108 cycles per prana = 432Hz

You may quote me: "I have gravitated towards a digital keyboard because I find it easier to push buttons to switch temperaments than use a saw and hammer on my other instruments".

How many 432ers know that before 1834 there was no way to measure cycles per second? The whole concept of A = 432 Hz as some sort of musical magic (a right-brained fantasy) is based on a supposed connection between pitch, Vedic numbers, Pythagoras's Music of the Spheres, and the Western system of measuring pitch in Hertz values which are cycles per second. Hertz or Hz references were completely unknown to the Grand Masters of Classical music who predated 1834, often by centuries - Vivaldi, Handel, Bach, Hayden, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann, Mendelsohn, Chopin. None of them used the same pitch for tuning or if they did, it was by sheer accident. 'A' could have been anywhere between 425 and 450 and they wouldn't have even known its reference value. Claims that Vivaldi used 432 Hz are just nonsense! 

At first I, too, thought that the "second" was arbitrary, nothing but yet another human construct. It turns out that it may not be after all. But it still doesn't make a clear-cut difference without exceptions.

Upon inquiry I was surprised to find a correlating time unit in... wait for it... Vedic cosmology, also connected with 108, 432, etc.  Without going too far into the philosophy, the Vedas are held to be composed - not by humans - but by God or empowered persons (specifically Vyasadeva aka Vedavyasa - I guess for those of Abrahamic faiths, somewhat like Moses and the Ten Commandments). So, in Hindu, Jain and Buddhists' etc minds, the time unit used wouldn't be considered arbitrary at all, but on the contrary, "God-given".

There are several Kala (Vedic time) systems depending on what time periods you are measuring - the blink of an eye, a breath, a day; a month, a year, the manifestation of the material world. Their system of diurnal timekeeping is different yet similar enough to end on a proportionate unit. To start with they divide the day not into 24:60:60 hours:minutes:seconds but with 30 and 2 (to begin with) to get a muhurta then a ghati or danda of 24 minutes.  From here it varies from system to system. One I used divides a muhurta of 48 minutes into 30 laghu of 96 secs, then by 15, 5, and 3 down to the respective units of a kashtha of 6.4 seconds, a kshana of 1.28 sec and a nimesha of 426 milliseconds.

Straight away I'm thinking it may not take much juggling to convert 1.28 into harmonic equivalents of the frequencies we are dealing with (read: "want"). Instead of cycles per second we now have cycles per kshana. Surely if we are going to use the "sacred geometry of the Vedas" as a basis for our magical thinking then our pitch will have to be based on the orbital frequency of the Earth and a pure tuning system like Just Intonation instead of Equal Temperament, using cycles per kshana instead of cycles per second (cps or Hz)!

Turns out not much of it makes sense. Drat!

432Hz = 552.96 cycles per kshana; and 256Hz = 327.68 c.p.k.

Not bad, close to a C# and an E respectively. Sort of.

So, using 432 cycles per kshana what do we get? (Comparisons are to note values from 432Hz ET)

432 cpk = 337.5 Hz (halfway b/n a G and an F#); and

256 cpk = 400 Hz (somewhere b/n G and G#).

Forget it! However, if we use another system (I have no idea what they're called) based on 30:2:30:2:6:10 we get a better result. Incidentally that ratio is 1/3600th, showing promise for whole integers, common demoninators, etc that 432ers fancy. The previous system is 1/3375ths, probably why it went nowhere as far as the results we are looking for... 426 milliseconds ain't gonna cut it.

For want of a better name, the muhurta-ghati-kala-pala-prana-vipala (30:2:30:2:6:10) method gives either a prana of 4 seconds or a vipala of 0.4 sec. It should be obvious that by using the larger prana unit of 4 seconds, all we are in fact doing is changing the octave. This, and only this, is where the connection with the Western second to the Vedic prana kicks in - 432 cycles per prana becomes A6 @ 1728Hz, the A two octaves higher. 

It also becomes apparent that to use the smaller vipala for calculations as it means you are converting by 2/5ths which will lead nowhere, eg:

432Hz x 0.4 sec (1 vipala) = 172.8 cpv (cycles per vipala), so for the same pitch referenced in Vedic terms instead of the Western 'arbitrary' second:

432Hz = 172.8 cpv (F? 171.4)

512Hz = 204.8 cpv (G#? 203.9)

Again referenced to A=432Hz ET. But if we reference to Just Intonation with C = 256:

432Hz = 172.8 cpv (F? 170.6)

512Hz = 204.8 cpv (G# exactly - finally, a direct hit!)

Close, but... nah, nothing like the results we get converting the frequency of the Earth's orbit around the Sun into cycles per seconds: 1 ÷ 31556925.250732 = 0.0000000317; which raised to the 32nd octave = 136.1Hz, EXACTLY C# in the A=432Hz Equal Temperament scale - the so-called Om note (ॐ)!

By the way, do you know how traditionally they used to tune up (Indian musicians) before a concert? They set pitch to the singer – what ever it is, it then becomes the shadja. Fair dinkum. Now, THAT is truly ARBITRARY! Legend also has it that the shadja (the root note, usually around C#) is found by the "orchestra guru" meditating on the Heart chakra which supposedly vibrates to the Earth's orbital frequency. He then hums it and the ensemble tunes to that. Hard to believe I know but in days of yore they lit fire sacrifices with mantras, not matches.

Conclusion:

108 cycles per prana = 432Hz; but it doesn't make a lot of sense with the Indian scale which is based on the Shadja!

This is hard to put into words succinctly. When we use the prana unit, a conflict arises when trying to establish a correlation between natural harmony and the vibrational frequency of 432Hz tuning using Vedic units of time measurement and 'Sacred Geometry' i.e. the 'magical properties' of whole integers such as 256 and 432. These represent C and A in the Pythagorean Temperament but are derived from the arbitrary Western second. Trying to use Vedic units of vipala, kshana, etc. however, it completely breaks down.

Yet another conflict arises where although Pythagorean (and derivatives thereof - the ONLY temperament with A & C @432 & 256) uses whole integer ratios, it actually sounds pretty terrible imho (unlike JI which also uses whole integer ratios but has pure thirds and is very harmonious despite its wide 4ths and narrow 5ths). Equal Temperament based on A=432Hz sounds a lot better than PythT but then every note in the scale is technically out of tune with the A - vibrating on a frequency that does NOT harmonically concur, causing beating.

Even if we do use the prana unit, which corresponds with A=432Hz frequencies (being a few octaves higher) and the traditional Indian method of tuning (of which Just Intonation and Ptolemaic Intense Diatonic Scale are mere simplifications) it breaks down again -depending on which 'magic number' 256 or 432 we chose as C or A - because a C of 256 gives an A of 426.6; and an A of 432 creates C = 256.9 (close, but again, no cigar! Remember we're talking about harmonics converging via whole integer ratios etc).

It is at about this point that I leave the desk and wander over to my keyboard and play some soothing chords in meantone. Ahhh, I just love those pure thirds!

Proving the unknowable?

There is no way to prove God doesn't exist.

Noumena - "the thing-in-itself", or that which exists independently of observation.

A Kantian term, somewhat refering to the description in the Bhagavad-gita of the Supreme Absolute Truth - that summum bonum which is beyond the power of the senses to see or to know yet pervades everything known and unknown in all the Universe(s).

Proof, whether in science, logic, or reasoning, is reliant on observations of phenomena - the opposite of noumena.

Philosophers argue that experience is the best teacher. One does not have to quantify an experience to prove that it happened. It is purely subjective. However, statistics in databases, being objective, have nothing to do with noumena - it is only a tally of phenomena.

All spiritually advanced souls, regardless of religion, creed, level of transcendence or attainment of Self-realisation agree on one thing - that there is more to the reality of existence than meets the eye. No matter which aspect of God they witness, whether it be an impersonal Light, the Wholeness of Creation, the Harmony of the Universe, a form of Divine Energy, an Angelic Being, The Supreme Person, or whatever or whoever, it makes no difference.

They all agree that that noumena is beyond the senses to see or to know and therefore will never be scientifically proven.

That science cannot prove God in no way means that God does not exist. The only thing it proves is that they (scientists) are limited in the scope of what they can prove - and it stops at phenomena.

Another Way To Look At The Flat Earth Debate.

I am reminded of the old joke about the English professor and the boatman ferrying him across the Ganges whenever I come across the Flat Earth debate on Vaishnava websites. Having knowledge is one thing, but if it can't be practically applied, it is useless. It would make no difference to anyone trying to practice bhakti-yoga whether the Earth was round, flat, spiral or pyramidal. Using such 'knowledge' to prove a point or score points for that matter is an exercise in pedantry. The art of practicing bhakti-yoga remains the same regardless of the geometry of Earth. 

Even more humorous is how various scientific arguments are misused, either incorrectly or out of context. For example "vanishing point" is a 2D concept illustrating when three-dimensional geography is represented on a two-dimensional plane – say, a drawing of the view looking down a straight road with buildings that progressively get smaller and smaller until they disappear. The vanishing point has nothing to do with ships sinking below the horizon in the distance as they leave port. That is a 3D effect, not 2D! And I don't know how those flat-earth trains manage to continue running on tracks that merge in the distance! 

Rather than beginning with jargon which sounds more like a thesis being submitted for a Masters Degree than an internet blog on spirituality – I'll just say this...

The easiest way to measure the curvature of the Earth is to observe the distance at which objects disappear below the horizon. For the purposes of demonstrating this, let's assume that the Earth is perfectly spherical with a radius of 6,378.137 kilometres and the height at which distant objects is obscured is expressed as 

                   h₁ = √[(d₀ - [√h₀ √[h₀ + 2 R]])² + R²] - R8

[trust me - I'm no mathematician, and have no idea what all this gobbledygook means. It's factual enough, but I just thought it looked impressive.] 

Now if we take a body of 'flat' water such as a lake (or the Suez Canal at 102 miles/164km or the Panama Canal at 48 miles/77km) we have a relatively calm, waveless surface to conduct our experiment. At one end we have a strong waterproof LED lamp mounted at water level. We need to take into account that even on the clearest day the atmosphere will limit visibility somewhat. 

Then we proceed to travel away from the light in a craft, seated  so that our eyes are three feet above water level. At some point (actually 2.121 miles) the horizon will begin to obscure the low part of the lamp. We can repeat the experiment altering the relative heights but until we eventually either run out of room or aren't able to get high enough, we will always observe the lamp disappearing below the horizon. 

There will be some optical distortion at greater distances due to light bouncing and refracting off the water and the humid air above it. Another method, which counters this, is to set markers at a given height above water level in a straight line every mile or so. Then with a telescope at a good distance you will observe differing heights. The markers further away will appear lower due to the curvature of the Earth similar to the way a ship 'sinks' as it drops below the horizon as it recedes into the distance. 

Arguing that the surface is perfectly flat and level (which in fact it isn't because of the curvature of the Earth) and that the "vanishing point" is causing the lamp to be obscured (or the ship to 'sink') is terribly illogical thinking. If the surface (Earth) was truly flat, the lamp would remain visible regardless of how high or low our vantage point is - up to 10 miles for even just one candlepower! In fact, if we jumped into the water, according to the Flat Earth theory we still see the lamp no matter what distance! With our eyes 6" above water though, the horizon would start to obscure the lamp less than a mile away. At 2 miles our eyes would need to be 3' above sea level. And so on. 

Anyway...

So, in one of my many information gleaning excursions I came across this gem regarding Astrology, not entirely unrelated because it deals with cosmology:
here (http://vedicastrology.wikidot.com/physical-astronomy-and-surya-siddhanta)

(like me, you'll probably speed-read or flip through the highly technical parts - but it's well worth persevering with!)

Without entering into whether or not this is valid Vaishnava scripture, it poses some interesting food for thought. We've all heard the various arguments of Jyotish versus Western Astrology, Tropical vs Sidereal, etc but here's another one: a system, Surya Siddhanta, that uses the "divine positions" of each planet's Deity or Demigod rather than the physical positions of the planets. It reasons this is why traditional Jyotish is faulty and therefore fails sometimes.

These 'Divine positions' are often any number of miles, kilometres, yojanas (or whatever) different from each planet's observed measurable position. For instance Divine Meru is reckoned to be some 28.9 km above the peak of physical Mt. Meru! 

Furthermore, the formulae for calculation Divine positions is never published or made public, for it is only passed down orally in the traditional guru-disciple system.

And it reasons that during dissolution of material universes as Lord Brahma is sleeping, this is how time is calculated in the absence of any physical planets.

Now do I have your attention? Thought so! Go to the linked article and read on. 

Apparently the physical Mt Meru is in Africa. That line running through the middle of the map is the Equator, centre of the Earth, with Mt Kenya and Meru either side of it (if you're impatient, go straight to the section "Ancient Cosmogony and Geography" which contains the Sanskrit origins of these African place names).  

The joke:

An English Professor was visiting India. He wanted to go from one side of the Ganges River to the other so he approached a Boatman who agreed to take him across.

 On the way the Professor said, "Tell me, Boatman - what do you know about literature?"

The Boatman said, "Oh not much. I'm just a boatman and I'm illiterate."

The Professor said, "Well then, 10 percent of your life is wasted. Tell me then, what do you know about mathematics?"

The Boatman replied, "Oh, not much, just basic arithmetic. I can only count to a hundred."

The Professor said, "Well then, 20 percent of your life is wasted. Tell me then, what do you know about philosophy?"

The Boatman said, "Oh not much. I'm just a boatman."

The Professor said, "Well then, 30 percent of your life is wasted.

Then the wind picked up, and the river's waters became greatly agitated. The Boatman struggled against the current. The Boatman looked over his shoulder and saw ominous storm clouds gathering in the sky. All of a sudden thunder and lightning broke out. He started to worry that they weren't going to make it to the other side. 

The Boatman turned to the Professor and said, "Tell me Professor, what do you know about swimming?"

Horrified, the Professor screamed, "Nothing! I can't swim!" at which point the Boatman yelled:

"Then 100% of your life is wasted!"

Guru - false or fake?

As a self-taught astrologer, I am duty-bound to list my limitations.

I have tried to garner wisdom from the ancients, the seers, the mystics, the prophesisers so disparaged by societies both modern and passed.

I cannot, and hesitate, to try to pass judgement on all the knowledge ascertained by such methods. But I dare say:

All these things, afore ye judged, they are written in the stars - "As above, so below".

Notwithstanding, I hereby shall attempt, by the grace of God, to describe certain astrological phenomena and the meaning thereof.

Firstly:
In regards to the argument of the physical position of the planets and the subsequent reckoning of them, either tropical of sidereal, there are other planes and criteria for which they can be reckoned. For it is stated in the Surya Siddhanta the physical positions of the planets is different to the otherwise ephemeral positions used to ascertain certain events, to whit:

During the night of Brahma, how is time reckoned whist He is sleeping? 

If the mundane Material World is dissolved, how can such mundane time be otherwise measured?

Lo, it is by the Surya Siddhanta, the divine positions of non-material planets and the demigods thereby residing that they shall be correctly reckoned. Mere observation and calculation with the telescope is not sufficient to determine the spiritual positions of the demigods of said planets; indeeed they cannot be reckoned with ordinary mundane telescopes or calculations. The formulae for discovering these Divine Influences can only be arrived at through the Surya Siddhanta.

And so, the argument ensues: is there any validity to Western Tropical astrology; or for that matter, Eastern Sidereal Astrology? One can argue that both have lost their way. And yet, it is perhaps annoying that several items of potential pecuniary interest arise.

Please send $25 to whoppowhaka@xmail.communist to get full benefit of scam, ha ha

Pardon me, sorry for that advertising. But it remains true, send money to a charlatan and they will no doubt give you a reading. Say what?
"you are disturbed. You are feeling anxious. I have magic oil to cure. Twenty-five dollars."
Otherwise....
"pay me some money and I will make you into God. Then, our business is finished."

Climate Lies

I find it very hard to listen to lies and untruths.

Coral reefs all over the world have undergone many global cooling and warming events and "survived" (adapted). It is estimated that the Great Barrier Reef formed as much as eight or ten thousand years ago, sometime soon after the last glaciation. Since then global temperatures have risen and fallen many times. Each time, corals all around the world swap the "wrong-temperature" symbiotic algae to make way for "right-temperature" ones. This process happens regardless of whether the temperature increases or decreases. In fact, most bleaching events have historically been due to COLD climate change - because the global temperatures when they first formed thousands of years ago were a lot warmer then.

All of these prior climate events are natural and have absofuckinglutely nothing to do with fossil fuel emissions and Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW = we are all going to die from man-made climate change!). I am not going to sit there and listen to some stupid ill-informed greenie hate speech that is based on a lie. The GBR isn't dead and it certainly wasn't killed by the "Wanker Government". It will adapt and continue to survive like it has for thousands of years, unlike the greedy ecotourism industry based around it.

Most climate change is caused by Milankovitch Cycles, i.e. changes in the (1) eccentricity of the Earth's orbit - 100,000 years;(2) axial tilt of the Earth - 41,000 years; and (3) precession of the Equinoxes - about 24,000 years... (http://www.indiana.edu/~geol105/images/gaia_chapter_4/milankovitch.htm) as well as atmospheric disturbances from (a) volcanic activity due to techtonic plate movements, (b) meteor impacts, (c) sulphur spews from the deep ocean floor, (d) sunspot 11-year cycles, (e) bushfires, and (f) human interference eg pollution, CFC's, aerosols, carbon dioxide emissions, blah blah blah.

It is estimated that Milankovitch Cycles (this is what causes the Ice Ages, five so far at last count) are by far are the main determining factor and that at most, human factors contribute less than 2%. Even if all the 197 countries reached their Paris Agreement targets (which they won't!) it would only reduce the global temperature by a fraction of a degree in 2050. Many top meteorologists and climatologists have either been relieved of their positions or quit in disgust because they refuse to peddle the bullshit about CAGW.

Judith Curry is a good place to start in case you don't know what I'm talking about. Dr. Roy Spencer is another great example. But don't stop there.. if you look, there are many.

97% of climatologists agree that the climate is changing. What they don't agree on is why. Only a minority believe that humans are the main cause and it is those who are used to push the agenda behind all this fake greenie bullshit. It's called the Messiah Complex. The fools delude themselves into thinking they are beautiful people because they are saving the world. Okay then, don't have anything to do with fossil fuels. Take off those plastic sunglasses. Don't wear synthetics. Don't drive a car or use a computer or a mobile phone or live in a house. All these things are manufactured by using fossil fuels and/or the power generated by them. Messiah Complex!