Posts Tagged ‘transformation’

DIVINITY HAS NO GENDER

February 11, 2014

Terms like “Divine Feminine” and “Divine Masculine” are used to divide us, separate us, and we are already separated enough!

DNA 27 DNA

As an engineer and wordsmith, I am hardcore.  No bullshit!  Also, as an Ocean Engineer and poet I recognize beauty in the fluidity of our humanity and our biology.  As a wordsmith, I like to see not only where our words came from, but also how their meanings have changed over history.  The word divine simply means having the ability to see or find the unseen.

 I look at all this as a function of our unique DNA coding.  Dr Bruce Lipton refers to our DNA as the blueprint for our lives.  Our lives are built on this blueprint.  If we don’ like our lives, we change the blueprint.  It sounds tough.  I suggest it is easier than we think.

 As an engineer I wrote a change order for a valve vault on a 30” pipeline. The manufacturer sent a flanged pup joint 56” (inches) long.  (A pup joint is any length of pipe shorter than the standard 20’.)  The original blue prints called for the pup joint to be 5 feet, 6 inches (5’6”) long.  They missed the apostrophe!  One tiny mark on a set of plans 3” thick and 24” x36” wide for a 130 mile pipeline!  It could have screwed up the whole job.  No problem.  I wrote the change order moving the vault wall and it fit.

Now let’s look at our DNA: our blueprint.  Everyone of us is unique!  Although each chromosome is composed of mom’s and dad’s contribution to us, during fetal development a lot of things happen.  In the segmented sequence of base pair we call a gene, there are five possibilities for each of the 20 or 30,000 genes that only use about 90 million of our 3.1 billion base pair. 

  1. They stay the same. 
  2. One or more base pair is added to the sequence.
  3. One or more base pair is subtracted from the sequence.
  4. One or more base pair swaps ends in the sequence.
  5. A combination of 2, 3 or 4.

This is called mutation.  The extent to which this occurs is called our “mutant load.”  Bottom line is we are all beautiful mutants.  There is more contributing to our uniqueness, but this is enough for now.

These genes when activated (expressed or turned on) produce amino acids that usually combine with other amino acids to produce proteins.  The proteins we know about are enzymes, hormones, neurotransmitters, neuroreceptors, and structural.  The first four impact our brain chemistry and it is as some big nest of wires with feedback loops running all over and impacting our amazing bodies.

Today we know methyl groups may form around any of our genes preventing them from expressing and producing that specific amino acid.  This prevents a “normal” protien from forming, where normal simply means that amino acid occurs in most everybody’s protein.  This impacts our brain chemistry.  It is just a little different for each of us.  Are we ever uniquely beautiful!  How does this happen?  We get them in three ways: 

  1. Transferred from parents.
  2. In fetal development.
  3. Fear instilled in post fetal development.  (Sexual abuse is a biggie!)

Methyl  gene
Methylated gene

I am sure there is more occurring in our DNA than methylation preventing our genes from expressing, but this is simply a primer, which is about all I have the intellectual capacity to write. 

Just as some of us are born with common methylated genes, some are born with out these genes being methylated.  They each have their own unique abilities to see, feel, perceive, and sense things the rest of us cannot.  We categorize them and put them in little boxes with names or labels like “empath,” “sensitive,” “paranormal,” or simply “strange” or “weird.”  The general population lacks acceptance of weirdos.  They may tend to collect into groups or cults where they are accepted.  Many of these are like cocaine.  Individual production increases initially, then usage increases until recovery or death. 

So what’s the answer?  You all know I look at love as energy: a spectrum.  Is it?  I don’t know.  As I look at it as energy it appears to work.  It takes energy to do anything.  Whether we are turning on a light switch or expressing a gene or untying a methylated gene, it takes energy.  Love works, so it must be some sort of energy.  I recognize the weakness of my Newtonian model.  It is only a beginning.

 Of course the next question is, “Does it really work this way?”  My answer is I don’t know and don’t care if it works this way or not.  Love works.”   Whether or not love is energy is immaterial.  Whether or not our divinity is a function of our DNA or not is also immaterial.  I put it together this way only to give me a hardcore possible explanation of what might be going on in our bodies.

Next question is why are girls so special?  To start with, their sex chromosome (#23) is XX giving them about 4000 genes.  Guys have an XY with less than 2100 genes.  I began my studies with sexual anatomy.  When I hooked up my wiring diagram to the female genitalia, all I could say was, “Holy Shit!  This is fan-f**in’-tastic!  Wow!”  I’ve reached a point where I know there is so much about our bodies I will never know and even if I did it wouldn’t make any difference because it keeps going and going. 

 Two more things about girls: 

  1. Their vagus nerve is hooked up to their genitalia and ours is not.  This is called the “nerve of compassion.”
  2. The structure connecting the left and right halves of the brain is thicker allowing girls to better process and integrate sensory signals.

There are probably a thousand more anatomical differences.  I don’t care.  I’ve seen enough to tell me what fantastic creatures they are and to appreciate their fluidity and power.

The last questions are why is sex bad and love a four-letter word? And why are we diverted into pleasure and/or procreation?  Erotic love with its associated passion, or amplitude of the energy frequencies transmitted, appears to be the most powerful mechanism for demethyizing our genes.  Divinity makes us aware.  We already are, but not too much.  “Women’s intuition” and “gut instincts” are the beginnings of our divinity.  We humans are fantastic but taught to limit ourselves where simply as biological entities we have no real limits.  (In your definition of real, we can limit anything.)

Other misused works to describe our growth into divinity are: awakening, evolving, ascension, transformation, transmutation (I like that one!), spiritual gifts, paranormal, empath, synestheisiac, clairvoyant, and on and on.  We are all divine to some degree or another.  I look at our purpose her as to love.  Our divinity is a “reward” for loving and makes us sacred or “safe and sane.”  We just need to let love flow through us.  It is pretty simple.  Love.  The tough part is getting rid of all the ego base limitations and fears we place on love and ourselves.  We are all fantastic creatures once we let love in.  Guys too.

A Proposed Model of Love

April 19, 2013

Erotic love is as essential as groceries and most of us are starving to death… or eating at McDonalds.  Love is currently defined as a feeling, generated by altered brain chemistry and then, generally between a man and woman.  This definition of love limits our capacity as human beings.  The proposed model of love is simply a model from which many simplistic observations can be made.

The Greeks had a word or six for love, but the Cologne Sanskrit Digital Lexicon lists 531 responses to a search for the word love.  In English, we have only one: love.  The most generic word in Greek is Agape, and in Sanskrit is anaGga, which we would think of as “unconditional love.”  It is from these generic words the other “forms” of love flow.  This article suggests these “forms” are but segments of a spectrum.  Whereas most articles and books on love are limited to erotic love and the associated brain chemistry as an internal mechanism, this proposes love is both internal and external as well as being much larger than erotic love.  The attraction of erotic love is possibly due to the passionate energy developed during the process, being much greater than gazing upon a sunset, or any other love.

The two-dimensional, Newtonian model is based on the visible light spectrum (VLS) with white light representing unconditional love, our minds as the prism, and the various colors as the “forms” of love.

 

prism-new base

Fig. 1.  Love as a Metaphorical Spectrum

Associating the colors with specific forms, led only to two: red and orange for erotic love and violet for a “spiritual” love.  This is in keeping with Eastern “chakras” in the human body.  In that light, to ask a Zen master how the other forms fit in the spectrum would only yield another question: “What difference does it make?”  What is interesting is to note, is the association of The different “forms” of love, or absences of love, or segments of the spectrum, with ancient gods and goddesses.

For example, the Greek God Eros was originally thought of as the son of Aphrodite and Ares.  He is a primeval deity who embodies not only the force of erotic love but also the creative urge of ever-flowing nature, the firstborn Light for the coming into being and ordering of all things in the cosmos.   Plato changed all that in his symposium. 

Aphrodite, was the Greek goddess of love, pleasure and beauty. We have two deities for erotic love.  Note the prism is in the shape of the blade, the male symbol.  Inverting it to the chalice yields the same spectrum, but in reverse order, giving us wonder as to whether or not women perceive love differently?

prism-female

Fig 2. Female Prism?

This model of light energy presumes then that love is energy.  At this time, it would be perceived as an “etheric” energy because we know as much about this energy as we knew about electricity 300 years ago.  Yet, love has both attributes of energy: transmittal and transformation.  We can transmit love with a smile.  The smile makes us feel better and perhaps the person we are smiling to feels better also.  We have “transformed” our feelings.  Expanding on this in the field of Consciousness, what is considered an increase in consciousness is also referred to as “transformation,” or “transmutation,” or “awakening,” etc.  So, we can look at love as energy.   This is not to say love is or is not energy.  It is simply a way of looking at it. 

For a moment, assume it is energy.  Energy has freequency and amplitude.  Erotic love is then most powerful because of the amplitude (passion) associated with it.  Of course the term “transmutation” implies genetics and the recent science of epigenetics.  Another question arises from considering love as energy: could this energy create “chemical signals” to tweak, or restructure genes, thereby altering our brain chemistry, promoting an “increase in consciusness?”  Similarly, could love be the energy altering our brain chemistry to generate the “feelings” of love?  Mother love is certainly a different feeling than erotic love yet can be as powerful in its own way.

Behaviors of Love

            The accepted behaviors of love are: communication, nourishing, touching, grooming, gazing and play.  These behaviors fall across the spectrum with the diffenence being in the intimacy between the giver and receiver of love.  We can nudge or give a pat on the back to a comrade with whom we have developed a friendly relationship (Philos, Brotherly love) of either gender.  However, until we have developed a level of erotic intimacy with an individual, erotic touching or any of the other erotic behaviors, violates boundaries.  Violating boundaries is not a behavior of love.

Shortfalls of the Spectrum Model

1.      Obviously it is two-dimensional and Newtonian.  However, Newton noted when a specific area of the prism was blocked, that color did not appear.  This model allows us to view our blockages to love as though someone had placed “chewing gum” on the prism.  These can also be viewed as memes, erroneous beliefs or inculturated behaviors.

 Love's Prism blocked by Conditions

Fig. 3.  Love’s Prism with Chewing Gum

2.      Metaphorically, using the sun as a primary source of light, we know that light energy (photons) is not the only energy put out by the sun: beta and gamma rays, radio waves and a host of other things are emitted by the sun.  Therefore, the VLS model is only the beginning of what may be found in the love spectrum.  Further, mauve is certainly a color not included in the spectrum of primary colors. 

3.      Two dimensionality. This model is only to suggest another, more expansive way of looking at love.  It is quite possible the linear segments we can visualize are only a part of another, non-linear geometry

Conclusions

1.      Love may be viewed as an energy spectrum.

2.     Love may exist both internally and externally.

3.     Most other views of love are limited to a specific “form.”

Copyright 2013 Art Noble

http://www.thesacredfemale.com

Sexual Perspective.

December 25, 2012

kissing
We each have our own, somewhat unique perspective on the subject of sex. Many times, what we say for political correctness and what we do are two different things. I feel we are like the five blind men and the elephant. Some stand on one side of the elephant yelling, “Procreation!” Yet, they do not stand in exactly the same spot, so their view and perspective is different. On the other side of the elephant, the crowd shouts, “Pleasure.” They too stand in different spots. The legs could be called “bonding,” “intimacy,” “kink” and “other” where other is GLBT etc. the tail, trunk and tusks are up for grabs.

Our perspective comes from what we have learned through our experience and our mental input about the experiences and dysfunctional beliefs of others ranging from hard-core porn to scientific research. As I was studying sexual biology, it occurred to me everything we do and feel is first a mental and or physical stimulation of nerve endings and secondly how our mind interprets, enhancing or blocking, those impulses. This interpretation impacts us at the level of our DNA, providing slightly different brain chemistry for each of us. This in turn, affects our behavior. The masochist stubbing his toe, might kick the chair again because it feels good? I don’t know.

Because the sexual responses I experienced were beyond orgasm, and what science says, I had to put sex in the category of nerve ending stimulation. As I continued to learn, I found that coitus, nor even genital contact, were necessary to elicit any of these sexual responses: they could all occur through mental stimulation. Of course, there is something missing fro the non-genital response: the warmth of human contact. What is this warmth? Could it be a tiny bit of love? And what is love? I’ve already discussed this in my blog, Love: A Many Splendored Spectrum. The result of this thinking is the premise; sex is a mechanism for transmitting love. This puts our elephant in an entirely different perspective.

I would point out, our pleasure/procreation paradigm is both incomplete and a political construct designed to keep us from even thinking about transmitting love during sex! Why? “Authority” does not want us doing this. Keep us fat dumb and happy with pleasure or kids and forget about love. This started about 5 or 10,000 years ago, so it is pretty well ingrained in us. I’ve looked at many of the admonitions about sex and love throughout history as well as the historic transformations occurring through erotic love. Those transformed realize how full of crap “authority” is on this subject which is why they want to keep us fat, dumb and happy.

Where others call our transformation a “spiritual experience,” because they don’t really know what is happening, I prefer to call it a genetic restructuring because I don’t really know what is happening. But, genetic restructuring is something I can get my head around to explain what the heck is going on in our bodies.

So, there you have it: both another perspective on sex and a reason why this has been kept from us. You are free to choose. I might add that orgasm can become a non-event—a miniscule thing compared to the joy and ecstasy available—when transmitting love.
© Art Noble 2012
http://www.thesacredfemale.com

Our Sexual Paradigm: Pleasure and/or Procreation

March 9, 2012

The human body is an amazing creation.  If we gathered all of the human biological scientists in the world in one place to tell us how it works, they would simply argue for 10 years.  But, thousands of years ago, somebody figured out why it works.  Essentially, the body is under control of the mind.  Control the mind and you control the body.

 For the last 5000 years, more or less, we have lived under the sexual paradigm of pleasure and/or procreation.  It is a political construct!  Under this construct, these are the only two aspects of sex.  This leaves us viewing women as either brood cows or pleasure palaces, either view implying male ownership.  Men are slowly learning that some women are smart, too.  We need new glasses.

 This is an easy political construct because both are obvious.  We are so focused on these aspects of human sex and sexuality we can see no other results.  There are many, most of which are “politically incorrect:” they belong to the occult.  Occult means, “beyond common knowledge.”  The knowledge is there, but needs to be applied differently to become common knowledge.  But this violates the political construct.  We have to think outside the box!

 From the occult, we hear a lot of ethereal words that make absolutely no sense to those of us who speak English.  We may grasp some vague understanding of what they are talking about, and we think we know, but are left flat later on.  Many of them use words to describe actual biological processes of which they know nothing in terms of biology.  I prefer hard science as a basis and do not mind using the word “idiopathic” rather than mysterious, mystical or spiritual.  They are all synonyms for, “Duh, I donno.”

 Political constructs are fabricated for purposes of diversion.  Tactics include deification, dismissal, and demonization.  Boy, are we easily diverted to pleasure!  The question arises, “What are we being diverted from?”  From Enkidu in The Epic of Gilgamesh, through early Tantra up to Napoleon Hill in Think and Grow Rich, it would seem we are being diverted from our transformation.  Hill called it our “transmutation”.  In that it is probably genetic in nature, transmutation is a better word.

 There are other names both in our culture and others for this transmutation: growth of consciousness, awareness, intuition, Satori , evolving, awakening, etc.  This leads to enlightenment, Divine enlightenment, or as Hill put it, “access to infinite intelligence.”  Don’t worry.  This access is on a “need to know” and “ability to communicate” basis.  Communication implies both verbal and mechanical.  For example, if one of the top wealthy men Hill interviewed placed a buy order for a stock that went up, that is considered mechanical communication.  Or consider Ed Leedskalnin constructing a machine that would lift 14-ton blocks, without having the slightest idea (intellectually) of what he had done. Who cares? It worked.  (Coral Castle)

 That transformation may take place in a blinding flash or take years, even generations.  But, the secret ingredient is love, another aspect of sex we have been diverted from, by focusing on pleasure or procreation.  Erotic love is not the only way for this to occur, but let’s face it.  Erotic love is a lot easier and more intense focused on one woman than trying to love the other seven billion people on this planet. That would probably work… eventually.  It worked for Mother Theresa and Sister Teresa of Avila.

 In my article on Illustrated Sexual Anatomy I define sex as “the mental and/or physical stimulation of nerve endings, creating electrochemical energy, resulting in pleasurable sensations in the genitalia and other sexual responses.”  In the blog on Love: A Many Splendored Spectrum, I define love as energy and model it on the visible light spectrum.  My guess is the combination of these two energies tweaks or expresses genes, producing the transformation.   It is like electrical energy into microwave energy reacting with a raw potato, producing heat energy to transform the raw potato to a cooked potato.  It makes no difference whether the guess is right or wrong.  It is all about an “attitude” of love.  Then, something happens!

 This sounds great!  Why not expand the paradigm?  Guys, you may know from sad experience, many women have a built-in crap-meter.  They have the uncanny ability to know when you are just hitting on them or when you are really interested in them.  With our transformation, we get one too.  Ours works differently.  Ours works on used-car salesmen and politicians.   Now you see why it is a political construct.

 Anthropologists too look at our evolutionary history with eyes locked into the pleasure/procreation paradigm.  What would happen if they expanded the paradigm?  Would this explain the genetic shift in Neanderthal?  Would it explain how we entered into the Bronze and Iron ages other than by fortuitous accident? Perhaps we should take another look.  Then we can consider the future of evolution based on love.

Copyright Art Noble 2012

www.thesacredfemale.com

“The Mystery of Sex”

February 28, 2012

Napoleon Hill            Don’t blame me.  I didn’t say it.  Napoleon Hill said it.  It is the title of a chapter in one of his books.  Who th’ hell is Napoleon Hill, you ask?  He was the Deepak Chopra and Tony Robbins of the 1920’s and 1930’s.  His book, Think and Grow Rich, was published in 1937!  That’s seventy-five years ago!  That was even before MY time!

You can read this chapter on line at http://books.google.com/books?id=c86H36mgiM4C&pg=PP&&dq=According+to+Napoleon+Hill,+98%25+…#PPA182,M1  starting on page 182.

Here are some quotes from that book:

The emotion of sex brings into being a state of mind.  Because of ignorance on the subject, this state of mind in generally associated with the physical, and because of improper influences, to which most people have been subjected, in acquiring knowledge of sex; things essentially physical have highly biased the mind. 

The emotion of sex, has back of it the possibility of three constructive potentialities, they are—

1.      The perpetuation of Mankind.

2.      The maintenance of health, (as a therapeutic agency, it has no equal).

3.      The transformation of mediocrity into genius through transmutation. (Bold emphasis is mine.)

 “Highly biased”?  See my blog on dysassociative sex.  His items 1 & 2 are what I call the pleasure/procreation paradigm.  But, his item #3 is why I wrote The Sacred Female!  The transmutation he speaks of may be a result of the transcendental experience I speak of.  However, the transcendental experience may not be necessary for the transmutation.  (Transmutation is simply the changing of one element or form of energy into another.)  But, more Hill.

Love, romance and sex are all emotions capable of driving men to heights of super achievement.  Love is the emotion which serves as a safety valve, and insures balance, poise, and constructive effort.  When combined, these three emotions may lift one to an altitude of a genius. There are genuii, however, who know but little of the emotion of love.  Most of them may be found engaged in some form of action which is destructive or at least, not based upon justice and fairness toward others.  If good taste would permit, a dozen genii could be named in the field of industry and finance who ride ruthlessly over the rights of their fellow men.  They seem totally lacking in conscience.  The reader can easily supply his own list of such men.  (Bold emphasis mine.)

Can you imagine?  He wrote this long before George Bush was born!  Nah!  Bush is no genius.

Now, you may think I wrote The Sacred Female to enhance the pleasure of women.  OK.  I did.  Why?  Accepting the various sexual responses of women is a part of loving them.  It seems the greater their sexual pleasure, the easier it is for them to provide this transcendental experience for men.  It clears the decks for action.  However, MEN ARE THE RECIPIANTS OF THIS GENIUS!  I wrote the book so men could survive and prosper in the tough times ahead.  I figured women would be the best teachers.

PS.  You can read The Sacred Female at http://authonomy,com, a Harper Collins UK site.  I’ve tried figuring out the URL, but unless you paste it into a new browser, it won’t work.    Here it is:

http://www.ask.com/bar?q=authonomy.com&page=1&qsrc=0&zoom=&ab=0&u=http%3A%2F%2Fauthonomy.com%2F

www.thesacredfemale.com

Copyright 2012 Art Noble

On Circumcision

December 15, 2011

 Let me start by saying misogyny is not about putting women down, it is about keeping men down!  And men bit into it hook, line and sinker!

 To figure all this out, I take a bio-energetic view of sex.  Let’s face it.  During sexual intercourse, we are stimulating nerve endings to create electrochemical energy.  This energy expresses genes that give us the sensation of pleasure and OTHER SEXUAL RESPONSES, by altering our brain chemistry.  Transcendence, in its many forms, is one of these responses.  Transcendence is defined as “altered brain chemistry.”

 Now, let’s add a little salt to the bland stew of sex.  (Yeah, it’s bland by comparison.)  Let’s add love.  Can love express genes to alter our brain chemistry and transform us into “super human” beings?  Sounds like something out of fantasy.  Worse yet, just a bunch of romantic BS.  Unfortunately history, both modern and ancient, tells us otherwise.

 Circumcision is an operation that removes 50% of our penile skin tissue and 50% of the nerve endings attached to our pudendal nerve.  The operation leaves scar tissue that can become painful after orgasmic ejaculation.  How many of us guys have said, “Stop!  Stop!  Don’t move!  Don’t move! Oh God?” Yeah, it’s painful.

 Some girls say the same thing, but for a different reason.  Some during the onset of orgasm have the “urge to void,” as Masters and Johnson said.  Some don’t.  They don’t know that this urge may precede their orgasmic discharge, either from the urinary bladder or prostate or both, and they think they are going to pee on you.  The bladder discharge is also called Amrita (“The Nectar of the Goddess,” believed to give immortality) and is not urinary stress incontinence.  So, they tell you to stop.

 Compared to women, guys don’t have anywhere near the number of sexual nerve endings.  The penis is our main stick!  And then they cut off half the nerve endings!  They diminish our capacity to create electrochemical energy!  Bastards!  The good news is it didn’t work.  All we gotta do is add a little more love.

 I’ve heard the excuses.  “Covenant with God.”  “Cleanliness.”  If God didn’t want us to have a foreskin, He wouldn’t have given us one, and did you ever hear of soap and water?  Skin it back and wash it!

 I’ve also heard women say, “Ouuh!  Yuck!  Uncircumcised?  Yuck!”  Well, ladies, if men in their infancy had not had this MALE genital mutilation forced upon them, you wouldn’t know the difference!

 Now, take a look at this video.  It is just Dr. Ken McGrath in Australia talking about it.  www.youtube.com/watch?v=DD2yW7AaZFw  Consider it, then add some more love.  Just let it flow through you.

Aliens or Love?

November 26, 2011

Ed Leedskalnin

            The problem with the “Ancient Astronaut” theory is that it diminishes man to a bestial state, with no hope of any achievement other than making money.  We humans are fantastic creatures, but we are shamed into believing we are not!  This is not to say ancient astronauts don’t exist, but a lot of the head gear looks like modern diving equipment to me.  We just don’t believe that humans can build things like the Pyramids and the structures at Machu Picchu.   We humans have great potential!  And our biology is still a mystery, even to scientists.  

It was a chilly, Spring Latvian night in 1913, as the 26 year-old Ed sat at his empty table, alternately weeping and sobbing.  It was supposed to be a night of anticipatory joy and excitement.  He was supposed to be married the next day.  His 16 year-old fiancé left an hour or so before, saying she had found another.  Ed, never forgot the name that might have been, Agnes Scuffs, or Skuvst, or Hermīne Lōuis?  We don’t know, but Ed did. Hearts may break, but love and hope remain.  Was this great love the source of his amazing accomplishments?  In the article, Love: A Many Splendored Spectrum, I suggest that love is an energy that can restructure our genetic code, possibly giving us access to infinite intelligence, as Hill put it. 

Edward Leedskalnin was born in Latvia in 1887.  He was not wealthy and only had a fourth-grade education.  The one hundred pound Ed immigrated to North America after the break-up and in 1919 bought land in Florida City where he began single–handed construction on Coral Castle: America’s answer to the Taj Majal.  Coral Castle is made of hewn oolitic limestone blocks having an average weight of 14 tons!  The largest block weighs 27 tons!  The 9-ton gate could be opened with the push of a child’s finger!  In 1936, he single handedly moved the structure North to Homestead, Florida to avoid the development in Florida City.   He continued his work until his death in 1951.

Ed did have a home made tripod, with a four-fall block and tackle at the hand-lashed top.  The six to eight inch diameter legs were made of Dade County pine, which is harder than a bankers heart when cured: almost impervious to nails.  But it is mechanically impossible for a 100-pound man to generate the purchase required to lift a 27-ton block!  Further, that weight would splinter the tripod legs: unless it didn’t “weigh” that much.

 When asked how he did it, Ed would give polite but vague answers: “learning the secrets of ancient Egypt,” or “being in line with the Earth’s magnetic field,” or “a perpetual motion machine.”  Allegedly, some teenagers sneaking a peek at his work saw him “levitating” the blocks into place.  Photographs show a “shoe-box” sized box on top of the tripod, but the box has never been found.  Through his great love, did he find access to “infinite intelligence” on a need-to-know basis?  Did this access allow him to construct something assisting him in the movement of the huge blocks: an “anti-gravity” machine?  From his pamphlets on magnetism, he believed he was using the earth’s magnetic field as an assist.  But how did he make the perfect cuts?

It is quite possible he didn’t really intellectually “know” how he did it.  He just did it.  The key is in his continual reference to “Sweet Sixteen” or his “earlier love.”  It is important to note, this love was unrequited.  He didn’t get any!  From his later laments on morality, we can assume somebody else did.  One can only wonder what could have happened had they married?

It is further quite possible we will never “intellectually know” how he did it.  A more rational explanation would be the energy of his great love raised him, not only “from mediocrity to the altitude of genius,” but also to a different plane of consciousness, inexplicable to the rational mind, where he had access to infinite intelligence.  That was easy!  And, it carries Kohlberg’s statement about communicating across more than one level of morality to the next level![1]   If communicating across more than one level of morality at an intellectual level of consciousness is impossible, what about communicating across levels of consciousness?

There are those who speculate, perhaps believe, that Edward Leedskalnin was an alien, similar to the Ancient Astronauts.  He was small in stature, as are the “Grays” seen on TV.  But, he died of malnutrition from stomach cancer, in a very human way.  Possibly eaten alive by his resentment of immoral young men or his betrayal by Agnes.  Hearts may break, but love and hope remain.  It is love that makes us great!   We have a universe ahead of us!


[1] Kohlberg, Lawrence (1981). Essays on Moral Development, Vol. I: The Philosophy of Moral Development. San Francisco, CA: Harper & Row.   Essentially, Kohlberg states that moral development is based on the five phases of childhood emotional development: dependence, co-dependence counter-dependence, independence and inter-dependence.  His stages of moral development are:

1. Obedience and punishment orientation

(How can I avoid punishment?)

2. Self-interest orientation

(What’s in it for me?)

(Paying for a benefit)

3. Interpersonal accord and conformity

(Social norms)

(The good boy/good girl attitude)

4. Authority and social-order maintaining orientation

(Law and order morality)

5. Social contract orientation

6. Universal ethical principles

(Principled conscience)

He further states that communication across more than one level of morality is impossible.  You cannot talk to a child about universal principles.

Love: A Many Splendored Spectrum: A Physical Model of Love

September 11, 2011
“I find Art’s prismatic model of love intriguing in its simplicity and inclusiveness.  It would fit well into any religion or belief system.” 
Fr. Thomas J. Rynne.

Abstract:  Love is currently defined as a feeling, generated by altered brain chemistry and then, generally between a man and woman.  This definition of love limits our capacity as human beings.  The proposed model of love is simply a model from which many simplistic observations can be made.  It also offers a different look at “boundaries.” Love can then be defined as any relationship with a noun (person, place or thing) that brings some “quantity” of joy into the life of the lover.  I love a good steak dinner, but I prefer women.  Maybe it really is simple?

~~~

While in the throes of failed models for love, I came across a mind-blowing Hindu myth:

Once upon a time, in the Indus Valley, running through parts of what we now call India, Pakistan and Afghanistan, the people were under attack by evil gods and demons.  They learned their only salvation would come from the son of Shiva, a god representing the Divine Masculine, and Shakti, a goddess representing the Divine Feminine, then in her second incarnation as Parvati. The people went to Shiva, an ascetic god, and pleaded with him.  They interuppted his meditation, so he told them to bug off.  The people then went to Kama, the god of love, and told him the story.  Kama said he would see what he could do.  Kama fashioned a bow from sugarcane and an arrow from a flower.  He waited until Parvati was walking by Shiva and shot Shiva with the arrow.

There were two results;

1.  The birth of Karttikeya who slew the demons and evil spirits, and

2.  Shiva was resentful at Kama for messing up his way of life.  Shiva hunted Kama and when he found him, focused the energy from his third eye upon him.  Kama burst into flames leaving only a pile of ash and borderless, boundryless, conditionless love all about the world.  Think of the earth’s magnetic field.  Where ever we go, there it is. 

Next, I checked out the Cologne Sanskrit Digital Lexicon and found 531 responses for the word “love,”  most dealing with erotic love.  This boderless love in Sanskrit was called ApAaga.  No way they were going to fit on a Venn diagram.  The question was, if love is not a feeling, what could it be?  Since Einstein, everything is energy. 

E=mc2

Energy has two attributes that may be considered common with love: it can be transmitted and it can be transformed.  Look at electrical energy.  It is transmitted along wires into a microwave oven where it is transformed into microwave energy.  This energy is then transformed into heat energy when we “nuke” a potato.  We know this every time we take a hot, baked potato out of the microwave oven. Chapter 1 talks about our transformation.  The easiest way to model love would be as energy. 

We can transmit love with a smile.  The smile makes us feel better and perhaps the person we are smiling to feels better also.  We have “transformed” our feelings.  So, we can look at love as energy.  What kind of energy?  Who knows and who cares?  This is only a model and it seems to work.  This is not to say love is or is not energy.  It is simply a way of looking at it.  If it is energy, we can let others get down to the nitty gritty of frequencies and wavelengths and all the scientific stuff.  There is work in Russia regarding “attitudes” impacting our genes, and who knows: love may simply be an attitude?  Or is an attitude simply a reflection of our thoughts?

Metaphorically, let’s look at love energy as though it were light energy.  We’ve heard a lot about “unconditional love:” Agape, or “ApAaga” in Sanskrit.  Let’s imagine it to be white light.  Yet, there are many kinds of love: brotherly love, erotic love, mother love, etc.  A way of separating white light into its component colors is through a prism.  A way of separating unconditional love into its various forms is through people, or what is in our minds.  We are as love’s prism.

 

Love refracting through the prism of our mind.

            Others, with greater spiritual knowledge than I, believe energy is concentrated in various sections of our bodies called “Chakras,” which are color-coded.  The “red Chakra” or “root Chakra” is located in the genital area, so we can let red represent erotic love, right at the top.  We can also coordinate other forms of love with these colors.  It is important to note that the colors have tiny, blurred boundaries.  The colors are scientifically defined by given areas of frequency in the electromagnetic spectrum.  In other words, red isn’t orange.  We should know our boundaries and protect them.

            Some 400 years ago, Newton and others observed if you screened or blocked part of the white light at the prism, you only got part of the rainbow.  If you blocked the prism on the other side, you only got part of the rainbow.  Sometimes one or both sides are just dirty and need a good washing, particularly in the region of erotic love.  The screens blocked the light just as the conditions we place on our love block that energy.  As an example, a guy becomes enamored of his secretary and finds the feeling is mutual.  When they begin the affair, what is the first condition, spoken or unspoken, he puts on his love?—“Don’t tell my wife.”  “Conditions,” or “screens” are generally based in fear.  It is like sticking a piece of chewing gum on the prism.  Other conditions we might place on our beloved might range from “Don’t ejaculate,” to “Don’t squeeze the toothpaste in the middle.”

 

              “Love’s Prism with a piece of Chewing gum.”

Of course, we all have these little bits of chewing gum all over our prisms and our “rainbow” is missing a lot of colors.  For the intellectual, these bits of chewing gum are called “memes” or “viruses of the mind.”  They are simple, subject-verb-object, negative thoughs, many implanted and transferred over the centuries.  “Women are evil,” is traced to the Malleus Maleficarum of 1486 and “men are dogs” may go back to Lysistrata around 411 BC.  Or as it is said in the military, “Grab ‘em by the balls and their hearts and minds will follow.”  It is quite similar to Pavlov’s dogs where we are conditioned to respond.

            We all have screens over our prisms, or conditions we put on love.  We seem to congregate with others who have screens covering the same areas of the prism.  I don’t know or care where your screens are.  Sometimes I think what we call “true love” is no more than two people having chewing gum in the same places on their respective prisms.  Problems arise when one scrapes some of it off.   I am here to simply suggest we at least change our screens from opaque to translucent.  Or scrape some of the chewing gum off. Let a little light through. 

 

Now, why would we want to wash our “prismatic” self?  If a smile can make us feel better, what would allowing love to stream through us do to us when we are making love with our beloved?  There is a lot more intense energy being generated in sexual congress than in just smiling. 

Science knows of many different proteins being created during this time, but certainly not all of them.  We know from ancient and modern history, transformations of we humans can occur through sexual love.  Oh yeah, with love, the sex is better too.

Of course, this is simply the speculation of a novelist. If this speculation is anywhere near correct, don’t think for an instant it deprives love of its mystery.  We will all be long gone from this mortal coil, or mortal double helix, before science accepts love as energy.  Even then, the mystery will remain.  I hope I am wrong about science.  But this is simply provided as a different way of looking at love.  I’m an engineer.  Whaddya expect? 

We modeled our spectrum of love on the visible light spectrum, mostly so we could visualize it.  We humans need this. But, visible light is only a tiny part of the Electromagnetic Spectrum (EMS), and this shows “erotic love” at the bottom, because red has a lower frequency,but a longer wavelength than purple.

 Let’s see what science says about these frequencies.

It can be seen from the different forms of human love, our behaviors would occupy different areas of the spectrum within the boundaries.  The frequencies in the electromagnetic spectrum of the basic colors are measured in Tetrahertz (1012 Hz) as follows:

Indigo-             665 – 715 Thz

Blue-                610 – 680 Thz

Green-             520 – 570 Thz

Yellow-            515 – 525 Thz

Orange-           485 – 510 Thz

Red-                405 – 480 Thz

We are just interested in the numbers.  Note the 5 Thz gaps between red and orange and orange and yellow.  There are “colors” and frequencies in those gaps, but they are neither red nor orange.  (Red-orange?)  Also note how green, blue and indigo overlap.  I don’t think the guys defining colors had anything to do but argue over which color was which, so they probably compromised on these numbers.  Maybe we might consider bringing all of these “colors” into the bedroom.

Could Love be Different for Women?

In looking at our prism, we can see it represents the ancient male symbol, the blade.  If we turned it upside down, it would represent the ancient female symbol, the chalice and red would be at the bottom, as it is in the EMS.  I wonder, do women look at love differently?  But that would be only a perception of this energy.  The energy itself has no gender attached: it embraces us all, if we allow it.

 

 

Could Love be Bigger?

            Our model of the prism and visible light spectrum only looks at the range of love as humans can perceive it, or perhaps intellectually know of it.  The EMS is a lot bigger.  Maybe the EMS is a measurable shadow of the love spectrum?  Perhaps to “perceive” more of it would require opening of other senses?  Forget it!  We have enough to handle right here.

How Do We Love?

            Now that we’ve finished all the theoretical stuff, we can forget it.  Let’s get down to brass tacks.  You’ve met a young lady, or you might be married to her.  Your paraventricular nucleus in the hypothalamus is putting out “those” signals.  You want to ravage her body.  Now, what about your desire to give her love?  You may “love” her as a friend, but that doesn’t give you “those” signals.  If all you have is “those” signals, get a blow up doll.  They don’t take the house when it is over. 

            When we get into sexual anatomy, you wil

l see what a fantastic creature a woman is, just from an anatomical point of view.  We know they think differently, possibly because of the corpus callosum connecting the left and right halves of the brain.  This is cool because they can offer a different perspective on the same problem and keep us from beating our heads against a wall, if we listen to them.  They have a lot going for them, besides being a “friend with benefits.” 

            OK.  Now, how much do you really know about this woman?  Can you think about her in a non-erotic way?  Just about what a good mother she is, about all the attributes she has; how she treats her friends and yours; how she behaves with you in public and in private (remember, this is non-erotic.)  When you can think about her in a non-erotic way and still get a bulge in your trousers, this is a pretty good indicator that you are in love.

            If we think we are responsible for love, we are putting a burden on ourselves.  By viewing it as something (energy?) outside of us, it makes it a lot easier.  We simply have to open ourselves to it.

            I’m just a guy with as much “chewing gum” on my prism as you will find under a 7th grade desktop.  When I wanted to give my love to my beloved, I figured I didn’t have much to offer.  Then I thought, “God can do a much better job than me.”  I envisioned a door on my back, opened it up and let God love her through me.  Done deal.  I wanted to give her the best of everything, including love.  I had not formulated the energy concept at the time.  It was that kind of desire to love, as well as ravage her body.  The temporary results were phenomenal!  I don’t know if I chose the right one or the wrong one, because it didn’t last long.  Damn near killed me when it ended.  But, the experiences I enjoyed, and I mean enjoyed at the deepest sense of the word, with her and others, led to my research to find out just what the hell was going on in our bodies, that I now share with you.  You don’t have to envision a door on your back.  For a poet, I am rather prosaic in these matters.  You may want to think of love as X-rays, and all you have to do is stand in front of the machine and let it pass through you to her.  Whatever works for you will be just fine, but it helps a lot if she is doing the same thing, with whatever works for her.

Yes, it is this simple.  Not easy, but simple.

There is a lot of talk about “foreplay” generally done in the bedroom as foreplay for sex.  Foreplay for love is done out of the bedroom, from a sense of desire to love.  When we bring that into the bedroom, Hoo Boy!  We’ll look at this in the next chapter.

Abraham Maslow

            In 1954, Maslow developed a hierarchy of human needs.  Later these were modeled in the triangle fashion as such: 

 

It is now suggested we take another look at this hierarchy to see how these needs are actually met, noting that Maslow based this hierarchy on

what he considered “healthy” individuals.  This is just a thought for consideration with our new perspective on love, not saying this is the way it is.

 

            Looking at this through our developmental stages, from infancy, childhood, adulthood, up to death, we all need to love and be loved.  In infancy, regardless of the time period in human history, our parents met most of our physiological and safety needs.  Even sexual intimacy in childhood is observed in children playing with their wee-wee’s, until parents come along and beat the crap out of them.  Love in, from and through the family, gives us our sense of belonging as well as our esteem.  Developing past puberty, sexual intimacy will give us the ability to create and self-actualize, however, self love is also very important here, including children getting a sense of sexual intimacy with themselves.  We simply open our selves to it for us.?

Copyright Art Noble 2010

www.thesacredfemale.com


%d bloggers like this: