Scientific validation of Law of One series

[Derek]

Hi everyone,

I was listening to one of the recent "Q and A with Carla Rueckart" episodes, and the question of whether there is anything that can scientifically validate the Law of One came up. I immediately thought of a series of three free online books written by David Wilcock that prove many of the concepts of the Law of One series scientifically, and can be of great value to many seekers.

Some of the concepts that are proven

Vital Energy (torsion fields)
Higher Densities (an octave of densities)
Pyramids harnessing energy
Global evolutionary cycle
And many many more

So enjoy
http://divinecosmos.com/index.php/start-...ree-online

[C-JEAN]

Hi, Carla & Ra fans!

About some "proof", one of "them" is totaly obvious for me:
It is about the **inconveniences** we should observe ! !

Look at "what" is happening around the world:
floods, more volcano activity, land slides, droughts,
unusual snow in USA and UK, economy down,
now South America is "tasting" it ! ! etc. . .etc. . .
. . .earthquakeS. . .etc. . .

For me, it is extraordinary that some 2008-2012
"problems" would be announced in 1981 !!!

Blue skies.

[AnthroHeart]

Indeed. The probability vortexes for these events must not have been that strong that far back.

For me, it is extraordinary that some 2008-2012
"problems" would be announced in 1981 !!!

Blue skies.

[Ankh]

Now I am not a geek and have a slight interest in scientific research, but still "scientific proof" is proof beyond any doubt. It is something that I can touch, feel and see. If there is not then it must be some machine that can "transform" the invisible to visible. For instance we can't hear radio waves, but our radio "can". It has a receiver that can transform radio waves into the sound complexies that my ears can perceive.

Maybe it is not what you meant, Derek, but proof of vital energies, higher densities and global weather changes are not the real proof of Law of One. Of course there are higher densities as some particles are more dense or compact in their structure than others. For instance the Venus atmosphere is more dense then our own because it contains particles that are more dense in its structure, carbone dioxide. Global weather changes do occur now and then. Last time it was during WW II. Winters were particular hard in years 1942-1943. Then there are sunstorms that have cycles of 11 years and some of these cycles are perticular powerful. Last time this kind of cycle occured was in 1958 when you could see northern lights all the way to Mexico. Next time it is going to occur - guess when? 2013.

No, scientific proof of Law of One will only exist when Ra actually will physically descend on this Earth on more time. I don't want to desillusion you, but it is a great strugle for me to "take it on faith". I don't have any other choice than to take it on faith since there is no proof that Ra actually exists, but I can't live in any other way. So it is all about the faith. Because you see, even if you do remember something, how do you know that it is not your brain that producing a fake memory for you to feel good? Maybe some scientists in 100 years or so will find a gene that are specially representative in caucasian race giving what would be called "Wanderer's Syndrome"?

It will never be that simple I'm afraid that we can scientifically prove existence of Ra and therefore what they teach/learn. And even if they would exist, how would you know what they say/said is true? Maybe they are just fooling you around. Therefore "take what resonates with you" parts. Until they descend in front of me, remove the veil completly and I would scream "brooooothers" it will always be about the Faith.

Sorry if I sounded a bit negative. It is sensitive matter to me right now since I am trying to practice Law of One in every day life without any physical/scientific evidence or proof of it.

[Derek]

Now I am not a geek and have a slight interest in scientific research, but still "scientific proof" is proof beyond any doubt. It is something that I can touch, feel and see. If there is not then it must be some machine that can "transform" the invisible to visible. For instance we can't hear radio waves, but our radio "can". It has a receiver that can transform radio waves into the sound complexies that my ears can perceive.

Maybe it is not what you meant, Derek, but proof of vital energies, higher densities and global weather changes are not the real proof of Law of One. Of course there are higher densities as some particles are more dense or compact in their structure than others. For instance the Venus atmosphere is more dense then our own because it contains particles that are more dense in its structure, carbone dioxide. Global weather changes do occur now and then. Last time it was during WW II. Winters were particular hard in years 1942-1943. Then there are sunstorms that have cycles of 11 years and some of these cycles are perticular powerful. Last time this kind of cycle occured was in 1958 when you could see northern lights all the way to Mexico. Next time it is going to occur - guess when? 2013.

No, scientific proof of Law of One will only exist when Ra actually will physically descend on this Earth on more time. I don't want to desillusion you, but it is a great strugle for me to "take it on faith". I don't have any other choice than to take it on faith since there is no proof that Ra actually exists, but I can't live in any other way. So it is all about the faith. Because you see, even if you do remember something, how do you know that it is not your brain that producing a fake memory for you to feel good? Maybe some scientists in 100 years or so will find a gene that are specially representative in caucasian race giving what would be called "Wanderer's Syndrome"?

It will never be that simple I'm afraid that we can scientifically prove existence of Ra and therefore what they teach/learn. And even if they would exist, how would you know what they say/said is true? Maybe they are just fooling you around. Therefore "take what resonates with you" parts. Until they descend in front of me, remove the veil completly and I would scream "brooooothers" it will always be about the Faith.

Sorry if I sounded a bit negative. It is sensitive matter to me right now since I am trying to practice Law of One in every day life without any physical/scientific evidence or proof of it.

Hi Ankh,
I can certainly understand your struggle, and I did not want to imply that "the Law of One" or "Ra" could be proven. Only that certain concepts that are brought up in the Law of One series could be. There are many metaphysical concepts in the Law of One that cannot be proven, and must be taken on faith. Some though, can certainly be proven.

Vital Energy, for example can be measured in the laboratory. The Russians have been doing all kinds of scientific experiments with this energy (which they call "torsion fields") for 100 years and published thousands and thousands of scientific papers. We can also prove that pyramids harness this energy and result in things such as a dramatic increase in crop yields, oil production, healing etc and decreases in violent weather, crime etc.

Of course there was a very detailed discussion of Larsionian physics in (I believe) the second book of the Law of One. The cycle I was referring to was actually the precession of the equinoxes which occurs every 25,000 years and is part of nearly every ancient cultures mythology. We cannot prove "the Law of One", but we can prove that we are all part of a unified field of energy that unites all matter and concioussness in the universe.

The overall story of the Law of One, Logos, Creation etc must be taken on faith though.

Many Blessings

[zenmaster]

Hi everyone,

I was listening to one of the recent "Q and A with Carla Rueckart" episodes, and the question of whether there is anything that can scientifically validate the Law of One came up. I immediately thought of a series of three free online books written by David Wilcock that prove many of the concepts of the Law of One series scientifically, and can be of great value to many seekers.

Some of the concepts that are proven

Vital Energy (torsion fields)
Higher Densities (an octave of densities)
Pyramids harnessing energy
Global evolutionary cycle
And many many more

So enjoy
http://divinecosmos.com/index.php/start-...ree-online

No, they do not prove anything scientifically. And there are no scientific theories proposed. This is not opinion.

[Monica]

No, they do not prove anything scientifically. And there are no scientific theories proposed. This is not opinion.

Maybe not proof per se, but I thought the tiny airplane models found in the pyramids were rather compelling.

[Derek]

Hi everyone,

I was listening to one of the recent "Q and A with Carla Rueckart" episodes, and the question of whether there is anything that can scientifically validate the Law of One came up. I immediately thought of a series of three free online books written by David Wilcock that prove many of the concepts of the Law of One series scientifically, and can be of great value to many seekers.

Some of the concepts that are proven

Vital Energy (torsion fields)
Higher Densities (an octave of densities)
Pyramids harnessing energy
Global evolutionary cycle
And many many more

So enjoy
http://divinecosmos.com/index.php/start-...ree-online

This is not opinion.

It seems like a very strong one.

Maybe proof is too strong of a word. Those books present very compelling scientific evidence, and if you read them, you will proabably agree. You don't appear to have done that, given that fact that those books present several scientific theories and prove many things.

I'm not sure why this is so controversial.

Best Wishes to all
Derek

[Ankh]

I'm not sure why this is so controversial.

Best Wishes to all
Derek

Dear brother,

Sometimes a mind sees what the heart wants to see, and sometimes a mind is trying to fool the self for you to feel better. We are then trying to find physical/scientific proof of stuff that we want to believe in, that we sometimes need to believe in, and ignoring all other things that poiting in the opposite direction. It is controversial in the way that is a sensitive subject to most of the people that are trying to take it on Faith. It is probably why religions started/start to fight each other. Religion and different other belief forms, like LOO, are matter of personal belief and need to believe in something better, more beautiful and geniune. That's what makes it so vulnerable. What if it would come some scientific discovery that clearly contradicts some big subjects discussed in LOO? Would we "believe" the science or would it hurt us so much that we would shut our eyes and ears and stubbornly continue look for proof that would support our faith? Would we be so much different then compare to other religious groups? Vulnerability lies in not knowing if your beautiful hopes and dreams are true. You want them to be true, but can't prove it. So we try then to find information that supports that "truth".
Please continue with your discussion. I didn't mean to interrupt it.

Namaste, brother.

[Derek]

Hi Ankh,

Your totally fine, no worries
I just sensed more aversion to those books than I thought there would be (I didn't think there would be any). I certainly agree that the fundamental basis for spirituality is Faith, and you make a good point. I simply wanted to provide a confirmation for many seekers, grounded in scientific documentation. I thought that it could enhance ones faith. I also wanted to provide a way of giving those (like the person in the Q and A episode I referenced) with a scientific mind a way to digest the Law of One alot easier.

Namaste
Derek

[Ankh]

I simply wanted to provide a confirmation for many seekers, grounded in scientific documentation. I thought that it could enhance ones faith.

You continue to do that, brother! You are doing a great job! Don't let my personal issues to interrupt your work.

Namasté

[zenmaster]

Not that they're not interesting or don't have value or merit to me (my opinion). I can enjoy reading the material for what it is and appreciate his efforts. I was particularly addressing the claim that it contains scientific proof. It simply does not, of course. Sure, he might claim that his presentation supports an intuitive idea that he imagines. But that is not how a rigorous scientific discovery process works.

I've been following David's work since his first posts on the internet, and have read the Convergence material. My criticism would be the hyper-intuitive approach of presenting tenuous connections to disparate things. And most of that done to support his unique confirmation-bias reality. I wonder how he and his followers will react to reality after 2012.

[Plenum]

I've been following David's work since his first posts on the internet, and have read the Convergence material. My criticism would be the hyper-intuitive approach of presenting tenuous connections to disparate things. And most of that done to support his unique confirmation-bias reality.

I wonder how he and his followers will react to reality after 2012.

I wonder indeed.

[Richard]

Probably the same way as the rest of them....something "did" happen. "You" just aren't..."attuned, light focused or just plain lucky" enough to recognize it for what it is/was.

[Plenum]

do you mind expanding further Richard?

did you have an experience as such?

what has changed for you since Dec 21?

[Richard]

Nothing has really changed for me physically, Plenum. Spiritually yes, but even that has been a journey for me. Nothing eye opening in the space of 24 hours.

I was being facetious re what a lot of channels are saying right now after they all predicted great happenings on 12-21.

[Plenum]

hey Richard, I thought the sarcasm filter was on with all the 'air quotes'.

personally, my own transformations continue, but I'm not going to try to imply that its because the 'world itself has changed'.