Guest guest Posted January 22, 2003 Report Share Posted January 22, 2003 Hi: I wonder if any of the great minds on this list can help me with something I have wondered about. Why does the moon appear the same size as the sun and why are both the same size as the earth? The moon is just the right distance from earth to be the same size as the sun. Any farther away and we would see it as a spot on the sun during eclipses and any closer and it would cover the sun longer. And during new moon the earth's shadow exactly covers the moon and no more. This just seems like a strange coincidence, does any one have a guess why? Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2003 Report Share Posted January 22, 2003 Hello Bobby, I love your questions... Some say that it was put there by the gods so we can be alerted if the sun ever wanted to go Nova on us. Most probably it underlines the greater harmonics at work in this world. Most certainly it makes one wonder of the beauty of this world. "My liberty Its you who helped me to let go of my moorings To go anywhere To go all the way Along the builded path To pick while dreaming A wind rose On a moon ray" (Moustaki) Antoine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2003 Report Share Posted January 22, 2003 Hi Antoine: It is good to hear from you! Yes the greater harmonics would be the answer. It seems evidence of great order. I don't know what good a warning about a supernova would be. A wind rose on a mooon ray seems real somehow. It would be nice to see some more photos. Thank you Love Bobby G. , Antoine Carré <antoine.carre@s...> wrote: > Hello Bobby, > > I love your questions... > > Some say that it was put there by the gods so we can be alerted if the sun ever wanted to go Nova on us. > > Most probably it underlines the greater harmonics at work in this world. > > Most certainly it makes one wonder of the beauty of this world. > > "My liberty > Its you who helped me to let go of my moorings > To go anywhere > To go all the way > Along the builded path > To pick while dreaming > A wind rose > On a moon ray" (Moustaki) > > Antoine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 23, 2003 Report Share Posted January 23, 2003 Does the earths shadow exactly cover te moon? In my search I found an interesting photo from a solar eclipse showing circles of sunshine through a tree. - ">texasbg2000 <Bigbobgraham (AT) aol (DOT) com> Thursday, January 23, 2003 3:54 AM Re: The Sun, The Moon, and The Earth Hi Antoine:It is good to hear from you! Yes the greater harmonics would be the answer. It seems evidence of great order. I don't know what good a warning about a supernova would be.A wind rose on a mooon ray seems real somehow. It would be nice to see some more photos.Thank youLove Bobby G., Antoine Carré <antoine.carre@s...> wrote:> Hello Bobby,> > I love your questions...> > Some say that it was put there by the gods so we can be alerted if the sun ever wanted to go Nova on us.> > Most probably it underlines the greater harmonics at work in this world.> > Most certainly it makes one wonder of the beauty of this world.> > "My liberty> Its you who helped me to let go of my moorings> To go anywhere> To go all the way> Along the builded path> To pick while dreaming> A wind rose> On a moon ray" (Moustaki)> > Antoine/join The Heart is the Self. The Self is the Heart. Your use of is subject to the Attachment: (image/jpeg) solf.JPG [not stored] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 23, 2003 Report Share Posted January 23, 2003 Does the earths shadow exactly cover the moon? In my search I found an interesting photo from a solar eclipse showing circles of sunshine through a tree. - ">texasbg2000 <Bigbobgraham (AT) aol (DOT) com> Thursday, January 23, 2003 3:54 AM Re: The Sun, The Moon, and The Earth Hi Antoine:It is good to hear from you! Yes the greater harmonics would be the answer. It seems evidence of great order. I don't know what good a warning about a supernova would be.A wind rose on a mooon ray seems real somehow. It would be nice to see some more photos.Thank youLove Bobby G., Antoine Carré <antoine.carre@s...> wrote:> Hello Bobby,> > I love your questions...> > Some say that it was put there by the gods so we can be alerted if the sun ever wanted to go Nova on us.> > Most probably it underlines the greater harmonics at work in this world.> > Most certainly it makes one wonder of the beauty of this world.> > "My liberty> Its you who helped me to let go of my moorings> To go anywhere> To go all the way> Along the builded path> To pick while dreaming> A wind rose> On a moon ray" (Moustaki)> > Antoine/join The Heart is the Self. The Self is the Heart. Your use of is subject to the Attachment: (image/jpeg) solf.JPG [not stored] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 23, 2003 Report Share Posted January 23, 2003 Hi Al: That is a pretty strange photo. You can see the sun's corona (not the beer)in an eclipse but the moon pretty much fits right over it I believe. Maybe the earth's shadow is bigger a little than the moon but I have watched the stages over the weeks and they look the same same to me. God is messin with us. Bobby G. , "Al Larus" <alarus@o...> wrote: > Does the earths shadow exactly cover te moon? > In my search I found an interesting photo from a solar eclipse showing circles of sunshine through a tree. > > > > > > - > texasbg2000 <Bigbobgraham@a...> > > Thursday, January 23, 2003 3:54 AM > Re: The Sun, The Moon, and The Earth > > > Hi Antoine: > > It is good to hear from you! > > Yes the greater harmonics would be the answer. It seems evidence of > great order. I don't know what good a warning about a supernova would > be. > > A wind rose on a mooon ray seems real somehow. It would be nice to > see some more photos. > > Thank you > Love > Bobby G. > > > > > , Antoine Carré > <antoine.carre@s...> wrote: > > Hello Bobby, > > > > I love your questions... > > > > Some say that it was put there by the gods so we can be alerted if > the sun ever wanted to go Nova on us. > > > > Most probably it underlines the greater harmonics at work in this > world. > > > > Most certainly it makes one wonder of the beauty of this world. > > > > "My liberty > > Its you who helped me to let go of my moorings > > To go anywhere > > To go all the way > > Along the builded path > > To pick while dreaming > > A wind rose > > On a moon ray" (Moustaki) > > > > Antoine > > > Sponsor > > > > > > /join > > > > > > The Heart is the Self. The Self is the Heart. > > Terms of Service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 26, 2003 Report Share Posted January 26, 2003 Dear Bobby, Ah, I love these 'coincidences" too. Scientifically, there is no valid answer to such why questions - just a how, having to do with distances and sizes determining gravitational orbits, but you already know that. Its like asking why are we here at all. Visually, the moon does appear to change size, appearing larger when nearer the horizon, plus its orbit is more elliptical than circular. To me, such mysterious harmonies are adequately explained as the music of the spheres. The so called explanations simply fill me with even more wonder than the question did instead of explaining it. with the slightest deviation from the way all is arranged, and life would be impossible. Yet that is so because life has arisen only in perfect adaptation to just such conditions. Possibly we could live without a moon, or with a different size moon, and the tides would be almost non-existent or something. Isn't there a plausible speculation that life began in tidal pools? It is all so connected that without the moon being just how it is, there might be no life to notice its size. I don't think anyone can explain why life is so beautiful. I've never gotten past being totally amazed to be here at all - it is astonishing, right down to the smallest microbe, that life exists at all. Love, Gloria , "texasbg2000 <Bigbobgraham@a...>" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > Hi: > > I wonder if any of the great minds on this list can help me with > something I have wondered about. > > Why does the moon appear the same size as the sun and why are both > the same size as the earth? > > The moon is just the right distance from earth to be the same size as > the sun. Any farther away and we would see it as a spot on the sun > during eclipses and any closer and it would cover the sun longer. > > And during new moon the earth's shadow exactly covers the moon and no > more. > > This just seems like a strange coincidence, does any one have a guess > why? > > > Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 26, 2003 Report Share Posted January 26, 2003 Hi Bobby and Gloria, I have found the information at this site and the ones linked to it helpful... http://www.solargeometry.com/index.htm I feel that there is much more to the Golden Mean (Phi) than even these folks have suspected. I feel that it is the *definition* of the structure of life - that the field called the 'golden mean' is *the* realm between extremes where the 'average' of extreme energies manifest - form is emptyness emptyness is form - the formation can only occur in only *one* certain 'field' - outside of this field there is chaos. This is why there are all these co-incidents - they are not co-incidents - they are the *only way* that the manifestation can occur and so naturally it reflects the 'order' called the 'Golden Mean'. Love and Gratitude, James ps- the definition of Golden Mean is: the smaller is to the larger as the larger is to the whole (the whole is to the larger as the larger is to the smaller). - my definition of Love is what is called the 'Golden Rule' - do unto others as you would have them do unto you (as you give so shall yea receive). The Golden Rule is the Law that the Golden mean applies (lives) as it manifests - in other words: All is Love , "glee_be <glee@c...>" <glee@c...> wrote: > Dear Bobby, > > Ah, I love these 'coincidences" too. Scientifically, there is no > valid answer to such why questions - just a how, having to do with > distances and sizes determining gravitational orbits, but you > already know that. Its like asking why are we here at all. > > Visually, the moon does appear to change size, appearing larger when > nearer the horizon, plus its orbit is more elliptical than circular. > > To me, such mysterious harmonies are adequately explained as the > music of the spheres. The so called explanations simply fill me with > even more wonder than the question did instead of explaining it. > with the slightest deviation from the way all is arranged, and life > would be impossible. Yet that is so because life has arisen only in > perfect adaptation to just such conditions. > > Possibly we could live without a moon, or with a different size > moon, and the tides would be almost non-existent or something. Isn't > there a plausible speculation that life began in tidal pools? It is > all so connected that without the moon being just how it is, there > might be no life to notice its size. I don't think anyone can > explain why life is so beautiful. I've never gotten past being > totally amazed to be here at all - it is astonishing, right down to > the smallest microbe, that life exists at all. > > Love, > Gloria > > , "texasbg2000 > <Bigbobgraham@a...>" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > > Hi: > > > > I wonder if any of the great minds on this list can help me with > > something I have wondered about. > > > > Why does the moon appear the same size as the sun and why are both > > the same size as the earth? > > > > The moon is just the right distance from earth to be the same size > as > > the sun. Any farther away and we would see it as a spot on the > sun > > during eclipses and any closer and it would cover the sun longer. > > > > And during new moon the earth's shadow exactly covers the moon and > no > > more. > > > > This just seems like a strange coincidence, does any one have a > guess > > why? > > > > > > Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 26, 2003 Report Share Posted January 26, 2003 Dear James and Gloria: Yes Gloria thanks. The music of the spheres. The law of octaves. The biosphere of the sun with the earth center stage. Being sentient life myself (semi at least) it would seem probable that suspicious proportions would make themselves apparent. It certainly is lovely. Thanks for the site James. I can't do the math but the programmers there seem awfully excited about something. I am familiar with the Golden Section from art. The perfect place in a composition for a balanced focal point. I use it all the time and it works very well. I have another question. It involves relativistic speeds and time dilation and the theory of the physical universe being created as we know it in a big bang. Our planet spins around a sun that spins around the center of our galaxy. Since we are pretty far out from the center it means we are moving faster than the stars near the center. Our galaxy is shooting away from the center point of the matter in the universe or the point where the big bang ocurred. It is probably spinning around that point also. The accumulation of speed must reach some fraction of light speed creating relativistic time dilation. For someone moving at slower speeds than us time would be moving faster. My question is this: Is there a spot where the big bang ocurred where matter is pefectly still? Would this mean that time is not dilated there? In that spot would time move so fast that the universe would actually last only a split second before the next big bang? I was just wondering. Love Bobby G. , "james <nisarga@c...>" <nisarga@c...> wrote: > > > Hi Bobby and Gloria, > > > I have found the information at this site and the ones linked to > it helpful... > > http://www.solargeometry.com/index.htm > > I feel that there is much more to the Golden Mean (Phi) than > even these folks have suspected. > > I feel that it is the *definition* of the structure of life - > that the field called the 'golden mean' is *the* realm between > extremes where the 'average' of extreme energies manifest - form is > emptyness emptyness is form - the formation can only occur in only > *one* certain 'field' - outside of this field there is chaos. > > This is why there are all these co-incidents - they are not > co-incidents - they are the *only way* that the manifestation can > occur and so naturally it reflects the 'order' called the 'Golden > Mean'. > > > > Love and Gratitude, > James > > ps- the definition of Golden Mean is: the smaller is to the larger as > the larger is to the whole (the whole is to the larger as the larger > is to the smaller). > > - my definition of Love is what is called the 'Golden Rule' - do > unto others as you would have them do unto you (as you give so shall > yea receive). > > The Golden Rule is the Law that the Golden mean applies (lives) as > it manifests - in other words: All is Love > > > > > , "glee_be <glee@c...>" > <glee@c...> wrote: > > Dear Bobby, > > > > Ah, I love these 'coincidences" too. Scientifically, there is no > > valid answer to such why questions - just a how, having to do with > > distances and sizes determining gravitational orbits, but you > > already know that. Its like asking why are we here at all. > > > > Visually, the moon does appear to change size, appearing larger when > > nearer the horizon, plus its orbit is more elliptical than circular. > > > > To me, such mysterious harmonies are adequately explained as the > > music of the spheres. The so called explanations simply fill me with > > even more wonder than the question did instead of explaining it. > > with the slightest deviation from the way all is arranged, and life > > would be impossible. Yet that is so because life has arisen only in > > perfect adaptation to just such conditions. > > > > Possibly we could live without a moon, or with a different size > > moon, and the tides would be almost non-existent or something. Isn't > > there a plausible speculation that life began in tidal pools? It is > > all so connected that without the moon being just how it is, there > > might be no life to notice its size. I don't think anyone can > > explain why life is so beautiful. I've never gotten past being > > totally amazed to be here at all - it is astonishing, right down to > > the smallest microbe, that life exists at all. > > > > Love, > > Gloria > > > > , "texasbg2000 > > <Bigbobgraham@a...>" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > > > Hi: > > > > > > I wonder if any of the great minds on this list can help me with > > > something I have wondered about. > > > > > > Why does the moon appear the same size as the sun and why are both > > > the same size as the earth? > > > > > > The moon is just the right distance from earth to be the same size > > as > > > the sun. Any farther away and we would see it as a spot on the > > sun > > > during eclipses and any closer and it would cover the sun longer. > > > > > > And during new moon the earth's shadow exactly covers the moon and > > no > > > more. > > > > > > This just seems like a strange coincidence, does any one have a > > guess > > > why? > > > > > > > > > Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2003 Report Share Posted January 27, 2003 , "texasbg2000 <Bigbobgraham@a...>" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > Dear James and Gloria: > > > I have another question. It involves relativistic speeds and time > dilation and the theory of the physical universe being created as we > know it in a big bang. > > Our planet spins around a sun that spins around the center of our > galaxy. Since we are pretty far out from the center it means we are > moving faster than the stars near the center. > > Our galaxy is shooting away from the center point of the matter in > the universe or the point where the big bang ocurred. It is probably > spinning around that point also. > > The accumulation of speed must reach some fraction of light speed > creating relativistic time dilation. For someone moving at slower > speeds than us time would be moving faster. Hi Bobby! I'm on the road to New Orleans, for real I mean, and I think time only seems to go by faster RELATIVE to just staying at home base. Actually the road is going past me and I do not move, I'm just sitting in the car. LOL Yes really, if you look up the Einstein examples somewhere, the famous one is about me going off in space at nearly the speed of light and when I return, you will have aged more than me. That is time dilation. Time actually slows down the faster you travel. The example you are using has to do with like newtonian gravity and spinning something on the end of a string it travels faster speeds and further than the centerpoint. Like kids do with that holding hands and spinning game. When you mix classical physics, more or less earthbound, with the relativity it is confusing. The universe has no center that we can find. My question is this: > > Is there a spot where the big bang ocurred where matter is pefectly > still? Would this mean that time is not dilated there? In that spot > would time move so fast that the universe would actually last only a > split second before the next big bang? > > I was just wondering. > Everything in motion is moving away from everything else, so the center is everywhere or anywhere, or wherever you are observing from. When you read about the big bang or look for a center of the universe in terms of gravity, what is found is more like many soap bubbles where the skin is a band of stars, and each bubble is expanding from its own "center" of gravity. Even knowing the age of stars isn't all that much help, as new stars are being born and others are dying. The numbers for the big bang can only approach "the exact moment" as all the known laws of physics break down at that intensity and infinite numbers come into play. That's why Planck's constant is used, as the closest it can be calculated. I love to read about all this, but I can't do the math. The jury is still out on whether the universe will expand until it dissappears entirely or eventually contract back into the density for another big bang. It's fun to do a google on big bang and read the ideas. Don't know when I'll be near another computer, back home Thursday tho. Love, Gloria > Love > Bobby G. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2003 Report Share Posted January 27, 2003 Hi Bobby, You were wondering... "Is there a spot where the big bang ocurred where matter is pefectly > still? Would this mean that time is not dilated there? In that spot > would time move so fast that the universe would actually last only a split second before the next big bang?" ~~~ I feel that there was/is and wasn't/is a big bang. I feel that Space Silence Stillness is Absolute and that the manifestation that unfolds from this primal source follows natural laws. I feel that everything is simultaneously microcosm and macrocosm, that things are infinitely nested in opposing directions, and that they unfold/manifest. In the light that everything is microcsm and macrocosm - when the *local mind* is Silent, there is the Absolute (wht is revealed what is always there) - when there is thinking (this is a big bang) then there is manifestation that unfolds in orderly ways. This process is seen in the microcsm of the *local mind* and it is an infinite regression/progression of the Absolute (infinitely nested in opposing directions). Everything is One. All is Love. The local mind can never understand this because its nature is *movement* that negates understanding Stillness - yet innocent *Seeing* has no troubles with this because what Seeing sees is Itself, and *innocence* allows this to be as it is, without the interference of comments/movement (time is movement - it is a way of *describing*) of *local mind*. Love and Gratitude, James , "texasbg2000 <Bigbobgraham@a...>" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > Dear James and Gloria: > > Yes Gloria thanks. > > The music of the spheres. The law of octaves. The biosphere of the > sun with the earth center stage. Being sentient life myself (semi at > least) it would seem probable that suspicious proportions would make > themselves apparent. > It certainly is lovely. > > Thanks for the site James. I can't do the math but the programmers > there seem awfully excited about something. I am familiar with the > Golden Section from art. The perfect place in a composition for a > balanced focal point. I use it all the time and it works very well. > > I have another question. It involves relativistic speeds and time > dilation and the theory of the physical universe being created as we > know it in a big bang. > > Our planet spins around a sun that spins around the center of our > galaxy. Since we are pretty far out from the center it means we are > moving faster than the stars near the center. > > Our galaxy is shooting away from the center point of the matter in > the universe or the point where the big bang ocurred. It is probably > spinning around that point also. > > The accumulation of speed must reach some fraction of light speed > creating relativistic time dilation. For someone moving at slower > speeds than us time would be moving faster. My question is this: > > Is there a spot where the big bang ocurred where matter is pefectly > still? Would this mean that time is not dilated there? In that spot > would time move so fast that the universe would actually last only a > split second before the next big bang? > > I was just wondering. > > Love > Bobby G. , "james <nisarga@c...>" > <nisarga@c...> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Bobby and Gloria, > > > > > > I have found the information at this site and the ones linked > to > > it helpful... > > > > http://www.solargeometry.com/index.htm > > > > I feel that there is much more to the Golden Mean (Phi) than > > even these folks have suspected. > > > > I feel that it is the *definition* of the structure of life - > > that the field called the 'golden mean' is *the* realm between > > extremes where the 'average' of extreme energies manifest - form is > > emptyness emptyness is form - the formation can only occur in only > > *one* certain 'field' - outside of this field there is chaos. > > > > This is why there are all these co-incidents - they are not > > co-incidents - they are the *only way* that the manifestation can > > occur and so naturally it reflects the 'order' called the 'Golden > > Mean'. > > > > > > > > Love and Gratitude, > > James > > > > ps- the definition of Golden Mean is: the smaller is to the larger > as > > the larger is to the whole (the whole is to the larger as the > larger > > is to the smaller). > > > > - my definition of Love is what is called the 'Golden Rule' - do > > unto others as you would have them do unto you (as you give so > shall > > yea receive). > > > > The Golden Rule is the Law that the Golden mean applies (lives) > as > > it manifests - in other words: All is Love > > > > > > > > > > , "glee_be <glee@c...>" > > <glee@c...> wrote: > > > Dear Bobby, > > > > > > Ah, I love these 'coincidences" too. Scientifically, there is no > > > valid answer to such why questions - just a how, having to do > with > > > distances and sizes determining gravitational orbits, but you > > > already know that. Its like asking why are we here at all. > > > > > > Visually, the moon does appear to change size, appearing larger > when > > > nearer the horizon, plus its orbit is more elliptical than > circular. > > > > > > To me, such mysterious harmonies are adequately explained as the > > > music of the spheres. The so called explanations simply fill me > with > > > even more wonder than the question did instead of explaining it. > > > with the slightest deviation from the way all is arranged, and > life > > > would be impossible. Yet that is so because life has arisen only > in > > > perfect adaptation to just such conditions. > > > > > > Possibly we could live without a moon, or with a different size > > > moon, and the tides would be almost non-existent or something. > Isn't > > > there a plausible speculation that life began in tidal pools? It > is > > > all so connected that without the moon being just how it is, > there > > > might be no life to notice its size. I don't think anyone can > > > explain why life is so beautiful. I've never gotten past being > > > totally amazed to be here at all - it is astonishing, right down > to > > > the smallest microbe, that life exists at all. > > > > > > Love, > > > Gloria > > > > > > , "texasbg2000 > > > <Bigbobgraham@a...>" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > > > > Hi: > > > > > > > > I wonder if any of the great minds on this list can help me > with > > > > something I have wondered about. > > > > > > > > Why does the moon appear the same size as the sun and why are > both > > > > the same size as the earth? > > > > > > > > The moon is just the right distance from earth to be the same > size > > > as > > > > the sun. Any farther away and we would see it as a spot on the > > > sun > > > > during eclipses and any closer and it would cover the sun > longer. > > > > > > > > And during new moon the earth's shadow exactly covers the moon > and > > > no > > > > more. > > > > > > > > This just seems like a strange coincidence, does any one have a > > > guess > > > > why? > > > > > > > > > > > > Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2003 Report Share Posted January 27, 2003 , "glee_be <glee@c...>" <glee@c...> wrote: > , "texasbg2000 > <Bigbobgraham@a...>" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > > Dear James and Gloria: > > > > > I have another question. It involves relativistic speeds and > time > > dilation and the theory of the physical universe being created as > we > > know it in a big bang. > > > > Our planet spins around a sun that spins around the center of our > > galaxy. Since we are pretty far out from the center it means we > are > > moving faster than the stars near the center. > > > > Our galaxy is shooting away from the center point of the matter in > > the universe or the point where the big bang ocurred. It is > probably > > spinning around that point also. > > > > The accumulation of speed must reach some fraction of light speed > > creating relativistic time dilation. For someone moving at slower > > speeds than us time would be moving faster. > > Hi Bobby! > > I'm on the road to New Orleans, for real I mean, and I think time > only seems to go by faster RELATIVE to just staying at home base. > Actually the road is going past me and I do not move, I'm just > sitting in the car. LOL > > Yes really, if you look up the Einstein examples somewhere, the > famous one is about me going off in space at nearly the speed of > light and when I return, you will have aged more than me. That is > time dilation. Time actually slows down the faster you travel. > > The example you are using has to do with like newtonian gravity and > spinning something on the end of a string it travels faster speeds > and further than the centerpoint. Like kids do with that holding > hands and spinning game. > > When you mix classical physics, more or less earthbound, with the > relativity it is confusing. The universe has no center that we can > find. New orleans is my old stomping grounds. I did sketches in the French Quarter on and off for twenty years. I had a couple of studios uptown. Be careful and leave NOTHING in the car overnight. You got the idea of why the earth would be traveling fast as if on a string tethered to the sun and the sun being tethered to the center of the Milky Way Galaxy with and the galaxies all tethered to the center of mass in the universe. What I am suggesting is that the cumulative speed from all of this centrifugal force might reach a fraction of lightspeed becoming relativistic instead of Newtonian. Light speed is only 186,000 miles per second. We can measure the speed of the earth relative to the sun but have no referents for the others. We must be going really fast compared to the original point of stillness where the mass of the universe came together. This would make time for us slower than it is at that point. If someone moves relativistically faster than earth time slows for them. But we are not the final resting place, as we are already moving relative to that original point of stillness (in theory). Why would things moving slower than us not have less time dilation than us? Why can we not theorize a point of complete stillness relative to us where time would move infinitely fast? All of our lives would play out in a blink to life there. That is what I was wondering anyway. It is funny what can capture your imagination. Have fun in NO. I envy you. Love Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2003 Report Share Posted January 27, 2003 Hello again Bobby, << What I am suggesting is that the cumulative speed from all of this centrifugal force might reach a fraction of lightspeed becoming relativistic instead of Newtonian. Light speed is only 186,000 miles per second. We can measure the speed of the earth relative to the sun but have no referents for the others. We must be going really fast compared to the original point of stillness where the mass of the universe came together. This would make time for us slower than it is at that point. >> You don't seem to mention the aspect of Einstein equation where the closer an object is to the speed of light, the bigger will become the Mass (the mass of the object will relatively grow). It takes more and more Energy to bring a photon to the exact speed of light, and such a photon would be infinitely heavy, it would drag the universe with it as it reach the exact speed of light, in a singularity, the big crunch. This aspect of the equation, may help to contemplate how matter is sustained in growing away from a singularity, like for our Big Bang theory and all this matter, that we are part of, circling around that "original point of stillness", like you say. One thing that limits me in making of Einstein equation a form of religion is the singularity aspect. The original point of stillness is only point, it is not all the universe, and the way to reach it is tied to a direction, defined as the arrow of time or moving back toward the minimum entropy Quantum physics gives nicer tools, without eliminating the path traced by Einstein. It draws no direction in finding the original "place" of stillness other than allowing ourselves to step out of our complexity. The complexity of our being, from atoms to the stars, is the only limitation in touching the Sea of consciousness or our Being or the zero point energy or as you which to call it. Some try to find that point in the past or the future, they usually need a lot of energy to do so, like in Einstein theory. Others just let go to what's there and the frequency they vibrate to starts changing by itself (E=hf). To each one is own path. May yours and that of Gloria, be full of Joy. Antoine << That is what I was wondering anyway. It is funny what can capture your imagination.Have fun in NO. I envy you.Love Bobby G. >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2003 Report Share Posted January 27, 2003 > > New orleans is my old stomping grounds. I did sketches in the French > Quarter on and off for twenty years. I had a couple of studios > uptown. Be careful and leave NOTHING in the car overnight. > Hi Bobby, If you ever went to Pat O'Brians, Henrietta has been singing there for about the past 25 years. She probably saw you around, as she lives in the Quarter. I understand now what you are theorizing, basically. Don't have time for the details, but even supposing there could be an absolute center and it is still - if you hold still, the rest of the universe is moving relative to you, right? The planet's relative motion around the sun is like being on an airplane, and your motion is just your walking down the aisle. In your example, the rotation of the earth, plus the motion of the galaxy, plus the galaxy moving away is all cumulative speed, right? Maybe this website can help, it has a search. http://www.astronomy-info.com/ Love, Gloria Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2003 Report Share Posted January 27, 2003 , "james <nisarga@c...>" <nisarga@c...> wrote: > > > I feel that there was/is and wasn't/is a big bang. > > I feel that Space Silence Stillness is Absolute and that the > manifestation that unfolds from this primal source follows natural > laws. > > I feel that everything is simultaneously microcosm and > macrocosm, that things are infinitely nested in opposing directions, > and that they unfold/manifest. > > In the light that everything is microcsm and macrocosm - when the > *local mind* is Silent, there is the Absolute (wht is revealed what is > always there) - when there is thinking (this is a big bang) then > there is manifestation that unfolds in orderly ways. > > This process is seen in the microcsm of the *local mind* and it > is an infinite regression/progression of the Absolute (infinitely > nested in opposing directions). > > Everything is One. All is Love. > > The local mind can never understand this because its nature is > *movement* that negates understanding Stillness - yet innocent > *Seeing* has no troubles with this because what Seeing sees is Itself, > and *innocence* allows this to be as it is, without the interference > of comments/movement (time is movement - it is a way of *describing*) > of *local mind*. > > > > Love and Gratitude, > James > Wow James this is really beautifully put together. thank you for this. I don't disagree at all. Much Love bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2003 Report Share Posted January 27, 2003 , Antoine Carré <antoine.carre@s...> wrote: > Hello again Bobby, > > << What I am suggesting is that the cumulative speed from all of this centrifugal force might reach a fraction of lightspeed becoming relativistic instead of Newtonian. Light speed is only 186,000 miles per second. We can measure the speed of the earth relative to the sun but have no referents for the others. We must be going really fast compared to the original point of stillness where the mass of the universe came together. This would make time for us slower than it is at that point. >> > > You don't seem to mention the aspect of Einstein equation where the closer an object is to the speed of light, the bigger will become the Mass (the mass of the object will relatively grow). It takes more and more Energy to bring a photon to the exact speed of light, and such a photon would be infinitely heavy, it would drag the universe with it as it reach the exact speed of light, in a singularity, the big crunch. This aspect of the equation, may help to contemplate how matter is sustained in growing away from a singularity, like for our Big Bang theory and all this matter, that we are part of, circling around that "original point of stillness", like you say. > > One thing that limits me in making of Einstein equation a form of religion is the singularity aspect. The original point of stillness is only point, it is not all the universe, and the way to reach it is tied to a direction, defined as the arrow of time or moving back toward the minimum entropy > > Quantum physics gives nicer tools, without eliminating the path traced by Einstein. It draws no direction in finding the original "place" of stillness other than allowing ourselves to step out of our complexity. The complexity of our being, from atoms to the stars, is the only limitation in touching the Sea of consciousness or our Being or the zero point energy or as you which to call it. > > Some try to find that point in the past or the future, they usually need a lot of energy to do so, like in Einstein theory. Others just let go to what's there and the frequency they vibrate to starts changing by itself (E=hf). > > To each one is own path. May yours and that of Gloria, be full of Joy. > > Antoine > Great Answer Antoine. The increase of mass is an interesting addition to the question. As I understand it the original point of stillness would have zero mass and zero time dilation relative to us. The center of the universe is the point of zero mass and zero duration. That is in the heart. That is the meaning of the word heart, ie, the center. E=hf? Love Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2003 Report Share Posted January 27, 2003 , "glee_be <glee@c...>" <glee@c...> wrote: > > > > New orleans is my old stomping grounds. I did sketches in the > French > > Quarter on and off for twenty years. I had a couple of studios > > uptown. Be careful and leave NOTHING in the car overnight. > > > Hi Bobby, > > If you ever went to Pat O'Brians, Henrietta has been singing there > for about the past 25 years. She probably saw you around, as she > lives in the Quarter. > > I understand now what you are theorizing, basically. Don't have time > for the details, but even supposing there could be an absolute center > and it is still - if you hold still, the rest of the universe is > moving relative to you, right? The planet's relative motion around > the sun is like being on an airplane, and your motion is just your > walking down the aisle. In your example, the rotation of the earth, > plus the motion of the galaxy, plus the galaxy moving away is all > cumulative speed, right? Maybe this website can help, it has a search. > > http://www.astronomy-info.com/ > > Love, > Gloria I don't know Henrietta but if you are talking about the piano bar, I have heard her sing and play. It is really a good time. Overpriced On the other side of the street is Johnny White's where the artists used to hang. Talk about rough. and Sleazy. but cheap. Back in '78... I guess I will post my question on the site you gave me and I will let you know. Thanks. O yeah, hurricanes make you sick. every morning when I went to work the businesses would be hosing hundreds of dollars worth of hurricanes off the sidewalks in front of their establishments. Love Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2003 Report Share Posted January 28, 2003 << The increase of mass is an interesting addition to the question. As I understand it the original point of stillness would have zero mass and zero time dilation relative to us. >> And don't forget the dilation of space in the direction of the movement... That would mean, if our solar system ever where to move at the speed of light, in relation to the point of stillness (or bindu) that you mention our distance to it would become infinite, our mass would become infinite and our time would become an eternal now. The original point of stillness that you mention is maybe the alpha to that omega that is everything already in the state of the speed of light, where the light we see with our eyes is just but a slowing down of that state. Our world forming this rainbow, or Oroborus, the body of this snake biting its tail (Alpha) with its head (Omega). << The center of the universe is the point of zero mass and zero duration. That is in the heart. That is the meaning of the word heart, ie, the center. >> To every center there is another center, playing here with symbols, I have put the original point of stillness in the tail after which runs the head of the snake making a circle. What is at the center of that circle made of the snake? who knows...<< E=hf? >> E was for Energy, h is the plank constant, f is the frequency of vibration of matter or that of the wave of matter. This formula replaces in quantum physics what is E=mc² for Einstein theory of relativity. Playing with both, for a same state of matter: E=E which gives by substitution : mc²=hf which gives: m/f = C, where C is a constant (h/c²) This means that if the frequency of vibration of an entity is raised, its mass will raise in the same proportion. If ever the vibration level is to high, and the mass cannot be raised anymore in this "Einstein/Newton/sensory system" Universe, then in quantum physics it will be said that this entity as become non-local. It will become light that is not observed. In other words its properties cannot exist, all at the same time, in the time/space fabric until a consciousness or a sensory system who as its "foot" in the time/space fabric of the Einstein/Newton/ sensory Universe a-knowledge it. It will then localize again with one or the other property it can sustain with the help of the "consciousness" attached to this complex "living" system or existing in what we call this Universe; or it will slow down as it does so often when a photon is seen (re-absorbed in) by a less vibrant or more complex system. To take an example. The atoms of phosphor, on your computer screen, receives energy from your PC, that make each electron go in high vibration mode, to the point they cannot keep such heavy and vibrating electron around the nucleus. That is when a photon is emitted from those phosphor atoms. This photon becomes non-local. It will hit anything at the speed of light no matter the speed of that thing. When the photon hits something, its either slowed down to light that is seen by the slower vibration entity, that is our body consciousness, or its seen with only a few of its properties (wave or (not and) solid particle to take an example). This non local "place" that is "everywhere" outside and inside of the fabric of our sensory Universe would be the head of the oroborus running after its tail. Where the tail is this singularity from which is born the "illusion" of space/time and mass; and the body of the snake would be this universe between the singularity to this non-local space. So I wonder, if _someone_ can ever know what is that center of the oroborus? Sorry if I went on using those black and white symbols when there is ice melting to observe, or why not the wind of a flower growing... It is nice to read you all Harsa, Gloria, Joyce, David, to Name a few... and thank you Bobby for those though provoking a search of a center. Antoine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2003 Report Share Posted January 28, 2003 Hi Antoine: Thanks for the thorough clear answer. I have saved it to file to figure on later. I saw a video of some physicists explaining remote viewing and they just took a lot of non-duality very literally and incorporated it, just as you did (I guess!) and treated it as real as they would any other physics. Remote viewing, or finding lost objects, he said was possible after you give up the sense of individuality and admit to being All. AC-"This means that if the frequency of vibration of an entity is raised, its mass will raise in the same proportion" I often feel bigger after meditating and smaller after my ego has taken over. A pleasure, Bobby G. , Antoine Carré <antoine.carre@s...> wrote: > > << The increase of mass is an interesting addition to the question. As I understand it the original point of stillness would have zero mass and zero time dilation relative to us. >> > > And don't forget the dilation of space in the direction of the movement... That would mean, if our solar system ever where to move at the speed of light, in relation to the point of stillness (or bindu) that you mention our distance to it would become infinite, our mass would become infinite and our time would become an eternal now. > > The original point of stillness that you mention is maybe the alpha to that omega that is everything already in the state of the speed of light, where the light we see with our eyes is just but a slowing down of that state. Our world forming this rainbow, or Oroborus, the body of this snake biting its tail (Alpha) with its head (Omega). > > << The center of the universe is the point of zero mass and zero duration. That is in the heart. That is the meaning of the word heart, ie, the center. >> > > To every center there is another center, playing here with symbols, I have put the original point of stillness in the tail after which runs the head of the snake making a circle. What is at the center of that circle made of the snake? who knows... > > << E=hf? >> > > E was for Energy, h is the plank constant, f is the frequency of vibration of matter or that of the wave of matter. This formula replaces in quantum physics what is E=mc² for Einstein theory of relativity. > > Playing with both, for a same state of matter: E=E > which gives by substitution : mc²=hf > which gives: m/f = C, where C is a constant (h/c²) > This means that if the frequency of vibration of an entity is raised, its mass will raise in the same proportion. > > If ever the vibration level is to high, and the mass cannot be raised anymore in this "Einstein/Newton/sensory system" Universe, then in quantum physics it will be said that this entity as become non-local. It will become light that is not observed. In other words its properties cannot exist, all at the same time, in the time/space fabric until a consciousness or a sensory system who as its "foot" in the time/space fabric of the Einstein/Newton/ sensory Universe a- knowledge it. It will then localize again with one or the other property it can sustain with the help of the "consciousness" attached to this complex "living" system or existing in what we call this Universe; or it will slow down as it does so often when a photon is seen (re-absorbed in) by a less vibrant or more complex system. > > To take an example. The atoms of phosphor, on your computer screen, receives energy from your PC, that make each electron go in high vibration mode, to the point they cannot keep such heavy and vibrating electron around the nucleus. That is when a photon is emitted from those phosphor atoms. This photon becomes non-local. It will hit anything at the speed of light no matter the speed of that thing. When the photon hits something, its either slowed down to light that is seen by the slower vibration entity, that is our body consciousness, or its seen with only a few of its properties (wave or (not and) solid particle to take an example). > > This non local "place" that is "everywhere" outside and inside of the fabric of our sensory Universe would be the head of the oroborus running after its tail. Where the tail is this singularity from which is born the "illusion" of space/time and mass; and the body of the snake would be this universe between the singularity to this non- local space. > > So I wonder, if _someone_ can ever know what is that center of the oroborus? > > Sorry if I went on using those black and white symbols when there is ice melting to observe, or why not the wind of a flower growing... > > It is nice to read you all Harsa, Gloria, Joyce, David, to Name a few... > > and thank you Bobby for those though provoking a search of a center. > > Antoine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2003 Report Share Posted January 29, 2003 > > I don't know Henrietta but if you are talking about the piano bar, I > have heard her sing and play. It is really a good time. Overpriced > On the other side of the street is Johnny White's where the artists > used to hang. Talk about rough. and Sleazy. but cheap. Back > in '78... > > I guess I will post my question on the site you gave me and I will > let you know. Thanks. > O yeah, hurricanes make you sick. every morning when I went to work > the businesses would be hosing hundreds of dollars worth of > hurricanes off the sidewalks in front of their establishments. > > Love > Bobby G. Yes overpriced, but people are paying her salary that way, so we don't mind. There needs to be places for tourists and for locals. Be home tomorrow. Gloria Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2003 Report Share Posted January 29, 2003 , Antoine Carré <antoine.carre@s...> wrote: > > << The increase of mass is an interesting addition to the question. As I understand it the original point of stillness would have zero mass and zero time dilation relative to us. >> Namaste, This is all very well in materiality and the dimensions of the lower kosas. However it doesn't take into account pralaya and even mahapralaya. It is still all in lower manifestation........ONS..Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2003 Report Share Posted January 29, 2003 > Namaste, > > This is all very well in materiality and the dimensions of the lower > kosas. However it doesn't take into account pralaya and even > mahapralaya. It is still all in lower manifestation........ONS..Tony. Hi Pralaya, is that a beverage of some sort? one man's lower kosa is another man's higher kosa. Are you speaking of higher manifestations? I am not really familiar with the terms you used. It is easier to speak of the lower manifestations and then see how they relate to higher ones within oneself than it is to speak of higher levels which are more difficult to speak of. The 'as above, so below' thing, scaling in chaos theory. Probably much of reluctance to use physical manifestion in ancient discussions was because of the ignorance of how the big picture is formed along the same lines as the small. Love Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2003 Report Share Posted January 30, 2003 , "texasbg2000 <Bigbobgraham@a...>" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > > > Namaste, > > > > This is all very well in materiality and the dimensions of the > lower > > kosas. However it doesn't take into account pralaya and even > > mahapralaya. It is still all in lower > manifestation........ONS..Tony. > > Hi > > Pralaya, is that a beverage of some sort? one man's lower kosa is > another man's higher kosa. > > > Are you speaking of higher manifestations? I am not really familiar > with the terms you used. > > It is easier to speak of the lower manifestations and then see how > they relate to higher ones within oneself than it is to speak of > higher levels which are more difficult to speak of. > > The 'as above, so below' thing, scaling in chaos theory. Probably > much of reluctance to use physical manifestion in ancient discussions > was because of the ignorance of how the big picture is formed along > the same lines as the small. > > > Love > Bobby G. Namaste, It is IMO only the lower manifestations of energy that science is involved with. There are myriads of dimensions and theories, string, sub atomic etc. These are in material manifestation, taking into account only the physical and basic energy, there are other levels above this far more subtle. At pralaya or subsumation of the universes, all matter and basic energy is subsumed, at mahapralaya even the subtle is subsumed, into pure consciousness, it is suspended in potentiality until the next universe manifests. There are endless numbers of universes at any one time.........ONS...Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2003 Report Share Posted January 30, 2003 on 1/30/03 11:33 AM, saktidasa <saktidasa at saktidasa wrote: > Namaste, > > It is IMO only the lower manifestations of energy that science is > involved with. There are myriads of dimensions and theories, string, > sub atomic etc. > > These are in material manifestation, taking into account only the > physical and basic energy, there are other levels above this far more > subtle. > > At pralaya or subsumation of the universes, all matter and basic > energy is subsumed, at mahapralaya even the subtle is subsumed, into > pure consciousness, it is suspended in potentiality until the next > universe manifests. There are endless numbers of universes at any one > time.........ONS...Tony. It doesn't take much to realise that the concerns one little person in this world amounts to a huge hill of beans to that person. from Casa Blanca ( ;-)) Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.