SOLAR MYSTERY CONVERSATION WITH ; Conversations with Ray Tomes, Jerry Iuliano, Prof.Seligman, Greg Piepol, Joe Parr, Nick ( Libra Rising), Vladimir ( Anonymous Russian Solar Scientist)

The following text snippets from a conversation I had with Iona Miller may be of interest.

Iona a well known science blogger has been interested in dodecahedrons. I mentioned

a conversation I had with Ray Tomes, Jerry Iuliano, Prof.Seligman, Greg Piepol, Joe Parr, Nick ( Libra Rising), Vladimir ( Anonymous Russian Solar Scientist)

"...funny thing, werid prob I ran into years ago, part of convo I had with Ray, was I couldnt figure out back in 2008 how to tell when the mutli-day rotary cycle of the sun 'began'... I checked everywhere, and no one knew... some of the big heads at observatories thought it was an intriguing question but had no idea how to determine it, its actually a pretty important fundament for all kinds of reasons, just as knowing when the metabolic cycle of a cell starts and ends, all they could provide, at the time, were intuitive punts or best guesses, looking to expressed characteristics of various frames, stages witin the total rotational peiod that might offer clues but nobody could say definitively (at the time) when "day 1" in the suns rotational cycle actually occurred - the weirdness of that just stunned me

Ray is one of the leading edge folks on the study of natural cycles and periods, we had a few interesting conversations, and he shared some far out data with me on asteroid clustering in space... turns out a variety of stellar objects will form 3d relational forms at a distance in free space to each other, which of course is never mentioned in mainstream astrophysics or any text books and one of those forms is the dodeca, if youd like I could share back the convo we had? There some pretty tweaked ideas and good hard tech points in there...

I think what was going on, was that astronomers can observe a spot on the sun and then tell how many days it takes for that point to rotate around - so we know the period of rotation, but they cant determine the true start point of rotation itself because unlike the moon and earth they dont know what the sun itself is in orbit around - you know, so for example its easy to determine day one of the lunar orbit becuase we know of the orbital relationship it has with earth and the earth with the sun, we can also look at the suns barycenter in the solar system, but if the sun itself is in orbit around an equal or greater mass, then if we could take ther relational perspective from that we could figure out the true start frame of the suns rotation, and thats the part we seem to be missing

Ray is altogether, reliable, modest, respected, hard worker, doesnt pilfer other peoples ideas and peddle them as his own and hes innovative and quite unique in the cycles research field, if I recall correctly people have literally compared him to Dewey himself, which is a heck of a compliment - I hope you find this of personal interest, see link following, scroll down and review especially the yellow highlit text ; http://soundofstars.org/conversationwithraytomesandcrew.htm

note, the page is rough, unedited, havent had a chance to clean it up, some text may be repeated, so if its gen of interest you will need to skip and scroll through some..."

CONVERSATIONS CIRC 2008- 2010

“Recently I have been in dialogue with professors of astronomy and astrologers about what

I feel should be a fairly simplistic question about the rotation of the sun on its axis.

So far it seems this simple question has stumped them and me, I remembered your work

and realized that you might actually be able to shed some unique light on all this due to

your very novel approach to studying and working with cosmic radiations.

I have included the most important chunks of the dialogue below, would very much like to hear

your thoughts on this and specifically how the question I have asked (below) might be answered.

Best regards to you!

Ray, have enjoyed your work for many years, I have written you occasionally with a question here

and there and you have always responded with a most thoughtful insight. Thanks for the below information,

I asked around quite a bit even to profs of astronomy, but it was you who seemed to have the best handle on this so far. I will check out the Gong project.

Regarding spin time, what I am hoping to find out is the start and end cycle of a 26 day (approx) roation cycle of the sun specifically and if that means finding a given latitude, depth that is ok, but am looking to discover exactly how to do this....”

From: Doc Stars <doc_starz@yahoo.com>
Subject: Conversations with Ray Tomes, Jerry Iuliano, Prof.Seligman, Greg Piepol, Joe Parr, Nick ( Libra Rising),

Vladimir ( Anonymous Russian Solar Scientist)

To: sound_of_stars@yahoogroups.com
Received: Thursday, December 9, 2010, 12:35 AM

Conversations with Ray Tomes, Jerry Iuliano, Prof.Seligman, Greg Piepol, Joe Parr, Nick ( Libra Rising), Vladimir ( Anonymous Russian Solar Scientist)

Who is Ray tomes?

Hes one of the leading edge folks on the study of natural cycles and periods, we had a few interesting conversations, and he shared some far out data with me on asteroid clustering in space... turns out a variety of stellar objects will form 3d relational forms at a distance in free space to each other, which of course is never mentioned in mainstream astrophysics or any text books and one of those forms is the dodeca, if youd like I could share back the convo we had? There some pretty tweaked ideas and good hard tech points in there...

https://www.facebook.com/raytomes

http://ray.tomes.biz/

ALSO SEE ;

Solar Harmonics & Planetary Orbits

by Ray Tomes

http://www.mountainman.com.au/news96_p.html

http://ordinatous.com/pdf/The_Fractal_Geometry_of_Nature.pdf

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/SunspotWeatherPlanetaryCycles/message/35

"Ray Tomes" <ray@...>wrote:
The basic integers in Harmonics Theory are derived from Me=1, V=2, Ea=3 .. which gives Ju=14 or
15.
IF Ju=15 is accepted then the step is 5.202/15 = 0.3468 AU. The following table of Asteroids are
the largest ones and are taken from wikipedia. The distances are compared for closeness to
multiples of 0.3468 AU to see if they tend towards that. Of the 19 asteroids listed, 10 are within
0.1 of the exact multiple wheras they should be randomly spread up to 0.5 error. This is very
highly significant in a chi-square test (I am guessing p<.0001 as mu chi-square table doesn't go
that far).

If you plot the asteroid distances you will see bunches at 2.37, 2.71 (or 2.66 and 2.76) 3.13 and
3.46 AU. Only one of the 19 is not in such a bunch and one other is at Jupiter distance.

BA: in one of the posts I recently offered in two summaries,
I noted that there are *also* major groupings of the *asteroids*
aka *planetoids* in the belt between Mars and Jupiter: and what
was interesting is that they are grouped at 60-degree intervals
*before* and *after* Ceres at the *hexagonal* points of the
intersecting *circular orbital* aka *mean* distance *arc* from
the solar center. In other words, Kepler was correct to use
a stellate dodecahedron system in 3-D space and the perimeter
of a hexagon=3. Thus, if we accept that *space* is architecturally
created by mathematics, then our solar-planetary system is
shelled with a circle=pi=3.14+ encapsulating a hexagon=3.
Thus, the Russian physicists who wrote pop books a a couple
decades ago, or more, were *spot on* with this analysis and
perception which harkens back to Copernicus and the *crystal*
shells! They had a similar dodecahedron system *beneath* the
earth's crust which served as a predicator of *hot* spots for
earthquakes which I theorized could also work for other *hot* spots,
such as other weather events, tornadoes and hurricanes aka
*earthspots* based on solar-sunspot activity.

Long live cycles : )

Bill
Author of Arnold's Law
Mathematics of Bode's/Arnold’s Law, spacing of planets around the sun.
Read Bode's Law Explained:
http://cyclesresearchinstitute.org/astronomy/arnoldbode.pdf
Special Theory of Order: mechanism of our Solar Planetary System:
http://www.cyclesresearchinstitute.org/astronomy/arnold_theory_order.pdf

----------------------------------

"INSIDE" SCIENCE NOTES - Behind the Scenes with Donald Adams

Thursday, August 14, 2008 1:35 AM
From: "Doc Stars" <doc_starz@yahoo.com>

For those of you who may be interested, here are some old "inside"
notes, I gathered some time ago, these came from conversations I had with some pretty interesting researchers and scientists you may have heard of and some you probably havent.....

Ray Tomes of Cycles Research

Jerry Iuliano - Maverick Number Theorist

and a host of Astronomers and related from groups like Soho

Note, the following is a bit of a ramble, just bits and snippets all jumbled together, but I hope you find these stimulating!

Ray, sometime ago we had a conversation about the value of 2.666 and its relation to planetary orbital values

You determined; 24 / 2.666 = 9

And

Pluto / 6.4 days = 1

Sun / 6.4 days = 4

Mercury / 6.4 days = 9

Also;

Earth / 160 minutes = 9

Mars / 160 minutes = 4

You said that all planets rotate in a period close to 160 minutes * n^2 OR

6.4 days * n^2

We determined further that 6.4 / 4 = 1.6

I wish to determine relatively accurate values for;

Earth / 6.4 days = ?

Mars / 6.4 days = ?

Jupiter / 6.4 days = ?

Saturn / 6.4 days = ?

Pluto / 6.4 days = ?

Sun / 6.4 days = ?

Mercury / 6.4 days = ?

Using your suggestions I came up with the following values.

Please see the below table, the column called RAY TOMES FORMULA,

The first value shown is for Mercury ; 21.99

Can you review the values in this column and tell me if you feel they are fairly accurate?

RAY TOMES FORMULA

ROTATIONAL SPEED of PLANETS as Compared to Rotation Speed of Earth

SUGGESTION: 160 Minutes * n^2

Body

Sidereal Period

Synodic Period = "Day"

OR 6.4 days* n^2

Inner

Mercury

58.647 days

175.942 days

58.647

21.99812

Inner

Venus

- 243.02 days

- 116.75 days

-243.02

-91.1553

inner

Earth

23 hr 56 min 4.1 sec

24 hr 0 min 0 sec

23.56

8.837209

inner

Moon

27.322 days

29.53 days

27.322

10.24831

inner

Mars

24 hr 37 min 22.66 sec

24 hr 39 min 35.24 sec

24.37

9.141035

outer

Jupiter

9 hr 55 min 30 sec

9 hr 55 min 33 sec

9.55

3.582146

outer

Saturn

10 hr 29 min 32 sec

10.29

3.859715

outer

Uranus

- 17 hr 14.4 min

-17.14

-6.42911

outer

Neptune

16 hr 6.6 min

16.66

6.249062

outer

Pluto

- 6.38723 days

- 6.38679 days

-6.38723

-2.39581

Hey Ray, thanks for the clarification and compliment! Actually you are to kind, I felt bagged all day!

Must be the weather. You are more on the game than I, and I appreciate the gems you are imparting to me.

May I ask, do you know the "n" values for Uranus and Neptune?

The new 160 minute constant, now I find this VERY interesting, and as you say it works!

24 / 2.666666667 = 9

Nicely done!

1.333333333

<-----Original Message----->

>From: Ray Tomes [ray@tomes.biz]

>Sent: 5/14/2007 3:43:43 AM

>To: durango@mail2world.com

>Subject: Re: Ray, regarding " n " value

>Hi

>Yeah, sorry, my mistake, it is 160 minutes not 83.

>So Earth or Mars /160 minutes gives 9.

>Jupiter or Saturn / 160 minutes gives 4.

>Pluto / 6.4 days = 1

>Sun / 6.4 day = 4

>Mercury / 6.4 day = 9

>Well, we established that you are wide awake. :-)

>Ray

Hey Ray, thanks again for the response,I know you are as busy as I am probably busier...\

The factoid you sent was very interesting and I hadn't heard of it, one thing though

what does the 'n' variable represent here?

>But an interesting fact. All the planets rotate in a poeriod that is

>very close to either 83 minutes * n^2 or 6.4 days * n^2. That 83 minutes

>about shows up in a lot of places.

Possible connects.... if we take 83 minutes as 1 hour and 23 minutes;

1.23

and 2 / phi = 1.23 * n^2 (where "n' = ???)

Why do it this way?

Because 6.4 days also renders this value ultimately so there must be a connection, vis a vis

6.4 / 4 = 1.6

Note also, that 6.4 is a decimal 10 harmonic of binary numerics, 2,4,6,8,16,32,64

==========

From: Ray Tomes | Save Address - Block Sender - Set Rule - Color Code

To: Mr X

Subject: Re: Also - Re: Solar Rotation Question

Date: 5/12/2007 3:59:35 AM

Download Message Display Headers Printer Friendly

Move to Folder Inbox Sent Drafts Trash Junk Mail NEWS Articles ALT [New Folder] Previous | Next

Mr X wrote:

> The big thing here that really peaks interest is that Joe is the guy

> Dan Davidson worked with, Keelynet

> connection, and the science they published is pretty sound, albeit

> weird - you may have heard of the MRA

> related experiments a few years ago... bottom line is Parr and

> Davidson measured annual cycles

> that re-occur between the Sun, earth and I believe, Sirius, this could

> be detected as measurable gravity flux...

> Parr literally created a table top device that he proved LOST a

> significant amount of weight when the Sun when through a certain kind

> of energy spike (conduit), pretty exciting stuff.

Yes, I followed the MRA stuff.

> Thanks Ray, yeah... I do understand the difference, but thanks for

> trying to help clear up what you felt might have been a

> misunderstanding on my part. The spreadsheet attached actually was

> meant to calc

> the rotations and not the revolutions. The thing I dont get, perhaps I

> didnt describe it well enough - sorry about

> that, is why the larger planets rotate faster?

OK, sorry about that. It depends on a number of things I think ... but

it is speculation.

1. When the planets formed how big a ball of gas dust etc fell in and so

what rotation it got.

2. Since then the planets slowed down. The Moon slows the earth, but why

mars is the same --- who knows?

3. Why are Mercury and VBenus slowest of all with no moons? Maybe the

Sun becasue they are closer?

But an interesting fact. All the planets rotate in a poeriod that is

very close to either 83 minutes * n^2 or 6.4 days * n^2. That 83 minutes

about shows up in a lot of places.

> That doesnt make sense to me... if a planet is significantly larger

> than earth and farther out from the sun, shouldnt that make it rotate

> on its axis MUCH more slowly?

Why? The Sun does noty cause the rotation, only the revolution vbelocity

(or more corrcetly the velocity causes the distance).

> Wikipedia is a really good generic resource, but for really meaty,

> truthful stuff, frankly I find it more meaningful

> to ask free thinkers their opinions directly, but Im sure you can

> appreciate that.

Yes, agreed. I was thinking only of rotation and revolution then.

> Don't know how aware of this you are, but a lot of people look up to

> you and your opinion holds a great deal

> of weight... so it doesnt surprise me.

Thanks

Ray

Ray Tomes | Save Address - Block Sender - Set Rule - Color Code

To: Mr X

Subject: Re: Solar Rotation Question

Date: 5/11/2007 6:28:46 PM

Download Message Display Headers Printer Friendly

Move to Folder Inbox Sent Items Drafts Deleted Items Junk Mail NEWS Articles ALT [New Folder] Previous | Next

Mr X wrote:

> Regarding spin time, what I am hoping to find out is the start and end

> cycle of a 26 day (approx) roation cycle of the sun specifically and

> if that means finding a given latitude, depth that is ok, but am

> looking to discover

> exactly how to do this....

Hi X

Because the Sun is fluid, any system that is used is necessarily

arbitrary. The Carrington rotation system is the one that is generally

used. It will link events quite well over a small number of rotations,

but when you start to compare many years later then different latitudes

will have drifted a long way apart, possibly whole rotations.

I think that you will find this page useful.

http://umtof.umd.edu/pm/crn/CARRTIME.HTML

regards

Ray

PS Busy now, so maybe more later.

==========

<-----Original Message----->

>From: Ray Tomes [ray@tomes.biz]

>Sent: 5/11/2007 5:28:00 AM

>To: durango@mail2world.com

>Subject: Re: Solar Rotation Question

>The solar rotation is variable. It varies with latitude. It varies with

>depth. It varies over time. Figures like 26 days (which amounts to 28

>days as seen from Earth because we are moving with the Sun's rotation)

>are used as a guide only. When things are plotted on a 28 day repeting

>map, some events will show up over many cycles. They will show as

>veryical lines if exactly 28 days, possibly sloping slightly left or

>right if a different rotation, but still visible.

>The variations are wll measured by the 5 minute oscillations (see GONG

>project and others) and the whole internal rotation of the Sun is known

>for some time.

>Have fun

>Ray

>On Wed May 9 1:05 , 'Mr X' <durango@mail2world.com> sent:

>Sir,

>this is very helpful, my thanks again to you. I am interested specifically in

>a 26 rotational value, if we take into account the angular tilt of the sun, at

>what latitude close to the equator do you feel a value of 26 or very close to

>this would occur? It is at this position I would like to determine where in

>the given cycle of rotation the sun is at.... any other ideas?

><-----Original Message----->

>>From: courtney@cseligman.com [courtney@cseligman.com]

>>Sent: 5/9/2007 12:09:54 AM

>>To: durango@mail2world.com

>>Subject: Re: Re: Solar Rotation Question

>>The number you are looking for is probably the Carrington Rotation Number,

>>expressed as a whole number of rotations, plus so many days. Each "Rotation"

>>is 27.3 days long, instead of the 26 days you were thinking of, because the

>>Earth moves partway around the Sun during each Solar rotation, requiring an

>>extra day and a third of solar rotation for a given solar longitude to "catch

>>up". You may want to take a look at this site:

>>http://www.sungazer.net/carrington.html

>>Prof. Seligman

>>On Tue May 8 21:35 , 'Mr X' <durango@mail2world.com> sent:

>>If the sun rotates on its axis once every 26 days, how can we determine its

>>position in this rotational cycle?

>>For instance, if we want to know if it is at day 8 of 26, how may this be

>>done? What do we 'clock' this

>>to? The Galactic Center?

>>I'd like to be able to know how to determine what the count of this cycle is

>>on any given earth calendar day,

>>for example if it is the 15th day of the 26th solar rotation, then what would

>>a given earth month calendar day be...

>>Must be some way to calculate this?

===========

Greg,

below is a brief dialogue I had recently with Prof. Seligman, am wondering if you might shed some light on this?

Specifically how to derive the current point in the suns rotation at the latitude where rotation = 26 days, as per below

===========================

Sir,

this is very helpful, my thanks again to you. I am interested specifically in a 26 rotational value, if we take into account the angular tilt of the sun, at what latitude close to the equator do you feel a value of 26 or very close to this would occur? It is at this position I would like to determine where in the given cycle of rotation the sun is at.... any other ideas?

From: courtney@cseligman.com Subject: Re: Solar Rotation Question

Date: 5/9/2007 12:14:00 AM

The number you are looking for is probably the Carrington Rotation Number, expressed as a whole number of rotations, plus so many days. Each "Rotation" is 27.3 days long, instead of the 26 days you were thinking of, because the Earth moves partway around the Sun during each Solar rotation, requiring an extra day and a third of solar rotation for a given solar longitude to "catch up". You may want to take a look at this site:

http://www.sungazer.net/carrington.html

Prof. Seligman

Thank you very much for your thoughtful response. I am particularly interested in the equatorial rotational rate

and hope to find the means of measuring that specifically, look forward to hearing back from you.

Best Regards!

<-----Original Message----->

>From: courtney@cseligman.com [courtney@cseligman.com]

>Sent: 5/8/2007 10:53:28 PM

>To: durango@mail2world.com

>Subject: Re: Re: Solar Rotation Question

>I'm not sure how the rotational position is calculated. It's more complicated

>than you might think, because it is a fluid (a gas at the photosphere, and a

>plasma above and below the photosphere) and rotates at different rates at

>different latitudes, taking closer to 26 days at the Equator, but more than a

>month at the Poles. So if there is a specific way of counting rotations, it

>would only apply to a particular latitude. I'll take a quick look at various

>references, and if I find any more information, get back to you sometime

>tomorrow.

>Courtney Seligman, Professor of Astronomy, Long Beach City College

>On Tue May 8 21:35 , 'Mr X' <durango@mail2world.com> sent:

>If the sun rotates on its axis once every 26 days, how can we determine its

>position in this rotational cycle?

>For instance, if we want to know if it is at day 8 of 26, how may this be

>done? What do we 'clock' this

>to? The Galactic Center?

>I'd like to be able to know how to determine what the count of this cycle is

>on any given earth calendar day,

>for example if it is the 15th day of the 26th solar rotation, then what would

>a given earth month calendar day be...

>Must be some way to calculate this?

From: Greg Piepol | Save Address - Block Sender - Set Rule - Color Code

To: 'Mr X'

Subject: RE: Re: Solar Rotation Question

Date: 5/9/2007 5:11:39 AM

Download Message Display Headers Printer Friendly

Move to Folder Inbox Sent Items Drafts Deleted Items Junk Mail NEWS Articles ALT [New Folder] Previous | Next

Interesting but, I'm just a solar imager. I'd have to leave it up to the professionals on that one.

Many of the amateurs I know use this tool for tilt:

http://www.atoptics.co.uk/tiltsun.htm

Hope this helps,

Greg

=============

Also

the following links tweaked my interest in relation to the question of a specific clocking mechanism relating to the sun;

Planets TestifyPlanetary periods are found to all be measured in one of two sacred units of time.

www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/lds/meridian/2004/planets.html

- 41k - Cached - Similar pages

Planets TestifyPlanetary periods are found to all be measured in one of two sacred units of time.

www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/lds/meridian/2004/planets.html - 41k - Cached - Similar pages

Joe Parr

http://www.gizapyramid.com/Parr/Index.html

http://www.gizapyramid.com/BIO-Parr.htm

http://www.gizapyramid.com/Parr/parchart2.htm

From: libra4@librarising.com | Save Address - Block Sender - Set Rule - Color Code

To: Mr X

Subject: Re: Solar Rotation Question

Date: 5/9/2007 11:33:46 AM

Download Message Display Headers Printer Friendly

Move to Folder Inbox Sent Items Drafts Deleted Items Junk Mail NEWS Articles ALT [New Folder] Previous | Next

Dear Mr. X,

Yours is a very unique question,

which unfortunately I don't really

have an answer to.

The first criteria used to measure solar

rotation is sunspots and their various cycles,

but I know this is not what you're looking

for.

Perhaps the answer to your question depends

on what the Sun orbits, which answer has not

yet been clearly determined or revealed.

The Galactic center may be part of the

answer, but there must be some other body

or bodies between our Sun and the Galactic

center to which our Sun is but a small

cog in the mechanism.

Some say Sirius, while others say Alcyone,

while others postulate a binary system. When

our Sun's star is discovered or revealed we

may then have a means by which to make sense

of the solar rotation cycle as well as its

greater orbital cycle through our local part

of the galaxy.

Untill then, there is little I can convey

to you about this question.

Nick, Libra Rising

===============================

From: Ray Tomes | Save Address - Block Sender - Set Rule - Color Code

To: Mr X

Subject: Re: Also - Re: Solar Rotation Question

Date: 5/13/2007 1:04:56 AM

Download Message Display Headers Printer Friendly

Move to Folder Inbox Sent Items Drafts Deleted Items Junk Mail NEWS Articles ALT [New Folder] Previous | Next

Mr X wrote:

> Hey Ray, thanks again for the response,I know you are as busy as I am

> probably busier...\

> The factoid you sent was very interesting and I hadn't heard of it,

> one thing though

> what does the 'n' variable represent here?

Oops, sorry, I should have said that n is an integer.

So for Mars and earth n=3, for Jupiter and Saturn n=2. (based on ~83

minutes)

For Pluto n=1, Sun n=2, Mercury n=3, Venus n=6 (based on ~6.4 days)

> >But an interesting fact. All the planets rotate in a poeriod that is

> >very close to either 83 minutes * n^2 or 6.4 days * n^2. That 83 minutes

> >about shows up in a lot of places.

> Possible connects.... if we take 83 minutes as 1 hour and 23 minutes;

In the following dialogue, I am " Mr X. "

24 / 2.666666667 = 9

<-----Original Message----->
>From: Vladimir >Sent: 5/21/2007 4:31:03 PM
>To: Mr X
>Subject: Mr X
>
>Hello
>
>I shall tell about a connection between the calendar cycles and the cycles
>of our Sun.
>One example.
>Today, most of the human race takes it for granted that their activities are
>recorded in the 7-day weeks. How can this be explained?
>To understand our ancient calendar, it is necessary to know many facts:
>
>A) The Sun has 6 magnetic poles (4 magnetic poles are on equator). One
>revolution of the Sun proceeds 28 days, if to look from the Earth (read the
>book of Maurice Cotterell).
>Here it is necessary to take into account two movements:
>- Rotation of the Sun.
>- Rotation of the Earth around of the Sun.
>Addition of these movements gives 28 days.
>28 days is a solar cycle for us.
>
>B) 7 days are the cycle of the solar magnetic field for us (28 : 4 = 7).
>Every 7 days change a direction of a magnetic field of the Sun. Seven days
>"+", seven days "-", and so on. It is registered with devices and feels your
>body. You may not see the Sun, but your body will know this cycle.
>
>Best regards from Russia,
>
>Vladimir
==========================

Some Links form Joe Parr

http://www.gizapyramid.com/Parr/parchart2.htm

http://www.gizapyramid.com/Parr/parchart3.htm

http://www.gizapyramid.com/Parr/Index.html

http://www.gizapyramid.com/Parr/parr21.htm

http://www.gizapyramid.com/Parr/parr22.htm

http://www.gizapyramid.com/Parr/parr23.htm

Some Ray Tomes Links
http://www.mountainman.com.au/news96_p.html

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cyclesi/message/14214

Recently I have been in dialogue with professors of astronomy and astrologers about what
I feel should be a fairly simplistic question about the rotation of the sun on its axis.

So far it seems this simple question has stumped them and me, I remembered your work
and realized that you might actually be able to shed some unique light on all this due to
your very novel approach to studying and working with cosmic radiations.

I have included the most important chunks of the dialogue below, would very much like to hear
your thoughts on this and specifically how the question I have asked (below) might be answered.

Best regards to you!

Ray, have enjoyed your work for many years, I have written you occasionally with a question here
and there and you have always responded with a most thoughtful insight. Thanks for the below information,
I asked around quite a bit even to profs of astronomy, but it was you who seemed to have the best handle on this so far. I will check out the Gong project.

Regarding spin time, what I am hoping to find out is the start and end cycle of roation cycle of the sun specifically and if that means finding a given latitude, depth that is ok, but am looking to discover
exactly how to do this....

From:   Mr X | Save Address - Block Sender - Set Rule - Color Code
To:   ray@tomes.biz
Subject:   Re: Also - Re: Solar Rotation Question
Date:   5/12/2007 2:51:56 PM
Download Message   Display Headers   Printer Friendly
     Move to Folder       Inbox       Sent Items       Drafts       Deleted Items       Junk Mail       NEWS Articles ALT [New Folder] Previous | Next

Hey Ray, thanks again for the response,I know you are as busy as I am probably busier...\

The factoid you sent was very interesting and I hadn't heard of it, one thing though
what does the 'n' variable represent here?

>But an interesting fact. All the planets rotate in a poeriod that is
>very close to either 83 minutes * n^2 or 6.4 days * n^2. That 83 minutes
>about shows up in a lot of places.

Possible connects.... if we take 83 minutes as 1 hour and 23 minutes;

1.23

and 2 / phi = 1.23 * n^2 (where "n' = ???)

Why do it this way?

Because 6.4 days also renders this value ultimately so there must be a connection, vis a vis

6.4 / 4 = 1.6

Note also, that 6.4 is a decimal 10 harmonic of binary numerics, 2,4,6,8,16,32,64

   Mr X | Save Address - Block Sender - Set Rule - Color Code
To:   JerryIuliano@aol.com; ray@tomes.biz
Cc:   courtney@cseligman.com
Subject:   Re: Solar Rotation Question
Date:   5/13/2007 3:01:24 PM
Download Message   Display Headers   Printer Friendly
     Move to Folder       Inbox       Sent Items       Drafts       Deleted Items       Junk Mail       NEWS Articles ALT [New Folder] Previous | Next

Regarding your comments about the suns rotation, Jerry, thank you very much!

Its helpful to now know how to derive this as a constant, I didn't know how to do this before.
Now that we have this as an anchor, I hope to be able to determine or find out how to address the
two key questions I have (which hopefully your feedback will help with), these are;

1.) In the relatively constant cycle you show how to compute, how can I determine the beginning, middle
and end of it? Or other points in its cycle (thats what Im really after mainly), I'd like to be able to compute other intervals of the cycle based on its relatively true start and end, i.e. 1/4, 1/8, etc....

2.) Using your formula, their should be a way to determine the latititude and layer depth where the 27.3 day relative constant cycle , i.e. if we place the sphere of the sun
into a cube, take the diagonal; (sqrt(3) /2) as center point, follow along the diagonal outwards until we reach the convective layer point where the 27.3 day cycle begins, mark that numeric position on the diagonal and then
from that point follow inwards or outwards till we locate the point that averages
But how to do this? Other inputs must be needed......

Would appreciate and thoughts, comments on this?

>
> The rotational value of the sun on the surface varies from 25 days at
>the equator to 36 days at the poles. The deep convective layer however rotates
>consistently at ~ 27 days. To prove this number use the following formulas:
>radius earth orbit = 149597892km

============
The factoid you sent was very interesting and I hadn't heard of it, one thing though
what does the 'n' variable represent here?

>But an interesting fact. All the planets rotate in a poeriod that is
>very close to either 83 minutes * n^2 or 6.4 days * n^2. That 83 minutes
>about shows up in a lot of places.

Oops, sorry, I should have said that n is an integer.
So for Mars and earth n=3, for Jupiter and Saturn n=2. (based on ~83
minutes)
For Pluto n=1, Sun n=2, Mercury n=3, Venus n=6 (based on ~6.4 days)

=========

From: Ray Tomes | Save Address - Block Sender - Set Rule - Color Code
To: Mr X
Subject: Re: Also - Re: Solar Rotation Question
Date: 5/12/2007 3:59:35 AM
Download Message Display Headers Printer Friendly
Move to Folder Inbox Sent Drafts Trash Junk Mail NEWS Articles ALT [New Folder] Previous | Next
Mr X wrote:

... bottom line is Parr and
> Davidson measured annual cycles
> that re-occur between the Sun, earth and I believe, Sirius, this could
> be detected as measurable gravity flux...
> Parr literally created a table top device that he proved LOST a
> significant amount of weight when the Sun when through a certain kind
> of energy spike (conduit), pretty exciting stuff.

> Thanks Ray, yeah... I do understand the difference, but thanks for
> trying to help clear up what you felt might have been a
> misunderstanding on my part. The spreadsheet attached actually was
> meant to calc
> the rotations and not the revolutions. The thing I dont get, perhaps I
> didnt describe it well enough - sorry about
> that, is why the larger planets rotate faster?
OK, sorry about that. It depends on a number of things I think ... but
it is speculation.
1. When the planets formed how big a ball of gas dust etc fell in and so
what rotation it got.
2. Since then the planets slowed down. The Moon slows the earth, but why
mars is the same --- who knows?
3. Why are Mercury and VBenus slowest of all with no moons? Maybe the
Sun becasue they are closer?

But an interesting fact. All the planets rotate in a poeriod that is
very close to either 83 minutes * n^2 or 6.4 days * n^2. That 83 minutes
about shows up in a lot of places.
> That doesnt make sense to me... if a planet is significantly larger
> than earth and farther out from the sun, shouldnt that make it rotate
> on its axis MUCH more slowly?
Why? The Sun does noty cause the rotation, only the revolution vbelocity
(or more corrcetly the velocity causes the distance).
> Wikipedia is a really good generic resource, but for really meaty,
> truthful stuff, frankly I find it more meaningful
> to ask free thinkers their opinions directly, but Im sure you can
> appreciate that.
Yes, agreed. I was thinking only of rotation and revolution then.
> Don't know how aware of this you are, but a lot of people look up to
> you and your opinion holds a great deal
> of weight... so it doesnt surprise me.
Thanks
Ray

Ray Tomes | Save Address - Block Sender - Set Rule - Color Code
To: Mr X
Subject: Re: Solar Rotation Question
Date: 5/11/2007 6:28:46 PM
Download Message Display Headers Printer Friendly
Move to Folder Inbox Sent Items Drafts Deleted Items Junk Mail NEWS Articles ALT [New Folder] Previous | Next
Mr X wrote:
> Regarding spin time, what I am hoping to find out is the start and end
> cycle of a 27 day (approx) roation cycle of the sun specifically and
> if that means finding a given latitude, depth that is ok, but am
> looking to discover
> exactly how to do this....
Hi X

Because the Sun is fluid, any system that is used is necessarily
arbitrary. The Carrington rotation system is the one that is generally
used. It will link events quite well over a small number of rotations,
but when you start to compare many years later then different latitudes
will have drifted a long way apart, possibly whole rotations.

I think that you will find this page useful.
http://umtof.umd.edu/pm/crn/CARRTIME.HTML

regards
Ray

PS Busy now, so maybe more later.

=========

<-----Original Message----->
>From: Ray Tomes [ray@tomes.biz]
>Sent: 5/11/2007 5:28:00 AM
>To: Mr X
>Subject: Re: Solar Rotation Question
>
>The solar rotation is variable. It varies with latitude. It varies with
>depth. It varies over time. Figures like 27 days (which amounts to 28
>days as seen from Earth because we are moving with the Sun's rotation)
>are used as a guide only. When things are plotted on a 28 day repeting
>map, some events will show up over many cycles. They will show as
>veryical lines if exactly 28 days, possibly sloping slightly left or
>right if a different rotation, but still visible.
>
>The variations are wll measured by the 5 minute oscillations (see GONG
>project and others) and the whole internal rotation of the Sun is known
>for some time.
>
>Have fun
>Ray
>
>.
>

>
>On Wed May 9 1:05 , 'Mr X' <Mr X> sent:
>
>
>
>Sir,
>
>this is very helpful, my thanks again to you. I

><-----Original Message----->
>>From: courtney@cseligman.com [courtney@cseligman.com]
>>Sent: 5/9/2007 12:09:54 AM
>>To: Mr X
>>Subject: Re: Re: Solar Rotation Question
>>
>>The number you are looking for is probably the Carrington Rotation Number,
>>expressed as a whole number of rotations, plus so many days. Each "Rotation"
>>is 27.3 days long, because the Earth moves partway around the Sun during each Solar rotation, requiring an
>>extra day and a third of solar rotation for a given solar longitude to "catch
>>up". You may want to take a look at this site:
>>http://www.sungazer.net/carrington.html
>>Prof. Seligman
>>
>>
>>On Tue May 8 21:35 , 'Mr X' <Mr X> sent:
>>
>>
>>
>>If the sun rotates on its axis once every so many days, how can we determine its
>>position in this rotational cycle?
>>
>>For instance, if we want to know if it is at day 8 of 27, how may this be
>>done? What do we 'clock' this
>>to? The Galactic Center?
>>
>>I'd like to be able to know how to determine what the count of this cycle is
>>on any given earth calendar day,
>>for example if it is the 15th day of the 27th solar rotation, then what would
>>a given earth month calendar day be...
>>Must be some way to calculate this?
>>

===========
Greg,

below is a brief dialogue I had recently with Prof. Seligman, am wondering if you might shed some light on this?
Specifically how to derive the current point in the suns rotation at the latitude where rotation = 27 days, as per below

===========================
Sir,

this is very helpful, my thanks again to you. I am interested specifically in a 27 rotational value, if we take into account the angular tilt of the sun, at what latitude close to the equator do you feel a value of 27 or very close to this would occur? It is at this position I would like to determine where in the given cycle of rotation the sun is at.... any other ideas?

From: courtney@cseligman.com Subject: Re: Solar Rotation Question
Date: 5/9/2007 12:14:00 AM
The number you are looking for is probably the Carrington Rotation Number, expressed as a whole number of rotations, plus so many days. Each "Rotation" is 27.3 days long, because the Earth moves partway around the Sun during each Solar rotation, requiring an extra day and a third of solar rotation for a given solar longitude to "catch up". You may want to take a look at this site:

http://www.sungazer.net/carrington.html

Prof. Seligman
--
Thank you very much for your thoughtful response. I am particularly interested in the equatorial rotational rate
and hope to find the means of measuring that specifically, look forward to hearing back from you.

Best Regards!

<-----Original Message----->
>From: courtney@cseligman.com [courtney@cseligman.com]
>Sent: 5/8/2007 10:53:28 PM
>To: Mr X
>Subject: Re: Re: Solar Rotation Question
>
>I'm not sure how the rotational position is calculated. It's more complicated
>than you might think, because it is a fluid (a gas at the photosphere, and a
>plasma above and below the photosphere) and rotates at different rates at
>different latitudes, taking closer to 27 days at the Equator, but more than a
>month at the Poles. So if there is a specific way of counting rotations, it
>would only apply to a particular latitude. I'll take a quick look at various
>references, and if I find any more information, get back to you sometime
>tomorrow.
>Courtney Seligman, Professor of Astronomy, Long Beach City College
>
>On Tue May 8 21:35 , 'Mr X' <Mr X> sent:

>If the sun rotates on its axis once every 27 days, how can we determine its
>position in this rotational cycle?
>
>For instance, if we want to know if it is at day 8 of 27, how may this be
>done? What do we 'clock' this
>to? The Galactic Center?
>
>I'd like to be able to know how to determine what the count of this cycle is
>on any given earth calendar day,
>for example if it is the 15th day of the 27th solar rotation, then what would
>a given earth month calendar day be...
>Must be some way to calculate this?

From: Greg Piepol | Save Address - Block Sender - Set Rule - Color Code
To: 'Mr X'
Subject: RE: Re: Solar Rotation Question
Date: 5/9/2007 5:11:39 AM
Download Message Display Headers Printer Friendly
Move to Folder Inbox Sent Items Drafts Deleted Items Junk Mail NEWS Articles ALT [New Folder] Previous | Next

Interesting but, I'm just a solar imager. I'd have to leave it up to the professionals on that one.

Many of the amateurs I know use this tool for tilt:
http://www.atoptics.co.uk/tiltsun.htm

Hope this helps,
Greg
=============
Also

the following links tweaked my interest in relation to the question of a specific clocking mechanism
relating to the sun;

Joe Parr
http://www.gizapyramid.com/Parr/Index.html

http://www.gizapyramid.com/BIO-Parr.htm

http://www.gizapyramid.com/Parr/parchart2.htm

Planets TestifyPlanetary periods are found to all be measured in one of two sacred units of time.
www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/lds/meridian/2004/planets.html - 41k - Cached - Similar pages

==
From: libra4@librarising.com | Save Address - Block Sender - Set Rule - Color Code
To: Mr X
Subject: Re: Solar Rotation Question
Date: 5/9/2007 11:33:46 AM
Download Message Display Headers Printer Friendly
Move to Folder Inbox Sent Items Drafts Deleted Items Junk Mail NEWS Articles ALT [New Folder] Previous | Next
Dear Mr. X,

Yours is a very unique question,
which unfortunately I don't really
have an answer to.

The first criteria used to measure solar
rotation is sunspots and their various cycles,
but I know this is not what you're looking
for.

Perhaps the answer to your question depends
on what the Sun orbits, which answer has not
yet been clearly determined or revealed.

The Galactic center may be part of the
answer, but there must be some other body
or bodies between our Sun and the Galactic
center to which our Sun is but a small
cog in the mechanism.

Some say Sirius, while others say Alcyone,
while others postulate a binary system. When
our Sun's star is discovered or revealed we
may then have a means by which to make sense
of the solar rotation cycle as well as its
greater orbital cycle through our local part
of the galaxy.

Untill then, there is little I can convey
to you about this question.

Nick, Libra Rising
===============================

From:   Mr X | Save Address - Block Sender - Set Rule - Color Code
To:   ray@tomes.biz
Subject:   Re: Ray, regarding " n " value
Date:   5/14/2007 4:53:23 AM
Download Message   Display Headers   Printer Friendly
     Move to Folder       Inbox       Sent Items       Drafts       Deleted Items       Junk Mail       NEWS Articles ALT [New Folder] Previous | Next

Hey Ray, thanks for the clarification and compliment! Actually you are to kind, I felt bagged all day!
Must be the weather. You are more on the game than I, and I appreciate the gems you are imparting to me.

May I ask, do you know the "n" values for Uranus and Neptune?

The new 160 minute constant, now I find this VERY interesting, and as you say it works!

24 / 2.666666667 = 9

Nicely done!

<-----Original Message----->
>From: Ray Tomes [ray@tomes.biz]
>Sent: 5/14/2007 3:43:43 AM
>To: Mr X
>Subject: Re: Ray, regarding " n " value
>
>Hi
>
>Yeah, sorry, my mistake, it is 160 minutes not 83.
>
>So Earth or Mars /160 minutes gives 9.
>Jupiter or Saturn / 160 minutes gives 4.
>
>Pluto / 6.4 days = 1
>Sun / 6.4 day = 4
>Mercury / 6.4 day = 9
>
>Well, we established that you are wide awake. :-)
>
>Ray
>.
From:   Mr X | Save Address - Block Sender - Set Rule - Color Code
To:   ray@tomes.biz
Subject:   Something Weird
Date:   5/14/2007 5:03:19 AM
Download Message   Display Headers   Printer Friendly
     Move to Folder       Inbox       Sent Items       Drafts       Deleted Items       Junk Mail       NEWS Articles ALT [New Folder] Previous | Next

The new constant you sent I find of particular interest, especially in light of the below;

2.6666 / 2 = 1.3333

Thought you might find this of interest;

(Am guessing you read the Jerry Iuliano reply I sent previously?)

Sun's rotation;

at equator = ~25 days

at deep convection layer = 27.3 days

at poles, 36 days

36 / 27 = 1.333333333

A perfect fourth!

27 / 36 = 0.75, ( 0.75 *2 = 1.5 ) a perfect fifth!

Note also, a cubic surface has 27 lines and can be configured 36 different ways!

Also;

1 / 360 = 0.0027777777777777777777777777777778

From:   Mr X | Save Address - Block Sender - Set Rule - Color Code
To:   joe.parr@worldnet.att.net; JerryIuliano@aol.com; courtney@cseligman.com
Cc:   Goldfinder@excite.com,ray@tomes.biz
Subject:   Re: Solar rotation question
Date:   5/14/2007 2:12:34 PM
Download Message   Display Headers   Printer Friendly
     Move to Folder       Inbox       Sent Items       Drafts       Deleted Items       Junk Mail       NEWS Articles ALT [New Folder] Previous | Next

Hello Joe!

Thanks for your reply! I wanted to share the most recent dialogue thread with you.

It seems that we can find a fairly consistent rotational value via polar axis ( 36 days )
and via the deep convection layer, ~27.3 days, I have included a most interesting comment
pertaining to this from Jerry Iuliano which is included below, also comments from Ray Tomes
of the Cycles Research group provide more interesting insights.

But the bottom line to all this, is this; Those re-occuring conduits that you and Dan measured, between
the sun, the earth and other stars.... well they happen at fairly specific times, those times (dates) probably do
wander a bit year to year, but chances are very likely they follow a somewhat predictable spiral, log path!

Which means, that they are also likely 'clocking' to something, which further likely means that the sun
IS part of the clocking mechanism, and if thats the case, its rotation must be somehow connected to this,
ergo if we can figure out how to find the start and beginning of the suns solar rotational cycle we should be in place to figure out how to accurately forecast exactly when those conduits open and close! Comments or feedback?

FREQUENCY ARTICLES AND LINKS ;

The below links were compiled courtesy of ;

Applied Biophysics Aether Research Laboratory

I’m providing this list to members, users as many of these subjects have been relevant in my own research

and development for well over a decade and I’m happy to see that someone has put this list together so

conveniently!

A number of these links and subjects will be easily recognizable to members as I have repeatedly made

reference to them in the past and they have been the focus of many conversations.

History of Bio-Energy Resonance.

Bio-Resonance is the field of energetic medicine that detects and works with electromagnetic frequency information generated by the body. Bio refers to a living organism and resonance means 'to vibrate in harmony with'.

bioresonance history

In his book It's Only Natural, Dr. G. E. Poesnecker wrote:

“… Since the beginning of man's existence on earth, he has pondered the nature of life itself. Even with all our great scientific advances, there is still no CONSENSUS on the basic nature of the life within us and other animate beings. The most generally accepted theories are based on the chemical and/or stimulative-inhibitive theory of existence. The most we can get from most authorities is that it may be of some value to regard life as the sum total of the properties and activities of a highly organized aggregate of various chemical compounds that we call protoplasm.

Among these properties they have called attention to irritability as a diagnostic property of a living body. Upon this Herbert Spencer based his classic definition: “Life is the continuous adjustment of internal relations to external relations.” Observation teaches us that this adjustment to environmental changes is possible only within narrow physiologic limits. For example, the human body can adjust itself to changes in external temperature only when these changes are very moderate. Viewed from this angle, they hold that life is the interplay between the organism and its environment by which the organism either adjusts itself to the environment or adjusts the environment to itself.

Such a definition tells only what life does; it doesn't tell what life is. Unfortunately, such an attitude has frequently been the nature of science since its inception. When a scientist is incapable of explaining something, he describes what he sees, makes up a few Latin or Greek names for the rest to impress us and then goes on to something else. This is particularly true in medicine, where most of the tongue-twisting disease names have nothing whatsoever to do with the cause or true nature of the disease but are only the description of its most obvious symptoms in Latin or Greek.

Some researchers haven't been satisfied with such smug descriptions of the nature of life. Some have listened to the voice of their conscience when contemplating the usual theories on the nature of life and have been able to see through the usual inane double talk couched in Latin and Greek, which all too often passes for scientific thought. They realize that much of the phenomena we encounter in living can’t be explained readily by the stimulus/response theory of life as put forth by their orthodox colleagues.

Surprisingly, many of these researchers have developed concepts similar to each other, even though their work has been accomplished without knowledge of their fellow investigators. All these studies have gone beyond the chemical or mechanical basis of life and have been carried into the molecular and atomic structure of matter. From this effort first developed an electrical, then an electronic, and finally a vibratory, or wave concept, of life and the activities carried out by the living subject.

Some of the most well-known researchers in this field were Dr. Georges Lakhovsky, Professor Jacques d’Arsonval (the discoverer of the meter movement that goes under his name), Dr. George W. Crile, Dr. Albert Abrams, Nicola Tesla and Ivan G. McDaniel (who advanced this theory into the psychological, mental, and spiritual spheres of human activity)… “

In 1925 Georges Lakhovsky, a Russian scientist, published a book called The Secret of Lifein which he identified that every living cell emitted radiation (electro-magnetic signals) and that a cell's nucleus acts as an electrical oscillating circuit similar to a radio transmitter and receiver. Lakhovsky was knowledgeable in both engineering and biology. It was the meshing of these two sciences that helped him prove his theories.

It had already been established by the 1920’s that invisible radiations were constantly bombarding the earth. Lakhovsky believed that these ultra short waves (sometimes called penetrating waves, at the time) were what gave us life.

Lakhovsky believed that each of our cells was a minute resonating circuit and when these circuits were oscillating correctly we or any living organism were healthy. When an outside source caused our cells to oscillate at a different rate then disease set in. In his book “The Secret of Life” Lakhovsky wrote, “What is life? It is the dynamic equilibrium of all cells, the harmony of multiple radiations that react upon one another. What is disease? It is the oscillatory disequilibrium of cells, originating from eternal causes. It is, more especially, the struggle between microbic radiation and cellular radiation.” He believed it was these radiations that kept our bodies oscillating correctly but too much or a distorted radiation would cause them to oscillate incorrectly.

Setting out to prove his theories, Lakhovsky felt that he could generate a practical application to enable the adversely effected cells to regain their full vitality by reinstating their proper oscillatory rate. Thus he invented the Multiple Wave Oscillator (originally called Radio-cellulo-oscillator). He felt that by giving the cells a large range of oscillating waves that the cells would find their proper frequency and therefore become strong enough to fight off the improper oscillations of microbes or be strong enough to fight back from such damage as that caused by smoking.

He initially proved his theory using plants. In December, 1924, he inoculated 10 germanium plants with a “plant cancer” that produced tumors. After 30 days, tumors had developed in all of the plants. He took one of the 10 infected plants and simply fashioned a heavy copper wire in a one loop, open-ended coil about 30 cm (12") in diameter around the center of the plant, and held it in place with an ebonite stake . The copper coil acted as an antennae or a tuning coil, collecting and concentrating oscillation energy from extremely high frequency cosmic rays. The diameter of the cooper loop determined whichrange of frequencies would be captured. He found that the 30 cm loop captured frequencies that fell within the resonant frequency range of the plant's cells. This captured energy reinforced the resonant oscillations naturally produced by the nucleus of the germanium's cells. This allowed the plant to overwhelm the oscillations of the cancer cells and destroy the cancer. The tumors fell off in less than 3 weeks and by 2 months, the plant was thriving. All of the other cancer-inoculated plants-without the antennae coil- died within 30 days. In his book, Lakhovsky shows pictures of the recovered plant after 2 months, 6 months, and 1 year. Three years later, with the original coil left in place, the plant grew into a very robust specimen. He tried this 3 different times and all three experiments produced the same results.

??? ??????? ????????, ??????? ??????? ??? ??????? ??????????. ??? ???????? ??????? ????? ??????? ?????, ??????? ???? ???????? ??????? ????????.

Since Lakhovsky’s belief was that living cells were tiny oscillators that were given life from penetrating radiation and the oscillation of these cells put off their own radiation, he proceeded with an experiment to find out if indeed the penetrating radiation was what caused the cells to oscillate or if some other stimuli such as chemical energy was responsible for sustaining this oscillation.

Dr. George Crile, in his book A Bipolar Theory of Living Processes, (Crile, George W.: A Bipolar Theory of Living Processes. New York, Mac Millan, 1926.) approached this subject from yet another point of view. The similarity between his conclusions and those of the other researchers in this field, however, is startling. For instance, Crile wrote, “It is clear that cellular radiation produces the electric current which operates adaptively the organism as a whole, producing memory, reason, imagination, emotion, special senses, secretions, muscular action, response to infection, normal growth and the growth of benign tumors and cancers-all of which are governed adaptively by the electrical charges that are generated by the short wave or ionizing radiation in the protoplasm.”

The human cell, as all matter in the universe, is composed of oscillating components known as atoms, which in turn are composed of particles called protons, electrons, neutrons, and positrons, among others. All these particles are in constant movement. The movement of the electron is especially great, as it rapidly circles this central mass of the atom in various bands, or orbits. The atomic structure is analogous to our own solar system, in which the sun represents the central nuclear mass and the various planets the encircling electrons.

In Lamp of the Soul, (McDaniel, Ivan G.: The Lamp of the Soul. Quakertown, Pa., Philosophical Publishing Co.1942.) Ivan G. McDaniel speaks of biologic wave systems that are vibratory interconnecting systems, that tend to hold a part or organ together for a specific functioning purpose. All this is based on the principle that the cell is an electromagnetic radiating entity. Concerning life on earth McDaniel says, “We may therefore picture life on earth as beginning with simple spores, or cells, which were built up by organizing wave systems when earth's conditions were suitable for life to express in that manner. As conditions changed, the fertilized genes were incorporated into the cells, bringing physical and mental growth. When a new gene and its corresponding wave system is introduced into an organism, we would expect to find the new biological wave competing with the older wave for the same cell material, and this may explain the peculiar combination of plant and animal sometimes found in the earlier species. The balance of the activating hormone between the old and the new biological wave systems may flow back and forth until one gains control and eliminates the effect of the other by absorbing all the vitality.”

In 1970s, German biophysicist Fritz Albert Popp, Ph.D., investigated the relationship between coherence and the biophoton energy in our cells. Popp used highly sensitive light-measuring equipment to monitor the light emitted by living cells. He was able to confirm that living cells emit small bursts of light. He determined that cells do not just radiate light, they also absorb light. In fact, the storage time is relative to the quality of the cell. Therefore, a healthy cell will store light the longest, while an unhealthy cell will give off the light in a shorter time. He also discovered that the dying process of a cell is identical to that of a star. Shortly before its death, it will change into a supernova, whereby its radiation increases a thousand-fold, He further discovered that a healthy cell radiates coherent light, while a diseased cell radiates chaotic light.

According to Popp, every cell in our body receives coherent light, stores coherent light, and emits coherent light. The most basic sub-molecular component of our body is made up of particles of light called biophotons. These biophotons, traveling at the speed of light, make up the electromagnetic frequency patterns that are found in every living organism. This matrix or field of frequency oscillations or resonance specificity provides the energetic switchboarding behind every cellular function, including DNA/RNA messengering. Cell membranes scan and convert signals into electromagnetic events as proteins within the cell's bi-layer change shape to vibrations of specific resonant frequencies.2 Every biochemical reaction is proceeded by an electromagnetic signal. Cells communicate both electromagnetically and chemically and create biochemical pathways that interconnect with all functions of the body.

Dr. Kikuo Chishima, Professor of the Nagoya Commercial University, Japan, and author of a nine volume collection of his research and scientific studies called "Revolution of Biology and Medicine: A New Theory on the Life Science and Its Practical Application to Health & Disease," is best known for his studies demonstrating that the origin of red blood corpuscles is not the bone marrow but the intestinal villus, and that red blood corpuscles differentiate into all kinds of somatic cells and germ cells in accordance with their cellular resonant environmental conditions.

Dr. Kikuo Chishima theorized that the intestinal villi act like small antennae that absorb both nutrients as well as energetic or frequency information from the food we eat. These red blood cells or erythrocytes respond to specific biophoton oscillations and aggregate, fuse, synthesize DNA and differentiate into lymphocyte or mesenchymal cells. Dr. Chishima's work offers some insight into current day quantum physics theories that remind us that at the sub-atomic level matter does not exist. There is only energy; bits of photons with lots of empty space around them. DNA has been thought to be the center of the definition of life. At closer inspection we find that DNA is made up of molecules, which are made up of sub-atomic particles and we end up back at the level of biophotons again.

THE RADIO

AMATEUR'S HAND BOOK

A Complete, Authentic and Informative Work on Wireless Telegraphy and Telephony

BY
FREDERICK COLLINS

Inventor of the Wireless Telephone 1899; Historian of Wireless 1901-1910; Author of "Wireless Telegraphy" 1905

1922

THE RADIO AMATEUR'S HAND BOOK

MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL TUNING

There is a strikingly close resemblance between sound waves and the way they are set up in the air by a mechanically vibrating body, such as a steel spring or a tuning fork, and electric waves and the way they are set up in the ether by a current oscillating in a circuit. As it is easy to grasp the way that sound waves are produced and behave something will be told about them in this chapter and also an explanation of how electric waves are produced and behave and thus you will be able to get a clear understanding of them and of tuning in general.

Damped and Sustained Mechanical Vibrations.--If you will place one end of a flat steel spring in a vice and screw it up tight as shown at A in Fig. 34, and then pull the free end over and let it go it will vibrate to and fro with decreasing amplitude until it comes to rest as shown at B. When you pull the spring over you store up energy in it and when you let it go the stored up energy is changed into energy of motion and the spring moves forth and back, or vibrates as we call it, until all of its stored up energy is spent.

If it were not for the air surrounding it and other frictional losses, the spring would vibrate for a very long time as the stored up energy and the energy of motion would practically offset each other and so the energy would not be used up. But as the spring beats the air the latter is sent out in impulses and the conversion of the vibrations of the spring into waves in the air soon uses up the energy you have imparted to it and it comes to rest.

In order to send out continuous waves in the air instead of damped waves as with a flat steel spring you can use an electric driven tuning fork, see C, in which an electromagnet is fixed on the inside of the prongs and when this is energized by a battery current the vibrations of the prongs of the fork are kept going, or are sustained, as shown in the diagram at D.

Damped and Sustained Electric Oscillations.--The vibrating steel spring described above is a very good analogue of the way that damped electric oscillations which surge in a circuit set up and send out periodic electric waves in the ether while the electric driven tuning fork just described is likewise a good analogue of how sustained oscillations surge in a circuit and set up and send out continuous electric waves in the ether as the following shows.

Now the inductance and resistance of a circuit such as is shown at A in Fig. 35, slows down, and finally damps out entirely, the electric oscillations of the high frequency currents, see B, where these are set up by the periodic discharge of a condenser, precisely as the vibrations of the spring are damped out by the friction of the air and other resistances that act upon it. As the electric oscillations surge to and fro in the circuit it is opposed by the action of the ether which surrounds it and electric waves are set up in and sent out through it and this transformation soon uses up the energy of the current that flows in the circuit.

…

MORE OF THIS FOUND HERE ;

Applied Biophysics Aether Research Laboratory

https://sites.google.com/site/appliedbiophysicsresearch/aaa-front-page-two

I originally found this list here ;

https://sites.google.com/site/appliedbiophysicsresearch/aaa-front-page-two

There is a lot of other good information at the above link, not all of it is shown herein.

There is a religious tone to the page, so for users who find this of additional interest that’s great if not, then skim past it.

Navigation

· 1 - Sound

o Conversion: frequency f to wavelength λ and wavelength to frequency

o Converting acoustic energy into useful other energy forms