|
Post by LorrB on Apr 8, 2011 12:23:11 GMT 9.5
Sometimes the 4 tassels of the mosaic pavement are linked to the four forces in nature - electromagnetism, gravity, and the strong and weak nuclear forces. But it seems now there might well the suspected fifth force. Tevatron accelerator yields hints of new particle
By Jason Palmer Science and technology reporter, BBC News
"We'd essentially be saying there's a new force of nature being communicated by the particle. We know that there's four forces: electromagnetism, gravity, and the strong and weak nuclear forces. This would be the fifth; every freshman physics class would have to change their textbooks."
www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13000253
Might we not then consider that the pentagram could represent these forces of the natural world? (I have always thought that the fifth point was referring to the Akasha which anchored (?) the other four)
|
|
|
Post by paul on Apr 8, 2011 12:52:28 GMT 9.5
I suggest that neither the strong nor the weak nuclear force can be directly observed. They seem to me to be logical constructs invented to justify the stability of atom and thereby save current theory from disproof.
The electric forces present in the atom are so strong that the electrons should be pulled into the nucleus and the nucleus should fly apart.
The pentagram resonates with fundamental structures in nature - including the five elements.
But why are there five elements and not six or seven?
|
|
|
Post by paul on Apr 8, 2011 12:53:10 GMT 9.5
It is more accurate to link the 4 tassels to the 4 rivers of eden - itself a veiling in allegory
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Apr 8, 2011 13:26:28 GMT 9.5
I kinda viewed the four forces as the four rivers... which tied/held together the physical world as we perceive it to be.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Apr 8, 2011 14:05:10 GMT 9.5
So from where do the rivers come?
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Apr 8, 2011 15:19:29 GMT 9.5
Where does the sun come from?
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Apr 8, 2011 15:21:11 GMT 9.5
I think you are referring to e.din ?
|
|
|
Post by paul on Apr 8, 2011 17:23:19 GMT 9.5
I think you are referring to e.din ? In that case the rivers would rest upon the Earth rather than hold it together
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Apr 10, 2011 10:05:23 GMT 9.5
But the tassels are knotted which indicates to me that they are tying/holding something together.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Apr 10, 2011 12:09:53 GMT 9.5
>the tassels are knotted which indicates to me that they are tying/holding something together.
Tassels are naturally the knotted ends along the sides of carpets. The appearance of tassels on the corners of pavements may indicate something out of the ordinary
|
|
|
Post by fitviavi on May 1, 2011 22:59:23 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by paul on May 2, 2011 6:19:34 GMT 9.5
And here is a Free Gardeners apron with the S&C, 4 Rivers and the Tree of Life This is consistent with my contention that the 4 Rivers are relevant to Masonic symbolism "Eden" is used in the legend to veil an origin that is not terrestrial.
|
|
|
Post by Henka on May 2, 2011 7:38:21 GMT 9.5
"Eden" is used in the legend to veil an origin that is not terrestrial. Only if you buy in to Sitchin, which I do not. I think our origins are quite terrestrial.
|
|
|
Post by paul on May 2, 2011 8:03:36 GMT 9.5
Only if you buy in to Sitchin, which I do not. In the case of Sitchin, he maintains on the basis of Sumerian text that E.din was the name used for this planet. I found the clue to the 4 Rivers in the Mayan tradition. Using that as a basis for direct observation I would suggest that the 4 Rivers of Eden is a veiling of 4 Primal Flows from a Cosmic Centre. I think our origins are quite terrestrial. No doubt you are aware that evolutionist theory suffers with missing links in every proposed evolutionary chain. As far as I know, after 150 years of extensive search not one evolutionary chain has been proven from the 2 million named (so far) species. This may indicate some weakness in the theory. It will be interesting to see if experience with gene modifications shows evidence of previous modifications. The cheetah is an obvious example.
|
|
|
Post by Henka on May 2, 2011 9:33:25 GMT 9.5
Sitchin was not a Sumerian linguistic expert, and those who are have pointed out that his interpretations were off base as far as the language. The Sumerians, and the Babylonian and Akkadians after them, actually left us dictionaries, in which they tell us precisely what their words mean.
I think mankind has been around on this planet quite a bit longer than current science can confirm from the archeological evidence available. Natural disaster (cometary strike) has left gaps in the fossil record and wiped out evidence of previous civilizations.
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on May 2, 2011 9:44:38 GMT 9.5
... how come I was given the word 'sitchin' in a dream? I thought it was just a nonsense word, 'what the heck is a sitchin?'. It took me about 6 weeks to finally google the word and was extremely surprised to find he was an author. Needless to say I read his books. I always follow my dream advice. Some-one out there likes him
|
|
|
Post by Henka on May 2, 2011 9:53:34 GMT 9.5
You likely ran across a reference to him and didn't remember it consciously, and it came out in your dream.
There is absolutely nothing in Sumerian writings that reference a "Planet X." Niburu does not mean what ol' Zack says it does.
|
|
|
Post by Henka on May 2, 2011 9:55:05 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by paul on May 2, 2011 12:09:33 GMT 9.5
Sitchin was not a Sumerian linguistic expert, Actually if you read my posts, Sitchin had nothing to do with what I was discussing. In this case I used direct observation to explore what I had discovered in the Mayan tradition. Perhaps Sitchin is worth his own thread.
|
|
|
Post by paul on May 2, 2011 12:11:48 GMT 9.5
You likely ran across a reference to him and didn't remember it consciously, Is there any evidence for this hypothesis?
|
|