Comments

From the title I was sooooo hoping this book would be a history of the Bern patent office...

Perhaps there are primary points,perhaps they are to be found only outside of Earth's atmosphere.This not really a great leap of faith,for in truth,a majority of Einstein's Quantum theory can not be observed within Earth's atmosphere.If indeed,such points exist,they do so only in the frictionless, gravity free environs of space.Why,should such an observation be true when we know so little of the fabric of space, and indeed spacetime ?Einstein himself dared to introduce the concept of 'spacetime.His theory's took decades to substantiate.Imagine if you will,a vessel travelling free of friction,gravity and surrounded by the absolute zero of space,might this vessel not be capable of inter dimensional.or perhaps transdimensional travel?If not,then why not?Such a vessel would 'disappear' and then reappear millions,or perhaps hundred of million miles from Earth.The only explanation can be found in the intermediate logic.A mixed disjunctive syllogism.Either the vessel travelled at a speed greater than light,or it did not.If not then how did it undergo such a linear displacement.Only time and a great deal of study will answer this question.Until then it is SOMETHING to THINK ABOUT.Good night now.

Hi. I am glad I found this review.
I noticed that the author has some similar insights with Walter Russell cubic wavefield.
After all, the inert gases do have a function In Russell's table of elements, look here some stuff I found on the internet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_mU020_eZ8

What the author of the book says (or chanelled, whatever)

"Suppose, we said, that the “spin” of an electron is all there is to it? In other
words, suppose that an electron is not an actual particle at all but purely a
rotational motion or vortex... a vortex in the aether... we suggest that the
aetheric substance which converges rotatingly into the electron vortex, spins
out into the surrounding four-dimensional matrix, then arcs across and reenters
our own 3-D space at a neighboring proton, spinning the other way!...
We assume the existence of a multitude of “primary points” scattered
throughout the vastness of space, all in constant vibration in a direction
perpendicular to our aether, and all generating 4-D wave disturbances. Were
it not for the fact that we have actually found experimental evidence for the
existence of such points, we would not make bold to advance such a
proposition, and this book would never have been written... Suppose that the
primary points responsible for the 4-D waves are not our 3-D space at all, but
instead are located within the adjacent region of the 4-D matrix through
which our space is curved."

Imo he has some good points :-), but missed the whole picture... maybe because he cannot assume that all this happens in this world, he introduced some imaginary ideas... and explanations.

I searched some pages of his web for references to Walter Russell but I couldn't find such reference.
Hm.

Alfred Armstrong I did some reverse searching with your aliases and emails and turns out you are a subscriber to several gay dating websites and even Craigslist ads seeking sex. would you care to elaborate on these findings?

Your greatest "bugbears," Mr. Article Writer, seem to be anything that contradicts what you want to believe. "Oh noes! A scientist who disagrees with what my teacher TOLD me was true! Quick, call him names and use obscure words to sound smarter than him, so he'll look ridiculous! Mustn't let anyone become curious to investigate his work!!"

Haha, maybe you should grow up and unlearn your public school propaganda before you try reviewing scientific experiments. XD

there is no question about it, the guy is a charlatan. He also wrote a book along the same lines of "moles and their meaning" called "body signs". It would be interesting to read a review of this book as well on this site

I agree with the last posts, especially the part about channellers sticking to channelling spiritual material and not science. After doing some research online, I found out that Steffan Vanel,the man who represents the "channelled" work of Maurice B Cooke online actually believes that Maurice B Cooke never channelled. If the man represents him, the author must therefore agree with him. "That Mr. Cooke is a channel I can accept, as it requires only low-grade clairvoyant ability. (In fact, continued channeling often degrades the channel remarkably.) Should we believe those who claim to channel some famous or great person, that they, in fact, channel this or that famous person? Generally, no. We should never. Our first job as readers is to strip away the name & then ask if what we are reading is worthy of such an exalted source. And the answer is always no. Perhaps hearing voices, perhaps not, Mr. Cooke was unwilling to publish under his own proper name, presumably for fear that no one would notice. And, in fact, what he has written under the pen name Hilarion, is no better than what one may read from a variety of strictly human sources - and there are many better" http://www.astroamerica.com/essays.html

I forgot to mention that one of the golden rules upon which the spiritual movement has been founded is that true mediums and channellers do not channel scientific information, because God wishes for people to improve themselves by experience. The second one is that spirits channel spiritual matters, not physical ones like science. (This the spiritualist theory behind false mediumship from the book "The mediums' book" by Allan Kardec published around 1869). Channellers that purport to have channelled from spirit new scientific discoveries usually have not channelled at all, but have written books by borrowing the name of an exalted source so that they would be listened to, because it would have been unlikely to gain such exposure and following under the name of John Smith for example. Such people are the ones who have given the whole spiritualist movement (channelling and mediumship) a bad reputation, because they are usually the ones who are exposed on the news for their own half-baked scientific theories. It has been going on since the 19th century and it is the reason why people should not believe what they say. So I understand that to people who are not interested in channelling and in delving deeper into its priciples and objects, such channellers represent the norm and that they all must be like it. This is not the case. There are many channellers who do this with integrity without seeking platforms for self-aggrandizement by coming out with scientific theories under the names of saints, and that only stick to what channelling should be about: spiritual philosophy, the validity of which is subjective and not scientifically provable (they do not claim that it is, and they usually put BIG disclaimers with their work) As for the validity of channelling per se, that is a whole different discussion which is grouped under the argument of religious belief versus scientific research. It ultimately bolis down to the way people want to live their lives, for there is really nothing after death, then people are free to live their lives according to what they choose to believe psychologically without repercussions. I understnd where you are coming from and I agree with you, especially when people's health is concerned. What I don't agree with is grouping all channellers under the same header, especially those who do not publish new scientific theories that are ment to revolutionize science and stick to philosophy alone. I apologise for the long reply, but I wanted to bring a different point of view to the discussion.

not all channelling is done by charlatans who talk about physics and pseudo theories that come from "spirit" and are meant to change the world. I agree with you and people should beware of that. The new channellings I talked about are about spirituality and spirituality only, without making big claims that stray from the subject of spiritual philosophy. Such is the content of the new books written by other people, and spirituality is not scientific nor do these particular channellers ever apprach the subject like others have done in the past with impunity. Spirituality and religion are a philosophy and a way of life that people around the world adopt by choice for a variety of reasons. I wouldn't be so quick to judge new content by different authors about spiritual philosophy and not physics. New channellings leave science to scientists, and whoever claims to channel new scientific discoveries is seriously misguided.

everyone is entitled to their own views. You call nonsense what you have not read, which are books completely unrelated to physics. Yours is not informed opinion but a biased one.

actually the official website of Marcus Books, The Hilarion Series and Maurice B Cooke is http://www.masterhilarion.com where you can find all the books available once more as they have been republished www.MasterHilarion.com

"“What we have just described may sound preposterous on first exposure”, he acknowledges. Actually it can continue to sound preposterous indefinitely." That is hands down my favourite witticism. You are a wonderful man.