Theos-Talk Archives (December 2009 Message tt00066)

Leon,

Greetings to you.I read your posts with great interest,although
it is mostly over my head.I write because I respect your opinion
regarding the occult side of things scientific(physics).

A Hindu brother posted some interesting comments on another site
(Temple Of Soloman). He left a link to his web-site,which is
very well done,there is a particular place in his site called
"cycle of life" where he writes at some length about physics,
and the nature of time,etc.

I think theosophists might find this site interesting. Would
especially like to see what you think.The site is at:
http://divineaim.com/mind.htm

peace to you all,
          brad

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Leon Maurer <leonmaurer@...> wrote:
>
> 
> On "rybo6" rybo6@... os_jbug wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Jan 12, 2009, at 6:37 PM, Leon Maurer wrote:
> >>> The geodesics are 3D flatten tetrahedral tubulars with an
> >>> associated  central axis.  imho
> >>>
> >>
> >> LM:  So, where does consciousness come from in that derivative view
> >> of the surface geometry of a sphere?
> >
> > Leon, first of all the physical and metaphysical aspects of
> > consciousness exist in degrees.
> >
> > Obivously the geometry I laid out is a static view.
> >
> > Consiouness is resulatant of dynamic interrelationships in mass, via
> > the,  no less than,  interfering set of 8, 5-fold, left or right skew
> > Icosahedra, thereby defining internal and nucleated 4-fold polyhedra.
> 
> How does that explain awareness, will, qualia?
> 
> How does subjective consciousness arise from objective mass?
> 
> Dynamic objective spatial geometry can't explain non spatial, non  
> massive, non energetic, entirely static subjective awareness,  
> perception (qualia), intention (will), or discernment,  
> discrimination, decision (thought), etc.
> 
> Nor can any geometry explain the storage or transmission of the  
> information of consciousness, or the actual mechanism, and operation  
> of the mind and its binding to the brain.  That is, unless the  
> geometry is that of electrodynamic, coenergetic (harmonically  
> resonant) radiant fields.
> 
> Therefore, the experience of consciousness must depend solely on wave  
> patterned information transformed and transmitted by electrodynamic  
> phase conjugate adaptive resonance processes indirectly or directly  
> from the senses, brain-mind or memory fields.  This depends on  
> physiology and electro chemistry, and requires subjectivity (or proto- 
> consciousness) to be a fundamental quality of the ubiquitous ground  
> of absolute space. ? that underlies all metric physical and  
> hyperphysical spacetime fields. How else could consciousness, unless  
> it was the stationary aspect of the singularity source of all radiant  
> fields, be capable of discriminating between the subtlest vibratory  
> modulations of visual or sound images?
> 
> How the consciousness (awareness) detects, holograohically  
> reconstructs and experiences the sensory and memory information is  
> explained at:
> http://tinyurl.com/astrobiocoen
> >
> >
> >>  None of that even gives us the faintest idea of the actual origin
> >> and genesis of the physical space-time continuum.
> >
> > Why do yo believe there is an orign to a "space-time continuum"?  I
> > see no evidence of such and in fact it is commonly understood the
> > energy( Physical 0 cannot be created nor destroyed ergo eternally
> > existent with no "origin".
> 
> The spacetime continuum originates from the spin momentum of the  
> "singularity" of Aether Space (the first physical derivative of  
> absolute unconditioned space). This singularity is an eternal "laya  
> point" of this cosmos (among infinite other universes) that  
> periodically manifests into overall metaphysical and physical  
> spacetime.  Thus, the potential energy (G-force of the singularity)  
> ?  when emanated, radiated and transformed through the fractal  
> involutions of hyperspace, until the lowest frequency/energy order  
> physical/material world appears ? can neither be created nor  
> destroyed.  There is no "belief" involved ? since the fundamental  
> geometry and its cyclic spin based electrodynamics speaks for itself.
> 
> As far as the physical world is concerned, it has its origin in the  
> astral world, when a sudden frequency phase change occurs at the Big  
> Bang... And astral light (at c^2) changes to physical light at (at  
> "c") and the particle-substance equation changes from E=mc^4 to E-mc^2.
> 
> This is very simple if you think about it, and explains all the laws  
> of physics that come into effect when the symmetry breaks, and the  
> quantum particle standing waves precipitate out on the surface of the  
> physical/material gravitational field, along with all the galaxies,  
> star systems spewing out of their black/white holes.  Einstein knew  
> all this, but unfortunately he could never prove it, during his  
> lifetime, using the limited renormalized algebraic mathematics of  
> relativity and quantum physics prevalent at that time.
> >
> >>  Interesting structural geometries, to be sure... But a waste of
> >> time for finding any correlation with cosmogenesis or
> >> consciousness, imho.  To think so, is to live in a dream world
> >> where nothing that occurs need an explanation which makes logical
> >> sense.
> >
> > "life is  but a dream" is famous phrase, that has some basis, when
> > logic is applied.
> >
> > Fuller was fond of his comment "there are no solids" and "what we
> > have, is interfering and non-interfering patterns operating in pure
> > principle".
> >
> > There is an old book called  "there are no electrons" and as you know
> > the electron is viewed as a fuzzy cloud of probability not certainty.
> 
> Milo Wolff <http://www.quantummatter.com/articles/> has recently  
> proven that electrons are spherical standing waves of the aether, or  
> total physical/electro-gravitational spacetime.
> >
> > Jacaob bekenstiens holographic black hole studies led him to make the
> > statement "we appear to be 2D creatures having and illusion of 3D"
> >
> > this correlates to time as a fading memory of a non-existent past and
> > time as anticipation of a non-exist future, leaving only a non-
> > existent time of 2D here and now present.
> 
> I think that this is a completely erroneous interpretation.   Time is  
> nothing more than a measure of change and is linked to the frequency   
> phase order and corresponding velocity of the fractal descending  
> fields of hyperspace.  That is why time slows down and stops as mass  
> approaches infinity at the speed of light.  The frequency phase  
> change at that point is like a fish bumping into a wall of ice.
> 
> Hawkings' studies of the black hole has shown why light stops at the  
> event barrier quite some distance from its central singularity.   
> What's in between is the three further phase changes that the light  
> energy needs to arrive at the near infinite mass center of spin  
> momentum at the singularity.   Since this point is almost at absolute  
> zero°K, there can be no further linear motion, and the Aether space  
> there is a BEC ? where it acts as if it were a single particle in  
> coadunation with all other zero-point "singularities" in the entire  
> physical universe.  This is how everything is interconnected with  
> everything else and conforms with the holographic principle.  It is  
> also the explanation of the EPR effect as well as quantum  
> entanglement.  All of this being completely counter intuitive.  So  
> it's no wonder you and even many physicists still misinterpret the  
> apparently physical/material world ? where all structural  
> information, based on previous cycles of cosmic evolution is  
> contained in every zero-point singularity... Thus, the the past,  
> present and future is contained in the ever present NOW.
> >
> >>
> >> The basis of actual radiant field spatial reality is a fractal
> >> involved hyperspherical (toroidal) geometry,
> >
> > Is that a finite or infinite fractal.
> 
> Infinite in absolute space and overall hyperspacetime, but more or  
> less finite in the lowest order physical spacetime... Although we  
> could imagine such total spacetime as an infinite set of an even  
> higher order infinity ? as explained by Cantor's infinite set  
> mathematics.
> >
> > Fuller believes the physical universe is micro-infinitely sub-
> > dividing ergo that would correlate to an infinite fractal.
> 
> He was right ? since he considered that all the fractal fields  
> between the zero-point in Planck space, up through quantum to  
> classical space time, is infinite.  It fits with the ancient Neo  
> Platonic idea that the universe has its center everywhere and its  
> circumference nowhere.  It also conforms with the fact that here are  
> an infinite number of zero-points of absolute space in every part of  
> configuration space, and that every singularity manifests its own  
> infinite series of harmonic fields that extend throughout metric  
> space, and overlap each other... This. being the basis of a  
> holographic universe ? where all its information is contained in  
> every zero-point spin momentum of each ZPE field, ad infinitum.
> >
> > I see toroids of gravitational *spacetime* as Great Circle-like
> > Polygonal Geodesic Tublars, but very flat tubulars.
> >
> > Ultra-micro   ?ergo hyper-dimensional space?, string-like but still
> > 3D ribbons.
> 
> Maybe like this one?   http://leonmaurer.info/ABCimages/ 
> BuddhaBabyGordianKnot.jpg (This represents the initial non linear  
> motion of the singularity.)   Note that the edges of the ribbon would  
> be moving in opposite directions.  (Couldn't this more or less be the  
> model of the twin spiral DNA molecular structure"?)
> 
> Or, perhaps this cross section of the harmonic hyperspherical  
> toroidal fields of cosmogenesis (that are analogous to the radiant  
> heart fields you once showed us) might be closer to your vision.  If  
> so, note that each line represents only one parallel edge of the  
> spiraling toroidal ribbon that weaves all the fractal involved  
> hyperspherical fields.
> http://leonmaurer.info/ABCimages/InvolutionToroidFractFld-di.jpg
> 
> Also, this implies that there is only one force -- with gravitation  
> being its compressive aspect spiraling inward, and electromagnetics  
> being its expansive aspect spiraling outward... Thus explaining the  
> coriolis forces that generates tornadoes, hurricanes, cyclones, and  
> water spiraling down a drain.
> >
> >> originating from the spin momentum of the conscious zero-point of
> >> absolute space ? that has no inherent geometry except the abstract
> >> motion of infinite cyclic spins...
> >
> > I equate your absolute space with metaphysical space macro existent
> > metaphysical space, beyond the finite set of our ribbon universe and
> > micro-infinite metaphysical space, between the ribbons that define
> > our universe.
> 
> Uhh... That could be it... But, we can only know if you can draw a  
> picture of it. However, I don't think absolute space could be  
> pictured ?since it has no radial dimensions, and is entirely outside  
> of all space and time.  So, having no linear dimensions or other  
> attributes, it's completely ineffable, and can't be macro (or micro)  
> metaphysical.  The only thing that could be between the ribbons that  
> define our space (as I defined them above) is the aether space  
> located everywhere (like a BEC).  And even that cannot be pictured  
> except as infinite zero-point singularity's, each of infinitesimal  
> diameter located everywhere in total space, and acting together as if  
> one thing in itself... Thus, explaining action at a distance and  
> entanglement.
> >
> >
> >> All of which are located in the same place ? and together,
> >> containing infinite holographic information of previous existences
> >> of many worlds (galaxies, star systems, organic life forms, etc.)
> >> eventually spread out everywhere in metric physical/material
> >> spacetime ?
> >
> > No two things cann occupy the same place.  Even tho it is claimed
> > that photons love to occupy the same place.
> 
> Since absolute space and aether space are at 0°K (or infinitesimally  
> close to it) they act as BEC's and therefore, they are not separate  
> "things"... Thus, their spin momentums or spin singularities can  
> occupy the same place (or ONE space).  Thus, the information of the  
> entire cosmos (as well as its inherent consciousness) can be  
> contained (like a hologram) in every zero-point of Aether space after  
> it spreads out everywhere at the big-bang.  This is just about as  
> counter intuitive as the theory of relativity is from the standpoint  
> of a classical or quantum physicist ? who sees all particles or  
> material forms as being separate points or independent structures.   
> Can they imagine mass shrinking to zero length at the speed of  
> light?  Or that time also stops?  The barrier is that physical  
> instruments are observing and measuring physical phenomena, and can't  
> see beyond the limits of the lowest order physical/material frequency  
> phase order they are both a part of.  That's why all this is counter  
> intuitive to all reductive physicalists.
> >
> >> all within a surrounding and interpenetrating hyperspacetime (and
> >> fractal involving down to the smallest ZPE fields in the false
> >> vacuum).  See how this fundamental pre cosmic spin might look ? if
> >> you can twist your imagination down into the Aether level (where
> >> the localized G-force spinergy manifests as ZPE at less than 1.6 x
> >> 10^-35 cm and near infinite mass):
> >> http://leonmaurer.info/ABCimages/BuddhaBabyGordianKnot.jpg
> >
> > there is no such thing as a true Zero point energy.
> >
> > Energy is inerently non-zero ergo active physical reality can never
> > ever be at zero.
> >
> > This is why energy cannot be created nor destroyed Leon.
> >
> > I think you have not thought this through enough.
> 
> Then explain where the energy that generates and empowers all  
> fundamental particles and the Planck space fields comes from?
> 
> Naturally, if we think in terms of point particles, we can't  
> comprehend the true nature of overall reality ? which has to  
> originate from a source of infinite potential energy or G-force.   
> That could only be the unlimited spin momentum of absolute zero (no  
> linear particulate motion) space.  This is a logical necessity.  No- 
> thing comes from nothing.  Thus, the spin momentum of the  
> singularity, at the source of all active energy, cannot be zero (in  
> mass-energy potential) but can be zero in linear dimension at the  
> infinitely small pre-cosmic absolute space level where consciousness  
> resides.  This is beyond all metric space and time, and cannot be  
> explained in its terms.
> 
> The exact center of a particle;s spherical standing wave (like a  
> photon) must be a non metric zero-point of absolute space (underlying  
> the next highest order astral, mental and spiritual space)  See cross  
> section diagram of a photon viewed head on: http://leonmaurer.info/ 
> ABCimages/PhotonField.gif  This zero-point (at its exact spherical  
> standing wave center) is pure consciousness.
> 
> But, if we see the "singularity" or manifest aether space (that began  
> the metric physical space after fractally involving through  
> spiritual, mental and astral space) as being finite in diameter ?  
> then you are correct... It's first derivative in physical/material  
> space is the photon ? which has a finite diameter (as does its three  
> inner harmonics representing the spiritual mental and astral photons)
> 
> Sp there cannot be a true zero-point (of energy or linear motion of  
> the aether) in physical spacetime...
> 
> But that physical space is not the timeless and formless absolute  
> space that underlies its birth (along with all its precursor higher  
> order hyperspace fields) ? which is located at the exact center of  
> the spin momentum singularity in every black hole, galaxy, star,  
> particle, material form, etc., etc.
> 
> Therefore, the source of that total cosmic energy must be in the  
> infinite spin momentum of the zero-point of absolute space itself ?  
> which is outside of all metric space and time ? from the highest  
> order cosmic spiritual fields on down to the Planck false vacuum  
> fields (chaos according to quantum physics)
> 
> I think that's thinking through it enough... So a true infinite ZPE  
> has to exist in absolute pre cosmic reality.  This is the only way  
> that Mass Energy cannot be created or destroyed (at any level of  
> cosmic hyperspacetime or meta physical and physical spacetime).
> 
> >>> Free-will is an illusion.
> >>>
> >>
> >> LM: How can it be, when it is a function of the absolute space that
> >> is at the center of every hyperspace and metric spacetime field ?
> >> and everyone can make choices of action based solely on their
> >> conscious intention?  No matter that such actions are dependent on
> >> the laws of  nature. For example, one cannot will themselves to
> >> rise against the force of gravity, or see through a brick wall.
> >
> >
> > "choices" are superficially appearing resultants of oscillations of
> > ultra-micro *spacetime* in our macro-physical bodies.
> >
> > Those superficial "choices" are constrained by physical limits of
> > reality.
> >
> > Metaphysical cosmic laws do not govern or constrain any physical
> > thing, they are just the metaphysical complement to physical.
> >
> > Only the physical  ?or quais-physical gravity? can contain any
> > physical thing.
> >
> 
> Sure... But your argument about choice ? which is the prerogative of  
> conscious will alone (that is a fundamental quality of unconditioned  
> absolute space) ? is entirely specious...
> 
> What makes you think that "oscillations of ultra-micro  
> spacetime" (whatever you think that is) is the cause of  
> consciousness?  And, if *choice* is the apparent result of such  
> oscillations ? what causes the modulations of the oscillations that  
> causes the different choices or responses to the awareness?  e.g.;  
> How does my choice to look in a certain direction (or not) depend on  
> "the physical limits of reality"? Spacetime doesn't make choices,  
> only conscious beings with evolved minds can.
> 
> IOW, explain how objective motion (oscillation) can be the cause of  
> subjective awareness, will or intent (choice)?  If you can answer  
> that ? you will have solved the "hard problem" and deserve a Nobel  
> prize. ;-)
> >
> >>
> >> What's free is the intention to act or not act (when permitted by
> >> natural laws).  And, at the primal beginning, why wouldn't the
> >> cosmic consciousness be totally in control of its will to observe
> >> the great show opening around it?
> >
> >
> > I see no evidence of  "cosmic consciousness".  A cosmic integrity,  
> > yes.
> 
> And, of course the fact that you see no evidence of "cosmic  
> consciousness" is sufficient proof to deny its existence.  Right?
> 
> Can you "see" the evidence that that mass compresses to zero  
> dimension at the speed of light?  So, does the fact that you cannot  
> see any evidence of it prove it cannot exist?
> 
> Can you show evidence that anyone else has conscious experience the  
> same as you do?  IOW, do they see the color red the same as you do?
> 
> Besides, how can there be "integrity" without consciousness?  (Unless  
> you mean by integrity that the cosmos is an inseparable entity in  
> itself.)  To me, "integrity" is a moral/ethical word closely related  
> to consciousness.
> 
> Could there even be a cosmos, if there was not a cosmic consciousness  
> to perceive it, if not create it?
> 
> 
> >> ... While knowing full well that its laws were immutable,
> >
> > Inviolate ergo eternally existent cosmic law.
> 
> Yes... Just like eternally existent cosmic consciousness... And, just  
> like eternally existent cosmic force.  As the potential sources of  
> all phenomenal individual consciousness and particulate matter-energy  
> fields and forms.
> 
> Can you imaging subjectivity without objectivity, an object without a  
> subject, an observation without an observer, motion without  
> stillness, light without darkness, fullness without emptiness.  
> something without nothing?
> 
> How can these dualities not be fundamental ? when the immutable  
> cosmic law is based on a pure zero-point cyclic spin that must be a  
> continuous spiral vortex triple loop on at least three axes?  That,  
> when expanded, can only produce (on each axis) a 2D circle with two  
> inherent inner circles, and then (due to lateral spin) a 3-D sphere  
> with two inner spheres.... Which ultimately expands and involves into  
> an infinite diameter hyperspherical (toroidal) field ? whose inner  
> spheres (following the same cyclic laws) continue to fractally  
> involve, ad infinitum, as analogous inner hyperspheres... Until,  
> eventually, they return back to the original spin at infinite mass...  
> This structure is repeated analogously at every zero-point throughout  
> the entire expanded cosmos.  Thus, the universe is composed of  
> infinite spheres, within spheres within spheres, in octaval and  
> duodecimal series on each hyperspace level ? ad infinitum ? both  
> expansively and compressively.
> 
> For a symbolical representation of how there fields analogously  
> involve and evolve into our physical universe (macrocosm) and  
> ultimately into the ideal human form (microcosm) ? study the  
> illustrations at:
> http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/23/13
> 
> The causative  logic, based on pure reason, coupled with the  
> holographic principle, and governed by the immutable laws of cycles  
> and periodicity, conservation, and symmetry ? from absolute to  
> relative, infinite to finite, consciousness or spirit through mind to  
> matter or mass/energy ? is unassailable.
> 
> >>> Ultra-micro gravitational spacetime is celluar ergo we have cells of
> >>>
> >>> macro-biologicals.
> >>>
> >>
> >> LM: Only because you are talking about the fourth lowest frequency
> >> phase order physical spacetime, where every particle standing wave
> >> starts out from a particular spin momentum ZPE source.
> >
> > There is no ZPE.  Energy is never ever zero activity.
> 
> That's because the energy you are speaking of occurs on a particular  
> manifest level of metaphysical or physical spacetime.
> 
> The absolute infinite spin momentum (ZPEa) underlying the spin  
> momentum (ZPEc) of the cosmic singularity?which, in turn, underlies  
> the spin momentum (ZPEp) of the physical/metaphysical universe  
> singularity ? are of different orders of frequency-energy  
> altogether.  And simply constitute a nested series of mass/energy  
> transformations
> >
> > You have not thought this through enough Leon.
> 
> All ZPE singularities in metric spacetime have a metric diameter, as  
> I have fully explained above as well as in my article at http:// 
> tinyurl.com/astrobiocoen
> 
> If you would think all that through, you might begin to understand  
> the true reality that underlies the illusionary world of your senses.
> >>
> >> Right now its all still a mathematical game, in which no one holds
> >> the key to the mystery.
> >
> > Metaphysical mathematics is just that Leon, illusionary dream we
> > observe and label as consciousness.
> 
> You are mixing categories.  The "metaphysical mathematics" (the  
> fractal topological geometry) has nothing to do with consciousness.  
> Consciousness is a separate aspect of the underlying absolute space.   
> The mathematical game I was talking about is the materialist  
> mathematics of the various physics theories now (including string  
> theory) that still can't see the forest for the trees, and do not  
> realize consciousness is the observer/creator of everything, and is  
> entirely separate from the creations.  Once they realize that, all  
> their physical mathematics will have to change into a metaphysical  
> mathematics -- which still won't have any relationship to  
> consciousness -- except as observer-observation.
> 
> The "illusionary dreams" are in the minds of the quantum  
> mathematicians who still believe in point particles and that physical  
> spacetime, and all its ponderable material forms, is all there is.   
> That's why, they will never understand the cause, nature or  
> mechanisms of consciousness, and why the "hard problems" will remain  
> forever unsolved by their mathematics or their observations.
> >
> >
> >> But, I'm certain that once they all realize the fundamental nature
> >> of the ubiquitous absolute space and its inherent infinite cyclic
> >> angular momentum, along with its built in holographic fractal
> >> nature ? they will come to a mutual agreement about how this
> >> entire cosmos periodically comes in and out of existence ? with
> >> each birth of the lowest order physical universe (as it comes out
> >> of the womb of hyperspace) appearing as the result of a "big
> >> bang." ;-))
> >
> > BIg Bang is ok, but they are not out of nothing or ZPE.
> 
> "Big Bang" refers only to appearance of the physical spacetime  
> universe as it expands out of metaphysical spacetime.  However, the  
> ZPE or G-force of the original cosmic source (along with proto- 
> consciousness) comes along with it in every zero-point (in the Planck  
> false vacuum) that generates its ZPE fields that create the virtual  
> particle fields ? which, in turn, empower all the fundamental quantum  
> particles... That are nothing more than hyperspherical standing waves  
> of aether space at various frequency/mass/energy densities... With  
> all of their accompanying harmonic fields being analogous to the  
> initial hyperspherical fractal involves fields of cosmogenesis.
> 
> Note how the inner fields of the photon are identical to the fields  
> of cosmogenesis, as well as those of human genesis.  This holographic  
> analogy goes all the way down to the DNA replicated in every cell of  
> every sentient being... Modified only by the random choices of action  
> by individualized consciousness at each level of "Physical" Nature...  
> Thus, accounting for the physical and psychic differences in every  
> species of living beings, the different responses of nature to  
> collective human actions, the cultural differences throughout the  
> civilized world, etc.
> 
> We can say then that all change, at any level of metaphysical or  
> physical nature, is initiated by consciousness and influenced by  
> thought and choice, in one degree or another.
> 
> Best wishes
> Leon Maurer
> http://www.tellworld.com/Astro.Biological.Coenergetics/
> 
> BTW, When I had my NDE and left the body, I could still see, hear and  
> think, without eyes, ears or brain, and visual time slowed down to a  
> crawl, while I experienced my entire lifetime pass in review in a few  
> seconds.  That started me thinking, over 45 years ago, until I found  
> out why.
> >
> > Rybo
> >
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>