Session 23 April 2022

[Bluegazer]

I hope your trouble sleeping is not because your mind is becoming overactive.

Well, it's several things really. And yes, I have to admit that I have an overactive mind that is always asking questions and well... ideas are always coming to me. -It's what happens when you get in the habit of asking yourself questions as part of self-remembering- But maybe it's also something that I attribute to the whole process of emotional cleansing, starting to eliminate bad habits and the wave. And also that my health condition has some chemical imbalance (DM Type 1).

Don't feel bad about this. When I am sad one day or my emotional state is difficult, there is always that voice that says: Nothing can harm the core. It has an adamantine strength.

 

[MJF]

I have been looking at old transcripts and came across this gem which backs up what has been said about the Star of David and links up with anti-gravity (I have bolded what I think are the key points from our viewpoint):

Tetrahedrons and Pyramids

Session 17August 1996:

Q: (L) All right, let's get on to our questions here. Let me ask a quick one about the tetrahedron. Terry, you ask it, because you know more about it. (T) The Tetrahedron, triangle mathematics that Hoagland is working with in conjunction with the Mars/Cydonia region where he supposedly discovered this...

A: Energy consolidator. EM Wave capturer.

Q: (T) Ok, so it’s an EM wave capturer. Does it also expel EM waves?

A: Close.

Q: (T) From the same points? The 19 points, whatever it is... [He obviously meant the points on the planet that Hoagland talks about that are located at about 19 Degrees of latitude if you place a tetrahedron inside a sphere.]

A: Channels and enhances, when used properly, and in pristine conditions.

Q: (T) Hoagland is not talking about... whatever he's talking about, as far as the mathematics go, of the tetrahedral triangles within the sphere, which I'm assuming this planet is calling the sacred geometries, but are physics-type things of different densities, which may not actually be right. OK, this doesn't apply just to Mars, this is, every sphere has these same properties...?

A: Yes.

Q: (T)... a golfball, a base ball; I know they're not perfect spheres, they have dimples; all the way up to the sun, and so forth and so on, of any size, made out of any material, as long as it's a sphere, it will have the same properties.

A: No.

Q: (T) OK, it has to have certain kinds of materials?

A: No, must be magnetized.

Q: (T) OK, it's a magnetized sphere; something that has a magnetic field around it. (L) Is the tetrahedral configuration a property of the magnetism?

A: Yes. No.

Q: (T) Yes to my question, no to Laura's question?

A: Yes.

Q: (T) OK, my question is, the sphere has to be able to generate a magnetic field, like the earth has a magnetic field, like Mars generates a magnetic field...

A: Or be magnetized by installation of internal magnetic generator.

Q: (L) OK, what's the purpose of this? What's the purpose of these tetrahedrons? What are the...

A: Purpose is not proper term.

Q: (T) That's right. It's not a purpose, it just exists this way. These spheres that are magnetic, or are able to be magnetized, this happens just because they are what they are, and this is how the physics works?

A: Reflection of universal balance.

Q: (L) OK, they just simply... and is it that something occurs at the points of these triangles that is noticeable, I mean, is it like a power point?

A: No.

Q: (L) OK, well, this guy Jim [who is in communication with Ark] says that they are designated by different monuments on the planet's surface...

A: Nonsense!!!

Q: (T) Thank you! (L)... and that they are visual sighting...

A: Artificial constructed tetrahedrons are placed on strategic locations on the planet's surface in order to utilize magnetic fields properly.

Q: (L) Who places these artificially constructed tetrahedrons at these points?

A: The artificial constructors.

Q: (L) And who are they?

A: Whomever they may be.

Q: (T) In other words, they can be anybody. They're artificial constructor, they could be anybody... (L) If people know about them, they can do this...

A: No, no, no. Nineteen degrees north and south.

Q: (T) Correct, those are the numbers that Hoagland came up with, with his stuff. On most of the planets, and our sun, we seem to have major events happening, or have happened...

A: Hawaii.

Q: (T) Yes, Hawaii, Puerto Rico... let's see, 19 degrees north and south, Philippines, I think, is somewhere close, on the south side. Major volcanos... (F) Philippines is on the north side, that's not in the Southern Hemisphere... (T) I'd have to pull out a global map to see what the 19 degrees are. On Mars, Cydonia resides at approximately 19 degrees, the Giant volcano, the dead volcano on Mars is approximately 19 degrees, the stuff that they found on Venus, the major things, are at approximately 19 degrees. The sunspots are approximately 19 degrees, the red spot on Jupiter... (L) Is there anything else we want to get on this tetrahedron... Is there anything else we could ask about this subject, that we haven't thought of ourselves... (T) I'm sure there's a lot... (L) Oh, I know... that you could give us?

A: Unlimited.

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.

Q: (T) So, in that 'Bear' book that I have...

A: You as Atlanteans knew this, and lived by it in many ways. For example, the pyramid recharges by capturing exactly half the energy points, thus allowing a positive imbalance buildup to be captured, then expended.

Q: (L) OK, are we finished, or... Ok, we know we are not finished, but we know we want to cover a couple of things... is there something more about the tetrahedrons that is important for us to know now? (T) That we can pass on to Ark? (L) Yes, essential to know now? A real 'goodie?'

A: Open.

And I guess we can now add the Octagon to the Tetrahedron and Pentagon.

What I wonder would you get if you crossed a tetrahedron (pyramid) with a pentagon. This is not a trick question like one of those old animal jokes. Well, you might get this - a five sided pyramid:



This is what is known as the D& M Pyramid on Mars in the region of Cydonia that is mentioned in the transcript above.

As you can see from the photo below, it forms part of the complex that Richard Hoagland called the 'Monuments of Mars'. It was by carefully analysing the angles between these monuments that he discovered the hyperdimensional physics discussed in the session.



The D&M Pyramid is a pentagonal (5 sided) geomorphic landmass located in the Cydonia region of Mars. It was named “D&M” after Vincent DiPietro and Gregory Molenaar of Goddard Space Flight Center by Richard C. Hoagland. The front of the D&M Pyramid, closest to the Face on Mars, is formed by two congruent angles, having two larger congruent angles forming the opposing side. A fifth angle forms the rear section. The pyramid exhibits some domed uplift on its right side, and what appears to be an unusually deep impact crater further to the same side. The pyramid is nearly 3 km in length and 1 km high. Please note that NASA and all other authoritative bodies deny the structure is in any way artificial just as one might expect.

The orientation of the D&M Pyramid to the other major objects forming the Mars Monuments is as shown below:



I set out below an extract from an article on the D & M Pyramid by Erol Torun, which examines the geometrical aspects of the Pyramid. For those who would like to read the full article, the link is: D&M Pyramid of Mars

The front of the D&M Pyramid has three edges, spaced 60 degrees apart. As noted above, the center axis points to the Face. The edge on the left of this axis points toward the center of a feature that has been nicknamed the "City" by the Cydonia investigators. The edge on the right of the center axis points toward the apex of a dome-like structure known as the "Tholus".

The five-sidedness, bilateral symmetry, and primary alignments were first observed by Richard Hoagland after studying quality digital enlargements prepared in 1984 by SRI International from negatives of images processed by DiPietro and Molenaar. These events are documented in detail by Hoagland [3] and Pozos [4].

Turning back to the reconstructed geometry, we will now consider the internal symmetries of this object.

The D&M Pyramid displays a complex interplay between five-fold and six-fold symmetry. Both symmetries are present simultaneously, with the front of the pyramid exhibiting six-fold symmetry, and the "ground level" of the pyramid yielding a 36 degree angle that is characteristic of five-fold symmetry.

It is worth noting that the practice of combining symmetries was widely practiced by the architects of antiquity. It was believed that geometry and certain mathematical relationships were crucial building blocks of the Cosmos, and that architecture should reflect these symmetries. These practices were later revived in the Islamic world and especially in Renaissance Europe.
The angles formed by the D&M Pyramid when viewed from above differ from each other. Consequently, they can form various ratios. These angle ratios were studied to see if the values were significant, or merely random.

The angle ratios display significant values, with a preponderance of square roots and fractions involving square roots. Once again, we have a theme used by Classical architects, who used the square roots of two, three, and five in laying out the proportions of their buildings.

For clarity, three of these angle ratios are illustrated below:

The ratios of the shaded angles are equivalent to the indicated values. In the right hand illustration, the ratio of the shaded angles is equivalent to the ratio of e (the base of the natural logarithms) and pi (the relationship between a circle’s diameter and circumference).

(This ratio of e/pi is nearly equal to the square root of three divided by two, and the precision of measurement, +/- 0.2 deg, is insufficient to distinguish between these two possible values.)

A table has been prepared displaying a list of the measured angles, and the results of the analysis. The square roots of three and five, and the values of e and pi predominate. The identity of these values is strengthened by the numerous combinations in which they occur.

Note that the radian measure and trigonometric functions of some angles yield the same values produced by the angle ratios. The geometry thus has a common contextual thread.

As mentioned earlier in the section on criteria, all of this geometry is "dimensionless", i.e. it is not dependent on such cultural conventions as counting by tens, or measuring angles in the 360 system. This geometry will "work" in any number system.

A Speculation Concerning Tetrahedral Geometry

The aforementioned ambiguity concerning e/pi vs. the square root of three divided by two can be resolved with the geometry of a circumscribed tetrahedron.

A tetrahedron is the simplest of the Platonic solids, a polyhedron having six edges, four vertices, and four sides where each side is an equilateral triangle. A circumscribed tetrahedron is a tetrahedron that has been enclosed in a sphere that just touches each of the four vertices.

The presence of 60 degree angles produces the ambiguity: the Sine of 60 degrees is defined as (√3)/2, and this is very close, but not equal to, the ratio of e/pi:

(√3)/2 = 0.866025
e/pi = 0.865256

It is this ambiguity that is resolved by the geometry of a circumscribed tetrahedron.

The surface area of a sphere, divided by the surface area of the tetrahedron circumscribed by it, yields a very close approximation of e which shall be termed e’:

e = 2.718282
e’ = 2.720699

It is this ambiguity that is resolved by the geometry of a circumscribed tetrahedron.

When the ratio e/pi is evaluated using this "tetrahedral approximation of e", the result is precisely equal to (√3)/2:

e/pi = 0.865256
e’/pi = 0.866025 = (√3)/2

Conclusions

This investigation of the D&M Pyramid reveals a morphology that is inconsistent with the surrounding geology. The geomorphological processes observed to exist on Mars not only fail to provide a potential mechanism for the D&M Pyramid’s formation, but seem to preclude its very existence. Analysis of the object’s geometry, and its alignment with other anomalous landforms, reveal intricate relationships that are numerous and logical, and are suggestive of highly sophisticated design.

This object has been compared with the elaborate symbolic architecture of antiquity. While much of the geometry is the same utilized by Classical architects, it is important to note that the implementation is totally different. Nowhere in Earth history is this exact type of geometric symbolism to be found.

The same techniques used for most of this century in air photo interpretation show that the D&M Pyramid may be artificial, or may be a natural landform modified by intelligence. The true nature of this object can be resolved by re-imaging the Cydonia region to obtain high-resolution imagery of the D&M Pyramid and the other enigmatic landforms nearby. The issue of possible ruins at Cydonia is thus the only question involving extraterrestrial intelligence that can be easily resolved with known scientific means.

Recall that the C's said the pentagon fulfilled the same function, as a power symbol, as the tetrahedron in that it describes a physics that transcends the densities:

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.

So is this perhaps why the US Department of Defence HQ known as the Pentagon was designed as a pentagonal structure. Given that the C's then said "You as Atlanteans knew this, and lived by it in many ways", were they drawing attention to the fact that structures such as the Face on Mars and the D&M Pyramid were built by our Atlantean ancestors prior to the Deluge. If Elon Musk ever gets to Mars, then I would recommend that he take some archaeologists with him for they will have a field day (pun intended).

 

[MJF]

Well, it's several things really. And yes, I have to admit that I have an overactive mind that is always asking questions and well... ideas are always coming to me. -It's what happens when you get in the habit of asking yourself questions as part of self-remembering- But maybe it's also something that I attribute to the whole process of emotional cleansing, starting to eliminate bad habits and the wave. And also that my health condition has some chemical imbalance (DM Type 1).

Don't feel bad about this. When I am sad one day or my emotional state is difficult, there is always that voice that says: Nothing can harm the core. It has an adamantine strength.

I sympathise with you, as I am also guilty of having an overactive mind at times (particularly when you know time is short now). However, I sleep quite well at the moment. Take good care of yourself.

 

[BHelmet]

Pentagonistic.

 

[Bodizaffa]

I find myself checking for new posts daily.. Like a kid at Xmas.. So much happening at moment..

Wonder what they would say about YouTuber suspiciousObservers. Explaining most of catastroism caused by solar cycles. And like most. 6000. 12000. Etc yr cycles.. Maybe I missed it but what is purpose of the cycles. They happen in galaxies. Stars. Planets.. And affect life on so many levels...

 

[Chaze]

A: Be aware that you are currently under attack by forces that wish to silence you and end your exertions on behalf of your group in specific and the planet in general. These forces are getting desperate and will attempt to use any inroad possible. Be awake and alert at all times. Any disputes or disagreements can be easily blown out of proportion to your destruction. And then, when the negative energy is withdrawn, the devastation left will be amplified by the knowledge that it was all a deception. [Planchette swirls around and around for about 45 seconds] You have been warned. Do not take this lightly. Communicate and listen. It will take all of you together to navigate these dangers!!! Goodbye.

I had to come back to this session recently and painfully remind myself of this particular warning from the C’s.

Although this seems to be primarily directed towards Laura and those closest to her, I most definitely did not apply the due diligence required to my own life and surroundings.. And recently my home became a “buffet” due to misunderstandings and disagreements turning into arguments that 100% could have been avoided if only proper communication would have occurred.

I have been tested immensely as of late, and I have been reminded that I have much.. much more work to do. I’ve been humbled, and every chink and weak spot in my armor has been exposed to me. In a way, I am thankful for it because I honestly thought I was finally in a position where things were going to finally smooth out for me.

I won’t be so naïve next time. This is a war, after all.

 

[Sol Logos]

A: … Knowledge protects in the most amazing ways. Mathematics is “taught” in your realm in such a way that only a select few will learn. And mathematics is the language of all creation. For example, advanced math studies, such as algebra, provide the keys to unlocking the doors between the matter and antimatter universes."

Hence, the model for UFT needs, I assume, to take account of the anti-matter universe too.

I don’t know the answer, but I wondered how Enstein’s formula applies to the anti-matter. From my very naive view, seems like there’s still mass and the speed of light I imagine is the same constant, so probably still applies?

This made me recall that some scientists think of matter as simply congealed light where energy is operating at a different (lower) frequency.

Going back to what you said, and still on Einstein’s formula, I “think” this makes sense. If the question is how much energy is stored in an object with [insert amount] mass, and if light and energy are “two sides of the same coin”, then it’s like saying how much congealed light is in this object with said mass. And if light is consciousness are we saying it takes that amount of consciousness to continue to maintain these “physical” attributes. Best analogy I can imagine is how much processing power is needed to keep an object in a computer game looking “real” when the player is paying attention to it?

What I wonder would you get if you crossed a tetrahedron (pyramid) with a pentagon. This is not a trick question like one of those old animal jokes. Well, you might get this - a five sided pyramid:

View attachment 58850

This is what is known as the D& M Pyramid on Mars in the region of Cydonia that is mentioned in the transcript above.

As you can see from the photo below, it forms part of the complex that Richard Hoagland called the 'Monuments of Mars'. It was by carefully analysing the angles between these monuments that he discovered the hyperdimensional physics discussed in the session.

View attachment 58851

The D&M Pyramid is a pentagonal (5 sided) geomorphic landmass located in the Cydonia region of Mars. It was named “D&M” after Vincent DiPietro and Gregory Molenaar of Goddard Space Flight Center by Richard C. Hoagland. The front of the D&M Pyramid, closest to the Face on Mars, is formed by two congruent angles, having two larger congruent angles forming the opposing side. A fifth angle forms the rear section. The pyramid exhibits some domed uplift on its right side, and what appears to be an unusually deep impact crater further to the same side. The pyramid is nearly 3 km in length and 1 km high. Please note that NASA and all other authoritative bodies deny the structure is in any way artificial just as one might expect.

The orientation of the D&M Pyramid to the other major objects forming the Mars Monuments is as shown below:

View attachment 58852

I set out below an extract from an article on the D & M Pyramid by Erol Torun, which examines the geometrical aspects of the Pyramid. For those who would like to read the full article, the link is: D&M Pyramid of Mars

The front of the D&M Pyramid has three edges, spaced 60 degrees apart. As noted above, the center axis points to the Face. The edge on the left of this axis points toward the center of a feature that has been nicknamed the "City" by the Cydonia investigators. The edge on the right of the center axis points toward the apex of a dome-like structure known as the "Tholus".

The five-sidedness, bilateral symmetry, and primary alignments were first observed by Richard Hoagland after studying quality digital enlargements prepared in 1984 by SRI International from negatives of images processed by DiPietro and Molenaar. These events are documented in detail by Hoagland [3] and Pozos [4].

Turning back to the reconstructed geometry, we will now consider the internal symmetries of this object.

The D&M Pyramid displays a complex interplay between five-fold and six-fold symmetry. Both symmetries are present simultaneously, with the front of the pyramid exhibiting six-fold symmetry, and the "ground level" of the pyramid yielding a 36 degree angle that is characteristic of five-fold symmetry.

It is worth noting that the practice of combining symmetries was widely practiced by the architects of antiquity. It was believed that geometry and certain mathematical relationships were crucial building blocks of the Cosmos, and that architecture should reflect these symmetries. These practices were later revived in the Islamic world and especially in Renaissance Europe.
The angles formed by the D&M Pyramid when viewed from above differ from each other. Consequently, they can form various ratios. These angle ratios were studied to see if the values were significant, or merely random.

The angle ratios display significant values, with a preponderance of square roots and fractions involving square roots. Once again, we have a theme used by Classical architects, who used the square roots of two, three, and five in laying out the proportions of their buildings.

For clarity, three of these angle ratios are illustrated below:

The ratios of the shaded angles are equivalent to the indicated values. In the right hand illustration, the ratio of the shaded angles is equivalent to the ratio of e (the base of the natural logarithms) and pi (the relationship between a circle’s diameter and circumference).

(This ratio of e/pi is nearly equal to the square root of three divided by two, and the precision of measurement, +/- 0.2 deg, is insufficient to distinguish between these two possible values.)

A table has been prepared displaying a list of the measured angles, and the results of the analysis. The square roots of three and five, and the values of e and pi predominate. The identity of these values is strengthened by the numerous combinations in which they occur.

Note that the radian measure and trigonometric functions of some angles yield the same values produced by the angle ratios. The geometry thus has a common contextual thread.

As mentioned earlier in the section on criteria, all of this geometry is "dimensionless", i.e. it is not dependent on such cultural conventions as counting by tens, or measuring angles in the 360 system. This geometry will "work" in any number system.

A Speculation Concerning Tetrahedral Geometry

The aforementioned ambiguity concerning e/pi vs. the square root of three divided by two can be resolved with the geometry of a circumscribed tetrahedron.

A tetrahedron is the simplest of the Platonic solids, a polyhedron having six edges, four vertices, and four sides where each side is an equilateral triangle. A circumscribed tetrahedron is a tetrahedron that has been enclosed in a sphere that just touches each of the four vertices.

The presence of 60 degree angles produces the ambiguity: the Sine of 60 degrees is defined as (√3)/2, and this is very close, but not equal to, the ratio of e/pi:

(√3)/2 = 0.866025
e/pi = 0.865256

It is this ambiguity that is resolved by the geometry of a circumscribed tetrahedron.

The surface area of a sphere, divided by the surface area of the tetrahedron circumscribed by it, yields a very close approximation of e which shall be termed e’:

e = 2.718282
e’ = 2.720699

It is this ambiguity that is resolved by the geometry of a circumscribed tetrahedron.

When the ratio e/pi is evaluated using this "tetrahedral approximation of e", the result is precisely equal to (√3)/2:

e/pi = 0.865256
e’/pi = 0.866025 = (√3)/2

Conclusions

This investigation of the D&M Pyramid reveals a morphology that is inconsistent with the surrounding geology. The geomorphological processes observed to exist on Mars not only fail to provide a potential mechanism for the D&M Pyramid’s formation, but seem to preclude its very existence. Analysis of the object’s geometry, and its alignment with other anomalous landforms, reveal intricate relationships that are numerous and logical, and are suggestive of highly sophisticated design.

This object has been compared with the elaborate symbolic architecture of antiquity. While much of the geometry is the same utilized by Classical architects, it is important to note that the implementation is totally different. Nowhere in Earth history is this exact type of geometric symbolism to be found.

The same techniques used for most of this century in air photo interpretation show that the D&M Pyramid may be artificial, or may be a natural landform modified by intelligence. The true nature of this object can be resolved by re-imaging the Cydonia region to obtain high-resolution imagery of the D&M Pyramid and the other enigmatic landforms nearby. The issue of possible ruins at Cydonia is thus the only question involving extraterrestrial intelligence that can be easily resolved with known scientific means.

And if we flatten that pyramid it’s a pentagram:

 

[agirl]

Many thanks for the new session.Wish you success with hyperbaric therapy.Stay safe

 

[christx11]

A dozen years ago Ark mentioned:


It's kind of like when you work on one thing, you want to always be aware of the other things you eventually want to connect it with. It would be difficult to connect your work with things like the different types of particles and forces. People will tend to want to produce the "loops" with math that fits better with the math already being used for particles/forces. Sometimes there can actually even be different correct ways to do something but some ways may fit better with what you want to do next.

I understand what you are saying. I know I wrote the paper in the vein of trying to connect many concepts of the C's to prime numbers, but that kind of went off the rails with the idea that Euler's theorem 7 could be false or at the very least incomplete. I continued with all of the observations trying to connect primes numbers to C's concepts, but the crux of the paper ended up being the proposition that Euler's Theorem 7 is not entirely right. The basis for the paper or foundation of the paper is entirely built from the proposition that the Euler product over the primes multiplicatively distributes simultaneously to two sets of numbers, the normally recognized set of finitely factored numbers (the harmonic series) and a second set of infinitely factored numbers (that are not supposed to be there, are not supposed to exist). If the simultaneous sets of finitely factored and infinitely factored numbers exists then numbers foundationally and fundamentally have their own duality built into them. (di/bi/double - dual emergence, duality).

I kind of expected comments to hone in on the idea of the dual sets firstly. Either it is right or it is wrong. If it is wrong then the rest of the paper is nonsense. If it is right, that is kind of shattering. If you think the simultaneous set of infinitely factored numbers is possible it may give a pathway to not only understanding what are densities but also what is the collapse of the wave, but it probably requires extending or expanding the electromagnetic spectrum and the wave function beyond what is quantizable and that seems to be the thing that is missing from all of the theories. It seems like somehow we need to go beyond the physical and include that which is not physical. Maybe we need to go beyond the Planck units and maybe there is also a macro Planck unit that would give both a lower bound and upper bound on physicality. But then that does not mean the electromagnetic spectrum or the wave form of energy stops there. It would just mean that waves exist that are not quantizable, not physicalizable.

I could write pages and pages of thoughts here, but I will just provide two more observations/correlations.

The first observation/correlation that I just realized since posting the paper is:

From the introduction of my paper:

In this paper I begin with Euler's result from theorem 7 (the infinite product form) and attempt to reverse engineer it to create the original form (the harmonic series).

From Session 20 October 2018:

Q: (Ark) What is the first priority? Can you help?

A: Memories and "reflections" will help.

Q: (Niall) A trip down memory lane?

(L) Why did you put "reflections" in quotes?

A: Maybe something should be reversed?

The second observation/correlation goes back to Session November 14 1998:

Q: (A) I have another question. In a session from April, you made the following comment: 'four dimensional, fourth density, see?' So you related four dimensions to fourth density. I don't know a mathematical representation of density. I know how to represent four dimensions. This was the first time that you related dimension to density. Is there really a relation?

A: Yes, because 4th density is experienced in 4th dimensional reality.

*** ( and we know that their idea use of dimension is for our reference/familiarity and is not what we consider dimensions )

Q: (A) Speaking now about 4 dimensional reality, is it four dimensional reality of the Kaluza-Klein type?

A: Visual spectrum.

Q: (A) Does that mean that the fourth dimension is NOT related to the fifth dimension of the Kaluza-Klein theory?

A: Yes.

Q: (A) Yes it is related?

A: No, yes it is not. There is a flaw in these theories, relating to prism. What does this tell you?

Q: (A) To prism?! Visual spectrum? I don't know what it tells me. I never came across any relation to prism. But, what is this 4th dimension? Is it an extra dimension beyond the three space dimensions, or is it a time dimension?

A: Not "time," re: Einstein. It is an added spatial reference. The term "dimension" is used simply to access the popular reference, relating to three dimensions. The added "dimension" allows one to visualize outwardly and inwardly simultaneously.

Q: (A) When you talk about this 4th dimension, what is the closest thing in currently understood physics that corresponds to this term? I cannot find anything that corresponds. It is not in relativity theory, it is not in Einstein, it is not in Kaluza-Klein...

A: Exactly, because it has not been hypothesized.

In my paper I am kind of making the hypothesis that: The 'added spatial reference' that "allows one to visualize outwardly and inwardly simultaneously." is the simultaneous sets of finitely factored and infinitely factored numbers.

I will use the C's definitions for inward and outward.

Session 10 December 1994

A: STO flows outward and touches all including point of origin, STS flows inward and touches only origin point.

STO is outward. STS is inward.

And what are the correlations for STS and STO from the C's?

"STO"​	"STS"​
"outward"​	"inward"​
not physicality​	physicality​
not collapsed energy​	collapsed energy​
not matter​	matter​
infinite​	finite​
wave​	particle​

It brings another perspective to "STO/STS" "OUTWARD/INWARD" "WAVE/PARTICLE".
It is also interesting to think about the leveling of the playing field and 4th density where "STO" and "STS" are equally in evidence. Probably the entire cosmology / belief center is based in these dualities.

Maybe the electromagnetic spectrum and the wave function should be altered so that like the visible spectrum from a prism that has a lower bound and an upper bound, but waves exist outside of those bounds, maybe there is a physicality band, a quantizable band with lower and upper bounds and there are waves outside of that band that just are not quantizable, but they exist.

It is all speculation on my part and based on real simple things compared to modern day physics and mathematics. But if the simultaneous sets exist we have to look back over the last 300 years and ask where are all of the papers and branches of mathematics and physics that deal with the infinitely factored set?

Even if it is all nonsense, it still has provided for me the first thing I have ever encountered that lets me visualize an idea of something beyond finite physicality, even if only in allegory by numbers.

 

[hlat]

And if we flatten that pyramid it’s a pentagram:

Nice illustration for triangles of fire!

 

[John G]

I understand what you are saying. I know I wrote the paper in the vein of trying to connect many concepts of the C's to prime numbers, but that kind of went off the rails with the idea that Euler's theorem 7 could be false or at the very least incomplete. I continued with all of the observations trying to connect primes numbers to C's concepts, but the crux of the paper ended up being the proposition that Euler's Theorem 7 is not entirely right. The basis for the paper or foundation of the paper is entirely built from the proposition that the Euler product over the primes multiplicatively distributes simultaneously to two sets of numbers, the normally recognized set of finitely factored numbers (the harmonic series) and a second set of infinitely factored numbers (that are not supposed to be there, are not supposed to exist). If the simultaneous sets of finitely factored and infinitely factored numbers exists then numbers foundationally and fundamentally have their own duality built into them. (di/bi/double - dual emergence, duality).

I kind of expected comments to hone in on the idea of the dual sets firstly. Either it is right or it is wrong. If it is wrong then the rest of the paper is nonsense. If it is right, that is kind of shattering. If you think the simultaneous set of infinitely factored numbers is possible it may give a pathway to not only understanding what are densities but also what is the collapse of the wave, but it probably requires extending or expanding the electromagnetic spectrum and the wave function beyond what is quantizable and that seems to be the thing that is missing from all of the theories. It seems like somehow we need to go beyond the physical and include that which is not physical. Maybe we need to go beyond the Planck units and maybe there is also a macro Planck unit that would give both a lower bound and upper bound on physicality. But then that does not mean the electromagnetic spectrum or the wave form of energy stops there. It would just mean that waves exist that are not quantizable, not physicalizable.

I could write pages and pages of thoughts here, but I will just provide two more observations/correlations.

The first observation/correlation that I just realized since posting the paper is:

From the introduction of my paper:



From Session 20 October 2018:



The second observation/correlation goes back to Session November 14 1998:


In my paper I am kind of making the hypothesis that: The 'added spatial reference' that "allows one to visualize outwardly and inwardly simultaneously." is the simultaneous sets of finitely factored and infinitely factored numbers.

I will use the C's definitions for inward and outward.

Session 10 December 1994

STO is outward. STS is inward.

And what are the correlations for STS and STO from the C's?

"STO"​	"STS"​
"outward"​	"inward"​
not physicality​	physicality​
not collapsed energy​	collapsed energy​
not matter​	matter​
infinite​	finite​
wave​	particle​

It brings another perspective to "STO/STS" "OUTWARD/INWARD" "WAVE/PARTICLE".
It is also interesting to think about the leveling of the playing field and 4th density where "STO" and "STS" are equally in evidence. Probably the entire cosmology / belief center is based in these dualities.

Maybe the electromagnetic spectrum and the wave function should be altered so that like the visible spectrum from a prism that has a lower bound and an upper bound, but waves exist outside of those bounds, maybe there is a physicality band, a quantizable band with lower and upper bounds and there are waves outside of that band that just are not quantizable, but they exist.

It is all speculation on my part and based on real simple things compared to modern day physics and mathematics. But if the simultaneous sets exist we have to look back over the last 300 years and ask where are all of the papers and branches of mathematics and physics that deal with the infinitely factored set?

Even if it is all nonsense, it still has provided for me the first thing I have ever encountered that lets me visualize an idea of something beyond finite physicality, even if only in allegory by numbers.

Things like the harmonic series are certainly fun. I would tend to think your infinitely factored set is related to the harmonic series set having infinite members (even though no member itself is infinite). Infinities are headache inducing and divergent infinite series means you can't even just check for approaching a limit but it actually is fun reading your work. I do think the inward/outward STS/STO duality is related to some math (root systems) of physics but in a Kaluza-Klein-like way where you have the internal symmetry space at the Planck scale plus our large spacetime.

 

[MJF]

I thought I had posted this post already since there are comments in this session which tie in with what other poster have said recently and it may help to support their comments. I guess it didn't download.

Thanks go to another Forum member for reminding me of the exchanges in the session dated 25 September 1999, which pick up on the comments made on Richard Hoagland's hyperdimensional physics in the 17 August 1996 session quoted in my earlier post:

Q: There could be many explanations. Now, we have a correspondent who wrote and asked a question. He said that he noticed there was promotion of Hoagland's idea about the 19.5 degree tetrahedral configuration at one point, and then another idea regarding the parallelogram business involving an 18 degree mark in another section. So, what is the difference between the 19.5 degree comments of Hoagland, and the 18 degree point of interest that you brought up? Are we talking about two different things here?

A: Well, if you do the math, you see that 18 degrees fits nicely with ninety. Maybe 19.5 is due to crustal slippages in some"land mark" event?!

Q: (A) But, in geometry, this 19.5 degrees is what you get when you try to put a tetrahedron into a sphere. That's how Hoagland got it, not because of observation.

A: Okay, that is good, too.

Q: How come you didn't know that?

A: We pointed it out in the first place.

Q: Is that why you put "landmark" in quotes? That 19.5 is where it touches. It is the mark of the point of contact. Is that it?

A: Clues, my dear, clues, and the eternal need not to abridge free will.

Q: But, if these tetrahedrons fit in a sphere, and they touch the sphere at 19.5 degrees, how do they relate to this effect that you have said manifests at 18 degrees?

A: Does 1.5 fit into 90? Does 90 fit into 180? Does 180 fit into 360? Ask yourself, "what does it mean?"

Q: We don't know. (A) The point is that the angle Hoagland is talking about is not 19.5, it is an approximation of point something, something, something.... So, if it is just 19.5, that's the difference between 19.5 and 18 - that is 1.5, which, in this case, is not exactly 1.5, it's one point something which does not fit into anything that we know.

A: Circumference.

Q: (A) Yes. 360 degrees. Is the circumference important?

A: It is important.

Q: (A) So, we can compute these two circumferences, and these will differ by some number, and this number will fit again into one of these circumferences, and the point is that it should fit so that there is an integer number...

A: Yes.

Q: (A) But, there will then be many more angles. There will be not only 18 and 19.5...

A: Yes. All Hoagland has done is highlight a point at which magnetic lines converge using the tetrahedron model.

Q: If they converge at that point...

A: But the question is how does the tetrahedron model relate to trans-dimensional space?

Q: How does the tetrahedron model relate to trans-dimensional space?

A: A key which unlocks the door.

Q: Speaking of a key that unlocks a door: there is some information going around that a gigantic computer has been installed inside the earth that was put there by a Reptilian race, and that the recovery of this thing is one of the reasons for the current or upcoming "invasion" by them. Does this tetrahedron configuration in the earth relate to some giant alien computer?

A: No.

Q: Is there a giant alien computer buried in the Earth?

A: Not likely that.

Q: Back to the tetrahedron. How is it a key to trans-dimensional space? Does one activate it in some way? Do you place machinery of some sort at these points?

A: No. Magnetism.

Q: Are you supposed to generate magnetism, or is it natural magnetism?

A: Natural.

Q: Are you supposed to do anything to it or with it?

A: Supposed???

Q: Is it useful to do something with it?

A: Can be.

Q: In what sense?

A: Travelling between dimensions.

Q: Is anybody at the present time utilizing it in this way?

A: Not terran STS 3rd density.

Q: That implies that 4th density STS IS doing this. Could one construct a scale model of a tetrahedron in a sphere, magnetize it, and open portals?

A: Yes.

Q: Would it require a lot of electrical current?

A: Yes.

Q: Is there anyway to travel between dimensions, in space time, or whatever, utilizing very little power, as such?

A: Off the point we told you before that all spheres of cosmic nature are windows.

Q: Going in a slightly different direction. I have been thinking about the nature of our reality, and I have been thinking that underneath it, or at the base of it, there is a 4th density reality similar to the Kaluza-Klein theory. Am I correct so far? Am I going somewhere here?

A: Pursue.

Q: Okay. And, beneath this 4th density reality, there is an etheric reality; and the etheric reality consists of 5th density. Okay? Beneath the 5th density reality, there is the 6th density reality which I am trying to describe in terms of geometry. That geometry is the underlying, essential thing about ideas, natures or aspects of concepts that come into being in our material world; that geometry is the essential nature of things. Am I getting there? But, beyond this geometry, from what does the geometry emanate? I know you are going to say something like "The One," or "Seventh Density," but I would really like to have a concept because I can't get beyond this. Even if it is inadequate, from what does geometry, which expresses as gravity, emerge?

A: Not in sync.

Q: What will get me "in synch?"

A: No "beneaths."

Q: Okay. Since there are no "beneaths," what term would be a suitable replacement?

A: Around.

Q: What is around this geometry?

A: For you to pursue.

Q: Can you give me a hint here?

A: We just did.

Q: Would it be safe to say that it is "nested?"

A: No, no, no. You still think in terms of a limited domain. When one goes out into space there is no above, below, up, down, left, right, beneath, etc. There is only around. In a spherical sense.

Q: Every point is the center?

A: Closer.

Q: Back to the tetrahedron, these points where this tetrahedron touches this sphere, and these are lines of magnetic convergence; how do these lines of magnetic convergence appear on this sphere; do they radiate out from the convergence points like spider webs? Or do they converge from the center to the outside of the sphere? Are they laid on the sphere like the grid of longitude and latitude?

A: Closer to latter.

Q: So, when you say they are lines of convergence, does that mean that a latitude line and longitude line, so to speak, converge at those points?

A: Think multi-dimensionally. No flat paper please.

Q: Okay, let's go in another direction now and try to get these questions covered. I would like to ask what are all of these spherical configurations that are showing up on radars all over the place in recent times? It is quite a scandal that it is happening so repeatedly and nobody is explaining it.

A: Stay tuned for more. And for now, goodnight.

 

[MJF]

I don’t know the answer, but I wondered how Enstein’s formula applies to the anti-matter. From my very naive view, seems like there’s still mass and the speed of light I imagine is the same constant, so probably still applies?

Going back to what you said, and still on Einstein’s formula, I “think” this makes sense. If the question is how much energy is stored in an object with [insert amount] mass, and if light and energy are “two sides of the same coin”, then it’s like saying how much congealed light is in this object with said mass. And if light is consciousness are we saying it takes that amount of consciousness to continue to maintain these “physical” attributes. Best analogy I can imagine is how much processing power is needed to keep an object in a computer game looking “real” when the player is paying attention to it?

And if we flatten that pyramid it’s a pentagram:

Q: Back to the tetrahedron, these points where this tetrahedron touches this sphere, and these are lines of magnetic convergence; how do these lines of magnetic convergence appear on this sphere; do they radiate out from the convergence points like spider webs? Or do they converge from the center to the outside of the sphere? Are they laid on the sphere like the grid of longitude and latitude?

A: Closer to latter.

Q: So, when you say they are lines of convergence, does that mean that a latitude line and longitude line, so to speak, converge at those points?

A: Think multi-dimensionally. No flat paper please.

So the C's are telling us to think multidimensionally when it comes to viewing such things as the Shield or Star of David, the Seal of Solomon and the Tetragrammaton. This advice applies equally to some of the crop circles that have appeared around the world, particularly in England.



The Star of David

The hexagram or "Star of David", which became a symbol of Judaism in the modern period and was placed on the flag of Israel in 1948, has its origins in 14th-century depictions of the Seal of Solomon (see below).

The Seal of Solomon

The Seal of Solomon (or Ring of Solomon; Arabic: خاتم سليمان ‎ Khātam Sulaymān) is the signet ring attributed to King Solomon in medieval Arabic tradition, from which it developed in Islamic and Jewish mysticism and in Western occultism. It is the predecessor of the Star of David, which became the symbol of the Jewish people in modern times. It was often depicted in either a pentagram or hexagram shape. This ring variously gave Solomon the power to command shedim (demons), jinn (genies) and spirits (or 4D STS entities from Orion maybe?). The legend of the Seal of Solomon was developed primarily by medieval Middle Eastern writers, who related that the ring was engraved by God and was given to the king directly from heaven. The ring was made from brass and iron, and the two parts were used to seal written commands to good and evil spirits, respectively.​

The Tetragrammaton symbol is formed with the letters YHWH which stands for the secret word for God or EHYH that stood for female, or Eve. The word tetragrammaton means four-letter word. In Hebrew the four letters yod, he, yau, he form YHWH which was the Ineffable Word of God. This name was only spoken once a year by the high priest.

Recall that Solomon, according to Laura's analysis, was an Egyptian Pharaoh and not a King of Israel. Hence, if true, this would seem to suggest that the Jews inherited this encoded scientific wisdom from the Egyptians, perhaps through Abraham/Moses who was a Prince and possibly a priest of Egypt - perhaps even Prince Thutmose who disappeared from the public record and appears to have died some time during the third decade of Amenhotep III's kingship, fairly late (or did he?). In his place, his younger brother Amenhotep IV, later known as Akhenaten, succeeded to the throne. However, we should note that the Pharaoh's successor would often act as a co-regent with his father prior to ascending the throne upon his father's death. Thutmose, was on record as being a High Priest of Ptah in ancient Memphis.

Like many deities of ancient Egypt, Ptah takes many forms, through one of his particular aspects or through syncretism of ancient deities of the Memphite region. Sometimes he was represented as a dwarf, naked and deformed but was generally represented in the guise of a man with green skin, contained in a shroud sticking to the skin wearing the divine beard, and holding a sceptre combining three powerful symbols of ancient Egyptian religion: (1) The Was sceptre; (2) The sign of life, Ankh and (3) The Djed pillar. I don't know about you but Ptah's description could certainly have him pass for an alien Grey today. Did the Egyptians possibly have contact with aliens? Egyptian hieroglyphs may provide the answer, particularly those at the Temple of Abydos - see ttps://www.thegypsythread.org/alien-encounters-egyptian/


Flying Machine Carvings found in Abydos at the Temple of Seti I

I wouldn't rule out this being possible evidence of time travel either.




See also this thought provoking article, with a health warning that it panders somewhat to the sensational: Proof of Aliens in Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphs, Relics Hidden in Rockefeller Museum | CSGlobe​

 

[MJF]

A: Yes, because 4th density is experienced in 4th dimensional reality.

*** ( and we know that their idea use of dimension is for our reference/familiarity and is not what we consider dimensions )

Q: (A) Speaking now about 4 dimensional reality, is it four dimensional reality of the Kaluza-Klein type?

A: Visual spectrum.

Q: (A) Does that mean that the fourth dimension is NOT related to the fifth dimension of the Kaluza-Klein theory?

A: Yes.

Q: (A) Yes it is related?

A: No, yes it is not. There is a flaw in these theories, relating to prism. What does this tell you?

Q: (A) To prism?! Visual spectrum? I don't know what it tells me. I never came across any relation to prism. But, what is this 4th dimension? Is it an extra dimension beyond the three space dimensions, or is it a time dimension?

I may be wrong but I think the C's may be referring here to Isaac Newton's Theory of Light, which is a particle theory:

Advocates of the wave theory had previously stated that light waves are made of white light and that the colour spectrum that can be seen through a prism is formed because of corruption within the glass. This means that the more glass the light travels through, the more corrupt it will become.

To prove that this was false, Newton passed a beam of white light through two prisms, which were held at such an angle that it split into a spectrum when passing through the first prism and was recomposed, back into white light, by the second prism (as shown in Figure 3.1). This showed that the colour spectrum is not caused by glass corrupting the light. Newton claimed this was a ‘crucial experiment’.

Since almost everyone agreed that light must be composed of either particles or waves, Newton used the failure of the wave theory to prove that light is made of particles. Newton concluded that light is composed of coloured particles that combine to appear white.

However, in 1678 the Dutch natural philosopher Christiaan Huygens claimed to have disproved Newton’s theory by showing that the laws of reflection and refraction can be derived from his wave theory of light.

See: Newton's theory of Light

Subsequently, in 1827, William Hamilton presented a theory of a single function, now known as Hamilton’s principal function. The theory brought together mechanics, optics and mathematics, thus helping establish the wave theory of light.

So we come back to William Rowan Hamilton again, the inventor of Quaternions. Quoting from Wikipedia's entry for William Hamilton:

Hamilton's scientific career included the study of geometrical optics, adaptation of dynamic methods in optical systems, development of theories of conjugate algebraic couple functions (in which complex numbers are constructed as ordered pairs of real numbers), solvability of polynomial equations and general quintic polynomial solvable by radicals, the analysis on Fluctuating Functions (and the ideas from Fourier analysis), linear operators on quaternions and proving a result for linear operators on the space of quaternions (which is a special case of the general theorem which today is known as the Cayley–Hamilton theorem). Hamilton also invented "icosian calculus", which he used to investigate closed edge paths on a dodecahedron that visit each vertex exactly once.

Despite the importance of his contributions to algebra and to optics, posterity accords him greatest fame for his dynamics. The formulation that he devised for classical mechanics proved to be equally suited to quantum theory, whose development it facilitated.

This no doubt is what attracted Paul Dirac, one of the fathers of Quantum Theory, to Hamilton's work.

I would just add that the C's have said that the reason why photographs of the planets Saturn and Jupiter appear surreal, or somewhat blurred, to us is that they are 4D bodies being viewed/photographed by us in 3D. Where they say "A: Yes, because 4th density is experienced in 4th dimensional reality." is this a clue as to why Saturn and Jupiter appear strange and other worldly to us?

 

[MJF]

Q: Back to the tetrahedron, these points where this tetrahedron touches this sphere, and these are lines of magnetic convergence; how do these lines of magnetic convergence appear on this sphere; do they radiate out from the convergence points like spider webs? Or do they converge from the center to the outside of the sphere? Are they laid on the sphere like the grid of longitude and latitude?

A: Closer to latter.

Q: So, when you say they are lines of convergence, does that mean that a latitude line and longitude line, so to speak, converge at those points?

A: Think multi-dimensionally. No flat paper please.

So the C's are telling us to think multidimensionally when it comes to viewing such things as the Shield or Star of David, the Seal of Solomon and the Tetragrammaton. This advice applies equally to some of the crop circles that have appeared around the world, particularly in England.

View attachment 58979

The Star of David

The hexagram or "Star of David", which became a symbol of Judaism in the modern period and was placed on the flag of Israel in 1948, has its origins in 14th-century depictions of the Seal of Solomon (see below).
View attachment 58976
The Seal of Solomon

The Seal of Solomon (or Ring of Solomon; Arabic: خاتم سليمان ‎ Khātam Sulaymān) is the signet ring attributed to King Solomon in medieval Arabic tradition, from which it developed in Islamic and Jewish mysticism and in Western occultism. It is the predecessor of the Star of David, which became the symbol of the Jewish people in modern times. It was often depicted in either a pentagram or hexagram shape. This ring variously gave Solomon the power to command shedim (demons), jinn (genies) and spirits (or 4D STS entities from Orion maybe?). The legend of the Seal of Solomon was developed primarily by medieval Middle Eastern writers, who related that the ring was engraved by God and was given to the king directly from heaven. The ring was made from brass and iron, and the two parts were used to seal written commands to good and evil spirits, respectively.​

View attachment 58975

The Tetragrammaton symbol is formed with the letters YHWH which stands for the secret word for God or EHYH that stood for female, or Eve. The word tetragrammaton means four-letter word. In Hebrew the four letters yod, he, yau, he form YHWH which was the Ineffable Word of God. This name was only spoken once a year by the high priest.

Recall that Solomon, according to Laura's analysis, was an Egyptian Pharaoh and not a King of Israel. Hence, if true, this would seem to suggest that the Jews inherited this encoded scientific wisdom from the Egyptians, perhaps through Abraham/Moses who was a Prince and possibly a priest of Egypt - perhaps even Prince Thutmose who disappeared from the public record and appears to have died some time during the third decade of Amenhotep III's kingship, fairly late (or did he?). In his place, his younger brother Amenhotep IV, later known as Akhenaten, succeeded to the throne. However, we should note that the Pharaoh's successor would often act as a co-regent with his father prior to ascending the throne upon his father's death. Thutmose, was on record as being a High Priest of Ptah in ancient Memphis.

Like many deities of ancient Egypt, Ptah takes many forms, through one of his particular aspects or through syncretism of ancient deities of the Memphite region. Sometimes he was represented as a dwarf, naked and deformed but was generally represented in the guise of a man with green skin, contained in a shroud sticking to the skin wearing the divine beard, and holding a sceptre combining three powerful symbols of ancient Egyptian religion: (1) The Was sceptre; (2) The sign of life, Ankh and (3) The Djed pillar. I don't know about you but Ptah's description could certainly have him pass for an alien Grey today. Did the Egyptians possibly have contact with aliens? Egyptian hieroglyphs may provide the answer, particularly those at the Temple of Abydos - see ttps://www.thegypsythread.org/alien-encounters-egyptian/

View attachment 58980
Flying Machine Carvings found in Abydos at the Temple of Seti I

I wouldn't rule out this being possible evidence of time travel either.

View attachment 58981


See also this thought provoking article, with a health warning that it panders somewhat to the sensational: Proof of Aliens in Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphs, Relics Hidden in Rockefeller Museum | CSGlobe​

Ptah's Throne

It was recognized and understood by the ancient Egyptians that Ptah was the mightiest of the gods. Ptah was the creator-god of Memphis, the city that served as the capital of the ancient Egypt for most of its history and which was known, during that history, as Het-ka-Ptah or "House of the Soul of Ptah". Ptah was worshiped in Memphis from the earliest dynastic times (c.3000 BC). From the Memphite Theology: "Thus it is said of Ptah: 'He who made all and created the gods.' And he is Ta-tenen who gave birth to the gods, and from whom every thing came forth, foods, provisions, divine offerings, all good things". This statement will take on more significance below. Ptah. Ptah was also one of the triad of Memphis along with Sekhmet (or Bast) and Nefertum, making him a part or aspect of a triple god, another common theme that is seen throughout antiquity. Ptah, as the ultimate creator god who made everything, also created the gods of the Ogdoad of Hermopolis and the Ennead of Heliopolis (it should be noted here that many pantheons of the ancient world comprised nine principal gods) and was given the epithet “He who set all the gods in their places and gave all things the breath of life”.

I recall watching an Ancient Aliens episode in which they mentioned that Ptah was connected with the Star Sirius whereas Osiris, who is also often depicted as green coloured, was meant to hail from Orion. It is therefore intriguing that in Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek series, the Orions are always shown as green coloured humanoids. For your information, Rodenberry was a noted Rosicrucian and took part in the 'Nine Channellings' (the Nine supposedly being linked to the 'Ennead'), which involved CIA operative Andrija Puharich. What did he learn from those sessions I wonder? See: The Council of Nine

However, Ptah was also connected in legend with a strange throne, which in many ways has attributes similar to the Montauk Seat. The throne or seat was supposed to be a feathered iron throne (which also makes me think of the feathered serpent god of the Mesoamericans Quetzalcoatl) and when Ptah sat upon it, he could bring into being whatever he visualised. This makes me think there could be a link here with the Holy Grail or Matriarch Stone - the Merkaba, which we know was based in Egypt and stolen by Nefertiti from her husband, the Pharaoh Akhenaten and given to Abraham/Moses. The Grail, which the C's called the 'Gift of God', was capable of providing whatever you wanted and was, I think, memorialised in the Nordic 'Horn of Plenty' or the magic 'Cauldron of the Dagda'. The Dagda was a Tuatha De Danann deity, a chieftan and a druid. He was seen as a father figure (could he have been Abraham/Moses?). He was often described as wearing a cloak. He owned many magical items, including his cauldron. This cauldron, known as the coire ansic, meaning undry, was named so because it never ran dry. Dagda’s cauldron was never empty and no one ever left it unsatisfied. Some scholars believe that the Holy Grail may contain both tropes of the magical cauldrons from Celtic mythology with the Christian legend surrounding the Chalice of the Last Supper.

The fact that Ptah's throne is depicted as a feathered iron seat would seem to indicate that it flies like Solomon's throne* - perhaps because they were one and the same thing. It was also supposed to allow future sight, teleportation to Orion and transmutation into a light body. This provides a connection back to the Philadelphia Experiment since this spawned the later Montauk Experiment, which seems to have involved a similar device called the 'Montauk Chair'**. When people with psychic abilities sat in the Chair and visualised objects, they were supposed to have materialised. Again this description has shades of the Holy Grail's attributes. The mention of future sight also makes me think of the C's reference to 'Seer of the Passage'. Hence, it would seem that in the thrones of Ptah and Solomon, we may be seeing advanced alien technology.​

*Throne of Solomon - Wikipedia.

** For more on the Montauk Chair see: PHOENIX II. However, I would not vouch for all that is quoted in this article since some of it may derive from Al Bielek, a known US government disinformation agent.