science question/vibration [Archive] - Divine Cosmos Discussions

View Full Version : science question/vibration

Tiffani Boswell

04-17-2002, 10:10 AM

<table bgColor="#ffffff">
>ok here are some thoughts...forgive me in advance if they are jumbled...please noone take this as scientific this is speculation and i know VERY VERY Little about science...never enjoyed it much in school and am now realizing i should have taken physics possibly...but this whole thing is in the form of a question to be dissected and corrected if i am wrong...just wanted to start with that caveat...
>
>i was thinking...about vibration and the physical and light and colors etc...
>
>first question would be...
>1. remembering that possibly solids vibrate slower, liquids faster, and gas fastest...
>is that true?
>
>2. now thinking back to Shift of the Ages (SoA) and the correlation between light and color....
>and isn't color just a reflection of the light back to us off of an "object"?
>and if so the color that is reflecting back to us is on a certain "vibration" which creates the color...
>so how do you see the color and the solid or the same color and the liquid if they are vibrating differently...or am i totally confused? or maybe my question is simply how do we see color and physical at the same time....
>
>3. also...if the answer to the first question is yes...then light vibrates the fastest? correct? or that we know of...so possibly "spirit" and 4D vibrates faster and since we are solid...that is why we cannot see it?
>
>4. is it true SCIENTIFICALLY speaking, not metaphysically....has it been proven, that say animal meat vibrates slower...and say lettuce vibrates faster because of the high water content?
>
>wait i will stop until some of this gets answered...as i may just confuse myself and everyone if i keep asking questions off of unsure premises.
>
>thanks so much
>tiffani
>
>

Clark stewart

04-17-2002, 11:02 PM

Hi Tiffani and group,

By no means do i know for certain, but I will give it a try. Might i add if
there is someone on the list how is working in top secret class lab, and
does know please illumate us all.

first question would be...
>1. remembering that possibly solids vibrate slower, liquids faster, and
>gas fastest...
>is that true?
>

My anwser is based alot upon the influences of RJ, and good old Bucky.
Firstly, we must see every element in the crystallography extension of the
periodic table as different subsets of the fundementals; namely Hydrogen,
and Helium.
The acadamist's would totaly disagree w what i am about to say, so hold that
for what you wish,

The 3 states, s, l, g, and i will not comment on Einstein- Bose condensates,
as a 4th b/c i do not know too much on this, someone else can try to tie
that in to the geometric pic.
For now you must forget about one being faster then the other, trying to
measure this becomes combersome. I will attach an image that desribes these
states as 2 tetrahedral bond relationships.

Amy C. Edmondson
A Fuller Explanation Chapter 11, Jitterbug
pages 172 through 174
Other Dynamic Models
Topology and Phase

Physical Universe differentiates into three categories: liquid, crystalline,
and gaseous phases. These distinct states of matter arise as a result of
changing temperature or pressure, which induce different types of bonds.
Fuller proposes a simple geometric analogy to make these invisible changes
easy to comprehend. Appropriately, the model is completed with an exhaustive
enumeration of the ways in which two tetrahedra can be connected to each
other. The three arrangements of the minimum conceptual system model the
three phases of physical matter.

Fig. 11-8 (see attachments)
Click on thumbnail for larger image.

First, two tetrahedra are triple-bonded, sharing one face between them
(Fig. 11-8a). Because the relative positions of the two tetrahedra are
completely fixed, the arrangement qualifies as a stable set of relationships
and represents a crystalline structure: "The closestpacking, triple-bonded,
fixed-end arrangement corresponds with rigid-structure molecular compounds"
(931.60). Once again, the intention is not to create a large-scale duplicate
of a particular "solid" compound, but rather to display the different
characteristics of each chemical phase. The model is a kind of visual
shorthand.

One of the three bonds is now released, leaving a double bond between
two tetrahedra. The shared edge acts like a hinge (Fig. 11-8b); the
tetrahedral pair can swing back and forth, but they cannot be moved doser
together or farther apart. The configuration is thus noncompressible?one of
the distinguishing characteristics of liquids. It bends any way you
desire?malleable just like a liquid?but the double bond persists:

The medium-packed condition of a double-bonded, binged arrangement is
still flexible, but sum-totally as an aggregate, all space-filling complex
is noncompressible?as are liquids. (931.60)

Finally, we break another of the bonds. "Single-bonded" tetrahedra are
joined by a vertex, and their behavior is analogous to that of a gas. The
vertex bond acts as a universal joint; the two halves can swing freely with
respect to each other, moving together and apart without disrupting the type
of bond (Fig. 11-8c). The arrangement is compressible, expandable, and
completely flexible?short of dissociation. Perpetual connectedness indicates
that both tetrahedra continue to participate in the same substance; they
exhibit a consistent relationship, but lack structural definition:

Tetrahedra linked together entirely by...single-bonded universal
jointing use lots of space, whicb is the openmost condition of flexibility
and mutability characterizing the behavior of gases. (931.60)

The analogy is complete. All the while, Bucky holds the simple
structures in his hands, and explains the different basic properties of
solids, liquids, and gases. With any luck, a small child is present, forcing
him to keep his discourse simple. How can the same type of molecule produce
such radically different substances? Bucky offers a tangible explanation
through geometry. This model is perhaps useful as a mnemonic device?an easy
way to remember the chemistry lesson by relating the different
characteristics to their analogous stage of the model?rather than as a true
demonstration of phase changes in a substance.

It is worth noting that this model of interconnected tetrahedra is
more appropriate, and, in fact, quite accurate, in connection with the
bonding of carbon atoms within molecules. In conclusion, it is unfortunate
that this and other polyhedral characteristics and relationships are
generally overlooked in educational curricula.

Fuller developed many dynamic models, and readers who go on to further
study will find a variety of examples in Synergetics. The transformations
discussed in this chapter set the stage to explore other examples.
Appropriate parallels in nature may well arise from such efforts.

>2. now thinking back to Shift of the Ages (SoA) and the correlation
>between light and color....
>and isn't color just a reflection of the light back to us off of an
>"object"?

Reflection is one way of describing the process, think of any object as a
satelite reciever of the One pure light and based upon it's unique spectral
orientation, will describe-show a different color, which may be dynamic as
Rife found with filterable bacteria.

>and if so the color that is reflecting back to us is on a certain
>"vibration" which creates the color...
>so how do you see the color and the solid or the same color and the liquid
>if they are vibrating differently...or am i totally confused? or maybe my
>question is simply how do we see color and physical at the same time....

Think about auras, they are colorized, yes, but it's a higher octave of
visual aid, so blue with our (345-690nm visual range) is roughy 500-550 nm,
but in auras we will find it outside the normal range, it is in the next
octave (rem. your piano scale) of colors.
.
>
>3. also...if the answer to the first question is yes...then light vibrates
>the fastest? correct? or that we know of...so possibly "spirit" and 4D
>vibrates faster and since we are solid...that is why we cannot see it?

There are many forms of light and we see it from one 3D relativistic pt of
view.(some faster some slower)
This is limiting, and if it were otherwise we would see stuff that Neo saw
in the matrix, and rocks pusating in and out of our dimension, and the rock
itself would have billions of these tiny pulsations, i see these in the
morning , especially when the sun is out, essentially charging/polarizing
air circuits (molecules).

>
>4. is it true SCIENTIFICALLY speaking, not metaphysically....has it been
>proven, that say animal meat vibrates slower...and say lettuce vibrates
>faster because of the high water content?

Read Udo's book, "FAts that heal fats that kill", he specifically mentions
the energetics of differents fats, saturated are virtually straight, and
therfore no spiral, no energy, omega 3's which are in dark leaf veges, in
small amounts, have a -3 charge, saturated are 0....So what do you think, i
have not even mentioned the residual effects of neurological damage which
also effects the meat, thus why hebrews, muslims eat kosure meat.
And water in cellular membranes when fed via Organics, and or loved, will
exhibit clustering effects, aka fractal star of david., this is life at it's
prime, see the Japanese book on water, you should be able to find it on the
internet, it is very popular.."The message of water" AWESOME book, dr.lee.
lorenzen would be a good search tip.

hopefully i have made some sense of these questions of yours, which are very
basic, but very good.
Concensus conceptuality must change.
Oneness be with you all,
Clark
>

__________________________________________________ _______________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

</td></tr>
Attachment: (image/jpeg) tetrabonds.jpg [not stored]

Crasher2ooo@...

04-18-2002, 12:04 AM

Hi Tiffani...

Ok im gonna have a go at answering these questions... im no scientist though, only know what I learned from school...

1. remembering that possibly solids vibrate slower, liquids faster, and gas fastest... is that true?



To my understanding yes... I seem to remember that a solid has tightly packed atoms that vibrate relatively slowly, if the solid is heated the atoms absorb more energy and vibrate faster, this begins to break the bonds between the atoms and the solid looses its structure. If the liquid is heated further the atoms vibrate faster again and the bonds between them are broken leaving the atoms to move around independently of each other. .

2. now thinking back to Shift of the Ages (SoA) and the correlation between light and color.... and isn't color just a reflection of the light back to us off of an "object"?

Yes this is correct...

...and if so the color that is reflecting back to us is on a certain "vibration" which creates the color...

Yes... The colour reflecting back to us is light vibrating/oscillating at a certain frequency, the colour that wee see depends on the speed of vibration... also worth remembering is the fact that light vibrates at many frequencies that we cant see e.g. infra red, x rays, radio waves, micro waves, ultra violet.



so how do you see the color and the solid or the same color and the liquid if they are vibrating differently...or am i totally confused? or maybe my question is simply how do we see color and physical at the same time...

The answer to that is we dont! Our eyes only detect light... we cant actually see the solid/liquid all our eyes can detect is a portion of the light spectrum (red through violet) reflecting of the object... If you take glass as an example, glass is a solid yet it does not reflect any light back to our eyes so we cant see it... same go's for water aswell I suppose.



3. also...if the answer to the first question is yes...then light vibrates the fastest? correct? or that we know of...so possibly "spirit" and 4D vibrates faster and since we are solid...that is why we cannot see it?

I think you may be getting mixed up between 'vibration' and 'speed'... Nothing travels faster than light, but that same light can vibrate at different speeds, we can only see light when it vibrates within a certain range of speed, any light vibrating faster or slower than this range will not be detected by our eyes... so you could say that spirit is light that vibrates faster than our eyes can detect.

4. is it true SCIENTIFICALLY speaking, not metaphysically....has it been proven, that say animal meat vibrates slower...and say lettuce vibrates faster because of the high water content?

This is pure speculation I dont have any facts on this but I would say the lettuce would have a higher vibration because it is less dense and contains allot of water whereas the animal meat is more dense and contains less water... the speed of vibration I am talking about here is molecular nothing to do with the metaphysical aspects of vibration.

I hope im not too far off with these answers... I know that I haven't gone into too much detail and left out a few points but im just trying to keep it simple here.

never enjoyed it much in school and am now realizing i should have taken physics possibly



I actually enjoyed physics in school... Im going to be going back into full time education in September, I realised that the 9 to 5 life isn't for me and the student lifestyle will give a much greater opportunity for learning and to be of service to others... I was also contemplating taking physics as a subject but then realised that the course wouldn't entail the type of physics we learn about here, I would actually be taught the type of physics that has been proven false!

One more thing... thanks Tiffani and everyone else who has posted their photo's, its very refreshing to put a face to the names that I learn so much from... and their dogs! Im gonna dig out a photo or two to post this weekend.

Thanks...

Robin.

Tiffani Boswell

04-18-2002, 07:06 AM

<table bgColor="#ffffff">
>Thanks Robin for answering! 
>
The answer to that is we dont! Our eyes only detect light... we cant actually see the solid/liquid all our eyes can detect is a portion of the light spectrum (red through violet) reflecting of the object... If you take glass as an example, glass is a solid yet it does not reflect any light back to our eyes so we cant see it... same go's for water aswell I suppose.

>Tiff: Ok I will have to think about this one for a while...so we are not seeing the physical just the light reflecting off of slower vibrating molecules that are also emitting a color frequency so it appears solid?
>oh my goodness...yes will have to think about it.
>
>I was also contemplating taking physics as a subject but then realised that the course wouldn't entail the type of physics we learn about here, I would actually be taught the type of physics that has been proven false!
>
>SO very true....so were do we start....i would LOVE to take a physics course but not one where I would have to unlearn it if it is being proven not so up to date....ROD & Clark...any courses at universities that you know of that might be worth it...books...online otherwise! i have asked this before but am serious now! :)
>
>Tiffani

Brian V. Cox

04-18-2002, 08:31 AM

i've been wondering something similar to this myself. i'm contemplating
graduate school, and my main interest would be to get into a physics
grad school program (my undergrad was BSEE)

anyway, i've been out of school for over 6 years...any advice on a
physics program that would be teaching some leading edge theoretical
ideas? my undergrad was at texas a&m which was about as conservative
of a curriculum as you can imagine. i'm actually thinking about
applying to UNT (univ of north texas) since they have one of the best
jazz music programs in the country, and they have a physics graduate
program. i'm thinking about doing the physics grad program and
the music undergrad at the same time, and possibly doing my thesis
on something involving the relationship between musical principles
and physics. dont know just what specifically, but that's the
idea that popped into my head. i know that some classical composers
(beethoven, bach, bartok, many others) used high level math and
physics in their composition...maybe that's something to explore...

i can say to you, tiffani, that if you are thinking about taking physics,
it would still probably be helpful for you to get a background in
classical physics, whether it's based on faulty assumptions or not.

lower level physics classes will be aimed at describing physical reality
that's all around you (motion, forces, gravity, etc). it's not until
you get into quantum mechanics and relativity that you really start to
question things...at least that's where i started being suspicious.
that and the non-symmetry of the maxwell EM equations we were taught
in elec engr classes...i never liked the non-symmetry of the maxwell
equations...didnt seem right for the B-field equations to be missing
a term that the E-field equations had. Now it looks like the equations
have been revised by some researchers to be symmetrical.

sorry for the rambling i guess...i'm just trying to decide what do
wo when/if i lose my job (so far i've survived 12 rounds of layoffs
here at worldcom...but it's not looking good)...i too have had feelings
that i should be getting out of the corporate slave routine and trying
to help people, possibly through being a teacher or researcher.

any pointers to interesting physics grad programs around the country
would be appreciated. (CU boulder have anything? boulder seems
to be pretty hip, and we want to move there anyway)

-brian

> I was also contemplating taking physics as a subject but then realised that=
> the course wouldn't entail the type of physics we learn about here, I woul=
> d actually be taught the type of physics that has been proven false!
>
> SO very true....so were do we start....i would LOVE to take a physics cours=
> e but not one where I would have to unlearn it if it is being proven not so=
> up to date....ROD & Clark...any courses at universities that you know of t=
> hat might be worth it...books...online otherwise! i have asked this before =
> but am serious now! :)
>

--------------
** In Lak'ech, Brian Cox - brian@... (/group/asc2k/post?postID=FNrbyb9mK4ahp4tWvmuJoRGyxwj872IKM_dYnO 5zOTTJUWl_e7PHnTQGv0wYinZrGUAO-jE_i7M8uA)
** MAGPU: Electric-Progressive-Trance-Improv-Fusion: http://www.magpu.com
** "There is geometry in the humming of the strings;
** There is music in the spacing of the (planetary) spheres" -Pythagoras
--------------

Rod Johnson

04-18-2002, 12:12 PM

<table>

Hi Clark,

Might I first say that I deeply enjoyed your post on nutritional advice.
First in that you validated many of my personal discoveries and second
in that you informed me of important things that I'm now enjoying within
my diet.

I now dialogue your science question/vibration post

Rod.

Hi Tiffani and group,

By no means do i know for certain, but I will give it a try. Might i add if
there is someone on the list how is working in top secret class lab, and
does know please illumate us all.

first question would be...
>1. remembering that possibly solids vibrate slower, liquids faster, and
>gas fastest...
>is that true?

Within the framework of your question is the idea that matter-space properties
are definable in vibration (pulse frequency). Yes this is true.

Those interested in the straight, simple yes answer can validate their individual
thoughts with it. All they must do is see that forces of gas elements are wider
and therefore weaker. Then, that the forces of liquids have to be equal and closer,
therefore the potentials of their molecular bonding are closer (stronger) When
bonding is producing tangible solids it stands to reason that the field potential
are much closer and therefore higher in frequency.

Those who are ready to expand their insights will have to bare with a basic
but extensive example. Based on your level of understanding the adventure may be
a bit mind boggling at times. But if you hang in there I hope it is rewarding.

A MORE DETAILED PRESENTATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ELECTROMAGNETIC
FREQUENCY AND THE PROPERTIES AND STATES OF ELEMENTS

What we perceive as matter vibration is an EM pulse consistency that can be
seen, by its every property, as light. However, this level of light manifests in
EM pulse frequencies beyond what we think of as light velocity. Its basic
nature is a fluid dynamic at transitions we are unable to perceive. In other
words it is connective in discrete circuits (flows) within and between separate
3-space dimensions (universes). In this connectedness liquid light is the
literal fabric of matter and space.

One might say that it is safe for an independent thinker to elaborate,
without fear of contradiction, on something that cannot be perceived in
the first place. Yet there are many signatures, within what we can perceive,
which point directly to what we cannot.

Though we are incapable of actually detecting the micro implicate pulse,
we are capable of detecting, within the macro its explicate orders and chaos.
For instance, we can abstractly render this higher state of light as matter
with a lower state as spectroscopy. We know that chaotic light is white to our
perception, yet when it flows past a prism at an exact angle it separates
into specific color orders. Why?

The only property in spatial physicality (real stuff) that can answer that
"why?" is "volume". If light is a random gyrating particle no physical law
can explain its spectral separation. Yet if each color is instead a definable
field volume (tetra form) in specific variations of size (frequency) then
spectral separation is easy to understand.

Flowing in linear cascades, like a fluid, the various volumes, of light,
as form, in complimentary geometries, will move, smaller ones surrounded by
larger ones. All will be blending in a combination of forms (colors) as
white light. If the flow is turned (bent) then the natural properties of
fluids indicate that the volumes must separate with the smaller (UV) moving
around the tight (inside) corner and the larger (red) moving around the loose
(outside) area of flow.

That brings us to the hyper-dimensional roll of frequency variation as the
signature of space volumes in complimentary vector field forms.

My anwser is based alot upon the influences of RJ, and good old Bucky.
Firstly, we must see every element in the crystallography extension of the
periodic table as different subsets of the fundementals; namely Hydrogen,
and Helium. The acadamist's would totaly disagree w what i am about to say,
so hold that for what you wish.

The 3 states, s, l, g, and i will not comment on Einstein- Bose condensates,
as a 4th b/c i do not know too much on this, someone else can try to tie
that in to the geometric pic. For now you must forget about one being faster
than the other, trying to measure this becomes combersome. I will attach an
image that desribes these states as 2 tetrahedral bond relationships.

Your image was very good for demonstrating vector form transitions that
demonstrate the geometry of bonding, spin and isotope formation. Missing
some steps that can't be seen at that level of simplicity but very good.

The point to make for understanding is; Primary tetra fields (your fig a)
are divided in third frequency (form sizes, red, yellow and blue) and exist
as primary light. They can flow (as white light), deflect in separate color
frequency ranges or coalesce (Come into close looped fields). When the later
occurred, EM fields must follow the laws of electro dynamics. They become
closer tighter fields. This is demonstrated in Coulomb's equation and by
the way, the basis for fiber optic phenomenon.

The matrix geometry prescribes that in the coalesced state they become
combinations of both octahedral and tetrahedral field domains. Their form
substance is based on bonding which is in terms of pulse force between
universe. Their seeming atomic movement is our perception of their circuits
iterating in and out of (inter-phasing) the space we perceive within.
The macro composite of these field domains are demonstrated in data as charge
polar densities which we erroneously think of as particles.

Here is the crux to the nature of matter and space that deals directly with
your question. The prescribed forms of the matrix are the fundamentals of both
space and matter. Octa-fields are the primary fundamental of electric space
(lower larger frequency). Call them the space factor. Tetra-fields are the
primary fundamental of magnetic bonded matter (higher smaller frequency). Call
them the matter factor. It is the combined nature of these two fundamentals
that produce the properties of elemental matter-space.

The matrix geometry defines the ratio of these fundamentals at any level of
their combinations. 1) If the space factor is greater than the matter factor,
you have a gas. 2) If the space factor is equal to the matter factor you have
a liquid. 3) If the space factor is less than the matter factor you have a
solid.

That is the direct answer to the relationship between frequency and the elemental
states of matter. However, that insight will take you a few more steps into the
understanding of Sequential Physics.

From that understanding it is easy to see specific gravity in further refinements
of ratios between these factors. These factors can be abstracted into phase physics
methods. Within those methods you can project boiling point, freezing point and all
of the more common chemical properties of elements.

Each factor ratio geometrically defines a form hierarchy which in turn demonstrates
a tensor property between geometric forces, which in turn defines a crystalline order.

The combined factors can, in vector analysis, show the electrodynamics possibilities
which provide electro valance and isotopic properties.

The matter-space factors of Hydrogen and Helium can each be projected in
definable patterns which gives a hyper-dimensional definition to the standard
periodic chart. Only your imagination is needed to explore the science benefits
of those possibilities.

For those of you who have read to this point, I hope that the examples and descriptions
were clear enough and simple enough to excite at least a rudimentary picture in your
mind.

Seek in peace and understanding,

Rod

Clark stewart

04-18-2002, 09:08 PM

Greetings to group,

I will attempt a challenge here of RJ's hypothesis, involving the geometric
constructive properties .
I am skipping to near the end of the email, RJ posted, but this is a
fundamental, and may help satisfy others here looking for more, like me.

Firstly, the aspect of tetra being magnetic phase, we can involve Bell's
experiments to try and validate this, by bringing angles of energetic
interactions (namely photons) with respect to the plane of incidence. this
polarized effect occurring at 60 degree intervals, could indicate that it
might be tetra affiliated.
But how does photons tie into magnetics..?

I found it interesting that in natural forming magnetite, there appears
octahedral formations. To me that shows magnetic formations are developing
in or during their solidification process in 90 degree phase angles.

What also might be of interest is how the GP of Giza neutralizes x-rays.
Can we draw anything from this.? Is there any reports of of MRI
interactions with x-ray diagnostics..?

What i am trying to get at is the way fields function together, and that
this may give us an idea of how to validate more of the seq. perspective.

>>Each factor ratio geometrically defines a form hierarchy which in turn
>>demonstrates
>>a tensor property between geometric forces, which in turn defines a
>>crystalline order.

Can you give us an example of two geo ratios, and demo of form prediction,
or just break this whole paragraph down, via step by step examples.

Something else, in radar sites there is something called "the cone of
silence" and it is a dead spot above the radar.
This spot is determined by a up-side-down cone, which has angles of the
perpendicular of 19.5 degrees.....hmmm where have we seen this before.?

>>The point to make for understanding is; Primary tetra fields (your fig a)
>>are divided in third frequency (form sizes, red, yellow and blue) and
>>exist
>>as primary light.

OK, here for those who are trying to follow, we would have your base red =
to one tetra-volume(edge length = 1), yellow = 3 tetra-volume (edge length =
3 tetras, and now has a octa embedded within it), blue = 6 tetra-volume
(edge length = 6 tetras , and is more complex, many octas embedded,
signature of higher frequency), RJ..? any corrections please add

And of course the difference now becomes clear, we have characteristics of
internal structure that is quite different. The integrity will now respond
to different thresholds, which is why some will bend earlier in the prism
then others.
RJ can you correlate the frequecny-volume ratio to angle of reflection in
the prism.

>> >1. remembering that possibly solids vibrate slower, liquids faster, and
>> >gas fastest...
>> >is that true?
>>
>>Within the framework of your question is the idea that matter-space
>>properties
>>are definable in vibration (pulse frequency). Yes this is true.
>>
>>Those interested in the straight, simple yes answer can validate their
>>individual
>>thoughts with it. All they must do is see that forces of gas elements are
>>wider
>>and therefore weaker. Then, that the forces of liquids have to be equal
>>and
>>closer,
>>therefore the potentials of their molecular bonding are closer (stronger)
>>When
>>bonding is producing tangible solids it stands to reason that the field
>>potential
>>are much closer and therefore higher in frequency.
>>

Rod, I believe you are mixing things here, non comprendo.
You say initially that yes solids do vibe slower, then go on to say b/c they
are closer and stronger in bond they must be higher in frequency.
Can you please set the record straight.

Peaceful setting, as I approach 25years into my rebirth.

Under the tree I await with anticipation of knowing the One, as I nectar
from the fruits of knowledge, contemplating all of existence.
Where there is no way, there is way.
Clark

__________________________________________________ _______________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

Crasher2ooo@...

04-19-2002, 12:11 AM

Tiff: Ok I will have to think about this one for a while...so we are not seeing the physical just the light reflecting off of slower vibrating molecules that are also emitting a color frequency so it appears solid?

oh my goodness...yes will have to think about it.

Right... your on track with the fact that we dont actually see the physical only the light that is reflecting off it... However, the colour of the object isnt determined by the speed its molecules vibrate at.

The colour of the object depends on which frequency of light it reflects. A red object absorbs all colours of light apart from red, the red light is reflected and our eyes detect this red light and to us the object looks red.

The reason the object will reflect one colour of light and not others depends upon its surface make-up... it is all about angles, if white light hits an object at a specific angle red light will be reflected, if that angle is changed a bit then orange will be reflected, change it again and yellow will be reflected, and so on... so a red object will be made up of molecules whose structure has angles that when white light is directed at them they will reflect only red light.



The speed at which the molecules vibrate doesnt determine the colour the object reflects and solids themselves do not have a colour frequency.

I hope this helps, it is alot easier to understand with diagrams!

Robin.

Tiffani Boswell

04-19-2002, 01:00 PM

<table bgColor="#ffffff">
>so the vibration is not necessarily vibration as such? it is the blinking in and out of this space?
>tiffani
<blockquote style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #800080 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From: Rod Johnson (rodj@299e.net)
style="FONT: 10pt arial">To: asc2k@yahoogroups.com
style="FONT: 10pt arial">Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 2:12 PM
style="FONT: 10pt arial">Subject: RE: [asc2k] science question/vibration
>

Hi Clark,

Might I first say that I deeply enjoyed your post on nutritional advice.
First in that you validated many of my personal discoveries and second
in that you informed me of important things that I'm now enjoying within
my diet.

I now dialogue your science question/vibration post

Rod.

Hi Tiffani and group,

By no means do i know for certain, but I will give it a try. Might i add if
there is someone on the list how is working in top secret class lab, and
does know please illumate us all.

first question would be...
>1. remembering that possibly solids vibrate slower, liquids faster, and
>gas fastest...
>is that true?

Within the framework of your question is the idea that matter-space properties
are definable in vibration (pulse frequency). Yes this is true.

Those interested in the straight, simple yes answer can validate their individual
thoughts with it. All they must do is see that forces of gas elements are wider
and therefore weaker. Then, that the forces of liquids have to be equal and closer,
therefore the potentials of their molecular bonding are closer (stronger) When
bonding is producing tangible solids it stands to reason that the field potential
are much closer and therefore higher in frequency.

Those who are ready to expand their insights will have to bare with a basic
but extensive example. Based on your level of understanding the adventure may be
a bit mind boggling at times. But if you hang in there I hope it is rewarding.

A MORE DETAILED PRESENTATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ELECTROMAGNETIC
FREQUENCY AND THE PROPERTIES AND STATES OF ELEMENTS

What we perceive as matter vibration is an EM pulse consistency that can be
seen, by its every property, as light. However, this level of light manifests in
EM pulse frequencies beyond what we think of as light velocity. Its basic
nature is a fluid dynamic at transitions we are unable to perceive. In other
words it is connective in discrete circuits (flows) within and between separate
3-space dimensions (universes). In this connectedness liquid light is the
literal fabric of matter and space.

One might say that it is safe for an independent thinker to elaborate,
without fear of contradiction, on something that cannot be perceived in
the first place. Yet there are many signatures, within what we can perceive,
which point directly to what we cannot.

Though we are incapable of actually detecting the micro implicate pulse,
we are capable of detecting, within the macro its explicate orders and chaos.
For instance, we can abstractly render this higher state of light as matter
with a lower state as spectroscopy. We know that chaotic light is white to our
perception, yet when it flows past a prism at an exact angle it separates
into specific color orders. Why?

The only property in spatial physicality (real stuff) that can answer that
"why?" is "volume". If light is a random gyrating particle no physical law
can explain its spectral separation. Yet if each color is instead a definable
field volume (tetra form) in specific variations of size (frequency) then
spectral separation is easy to understand.

Flowing in linear cascades, like a fluid, the various volumes, of light,
as form, in complimentary geometries, will move, smaller ones surrounded by
larger ones. All will be blending in a combination of forms (colors) as
white light. If the flow is turned (bent) then the natural properties of
fluids indicate that the volumes must separate with the smaller (UV) moving
around the tight (inside) corner and the larger (red) moving around the loose
(outside) area of flow.

That brings us to the hyper-dimensional roll of frequency variation as the
signature of space volumes in complimentary vector field forms.

My anwser is based alot upon the influences of RJ, and good old Bucky.
Firstly, we must see every element in the crystallography extension of the
periodic table as different subsets of the fundementals; namely Hydrogen,
and Helium. The acadamist's would totaly disagree w what i am about to say,
so hold that for what you wish.

The 3 states, s, l, g, and i will not comment on Einstein- Bose condensates,
as a 4th b/c i do not know too much on this, someone else can try to tie
that in to the geometric pic. For now you must forget about one being faster
than the other, trying to measure this becomes combersome. I will attach an
image that desribes these states as 2 tetrahedral bond relationships.

Your image was very good for demonstrating vector form transitions that
demonstrate the geometry of bonding, spin and isotope formation. Missing
some steps that can't be seen at that level of simplicity but very good.

The point to make for understanding is; Primary tetra fields (your fig a)
are divided in third frequency (form sizes, red, yellow and blue) and exist
as primary light. They can flow (as white light), deflect in separate color
frequency ranges or coalesce (Come into close looped fields). When the later
occurred, EM fields must follow the laws of electro dynamics. They become
closer tighter fields. This is demonstrated in Coulomb's equation and by
the way, the basis for fiber optic phenomenon.

The matrix geometry prescribes that in the coalesced state they become
combinations of both octahedral and tetrahedral field domains. Their form
substance is based on bonding which is in terms of pulse force between
universe. Their seeming atomic movement is our perception of their circuits
iterating in and out of (inter-phasing) the space we perceive within.
The macro composite of these field domains are demonstrated in data as charge
polar densities which we erroneously think of as particles.

Here is the crux to the nature of matter and space that deals directly with
your question. The prescribed forms of the matrix are the fundamentals of both
space and matter. Octa-fields are the primary fundamental of electric space
(lower larger frequency). Call them the space factor. Tetra-fields are the
primary fundamental of magnetic bonded matter (higher smaller frequency). Call
them the matter factor. It is the combined nature of these two fundamentals
that produce the properties of elemental matter-space.

The matrix geometry defines the ratio of these fundamentals at any level of
their combinations. 1) If the space factor is greater than the matter factor,
you have a gas. 2) If the space factor is equal to the matter factor you have
a liquid. 3) If the space factor is less than the matter factor you have a
solid.

That is the direct answer to the relationship between frequency and the elemental
states of matter. However, that insight will take you a few more steps into the
understanding of Sequential Physics.

From that understanding it is easy to see specific gravity in further refinements
of ratios between these factors. These factors can be abstracted into phase physics
methods. Within those methods you can project boiling point, freezing point and all
of the more common chemical properties of elements.

Each factor ratio geometrically defines a form hierarchy which in turn demonstrates
a tensor property between geometric forces, which in turn defines a crystalline order.

The combined factors can, in vector analysis, show the electrodynamics possibilities
which provide electro valance and isotopic properties.

The matter-space factors of Hydrogen and Helium can each be projected in
definable patterns which gives a hyper-dimensional definition to the standard
periodic chart. Only your imagination is needed to explore the science benefits
of those possibilities.

For those of you who have read to this point, I hope that the examples and descriptions
were clear enough and simple enough to excite at least a rudimentary picture in your
mind.

Seek in peace and understanding,

Rod



<tt>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
asc2k-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

</tt>

<tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service (http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/).</tt>
</blockquote>

Tiffani Boswell

04-19-2002, 01:05 PM

> What also might be of interest is how the GP of Giza neutralizes x-rays.
> Can we draw anything from this.? Is there any reports of of MRI
> interactions with x-ray diagnostics..?
>
ok what exactly does this mean? neutralizes x-rays.

Sunny One

04-24-2002, 12:10 PM

This is from a book called "No Way" by Ram Tzu,
Advaita Press, 1990.
I share this in response to Clark's last comment.
This is the tamest one which I share for fear of
being censored. It is a book of paradox that can
make you laugh, and as Ram Tzu says, it is
accessible from several levels of misunderstanding.
Pat

#79
You think something's wrong
There must have been a mistake

You think things should be different
By different you mean better
And you're pretty sure
You know what better is.

You would eliminate
All the "bad" stuff:

War
Disease
Suffering
Famine
Pollution

Would be good for starters.

Who could argue with that?

You would save cute animals
You would ban bombs
You would halt injustice
You would make everyone happy

Why not?
It could happen.

And if it does, Ram Tzu knows this...

God will be grateful
For your help.

--- Clark stewart <fudoshin09@... (/group/asc2k/post?postID=_UctlSl5Zbx2VpBD2p37dvd7EBLrenhiOYF48X r6SqP-xLJKcBpiLxWx5iNtFGf0Pm9mM6NwJFapEu2LUu88)> wrote:
> Greetings to group,
>
> Peaceful setting, as I approach 25years into my
> rebirth.
>
> Under the tree I await with anticipation of knowing
> the One, as I nectar
> from the fruits of knowledge, contemplating all of
> existence.
> Where there is no way, there is way.
> Clark
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more
http://games.yahoo.com/

Rod Johnson

04-28-2002, 01:54 PM

<table>

Hi group,

Especially those interested in the physics part of this dialogue.

As an Introduction: The main treatment of Clarks challenge is a long post that
require deep interest in physical explanations. The short of it follows this
introduction:

Two problems always arrives with radical departures from a standing paradigm.
One is terms and the other is specific tools needed for theoretical approaches
to data. Both are involved the problem here, not to mention my carelessness in
developing explanations.

First the sequential use of the words vibration and frequency are more specifically
technical in meanings than the average person will sort out in their usage of
them. Vibration is an oscillation and frequency is either a interval of time or an
increment of distance. In the sequential Perspective, frequency is an increment
of distance.

Second, angles can be used to measure arcs as in plane geometry, or to designate
actions as phase states of a given cycle. This usage produces three dimensional
geometric descriptions of related actions such as pendulums andalso dynamics of chas.
In this use the angles define phase states and are the basics of phase physics.

Hence, it is hard to understand Sequential Physics in normal quantum measurement
terms.


Rod
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Clark,

You wrote and I responded:

I will attempt a challenge here of RJ's hypothesis, involving the geometric
constructive properties.

Hi Clark,

Thank you for your challenge. I did get off track. So much so that I should
retract and/or rewrite the piece. However, I will make some comments that
deal with your challenge points.

Firstly, the aspect of tetra-fields being magnetic phase,

we can involve Bell's experiments to try and validate this, by bringing
angles of energetic interactions (namely photons) with respect to the plane
of incidence. this polarized effect occurring at 60 degree intervals, could
indicate that it might be tetra affiliated. But, how does photons tie into
magnetics..?

The part that I neglected in my haste to answer was to clarify the difference
between angles of phase with respects to angles of field relationships. The
quantum perspective cannot see electric and magnetic phenomena in terms of
inter-phase concepts. It only sees the micro-data in terms of macro-
measurements in angles of field relationships.

All of the quantum data presents field relationships with respects to a known
reference field. (plane of incidence) All field relationships are are in respects
to that reference and/or the relationships from one field to the next.

The Sequential Perspective requires no reference field. All quantities are degrees
of phase with respects to a determined cycle based on geometric equilibrium.
Sometimes angles of fields relate to phase angles. But, don't always count on it.

For instance: Magnetic and paramagnetic phenomena can be literally defined as
forces aligned in perpendicular domains (relative angles of fields). We can see
the forms (octahedral) of their domains. Hence, "in natural forming magnetite,
there appears to be octahedral formations." In terms of Sequency, inter-phase
is a perpendicular (90 degree) fundamental. and it is only incidentally related
to both phase theory and reference measurements.

To me that shows magnetic formations are developing in or during their solidification
process in 90 degree phase angles.

You will see below how and why they are not phase angles but rather crystalline domain
field angles.

In physical metallurgy we can control the eutectic point (solidification) of iron to
be either alpha or Bata. One is cubic center faced which is a rigid, brittle, very
magnetizable material, in a geometry of octahedral field angles. The other is cubic
face centered which a ductile, softer, lesser magnetizable material in a geometry
of tetrahedral field angles. Yet both form in perpendicular domains. That
information can all be realized in direct testing and microscopic experience.

Yet what manifests in apparent macro experience can provide new insight for non-
apparent micro conditions. For instances Sequential Perspective looks much deeper
into the matter-forces. In that perspective magnetic force is defined as forces of
inter-phase aligned to the limits of the threshold of molecules. That means
perpendicular vector fields of inter-phase, that are usually equally distributed
in more isotropic tetrahedral matrix domains, arrive at a predicable hierarchy of
the matrix geometry. This geometry demonstrated that the alignments extend the
force of inter-phase, as in magnetite, to the boundaries of matter hence, magnetic
force.

This conceptual view is is a self delineating characteristic of the geometry. It
does not need an add hoc abstraction such as electrons in counter spin to justify
its applied conclusions.

Again to your question. But, how does photons tie into magnetics..?

Simply bare in mind that the difficulty lies in realizing phase angle concepts
as compared to, and discribing, field angle relationships. All inter-phase is
a cycle (360 degree angle of phase) of circuits that act in octahedral vector
fields (90 degree phase angles). EM fields (space inter-phase) cascades in
direct perpendicular (90 degree angle) relationships. Yet in terms of real space
they unquestionably define spatial tetrahedrons and tetrahedral phases.

Tetrahedrons are in 60 degree field angles and the magnetic actions of them are in
120 degree phases. All circuit continuity in the tetrahedron is in 60 degree angles
which are 1/3 (120 degree phases) of a 180 degree field plane circumvention. And,
circumventions of a tetrahedron are in 120 degree phases which are 1/3 increments
(120 degree phases) of its four point harmony. The four points of harmony are 90
degree) phases of a 360 degree (single phase) cycle.

What I am trying to get at is, the way fields function together, and that
this may give us an idea of how to validate more of the sequential . perspective.

Yes that is the key! The difference between field angles and angles of phase is
a refinement known as phase physics. In other words, what proceeds in cycles of
measured angles is analyzed in numbers of actions per cycle. The numbers of
actions are divided into 360 degrees to provide the degrees of phase.

Now, we begin to see the 120 degree phase aspects of a perpendicular angle function.
In phase physics terms; Phase functions of real free space and all matter within
space are in three 120 degree phases of transition for a 360 degree cycle. They
are magnetic fields in the sense that they are moving and dynamic. In other words
the torsion functions of real apace from photons to so called quark phenomena are
in 120 degree (1/3-60 degrees 2/3 120 degree, 3/3 whole spin characteristics) phases.
The magnetic fields are in these 120 degree phase state functions but intern-phase in
fundamental 30 degree potential (90 or 180 degree) increments of phase states. The tetra-
lattice is the perfect descriptive geometry for these phase state functions.

Inter-phase state functions between separate yet coalesced 3-spaces are all octa-
phase states i.e. perpendicular. That means that the inter-phase state functions must
translate actions (static electric) between parallel moments of universes
(180 degrees) in a two-phase perpendicularfunctions of (90 degree) phases.
The octa-lattice is the perfect descriptive geometry for those phase state
functions.

Does that boggle your mind or what? I am saying in a general sense that to
understand the logic of the sequential perspective one has to study and
understand the logic of phase state physics.

Rod, I believe you are mixing things here, non comprendo. You say initially
that yes solids do vibe slower, then go on to say b/c they are closer and
stronger in bond they must be higher in frequency. Can you please set the
record straight.

I don't blame you for being confused with that one. I often get caught on the
term vibration. To me it is part of the old paradigm and has little meaning in
the sequential logic.

The basis of sub-molecular structure is pulse frequency which is a space
increment and not a time interval. Per nanometers of existence rather than
functions per second. For instance H has a very high energy electro-negative
potential of 1200 -eV and very wide and weak nucleon bonding, (Vector phase
frequency) whereas Fe has a potential of 67 -eV and the closest (Vector phase
frequency) nucleon bonding.

We then have a ratio factor between 3-space energy oscillations (vibration) and
inter-phase pulse magnitude. The former is measured in repetitions per second
and the later measured as spectrographic band widths of light (Per nanometers of
existence). Each factor ratio geometrically defines a form hierarchy which in
turn demonstrates a tensor property between geometric forces, which in turn
defines crystalline order and the final motif is close packed spheres.

What also might be of interest is how the GP of Giza neutralizes x-rays. Can we
draw anything from this.? YES! Is there any reports of MRI interactions with x-ray
diagnostics..?

Not that I am aware of or have an opinion about. However, in 1972, at UC San Diego,
I did a detail study of the ionic structure within pyramids. Learned some far out
stuff.

Can you give us an example of two geo ratios, and demo of form prediction,
or just break this whole paragraph down, via step by step examples.

Something else, in radar sites there is something called "the cone of
silence" and it is a dead spot above the radar.
This spot is determined by a up-side-down cone, which has angles of the
perpendicular of 19.5 degrees.....hmmm where have we seen this before.?

Don't understand that relationship.The 19.5 is the latitude points of a 

tetrahedron vertex in a sphere on a longitudinal perpendicular.

The point to make for understanding is; Primary tetra fields (your fig [a])
are divided in third frequency (form sizes, red, yellow and blue) and
exist as primary light.

OK, here for those who are trying to follow, we would have your base red =
to one tetra-volume(edge length = 1), yellow = 3 tetra-volume (edge length =
3 tetras, and now has a octa embedded within it), blue = 6 tetra-volume
(edge length = 6 tetras , and is more complex, many octas embedded,
signature of higher frequency), RJ..? any corrections please add

Look at the photon field function as a frequency divisible by three. You will
come to see the octa factor as non essentials to the description since photon
action is a 3-space function without mass. The volume ratio is what is critical.
The photon as a real space volume of perceivable light operates at about 10 to
the -19 or -22 and the primary space field volume that function as its sub-set
operates at 10 to the -32 or -35. This allows a high degree of field frequency
(nana-meters of existence) difference for the photon function to inter-phase to
coalesce in infinite hues of the primary colors.

And of course the difference now becomes clear, we have characteristics of
internal structure that is quite different. The integrity will now respond
to different thresholds, which is why some will bend earlier in the prism
then others.

RJ can you correlate the frequecny-volume ratio to angle of reflection in
the prism.

Yes it will soon be part of the computer model that is under way.

Peaceful setting, as I approach 25years into my rebirth.

Under the tree I await with anticipation of knowing the One, as I nectar
from the fruits of knowledge, contemplating all of existence.
Where there is no way, there is way.

Clark

What I am saying in a general sense is that to understand the logic of the sequential
perspective one has to study and understand the logic of phase state physics.
Keep up the search and more later,

and much thanks for your challenging help,

Rod

Chamil1950@...

04-28-2002, 04:55 PM

Hi Rod- You have made some statements, that, as an amateur astrologer, I would
like to remark on, if I may. Physics always seems to attempt the equation
microcosm=macrocosm, but fails always, which, I fully understand is your life
work to solve :) So, from my humble astrological side, I will attempt to explain
your statement here (in quotes)

"Second, angles can be used to measure arcs as in plane geometry, or to
designate actions as phase states of a given cycle. This usage produces three
dimensional geometric descriptions of related actions such as pendulums and also
dynamics of chas. [What is 'chas' here? Chris]
In this use the angles define phase states and are the basics of phase physics."

As astrology has it's basis in angles and utilizes, at certain points, karma and
relationship charts, I hypothesize that it is basically no different than what
you are attempting to synthesize in your remarks. The only difference is that
you are coming from the macrocosm (male aspect) and I am coming from the
microcosm (female aspect) of creation and polarization. The only diferrence here
is that we have had astrology alot longer than we have had physics :). Just a
thought, as Tif (i) would say... Now, I can't possibly remark on most of your
brilliant statements, which I conceptually understand, but can't explain
verbally. When I compare to my astrological knowledge, I can verbalize a
parrallel belief, even if limited by your standards, so I keep plugging away
with my questions :). And, Thanks for your continued effort to help us all
understand. Also, on the knot-hole..just carve it out a little wider...you will
see much more ;)Chris
>
>

alex1h2000

05-03-2002, 02:14 PM

Tiffani,

I saw this post and I thought I would relate some of the books that I
have come across which the lay person can readily understand.

1. The Cosmic Mind - Plummer. Probably my all time favorite sacred-
geometry/cosmology book. Out of print.

2. Rythyms of Vision - Blair. Covers a lot of areas related to sacred
geometry. Out of print.

3. Time Stands Still - Critchlow. Beautiful book about the sacred
geometry of neolithic cultures. Out of print.

4. Sun Earth Man - Landscheidt. Nonlinear systems, solar system
dynamics and relationship to music/fractal sets. In print.

5. Sacred Geometry - Robert Lawlor. Pure Greek sacred geometry.

6. The Pythagorean Plato: Prelude to the song itself - McClain.
Musical interpretation of Plato's writings. Out of print.

Just about any book by Lawlor, Critchlow or Lubicz is recommended.
Although most of these are out of print libraries in metropolitan
areas should have most of them.

I have a science background and I have always been interested in
quantum mechanics but I found the above subjects to be more
accessible and aesthetically pleasing.

> I was also contemplating taking physics as a subject but then
realised that the course wouldn't entail the type of physics we learn
about here, I would actually be taught the type of physics that has
been proven false!
>
> SO very true....so were do we start....i would LOVE to take a
physics course but not one where I would have to unlearn it if it is
being proven not so up to date....ROD & Clark...any courses at
universities that you know of that might be worth it...books...online
otherwise! i have asked this before but am serious now! :)
>
> Tiffani