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?