world itself, the nature of things and of the mind.” He aimed at ‘compilation and completion of a natural and experimental history, for raising the superstructure of philosophy. The fabric of the universe is like a labyrinth… necessary for better use of human understanding.” Bacon would have been ready to take a hyperspace tour.
Spiral Eye: “Or the brain assembles the 3rd dimension of vision from information that is sent from the 2d surface of the retina.”
But nature, and sensory organs, and perception, and meaning itself is already archetypal.

Spiral Eye: “Myth [are] archetypal maps for subjective understanding of one’s own neural connections.”
Yes, and the other way around.
Spiral Eye: “When a psychonaut, shaman, bard, or other explorer of the inner world begins to work with myth, the archetypal characters and places are crude and undeveloped – not much can be understood or predicted using such simplistic mappings. As the explorer begins to create more elaborate details, interconnecting different elements of their mythos, their brain correspondingly becomes more interconnected. Myth becomes the language by which the internal world of the subconscious can engage in dialogue with the conscious mind, with archetypal imagery as the words, and events occurring within the mythos as the syntactical/grammatical contextualization.”
Yes, the collective and ‘individual’ subconscious already knows innate structure. We may allow consciousness levels to integrate, and mature, and thus to individuate, as Jung explained.
Spiral Eye: “As the mythos develops, the overall story is the aggregate of all neural circuits and connections that have so far been mapped.”
With the warning that archetype and mythos is complete ‘before’ energy-matter interaction and time. Only individual conscious access to mythos matures. Culture adds nothing to nature, it only participates to some extent. As your channel indicates, “consciousness can begin to create higher dimensional schema for modelling reality. As the schema develops, consciousness is able to see the world from a higher dimensional perspective, allowing for exploring… that would normally be inaccessible. I have developed ‘flatland’ maps to improve access.
Your channelled text is delightful clarification of how outer and inner experience, perception, and meaning, reveal aspects of archetype.
I have offered to post some demonstrations of how artists, including some artworks in the Nexus gallery, express archetypal structure.