|
Post by John Locke on Mar 5, 2012 16:43:29 GMT 9.5
It has been said by professionals that the state of a person's inner world (or temple) can be observed to some extentt by the state of his outer world. Sometimes it is easier for a stranger to observe the state of our temple. Well said "The commonwealth of learning is not at this time without master-builders, whose mighty designs, in advancing the sciences, will leave lasting monuments to the admiration of posterity: but every one must not hope to be a Boyle or a Sydenham; and in an age that produces such masters as the great Huygenius and the incomparable Mr. Newton, with some others of that strain, it is ambition enough to be employed as an under-labourer in clearing the ground a little, and removing some of the rubbish that lies in the way to knowledge..."
|
|
|
Post by jackjack on Mar 9, 2012 6:19:22 GMT 9.5
But...this is too easy!
The goal of freemasonry isn't just to instill good moral values into people; it's teaching men to make themselves into whatever they want themselves to be. Into a god of sorts, imbued with supernatural power. Why else is the blazing light on the altar of the temple in Freemasonry so important?
The letter G is also associated with this blazing light; we are told it means "God", then "Geometry", then "Gimmel", and then "Gibium" ).
The new questions now are; if the letter G symbolizes God, Geometry, and the Freemason, then what are the implications?
|
|
|
Post by jackjack on Mar 9, 2012 6:27:30 GMT 9.5
A different perspective When I nearly died I went through the tunnel of light all the way to the old gates of heaven. Religions may tell you that is the way it is. Science may tell you that it is brain chemicals going do lally. Who is right - science or conventional wisdom? Now turn this around, science, Einstein proved that E=MC2, everything is energy, old esoteric teachings. Conventional wisdom may say that this is nonsense. You never know what science will prove, if the egos of older scientists (thinking of genes here how the true number took some time to be accepted allegendly due to an aritmetical errror by the chap who found them) and if conventional wisdom will allow it. Bitterness serves only darkness. The problem with E=mc2 is simple; on Planet Earth, this law is true. But in outer space...what does energy become? For example; on earth, the Law of Gravity works. But in outer space...what happens to the Law of Gravity? Logically, it can't just...disappear--can it? I mean, that just wouldn't make any sense would it? It just...wouldn't be logical now would it? The reality? Logical or not, the Law of Gravity practically ceases to exist except for a few planets that have a very heavy gravitational pull. So, the moral of the story? Natural rules and laws that work on earth don't always work in outer space; therefore, does energy operate the same way in outer space that it works on Planet Earth?
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Mar 9, 2012 7:42:38 GMT 9.5
I think you will find that gravity is a result of other things at play... ie the curvature of space. Thus gravity changes depending on the curvature of the area under consideration.
Check out Unified Field Theory. Behind the many laws is one law?
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Mar 9, 2012 12:49:00 GMT 9.5
Jackjack, you may want to dig deeper. Lay observations about physics are clearly shallow. It takes some knowledge to know what you are talking about there. Gravity does not cease to exist in space. Where did you get that notion?
|
|
|
Post by paul on Mar 9, 2012 12:58:13 GMT 9.5
It is perhaps more accurate to say that the measurement of gravity is based on local observations and in the absence of a theory of gravitational transmission, it is difficult to make accurate statements about gravity beyond the solar system.
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Mar 9, 2012 14:46:49 GMT 9.5
Local?
|
|
|
Post by paul on Mar 9, 2012 15:19:31 GMT 9.5
Gravity estimates work reasonably well in the solar system (allowing for multiple misses by moon shots) but not outside the solar system.
To rescue gravity calculations for the galaxy dark matter was proposed - and then dark energy.
It may be, however, that other factors are present, e.g. electric (plasma) currents through the galaxy that complicate gravitational calculations.
One of the missing aspects of conventional gravitation calculations is the effect of spin e.g. of a space craft.
|
|
|
Post by jackjack on Mar 9, 2012 17:22:35 GMT 9.5
Why do people float in space?
|
|
|
Post by paul on Mar 9, 2012 19:14:40 GMT 9.5
The appearance of floating rather depends on one's point of reference.
|
|
|
Post by jackjack on Mar 10, 2012 2:25:57 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by Henka on Mar 10, 2012 3:01:27 GMT 9.5
The visual below can perhaps help in picturing how gravitation works:
|
|
|
Post by paul on Mar 10, 2012 5:26:23 GMT 9.5
Actually that sequence is not of floating but falling. The situation is actually an orbit. There is a combination of falling to Earth while travelling sideways at just the right speed to keep missing the Earth.
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Mar 10, 2012 9:38:12 GMT 9.5
Gravity is certainly not a local phenomenon. The difference between those that are working on these matters and others is that those that are working admit ignorance and strive to rememdy that. Others make bland statements, and lacking knowledge, propose that we know nothing and that these observed and quantified forces do not exist. I guess it must be leprechauns.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Mar 10, 2012 9:57:44 GMT 9.5
... the measurement of gravity is based on local observations ..... Gravity is certainly not a local phenomenon. Gravity measurements are based on local observations - or do you disagree?
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Mar 13, 2012 13:13:10 GMT 9.5
What do you mean by local observations? As I said, I am not an astrophysicist. I do know that gravity is measured with more than timing a ball falling off of a table. From that point of view the observations are not local.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Mar 13, 2012 13:29:28 GMT 9.5
Local means in and around this planet.
As we have seen, gravitational calculations as far as the Moon have been difficult. For example the neutral gravitational point between the Earth and Moon was nowhere near where calculated.
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Mar 13, 2012 15:44:03 GMT 9.5
Difficult but far from impossible and they have certainly been open to examination. Kepler, with primitive knowledge and equipment, established the "laws of planetary motion." Others have taken that initial start and built a greater understanding. Building is possible when you take previous information and move forward.
What is missing in esoteric studies?
|
|
|
Post by paul on Mar 13, 2012 15:54:09 GMT 9.5
.. What is missing in esoteric studies? It seems to me that Masonic science was not made available to the London Masons of 1717 - or perhaps they did not want it.
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Mar 14, 2012 7:16:31 GMT 9.5
It has been my experience that one first reads the esoteric literature, then as with regular science. devises ways to test what is given. As the literature base is broad, I usually concentrate on knowledge that is wide spread .. ie through different cultures and in all ages. I figure if the knowledge is 'common' there must be something to it.
The results speak for themselves.
"The Secret Teachings of All Ages" by Manly P Hall is a good place to start for those who are interested in this approach.
I think there is a freebie in our library section on this forum.
|
|