Tag Archives: matter

Vector Equilibrium


I have been making physical and cyber models of some of the basic Synergetic Principles in anticipation of using them in an upcoming seminar. I have decided to post them here as I complete and animate them. I’ll give a brief description of what we are looking at with some possibilities.

This model is a 3 frequency Vector Equilibrium [FULL ANIMATION] and is the root of much of synergetics. We are not showing the vectors here, only the spheres, and, for demonstration purposes, they are half the unit radius. As the object rotates about the Y axis we can see many variations in alignment and symmetry. I suspect this is typical of many of the “particles” we are dealing with. As it rotates it may appear very differently depending on one’s POV. This also contributes to the Heisenberg Principle in that it is virtually impossible to locate the exact center in the midst of the spin. Remember we are talking about trying to lock an unknown, unseen object in space and time as layers of other “particles” whiz around it. Like trying to see where the end of a fan blade is.

The 3 frequency is significant as it represents the upper limit of unique sphere nestings. The outer layer of 92 gives us the number of unique, regenerative elements. The total number of spheres is 238, the atomic number of Uranium, the heaviest of the elements. We’ll go into this in another post.

Forward

As the 21st century dawns, we find ourselves on the brink of what may be mankind’s greatest challenge. Can we, as a species, use the tools we have at our disposal to continue to survive, if not thrive?


In the broad spectrum of information we have available, the data can be interpreted in many ways. On one end of the spectrum we can envision shortages leading to conflicts which, if left unresolved, may continue to spread and escalate to a point of no return which could lead to extinction. Another extreme could have us using technology at our disposal in an environmentally responsible manner while providing humanity with wealth and abundance unthinkable at the moment. While there is also an entire range of choices in-between, I can’t help but believe that the extremes presented are the true choice.

In this work I would like to examine the choices available to us in such a way as to enable each of us to understand that there are, indeed, choices and that each of us has the opportunity to participate in our own evolution in a very real and tangible way.

I would like to state at the outset that all of the ideas presented here are the direct result of my having studied the works of Richard Buckminster Fuller over the past 30 years.

We owe him a lot.

A=440 vs A=432 Leads to a Challenge

I have just had a friend recommend an article he read on the significance of Standard Tuning of A440 HZ or A432 HZ and the ramifications of this fact. He and I are both musicians but the implication of the article is that this 8 HZ difference represents far more than musical inclinations. From this site you can get to all sorts of discussions and controversies: Rothschild’s, Illuminati, enslavement.

This got me to the field of Cymatics and some spectacular patterns generated by sound vibrations. It also got me to a really interesting conspiracy theory basically claiming that The Pope and Hitler had tried to shift standard tuning from 432 HZ, which, they (the conspirators) claim had always been used for 2000 years because; they had discovered that this shift in frequency was what caused people to be more inclined to fight and disagree, to generate aggression. Kind of like when you are running out of your favorite <fill-in-the-blank> .

A lot of these sites basically took some very interesting and verifiable facts and combined them in some interesting ways to then generate some pretty fantastic conclusions supposedly based on these facts. Then I realized this is really what happens with every conspiracy theory. Start with an idea, preferably outrageous, and take a few facts, kludge them together and BINGO “Theory Proved.”

Now, fact checking is a bitch; someone makes a statement, maybe they reference it, maybe they don’t. Do you believe them? Here’s what I usually do. The first statement I don’t already know something about, I look up (in what I believe are reliable sources) to get some background. Then I continue with the article. If the conspirator makes a statement and I can confirm it easily I continue. After a number of these fact checks prove verifiable I can ease off and continue the article leaving out the fact checking. However, if I am going to put that article up or quote it, I really should check all of the significant statements. As Arthur C. Clark said, “If you allow me to pick and choose which facts I can use, I can prove anything.”

Unfortunately, when I applied this standard reference practice most of the conspiracy stuff just went away. The first 5 facts I looked into were just plain false. Why weren’t the great cathedral  organs tuned to 432? Why were the tuning forks of Haydn (415) and Bach (422) NOT tuned to 432? Why wouldn’t the ear cochlea adjust, over growth, to adapt to its environment? Why wouldn’t any orchestra use the tuning to lure customers back to their superior feeling music? Why aren’t we all crazy? Well, let’s hold on that one, the jury’s still out. More significantly, where is the hard evidence? Give me something. Take 2 rooms full of 6 yr olds and expose one to a 440 tone and the other to a 432? Try it for a while then switch tones. This ain’t rocket science but I think it falls squarely in the scientific method. Expose someone to 432 HZ while doing an MRI and then to 440 HZ. We can see all sorts of things. Where’s the evidence?

It’s a pain in the ass but, ya gotta do it. “But what does this have to do with Synergetics?”, you might ask? Just this:

I contend Synergetics gives us a way to simplify the entire fact checking process by not having to keep proving the same shit over and over again, which is exactly what we are doing. Take some facts, put them together based on preconceived notions and jump to a totally irrelevant conclusion. It may be hardwired in, which is why I try to stick to a pretty strict interpretation of the Scientific Method.

Here’s how it works:

I want to take this entire idea that there is a true significance to the difference between A440 HZ and A432 HZ and see if we can’t make sense of it. But, rather than start with the conclusion (the Pope and the Hitler had discovered something about that frequency ) and seeking facts to support what this discovery must be, let’s see if we can’t come up with a much simpler and clearer explanation for facts we are being shown. I suspect this may take a while but, I think, if we can make it work, it will be self confirming. Furthermore, we hope to demonstrate that these same facts may be recombined to explain any number of phenomena. Sacred Geometry, Holistic Medicine, Psychology, Market fluctuations, Chemistry, Physics, Languages are the ones I have looked at so far and all seem to work nicely within the network provided us by Synergetics. Not giving us predictions, but allowing us to understand what variables are truly important to the area we are exploring and giving more reliable predictability, while allowing for true freedom. In addition, it gives us several additional variables we didn’t even know we had!

The real beauty is that it is a very small set of facts. We shall refer to these as “generalized principles”, which must work everywhere and everywhen to be even considered facts and, once gotten, become the basis of any other area of the Universe we would like to explore. This is how a hologram works, this is how we apply the concept of holons and it all works together.

Sorry, no pictures yet but I am working on the models.

Stay tuned! I want to examine the work of Nassim Haramein and Frank Chester at the Rhode Island School of Design, both of whom have some very good ideas but abuse the application of their “so-called” discoveries.

Nucleus of Standard Model



These are the symbols used by western science to show the nucleus of an atom with its constituent parts.

Below we have a rough sketch of the ideas Fuller has for the visualization of the components of the nucleus. See any similarities? The numbers 3, 4, 12, 24, 48 and 64 show up regularly in both systems.

Notice that the Standard Model uses the term spin with the Fermions all exhibiting increments of “half spins”. In the next post I hope to show some models which should spread some light on exactly what a “half-spin” is.

First There’s Nothing, Then There Is.

Fuller starts us out at a place that nicely coincides with the numbers given us by modern physics.

In high school math you may or may not recall the parts about actions and reactions, Newton’s laws, that stuff. The billiard balls and angles. Well, basically we still use these same laws, and, not a whole hell of a lot more. We shoot things at things for US$50 Billion and see how they react. Makes sense in a basically 2 dimensional universe. We can even make it work more or less in a 3 dimensional Universe but let’s have a look at this, shall we?

The billiard balls we are examining are moving about in what appear to be indeterminate patterns. For arguments sake, and a coherent starting place, we’ll call this “space”; Aether, vacuum space, Zero Point Energy, Higgs field, whatever. Seems to be where all the energy is, no matter how you cut it. It’s everywhere and it’s just energy events. Now, let’s take, for a moment, the work of the Russian scientists  referenced in David Wilcock’s work which we will use presently to nicely model the toroidal (doughnut shapes) used in Kozyrev’s and, later, Nassim Haramein’s presentations.

Fuller uses the term “energy event” and combines these as action-reaction-resultant. Remember, there aren’t 2 balls on a flat plane but millions all going in different directions. Now, let’s throw in the unprovable, but highly plausible, hypothesis that somehow, consciousness (human or otherwise) can cause these energy events as a disturbance in the counter-rotating layers of this aether. We can even use this model to exhibit where angular momentum (another physics sticking point) may come from.

 
To summarize, let’s see if we can map these up/down spins of modern physics with the 4 dimensional advantages of Synergetics. Shown here on the right as some of Fuller’s original sketches.

I’m open to suggestions.

I can now also see how the Up and Down characteristics of physics can relate to the radiant and gravitational aspects of Synergetics giving us the “tunable/untunable” in the form of visible and invisible, perhaps?

Direction of Entropy

Since there is general agreement (scientists, spiritualists, new agers) that time is an illusion, created by the mind, to enable us to comprehend what, by most all accounts, takes place in an instant, we won’t get into the myriad variations here, but start thinking about it.

Though time is an illusion, it still appears very real to us within this physical existence we have chosen. We have entropy as radiation defining time but where does the syntropy come from? Yeah, you know, the thing making the stuff that is breaking down. Does time go backward when we are creating things?

Or could we be dark matter? Consciousness gathering the elemental particles disbursed by entropy and re-knitting them in endless variations?

Considering how physics has buggered with the numbers and re-worked the equations, we should be able to do the same. Only let’s try to be a bit more consistent, shall we?

Crossing the Event Horizon

This is the video I have been endeavoring to make but, I can fill in many of the gaps and clarify a few of his assumptions. He has done great work, especially with the mathematical/physics technical issues but, it feels like he spends a lot of time describing how he “figured out” all of this. Of course, he may not have read Synergetics but, every point he makes was described in much more detail by Fuller in 1974. Simplification is the key. I think that we all have to espouse our ideas and see how they all fit. After all, we are all looking at the same thing.

It’s just good to see physicists starting to understand how nature, science and spiritual “mysteries” can be resolved. This is just the beginning. The Glass Bead Game starts here!

Stay tuned.

Entropy and Consciousness

One of the generalized principles of the Universe is that it is entropic. This means that matter and energy are always going toward greater chaos. If you leave an object, say a tea-cup, sit for long enough it will, at some point, start to break down. It will break into ever smaller pieces, effects like erosion will continue to break it into dust. This occurs universally. Grains of sand never self-assemble into teacups. Molecules don’t come together to form clay and bake themselves into the shape of a teacup. So where does the teacup come from? Where does a tree or a rock come from?

Our contention here is that consciousness is the source of anti-entropy or, syntropy. Entropy is the progression toward ever-increasing chaos while syntropy is the opposite; the assembling of chaos into higher levels of organization. It seems rather obvious that that teacup is the product of consciousness. In point of fact all objects, all organized systems, are always and only the manifestation of an idea assembled by consciousness. Science is now realizing that consciousness is not a product of the physical world. I was taught that the Universe started with a “Big Bang” which distributed myriad particles throughout space and that these particles attracted each other and collected into globules and clusters that somehow assembled into elements and molecules and formed matter and then somewhere in this process, cells formed and organized into cellular systems and biological entities and then somewhere in there consciousness was born. Does this make any sense? In a Universe where entropy is the rule where does a teacup come from?

Without going into detail let’s see if consciousness creating matter makes sense. If we choose to believe that this is so; that at a very fundamental level, consciousness is the spark which initiates the basic assembly of something into the most elemental of particles, that this is the driving force which initiates matter, we can see if the concept holds up. We can see that without consciousness there is no syntropy and for argument’s sake we’ll simply state, as do many religions, that all objects have consciousness. A rock, a tree, a grain of sand an animal. Any example of syntropy has consciousness behind it. We are not making something out of nothing, merely assembling energy events into groups or holons which in turn break apart and reassemble into ever more complex combinations of atoms, molecules, amino acids, cells, cell systems, organs, organ systems and organizations.