How many holes does a ring have? E-Book

Gnomo Orzo

• Herausgeber: WS
• Kategorie: Religion und Spiritualität
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 186

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2018

Beschreibung

What if the universe weighed nothing and matter did not really exist? That which seems to be a legitimate doubt for a mystic scholar of the Indian Vedas is, instead, an embarrassing result of applying restricted Relativity to observations obtained from the group of astrophysics who have measured the background cosmic radiation of our universe. At the dawn of the new millennium, the WMAP satellite, in addition to providing us with measurements of the cosmos that have never been obtained before, also created many concerns about the conception of the universe, which we still obstinately believe today. Through the story of one hundred years of provocative discoveries in Physics, this book leads us to a new, astonishing vision of the cosmos. Curiously identical to that of a mystic.

Leseprobe

How many holes does a ring have?

Gnomo Orzo (Rinaldo Accorti)

ISBN: 978-88-99652-88-3

First English edition DEVODAMA Ltd., Vidracco (TO), Italy

(First Italian edition Quanti buchi ha un anello? - Edition Devodama 2017)

Translation: Quaglia Cocco (Juliett Chi)

COPYRIGHT 2017©Associazione di Promozione Sociale MIL

The current volume was created by the Associazione di Promozione Sociale MIL as part of the activities and functions of the statute.

All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced in any form without the written authorization of the publisher, except for brief citations used for book reviews.

Printed in the month of December 2017

How many holes does a ring have?

The Theory of Spiritual Physics

Preface

SEEING FAR

If I have seen further it is only by standing on the shoulders of giants.

Sir Isaac Newton

Imagine for a moment that you are living on a planet where you do not need to defend yourself from anything. A place where no one obliges you to be or to do what you do not want.

Imagine knowing your deepest desires and having your days, your nocturnal dreams, and your resources available to realize them. Imagine looking around you and knowing that the answers to everything you ask really do exist and you do not have to go anywhere to look for them because they are inside of you.

Imagine actually being a small piece of a larger mosaic, where the dreams and desires of all beings are perfectly and elegantly harmonized, and that the glue that holds together the pieces of the mosaic is not made of fear and war, but of love and intelligence.

Imagine that this is not a fantasy but a reality, one that has been so well hidden that it is almost transparent to your eyes. Almost. If you are imagining these things, it is because deep down you know they are possible. The pages of this book are the result of this effort, of this certainty: all this is possible.

It is curious to cite aspects such as happiness, freedom, our inner world, dreams, intelligence, and – last but not least – love, in the preface of a book about Physics. Yet, by covering the concepts, people and events of Physics, and not only, this book seeks to demonstrate that without newly reuniting the many diverse expressions of human beings, it will not be possible to find that unitary law that we are seeking.

It will not be possible to make a new leap and revolu-tionize our technologies to the point of increasing the quality of life without destroying everything that sur-rounds us, without polluting and threatening ecosystems, without destroying races and species.

This work of summary would have never come about if I had not climbed on the shoulders of someone of a much greater stature, someone who made it possible for me to see further: Oberto Airaudi, Falco Tarassaco.

My master, my teacher, my inspiration for this work and for so many things in my life that I can now be proud of.

Thank you, Falco Tarassaco.

Premise

In the first part of this book, I will make some brief allusions to the history of Physics, mainly from the end of the 19th century to present times, except for Aristotle, Galilei and Newton, who for obvious reasons have space within my historical excursus.

Knowing modern Physics is certainly not essential for understanding Spiritual Physics, but it helps us to demonstrate that spirit, matter and energy are the same thing.

“Spiritual” is sometimes a misleading word, especially since monotheistic systems want us to believe that it is their exclusive playground. The Physics of Everything? Holistic Physics? I was thinking of different terms to describe Spiritual Physics in these pages, but ultimately the most important thing is understanding the content. Let us let those who really need them take care of the labels.

So, I will start from the cornerstones of scientific thought, such as Relativity, the Big Bang, and Quantum Mechanics. When possible, I will not only tell about the theories but also the vicissitudes of the scientists who have formulated them – which are perhaps more exciting than the principles themselves – while I will leave aside formulas and complicated calculations I do not know, leaving them to the specialists.

This work, compared to others that cover the same theme and can be found in our catalog of books, is expressly focused on the connection between modern Physics and Spiritual Physics, and has an educational nature.

Unfortunately, it will not be possible to explore the whole range of arguments in Spiritual Physics here, as its vastness and multiple facets made it necessary for me – and those who helped me with this work – to make choices and give more space to aspects that are essential for understanding the fundamentals of the Damanhurian vision of Physics.

Precisely because the theme is vast, and during courses and seminars it has never been possible to cover every question, I hope that friends and students with whom I have discussed these topics over the last 20 years can integrate their knowledge and further enrich it.

However, you may find an exhaustive summary in the book Spiritual Physics written by my “colleague” and friend Coyote Cardo, a walking esoteric library who, when he has had enough of the laws of the universe, amuses himself with an electric guitar and a distortion pedal, making his cat’s fur stand up on end. I cannot lend it to you – the book that is, not the cat – because I have consumed it by consulting it so much while writing my book.

In the second part of the book, we will discuss topics that are not directly related to Physics, such as History, Cognitive Science, Philosophy of Language, and Philosophy.

These aspects and events make it possible for us to better understand the context of one of the main themes of this work: demonstrating that a unitary knowledge exists, and that the various sciences are only limited points of view of this knowledge.

The rest of the work is entirely dedicated to Spiritual Physics, as it was formulated since the founding of Damanhur in 1975 to the present, by Falco, through confrontation and debate with his students and collaborators during almost 12,000 hours of meetings, carefully recorded on audio cassettes until 1984, and from then on, with video.

Although 12,000 hours is a considerable amount of time, for me it is quite enjoyable to remember all those moments, with so many questions, his and ours, so many answers, and so many inquiries that have gradually created the model that we will cover on these pages and that has radically changed my life and way of seeing the world.

I imagine that many of you who are reading this book may be wondering why some of us have names like Falco Tarassaco (Falcon Dandelion) or Coyote Cardo (Coyote Thistle). Or why I and others have spent 12,000 hours asking questions and seeking answers about Physics, spirituality, life, and most of all, what is this Damanhur that was founded in 1975, since there is another Damanhur in Egypt that is much more ancient? Have no fear! At the end of the book, you will find a chapter dedicated to Damanhur, Federation of Communities.

I conclude by sharing a hope of mine. I do not know if you have anything to change, and in any case, I do not think that I can teach you how to change, but I would like these pages to help you, if it were not already the case. Using a quote from Albert Einstein about walking through the trees and becoming aware of the forest, I think that Spiritual Physics, as it was developed by Falco, helps us to see and admire the entire forest.

So let us begin precisely with one of his questions.

Introduction on thursday, obviously

What’s the story with this ring?

Falco Tarassaco

Like all stories, this one has a starting date and place, and it was July 7, 1988 in a sweltering Turin, already in the process of preparing for the summer holidays. We were almost at the end of an era where, starting from July, the city of the Savoys emptied out and the Autostrada del Sole fills with Fiat Ritmos and Fiat 127s, packed with suitcases and headed for the sea.

The words “economic crisis” were still to come. Archbishop Lefebvre had taken it upon himself to create a schismatic current in the Catholic Church, while Jacques Benveniste published an article in Nature magazine about researching the memory of water that would cause him a lot of trouble and very little fame.

That evening, for the second time, I was attending a talk by Mr. Oberto Airaudi, a prolific – perhaps I should say volcanic – philosopher, healer, painter, as well as the founder of the Damanhur, Federation of Communities. Three months before, I had begun a path of Meditation in his philosophical school, and I was there to understand something more about this man and his ideas.

I discovered that the previous Thursday evening, during one of the meetings he was holding at Via San Secondo street, number 42, he had asked his audience a question that seemed decidedly strange to me: How many holes does a ring have?

PART ONE - A BIT OF HISTORY

When invitations were sent out for the grand scientists’ ball

Kelvin said he was at the right temperature to be able to attend;Einstein thought it would be relatively easy to come;Pierre and Marie Curie radiated enthusiasm;Ampère was not in the current;Ohm had resistance to the idea;Boyle said he was under too much pressure;Fermi said it was a news bomb;Coulomb’s wife felt charged;Hertz felt on the crest of the wave;Joule had to renounce the invitation due to work problems;Nobel exploded with joy at the news;Fourier already had a number of commitments;Dr. Jekyll declined, saying that he didn’t feel like himself lately;... and Avogadro was not invited as no one remembered his number.

www.matematicamente.it

Yes, I know, Dr. Jekyll was not a scientist, but with this logic, Hubble was not an astronomer, Einstein did not entirely believe in his theory of General Relativity, and Newton was disturbed by the implications of his Universal Gravitation.

If we now have the possibility to go as far as Spiritual Physics – that is, to the All – it is because we understand the huge leaps in logic of many thinkers and scientists, and we also know how to observe their mistakes, their fears and the hesitations they had. As noted by Carlo Rovelli1, genius hesitates, and these hesitations can show us some cracks through which the light filters in, giving us clues and suggestions to enter into a new Physics that could revolutionize the world.

Perhaps Aristotle was the only one who really had it all together. It is not by chance that we owe the Unmoved Mover or the Prime Mover to him. The Prime Mover of Metaphysics is the solution to the otherwise infinite chain of causes and effects. Without a first cause, which is not itself an effect from another cause, we would have no creation but rather an infinite becoming. Many physicists jokingly say that when the Infinite comes onto the scene, you need to stop going to them and find a priest instead.

Being a Mover, this first cause moves the world. That is, it gives Aristotle a sense of an initial step: from cause to effect. At the same time, it is immobile, total, absolute.

How can two such different natures coexist? Plato tells us that if we look at the Unmoved Mover in its entirety, it is a kósmos, that is, something orderly and harmonious – pure beauty. We can only observe it with the eyes of our imagination since it is so complex. What appears to us is a unique object, stable in itself because it is a container of all the forces, thrusts and directions, completely balanced with each other. Indeed, immobile.

If instead of using your imagination, you were to look around you, looking at the book in your hands, at a stone, a plant, a star, at yourself, you would see a multitude of things in movement: rotations, explosions, implosions and continuous transformations. You would see things bigger than you and me, and others that are much smaller.

The Unmoved Mover, seen from close up, opening the hood, is therefore extremely mobile and unstable in its becoming. It is a fabric of causes and effects that chase each other, continually changing their nature, with causes that transform into effects as soon as they begin to exist.

These principles were part of Natural Philosophy, as Physics was called when physikà retained its original meaning: that which exists in nature. This was before modernity invented specializations, creating distance between things.

In this way, Philosophy, Science, Art and Medicine were united, and there were no categories of scientists, doctors and artists. Further along we will see that, if there is an obstacle to understanding the universe, it is precisely this excessive specialization.

From the 3rd century BC of Plato, we make a great leap and arrive at the first formulation of the Principle of Relativity, which – take note – is much older than Einstein, as it was stated by Galileo Galilei in 1632 in his Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems.

What did Galileo say? In a nutshell, he said that a movement which is truly uniform and stable – such as that of a ship with a constant speed, or today, a car with cruise control – does not interact with the movements that can be created within these vehicles.

To make it even clearer: if I am in a car going 100 kilometers an hour on the freeway, and in the back seat I am playing cards with my sister, the cards that drop from my hand to the seat will fall vertically, just as if we were sitting still at a table at home. This means that the internal motion is relative, as it is in Aristotle’s Unmoved Mover.

I am sitting at a table and I observe my glass full of water which is perfectly immobile, while the Earth flies at more than 100,000 kilometers per hour in its revolutionary motion around the Sun, and rotates 360 degrees on its axis in just one day, without the water being minimally disturbed by all this swirling.

This means that, from observation, Galileo had de-duced the intrinsic relativity in the laws of motion.

Starting from these assumptions, we come to 1666, when the effect of gravity on an apple made it fall on the right head. We are talking about Sir Isaac Newton, of course, even though it seems that the apple actually stayed firmly attached to its branch.

1 Carlo Rovelli, Seven Brief Lessons on Physics, Adelphi 2014.

Isaac Newton

His greatest threat:“What goes up must come down.”

Sir Isaac Newton

1666 was considered the annus mirabilis of Newton, and with good reason as he came to conceive the Law of Universal Gravitation, even though in embryonic form.

Also, Optics has him to thank for an exceptional discovery: white light is the sum of all the other colors, and the colors themselves are not the result of the properties of the materials that they refract upon, but they are the properties of light itself. The glass prism that refracts light and separates it into the basic colors is also very well known.

To develop his Theory of Gravitation, in the Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica, Newton created what would become a fundamental contribution to Mathematics and to the discipline that would be called Physics in the future: infinitesimal calculus.

There are rumors that Newton was ill tempered and unpleasant, so much so that many people said he never laughed, a situation of a certain gravity, we could say...

Who knows how much it affected his nerves, the fact that the discovery which had made him famous all over Europe was the thing that distressed him the most. It distressed him because, in formulating the Principia – as his most important work is commonly called – he touched on the awareness of what gravity means, and he described its behavior with a good approximation for velocities less than the speed of light, but he was also aware that he did not understand the true nature of this force. He wrote to a friend: “That, in emptiness, an object could act at a distance on another object, without the mediation of anything else, as a means and through which their action and force could be transferred from one to another, for me it is such a great absurdity. I believe that no human being with competencies in philosophical questions could ever believe it.”2

Newton was also known for his lay faith in an immobile and transcendent God-universe. This approach definitely colored his thought, motivating him to consider the universe as a place of simplicity and uniformity. He officially accepted that the Scriptures were a divine work, although he considered the divine as a demiurge, a “watchmaker,” and therefore it was order.

Here, we have a secular, functional spirituality. On the other hand, his vision of the world and the divine – so modern and “heretic” – in any case, submitted to the conditioning of his education, which presupposed an Absolute at the base of the creation of the world.

Perhaps it was this that motivated him to think that light, understood as a manifestation of this absolute order, must have the same characteristic: that is, it is an instantaneous force. Furthermore: despite the fact that his Universal Gravitation always described relative motions and effects, perhaps it was this that compelled him to postulate an absolute space and time?

How much do culture, education and beliefs condition us in observing what we have before us? Would it have made a difference knowing that the space between two masses is not at all empty?

Although – let’s admit it – without him, the cover of Time featuring Pink Floyd would certainly have been a flop.

2 Richard S. Westfall, The Construction of Modern Science: Mechanisms and Mechanics, Cambridge University Press 1971.

Relative time

When a man sits in the company of a beautiful girl for an hour, it seems as if only a minute has passed. But let him sit on a stove for a minute and it will seem longer than any hour. This is relativity.

Albert Einstein

An old saying affirms that the best way to hide something is make it very evident. I believe that Albert Einstein’s worldly renown and his formula of the relationship between mass and energy perfectly illustrate this idea. If we think about a scientist, Einstein comes to mind. If we have evaluate intelligence, the reference will be from 0 to Einstein. If we decide to print a math formula on a t-shirt, the choice will be between E=mc2 and all the others.

It is understandable that in the 1920s, Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington affirmed that the Theory of Relativity had been understood by two people, besides himself. Even more strange is that, nearly a hundred years later, it is still so little understood, beyond the vague concept that says, “Everything is relative.”

Einstein was not a pure mathematician. First he imagined new hypotheses through “mental experiments” of pure logic, and only subsequently articulated them using the language of Mathematics.

He worked at the Patent Office in Berne, had no formal education in Physics and was almost unknown when, in 1905, he published the article entitled On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies, which enunciated the Theory of Restricted Relativity, also called “Special” because it only refers to a certain category of bodies in movement: ones in movement but without any acceleration, that is, without variation of motion.

Even though his popularity is due to Relativity, Einstein did not win the Nobel Prize for that article, but for another one. In 1905, the total number of articles written by the young employee of the Patent Office was: three. Each one of them generated consequences and developments that fueled Physics for a century. In fact, even today there are many implications of those brilliant and precise intuitions still to be discovered.

In addition to the aforementioned article about the first formulation of Special Relativity, in the second article published that year, he solved the enigma of Brownian motion of particles and confirmed the general idea of atomic structure, which is still valid today, albeit with many additions and variations.

In 1827, Scottish botanist Robert Brown noted that pollen grains suspended in water demonstrated continuous, rapid and irregular motion, and there was no explanation for this in light of kinetic theory at that time. Even worse: the same thing happened with tiny fragments of wood or rock. Somewhere in that microscopic world, there was a source of energy and motion that did not correspond to the laws that were known then. It was a problem for the Physics of that era.

Einstein understood that the explanation of this phe-nomenon involved a relationship between the macroscopic and microscopic aspects, which, intertwined together, provide a coherent explanation with both Kinetics and Electrodynamics.

To say it in a simpler way, Einstein realized that there are two different areas of influence: one concerning the microcosm and one concerning the macrocosm, where the laws are different and behave differently. If this concept is obvious today, it is because Einstein understood it back then. In fact, this intuition opened the doors to successive visions, such as Complexity Theory and the atomic model that is currently considered valid.