For a number of years I have been uncomfortable with the notion that our Sun is a huge fiery yellow ball with extremely high temperatures which radiate heat and light to our Solar System. Why? Well, I could not understand why, as you climbed further up a mountain the colder it became, yet you were nearer the Sun. I was also a big fan of the Space Program and used to follow its every course and action, and I gradually became more dissatisfied with our conventional conception of what the Sun was. We were being informed that Space was black, the deep blackness of Space – Space was cold, the icy cold of Space - and we were informed that Space was indeed a vacuum! Now, were we not told at school that heat could not pass through a vacuum by conduction, convection or radiation?  Isn’t this exactly how a thermos flask works? No I was not happy with this conception; the Sun could not radiate heat and light to the Earth even if it was a huge ball of fire. There had to be something else responsible for creating heat and light as we know it on earth and I wanted to know what that was.

I found my answer to this enigma while I was reading Living Energies by Callum Coats – Viktor Schauberger’s brilliant work with natural energy explained. Here, in this marvellous book was a full chapter just on the Sun, explaining the Sun’s energetic interaction with Earth, and most importantly just what does create heat and light on our planet. There is not the scope within this article to give a full scientific extrapolation here so I will condense the important parts, as I understand them. The Sun’s energy is kinetic not thermal and interacts with the Earth’s energies and in particular the Earth’s atmosphere where these energies are converted into heat and light. [This is the origin of the Cross - the union of the Sun (Father) and the Earth (Mother)]. To be more specific it is the water molecules in our atmosphere that contains the energy of heat and light. Light is a function of the atmosphere as is heat. This process is known as the Hydrological Cycle and involves our oceans and rainforests in a process similar to precipitation. This is where the water molecules from the oceans combine with the water molecules of the rainforests to provide a perfect balance in our atmosphere which can then utilise the energy from the Sun to provide heat and light. It is our atmosphere that contains and provides us with heat and light, the very spark of life; in fact our atmosphere is responsible for sustaining all life itself. Therefore, as we climb higher (up a mountain) our atmosphere becomes thinner, so there is less energy converted to heat and therefore the colder it becomes. Interstellar space has a thermal temperature of –273.15°C (0°Kelvin) so how can we possibly obtain heat directly from the Sun? 

Even some of our ancestors thought the same way. Within Living Energies, published by Gateway Books, there is a reference to a translation of the Naacal Tablets, page 81, from James Churchward’s book, the Lost Continent of Mu, I quote ‘…the light was contained in the atmosphere. And the shafts of the Sun met the shafts of the light in the atmosphere and gave birth to light. Then there was light upon the face of the Earth; the heat was also contained in the atmosphere. And the shafts of the Sun met the shafts of the heat in the atmosphere and gave it life. Then there was heat to warm the face of the Earth.’

A second quotation from the same book, taken from The Life and Teaching of the Masters of the Far East by Baird T. Spalding – which records his three-year visit to Tibet at the invitation of high lamas – states ‘ If we take the science of things, we know there is a legend told here that all the heat and light and many other natural forces are contained right within the Earth itself. The Sun, of itself, has no heat or light. It has potentialities that draw the heat and light from the Earth. After the Sun has drawn the heat and light rays from the Earth, the heat rays are reflected back to the Earth by the atmosphere that floats on the ether. The light rays are drawn from the Earth in about the same manner and are reflected back to Earth by the ether. As the air extends only a comparatively short distance, the effect of the heat rays varies as you leave the Earth’s surface and ascend towards the outer limits of the atmosphere. As the air becomes less dense, there is less reflection; consequently as you ascend into the higher altitudes the heat becomes less and the cold increases. When you have reached the limit of air, you have reached the limit of heat. It is the same with the light rays. They are drawn from the earth and reflected back by the ether. As this ether extends much farther than the air, the light rays extend much farther before they are all reflected. When you have reached the limit of ether, you have reached the limit of heat and light. When you have reached the limit of heat and light, you have reached the great cold’.

What do you believe? Vital though the Sun’s energy is to life on this planet, the Sun is probably a cold dark place.

http://www.equilibrauk.com/illusion.shtml

"We already have the means to travel among the stars, but these technologies are locked up in black projects and it would take an Act of God to ever get them out to benefit humanity...Anything you can imagine, we already know how to do."

If a breakthrough in space-time/field physics is achieved in the early 1980s, two advanced types of field-dependent "propulsion" systems could be developed and tested in the early 1990s. The two propulsion types are (1) Gravimagnetic Systems — multipurpose propulsion systems which utilize the "gravitational" effects of coherent electromagnetic energy configurations, and (2) Field Resonance Systems - deep-space propulsion systems which initiate extreme but localized changes in the nonlinear coordinate transformation properties of space-time ("hyperspace jumps"). Preliminary analyses of astrophysical systems support a new theoretical model which describes the space-time/field interactions utilized by these "propulsion" systems.[...]In less than 10 years, we landed men on the Moon; in less then 10 years, we can achieve a breakthrough in field-dependent propulsion.

Q: Well, then I said: If the varieties of waves of the EM spectrum are unstable
gravity waves, then they could be added together which could arrive at some
total factor of electromagnetism, which then, if reversed, would express the
existence of gravity?
A: On the right track, or "rail" as in "rail-gun."
Q: Well, I can't go any further with that because I know nothing about
rail-guns, not even what they are.

Now, let me read this text: "I have recently come into possession of a paper on
magneto-gravitics and field resonance systems, presented by A.C. Holt from NASA
Johnson Space Center to the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics'
16th Joint Propulsion Conference, June 30-July 2, 1980. Holt presents a project
using an already existing system known as the Coherent Field and Energy
Resonance System (CoFERS) [probably located at Los Alamos Labs' High Magnetic
Field Research Laboratory]. CoFERS utilizes a toroidal-shaped energy guide with
mega gauss magnetic field sources located along radius vectors equally spaced
around the toroid. CoFERS is shaped like a thick flying disc. Holt goes on to
say: "By converying an object's normal space-time energy pattern to an energy
pattern which differs substantially from the normal pattern, the gravitational
forces acting on the object are changed. The object's new pattern interacts with
the surrounding space-time and virtual energy patterns, such that the
interactive forces are substantially altered. The alteration of the
characteristics of the continuous field of force results in the apparent motion
of the object *through space-time*." [...] "Since the gravitational forces
acting on the propulsion system can be quickly altered to achieve the desired
motion, the *spacecraft* can make right-angle turns at very-high velocities
without adversely affecting the crew or system elements. The effective
gravitational field the *spacecraft/ aircraft* experiences can be nearly
simultaneously reoriented at a 90-degree angle, resulting in a smooth continuous
motion as far as the occupants are concerned." [ ... ] "The gravimagnetic system
is perhaps best suited for use in and around ... a large mass such as the
Earth." "While the gravimagnetic system is likely to be the first
field-dependent propulsion system developed, the field resonance system will
**bring stellar and galactic travel out of the realm of science fiction**. The
field resonance system artificially generates an energy pattern which precisely
matches or resonates with a virtual pattern associated with a distent space-time
point. According to the model, if a fundamental or precise resonance is
established, (using hydro magnetic wave fine- tuning techniques), the spacecraft
will be very strongly and equally repelled by surrounding virtual patterns. At
the same time, through the virtual many-dimensional structure of space-time, a
very strong attraction with the virtual pattern of a distant space-time point
will exist. ... this combination of very strong forces will result in the
translocation of the spacecraft from its initial position through the
many-dimensional virtual structure to the distant space-time point. [ ... ] "A
space-time 'jump' already appears to be supported by astrophysical research."

Having read this text, my thought is that it is very similar to what I was
talking about earlier today, and which was explicated by Karl von Eckertshausen
in regards to the 'violin allegory.' That is, that a violin string tuned to a
particular pitch, if plucked, will cause the identical string on another violin
across the room tuned to the same pitch to sound also. However, it seems that
what they are doing here is setting up a 'pitch' in this object which actually
exists somewhere else. And, by creating this resonance, it 'becomes' or
disappears from this point in space/time where its resonance is no longer
appropriate, and reappears at the point in space/time where the 'tuned
resonance' actually exists. It is both virtual and real. Is this text on the
right track, and am I understanding it correctly?
A: Propulsion system for 3rd and 4th density Alien spacecraft.
Q: That is the propulsion system?
A: Very close, yes.
Q: Is my understanding close to correct?
A: Well, that is a clever anecdotal parallel as it matches conceptually, which
is really the point, isn't it?
Q: The point? Are you saying that the anecdote is more to the point
than what this paper is saying?
A: In terms of consciousness, which is why everything exists ultimately, and
with gravity as the "glue" that holds all on physical
and ethereal planes together!
Q: Is the object to 'dematerialize' or is the object to transpose something that
is material to some other point in space/time? I
mean, when you collapse the gravity wave, is it necessarily that the object or
person 'dematerializes' or 'disappears' from this point...
A: Break the veil of "time," and dematerialization is no longer necessary,
because one enters the realm of pure consciousness,
where the illusion of physicality serves no longer, a purpose.
Q: Is it an issue for one to be able to retain internal coherence if one is no
longer in a physical state?
A: Internal coherence can only be guaranteed in a purely non-physical "state."
And this state is really only a state of mind, anyway!!
Q: If one were to travel in this manner, would it not be a temptation to not
return to the physical reality?
A: If one goes bowling, is it a temptation to not return to the parking lot?
Q: I guess if your only choice was the parking lot, I guess you would want to
stay, but if going to the parking lot meant getting in your car
and going home, then no. Now, glue. The thing is that one has to 'unglue'
oneself? Is that the point?
A: No.
Q: Well, if gravity is what holds material and ethereal existence together, and
you are going from material into ethereal states...
A: By your definition, you would be unglued, since you perceive the physical,
and thus are not completely stuck.
Q: So, you still have the ability to perceive the physical reality and the
physical world when you are traveling this way, therefore you are
not completely 'stuck.' However, we have talked about people who do get
completely 'stuck,' is this correct?
A: Close.

Sunset Physics

We’ve all seen the Sun setting and the twilight slowly arriving. It’s a sight to behold! Over many centuries, sunsets have inspired poets, writers, painters, and “beauty-sensitive” average citizens.

newport-beach-at-sunset.jpg

[ a beautiful sunset at Newport Beach, Orange County, California - Photo courtesy of Mike Liebner from Creative Power ]

At a very tender age, I started to come up with rather deeps questions such as “why is the sky blue?”, which led me to think of another question: “why does the sky look reddish at sunset?”. I assume that the reader has wondered about the very same issues at some point of his/her life. We know that the sky is blue during the day, and that it gets reddish at sunset. Those are unquestionable facts. But why is that so? What are the underlying physical principles that explain this phenomenon?

Allow me to dwell on this…

The Sun emits light and other electromagnetic (EM) radiation, such as infrared (IR), ultra-violet (UV), X-rays, among other types of radiation. The Human eye can “see” only in a very narrow wavelength band of the EM spectrum, ranging from about 400 to about 700 nanometers. The fact that Humans can only “see” in this narrow wavelength band is, in a way, a coincidence. It just happened to be so. Other animals can “see” in different wavelength bands of the EM spectrum: night predators, for instance, can often “see” in the infrared (IR) range, which means that Nature equipped them with night-vision goggles, so to speak!

The EM radiation emitted by the Sun travels undisturbed through the void of outer space for millions and millions of miles, until it reaches the Earth’s atmosphere and starts interacting with the molecules that constitute the atmosphere (such as oxygen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, etc). UV light and lower wavelength (higher frequency) radiation carry enough energy to ionize the molecules in the outer layers of the atmosphere. This causes energy to be transfered from the EM field to the medium with which the radiation is interacting. Visible light does not carry enough energy to ionize the atmosphere’s molecules, and thus it “passes through” the atmosphere pretty much undisturbed, transferring relatively little energy to the medium. This means that most visible light gets to the innermost layers of the atmosphere (close to the Earth’s surface), while higher energy radiation is transferred to the medium (i.e., absorbed) in the outer layers of the atmosphere. Fortunately, the Earth’s atmosphere blocks most of the high-energy ionizing radiation which is known to cause cancer.

However, not all visible radiation propagates the same way through the atmosphere! Due to a physical phenomena called Rayleigh Scattering, we have that the light scattering is proportional to \lambda^{-4}, where \lambda is the radiation’s wavelenght. Blue light has a lower wavelength (higher frequency) than red light, the ratio between the two wavelengths being approximately 1.75. This means that blue light is scattered 1.75^4 \approx 10 times more intensely than red light.

Imagine that you are looking at the Sun, and let us think of the light that gets to our eyes, and the light that is scattered to the whole sky. Let us also assume that the Sun emits the same power of red and blue light. Then, we have that red light will get to your eyes (though it suffers scattering), and the Sun will look more reddish than blue. Ok, but where’s the blue light!?

The blue light is everywhere in the sky! :-)

Given that blue light is scattered approximately 10 times more intensely than red light, the sky will be 10 times more blue than red (so to speak)! Note that if there were no atmosphere, the sky would look as black as outer space. When we look at the sky, what we see is blue light being scattered all around, ando this is possible only because there are molecules in the air which emit blue light. Photons are thus “random walking” all over the sky, jumping from atom to atom, causing the atoms’ electrons to jump to excited states, and then decaying back to the ground state. Due to Rayleight Scattering, there are many more “blue photons” in the sky than “red photons”. As a result, the sky is blue! It’s not magic, it’s Physics…

OK, this sounds great! But what about the sunset!? Why does the sky look reddish at sunset?

That is a geometric phenomenon! When the Sun is at the zenith, the EM radiation emitted by the Sun will have to travel through approximately h = 80 Km of atmosphere. However, at sunset, the Sun is close to the horizon and light will have to travel through a much greater distance! Let \theta be the angle of the sun, measured from the zenith, then when the Sun is at the zenith, we have \theta = 0, and when the Sun is at the horizon, we have \theta = \pi / 2. When the Sun is not at the zenith, it will have to travel a distance d = h \sec(\theta), where \sec(\theta) = 1 / \cos(\theta) > 1, \forall \theta \in (0, \pi/2].

Given that the light will have will have to travel a much higher distance when the Sun is closer to the horizon, then the Rayleigh Scattering will also be much higher, and the red light will now be much more scattered to the sky. Thus, the sky will look reddish. Given that there will be less blue light in the spot where we see the Sun, the Sun will also look reddish. At noon, there will be much more blue light in the spot where the Sun is, and thus the Sun will look whiter.