The creation of energy

[arthur hamlin]

My dowsing says that as we are all made in Gods image it is likely that we have some of his attributes.
These attributes I believe relate to energies for healing work. It is known for instance that a healer can be worn out at the end of a healing session and many will say that he/she has used their own energy for this task when it is known that one needs to channel it from source.

[ledgehammer]

And what you use as a definition is not my idea of what process necessarily means!
Semantics are really getting in the way here...
Tom- maybe you can expand on the process concept?

In the meantime:

proc·ess
[pros-es; especially British proh-ses] Show IPA noun, plural proc·ess·es [pros-es-iz, ‐uh-siz, ‐uh-seez or, esp. British, proh-ses‐, proh-suh‐] Show IPA , verb, adjective
noun
1.
a systematic series of actions directed to some end: to devise a process for homogenizing milk.
2.
a continuous action, operation, or series of changes taking place in a definite manner: the process of decay.
3.
Law.
a.
the summons, mandate, or writ by which a defendant or thing is brought before court for litigation.
b.
the whole course of the proceedings in an action at law.
4.
Photography . photomechanical or photoengraving methods collectively.
5.
Biology, Anatomy . a natural outgrowth, projection, or appendage: a process of a bone.

Taken from dictionary.com and here is the link

Simon,

sorry haven't been able to respond as quickly as I have wished,

I see it as such:

The universe is a process, a continuing process - it is difficult to quantify as we are involved as such. But I suggest all of us here take a minute and imaging you are not involved in the process, I have excersizes in my book describing it as do others. Imagine you are outside of the universe looking in, (no semantics required). Please, you have to be able to do this to even comprehend the ideas taking place here. Imagine the universe is a ball and you are not involved, ask to see it and the way it interacts with itself, and hopefully observe it in some context. Now having accepted this, try and see how it works, there is NO END, and NO BEGINNING. hence I use the term process, now the physical will start and end e.t.c, but this CANNOT be the only process going on here so I directed my questions towards this, and now I admit I do not have the full ins and outs , but this is a rational conclusion surely.

So surely the next logical step is to define things within this context for the purposes of debate, hence the physical world and the unphysical world, i.e the energy we are describing, now as being as part of the process I am sure you can do wonderful things : but these are part of the same process as you are in fact part of the process as I am SURE your dowsing will confirm, any isolation within this is purely your context within the process?

The word process is irrelevant, as are any other words here, it is merely used to describe something which is going on, and if you take all of the words away guess what the process still continues whether it is a scientific word or not?

I am using words that I was taught as others have been taught in a faint hope that we can all use these words and language to describe what is in fact very difficult to describe as no words have been made to correspond, i like others have seen things and have attempted to voice this, and surely this is the point, not the words?

I think there is more so I will quote accordingly

best

Tom

[ledgehammer]

Tom: 1.Does the physical universe have a fixed mass?

2.Does this fixed mass contain a type of energy, where energy is life force of all living things?

3.Is this energy Infinite?

Firstly...the problem with #2 is that it assumes the response to #1 is "Yes".
My dowsing says:
1. No
2. Ignoring the notion of "fixed mass", the answer was Yes.
3. Yes. And no.

To back up a bit...and responding to the 3 sections/questions Tom puts:

1. If energy manifests in different states (cf solid, gas, liquid) then the notion of "physical" needs to be explored. For example, is healing energy a physical phenomenon- or is it that the energy used/channeled is a catalyst for physical change and is, in itself, not physical matter? If it isn't, what is it? And where does it come from? And where does Time fit in? Are there other universes where our "rules of physics" are completely different? (Dowsed- "yes"). Can we in any way interact with them? (Dowsed- "yes")

2. Thoughts and emotions may contribute to the "fixed mass of the physical universe"- or not!
Where is this "Life Force" contained within the fixed mass? ("Contained" is the word Tom uses...I'm unhappy with the concept of energy being contained)
Does the physical mass actually fluctuate and move like a liquid....in which case it is constantly changing...what are the implications of this?
Are there other energies beyond what Tom describes as "Life Force" (Dowsed- yes")

3. I cannot explain this! My dowsing responses show both at the same time....both infinite and finite. But I did ask the question, "Does this apparently contradictory response mean 'does it depend upon what we mean by energy'"...and I got "yes". So- back where we started, perhaps!

Simon,

great stuff!!! :-)

The universe does not have a fixed mass, so should the energy within the universe be included in this ?

It depend on how you view the universe, but the more open minded (as well as scientists) will agree that the universe is basically energy.

(I find that in fact the physical and the spiritual/heaven are in fact the same thing to those who are able to perceive as such, the physical protects us from the spiritual as a result of us and nothing more - can you guys dowse this please as I think its relevant)

What is infinite, because energy can be ascribed as infinite, If you see the process i.e it will continue and potentially be infinite, but something which is infinite cannot be contained by something which is finite?. The infinite part means that a it will keep going, nothing is lost (if we are to perceive this as a whole i.e as a process, or lets try the word "system").

I find that in fact we are limited (mostly) by the physical signals and information we receive, which I see as a finite process i.e limiting, but i have seen potential which seems to be infinite, and we have access to such as does the universe, and as such this seems infinite to me (I should probably abandon this concept as it is a belief which I have always had)

Best

Tom

[ledgehammer]

My dowsing says that as we are all made in Gods image it is likely that we have some of his attributes.
These attributes I believe relate to energies for healing work. It is known for instance that a healer can be worn out at the end of a healing session and many will say that he/she has used their own energy for this task when it is known that one needs to channel it from source.

Arthur,

scientists will state that the molecules we are made up of are similar to that of the universe, in this way are we not aspects of the universe (on a lesser scale physically), but nothing to say we are not capable potentially!

i gave the example, a healer will feel depleted after healing work (I was told that they shouldn't continue if it meant being lesser than after). This may mean that after such a transfer they may feel weaker, not necessarily the case, but i have taken healers word as such, as I am not a healer, so Im going to have to rely on others here.

Do you perhaps think that after you have performed work e.t.c, perhaps you are given the authority to use this energy like it is second nature, I am not seeing anything here that tells me that you are outside of the process, and that you are creating the energy, this would indicate to me that you are functioning as either a separate entity to the universe or perhaps you are lucky enough to have ascended into a situation where perhaps you are becoming a universe yourself (not as crazy as it sounds)

Best

Tom

[arthur hamlin]

Tom Thanks,
Now both Geoff and I believe that as this is a dowsing forum site that dowsing is mentioned somewhere to indicate our answers are coming from the sources we have. With respect I do not see this in many replies here and am led to believe that your input is a belief rather than dowsed information.
Scientists will talk about molecules but they will never talk about the etheric counterpart as this is where they lose out and will not get the fuller picture.
I am not sure whether your last paragraph has much significance to the general thread here. I only believe that when we climb a ladder either physically or spiritually our vision and understanding etc is improved. Like darts players their accuracy improves over time if their interest is sustained. With me its dowsing many times a day. I even get a pat on my chest with my own hands being used when I say thank you for the energies that make up the food in front of me.

[simonwheeler]

Arthur: I only believe that when we climb a ladder either physically or spiritually our vision and understanding etc is improved.

..... and am led to believe that your input is a belief rather than dowsed information.

????

You are making assumptions, Arthur. I suggest many of us here dowse regularly and just because we don't mention this in every post, it doesn't mean our answers are any the less valid.

By the way,

Arthur: both Geoff and I believe that as this is a dowsing forum site that dowsing is mentioned somewhere

....last I saw this Forum was for anybody with an interest in dowsing and is sponsored/run by/provided by the BSD- not by you and Geoff.

[ledgehammer]

Tom Thanks,
Now both Geoff and I believe that as this is a dowsing forum site that dowsing is mentioned somewhere to indicate our answers are coming from the sources we have. With respect I do not see this in many replies here and am led to believe that your input is a belief rather than dowsed information.
Scientists will talk about molecules but they will never talk about the etheric counterpart as this is where they lose out and will not get the fuller picture.
I am not sure whether your last paragraph has much significance to the general thread here. I only believe that when we climb a ladder either physically or spiritually our vision and understanding etc is improved. Like darts players their accuracy improves over time if their interest is sustained. With me its dowsing many times a day. I even get a pat on my chest with my own hands being used when I say thank you for the energies that make up the food in front of me.

Arthur,

much / most of what I understand comes from techniques, one of those techniques is dowsing, I use other techniques, but I see dowsing as sometimes taking the long way round. Sometimes I have the vivid sensation when dowsing to not dowse, as I do not need to dowse, sometimes the yearn for knowledge can influence the potential information coming through.

If you would like I can add a string to my text informing you on specifically dowsed answers, but this would be a pain so please don't request this unless it has a genuine benefit.

I find often at ancient sites it almost disrespectful by dowsing, and honestly I can get this - I mean it like your being prodded and poked by something, (not too dissimilar to an invasion), I find this even upon asking. Sometimes in the woods I just know that the area is not to be dowsed, this doesnt stop me contemplating , feeling, smelling and understanding what I am wintnessing and involved in, and experiencing it in a positive context : I just know that it is disrespectfull in that instance to dowse , do any work which maybe doesnt need to be done.

With some of my comments Arthur, they are not to be taken literally, they are tools to explain what i am explaining, I will go back through and ensure i was clear (i did have a few drinks last night)

best

Tom

[ledgehammer]

My dowsing says that as we are all made in Gods image it is likely that we have some of his attributes.
These attributes I believe relate to energies for healing work. It is known for instance that a healer can be worn out at the end of a healing session and many will say that he/she has used their own energy for this task when it is known that one needs to channel it from source.

Arthur,

scientists will state that the molecules we are made up of are similar to that of the universe, in this way are we not aspects of the universe (on a lesser scale physically), but nothing to say we are not capable potentially!

i gave the example, a healer will feel depleted after healing work (I was told that they shouldn't continue if it meant being lesser than after). This may mean that after such a transfer they may feel weaker, not necessarily the case, but i have taken healers word as such, as I am not a healer, so Im going to have to rely on others here.

Do you perhaps think that after you have performed work e.t.c, perhaps you are given the authority to use this energy like it is second nature, I am not seeing anything here that tells me that you are outside of the process, and that you are creating the energy, this would indicate to me that you are functioning as either a separate entity to the universe or perhaps you are lucky enough to have ascended into a situation where perhaps you are becoming a universe yourself (not as crazy as it sounds)

Best

Tom

My point is here with the scientists, : scientists are not wrong, they are only allowing themselves to see a confirmed part of reality, confirmed by anyone, in every instance, i.e repeatable. Now we have seen that this is not the case, it is not as black and white as that, but if even scientists can state that there are striking similarities with us as individuals and the universe, I find this compelling.

Now, individually you have your own context within the universe, a specific connection between you and x, and science can help with this - but as you become more accepting of this process (i.e a personal connection with x), your connection becomes more specific and less "scientific" i.e it becomes a lot less relevant to everybody else.

I have asked for help in the past Arthur, and I was very grateful and I have no doubt you, Geoff and others are doing the things that your dowsing responses are stating, but if you rephrased the question while accepting my viewpoints as "possible", I suspect you would get similar answers. because you are phrasing the question with the understanding that things that you see start and end i.e they are finite then you will not get that energy came from a transition before you were aware of it i.e at the point of what you would call creation, what I would call transfer.

Hope this explains it ...

either way I have no hangover !

Best

Tom

[arthur hamlin]

e: The creation of energy
by simonwheeler » Sat Feb 02, 2013 10:00 am

Arthur: I only believe that when we climb a ladder either physically or spiritually our vision and understanding etc is improved.


..... and am led to believe that your input is a belief rather than dowsed information.


????

You are making assumptions, Arthur. I suggest many of us here dowse regularly and just because we don't mention this in every post, it doesn't mean our answers are any the less valid.

By the way,
Arthur: both Geoff and I believe that as this is a dowsing forum site that dowsing is mentioned somewhere

....last I saw this Forum was for anybody with an interest in dowsing and is sponsored/run by/provided by the BSD- not by you and Geoff.




Or you Simon

[ledgehammer]

Its sad how we turn to conflict instead of answering the questions that we have the answers to,

In Simons Defence he was supporting me, and in yours Arthur you are defending your corner, both admirable standings:-)

Arthur:

I promise I am not trying to demeen or attack you , merely attempting to learn from you , and understand : this is essential for me, and dowse please if you wish if you disbelieve.

All:

please can you respond to the three posts I posted, I genuinely think we were getting somewhere, unsure as to why we have de-railed...

Best

Tom

[simonwheeler]

Maybe this gives a clue as to

Tom: why we have de-railed...

Thank you for the "defence", Tom! You are right- I am, like you, trying to understand what is a complex, abstract and maybe fundamental concept. By exchanging ideas...based on what another poster writes...there is a hope that we can move forward. Nobody here has all the answers. Nobody is "better" than anybody else. It may be that by examining a topic our own beliefs and theories are challenged. Or confirmed. But by failing to engage in an attempt to dialogue, and to understand, we are limiting not only our own involvement and advancement in understanding, we are just reinforcing our own prejudices or maintaining our own ignorance.
One of the joys- as well as disadvantages- of such a Forum is that people from an eclectic mix of backgrounds, education, experience, interests etc., can meet and "verbally spar" in order to try to reach an acceptable commonality of: either agreement or willingness to openly disagree; understanding or agreement to remain bewildered; or maybe just throw out ideas and problems in the hope that somebody else will pick up on them and help move us all forward.

I was intrigued by Geoff's question:

Scientists maintain that energy can neither be created not destroyed. Does that theory include mental energy when used for healing and other purposes, e.g. thought forms ?

so responded to it. As did you.
Hillary joined in:

Dowsing that physical energy can be destroyed by channelled mental energy i.e. cancer cells.

(Then no more from her....)
Arthur added things.
Amidst all this, Geoff & Tom & I have been grappling with tricky matters that have been getting more entangled as we go along so that, reading through the whole of this thread we seem to have covered much ground and raised far more questions than can possibly be answered. Maybe we are, inadvertantly, heading towards trying to establish a "theory of everything"?!!

May I suggest that Geoff, as the starter of this thread, considers whether or not to try to get us back on track?
A summary, from somebody, would be useful; I don't know about anyone else, but it seems we may be bogged down and/or lost!

[ledgehammer]

Maybe this gives a clue as to

Tom: why we have de-railed...

Thank you for the "defence", Tom! You are right- I am, like you, trying to understand what is a complex, abstract and maybe fundamental concept. By exchanging ideas...based on what another poster writes...there is a hope that we can move forward. Nobody here has all the answers. Nobody is "better" than anybody else. It may be that by examining a topic our own beliefs and theories are challenged. Or confirmed. But by failing to engage in an attempt to dialogue, and to understand, we are limiting not only our own involvement and advancement in understanding, we are just reinforcing our own prejudices or maintaining our own ignorance.
One of the joys- as well as disadvantages- of such a Forum is that people from an eclectic mix of backgrounds, education, experience, interests etc., can meet and "verbally spar" in order to try to reach an acceptable commonality of: either agreement or willingness to openly disagree; understanding or agreement to remain bewildered; or maybe just throw out ideas and problems in the hope that somebody else will pick up on them and help move us all forward.

I was intrigued by Geoff's question:

Scientists maintain that energy can neither be created not destroyed. Does that theory include mental energy when used for healing and other purposes, e.g. thought forms ?

so responded to it. As did you.
Hillary joined in:

Dowsing that physical energy can be destroyed by channelled mental energy i.e. cancer cells.

(Then no more from her....)
Arthur added things.
Amidst all this, Geoff & Tom & I have been grappling with tricky matters that have been getting more entangled as we go along so that, reading through the whole of this thread we seem to have covered much ground and raised far more questions than can possibly be answered. Maybe we are, inadvertantly, heading towards trying to establish a "theory of everything"?!!

May I suggest that Geoff, as the starter of this thread, considers whether or not to try to get us back on track?
A summary, from somebody, would be useful; I don't know about anyone else, but it seems we may be bogged down and/or lost!

Simon,

you're a whizz with this site and its many intricacies :-)

Ah yes, (takes a small step back) perhaps unfortunately in the desire to learn we have shunned the original thought and person. Knowing that this was unintentional hopes that as you say we can get back :-) and.... sorry Geoff

Simon, everything in my life points to this excitement that I have somehow a unique opportunity to offer my own answers in reference to "theory of everything" unfortunately, this means that most of the time I am speaking in too general a term and this is probably where the conversations get heated. I also get that the conclusions I am reaching are so personal, its difficult for anyone else to comprehend - like you said : no more right than anyone else , and I should clarify this reading back at my texts and the way i have worded, I can only try to work on this - channelling this excitement and passion to learn can appear domineering to others, and the last thing i want is a perception that this is the case.

I still hold to what i say as it is what i have experienced (and dowsed), and this must has some befit to everyone else (the trick in life is to get benefits from everything, even negative things, in the way in which we use the information... i.e everything is a tool which can be used to enhance ones understanding)

I get on further dowsing, quantification (I love that word!) that the energy which Geoff is speaking of is different in some way, and as i see this as a progression from something deeper, a transformation if you like. I believe Geoff, is able to summon this energy and seemingly change it in a way in which potential becomes actual, and this is a gift to never be underestimated (it is also something I am unable to do, on that level)..

so potato , potata... i think my desire to explain something deep has sidetracked us from Geoffs original point.

I hope that clarifies this

Best

Tom

[Geoff Stuttaford]

(Simon) May I suggest that Geoff, as the starter of this thread, considers whether or not to try to get us back on track?

I will have a go at this, Simon. It would seen that, from my appreciation of the situation, we have reached a conclusion that mental energy should be termed “Mental Power” which could be a different form of energy from that which is channelled via the Universe.

I would suggest that a definition of Mental Power is that which is generated (created) by the mind of a person using Intent for specific purposes that cannot be achieved by the use of channelled Universal energy.

So, to answer the original question, I dowse that the energy that scientists refer to cannot be created or destroyed but there are other kinds of energies, in the form of mental power, that can be used to create and/or eliminate certain conditions that I have listed previously in this thread. The following comments from Tom would seem to bear this out.


(Tom) “I get on further dowsing, quantification (I love that word!) that the energy which Geoff is speaking of is different in some way, and as i see this as a progression from something deeper, a transformation if you like. I believe Geoff, is able to summon this energy and seemingly change it in a way in which potential becomes actual, and this is a gift to never be underestimated (it is also something I am unable to do, on that level).”

The only comment I would make is that I do not regard it as a “gift”. I have dowsed that, like many other people I know, our abilities in this particular field are the results of training we have received, mostly by shamans, in previous incarnations. I am presently training 11 local people to use this metaphysical technique and have been in contact with several others, world wide, who also use it. Whether you believe that the technique exists or not, or whether it is a form of energy or not, is up to you.

My source cannot answer the further questions that Tom asks because not even they know the answers !

[simonwheeler]

Thank you, Geoff!

Geoff: It would seen that, from my appreciation of the situation, we have reached a conclusion that mental energy should be termed “Mental Power” which could be a different form of energy from that which is channelled via the Universe.

I concur- for the purposes of this thread, anyway.

Geoff:I would suggest that a definition of Mental Power is that which is generated (created) by the mind of a person using Intent for specific purposes that cannot be achieved by the use of channelled Universal energy.

I'm not so sure, here. I am starting to wonder if by Mental Power we actually mean "intent".

Geoff: So, to answer the original question, I dowse that the energy that scientists refer to cannot be created or destroyed but there are other kinds of energies, in the form of mental power, that can be used to create and/or eliminate certain conditions that I have listed previously in this thread.

Now we seem to be getting to the nub of the issue.
I'm unclear about what is meant by "the energy that scientists refer to". A nuclear physicist might mean energy from fission whereas a chemist might mean energy created by mixing two chemicals together. The commonality here would be that in both cases the energy can be measured- maybe perceived in some way(s) (explosion, bubbles); also that the scientists would want empirical evidence- so the experiments would be repeated and produce the same observable results. This form of energy is transforming...producing observable and repeatable changes in physical matter.

The "other forms of energies" are more esoteric (hidden). I suspect that these are the energies of which we write here. And using Mental Power (that is, intent) we can work with these energies. As Hillary says- using intent to channel energy to destroy disease. Or maybe using intent (Mental Power) to move earth energy (whatever that is!) that may be proving harmful. Or, shamanistically, to temporarily inhabit the body of another creature. Or to have a premonition. Or work as a medium. These energies, too, are transforming.

And just as physical matter can exist in various states (solid, liquid, gaseous), so can esoteric energies- but they may not be states with which we are familiar. However, we can "piggyback" on them.

And, maybe, where the physical and esoteric energies meet (sorry to use these expressions, but it's all I have for now) is where the dowser works.

Am I getting near, Geoff?! Tom?

[Geoff Stuttaford]

Simon" m I getting near, Geoff?! Tom?

In my opinion, Yes. Dowsing, I get Yes as well ! Very nicely put.