Guest guest Posted December 8, 2007 Report Share Posted December 8, 2007 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... > > " > > Sun is also a part of temporary world? Totally > > confused. Earlier in > > first para it was said, 3 world theory has > > correlation with sun's 3 > > orbits (though not clear what these orbits are). But > > now, as per > > the above lines, earth and sun are part of the 3 > > temporary world. > > How come? How can there be worlds above earth and > > sun be part of > > them at the same time? > > > > What is the relevance of Padma, Nabhi here? What > > does all these > > mean? > > > > Can you please clarify ? > > > > > > Regards, > > Jyothi > > > > , > > Bejoy > > <bejoy_cs@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dear Sreeram and All, > > > > > > Thanks for the encouraging words. > > > > > > As far as my understanding goes, Rig Veda ( RV ) > > has > > > talked in length about 7 worlds above the earth > > and 7 > > > below. Of the 7 that is above, 4 it seems is > > permanent > > > and 3 are temporary. 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. > > > > > > If indeed the Sun has 3 higher orbits ( debatable > > ) , > > > its quite probable that the velocity at the > > highest > > > orbit should be very close to the velocity of > > light > > > and at this stage mass should convert as energy ( > > > E=mc^2 ). So beyond this orbit where the 4 > > permanent > > > world lies must be all energy fields only and > > hence is > > > not subject to destruction. > > > > > > The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we belong ) is > > then > > > particles at different mass and hence subject to > > time > > > and hence subject to periodic creation and > > destruction > > > which again as RV says the period equal to 4.32E+9 > > > earth years ( EY ). > > > > > > As earth and sun are part of this temporary world, > > > here comes the relevance of illusion or maya or > > > relativity as we are created and subject to > > > destruction at periodic intervals. While the 4 > > > permanent worlds are not subject to time as its > > all > > > energy fields. The centre of mass of this energy > > field > > > must be Vishnu or AmanthaPadmaNabhi > > > > > > Anatha ( infinite ) > > > > > > Padma ( lotus, symbolism for centripetal force., > > lotus > > > is a collection of petals and gravity is a > > centripetal > > > force ) > > > > > > Nabhi - Navel - centre of mass - where the entire > > > cosmic mass goes thru. > > > > > > Not sure if I have made any sense. I myself isnt > > sure > > > ... just another wayward thought on mine. > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > Bejoy C.S. > > > www.keraladarsan.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- sreeram srinivas <sreeram64@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Be-joy !! > > > > > > > > Thanks for that supporting piece > > posting......find > > > > it too technical an > > > > answer for members reeling under Maya !! Can > > you > > > > come up with easier > > > > examples, like our great Kabir, better for > > > > us....i.e. Kabir simplied > > > > this complex Maya & Illusion, God -atma & > > paramatma > > > > through his couplets > > > > in lay man words.....understandable even to the > > > > condemned Shudhra > > > > Caste......which have become a folklore today. { > > I > > > > do not believe in > > > > caste differentiation, finds mention here for > > > > discussion sake - > > > > jingoists in the group if any - first note my > > > > disclaimer !! }. > > > > > > > > Rider to Be-joy : Einstein / Lorentz formula - > > to > > > > my memory & > > > > follow-up, they are still in theory state of > > > > acceptance or some of it > > > > was supposed to be rejected in the > > > > Physics/Physicists conference a > > > > couple of years before.....update us should you > > > > happen to know about it > > > > > > > > Be-Joy = good name....must be in [: " >] this > > state > > > > !! > > > > > > > > with regards, > > > > > > > > sreeram srinivas > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > Bejoy <bejoy_cs@> > > > > wrote: > > > > Dear all, > > > > > > > > For those who would like to see time as an > > > > illusion, > > > > one justification could be the theoretically > > > > proved > > > > Einstein / Lorentz formula for time dilation > > with > > > > increase in velocity. > > > > > > > > As per T = T0 / (sq. root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ) , > > > > as particle velocity approaches the velocity of > > > > light > > > > ( 3E+8 m/s ) , time reduces close to zero. In > > this > > > === 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.