4/5 페이지 처음처음 1 2 3 4 5 마지막마지막
Results 7 to 8 of 9

제목: PJ#074, MYSTERIES OF RADIANCE UNFOLDED

  1. #7
    宇宙生命一家, 無次 Justice Future Society Institute wave's Avatar
    가입일
    2004-07-16
    게시글
    1,180
    힐링에너지
    100

    Default

    PJ 74
    CHAPTER 11

    REC #1 HATONN

    SUN., JULY 25. 1993 9:18 A.M. YEAR 6, DAY 343

    SUN., JULY 25, 1993


    LET THERE BE LIGHT
    In the interest of continuity let us just continue with the printing of articles on the subject of Mr. Walter Russell as appeared in his time, relative to his approach to science subjects, in the New York Times. Since our focused interest is toward Mr. Russell's scientific work, at this time, we shall leave alone his approach to metaphysics or philosophy. Nora is working on a "biographical study" of the Life and Times of said Mr. Russell and the Uni­versity of Science and Philosophy. So, in order to not cause trouble flares with US&P regarding contempt charges against Dharma for writing on the subject, we shall not refer to that at all.

    Our only purpose here is to offer public "articles" regarding Russell's subjects as presented. I would, however, ask that these writings of mine AND copies of the copies of the articles themselves be forwarded to Nora for her information. Thank you. For prior articles on this subject please see the writing of July 23, 1993 of which this is simply a continuation.

    I have two comments as we enter into this writing which I con­sider so important as to stop and pre-focus your attention. I am asked why I do not "always" refer to Russell as doctor (Dr.)? Because, even though it is that perhaps US&P and Lao Russell desired the designation to give advanced implication and infer­ence of Earth-based "physical" academic achievement-the only doctorate received EVER by Russell--was an honorary one. I have stated before that "I" may well refer to Russell as "doctor" because of my own RESPECT AND HONOR TO THE MAN IN POINT AND THE KNOWLEDGE THAT SURPASSES ANY SUCH KNOWLEDGE HELD BY THE PROFESSORS OF ACADEMIA.

    Next, you will see that I reprint a lot of the prior article in this writing. Why would I do that? BECAUSE IT IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT LESSONS ANY SCIENTIST OR STUDENT CAN RECEIVE! IN FACT!! So, we keep our Dr. Young so very busy with his Editorial duties and swamped in every kind of "other" task that he has not time to catch up with the information on "Light" that I have provided FOR him. So, there are some facts which are so important to ANY scientist working henceforth WITH ME AND TEAM, THAT HE MUST BRING THEM TO HIS EYES AND EARS AND ATTENTION WITHOUT CHOICE. HE MUST EDIT THIS WRITING FOR THE PAPER--SO HE WILL GET THIS LESSON WITHOUT FURTHER SEARCHING! HE, NEITHER, PRIOR TO ME, HAD SO MUCH AS HEARD OF WALTER RUSSELL--AND YET HE HOLDS PHDs, OR EQUIVALENTS, IN AT LEAST THREE SCIENTIFIC SUBJECTS. THIS IS WHY DR. YOUNG IS IN THIS LOCATION WITH "US"--FOR THIS SCIENTIFIC ADVENTURE IS HIS PURPOSE--NOT DAB­BLING IN PRINTED NEWSPAPERS. HE DOES, HOW­EVER, NEED TO MAKE SOME OF THE CONTACTS WHICH SHALL COME FROM THIS PAPER--SO BEAR WITH US, ALL OF YOU AS THE CALL GOES FORTH. THANK YOU.

    Dr. Young is a young man who has all the ridiculous eccentrici­ties of "habit" as did Tesla, Edison, Einstein, etc. He stays up communing and tinkering, thinking and working ALL NIGHT--­and is found to be "absent" most of the daylight hours until "awakening" again toward evening. Does this mean that he "sleeps" all day and is unavailable? Yes, it would APPEAR TO BE THAT WAY--but NO indeedy, WE WORK HIM DAY AND NIGHT! The very hub of your cycling is based solely on PHYSICS (not mystical garbage) and he is trained to recognize the truth, assumptions, separate out theories from fact and bring some massive changes upon your place--IN TRUTH. I honor him and ask him to bear with us while we catch-up some of the citizens so that we can move on in that which is absolute and necessary. It means moving through the trash heap of politics and other human physical incantations. But, he is busy and his interests are narrow enough in attention that I have to cause him to monitor EVERYTHING (for the CONTACT) so that he doesn't simply "miss" the important messages. It makes good lessons for ALL OF YOU and allows you to see that you can NEVER learn the facts of your own BEING with the WRONG ASSUMPTIONS! Consider me simply a Cohan (professor/­teacher) and you as chela (student) and the mystical relationship will vanish.

    Dharma is NOT some "UFO Lady" as referred to her, directly, by a most uninformed "investigative reporter" who announced that Dharma passes out misinformation and other insulting thrusts. Dharma asked this person if she "had read the paper"? The response in loud and emphatic terms: "No, I try never to read such a thing." Dharma then asked her how she could be a worthy researcher of anything in such circumstances as to "know nothing" about her subject. She said she was "going to sue" Dharma, the paper, everyone. E.J. simply told her she would have to "hurry"--at which point she flung down the phone so as to probably break it. Is this not the same as Dr. Jackson? "I refuse to even consider or read your presentations--I have heard you are a disinformation source for nit-wit scientists against our 'sacred' set ideas and do not enlighten me for I am already a "sacred research journalist/scientist." We welcome all suits in the courts of law for even as the LIES are told in court--­the Truth is also THERE and will always, sometime, some­where, someday, "when you least expect it", smile, you are on Candid Truth.

    ARTICLES ON WALTER RUSSELL
    (from the New York Times)
    I shall reprint the "response by Dr. Russell" to Dr. Jackson as we see that the sender of the information was far more exacting than were we. He has sent the "missing" portions in a separate copy and therefore, since we may have left out much in the prior presentment, we shall simply offer the "reply" again.

    August 3, 1930

    RESPONSE OF RUSSELL TO JACKSON
    To the Editor of The New York Times:

    Dr. John E. Jackson's letter to you, a copy of which he gra­ciously sent to me, is a perfectly natural letter of resentment for which I do not blame him in the least.

    It is true that I have challenged the accuracy or completeness of the Newtonian laws of gravitation and will just as vigorously attack the other "sacred laws" of Kepler, and any others, either ancient or modern, that need modifying or rewriting to fit the needs of a civilization whose onward march is held back by the untruths, or half truths, of those who rely upon the deceptive evidence of what their eyes think they see.

    I am sorry that an artist had to do it, but Sir Oliver Lodge said that no scientist could make the supreme discovery of the one thing for which science is looking and hoping. He said that such a discovery would have to be the "supreme inspiration of some poet, painter, philosopher or saint."

    SUPPLYING NEEDED IMAGINATION
    In other words, science sorely needs the imagination of an artist or poet to synthesize here heterogeneous complexities, and put her on the path of simplicity and truth; for nature is very simple in her causes. She is complex only in her repetitive ef­fects.

    I have not said that Newton's laws were wrong, for they are right as far as they go. They are only half-truths, though. Ke­pler's first law is not only a half truth, but the half that is stated is inaccurately stated.

    Science should be exact, not approximate or inferential.

    Just as Newton left out all consideration of the equal and op­posite reaction to the attraction of gravitation, which is the re­pulsion of radiation, so does Kepler leave the other focus of his ellipses out of his consideration. "The sun is one of the foci of planetary elliptical paths," he says; but how about the other one? My friendly critics will of course admit that there are two foci to any elliptical orbit. If one of these foci is important, why is not the other equally so?

    What is the cause of elliptical orbits if not that some doubly acting force, concentrated at two foci, is exerting its opposite in­fluences on both masses, not on one. For this reason also it is inaccurate, because untrue, to say that the sun is at one of its foci. That infers that the sun's centre is one of its foci, which is not true. The true focus, which only happens to be within the sun, because of the sun's huge bulk, is the mutual gravitative centre of both sun and planet, or earth and moon.

    LAW MERELY LOCAL
    If a planet happened to be a big fellow, the focus referred to would be a long way outside of the sun. For this reason, the law is purely a local one, limited to a solar system, and would not apply to two solar systems or to two bodies of approximately equal mass revolving around each other, as a universal law should apply.

    The neglected focus is the mutual centre of repulsion which is the lowest point in the pressure gradient between any two masses. These two oppositely acting foci are the controls which determine the orbits of both masses around each other instead of one mass around the other, which was the apparent limit of Ke­pler's consideration.

    Perhaps Dr. Jackson will explain to me why Kepler and Newton, and all who have followed since then, have shirked this other necessary focus and have given us only the perfectly obvi­ous one.

    If Newton had watched that apple compose itself from low potential gases and liquids to high potential solids, saw it fall, and still remained on his job watching it decompose back again into low potential gases and vapors as it arose, we might have had a complete law of gravitation which would have been a great aid in putting a much-needed foundation under the feet of science during these intervening centuries.

    FAIR TREATMENT ASKED
    I am offering again my contribution to what seems to me the unstable foundation beneath the feet of science. Einstein and others have already been respectfully credited for the same ideas which, when published by me, had formerly brought me ridicule. All I ask is a consideration of my ideas and fair treat­ment.

    I have begun by correcting the Eddington idea of a running­-down universe, by supplying the other half of Newton's laws and Kepler's neglected focus, which makes the universe a con­tinuing one. This must be followed up by correcting many other things, such as the structure of the atom, the supposed nature of the electron and kindred fantasies, illusions, cosmogonies and hypotheses, which have succeeded each other for three hundred years, none of which survive the test of five years trial without becoming as ephemeral as Laplace's nebular hypothesis or as old fashioned as a 1927 model of the atom.

    If Dr. Jackson thinks academic science is advancing, he is wrong. Industrial science is leaping ahead on restricted lines, but the theorists who draw fantastic conclusions from their ex­periments have "gone cubist". The "jumping electron" atom, and all other atomic models, with the exception of Rutherford's, for which so many Nobel prizes have been given, have no more relation to nature than green cheese has to the moon. And as for the little wire cages studded with marbles, which are supposed to show how the atoms determine crystallization--they are just FUNNY.

    WALTER RUSSELL New York, July 28, 1931.







    PJ 74
    CHAPTER 12

    REC #2 HATONN

    MON., JULY 26, 1993 12:11 P.M. YEAR 6, DAY 344

    MON., JULY 26, 1993

    Continuation: Articles regarding Walter Russell, from the NEW YORK TIMES.

    EINSTEIN SEEMS TO SAY THAT THE
    UNALTERABLE CAN BE ALTERED
    August 10, 1930

    THEREFORE, ONE HOLDS, VIEWS OF BOTH DR. JACK­SON AND MR. RUSSELL ARE BORNE OUT.

    To the Editor of the New York Times:

    The letters of Dr. John E, Jackson and Walter Russell in The Times of Aug. 3 contain, respectively, "For nearly 300 years no one, not even a scientist, has had the temerity to question New­ton's laws of gravitation,' and "science needs the imagination of an artist or poet to synthesize her heterogeneous complexities .,," both of which statements seem to be representative of aca­demic static and dynamic thought, for the contributions of sci­ence to art and art to science are relative with respect to the analysis and synthesis of primitive symbolism.

    The questioning of Newton's laws and Kepler's extensions is a timely and healthy inquiry directed at contemporary cosmoge­netics. The assimilation of knowledge within an individual ex­perience, therefore, can be regarded rightly as either static or dynamic, can be applied as a simple correlation of established facts, or can be accepted as a means for concentrating on and contributing to progressive thought.

    In the latter instance it is clear that a metaphysical perspec­tive upon the collective result of recent scientific research is causing many to refer to earlier basic laws. For the most part this reversion seems to extend as far as Newton and from thence is carried forward again in general, through Faraday and Maxwell, Eddington, Compton, Heisenberg and Einstein. The net result permits a repostulation of the laws of gravitation linked with the electromagnetic theory and tied to the cosmic continuum by means of a conception or reconception of time, space and matter.

    THE ARTISTIC "CENTRE"
    In supporting Mr. Russell's request for fair treatment, it may be added that the abstractions of science, along with the reality of art, present a fundamental intellectual and physical process to which the effort and production of the individual is irrevocably linked. The binder is found in the symbolism of primitive form. Just as the mathematician frees his mind from the concrete by conceiving modern zero to be infinity, and from it working out or back to his problem by means of symbolic devices in com­mon usage within his field, so the metaphysician accepts the as­sumption of a point as the centre for induction and the scientist regards it as the beginning for all deduction and correlation.

    If the laws of gravitation be considered as contributory rather than final, and if the electro-magnetic theory of a "field" be ac­cepted as local rather than inferential, then it is evident that the Russell genero-radiative concept of foci postulates an inert but not a natural centre-the "centre" used by the artist, poet, philosopher and scientist alike as a point for departure for all creative work. This "centre," however, seems to serve an addi­tional purpose, for it defines and subordinates the orbit of New­ton and the ellipses of Kepler--both of which are in elaboration of the Cartesian and Pythagorean theorems and axioms of coor­dinates.

    MUST ASSUME FOCI
    But in assuming the existence of "centres" (foci) as purely scientific abstractions within the cosmic structure (the recogni­tion of the actuality of coordinate systems of reference in rela­tion to infinite solar and planetary systems), we are able to dif­ferentiate within our mind the idea of force, acceleration, rota­tion and speed (time and distance), and to minimize the zero of the mathematician along with the esthetic and spiritual signifi­cance of the circle. The hypothesis then possible to establish provides a mental perspective on the metrics and geometries of both physical and cosmic space, and we find that Newton's laws contribute rather than define, and space itself resolves and evolves into a measurable unit in terms of physical content and direction. It remains to articulate and delineate our current knowledge from an inert point, which we can place into ab­stract, real or natural movement within our particular field as a true centre--the pure symbolism of which is evident because of the simplicity of the concept. If we do just that, and no more, we find that we must introduce the basic elements that form our individual opinion or experience with the laws of centripetal and centrifugal force. The application of these elements in logical or structural sequence (elements drawn from the contemporary re­search field of pure and applied science) provides a simple "tool" for effecting abstract, physical and social deduction so that we can bring any inert point into continuous movement, the direction of which is horizontal or vertical, with respect to the laws of gravitation, and the delineation of which forms a true and natural centre.

    NEWTON'S LAWS OUESTIONED
    To aid and abet an escape from academic finality by means of such generalities is admittedly the essence of temerity, but Newton's laws have been repeatedly, consistently and profitably questioned. They are rightly finite in analysis so why not let them provide for the infinite in synthesis?

    In The Times of June 29 the pioneer achievement of Frank Lloyd Wright in the field of architectural form, design and the adaptation of materials, was outlined in a comprehensive article illustrating not only the functional relation of the engineer, the architect and the draftsman within the creative accomplishments of an individual, but also including contributions to modern ar­chitectural practice which may be attributed almost entirely to an understanding of Newton's dynamics. The catalogue of the Harvard Society for Contemporary Art states that Buckminster Fuller's dymaxion house is "the first complete attempt in archi­tectural design to acquire a symbolism of the fourth dimension as the designing method is literally from the 'inside out' on a radionic, time space and quantum basis." Mr. Fuller's approach to his problem is through spherical geometry and the application of simple dynamics to the evolution and introduction of new materials in the logical relation to height, bulk and weight re­quirements.

    "Roadtown" of Edgar Chambless, a practical conception of continuous structure within which is integrated all ways of communication, and the utilities of service, along with the bal­anced social system, constitutes a recognized application of the laws of centripetal and centrifugal social force (the centraliza­tion and decentralization of population) and is based upon social dynamics.

    My adaptation of historical and chronological time (the "inverted" or "coreless" pie-chart outlined in a letter to The Times of June 29 last) delivers a "linear scale," the simple graphics of which postulate the inert foci of Mr. Russell and give natural movement and direction to real and abstract deduc­tion, the dynamics of which is based upon the articulation of multiple correlations carried along at one time in logical, inte­grated and continuous sequence.

    Recent correspondence from Geneva published in The Times leads us to believe that Dr. Einstein has the temerity to extend the pure symbolism of his mathematical abstractions to include a world application to child education--an indication which seems to bear out the viewpoint of Dr. Jackson and Mr. Russell that the future is behind us, is common property, and anyone, even a scientist, is privileged to alter the unalterable.

    G.P. HERSEY,
    Ridgefield, Conn., Aug. 6, 1930

    * * *
    Now, readers, I would think that the last paragraph above repre­sents the intent of "public property" of these GREAT ideas as well as almost any statement found thus far. These men, ALL, recognized they gained knowledge from a source somehow and somewhere "higher" than the presenting "self" AND this pro­jects that these higher bits of information are for mankind--NOT TO HIDE BENEATH A BUSHEL IN SECRET PLACES GARNERED BY ONLY SELECT GROUPS OF ELITE OR FANCIED SELF-APPOINTED "KEEPERS". PLEASE REC­OGNIZE THAT IN HIS DAY G.P. HERSEY WAS PERHAPS FAR BETTER RECOGNIZED THAN EITHER RUSSELL OR JACKSON.

    Next comes a repeat of one we have already offered but I ask that Dharma retype it for I want it in her head, please. In the first offering we had "deleted lines" which were actually present but the one who did the copy work had carefully explained and marked the papers and Dharma just didn't see it in time to get the missing parts into that writing. It is important enough to re­peat it with the insertions. Please be patient for by the time we did that prior writing. Dharma had been at the keyboard over seven hours at start and the brain and the fingers get awash.

    Further, I had a VERY GOOD REASON for allowing the printing of the information EXACTLY as copied, with the lines missing, BECAUSE I WANT YOU TO NOTICE VERY CAREFULLY--THAT UNLESS YOU HAVE THE WHOLE THING--YOU CANNOT KNOW OF THAT WHICH YOU SPEAK OR HAVE OPINION! YOU MUST HAVE ALL OF THE MISSING INFORMATION TO FORM VALID CONCLUSIONS ABOUT ANYTHING. YOU SCIENTIFIC MINDS WOULD HAVE ALREADY HAD YOUR IMPA­TIENCE WITH ME FOR PRESENTING ONLY THE MAJOR PORTION OF THE ARTICLE AND THAT, DEAR ONES, IS THE HALF-TRUTH AT BEST, THAT HAS COME TO BE IN YOUR INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SERVICES.

    MR. RUSSELL FINDS SCIENTISTS TOO READY
    TO ACCEPT THEORY
    His Attempt at Reformation Not Based on Metaphysics, lie Declares.

    The New York Times, Aug. 17, 1930.

    To the Editor of The New York Times:

    Since the publication in the TIMES of my statement that mod­ern science is without a foundation and needs a major surgical operation to put it in line for a logical cosmogenetic synthesis, I have been bombarded by telephone and by letters questioning this statement and others made in my book The Russell Genera­-Radiative Concept, recently published.

    May I tell those people who think I have a superficial, meta­physical concept which I am trying to inject into practical sci­ence for its reformation that I am as thoroughly prepared to carry out my program with dynamic answers, not metaphysical ones, as Copernicus was when he upset an equally obstinate world of thoroughly satisfied Ptolemyites? Also I am as thor­oughly aware of the difficulties of uprooting established ideas as he was.

    I am also thoroughly conversant not only with every experi­ment that has given science its present unstable state, but also with the wrongful deductions which have resulted from those experiments.

    KNOWS SCIENTISTS' THEORIES
    I am as familiar with the experiments and observations of Newton and Kepler as I am of those of Faraday, Cavendish, Rutherford, Bohr or Millikan, and I also am as familiar with the things which these great men did not see in their own experi­ments as those which they did see, and even then misinterpreted.

    An observation of an effect of Nature is equal to an experi­ment and a proper deduction from either is more important than either.

    Newton, for example, would have solved the other half of the gravitational problem if he had found out how that apple and the tree upon which It grew got up in the air before the ap­ple fell.

    I challenge the world of science to correctly and completely answer that question. Let your readers qualify for the right to subject me to their criticism as an impractical visionary by first giving a dynamic answer to this by no means simple question.

    Therefore I say to all my critics who wonder why I do not go into the laboratory and "perform experiments" that I do perform experiments in physical laboratories and make profound obser­vations in Nature's vast laboratory that have fitted me to make new and logical deductions from old experiments which have no inconsistencies and no exceptions.

    EFFECTS OF MOTION ILLUSIONS
    To illustrate: Suppose a man experimented with the moon running behind the trees as he ran, then set down his conclu­sions from the "facts", as he saw them, such as the correspon­dence of acceleration and deceleration to his speed, we could easily point out the error of such a deduction because we are familiar with the illusions of perspective.

    Science has never considered the fact that in the universe of motion all effects of motion are illusions. Illusions are not lim­ited to perspective but to every electrical, chemical and as­tronomical relation.

    Nature is the supreme deceiver, the champion "poker bluffer", who, with a simple hand, makes you think she has much.

    Nature is simple. She has but one force (which she divides into two), one form (which she divides into many), and seven patterns (which she complexes by repeating them in such mar­velous systems of wave periodicities that it needs imagination, rather than eyesight, to coordinate them).

    Nature can be beautifully described by that child's toy of hexagonal mirrors which makes the most exquisite and complex patterns in color and form out of a bit of feather, some chips of colored glass, a toothpick and other odds and ends.

    Everyone knows how those simple things are not only com­plexed but glorified by such a treatment.

    NATURE'S SIMPLE PRINCIPLES
    My humble contribution to science is to point out these sim­ple principles of Nature which would, if known, have prevented one untruth to pile up on top of another until, even with the aid of experimentation, a theory which can survive five years is ex­ceptional.

    I will warrant that the dinner coat which Sir Oliver Lodge wore in New York when he delivered his lecture on energy and atomic structure is still presentable, but Sir Oliver himself would under no consideration repeat that lecture today.

    The entire modern theory of atomic structure is so utterly without parallel or precedent in Nature that fantasy only mildly expresses it. It is to be regretted that the profound thinking of profound men is thus being wasted on conclusions which cannot possibly endure. [H: It might be added that the profound thinking of those profound men are also kept from use and presentation by ones who do not understand the magnitude of the offering in point. It Is most certainly a time of coming together and sharing the gifts as given so that civilization CAN ENDURE.)

    Scientists ignore Nature when they choose, or when mathe­matical formulae work out in accordance with preconceived premises. Scientists then become inventors and work out won­ders which Nature never thought of. I can cite hundreds of such inventions born of supposedly observed facts of experiment.

    LAPLACE'S MISTAKES
    Mathematics are useless if the premises they start with are wrong. La Place, the greatest mathematician of his day, "proved" many things which have since been disproved. He even went so far as to prove that the outer edges of his rings moved faster than their inner surfaces, and his contemporaries accepted that impossibility as Niels Bohr's "jumping electron" was accepted by his contemporaries.

    Nature hasn't one separate series of laws for big mass and another series for small mass. She has one law for both, but science unhesitatingly invents a series of laws for little mass that outdoes the reliance of the Arthurian sages upon a credulous public.

    The moons of Jupiter and the planets of the sun pursue their courses around their primaries in an orderly periodic fashion in strict obedience to the two forces which command and control them from two foci.

    It would be the most astounding claim imaginable to state that this earth could suddenly jump to the orbit of Mars without consuming one-millionth of a second of time, yet that invention is the utterly fantastic and completely un­founded belief of modern science regarding the planets of the atom.

    I could write volumes based upon modern electrical experi­mental data to prove that such a happening is not in Nature's scheme.

    Science attributes this deduction to a "brilliant young Dane, Niels Bohr", who, working under Rutherford, proved it by ex­periment, backed by Rydburg's constant, Coulomb's law, math­ematics and the evidence of the spectroscope.

    Of what use is Bohr's mathematical equation regarding the hydrogen spectrum, for example, if the four admittedly assumed premises upon which it is based are not in accord with Nature's plan of motion?

    WRONG BASIC CONCLUSIONS
    Of what value also is the spectroscopic evidence if the pre­sumption that band-spectra are caused by molecules and line spectra by atoms is found to be a wrong one? In respect to this I am prepared to offer consistent reasons why band and line spec­tra have another and more logical cause.

    I can cite wrong premise after wrong premise which has caused science to form wrong basic conclusions, such as that there are separate negative and positive charges instead of dou­bly charged masses, also that positive and negative "charges" attract each other when the evidence in its favor is the simplest of Nature's illusions and there is an overwhelming amount of evidence against such a law. Take only one for example: How does science explain the fact that in all decomposing compounds like charges seek like charges and repel all others? If this law were true the universe which we know could not hold itself to­gether, for all similar substances and atoms of substances would be explosive, and a pound of anyone substance would be im­possible.

    WALTER RUSSELL
    New York, Aug. 12, 1930

    * * *

    SCIENTISTS SHOULD EXPLAIN

    The New York Times, Aug. 24, 1930.

    Written: GENEVA VIOLA WOLCOTT, New York, Aug. 18, 1930.

    To the Editor of the New York Times:

    Owing to the fact that the world and his wife are becoming astro-minded, the letter from Walter Russell that appeared in the Aug. 17 issue of the Times impels me to air my views de­spite the fact that the press's attitude is decidedly against the "female of the species" going scientific.

    Mr. Russell's arraignment of scientists who work by rod and plumbline, so to speak, and in many instance reckon without their host--Nature--stresses a striking example: From era to era scientists have explained the orbital ellipse, postulating the fact that in the solar system (by way of concrete example) the sun (Sol) forms one of the two foci of an ellipse, let us say, of the orbit of Earth. This, as every schoolboy knows, is inevitable.

    Granted, but no one seems to have given a thought to the other focus. Kepler devised the radius vector in order to pro­vide for the sweep over equal areas in equal time as Earth per­formed its trajectory from perihelion to aphelion, then on again to perihelion. This device has been demonstrated by means of delineation, oral and written description until every student knows it as he knows his alphabet. So far, so good; but what of the other focus without which no ellipse is possible?

    Now along comes Mr. Russell to demonstrate, first of all, a forcible axiom that appeared recently in the Times: "The only thing stronger than armies is an idea whose time has come."

    Accounting for the other focus demonstrates Mr. Russell's idea (concept, rather) that the twin focus is a vacuous force functioning just as effectually as its mate, the sun. Thanks to everyday utilities, this function is within the grasp of the lay mind. Now, if the professionals decline to accept this view, why should they "hold out on us", to drop into the vernacular, by failing to account for the second focus without which no el­lipse is complete? [H: This is the same question I raise when disallowed from utilizing, with full recognition, Dr. Russell's work in the PLEIADES CONNECTION series of JOUR­NALS. Why do these people wish to keep this information under singular lock and key? We have no wish nor intent to validate nor pull down the thrust of such as US&P--but in checking most carefully in full detail, we found that even though some copyrights may well have been ASSUMED shifted off to said "University"--the proper corporate records do not present such. The line of appropriate pa­perwork would have to explicitly shift each and every title and manuscript in every detail. They do not! Further, if the material is such that it is "joint" but only one facet of in­formation is utilized--it is "literally" not in question if an­other UTILIZES THE MATERIAL ISSUED AS FACT TO FURTHER FACT OR DRAW OPPOSING CON­CLUSIONS. We who offered the CONNECTIONS series only wished honor and attention in a most wondrous way--to Walter Russell. We do not share the same appraisal of the work of Lao nor to her intentions or actions. Lao was an avowed humanist and although her so-called metaphysical conceptions were "new age" and even "spiritual" on the sur­face of it--she was humanistic in every recognized aspect.]

    Surely they are not afraid of losing their laurels! Perish the thought! If so, they differ from the sportsmen who are always scouting about to enlist amateurs into the professional ranks. Let us hear from the acknowledged scientists why the second focus has been ignored; also if there is any law in celestial me­chanics against adopting new discoveries--inventions, if you will. GENEVA VIOLA WOLCOTT

    * * *
    These articles bring forth a lot of information and a lot of ques­tions, don't they? From "why not recognize women's input" to "wise reasoning" is visible from the above article--from, by the way, a very prominent personage of the day!

    I think I shall ask for a break here so that we have the approxi­mate amount of material for the next chapter without interrupt­ing it.

    I hope you are finding the information interesting and thought provoking for I find the puzzle fascinating--most especially since you find yourselves in something similar to a confrontation on the magnitude of a "Darwin" Scopes trial. The great difference here is that no "trial" IS EVEN ALLOWED AND THE WRITER, DHARMA, IS CONVICTED, CHARGED AND PENALTIES IMPOSED FOR NOT ONLY WRITING--BUT FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT BY SIMPLY BEING ALIVE. YES, INDEED, INTERESTING!



  2. #8
    宇宙生命一家, 無次 Justice Future Society Institute wave's Avatar
    가입일
    2004-07-16
    게시글
    1,180
    힐링에너지
    100

    Default

    PJ 74
    CHAPTER 13

    REC #1 HATONN

    TUE., JULY 27, 1993 11:18 A.M. YEAR 6, DAY 345

    TUE., JULY 27. 1993
    Continuation: The New York Times articles regarding Walter Russell:

    SHAKING SCIENCE'S FOUNDATIONS
    August 31, 1930

    To the Editor of The New York Times:

    Several of my contemporaries in the electrical field seem to be particularly incensed because of a statement made by Walter Russell in The Times that "all modern theories of atomic struc­ture have no more relation to nature than green cheese."

    Their rancor is based upon the fact that great scientists such as Millikan, Bohr, Rutherford, Langmuir and others of great prominence have proved their theories by experiment, and Rus­sell, who seems to have obtained most of his knowledge by close observation of nature rather than in the laboratory, tells these men that their conclusions are wrong because their funda­mental premises are wrong.

    Personally I find it hard to accept Bohr's "jumping electron", as Russell calls it, and I find many others equally skeptical. John Langdon Davies in his recent book, Man and His Uni­verse, criticized this belief severely, ending as follows: "Now, if scientists seem to believe these two things are true, it means that the universe is essentially meaningless."

    Russell claims that all conclusions of scientists in regard to things electric are based upon the assumption that all masses are "charged" either positively or negatively. This, he says, is fun­damentally wrong, for all masses are doubly charged, each one being preponderantly one or the other just as male and female are known to be so.

    Russell has set up such a very strong and convincing argu­ment in support of his claim that my traditional electrical train­ing is severely shaken even if I am not a 100 percent convert as yet.

    If, however, Russell succeeds in establishing this one claim alone he will have shaken the very foundations of science, for every textbook on electrical practice, physics and astronomy will have to be rewritten and another mass of mathematical for­mulae will have to be relegated to the waste basket to keep com­pany with much that has gone that way before.

    GEORGE SOULE
    New York, Aug. 27, 1930

    * * *

    MR. RUSSELL UPHOLDS THEORY OF A
    "TWO-WAY" UNIVERSE

    Proton Is Not a "Hole", He Declares, Merely Because It Acts Like One.

    November 2, 1930

    To the Editor of The New York Times:

    The Times editorial "This Month's Atom" has so filled these intervening days with answering questions as to whether Dr. Dirac's theory was in line with my cosmogony that I am con­strained to answer it. Also, I might as well include the question so often asked regarding the comparative relationship of Dr. Robert Andrews Millikan's statement published some time ago, also in the The Times, for both are interrelated.

    The editorial says that "when an electron disappears the va­cancy left behaves mathematically like a proton."

    A hen seeing her duckling brood taking to water could not be more surprised than modern scientists in seeing this "hole" act like a proton. The proton is not a hole, however, as Dr. Dirac concludes, just as a duckling is not a chicken because it acts like one in respect to the hen. The hole is the vacuous force which acts as an expansion pressure force exerted against an equal compression pressure force which is located in mass and culminates at its centres.

    Neither is the proton a hole because it acts like one in all re­spects save direction, more than an inward explosion toward a vacuum is like an outward explosion because it also acts like one in all respects save direction.

    A COMPLETE CYCLE OF MOTION
    Modern science does not recognize the vacuous force in na­ture, due to the incomplete Newtonian concept which has given us a "one-way" universe instead of the "two-way" universe of my cosmogony. If Newton had completed his gravitational ob­servations and Kepler had been as curious about unmentioned vacuous focus as he was regarding the focus he did mention, science would now understand what this newly discovered neg­ative "hole which acts like a proton" really is and I would not be in the position of being disliked by my scientific friends for playing the part of Copernicus to their Ptolemy.

    The following is a brief explanation of the complete cycle of motion which will explain what Dirac found, what he has not yet found and what he and Lodge and others say they do not un­derstand regarding that which he has found.

    The electron is a doubly charged mass. The action of in­tegrating any mass is a generative or condensive one which is called the attraction of gravitation. This causes mass to ap­pear around a common centre of high compression pressure and gives rise to the commonly believed error that matter attracts matter, which is not true to nature. The reaction to this action of compression is the expansion of the field which has been rendered vacuous by thus being drawn upon by the gravitative, indrawing, endothermic action of condensation. The expansion of the residual volume, or field surrounding the mass, is a vacuity which Is as equally minus the original equilibrium of the total volume as the centre of the mass is plus that equilibrium.

    SOURCE OF AN ERROR
    The force represented by that vacuity is an expansion pres­sure which is the equal and opposite of the gravitative compres­sion pressure and gives rise to that commonly believed error of light repulsion which is not true to nature.

    The "hole" that Dirac describes is the vacuous force of the expansion stroke of the universal pump. This force is correctly described as negative electricity, negative discharge, radiation, radio-activity or by any other name which results in the disap­pearance of mass into its surrounding tenuous field.

    On the contrary, the high pressure point of dense mass is the condensive force which is the compression stroke of the univer­sal pump. This force is correctly described as positive elec­tricity, positive charge, gravitation, condensation or by any other name which results in the appearance of mass into solidity.

    These two opposing actions and reactions constitute the elec­tro-magnetic oscillations, or compression-expansion sequences, which are present in every mass and which constitute the mech­anistic or life principle of the universe. These sequences have a periodicity of preponderances which are first preponderantly generative and then preponderantly degenerative, which we know of as the phenomena of growth.

    We have now completed the cycle of appearance and disap­pearance of mass through the series of endothermic, inbreath­ing, positive oscillations of compression pressure and exother­mic, outbreathing, negative oscillations of expansion pressure which is the dual characteristic of electricity; but we have one more characteristic of nature as a result of these action and reac­tion sequences.

    This one other attribute of nature is the reproductive or re­generative force which is set up solely by the resistance of each expression of force against the other.

    DUAL CHARACTER OF FORCE
    This characteristic attribute of nature to repeat herself, and to do so in waves or striations of periodicities, is because of the dual character of force to express itself always in equal oppo­sition of force.

    Every effect of motion thus results in the production of the opposite effect, therefore the negative reaction which results in the disappearance of the electron is accompanied by its equal and opposite action which causes the reappearance of the mass by the reverse action of the "hole".

    Hence there can be no such thing as a positively charged mass or a negatively charged mass. All charging masses are simultaneously discharging and all discharging masses are si­multaneously recharging other masses in this two-way universe of motion. Energy is kept continually moving between the high ­pressure hot points of gravitative centres and the low-pressure cold areas of the evacuated fields which surround all masses.

    This constant interchange is the cause of the motion of force which moves only for one purpose, and that is find an equilib­rium position for which it is ever in search of and never finds, for that position is itself always in motion.

    While in search of this ever-moving position the work of the universe, and of man, is performed. There is no other way that work can be performed than by the oscillations of this dually acting electric force as it surges back and forth between the two polar dead centres of force, the gravitative focus and the vacu­ous focus.

    It matters not whether this two-way interchange of potential is between the poles of a battery, which we call electric current, or between dynamos or solenoids, which we call lines of force, or between the high and low barometric pressure position of the weather map, which we call winds, or between the sun and planets, which we call radiant energy, or between elements, which we call radio-activity--all are the same. All are seeking an ever-changing equilibrium position and kept continually on the go and producing that thing which we call energy.

    Every mass in the universe is a complete pump oscillating between two equilibrium dead centres of opposed force. Every two masses are reciprocating, collaborating and coordinating their respective energies, each in accordance with its respective and comparative potential. Each mass in the universe is re­volving around every other mass in elliptical orbits determined by their mutual ever-moving compression and expansion foci.

    All masses, whether electrons in hot suns or electrons in cold space, are simultaneously integrating by their generative oscilla­tion, and disintegrative by their opposed radiative one. This is the completed cycle of the motion of force toward which Dirac has made a step in the right direction.

    [H: Here again, Russell has detailed his approach and his subject to exacting presentation to ALL READERS. This would appear to me to be intent toward having mankind have access without restraint--to his scientific application to the wave-universe in a LIGHT UNIVERSE. This certainly would not, by its mere presence in the largest newspaper of the day by Russell, personally, indicate a great desire for his work to be FULLY AND TOTALLY PUBLIC DOMAIN. I have no intention to further complicate my scribe's life by continuing to harangue with holders of information which was ONCE COMPLETELY PUBLIC DOMAIN--but neither can I understand WHY it is so difficult to share this SCI­ENTIFIC TRUTH OF UNIVERSAL OPERATION WITH THE VERY PEOPLE FOR WHOM IT WAS INTENDED AND ORIGINALLY GIFTED. SO BE IT--WE SHALL CERTAINLY ABIDE BY ALL FEDERAL COURT ORDERS, BUT IT ELUDES MY REASONING LOGIC!]

    DR. MILLIKAN'S STATEMENTS
    Robert Andrews Millikan is the only other man who, to my knowledge, has begun to divine nature's secret of the duality of force and continuity of creation in cycles. Dr. Millikan de­clares: "In the hot stars and the sun, matter is being disinte­grated into energy or radiation; in the unimaginably cold ex­panse of infinite space, radiation or energy is being reintegrated into matter."

    If Dr. Millikan had written that all mass, whether in hot suns or cold space, is integrating by its contractive oscillation (which is caused by the cold of its preceding expansive one) and that it is disintegrating by the heat of its preceding contractive one, he would have been right.

    To say, however, that matter is disintegrating in hot masses and integrating in cold space is not in keeping with nature's method of creation, for it would not account for the integration of mass in hot suns except by miracles or by "divine ordain­ment", as they said in the Middle Ages, nor would it account for the disintegration of mass in cold space except by the same method.

    In order for that principle to work, Dr. Millikan would have to find a critical point of temperature below which all matter in­tegrated and above which it all disintegrated. This is impos­sible, for all matter has differing melting points, according to its pressures or densities, these points rising as pressures rise.

    We know that above these critical points at which all ele­ments melt the solids disintegrate into liquids, then into vapors and then into gases. But the very act of disintegrating by radia­tion causes a relatively cold reaction to take place which reinte­grates. Both processes are therefore taking place above and below the melting point, and this is as true along the trail of a comet which is luminous and relatively hot in its contractive oscillations at 240 degrees below zero as it is true in Viga's heart which is relatively cold in its expansive oscillations at 300,000 degrees or more.

    WALTER RUSSELL
    New York, October 29, 1930

    * * *

    MR. RUSSELL MAY BE RIGHT
    Dr. Jackson Withdraws Criticism of "Two-Way" Universe and Seeks Proof.

    THE NEW YORK TIMES, November 9, 1930,

    To the Editor of The New York Times:

    Some time ago The Times published a letter of mine severely criticizing Walter Russell for presuming to attack the "laws" of Kepler and Newton. Obviously, as a scientist, I resented the sweeping claim of a non-scientist "that science needed a major surgical operation to put it in line for a logical, cosmogenetic synthesis". I felt that it was ridiculous for anybody to criticize such laws, and especially anybody without recognized scientific standing to attempt such surgery.

    [H: Is this unlike the attack against our writers and Dharma? Without checking into possible intent or work in any manner it was immediately attacked along with my secretary, thrown into a Federal Court of Law and the en­tire point of either WRITER was missing all attention while running up lawyer's bills, court costs, painful disagreements which cost so much in working time (which is so little with which to begin) in integration of resources. Your PROOF of value in both instances is the adversarial scooping up of the Russell material under "re"copyright efforts and then, the attack against the OTHER source of the information desper­ately mandated for your society. We SHOULD NOT BE IN COMPETITION--we should be working jointly to bring necessary material substance to you, the remnant civilization. I will not, however, share, work, join or integrate WITH THE ELITE COMMITTEE OF 300 IF IT MEANS THE AB­SENCE OF THE VERY WORKING SUBSTANCE AND KNOWLEDGE TO THE SOCIETY AT LARGE. I DO NOT WORK WITH GOD'S "ENEMY" AND THESE COURT PROCEEDINGS ARE ADVERSARIAL TO THAT SOURCE OF PERFECTION AND "ALL" POSSIBILITY! Together we can change the world in ALL manners--or, we can continue as adversaries and, finally, WE shall WIN! Will it be in time to save the tedious steps toward full expla­nation otherwise presented? Yes, I would think so for there are several with working models and all they need is a bit of encouragement and a few minor changes in perception and perspective. Dharma, It is not YOUR problem, chela, so release the concern unto me for I shall not trample the oppo­sition further. Neither shall I long leave the door open for understanding with important participants (if they but choose open mindedness) in that grouping. The best way to lose an enemy is to make of that one, a friend. I have no animosity or hostility and If we could move beyond the per­ceived anger and misperceptions of court battle--we could produce incredibly wondrous things. So be It.]

    I now wish to modify my statements and criticisms, for, since writing that letter, my viewpoint has somewhat changed from scathing to one of expectation. What I considered the over-night inspiration of that revolutionary type of man we call a "crank" might be, instead, the result of an intelligent and prolonged study of Nature.

    COORDINATION OF UNITS
    Mr. Russell has evidently approached his solution to the great riddle from the point of view opposite to that of the scientist. He has considered the universe as a whole and offers expla­nations for the workings of its units as they fit into the whole, while we scientists study the separate parts but as yet cannot fit them together perfectly.

    Who is to say that Russell's method of approach is not as valuable as our own, especially when it is carried on by so keen an observer? Let us give him a chance for a proof. The future will tell. I believe we should welcome such a mind, with its freedom from the traditions by which our minds are bound to the extent that we sometimes forget to question. I, for one, do not want to be "set" and invincible.

    I am not yet prepared to say that I thoroughly accept Mr. Russell's "two-way" principle, but I am immensely intrigued by it, for it gives this universe of motion a meaning to me that it did not have before. In fact, our universe is rather meaningless even to ourselves; we know very little of the why of anything and many researchers have practically ceased trying to fathom it. In our experiments we see the effects but do not always find a satisfactory explanation of the cause. If it "works" we are thankful, so we do not always worry about the "why".

    OPEN TO CONVICTION
    Mr. Russell's theory may be the method of understanding the nature of electricity, the generation and degeneration of mass and the universal mechanistic principles, through his "two-way" swing of the universal pendulum. In this defending his princi­ples I again repeat that I am only weighing them in my mind at present, but I think the entire scientific world should also seri­ously weigh them, for, if Russell is right--and he surely thinks he is right--his claim that science needs "a major surgical opera­tion" is justifiable.

    A few outstanding and seemingly irrefutable facts stand in favor of the "two-way" principle. First of all, the compression-­expansion sequence constitutes a cycle of motion which is mechanistic; it conforms with the known oscillating character of all electrical force. It makes matter comprehensible when each mass is known to be a compression-expansion "pump", or stor­age battery of polarized force doing the work of the universe.

    Russell says that every effect of motion gives birth to its op­posite effect, that our degenerative, radiant energy which is wasting away our universe becomes generative energy simply through its gravitational change of direction toward mass instead of away from it. The same radiation which degenerates our sun regenerates this planet as light. Let us give him a chance to prove that and see what the outcome is.

    Our "positive" and "negative" are admittedly meaningless words. Russell's dual principle gives them a rational and rea­sonable meaning which may be mechanically comprehensible. He says that "positive" is plus an equilibrium of a quantum of energy, and that "negative" is minus that equilibrium. In other words, a vacuous condition is created in a given quantum of en­ergy by pumping some of it out of one part (the surrounding field) and into the other part (the central mass). How simple it is to understand an electrical short circuit, or a chemical reac­tion, when thus explained, or to understand the motion of energy as force seeking an equilibrium.

    I remember when we used to think that the current in a bat­tery flowed only in one direction. We now admit its now in both directions. If nature expresses itself universally by a now in both directions, instead of in isolated instances, it is well to know it even though we old-timers have to adjust our practice to it.

    KEPLER'S LAW NOT INFALLIBLE
    I was especially vituperative toward Russell because he dared to tamper with the Kepler law. I can now see that Kepler's mention of a single focus, and his failure to mention the other, coupled with Newton's single attribute of matter to attract matter without mentioning its equally apparent power to repel, deprived science of a possible solution of the universal riddle.

    The second focus of Russell's is physically and mathemati­cally necessary to an elliptical orbit. Why did not some scientist think of this instead of waiting 300 years for an artist to tell us about it?

    I am anxious to see that other focus proved as the seat of the vacuous force of negative electricity that Russell claims for it. When his present experiments with lines of force are completed, by means of which he expects to prove his contention, and are found to substantiate his claim experimentally, we shall then know that positive electricity is that which is flowing inward, accumulatively, toward a point of compression (which is one of the dead centres of force in the universal machine) and that neg­ative electricity is that which is flowing outward, dissipatively, toward a vacuous field (which is the other dead centre of force).

    We shall then be convinced that Russell's contention that matter does not attract nor repel matter is probably true, and that attraction and repression-expansion oscillations with which we have long been familiar in electrical practice, but did not con­nect up with gravitation or radiation.

    I invite the collaboration and criticism of my fellow scientists at large to join me in this, because, should Russell be able to prove his claims, we should all give him due credit, and if he fails, it will then be time to add his theory to the long list of dreams. He is in earnest and at least deserves our support.

    JOHN E. JACKSON
    New York, Nov. 4, 1930

    * * *

    RUSSELL'S THEORY WINS APPROVAL

    July 7, 1931

    It Contains More Hope Than That of Sir James Jeans.

    To the Editor of The New York Times:

    During the past weeks people of this country who are inter­ested in scientific and cosmic problems have been reading a good deal of the doings and sayings of Sir James Jeans. The newspapers have given much space to his theory that the universe is running down. At a scientists dinner last week he told not only his large and distinguished audience, but thousands of radio listeners, that only a mathematician could understand the universe. His tones were lugubrious [mournful), his face sad. His message is destruction; his complicated theory withers whatever it touches.

    In the Museum of Science and Industry of New York there is on exhibition a group of remarkable paintings which refute the Jeans theory and substitute a simple, constructive idea of a two­-way universe. This exhibition and what it implies seems to have escaped the notice of the news-gatherers. The artist is the well-­known American, Walter Russell, president of the Society of Arts and Sciences, who has been decorated by many European governments and societies. Mr. Russell's writings have aroused considerable controversy in the columns of The New York Times. Those of his paintings now on exhibition illustrate what he calls the dual action of the one force in the universe. The force, he says, is light, and all matter is "frozen light".

    The Jeans theory is pessimistic; the Russell hypothesis is full of hope and beauty. Which of these deserves the attention of forward-looking Americans, especially at this time when the world is looking for" depression proof" ideas.

    LOUIS HASBROUCK
    New York, June 3, 1931.

    * * *
    Perhaps as you understand more about the rising recognition of Walter Russell's work and consider that which happened to Dr. Nikola Tesla at the hands of the Elite One Worlders and bankers, a lot will become clear to your perceptions. It may well become most clear as to WHY a beautiful woman would enter the picture and the focus be shifted from SCIENCE to metaphysics and the work open for the public domain--was gathered again into disallowance for freedom of USE. There had to be something done lest the Russell explanations take hold and the public demand use of same. The massive change of such information which would wipe out entirely ALL prior con­cepts of almost everything believed and utilized--would wipe out business as recognized. There had to be something to hold you in the Dark Ages to prevent this massive change to happen. The adversary NEVER misses a beat on his drum, readers--NEVER!

    So, what has happened? The Elite have utilized the scientific knowledge to gain control of the WORLD. YOU have been given NO INPUT OR USE OF ANY OF IT. It has gone to build the very shackles which will terrify, panic and bind you--­while you drift aimlessly along never having HEARD of one, Walter Russell and not many more, Nikola Tesla. If the adver­sarial people and the Federal Court system has its way--the in­formation will again be gathered up and tucked away so that YOU WILL NOT SEE WHAT WAS DONE UNTO YOU.

    You can note from the timing of writings that as the scientific community. began to recognize this gifted input from higher realms--the physical constraints and temptations of Walter began and was finally pulled-off in the 1940's when Walter neared his 80s. It is simply history repeating itself in negative form and the physical perceptions and needs for ego attention and fulfillment­--overshadow the spiritual journey and purpose as a messenger to God's creations. It is ever thus and ever as difficult to rise be­yond!

    Let us close this portion, please. Thank you.






    PJ 74
    CHAPTER 14

    REC #3 HATONN

    TUE., JULY 27, 1993 4:24 P.M. YEAR 6, DAY 345

    TUE., JULY 27, 1993


    ADVERTISING!?
    As you ponder in your mind, the things which flow in ceaseless streams through consciousness--one looks at that which is sup­portive, destructive and obvious misrepresentation.

    Not only did problems begin with the University of Science and Philosophy for the Ekkers, EJ. and Doris, for well over a year ago--the slings and arrows are ever present.

    How would you feel if your very life was being drained away and the following came to you PERSONALLY from ones at US&P.

    A HOLIDAY GREETING
    TO OUR TREASURED STUDENTS AND FRIENDS:

    1992 was a fabulous year of growth and change for the Uni­versity. We had four new additional books published; we es­tablished The Crystal Blue Group whose main function is to as­sist in environmental rehabilitation and help create a peaceful and sustainable civilization; we started The Fulcrum, a Science Newsletter with its second issue containing a report on the suc­cessful re-demonstration of Walter Russell's principles of Trans­mutation; we had many dedicated volunteers and additions to our staff; we built a brand new road to the PALACE; the high point of the year was our annual Homecoming, a great success, with everyone enjoying the speakers, the food, the music, and each other.

    We want you to know that we are all here to support your growth and help you in any way we can. Every organization is the combined energy of its founders, directors and the people drawn to the work. You are very important to us!

    May this holiday season bring you a wonderful awareness of the inner presence of Light, Love, beauty, joy, harmony, and true self-expression and result in the fulfillment of your heart's desire. We KNOW the secret of Life is sharing our light and love with each other and the world. Bless you!

    With our combined Love to you,

    Dr. Timothy A. Binder, President
    Shirley Calkins Smith, Director of Student Affairs
    Board of Directors
    And Staff.

    * * *
    Would this not seem most interesting--with ongoing aggressive litigation against these "Treasured Friends "? At the very time this was sent--there were surveillance teams following these people everywhere they went, intent upon suing for "contempt of court". What went wrong do you suppose? The PLEIADES CONNECTION series was long prior to this writing. Would it not seem contradictory, this action and these words: " ..... Light, Love, beauty, joy, harmony, and true self-expression and result in the fulfillment of your heart's desire. We KNOW the secret of Life is sharing our light and love with each other and the world .... " In prison perhaps--62 years old and in prison for contempt of court? This "Treasured Friend" feels she needs no enemies if these be friends. Does the right hand have any idea of that which the left hand does?

    This is perhaps an error? Sorry--It is addressed directly to Mr. E.J. Ekker at his home address!

    I do also request that excerpts from the writing called "LAO RUSSELL" be shared. Lao was a remarkable woman--beautiful, talented, and perspicacious. You must understand that in considering the University of Science and Philosophy and possible errors of ones such as ourselves who long have honored such as WALTER RUSSELL, and further back prior to US&P was The Russell Foundation as we are told. At onset, we KNEW NOTHING OF EITHER! Why might this lack of human knowledge be resting with my scribe? Because the material offered her came BEFORE US&P and as for the Home Study Course--the "authors" came after the volumes were an uncopyrightable edition--and more material came from The Universal One MANUSCRIPT--long prior to Lao Russell or any Foundation and was never copyrighted! We do not quibble over this but it is most interesting that SOMETHING had to have happened to precipitate such animosity against our work--would it not seem?

    Russell did NOT found the Russell Foundation. How do we know? Because it says right here in their own material: "Well knowing that our present destructive basis of human relations was not solving personal, national and international problems, LAO RUSSELL FOUNDED THE WALTER RUSSELL FOUNDATION IN 1948, WHICH IN 1957 BECAME THE UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPIIY ....."

    "Performing a herculean task from which many strong men had turned away, Lao Russell restored a 52-room Italian Renais­sance Marble Palace that had been the prey of the weather and vandals for 20 years and transformed it into a mountain top par­adise with sculpture gardens that is visited annually by thousands from all over the world."

    Well so far, it doesn't match much of anything Dharma and "we" do here--no students, no group, not even a home any more, no profits, no nothing but work. How could we be such an adversary OR "Treasured Friend"?

    Ah, now perhaps we will see who this person is and why, just perhaps, there is dislike for Commander Hatonn--not to mention his lowly scribe without title or nobility.

    "For additional information concerning Lao Russell, who is a member of "The International Platform Association". see "Who's Who of American Women". and "The National So­cial Directory". She is also listed in the 1968 Coronation Edition--which is the First Edition--of the "ROYAL BLUE BOOK" of England. This is an international social and genealogical register with a key to present-day leaders who have achieved distinction on the regional, national or international scene as contributors...."

    How much input might Walter have had in the formation of US&P considering his age of near 90 YEARS? Is it not possi­ble that some of Walter's intentions may well have not been recognized and usurped by ones coming AFTER? I have no great bones to pick--but IF WALTER RUSSELL'S WORK IS TRUTH IN SCIENCE--IT WILL BE PRESENTED SOMEWHERE BY SOMEONE! I cannot believe that a late coming home-breaker has the right to take a man's most precious possessions and garner unto herself all claims to self and HER FOLLOWING. If my opinion is misinterpreted as "contempt", then I no longer have any understanding of your narrow imprisoned world at all.

    Lao Stebbing (Russell) made many very talented contributions to human consciousness through her writings on romance, mar­riage and LOVE as she called one of her books. Perhaps we again mistake the flower blossom FOR THE TREE?

    Chelas, as with Newton: "If I see further, it is because I stand on the shoulders of giants who came before me!" Well, I stand on the shoulders, students, of giants such as Walter Russell who could see farther and beyond even Newton! So be it.



주제글 정보

Users Browsing this Thread

이 주제글은 현재 2명이 열람중입니다. (0명의 회원과 2명의 손님)

이 주제글의 글단추(태그)

글쓰기 규칙

  • 새 글 작성이 불가능함
  • 응답글 작성이 불가능함
  • 파일 첨부가 불가능함
  • 내 글 수정이 불가능함
  •