Jump to content
Urantia Book Forum, conversations with other readers

John Anngeister

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About John Anngeister

  • Rank
  1. I think modern pagan rituals like this one at the Edinburgh Samhain this year are a good advertisement for the comparative beauty of Christianity, and the enormous advance upon the ancient ways which has been realized by some progressive forms of the religion of Jesus of Nazareth. Be sure to turn on the sound for that link. On the other hand, I see some similarities between the pagan pageantry and some of the traditional Christian forms. Merry Christmas! -John
  2. Carola is a forum member who asked the initial question about the "emanations" in yesterday's OPAD segment. In my suggestion of an answer to her, I heard hoofbeats in the street and was thinking zebras (quasars) instead of horses. I'm glad we have some folks here (like you) who can keep me on the straight and narrow when I stir the pot. I still think the red shift question is interesting, and the challenges to the Big Bang theorists.
  3. I love this as a kind of word of wisdom in itself. Great bumper-sticker! Thanks for the clarity, Bonita. (And as you mentioned, it doesn't refer to Paradise.)
  4. Great images, HSTa. It looks like quasars are primary stage nebular phenomena (identified in your quote from p.653) rather than the kinds of emanating stars described in 15.4. Perhaps the quote from 15.4 is simply describing a phenomenon that causes stars to manifest unusual magnitudes or spectra when in proximity to large energetic gas clouds. The authors usually have some kind of "peg" out there in the 1930s astronomic lexicon on which they wish to hang these short but intriguing statements like the one which interested Carola. The second link I gave in my initial post favors the concept of an infinite and ageless universe over that of the 15-Billion year old Banger universe. They're pointing to things like the "Great Wall" and saying, no, that kind of structure would require many times 15-Bill years to form. Still, I notice they also are saying that there is no need to postulate an expanding universe. Interesting how no one theory fits the revealed version, but signs of truth are running through them all. That would square with the mandate to organize fact and filter out error which the revelators were tasked with.
  5. What do people think - - must the phrase "outside the inhabited superuniverse" necessarily mean in the First Outer Space Level? I would say no, Andromeda can be situated on the outskirts of the grand universe (within the superuniverse level but "not counted" as such because still uninhabited. In other words, just because the First Outer Space Level is uninhabited does not mean that every uninhabited system is also in OS-1. Elsewhere in the book there is emphasis on the difference between inhabited and uninhabited levels within a superuniverse space level. For example, registration of star systems on Uversa I think occurs only after they are inhabited. I would be willing to discuss this further with anyone who doubts that Andromeda is actually on the ragged edge of Orvonton, or a neighboring Super-U. Meanwhile, I left my references on another computer. Anybody need more proof?
  6. HSTa, thanks for the response. Yes, I had forgotten that most quasars are radio sources (I called them light sources and will revise that). Thanks, I should have remembered that distinction. Question: If quasars have a red-shift, there must be a spectrum. Do radio sources emit energy that can be assigned to a light spectrum? I found the following dictionary definition for emanation “a heavy gaseous element produced by radioactive disintegration (as in radium emanation).” There’s another sense of the word’s meaning which might be used to describe “a series of hierarchically descending radiations” beginning with an original state and passing through intermediate stages to a later, dissimilar state. I don’t have the page reference to this: But I do recall that description from the UB. Do you think it falsifies my hypothesis of connection between quasars and 15.4?
  7. Carola, your question about the author's reference to solar "emanations" got me thinking: I posted the beginning of one possible answer in the Science and Cosmology forum, Quasars, Red Shift, Big Bang. I might not have made the connection without help of your comment. Thank you for your stimulating questions! -John
  8. In today's OPAD segment, Carola asks about the meaning of the “solar emanations” referred to by the author Isn’t there is a possibility that the author is here referring to the phenomenon called Quasar (short for quasi-stellar object)? A quasar is a tremendously energetic radiation source sometimes physically linked to a nearby galaxy (many of these quasar-partner galaxies appear to be gaseous). I studied some photos of these Quasar-galaxy relationships recently at the web page of astrophysicist Halton Arp, who thinks the association brings the Hubble distance formula into question for the associated galaxies (Quasars are heavily red-shifted but thought to be much nearer than the Hubble formula would place them). It’s controversial, because it’s considered by the scientific majority to be impossible in a theoretically tight Big-Bang universe (of course UB readers know Bang cosmology is due for an adjustment anyway). Here’s an informative link to that part of the controversy. Scroll down the page for the discussion of Quasars and red shift. Again, isn't there a possibility...? -John
  9. When suggesting that the quiescent zones are neither pervaded nor unpervaded, I should have included mention of the primary zone’s contact with the central Isle, which, according to the authors, gives it the appearance of being (remarkably) “a relative extension of Paradise.” Nigel, I know you are well aware of this. I'm getting more mileage thinking midspace is not merely a name for the relative separation between pervaded and unpervaded space, but a third kind of space. Two problems for me from the quote: 1) I’m not clear whether the phrase “some motion in them” refers to motions within midspace or the motion of midspace. I’m inclined to the former. 2) I’m worried about the use of the plural “them” when referring to the QMZ. This doesn’t square with my current view of the ultimate singularity of midspace. I have the same problem with the “artist’s view” which Rick is posting so much, which depicts most of these zones as nested ellipses. Is that the standard consensus? I've missed a lot of discussion on these problems. But if both pervaded and unpervaded space are ultimately encompassed by quiescence, isn’t there an implied continuity? I am missing something. Maybe it’s a dimensional thing after all. In any case, I think the close association between Paradise and midspace adds to the general (and admirable) perplexity of our problem, even if I am now doubting my “single organism” view of the QMZ. I begin to imagine that almost anything is possible here. The proper human approach to a problem with such admirable perplexities usually has the earmarks of a distinctly religious attitude rather than a scientific one. Of course eventually we must get up off our knees, unbow our heads, and get back to puzzling. (In view of the usage in the quote above, I have begun abbreviating the quiescent midspace zone as QMZ rather than MQZ, and I will edit my previous post accordingly as well) PS: glad to see you posting again, HSTa
  10. Nigel (and all), It’s been a stretch (both of time and mind), but I finally return with my discussion of your point: Our text is daunting: Although I am unable to follow you into the realm of branes and multiple dimensions, I am not doubting you know your way around those parts. But in addition to musings about unusual conditions of space, I want to suggest only the possibility that the photon itself might exist in some unusual state - - since by definition it cannot exist in unpervaded space in any states in which we know it to exist in pervaded space. I am not claiming to say how or even whether light energy traverses unpervaded space with different characteristics than those we know it to possess in pervaded space. I cannot begin to imagine what photons as we don’t know them might be like. But neither do I want to forget that the photon we know has no mass, no spin, etc. (even in pervaded space), although the UB states that the light of a comet’s tail is a proof that light “has weight” (UP15.6 p.173). So what we allegedly know about photons might be a block to our seeing the problem at hand. Then again, the word “pervaded” implies much more than motion through; it mainly refers to the diffuse presence of matter/energy in a given space, the material medium which aids in the propagation of the material “fusillade” of linear matter, etc. That is, pervaded space is indeed an enabler of motion as we know it. But the presence of the Universe Mother Spirit is also said to “pervade” local universe space (p.455). And that of the Master Spirit also “pervades” his superuniverse space. This does not mean either of them are bouncing off the walls or racing around from point to point. I feel strongly in any case that we ought not to accept a concept of nonpervaded space as a mysteriously dark and inscrutable barrier to light. We observe no cone-shaped voids among the distant galaxies in the radial of the Sagittarius center once we are clear of the light pollution of the disc. Given the above definition of space, may we assume that nonpervaded space has the right to be called “space” not only because it moves (contracts and expands) but also because it conditions or contains motion? I might even suggest that the “conditioning” of motion which we might find in unpervaded space is actually a kind of de-conditioning when compared to the motions (and velocities) we can identify with pervaded space. If there is no spatial medium in the cone, but the light is getting through anyway (which we see as so, I think), then - - is it travelling with infinite acceleration? In this line of speculation, I wonder about the hypothetical path of a photon through the primary Quiescent Mid-space Zone (the one between Pervaded and Unpervaded Space). I don’t think the quiescent space zones are considered to be pervaded or unpervaded. However, it is a fact that we have observable light from sources on the far side of the relatively quiescent zone lying between Orvonton and OS-1. Compared to that, the primary QMZ is really empty (or shall we say motionless?). If there is neither motion in the space of the QMZ, nor motion of the QMZ, are we in the realm of possibility for light at infinite velocity? What if a photon coming toward us from the far side attain infinite acceleration while within the far-side QMZ (prior to reaching the unpervaded cone? I want to think that photons at infinite velocity (although perhaps temporarily devoid of heat) would traverse pervaded space in a leap, manifesting only when it breaks out (and slowing down to a burning “c,” on our side of the QMZ? I like to remember too that the QMZ is like one interconnected web which encompasses both pervaded and unpervaded space at their extremities. This gives it the continuity of a “single organism,” rather than a complex of zones or “sides” vis-a-vis the reservoir cone. It is this organic continuum of the QMZ which gives me notions that the instantaneous light circuit may be “closed” by the MQZ itself, on both sides of the cone simultaneously (since the reservoir is ultimately under a total QZ wrap). The photon might then only appear to be traversing the unpervaded cone without actually leaving the bosom of the QMZ. Oh dear, I am in over my head here, but to me it is all the same with branes and multiple dimensions. May I thrash about for your amusement? But if light is indeed unconditioned by time while it “appears” to traverse the Q-wrapped cone of unpervaded space, then I might as well suggest that phenomena related to such velocities in the QMZ wrap could contribute to distortions in red-shift. This kind of cause for red-shift distortion is suggested by our text: -John
  11. Last post, I promised some thoughts on meaningful number groups within the circuits (the circles within the circles) based on my original basis number. But I realized I owed everybody (self included) a careful look into other parts of the revelation first, in case there was some word that would save me the trouble of going too far out on a limb. Glad I did that. In Paper 26 there is some interesting material on the outer-circuit training regime which forced me to change the numbers in my world count theory, making it less mathematically arbitrary, better grounded in the revelation, and closer in most respects to the accepted guidelines. This gives a possible scenario in which the pilgrim ascenders enter a major phase of their adventure - say the Intellectual Phase - on a sphere of classification 0001 of subgroup 70, in the 12th minor division of the 7th branch of the Phase, and work their way in from there. Actually the 3 major phases are probably not sequential but mixed in there pretty well. 1000 classifications x 70 subgroups (=70,000) x 12 minors (=840,000) x 7 branches (=5,880,000) x 3 phases of instruction =17,640,000. With 5,880,000 classifications of achievement indicated for each of the 3 phases, I can imagine this amazing “primary or elementary course” playing out on 17,640,000 testing or proving spheres of the outermost circuit of Havona. But 17,640,000 is only about 1/56 of the “over two hundred forty-five million” worlds in the outer circuit. And it seems we will visit all and “attain” on each one. So what about the other approx. 228 million worlds? Does the seventh circuit hold out a prospect of more courses than the “primary, elementary course” mentioned here? It’s anybody’s guess, but I have two suggestions: 1) It may be that ascenders are required, in addition to achieving the primary course as students, to visit 17,640,000 other worlds to aid in the teaching of the lessons learned. (There’s a quote somewhere that spells out the dual role of student and teacher that characterizes all of our later training) This suggestion would mean an adventure comprising 35,280,000 worlds for the primary course alone - - 3 phases, each containing 5,880,000 classifications of adventure, and all done twice over, as student and as teacher. 2) There is also a reason to believe that, before we move on to the sixth circuit, we may be required to pursue the same or similar courses of learning and teaching from the standpoint of each of the other six superuniverses. Now we are talking about an outer circuit of “over two hundred forty-five million” worlds - 246,960,000 to be exact. This then, will have to be my current view. I see an outermost circuit divided into seven major arc segments of at least 35,280,000 worlds apiece, each segment representing 1/7 of the circumference of the seventh circuit. (I want to associate each arc-segment of the circuit with one of the seven superuniverses, but I keep reading that there is only 1 pilot world rather than 7 in the outer circuit). In this larger view, each of the seven arcs of the seventh circuit offer the 3 main phases of attainment, etc., as indicated. In each of the three attainment phases the ascender is required to experience life as a kind of student or follower on 5,880,000 worlds and as a kind of teacher or leader to 5,880,000 worlds. So my world count theory evolves: For a=35,280,000 a + (a x 2) + (a x 3) + (a x 4) + (a x 5) + (a x 6) + (a x 7) = 987,280,000 Obviously, these numbers and conjectures leave 12,720,000 Havona worlds still unaccounted for if all seven Havona circuits are to add up to one billion. My theory, in other words, is back to being under construction. Distribution of these additional 12,720,000 worlds to the other six circuits is probably determined by the following two clues: This indicates an additional system of future-oriented Outline Worlds in the seventh circuit, as well as room for the accommodation of more detailed instruction on subsequent circles. There’s a certain futility in my persistence, I admit, but it’s amusing me. And I do think Paper 26 ought to be considered, and somehow accommodated, by anyone entertaining theories of Havona world counts. There's something about numbers that beguiles the mind into believing it is close to the facts
  12. In a recent OPAD post, Rick linked to Mark Underwood’s Havona Word Count Theory in the Master Universe Almanac. Mathematics is one of my pet diversions, and so I was already spending far too much time crunching numbers on this very question, after the initial post for Paper 14 on Monday. Reading the MUA article proved to be a breakthrough in my reasoning (although my result differs from Mark’s). All theories of world counts for the Heaven of Heavens start with Paper 14.1 p.152-3, quoted by both Rick and Mark, which suggests a figure “upwards of [greater than] thirty-five million” for the inner circuit and “over two hundred and forty-five million” for the outermost. The fun starts because the numbers provided are floating in an ambiguous setting, both linguistic and arithmetic. Markers like upwards of and over point in one direction, but without clear limits. I am also struck by the fact that the author refrains from using arabic symbols for the quantities here, but takes the trouble to spell them out. In what follows, I base my claims on the suggestion that the principle thing we are to grasp from this statement is something other than a strictly quantitative parameter. For example, from the plain fact that there are 7 circuits, and that 245 = 35 x 7, I think we are safe in assuming (on the basis of the text) that the solution is to be found in a simple arithmetic progression for a series of 7, which usually looks like so: (a + 2a + 3a + 4a + 5a + 6a + 7a) = b The problem may be phrased, given a>35Million and 7a>245Million, find the simplest combination of integers which will yield b = 1Billion. For a simple series of 7, this kind of progression will usually yield 28 equal segments (since n is constant, and the sum of 1+2+3+4+5+6+7=28). The solution for a is then b/28. However, a divisor of 28, when applied to 1,000,000,000, yields an irrational number with a six-place repeating decimal: 35,714,285.714285. A non-integer result for any series usually means that the series contains an embedded constant, or a nested series, or some other kind of formulaic novelty (such as Mark proposes). It was the Editor's Note and the quote regarding the Havona Power Centers from Paper 29 in the MUA article which gave me a new approach to this problem. I decided this statement gives us warrant for assuming that the number of spheres in each of the seven circuits must be some multiple of one thousand (in order to accommodate the functional supervision of the Power Centers). From this point I judged that it might be interesting to see what happens with the non-integer result for 1Billion/28 when we bracket not only the repeating remainder but also the digits in the hundreds, tens and ones columns. For multiples of 1000, the integer result for b = 1Billion/28 is: a=35,714,000. What about the weird remainder? With a = 35,714,000 as the basis for the series (multiplied by 28), the total is 999,992,000. The new remainder is a nice even integer of 8000. Needless to say, I did not hesitate to apply a little more mathematical swagger to the problem and propose a CONSTANT of 1000 for each series, in order that 7000 of these remaining spheres might reasonably be assumed to populate the 7 circuits at 1000 spheres per circuit. With a=35,714,000 and constant c=1000 we have: (a+c) + (2a+c) + (3a+c) + (4a+c) + (5a+c) + (6a+c) + (7a+c) = 999,999,000 spheres Holding firm to the principle of whole thousands, it is my judgment that the last 1000 spheres cannot be further distributed among the circuits, but must exist as a unit in one of the seven circuits. I suggest either the first or the seventh, with either an administrative function over the whole, or as an alpha or an omega attainment circuit. So then, my own Havona World Count, totaling 1 Billion and with all circuits numbered in multiples of 1000: 35,714,000 + 1000 (or +2000 if the double constant is applied to this inner circuit). 71,428,000 + 1000 107,142,000 + 1000 142,856,000 + 1000 178,570,000 + 1000 214,284,000 + 1000 249,998,000 + 1000 (or +2000 if the double constant is applied to this outer circuit). This result is so simple that I would not be surprised if it is old-hat to some of the mathematicians in the readership. The theory will present problems, however, to readers who place too literal an interpretation on the numbers given in Paper 14.1. The slightly high count in the first circuit satisfies Mark’s hypothesis of rounded numbers (not necessary in my theory). But a number like 249,998,000 for the outermost circuit might be too rich for those who feel certain the revelators would have substantiated it with words like “nearly two hundred fifty million” (in fact, with the double constant applied, it comes in at a neat 250 million). I have already addressed this problem in my analysis of the ambiguity of statements like “over two hundred forty-five million.” Why they do not give the actual numbers is beyond me. But the above theory is based on the assumption that we are given not a quantitative numeric limit but simply a clue to the fact that a simple numeric progression is involved. I still think this solution has a rather nice economy of structure which lends it some merit: (a+c) + (2a+c) + (3a+c) + (4a+c) + (5a+c) + (6a+c) + (7a+c) + c = 1,000,000,000 spheres where a=35,714,000 and c=1000 I hope Mark will have a chance to review it. I also have some “things to love” about the base number (35,714,000), saved for a future post, where I will speculate (for fun) about meaningful groups of worlds within the inner structure of each of the seven circuits.
  13. Nigel, I am reflecting and re-writing my ideas about the path of a photon through unpervaded space. But in the meantime I want to suggest a fruitful field for distance studies in that huge slice of pervaded space which is not on the far side of the upper or nether reservoir cones. For all near side OS-1 galaxies, I think my previous assertion of a non-materialized OS-2 level*, if accepted, gives a useful measure of standard maximum distance. That is, if we hold that the OS-1 cylinder at a diameter of 25MLY is the ONLY materialized level of space outside the Super-U level, we have a numerical outer limit against which any red-shift estimations of greater magnitude must be adjusted (radio images not included, as they may reveal something for the OS-2 level, for all I know). Whether we assume a maximum radial distance r, of 2, 3, or 4 MLY from peripheral Paradise to Andromeda (the current unpopulated edge of Orvonton space), we may safely say that the most distant visible galaxies in the area of Gemini (opposite Sagittarius) have distance radii (from Paradise) no greater than r+25 MLY. Any red-shift distance which yielded a deeper space location would be subject to adjustment downwards. From our home perspective, distances to objects in other areas of sky would naturally have a progressively deeper numerical limit in proportion to their degrees of separation from Gemini (as greater lateral segments of pervaded space would be swept into the limit). But I believe this scheme would yield no limit-distance so deep as the deepest red-shift distances of spectral astronomy. I think this may be relevant because having such a constant in the tool shed might aid us in cracking the code of red-shift distortion. * I mentioned my grounds for assuming an non-materialized OS-2 level on a previous thread
  14. I like Alina’s answer, of course, but I think there’s room for discussion of this interesting profusion of weird detail remarked by Bonita without claiming it is all flawlessly divine and inscrutably important. I believe that at least some of the 2000-page length of the UB must be attributed to the process of question-and-answer which was used by the revelators with readers and auditors who were members of “the Forum” between 1925 and 1935. Both the positive and the negative sides of this dynamic method may be seen today in most study groups, when a new reader stops the reading to ask a question about a word or concept that is unusual to them. On the one hand, a long-time reader might experience the down side of Q&A when a personalized answer to a newcomer’s question seems to broaden out into an unnecessary over-revelation of bits and pieces from other parts of the book, bringing an amused or perplexed look to the face of the questioner. Think of what the revelators faced under similar circumstances, themselves knowing so much more of reality than that smidgen which a long-time reader can recall from the UB. On the other hand, it is often the case that a reader’s question is answered in a later paragraph of the same paper. I attribute this anticipation of human questions not to the omniscience of the Spirit but to the wisdom of the Q&A method and the probability that similar questions were asked by members of the original forum, guiding the authors in their finalization of the revelation. My point is that the wisdom of using Q&A does not rule out the possibility that some of the human questions may have been hasty or ill-advised, and some of the answers too “forthcoming.” For example, the eugenics material, the passenger birds, the political science, the minutia of heavenly support staff, etc., might not represent the original thrust of the revelators but is instead a pesky gloss stemming from a divine attempt to respond in good faith to the fleeting idols (even the prejudice) of human curiosity. It just comes with the territory, when your mandate includes human participation.
  15. I think it helps, in considering the mystery of all these secrets, to remember that Father keeps secrets not only from us but with us - and these are kept in eternal confidence.
  • Create New...