Theos-Talk Archives (January 2004 Message tt00163)

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

Is this a compliment OR are you asking me a question here? I don't 
claim to be wise, or intelligent in the Aryan sense, just a knower.

> and doesn't need a bit of scientific background before getting an 
alternative 
> scientific view of Cosmogenesis that makes some theosophical sense?

I am saying I had no scientific background, but after studying 
spirituality I was ABLE to better understand physics. That's what I 
am saying. Did you understand it that way?


As for 
> the treatise on Cosmic Fire, what makes you so sure it was blessed 
by HPB?

HPB said that someone would come who would continue what she 
started. I believe she was talking about AAB. There was a connection 
between she and AAB on a psychic level as well.

I've 
> read it, too, and it didn't tell me anything I couldn't figure out 
for myself 
> by studying the Secret Doctrine

I did not read the SD beforehand--nor refer to it. I understood TOCM 
without reading the SD. I have only recently spent some time reading 
the SD's. I spent far more time reading AAB. I read only the 
historical accounts of the TS, and was never interested in their 
books until later when I was making a study of them in terms of 
their past lives coming and going.

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).

You know there are some sayings that just don't die hard. I also put 
Bible in quotes. It is an expression which means that I refered to 
it many many times. That is what makes it a "Bible" to me, nothing 
more.

I also find it to be a blueprint for initiations which go beyond the 
5th. That is also the Bible meaning for me, it is spiritual.

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 to argue 
> against that? :-) 
> 
> Leonardo     


Thanks

Netemara

> 
> In a message dated 01/09/04 10:36:02 PM, netemara888@y... 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.h
tml
> 
> > 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 Å"Water,â and the â Å"water of lifeâ areall, 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 
Å"surprisedâ 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 
Å"enigmatic and
> 
> > >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
> 
> > >