Theos-Talk Archives (February 2002 Message tt00668)

In a message dated 02/21/02 3:34:33 PM, bri_mue@yahoo.com writes:

>Eldon : "People want nice stories that tell things
>in myth and metaphor."
>
>Leon:"zero point energy theory (which was presaged by HPB as 
>scientific discoveries to come in the 20th century)"
>
>Brigitte: The inventor of "zero point energy" was Keely who lived in 
>Philadelphia at the same time as HPB, and HPB mentioned zero point 
>energy in the SD only in relationship to him.
> 
> 
> Bri.

As usual, I see that you continue to nit pick, and "expose" whatever is (to 
your mind) negative about Blavatsky -- in order, apparently, to undermine her 
students belief in her as the "definitive" teacher of "ancient" theosophy for 
the modern age -- no matter how far off the subject and into her personality 
foibles you have to go. What is the ax that you seem to be grinding? 

The above statement of mine is also, as usual, taken out of context, and your 
comments on it apparently intentionally twisted to throw doubt on HPB's 
teachings of fundamental theosophy and its presaging of the cutting edges of 
contemporary physics in its metaphysical scientific disclosures... Which, 
incidentally, as a student of the occult sciences since the mid thirties (my 
father being a well known dye chemist, freemason and practicing alchemist), 
and long before I studied the SD -- I had never read of any occult source in 
his vast library, from Hermes through Pythagorus to Paracelsus, that so 
clearly presented the scientific basis of modern and post modern science, 
from E=mc^2 (matter is energy is light) to 11 dimensional (3 fold +7 fold + 
time) "Superstrings" (lines or "rays" of force) and "Membranes" (field 
surfaces), as clearly as was disclosed in the SD. And, I didn't find out 
about that until many years later when I took up the serious study of the 
Secret Doctrine. See my comments at: 
http://users.aol.com/unIwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/einstein.html

With respect to my previous comments, the complete sentence you quote from -- 

>It doesn't have to "appeal" -- if it hits them square between their eyes 
when the
>new direction of science that marries relativity theory with quantum theory 
under the 
>umbrella of Superstring/M-brane zero point energy theory (which was presaged 
by 
>HPB as scientific discoveries to come in the 20th century) is finally 
"accepted" in this 
>century. 

-- includes many other scientific theories besides "current" 
Superstring/Membrane theories -- which, in their reference to "zero point 
energy" (ZPE), has nothing whatever to do with the psychic energy theories of 
Keely reported by HPB (solely as a critical observer of his "Hydro Vacuo 
Engine, invented by John W. Keely
of the City and County of Philadelphia and state of Pennsylvania - 1872"). 

Therefore, Keely "invented" nothing -- other than a "machine" that he claimed 
could utilize "auric" energy. Unfortunately, his machine didn't work except 
when Keely was at the throttle (as HPB pointed out), and the patent 
application is still "held in reserve" by the US Patent Office. 
Incidentally, one would wonder why it never was formally rejected by the 
USPO? Could it be the same reason why other inventors of "free" auric energy 
generators, such as, Tesla, Rife, Reich, etc., have been suppressed and lied 
about by the established materialistic powers that be and their "historians"? 
And, could that reason be the fear that such inventions (which may actually 
have worked, and possibly were sabotaged to appear as if they didn't) would 
obsolete all fossil fuels? I wonder who stands to lose and who might benefit 
from that? (There's a worthwhile job for a really unbiased historian to set 
the record straight, I would think.;-)

If, as a truly unbiased historian, you wish to find the actual words and 
sentences where Blavatsky "presaged" the modern scientific theories of 
Relativity and Quantum physics, as well as their synthesis in post modern 
Superstring/M-brane theories -- I suggest you seriously study the *Secret 
Doctrine* (in the original 1888 facsimile edition) and search for its 
fundamental scientific teachings... That is, if you understand English well 
enough, and can wade through the "blinds" of historical, philosophical, post 
Newton (pre Einstein) "classical" scientific, and scriptural references, plus 
*her own* symbolical statements, and read "BETWEEN the lines and IN the 
words" -- to find and "understand" its profound scientific and metaphysical 
disclosures that presage contemporary modern and post modern science... This 
could be your goal as an historical researcher, rather than look at the SD 
superficially, and prejudiciously harp on it as a fraudulent as well as 
defective work of plagiarism from extant sources. For your information, the 
"zero-point" in theosophy is called the "laya-point" by Blavatsky, and is 
mentioned in the SD innumerable times with reference to "light" (energy), 
"abstract motion" (spin) and "wheels" (fields) within wheels, within wheels, 
etc., etc. "Seek and you will find," as the sage said. (Who might have been 
HPB in a previous incarnation.:-). 

In this light, I think that historians should stick to their calling as 
"unbiased reporters," and leave the theorizing to the psychologists, 
philosophers and scientists. History that relies on personality bashing, no 
matter how contrived to appear as unbiased, especially when focused on the 
"exposure" of one particular individual using spurious references or out of 
context statements -- might not be valid "history" at all, but could be based 
on the prejudice of an opinionated researcher who has some unknown bias 
against the individual in question, or has negative opinions about the fruits 
of his/her efforts -- not to mention other, more serious "axes to grind."

LHM