Relationship between Dewey Larson and Don/Carla

[greyWiz]

Hi, I was reading the preface of Dewey Larson's The Universe of Motion, when I've found this statement at the very end:

It will not be feasible to acknowledge all of the many individual contributions that have been made toward developing the details of thc theoretical system and bringing it to the attention of the scientific community. However, I will say that I am particularly indebted to the founders of the New Science Advocates, Dr. Douglas S. Cramer, Dr. Paul F. de Lespinasse, and Dr. George W. Hancock; to Dr. Frank A, Anderson, the current President of the NSA, who did the copy editing for this volume, along with his many other contributions; and to the past and present members of the NSA Executive Board: Steven Berline, RonaId F. Blackburn, Frances Boldereff, James N. Brown, Jr., Lawrence Denslow, Donald T. Elkins, Rainer Huck, Todd Kelso, Richard L. Long, Frank H. Meyer, William J. Mitchell, Harold Norris, Carla Rueckert, Ronald W. Satz, George Windolph, and Hans F. Wuenscher.

Here's the link:
http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/nbm/nbm00pre.htm

I guess this book is from 1979, so what was the relationship between Dewey, Don and Carla at that time, in order to cite them in the acknowledgments?

Is there a chance of Dewey being influenced by Don and Carla's works?

Thanks in advance!

[Eddie]

This is news to me. I was unaware that Dewey had even heard of Don and Carla.

[greyWiz]

Sorry, this book is Nothing but Motion (first volume) - The Universe of Motion is the third volume...

I'd like to quote an excerpt from the August 1973 session, chanelled by Don:

I am Oxal. I am with this instrument. I have been called for the purpose of speaking to you on the nature and reality of time. Time is a field, like unto your electric field, your magnetic field. But what is a field, my friends? A field is an effect. A field is in your minds. A field has different effects at different distances. So does time. As you have recently stated, time and space are dependent, one upon another. It has also been stated that they are totally independent, and have no relationship.

Both of these statements are true. It simply depends on your point of view. The people of your planet at present do not appreciate the number of dimensions that are available for one to experience the creation. All of these dimensions are made up of a single place and a single time, and, for that matter, a single dimension, which has no dimension. But it is necessary to go from where you are to where you will be. Therefore, we shall speak of time as you know it and try to lead you to that place where you will know it.

Time is a field. It is space-dependent. Space is a field and is time-dependent. For this reason you recognize a reciprocal nature. The relationship between the two is the third power [of] displacement in either. This may be recognized by a simple equation or formula. T3[superscript] divided by 3 is equal to S3[superscript - is this one right?!]. S3[superscript] divided by 3 is equal to T.

There are three dimensions: therefore, the numeral “3” is used, both as a power and as a constant. Permeability of the field is dependent upon the speed of the reciprocal field. Your present constant, that which you call the velocity of light, is the basic speed of the field. The permeability of that which you know as matter is dependent upon this constant. In other words, my friends, the densities of which your world is composed, and the densities of the other planes of existence as you know them, are time-dependent. Their permeability is a function of apparent speed.

(I think that the second superscript in the transcription shouldn't exist - does anyone know if it's correct?)

The explanation given by Oxal is strikingly similar to Larson's Reciprocal System, but it goes further:

Condensation in dense form results from oscillations between reciprocally related space/time entities and permeability, or the basic density of this material, is a function of the apparent velocity of what you call light. There are six spaces and six times in each density. In your present form and state of awareness you recognize three. The other three you travel in in[sic] the state of sleep. In doing this.[sic] you become, quite often, mismatched with your awareness you possess in your waking state. For this reason you are able to perceive events that will occur in what is to you in the waking state the future. However, the future is an illusion, as is the past, for there is only the present. It is possible to slide, shall we say, along with respect to your awareness of time in the waking state simply by removing through the process of normal sleep the confines of the physical illusion. Space and time are then, as before, reciprocally related.

This part goes beyond Larson's theory, but the similarities of the first part are remarkable. Would it corroborate the fact that the chaneller must have some training (or at least the vocabulary) in certain subjects in order to channel properly?

Anyway, Don and Carla are quoted as members of the New Science Advocates Executive Board, so maybe the relationship goes way before 1979.

[Aaron]

The relationship between the two is the third power [of] displacement in either. This may be recognized by a simple equation or formula. T3[superscript] divided by 3 is equal to S3[superscript - is this one right?!]. S3[superscript] divided by 3 is equal to T.

There are three dimensions: therefore, the numeral “3” is used, both as a power and as a constant.

(I think that the second superscript in the transcription shouldn't exist - does anyone know if it's correct?)

I don't know about Don and Carla's relationship with Dewey. It would be interesting to see who influenced the other. Maybe someone like Gary can tell us more?

It's possible, I suppose, that both Dewey and Don/Carla received information from Oxal at the same time, as the possibility/probability vortexes allowed.

As for the equation, I'm having trouble understanding it too... It kind of works if we replace T with the number 3. 3(cubed) / 3 = S3. That makes S(cubed) = 9. So S = 3. Using S as 3: 3(cubed) / 3 = 3. That makes the second part of the equation wrong. If we take away the second superscript like you suggest, then we get 3 / 3 = 9. That's not quite right either!

Try it with an arbitrary number like, say, 67, and you have to divide by 67 in order to get results that make sense.

67(cubed) / 3 = 100254.33...
100254.33... / 3 = 33418.11...

but

67(cubed) / 67 = 4489
4489 / 3 = 1496.33...

Still not right! Maybe I'm terribly misunderstanding. Do you have a link to the original session, by the way?

[zenmaster]

Don was a professor of physics. He became interested in Larson's work, and they became friends. The Reciprocal System is not channeled information - it was developed by Larson starting in early 1930's.

The Oxal quote is clearly from the channeler's bias, as those specifics are just particular mathematical abstractions.

[greyWiz]

Hi, Aaron, thanks for your reply.

Here's the link to the session:
http://www.llresearch.org/transcripts/is..._0800.aspx

Removing the second superscript, we get these equations:

T3[superscript] / 3 = S

S3[superscript] / 3 = T

I've questioned the second superscript because it breaks the symmetry between the equations... I think they are only indirectly related, so you can't make a simple substitution of one into the other (partial differential equations, maybe?).

All of this looks like descriptions of fields, but I'm afraid I don't have enough expertise to figure it out...


Another thing I was wondering: if you start from the number 2 and, then, integrate it 3 times, you get:

- First integration: 2x

- Second Integration: x2[superscript]

- Third integration: x3[superscript] / 3

Which is exactly the equations given by Oxal.

[Eddie]

[quote]Condensation in dense form results from oscillations between reciprocally related space/time entities and permeability, or the basic density of this material, is a function of the apparent velocity of what you call light. There are six spaces and six times in each density. In your present form and state of awareness you recognize three. The other three you travel in in[sic] the state of sleep. In doing this.[sic] you become, quite often, mismatched with your awareness you possess in your waking state. For this reason you are able to perceive events that will occur in what is to you in the waking state the future. However, the future is an illusion, as is the past, for there is only the present. It is possible to slide, shall we say, along with respect to your awareness of time in the waking state simply by removing through the process of normal sleep the confines of the physical illusion. Space and time are then, as before, reciprocally related.

This part goes beyond Larson's theory, but the similarities of the first part are remarkable. Would it corroborate the fact that the chaneller must have some training (or at least the vocabulary) in certain subjects in order to channel properly?

Perhaps not. I've been aware that space and time were illusiory since childhood. Larson's theory made perfect sense to me when I first encountered it.

[Steppingfeet]

Hello GreyWiz,

I asked Carla about this. Some stories of the past I have heard multiple times. Others I have never heard. The relationship between Don, Carla, and Dewey being among the latter category; so it was interesting for me to get the scoop on this chapter in the L/L Research story.

Carla said that in the course of his research, Don Elkins encountered Dewey Larson’s book, “New Light on Space and Time", which apparently contains a lot of mathematical and physics theory and equations. In order to verify the veracity of the information for himself, Don worked out each of Larson’s equations to his own satisfaction.

Don subsequently contacted Dewey - who was impressed at Don's aptitude (apparently few were able to work out the equations) - and, in 1971, Don invited Larson to speak at the University of Kentucky in the class of John Hutchins, and paid for his travel.

Don and Carla listened to Dewey speak over the course of a couple of days and in the meantime they each got the opportunity to know Dewey. According to Carla, the two intellects had great chemistry and really hit it off.

Dewey Larson sometime thereafter invited Don and Carla to be board members for Dewey’s non-profit organization: The International Society of Unified Science (ISUS). Don and Carla gladly accepted. When one of the board members discovered that Carla was an English major, the board asked Carla to edit their newsletter. Carla was more than happy to serve.


Around the publication of Carla and Don's book about their research up to that time, "Secrets of the UFO", Carla says that a mild flurry was created by the book's publication. Don felt that the book made them too notorious, in terms of being on the fringe, for them to be a part of a dignified group of people like ISUS. Don subsequently submitted resignations for Carla and himself. The ISUS board reluctantly accepted.

(Carla and Don maintained relationships with ISUS. Sometime in the late 80's or early 90's Jim and Carla hosted an ISUS meeting in their home, and in the mid-2000's an ISUS member became one of our housemates for a couple/few years.)

Carla says that Don and Dewey did have a personal relationship outside of ISUS, and did speak to one another over the phone. She doesn't recall whether and to what extent Don and Dewey spoke during the Ra contact, but she said it is possible that Don’s own research, and the information from Ra specifically, influenced Larson. She knows that the concepts Larson produced "stuck in Don's fertile mind", concepts which Don later used in his role as Questioner for the Ra Contact.

Hope that helps!
GLB

[Steppingfeet]

Dewey Larson and Don Elkins


  Dewey and Don.jpg (Size: 284.19 KB / Downloads: 95)

Dewey Larson and Carla L. Rueckert


  Dewey and Carla.jpg (Size: 261.82 KB / Downloads: 52)

[greyWiz]

Hi, GLB, it was a fascinating story - I thank you and Carla for sharing this with all of us.

The story and the pictures were far beyond my expectations, and now I'm really glad I asked about it.

Thanks a lot!

[kycahi]

I recall Don saying that he asked Larson whether he was open to the kind of "out there" info that Don pursued, and Larson told him he hoped to get into that in the future, and thought it was worth looking into. Even if he were just being polite at first, I am sure that Don and Carla won him over with their intelligence, charm and humor.

I'm impressed at how much the "modern" String Theory resembles Larson's work. I call it his "work" because Larson developed his entire body of knowledge by deriving equations to describe the Universe instead of using any evidence at all. He only used scientific evidence to verify his results. I think that was what attracted Don to Larson's books.

[zenmaster]

Larson developed his entire body of knowledge by deriving equations to describe the Universe instead of using any evidence at all. He only used scientific evidence to verify his results. I think that was what attracted Don to Larson's books.

This is a little misleading as Larson's initial development was indeed inductive. This period spanned maybe 20 years alone. He simply did not publish until he had a 'system of theory' that allowed the deductive, or axiomatic approach. Many readers criticize Larson for not including any info on this inductive work, becaused they feel it would've helped them understand the thought process supporting some of his conclusions. Larson was keenly aware of the customary method of explanation, but felt his purely deductive approach was ideal.