June 21, 2013

PJ-74

CHAPTER 13

 

REC  #1  HATONN

 

TUE., JULY 27, 1993   11:18 A.M.     YEAR 6, DAY 345

 

TUE., JULY 27. 1993

 

Continuation: The New York Times articles regarding Walter Russell:

 

SHAKING SCIENCE'S FOUNDATIONS

 

August 31, 1930

 

To the Editor of The New York Times:

 

Several of my contemporaries in the electrical field seem to be particularly incensed because of a statement made by Walter Russell in The Times that "all modern theories of atomic struc­ture have no more relation to nature than green cheese."

 

Their rancor is based upon the fact that great scientists such as Millikan, Bohr, Rutherford, Langmuir and others of great prominence have proved their theories by experiment, and Rus­sell, who seems to have obtained most of his knowledge by close observation of nature rather than in the laboratory, tells these men that their conclusions are wrong because their funda­mental premises are wrong.

 

Personally I find it hard to accept Bohr's "jumping electron", as Russell calls it, and I find many others equally skeptical. John Langdon Davies in his recent book, Man and His Uni­verse, criticized this belief severely, ending as follows: "Now, if scientists seem to believe these two things are true, it means that the universe is essentially meaningless."

 

Russell claims that all conclusions of scientists in regard to things electric are based upon the assumption that all masses are "charged" either positively or negatively. This, he says, is fun­damentally wrong, for all masses are doubly charged, each one being preponderantly one or the other just as male and female are known to be so.

 

Russell has set up such a very strong and convincing argu­ment in support of his claim that my traditional electrical train­ing is severely shaken even if I am not a 100 percent convert as yet.

 

If, however, Russell succeeds in establishing this one claim alone he will have shaken the very foundations of science, for every textbook on electrical practice, physics and astronomy will have to be rewritten and another mass of mathematical for­mulae will have to be relegated to the waste basket to keep com­pany with much that has gone that way before.

 

GEORGE SOULE

New York, Aug. 27, 1930

 

*******

 

MR. RUSSELL UPHOLDS THEORY OF A

"TWO-WAY" UNIVERSE

 

Proton Is Not a "Hole", He Declares, Merely Because It Acts Like One.

 

November 2, 1930

 

To the Editor of The New York Times:

 

The Times editorial "This Month's Atom" has so filled these intervening days with answering questions as to whether Dr. Dirac's theory was in line with my cosmogony that I am con­strained to answer it. Also, I might as well include the question so often asked regarding the comparative relationship of Dr. Robert Andrews Millikan's statement published some time ago, also in the The Times, for both are interrelated.

 

The editorial says that "when an electron disappears the va­cancy left behaves mathematically like a proton."

 

A hen seeing her duckling brood taking to water could not be more surprised than modern scientists in seeing this "hole" act like a proton. The proton is not a hole, however, as Dr. Dirac concludes, just as a duckling is not a chicken because it acts like one in respect to the hen. The hole is the vacuous force which acts as an expansion pressure force exerted against an equal compression pressure force which is located in mass and culminates at its centres.

 

Neither is the proton a hole because it acts like one in all re­spects save direction, more than an inward explosion toward a vacuum is like an outward explosion because it also acts like one in all respects save direction.

 

A COMPLETE CYCLE OF MOTION

 

Modern science does not recognize the vacuous force in na­ture, due to the incomplete Newtonian concept which has given us a "one-way" universe instead of the "two-way" universe of my cosmogony. If Newton had completed his gravitational ob­servations and Kepler had been as curious about unmentioned vacuous focus as he was regarding the focus he did mention, science would now understand what this newly discovered neg­ative "hole which acts like a proton" really is and I would not be in the position of being disliked by my scientific friends for playing the part of Copernicus to their Ptolemy.

 

The following is a brief explanation of the complete cycle of motion which will explain what Dirac found, what he has not yet found and what he and Lodge and others say they do not un­derstand regarding that which he has found.

 

The electron is a doubly charged mass. The action of in­tegrating any mass is a generative or condensive one which is called the attraction of gravitation. This causes mass to ap­pear around a common centre of high compression pressure and gives rise to the commonly believed error that matter attracts matter, which is not true to nature. The reaction to this action of compression is the expansion of the field which has been rendered vacuous by thus being drawn upon by the gravitative, indrawing, endothermic action of condensation. The expansion of the residual volume, or field surrounding the mass, is a vacuity which Is as equally minus the original equilibrium of the total volume as the centre of the mass is plus that equilibrium.

 

SOURCE OF AN ERROR

 

The force represented by that vacuity is an expansion pres­sure which is the equal and opposite of the gravitative compres­sion pressure and gives rise to that commonly believed error of light repulsion which is not true to nature.

 

The "hole" that Dirac describes is the vacuous force of the expansion stroke of the universal pump. This force is correctly described as negative electricity, negative discharge, radiation, radio-activity or by any other name which results in the disap­pearance of mass into its surrounding tenuous field.

 

On the contrary, the high pressure point of dense mass is the condensive force which is the compression stroke of the univer­sal pump. This force is correctly described as positive elec­tricity, positive charge, gravitation, condensation or by any other name which results in the appearance of mass into solidity.

 

These two opposing actions and reactions constitute the elec­tro-magnetic oscillations, or compression-expansion sequences, which are present in every mass and which constitute the mech­anistic or life principle of the universe. These sequences have a periodicity of preponderances which are first preponderantly generative and then preponderantly degenerative, which we know of as the phenomena of growth.

 

We have now completed the cycle of appearance and disap­pearance of mass through the series of endothermic, inbreath­ing, positive oscillations of compression pressure and exother­mic, outbreathing, negative oscillations of expansion pressure which is the dual characteristic of electricity; but we have one more characteristic of nature as a result of these action and reac­tion sequences.

 

This one other attribute of nature is the reproductive or re­generative force which is set up solely by the resistance of each expression of force against the other.

 

DUAL CHARACTER OF FORCE

 

This characteristic attribute of nature to repeat herself, and to do so in waves or striations of periodicities, is because of the dual character of force to express itself always in equal oppo­sition of force.

 

Every effect of motion thus results in the production of the opposite effect, therefore the negative reaction which results in the disappearance of the electron is accompanied by its equal and opposite action which causes the reappearance of the mass by the reverse action of the "hole".

 

Hence there can be no such thing as a positively charged mass or a negatively charged mass. All charging masses are simultaneously discharging and all discharging masses are si­multaneously recharging other masses in this two-way universe of motion. Energy is kept continually moving between the high­ pressure hot points of gravitative centres and the low-pressure cold areas of the evacuated fields which surround all masses.

 

This constant interchange is the cause of the motion of force which moves only for one purpose, and that is find an equilib­rium position for which it is ever in search of and never finds, for that position is itself always in motion.

 

While in search of this ever-moving position the work of the universe, and of man, is performed. There is no other way that work can be performed than by the oscillations of this dually acting electric force as it surges back and forth between the two polar dead centres of force, the gravitative focus and the vacu­ous focus.

 

It matters not whether this two-way interchange of potential is between the poles of a battery, which we call electric current, or between dynamos or solenoids, which we call lines of force, or between the high and low barometric pressure position of the weather map, which we call winds, or between the sun and planets, which we call radiant energy, or between elements, which we call radio-activity--all are the same. All are seeking an ever-changing equilibrium position and kept continually on the go and producing that thing which we call energy.

 

Every mass in the universe is a complete pump oscillating between two equilibrium dead centres of opposed force. Every two masses are reciprocating, collaborating and coordinating their respective energies, each in accordance with its respective and comparative potential. Each mass in the universe is re­volving around every other mass in elliptical orbits determined by their mutual ever-moving compression and expansion foci.

 

All masses, whether electrons in hot suns or electrons in cold space, are simultaneously integrating by their generative oscilla­tion, and disintegrative by their opposed radiative one. This is the completed cycle of the motion of force toward which Dirac has made a step in the right direction.

 

[H: Here again, Russell has detailed his approach and his subject to exacting presentation to ALL READERS. This would appear to me to be intent toward having mankind have access without restraint--to his scientific application to the wave-universe in a LIGHT UNIVERSE. This certainly would not, by its mere presence in the largest newspaper of the day by Russell, personally, indicate a great desire for his work to be FULLY AND TOTALLY PUBLIC DOMAIN. I have no intention to further complicate my scribe's life by continuing to harangue with holders of information which was ONCE COMPLETELY PUBLIC DOMAIN--but neither can I understand WHY it is so difficult to share this SCI­ENTIFIC TRUTH OF UNIVERSAL OPERATION WITH THE VERY PEOPLE FOR WHOM IT WAS INTENDED AND ORIGINALLY GIFTED. SO BE IT--WE SHALL CERTAINLY ABIDE BY ALL FEDERAL COURT ORDERS, BUT IT ELUDES MY REASONING LOGIC!]

 

DR. MILLIKAN’S STATEMENTS

 

Robert Andrews Millikan is the only other man who, to my knowledge, has begun to divine nature's secret of the duality of force and continuity of creation in cycles. Dr. Millikan de­clares: "In the hot stars and the sun, matter is being disinte­grated into energy or radiation; in the unimaginably cold ex­panse of infinite space, radiation or energy is being reintegrated into matter."

 

If Dr. Millikan had written that all mass, whether in hot suns or cold space, is integrating by its contractive oscillation (which is caused by the cold of its preceding expansive one) and that it is disintegrating by the heat of its preceding contractive one, he would have been right.

 

To say, however, that matter is disintegrating in hot masses and integrating in cold space is not in keeping with nature's method of creation, for it would not account for the integration of mass in hot suns except by miracles or by "divine ordain­ment", as they said in the Middle Ages, nor would it account for the disintegration of mass in cold space except by the same method.

 

In order for that principle to work, Dr. Millikan would have to find a critical point of temperature below which all matter in­tegrated and above which it all disintegrated. This is impos­sible, for all matter has differing melting points, according to its pressures or densities, these points rising as pressures rise.

 

We know that above these critical points at which all ele­ments melt the solids disintegrate into liquids, then into vapors and then into gases. But the very act of disintegrating by radia­tion causes a relatively cold reaction to take place which reinte­grates. Both processes are therefore taking place above and below the melting point, and this is as true along the trail of a comet which is luminous and relatively hot in its contractive oscillations at 240 degrees below zero as it is true in Viga's heart which is relatively cold in its expansive oscillations at 300,000 degrees or more.

 

WALTER RUSSELL

New York, October 29, 1930

 

***

 

MR. RUSSELL MAY BE RIGHT

 

Dr. Jackson Withdraws Criticism of "Two-Way" Universe and Seeks Proof.

 

THE NEW YORK TIMES, November 9, 1930.

 

To the Editor of The New York Times:

 

Some time ago The Times published a letter of mine severely criticizing Walter Russell for presuming to attack the "laws" of Kepler and Newton. Obviously, as a scientist, I resented the sweeping claim of a non-scientist "that science needed a major surgical operation to put it in line for a logical, cosmogenetic synthesis". I felt that it was ridiculous for anybody to criticize such laws, and especially anybody without recognized scientific standing to attempt such surgery.

 

[H: Is this unlike the attack against our writers and Dharma? Without checking into possible intent or work in any manner it was immediately attacked along with my secretary, thrown into a Federal Court of Law and the en­tire point of either WRITER was missing all attention while running up lawyer's bills, court costs, painful disagreements which cost so much in working time (which is so little with which to begin) in integration of resources. Your PROOF of value in both instances is the adversarial scooping up of the Russell material under "re"copyright efforts and then, the attack against the OTHER source of the information desper­ately mandated for your society. We SHOULD NOT BE IN COMPETITION--we should be working jointly to bring necessary material substance to you, the remnant civilization. I will not, however, share, work, join or integrate WITH THE ELITE COMMITTEE OF 300 IF IT MEANS THE AB­SENCE OF THE VERY WORKING SUBSTANCE AND KNOWLEDGE TO THE SOCIETY AT LARGE. I DO NOT WORK WITH GOD'S "ENEMY" AND THESE COURT PROCEEDINGS ARE ADVERSARIAL TO THAT SOURCE OF PERFECTION AND "ALL" POSSIBILITY! Together we can change the world in ALL manners--or, we can continue as adversaries and, finally, WE shall WIN! Will it be in time to save the tedious steps toward full expla­nation otherwise presented? Yes, I would think so for there are several with working models and all they need is a bit of encouragement and a few minor changes in perception and perspective. Dharma, It is not YOUR problem, chela, so release the concern unto me for I shall not trample the oppo­sition further. Neither shall I long leave the door open for understanding with important participants (if they but choose open mindedness) in that grouping. The best way to lose an enemy is to make of that one, a friend. I have no animosity or hostility and If we could move beyond the per­ceived anger and misperceptions of court battle--we could produce incredibly wondrous things. So be It.]

 

I now wish to modify my statements and criticisms, for, since writing that letter, my viewpoint has somewhat changed from scathing to one of expectation. What I considered the over-night inspiration of that revolutionary type of man we call a "crank" might be, instead, the result of an intelligent and prolonged study of Nature.

 

COORDINATION OF UNITS

 

Mr. Russell has evidently approached his solution to the great riddle from the point of view opposite to that of the scientist. He has considered the universe as a whole and offers expla­nations for the workings of its units as they fit into the whole, while we scientists study the separate parts but as yet cannot fit them together perfectly.

 

Who is to say that Russell's method of approach is not as valuable as our own, especially when it is carried on by so keen an observer? Let us give him a chance for a proof. The future will tell. I believe we should welcome such a mind, with its freedom from the traditions by which our minds are bound to the extent that we sometimes forget to question. I, for one, do not want to be "set" and invincible.

 

I am not yet prepared to say that I thoroughly accept Mr. Russell's "two-way" principle, but I am immensely intrigued by it, for it gives this universe of motion a meaning to me that it did not have before. In fact, our universe is rather meaningless even to ourselves; we know very little of the why of anything and many researchers have practically ceased trying to fathom it. In our experiments we see the effects but do not always find a satisfactory explanation of the cause. If it "works" we are thankful, so we do not always worry about the "why".

 

OPEN TO CONVICTION

 

Mr. Russell's theory may be the method of understanding the nature of electricity, the generation and degeneration of mass and the universal mechanistic principles, through his "two-way" swing of the universal pendulum. In this defending his princi­ples I again repeat that I am only weighing them in my mind at present, but I think the entire scientific world should also seri­ously weigh them, for, if Russell is right--and he surely thinks he is right--his claim that science needs "a major surgical opera­tion" is justifiable.

 

A few outstanding and seemingly irrefutable facts stand in favor of the "two-way" principle. First of all, the compression-­expansion sequence constitutes a cycle of motion which is mechanistic; it conforms with the known oscillating character of all electrical force. It makes matter comprehensible when each mass is known to be a compression-expansion "pump", or stor­age battery of polarized force doing the work of the universe.

 

Russell says that every effect of motion gives birth to its op­posite effect, that our degenerative, radiant energy which is wasting away our universe becomes generative energy simply through its gravitational change of direction toward mass instead of away from it. The same radiation which degenerates our sun regenerates this planet as light. Let us give him a chance to prove that and see what the outcome is.

 

Our "positive" and "negative" are admittedly meaningless words. Russell's dual principle gives them a rational and rea­sonable meaning which may be mechanically comprehensible. He says that "positive" is plus an equilibrium of a quantum of energy, and that "negative" is minus that equilibrium. In other words, a vacuous condition is created in a given quantum of en­ergy by pumping some of it out of one part (the surrounding field) and into the other part (the central mass). How simple it is to understand an electrical short circuit, or a chemical reac­tion, when thus explained, or to understand the motion of energy as force seeking an equilibrium.

 

I remember when we used to think that the current in a bat­tery flowed only in one direction. We now admit its now in both directions. If nature expresses itself universally by a now in both directions, instead of in isolated instances, it is well to know it even though we old-timers have to adjust our practice to it.

 

KEPLER'S LAW NOT INFALLIBLE

 

I was especially vituperative toward Russell because he dared to tamper with the Kepler law. I can now see that Kepler's mention of a single focus, and his failure to mention the other, coupled with Newton's single attribute of matter to attract matter without mentioning its equally apparent power to repel, deprived science of a possible solution of the universal riddle.

 

The second focus of Russell's is physically and mathemati­cally necessary to an elliptical orbit. Why did not some scientist think of this instead of waiting 300 years for an artist to tell us about it?

 

I am anxious to see that other focus proved as the seat of the vacuous force of negative electricity that Russell claims for it. When his present experiments with lines of force are completed, by means of which he expects to prove his contention, and are found to substantiate his claim experimentally, we shall then know that positive electricity is that which is flowing inward, accumulatively, toward a point of compression (which is one of the dead centres of force in the universal machine) and that neg­ative electricity is that which is flowing outward, dissipatively, toward a vacuous field (which is the other dead centre of force).

 

We shall then be convinced that Russell's contention that matter does not attract nor repel matter is probably true, and that attraction and repression-expansion oscillations with which we have long been familiar in electrical practice, but did not con­nect up with gravitation or radiation.

 

I invite the collaboration and criticism of my fellow scientists at large to join me in this, because, should Russell be able to prove his claims, we should all give him due credit, and if he fails, it will then be time to add his theory to the long list of dreams. He is in earnest and at least deserves our support.

 

JOHN E. JACKSON

New York, Nov. 4, 1930

 

***

 

RUSSELL’S THEORY WINS APPROVAL

 

July 7, 1931

 

It Contains More Hope Than That of Sir James Jeans.

 

To the Editor of The New York Times:

 

During the past weeks people of this country who are inter­ested in scientific and cosmic problems have been reading a good deal of the doings and sayings of Sir James Jeans. The newspapers have given much space to his theory that the universe is running down. At a scientists dinner last week he told not only his large and distinguished audience, but thousands of radio listeners, that only a mathematician could understand the universe. His tones were lugubrious [mournful), his face sad. His message is destruction; his complicated theory withers whatever it touches.

 

In the Museum of Science and Industry of New York there is on exhibition a group of remarkable paintings which refute the Jeans theory and substitute a simple, constructive idea of a two­-way universe. This exhibition and what it implies seems to have escaped the notice of the news-gatherers. The artist is the well-­known American, Walter Russell, president of the Society of Arts and Sciences, who has been decorated by many European governments and societies. Mr. Russell's writings have aroused considerable controversy in the columns of The New York Times. Those of his paintings now on exhibition illustrate what he calls the dual action of the one force in the universe. The force, he says, is light, and all matter is "frozen light".

 

The Jeans theory is pessimistic; the Russell hypothesis is full of hope and beauty. Which of these deserves the attention of forward-looking Americans, especially at this time when the world is looking for" depression proof" ideas.

 

LOUIS HASBROUCK

New York, June 3, 1931.

 

***

 

Perhaps as you understand more about the rising recognition of Walter Russell's work and consider that which happened to Dr. Nikola Tesla at the hands of the Elite One Worlders and bankers, a lot will become clear to your perceptions. It may well become most clear as to WHY a beautiful woman would enter the picture and the focus be shifted from SCIENCE to metaphysics and the work open for the public domain--was gathered again into disallowance for freedom of USE. There had to be something done lest the Russell explanations take hold and the public demand use of same. The massive change of such information which would wipe out entirely ALL prior con­cepts of almost everything believed and utilized--would wipe out business as recognized. There had to be something to hold you in the Dark Ages to prevent this massive change to happen. The adversary NEVER misses a beat on his drum, readers--NEVER!

 

So, what has happened? The Elite have utilized the scientific knowledge to gain control of the WORLD. YOU have been given NO INPUT OR USE OF ANY OF IT. It has gone to build the very shackles which will terrify, panic and bind you--­while you drift aimlessly along never having HEARD of one, Walter Russell and not many more, Nikola Tesla. If the adver­sarial people and the Federal Court system has its way--the in­formation will again be gathered up and tucked away so that YOU WILL NOT SEE WHAT WAS DONE UNTO YOU.

 

You can note from the timing of writings that as the scientific community. began to recognize this gifted input from higher realms--the physical constraints and temptations of Walter began and was finally pulled-off in the 1940's when Walter neared his 80s. It is simply history repeating itself in negative form and the physical perceptions and needs for ego attention and fulfillment­--overshadow the spiritual journey and purpose as a messenger to God's creations. It is ever thus and ever as difficult to rise be­yond!

 

Let us close this portion, please. Thank you.

http://www.fourwinds10.net/journals/pdf/J074.pdf