|
|
February 28, 2005
Cooperative Space Exploration - Linking up with NASA
Free energy and new physics are discussed by a comparatively small group of passionate theorists and experimenters but there is little to link these researchers up with the "mainstream". Yet those some of those "wild" ideas could make all the difference in our future in space.
True, there is the "Journal of New Energy" of Hal Fox, "Infinite Energy" magazine, which started out through the heroic efforts of Gene Mallove who unfortunately is no longer with us, there are several e-mail based discussion groups, and there are now some websites that provide information and news: www.freenergynews.com and www.zpenergy.com.
Still, says Michael Hannon, an American member of the Aerospace Technology Working Group of NASA and a student of various disciplines involving the enhancement of consciousness and various sciences, as well as an artist and musician:
Were we to actually put ourselves together, focusing all that united intelligence and human capability, think of what could we accomplish, and when you have come to terms with your own feelings of separateness, from wherever they may stem, please join in uniting our efforts towards real accomplishment at a global level the likes of which the world has never before realized.
See Michael's impassioned plea for joining together and his offer to mediate contacts between interested individuals and the NASA working group.
- - -
Divided and Conquered We Fall
Although there have been many strategies used to maintain a low-level status quo in the world community, the most successful has been the capacity of various individuals and groups who do cooperate with each other to actively divide the focus and energies of those they choose to control. Without focus, millions of people can be controlled in their thinking by people who can focus their abilities.
The methodology of separation has worked wonders for centuries at keeping the majority of people worldwide thus at enough odds with each other that they cannot unite in common beliefs which they can then institute. This is why a focus of concepts is so important for real change worldwide, and why change does not simply happen as it can otherwise.
We are now facing whole societies at odds with each other primarily because we cannot join together. People on various continents maintain their respective disdain and mistrust of for each other, hoarding whatever they can for their own pursuits instead of uniting to effect real change. Schools of thought that would enhance the capacity of people to think as individuals in creative, constructive ways are slowly losing ground to xenophobic influences in societies which further separate people into factions who feel that in order to survive, they must compete with other factions, when in fact, were they to unite with each other in intelligent, thoughtful individualistic dialogue, they would realize that they cannot achieve anything more than piecemeal accomplishments through in-fighting which divides their energies against each other rather than combining them for real results.
This philosophy of separation and separatism is unwise and literally destructive to those groups practising it, yet because they have had no real training in other ways of thinking, they cannot even comprehend the possibility that other means of much greater accomplishment and life fulfillment are available for the taking to whomever among them would open their eyes to them.
Such disciplines as Zen, Qaballah, Sufism, and many others offer non-conflictive means of training people's minds to function at much greater levels of wisdom and understanding than the status quo can offer, yet they are not in general use and therefore cannot provide the world with the fruits of their disciplines in a sufficiently beneficial number. Were they to be able to, life on Spaceship Earth would be quite different, because its general crew would be operating at a much higher level of thinking than that lower level of thought, emotion, conflict, separateness, and hostility, and downright lower brain function in which the status quo now makes its home.
Human nature has not changed over the millennia, and just as these disciplines, under constant refinement by their dedicated practitioners and masters of their methods, have worked for centuries in many cases, they work as well today indeed, and they all function on the same fundamental principles - uniting the energies of the mind, emotions, and body into a refined whole capable of much more than the conflicting parts left untrained could possibly accomplish. As with each individual, so with societies. They can also accomplish much more when conflicting and non-cooperative elements - often so simply out of a lack of awareness, coherence, and cohesiveness - can be brought together in function by conscious, conciliating influences. That task is most efficiently accomplished through those who have come to terms with the conflicts within themselves by disciplines which do precisely that when followed.
As an American member of the Aerospace Technology Working Group of NASA and a student of various disciplines involving the enhancement of consciousness, and various sciences, as well as being an artist and musician, I must conclude that the time has come for us to stop this non-cooperative stance. We must begin uniting worldwide in networks which are no longer separated by nationalism and territorialism, or anything else, and through the acceptance of each other's capabilities to join together in as ubiquitous a group as we can possibly maintain. Only then can we accomplish those goals we see for this planet, region by region. We must adopt a level of cooperation we may never have been willing to give before, in order to reach this end. Perhaps in the future we can look back and realize that the so-called "sacrifices" we made in order to do so were in reality merely parts of our natures we should have dispensed with long ago. We need to think, feel, and act above the level of a status quo which would pull us into lives of non-individualism, non-achievement and mediocrity in which it makes its home.
I am therefore offering to anyone who feels they have intelligent contributions to make to that world community to consider joining the NASA Aerospace Technology Working Group in a worldwide forum of commitment to long term peaceful cooperative efforts in space research and exploration, the benefits of which will be shared by all peoples on this planet rather than hoarded as they are now by a very few who dictate what will reach the public and what will not. This is not in any way an attempt to draw anyone away from what they are doing, but to bring us together in a unity of purpose and focus for us all. The stake is making a better world for ourselves, our children and their children. Our tool is cooperation at a global level. We need to move on from the current state of being divided by differences we have been spoon fed to keep us apart.
We must stop the superfluous separatism now practised which plagues the status quo and build a firm foundation of acceptance and peaceful cooperation, united by our common goals for all of us, if we ever hope to bring about those changes wordwide. Separation has been hindering humanity since time immemorial. ATWG is but part of the means by which to implement this, but because it was founded by senior members of the scientific and aerospace communities, it is a giant step ahead of most groups who are not populated by people in positions to effect change who have the vision shared by so many of us who are not as yet united into a coherent, cohesive whole which can focus its energies efficiently and effectively in today's world.
If you can envision a worldwide network of multiple groups acting in cooperation with each other rather than separately and unaware of each other, I hope that you can see what such an organization could actually accomplish versus the totality of non-united, non-affiliated groups sharing quite common goals that now exists. Were we to actually put ourselves together, focusing all that united intelligence and human capability, think of what could we accomplish. When you have come to terms with your own feelings of separateness, from wherever they may stem, please join in uniting our efforts towards real accomplishment at a global level the likes of which the world has never before realized.
Kind Regards,
Michael
You can contact Michael Hannon at m.f.hannon@att.net
Aerospace Technology Working Group
See also:
Experts warn U.S. of space isolation
Report warns of challenges to U.S. leadership in space
NASA climate expert says US tried to silence him
NASA's top climate scientist has accused the Bush administration of trying to stop him from speaking out after he called for swift cuts in emissions of the greenhouse gases linked to global warming in a lecture, The New York Times reports.
posted by Sepp Hasslberger on Monday February 28 2005
updated on Wednesday December 8 2010
URL of this article:
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2005/02/28/cooperative_space_exploration_linking_up_with_nasa.htm
Related Articles
Science Commons: Open The Flow Of Scientific Information
Creative Commons has become a modern-day alternative to copyright which we inherited from pre-computer and pre-internet times. Ubiquitous copyright has become an obstacle to sharing and utilizing the immense amounts of information now at our fingertips. The idea is to form a "commons", that is, a freely accessible body of facts and ideas where barriers to the exchange and use of information have been removed or at least lowered from... [read more]
February 21, 2005 - Sepp Hasslberger
New Physics: Debating Einstein, Matter, Time and Space
My recent posting of Eit Gaastra's speculative work under the title Beyond Einstein's Relativity: Cosmology Dissident Says Big Bang Absurd has drawn quite some comments, which I would like to share. I also believe it might be useful if there were a forum, perhaps in the form of a site such as this one, for making alternative views to current cosmology known and for feeding back comments to the authors.... [read more]
December 11, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger
Gene Mallove: Science Censorship is 'Invisible Evil'
When in February this year, the Union of Concerned Scientists came out with a warning that "the Bush administration had systematically distorted scientific fact in the service of policy goals on the environment, health, biomedical research and nuclear weaponry at home and abroad", a long festering wound was touched, but unfortunately no cleansing process seems to be underway as yet. Examples for the distortion of science for purposes of either... [read more]
April 30, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger
Antarctic Time Warp Discovery
Time has been a somewhat intractable problem in science. There is no agreement even on the nature of time itself, although experiments have been made to "travel" to different time periods. The discovery of a time anomaly in the Antarctic - reported in Pravda yesterday - dates back eight years. Nevertheless, I find it highly interesting that such a discovery was made and that we have heard little or nothing... [read more]
March 02, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger
A Universe of Scale - Stars edge closer
Can communication be transmitted over distance without the need for electromagnetic radiation "travelling" to carry the message? Hartmut Mueller of the Institute for Space-Energy-Research in Wolfratsthausen, Germany, says it can. Mueller has developed a theory of global scaling, which states that matter and energy organize in accordance with principles of scale. The "nodes" or preferred points of concentration, may be distant in linear space, but adjacent in "logarithimic space",... [read more]
September 21, 2003 - Sepp Hasslberger
Peer Review - Politics of Science?
According to a recent article on BushGreenwatch.org, the White House is looking for ways to more closely control what scientists are allowed to say in studies that are to be used by the US government in forming policy in the areas of health and the environment. The peer review system, whereby a scientific article is scrutinized by a scientist's colleagues - actually often by an anonymous selection of "guardians of... [read more]
January 29, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger
Readers' Comments
With the help of Dr de Silva I am trying out new ideas in physics, using conventional math and accepted new physics
Pls check url - comments welcome
http://www.newphysics.us
Posted by: phil on February 28, 2005 09:43 PM
A message (by email) from Paramahamsa Tewari in India, which is of general interest:
I have read with interest your invitation letter to join discussions at Aerospace Tech. Working Group. But please permit me to bring to your notice that some senior  NASA  scientists are shy of discussions if new concepts are introduced. In fact their replies can be rude. For instance, having read in newspaper NASA's report on collision of galaxies, it was predicted that two galaxies with oppsite axial rotation will be electrically attracted as per the principles of a new theory, Space Vortex Theory (SVT).  A scientist friend from USA sent me the pictures of the colliding galaxies' axial rotation; the prediction came true. With sufficient explanations, very briefly given, I sent a  letter to Tom Van Flandern and received a rather rude reply.
I am seperately forwarding to you my letter on this, sent to a scientist, as it gives relevant details. Perhaps this note can be the start of discussions on the basic nature and origin of gravity of cosmic bodies and existence of electrical forces in cosmic space that remain hitherto undiscovered in modern physics.
Best wishes,
Paramahamsa
Posted by: Sepp on March 1, 2005 03:09 PM
Please take note of apparently unforeseen scientific data regarding the human overpopulation of Earth. Russell P. Hopfenberg, Ph.D., has published articles indicating elegantly that human population dynamics are common to the population dynamics of other species. This means the world's human population growth is a rapidly cycling positive feedback loop, a relationship between food and population in which food availability drives up population numbers, and increasing population fuels the mistaken impression, the misperception, that food production needs to be evermore increased. The data make clear increasing annual global food production gives rise to growing numbers of human beings.
Perhaps, a new biological understanding with Dr. Hopfenberg's research. It is simply that the Earth's carrying capacity for human organisms, like that for other organisms, is determined by food availability. More food equals more people; less food equals less people; and no food, no people. Given its current scale and rate of growth, human population worldwide appears to be a huge problem, taking an ever-increasing toll on limited natural resources; nonetheless, we can take the measure of this problem and find a remedy that is consonant with universally shared human values.
Thanks for all you are doing to protect humanity from endangerment, biodiversity from extinction, and Earth from irreversible degradation.
Posted by: Steven Earl Salmony, Ph.D., M.P.A. on March 3, 2005 10:00 PM
My reply to Steven Earl Salmony:
thank you for pointing me to this most interesting publication by Russell Hopfenberg, Human Carrying Capacity is Determined by Food Availability.
Of course there are dangers in overpopulation and we should try to avoid those, but perhaps population control is not the only means at our disposal.
In my view, we have ample room for improvement in reducing the human "footprint" on the environment and sustain a population greater than the present one, with much reduced reliance on the resources that are available. New solutions in the energy field are a must in this respect.
Food is indeed a problem and perhaps new avenues of making nutritious food that do not rely so much on livestock and fishing should be found. I could imagine that with ingenuity, growth of population might be sustained into the future, with the important caveat of doing something about our weight on the planetary environment.
Posted by: Sepp on March 3, 2005 11:28 PM
Thanks Sepp,
Please note that there is another valuable article by Dr. Russell Hopfenberg (with David Pimentel). It is Human Population Numbers as a Function of Food Supply, ENVIRONMENT, DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY. 3: 1-15, 2001.
With every passing year, as food production is increased, leading to a population increase, millions more people go hungry. Why are those hungry millions (now numbering in the billions worldwide)not getting fed year after year after year....and may not ever be fed? Every year the global human population grows. All segments of it grow. The data in support of this understanding are uncomplicated and overwhelming. For example, every year there are more people with blue eyes, more people with brown eyes, more people with who are tall and more people who are short. It also means that there are more people growing up well-fed and more people growing up hungry. According to Dr. Hopfenberg's data, we are not bringing hunger to an end by ever increasing the food supply; instead, annual increases in food production give rise to more hungry people. Currently, data show us that there are more people existing on the planet on resources worth less than $2 per day than were alive on Earth in the year of my birth, 1945.
Is the human population bomb Dr. Paul Ehlich identified for all of us exploding now?
Posted by: Steven Earl Salmony, Ph.D., M.P.A. on March 4, 2005 03:17 PM
Dear Steven,
Hopfenberg and Pimentel say:
"The increase in the number of humans is responsible for amounts of pollutants dumped into land, water, and atmosphere."
While this may be suggestive, it is far from the truth.
In my view it is not the increase of the number of humans that is responsible for pollution but our refusal to face the reality that we are part of an eco-system and that we cannot make unlimited demands on that system for our own survival and expansion.
Rather than population expansion itself, our mode of operation bears some looking into. We seem to be blinded by "economic realities" that dictate economy must expand to be healthy, and perhaps our over-production of food follows economic, rather than humanitarian (like in "we need to feed all those poor people") concerns. We are forced to expand production to satisfy the faulty expansionist maxim of a finance-driven debt economy.
Hunger seems to depend more on problems of distribution - and on a refusal of industrialized nations to support food production in developing nations - than on a real shortage of food. Distribution or rather distributed food production is hampered by the same economic maxims that blind us to our responsibility towards the environment. Rich nations subsidize their own agriculture to the detriment of developing nations and to the detriment of the environment, requiring food to often travel thousands of miles before it reaches the final consumer.
It would be quite possible to produce without polluting, and to have abundant energy without using fossil fuels albeit not with the profit maximization imperative and the monopolistic concentration of economic power in mega corporations that our economic system dictates.
Something to consider.
Posted by: Sepp on March 4, 2005 05:48 PM
Dear Sepp,
Is the unlimited growth of human numbers not primarily a natural result of the spectacular production of an ever increasing food supply? Do growing human population numbers not naturally lead to the taking of a greater and greater toll on the Earth's resources? Given their scale and rate growth, how much longer can our small, finite, noticeably fragile planetary home sustain unrestrained human numbers, unbridled per capita human consumption, or the seemingly endless expansion of global human economy? Taken together, do these distinctly human activities not run the risk of perhaps ruining the environment as a fit place for human habitation soon?
Thanks for considering these questions.
Posted by: Steven Earl Salmony, Ph.D., M.P.A. on March 4, 2005 08:16 PM
...... and SAVE THE WORLD.
steve salmony, global citizen
Posted by: Sepp on March 5, 2005 12:24 PM
Dear Sepp,
A problem for us here and now derives from my noticeably lacking communication skills. Forgive me.
Before we can begin figuring out what to do for a patient is distress, first we need an accurate diagnosis of the problem pressented to us.
According to Dr. Hopfenberg's data, human beings are creatures of the Earth. We evolved here like the other species did. We may be the most miraculous and wondrous and complex example of evolving life (some would likely want to argue with this, given certain of our behaviors), but clearly, absolutely, we appear to be creatures of this planet. It may be that there is nothing 'supreme' about human beings. Such supremacy is reserved to God in my worldview. Of the creatures great and small that ever existed, we are but one. We are exceptional in that we live by our wits.
Russell Hopfenberg's science indicates that Homo sapiens propagate like other species. If that is so, then we could have diagnosed a very serious human "condition." THE problem before us could be continuously increasing absolute global human population numbers. Until we recognize THE problem, it is difficult for me to understand how we address it. We need a diagnosis before prescribing a remedy.
Increasing human consumption and expanding human production appear to be a natural result of a growing human population. Of course, we could restrain consumption. Certainly, we could restrict production. That would surely help. But THE problem remains the growing human numbers. Dr. Hopfenberg's data indicates that that non-recursive biological problem needs to be carefully and skillfully examined.
How it is the human community chooses to do respond to its condition - consonant with universally shared human values - looks to me like a good topic for general discussion.
Posted by: Steven Earl Salmony, Ph.D.,M.P.A. on March 5, 2005 02:02 PM
Dear Steven,
you say we need to find an accurate diagnosis of the problem presented to us.
The problem, as stated, is the continuing growth of human population.
Hopfenberg makes two unsubstantiated leaps in his work. First he jumps from environmental problems human population growth, saying that human population growth is the cause of our environmental problems. He then goes on to say that human population growth (now identified as a serious problem) is a function of the food supply.
I have commented before that I do not feel that human population growth, but rather our blatant disregard for our responsibilities as part of earth's ecosystem is the cause of our destroying this planet as fast as we possibly can manage.
Let me add to that and say that I am equally unconvinced that the availability of food is a primary factor in current population growth. While this may well be true for animal populations, I believe that what sets apart from the animals, our intellect, may make the food factor of potentially much less importance.
But - I do agree that we have a problem, and the real problem seems to be that we, as humanity, are destroying our environment with just about every action we take. We use up resources as if they were unlimited, we produce chemical poisons and we concentrate nuclear elements, we use oil and gas as if our life depended on it, and we call it progress.
What is the source of our problem?
Certainly not the fact that we are here and that there seem to be more of us every day.
I would say that the source of our problem is that we are unable to agree that what is good for the environment is good for us. All the major corporations tell us, if not by word then by action, that we must be free to pollute, to waste, to destroy, otherwise we cannot "economically survive". In other words, we have an economics problem.
The way our economic interchanges are arranged, everything, including the fate of the environment and ultimately the fate of humans on earth, becomes secondary to maximizing profit. We have food production for profit (not for nutrition and not for feeding people, but for profit), we have wars for profit, we got energy for profit and we have illness for profit.
We have been living with this idea for quite some time, and its proponents have convinced us that there is really no alternative to pollution, to poisoning ourselves and other species, to reducing the habitat of the other creatures that inhabit this planet together with us. If we are to economically prosper, we have to do all these things.
That is my diagnosis.
What are we going to do about it?
Posted by: Sepp on March 6, 2005 08:51 PM
Dear Sepp,
As you can tell, I am unprepared and poorly equipped for this exchange. Please bear with me.
Before I saw Dr. Hopfenberg's data (both published and not yet published), the point of view you put forward is one I shared. These unexpected and unwelcome scientific data have lead me to see things differently. His research does not seem to be a leap, but rather a slight extension of what already is known about population dynamics. In the light of these new data, could it be said that human intelligence has not yet been deployed in an effort to examine and respond ably to the biological problem potentially presented to humanity by the human overpopulation of Earth? As a first step, I would like to propose that we begin examining together and with other esteemed colleagues the scientific data from Malthus to Darwin to Darling to Hardin to Ehlich to Hopfenberg (as well as the work of other great scientists of population issues) and not become tied up and distracted by outworn, preternatural and supernatural beliefs about the supremacy of Homo sapiens. Perhaps, it is precisely the unreality of the belief Homo sapiens are not an integral part of the natural order of all living things that presents a primary obstacle to going forward as I am suggesting.
Let me add, but this time with different words, that I surely agree with you that humanity has an "economic problem," looked at in terms of both unrestrained per capita global human food consumption and unbridled increases in global human food production.
We want to take care, I suppose, that present worldwide growth trends of human numbers, human consumption and human production do not lead us inadvertently to overwhelm the small, finite, noticeably fragile planetary home we are blessed by God to inhabit with other creatures.
This opportunity to communicate about so significant a concern means much to me. Thank you for it.
Posted by: Steven Earl Salmony, Ph.D., M.P.A. on March 7, 2005 05:24 PM
...... and SAVE THE WORLD.
steve salmony, global citizen
Posted by: Steven Earl Salmony, Ph.D., M.P.A. on March 18, 2005 02:16 PM
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
These articles are brought to you strictly for educational and informational purposes. Be sure to consult your health practitioner of choice before utilizing any of the information to cure or mitigate disease. Any copyrighted material cited is used strictly in a non commercial way and in accordance with the "fair use" doctrine.
1600
|
|
