Guest guest Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 Dear Jyothi, The cosmic paradigm that I am trying to visualise is in variance with PNB. PNB says the first motion is the spin of earth ( manifested as Day/nights ), second is the orbit of earth ( manifested to us as seasons ) and the third is the precession of equinox ( the change in the axial tilt of the earth ). PNB is more an authority on this subject while I consider myself as a layman. Robert Wilkinson ( who is also part of this discussion group ) is also a part of the Aeon group. Regards Bejoy C.S. www.keraladarsan.com --- jyothi_b_lakshmi <jyothi_b_lakshmi wrote: > Dear Sir, > > Thanks for the link and introduction to PNB.(Havent > heard of this > lady before). Lots to read and understand before any > comments are > made. Let me see if the articles make any sense to > me:) > > Regards, > jyothi > > , > Bejoy <bejoy_cs > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Jyothi & All, > > > > To start with, I would like to clarify that am not > > knowledegable in astrology / astronomy / > astrophysics. > > Whatever that has been written by me are my own > > thoughts with no proof that I can provide to > > substantiate myself. > > > > I am just trying to decipher patterns in the Vedas > > with what is now known as scientific facts. > > > > My interest in this area was triggered just 10 > months > > back as I by coincidence found Patricia Norelli > > Bachelet ( PNB ) thru Google and her article on > the > > precession of equinox made me think. Please visit > PNBs > > Aeon group www.aeongroup.com if you havent known > her > > already. > > > > Having told this, what I have stated below is > infact > > at variance to what PNB is trying to say. > > > > To clarify myself more as you wanted ... > > > > Moon orbits earth at 1 Km/s. > > > > Earth orbits Sun at 30 Km/s. > > > > Sun orbits X at 217 Km/s. > > > > It still is a matter of conjecture if the Sun > actually > > is in an orbit. But it quite fair to assume so. > Its > > not immobile anyway ( speed = 217 km/s proved ). > Dont > > think if this could be a linear motion. If its not > > linear then it has to be orbital. If it orbits, > what > > is the Sun orbiting - assume X. > > > > RV says Sun is the chariot of Sun is driven by 7 > > horses - which could be the 7 planets. But here I > > assume it to be the Saptarishis - Ursa Minor - Big > > Dipper. I start with this assumption that the Sun > > orbits the Saptarihis ( 7 Rishis ). If this > assumption > > of mine is wrong then am entirely wrong. > > > > Assmption 2 - Saptarihis orbits Dhruva ( taking > the > > Sun along with it ). > > > > Assumption 3 - Dhruva ( Taking Saptarishis and Sun > > along ) orbits Brahma. > > > > So as you go higher up the orbit the orbital > velocity > > must increase and if indeed Dhruva is orbiting > Brahma, > > its quite probable that the orbital velocity of > Dhruva > > is close to the speed of Light ( C ). > > > > At C, as per Einsteins E=MC^2 - mass should > convert > > into energy so Brahma is the last frontier where > mass > > could exist and beyond Brahma it should all be > energy > > field. > > > > At C, as per Lorentz - T = T0 / Sq.root ( > 1-v^2/c^2 ), > > time reduces to zero - time dilation. So Brahma is > the > > last frontier where time could exist and beyond > Brahma > > is timelessness. > > > > Sun orbiting Saptarishis is 1 world, Saptarishis > > orbiting Dhruva is the second and Dhruva orbiting > > Brahma is the third world - these 3 worlds have to > be > > temporary as it got mass and time and is subject > to > > destruction. > > > > > > Beyond Brahma is the infinte energy field then, > the > > centre of mass of which is Anantha Padma Nabhi - > > energy has got a centripetal nature which I think > RV > > symbolised it as lotus ( lotus is a symmetric > > collection of petals, gravity is a centripetal > force > > ). RV says even this energy field comprises of 4 > more > > worlds which is permanent - no mass / no time - > only > > energy ). > > > > I have made many assumptions here which may or may > not > > be valid. If it is not valid then am wrong. > > > > Regards > > > > Bejoy C.S. > > www.keraladarsan.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- jyothi_b_lakshmi <jyothi_b_lakshmi > > wrote: > > > > > Dear Sir, > > > > > > I am trying to comprehend what you have > mentioned in > > > your mail > > > below. But I am totally confused. Many grey > areas > > > may be because of > > > lack of my proper understanding. Let me mention > my > > > doubts here: > > > > > > " This 3 world theory sits nicely > > > with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said > in RV > > > assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits. > > > " > > > What is meant by three mean motions of sun? Sun > is > > > static in the > > > solar system and it is the planets that are > moving, > > > as everybody > > > knows. So which is the motion of sun mentioned? > > > > > > What is the correlation between the 3 worlds > above > > > earth and suns 3 > > > higher orbits? If both are same, then the worlds > > > above earth are > > > above sun as well. Right? > > > > > > You said " The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we > > > belong ) is then > > > particles at different mass and hence subject to > > > time " > > > > > > When we all belong to earth, how can we belong > to > > > the temporary > > > worlds that you say is above the earth? > > > > > > " As earth and sun are part of this temporary > world, > > > here comes the relevance of illusion or maya > or... > === message truncated === ______________________________\ ____ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Search. http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 15, 2007 Report Share Posted December 15, 2007 Dear Jyothi / Sreenivas and All, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_cosmology A link above,, please see a paradigm of the structure of the universe, which gels well with the 3 temporary lokas + 4 permanent lokas and Saptarishis as the loka that is immediately beyond Sani ( saturn ). These Lokas ( worlds ) cannot be seen as isolated or mutually exclusive. They must have something to do with each other. Hope useful. Regards Bejoy C.S. www.keraladarsan.com --- jyothi_b_lakshmi <jyothi_b_lakshmi wrote: > Dear Sir, > > Thanks for the link and introduction to PNB.(Havent > heard of this > lady before). Lots to read and understand before any > comments are > made. Let me see if the articles make any sense to > me:) > > Regards, > jyothi > > , > Bejoy <bejoy_cs > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Jyothi & All, > > > > To start with, I would like to clarify that am not > > knowledegable in astrology / astronomy / > astrophysics. > > Whatever that has been written by me are my own > > thoughts with no proof that I can provide to > > substantiate myself. > > > > I am just trying to decipher patterns in the Vedas > > with what is now known as scientific facts. > > > > My interest in this area was triggered just 10 > months > > back as I by coincidence found Patricia Norelli > > Bachelet ( PNB ) thru Google and her article on > the > > precession of equinox made me think. Please visit > PNBs > > Aeon group www.aeongroup.com if you havent known > her > > already. > > > > Having told this, what I have stated below is > infact > > at variance to what PNB is trying to say. > > > > To clarify myself more as you wanted ... > > > > Moon orbits earth at 1 Km/s. > > > > Earth orbits Sun at 30 Km/s. > > > > Sun orbits X at 217 Km/s. > > > > It still is a matter of conjecture if the Sun > actually > > is in an orbit. But it quite fair to assume so. > Its > > not immobile anyway ( speed = 217 km/s proved ). > Dont > > think if this could be a linear motion. If its not > > linear then it has to be orbital. If it orbits, > what > > is the Sun orbiting - assume X. > > > > RV says Sun is the chariot of Sun is driven by 7 > > horses - which could be the 7 planets. But here I > > assume it to be the Saptarishis - Ursa Minor - Big > > Dipper. I start with this assumption that the Sun > > orbits the Saptarihis ( 7 Rishis ). If this > assumption > > of mine is wrong then am entirely wrong. > > > > Assmption 2 - Saptarihis orbits Dhruva ( taking > the > > Sun along with it ). > > > > Assumption 3 - Dhruva ( Taking Saptarishis and Sun > > along ) orbits Brahma. > > > > So as you go higher up the orbit the orbital > velocity > > must increase and if indeed Dhruva is orbiting > Brahma, > > its quite probable that the orbital velocity of > Dhruva > > is close to the speed of Light ( C ). > > > > At C, as per Einsteins E=MC^2 - mass should > convert > > into energy so Brahma is the last frontier where > mass > > could exist and beyond Brahma it should all be > energy > > field. > > > > At C, as per Lorentz - T = T0 / Sq.root ( > 1-v^2/c^2 ), > > time reduces to zero - time dilation. So Brahma is > the > > last frontier where time could exist and beyond > Brahma > > is timelessness. > > > > Sun orbiting Saptarishis is 1 world, Saptarishis > > orbiting Dhruva is the second and Dhruva orbiting > > Brahma is the third world - these 3 worlds have to > be > > temporary as it got mass and time and is subject > to > > destruction. > > > > > > Beyond Brahma is the infinte energy field then, > the > > centre of mass of which is Anantha Padma Nabhi - > > energy has got a centripetal nature which I think > RV > > symbolised it as lotus ( lotus is a symmetric > > collection of petals, gravity is a centripetal > force > > ). RV says even this energy field comprises of 4 > more > > worlds which is permanent - no mass / no time - > only > > energy ). > > > > I have made many assumptions here which may or may > not > > be valid. If it is not valid then am wrong. > > > > Regards > > > > Bejoy C.S. > > www.keraladarsan.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- jyothi_b_lakshmi <jyothi_b_lakshmi > > wrote: > > > > > Dear Sir, > > > > > > I am trying to comprehend what you have > mentioned in > > > your mail > > > below. But I am totally confused. Many grey > areas > > > may be because of > > > lack of my proper understanding. Let me mention > my > > > doubts here: > > > > > > " This 3 world theory sits nicely > > > with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said > in RV > > > assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits. > > > " > > > What is meant by three mean motions of sun? Sun > is > > > static in the > > > solar system and it is the planets that are > moving, > > > as everybody > > > knows. So which is the motion of sun mentioned? > > > > > > What is the correlation between the 3 worlds > above > > > earth and suns 3 > > > higher orbits? If both are same, then the worlds > > > above earth are > > > above sun as well. Right? > > > > > > You said " The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we > > > belong ) is then > > > particles at different mass and hence subject to > > > time " > > > > > > When we all belong to earth, how can we belong > to > > > the temporary > > > worlds that you say is above the earth? > > > > > > " As earth and sun are part of this temporary > world, > > > here comes the relevance of illusion or maya > or... > === message truncated === ______________________________\ ____ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Search. http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping 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.