Theos-Talk Archives (January 2004 Message tt00169)

In that case, I prefer not to buy that Bailey was continueing the psychic w=
ork  
that was started with HPB nor any of her Masters. In the Theosophical world=
, 
we have too many groups, persons, and organizations that claim pretty much =

the same thing. Besides that, I see nothing wrong in the Bailey work. I wo=
uld 
have preferred if she presented it as her interpretation of the Theosophica=
l 
truths instead of claiming it to be the work of a Master, but for some peop=
le , it 
is the work of a Master, therefor there is no point arguing. How does one 
prove something like that? 


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "netemara888" <netemara888@y...> 
wrote:
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "arielaretziel" 
> <arielaretziel@y...> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 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.
> 
> Huh? I didn't say it was, reread below. I said that AAB continued 
> the psychic WORK of HPB, that's a different matter than saying that 
> this book specifically was a continuation of the SD. In fact I said 
> I had never even read the damn book before I read TonCF. 
> 
> Even DK said that HPB was his first amenuesis and AAB the next one. 
> HPB said it first though.
> 
> =
> > That 
> > might be the case for YOU, but for me it is a real STEP DOWN. 
> 
> 
> I don't recall asking your judgement on something I did not say.
> 
> 
> And perhaps =
> > 
> > that's the way Wisdom is, that poeple gain from different books 
> and therefo=
> > re 
> > we can't argue either way. 
> 
> Huh?
> 
> Netemara
> > 
> > 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 lifeâare 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
> > > > 
> > > > > >