Time


I have been having some overlap in fields while thinking about the nature of time. Time gives us some of the more interesting paradoxes in Western Science; The Twin Paradox, Time Dilation, Instantaneity. Once again I would like you to consider the possibility that we adhere so tightly to our “beliefs” that it blocks us from seeing the obvious.


Let me point out a few of these beliefs:

  • We believe that speed is measured relative to an “at rest” state which doesn’t exist in nature. Everything vibrates.
  • We believe that the Universe is divided into a 3 dimensional coordinate system that nature uses. 
  • Einstein has shown, among other things; that the speed of light appears to be a constant,
  • some events in the physical world appear to occur instantaneously over great distances,
  • time appears to be an illusion of mind, relative and different for each individual.

These give some insurmountable problems when trying to deal with the concept of time. Let’s try a different point of view.

Let’s start by realizing that everything vibrates at some subdivision of the speed of light (c) which appears to us to be a constant. This is Eternity. When we can traverse the Universe in an instant we experience Eternity. Let’s see this once again as the aether. This was part of what Einstein was trying to resolve with the idea of “hidden variables”. How does one resolve instantaneous action with the concept of time and the concept of the speed of light being a constant and insurmountable.

What if we start with Eternity as the “constant state.” For objects to come into physical perception they must slow down. Anything beyond this speed of light threshold is not within our perception. Now, this slow down comes about as the “knotting” of energy events into matter. This is synergy as opposed to radiation which appears as coils of energy. At this point we should consider some points presented in David Wilcock’s Ascension 2000.

In order to truly be able to get a grasp on Kozyrev’s work and related findings, certain new analogies for physical matter are required. Rigorously, Kozyrev’s work forces us to visualize all physical objects of matter in the Universe as if they were sponges that are submerged in water.

In all of these analogies, we should consider the sponges as having remained in water for a long enough period of time that they are completely saturated. Bearing this in mind, there are two things we can do with such sponges underwater: we can decrease the volume of water that they contain or increase it, by very simple mechanical procedures.
1.Decrease: If a submerged, saturated sponge is squeezed, cooled or rotated, then some of the water inside of it will be released into its surroundings, decreasing its mass. Once the sponge is no longer disturbed, the pressure on the millions of tiny pores is relieved, causing it to again absorb water and expand back to its normal resting mass.
2.Increase: We can also pump more water pressure into the sponge in its rest state, such as by heating (vibrating) it, thus causing some of the pores to expand with more water than they can comfortably hold. In this case, once we relieve the added pressure, the sponge will naturally release its excess water and shrink back down to its normal resting mass.

Though it would seem impossible to most people, Kozyrev showed that by shaking, spinning, heating, cooling, vibrating or breaking physical objects, their weight can be increased or decreased by subtle but definite amounts. And this is but one aspect of his amazing work.

Please note, at this point we don’t have to concern ourselves with the validity of the above stated model. We are merely testing it as a hypothesis and it will either work or not.

Advertisements

Vector Equilibrium


I have been making physical and cyber models of some of the basic Synergetic Principles in anticipation of using them in an upcoming seminar. I have decided to post them here as I complete and animate them. I’ll give a brief description of what we are looking at with some possibilities.

This model is a 3 frequency Vector Equilibrium [FULL ANIMATION] and is the root of much of synergetics. We are not showing the vectors here, only the spheres, and, for demonstration purposes, they are half the unit radius. As the object rotates about the Y axis we can see many variations in alignment and symmetry. I suspect this is typical of many of the “particles” we are dealing with. As it rotates it may appear very differently depending on one’s POV. This also contributes to the Heisenberg Principle in that it is virtually impossible to locate the exact center in the midst of the spin. Remember we are talking about trying to lock an unknown, unseen object in space and time as layers of other “particles” whiz around it. Like trying to see where the end of a fan blade is.

The 3 frequency is significant as it represents the upper limit of unique sphere nestings. The outer layer of 92 gives us the number of unique, regenerative elements. The total number of spheres is 238, the atomic number of Uranium, the heaviest of the elements. We’ll go into this in another post.

Waxing Political


I have been listening to a great radio show called On Point  which I listen to on www.wbfo.org. This morning for example they had back-to-back hours on Education and the internet, and an interview with the author of “When America First Met China.”

The education hour explored the potential future of education and the application of the newest technologies. The implications of the availability of education and how it should best be distributed and it really shows that most of these existing Universities are truly interested in distributing education but, as soon as we get the corporations involved (and they are NOT people) focus shifts to the bottom line and their own future existence. We must, as a globally evolving nation, invest heavily in the education of our youth.

Now, ask yourself this. If you agree with this premise, who do you think will keep us on a path to better opportunity and who wants to cut “entitlements.” I’m not looking for rebuttals or arguments but, this just appears to be common sense to me.


The second part of this show was an interview delving into the US involvement with China from the beginning and was fascinating. Items from; the treatment in the US of Cooleys, to the decimation of the sea otter population in which pelts were bought from US trappers for a small fraction of what they sold for in China, to the exportation of opium and the Opium War. Ups and downs in huge cycles. How, many of the fortunes of The Rockefellers etc were gotten by trade with China which they turned into railroads and industry. Men (sorry, ladies, that’s history) who kept their money moving, individuals who, in some cases, cared deeply about the future and the country. In many cases they were the recipients of huge government handouts, during the wars, given land in exchange for developing infrastructure. In the case of Herbert Dow, he was given a million dollars during World War II to develop a “synthetic rubber.” After the war, after having developed a great petrochemical complex capable of making huge quantities of some very essential chemicals such as chlorine and later plastics, what was the government to do? All of this developed on the taxpayers back. It couldn’t be controlled by the government, that would be seen as “socialism”.  So, the decision was made to give Dow Chemical to Herbert Dow for pennies on the dollar but, since it had a virtual monopoly AND was paid for by US taxpayers, it would be regulated. That is until Reagan decided it was “unfair” to regulate such an industry and anyone should be able to compete with Dow Chemical in an “open market.” An interesting twist.

I just don’t think that enough American corporations of today have that capacity to be concerned about anything other than profit. Unfortunately, much of the populace see themselves as those great men who built this country, they seem to think that by investing in some mutual fund that does good that they are building a future. And to some extent they are, but it’s an investment in themselves and their families. That’s all well and good but, if you are stashing away cash overseas while American Vets are homeless, or fighting “entitlements” which give young, poor mothers a place to spend a night, that’s a bit hypocritical, no matter what church you go to on Sunday or Saturday.  I can’t imagine myself or anyone wanting to jump into this “handout”.

You may already be on the other side of this fence but, it’s still going to be there after the election. I know where I’m gonna’ be.