I believe I may be sorting values incorrectly here, and would value some feedback.

My understanding of Tangible is something I can physically feel.
Often seeming to be higher-level desciptors of dimensions.
Example:
object
lifeform
crooked
entangled

My understanding of Intangible is something i cannot physically touch.
Often seeming to be higher-level desciptors of emotions or concepts.
Also occasionally more concise descriptors from metaphoric concepts that arise in perception.
Example:
Romance
artificial
natural


Have I gone astray? Is my understanding incorrect?

Where would a word like "submerged" appear ?
Its not a dimension persay, it doesnt a appear to be a tangible reference (you cannot touch the aspect of submersion), but its a concept that seems to have more sustenance than an intangible.


help please. thank you!

an additional 5 possible example keywords for T, I, would be very helpful too.
the more uncommon these examples would be, the better, to help illustrate how an uncommon perceived term might be better placed in the S4.

--Angel

"Crooked," and, "entangled," are not tangibles.

One would not say, "Hey, please hand me a 'crooked' ... and while you're at it, move that 'entangled' out of the way."

"Submerged," is not a dimension descriptor. "Under," would be the correct dimension descriptor to be used. "Submerged," has the inherent implication of something/someone being under something else (usually water). However, "submerged," could be an, "I," or an, "AOL/S," depending on the structure and build of your S4. Bear in mind that if, "submerged," is listed in the, "I," column, there had better be supporting data indicating that you are dealing with something/someone that is submergible, and is indeed under something else. Otherwise, it's AOL/S (or AOL).

.

Train back on tracks. Thanks!

--Angel

.

In my remote viewing practice, the intangible column is more often left blank. This is because even though I understand the meaning of the word, my mind somehow can still not seem to cough up with these elusive intangibles. Maybe someone has an idea for a slightly different understanding or a list of examples I could study.

But you are getting tangibles though, right ?

After you get a tangible - are you asking follow-up questions that would lead to a descriptive intangible ?

Say there is supporting S/D data leading to a T of manmade building/structure.

Are you pulling in the fishnet containing the intangible data up by asking "what is the structure used for?" Which would then lead to possiblities of "worship", or "storage", or "entertainment" or "work" ?

or are you waiting for the bagload of fish to jump up into the boat on it's own ? just waiting there 3.25 seconds and then moving onto another column? (it helps to ask - but sometimes it doesn't come easily and you've got to really do the fishing)

Or perhaps you are already doing this (asking follow-up questions) and there are other possibilities at work here. In which case, others are probably better suited to answer your question.

But those were my initial thoughts...

A word that came to mind the other day when my pen was in the IT column was "because." Another time (same session, different aspect) the word "thorough" came in while the pen was in the IT column. Anyone have any thoughts on these two words as ITs?

"I" column -- not "IT"

That's funny. I just went back to see when I started writing IT at the top of my intangibles column. I've been doing IT since May 21 at the Beginning RV Workshop. All this time I was convinced that the original templates used IT at the top of that column, and several times I have asked myself, "Why do they do it that way? Wouldn't I work just as well?" But of course, the templates DO use I at the top of that column. Since I've never been wrong about anything, ever, I must conclude that reality has once again failed to meet my expectations. Thank you for bringing that to my attention.

You're not alone.

I found myself writing "From the top of [X] the following should be perceivable."

It should have been "From the top of [X} something should be perceivable"