Theos-Talk Archives (February 2002 Message tt00805)

Dear Adelasie,

Unfortunately, the advanced technology that follows the leading edge of new 
scientific discoveries that have any relationship to the fundamental energies 
of interest to theosophy, are mostly under the control of the government... 
Whose primary interest in the face of their current world views and concerns, 
are military applications, followed by the vast economic potentials for those 
who supply the weapons of war, as well as the communications, defense 
materials, record keeping, and control systems necessary to carry out 
worldwide military operations and protect the lives of soldiers in the field 
-- among other military considerations. Also, most of these products also 
have potential civilian applications of great economic value. Thus, in the 
face of the nature of the military as well as the political mind, the 
exigencies of their work, as well as the eventual economic considerations, 
along with the plums of material gain that are held out for the successful 
civilian application of their discoveries and inventions -- ethical 
considerations have to be put aside by the government and military leaders, 
as well as the technologists who work on these advanced scientific and 
technological projects.

On the other hand, the theoretical and experimental scientists who discover 
the fundamental theories that stand behind these technologies, are for the 
most part highly ethical and moral in their private lives, but do not let 
these considerations effect their thoughts or interfere with their work as 
they unfold the secrets of nature in their perennial search for ultimate 
truths (and/or potential fame and gain from their discoveries) without being 
inhibited by the possible harmful applications of their work. There are also 
many scientists -- while fairly religious, and even theosophical thinkers, as 
Einstein, and many of his colleagues and followers were -- who still cannot 
control the applications of their theoretical work, even though they decry 
the possible misuse of their discoveries for non ethical or immoral purposes. 
All they can do is warn us of the possible consequences or dangers, as 
Einstein did in his later writings... (Even though he was the one who was 
impelled by Leo Szilard to inform President Roosevelt of the Nazis' search 
for atomic weaponry based on their theories, that led the US toward 
developing the A-bomb.) 

So, there's a fine line to be drawn between those who use science 
intentionally for nefarious or unethical purposes, and those who use it for 
what appears to be good purposes in the face of their world concerns. But, 
even those applications may cause harm (or "collateral damage") -- as well as 
save lives in the defense of their family, friends, or countrymen. It's hard 
to say, then, what constitutes the ethical and moral use of science and its 
resultant technology -- in the face of these disparate concerns on all levels 
of government, defense and economics -- that, ostensibly, as they see it in 
their limited views, contribute to the well being of the majority of people. 

Unfortunately, the concerns of the leaders of countries, don't always 
correspond with the needs of the people (as contrasted with their "wants"). 
Vide, the continued use of fossil fuel as a source of energy required by 
almost all scientifically based technologies, that causes pollution and 
damage to living beings as well as to the ecology of the Earth's biosphere. 

This can only change, when science and theosophy become merged into one 
"Gupta Vidya" or Grand Unified Theory of Everything (including consciousness) 
-- that all mankind can accept as the only truth necessary to govern both 
their personal and communal lives on Earth.

Referring to the many scientists and engineers who worked successfully on the 
first Atomic bombs during WW II, many of them were quite disturbed by the 
application of their work in destroying so many lives at Hiroshima and 
Nagasaki -- But, their mitigation was that so many more lives of their own 
countrymen were saved by not having to face a costly invasion of Japan. 
This, of course, doesn't reduce the moral responsibility for so many lost 
lives... And, some scientists went through difficult emotional problems, 
depressions and nervous breakdowns after the war ended. 

For example, one of my close friends, Dr. Sebastian Perchion, a nuclear 
physicist and engineer who was instrumental in designing the trigger 
mechanism on the initial A-bomb, had a nervous breakdown soon after 
Hiroshima. And, after three years in a Trappist monastery doing penance, he 
went to Nepal following in the footsteps of another disallusioned scientist, 
Richard Alpert (Baba Ram Dass) and became a Llama of the Ningmapa sect of 
Tibetan Buddhism. Returning to the US, after several years in a Tibetan 
monastery, besides changing his profession to become a nuclear biologist 
(like Leo Szilard) he studied theosophy in depth for over a year (orally, 
through me, as a "reader" and interpreter of the SD, since he was semi-blind 
as a result of the flash of the Alamagordo "Trinity" test bomb) -- and later, 
based on this study, became my collaborator in helping correlate the ABC 
theory with modern relativity, quantum and string theories. During this 
period, he taught me the fundamentals of relativity, quantum and string 
physics, with emphasis on the technological and engineering aspects which 
aligned with my professional training as a chemical engineer along with a 
strong background in physical chemistry coupled with electronic and 
mechanical systems and industrial product design.

Unfortunately, Dr. Perchion died (in 1987) before completing the mathematics 
necessary to justify the ABC theory as being, at least, analytically 
consistent with all the other modern theories of physics. Since that time, 
however, the mathematical developments of 10 dimensional Superstring theory 
leading to the 11 dimensional M-brane synthesis, are finally beginning to 
mathematically justify the ABC concept we envisioned as a direct scientific 
interpretation of the theosophical Cosmogenesis theory of "coadunate but not 
consubstantial" field involution and evolution -- as described symbolically 
by HPB in the SD. 

The difference in thinking however is that most M-brane theorists still look 
at the their theoretical developmental problem from a materialistic or 
reductive "particulate" point of view -- while ABC considers it from a 
geometrical waveform "informational" direction -- giving the photon "field" 
nature primacy over the electron "particle" nature as described by 
conventional physics... Thus, allowing ABC to consider energy transformations 
using coherent (laser) light transformed in a spiral-vortex pattern through 
specialized crystalline structures, as well as to incorporate an explanation 
of consciousness, perception and organic "life" energies as part of its 
technological and theoretical, as well as its humanistic aspects. 

Thus the ABC approach toward zero-point energy transformations are based on 
inductive resonance processes acting between coadunate fields of 
"information," similar to the "coenergetic" transformational "consciousness" 
and "perceptive" processes in sentient beings (whether in wakeful or dream 
states) that do not require any mechanical action or moving parts. 

However, while most of the theoretical work is soon to be completed, none of 
the "reduction to practice" of potential technologies related to healing, 
ecological damage repair, "free" non polluting energy, antigravity, space 
drives, information storage, etc., has been carried out -- while my 
colleagues and I have been and are still studying the potential 
misapplications, and deciding how to avoid or divert them... Hopefully, to 
prevent the mistakes made in the past (and present) with technologies 
stemming from materialistic thinking and personal greed -- without prior 
theosophical, karmic, and other ethical and moral considerations. 

I hope this gives you some further food for thought, both from a 
technological as well as a theosophical scientific point of view, with regard 
to the future potentials of these new scientific "paradigms" that will begin 
to be applied in the very near future -- whether through development of ABC 
or through the current work in zero-point M-brane physics -- both of which 
are in close agreement with theosophical principles and metaphysical 
philosophy.

LHM

In a message dated 02/18/02 5: 28:49 PM, adelasie@surfari.net writes:

>Dear Leon,
>
>Thanks for your comments. You always put these scientific issues in 
>better perspective for me. It seems from what you say here that 
>science is indeed moving toward discovering its link with 
>metaphysical philosophy. How widespread is this trend? Is it anywhere 
>near mainstream? And what about the question of ethical application? 
>>From a layman's point of view, it seems that science is moving in 
>some alarming directions: military science, genetic technology, 
>nuclear power, etc. Does the theosophical philosophy inform science 
>in any way?
>
>Best wishes,
>Adelasie
>
>On 18 Feb 2002 at 2:26, leonmaurer@aol.com wrote:
>
>> Maybe this definition from the American Heritage dictionary might
>> clear up the confusion a bit:
>> 
>> Syn'chro'nic'i'ty - n
>> 1. The state or fact of being synchronous or simultaneous;
>> synchronism. 2. Coincidence of events that seem to be meaningfully
>> related, conceived in the theory of Carl Jung as an explanatory
>> principle on the same order as causality.
>> 
>> The first is the scientific meaning that refers to the simultaneous
>> time of occurrence of two different actions or activities that depend
>> solely on linked chains of cause and effect. For example, the sounds
>> of speech that are synchronous or simultaneous with the movements of
>> the mouth and lips, or the simultaneity of a light coming on when the
>> switch is thrown. Today, the scientific theory of Chaos that links
>> the fluttering of a butterfly's wings in Africa with a tornado in
>> Kansas, as well as the theory of Superstrings/Membranes that links
>> together the 10 dimensional fields of energy in both the material as
>> well as the immaterial vacuum of physical space, all depend on the
>> same concept of cause and effect as does the fundamental principles of
>> theosophy. These theories along with relativity and quantum theories
>> (as they are correlated by Superstring theory) are what HPB predicted
>> would happen in the 20th century to eventually bring theosophical
>> science and physical science together in perfect synchronicity... As
>> I've tried to show by linking together all the above mentioned
>> scientific theories in my theosophically rooted ABC multidimensional
>> [chakra]field theory. 
>> 
>> The second definition, as posed by Jung in his introduction to the
>> Wilhelm translation of the I-Ching -- in order to explain its oracular
>> power that depends on the apparently random throwing of coins while
>> thinking of a question to effect the changes in the hexagrams and,
>> simultaneously, their interpretations -- refers to his theory that the
>> simultaneity of the patterns of actions that occur on the physical
>> plane are synchronous with the similar patterns in the mind, and also
>> those on the higher universal planes... Implying a causal link between
>> these different fields of action. The Native American's
>> interpretations of the environmental signs, that they assume come
>> directly from their Great Spirit Guide, also relates to this
>> definition. 
>> 
>> All the above, it seems, would certainly confirm that there is no
>> possibility of coincidence or synchronicity without lawful cycles or
>> chains of cause and effect -- as held by theosophy. 
>> 
>> I hope this helps clarify the meaning of the word "synchronicity" in
>> its various usage's.
>> 
>> LHM
>> http://tellworld.com/Astro.Biological.Coenergetics
>> http://users.aol.com/unIwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/einstein.html
>> http://members.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/chakrafield
>>