Leon: Science questions
Mar 10, 2006 07:58 PM
by krsanna
It sounds as though you have an interest in science and theosophical
questions. In this regard, I thought you might be interested in
looking close at the Mahatma letter below. It is the one from Koot
Hoomi posted earlier, and, in this posting, only paragraphs
pertinent to science are incuded. It is 93B in the chronological
version and 23B in Barker's version of "The Mahatma Letters To A. P.
Sinnett."
I have done some reading on solar science extant in 1882, when the
letter was written. In that year, scientific wisdom suggested that
the sun was a magnet to which the earth was associated in a magnetic
relationship. A relationship between sunspots and geomagnetic
storms was recognized in 1882. Much discussion revolved around
whether this resulted from the sun acting as a magnetic to the
earth. Many theories would develop about these observations in the
next 50 years, when corpuscular theories of charged particles were
accepted in the 1930's.
One thing that's interesting about KH's letter is that he seems to
hint at leading-edge solar theories as they existed in 1882. KH did
not have an internet to make access to leading science of the day
easy. Why was KH sufficiently interested in science as to be
familiar with emerging solar science that were far more difficult to
obtain in 1882 than today? Further, he it looks like he may have
laid a few hints about science that would emerge in the next century.
Some of KH's comments about meteorites may come fairly close to
recent theories of astrobiology. Astrobiology is such a new science
that no university offers a degree in it. It is so complex that it
requires highly inter-disciplinary study. NASA created the first
astrobiology research institute only in the last few years. It is
the only institute set up to study astrobiology that, to my
knowledge, presently exists on the planet.
KH's comments about the earth being a conductor is very similar to
Nikola Tesla's theory of the earth and atmosphere that served as a
capacitor. Tesla technology is now used in the HAARP projects that
heat up the atmosphere with generators then focus the energy back to
specific locations on the earth.
I am reminded of Wilhelm Reich's research on orgone in KH's comments
about making rain. In the book John and discussed briefly, "Black
Elk Speaks," the author describes watching rain gently begin to fall
around Black Elk as he stood in prayer.
Absolutely new research on how the earth's magnetic fields are
generated may be most pertinent to KH's comments in this letter.
Koot Hoomi did a pretty good job of shooting from the hip in this
letter. The matter of the earth's atmosphere expanding and
contracting as it passes through various regions of space with
different concentrations of meteorite dust is tantalizing.
In any event, I would appreciate your comments on this.
Best regards,
Krsanna Duran
EXCERPT FROM MAHATMA LETTER 93B (23B):
(8) [For Question see p. 305. EDS.]. Most assuredly they have. Rain
can be brought on in a small area of space — artificially and
without any claim to miracle or superhuman powers, though its secret
is no property of mine that I should divulge it. I am now trying to
obtain permission to do so. We know of no phenomenon in nature
entirely unconnected with either magnetism or electricity — since,
where there are motion, heat, friction, light, there magnetism and
its alter ego (according to our humble opinion) electricity will
always appear, as either cause or effect — or rather both if we but
fathom the manifestation to its origin. All the phenomena of earth
currents, terrestrial magnetism and atmospheric electricity are due
to the fact that the earth is an electrified conductor, whose
potential is ever changing owing to its rotation and its annual
orbital motion, the successive cooling and heating of the air, the
formation of clouds and rain, storms and winds, etc. This you may
perhaps, find in some text book. But then Science would be unwilling
to admit that all these changes are due to akasic magnetism
incessantly generating electric currents which tend to restore the
disturbed equilibrium. By directing the most powerful of electric
batteries, the human frame electrified by a certain process, you can
stop rain on some given point by making "a hole in the rain cloud,"
as the occultists term it. By using other strongly magnetized
implements within, so to say, an insulated area, rain can be
produced artificially. I regret my inability to explain to you the
process more clearly. You know the effects produced by trees and
plants on rain clouds; and how their strong magnetic nature attracts
and even feeds those clouds over the tops of the trees. Science
explains it otherwise, maybe. Well, I cannot help it, for such is
our knowledge and fruits of milleniums of observations and
experience. Were the present to fall into the hands of Hume, he
would be sure to remark that I am vindicating the charge publicly
brought by him against us: "Whenever unable to answer your arguments
(?) they (we) calmly reply that their (our) rules do not admit of
this or that." Charge notwithstanding, I am compelled to answer that
since the secret is not mine I cannot make of it a marketable
commodity. Let some physicists calculate the amount of heat required
to vaporize a certain quantity of water. Then let them compute the
quantity of rain needed to cover an area — say, of one square mile
to a depth of one inch. For this amount of vaporization they will
require, of course, an amount of heat that would be equal to at
least five million 4 tons of coal. Now the amount of energy of which
this consumption of heat would be the equivalent corresponds (as any
mathematician could tell you) — to that which would be required to
raise a weight of upwards of ten million tons, one mile high. How
can one man generate such amount of heat and energy? Preposterous,
absurd! — we are all lunatics, and you who listen to us will be
placed in the same category if you ever venture to repeat this
proposition. Yet I say that one man alone can do it, and very easily
if he is but acquainted with a certain "physico-spiritual" lever in
himself, far more powerful than that of Archimedes. Even simple
muscular contraction is always accompanied with electric and
magnetic phenomena, and there is the strongest connection between
the magnetism of the earth, the changes of weather and man, who is
the best barometer living, if he but knew [how] to decipher it
properly; again, the state of the sky can always be ascertained by
the variations shown by magnetic instruments. It is now several
years since I had an opportunity of reading the deductions of
Science upon this subject; therefore, unless I go to the trouble of
catching up what I may have remained ignorant of, I do not know the
latest conclusions of Science. But with us, it is an established
fact that it is the earth's magnetism that produces wind, storms,
and rain. What science seems to know of it is but secondary symptoms
always induced by that magnetism and she may very soon find out her
present errors. Earth's magnetic attraction of meteoric dust, and
the direct influence of the latter upon the sudden changes of
temperature, especially in the matter of heat and cold, is not a
settled question to the present day, I believe.5 It was doubted
whether the fact of our earth passing through a region of space in
which there are more or less of meteoric masses has any bearing upon
the height of our atmosphere being increased or decreased, or even
upon the state of weather. But we think we could easily prove it;
and since they accept the fact that the relative distribution and
proportion of land and water on our globe may be due to the great
accumulation upon it of meteoric dust, snow — especially in our
northern regions — being full of meteoric iron and magnetic
particles; and deposits of the latter being found even at the bottom
of seas and oceans, I wonder how Science has not hitherto understood
that every atmospheric change and disturbance was due to the
combined magnetism of the two great masses between which our
atmosphere is compressed! I call this meteoric dust a "mass" for it
is really one. High above our earth's surface the air is impregnated
and space filled with magnetic, or meteoric dust, which does not
even belong to our solar system. Science having luckily discovered
that, as our earth with all the other planets is carried along
through space, it receives a greater proportion of that dust matter
on its northern than on its southern hemisphere, knows that to this
are due the preponderating number of the continents in the former
hemisphere, and the greater abundance of snow and moisture. Millions
of such meteors and even of the finest particles reach us yearly and
daily, and all our temple knives are made of this "heavenly" iron,
which reaches us without having undergone any change — the magnetism
of the earth keeping them in cohesion. Gaseous matter is continually
added to our atmosphere from the never ceasing fall of meteoric
strongly magnetic matter, and yet it seems with them still an open
question whether magnetic conditions have anything to do with the
precipitation of rain or not! I do not know of any "set of motions
established by pressures, expansions, etc., due in the first
instance to solar energy." Science makes too much and too little at
the same time of "solar energy" and even of the Sun itself; and the
Sun has nothing to do whatever with rain and very little with heat.
I was under the impression that science was aware that the glacial
periods as well as those periods when temperature is "like that of
the carboniferous age," are due to the decrease and increase or
rather to the expansion of our atmosphere, which expansion is itself
due to the same meteoric presence? At any rate, we all know, that
the heat that the earth receives by radiation from the sun is at the
utmost one third if not less of the amount received by her directly
from the meteors.
(9) [For Question see p. 305. EDS.]. Call it a chromosphere or
atmosphere, it can be called neither; for it is simply the magnetic
and ever present aura of the sun, seen by astronomers only for a
brief few moments during the eclipse, and by some of our chelas
whenever they like — of course while in a certain induced state. A
counterpart of what the astronomers call the red flames in
the "corona" may be seen in Reichenbach's crystals or in any other
strongly magnetic body. The head of a man in a strong ecstatic
condition, when all the electricity of his system is centered around
the brain, will represent — especially in darkness — a perfect
simile of the Sun during such periods. The first artist who drew the
aureoles about the heads of his God and Saints was not inspired, but
represented it on the authority of temple pictures and traditions of
the sanctuary and the chambers of initiation where such phenomena
took place. The closer to the head or to the aura-emitting body, the
stronger and the more effulgent the emanation (due to hydrogen,
science tells us, in the case of the flames); hence the irregular
red flames around the Sun or the "inner corona." The fact that these
are not always present in equal quantity shows only the constant
fluctuation of the magnetic matter and its energy, upon which also
depend the variety and number of spots. During periods of magnetic
inertia the spots disappear, or rather remain invisible. The further
the emanation shoots out the more it loses in intensity, until
gradually subsiding it fades out; hence the "outer corona," its
rayed shape being due entirely to the latter phenomenon whose
effulgence proceeds from the magnetic nature of the matter and the
electric energy and not at all from intensely hot particles, as
asserted by some astronomers. All this is terribly unscientific,
nevertheless a fact, to which I may add another by reminding you
that the Sun we see is not at all the central planet of our little
Universe, but only its veil or its reflection. Science has
tremendous odds against studying that planet which luckily for us we
have not; foremost of all — the constant tremors of our atmosphere
which prevent them from judging correctly the little they do see.
This impediment was never in the way of the ancient Chaldee and
Egyptian astronomers; nor is it an obstacle to us, for we have means
of arresting, or counteracting such tremors — acquainted as we are
with all the akasic conditions. No more than the rain secret would
this secret — supposing we do divulge it — be of any practical use
to your men of Science unless they become Occultists and sacrifice
long years to the acquirement of powers. Only fancy a Huxley or a
Tyndall studying Yog-vidya! Hence the many mistakes into which they
fall and the conflicting hypotheses of your best authorities. For
instance; the Sun is full of iron vapours — a fact that was
demonstrated by the spectroscope, showing that the light of the
corona consisted largely of a line in the green part of the
spectrum, very nearly coinciding with an iron line. Yet Professors
Young and Lockyer rejected that, under the witty pretext, if I
remember, that if the corona were composed of minute particles like
a dust cloud (and it is this that we call "magnetic matter") these
particles would (1) fall upon the sun's body, (2) comets were known
to pass through this vapour without any visible effect on them, (3)
Professor Young's spectroscope showed that the coronal line was not
identical with the iron one, etc. Why they should call those
objections "scientific" is more than we can tell.
(1) The reason why the particles — since they call them so — do not
fall upon the sun's body is self-evident. There are forces co-
existent with gravitation of which they know nothing, besides that
other fact that there is no gravitation properly speaking, only
attraction and repulsion. (2) How could comets be affected by the
said passage since their "passing through" is simply an optical
illusion; they could not pass within the area of attraction without
being immediately annihilated by that force of which no vril can
give an adequate idea, since there can be nothing on earth that
could be compared with it. Passing as the comets do through
a "reflection" no wonder that the said vapour has "no visible effect
on these light bodies." (3) The coronal line may not seem identical
through the best "grating spectroscope," nevertheless, the corona
contains iron as well as other vapours. To tell you of what it does
consist is idle, since I am unable to translate the words we use for
it, and that no such matter exists (not in our planetary system, at
any rate) — but in the sun. The fact is, that what you call the Sun
is simply the reflection of the huge "storehouse" of our System
wherein ALL its forces are generated and preserved; the Sun being
the heart and brain of our pigmy Universe, we might compare its
faculae — those millions of small, intensely brilliant bodies of
which the Sun's surface away from the spots is made up — with the
blood corpuscles of that luminary, though some of them as correctly
conjectured by Science are as large as Europe. Those blood
corpuscles are the electric and magnetic matter in its sixth and
seventh state. What are those long white filaments twisted like so
many ropes, of which the penumbra of the Sun is made up? What the
central part that is seen like a huge flame ending in fiery spires,
and the transparent clouds, or rather vapours formed of delicate
threads of silvery light, that hangs over those flames — what — but
magneto-electric aura — the phlogiston of the Sun? Science may go on
speculating for ever, yet so long as she does not renounce two or
three of her cardinal errors she will find herself groping for ever
in the dark. Some of her greatest misconceptions are found in her
limited notions on the law of gravitation; her denial that matter
may be imponderable; her newly invented term "force" and the absurd
and tacitly accepted idea that force is capable of existing per se,
or of acting any more than life, outside, independent of, or in any
other wise than through matter; in other words that force is
anything but matter in one of her highest states, the last three on
the ascending scale being denied because only science knows nothing
of them; and her utter ignorance of the universal Proteus, its
functions and importance in the economy of nature — magnetism and
electricity. Tell Science that even in those days of the decline of
the Roman Empire, when the tattooed Britisher used to offer to the
Emperor Claudius his nazzur 6 of "electron" in the shape of a string
of amber beads — that even then there were yet men remaining aloof
from the immoral masses, who knew more of electricity and magnetism
than they, the men of science, do now, and science will laugh at
you as bitterly as she now does over your kind dedication to me.
Verily, when your astronomers, speaking of sun-matter, term those
lights and flames "clouds of vapour" and "gases unknown to science"
(rather!) chased by mighty whirlwinds and cyclones — whereas we know
it to be simply magnetic matter in its usual state of activity — we
feel inclined to smile at the expressions. Can one imagine
the "Sun's fires fed with purely mineral matter" — with meteorites
highly charged with hydrogen giving the "Sun a far-reaching
atmosphere of ignited gas"? We know that the invisible sun is
composed of that which has neither name, nor can it be compared to
anything known by your science — on earth; and that its "reflection"
contains still less of anything like "gases," mineral matter, or
fire, though even we when treating of it in your civilized tongue
are compelled to use such expressions as "vapour" and "magnetic
matter." To close the subject, the coronal changes have no effect
upon the earth's climate, though spots have — and Professor N.
Lockyer is mostly wrong in his deductions. The Sun is neither a
solid nor a liquid, nor yet a gaseous globe; but a gigantic ball of
electromagnetic Forces, the store-house of universal life and
motion, from which the latter pulsate in all directions, feeding the
smallest atom as the greatest genius with the same material unto the
end of the Maha Yug.
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application