Page 1 of 1
Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 3:50 pm
I've been reading Gustave Le Bon's book, The Evolution of Matter (1907), and he makes the claim that subatoms, particles and rays are all decomposition products of atoms, and do not appear to occur naturally. The actual term he uses is a French word, effluve, with the nearest English being effluent, which would make electrons, photons and stuff to be analogous to "atomic diarrhea."
Larson takes the opposite position, starting with a singularly simple and consistent photon, and rotating it all around to build up particles, atoms and molecules.
But in Beyond Space and Time, Larson also comments about the "inverse" relation between the levels of existence, where in Level 1, inanimate, gravitation rules, wanting to suck everything in the universe into one, giant ball. Level 2, biologic life, does exactly the opposite, breaking apart aggregates and producing seeds, spreading itself out across the universe.
In the BST sense, Le Bon's position makes more sense, because we see life "building up" from nothing--seeds produce plants and trees, whereas the inanimate realm in nature tends to be more of a breaking down, mountains eroding, volcanoes erupting, earthquakes splitting open chasms and the like. And given the reciprocal relation between levels 1 and 2, it would make more sense that the inanimate, chemical realm should start with element #117 and decompose into the other elements, resulting in the "effluve" of particles and rays.
This reverse chemical approach may also explain a lot of the problems with EM radiation, in general. Light has some weird behavior, which does not make sense with Larson's SHM approach, even with birotation. There is really no mechanism to explain concepts such as wavetrains or bundles (as Einstein put it), the flip-flopping electric and magnetic properties, etc. But, if you look at radiation as solely a decay product, then the process of decay can produce thousands of configurations for the phenomenon we refer to as EM radiation. The rotation of an electron breaks down into 8 linear units, so you get "bundling", those bundles, themselves, could be bundled (recursive), so the properties of light would depend on the mechanism that created the light as a decay product, not a fundamental structure.
If inanimate behavior is the inverse of biologic behavior on the "low side," then the same situation will also occur on the "high side," where spirituality is approached as an evolutionary development of biological life. Life is trying to build up to higher complexities, and when the boundary is crossed to Level 3, ethical, the rules should again invert and be a situation more like that of inanimate matter, where spiritual interactions would appear more like chemical ones, than biological ones.
Just wondering if anyone has seen any other arguments, either way, to support or deny this concept of level inversion.
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:07 pm
Code: Select all
In the BST sense, Le Bon's position makes more sense, because we see life "building up" from nothing--seeds produce plants and trees...
I would continue that a few steps more... seeds, produce plants and trees, which produce seeds, which produces plants and trees... so it is actually a combination of involution (seed making process) and evolution (tree making process).
Remember the observation you had made on a separate thread as to how the water is a result
of biological activity? A similar process is reported by a number of scientists, e.g. Baron Von Herzeele and Louis Kervran, who state that the plants create
Going a step further in evolution, you still have a 'vibration', but this time along the surface of the Earth. Plants produce and reproduce mostly radially, from the center of the Earth outwards and inwards. Even the seeds only grow when they hit the ground again. And with animals you see a pulsating patch... or a herd, whose number either oscillates regularly or which itself moves regularly (e.g. migrations).
I think it is only after you hit the next sector, when the direction actually reverses, with access to the ethical sector implying an immediate differentiation. Here the true "unity" would be in differentiation towards an ethical goal.
Just my couple of thoughts.
Evolutionary direction, level inversion
Posted: Sat Jan 23, 2016 12:04 am
Before becoming aware of Larson's writings I read two very profound books which I now realize support Larson theories in "Beyond Space and Time", specifically the idea of tri level inversions:
1. "Thinking and Destiny" by Harold Percival
2. "The Secret Science of Miracles" by Max Freedom Long
These books are dense and tedious but exceedingly rewarding if studied carefully. I now see that the parallels with Larson found in these books are profound almost beyond imagination.
Posted: Sun Jan 24, 2016 4:22 pm
Perhaps you could list some of the parallels you discovered? I think the people here would find it interesting.
Posted: Mon Jan 25, 2016 12:41 pm
Good shout, here are the PDF's for those who fancy a thorough read:
http://selfdefinition.org/yoga/Harold%2 ... estiny.pdf
http://www.holybooks.com/wp-content/upl ... racles.pdf
From a quick glance at the contents of both it looks like jdalton4 is spot on.... looking forward to reading them both and further discussion from those who have.
From thinking to destiny
Posted: Mon Jan 25, 2016 1:49 pm
Just happened across the following, from Thinking And Destiny, p.35:
In this section is presented a comprehensive system of the Universe,—a system of development by progression, not evolution.
This system takes in the Universe in its entirety, in its largest divisions and in its smallest parts; it shows the place of the human body in relation to the physical universe, and of the human in relation to his Triune Self and the Supreme Intelligence of the Universe; and, finally, Consciousness, the ultimate One Reality.
The system is all-inclusive; yet it is compact, logical and easy to apprehend or imagine. It can be tested by its scope, by its unity, by its simplicity, its analogies, its inter-relations, and by the absence of contradictions.
Current classifications, such as God, nature, and man; body, soul, and spirit; matter, force, and consciousness; good and evil; the visible and the invisible, are insufficient; they are makeshifts, not parts of a system, yet these various entities and things have each a place in the vast scheme, but what place has not been shown.
This system shows a Universe which consists of nature- matter and intelligent-matter, and Consciousness which is the same in both kinds of matter. Matter differs in the degree in which it is conscious. All matter as units on the nature-side is conscious, but merely conscious—each unit being conscious as its function only; all matter on the intelligent-side at least can be conscious that it is conscious; that is the distinction between the units of unintelligent nature-matter and of intelligent-matter. The purpose of the Universe is to make all units of matter conscious in progressively higher degrees, so that nature-matter shall become intelligent-matter; and, further, so that intelligent-matter shall increase in being conscious until ultimately it becomes Consciousness. The purpose of the Universe may be comprehended by distinguishing beings, that is, units of the elements, elementals, out of the mass of matter, as they progress through the various stages or states in which matter is conscious. The progression of these nature units is accomplished while they are on ground which is common to all nature units. In the world of birth and death the common ground is the human body.
The human body is on the lowest degree of the physical plane of all the worlds and spheres. The units of the matter of the world of birth and death are kept circulating through, or in contact with, human bodies. By means of this circulation all physical acts, objects, and events are brought about.
In order to understand the human body and its relation to this complex Universe and the relation of the doer in that body to the nature-side and to the intelligent-side of the Universe, it is well to examine the Universe as a whole and in all its parts. In the following propositions certain words are given specific meanings; they are used for lack of more adequate terms, for example: fire, air, water, earth, for the spheres; and light, life, form, physical, for the worlds and planes.
The spheres, worlds, and planes have each an unmanifested and a manifested side; the unmanifested side permeates and sustains the manifested, (Fig. I-A, B, C). In the diagrams they are shown as an upper and a lower half. Let it be understood that the point of coincidence of the spheres, worlds, and planes is their common center, and not at the lowest part of the circles. The diagrams are drawn as they are in order to show relations, which cannot well be done with a set of concentric circles.
The book is 1000+ pages (downloadable as a free PDF).
From the "About the author" page: http://thewordfoundation.org/a-author.shtml
He wanted his writings to stand on their own merit. His intention was that the validity of his statements be tested according to the degree of Self-knowledge within the reader and not be influenced by Percival's own personality...
In 1893, and twice during the next fourteen years, Percival had the unique experience of being "conscious of Consciousness," a potent spiritual and noetic enlightenment. He stated, "Being conscious of Consciousness reveals the 'unknown' to the one who has been so conscious. Then it will be the duty of that one to make known what he can of being conscious of Consciousness." He stated that the value of that experience was that it enabled him to know about any subject by a mental process he called "real thinking." Because these experiences revealed more than was contained in Theosophy, he wanted to write about them and share this knowledge with humanity.
Sense vs Self Government
Posted: Sun Feb 21, 2016 6:24 pm
Perhaps you could list some of the parallels you discovered? I think the people here would find it interesting.
Here's a specific example, which happened to be staring me in the face earlier today. Not coincidentally I presume.
It relates to another post on an active forum at Antiquatis, link here: Re: Advantages and Disadvantages of a Monastery
discussing thinking vs feeling.
Thought of posting it over there, but decided it belongs here, as its specific to the book mentioned above, and is in direct response to Bruce's inquiry above.
It's a reference from p.954 which charts the difference between thinking/living from feeling or thinking/living from reason, ie sensation and impulses vs moral reasoning.
I havent made it very far in the book. Especially as the text from early pages on continuously asks the reader to view and reference charts and diagrams at the back of the book to relate and visualize the meaning of the content. It's quite a challenge to follow bouncing back and forth while scanning for pages.
A tip for the reader who attempts this book reading it on a computer: Make a duplicate of the PDF, and open both the original and the duplicate in single page mode side by side. This makes it easier to read the text on the original, whilst viewing the diagrams at the back of the book on the duplicate.
(Attached as I can't seem to upload inline image, and copy/paste destroys the diagrams)
On materialism vs consciousness
Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 9:27 am
Also related to the afrementioned forum post on antiquatis, in your consideration of creating a "physical" ethical presence in a material world...
I suggest you read Chapter 4 (IV), Sections 3 & 4 of "Thinking And Destiny", beginning on page 84 in the book (page 113 of the PDF).
Other than minor details, you won't need to read any of the rest of the book to comprehend what the author is describing.
I think this will interest you, Bruce.