Admin
Administrator
 Din: Vechime
Inregistrat: acum 18 ani
Postari: 10086
|
|
God, Matter and Energy
A: Your question was badly formulated. You should first investigate the origin of matter and energy, as both are expressions of something else which you see and feel, but are not aware
Q: Are you referring to the ether?
A: No, I am certainly not referring to the ether. Ether only exists around planets for a certain distance, and is nothing more than a type of matter. The etheric layers are effects, not causes. Lacking the basic terms of reference, it is difficult for me to be explicit. What I mean to say is that I lack the basic term of reference because you reason in a different way. I do not know the appropriate terminology in your language.
Q: What particular terms are you referring to? Mathematical ones?
A: No, theological ones rather than mathematical.
Q: What have matter and energy to do with theology?
A: Man can only truly understand the phenomena of Nature when he understands the nature of God.
Q: Well, I could never believe in the existence of God, for the very good reason that I could not see what part He had to play in the Universe. If He existed, and reigned eternally, He should play the leading role. But to me there never appeared to be any arbitrary principle capable of influencing the general order of things, that could be considered to be above everything that is; because matter, energy and the movement- of bodies, in fact everything, seems to resolve itself into specific laws, mostly of a mechanical order. It is up to you to tell me what He is, what is His nature, what He is composed of, what are His attributes, how He acts and what influence He has on created things; and also to prove to me that He is not a mere decorative figure. I do not wish to be shown a God subject to mechanical laws, in whom I could never believe, but a supreme God who is above any law. If He is subordinate to the law, that which subordinates Him is superior, and if laws operate on Him, then the divine attributes belong to the laws, and God becomes a mere subject. I am also subject to law, but I am not God.
A: There is a certain truth in your scepticism. I would also not be able to believe in a God who is subject to anything or to the natural order. Law is nothing more than a convention and presupposes a legislator. The Creator is above the thing created, so He is the judge who judges the law. He is the lawgiving principle whenever lawgiving becomes necessary for the good of creation, and for the maintenance of order. But creation itself is above the law, because legal statutes are only made for its protection. It is useful for the protection of created beings, but if instead of protecting them, it becomes oppressive, the legislator has the power to modi4r it according to his discretion. God judges, and is not judged on any question.
I would like to give you my views on God, giving you the simplest possible definition. God is an isotropic' line parallel to itself and vibrating on itself at right angles. He is like a system of axes in which the point of intersection of the lines is (isotropic: That which exhibits equal physical actions in all directions. Light is a case in point.) everywhere at the same time. Then He is many, because dimensions are contained within Him, 'when these are per-mutated-to use a terrestrial definition-" n" equals infinity. Please remember that this is an attempt to explain, in human language, the unexplainable. On the basis of this premise we can now go further and see how matter and energy were created.
Q: Did you say created?
A: I mean created because there was a time when they did not exist. If they had existed for all eternity they would have coexisted with God and the Father could not have been the Creator of something which was as eternal as He. God acted as a transformer and created them. The "how's is what we shall study.
Your attention must have been drawn to an interesting peculiarity of electricity: if we turn a rotor in a magnetic field formed by a magnet, we immediately get a flow of electrons which move along the surface of the conductor. I myself used to wonder where these electrons came from. They must have come from somewhere, but where?
They do not come from anywhere, they were generated within the magnetic field. How? They are the result of a deformation brought about within the magnetic field by the movement of the rotor.
Supposing we take this generator and enclose it in an airtight vessel, we still get a flow of electrons as soon as we start the rotor turning, and if we had a pressure gauge inside the vessel we would see that in spite of the large current flowing between the two conductors, the atmospheric pressure would remain the same. This being the case, we can define the electron as deformed magnetic space, propagated in wave form.
An eloquent proof that the electron is a wave form and not a particle is obtained by refracting it through a spectrum.
There is an experiment that Earth scientists have done to prove this: a gamma ray (a gamma ray is of electro-magnetic origin), when passing close to a nucleus, pulls an electron away with it. It is true that the moment of inertia of the gamma ray is changed. To explain this phenomenon they devised the rather thin hypothesis that the ray's acceleration was transformed into energy, but it is absurd to believe that the moment of inertia of a vector in space could be transformed into energy.
There is a relationship between energy and the force that imparts acceleration to a body, but only a certain relationship. Water activates a turbine, but the gravitational force which activated the water could never be turned into electrical energy.
All that happened then was that the rotor moved inside the generator and caused a deformation of the magnetic space. The deformation that the points M' of the mass M of the rotor brought about in the magnetic field corresponds to the force of gravity in the water in a turbine.
If it is absurd to say that a vector moment creates energy, it would be even worse to say that this moment generates matter, in other words that an electron is a particle. The only rational explanation is that a gamma ray, being of electromagnetic origin, deformed itself for an instant near the nucleus and from this deformation an electron was created which must therefore be a charge of wave form.
Q: But if the gamma ray, on being deformed, does create electrical energy, it must have come out of something, whose mass in turn must have been diminished.
A: The gamma ray lost nothing other than acceleration. That is to say it lost a certain proportion of its frequency or its wave compression. Thus it could be said that if one put obstacles consisting of nuclei in its path, we could create as many electrons as its frequency allowed. As it happens, this system is used to a great extent by us in order to obtain energy more about this later. In any case the alteration was brought about in the space occupied by it at that moment.
Q: Your reasoning is very interesting. If one concedes that an electron is a wave form, how can one reconcile this with the structure of an atom? How can waves rotate round a nucleus?
A: If waves cannot rotate round a nucleus, particles certainly cannot.(5)
The laws of physics are immutable. The first law of thermodynamics is called the Mechanical Equivalent of Heat.(6)
A given quantity of energy is required for a body to carry out a given amount of work. When this is exhausted, the mechanical movement of the body ceases.
However much energy an electron may have, it must be a limited amount of energy.
This being the case, an electron revolving round a nucleus would use up this energy in a short time. However, this does not happen as the movement and stability of an electron in its orbit is dependent neither on time nor thermodynamics.
Let us go further. If an electron were a particle, its high speed would make it fly off at a tangent from the atom owing to its centrifugal force.
We must also bear in mind that a body, however much energy of its own it may have, does not move unless an exterior force sets it in motion. If one charges a sphere with a considerable amount of energy, it still does not move. Nevertheless if a force of i gr. is applied to it, a corresponding impulse is transferred to the sphere.
All the intrinsic energy of an electron, supposing an electron to be a particle, would be of no use to it unless there were an exterior force to impart acceleration to its mass.
As a wave form(7) however, an electron perpetuates its vibration within a field without losing its characteristic wave structure. These wave structures have the property of moving through a field, or remaining stationary within it. An electron is a stationary wave form within an atom.(8)
Even Heisenberg felt that he could not account for all the electronic movements in an atom. He saw that this minute electron seemed to be ubiquitous, appearing at all points in an orbit at the same instant. Being unable to locate the point in space where it was to be found at any given time, since it appeared at all points, he developed his "Uncertainty Principle"(8)
__________________________________________________________________________________________
(*5) The scholar Antonio J. B. de Miranda, in his work The Theory of Photons (page 208), states that if an electron were an homogeneous particle its speed of revolution around the nucleus would be 268 times that of light, which science admits is impossible. And if we were to consider an electron as a cylindrical particle, we would arrive at a speed 100 times that of light, On page 15 of the same work the author says "the problems of the dimensions of the quantum have puzzled physicists. Transverse measurements taken by producing bands of interference from parallel slits indicate that a quantum has a width of about 6 metres; longitudinal measurements taken by producing interference by echelons down to a microns indicate that the wavelength of a quantum is in the order of I metre.
(*6) The Mechanical Equivalent of Heat is the number of kilogramme/ metres required to produce a calorie. Thus, a caloric is the amount of energy obtained from a body of one kilogramme falling through 427 metres.
(*7) If photographic plates are bombarded by parallel streams of electrons, these defractive images are produced. They appear as concentric rings. which shows that the electron is a wave form.
(*8)If the electron is a wave form having its origin in space, the whole concept of modern science would fall to the ground. It would contradict the principal argument of Planck's theory which asserts that an electron is a particle whose energy is stepped up in "quantic jumps.
It would also lead to the collapse of our conception of light and all the mechanics of relativity.
(*9)The "Uncertainty Principle" exploded the scientific theory of determinism. This showed that Nature, in isolated cases, acted in a completely arbitrary manner and did not conform to, and appeared to be unaware of, any mathematical laws. Later, Dirac showed that the concept of the Universe as a collection of measurable phenomena of constant and definite form was possibly correct. He based this theory on the fact that these arbitrary phenomena in the U eventually gave rise to a definite pattern. This was also the death of the laws of cause and effect because it was not possible to conceive of identical effects originating from different causes.
The physicists reasoned that if the basic phenomena are arbitrary that the
force which gives rise to these must also be arbitrary.
That force must therefore possess freedom of action in the widest sense of the word, and act as it pleases apparently purposely unaware of the precision required by science, in spite of the fact it showed this desired precision when the secondary effects which make up the visible Universe were created from the primary phenomena.
In fact it appeared to the physicists that behind the laws of physical phenomena there was an Intelligence with well-defined aims, infallibly arriving at the same result using different means to do so every time. Thus we reached a point where we could state that the principal cause of phenomena is an Intelligence, and that these phenomena which we believe to be causes are nothing more than effects, or in other words, accidents appertaining to a substance which in its entirety gives rise to the visible Universe.
(*10) orbits K-L-M are those in which electrons are believed to revolve round a nucleus.
"In reality the action of short radio waves on television brings about various effects, e.g. the transformation of positive into negative; the superimposition of extraneous images; multi-colour effect in the form of bands; outside interference; the reception of distant foreign stations; and the appearance of unknown human forms. These phenomena only occur when ultra short waves and television sets with anti-magnetic circuits are used.
______________________________________________________________________________________
Thus the so-called orbits K-L-M'0 are nothing but stationary electrical waves in the field of the atom, each having its particular wave structure and frequency. It is known that waves of varying length do not interfere with one another as is shown by radio, even though 'they occupy the same area of space. In this peculiarity of an electron, there is a vast field waiting to be opened up for the benefit of man in almost all branches of knowledge. As an electron has a variable wave form, its characteristics are in consequence virtually unlimited.
If, for example, you connect up your television and set up interference by means of short radio waves, you will see how this inverts the image. If still shorter waves are used, even more interesting phenomena occurs, Thus, if it is possible to deform the sweep of electrons which form the television picture, to completely inverse their characteristics, making white appear as black and black appear as white, then it is evident that such an effect could never be produced by a particle."
If we do not regard an electron as a wave form, there is no explanation for molecular cohesion.
Q: There is, however, something that is not clear to me. You say a body or particle cannot move indefinitely through space without losing its energy. On the other hand you say that all bodies require a force to impart acceleration to them. Using Newton's laws of physics that all bodies can be considered points in space, and taking for the moment the Earth as a simple particle, we get two movements which are contrary to your theory: the first is the rotation of the Earth, and the second is our planet's revolution in orbit.
A: Quite. The case of the Earth is quite different and quite simple. The analogy that physicists wish to see between movements of stars and planets and the movement within the atom is false. In the atom we have stationary waves in a state of permanent vibration; Earth is a body impelled by constant force. Even if Earth had no energy of its own, it would still move through space.
This phenomenon is the same as that which occurs in a radiometer. In this apparatus the blades are subject to a potential difference, the black sides absorb sunlight, and begin to rotate around their axis. The intensity of the movement depends upon the intensity of the sunlight that the black faces are able to retain (see Fig. I).
Earth also, having one hemisphere in sunlight and the other in darkness, is subject to a difference of potential or, more specifically, a binary potential difference, and turns about its axis. It should be noted that in the radiometer the atmospheric pressure inside the bulb needs to be low, otherwise the blades will not rotate. Earth also, in the upper layers of its atmosphere, has this low pressure, extending almost to a vacuum. It was a good thing you mentioned the rotation of the Earth, because later when we talk about its movement in orbit, this knowledge will be invaluable to us.
So, to continue the explanation of how rotation arises, I can tell you that this phenomenon will be one of the difficulties which will face you when you come to make interplanetary voyages-that is if, 'with the way things are going in the world, you get as far as that.
FIG I RADIOMETER.
This little apparatus gives an idea of the movement of the Earth. The vanes are painted black on one side and white on the other. Solar energy is absorbed by the black faces, which gives rise to a difference of potential and causes the vanes to rotate on their axis.
(*12) Airmen who make parachute descents from a great height get into violent spins and are only able to control this movement when they reach the denser layers of the atmosphere.
There is, however, quite a simple solution to this problem. if a body rises to a certain height above the Earth, thus reducing the atmospheric pressure on it, the body at once begins to rotate?' This is due to one side of the body receiving more light and heat than the other. The remedy lies in balancing out the difference and supplying light and heat to the colder side.
From this you can see that the phenomena of Nature are simple, all resolving themselves into readily understandable laws which need very little analysis or understanding. This is what we are trying to prove in the question of electrons.
Having satisfied ourselves on this point, we will leave the explanation of the revolution of the Earth in orbit round the Sun until later, so as to keep to the point. We will now see how things are created in the Universe out of nothing.
We said that God, being an isotropic line, can be regarded as a system of axes, from which an infinite number of lines go out in all directions. As the centre of this axis is everywhere, we can regard the whole Universe as its centre.
The fact that the lines of force are consequently unable to escape from the ubiquitous centre and are always encompassed by the Being of God, makes Him an Immanent figure.
Thus, if the lines cannot move out from the Being of God, they can only move within it. But as there is no such thing as interior or exterior, the whole Universe being a centre of lines of force, all the lines resulting from the isotropism of God will be found to be oscillating on one point.
We may therefore call the Universe a point of infinite osci1lation.~~ We have already shown that superimposition of lines of force on a certain point constitutes a deformation of space.
If this definition of the Universe is correct, God is an oscillating charge superimposed on an infinite point, constantly causing a deformation of space, continually exerting its influence on the un manifest, and automatically creating energy, and in consequence, matter. If God did not exist, nothing whatsoever would exist.
I could continue this proof up to a high level, but people not used to these heights might suffer from dizziness. Let us be satisfied with this for the moment.
(*13) Science made a great step forward when Newton regarded all bodies
mere points. Thus all the points M' of a body were taken as a single
were to regard universes as points instead of scattered masses,
we might get somewhere.
This continual creation of energy in the Universe gives rise to an internal pressure in the nebulae which can be seen in the phenomenon known as "the flight of the nebulae."14 As a result of this internal pressure they move away from one another.
You may raise the objection that this pressure is also applied in the direction of flight so that the internal pressure coupled with the external one would make them stable and they would not move apart, which would cause their mass to condense. My answer to this would be that energy created outside a galaxy tends to be drawn into the galaxy, condensing itself into material form. Thus we have an internal pressure coupled with an external decompression.
The flight of the nebulae prevents condensation taking place for three reasons:
(i) This movement causes the interior pressure to disappear.
The flight of the nebulae is a well-known phenomenon, where they appear to fly away from each other, moving out from a hypothetical centre. Various theories have been put forward. An interesting one is one suggesting that this flight might he a pure periodic movement, and that the nebulae will later return to the point of departure. This might be described as a sistolic and diastolic movement of the Universe. The most generally accepted theory is, however, that of Father LeMaitre who thought that the Universe, many millions of years ago, was an immense radioactive atom which, at a certain point, became completely disintegrated, the nebulae being fragments of this original atom. His theory, however, brought serious difficulties in its wake for if we all originate from one single "atom," all bodies in Nature should be of the same age. However, it is known that things did not happen that way, celestial bodies are of different ages. On the other hand, there could have been no disintegration if external factors had not upset the internal movement. If such external factors had indeed existed, the "radioactive atom" would not have been the only thing in existence and the Universe could thus not have begun in this manner.
It is strange that a priest should be able to conceive of a system so completely different from that revealed by the Church, a system which was born of an accident in Nature and appears to leave out the question of an Intelligence acting as a superior power directing all activity.
However, nebulae appear to maintain an acceleration caused by an internal pressure within the Universe.
(2) As the nebulae move apart, that space which had been transformed into matter endeavours to return to its former state of primordial space in accordance with the law of rotation of masses in a magnetic field. This reconstitutes the energy that had been used for condensation of the matter, turning it into light, whose wave energy goes on decreasing until the moment of entropy is reached. This is what takes place on the Sun. Leaving aside the reaction that they bring about on the planets, the Sun's discharges into space are, in a sense, matter returning to its original state of primordial space.
(3) Light repels magnetic fields. Light from a myriad of suns in the various galaxies produces a very great force of repulsion on all the nebulae, and under this pressure they move away from one another. We shall have more to say about this force of repulsion later.
In the first instance God supplied the power that brings about the deformation of space and the Sun, by an opposite process, turns it back into energy, thus re-establishing the balance. Everything comes from God and everything returns to Him.
That is why neither matter nor energy exist, but only deformed space, which is called matter, and what you call energy is nothing more than a phenomenon of transition between primordial space and deformed space.
Q: I assure you, my friend, that we have no means of refitting your theory, and your explanation fascinates me. However, God is spirit. If He can create matter, can it be said that all spirits can deform space and create also.
A: Not all of them. Only the Creator, whose nature is different. Spirits are created, and therefore in some degree manifest, but God is the Unmanifest. We are spirits but not of the nature of God. The Father is the generator of energy, and the spirits are merely a form of energy, albeit a different form to that found in matter.
A spirit can create to a certain extent, just as we ourselves can, within limits, deform space,create and destroy. But there are limits to the things we can create. No spirit can create another spirit, for example. That would be beyond its power, but nothing is beyond the power of God. Not only can He create matter, energy and spirit, as He did, but He also created others who have a nature akin to His own. These are His Sons, let us give homage to them; they are of a similar nature to Him, and are sources of life and have the power to deform space.
Life does not belong to us, and if we were to dissociate ourselves from God, we would die spiritually. But these other beings who are of a similar nature to the Father constitute with Him a single unit, in themselves eternal.
Q: You said you were going to talk about the movement of the Earth in orbit. I would like to hear about that.
A: The Earth's movement through space is partly a result of its rotation. Note, however, that I said partly, because in order to explain it fully there is one other thing in connection with the Sun that needs to be studied: Terrestrial science states that the Sun is the centre of the planetary system, which is not the case. The Milky Way is a vast magnetic field, but a magnetic field contains within itself secondary fields. Earth, for example, is a magnetic field, within a field of our system, which in turn is a field within the Milky Way. Earth with its poles also has its secondary fields, which the people of Earth have unfortunately not yet discovered.(*15)
(15) Many scientists already suspect that there may be other magnetic centres on Earth, independent of other know poles. Thee Dutch have put a lot of research into this question.
Herschel and Newton mathematically proved the existence of our magnetic field, within which the Sun and the planets move, when they discovered that the point of equilibrium of the solar system lay at a distance from the Sun equal to three times its diameter, due to the proportion of 1 to 700 in the relative mass of the planets to that of the Sun. It is round this point of equilibrium that the Sun moves.
It is wrong to say that matter attracts matter in the direct ratio of mass and in the inverse of the square of distance. Matter having undergone atomic interaction has no influence on other matter at a distance. However, magnetic fields attract or repel one another, and matter can be attracted by a magnetic field. A force of attraction is exerted on the Earth by this magnetic point of equilibrium of our system, which we may call "point zero."
While being attracted by this point. Earth is being repelled by the light from the Sun; its orbit round the Sun represents the balance between these two actions of attraction and repulsion.17
Q: Repelled by the light of the Sun?
A: Yes, repelled. The same force of repulsion that makes nebulae fly apart affects Earth and the rest of the planets. Has the weight of light not been measured? What is it but a pressure constantly exerted upon matter? If the Sun exerted attraction its light would not have weight, but a contrary effect.(18)
I told you that light is deformed space turning itself back '
(16) According to science this point is where the equilibrium of the masses
is to be found, due to the movement of the planets around space. The Sun appears to revolve round this point. Given the form of the terrestrial orbit, if the Sun made a revolution round this point of equilibrium its movement should also take 365 days, equal to that of Earth.
(17) Newton showed that if Earth were to be only very slightly attracted, its orbital movement would become spiral and it would finish by colliding with the Sun. However, as yet it is difficult to calculate the action of these forces because we have not had, until the present time, a satisfactory mathematical solution to the problem of the three bodies.
(18) The weight of light is equal to 410 of atmospheric pressure per square mile. If the captain of the flying saucer is correct, this pressure of light will be greater on the upper atmosphere. As long ago as 1873 Maxwell showed that radiation exerts a pressure. Lebedev and Nichols discovered the same thing.
I told you that light is deformed space turning itself back into primordial space. The meeting of these two conditions of space causes quite a marked pressure (see Fig. 2)
Now, a body in space can only be in a state of equilibrium if two contrary forces meet to support it. If there were only a force of attraction without a corresponding one of repulsion, the planet would move towards the point of attraction.19
I have already shown you that if the repulsion were caused solely by centrifugal force, the planet would slowly spiral in, towards the source of attraction.
Earthly mathematics themselves confirm this. Without the repulsive force of the Sun, there would, however, be no circular movement. There would be neither axial rotation nor orbital revolution. A body impelled in one direction only does not move in another direction.
How could Earth move in orbit in a different direction to this repulsive force? Surely a thrust from one direction cannot give rise to another at right angles to itself?
In order to understand the phenomenon of revolution we must regard the true diameter of the planet not as that of its solid mass, but as the sum of its solid and gaseous parts.
The true diameter can be obtained from the following formula:
Terrestrial radius x speed of revolution
--------------------------------
Speed of rotation of the globe (= 407,200 km.).
Your planet rotates on its axis at 1,660 km. per hour, and revolves in its orbit at 1o6,ooo km. per hour. This gives a value of 407,200 km. for the radius of the total gaseous envelope. If we subtract from this figure the radius of the Earth (6,378 km.) we see that the terrestrial ether extends 400,822 km. beyond the solid surface of the planet (see Fig. 3).
The Moon, then, lies within the fringes of the etheric covering, so that the various phenomena connected with it take place within this covering.
The etheric covering acts as a fulcrum by virtue of which
(*19) in mathematics a body in space only has equilibrium when two contrary forces act upon it, whose result equals zero.
Fig. 2. FORCES WHICH MAINTAIN EARTH IN SPACE.
Earth is simultaneously attracted by the magnetic centre of the system and repelled by the light of the Sun. According to the captain of the flying saucer, this light repels the magnetic field of Earth in the same way as a ray of light from a star is repelled and so deflected on approaching the magnetic centre of our system.
The movement of the Earth in orbit is the result of its speed of rotation and the extent of its etheric covering, which acts as a supporting medium allowing it to revolve under the action of the two simultaneously opposing forces.
Its orbit round the magnetic centre is not eccentric because the Sun moves round the centre in the same time that the Earth takes to move round the Sun. Thus the orbits of the planets are affected whenever the come into conjunction with or p ass through opposition to the Sun and the magnetic centre, causing both their speed of rotation and velocity in orbit to increase or decrease.
The greater deflection of light near the poles causes a drop intemperatur4 whereas at the Equator a strong concentration of light gives more heat. The elliptical orbits of the planets are yet another consequence of the interaction
of the two forces. If the magnetic centre lies between a planet and the Sun, the force of attraction is predominant and the planet is drawn in. However, if the Sun is between the planet and the centre, the force of repulsion predominates and the planet moves out, its path disturbed. As the position of the Sun changes in relation to the "point zero" centre, each successive aphelion and perihelion of a planet occurs in a different position.
the two opposing forces of attraction and repulsion are able to act upon the Earth.
This gives us 814,400 km. as the effective overall diameter of the planet. The whole moves with an angular velocity, supported by the opposing forces, upon a given plane. It is moved in its orbit just as a turning wheel moves forward over the ground.
We see, then, that the same force which causes rotation, moves the body through space. In the case of Earth, the rotational force is applied to the solid surface at a distance of 6,378 km. from the axis, but the effect of its movement through space occurs at 407,200 km. from the axis, at which point the surface of the etheric covering attains a speed of io6,ooo km. per hour.
Having explained this, we can understand why planets of large volume are situated at a considerable distance from the Sun. By taking note of their distance from the Sun and their volume, we can discover their true density, and this will also give us the magnetic force of its poles. Thus the planet Jupiter is of low density and, having a large diameter, it is more subject to the force of repulsion than that of attraction.(*20) If it were true that matter attracted matter in direct proportion to the mass of the bodies, Jupiter, with a volume 1,330 tunes greater than Earth and 331 times as much mass, should be much closer to the Sun than Earth is.
Once the speed of rotation of a planet and its velocity in orbit are known, we can work out the extent of its gaseous envelope. This cannot generally be observed by telescope.
You will see from the foregoing why celestial bodies move in elliptical orbits. The problem involves the movement of three bodies, and terrestrial mathematics have not yet found any suitable equation to solve this problem involving eighteen unknown factors.
If no suitable solutions have been found to problems involving three bodies, imagine an equation involving the whole solar system with eight, nine or ten bodies, and the number of unknown factors to which this would give rise.
However, there is a solution and it is easy to prove. The problem becomes complicated by the amount of self-luminosity that each planet has.
Q: Self-luminosity? Then the planets have light of their own?
A: Every body in rotation, surrounded by atmosphere, has some light of its own. Earth has what scientists call the " permanent aurora." It is a greenish light, found in the higher
(*20)The density given by science to the various heavenly bodies( is:
Mercury 6.2; Venus 5; Earth 5.5 Mars 3.8; Jupiter 1.36; Saturn 0.07; Uranus 1.3; Neptune 1.2; Pluto unknown. (Based on density of water= 1.)
layers, invisible to the naked eye.(21)" It is the result of discharges from the poles in the upper atmosphere, where hydrogen, sodium and oxygen are to be found. The intensity of this light depends upon the atmospheric composition and on the speed of rotation of each planet. A body rotating in space, being immersed in the magnetic field of the solar system, acts like a dynamo, generating a certain degree of electricity. The intensity of its poles depends upon the rotation of its mass. In this case we take the diameter, the mass, the distance between the poles, and the atmospheric composition of the planet, and make the equation.
These equated elements will give us the intensity of the discharge and in consequence the amount of self-generated light, which in turn modifies the actual movements of rotation and revolution in orbit. Therefore, rotation is the result of the distance of the planet from the Sun, the overall diameter it presents to the Sun, its mass and the satellites which throw their light on its surface; less its own self generated light.
This also includes the Aurora Borealis, the explanation of which has given so much trouble to your scientists. Its intensity is due to the proximity of the magnetic and geographical poles.
Q: Is there any concrete proof that light repels matter?
A: There are several proofs. For example:
(1) A comet approaching the Sun becomes flattened.
(2) Light is deflected when it comes into contact with a magnetic field (it is not deflected by mass). An electron, passing through a magnetic field, is also deflected.
(3) The planet Jupiter, when closest to the Sun, is able to exert a pressure upon it which moves it from its position.
(4) Light has weight and gives rise to friction.
(*21)"The permanent aurora is also known by physicists as "air glow." It may be found at a height of 150 km.
(5) Solar light causes barometric pressure.
(6) In aphelion the planets move at slower speeds.
(7) The pressure of sunlight upon Mercury pushes it 23 million km. away from the Sun.
One could quote other proofs, but we will leave these aside as we have not yet discussed other phenomena.
Shortly, people of Earth will have other problems to solve. if up to the present you have been unable to solve problems involving three bodies, there will soon be a greater difficulty with the entry into our system of another Sun. There will then be four bodies instead of three, that is to say, the Earth, the two Suns and the magnetic centre.
Q: I do not understand you. What is this other Sun that will form part of our system?
A: That is what I want to explain to you. Another Sun will soon enter our solar system, and we shall be lucky enough to have a system of binary Suns. This is, in effect, one of the reasons, apart from conveying greetings to you, why this meeting is taking place; the other is to warm you of the dangers to which you are exposed with the advent of the atomic age.
Q: Yes, I would like to know what dangers we are laying ourselves open to with the advent of the atomic age, but first I would like to hear more about this new Sun.
A: It is a body of monstrous proportions which will shortly become visible in the direction of Cancer. It will not, however, emit any light as the light of a Sun only becomes intense when it enters into a secondary magnetic field such as our solar system. It begins to rotate on entering such a field. It deforms space around itself and generates currents which give rise to its brilliance, if it were luminous beforehand, its light would set up a force of repulsion, and it would be deflected from its path. With no luminosity it becomes subject to the pressure of our Sun, but its own momentum will ensure that it enters our system.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Note from the web master
It is interesting to note as of may 1999 a comet matching this description has been observed by an Australian amateur astronomer's at a star party and is believed not behaving in a way a normal comet should.
It is rumoured the military are a little nervous about this object and newspaper coverage at this time August 1999 has been lacking.
More detials can be read in The Australian New times magazine Nexus July August 1999 volume 6 number 5 or check out the following website
Photos of this object are of a greeny blue in colour at the moment.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
It will first be seen as a reddish light, later turning to blue. After reaching the area of the large planetary bodies, it will encounter the repulsive force of the Sun, but in its rear it will then have the weight of large bodies, also imparting a force of repulsion to it in the opposite direction. The force of repulsion of the planets behind it, the light it gives off and its great mass will cause the present Sun to move further away from the magnetic centre of our system. Then the two Suns will settle down in their new orbits, the one of greater mass and lesser light being nearer the centre 22 (see Fig. 4).
Two Suns in the solar system will create difficult problems. The orbits of all the planets will be changed. Mercury will move into the area between the present orbits of Venus and the Earth. Venus will move out to a position between the present orbit of the Earth and Mars. The Earth will feel the effect before the new Sun settles down in its definitive orbit. As the luminosity of this body increases, the pressure of this light will cause the Moon to move out of its orbit, and it will settle in a position that will turn it into a planet. With this displacement it will take with it part of the etheric mass of the Earth, which will impart to it a stabilised movement. The Earth, in turn, under the pressure of the twin Suns, will move out into the area now occupied by the planetoids. In short, there will be a general displacement of all the bodies belonging to 'our system. Pluto will be ejected from the system, and will wander though space until it finds some new haven.
(*22) And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Lord God, that I will cause the sun to go down at noon and I will darken the Earth in the clear day (Amos 8: ix).
FIG. 4. A Binary System.
The entry of a new Sun into our system would throw the Earth out into an orbit between Mars and Jupiter now occupied by the planetoids. All the planetary orbits will be altered. There will be turmoil1 but this will be bearable as the repulsive force of the new Sun will speedily restore order. When the new Sun reaches it maximum luminosity the Earth will already be in its appointed place in the system. There will certainly be a change in the fauna, but life will continue, probably under better conditions than before.
The entry of this new body into the system was predicted by Nostradamus in his famous Centuries, vol II, stanza 4r:
"La grande estoile par sept jours bruslera
Nuee fera deux soleils apparoir."
(The great star will bum or seven days, and cloud will make two Suns appear.)
One of the satellites of Mars will be torn from its present orbit and thrown into space. As it is a relatively dense body, it will be attracted towards the centre of the system rather than repelled outwards. Its trajectory will be such that it will become a satellite of the Earth. Everything depends on its direction of travel when it establishes contact with this planet. If this happens to be against the direction of rotation of the Earth, the shock produced by its contact with the etheric covering of the Earth will smash it to pieces; if it is with the rotation of the Earth, then the satellite will attach itself to the planet.
The Earth itself will not be affected by this impact, as its etheric covering will protect it. According to our calculations, a shower of rocks is all that will reach the surf ace of the planet; principally in the area of Europe and North Africa, Asia Minor, the north of South America and the south of North America. The impact will turn this now splendid Martian satellite into fragments weighing about 50 lb. each, which will lay waste these areas. After that, everything will become normal again and we shall have a new sky in which to travel, and you will have a new Earth.
Q: When will this take place? In the distant future?
A: It will be very soon, towards the end of this century. The Earth will begin its new millennium with a new source of light to illuminate it. Many people will vanish forever from the face of the Earth but a small community, obedient to the laws of God, will remain, and present suffering will cease. There will be peace and abundance, justice and compassion. The unjust souls will get the punishment they deserve, and the just will get their recompense. On this day, many will understand the triumph of the just and he will see why God did not immediately punish the wrongdoers. The Sun which is to come will be called the Sun of Justice. Its appearance in the heavens will be the warming signal of the coming of the One who will shine even more than the Sun itself.
Q: What has the arrival of the flying saucers on Earth to do with the Sun that is to come?
A: We are studying all the effects that its appearance will bring in its wake. If we were permitted, we could, with suitable apparatus, send electromagnetic pulses against it, and prevent its entry into our system by causing it to become incandescent outside our system. However, to prevent its arrival would be tantamount to opposing the will of God and allowing the injustice that eiists here to continue indefinitely. Those with clear consciences and those at peace with their Creator need fear nothing. Let it come.
We came here for purposes of study but also to make a desperate appeal to man to avoid the catastrophe and to live in peace. The Earth is not the centre of the planetary system. as was previously believed, but the centre of evil. If man were to reform himself, it is possible that the Creator would have compassion on him. Avoid war, because man can thereby destroy his planet with his own hands without the intervention of the forces of Nature. It is not difficult to be good; it is sufficient to do no evil. God will do the rest.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
DETAILS OF THE PLANETARY SYSTEM ACCOUDING TO THEORETEICAL DATA
FURNISHED BY THE CAPTAIN OF THE FLYING SAUCUER
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Planets Diameter Period of Speed of Velocity etheric
Rotation Rotation in orbit covering
Miles hr min mph mph miles
Mecury 3025 23 412 107700 392500
Venus 7700 16 31 1465 78750 200500
Earth 7970 23 59 1040 66250 253500
Mars 4160 24 37 530 54000 197250
Jupiter 87390 9 50 28000 29500 10
Saturn 71025 10 2 22000 21800 no atmospheric ether
Uranus 29625 10 50 8560 15300 11530
Neptune 27050 15 10 5435 12225 16750
Pluto 7300 19 57 1230 10660 60500
|
|
