-
Messages
-
Hello Nigel,
I finally viewed the video of the presentation you gave to who seemed to be members of the Urantia Foundation – I very much enjoyed it and understood a good bit of what you presented! The other super-universes existing on the same plane made me think of the shape of a multi-disc CD player. And your concept of a giant wheel of which the super-universes are only a part makes sense, but so does your idea of our universe functioning much like a gyroscope. In fact, maybe the UB flag of 2-dimensional, concentric circles should actually be more like spheres within spheres.
Towards the end of your video, you showed a 3-D image of something that showed locations of a few constellations, such as Pavo & Virgo. A few years ago, I came close to buying a celestial globe, but instead I settled for online images of the northern nite sky and the southern nite sky; I still may buy it sometime.
I actually have more to write but it’s so late for me now (around 3am) that must write again another time.
Hello Nigel,
After viewing/hearing your presentation to members of the Urantia Foundation, 2 specific sections of the Urantia Book came to my mind as possible answers to questions that naturally arose from your research:
Paper 57, Section 4: When you mentioned the commonly accepted 14.7 billion year age of the universe as not being nearly enough time to allow for all that astronomers can now perceive in outer space, I wondered if this section could explain that discrepancy and further hint that maybe our best perceptions are only able to perceive the end of the tertiary cycle and the start of the quartan cycle?! Perhaps we human are mis-perceiving those cycles as the age of the universe due to all the various motions that you cited in your presentation?!
Paper 54, Section 6: While this section may at first seem unrelated to your research, it may in fact confirm the giant wheel concept based on the UB’s example of how time is relative with regard to Lucifer’s adjudication… « now begun, should not be completed for a hundred thousand Urantia years. The relative lapse of time from the viewpoint of Uversa, where the litigation is pending, could be indicated by saying that the crime of Lucifer was being brought to trial within two and a half seconds of its commission. From the Paradise viewpoint the adjudication is simultaneous with the enactment. »
Must get ready for work now. I may also comment a little later on the specific points of your last forum post to me. Best regards, Michael
Hi Michael,
PS: You can disregard those Urantia Foundation videos. Both were early looks at rough notes. The one from 2016 became Part 4C: Exploding Dark Islands, and the one from 2019 became Part 4D: Ancient Orvonton – and a young cosmic web.
Getting back to your comments about tachyons, you wrote:
« From all that I read today, I now wonder if Tachyons are actually what the Urantia Book calls Ultimatons! I honestly hope you will consider looking online to see not only what I saw online today, but also to consider at least briefly looking further into the topic of Tachyons, for you are more qualified than I am to determine if my assumption is correct. »
As defined in the Urantia Book, « segregata » (11:8.5, 42:2.9) is actually a textbook « tachyonic field« .
In standard model physics, a tachyonic field is a distribution of energy that can relax to a lower energy state by « spontaneously creating particles » (see Tachyon condensation). The most famous such field is the sort of Higgs-type field required by standard model physics.
In our case, part of the angular momentum in a cyclone of « primordial force charge » (segregata) becomes quantized as « mature ultimatons » (46:1.2). In other words, the « mass-movemented, mighty-tensioned » (42:2.11) energies of segregata relax and quantize as ultimata.
More technically, the sort of Higgs-type field required by standard model physics is a condensate of weak hypercharge. So if we define this (primitive, primordial) condensate of weak hypercharge to be the Urantia Book’s « primordial force charge » (segregata), then we find that segregata serves nicely as that necessary tachyonic Higgs-type field.
Regarding the idea of « faster-than-light particles », Sudarshan and Feinberg both speculated about the negative square root of a certain term in a certain equation. This led to the idea of particles that could NOT travel SLOWER than ‘the speed of light’. While their idea is now dismissed as mathematical error, the Urantia Book is actually FILLED with concepts, phenomena and beings that are « absolutely » and « ultimately » independent of the speed of light. Thereby hangs a tale
But getting back to the actual condensation occurring in a tachyonic field: while the formation of discrete ultimatons likely involves the quantization of vortices of angular momentum, I think the actualized « mature » ultimaton (46:1.2) will be better modeled as a quantum of that angular momentum (« motion ») folded back on itself as some kind of topological knot. It’s this topological aspect of ultimatons that allows matter — made from such ultimatons — to resist gravitational collapse to a black hole. It’s this irrepressible nature of such topological quanta that causes dark islands to explode once that « critical level of ultimatonic condensation » (41:7.15) is reached in the « cooling and contraction » (41:3.6) of collapsed stars…
« This process of cooling and contraction may continue to the limiting and critical explosion point of ultimatonic condensation. » (41:3.6)
« Those [suns] which are not thus eventually recharged are destined to undergo disruption by mass explosion when the gravity condensation attains the critical level of ultimatonic condensation » (41:7.15)
As tiny axionic preons, ultimatons DO seem to exist on a border between absonite and finite realities; so their relationship to time must be a bit slippery
Nigel
Thank you Nigel for giving me good replies for me to explore and ponder! Do you suppose there are examples in nature or in our atmosphere that shows a structure and process vaguely similar to Segregata and Ultimata and physical creation? As I read your reply, I was thinking of a moving stream of water with some little whirlpools occurring, with algae forming where the water has become somewhat stagnate near the whirlpools. Perhaps a better analogy exists, such as thoughts leading to words of instruction which result in physical action. I ask that not only for my increased understanding, but also wonder if analogies ever aid you in your research?
Best regards, Michael
Hi Michael,
You wrote:
« Perhaps how rain is produced would be a suitable analogy?!«
I use the rain analogy at time 2:21 in video 4B1. With water vapour as absoluta and clouds as segregata, the drops falling on forests become ultimatons
For easier reference, see page 5 in the script.
Nigel
Hello Nigel – sorry I have been away from the forum discussions for a while. I have a parent who seems to be developing dementia, or something related. I’m happy to know that you already used rain as an analogy; I will view that link soon. As for your prior post, I may re-read it one or two more times after I view your rain analogy. I like learning astronomy and other sciences but sometimes it takes me a little time to fully understand the language specific to each discipline. Likewise, terms specific to the UB (like the differences between the various universe levels (such as local, grand, master, etc) slowed down my learning, until I saw one of your prior videos.
It’s quite late for me now, so goodnight – Michael
Hello Nigel,
I viewed your video containing the analogy of how rain forms – that really was helpful for me to better understand the relationships between Absoluta, Segregata, and Ultimata. Thank you!
Michael
Okay, so finally we have a picture of the massive black hole in the center of our galaxy. But to me it seems that the picture does not match with the simulations. What are the three light-emitting things? To my eyes they don’t look like the expected accretion disc.
I refer to this YouTube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVxE6F6REyE
I read news about an observed stellar black hole that is much bigger than was thought to be possible.
That lead me thinking: So they have been observing something that should not be, or something that does not fit in their calculations. Either it is exactly what they think they have been observing, or it may be something else they did not know anything about.
Astronomers found also a supermassive black hole SAGE0536AGN is much larger than it should be.
https://www.space.com/30651-supermassive-black-hole-surprisingly-large.html
Login to reply to this topic.
Not registered? Sign up here.