Lightmind Network
The nature of our universe
You’re not going to like this, but if you think the Sun is the center of the universe, and that the beliefs of Christianity in the past about the nature of our universe are a lot of hogwash, well you’re wrong.
The ideas of a Sun-centered universe versus an Earth-centered universe have been around for a long long time, and contrary to the popular beliefs people have been conditioned to believe, as it happens, the idea of a Sun-centered universe is just the most popular theory.
If you are interested, Mr. Wilcock’s on-line book entitled The Divine Cosmos, and in particularly Chapter 8 (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_divinecosmos_8.htm), utilizes “redshift theory” to explain the scientific position whereby our Earth-centered Universe is very much a mainstream theory.
My interest in the subject was/is in relation to the revolution of thought on the subject of Star of the Magi, as concentric alignment of the sun and planets, which is a phenomenological synthesis of the existing geocentric (which assumes that the Sun, Moon, and naked eye planets (as well as the stars) circle the Earth is often called the “Ptolemaic System”) and heliocentric (the “Copernican System”) models of the solar system, that appeared in 2BC and then again on 5/5/2000, offers much in the way of religious symbolism and also has a place in the global warming debate, because of its’ relationship with Einstein’s work and The Philosophy of Space and Time by Hans Reichenbach (1958), indicating that science in principle cannot even decide whether it is that the earth stands still and the sun revolves around it, or vice versa and that education on the state of the universe is prejudiced against religious belief since Albert Einstein’s Theory of Relativity eliminated the idea of absolute space and absolute movement.
In the process of my review, I was also impressed by much of the work Mr. Wilcock presented in Chapter 7 (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_divinecosmos_7.htm), in relationship to the work of physicist Ray Tomes and the evidence produced by the noted physicist, psychologist, psychophysiologist and sacred geometry teacher Dan Winter, exploring the relationships of vibratory frequencies, which appeared to correspond with quotations from Jack Kornfield’s, A Path with Heart, but of course, then we would be talking about a slightly different idea of reality which corresponds more to the subject of the nature of our universe in terms of that addressed by String or M-Theory.
Blessings,
Bill
The ideas of a Sun-centered universe versus an Earth-centered universe have been around for a long long time, and contrary to the popular beliefs people have been conditioned to believe, as it happens, the idea of a Sun-centered universe is just the most popular theory.
If you are interested, Mr. Wilcock’s on-line book entitled The Divine Cosmos, and in particularly Chapter 8 (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_divinecosmos_8.htm), utilizes “redshift theory” to explain the scientific position whereby our Earth-centered Universe is very much a mainstream theory.
My interest in the subject was/is in relation to the revolution of thought on the subject of Star of the Magi, as concentric alignment of the sun and planets, which is a phenomenological synthesis of the existing geocentric (which assumes that the Sun, Moon, and naked eye planets (as well as the stars) circle the Earth is often called the “Ptolemaic System”) and heliocentric (the “Copernican System”) models of the solar system, that appeared in 2BC and then again on 5/5/2000, offers much in the way of religious symbolism and also has a place in the global warming debate, because of its’ relationship with Einstein’s work and The Philosophy of Space and Time by Hans Reichenbach (1958), indicating that science in principle cannot even decide whether it is that the earth stands still and the sun revolves around it, or vice versa and that education on the state of the universe is prejudiced against religious belief since Albert Einstein’s Theory of Relativity eliminated the idea of absolute space and absolute movement.
In the process of my review, I was also impressed by much of the work Mr. Wilcock presented in Chapter 7 (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_divinecosmos_7.htm), in relationship to the work of physicist Ray Tomes and the evidence produced by the noted physicist, psychologist, psychophysiologist and sacred geometry teacher Dan Winter, exploring the relationships of vibratory frequencies, which appeared to correspond with quotations from Jack Kornfield’s, A Path with Heart, but of course, then we would be talking about a slightly different idea of reality which corresponds more to the subject of the nature of our universe in terms of that addressed by String or M-Theory.
Blessings,
Bill
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by William (Bill) M. Greene on -
Yes, as I said, Mr. Wilcock’s on-line book entitled The Divine Cosmos, and in particularly Chapter 8 (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_divinecosmos_8.htm), utilizes “redshift theory” to explain the scientific position whereby our Earth-centered Universe is very much a mainstream theory.
Clearly, if the wavelengths in Figure 8.5 were an indication of distance, and all redshift values only fall into certain exact intervals with nothing whatsoever in between, then it would imply that the Earth was the center of the Universe. All quasars in the Universe would naturally have to fall into discrete “shells” of distance away from the Earth, as seen in Figure 8.6. [38] This places us right back into the medieval “geocentric” models of the Universe! (If I knew how I would insert Figure 8.6 – The Earth-centered Universe as seen from the mainstream redshift theory. (Courtesy J Talbot) so you could see how they present the Earth as the center of the universe)
Simple common-sense knowledge of our position in the Galaxy would tell us that the Earth is not the center of the Universe; the major problem that we then face is that redshift is the primary method that astrophysicists use to calculate the distances of celestial objects. What we are faced with, instead, is a very strange anomaly that screams of “harmonics”, the basic vibratory patterns of sound in any given medium, which we would expect to see in aetheric models of the Cosmos. [39]
Its kinda funny though, cause one would think that because “redshift theory” actually validates Relativity Theory that more people would become aware that both geocentric and heliocentric models of our universe are viable perspectives. Go figure!
Blessings,
Bill
PS: Thank you for the note on how to blockquote!
About
Badge
© 2010 Created by Elias on Ning. Create a Ning Network!
