Q: Can our eyes perceive dimensions other than 3D?

A: Our eyes are made of 3D material, we apparently exist in a 3D universe, and our eyes are designed for seeing in 3D (or really, a stereoscopic 2D projection of 3D surfaces) and don’t appear to see anything else, so the answer is probably not.

Though if I were to go out on a limb, I’d say maybe. I’ve always been able to see a thin blue “film” or kind of aura outlining my fingers if I look carefully enough against a dark background, and I’ve read that this is the etheric body (one of the seven subtle bodies; see Subtle Body Energies: The Seven Subtle Bodies). This body is nonphysical, so if I’m seeing it with my eyes, apparently my eyes can see the nonphysical. And I don’t think I have the capability of seeing something without my eyes, because I can’t see auras (as in the regular kind).

And there’s one peculiar thing about my seeing this subtle body: the “film” appears to get wider as I move my fingers farther from my eyes. I suspect this may be because the film actually exists in a higher-dimensional space, so the geometry of perspective works differently for it.

I know this would more obviously be explained if the film is a mere visual artifact, because the artifact wouldn’t become thinner just because the object is farther away, so it would appear to become thicker relative to the diminishing apparent size of the object as it moves farther away. But I’m not convinced this is what’s happening, because a friend and I once compared our etheric bodies to each other from the same distance, and both of us observed that mine looked thicker. Obviously, if it were a mere visual artifact, this would be next to impossible.

And also, the nature of the “film” doesn’t appear as a visual artifact likely would. It doesn’t vary at all in in color, intensity, etc.; it has exactly one definite, sharp boundary; and it extends equidistantly from all points of the edge of my finger, meaning it’s as if my finger were extended by the same amount on all directions. If it were a visual artifact, I might see a second instance of the edge of my finger, but it shouldn’t be an exact equidistant trace around my finger, because it should be offset from the real border in the same direction all over, so it would be closer to or farther from my finger or run into it and overlap it depending on the angle of my skin at that point. And, on the other hand, if it were just an effect that makes all outstanding colors extend outward in all directions with an apparent “aura,” then it makes no sense for there to be no gradient to the intensity with distance from the edge of my finger and for there to be a clearly defined edge to the “film.”

But how could a 3D eye designed to see in a 3D universe detect anything higher-dimensional, and let alone how could a physical eye detect something nonphysical? Perhaps it’s because the matter of the eye is inextricably interconnected with some more subtle energy, like it has a physical aspect and a nonphysical aspect that are two parts of the same thing and work together/influence each other, and the reason we think it’s only physical is because the scientific instruments we measure such things with are physical and our scientific theories are physicalist, so we can only scientifically detect physical things. Perhaps the nonphysical part of the eye’s mechanics is provided by its living aspect, the life energy (or just life) that infuses all biologically living material.

Or maybe there’s some other explanation for the anomaly that’s completely mundane. Beats the hell out of me