[MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX] |

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |

Feb 06, 2002 10:16 PM

by leonmaurer

In a message dated 02/04/02 9:56:18 PM, cronjev@hotmail.com writes: >Theosophy was a relatively recent discovery for me, and I have found >all written matter I have come across up till now very informative. > >I do find however that most of the discussion revolves around the >concepts of the Universe as it viewed and documented a hundred years >back. > >>From what I understood of the definition of Theosophy, is that it >should try to explain everything, reconciling science with religion >and mysticism. > >How much new ideas and concepts have been developed in recent years, >and where can you read about it? > >A zealous newbie ... > >(I have put down the Universe as I understand it in a badly written >form www.geocities.com/cronjev - I need more information.) In a message dated 02/04/02 9:23:20 PM, cronjev@hotmail.com writes: >I understand that my premise is a long shot when evaluated superficially, >I agree completely that it does just transplants the mystical aspect to >another level. > >The theory does still have certain merits, it just requires a change in >perspective. > >My main objective is to define the great unknown according to Theosophy. >I agree with, and fully believe in every aspect of all the Theosophical >documents I have read, but further simplification is possible. >All the Theosophy articles I am continuously referred to by everyone on the >discussion group, can't and doesn't reflect scientific knowledge we have >only started discovering in the past few years. Although they do contain >the same truths, the spirit of Theosophy as I understand it is killed at the >same time. Namely to reconcile the most advanced scientific knowledge with >the knowledge from religion and mysticism. > >Regarding my logic, I would agree that the logic isn't explained properly, >let me try to shed some light on my reasoning once more. > >Regarding the logic that nothing is nothing, and nothing can come from >nothing. Expressed mathematically it would read 0 = 0, and the logic is >true. But you can also write it as 1-1 = 0. And then if you examine the two >in the equation separately, you can't say they are nothing, although they >are zero if you examine the equation as a whole. If you apply this >mathematical concept, which puts nothing in relation to infinity, thus >0 = 1/infinity ... for all practical definitions of infinity. Then you will >be able to express everything in the Universe according to the equation that is >developed from there. And such a mathematical model would explain Hawking >to Blavatsky with ease. > >This is the basic concept that my Universe theory is based on. A >mathematical equation for Blavatsky's 'the great unknown'. I don't know if any of that will stand scrutiny, either scientifically or theosophically, as a valid expression of the "great unknown," -- since it still argues from the logical causally fallacious position of an arbitrary assumption that matter and energy are generated from nothing -- without giving an explanation of how that process actually works. Besides, it isn't mathematics that decides the nature of the universal truths, but the universe itself, as it is, that allows man to discover the mathematics that can describe it. All energy is based on motion. But, such motion cannot come from non motion (the zero-point-instant alone). Therefore, the primal zero-point must be accompanied by a surrounding abstract "angular motion" that can only be an inherent attribute (the spinning) of the zero point itself. Since there is no friction or resistance of primal space to slow such spin motion, its angular velocity (and frequency) would potentially be infinite (as would its information carrying capacity) -- and thus, its energy (as angular momentum) would also be infinite. I call this primal abstract angular motional energy circling the zero-point, "spinergy." As explained in previous posts, it is the root of cycles, and all subsequent energies linked to all phenomenal fields, from spiritual and mental energy-substance to physical mass-energy. (Ref: E=mc^2). This is how (1) zero relates to infinity, and how manifest energy and linear motion comes from (2) "something" -- which, we must conclude, are the two orders of reality, existing abstractly (as noumena) within the unity of (3) eternal (timeless) primal "Space." These aspects of the "great unknown" (or primal monadic root) constitutes the fundamental "trinity" that ultimately resolves, upon manifestation, into the triune phenomenal universe, and is the root of all subsequehat is, was, or ever will be. This verifies Blavatsky's statement that the unknown Absolute source, the one "reality" -- "unknown," simply because finite mind beings are unable to experience, observe, or measure it -- is "BOTH empty and full." (i.e., Empty at its "zero-point," and full in its surrounding infinite "spinergy", or, empty of form and phenomena, but full of infinite potentialities, etc.). >From this infinite potentiality, or "diversity within a unity," the whole universe involves and evolves to form the seven fold "coadunate but not consubstantial" field nature of all beings -- in accordance with the fundamental laws of cycles and periodicity that underlie the laws of electricity (from a scientific standpoint) as well as the laws of karma (from a mystical or theosophical standpoint)... These laws are analogously similar in governing the cause and effect chains (action<-->reaction<-->action) within and between the various coadunate fields, their vibrational information carrying processes, as well as the inductive process for transference of such information from one field to another. Unfortunately for many of us mathematic dunces :-) -- the working of these laws can only be fully described scientifically (on the material plane) by a combined geometrical (at least 10 dimensional vector analysis) and a subtle form of infinite set numerical mathematics that requires symbolic multidimensional diagrams as well as abstruse linear and non linear equations. Thus, positing a fundamental "simplicity" that leads to an evolving "complexity" -- following fixed laws of both information acquisition, storage and transformation, as well as physical particle and energy interactions and reactions -- is the only logical way to describe a singular universe that revolves (involves and evolves) cyclically and periodically from chaos to order and from order to chaos -- with constant change along the way -- leading to higher and higher levels of gained and retained diversified experience, knowledge and wisdom. This could be the only logical conclusion that will hold up in the court of both intuitive theosophical and rational scientific inquiry. As far as modern science goes, the latest multidimensional theories of Superstrings and Membranes, which is getting closer and closer to the theosophical truths -- has been fully presaged in the Secret Doctrine (as was relativity and quantum physics)... And, aside from its complex mathematics, its underlying logical assumptions are similar to what was described above regarding the metaphysical relationship of the zero-point with its surrounding "spinergy" or zero-point energy (ZPE). Unfortunately, mainstream science still hasn't given up its materialistic bias, and, aside from the speculations of Superstring theorists, all the theories of quantum cosmology (Hawkings, et al) and quantum physics (Penrose, et al) still ignore the gap between the primal source and the "Big Bang" (on the material plane) -- which theosophy, along with my ABC holographic field theory, has covered relatively clearly (as the apparently valid linkage between deductive theosophical or "metaphysical" science and reductive-inductive "physical" science at its most advanced stage). As a description of a complete and consistent causal system from zero to infinite diversity (and vice versa) I don't think it could be explained in any simpler or more logically valid terms. I hope this clarifies things a bit, and indicates that the simple (as well as complex) scientific and logical explanation of the "Great Unknown" as well as its Cosmogenesis and Anthropogenesis has already been fully defined in the Secret Doctrine... (Should one be intuitive enough to read "through the *blinds*, *between* the lines, and *in* the words" -- as HPB advised her students). LHM http://tellworld.com/Astro.Biological.Coenergetics/ http://members.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/chakrafield.html http://users.aol.com/unIwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/einstein.html

**Follow-Ups**:**Theosophy and Science Re: A complete short rational theory ... ???***From:*"bri_mue" <bri_mue@yahoo.com>

Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application