Theos-Talk Archives (January 2004 Message tt00170)

-
I only see one thing: that the most people are like babies, they need 
a master to tell them how to life.Realy that is crazy.
Everyone have to be born with inner culture and if he or she have 
not, no master help them. Don't forget that.Then you are on such a 
lower plan,they let you.!
And higher you have to be the master of your own truth,compassion and 
tolerance.







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