Who Needs the Higgs (A Freak's View of the Uni-verse)

It has been well over a decade now since I saw the video. In it a radiantly vibrant silver haired woman marches assertively up to a podium and proceeds to give a slide lecture presentation of her discovery and recording of nothing less than the human energy field - a first in western science. Her voice is powerful and her manner confident - a polished presenter as befits her background as a retired Professor of Physiology at a major university.
She had been studying the musculature of dancers and this led to her investigating what lay behind the 'noise' on her recordings of the electronic traces created by the movement of their muscles. What she discovered was a whole range of minute signals that had never been seen before -- patterns below the pattern -- like some sort of energetic Mandelbrot, they were in the audio range and could be amplified and heard as well as ‘seen' by sensitive's, as if they were the ‘sound of light'. No wonder no one had ever found them - who would have guessed! 'Light' you can listen to! And furthermore each one of these frequencies corresponded to a discrete characteristic of the human mind and body and each had a distinct waveform and color. So frequency, waveform and color were synonymous with different human characteristics. She was astounded.
But what was it about the shape of the waveforms of this 'light' that contributed to its appearance and function? Was there something behind light that helped give it its distinctive waveform and that was behind the characteristics of mind and body it appeared to represent? Was the waveform a combination of carrier wave and some sort of modulated intent which helped to shape it and give it meaning -- a literal display of function following form? She didn't say.
Her name was Dr. Valerie Hunt and the waveforms she displayed on her slides were what are known as vector waveforms. All known frequencies in the electromagnetic spectrum are vector waves. Vector waves travel spatially for long distances and can be displayed and measured. But there are other waves in physics that are known to be 'below' or 'behind' the vector waveforms that we can see and measure and these waveforms are referred to as scalars and they are not so easy to see or measure -- or even describe.
Writing about scalars is like writing about zen. You could spend infinities at it and still be scratching your head in a different place. The language is all square and the 'whole' is a confoundin' dodecahedron. It's a pathetic operation -- has an endlessly futile feel to it like throwing water balloons at the sun. When you sift through the literature you are confronted with a Berlin wall of 'talkin' in tongues' terminology and Rune like formulas, all of which does nothing to clarify the true nature of the phenomena. In fact the opposite happens. A window of opacity opens up before the reader, somehow revealing yet simultaneously obscuring the view. Such is physics.
One thing though that does jump out at the casual investigator is that scalars have been referred to, at times as the information 'behind' a vector waveform and that when a vector waveform is 'collapsed' the scalar information is 'revealed'. This is generally done by running a vector through what is known as a Caduceus coil, a winding twisting pair of wires which wrap the wave back around on itself so as to combine the waveforms in such a way as to negate them, like a homeopathic. But the information left behind is not like a radio signal that was modulated onto a carrier wave -- a small vector riding on the back of a bigger vector -- it's the information that formed the wave itself... and that survives its destruction. A very curious phenomenon.
If scalars were something of an alchemist's dream then perhaps I was headed for a bottomless pit of pi in the sky, but as luck would have it I was eventually pointed in the direction of Tom Bearden, that curmudgeonly critic of all things false, inelegant and wrong headed in the field of electrical engineering. Bearden was a contradiction. On the one hand he was 'country... just folks', a loyal and retired military Cold Warrior with the Chuck Yeager twang, while on the other hand he was an ultimate, sophisticated and devastating Free Thinker! -- an intellectual and philosophical thorn in the side of an entire world view, like an 'edgy' Terence McKenna with an oscilloscope probe. No walls around his words! But he was more than just a pain in the neck to the Phd's in 'Double E'... he had something that not one of them could claim. He had earned a patent, but not just any patent, another boring 'breakthrough' in the long line of incremental engineering. No...his patent was unique, the first ever awarded for a Free Energy device (Uber Unity!). So when he 'spoke'... I listened. And what he spoke 'spoke volumes' to my clouded mind -- gave clarity to what were murky waters -- like Soma for my scratched sunglasses. What he 'spoke' was actually a reply to a question in an interview recorded on-line that he had given almost two decades earlier yet it was more revealing than any of even the more recent descriptions I could find.
On the subject of scalars...
"If the sum of the internal motions is zero, the external object seems to be sitting still and motionless to us (though it's still moving through time with -- usually -- uniform motion)."
Interesting -- scalars were somehow 'still'... yet "still moving'
"We describe that internal characteristic of the system as a vector zero resultant system. Externally we may also characterize it as a scalar, because it still possesses attributes that have magnitude. On the other hand, if the sum of the internal motions is not zero, but is a motion in a certain spatial direction, then to us the external object seems to be moving along in space. That is, it is translating spatially. Externally it has both magnitude and direction, so we view it as a vector. To label a thing as only a vector is to look only at its external attributes. To label a thing as only a scalar is to look only at its external attributes. To look at its internal attributes, it must be recognized as a scalar and a vector at the same time. That is, the scalar attributes must be recognized to be composed on internal vectors."
What he was describing was a paradox (takes one to know one!)... it not only seemed to move in space while standing still, a scalar had vector like movements but was not a vector...
"And the whole system that is not moving spatially is still moving in time. However, we don't see "time" but just space; therefore we see the thing as "motionless." However, the "motionless" thing we look at is rather like a fixed whirlpool in a swiftly flowing river the whirlpool seems to us to stay "fixed" and motionless, but internally its parts (the flowing water) are in constant motion."
Whoa... Scalars as whirlpools! They rotate but don't radiate.--- they occupy space, even rotate in space but don't radiate into space outside of the space they occupy!
A simple vector -- one 360 degree 'roller coaster' -- is created from two longitudinally coupled scalars -- i.e. two whirlpools abutted lengthwise, end to end so to speak. In eastern cosmology there is a phenomenon that comes tantalizingly close to the description of such a coupling of whirlpools and it's called a chakra. It was an idea that even Bearden would probably spit out like a peach pit, but it got my attention. I couldn't prove it -- but I couldn't rule it out either.
A chakra is two longitudinally coupled rotating standing waves -- Bearden again: "To look at its internal attributes, it must be recognized as a scalar and a vector at the same time. That is, the scalar attributes must be recognized to be composed on internal vectors." But in this case the vectors are spiraling, a crucial difference -- unlike the sinusoidal transverse model we normally associate with vectors that translate (i.e. radiate) through space. It's a Hybrid -- perfect for the times. And like a top, the only way it 'stands' in place is by rotating? It's self organizing! Like a traffic circle. So standing waves had to rotate -- otherwise they would unwind -- perhaps into vectors? -- vectors that didn't stand in place but that had to translated through space? And for vectors to be able to turn in circles they first had to spiral? Like an F-15! Energy can't be stopped! "Stand and be counted". Nothing in nature is still -- everything moves, so would whirlpools be natures way of appearing to 'stand still'? "Every-body...stand... Stand... Staaand!" Yea -- Sly!
The only problem was in nature sometimes these 'chakras' would couple in all kinds of ways -- some with the vortices running right back up along side or even inside each other. And the only thing they seemed to have in common was the abutment but even then they could wrap around from both ends like a spherical 'yin-yang' to form what appeared as particles. Clearly these were not going to look like the nice neat linear models in the science lit. There was variety here...attractors and chaos. And it had the potential to come in infinite variations, bending and twisting in endless ways -- function following form, a whole universe of unique shapes as the potential precursors for the manifestation of endlessly unique expressions.
I mean you can almost see it. Spirals do stand... but they're flexible -- like our bodies! (ask Dorothy!). Have you ever played Slinky? Have you ever eaten 'chi-zzz'?
Flexible, like a blanket at the beach... like a wave at the beach! Flexible, like a fiber optic... like the light in a fiber optic. Actually -- according to the Hunt discoveries...we are 'fiber optics'!
And finally...
"These are pure waves of Spacetime, and they are oscillating curvatures of space-time itself."
Yup, Bearden had lopped the scales from my eyes but the matter was put to rest in my mind when I looked at the writings of one Nikola Tesla, perhaps the most intuitive inventor of the industrial age and one with a long track record of creations that are at the heart of today's modern electrical world. If Bearden was 'Saturn & Uranus' then Tesla was 'Taurus on stilts'. In short, Tesla was no 'dreamer' -- he knew that what he invented was going to work even before it was tested. He had built a working remote controlled mini-warship before WWI -- a drone -- heavens to Afghanistan! And unlike other inventors who toiled at prototypes, tweaking by trial and error (10,000 lightbulbs later!) Tesla was famous for inventions that hit the ground running, fresh from his mind like a hot pizza pie. And mama mia, what inventions they were! No 'better bottle openers' here -- we're talking grand ideas on an even grander scale. And because of that he was considered to be something of a freak by his contemporaries who were some of the brightest thinkers in an age littered with halogen minds. But even they had never seen anything like him! Tesla, obviously... was 'not from these parts'.
The following is from a letter he wrote to the New York Times in 1908... (emphasis mine)
"According to an adopted theory, every ponderable atom is differentiated from a tenuous fluid, filling all space merely by spinning motion, as a whirl of water in a calm lake. By being set in movement this fluid, the ether, becomes gross matter." Clearly Bearden and Tesla were barking up the same tree.
But he didn't stop at mere theory or architecture, he was looking at practical applications - he wanted to control it, to create with it...(oh my!)
Again, from the same letter...
"It appears, then, possible for man through harnessed energy of the medium and suitable agencies for starting and stopping ether whirls to cause matter to form and disappear."
Clearly Tesla had plans for his 'whirlpool'. And Tesla was a man who knew what to do with a plan.
So if a man with the stature of Tesla was willing to bet it all on a whirl then perhaps it behooves us to clear our conceptual workbench, give him a little credit and take the time to contemplate his view.
As an analogy, a scalar is a system that is expanding or contracting on a sliding scale in multiple directions simultaneously - IE it's changing its magnitude. A vector translates directionally through space -- i.e. spatially. So a vector that scales is a vector that expands or contracts in multiple directions simultaneously while translating in a specific direction through space. Our hybrid. There is only one method in nature to accomplish that seamlessly and that is to spiral.
So could it be possible that what are often called 'scalars' in science may actually be coupled spinning pranic whirlpools composed of spiraling vectors, kinda like kundalini, and that this awe inspiring movement has not been adequately characterized? Even ordinary analog vector signals are difficult to model so a three dimensional whirlpool -- the ultimate compound analog device -- at the level of a scalar, would most definitely be a forbidding challenge. In any case, should it surprise us that with spirals being ubiquitous, even iconic in nature, that there would be a more fundamental equivalent in the scalar world? It would be more surprising if there weren't. And why is an object so central to eastern cosmology so conspicuously absent from mainstream western scientific investigation? You'd think energy was confined to railroad tracks and that transverse sinusoidal waves were the ‘bee's knee's' -- the end of the story -- in some frozen, eternal trolley car world. Something had to shape that hurricane and hurricanes are certainly not short on energy. i.e.: spiraling storms don't come from straight lines. Straight lines do.
In any case, common sense alone should tell us that if you're going to create a duality from an infinite source, then you need a device to transition somehow and the dual vortice is the path of least resistance for doing just that. You could think of it as an 'etheric fiber optic interface' -- or better yet, a sort of double barreled 'cosmic universal joint' with spiraling bearings and 'three on the Tree'! I mean, there is nothing else in nature even remotely up to the job. In fact this vortical movement would be a dimensional transition or stepping down from an infinite space into 3d space -- Huxley's Reducing valve -- where space can appear to 'stand still' -- and it is accomplished in nature with a hybrid movement or standing spiral, also known as first movement.
So the dual opposing vortice and/or chakra is the bridge between the real... the primal space and our world, and back! (the 'real space' race) It is the engine of creation and destruction -- a rotating tug of war between Shiva and Shakti. As such it requires a balancing force or Vishnu. But we don't see Vishnu as he's outside of creation -- in the source. Vishnu is the one who twists the valves of creation to maintain the world. He spins the chakras -- tweaks our world in a system so granular that it's capable of changes so fine as to go virtually unnoticed -- or so sudden as to seem catastrophic. All things are possible in such a system -- and such a system we seem to have.
Yes... Three on the Tree indeed. Always Three. The Caduceus, gift of Apollo (the God of light!) was two serpents wrapped around a central, immovable staff -- "thy rod and thy staff!" -- and they are positioned in perfect balance, exactly as the waveforms would be in its namesake coil just before they would collapse, thus revealing their precious 'information'. On and on... you name it... always Three. "Thus the Law of Three is manifested and the spiraling octave is writ large."
So if the dual opposing vortices would seem to be a 'u-joint' in the 'real space' race -- a 'gnostic tunnel' from one existence to another -- where do we go from here? Well one could start by going outward -- from spinning scalars to orb like particles -- from flowform's to flowers, monochords to musical scores, from minor and major charkas to trout streams and tornados -- from planetary power spots to spiraling planet tracks -- Galactic schematics... it's all there. Its got 'Doors to dimensions' and puzzling paradox -- infinitely granular and coarse beyond belief. It's creative and destructive, capable of instantaneous change and insidious mission creep... it's all there -- east and west, Huxley and Hermes, chaos and common sense -- an 'in your face mystery' a million miles from everywhere, it's all there... in the 'Blake of an eye' and a hundred mile stare.
It's all there...
But one really begins to appreciate the view when one takes the opposite journey -- inward -- beginning with our spiraling vector. If such a phenomenon exists, one would naturally ask what would lie 'beneath' it or 'behind' it and the answer would have to be a scalar -- but a scalar on a much smaller 'scale'. And that scalar would in turn be composed of even smaller spiraling vectors composed of still smaller scalars and on and on -- spiraling vectors enfolding spinning scalars enfolding spiraling vectors on into infinity -- Planck Length be damned -- an infinitely enfolding energetic Mandelbrot. And when one contemplates such an infinitely regressing movement one begins to appreciate that the words 'first movement' doesn't even begin to express the beginning -- that it's all an endless beginning -- it's all a one act play -- an infinitely recursive and enfolding one act play. Thus the 'first movement' is everywhere you look and pretty soon your sense of time will begin to attenuate along with your recursive view and on and on.
And a funny thing happens when you take the time to re-read this article. You'll begin to see deeper levels of meaning enfolded in each paragraph, sentence and word than the previous time you read it and then you'll see that the article itself is an enfolded Mandelbrot and your appreciation for it will deepen and deepen recursively like your newly enfolding view. And soon you'll look up and see the same thing in every thing you look at until your view of reality begins to shift and with it meaning itself will take on a whole new meaning and on and on and on - beginnings enfolding endings which enfold another beginning until there's no more beginnings or endings and you just are.
------------------------------------------ & ----------------------------------------
Postscript
There was one contemporary of Tesla who was not off-put by his 'out of this world' ideas and his name was Walter Russell. To characterize Russell as a 'Renaissance Man' would be to not do justice to his being. Russell was a natural mystic, artist, educator and businessman -- the very prototype of what many would hope to be the practical, fully functioning enlightened future of humanity. And the dual opposing vortices were at the heart of his cosmology. Tesla and he were acquainted and paradoxically, it was Tesla that told Russell to 'bury his ideas for a thousand years' as humanity was not ready for what he had to express. But as Robert Otey, an authority on Russell, has pointed out in an on-line interview with Matt Presti, Tesla was not aware of the coming Hunab Ku in 2012 and the acceleration of time that came with it. But we are.
For an inspiring musical and visual tour of Walter Russell's (and Viktor Schauberger's) scalable spiraling world see this.
For an excellent illustration of Viktor Schauberger's naturally spiraling waveforms see the book 'Hidden Nature' by Alick Bartholomew.
Also, western science is finally coming close to validating Valerie Hunt's empirical discovery decades ago of 'sound you can see' -- a sort of 'Synesthesia', long known to the initiated and familiar to sensitive's, OOB & NDE experiencers alike, it's been a 'long time comin'
See Dr. Hunt's DVD 'The Human Energy Field and Health' for images of 'light you can listen to' and much, much more... in my world, she gets the Nobel - in 2013!
For a more 'chaos like' alternative view of magnetic fields as dual opposing spinning (and wild looking) vortices see the classic book 'The Secret World of Magnets' by Howard Johnson, from Tom Bearden's Cheniere Press link below or on Amazon...
To see an interesting Mayan correlation between our spiraling galaxy and the Vedic chakra system see chapter 23 of John Major Jenkins book 'Galactic Alignment'.
And last but by no means least, in one of the many synchronicities associated with the writing above, I came across this image, shortly after finishing this piece -- Thank You Alex Grey -- one picture truly is worth an infinity of feeble words...
May we all enjoy the view...
from our human but impersonal ‘you'.
Big Apple to Katmandu!... may the Hunab Ku renew.
------------------------------------------- not the end -------------------------------------------
Image by NASA Goddard Photo and Video, courtesy of Creative Commons license.
Tweet- 11-30-10
- Robert McCoy's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version










Comments
INFINTUDE
In subterranean caverns of radiant light
Memories cluster, numbers take flight
Emerging instincts quiver and gleam
Coiling amorphous in the particle stream
Primordial echoes of voices and names
Vibrating cells, multiple strains
The communal hum of primitive tongues
Auguring the gossip of worlds to come
Thoughts eternal in the vast sensorium
Time without end in a moment of freedom
The inscrutable wisdom of an undying law
God speaking in riddles on the nature of awe
Beyond measure, there's no correlation
Impossible pleasures, transcending elation
So close and intimate, the likeness destroyed
There is no distance in the limitless void
We walk in spirals
I've only scanned your article so far but I feel that this story might be relevant somehow:
A Mystery: Why Can't We Walk Straight?
It shows that people when blindfolded walk in circles and spirals, while thinking that they are walking in a straight line. Even happens when driving, when external points of reference are removed.
Dizzy With Possibilities
In relation to an inversion or internal version of this phenomenon, especially in relation to the "Vishnu" concept
... in relation to "always threes" .. chant
Hare Krsna, Hare Krsna, Krsna Krsna, Hare Hare,
Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare"
Krsna {Sanskrit- krish-na} being the "internal version of Vishnu" ... Hare {huh-ray-rolling r} ... Rama { ra-ma} ... three words combining three internal or spiritual potencies ... Sat - Cit - Ananda
... the mind when chanting such in a steady rhythm, {pronounced & listened to properly} will transcend all structured karma .. release doer-ship though perfecting motion in relation to consciousness .. evolve understanding beyond fact
Attraction beyond force ...{Krsna} activity beyond chakra ... [Hare} ... steadfastness beyond stillness ... {Rama}
Spiral (Un)archetype
Thank you for writing this! As someone who had her head broken open by Nassim Haramein, I am fascinated by the role that spirals play in the evolution of human consciousness. I think the spiral represents the feedback loop of human interaction, as revealed through synchronicities and other non-causal phenomena.
Lots of inspiration and food for thought here...
Thanks again!
jp
Spiral as Feedback
This is an excellent observation IMO. It applies in 2 differnt and opposite ways. In a Tornado for instance we see an energetic "additive" function that increases energy in the storm. I have referred to this in the past as "Natures Feedback Amplifier". But an overlooked part of Tornados is that they also act (IMO strictly) as a Scalar Interferometer in that the feedback also has a homeopathic component (or self cancelling effect) which "exposes" scalar energy. This may account for the dimensional effect we commonly see such as 2x4's stuck in brick walls etc.
So when is a storm not a storm? - so to speak. Its both. Just as the mind is a storm - or not a storm - depending on whiuch way we "turn it" See my comment above for more detail on that.
Thanks again for the excellent observation -
now you talkin
RE to above comment
There is one point to keep in mind when using the spiral as visualization (or the infinite movement). It should be done with second or background attention and not ones primary attention - you can tell the difference because with the primary attention it will seem as if the spiral is appearing where your eyes are pointing whereas with second attention it will be elsewhere in the background. Thus if secondary attention is used it won't distract from whats in front of us which would be counterproductive. There should be an increase in ones ability to focus outward as a result. In my experience the background is where monkey mind begins and why it gets away with what it does - it's not in our primary sights. Also in my experience it only takes a moment of this practice to mulch a negative situation into productive energy so it's not something one has to do for very long in order to get real and noticable results. As a practice it will have a two fold effect - to increase ones ability to recognize second attention and to usefully employ it as well.
This essentially mimics what Schauberger taught about implosion and as such is a valid lesson from nature. Up till the recent decades the western mind has allowed the second attention to run unchecked with explosive results - thus the opposite practice is in line with counteracting that IMO and a natural extension of an already ongoing process.
One advantage of employing this technique is that it takes advantage of the minds natural trendency to project - but in this case the projection is an internally directed one and one that transforms counterproductive outward projectied mental patterns into useful energy rather than potentially manifesting them unconsciously in the world at large. Thus the individual takes advantage of the minds natural movement instead of struggling with it - puts it to good use and it consumes less energy to employ it - a double win. So rather than struggling with uncomfortable mind projections they are turned inward and used to the individuals advantage. It's in effect... mental recycling.
So instead of "garbage in - garbage out" it's...
"garbage in... free energy out...
That's the essence and Hallmark of any worthwhile meditation or yoga IMO.
As a friend said when he
Belief block
I have found that with the "infinitely regressing movement" projection that it helps to believe that in fact nature does indeed have an infinite source so it helps to have had a direct experience of that. But even then there can be a block but one way around it is to ask "does nature indeed have an infinite source?" - this seems to be a way around any unconscious beliefs to the opposite which can still be there as it is our habit to see nature only on the surface of things. So just asking the question appears to create an opening in that wall of belief long enough to get the visualization going at least briefly.
The imploding spiral does not appear to have any noticable belief blocks interfering with it so it only appears to require a willingness to do it - at least that I am aware of so far. As it is something that is opposed to the ordinary "outward movement" habit of mind it may take a reminder of some sort to even remember to try. After a few successes it becomes easier to invoke IMO.
Shapes of the Universe
wowow
OH MY GOD BOB!! Your article blew me away!! Your humor, your insights, your ability to make esoteric science comprehensible, your masterful weaving of spirituality, science and humor; where you were speaking FROM (to all of us as fellow travelers) … far more than I can put into words. This is clearly you as a master of all that you have done up to now, coming to the table with this beautiful synthesis and is so accessible. When I did the reading for you I saw you as a MASTER OF THE NEW PARADIGM …. This is you putting your toe in the water …….. C*O*N*G*R*A*T*U*L*A*T*I*O*N*Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Bearden Interview link and Tesla quote
It occurred to me that I had neglected to attribute the source of the Bearden interview and Tesla quote in the Postscript to the article above so I would like to correct that in the notes below: The Bearden interview was found on the Wiki link of Dale Pond's website on Sympathetic Physics: http://www.svpvril.com/ Bearden Interview linked below: http://pondscienceinstitute.on-rev.com/svpwiki/tiki-index.php?page=Scala... The Tesla quote can be found on the link below: http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1908-04-21.htm
Also for an understandable explanation of what a scalar is see DB Larson's link below...
http://library.rstheory.org/video/rs-102
Axion field and a balck hole...
Re to dowser
Enjoy the Feast - I'm still thinking about it! It's the Ultimate Deep Subject IMO. It's endlessly fascinating as it is (IMO) the ultimate answer to every issue facing us today - subtle energy, health, longevity and long term living in earth orbit, Time / Space travel and Dimensions, free energy, healing, environmental bio-remediation (IE healing the Planet) Spiritual, Mind and psychic phenomena... life after death, human interaction with technology... there is literally not a single area of our lives that isn't touched by this subject as it is eveything and everywhere. All roads lead to it and to deny it is to deny the future... or worse, to not be able to cope with future changes. 2012 will be the point where it all comes to a head - whether we accept and deal with this straight on or remain in denial will be the difference between success and failure.
Everything rests on this IMO... we will no longer be able to cope with the Tsunami of life threatening issues that face us without coming to grips with subtle energy and vortical forces. It is the Only way to facilitate the rate of change required to stop or reverse the flood of issues coming our way. To tackle them seperately with old paradigms of so called "particle physics" is to be divided and conquered. To appraoch it all from a single comprehensive and correct view of reality is the Only way to move through the "eye of the needle" facing us IMO...
There comes a point in the trajectory of every age and issue when increasing complexity (chaos) can no longer be sustained with increasingly complex answers alone. Somehow, a fallback to a greater simplicity is required in order to reorganize... to move forward and to breakthrough the wall of complexity. We are At That Wall right now IMO. The future will be an inevitable and practical mixture of simplicity and complexity - common sense and subtlety... or simplicity will be forced upon us - it Is being forced upon us. Vortical physics is the ultimate simple source of complexity and thus compatible with the needs of the future IMO...
Vortex
RE to Vortex
Stunned in this context is a good thing I assume. Yes these things are intuitive to many and thus resonate a great deal below the surface. Thanks for the insight about meditating on a vortice - that is indeed what I have been up to as a result of writing this piece - I go into that in detail in several of my comments above if perhaps you haven't seen them yet.
I have not - until now - been able to incorporate the Ouroborus in my thinking as I could not reconcile it's single plane rotation with what you refer to as the 'ring vortex' - I like that term. It resolves the difficulty. The Ouroborus is then an analogy for a more spherical phenomena? If so then I would assume you are referring to the twin wortices that wrap back around on themselves to form particles. The Schauberger book I referred to in the Postscript has excellent depictions of this and other naturally flowing energy paths. These pathways were well known to the ancients - Particularly the ancient Chinese in their depictions of the flow of Chi. Russell's work also paints pictures of this - literally.
If in fact these structures are fundamental to nature then how can we not account for them in so called 'particle physics'? This lack of account for the 3 main forces in the universe has ked to all kinds of intellectual fantasies about "dark energy" forces that are merely opinions attempting to account for concepts we don't understand. The universe is alot more simple than we have imagined up till now but that simplicity 'self organizes' in a complexity that is unimaginable - above the level of simplicity -therefore we impute complexity at all levels, even where simplicity reigns. Its a classic mind projection - and it blinds us to the simple truth. All complex structures are simple at their fundamental levels - that is a fundamental insight of any complex endeavor. Otherwise there would be no starting point. So to project complexity onto nature at its fundamental level is to blind ourselves to its true nature and to forever preclude our understanding. Subtlety is required here - flexibility - not equations and brute force colliders - IMO.
One last thing about self organizing. Somewhere geometry has to be accounted for as its everywhere as well. I suspect the term "self similar" has been applied to being self similar at All levels. To me that is a mistake. The universe is more subtle than that. I see it more as alternating levels of self similar construction with vortices as fundamental - then self organizing into self similar geometry - then asserting itself as spirals - in alternating levels of dis-similar self organizing structures - spirals begetting geometry which begets spirals. IE orbs as particles begetting crystaline structures which beget storms etc. So it hides its self similarity - Sly!
Thanks for your comment...
The Swirl
It constantly surprises me how science still does not acknowledge the existence of the swirl.
The swirl pattern or shape can be found literally everywhere in nature but ask a scientist why and he or she will have no answer. Why? Because science does not see it as important.
Now I don't know about you but personally I would think that just on a common sense level the fact that we see this pattern everywhere in nature should be enough to at least want to know why? Why has nature chosen this shape or pattern? What is it's significance and importance? Even if the answers we find are prettty boring and of little importance surely it is something that deserves proper scientific attention and research?
RE to the Swirl
That is an observation that makes me smile... it is the most simple thing to just observe (Schauberger was a Master Observer) but somehow western science has been side tracked into math and abstract theories to justify equations instead of using equations (like Mandelbrot's!) to help explain what we observe. Once observation takes a back seat it opens the door to all kinds of irrational theories to backfill the gap... and then the race is On!
The Planck Length is a classic example - it's based on so called "constants?" - "Fundamental constraints??" - Oh? Since when has nature been constant? Or constrained? Why do we make these assumptions? As if nature respects lines drawn in the sand? Because assumptions create a starting point in the conversation and are useful in generating (and justifying!) theories but there is a price to pay for 'intellectual guardrails' and it's all around us in every concievable area of our lives.
One last comment on the demise of observation - technology plays a part in this - we trust too much in second hand 'data'. Now data is fine in engineering or manufacturing processes and many other areas but in pure science it is not enough. To rely too heavily on it is to abdicate our own powers of observation. We give over our power to a machine and right there we are one step further removed from nature instead of the other way around. Data that backs up observation is usefull - data that stands in for observation is a trap. But the further away the object we observe or the smaller it gets the more we reply on 'data' as our eyes are no longer 'up' to the job. (which is all the more reason to have a correct view up front)
But then again, this distance problem was not a constraint on the ancients - perhaps there is something we could learn from them??
Thank you for this observation...
RE RE to the swirl
Thanks Robert.
I am aware of Shauberger and like to consider myself a student of his work. You mention the ancients. Perhaps you are aware Shauberger himself considered what he learned about nature merely a re-discovery of an ancient knowledge?
I totally agree with your comments. I think the fundamental problem lies in the fact that we only see complexity, and the reason we only see complexity is to do with the language we use to decipher nature. The language I am referring to is of course mathematics. In my humble opinion it is the wrong language to use. That does not mean to say it is not useful, but as you have alluded to Robert mathematics should be confined to the job of construction, manufacturing and engineering, and not as it is now in trying to describe the mechanics of nature.
It is my belief that deep down nature may be very very easy to understand. Far easier than we are lead to believe. I think the trick is 'seeing' the simplicity within.
Yes - we are obviosly on the
Yes - we are obviosly on the Very same page. Which points out the obvious benefit of a unified view - it offers common ground, with all the advantages that go with that. Is that not what we all desire - especially now.
Our view as it stands now offers only conflict as it is impossible to come to any obvious common conclusion based on 'data'. So we get the obvious results.
Yes Schauberger was humbly respectful of the ancients whereas we now look down on them as well meaning but 'short-sighted' at best.
Best to let numbers do "what numbers do" which is to serve in practical matters. In matters where our eyes can't see it might be best to develop 'new eyes'. If the Law of Three holds up then there is room for a 'Third Eye' of intuition - in fact it would be required as a Balancing Force. That is my experience - it balances thought and emotion - or better yet, when thought and emotion are balanced intuition is revealed more often. Any society over reliant on thought alone will be short on intuition and long on numbers - it's inevitable. And any society short on intuition is "partially blind" - with the inevitable results. Cathedrals would be a good example of practical numbers being put to use to enhance intuition - the highest application of math IMO.
In case you haven't read my earlier comments I touch on the simplicity issue as well... further proof that this view offers common ground as it is the inevitable conclusion is it not? Basic simplicity is the basis of incomprehensible complexity. But to dwell on the complexity is to be eternally lost in it and to eternally propagate ever increasingly complex issues in ourselves and society - until we're forced back into simplicity by our very momentum. I mean it's just common sense. Any study of chaos reveals that but even that is controvertial in current scientific circles as it is not "commonly accepted" - and isn't likely to be either, anytime soon.
RE Yes we are obviously on the...
"Our view as it stands now offers only conflict as it is impossible to come to any obvious common conclusion based on 'data'. So we get the obvious results."
This paragraph I feel gets more profound the more I think about it. At first I thought you were speaking of scientific conflict but could we expand on that and say our complex view has lead to conflict on every conceivable level? Conflicting viewpoints, physical conflict (wars), conflicting discoveries, internal human conflict, conflict within environmental systems.
All that is in conflict on our world, on every conceivable level has been brought about by us? Perhaps even at the atomic level? Simply because of the way we perceive and think about that which surrounds us. As ancient philosophy teaches us are we truly the architects of our own illusion?
Robert might another good example of practical numbers being put to good use to enhance intuition/spiritual awareness be a Pyramid? Like those situated at Giza - Egypt?
I think I'm beginning to understand the rest of your reply now Robert. One day common sense and therefore simplicity has to prevail, because it is that which will be understood and agreed upon by ALL. I'm imagining a world where everyone is able to contribute to the development and progress of knowledge and our civilization. ALL of us able to understand nature and the creation of all that surrounds us. Imagine what we would be capable of were we ALL able to understand and share in that knowledge. New ideas and abilities would be springing up all over the world and not just from well funded research centres such as universities and laboratories. A quick search and I find the world population currently stands at over 6 billion! Imagine!
Thank you very much for your continued insights Robert. I can now see we ALL have a part to play in that which lies ahead. What makes us ordinary is that we are ALL special.
RE to Common Sense
I would say that when common sense as we know it is expanded to include the common recognition of the one 'Being' then the profundity of that recognition will put all outer differences in their proper perspective. Once that happens then any solutions will be obvious to all and mutually agreed upon with minimal discussion. Then everyone just does what needs to be done and life just moves on - as it should.
The spiritual path is the journey from personal obsession to impersonal insight. No obsession (with the path) - no insight. But the spiritual obsession has to be balanced by some degree of discernment otherwise we'll meet only resistance. Although feeling special can be a result of sudden breakthroughs, seeing ourselves as "special" is an invitation to resistance and slows down the journey.
The word 'unique' IMO is more applicable as it is more in line with the truth of the situation. Impersonal individuals are absolutely unique on the level of their outward expression (as are all individuals). But they are also primarily aware of their common nature with all other beings so this has a modifying effect for the better on that expression. Uniqueness can be enjoyed while specialness is a burden of the spiritual obsession.
It's important to keep in mind that "impersonal individual" does not mean an individual "devoid of the personal" - it means that in this case the personal is overshadowed by the simultaneous recognition of Being which is "larger" than the personal - has a bigger view by nature and is instinctively more highly valued by the imdividual than the personal. So both the personal and the impersonal being are experienced simultaneously and this facilitates the resolving of paradox "real time" so to speak as this dual view is a "real time" interactive paradoxical view - IE two realms at once - with one overshadowing the other - one informing the other.
So in the end it's best to avoid being "special"... IMO, as it limits our ability to maintain this larger view which is challenging enough for most of us given all the distractions we have to deal with.