![]() |
|
Ra's "photon" vs. electromagnetic radiation - Printable Version +- Bring4th (https://www.bring4th.org/forums) +-- Forum: Bring4th Studies (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Strictly Law of One Material (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2) +--- Thread: Ra's "photon" vs. electromagnetic radiation (/showthread.php?tid=2340) |
Ra's "photon" vs. electromagnetic radiation - Poffo - 03-07-2011 *I've posted this in Strictly Law of One because I feel it deals with a fundamental issue from the Law of One relating to Ra's cosmology. It just happens to be a science related topic also so mods may think it better suited for the Science and Technology section.* Greetings fellow seekers. I have a cosmological quandary and I'm wondering if anyone's up for helping me lessen some of the distortion. I'm having a hard time reconciling the photon that Ra and Don discussed with the photon which is understood to a high degree by modern physics. In the “Standard Model of Particle Physics” the photon is designated as the force carrying particle of the electromagnetic interaction, the quantum of electromagnetic radiation, and as such it makes up the visible light of everyday experience and all the other parts of the EM spectrum (radio, infrared, ultraviolet, x-rays, gamma rays). I'm of the understanding that the densities of awareness are a spectral representation of the original thought's vibrations and Ra posits that each density is formed of a quantum of light representing each density. From what I can tell, the photon of Ra's cosmology doesn't seem to be equivalent or even relate directly to that of the Standard Model. What I'm trying to figure out is where does the phenomena that most people call a photon (EM radiation spectrum) fit into the cosmological scheme of the densities of awareness? I was originally thinking that the regular everyday EM photon we know, since it comes about from electrons oscillating between quantized energy levels, relates to the 1st density light. Electrons are considered a fundamental particle of matter, and I had always thought of 1st density as consisting mostly of the raw matter that makes up our planet. But then I started thinking about matter that isn't bound to a planetary environment (like space dust, solar winds, etc) and I had to reevaluate where 1st density actually begins. That topic deserves its own thread so I won't go into that any further here. My main concern is the relationship between what we generally know as photons, the visible light and other higher and lower wavelengths that make up the EM spectrum, and the light quanta of awareness which make up the spectrum of densities. My tentative position at this point is that the the basic matter of 1st density which makes up the physical world is a kind of “limited” light, or as David Bohm said, “frozen light”. What I mean is that photons don't have a rest mass and are pure electromagnetic energy at constant velocity, whereas atomic particles have definite mass, are bound, but have electromagnetic properties; they seem to me to be a restriction on the high freedom of the photon. At this point there are atoms and molecules which make up the classical elements which Ra lists as being characteristic of 1st density. From here DNA develops from those interactions and gives rise to 2nd density, which after a damn long time gains reflective self-awareness in 3rd. We can see here the progression of “solid” entities through the experiences which each density has to offer, but the basic photon that is EM radiation isn't solid in any way. So where does that photon fit into the spectrum of densities which makes use of the universal Light substance which is the 3rd distortion of Intelligent Infinity? Is there a distinct difference between the EM radiation which is a fundamental expression of 1st density (and 2nd density as bioluminescence , and both 2nd and 3rd as infrared heat radiation) vs. the 3rd distortion of II that Ra calls Light and which makes up all of the densities? I'm surprised that Don, given his physics background, never sought to clarify any of this, but perhaps it never crossed his mind. I have no problem seeing Light as the universal substance which Logos uses to express the original thought, I just have a problem fitting in what most humans think of as light into that picture. This is something that's been bugging me for a while so it would be cool to read what others have thought of this issue. Any ideas are welcome and appreciated. /:idea:
RE: Ra's "photon" vs. electromagnetic radiation - Crimson - 03-07-2011 My understanding is that the photon as related to densitities are quantum shifts and 'pulls' to the visible light frequency spectrum. Then a 1st density photon vibrates/moves on red as the base for holding information to possible form elements/molecules then 2 density photon vibrates on orange then being able to hold more information...including DNA formation...green vibration of the photon appears to allow the formation of electrical bodies instead of the mainly chemical ones of yellow vibrating photon.... Quote:27.14 Questioner: I will make a statement that I have extracted from the physics of Dewey Larson which may or may not be close to what we are trying to explain. Larson says that all is motion which we can take as vibration, and that vibration is pure vibration and is not physical in any way or in any form or density, and the first product of that vibration is what we call the photon or particle of light. I am trying to make an analogy between this physical solution and the concept of love and light. Is this close to the concept of Love creating light? RE: Ra's "photon" vs. electromagnetic radiation - zenmaster - 03-07-2011 Apparently, the 1D photon is the fundamental manifestation that occurs when the unity of space/time is displaced or distorted (due to free will). According to Larson, the primary mechanism for distortion is thought to be a scalar 'vibration'. More complex motions, such as the rotation and rotational vibrations result in particles and atoms. Crossing to 2D, we have another level of complexity that enables local 1D material aggregates to be assimilated, organized and sustained. Essentially, a 'foothold' in 2D allows control of 1D (and 3D of 2D, etc). These 2D distortions are themselves also vibrations, rotations, etc of space/time. 3D space/time: body - 3D controlled matter 3D time/space: mind - controller of 'controlled matter' (identity/ethics) 2D space/time: body - 2D controlled matter 2D time/space: mind - the controller 1D space/time: body - light and matter 1D time/space: 'mind' - energy 'nonlocal' RE: Ra's "photon" vs. electromagnetic radiation - Poffo - 03-31-2011 Apologies for such a late reply. I just got a new job and haven't been able to dedicate much time here. I was also hoping that others might contribute. (03-07-2011, 01:06 AM)Crimson Wrote: My understanding is that the photon as related to densitities are quantum shifts and 'pulls' to the visible light frequency spectrum. I don't quite understand what you're saying here. I understand there is a true analogous correlation between colours of the VLS (light) and the spectrum of densities (Light). But, I'm trying to figure out whether the EM spectrum counts as the first level on the scale of 1st density or whether it's outside of the densities altogether. I have trouble with the following bolded text from the Law of One: Quote:27.16 Questioner: Then this vibration which is, for lack of better understanding, pure motion; it is pure love; it is nothing that is yet condensed, shall we say, to form any type of density of illusion. This Love then creates by this process of vibration a photon, as we call it, which is the basic particle of light. This photon then, by added vibrations and rotation, further condenses into particles of the densities we experience. Is this correct? I don't see where this fits with the standard model, and this is because I'm not sure Don is describing such a photon, but rather going with the 3rd distortion which forms the densities of Ra's cosmology. (03-07-2011, 01:44 AM)zenmaster Wrote: 3D space/time: body - 3D controlled matter So are you saying that EM radiation is included in the space/time aspect of 1d? The time/space of 1d is a bit of a mystery to me. /:idea:
RE: Ra's "photon" vs. electromagnetic radiation - Etude in B Minor - 03-31-2011 I think of the densities as embodying different physical laws. Thus the "standard model" of modern physics is describing 3rd density physics only. The "added vibrations and rotation" suggest that in higher densities photons, or the corresponding entity, has more rotational degrees of vibrational freedom. In 3rd density physics a photon is specified by having a single "spin" quantum number of 1 (as do the other carriers of force, which become indistinguishable at high energies/temperatures). Particles such as electrons have a spin number of 1/2. I think (with nothing to back this up besides that it could produce more complex physics) that in higher densities the photon (and other particles) has more than one quantum number that define its behaviour. In certain cases these particles would be able to interact with 3rd density physical systems (e.g. by projection) but would otherwise be incompatible and not interactive (and hence would appear invisible to each other). RE: Ra's "photon" vs. electromagnetic radiation - zenmaster - 03-31-2011 (03-31-2011, 03:14 AM)Poffo Wrote: I'm trying to figure out whether the EM spectrum counts as the first level on the scale of 1st density or whether it's outside of the densities altogether.EM spectrum is 1st density. It's the least complex form of light. (03-31-2011, 03:14 AM)Poffo Wrote: I have trouble with the following bolded text from the Law of One:Don's referring to the Reciprocal System of Theory. (03-31-2011, 03:14 AM)Poffo Wrote: So are you saying that EM radiation is included in the space/time aspect of 1d? The time/space of 1d is a bit of a mystery to me.Yes. EM radiation is a "vibration" of the photon. I see time/space as non-local. (03-31-2011, 07:27 PM)Etude in B Minor Wrote: Thus the "standard model" of modern physics is describing 3rd density physics only.It's actually defining a portion of 1st density only. If we get to the point of realizing a physics of biology (2nd density), then I'd imagine we'd have our 'free energy' technology. RE: Ra's "photon" vs. electromagnetic radiation - Poffo - 04-01-2011 (03-31-2011, 09:19 PM)zenmaster Wrote: EM spectrum is 1st density. It's the least complex form of light. This leads to interesting thoughts because 8th and 1st density are intimately related. I wonder at what point the EM spectrum lies in the 1st density octave. If 8th and 1st blend into each other then perhaps it's actually at the mid point or even higher. Quote:Don's referring to the Reciprocal System of Theory. Right. I've not studied it much to know. Does Larson differentiate between typical photons and The Photon which the entirety of Creation is made of? Quote:Yes. EM radiation is a "vibration" of the photon. I see time/space as non-local. Ok, I guess I just find it funny that the photon can mean a very specific thing in science and something all encompassing in the the Larson/Ra use of the term. Yeah, non-local it must be since there would only be 1 dimension of space. What I meant by 1d time/space being such a mystery to me is that it's incredibly hard to picture what it consists of. What exactly is non-local energy? ---- Thanks Etude for the response. Interesting thoughts for me to ponder. --- I think the general idea here is that photons of the EM spectrum, though fundamental to lower density (1st-3rd/4th) dynamics, is only one part of the the full spectrum of the Light of Creation, and belongs somewhere in the 1st density octave. /:idea:
RE: Ra's "photon" vs. electromagnetic radiation - Ens Entium - 04-01-2011 Hi Poffo Sorry for being late about this. As i understand the reciprocal system of theory, the photon can be thought of as the basic unit of motion, this is scalar motion. 'Vibrational' motion. The various rotations result in different the different phenomena and particles. By the way, there was a Q'uo transcript in which it's mentioned that the imbalance between the energies of space and time are what result in the oscillatory motion, that we detect as 'a particle'. I can't find it now but one can search for it. There are a good series of essays on the reciprocal system's website. In the collected essays section, look at the series called "Step-by-Step". http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/ce/step/index.htm The sections i think will be of particular interest to you are sections D,E and F. From section D: Quote:# The vectorial direction corresponding to this inward (negative) scalar direction, like the vectorial direction of the non-rotating photon, is a result of viewing the motion in the context of an arbitrary reference system, rather than an inherent property of the motion itself. The vectorial direction is therefore determined entirely by chance in both cases. However, the non-rotating photon remains in the same absolute location permanently (unless acted upon by an outside agency) and the direction determined at the time of emission is therefore permanent. The rotating photon, on the other hand, is continually moving from one absolute location to another as it travels back along the line of progression, and each time it enters a new location, the vectorial direction is redetermined by the chance proess. Inasmuch as all directions are equally probable, the motion will be distributed uniformly over all directions in the long run. A rotating photon will therefore move inward toward all space (or time) locations other than the one that it happens to occupy momentarily. From section E: Quote:# The rest of section E is interesting because he goes on to show how the various chemical elements are classed according to how rotational motion happens. It makes me think of the bit where Ra says that materials (it was a crystal i think) are "frozen light". I see now, frozen in motion. Really neat. ![]() Here's from section F: The displacements given are displacements in the time dimensions. net time displacement. Quote:2. On this basis, the sub-atomic particles are not constituents of atoms, as viewed by current physical theory. They are incomplete atoms; that is, they are rotational combinations which do not have enough net total time displacement to form the two rotating systems that are required by the definition of an atom previously stated. Quote:Summary of Sub-Atomic Particles These are the quote i think address what you're looking for. Let me know what you think... Alternatively, you could think of the photon being the mediator of electromagnetism and then you can see gravity as the BxV EMF, caused by moving electrons, field asymmetrically acting in the direction of the proton, to give you the central tendency. This then deflects electron orbitals and then atoms to the more massive object (atom). Let me know if i left out anything here, i haven't looked at RST with regard to strong and weak nuclear forces. Thank you for bringing this topic up!
RE: Ra's "photon" vs. electromagnetic radiation - zenmaster - 04-01-2011 (04-01-2011, 03:07 AM)Poffo Wrote:Larson posits that the photon is a manifestation of a vibration, or a displacement from unity of space and time (that he calls 'motion'). So motion is primary, not the photon. But the photon would be the most fundamental entity created from this space-time displacement. Larson's 'motion' is also not primarily vectorial (as in 3D cartesian), but scalar in nature.(03-31-2011, 09:19 PM)zenmaster Wrote: EM spectrum is 1st density. It's the least complex form of light. Larson gets into some speculation about biological and ethical possibilities in the book 'Beyond Space and Time'. I suppose that could be considered to touch on 2nd-density and 3D-density. But Larson was careful not to overreach and actually didn't want the book to be published in his lifetime. (04-01-2011, 03:07 AM)Poffo Wrote:Most of workable science is particle, field and forced based. Larson thought the RS model was more primary because it explained the origin of particles and forces (i.e. gravity).(03-31-2011, 09:19 PM)zenmaster Wrote: Yes. EM radiation is a "vibration" of the photon. I see time/space as non-local. (04-01-2011, 03:07 AM)Poffo Wrote: Yeah, non-local it must be since there would only be 1 dimension of space. What I meant by 1d time/space being such a mystery to me is that it's incredibly hard to picture what it consists of.In Larson's terminolgy space-time = time/space, and time-space = space/time. (04-01-2011, 03:07 AM)Poffo Wrote: What exactly is non-local energy?Here's a physics professor's take on it: http://library.rstheory.org/articles/KVK/NonLocality.html (04-01-2011, 03:07 AM)Poffo Wrote: I think the general idea here is that photons of the EM spectrum, though fundamental to lower density (1st-3rd/4th) dynamics, is only one part of the the full spectrum of the Light of Creation, and belongs somewhere in the 1st density octave.Again, the EM spectrum (measurable radiation with frequency range) is only of 1st density. While 'motion' and 'light' (generic) are part of the entire creation. RE: Ra's "photon" vs. electromagnetic radiation - transiten - 04-01-2011 What does Nassim Haramein have to say on this subject? I watcehd his theory on Singularity some years ago, must "mercury retrograde review it" transiten |