Gravity, it's not a force!

[3D Sunset]

What are your thoughts people? Does this come close to what Dewey Larson explained?

Hi Ali,

Larson says that gravity is an artifact of the vectoral expansion of the universe at unit speed (which is the speed of light), versus the rotational velocities that cause light to become more dense and form matter. Don Elkins alludes to this in the following dialog:

Questioner: I believe that Love creates the vibration in space/time in order to form the photon. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is essentially correct.

Questioner: Then the continued application of Love—I will assume that this is directed by a sub-Logos or a sub-sub-Logos—creates rotations of these vibrations which are in discrete units of angular velocity. This then creates chemical elements in our physical illusion and I will assume the elements in the nonphysical or other densities in the illusion. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. The Logos creates all densities. Your question was unclear.
However, we shall state the Logos does create both the space/time densities and the accompanying time/space densities.

Questioner: What I am assuming is that quantized incremental rotations of the vibrations show up as a material of these densities. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is essentially correct.

Questioner: Then because of these rotations there is an inward motion of these particles which is opposite the direction of space/time progression as I understand it, and this inward progression then is seen by us as what we call gravity. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is incorrect.

Questioner: Can you tell me how the gravity comes about?

Ra: I am Ra. This that you speak of as gravity may be seen as the pressing towards the inner light/love, the seeking towards the spiral line of light which progresses towards the Creator. This is a manifestation of a spiritual event or condition of living-ness.

Don is trying to get Ra to bless Larson's theories. Ra however seems concerned that Don is trying to describe the processes of materialization and physical laws without giving appropriate credit to the Creator in the process. It is one of the more humorous interchanges in my opinion, because Ra seems determined to vex Don's attempt to leave the Creator and our spiritual searching out of our system of physical laws. All that aside, Ra later concedes that Larson is correct for as far as he goes in his Theory.

For what I can glean about the works of Mr. Verlinde, his approach seems orthagonal to Larson, as is most other work of modern physics. That is not to say that it is incorrect. Indeed, Larson's Reciprocal System of Theories (RST) creates a framework that allows most other modern "theories" to co-exist, seeing most of those theories actually as their mathematical models than the theories per se. I suspect that in time the RST experts (a group of which I am emphatically not a member, I hasten to point out) will find Mr. Verlinde works a rightful place in the Reciprocal System of Theories.

Love and Light,

3D Sunset