Theos-Talk Archives (January 2004 Message tt00164)

I personally see nothing wrong with people studying the Cosmic Fire. Just 
please don't keep harping that it's a continuation of the Secret Doctrine. =
That 
might be the case for YOU, but for me it is a real STEP DOWN. And perhaps =

that's the way Wisdom is, that poeple gain from different books and therefo=
re 
we can't argue either way. 

A^A^


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "netemara888" <netemara888@y...> 
wrote:
> --- 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 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 
> 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
> > 
> > > >