Theos-Talk Archives (January 2004 Message tt00159)

Hey Netamara, I'm happy to hear that you understand whatever I was talking 
about, But, what makes you think anyone else in this forum is as wise as you, 
and doesn't need a bit of scientific background before getting an alternative 
scientific view of Cosmogenesis that makes some theosophical sense? As for 
the treatise on Cosmic Fire, what makes you so sure it was blessed by HPB? I've 
read it, too, and it didn't tell me anything I couldn't figure out for myself 
by studying the Secret Doctrine and all the references to esoteric 
metaphysical material she included -- from the I-Ching, through Hermes, pythagorus, and 
Paracelsus, to the kabbala (the entire list would be too long to put in here) 
in addition to some direct teachings from living masters of both science and 
metaphysics -- one of whom was my father, an alchemist, kabbalist and 33rd 
degree Mason who taught me to question and search out the real meaning of 
everything I read, and accept no "Bibles" (like HPB also advised). And, what came out 
of it all was much clearer, and made more sense than all the convoluted 
writings of AAB. (Although, admitteedly, I did get a few tidbits from DK hidden in 
the doubletalk.) But, if that's your "Bible," and it gave you all the 
scientific, metaphysical and philosophical truth you need, then who am I toargue 
against that? :-) 

Leonardo     

In a message dated 01/09/04 10:36:02 PM, netemara888@yahoo.com writes:

>Helloooooooo yourself. Why are you reinventing the wheel here? The 
>other seminal tome which was dedicated to HPB (which is my Bible) 
>is "A Treatise on Cosmic Fire" which deals with electrical fire and 
>all the rest. I've been studying it for 35 years as well, long 
>before I had a scientific background because it was the same as the 
>Indian Philosophies, and hell I understood those. So I took what I 
>did understand and applied it to what I did not (there's a definite 
>name for that but it escapes me now) and voila, I know as much about 
>physics, in the theoretical sense as any physicist, and can listen 
>to any lecture on the subject.
>
>However, AAB took the SD and parlayed it into The Cosmic Fire 
>Treatise with HPB's blessings. What say you about this Leon?
>
>Netemara


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, leonmaurer@a... wrote:

> Hello everyone,

> 

> Referring to the HPB quote and the article below:

> 

> How about that? Looks like they are almost getting close to my ABC theory 

> (which was almost presaged by HPB and pretty much consistent with 

> everything she taught). 

>    

> But they still haven't figured out how all those electrical fields come 
into 

> being. Or, more importantly, how they relate to consciousness and give 
rise 

> to mind, memory -- and brains (not to mention, bodies:-)? Be nice if the 

> cosmologists and string theorists get together... (And then ask me [or HPB] 

> to fill in the links to the missing zero-points of pure consciousness 

> between the em fields and the strings.:-)  

> 

> In any event, the "Big Bang" may still be a viable concept -- so long as we 

> realize it may just be the apparently singular instant at the beginning of 
(our 

> sidereal) time when the universe fell into matter and changed from its 

> spiritual (noumenal) to its physical (phenomenal) state. (Of course, in 

> Cosmic time, since it also had to evolve through the mental and astral 
planes, 

> that may have taken ages.) Before that sudden appearance in our sidereal 

> space-time level, the numbers, spatial directions, frequencies, and time 

> relationships used for scientific measurement in our visible metric 
universe, 

> would have no reality.  

> 

> So, as far as science is concerned, that's where everything appeared to 
begin 

> -- all at once. Because of that, somebody, said it seems like an 
explosion, 

> so they gave it the name "Big Bang," and it stuck. But, then, a lightning 

> bolt seems like an explosion to us, and that's an electrical effect, too, 
that 

> has a finite velocity of propagation. Between those last two states is 
where 

> modern science (that tries to imagine the whole by examining all the parts 

> and figuring how they interrelate) gets lost in space. 

> 

> One problem, besides getting hooked on the particles as being fundamental 

> (rather than the wave) is that they don't yet fully understand the 
fundamental 

> electrical nature of the material universe that must originate in the 
abstract 

> motion (superspin or spinergy) of the nonmaterial energy source behind 
their 

> "Big Bang." And, that spin must lead to cycles, and cycles lead to waves, 
and 

> waves have to flow like electricity and obey all the same laws of 

> electrodynamics such as voltage (pressure), amperage (volume), resistance, 

> capacitance, inductance, phase, resonance, harmonics, etc., as well as 

> generate wave fronts that act as particles that smash into things. 

> (Incidentally, these laws are analogously similar to all the laws of 
> hydrodynamics.)             

>     

> Another problem is that the parts keep shifting around trying to get back 
to 

> that superspin or spinergy (the root of electricity, cycles and 
periodicity) 

> they came from. (All fundamental electrical forces, including gravity, can 
be 

> both attractive and repulsive depending on the polarity.) So, when science 

> gets down to observing the smallest parts (quantum particles), they change 

> their motion (energy level) and, consequently, their position just by 


> looking at them. Quantum physics thinks that's because these properties 
are 

> indeterminate and subject to statistical probability laws. (But, maybe, 
those 

> mites know what they are doing. :-)  

> 

> Actually, these apparent effects may be because we can only observe 

> something by reflection. And that means sending out a ray of 
electromagnetic 

> energy (light, electrons, x-rays or otherwise) to bounce off the object.  

> When that energetic corpuscle or "inquiray" (sic) wave front has the same 

> energy as the small particle (which is also an electrical wave front) the 

> particle reacts by moving backward and/or changing its direction of spin -- 
> like a billiard ball when tapped with the cue stick. (Since, from a 
theosophical 

> opoint of view, the bserver's consciousness, or consciously directed will 
or 

> intent which must be a projection of minute energy, can interfere with the 

> consciousness aspect of the quantum particle -- could this be a partial 

> explanation of the mechanisms behind some forms of psychic phenomena?)  

> 

> So, when we try to locate the position of an electron, we can't determine 
its 

> momentum, and when we try to measure its momentum, we can't determine 

> its position. But, to the scientist, that can only mean that the universe 
is 

> governed by probability laws... When, actually, it is governed by the 

> informational wave patterns of electrical energy carried by the invisible 

> hyperspace fields that exist in the apparently empty space between the zero-

> point and the quantum particle. Science labels this space, the Planck 
distance, 

> and fills it with perturbations or "Cosmic foam" of the "vacuum" -- without 
r

> eally knowing what they are talking about. Although, they know from 

> Einstein's theory of relativity, that the closer you get to the zero-point 
the 
>greater the energy, until at the zero-point, it approaches infinity 

> (by our measurements). Of course, this completely 

> violates all the rules of quantum physics, since its mathematics 

> can only deal with finite particles having finite energies. So, what to 
do?  

> Science needs a new paradigm that can bring these two theories into 

> conformance with each other. Well, that's what string physics is all 
about.   

> 

> So, the more advanced Superstring/M-brane theorists are beginning 

> to see that these vibrational patterns on the one dimensional ray of energy 

> ("superstring") that composes the surface ("M-brane") of the adjacent 

> zero-point hyperspace fields (theosophically, the Astral realms linked to 
> the mental realms), are what determine the vibrational nature of the 2-

> dimensional "strings" that compose the quarks and gluons that make up 
> the 3-dimensional quantum particles.  

> From there on, electrodynamics takes over and determines the nature of the 

> atoms and molecules, and eventually, all the beings in the universe -- 

> from viruses to stars, quasars and black holes. A process -- starting from 

> ezero, and nding up with our space time continuum -- that is as simple as 

> ABC. (That is, if you look at it simultaneously from both the inside out 
> AND the outside in.)  

> 

> And, it will become so simple when these scientists begin to understand 

> how zero-point consciousness (awareness and will) is physiologically, 

> chemically, neurological, and psychologically linked to all those material 

> entities through their coenergetic hyperspace electrical fields.  

> 

> Thus, such a new paradigm will eventually -- by tying together and 

> correlating holographic information theory with Superstring/M-brane physics 

>and its hyperspace fields (matter) married to consciousness (spirit) which, 

> together, originate simultaneously at the cosmic field's zero-laya-point 

> center -- give us a Unified Field Theory of Everything. Incidentally, that 
is  

> what the theosophical and scientifically metaphysical theory of ABC has 

> already done... Although, conventional science, steeped in its 
materialistic 

> biases, is not yet ready to fully comprehend or accept it.

> 

> But, when they do, which, as HPB predicted, is inevitable, theosophy will 

> no longer stand outside of established science, but will merge with it.  
And, 

> from then on, no one will be able to refute the reality of both karma and 

> reincarnation and the unity of all beings, along with the moral-ethical 

> responsibilities to each other that they imply. 

>     

> But, didn't we theosophists already know that everything in the universe is 

> conscious -- to one degree of expression or another -- and, that 
> consciousness is eternal?  

> 

> How could that not be -- since the zero-point center of the universe is 

> everywhere, while it's circumference, being the continuous interconnected 

> surfaces (or M-branes) of all the coadunate but not consubstantial and 

> multidimensional hyperspace electrical fields, is nowhere? And, further, 
> while the fields are forever changing, the zero-point (that is their 
origin) 
>can never change its essential "beness," or potential being. 

> 

> To visualize (by using our imagination focussed meditatively in the higher 

> mind) how these fields at the primal beginning are, (1) derived out of a 

> centralized zero (Laya) point of infinite spinergy, (2) coenergetically 

> interrelated with each other in their spiral involution's, (3) have no 

> beginning or end (like a snake with its tail in its mouth), (4) follow a 
>continuous spiral vortical path that has no separate inside or outside 
(like a 

> Mobius strip or Klein bottle), and (5) simulates the analogous paths as 
well 
> as the topological molecular code of the eventual DNA molecule -- 

> to finally form 14 inner spherical 

> fields within the outer ring-pass-not field (in accord with the formula in 
the 

> Book of Dzyan, "The 3, the 1, the 4, the 1, the 5, the twice 7, the sum 
total," 

> and the ancient concept, "As above so below") -- see the following web 
sites:

> 

> http://users.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/chakrafield.html

> http://users.aol.com/leonmaurer/invlutionflddiagnotate.gif

> http://users.aol.com/leonmaurer/Invlutionfldmirror2.gif

> 

> [Note that these diagrams are only symbolic, since they try to describe a 

> multidimensional reality in only 2-dimensions. So, don't get caught in the 

> linear diagrams, themselves, but visualize the "fields of consciousness" as 

> transparent spheres within spheres within spheres, etc., with the lines of 

> force wound around their surfaces and through all their zero-point 

> centers and tangent points in intertwining spirals, like balls of yarn -- 
> with all their beginnings and ends tied together.]

> 

> Lenny

> 

> For an overall picture of the ABC concept, see"

> http://tellworld.com/Astro.Biological.Coenergetics 

> 

> 

> In a message dated 01/06/04 9:56:23 AM, ultinla@j... writes:

> 

> >â œWater,â and the â œwater of lifeâ are all, on our plane, 

the progeny; or

> >as a modern physicist would say, the correlations of 

ELECTRICITY. Mighty

> >word, and a still mightier symbol! Sacred generator of a no less 

sacred

> >progeny; of fire â " the creator, the preserver and the 

destroyer; of light

> >â " the essence of our divine ancestors; of flameâ "the Soul of 

things. 

> >Electricity, the ONE Life at the upper rung of Being, and Astral 

Fluid,

> >the Athanor of the Alchemists, at its lowest; GOD and DEVIL, GOOD 

and

> >EVIL. â " SD I, 81

> >

> >================================================

> >

> >There is a revolution just beginning in astronomy/cosmology that 

will

> >rival the one set off by Copernicus and Galileo. This revolution 

is

> >based on the growing realization that the cosmos is highly 

electrical in

> >nature. It is becoming clear that 99% of the universe is made up 

not of

> >"invisible matter", but rather, of matter in the plasma state. 

> >Electrodynamic forces in electric plasmas are much stronger than 

the

> >gravitational force. 

> > Mainstream astrophysicists are continually â œsurprisedâ by 

new data

> >sent back by space probes and orbiting telescopes. New 

information

> >always sends theoretical astrophysicists "back to the drawing 

board". 

> >In light of this, it is curious that they have such "cock-sure" 

attitudes

> >about the infallibility of their present models. Those models 

seem to

> >require major "patching up" every time a new space probe sends 

back data.

> > Astrophysicists and astronomers do not study experimental 

plasma

> >dynamics in graduate school. They rarely take any courses in

> >electrodynamic field theory, and thus they try to explain every 

new

> >discovery via gravity, magnetism, and fluid dynamics which is all 

they

> >understand. It is no wonder they cannot understand that 99% of 

all

> >cosmic phenomena are due to plasma dynamics and not to gravity 

alone. 

> > When confronted by observations that cast doubt on the 

validity of

> >their theories, astrophysicistss have conjured up pseudo-

scientific

> >invisible entities such as neutron stars, weakly interacting 

massive

> >particles, strange energy, and black holes. When confronted by 

solid

> >evidence such as Halton Arp's photographs that contradict the Big 

Bang

> >Theory, their response is to refuse him access to any major 

telescope in

> >the U.S. 

> > Instead of wasting time in a futile battle trying to convince

> >entrenched mainstream astronomers to seriously investigate the

> >Electric/Plasma Universe ideas, a growing band of plasma 

scientists and

> >engineers are simply bypassing them. A new electric plasma-based

> >paradigm that does not find new discoveries to be â œenigmaticand

> >puzzlingâ , but rather to be predictable and consistent with an 

electrical

> >point of view, is slowly but surely replacing the old paradigm 

wherein

> >all electrical mechanisms are ignored. 

> > An electrical "plasma" is a cloud of ions and electrons that, 

under the

> >excitation of applied electrical and magnetic fields, can 

sometimes light

> >up and behave in some unusual ways. The most familiar examples of

> >electrical plasmas are the neon sign, lightning, and the electric 

arc

> >welding machine. The ionosphere of Earth is an example of a 

plasma that

> >does not emit visible light. Plasma permeates the space that 

contains

> >our solar system. The cloud of particles that constitutes the 

solar

> >"wind" is a plasma. Our entire "Milky Way" galaxy consists 

mainly of

> >plasma. In fact 99% of the entire universe is plasma! 

> >History

> > During the late 1800's in Norway, physicist Kristian 

Birkeland explained

> >that the reason we could see the auroras was that they were 

plasmas. 

> >Birkeland also discovered the twisted corkscrew shaped paths 

taken by

> >electric currents when they exist in plasmas. Sometimes those 

twisted

> >shapes are visible and sometimes not - it depends on the strength 

of the

> >current density being carried by the plasma. Today these streams 

of ions

> >and electrons are called "Birkeland Currents". The 

mysterious "sprites",

> >"elves", and "blue jets" associated with electrical storms on 

Earth are

> >examples of Birkeland currents in the plasma of our upper 

atmosphere.

> >In the early 20th century, Nobel laureat Irving Langmuir studied 

electric

> >plasmas in his laboratory at General Electric; he further 

developed the

> >body of knowledge Birkeland had initiated. In fact it was he who 

first

> >used the name "plasma" to describe the almost lifelike, self-

organizing

> >behavior of these ionized gas clouds in the presence of electrical

> >currents and magnetic fields. 

> >Basic Properties

> >Modes of Operation

> > T Currents in Cosmic Sized Plasmas

> >Because plasmas are good (but not perfect) conductors, they are

> >equivalent to wires in their ability to carry electrical 

current. It is

> >well known that if any conductor cuts through a magnetic field, a 

current

> >will be caused to flow in that conductor. This is how electric

> >generators and alternators work. Therefore, if there is any 

relative

> >motion between a cosmic plasma, say in the arm of a galaxy, and a

> >magnetic field in that same location, Birkeland currents will 

flow in the

> >plasma. These currents will, in turn, produce their own magnetic 

fields.

> >

> >Plasma phenomena are scalable. That is to say, their electrical 

and

> >physical properties remain the same, independent of the size of 

the

> >plasma. Of course dynamic phenomena take much less time to occur 

in a

> >small laboratory plasma than they do in a plasma the size, say, 

of a

> >galaxy. But the phenomena are identical in that they obey the 

same laws

> >of physics. So we can make accurate models of cosmic sized 

plasmas in

> >the lab - and generate effects exactly like those seen in space.  

In

> >fact, electric currents, flowing in plasmas, have been shown to 

produce

> >most of the observed astronomical phenomena that are inexplicable 

if we

> >assume that the only forces at work in the cosmos are magnetism 

and

> >gravity. 

> >

> > ====================

> >

> >If this is true the current cosmological speculations --- not 

just the

> >big bang, but many others related theories go into the trash 

can. What

> >does the group think???

> >jw

> >