Session 18 May 2024

Theres nothing you wrote that I disagree with. And my chances of visiting Stonehenge in my lifetime are practically zero, I really don't have to contemplate this very deeply.

SH is a very special place to me, and many others...there are times to call the police and there are times to act...for me personally, I would act. I don't expect everyone/anyone to agree with me.
Never say never.

I would admit that I was privileged to have lived close to Stonehenge as a child, so I have visited the stones. They are really awe inspiring up close. It reminds me though how my family once had my eight year old cousin staying with us one summer. She was a real handful (that's an understatement) and my mother was at her wits end looking after her. My father came home from work and sizing up the situation, bundled his niece into the car and took her to Stonehenge to calm things down. He actually adored his young, if rather naughty, niece and took some photographs of the little minx wandering in amongst the stones with a grumpy expression on her face. I can't remember if the treatment worked but my mother at least got a short break. My cousin thought very highly of my father too since the night he died (Christmas Eve), she drove all the way up from Portsmouth to sit by his body for hours and mourn him. She still remembers that impromptu visit to Stonehenge. :-D
 
And here are the prize idiots who attacked Stonehenge:

View attachment 97371
Rajan Naidu and Niamh Lynch were arrested on suspicion of damaging the monument


Stonehenge summer solstice

I also find it kind of ironic that people are not only allowed to congregate around, but also climb and sit atop the structures, which undoubtedly adds to the wear and tear.
 
Its great that people can be close to and touch the stones...but IMO, sitting on them is disrespectful.

Agreed. And intention also plays a huge role here. I think it’s actually kinda cute that they’re sitting on it. As a child who grew up with the freedom of climbing trees for fun and rolling around in the grass, a part of me would love to climb on top of it and just lay there to stare at the clouds. But adult me knows that this is a sacred place not to be disturbed, and that applies to all implications of protecting said place. Maybe some day when we’re able to replicate this technology :)
 
They didn’t say is not recorded at higher levels, they only mentioned that is ‘equals time’, which at higher levels can be perceived or could be a totally different concept as how we perceive or understand ‘time’
I am not sure about that. When Joe asked "does that mean that at higher levels information is recorded?", the C's said "No". That seems pretty clear to me.

I think that what both are saying are not mutually exclusive.
On the one hand, I agree with Irjo because Cas did not directly say that at higher densities "no information is recorded".
That, does not exclude the possibility that this is so.

What I interpret from Cas's response to Joe is that:
The fact that "recorded information equals time, and time only exists for us", does not mean that at higher levels information is recorded.

That is, whether information at higher levels is recorded or not recorded is not an answer we got, since Joe asked something else.
He asked if such a fact meant such another fact, and the answer to THAT, was no.

Perhaps MJF is a bit hasty in concluding that at higher densities information does not register, but it sounds very interesting indeed.

It reminds me of that question the Cas once asked us.
I don't have the quote now, but basically it was about what happens if a tree falls and no one is there to hear it. I don't know if anyone remembers the session to quote verbatim.

That always stuck in the back of my mind, and now I'm making more sense of it.
Apparently, it's about "recorded information and unrecorded information".


Taking into account that we are wave reading units, we ourselves are the ones who create reference points, every time we register something, or become aware of something.
Perhaps because of the direct relation this has for our senses of location or reference we call it time, but in the end it is recorded information.

I don't know anything about mathematics, but I suppose that in quantum theory there will be formulas and that sort of thing, where "time" is one of the factors represented in those equations.
If so, that is the factor that must be replaced by "recorded information".
If that is achieved, it would include the interaction of consciousness, which is what is missing in the equation, according to the Cas.

I am suffering from my ignorance in mathematics, which does not allow me to collaborate in the search for some term that represents "registered information", which in turn is manageable within a mathematical equation.

But I am enjoying the fascinating exchanges of others here.
When I can understand or seem to be understanding something! of what they are saying, I am tickled with joy.

I hope that those knowledgeable in math and science, continue to network, and not underestimate or waste the seemingly silly questions of the non-understanders.
Freeing oneself from prejudices is very difficult, but it seems to be something of prime importance on the upward path of consciousness.
For me at least, I find it quite difficult to get rid of prejudices, but when I have some small achievement, the difference in possibilities because of freedom is enormous.
Even that lessening of harmful burden, one can even feel it physically.

It is a daily struggle but it is worth it.


Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
 
I need to qualify something I said concerning Nikola Tesla in a recent post. I said:

"Curiously, the great Serbian inventor Nikola Tesla was passionate about the significance of the number three and believed that it held the secret of all creation. For example, he would always walk around a building three timed before entering it."

What I said about him circling a building three times before entering it is true but he actually believed that it was 3, 6 and 9 which held the secrets to all creation. Insofar as I am aware. he never explained why. However, could it have something to do with densities and UFT. I say this because although the C's have mentioned the importance of algebra in forming or expressing UFT, they have also stressed the importance of geometry too.

The Greek philosophers and mathematicians, like Pythagoras and Plato (who according to the C's plagiarised much of his work), also focused very much on geometry, e.g., the Platonic Solids, although they most probably obtained much of their mathematical knowledge from the older Persian (Magi), Egyptian, Indian and Babylonian cultures and possibly even the Druids (legend has it that one of Pythagoras's main teachers was a Druid priest probably from Gaul). Indeed, as I have posted before, the pyramid or tetractys was sacred to the Pythagoreans and to the Druids. Another name for a pyramid is a tetrahedron, which is reflected, for example, in the Star of David symbol, which is a 2D version of a double tetrahedron in 3D. The C's mentioned the significance of the tetrahedron here:
Session 17August 1996:

Q: (L) Do the tetrahedrons spin within the sphere? Do these power points of the tetrahedron spin?

A: Energy fields flow in balance.

Q: (T) So they're spinning to keep balance? (J) Like a gyro. [Notice that the Cs did NOT say that anything was spinning, only that energy was flowing.] (T) Is there... now, am I correct in the fact that there's a direct relationship here to the real Hebrew Star of David, to these tetrahedrals?

A: Yes.

Q: (T) And that everything that has been done to it for the last 500 years or so, has been done to screw things up?

A: Yes.

Q: (T) Yes. So that that symbol is not a religious symbol, as such, but a very important... (L)...power symbol?

A: Yes.

Q: (T) It describes a physics that transcends the densities.

A: So is pentagon.

Q: (T) So is the Pentagon? (J) A pentagon. (T) The pentagon shape. These are part of what humans describe as the sacred geometries.

A: Yes.


However, a pyramid when expressed in 2D is a simple triangle, which, as everyone knows, is a three sided object. The number 3 is obviously reflected in the three dimensional and 3rd Density world that we dwell in, as it is by the C's 'Law of Three', but in geometric terms it is linked with the triangle.

If the number 3 can be linked to the triangle, what of the numbers 6 and 9, which were also special to Tesla? Well if you take a regular six sided object, you get a hexagon. This is a shape that curiously is often found in nature with some crystals and stones, snowflakes and even the honey cones that bees construct taking on a natural hexagonal shape. However, what the triangle (which can be three dimensionalised into a pyramid or tetrahedron) represents in 3rd Density may correspond to that which the hexagon represents in 4th Density (or possibly 6th Density). Indeed, the C's have on more than one occasion mentioned the importance of the hexagon in the transcripts:

Session 22 August 1998:
Q: (A) Next question: three weeks ago you mentioned in relation to UFT pentagons and hexagons. I have here a pentagon and a mathematical formula under pentagon which for me, relates to a pentagon, and it has x, y, z, three dimension; time, which is one dimension, and perhaps the fifth dimension, which corresponds to the fifth. Is this association of pentagon with this mathematical symbol below correct?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) I want to ask if you ever told us to do something with a Tesla coil which I failed to record or got lost somewhere?

A: Maybe. Gravity waves, pentagon is the foundation; hexagon is the conclusion.


In case people are not aware, the US Navy apparently used Tesla coils on the USS Eldridge (ref. the Philadelphia Experiment) to create the strong electromagnetic field they wished to use to degauss the ship. By accident, they managed instead to teleport (and time travel) the ship, which obviously was an inadvertent application of the UFT causing the ship and the men on it to phase shift. Did this wayward experiment create unstable gravity waves perhaps? However, what do the C's mean here by the "hexagon is the conclusion"?

Session 28 November 1998:
Q: (A) Last time when we were talking, you made an essential division between the physical world and the non-physical world, ethereal world, the one which cannot be quantified. Now, I know something about the physical world, how it is built, and the main concepts of atoms and forces and so on. I would like to know what are the building blocks that describe this ethereal world. I am asking because you said that these two worlds can be bridged, if not united. In order to bridge them, I need to know something about this ethereal world. Where can I learn it?

A: Consciousness is in reality, the purest form of energy. The alter realm is composed of consciousness energy. To better understand the concept, one must utilize one’s memory of particularly vivid dreams, when one had the sensate of physicality in a transitory state.

Q: (A) How to bridge the physical and ethereal worlds?

A: Gravity is the key. One must formulate an hypothesis based upon the quantum range of wave particulate transfer. In other words, where does the wave go when it appears to disappear into the very core of an object with a strong gravitational field? Pentagon, hexagon, you know?!?

Then there is the extraordinary hexagonal storm shape discovered by NASA at Saturn's North Pole (see below):

1719016107561.png

What we should bear in mind here is that the C's once said that Saturn, like Jupiter, is a 4th Density world. Could we therefore be seeing in real time here gravity waves disappearing into the core of Saturn, a planet with a very strong gravitational field?

Then there is the fact that the C's told us that the huge spaceship which forms the STS Orion Headquarters in the inner solar system is an hexagonal shape as well:​

Q: How large is this object?

A: 1005.6 kilometers diameter.

Q: What is the general configuration or shape of it? (A) A sphere, a ball, a disc, a cylinder?

A: Partial sphere, hexagonal.


Does the fact that the ship is constructed in an hexagonal shape imply the application of UFT in its design?

Session 5 February 2000:

Q: It's really sad that Santilli is involved with such flakey people! (F) Hasn't he always been? (L) He is certainly influenced by the wrong people! And I don't think we want anything to do with him at all. (A) Now, we were talking about Kaluza Klein, and you mentioned the Germans "exploring the loop of the cylinder" in relation to time travel. I don't know what this means but I have the idea that it is related to extra dimensions, hyperspace. Now, we asked a question at some point, and you said that a cylinder is really a double loop. You then suggested that we meditate on the true meaning of this sentence. Now, I don't know how to meditate, but I do know how to do math. So, I drew three pictures here: one is a real cylinder, two is a kind of cylinder inside a cylinder, and three, like a torus. Laura said that it wasn't any of these, that it should only have one side like a cylinder/mobius strip - no left and no right. So, this could be option 4, something like a Klein bottle or option 5, something called a twisted torus. Is it 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5? Or 6, none of the above? Is it one of these?

A: Selection 3.

Q: 3 is the torus. (L) What is a loop of the cylinder? Yes, there is one loop and then there is another loop. One loop is probably what we call time - cyclical time.

A: Time cycle.

Q: What is the second loop?

A: Included, but not inclusive.

Q: I guess that means that it is included, but is not the whole thing. It covers that, but that isn't the whole thing. What DOES it mean?

A: Yes.

Q: Wait, I asked what is the second loop. The second loop is included but not inclusive?

A: Remember, you do have cycles but that does not necessarily mean cyclical. 3-Dimensional depiction of loop, seek hexagon for more. Geometric theory provides answers for key. Look to stellar windows. Octagon, hexagon*, pentagon.

*
MJF: Think here of the hexagon cloud formation at the North Pole of Saturn shown above, which may well be a planetary window.

Q: Are those the different levels of density?

A: No, but it relates.
Geometry gets you there, algebra sets you "free."

Hence, we see the C's stressing the importance of geometry to the UFT but also linking the hexagon to the 3-Dimensional depiction of the loop Ark was referring to. It appears then that geometry creates a foundation for the UFT but algebra provides the expression.

Coming back to Tesla's 3, 6 and 9 and the secrets of all creation they supposedly contain (like the C's 1, 2 and 3), this makes me wonder whether this Serbian genius may have worked out the UFT before Einstein, who the C's said had accomplished it in secret.

I have considered the relevance of the numbers 3 and 6 from a geometric viewpoint above but what about the number 9? A nine sided regular shape is called a "nonagon", although sometimes it is referred to alternatively as an "enneagon". The C's have never mentioned the nonagon in the transcripts as far as I am aware. However, it is known in some traditions that the number nine often signifies completion or the end of a cycle, adding a layer of symbolic significance to the Nonagon’s use.

The geometry of the Nonagon plays a role in various mathematical calculations, including the calculation of area, perimeter, and the properties of diagonals. While the geometry of nonagons might be slightly more complex than simpler polygons like triangles or squares, they offer an interesting field of study in geometry with numerous practical applications. In the realm of geometry, nonagons play a crucial role in understanding the properties and behaviours of polygons.

This makes me wonder though what would you get if you three-dimensionalise a regular nonagon. Did Tesla possibly know something about higher dimensions that we don't? Curiously, the C's once said there was a reason the Pentagon building was constructed in a pentagon shape but what few people realise is that at the Pentagon's centre there is a plaza or courtyard known as the 'Ground Zero Café', which is built in the shape of a regular nonagon. However, I don't wish to read anything too sinister into this as nonagons have often been used in building construction for the novelty and aesthetic beauty of their shape.

In fairness, the other regular polygon the C's have referred to in the transcripts is the Octagon, which obviously does not fit into Tesla's 3. 6 and 9 scheme but still seems to play an important role in things though, given what the C's have said about it here:
Session 10 July 1999:

Q: (A) Good. So, there are seven densities. Now, how come, there are seven, and not three or five, or eleven? Does it follow from some mathematics?

A: What form of mathematical theory best describes the concept of balance?

Q: (L) Algebra. (A) So, I had the idea that these seven densities were related to what Gurdjieff relates to the number of laws that apply in the various densities; the higher the density, the fewer the laws that apply, which means there is more freedom?

A: That is very close. Consciousness is the key here.

Q: (A) Yes, so my question relates to the geometric model of gravity and consciousness.

A: Picture an endless octagonal... in three dimensions.

Q: (A) A lattice, you mean?

A: Okay.

Q: (A) Are these densities related to the mathematical concept of 'signatures of the metric?' I would like to model densities with slices of different geometric properties, in particular slices with different properties of the distance.

A: Yes...


Session 24 July1999:

Q: (A) Okay, I was trying to figure out how to build this expanded gravity, and I made a table to assist the question. The first possibility is that one can build gravity on a square matrix. This matrix can be symmetric, can be non-symmetric, or can be a complex matrix, which I call possibilities a, b, and c. The second possibility is to build a theory of gravity on the basis of a connection which looks like a cube rather than a matrix. Here we also have three possibilities: no curvature, but torsion; no torsion but curvature; torsion and curvature. These are possibilities 1, 2, and 3. Another possibility is to use any combination of these two lines of speculation. Another possibility is none of the above, but to build gravity on the basis of an irregular cube, or an irregular square, which I call A. Another possibility is to use something that is none of the above.

A: Octagonal complexigram. Try the formula for possibility 1-c first.


I am not familiar with the term "complexigram" and wonder if they may have meant "complexogram", which seems to be a flow diagram. Any suggestions?
 
I need to qualify something I said concerning Nikola Tesla in a recent post. I said:

"Curiously, the great Serbian inventor Nikola Tesla was passionate about the significance of the number three and believed that it held the secret of all creation. For example, he would always walk around a building three timed before entering it."

What I said about him circling a building three times before entering it is true but he actually believed that it was 3, 6 and 9 which held the secrets to all creation. Insofar as I am aware. he never explained why. However, could it have something to do with densities and UFT. I say this because although the C's have mentioned the importance of algebra in forming or expressing UFT, they have also stressed the importance of geometry too.

The Greek philosophers and mathematicians, like Pythagoras and Plato (who according to the C's plagiarised much of his work), also focused very much on geometry, e.g., the Platonic Solids, although they most probably obtained much of their mathematical knowledge from the older Persian (Magi), Egyptian, Indian and Babylonian cultures and possibly even the Druids (legend has it that one of Pythagoras's main teachers was a Druid priest probably from Gaul). Indeed, as I have posted before, the pyramid or tetractys was sacred to the Pythagoreans and to the Druids. Another name for a pyramid is a tetrahedron, which is reflected, for example, in the Star of David symbol, which is a 2D version of a double tetrahedron in 3D. The C's mentioned the significance of the tetrahedron here:
Session 17August 1996:

Q: (L) Do the tetrahedrons spin within the sphere? Do these power points of the tetrahedron spin?

A: Energy fields flow in balance.

Q: (T) So they're spinning to keep balance? (J) Like a gyro. [Notice that the Cs did NOT say that anything was spinning, only that energy was flowing.] (T) Is there... now, am I correct in the fact that there's a direct relationship here to the real Hebrew Star of David, to these tetrahedrals?

A: Yes.

Q: (T) And that everything that has been done to it for the last 500 years or so, has been done to screw things up?

A: Yes.

Q: (T) Yes. So that that symbol is not a religious symbol, as such, but a very important... (L)...power symbol?

A: Yes.

Q: (T) It describes a physics that transcends the densities.

A: So is pentagon.

Q: (T) So is the Pentagon? (J) A pentagon. (T) The pentagon shape. These are part of what humans describe as the sacred geometries.

A: Yes.


However, a pyramid when expressed in 2D is a simple triangle, which, as everyone knows, is a three sided object. The number 3 is obviously reflected in the three dimensional and 3rd Density world that we dwell in, as it is by the C's 'Law of Three', but in geometric terms it is linked with the triangle.

If the number 3 can be linked to the triangle, what of the numbers 6 and 9, which were also special to Tesla? Well if you take a regular six sided object, you get a hexagon. This is a shape that curiously is often found in nature with some crystals and stones, snowflakes and even the honey cones that bees construct taking on a natural hexagonal shape. However, what the triangle (which can be three dimensionalised into a pyramid or tetrahedron) represents in 3rd Density may correspond to that which the hexagon represents in 4th Density (or possibly 6th Density). Indeed, the C's have on more than one occasion mentioned the importance of the hexagon in the transcripts:

Session 22 August 1998:
Q: (A) Next question: three weeks ago you mentioned in relation to UFT pentagons and hexagons. I have here a pentagon and a mathematical formula under pentagon which for me, relates to a pentagon, and it has x, y, z, three dimension; time, which is one dimension, and perhaps the fifth dimension, which corresponds to the fifth. Is this association of pentagon with this mathematical symbol below correct?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) I want to ask if you ever told us to do something with a Tesla coil which I failed to record or got lost somewhere?

A: Maybe. Gravity waves, pentagon is the foundation; hexagon is the conclusion.


In case people are not aware, the US Navy apparently used Tesla coils on the USS Eldridge (ref. the Philadelphia Experiment) to create the strong electromagnetic field they wished to use to degauss the ship. By accident, they managed instead to teleport (and time travel) the ship, which obviously was an inadvertent application of the UFT causing the ship and the men on it to phase shift. Did this wayward experiment create unstable gravity waves perhaps? However, what do the C's mean here by the "hexagon is the conclusion"?

Session 28 November 1998:
Q: (A) Last time when we were talking, you made an essential division between the physical world and the non-physical world, ethereal world, the one which cannot be quantified. Now, I know something about the physical world, how it is built, and the main concepts of atoms and forces and so on. I would like to know what are the building blocks that describe this ethereal world. I am asking because you said that these two worlds can be bridged, if not united. In order to bridge them, I need to know something about this ethereal world. Where can I learn it?

A: Consciousness is in reality, the purest form of energy. The alter realm is composed of consciousness energy. To better understand the concept, one must utilize one’s memory of particularly vivid dreams, when one had the sensate of physicality in a transitory state.

Q: (A) How to bridge the physical and ethereal worlds?

A: Gravity is the key. One must formulate an hypothesis based upon the quantum range of wave particulate transfer. In other words, where does the wave go when it appears to disappear into the very core of an object with a strong gravitational field? Pentagon, hexagon, you know?!?

Then there is the extraordinary hexagonal storm shape discovered by NASA at Saturn's North Pole (see below):

View attachment 97395

What we should bear in mind here is that the C's once said that Saturn, like Jupiter, is a 4th Density world. Could we therefore be seeing in real time here gravity waves disappearing into the core of Saturn, a planet with a very strong gravitational field?

Then there is the fact that the C's told us that the huge spaceship which forms the STS Orion Headquarters in the inner solar system is an hexagonal shape as well:​

Q: How large is this object?

A: 1005.6 kilometers diameter.

Q: What is the general configuration or shape of it? (A) A sphere, a ball, a disc, a cylinder?

A: Partial sphere, hexagonal.


Does the fact that the ship is constructed in an hexagonal shape imply the application of UFT in its design?

Session 5 February 2000:

Q: It's really sad that Santilli is involved with such flakey people! (F) Hasn't he always been? (L) He is certainly influenced by the wrong people! And I don't think we want anything to do with him at all. (A) Now, we were talking about Kaluza Klein, and you mentioned the Germans "exploring the loop of the cylinder" in relation to time travel. I don't know what this means but I have the idea that it is related to extra dimensions, hyperspace. Now, we asked a question at some point, and you said that a cylinder is really a double loop. You then suggested that we meditate on the true meaning of this sentence. Now, I don't know how to meditate, but I do know how to do math. So, I drew three pictures here: one is a real cylinder, two is a kind of cylinder inside a cylinder, and three, like a torus. Laura said that it wasn't any of these, that it should only have one side like a cylinder/mobius strip - no left and no right. So, this could be option 4, something like a Klein bottle or option 5, something called a twisted torus. Is it 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5? Or 6, none of the above? Is it one of these?

A: Selection 3.

Q: 3 is the torus. (L) What is a loop of the cylinder? Yes, there is one loop and then there is another loop. One loop is probably what we call time - cyclical time.

A: Time cycle.

Q: What is the second loop?

A: Included, but not inclusive.

Q: I guess that means that it is included, but is not the whole thing. It covers that, but that isn't the whole thing. What DOES it mean?

A: Yes.

Q: Wait, I asked what is the second loop. The second loop is included but not inclusive?

A: Remember, you do have cycles but that does not necessarily mean cyclical. 3-Dimensional depiction of loop, seek hexagon for more. Geometric theory provides answers for key. Look to stellar windows. Octagon, hexagon*, pentagon.

*
MJF: Think here of the hexagon cloud formation at the North Pole of Saturn shown above, which may well be a planetary window.

Q: Are those the different levels of density?

A: No, but it relates.
Geometry gets you there, algebra sets you "free."

Hence, we see the C's stressing the importance of geometry to the UFT but also linking the hexagon to the 3-Dimensional depiction of the loop Ark was referring to. It appears then that geometry creates a foundation for the UFT but algebra provides the expression.

Coming back to Tesla's 3, 6 and 9 and the secrets of all creation they supposedly contain (like the C's 1, 2 and 3), this makes me wonder whether this Serbian genius may have worked out the UFT before Einstein, who the C's said had accomplished it in secret.

I have considered the relevance of the numbers 3 and 6 from a geometric viewpoint above but what about the number 9? A nine sided regular shape is called a "nonagon", although sometimes it is referred to alternatively as an "enneagon". The C's have never mentioned the nonagon in the transcripts as far as I am aware. However, it is known in some traditions that the number nine often signifies completion or the end of a cycle, adding a layer of symbolic significance to the Nonagon’s use.

The geometry of the Nonagon plays a role in various mathematical calculations, including the calculation of area, perimeter, and the properties of diagonals. While the geometry of nonagons might be slightly more complex than simpler polygons like triangles or squares, they offer an interesting field of study in geometry with numerous practical applications. In the realm of geometry, nonagons play a crucial role in understanding the properties and behaviours of polygons.

This makes me wonder though what would you get if you three-dimensionalise a regular nonagon. Did Tesla possibly know something about higher dimensions that we don't? Curiously, the C's once said there was a reason the Pentagon building was constructed in a pentagon shape but what few people realise is that at the Pentagon's centre there is a plaza or courtyard known as the 'Ground Zero Café', which is built in the shape of a regular nonagon. However, I don't wish to read anything too sinister into this as nonagons have often been used in building construction for the novelty and aesthetic beauty of their shape.

In fairness, the other regular polygon the C's have referred to in the transcripts is the Octagon, which obviously does not fit into Tesla's 3. 6 and 9 scheme but still seems to play an important role in things though, given what the C's have said about it here:
Session 10 July 1999:

Q: (A) Good. So, there are seven densities. Now, how come, there are seven, and not three or five, or eleven? Does it follow from some mathematics?

A: What form of mathematical theory best describes the concept of balance?

Q: (L) Algebra. (A) So, I had the idea that these seven densities were related to what Gurdjieff relates to the number of laws that apply in the various densities; the higher the density, the fewer the laws that apply, which means there is more freedom?

A: That is very close. Consciousness is the key here.

Q: (A) Yes, so my question relates to the geometric model of gravity and consciousness.

A: Picture an endless octagonal... in three dimensions.

Q: (A) A lattice, you mean?

A: Okay.

Q: (A) Are these densities related to the mathematical concept of 'signatures of the metric?' I would like to model densities with slices of different geometric properties, in particular slices with different properties of the distance.

A: Yes...


Session 24 July1999:

Q: (A) Okay, I was trying to figure out how to build this expanded gravity, and I made a table to assist the question. The first possibility is that one can build gravity on a square matrix. This matrix can be symmetric, can be non-symmetric, or can be a complex matrix, which I call possibilities a, b, and c. The second possibility is to build a theory of gravity on the basis of a connection which looks like a cube rather than a matrix. Here we also have three possibilities: no curvature, but torsion; no torsion but curvature; torsion and curvature. These are possibilities 1, 2, and 3. Another possibility is to use any combination of these two lines of speculation. Another possibility is none of the above, but to build gravity on the basis of an irregular cube, or an irregular square, which I call A. Another possibility is to use something that is none of the above.

A: Octagonal complexigram. Try the formula for possibility 1-c first.


I am not familiar with the term "complexigram" and wonder if they may have meant "complexogram", which seems to be a flow diagram. Any suggestions?
Wish I was smart enough to understand the mathematics...always did well in math but this stuff is beyond my comprehension.

The mother ship is 1005.6 kilometers in diameter....thats 625 miles, almost a quarter the size of the US. Mind boggling.
 
I think the biggest limitation here is our linear perception of time. In 4th density this limitation is removed.

I think the Cs are trying to tell us that any geometry can be created by cycles within cycles and waves within waves. Because everything is waves. The problem is, that when we observe waves, we only see what is happening right now. If we could see the interaction of waves in infinite time, all at once, then the waves naturally create geometric objects. One can look into cycloids and related curves to understand. Those who are more artistically inclined might look at Joe Freedmans cycloid drawing machine.


Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
 

Attachments

  • Duograph-1.jpg.jpg
    Duograph-1.jpg.jpg
    198.1 KB · Views: 10
  • Duograph-2-1.jpg.jpg
    Duograph-2-1.jpg.jpg
    178.1 KB · Views: 10
  • Duograph-3-1.jpg.jpg
    Duograph-3-1.jpg.jpg
    196.6 KB · Views: 10
Never say never.

I would admit that I was privileged to have lived close to Stonehenge as a child, so I have visited the stones. They are really awe inspiring up close. It reminds me though how my family once had my eight year old cousin staying with us one summer. She was a real handful (that's an understatement) and my mother was at her wits end looking after her. My father came home from work and sizing up the situation, bundled his niece into the car and took her to Stonehenge to calm things down. He actually adored his young, if rather naughty, niece and took some photographs of the little minx wandering in amongst the stones with a grumpy expression on her face. I can't remember if the treatment worked but my mother at least got a short break. My cousin thought very highly of my father too since the night he died (Christmas Eve), she drove all the way up from Portsmouth to sit by his body for hours and mourn him. She still remembers that impromptu visit to Stonehenge. :-D
Q: (L) When was Stonehenge built?

A: 6000 approx. B.C.

Q: (L) What was Stonehenge built to do or be used for?

A: Energy director.

Q: (L) What was this energy to be directed to do?

A: All things.

Q: (L) Was the energy to be directed outward or inward to the center?

A: Both.

Q: (L) Are you suggesting we should get together and try to move something with sound?

A: Yes.
==================

Im wondering if anyone has tried to move something heavy with tonal vibrations.

Also, id ask if rebuilding Stonehenge or recreating similar would be something we should pursue....and also what is the closest replica to Stonehenge that has been made, and does it have the ability of the original in any way.

Next to the Great Pyramids, Stonehenge is my favorite ancient structure, cant get enough of it.
 
Back
Top Bottom