Why start with "Unity"?

[bperet]

Larson's #1 assumption about the universe is that "unit motion" is the natural datum. But why "Unity"?

When examining the concepts behind RS, and comparing them to other cosmologies, I found one concept missing--Larson does not have the concept of an octave or densities/planes of existence. He just starts with unity, and creates displacements from there. It was not until his work in "Beyond Space and Time" that he started to address the concept of "Levels of existence", inanimate, biological and ethical. Even Larson was eventually forced to conclude that this type of density/plane structure did exist and was needed to complete the RS model.

My first step in encoding the RS as a neural network, was to start with Unity--Larson's natural datum. But when I tried to incorporate the Law of One view, I discovered that, while I could "fudge" the 1st density into Larson's "level 1--inanimate" plane, there was no concept of the "Octave".

Then it hit me--an Octave is a doubling in frequency. In other words, something goes from "1" to "2". I've seen this pattern many times--it's called a "displacement from unit motion", exactly what the RS is built upon. The positron and electron are speeds of "1/2" and "2/1", respectively, giving them UNIT DISPLACEMENTS.

From that, there was one, obvious conclusion: that this "doubling", called an "Octave" in the Law of One material, is just a "displacement of 1", which IS the "unit datum", Larson's unit speed, for this octave of existence.

Our entire Universe, is nothing more than a macrocosmic scalar speed change from 1 to 2, giving us the "starting point" of Unit motion from which all is derived. From that point, the Universal Unity follows that pattern of "as above, so below", and displaces itself, creating the material and cosmic realms.

I had originally started the Law of One conceptual basis by providing for 7 densities, each with its conjugate, and placing the physical universe in the first density. But I could not understand why Unity would break down into "7", for no particular reason.

Enter again, Larson and the Periodic Table of the Elements, which has SEVEN "densities" to it, starting with the electron/photon group, neutrino group, proton group, hydrogen group, and the lower, intermediate and upper atomic groups. But each of these groupings were BUILT UP from the original Unity; they were not pre-extant.

Thus, the logical conclusion for the presence of densities or ontological planes of existence is that these quantum divisions occur as a process of complexification of motion, and are created as motion becomes more complex. Being a "discrete" universe, it is natural to have such boundaries.

I find it quite fascinating, that no matter how large or small a view you take of the Universe, the EXACT same principles are in effect. The process that created the Universe, the largest thing we know, is the same process that creates the photon, the smallest thing we know.

[Guest]

Interesting post, thank you.

[Alluvion]

most definately interesting to read ; )

-a

[Gopi]

Hi,

Yes that was a truly great insight into things... dazzles me still.

Quote:

From that, there was one, obvious conclusion: that this "doubling", called an "Octave" in the Law of One material, is just a "displacement of 1", which IS the "unit datum", Larson's unit speed, for this octave of existence.

If the unit datum of Larson is itself a unit displacement, are even other displacements possible,creating an infinite number of octaves in Creation...seems to be follow logically,as far as I can make out.Here is a quote from Ra:

Quote:

Questioner: Are you saying then that there are an infinite number of octaves of densities one through eight?

Ra: I am Ra. We wish to establish that we are truly humble messengers of the Law of One. We can speak to you of our experiences and our understandings and teach/learn in limited ways. However, we cannot speak in firm knowledge of all the creations. We know only that they are infinite. We assume an infinite number of octaves.

So is it "Zero,One,Infinity" all over again?Cool! 8) If we take this direction further,are these higher level displacements brought about by the ULTIMATE UNITY,the Creator?

Quote:

The process that created the Universe, the largest thing we know, is the same process that creates the photon, the smallest thing we know.

If I read this right,does it give a clue to the increase and decrease of inward and outward progressions referred to in Fortune's book...the concept of the unit datum with its displacements either way ITSELF being a representation of the displacement from 1 to 2 refered to here...a 'giant photon' or an SHM character introduced, maybe...

Phew!

Cheers,

Gopi

[Horace]

Maybe the "Octave" is related to the Bott Periodicity of dimensions, as described at the URL below:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/week105.html

[bperet]

Horace wrote:

Maybe the "Octave" is related to the Bott Periodicity of dimensions, as described at the URL below:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/week105.html

Now that is a fascinating read. I think you really hit on something here.

I could not help but notice the geometric symmetry of Clifford Algebra... the "Euclidean" region of C6-C7-C8 and H2-H3-H4, reflected about a complex plane of C1-C5.

It also lays in beautifully with Larsons's motions, Complex being the photon group, Quaternions being sub-atomic and the H+H double-Quaternions being atomic. But it does beg the question of H(2)... 4th density atoms?

I have attached a gif of the Clifford Clock, showing the geometric positioning of Euclidean and Polar (counterspace) on the diagram, and where the atomic systems fit in.

I also put a short "Density" map at the bottom... it appears that Ra's density model fits in nicely with the geometry.

Only problem is that it might throw a monkey wrench in Nehru's equation proving you can only have three, independent dimensions, because that was based on the "H" (Quaternion), or C2 model.

Q'uo, in a recent channel session, said that the perceived reciprocal relationship we are exploring between space and time is an artifact of 3rd density perception, and doesn't really exist as we understand it in 4th density. This might actually prove that, if it does fit in as you have suggested--the natural breakdown of the octave doubling.

Good find!

[Horace]

I think so too.

Another interesting geometry is the geometry of Octonions, especialy the Octonionic Projective geometry (OP) where it is impossible to define multidimensional OP^n, for n greater than 2.
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/week106.html

The Octonionic Hyperbolic geometry, where 2 components of a RATIO form a hyperbolic relationship (reciprocal relationship) is even closer to home.

Especialy if such geometry could be expressed over discrete magnitudes, a la RS Theory.

[GhostCat]

Oh, that's just COOL (referring to the downloaded image). I must take a closer look at this.

[bperet]

Horace wrote:

Another interesting geometry is the geometry of Octonions, especialy the Octonionic Projective geometry (OP) where it is impossible to define multidimensional OP^n, for n greater than 2.
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/week106.html

I've looked at Octonions before, after Nehru introduced me to quaternions. It basically led down a blind alley at that time. It was good at representing rotational spaces, but you could not transform the system easily into other projective layers.

I do like the multivector idea of GA... good way to represent compound motion, since it covers all the geometries at the same time. Much easier to work with when you are outside a fixed perspective.

Horace wrote:

The Octonionic Hyperbolic geometry, where 2 components of a RATIO form a hyperbolic relationship (reciprocal relationship) is even closer to home.

If you look at it detail, you'll find it works really well for the time region, but falls apart when you move into other frames.

[bperet]

GhostCat wrote:

Oh, that's just COOL (referring to the downloaded image). I must take a closer look at this.

The breakdown is quite interesting...

R -1- C -2- H -3- 2H -4- H(2) -5- C(4) -6- R(8) -7- 2R(8) -8-

R, the "real numbers" are space/time (material sector)--Ra's "1st density", Larson's "Level 1--inanimate" realm.

C, "complex numbers" are at the junction between 1st and 2nd density, the "real" component of the complex number being space/time (physical) and the imaginary part being time/space (metaphysical)... the very linkage between the material and cosmic sectors that Larson calls the "Life Unit", Ra's "2nd density" and Larson's "Level 2--biological" realm.

H, "quaternions" are time/space (cosmic sector)--the non-local view that Ra refers to as the "spirit complex", and Larson the "Level 3--Ethical" realm. You can see that both concepts are again, the same. Spirit drives the heart, which gives one a sense of ethics. It also indicates that Larson's "Ethical Control Unit" is metaphysical in nature, being in time/space.

2H (or H+H) are a conjugate of quaternions -- two systems of opposing views... a choice between "service to other" and "service to self" that allows one to cross the boundary between 3rd density and 4th? (Larson lumped densities 3-7 all in to his Level 3, unfortunately).

It is fascinating how closely this Clifford algebra/Bott peridocity maps into these living systems so easily. It could reveal some interesting things.