sinus cavity resonance...

>On Sun, 23 Mar 1997 11:37:55 -0800 Atlas Eclipticalis said:
>>Well you know, my dad can produce an exact 440Hz at will ever since
>>interfacing with a flying tire on Hwy101 in South San Jose which detatched
>>his sinus cavity, which just happens to resonate at 440Hz. I guess that
>>really tuned him up.
>>rick
>>
>This begs the question: If your dad (or anyone else....) were to dynamically
>interface with a flying tire (tyre) in Europe, would he then resonate at
>442 Hz?
> -- Brian B.

Yeah, thats true. But I though it was amazing when he described it
to me because it might say something about either where/how we physically
'sense' intervals (as oppose to mentally 'percieve'), or how/why some
people have trained and/or learned "absolute pitch memory" or 'perfect
pitch'. In that sense, the face may be a better sound antenna than I
originally thought.
Since my parents are suing in this matter (the accident), this
phenomenon will become part of the public record in about a year, when our
hot-shot SF plaintiff-attourney shall begin "depositions".

Peace and Harmony!
Rick.



Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl
with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Tue, 25 Mar 1997 03:12 +0100
Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA14279; Tue, 25 Mar 1997 03:12:10 +0100
Received: from ella.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA14278
Received: from by ella.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI)
id SAA15929; Mon, 24 Mar 1997 18:10:39 -0800
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 18:10:39 -0800
Message-Id:
Errors-To: madole@mills.edu
Reply-To: tuning@ella.mills.edu
Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Sender: tuning@ella.mills.edu

I shall assume, perhaps falsely, that this author is presenting this
document in the expectation that it will be evaluated scientifically, so
that's the approach I shall take to it. If it is to be viewed
metaphysically, then harkening to well-understood physical and biophysical
processes is irrelevant to any sort of mystical expose', and seems more
likely to be an attempt to make the document appear on the surface more
scientific than it is.




> The first is very near the skin and appears to be a
> dark color (its true color is a flourescent red). ...
> The first field is simply the radiation of body
> heat, i.e., infrared. "

There appears to be some sort of color-coding scheme involved here.
Obviously "infared" (lower frequency than red light) radiation cannot
directly appear as "flourescent red" to our eyes. If the author is
claiming that he can see infared with his eyes, then he is imagining
things.




> Therefore, we can no longer regard the physical
> chemical organism as more "real" than the non-physical electric organism.

> (Here is strong support for the old metaphysical view that the human
> complex is more electric than chemical, more "spiritual" than physical.)

What is this author's basis for suggesting that electrical phenomena are
not governed by physical laws and are thereby spiritual in nature? There
is nothing spiritual, metaphysical, or aphysical about electricity. The
laws that govern electric and magnetic phenomena have been known, and have
gone mostly unmodified, since the late 1800s. They are known as Maxwell's
Equations.



> While
> traditional science adequately describes the process of metabolism and
the
> function of the endocrines, we must accept the possibility that these
> glands are governed by forces outside the human organism: solar rythms.

Phrases like "traditional science" strike me as a warning sign: He
could be preparing his readers for a later suggestion that "traditional
scientists" ignore or ridicule him for no reason other than that they just
inexplicably hate him. More likely, it's because he hasn't convinced them
of the scientific validity of his findings. Or perhaps it's because he
doesn't understand the conservative nature of science: An alternative
explanation of well-understood phenomena is rarely interesting to
scientists. What IS interesting when it comes to alternative explanations
of well-understood phenomena is when they present new and unequivocally
accurate evidence that the previously-accepted cannot possibly explain, but
the alternative explanation can. But different just because of novelty
rarely leads to new scientific models.

That being said though, I seriously doubt if many medical scientists
would disagree that the sun affects biochemistry and psychology.




> There is every reason to believe that the energy fields are the source of
> life and may have the potential of surviving the death of the physical
> organism.

Uhmmm... What reason(s) in particular is the author refering to?




> they are representative of a more refined cosmic body which requires
> electromagnetic (not chemical) nourishment directly from the source of
all
> life, the sun. The energy fields, I suspect, would therefore affect the
> biophysical organism.

Comments on terms:
"Cosmic body" has not been defined (at least not in this fragment) and
seems to
be an oxymoron.
"Nourishment" here is metaphorical at best. He has not presented evidence
(again at least not in this fragment) of essential nutrients being
gleaned
directly from any form of electromagnetic radiation.
"Energy field" has a very wide variety of possible meanings, so that last
sentence is almost certainly true be default.




Thank you Bruce for taking the time to type this up for us.

My best guess, from what little I've read of this document is that the
author intends it to be evaluated mystically. If indeed that is the case,
I would recommend that he avoid scientific principles, since they are
uninteresting to mysticism, and since, unless he's prepared to pursue them
with true scientific rigor, it constitutes poor science.

Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl
with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Wed, 26 Mar 1997 12:39 +0100
Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA17948; Wed, 26 Mar 1997 12:39:05 +0100
Received: from ella.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA17975
Received: from by ella.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI)
id DAA24496; Wed, 26 Mar 1997 03:37:26 -0800
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1997 03:37:26 -0800
Message-Id: <336406c8.2227516398@kcbbs.gen.nz>
Errors-To: madole@mills.edu
Reply-To: tuning@ella.mills.edu
Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Sender: tuning@ella.mills.edu

On Tue, 25 Mar 1997, Gary Morrison wrote:

>
> There appears to be some sort of color-coding scheme involved here.
> Obviously "infared" (lower frequency than red light) radiation cannot
> directly appear as "flourescent red" to our eyes. If the author is
> claiming that he can see infared with his eyes, then he is imagining
> things.
>
Gary, the author is referring to a phenomenon which I also have
experienced. This comes about through rather intensive eye training with
solar light--not to be undertaken without guidance. The rods and cones of
the eyes are sensitized to perceive beyond what I suppose could be called
the "normal" range. Further discussin of this should be continued
privately.

>
> > Therefore, we can no longer regard the physical
> > chemical organism as more "real" than the non-physical electric organism.
>
> > (Here is strong support for the old metaphysical view that the human
> > complex is more electric than chemical, more "spiritual" than physical.)
>
> What is this author's basis for suggesting that electrical phenomena are
> not governed by physical laws and are thereby spiritual in nature? There
> is nothing spiritual, metaphysical, or aphysical about electricity. The
> laws that govern electric and magnetic phenomena have been known, and have
> gone mostly unmodified, since the late 1800s. They are known as Maxwell's
> Equations.
>
>
Again the author is discussing what could perhaps be more accurately
termed "radiant" fields and energy--these are either more "electric" or
more "magnetic" in nature. I am sure that we are at the very beginning of
our understanding of things electrical and magnetic; Newtonian physics
falls apart on the microscopic level and I believe Maxwell's Equations
will eventually suffer the same fate.

I realize it is too much to expect that anyone could make sense out of my
previous post taken out of context as it was. Let me attempt to clarify
several of the "mystical" givens that form the basis of these thoughts and
then take this discussion off this list if necessary.

Even from the strictly "scientific" description I presume that all would
agree that as the earth evolved out of the sun, so we must see the sun as
the source also of life. Mr. Savoy has proposed that energy, and therfore
matter also, has associated with it what he calls intelligence factors
(IF) and that it is these IF factors that are responsible for organizing
matter into forms which express life. In fact solar radiant energy is by
far the most influential force on this planet. Savoy proposes that eyes
evolved solely for the intake solar energy (intelligence)--Plato's
metaphor of the cave is apropo. By absorbing solar energy in the proper
way, changes take place in many ways, from stimulating the rods and cones
to perceive a broader range of the electromagnetic spectrum to changes in
the endocrine system and resultant physiological changes. As a result of
the IF factors of sunlight there is also a tremendous impact on the psyche
of the individual, which can be completely overwhelming (the devil made me
do it!). This radiant energy absorption is a kind of nourishment for the
organizing fields, or the intelligence that holds matter in particular
forms. These fields reflect certain solar force centers and are linked to
particular organ systems of the body. These fields can eventually "live"
independently of the physical body, achieving the potential for
"immortality". Taoist techniques collect "chi" energy, circulating it
correctly to raise "shen", spirit, in the pursuit of
immortality--unfortunately I believe that the negative alchemical
presentation of taoist principles does a disservice to the true ideas,
like judging the efficacy of science based on its involvement in producing
the atomic bomb.

But what does all this have to do with music?

I believe that this general thread of discussion of things "mystical" is
the result of several simple questions--as musicians, is there any reason
to work with one particular scale or another? Does musical expression
have any particular effect on us, our bodies, psyches, spirits?

Bruce Kanzelmeyer


Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl
with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 04:21 +0100
Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA18855; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 04:21:03 +0100
Received: from ella.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA18847
Received: from by ella.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI)
id TAA10772; Wed, 26 Mar 1997 19:19:39 -0800
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1997 19:19:39 -0800
Message-Id:
Errors-To: madole@mills.edu
Reply-To: tuning@ella.mills.edu
Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Sender: tuning@ella.mills.edu