Also, I think somewhere some time back everyone got used to the idea of time as the fourth dimension. I don't see a need for this distinction, and it really doesn't make too much sense to me. From my journeys in hyperspace, it seems quite clear that we can add extra spatial dimensions without the need of talking about time as the fourth dimension.

It makes more sense to me that we probably have a certain set of spatial dimensions along with a (possibly smaller set) of temporal dimensions. So let's start at the bottom up, and see how far we get. In geometry we have a zero dimensional point. It is really more theoretical than anything. If we think about a zero dimensional point in time that would be a moment...you know that one that just went by....and here comes another...did you see it? Of course it's easy to see how that's just as theoretical and conceptual as the zero dimensional point in space.

So moving on, we have a one dimensional line in geometry so our corresponding temporal dimension would be a linear one dimensional line in time. This seems to be the way that we tend to experience time (or at least the way we tend to think about the way that we experience time regardless if it's true or not). In two dimensional time (which by my guess would be closer to the way we probably experience time on a day to day basis) time is still somewhat linear, but it's got more flexing room for distortion. I view this as somewhat akin to time flying when you're having fun seeming unusually slow at the dentist's office, but things don't get too wacky in this temporal dimension.

Three dimensional time is something I feel I've experienced on DMT. Can I be sure? Of course not. I can't be sure of anything I've just said, but during some of my godhead experiences, as I approach the godhead, the "particles of time" quite literally seem to dilate into spheroids. I want to stress it's not something that I see visually, but it is perceived in some fashion though I can't really describe it. Time expands and expands and expands until it comes to a grinding halt. This reminds me of the "highest" theoretical spatial dimension which might assume that it encapsulates all of the other spatial dimensions to come before it, and is therefore the 1 sum of the whole. This is how time comes across in the presence of the godhead to me which seems interestingly fitting anyway now that I think about it. Now I don't know if that particular dimension is the fourth temporal dimension or higher, but I see it as a better way to address time than to have a bunch of spatial dimensions and then the fourth one is time and then we're on to whatever. It just seems so inconsistent.

but during some of my godhead experiences, as I approach the godhead, the "particles of time" quite literally seem to dilate into spheroids.

Take the E8 for example. It has 8 spatial dimensions (projected from a 2 dimensional plane) that is congruent with the kinds of geometry and the aesthetics of flow and motion as I observe them in hyperspace. The eighth dimension in Bryanton's model does not address this kind of geometry.

We currently have a thread going on here about "lessons from DMT" where the general consensus has been 'they don't teach you anything, you teach yourself' which in the following case, I only find to be half true at best. Early on in my journeys, I wound up in a multidimensional classroom where I was being given a thorough lesson with demonstration, narration and explanation of how exactly it is they do their multidimensional thang. They were showing me how they pull things through a "behind-the-scenes" plane as they move other parts of the hologram/object/entity/whatever into the visible foreground. They demonstrated how this is somehow achieved with 90 degree angles. I've also noticed since then that sometimes (and I notice this best with open eyed holograms) when they start becoming more and more multidimensional, they are stacking iterations of themselves at 90 degree angles to each other, so from your stable perspective, a bunch of adjacent 2D planes can appear multidimensional. I've noticed since then that this is how the holograms appear when etched into glass in some glass objects I have laying around my house.

The point of this is that the lesson was since verified for me when I found out that the way that the computer renderings or even hand-drawn representations of the higher dimensions are accomplished by replicating planes at 90 degree angles to each other. I think there is a very clear and well-defined Euclidean-esque geometric principles that can account for however many dimensions you need.

Well, purely Euclidean spatial dimensions would not account for the kind of alternate universe, parallel reality, timeline transcending, multiverse accessing experiences I and others here have. Hyperspace is more than just nifty multi-spatial-dimension holographics for me. Bryanton and M-Theory come closer IMHO.

The eighth dimension in Bryanton's model does not address this kind of geometry.

If Bryanton's theory does come closer, it doesn't take into account the extra spatial dimensions, and that would at the very least skew the notion of 10 dimensions, as you'd have to add at least a couple extra spatial dimensions before you got up to what he refers to as the "fourth dimension".

All I can say is that I have learned more from entities than I have learned in all my many years in school... hands down. Not even close really.

Regarding your critique on Bryanton's model not adressing extra spatial dimensions, I would want to add that there is no need to see a contradiction between temporal and spatial dimensions, which seems to be the core of your critique.

To explain that in short, with a 'classic' example: imagine a 3d circle being intersected by a 2d plane. In the 2d plane you would see a spot appearing out of nowhere, growing into a circle, reducing again into a spot and disappearing. Now imagine a 4d circle intersecting 3d space. You would see a sphere appearing out of nowhere, growing and shrinking and disappear again. You could argue that it is a temporal process, in which the circle grows and shrinks. The same event could be described as a static object (the static 4d circle) where the dynamic process in time is nothing more as an illusion because of the 3d intersection. Time and space are interchangeable perspectives...

If Bryanton's theory does come closer, it doesn't take into account the extra spatial dimensions, and that would at the very least skew the notion of 10 dimensions, as you'd have to add at least a couple extra spatial dimensions before you got up to what he refers to as the "fourth dimension"

I'm just not fond of them being part of a continuum as if one must logically follow from the other.

Time and Space being mutual exchangeable is kind of the consensus in physics.

Stacking iterations at 90 degree angles is nice for building complex geometry, but i must admit that i find lets say a 4d hypercube quite challenging to wrap my mind around all different ways to project it in 3d... And space and time being mutual exchangeable might be even more a mind-boggler, but your explanation of stacking in 90 degrees is kind of the standard on which the mutual exchangeable time&space dimensions are usually build, so I think I don't quite get you...