My contact with ufo's

Subject: fs1 - Contact with UFO's

My Contact with UFO's by Dino Kraspedon chapter one

Preface to this second edition Introduction A Pleasant Surprise.

God Matter and Energy

Overcoming Gravity

Authors Note

Astro Navigation

Sundry Topics

Olaf Roemers Experiments

The Aberation of light

Man wasted Efforts

The atomic danger

of 10Message

7/7/2008file://F:\IAeSR\BOOKS_Science\PDFs_PS_docs\PATENTS\DISCOID AIRCRAFT-UFO's...

Life on other worlds

Farewell and Conclusion

DEDICATION

To all those who fought, and are fighting, for the progress of ideas, against the

bitter criticism and injured pride of their contemporaries, in a desire to create a

better world: not for themselves, but in order to lighten the burden of life for

future generations

"I am surprised that scientists of Earth should continue to put their trust in

their false science, in spite of all its errors they have so far been unable to

rectify, and to deny the supreme science which is God They are like glow-worms

enamoured of their own light, crying out to other glow-worms, The Sun does not

exist; the light in my tail is the only light there is'"

(The Captain of the Flying Saucer)

Preface to Second Edition

WHEN we wrote this book we had not expected so rapid a confirmation of many of our

affirmations. A month after the first edition had come off the press a Dutchman

announced that he had been in contact with beings from Venus who informed him that

another Sun would come into our planetary system, which is in accord with what we

wrote. A Professor of Roman Law at the Catholic university of Santos said he had

been in contact with the crew of a flying saucer, and his story is similar to ours,

including details of the system of propulsion by the creation of a vacuum, which no

one had mentioned before this book was published. Counties like the U.S.A. and

Great Britain published the results of their researches and announced that they

hoped to construct interplanetary craft using ionisation as a means of propulsion

similar to that described in this book.

We have said that gravity is a combination of phenomena in which the atmosphere

plays a large part and beyond which one is almost entirely free from gravity. We

showed that all objects have the same rate of fall in a vacuum which disproves

Newton's law as it shows that the mass of the objects is attracted by the vertical,

component of magnetism. Many "boffins" would be highly amused at this, but the

success of the sputniks shows there is some truth in what we have said.

The Reds announced that they had launched an artificial satellite weighing 86 kg.

whereas the Americans, obstinately clinging to the laws of gravity and relativity,

doubted the truth of the Soviet announcement, having calculated that only a

satellite of 5kg. could maintain itself in orbit.

The Soviets replied by saying that not only was there an 86 kg. satellite in orbit,

but that the third stage of the carrier rocket had, contrary to expectations, also

gone into orbit round the Earth; and the rocket weighing much more than the

satellite. The theory of gravitation is therefore a non sequitur.

At this height, free of the atmosphere and subject only to a small proportion of

the vertical component of magnetism, the satellite becomes more subject to its

horizontal component and moves at a certain speed corresponding to the relation

between its mass and the magnetic impulse. As magnetic lines of force describe a

circular path around the planet, both these bodies launched into space went into

orbit round us.

of 10Message


We should have been happy to have received even the smallest scientific

confirmation, let alone this wealth of proof which has accumulated in so short a

time.

It was apparently not God's will that proof should be lacking, as even the Soviets

have declared that planets are repelled by the light of the Sun and not attracted

by it.

This statement is to be found in our book, and we can go so far as to say that it

is the backbone of the system we have described.

We could make a long list of all the proofs such as observations of aurorae,

properties of electrons, etc., but it would tire the reader's patience as he would

have read about these himself in the Press. We would, however, like to publish a

letter from the U.S.S.R. addressed to one of our scientific friends:

Please note I was unable to convert the Russian script for the address (web editor)

Moscow, 26th September, 1957

Dear Sir~

We have your letter, together with your book My Contact with Flying Saucers which

we have passed on to the astronomical section of the Academy of Sciences of the

U.S.S.R. (Bolshaya Gruzinskaya St. 10), asking them to reply directly to you. We

are of the opinion that Soviet astronomers will be very interested in the work of

their Brazilian colleagues.

Sincerely,

(signed) Constantin Chugunov.

(Head of the American Department of Voks).

We would like to point out that our friend, who shall remain anonymous, sent a copy

of this book to a friend of his in Russia without asking for any comment from the

Academy of Sciences. He only wanted to show that the West was taking some interest

in flying saucers. Being a scientist and not wishing to give the Russians the

impression that he was a raving lunatic, he told his Soviet friend that our book

was in the nature of space fiction and was a sample of a new type of Western

literature. However, the Head of Voks, who is also a scientist, when he had taken

note of the problem, passed it on for study by the greatest academy of science in

the world. Surely the Reds are not idiots. Why should they waste their time

studying a work of fiction? Could it be that they found something more in it than

light reading?

The book was sent off in June and as early as October the U.S.S.R. published the

results of its researches on the effect of the repulsion of solar light Far be it

from us to say that the fruits of the Soviet scientists' researches were based on

this book, but we are in any case grateful for the moral support which we have

derived from them. If they accept our scientific theories, may they not forget to

take note of our ethical conclusions also. May their hearts ponder on the humanist

and religious aspects as fully as their minds have worked on the scientific ones.

The deference that has been shown to our book by cultural institutions in the

U.S.S.R. is flattering to us and should help to call our authorities' attention not

of 10Message


to the book itself, but to the whole subject of flying saucers.

If they are loath to follow the Soviet example, they should at least take note of

the desperate attempts that the Americans are making to obtain all possible

information about flying saucers, which border, in certain cases, on the

unscrupulous. This does not apply only to the Americans, but to the Russians as

well.

Many people have attacked us and even those who believe in the existence of flying

saucers are subjected to invective by the incredulous. We have disregarded them and

not taken offence. It is not us they are attacking, but Truth, and this, whatever

they may say now, will one day triumph. They can no more deter us with insults than

pebbles can stop an advancing wave. The wave of Truth will one day break over them

and submerge them.

Dmo Kraspedon

Sao Paulo. November 1957.

INTRODUCTION

THE events which are described in this book have been kept secret since November

1952.

We wanted at all costs to keep quiet about them for fear of the criticism of people

who believe only in an Earthly life and who could not credit the existence of other

human beings in the solar system capable of reasoning in scientific terminology as

good as, if not better than, our own.

This does not mean to say that our believing in the existence of other inhabited

worlds beyond this nutshell in space, of which we are so proud, is just an act of

faith; we are convinced that it is highly probable that life is not just an

accident that happened to a globe with no special attributes, as ours is.

If this is a reasonable premise, then it is also equally possible that there should

be an exchange of scientific, spiritual and other ideas between planets. Such

exchanges between the inhabitants of other worlds who have been able to free

themselves from the shackles that still bind the feet of proud homo sapiens are

probably at a higher level than we can conceive of, and for reasons that are beyond

our imagination.

In spite of our self-imposed silence, we were on one occasion asked to take part in

a reunion at the residence of one of our generals where a young lad was to give an

account of a strange journey which he had made to a distant planet with the crew of

a flying saucer.

In order to give some moral support to the lad and put him at easer we told him

some of the things that had happened to us, with the result that everybody wanted

to know the rest of the story. We gave them some of the facts and remained silent

about others which we did not consider relevant at the time.

It is, however, difficult for a man to keep quiet about flying saucers, especially

when someone else is holding forth about them.

of 10Message


Within a short time we were being pressed from all sides to tell the whole story,

which we had to repeat a number of times. We gave an account of fragments of it, so

as not to impose on our host, but our attempts to cut the story short merely

aroused greater interest. A certain gentleman who spent most of his time arguing

with people who had seen saucers, and to whom we had confided a few things,

promised faithfully not to pass them on. A few days later he invited us to visit a

friend of his.

When we arrived, thinking that it was an ordinary social call, we were met by about

forty people' who had been "specially" invited to hear us. We were surprised that

this topic, which holds so much interest for the world, should have been handled so

indiscreetly. As we did not wish to appear discourteous to our hosts, we invented

some fairy stories about flying saucers which passed the time and gave full rein to

our sense of humour. It was an amusing evening.

We mention this to show the reader that we never did have, nor have, any desire for

publicity; the publication of this book has been brought upon us by force of

circumstance. We had many cash offers for the story which we always declined in

spite of our abject poverty.

This book does not contain all the information we received,

but represents a resume of it. There are certain things which we considered it our

duty to withhold, partly in accordance with our informant's wishes, and partly on

our own judgment. Furthermore, there are other things which we intend to publish in

a separate book which do not really come within the scope of a work for the general

public, such as this one.

We have also withheld the details of our first meeting with the flying saucers, as

it was our sole intention to make known the viewpoints of the people that man these

mysterious craft.

We wished thereby to avoid relating minor details which others have already done to

good effect.

As far as was possible we have avoided bringing in religious questions, since an

invasion of a territory reserved for those properly ordained might well appear as

an impertinence on our part.

If we have here and there made reference to religion, it is because we have been

forced to do so and because we did not wish the subject to suffer as a result of

our being too unwilling to risk the possibility of treading on other people's toes.

The remarks in this book do not imply that we disdain the honest efforts made by

our scientists and the sincere efforts of thousands of research workers bent over

test tubes and various apparatus in search of the unknown, and to whom we, in fact,

owe what well-being we enjoy, and the little enlightenment that is left to us. We

respect their efforts and hold them in highest regard.

We are certain that if errors or omissions have crept into science it is not due to

bad faith on the part of the scientists, who have dedicated their lives to the

search for true knowledge.

The thing that appals us is that the long hours, the sacrifice of lives, and all

the efforts of thousands of inquiring minds which only had the common good in view

should have been diverted by pseudo-scientists towards the destruction of this

humanity which produced so many geniuses and which is held in such high esteem by

of 10Message


the truly wise.

We do not attack science as such, but only those who pervert it. Those who dedicate

themselves to the nefarious task of destroying human life no longer have the right

to call themselves scientists. It would be an insult to Newton, Galileo, Fleming,

Laplace, Kepler, Lagrange, Hertz and all those others to include among their number

the bloodthirsty individual responsible for letting off atomic bombs over Hiroshima

and Nagasaki. Pascal would turn in his grave if he should one day be compared with

the individual who produced the" G" gas.

It is possible for anyone to make a correct observation, yet draw false

conclusions from it. Newton thwarted progress in the field of optics for about a

century merely because he drew a wrong conclusion, but nobody could blame him for

it, or doubt his good faith. Aristotle's philosophical theories blocked the path of

human knowledge for several centuries, but he was honest with himself and his

fellow beings. We could say the same for a great many others in all branches of

knowledge where the flash of genius was accompanied by tremendous mistakes.

But we pay our respects to those whose only motivating interest was honesty and

love of science, and do not dwell on the mistakes they were in some way or other

responsible for, bound as they were by the limited knowledge of their times and a

false appreciation of Nature's laws.

Everything is forgivable in man within the concept of perfection which we hold.

What he can never be forgiven is wilful wrongdoing and the abuse of knowledge

endangering the life and most cherished aspirations of his less enlightened and

intelligent fellow beings.

Nor does this book intend to refute other works which have dealt with the question

of flying saucers, and which describe different types and different principles from

those shown by us. We know that even on one planet there are men of various types

ranging from black to white, from pigmy to giant.

We believe these other stories, for we believe in other people's honesty.

We have confined ourselves to repeating what we heard. It is obvious that the words

printed here are not the very ones which the captain of the flying saucer spoke.

Even if we had taken them down verbatim, we still could not reproduce the whole

message. We have, however, tried to simplif3r matters, and used the same reasoning

and the same logic as our informant, albeit a lamentably poor imitation, in an

attempt to bring out the spirit of his replies rather than his actual words.

If we should later receive confirmation of the ideas put forward, perhaps this book

will be looked upon as having contributed something to the unravelling of the

mystery of the so-called" Unidentified Flying Objects." If, however, they are not

confirmed, we lay ourselves open to charges of misrepresentation.

We are fully aware of the risks we run, if it turns out that we have been victims

of a cruel deception, but we remain undaunted.

However, the last thing we -want to do is to give the impression that we are in any

way better than the next man, or that we have vast knowledge with which to

contradict everything that scientists have proclaimed to date. We do not wish to

resemble that glow-worm which the captain of the flying saucer referred to, who was

so proud of his own light endowed by Nature, that he cried out to all the other

glow-worms:

of 10Message


The sun does not exist because the only light there is is the one I carry in my

tail.

Dino Kraspedon

A Pleasant Surprise

The doorbell rang three times. My wife came and told me that there was a parson at

the door who wanted to speak to me.

"What does he want?" I asked apprehensively.

"I don't know, but it looks as if he wants to preach at you, replied my wife.

Almost every Sunday Protestant parsons, or ordinary preachers, would come along to

preach at us or try to convert us to their belief. As, at that time, I was an

atheist in the widest sense of the word, I hated long biblical dissertations and,

in fact, had an aversion to anything that smacked of religion.

We won't be able to go out with the children now," I remarked.

"No, I suppose we won't," said my wife," but never mind, if we don't go today,

we'll go another day."

"It's not fair that the children should miss their walk. The will have to go out

after lunch by themselves."

I had a good mind to tell the parson I could not see him, but then decided that he

was probably quite harmless. After all, he was only coming to see if he could get

me into heaven. I went downstairs far from pleased, but maintained an air of

politeness, and managed to put on a smile.

Sitting downstairs, however, I found a well-dressed man in a good cashmere suit

which fitted his athletic body perfectly. As a rule priests dress unostentatiously,

but this one was singularly well turned out. He had a white shirt with a stiff

collar, and a blue tie with white geometrical patterns. His shoes did not look as

if they had been worn for more than a month or two.

My attention was drawn to the fine weave of his gloves, and I remembered where I

had seen this type of glove before. As I came face to face with him, I almost lost

my voice with surprise; I recognised him as the captain of a flying saucer.

In November 1952 I was touring with a friend in the State of Sao Paulo. On reaching

the top of the Angatuba range coming up from Parana, we were confronted by five

saucers hovering in the air. It was a rainy day and visibility was had.

I went back to the same spot later and spent thee days and nights there in the hope

of seeing a saucer again. On the last night, after a series of episodes which we

will not go into here for fear of digression, a saucer landed and we were given the

chance of going inside it and meeting its crew.

We stayed on board for about an hour looking at the various pieces of equipment in

the machine. The captain was kind enough to explain how they all worked. At the end

of our visit, this fascinating individual promised to come and see us as soon as he

was able. And now, four or five months later, he had come as romised.

of 10Message


"Your surprise is quite understandable," he said, getting up from the armchair and

extending his hand, "but I have come to return your visit to my craft. I have come,

not only because I promised, but because I very much wanted to have the pleasure of

seeing you again."

"I feel I hardly deserve such a gracious gesture on your part, especially as I have

nothing to offer you but the hand of friendship."

"If you were to offer me the whole Earth, but not the hand of friendship, it would

be worth nothing. Only friendship has real value. I accept it with gratitude as I

have come to offer you the same thing: my hand of friendship.

Please excuse me for having presented myself as a parson, but you must realise that

your wife would be very disturbed if she knew the truth."

"It was a harmless subterfuge," I reassured him, "and I am grateful to you for it;

my wife would certainly be unhappy if she one day thought her husband was mixed up

in some subversive activity in partnership with a foreign agent who passed himself

off as a gentleman wandering about in space.

"In fact I had never believed that flying saucers were extraterrestrial. The whole

thing appeared to me as a deception on the part of people of Earth, presenting

themselves as beings from another world, and exploiting humanity's vague desire to

know that there is other human life within the solar system, in order better to

carry on some nefarious activity or other.'

My visitor merely smiled. "I assure you," he said, "that your suspicions are

groundless, but there is no doubt that it your duty to be on your guard against

possible deception. Or thing is certain however; if I were a foreign agent I show

long since have conquered the Earth, and you would have pa dearly for your

curiosity which led you into my craft."

At this point my wife came in with the children. She told me that lunch was ready

and that the "parson" was welcome to eat with us. She would be going out and would

not be back until the evening.

During lunch I wanted to try out my guest's linguistic ability to see whether he

would betray his origin by his accent. I started off by discussing the Christian

religion and asked him if he could tell me the first words of the Old Testament in

Hebrew, to which he replied promptly and without the slightest hesitation or

embarrassment, "Bereshith bara Elohim,"*1 and proceeded to recite a lengthy

passage.

I continued the discussion in the same vein without letting him know that he was

being put through his paces. At one point I pretended to be day-dreaming and began

reciting "hodie si audieritis vocem meam.. " and asked him how it went on. He

continued .... . nollite obdurare corda vestra."

*1 In the beginning God created.

2 Today if ye will hear my voice.., harden not your hearts (Heb. 3:vii-viii).

Continuing on the same lines I said " nollite putare quoniarn veni solvere lege aut

prophet.. .", he completed it for me, "non veni solvere sed adimplere."~

I spoke to him later in English and Greek and he answered me m each language

perfectly. Not only was he a linguist, but it was obvious from what he said that he

of 10Message


was extremely erudite, giving dates and places of historical events and the names

of the principal figures involved. Only once in a while would his interpretation of

events be slightly at variance with our orthodox point of view.

English was the only language he appeared to have any difficulty with at all,

nevertheless his ability to discuss the most varied topics in that language amazed

me.

When we returned to the sitting-room I decided to try to find out what his

scientific knowledge was like; it is one thing to be able to discourse on history

and religion and to have the gift of languages, but it is quite another thing to be

able to talk on scientific subjects. Obviously when talking about science he should

not only show he possessed all the knowledge that we have, but he should also be

able to present something more advanced, If he could not do so, this would prove

him to be nothing more than an inhabitant of this planet. Nobody makes up

scientific theories on the spot unless he is a genius or unless they do not hold

water.

What is your name?" I asked him.

"I have no name in your sense of the word. On my planet names are a picture of the

character of the individual. Though them we know a person's merits and

shortcomings, even if he is unknown to us. Our names are based on a combination of

sounds which would be unintelligible to you, for whom one name is as good as

another. Today I have one name, and if tomorrow I should be wiser or better, I

should have a different one, and so on."

*3 Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets: I am not come to

destroy, but to fulfil (Matthew ~: xvii).

"I see. Well, tell me, then, where do you come from?"

"I come from a satellite of Jupiter."

"From which satellite?"

"Not from any one in particular. Sometimes I live on Ganymede, and sometimes on Io,

just as you move around from one city to another."

"But I have heard that men from other planets are diminutive, but you are tall-over

six foot How do you explain this?" I asked him with the object of embarrassing him.

"We are not all diminutive. On the same satellite we have men who are small or

large, white, black or dark. Earth men are generally tall, but there are also

pigmies and people of medium stature, and the white, the red, the dark and the

black. Nature reveals her unity in diversity."

"That is unimportant," I said. "One knows the leopard by its spots. You must be

aware of our prodigious efforts to make certain discoveries. We spend vast sums of

money on research, often without encouraging results.

I myself, as you can see from my books full of notes, do a lot of studying, but up

to the present, I cannot say that I have learned anything. I appear to be lost in a

tangle of equations, and the mere mention of a parameter in a calculation drives me

insane.

of 10Message


There is one problem, for example, which our best physicists and mathematicians

have worn themselves out on; it is one which I believe may be easy for you to

answer, whose science has conquered space for you. The problem is to know whether

it is energy or matter that exists in Nature. I would like to make it clear that I

shall not be satisfied with some simple academic definition, and shall require from

you a more detailed explanation, which you are obviously in a position to give. Can

you enlighten me?"

The captain of the flying saucer seemed to withdraw his thoughts to some distant

point, as though looking for some way of embarking on this subject in a simple

manner, or as if he were trying to listen to someone who was speaking to him

from the depths of his soul. Then he answered me slowly, weighing each word as he

said it

* * *

The object of this chapter is to explain to the reader how it was that we were able

to start off a conversation on the highest level with this captain of the flying

saucer. Therefore we would like to close it at this point and take up the thread

again in the next chapter.

In this new chapter we will try to exclude all the unimportant words that passed

between us, synthesising the whole conversation in the form of questions and

answers.

The following pages do not represent the fruits of a single conversation, but a

series of five meetings which took place as follows: Once in the flying saucer

itself, once in my home, twice in the main square in Sao Paulo, and the last at the

Roosevelt station in Sao Paulo. It is perhaps important to explain that the two

conversations we had in the main square took place in the presence of a professor

of physics and mathematics, who shall remain anonymous out of respect for his

present high position.

It is possible that some of the replies do not reflect the true spirit of the

captain, and owing to the time that has elapsed since some of the outlines may have

become blurred. However, we have preserved the essence of the replies, based on

notes made at the time.

We have also tried, in the part that deals with religion, to exclude anything which

could offend the viewpoint of existing Churches or sects. There is just one thing

we would like to state, as a matter of conscience. The difficulties we faced him

with concerning the Bible were fully explained by him. He gave us answers about the

creation of man, the resurrection of the body, the reason for human suffering,

etc., which fully confirm the truth of this book. For us his arguments were so

satisfying that we became Christians. It is possible, however,

that what appeared to be perfectly understandable to us may seem ridiculous to

others. We shall refrain from publishing these questions, unless we are pressed to

do so, for fear of prejudicing the main issue. With these reservations we shall now

proceed with the subjects that appear most interesting to us.

of 10Message


God, Matter and Energy, Chap. 2

A: Your question was badly formulated. You should first investigate the origin of matter and energy, as both are expressions of something else which you see and feel, but are not aware

Q: Are you referring to the ether?

A: No, I am certainly not referring to the ether. Ether only exists around planets for a certain distance, and is nothing more than a type of matter. The etheric layers are effects, not causes. Lacking the basic terms of reference, it is difficult for me to be explicit. What I mean to say is that I lack the basic term of reference because you reason in a different way. I do not know the appropriate terminology in your language.

Q: What particular terms are you referring to? Mathematical ones?

A: No, theological ones rather than mathematical.

Q: What have matter and energy to do with theology?

A: Man can only truly understand the phenomena of Nature when he understands the nature of God.

Q: Well, I could never believe in the existence of God, for the very good reason that I could not see what part He had to play in the Universe. If He existed, and reigned eternally, He should play the leading role. But to me there never appeared to be any arbitrary principle capable of influencing the general order of things, that could be considered to be above everything that is; because matter, energy and the movement- of bodies, in fact everything, seems to resolve itself into specific laws, mostly of a mechanical order. It is up to you to tell me what He is, what is His nature, what He is composed of, what are His attributes, how He acts and what influence He has on created things; and also to prove to me that He is not a mere decorative figure. I do not wish to be shown a God subject to mechanical laws, in whom I could never believe, but a supreme God who is above any law. If He is subordinate to the law, that which subordinates Him is superior, and if laws operate on Him, then the divine attributes belong to the laws, and God becomes a mere subject. I am also subject to law, but I am not God.

A: There is a certain truth in your scepticism. I would also not be able to believe in a God who is subject to anything or to the natural order. Law is nothing more than a convention and presupposes a legislator. The Creator is above the thing created, so He is the judge who judges the law. He is the lawgiving principle whenever lawgiving becomes necessary for the good of creation, and for the maintenance of order. But creation itself is above the law, because legal statutes are only made for its protection. It is useful for the protection of created beings, but if instead of protecting them, it becomes oppressive, the legislator has the power to modi4r it according to his discretion. God judges, and is not judged on any question.

I would like to give you my views on God, giving you the simplest possible definition. God is an isotropic' line parallel to itself and vibrating on itself at right angles. He is like a system of axes in which the point of intersection of the lines is (isotropic: That which exhibits equal physical actions in all directions. Light is a case in point.) everywhere at the same time. Then He is many, because dimensions are contained within Him, 'when these are per-mutated-to use a terrestrial definition-" n" equals infinity. Please remember that this is an attempt to explain, in human language, the unexplainable. On the basis of this premise we can now go further and see how matter and energy were created.

Q: Did you say created?

Page 1 of 15Message


A: I mean created because there was a time when they did not exist. If they had existed for all eternity they would have coexisted with God and the Father could not have been the Creator of something which was as eternal as He. God acted as a transformer and created them. The "how's is what we shall study.

Your attention must have been drawn to an interesting peculiarity of electricity: if we turn a rotor in a magnetic field formed by a magnet, we immediately get a flow of electrons which move along the surface of the conductor. I myself used to wonder where these electrons came from. They must have come from somewhere, but where?

They do not come from anywhere, they were generated within the magnetic field. How? They are the result of a deformation brought about within the magnetic field by the movement of the rotor.

Supposing we take this generator and enclose it in an airtight vessel, we still get a flow of electrons as soon as we start the rotor turning, and if we had a pressure gauge inside the vessel we would see that in spite of the large current flowing between the two conductors, the atmospheric pressure would remain the same. This being the case, we can define the electron as deformed magnetic space, propagated in wave form.

An eloquent proof that the electron is a wave form and not a particle is obtained by refracting it through a spectrum.

There is an experiment that Earth scientists have done to prove this: a gamma ray (a gamma ray is of electro-magnetic origin), when passing close to a nucleus, pulls an electron away with it. It is true that the moment of inertia of the gamma ray is changed. To explain this phenomenon they devised the rather thin hypothesis that the ray's acceleration was transformed into energy, but it is absurd to believe that the moment of inertia of a vector in space could be transformed into energy.

There is a relationship between energy and the force that imparts acceleration to a body, but only a certain relationship. Water activates a turbine, but the gravitational force which activated the water could never be turned into electrical energy.

All that happened then was that the rotor moved inside the generator and caused a deformation of the magnetic space. The deformation that the points M' of the mass M of the rotor brought about in the magnetic field corresponds to the force of gravity in the water in a turbine.

If it is absurd to say that a vector moment creates energy, it would be even worse to say that this moment generates matter, in other words that an electron is a particle. The only rational explanation is that a gamma ray, being of electromagnetic origin, deformed itself for an instant near the nucleus and from this deformation an electron was created which must therefore be a charge of wave form.

Q: But if the gamma ray, on being deformed, does create electrical energy, it must have come out of something, whose mass in turn must have been diminished.

A: The gamma ray lost nothing other than acceleration. That is to say it lost a certain proportion of its frequency or its wave compression. Thus it could be said that if one put obstacles consisting of nuclei in its path, we could create as many electrons as its frequency allowed. As it happens, this system is used to a great extent by us in order to obtain energy more about this later. In any case the alteration was brought about in the space occupied by it at that moment.

Q: Your reasoning is very interesting. If one concedes that an electron is a wave form, how can one reconcile this with the structure of an atom? How can waves rotate round a nucleus?

A: If waves cannot rotate round a nucleus, particles certainly cannot.(5)

The laws of physics are immutable. The first law of thermodynamics is called the Mechanical Equivalent of Heat.(6)

Page 2 of 15Message


A given quantity of energy is required for a body to carry out a given amount of work. When this is exhausted, the mechanical movement of the body ceases.

However much energy an electron may have, it must be a limited amount of energy.

This being the case, an electron revolving round a nucleus would use up this energy in a short time. However, this does not happen as the movement and stability of an electron in its orbit is dependent neither on time nor thermodynamics.

Let us go further. If an electron were a particle, its high speed would make it fly off at a tangent from the atom owing to its centrifugal force.

We must also bear in mind that a body, however much energy of its own it may have, does not move unless an exterior force sets it in motion. If one charges a sphere with a considerable amount of energy, it still does not move. Nevertheless if a force of i gr. is applied to it, a corresponding impulse is transferred to the sphere.

All the intrinsic energy of an electron, supposing an electron to be a particle, would be of no use to it unless there were an exterior force to impart acceleration to its mass.

As a wave form(7) however, an electron perpetuates its vibration within a field without losing its characteristic wave structure. These wave structures have the property of moving through a field, or remaining stationary within it. An electron is a stationary wave form within an atom.(8)

Even Heisenberg felt that he could not account for all the electronic movements in an atom. He saw that this minute electron seemed to be ubiquitous, appearing at all points in an orbit at the same instant. Being unable to locate the point in space where it was to be found at any given time, since it appeared at all points, he developed his "Uncertainty Principle"(8)

__________________________________________________________________________________________

(*5) The scholar Antonio J. B. de Miranda, in his work The Theory of Photons (page 208),

states that if an electron were an homogeneous particle its speed of revolution around the nucleus would be 268 times that of light, which science admits is impossible. And if we

were to consider an electron as a cylindrical particle, we would arrive at a speed 100

times that of light, On page 15 of the same work the author says "the problems of the

dimensions of the quantum have puzzled physicists. Transverse measurements taken by

producing bands of interference from parallel slits indicate that a quantum has a width of

about 6 metres; longitudinal measurements taken by producing interference by echelons down

to a microns indicate that the wavelength of a quantum is in the order of I metre.

(*6) The Mechanical Equivalent of Heat is the number of kilogramme/ metres required to

produce a calorie. Thus, a caloric is the amount of energy obtained from a body of one kilogramme falling through 427 metres.

(*7) If photographic plates are bombarded by parallel streams of electrons, these defractive images are produced. They appear as concentric rings. which shows that the

electron is a wave form.

(*8)If the electron is a wave form having its origin in space, the whole concept of modern

science would fall to the ground. It would contradict the principal argument of Planck's

theory which asserts that an electron is a particle whose energy is stepped up in "quantic

jumps.

It would also lead to the collapse of our conception of light and all the mechanics of

relativity.

(*9)The "Uncertainty Principle" exploded the scientific theory of determinism. This showed

that Nature, in isolated cases, acted in a completely arbitrary manner and did not conform

Page 3 of 15Message


to, and appeared to be unaware of, any mathematical laws. Later, Dirac showed that the

concept of the Universe as a collection of measurable phenomena of constant and definite

form was possibly correct. He based this theory on the fact that these arbitrary phenomena in the U eventually gave rise to a definite pattern. This was also the death of the laws of

cause and effect because it was not possible to conceive of identical effects originating

from different causes.

The physicists reasoned that if the basic phenomena are arbitrary that the

force which gives rise to these must also be arbitrary.

That force must therefore possess freedom of action in the widest sense of the word, and

act as it pleases apparently purposely unaware of the precision required by science, in

spite of the fact it showed this desired precision when the secondary effects which make up

the visible Universe were created from the primary phenomena.

In fact it appeared to the physicists that behind the laws of physical phenomena there was

an Intelligence with well-defined aims, infallibly arriving at the same result using

different means to do so every time. Thus we reached a point where we could state that the

principal cause of phenomena is an Intelligence, and that these phenomena which we believe

to be causes are nothing more than effects, or in other words, accidents appertaining to a substance which in its entirety gives rise to the visible Universe.

(*10) orbits K-L-M are those in which electrons are believed to revolve round a nucleus.

"In reality the action of short radio waves on television brings about various effects,

e.g. the transformation of positive into negative; the superimposition of extraneous images; multi-colour effect in the form of bands; outside interference; the reception of

distant foreign stations; and the appearance of unknown human forms. These phenomena only

occur when ultra short waves and television sets with anti-magnetic circuits are used.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Thus the so-called orbits K-L-M'0 are nothing but stationary electrical waves in the field of the atom, each having its particular wave structure and frequency. It is known that waves of varying length do not interfere with one another as is shown by radio, even though 'they occupy the same area of space. In this peculiarity of an electron, there is a vast field waiting to be opened up for the benefit of man in almost all branches of knowledge. As an electron has a variable wave form, its characteristics are in consequence virtually unlimited.

If, for example, you connect up your television and set up interference by means of short radio waves, you will see how this inverts the image. If still shorter waves are used, even more interesting phenomena occurs, Thus, if it is possible to deform the sweep of electrons which form the television picture, to completely inverse their characteristics, making white appear as black and black appear as white, then it is evident that such an effect could never be produced by a particle."

If we do not regard an electron as a wave form, there is no explanation for molecular cohesion.

Q: There is, however, something that is not clear to me. You say a body or particle cannot move indefinitely through space without losing its energy. On the other hand you say that all bodies require a force to impart acceleration to them. Using Newton's laws of physics that all bodies can be considered points in space, and taking for the moment the Earth as a simple particle, we get two movements which are contrary to your theory: the first is the rotation of the Earth, and the second is our planet's revolution in orbit.

A: Quite. The case of the Earth is quite different and quite simple. The analogy that physicists wish to see between movements of stars and planets and the movement within the atom is false. In the atom we have stationary waves in a state of permanent vibration; Earth is a body impelled by constant force. Even if Earth had no energy of its own, it

Page 4 of 15Message


would still move through space.

This phenomenon is the same as that which occurs in a radiometer. In this apparatus the blades are subject to a potential difference, the black sides absorb sunlight, and begin to rotate around their axis. The intensity of the movement depends upon the intensity of the sunlight that the black faces are able to retain (see Fig. I).

Earth also, having one hemisphere in sunlight and the other in darkness, is subject to a difference of potential or, more specifically, a binary potential difference, and turns about its axis. It should be noted that in the radiometer the atmospheric pressure inside the bulb needs to be low, otherwise the blades will not rotate. Earth also, in the upper layers of its atmosphere, has this low pressure, extending almost to a vacuum. It was a good thing you mentioned the rotation of the Earth, because later when we talk about its movement in orbit, this knowledge will be invaluable to us.

So, to continue the explanation of how rotation arises, I can tell you that this phenomenon will be one of the difficulties which will face you when you come to make interplanetary voyages-that is if, 'with the way things are going in the world, you get as far as that.

FIG I RADIOMETER.

This little apparatus gives an idea of the movement of the Earth. The vanes are painted

black on one side and white on the other. Solar energy is absorbed by the black faces,

which gives rise to a difference of potential and causes the vanes to rotate on their axis.

(*12) Airmen who make parachute descents from a great height get into violent spins and are only able to control this movement when they reach the denser layers of the atmosphere.

There is, however, quite a simple solution to this problem. if a body rises to a certain height above the Earth, thus reducing the atmospheric pressure on it, the body at once begins to rotate?' This is due to one side of the body receiving more light and heat than the other. The remedy lies in balancing out the difference and supplying light and heat to the colder side.

From this you can see that the phenomena of Nature are simple, all resolving themselves into readily understandable laws which need very little analysis or understanding. This is what we are trying to prove in the question of electrons.

Having satisfied ourselves on this point, we will leave the explanation of the revolution of the Earth in orbit round the Sun until later, so as to keep to the point. We will now see how things are created in the Universe out of nothing.

We said that God, being an isotropic line, can be regarded as a system of axes, from which

Page 5 of 15Message


an infinite number of lines go out in all directions. As the centre of this axis is everywhere, we can regard the whole Universe as its centre.

The fact that the lines of force are consequently unable to escape from the ubiquitous centre and are always encompassed by the Being of God, makes Him an Immanent figure.

Thus, if the lines cannot move out from the Being of God, they can only move within it. But as there is no such thing as interior or exterior, the whole Universe being a centre of lines of force, all the lines resulting from the isotropism of God will be found to be oscillating on one point.

We may therefore call the Universe a point of infinite osci1lation.~~ We have already shown that superimposition of lines of force on a certain point constitutes a deformation of space.

If this definition of the Universe is correct, God is an oscillating charge superimposed on an infinite point, constantly causing a deformation of space, continually exerting its influence on the un manifest, and automatically creating energy, and in consequence, matter. If God did not exist, nothing whatsoever would exist.

I could continue this proof up to a high level, but people not used to these heights might suffer from dizziness. Let us be satisfied with this for the moment.

(*13) Science made a great step forward when Newton regarded all bodies

mere points. Thus all the points M' of a body were taken as a single

were to regard universes as points instead of scattered masses,

we might get somewhere.

This continual creation of energy in the Universe gives rise to an internal pressure in the nebulae which can be seen in the phenomenon known as "the flight of the nebulae."14 As a result of this internal pressure they move away from one another.

You may raise the objection that this pressure is also applied in the direction of flight so that the internal pressure coupled with the external one would make them stable and they would not move apart, which would cause their mass to condense. My answer to this would be that energy created outside a galaxy tends to be drawn into the galaxy, condensing itself into material form. Thus we have an internal pressure coupled with an external decompression.

The flight of the nebulae prevents condensation taking place for three reasons:

(i) This movement causes the interior pressure to disappear.

The flight of the nebulae is a well-known phenomenon, where they appear to fly away from

each other, moving out from a hypothetical centre. Various theories have been put forward.

An interesting one is one suggesting that this flight might he a pure periodic movement, and that the nebulae will later return to the point of departure. This might be described

as a sistolic and diastolic movement of the Universe. The most generally accepted theory

is, however, that of Father LeMaitre who thought that the Universe, many millions of years

ago, was an immense radioactive atom which, at a certain point, became completely

disintegrated, the nebulae being fragments of this original atom. His theory, however,

brought serious difficulties in its wake for if we all originate from one single "atom,"

all bodies in Nature should be of the same age. However, it is known that things did not happen that way, celestial bodies are of different ages. On the other hand, there could

have been no disintegration if external factors had not upset the internal movement. If

such external factors had indeed existed, the "radioactive atom" would not have been the

only thing in existence and the Universe could thus not have begun in this manner.

Page 6 of 15Message


It is strange that a priest should be able to conceive of a system so completely different

from that revealed by the Church, a system which was born of an accident in Nature and

appears to leave out the question of an Intelligence acting as a superior power directing all activity.

However, nebulae appear to maintain an acceleration caused by an internal pressure within the Universe.

(2) As the nebulae move apart, that space which had been transformed into matter endeavours to return to its former state of primordial space in accordance with the law of rotation of masses in a magnetic field. This reconstitutes the energy that had been used for condensation of the matter, turning it into light, whose wave energy goes on decreasing until the moment of entropy is reached. This is what takes place on the Sun. Leaving aside the reaction that they bring about on the planets, the Sun's discharges into space are, in a sense, matter returning to its original state of primordial space.

(3) Light repels magnetic fields. Light from a myriad of suns in the various galaxies produces a very great force of repulsion on all the nebulae, and under this pressure they move away from one another. We shall have more to say about this force of repulsion later.

In the first instance God supplied the power that brings about the deformation of space and the Sun, by an opposite process, turns it back into energy, thus re-establishing the balance. Everything comes from God and everything returns to Him.

That is why neither matter nor energy exist, but only deformed space, which is called matter, and what you call energy is nothing more than a phenomenon of transition between primordial space and deformed space.

Q: I assure you, my friend, that we have no means of refitting your theory, and your explanation fascinates me. However, God is spirit. If He can create matter, can it be said that all spirits can deform space and create also.

A: Not all of them. Only the Creator, whose nature is different. Spirits are created, and therefore in some degree manifest, but God is the Unmanifest. We are spirits but not of the nature of God. The Father is the generator of energy, and the spirits are merely a form of energy, albeit a different form to that found in matter.

A spirit can create to a certain extent, just as we ourselves can, within limits, deform space,create and destroy. But there are limits to the things we can create. No spirit can create another spirit, for example. That would be beyond its power, but nothing is beyond the power of God. Not only can He create matter, energy and spirit, as He did, but He also created others who have a nature akin to His own. These are His Sons, let us give homage to them; they are of a similar nature to Him, and are sources of life and have the power to deform space.

Life does not belong to us, and if we were to dissociate ourselves from God, we would die spiritually. But these other beings who are of a similar nature to the Father constitute with Him a single unit, in themselves eternal.

Q: You said you were going to talk about the movement of the Earth in orbit. I would like to hear about that.

A: The Earth's movement through space is partly a result of its rotation. Note, however, that I said partly, because in order to explain it fully there is one other thing in connection with the Sun that needs to be studied: Terrestrial science states that the Sun is the centre of the planetary system, which is not the case. The Milky Way is a vast magnetic field, but a magnetic field contains within itself secondary fields. Earth, for example, is a magnetic field, within a field of our system, which in turn is a field within the Milky Way. Earth with its poles also has its secondary fields, which the people of Earth have unfortunately not yet discovered.(*15)

(15) Many scientists already suspect that there may be other magnetic centres on Earth,

Page 7 of 15Message


independent of other know poles. Thee Dutch have put a lot of research into this question.

Herschel and Newton mathematically proved the existence of our magnetic field, within which the Sun and the planets move, when they discovered that the point of equilibrium of the solar system lay at a distance from the Sun equal to three times its diameter, due to the proportion of 1 to 700 in the relative mass of the planets to that of the Sun. It is round this point of equilibrium that the Sun moves.

It is wrong to say that matter attracts matter in the direct ratio of mass and in the inverse of the square of distance. Matter having undergone atomic interaction has no influence on other matter at a distance. However, magnetic fields attract or repel one another, and matter can be attracted by a magnetic field. A force of attraction is exerted on the Earth by this magnetic point of equilibrium of our system, which we may call "point zero."

While being attracted by this point. Earth is being repelled by the light from the Sun; its orbit round the Sun represents the balance between these two actions of attraction and repulsion.17

Q: Repelled by the light of the Sun?

A: Yes, repelled. The same force of repulsion that makes nebulae fly apart affects Earth and the rest of the planets. Has the weight of light not been measured? What is it but a pressure constantly exerted upon matter? If the Sun exerted attraction its light would not have weight, but a contrary effect.(18)

I told you that light is deformed space turning itself back '

(16) According to science this point is where the equilibrium of the masses

is to be found, due to the movement of the planets around space. The Sun appears to revolve

round this point. Given the form of the terrestrial orbit, if the Sun made a revolution

round this point of equilibrium its movement should also take 365 days, equal to that of Earth.

(17) Newton showed that if Earth were to be only very slightly attracted, its orbital movement would become spiral and it would finish by colliding with the Sun. However, as yet

it is difficult to calculate the action of these forces because we have not had, until the

present time, a satisfactory mathematical solution to the problem of the three bodies.

(18) The weight of light is equal to 410 of atmospheric pressure per square mile. If the

captain of the flying saucer is correct, this pressure of light will be greater on the

upper atmosphere. As long ago as 1873 Maxwell showed that radiation exerts a pressure.

Lebedev and Nichols discovered the same thing.

I told you that light is deformed space turning itself back into primordial space. The meeting of these two conditions of space causes quite a marked pressure (see Fig. 2)

Now, a body in space can only be in a state of equilibrium if two contrary forces meet to support it. If there were only a force of attraction without a corresponding one of repulsion, the planet would move towards the point of attraction.19

I have already shown you that if the repulsion were caused solely by centrifugal force, the planet would slowly spiral in, towards the source of attraction.

Earthly mathematics themselves confirm this. Without the repulsive force of the Sun, there would, however, be no circular movement. There would be neither axial rotation nor orbital

Page 8 of 15Message


revolution. A body impelled in one direction only does not move in another direction.

How could Earth move in orbit in a different direction to this repulsive force? Surely a thrust from one direction cannot give rise to another at right angles to itself?

In order to understand the phenomenon of revolution we must regard the true diameter of the planet not as that of its solid mass, but as the sum of its solid and gaseous parts.

The true diameter can be obtained from the following formula:

Terrestrial radius x speed of revolution

--------------------------------

Speed of rotation of the globe (= 407,200 km.).

Your planet rotates on its axis at 1,660 km. per hour, and revolves in its orbit at 1o6,ooo km. per hour. This gives a value of 407,200 km. for the radius of the total gaseous envelope. If we subtract from this figure the radius of the Earth (6,378 km.) we see that the terrestrial ether extends 400,822 km. beyond the solid surface of the planet (see Fig. 3).

The Moon, then, lies within the fringes of the etheric covering, so that the various phenomena connected with it take place within this covering.

The etheric covering acts as a fulcrum by virtue of which

(*19) in mathematics a body in space only has equilibrium when two contrary forces act upon

it, whose result equals zero.

Fig. 2. FORCES WHICH MAINTAIN EARTH IN SPACE.

Earth is simultaneously attracted by the magnetic centre of the system and repelled by the

light of the Sun. According to the captain of the flying saucer, this light repels the

magnetic field of Earth in the same way as a ray of light from a star is repelled and so

deflected on approaching the magnetic centre of our system.

Page 9 of 15Message


The movement of the Earth in orbit is the result of its speed of rotation and the extent of

its etheric covering, which acts as a supporting medium allowing it to revolve under the

action of the two simultaneously opposing forces.

Its orbit round the magnetic centre is not eccentric because the Sun moves round the centre

in the same time that the Earth takes to move round the Sun. Thus the orbits of the planets are affected whenever the come into conjunction with or p ass through opposition to the Sun

and the magnetic centre, causing both their speed of rotation and velocity in orbit to

increase or decrease.

The greater deflection of light near the poles causes a drop intemperatur4 whereas at the

Equator a strong concentration of light gives more heat. The elliptical orbits of the

planets are yet another consequence of the interaction

of the two forces. If the magnetic centre lies between a planet and the Sun, the force of

attraction is predominant and the planet is drawn in. However, if the Sun is between the

planet and the centre, the force of repulsion predominates and the planet moves out, its

path disturbed. As the position of the Sun changes in relation to the "point zero" centre, each successive aphelion and perihelion of a planet occurs in a different position.

the two opposing forces of attraction and repulsion are able to act upon the Earth.

This gives us 814,400 km. as the effective overall diameter of the planet. The whole moves with an angular velocity, supported by the opposing forces, upon a given plane. It is moved in its orbit just as a turning wheel moves forward over the ground.

We see, then, that the same force which causes rotation, moves the body through space. In the case of Earth, the rotational force is applied to the solid surface at a distance of 6,378 km. from the axis, but the effect of its movement through space occurs at 407,200 km. from the axis, at which point the surface of the etheric covering attains a speed of io6,ooo km. per hour.

Having explained this, we can understand why planets of large volume are situated at a considerable distance from the Sun. By taking note of their distance from the Sun and their volume, we can discover their true density, and this will also give us the magnetic force of its poles. Thus the planet Jupiter is of low density and, having a large diameter, it is more subject to the force of repulsion than that of attraction.(*20) If it were true that matter attracted matter in direct proportion to the mass of the bodies, Jupiter, with a volume 1,330 tunes greater than Earth and 331 times as much mass, should be much closer to the Sun than Earth is.

Once the speed of rotation of a planet and its velocity in orbit are known, we can work out the extent of its gaseous envelope. This cannot generally be observed by telescope.

Page 10 of 15Message


You will see from the foregoing why celestial bodies move in elliptical orbits. The problem involves the movement of three bodies, and terrestrial mathematics have not yet found any suitable equation to solve this problem involving eighteen unknown factors.

If no suitable solutions have been found to problems involving three bodies, imagine an equation involving the whole solar system with eight, nine or ten bodies, and the number of unknown factors to which this would give rise.

However, there is a solution and it is easy to prove. The problem becomes complicated by the amount of self-luminosity that each planet has.

Q: Self-luminosity? Then the planets have light of their own?

A: Every body in rotation, surrounded by atmosphere, has some light of its own. Earth has what scientists call the " permanent aurora." It is a greenish light, found in the higher

(*20)The density given by science to the various heavenly bodies( is:

Mercury 6.2; Venus 5; Earth 5.5 Mars 3.8; Jupiter 1.36; Saturn 0.07; Uranus 1.3; Neptune

1.2; Pluto unknown. (Based on density of water= 1.)

layers, invisible to the naked eye.(21)" It is the result of discharges from the poles in the upper atmosphere, where hydrogen, sodium and oxygen are to be found. The intensity of this light depends upon the atmospheric composition and on the speed of rotation of each planet. A body rotating in space, being immersed in the magnetic field of the solar system, acts like a dynamo, generating a certain degree of electricity. The intensity of its poles depends upon the rotation of its mass. In this case we take the diameter, the mass, the distance between the poles, and the atmospheric composition of the planet, and make the equation.

These equated elements will give us the intensity of the discharge and in consequence the amount of self-generated light, which in turn modifies the actual movements of rotation and revolution in orbit. Therefore, rotation is the result of the distance of the planet from the Sun, the overall diameter it presents to the Sun, its mass and the satellites which throw their light on its surface; less its own self generated light.

This also includes the Aurora Borealis, the explanation of which has given so much trouble to your scientists. Its intensity is due to the proximity of the magnetic and geographical poles.

Q: Is there any concrete proof that light repels matter?

A: There are several proofs. For example:

(1) A comet approaching the Sun becomes flattened.

(2) Light is deflected when it comes into contact with a magnetic field (it is not deflected by mass). An electron, passing through a magnetic field, is also deflected.

(3) The planet Jupiter, when closest to the Sun, is able to exert a pressure upon it which moves it from its position.

(4) Light has weight and gives rise to friction.

(*21)"The permanent aurora is also known by physicists as "air glow." It may be found at a height of 150 km.

(5) Solar light causes barometric pressure.

(6) In aphelion the planets move at slower speeds.



(7) The pressure of sunlight upon Mercury pushes it 23 million km. away from the Sun.

One could quote other proofs, but we will leave these aside as we have not yet discussed other phenomena.

Shortly, people of Earth will have other problems to solve. if up to the present you have been unable to solve problems involving three bodies, there will soon be a greater difficulty with the entry into our system of another Sun. There will then be four bodies instead of three, that is to say, the Earth, the two Suns and the magnetic centre.

Q: I do not understand you. What is this other Sun that will form part of our system?

A: That is what I want to explain to you. Another Sun will soon enter our solar system, and we shall be lucky enough to have a system of binary Suns. This is, in effect, one of the reasons, apart from conveying greetings to you, why this meeting is taking place; the other is to warm you of the dangers to which you are exposed with the advent of the atomic age.

Q: Yes, I would like to know what dangers we are laying ourselves open to with the advent of the atomic age, but first I would like to hear more about this new Sun.

A: It is a body of monstrous proportions which will shortly become visible in the direction of Cancer. It will not, however, emit any light as the light of a Sun only becomes intense when it enters into a secondary magnetic field such as our solar system. It begins to rotate on entering such a field. It deforms space around itself and generates currents which give rise to its brilliance, if it were luminous beforehand, its light would set up a force of repulsion, and it would be deflected from its path. With no luminosity it becomes subject to the pressure of our Sun, but its own momentum will ensure that it enters our system.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Note from the web master

It is interesting to note as of may 1999 a comet matching this description has been observed by an Australian amateur astronomer's at a star party and is believed not behaving in a way a normal comet should.

It is rumoured the military are a little nervous about this object and newspaper coverage at this time August 1999 has been lacking.

More detials can be read in The Australian New times magazine Nexus July August 1999 volume

6 number 5 or check out the following website www.millengroup.com

Photos of this object are of a greeny blue in colour at the moment.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

It will first be seen as a reddish light, later turning to blue. After reaching the area of the large planetary bodies, it will encounter the repulsive force of the Sun, but in its rear it will then have the weight of large bodies, also imparting a force of repulsion to it in the opposite direction. The force of repulsion of the planets behind it, the light it gives off and its great mass will cause the present Sun to move further away from the magnetic centre of our system. Then the two Suns will settle down in their new orbits, the one of greater mass and lesser light being nearer the centre 22 (see Fig. 4).

Two Suns in the solar system will create difficult problems. The orbits of all the planets will be changed. Mercury will move into the area between the present orbits of Venus and the Earth. Venus will move out to a position between the present orbit of the Earth and Mars. The Earth will feel the effect before the new Sun settles down in its definitive



orbit. As the luminosity of this body increases, the pressure of this light will cause the Moon to move out of its orbit, and it will settle in a position that will turn it into a planet. With this displacement it will take with it part of the etheric mass of the Earth, which will impart to it a stabilised movement. The Earth, in turn, under the pressure of the twin Suns, will move out into the area now occupied by the planetoids. In short, there will be a general displacement of all the bodies belonging to 'our system. Pluto will be ejected from the system, and will wander though space until it finds some new haven.

(*22) And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Lord God, that I will cause the sun to go down at noon and I will darken the Earth in the clear day (Amos 8: ix).

FIG. 4. A Binary System.

The entry of a new Sun into our system would throw the Earth out into an orbit between Mars

and Jupiter now occupied by the planetoids. All the planetary orbits will be altered. There

will be turmoil1 but this will be bearable as the repulsive force of the new Sun will speedily restore order. When the new Sun reaches it maximum luminosity the Earth will

already be in its appointed place in the system. There will certainly be a change in the

fauna, but life will continue, probably under better conditions than before.

The entry of this new body into the system was predicted by Nostradamus in his famous

Centuries, vol II, stanza 4r:

"La grande estoile par sept jours bruslera

Nuee fera deux soleils apparoir."

(The great star will bum or seven days, and cloud will make two Suns appear.)

One of the satellites of Mars will be torn from its present orbit and thrown into space. As it is a relatively dense body, it will be attracted towards the centre of the system rather than repelled outwards. Its trajectory will be such that it will become a satellite of the Earth. Everything depends on its direction of travel when it establishes contact



with this planet. If this happens to be against the direction of rotation of the Earth, the shock produced by its contact with the etheric covering of the Earth will smash it to pieces; if it is with the rotation of the Earth, then the satellite will attach itself to the planet.

The Earth itself will not be affected by this impact, as its etheric covering will protect it. According to our calculations, a shower of rocks is all that will reach the surf ace of the planet; principally in the area of Europe and North Africa, Asia Minor, the north of South America and the south of North America. The impact will turn this now splendid Martian satellite into fragments weighing about 50 lb. each, which will lay waste these areas. After that, everything will become normal again and we shall have a new sky in which to travel, and you will have a new Earth.

Q: When will this take place? In the distant future?

A: It will be very soon, towards the end of this century. The Earth will begin its new millennium with a new source of light to illuminate it. Many people will vanish forever from the face of the Earth but a small community, obedient to the laws of God, will remain, and present suffering will cease. There will be peace and abundance, justice and compassion. The unjust souls will get the punishment they deserve, and the just will get their recompense. On this day, many will understand the triumph of the just and he will see why God did not immediately punish the wrongdoers. The Sun which is to come will be called the Sun of Justice. Its appearance in the heavens will be the warming signal of the coming of the One who will shine even more than the Sun itself.

Q: What has the arrival of the flying saucers on Earth to do with the Sun that is to come?

A: We are studying all the effects that its appearance will bring in its wake. If we were permitted, we could, with suitable apparatus, send electromagnetic pulses against it, and prevent its entry into our system by causing it to become incandescent outside our system. However, to prevent its arrival would be tantamount to opposing the will of God and allowing the injustice that eiists here to continue indefinitely. Those with clear consciences and those at peace with their Creator need fear nothing. Let it come.

We came here for purposes of study but also to make a desperate appeal to man to avoid the catastrophe and to live in peace. The Earth is not the centre of the planetary system. as was previously believed, but the centre of evil. If man were to reform himself, it is possible that the Creator would have compassion on him. Avoid war, because man can thereby destroy his planet with his own hands without the intervention of the forces of Nature. It is not difficult to be good; it is sufficient to do no evil. God will do the rest.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

DETAILS OF THE PLANETARY SYSTEM ACCOUDING TO THEORETEICAL DATA

FURNISHED BY THE CAPTAIN OF THE FLYING SAUCUER

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Planets Diameter Period of Speed of Velocity etheric

Rotation Rotation in orbit covering

Miles hr min mph mph miles

Mecury 3025 23 412 107700 392500

Venus 7700 16 31 1465 78750 200500



Earth 7970 23 59 1040 66250 253500

Mars 4160 24 37 530 54000 197250

Jupiter 87390 9 50 28000 29500 10

Saturn 71025 10 2 22000 21800 no atmospheric ether

Uranus 29625 10 50 8560 15300 11530

Neptune 27050 15 10 5435 12225 16750

Pluto 7300 19 57 1230 10660 60500



Overcoming Gravity, Chap. 3

Q: Have you any objection to telling us about the problems of navigation in flying saucers?

A: None at all. It is obvious that interplanetary voyages will not be possible for people of Earth for some time to come, but we will give them a helping hand by

showing you what takes place.

The atmospheric pressure on Earth is 1.033 kg. per sq. cm. If a sheet of paper is placed over the mouth of a glass full of water and turned upside down, the

atmospheric pressure on the paper will prevent the water from being subject to the force of gravity and spilling out of the glass.

We use this natural atmospheric pressure in the flying saucer. It is this which

gives us the necessary propulsive force.

If we maintain this pressure underneath the saucer and bring about a decompression on top, the craft will be given a terrific upward thrust which no known force can

match.

Q: Please be more explicit, I do not quite understand the system you describe.

A: It is quite simple, my friend. We create a vacuum in the direction of travel. If

we have low pressure on one side, the other side is subject to the full atmospheric pressure. Any object, whatever its nature, can only be moved if some difference of energy potential is created. For example, with a saucer of 20 m. diameter, we get

pir radius cubed= 3,141,600 sq. cm. as the surface of the saucer.

With an atmospheric pressure of 1.033 kg. per sq. cm. we can calculate that the force operating on a saucer of 20 m. diameter is equal to 3,278,272.8 kg.

This gives you some idea of what is involved, even, the smallest type of saucer develops a thrust of approximately 3 million kg., whereas even your most powerful aeroplanes cannot develop more than a few thousand kilogrammes of thrust.

Page 1 of 13Message


FIG. 5. Saucer in horizontal flight.

By maintaining the vacuum in the direction of its flight, the saucer can move at any speed and without creating any friction with the atmosphere. It is also very

easy to manoeuvre, since this vacuum can be moved in any direction. The atmospheric pressure developed on a saucer of 65 ft. diameter is over 3,000 tons; in the case of a saucer 'with a diameter of 200 ft. the pressure developed would be some 30,000

tons. This, therefore, is a tremendous source of power, unequalled by any other natural phenomenon.

For those who are interested in communication with the spirits of the departed, we

quote below an extract from the Spiritualist Review of 1859, which 'was translated into Portuguese and incorporated into a publication entitled Poitevin the aeronaut.

At that time the possibility of reaching other planets by balloon was being investigated so in this book Allan Kardec invokes the spirit of Poitevin, ~ balloonist, and asks him about the future of this type of craft

Poitevin predicted that there was no great future for balloons, and that they were not suitable for space travel; later he went on to describe how a suitable craft might be constructed. "You did not ask me whether you would be able to visit other

planets by this means. But this problem has given much food for thought, and its solution would fill your 'world 'with 'wonder. No, you will not succeed by this

means.

You can imagine how long it would take to traverse the inconceivable vastness of space, when it takes light several years to travel the millions of millions of

leagues, even if we were carried there by wind or steam But to get back to the main subject, I told you at the beginning that you should not expect too much from the present system, but that you will achieve far more by utilising the high and

permanent pressure of the air. The fulcrum that you seek is always before you and encloses you on every side. You run up against it in your every move, it hinders

your flight and acts on everything you touch. Meditate well on this and work on this revelation as much as you can, the possibilities are enormous."

Otto de Guericke was the first to notice the tremendous pressure of the atmosphere.

It was in 1654 that he tried to pull two hemispheres apart in which he had created a vacuum. Not even the strength of sixteen horses could achieve this. Before this he had seen atmospheric pressure crush a copper boiler in which the pressure was

low like a piece of paper. The movement of the air in the upper layers of the atmosphere supports this incredible pressure; if it were not for these we would be

crusted by the volume of gas above us.

A great danger hangs over the Earth as a result of atomic explosions; the disturbance of these upper layers can cause torrential rainstorms, hurricanes and

an unbelievable increase in the atmospheric pressure and in the intensity of solar radiation.

Saucers do not cancel out gravity, as was at first thought, but they derive their

power from the atmospheric pressure itself.

This is why many people have been told that their source of energy was Nature herself. If saucers cancelled out gravity, they would only be able to move in one

direction, and would still need a propellant to supply the power. Even supposing they did overcome gravity this way, they would still possess a certain 'weight in relation to the air, and the ensuing friction with the atmosphere 'would limit

their speed considerably.

Page 2 of 13Message


It should, therefore, be perfectly feasible to construct a saucer on Earth. Its

covering could be made of any material, as there 'would be no friction with the atmosphere. They could be any shape although the saucer shape is the ideal one,

since one half can take the full force of the atmospheric pressure, while the other is immersed in a vacuum. The speed and manoeuvrability of a cube shaped craft would be impaired owing to air resistance on its sides, which would consequently be

subject to friction.

The saucer could not be fitted with glass windows, since the difference of pressure at various points of their surface would break them, which would create havoc

inside the saucer. The saucer's "eyes" consist of television apparatus paced at various points on the outside of the craft, which relay to a screen in front of the

pilot. This screen covers all directions simultaneously, and is therefore better than the human eye which can only take in a certain angle of vision at one time.

Unfortunately a craft of this type could be used in war, but it would also

revolutionise our transport systems if it could be constructed on Earth. Distance would not be a factor, ships and trucks could be dispensed with, as loading and unloading could take place anywhere without having to build special landing fields.

In a standard transport saucer, this pressure would be much greater. With a craft of room. diameter, we would get a thrust of 78,540,000 kg. and with one of 200 m. diameter the thrust would be 314,160,000 kg.

There is no limit to the size or capacity of these craft. We construct big cargo carriers up to 600 m. diameter with a payload of almost 300 million kg.

Page 3 of 13Message


This is more or less "theoretical because we never use the whole cargo carrying

capacity of these giant freighters. If we did so, we would not have sufficient force available to develop high speeds.

When we undertake any interplanetary journey we use a low capacity craft. The size

depends on the object of the visit. Generally saucers with a diameter of 20 metres are the handiest. These craft, fully equipped, weigh 250,000 kg. The total capacity

of this craft would be 3 million kilos, but we use this margin of power to enable us to operate at high speeds.

A ship could never develop energy on this scale, not even atomic energy can compare

with the forces of Nature. And Nature does it without poisoning the atmosphere! Is it clear to you now?

Q: I understand. What an extraordinarily simple process!

A: Yes, it is simplicity itself. It is just a question of knowing how. But it would

not be complete unless I told you how we set about creating a vacuum externally. First I will explain to you how the saucer is steered. We can move this vacuum in.

any direction. Course is set by operating an ordinary lever on a hemispherical mounting which moves the vacuum in the required direction. If we wish it to go in a particular direction, we produce a vacuum on that side of the saucer, and

immediately the atmosphere produces a pressure on the opposite side pushing us in the direction of the vacuum. Let us imagine that we are moving in level horizontal

flight, if we wish to make a right-angled turn, all we have to do is move the vacuum to the top, or to one of the other sides, and we shall move at the same speed in the new direction. We can change direction abruptly and do not need to

describe curves. Do you understand now?

Q: Yes, I see the whole import of it. This can revolutionise all our concepts of aerial navigation. It is a diabolical piece of machinery.

A:It depends on the use to which it is put. I stlll have faith in humanity and promise that if one day you can agree to abolish war, I will personally come and help you achieve these results, and other more important ones. I shall teach you

how to make life a paradise.

But as I was saying, we create a vacuum and, to use your words, a "diabolical" thrust. Friction, however, does not arise as we are always moving into a vacuum.

And without friction the craft does not heat up. We often need extra heating to keep ourselves warm, because the vacuum causes a drop in temperature.

There are no technical difficulties involved in producing an external vacuum. You

know that cathode rays have the strange property of decomposing the atmosphere through which they pass. Under the action of these rays, the elements of the atmosphere revert to their etheric state. In addition to this we make cathode rays

intersect the anode rays at an angle of 45 degrees. This we achieve by using high voltage and current.

Q: Where is the cathode ray apparatus situated?

A: All over the peripheral area. That is to say, the whole of the outer edge of the craft acts as a cathode ray emitter. These rays are deadly and can only be projected outwards. If a human being were to be exposed to rays as powerful as the

ones we use, his cells would be destroyed, and he would suffer lethal burns.

Page 4 of 13Message


But inside the craft there is less radioactivity than in the air that is breathed

on Earth.

The coloration that saucers appear to give off in flight is caused by these rays, the same thing happens in a Crookes or Geissler tube. They are a result of the low

pressure or vacuum that we create. If we wish to go very fast, we use an absolute vacuum, and move through space in a flash. At other times, we use a semi-vacuum,

and we move more slowly. The intensity of the vacuum is proportional to the current used and is controlled by a rheostat. If we want to follow an undulating course we use a pulsing current.

When we are using a semi-vacuum, you observe a luminosity around us at night; but if we are using an absolute vacuum we become invisible because light does not exist in a vacuum." This is the reason why people always say that we appear to be

stationary and suddenly vanish and appear in another spot.

I must admit that other methods are also used, such as the bismuth system, which is still used on some craft to set up a difference of energy potential, in fact this

was the system we used to use at first. (The captain described this other process to us, but as it was a complex one we would rather not repeat it here.)

After having travelled around for some time in these bismuth crates, a Being from

another planet explained to us how to use a simpler method. Now they are only used for space travel by enthusiasts as a kind of sport, just as you still use sailing

boats.

That, my friend, is how you can make a craft as fast as, or even faster than, a flash of lightning.

(*23) A diminution of the pressure in cathode ray tubes causes the light in them

to disappear. Light therefore is an atmospheric effect, and if it were possible for us to live in a vacuum we would be in darkness.

Q:I filly accept the explanation you have given Of course, a craft which could

create an external vacuum should have great manoeuvrability; motive power and payload. It appears to me, however, that this system would not be very good for

getting away from the Earth. It is easy to manoeuvre as long as there is atmospheric pressure. But at a certain height, unless our calculations are basically wrong, this pressure goes down to nothing. I would like you to talk

frankly about the method you use to escape from the Earth, because what you have told us so far is only part of the answer.

A: You are forcing me to elucidate a vital point, which I would have preferred not

to tell you. Once you know this, we shall no longer have any security and would run serious risks due to man's innate love of conquest. But no one can refuse to tell

the truth when he is asked. I will tell you everything, but you must promise to keep secret the means by which we produce this force.

Q: Does this mean that I am not to tell it to other people?

A: Of course. If there were nothing in what I have to tell you I would not be

imposing conditions. But you must use your own judgment. I cannot forbid you passing on to others information which could contribute to the well-being of the

community. But I insist that the information that I give you concerning means of destruction must be kept for yourself only. What I want to tell you could bring destruction even to us as it would make it possible for you to reach our homeland.

The menace that hangs over the world as a result of human technological development

Page 5 of 13Message


would be upon us, and it might turn men into devils. If you approve of the other

things I tell you, you may talk about them and carry them out. And if at any time any technical difficulties should arise, I shall be ready to help you solve them.

It is sufficient for you to call upon me in thought, and I shall know, even at a distance.

Friendship does not impose conditions, and generosity ought to be our universal

motto.

I also ask you that if one day you should want to make use of this information for the good of the world, you should first tell your own people, as the Brazilians are

not aggressive and abhor war. Do not try to explain the problem to anyone who could make one of these craft into a weapon of mass destruction.

However, if your people do not attach any importance to the information, you should

publish it as you see fit. You should do this without any restrictions, so that all men know it and no one nation can gain an advantage over another.

Now I will satisfy your curiosity, but first please pay special attention to

certain details which I have told you. Around every inhabited globe in space there is an etheric fluid which envelops it and creates suitable conditions for life.

It is a temporary habitat, not only for men but also for spirits. No one can escape

from it unless he knows how to produce another for his use.

Q: Are spirits also caught within this etheric envelope?

A: Yes. A spirit inhabiting a planet has a fluid body surrounding it. A spirit who is still bound by matter to any extent, cannot live without it. If it attempts to

escape from its particular world, its spirit body leaves it and is re-assimilated into the etheric envelope of the planet. Thus, even spirits are prisoners for as

long as they are unable to reject evil, and remain ignorant.

Many people call this fluid "ether," but the label is of little importance. It is a question of words, which does not affect the problem. What is important is to know

what it is made of

We could well call it" electric fluid," which would be nearer the truth. In electricity there is a negative charge, and a positive charge. In physics we have

protons and anti-protons, mesons and anti-mesons, electrons and anti-electrons, matter and anti-matter. On Earth we only find matter, yet it is possible to create anti-matter.

A body made of anti-matter would be expelled from matter. The force of repulsion would be unbelievable. There are interplanetary vessels which are composed entirely of anti-matter, but the force-field created by this means has a terrifying effect

on the physical properties of the people travelling in them.

For this reason our space ships are made of matter.

Further, we make our own etheric fluid inside the saucer, and by changing its

polarity so as to oppose that of the Earth we are repelled from the planet at a speed corresponding to the difference in polarity between the saucer and the Earth.

A knowledge of magnetic fields is required. You on Earth do not yet define them correctly, but we know that the magnetic field is made up of the "electric fluids'

of the planet. If we "manufacture" an electric fluid which differs from the

Page 6 of 13Message


terrestrial etheric 'envelope, the magnetic field of the Earth no longer affects

us, and we enjoy complete freedom of movement. We can change direction in a way that amazes you, we can move at the speed of light and suffer no ill effects. It is

a complete breaking of the shackles which bind man.

Within the Earth's atmosphere we always use a vacuum system, but when we leave this atmosphere we put the anti-electron producing machinery into action, and our escape

velocity is then phenomenal. Without wishing to terrify you, I can tell you that normally we can reach Mars in a matter of minutes, unless there is a breakdown, and then the trip becomes tedious.

When you entered our craft I called your attention to the different kind of light inside which did not emanate from any particular piece of machinery, but was caused by the air itself being luminous. You also noticed an agreeable, almost spiritual

feeling of lightness, a state of near levitation, as well as a feeling of great well-being.

At that time you were in an artificial etheric atmosphere and not the ordinary

Earth atmosphere. When one's eyes are accustomed to seeing the terrestrial ether, the artificial ether appears luminous.

Without this artificial ether no interplanetary voyage is possible. If you tried to

make a journey without this precaution, you would face certain death. The fluid which binds you to your bodies would leave you, and your bodies would instantly be

crystallised. This is the mystery of the crystallised bodies which reach the Earth in the form of meteorites, any body in space without ether undergoes this process, whether it be made of carbon, calcium, iron, nickel, or any other element.

After passing out of the magnetic field of the Earth, all we need to do is to create an ether similar to that of the planet to which we are travelling, and we will then be attracted by it. We can create this ether of another planet even on

Earth, so that we will be repelled from Earth and attracted to the other planet whose ether is contained within the saucer.

On reaching that planet, we need only to change the ether again to propel ourselves

once more into space.

By this means life can be maintained inside the craft whatever its construction, and at the same time it provides us with a means of locomotion.

Q:I think I understand the system, it is rational enough, but the difficulty would appear to lie in making and changing this "electric fluid" as required.

A: You are wrong there. In Nature nothing is difficult. Things are only difficult

for those who make them so. Let us go back to what I told you about an electron being a wave and not a particle. One of your physicists said, correctly, that an electron is an integration of electro-magnetic waves. But an electro-magnetic wave

can be of positive or negative polarity. If we were to send electro-magnetic pulses between magnets, the waves thus produced would create an ether different from that

on Earth. A variation in the distance between the plates would bring about a modification in the ether produced. That is what you wanted to know in clear and simple terms. I cannot tell you more clearly than that.

Q: Is very much electrical energy required to bring about this effect?

A: Everything is relative. On our saucer, the voltage and current are very high indeed. On a small craft used for research, very little current would be needed.

Page 7 of 13Message


Q: Where do you get this energy from to achieve these results?

A: There are various means of making it. It can be obtained by turning hydrogen into helium at low temperature and bombarding deuterium with heavier mesons, releasing a fabulous amount of energy; or by using ultra rays in an acid solution

saturated with helium nuclei. The latter process is the most usual.

Q: How does the transformation of ultra rays into useable energy take place?

A: If you allow radioactivity to pass through a magnetic field you will get alpha,

beta and gamma rays. The first are helium nuclei, the second are electrons and the third are gamma rays which are similar to ultra rays in their electro-magnetic content. These three components of radioactivity are related.

The ultra rays, or gamma rays, on passing close to helium nuclei, bring about a deformation of space and give birth to electrons until their wave energy is expended. Thus when gamma rays pass through an acid solution saturated with helium

nuclei, the newly created electrons gyrate around the nuclei, but the acid prevents them from joining up with the nuclei, and they are collected on plates at the

bottom of the apparatus. This provides an inexhaustible supply of energy which requires nothing more than a little acid solution and some helium nuclei.

There are, however, other means. On an interplanetary journey something might go

wrong with the apparatus we use for transforming hydrogen into helium and the gamma ray collecting apparatus. If this should happen we would turn to solar energy. We would pass it through a tube of coal gas. This gas, with a suitable catalyst,

unites with water, turning it into formaldehyde. This product is then oxidised giving us coal-gas and water again.

In this second process solar energy is turned into useable electric current, which

is quite sufficient to meet our immediate requirements, as on interplanetary voyages there is no lack of propulsive energy for the craft. The laws of inertia

provide us with the necessary acceleration to reach the planet that is our objective.

Q: So that explains the whole operation of the saucer?

A: Yes, that is how it moves. We have, however, several navigational instruments,

as you were able to see. Supposing you had to explain to somebody how a jet plane moves, you would naturally say that a backward thrust is exerted which impels the

craft in a forward direction. That would be true, but inside the plane there are many navigational instruments.

If I were to begin to talk to you about the equipment we use for detecting the

etheric covering of planets, that alone would take us some three hours. The instrument we use for interplanetary communication is also complex; it is based on principles that you already know of, but have not put into practice.

The most important scientific discoveries are still to be made in the simplest things. The secret lies in concentrating on the main issue without going into abstract formulae.

With a formula you can explain a phenomenon but you cannot discover it. In science we have to try to discover things, even though everything may already appear to have been discovered. To bring formulae into the calculation merely complicates

something that was previously simple.

Page 8 of 13Message


How would your formulae help to show that a difference of energy potential could be

produced between the atmospheric pressure and a vacuum, thus producing a thrust. If you had discovered this, it would not have to be proved. The craft itself would

have been sufficient demonstration. Anything else is academic pedantry.

Terrestrial science does not accept anything which cannot be proved mathematically, and is then only accessible to the few. I can assure you that many brilliant ideas

have been shelved for the sole reason that their originators were not sufficiently versed in mathematics to supply the necessary proofs. This kills the spirit of research in a world where so much is yet to be discovered.

Q: We supposed, hitherto, that the saucer simply cancelled out the effect of gravity.

A: You supposed something that doesn't exist. Gravity is no more than a wrong

interpretation of a combination of phenomena.

Q: What? Doesn't gravity exist?

A: It does not exist. What science calls gravity is a question of a difference in the density of bodies. To explain; the smoke of your cigar is heavier than the

surrounding air. Yet, it rises as the result of warmth. That is to say the difference in density is compensated for by the temperature of the smoke.

Therefore, two factors are at work which can influence this phenomenon; density and temperature.

We can see that a balloon full of hydrogen gas rises, according to the volume of

the gas. The same thing happens with helium. That is to say, bodies of lesser density always tend to rise, in the same way that water and oil separate, due to density: Gravity does not prevent bodies of lesser density from rising. Whereas in

air, which is of low density, heavy objects fall rapidly, in water-more dense than air-they fall more slowly. The third factor influencing gravity is the mass of

atmosphere and ether surrounding a planet; this can, however, be included in the factor of density. It is wrong to attribute greater or lesser gravity to a planet without knowing the extent of its gaseous mass and the density of its atmosphere.

On Saturn, for example, owing to the absence of atmosphere, gravity is considered zero. On Jupiter, which has a very rarefied atmosphere, it is quite different. A

falling body has a high initial acceleration and then it collides with the low density of the planet. On Mercury, however, where the etheric covering extends more than 6oo,ooo km., atmospheric pressure is high and gravity is tremendous.

The fourth factor influencing gravity is the vertical component of magnetism. However, the attraction it exerts on a body is, with small variations, the same as that on any other body. Thus it is that the speed of fall in a vacuum is constant.

However, this attraction is not due to mass, it is caused by the magnetism with which the whole body is endowed.

Lastly, we have the energy that exerts pressure upon the Universe and penetrates

our systems of galaxies, of which I spoke to you earlier. As a body cannot be subject to pressure in all directions, the Earth always shielding it from this

pressure on one side, the body feels a difference in the forces acting upon it and falls to the surface of the Earth.

This tremendous universal pressure, which is the result of the vibration of God on

the infinite point of the Universe, is what maintains the atmosphere of the planets.'

Page 9 of 13Message


As the atmospheric pressure has the fabulous power we use to propel our saucers,

and as the tendency of gases is towards continual expansion, the whole of the gaseous envelope surrounding a planet would expand into the vacuum were it not

maintained by constant pressure.

When Newton saw the apple fall, he could not guess that in that moment he witnessed the effect of the divine presence in the Universe. Thus it is that we move and have

our being in God.

Gravity is, then, a combination of phenomena and never an individualised force.

Q: Why does heat affect gravity?

A: Because it reduces the magnetic force of bodies. You can prove that a magnet

loses its properties on being heated. As matter is made up of stationary waves, heat has a powerful influence on them. By increasing the frequency of these waves they begin to give off light. Moreover, it is well known that heat reduces the

density of a body. Accordingly, it tends to rise. This can best be seen in the case of boiling water.

The warmer water tries to place itself above the cooler, producing currents. We

note that heat is a factor which affects gravity, not because it is itself an agent causing the phenomena of gravity, but because it influences magnetism and density.

Q: Does this mean that our science is wrong?

A: Very wrong.

Q: Then all our physics, including relativity, fall to the ground?

A: Only the fallacious principles fall to the ground. Others will certainly remain valid. Does it seem strange to you that this should happen? Ptolemy was a genius,

but his entire system collapsed like a pack of cards. The same thing happened with Aristotle. In turn, Isaac Newton came up with the physics of relativity, and its days are numbered.

Q: But relativity provided an explanation for the irregularity in the orbit of Mercury.

A: It could give an explanation, it remains to be seen whether it is rational.

But even supposing it were, we need to see whether it corresponds with the method

Nature uses. We can advance a thousand rational hypotheses, whereas Nature makes use of only one, rejecting the other , however rational they may be; or again, it

may not even make use of any of them.

Relativity contains certain erroneous elements which in themselves can be called rational, but which Nature, according to the view of Sir James Jeans, appears to

disregard. For example, it is an accepted mechanical theory that if two rays move in the same direction at the same speed, their velocity in relation to one another is nil; but if they move in opposite directions, the velocity of the one in

relation to the other is 2V. However, in order to cope with certain difficulties in his system, Einstein affirmed that whether the rays move in one direction or

another, the velocity between them is always V.

It is not necessary to have much imagination to see that this principle is false.



In order to justify this fallacy, Einstein invented another, greater one; he

attributed a space and a time appropriate to each moving body, according to its speed. But as one error leads mankind to another greater one, he had now to produce

a third idea in order to justify the second; he set confines to the Universe, marking out a particular space for us. But Nature disregards imaginary enclosures, and our desire that the Universe should conform to our particular points of view,

as well as our carefully thought out ideas. Throughout she behaves as though she were ignorant of Hamilton's calculus and the importance which Earth people attach

to formulae.

In short, you can see that the frontiers proposed by Einstein were too narrow to contain what is by nature infinite. Space is indivisible and time is non-existent.

The latter is merely a convention based on the movement of the stars. It is merely an effect.

If the movement of a body, or the acceleration of a mass, is due to force, time is

then an effect of the force and the latter' is the cause. But if the force varies and is consumed, time will vary accordingly. Now, as space is a constant, it is difficult to imagine how you could create a time/space constant, let alone regard

it as a dimension in itself. This is an example of Nature disregarding these things. If one multiplies two dimensions one gets the area; if one multiplies area

by height, one gets the volume; now, if one multiplies this volume by a fourth dimension, one only gets nonsense. In space, a body does not travel in four, three,

two one dimension,because space, being infinite, has no dimensions whatsoever. We can, at the most, say that a body obeys a direction of stress when it moves from point A to point B.

Up to a point Einstein was right in saying that a moving body in space has its own time, because when one leaves the Earth there is a change in what is conventionally known as terrestrial time; but basically he was wrong. Time is based on the period

a moving body takes to return to its point of departure, and is thus the result of a circular movement. He made a further mistake when he assumed that every moving

body created a space of its own and peculiar to itself.

The precession of Mercury's perhelions, which gave rise to this theory, is due to the planet's proximity to the Sun. As it moves closer to the Sun, it receives more

light, rotates more rapidly and moves through space with greater speed.

Q: Well, then, what about the curvature of light, obseryed by Eddington, Crommelin and Davidson during the eclipse of the Sun on May 29th, 1919, which formed part of

Einstein's theory?

A: The curvature of light is not due to the action of the mass of the Sun, but is caused by the magnetic centre of the system situated near the Sun. Even within a

solenoid you can see that a stream of electrons is deflected by a magnetic field. There is nothing new in this. If light were to be deflected when passing close to a mass, this phenomenon could be clearly observed in the vicinity of planets, let us

say Mars, when it is close to Earth. Eclipses of the Moon, for example, would provide the best opportunity for such observation.

Nevertheless, this curvature was only seen precisely where the magnetic centre of

our system is to be found. If there were no repulsion between energy and magnetism, your motors would not turn. Therefore, light is deflected by the magnetic centre

and curves round the Sun. If you had proper apparatus, you would see that light also curves on the side opposite the centre, as though it were trying to get away from the Sun.

I wish to imply that the curvature of space is anti-scientific. Primordial space is



not relative to any thing and has no form at all. It is neither a curve nor a

straight line, and it has no dimensions, it is simply space, infinite in all directions. Wheresoever an observer may place himself, he will always have before

him the infinite Universe.

Q: Then no limit can be conceived to matter?

A: If in space there should be a point that could serve as a limit to creation, there God would be contained. But God is infinite, and the Universe is a point to

Him. Only a materialistic science could limit creation. If you conceive a limit, what would you then have beyond it?

Q: I should say, nothing.

A: Truly, you would have nothing. But space is nothing transformed by God. Matter also is nothing. If it comprises anything, it is the divine energy that brought life to space. To you matter is something; but make a stream of cathode rays pass

through it and it will disappear from your view. You will only see space.

All that appears is an illusion of our senses. Only one thing is real; that is Spirit, and that is exactly what earthly science does not admit.

Q: It is hard for us to learn that our most cherished concepts are completely at variance with reality.

A: Indeed, one of the bad aspects of man is his obstinacy. If I had erred for an

eternity, I would welcome the day when someone would enlighten me. Believe me, l'am telling you the truth. What pain can anyone feel by putting error aside and seeing the truth.

Q: But it is difficult for us to abandon the science of relativity.

A: It will be difficult for science, also, to abandon the experiments of Hertz and Fresnel, who settled upon the wave theory of light. However, when science has to explain electronic theory, the wave theory is put aside; when atomic theory is in

question, it turns things upside down and says that the electron is a particle, and has recourse to Planck's theory.

Before abandoning relativity, first decide whether the wave theory or the emission

theory is true. Verify the true speed of light. Determine the action and reaction of the planetary system. Never use two interpretations in one science, in order to

explain the same thing.

Q: I have noted the factors which you say affect gravity, but there is a case which should be considered. If it is true that the density of bodies affects gravity, on

the top of a mountain the air is more rarefied so that iron, for example, being in a more attenuated medium, should weigh more. However, the contrary is the case, the

higher one goes, the less it weighs.

A: But I told you also that gravity is affected by the mass of ether surrounding the planet. If the weight of the atmosphere, at sea level, is equivalent to a

column of mercury of 76 cm. for each 10 m. of altitude the column falls about 1 mm.

Thus, we must consider the pressure which bodies undergo as a function of their density. The lower the atmospheric pressure, the less is the weight. If gravity were a force with its own attributes and it was that which supported bodies in

space, it would be rather difficult for earthly science to explain why meteors are



maintained in their orbits. Every year Earth collides with millions of meteorites,

always in the same month. This means that they are located in one place. Now, if there were a law of gravitation, they would either all come towards Earth, or

already have been attracted by the Sun.

However, those which succeed in penetrating the mass of ether fall to Earth and the others remain in the same place. They are, then, in balance between the magnetic

attraction of the centre of the system and the repulsive force of the Sun. For terrestrial gravity to exist, there would have to be solar attraction, but neither of these exist.

If my reasoning were incorrect, bodies in a vacuum would never have the same speed of fall.

For the sake of argument, let us suppose that gravity exists. But if all bodies in

a vacuum fall with equal velocity, it ceases to be true that matter attracts matter in direct proportion to their respective mass, at least not if this matter is in a vacuum. If this premise is demolished, it is easy to see that if a vacuum exists

between the celestial bodies, solar gravitation-if it exists-should attract all bodies equally, independently of their mass. But all terrestrial astronomy is based

on the mass of bodies and their distance from one another.

Therefore your conception of the cosmos is wrong. Besides, when Newton supposed a gravitational force to exist, he had to imagine the existence of an ether. He could

not conceive of this force without there being a vehicle for it. And it is strange that, later, relativity denies the ether and yet approves of gravity. it admits what the discoverer of gravity himself could not admit.

This being the case, we do not cancel out gravity at all. All we do is to utilise the forces of Nature. if our craft flew on the basis of cancelling out gravity, as you suppose, we would only move in one direction. We would always fly against the

Earth's rotation, and it would be impossible to fly with it, or anywhere near the poles. Besides, we would be limited to the insignificant speed of 1,660 km. per

hour.

Now, it is laughable to imagine a craft coming from another planet with such low velocity and with only one directional movement. Such a saucer would be much

inferior to terrestrial aircraft and it would be a case of our coming to learn from you something about manoeuvrability and how to fly faster.



Author's Note, Chap. 4

The extraordinary power of atmospheric pressure was discovered in 1654. It was then

that Otto Guericke carried out his famous experiment with two hemispheres. Even

sixteen horses could not succeed in pulling them apart. Another time he exhausted

the air from a copper cauldron but the terrific exterior pressure crumpled it as

though it were a piece of paper.

A short while ago, a water sprout was observed at Santos in Brazil, and the bathers

on the beach were able to witness this spectacle. Several tons of water were seen

to rise to a great height and then fall back again. If a ship had been passing at

that moment, it would have been sucked several hundred feet into the air.

This was merely the effect of an area of low pressure, not an absolute vacuum. This

phenomenon is caused by a whirly wind which spins the air molecules at great speed,

thus creating a semi-vacuum at the centre by virtue of the centrifugal force. As

the atmospheric pressure is exerted on the whole of the surface area of the sea, a

tremendous volume of water rises up into the low-pressure area. Toricelli, the

notable Italian physicist, found that atmospheric pressure acting on the surface of

the Earth was equal to 76 cm. of mercury in his tube. Given that 1 cu. cm. of water

weighs 1 gr. and that mercury is 136 times heavier than water, he concluded that

the atmospheric pressure per cm.2 should be 136 gr. x 76 cm., which gives 033 kg.

per cm.

This, however, is the pressure at sea level only. For every 10 m. above sea level,

the height of the column of mercury decreases by i mm. In theory, atmospheric

pressure should cease to exist at a height of 76 km.

However, physics will need to revise its calculations as air currents have been

observed at about this height. Air currents parallel to the Earth's surface give

the upper layers of the atmosphere a considerable degree of support, especially

when we remember that these layers move at a speed of some 1400 m.p.h., or faster

than a jet plane. If these currents did not exist, we would be crushed by the

terrific atmospheric pressure.

So that in whatever part of the atmosphere a saucer is, there is a considerable

atmospheric pressure available for propulsion, its speed will depend on the degree

of vacuum it happens to be wing. To give you some idea of the power of atmospheric

pressure at 1.033 kg. per cm.2: there is a pressure of almost 500 kg. now acting on

the page of this book.

A man can slide a weight of several hundred kilograms over a smooth surface, and

can move several thousand kilograms floating in water. However, no one has ever

been able to lift a weight of 500 kg. unaided, and even in water our large ships

only displace a few thousand tons. On the other band, a saucer 20 m. diameter can

develop a lift of more than 3 million kg., producing an absolute vacuum on its

upper surface. If its diameter were increased to 60 in., the lift obtained from the

atmospheric pressure would reach the incredible total of 29 million kg.

There is thus nothing on Earth to equal this force. If such a craft were built on

Earth it would completely revolutionise our transport system. Such a fantastic

power, enough to lift a skyscraper into the air, would make our large cargo ships

Page 1 of 7Message


look insignificant, for not only do these craft have an enormous carrying capacity,

but they can also move at the speed of lightning without needing landing fields. We

would not even have any further use for cranes.

There is no great difficulty involved in the production of an exterior vacuum.

For reasons of security we are not permitted to give all the information that was

imparted by the captain of the flying saucer.

If anybody were to use the system as here described, he would get nowhere because

there is also another important factor involved, apart from the high voltage and

current and the anti-cathode plates which we mentioned.

The known effects produced by cathode rays are as follows:

(1) They produce fluorescence in bodies with which they come into contact.

(2) They are deflected by a magnetic field.

(3) They are attracted by the positive plate of a condenser.

(4) They penetrate matter enabling one to "see" through it.

(5) They decompose the elements that make up the atmosphere.

(6) They discharge bodies carrying an electric charge.

Now that we know the principle by which saucers move, we can explain the various

phenomena connected with their sightings.

The light that has been seen round them at night depends on the degree of vacuum.

By varying the vacuum the colour is also changed. The flakes that have been seen to

fall when flying saucers pass over are a precipitate of nitrogen. The nitrogen, by

the action of currents, falls from the atmosphere and settles on the ground. The

luminous wake which saucers leave is a result of the ionisation by cathode rays.

After their passage, there must be an intense molecular disturbance of the air,

which would appear to the observer like a vapour trail.

There is no friction between the saucer and the atmosphere, however quickly it

moves. It always moves through a tunnel of low pressure.

All a saucer would have to do to destroy one of our aircraft would be to get close

enough for the aircraft to come within the area of low pressure round the saucer,

and then suddenly change the direction of the vacuum which would release the full

atmospheric pressure on to the aircraft. This would smash it to pieces.

This is what happened to Captain Mantell. When he was pursuing the saucer he got

into the low-pressure area that was maintaining the saucer in the air. After he had

gone through this area, he ran up against the wall of atmospheric pressure on the

opposite side, and was shattered to pieces. He probably died when passing through

the vacuum created by the saucer and may never have been aware of the

disintegration of the plane.

Page 2 of 7Message


This was certainly not done intentionally by the people in the saucer, and could

only have been an accident.

It is apposite to mention certain other details of the functioning of the saucer,

based on the cathode ray method of propulsion. Gassiot, in the middle of the

nineteenth century, made the first unsuccessful attempts to pass electricity

through rarefied gases. After him, Plucker invented the tube which was later used

by Geissler for his experiments, from which the name "Geissler tubes" is derived.

Other scientists of world fame, like Crookes, also carried out experiments with

considerable success, which resulted in considerable progress in the field of

physics.

In a Geissler tube the atmospheric pressure is reduced to between 1 and 3 mm. of

mercury. If the tube contains air and the anode and cathode ends of it are put into

contact with the positive and negative poles of a high tension electric current,

the whole tube lights up with a violet light, with the exception of a space at the

cathode end where the light is blue and separated from the remaining violet light

by a dark band.

Various effects are brought about by changing the gas pressure inside the tube,

such as the appearance of dark bands which are known as Faraday bands; the

disintegration of gas molecules, liberating hydrogen; changes in the colour of the

light to green, yellow, red, etc. Crookes succeeded in proving the mechanical

action of cathode rays by bombarding rotary blades with them and setting them in

motion. Similar experiments with spheres painted black produced the same result.

There was, however, one great difficulty which dogged the steps of science: cathode

rays could not leave the tube of rarefied air since they were incapable of passing

through any substance. The scientists asked themselves what effect cathode rays had

on the ordinary atmosphere.

It was then that Lenard, Nobel prize winner in physics in 1905, working on Hertz'

previous experiments, made an aluminium "window" on the opposite side to the

cathode which projected the rays outside the tube where they could be studied with

ease. He proved that these "Lenard rays" could be propagated in the atmosphere as

easily as in the rarefied air of the tube, causing atmospheric phenomena of a

similar nature. He proved that the passage of electrons through the dense air of

the atmosphere appeared to open up a tunnel giving rise to strong ionisation of the

particles with considerable air turbulence and luminous effects which varied

according to the voltage used.

However, he could not completely comprehend the nature of the phenomena as he did

not know that they were the result of a disturbance in the atmosphere and ether.

The most important thing as far as we are concerned, is to know whether or not

jonisation causes a drop in atmospheric pressure. It is now well known from

meteorology that heavy ions cause low pressure, they often bring about devastating

cyclones. It is known that the emission of a single particle of medium velocity can

produce in the first centimetre of its trajectory through the atmosphere as many as

24,400 ions. The number gradually increases as the particle proceeds along its

trajectory. Even using a low voltage the electrons moved through space at a speed

of between 25,000 and 50,000 miles per second.

Later it was observed that by using 250,000 volts 'the elctrons moved at 150,000

miles per second. In one experiment 900,000 volts was used, but the speed of the

electron was not noted. It is also well known that the higher the voltage used, the

greater is the number of ions produced, sometimes as many as 2 million ions

appearing in the first centimetre of the electron's trajectory.

Page 3 of 7Message


Subsequent experiments showed that the electrons emanating from cathode ray tubes

could break down the atmosphere and set free hydrogen which then also became

ionised.

It may well be that these rays break the atmosphere down completely, and set free

the nuclei, which they subsequently join up with, thus producing the amount of

hydrogen that has been observed.

Madame Curie was able to calculate the speed of ions as 1.3 cm. per electron volt

in dense atmosphere, and 6.7 cm. per electron volt when the ionic movement took

place in pure hydrogen. This shows that a high voltage would result in a higher

electron speed and that in the upper atmosphere the speed would be greater.

The vacuum creating effect is, however, not strictly due to the intrinsic speed of

the ion, but to the atmosphere's ability to absorb ionised particles. While

negative ions are absorbed by the atmosphere, the positive ones move towards the

negatively charged surface of the saucer, at which point the electrons pass into

the vacuum.

In an ordinary cathode ray tube the electric current reaches a saturation point

which shows that all the atmospheric particles contained within the tube have been

ionised. This is due to the limited amount of electrolyte within the confines of

the tube. In the case of the flying saucer the electrolyte is made up of the whole

atmospheric envelope of the Earth which never reaches saturation point. The ionised

"bubble" surrounding the saucer is attracted and absorbed by the surrounding

atmosphere with tremendous force and in its place only a vacuum is left, into which

the saucer moves, impelled by the atmospheric pressure of 1.033 kg. per cm2.

The reader may ask how the saucer can stop in space. The question is a pertinent

one because if an inexperienced saucer pilot were to cut off the current, the

atmosphere would immediately fill the vacuum, generating sufficient heat to

vaporise the saucer and produce a tremendous explosion. Any short circuit would be

equally disastrous.

There are, however, various means by which a saucer can be brought to a standstill.

One is by a magnetic effect which deflects electrons, but we would prefer not to

talk about this here. The chief means, however, is to create a vacuum on the other

side of the saucer as well, preventing the atmosphere from exerting pressure on the

craft.

There is another way this is done which we would like to outline to the reader, but

it involves the whole question of the automatic production of propulsive power for

the saucer itself. In the previous chapter we mentioned various systems of

producing energy but we refrained from mentioning the principal one, which we have

now decided to include in this book to add to its authenticity.

This is not a perpetual motion system which some people might suppose. Energy for

the saucer can be extracted from the atmosphere itself, ensuring constant

uninterrupted mobility.

We saw that it was not the movement of ions themselves that produced the vacuum,

but the atmosphere's ability to absorb them, which corresponds to the electric

potential of the atmosphere. If the end of an insulated wire is heated, anything

from 6o to 6oo volts are developed for every metre that the wire is raised above

ground level.

This gives some idea of the magnitude of this potential. More energy is obtained

Page 4 of 7Message


from the effect of atmospheric pressure on the craft than is required to create the

vacuum.

An electric motor is an example of this type of operation. The motor will not work

without an electromagnet to create the magnetic field; but the electromagnet is

made of soft iron and has no latent magnetism. If a current is passed through it,

the motor begins to turn under the action of the current. The current supplied to

the electromagnet is not proportional to the effect obtained by the rotation of the

motor. The electromagnet in this illustration performs the same function as the

ionised particles which merely supply the atmosphere with the means by which

absorption takes place.

Another illustration we can give is the fission of uranium. The energy used is only

the minimal amount required to bring two masses of uranium dose enough to cause

their explosion. The presence of one produces an excitation in the other and

immediately a chain reaction is set off. These illustrations help us to understand

how saucers obtain their energy automatically without confusing this process with

perpetual motion.

Many people who have seen saucers have observed that most of them, but not all,

have a hollow tube running through their centre. Inside this there is an air

turbine. If some 3oo,oOo kg. of pressure is sufficient to move a saucer of zo m.

diameter, and the available pressure exceeds 3 million kg., there is a considerable

margin of surplus energy. The air pressing against one side of the saucer rushes

through the vent into the area of the vacuum and creates a strong current that

actuates the blades of the turbine.

In a "tunnel" of air 4 metre in diameter, pressure on the turbine blades would be

equal to 130 tons, that is, the pressure of a jet of water of i sq. metre falling

from 130 m. The current of air thus produced would be sufficient to suck a man into

it from 100 yd. away. If a saucer with its turbine working were to pass over a

tree, the movement of the air currents would strip off its branches.

The energy thus obtained would be sufficient to keep a dozen factories going.

This is the way in which the inhabitants of other planets generate the electrical

energy they require without using waterfalls, which are preserved for their natural

beauty.

The air that goes in one side rushes into the vacuum and is there immediately

ionised and absorbed by the atmosphere. Thus there is always a small layer of

atmosphere close to the saucer. When the saucer wants to stop, the emission of

Lenard rays is decreased and this atmospheric layer gradually increases until it

joins up with the adjacent atmosphere.

Any violent collisions between the particles that might occur would take place away

from the surface of the saucer, giving it complete structural protection.

At first sight it might seem absurd to make a tunnel to utilise atmospheric

pressure, yet what is a chimney but a vertical tunnel which makes use of a

difference in atmospheric pressure?

It may well be that many people before us have looked at the power in waterfalls

with wonder, but considered it impossible to use as the pressure was only exerted

in one direction. One day, however, someone must have realised that a paddle-wheel

could be used to transform this power.

Page 5 of 7Message


When it came to the question of exploiting the expansive forces of gases, even the

most renowned scientists ridiculed the idea of using this uncontrollable force,

until an unqualified mechanic constructed the first motor utilising this difference

of energy potential by the use of pistons. The same thing happened with steam;

orthodox science, having looked into the idea, decreed that the machine would not

move.

In spite of this edict, great liners now proudly plough the seven seas. In 1934 the

erudite American C. C. Furnas wrote about atomic energy, saying that any attempt to

exploit the energy contained in the nucleus would be doomed to failure because the

energy derived from its disintegration would be less than that required to bring

the disintegration about.

Eleven years later, atomic power terrorised multitudes and today keeps the world in

a state of panic.

It often happens that the effect is many times greater than the cause. When mixing

chlorine with water a small ray of light is sufficient to detonate the mixture and

convert it into energy.

The small amount of energy contained in a fuse cup or detonator is sufficient to

send a projectile several miles.

The same thing happens with the inexhaustible energy available to a saucer. The

atmospheric ionisation on one side gives rise to a fantastic pressure on the other.

It is the detonator that unleashes a cyclone behind the saucer.

What we are stating is not a pipe dream, but something quite practicable, the

result of observation in low which more advanced beings than ourselves have used

with complete success.

The author of this book does not claim any exclusivity with regard to this

knowledge, as it is certain that other men on Earth also possess it.

It is only that they will always refuse to reveal what they know, for fear of

vested interests, or because they have been sworn to secrecy by certain

philosophical orders, whose existence everyone is aware of. The whole world, the

pattern of life of nations, commercial interests, governments, frontiers, in fact

everything could be transformed by the exploitation of this atmospheric energy.

Cars would lose their raison d'etre and there would be no further need for roads or

railways, nor for large port installations or ships.

The ownership of land would cease to exist. The head of a family could put his

house on wings and move about in space visiting any part of the world he wished,

with his whole household and without, it should be noted, having to give any

explanation to officious Customs officers, unless aerial barriers are set up.

Governments would not be in a position to impose crushing taxes, and without taxes

there would be no armies to make wars to plague us.

The flying saucer could be used to destroy humanity, but it could also lead to

man's complete liberation and the release from the "patriotic" chains that bind

him, and the reinstatement of his right to direct his own life which a misguided

social order deprived him of, leading him by various isms to a criminal and

unbrotherly clash of interests.

Page 6 of 7Message


The petroleum reserves of Earth are running out, fissionable material will one day

come to an end and with deforestation, rivers and waterfalls will dry up, but

atmospheric pressure will always be there.

God gave man inexhaustible wealth to be exploited as the evolution of life and

intelligence proceed. Before we were created, He prepared our table with our "daily

bread."

In our intellectual blindness we cannot discern the laden table and, famished, pray

that He should satisfy our hunger. Nature, however, wellnigh revolted by such

stupidity, pushes into our mouth things which we have only to stretch forth our

hands to get.

It is infuriating to us proud members of modem Western civilisation, lords of fire

and thunder, with the exalted title of homo sapiens, that individuals from other

planets, whose very existence we had until recently disbelieved, should have to

teach us how to use atmospheric energy to save ourselves from dying of atmospheric

pollution or becoming cannibals. If we do not, strictly speaking, eat each other's

flesh, we live on the sweat of the poor in a disgraceful and unjust society, which

progress will one day have to supplant; unless we kill ourselves off in a hydrogen

war before that happens.

We would rather not say anything about the electronic fluid discussed by the

captain of the flying saucer. The malevolence of humanity is enough to discourage

anyone and turn to stone the most friendly of hearts. Man's antecedents prove his

intentions. All that has been achieved to date has been used to further his

murderous, dominating and imperialist spirit.

Santos Dumont, one of those beings without parallel, who only grace this world once

in a century, sought in death an escape from his conscience for having given wings

to man, while in the depths of his soul there was only love and desire for

progress. In wishing to make man into an angel he forgot that we were not men but

wild beasts. He gave wings to vipers. This kindly soul, doubtless used to living

among the immortals in a glorious homeland far from Earth, did not realise that

what was progress for good people was, for us, a calamity without parallel. He

would never have made his invention into a weapon of mass murder.

If Pasteur had dreamed that his discovery would one day give rise to

bacteriological warfare, he would rather have taken his knowledge to the grave;

if Galvani could have foreseen the electric chair he would have preferred not to

have exposed himself to ridicule by asserting that frogs' legs could be made to

twitch; Marconi would certainly have committed suicide had he foreseen that radio

could be used for the remote control of missiles which in future war could destroy

life on Earth; Curie and his wife would never have revealed radioactivity to the

world had they been able to foresee the fate of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

It is not necessary to state how a flying saucer can leave the Earth. If, one day,

higher beings more advanced than ourselves see in man a sufficient greatness of

soul to reach up to them, they will come to meet us and aid us in the great journey

through space. It is not up to the humble author of this book to tell the world the

why and wherefore of things. Others who do not belong to the Earth will discharge

this duty. On that day the condor will come down from the Andes, not only to visit

us earthworms of the lowlands, but to give us wings powerful enough to make the

return journey to the Andes. May this day not be far distant!

Page 7 of 7Message


ASTRO-NAVIGATION, Chap. 5

Q: Shall we one day be able to journey through space and visit other planets?

A: Yes, it will be possible, as it is, in fact, at present. There is now much talk on Earth of journeys through space and of conquering other worlds and their inhabitants but before running the tremendous risks involved, one needs to know all the laws which govern the planetary system and the peculiarities of each one of the planets. If one were ignorant of these laws one would be destroyed before leaving the rarefied matter that surrounds the Earth; and if we are to have the pleasure of being conquered we should hate to see you come to grief without having got beyond the gaseous envelope of your own planet! There is no visible doorway into space, but it is shut to those who are ignorant of the fundamental laws that govern it.

Knowledge is the key that opens it.

But in view of the state of Earthly knowledge, this is as yet an impossible dream. Science will not be able, in one fell swoop, to achieve the conquest of space when it knows nothing about what happens more than 300 miles up.

How do you think that man, who knows nothing of the forces which move and maintain the planets in space, can leave the Earth? This would be tantamount to a primitive savage building an aeroplane and flying.

A certain American official even went so far as to state that other planets would have to be conquered, and the Stars and Stripes hoisted on them. He presumably thought this was the best way of defending Democracy and our Christian values.

To achieve this using fuel propellants is impractical for various reasons, if only because fuel is unnecessary. If the forces which operate in the planetary system were indeed those which terrestrial science claims them to be, the saucer would be attracted by the Sun or by the planets and in this case the law of inertia that maintains acceleration imparted to a body would not be valid.

Even at this point science has gone wrong.

If one were to use fuel, a tremendous amount of it would be required in view of the time it would take for a craft of this type to reach another planet. Then there is the question of the return journey. This method is obviously impractical.

The difficulty facing the people of Earth is an illusory one. They need only to understand cosmic laws and everything will be made easy. If we have been able to understand them, you also will be able to.

Earth's scientists have got their terminology mixed. It appeared to them that the only thing that could conceivably maintain the Earth in orbit and account for its revolution was solar attraction, so they based all their calculations on this. In reality the opposite is the case; the Sun exerts a repulsive force on the Earth. Further, as it was obvious to them that a body could not maintain itself in an orbit when acted upon by a single force, they impute miraculous qualities to centrifugal force, believing that it was the second force that held the planets in their orbits. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Even if centrifugal force did give the necessary balance to a planet, which it does not, there is one glaring omission in this theory, namely the force that impels a planet in a

Page 1 of 9Message


certain direction. They see that a planet is attracted, they also see that centrifugal force counterbalances this attraction, but they do not see that they have overlooked a third force which gives a planet movement. When one whirls a stone on the end of a string, the string represents the force of attraction and centrifugal force plays the part of repulsion, but the individual represents the third force which gives direction to the stone.

If y = F or f= y x M,

then the element of propulsion F is necessary to make the Earth move, since it is this that imparts an acceleration to the mass M. It is logical that a body to which acceleration has been imparted should begin to move, but it is absurd to state that this acceleration could be initiated without a force and then maintained without one, especially as there is a loss of energy as the result of the movement of the body against the action of gravity.

Your term is "centrifugal force," which means to say that all the points in a body tend to fly away from the centre. We put it diffently. In our view all the points M' tend to follow a straight line in space in the direction of the impelling force and at a tangent to the equatorial plane of the body.

It is this interpretation of centrifugal force which gives direction to the saucer when we leave the Earth or any other planet. Without it there would be no interplanetary travel.

Now let us analyse the consequences of the terrestrial system based on solar attraction and repulsion through centrifugal force: if all the points of a body tried to fly away from the centre, the force of solar attraction resisted by the centrifugal force would give rise to a loss of energy and the planet would become stationary.

We should also bear in mind that this loss of energy would be a double one as the Earth develops two kinds of centrifugal force, the first due to its orbital velocity, and the second due to its axial rotation. Work cannot be performed by a body without a source of power. If Earth itself were the source of the power, then the whole of physics, thermodynamics included, would be wrong.

This alone is sufficient to show the incorrectness of terrestrial astronomy, as a theory is only valid when it answers all the relevant problems involved.

________________________________________________________________________________________

Let us look at the following:

Velocity in Distance from

Orbit the Sun Mass

Earth 66,000 m.p.h. 93,000,000 miles 1

Jupiter 29,500 m.p.h. 489,000,000 miles 317

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Jupiter, with a mass 317 times greater than that of the Earth, should be subject to a far greater attraction than the Earth, yet the velocity in orbit is not high enough to counterbalance this and maintain it in orbit. This planet has a large mass and a low velocity. This being the case, either the orbital velocity of the Earth is too great for its mass, and it should be flung out of its orbit, or Jupiter's is too low, and it should be drawn into the Sun.

Page 2 of 9Message


Note that I give Jupiter's mass as 317 times that of the Earth, so as not to differ from your estimate which is based on the force of attraction of the Sun against centrifugal force. This figure, however, is incorrect.

You might raise the objection that Jupiter, with its large mass, revolves in an outer orbit according to the theory that spheres of greater mass are said to be more subject to the action of centrifugal force. Against this we have the case of Mars which is smaller than the Earth, yet is farther from the Sun; or again, the planets beyond Jupiter which are smaller than it, and yet revolve at a tremendous distance from the Sun. Moreover their velocity in orbit is very low. So that does not make sense either.

The phenomena of Nature are simple and can easily be explained. The difficulties lie in the capacity of beings to analyse the facts, and they often elaborate complicated systems which are often quite ridiculous. There was one which lasted for some time which maintained that the Earth was held in space by elephants. If anyone had had the sense to ask what the elephants were standing on, this theory might have had a shorter life.

Nobody can equate problems without weighing all the factors which lead to their solution. Scientists forgot, when dealing with the movement of planets, that energy must have been used up as a result of solar attraction working against the two centrifugal forces mentioned. If no explanation was given as to the source of power necessary to sustain the movement- which in this case is what the elephants' feet stand on-then it is because the problem was based on false premises.

In the theory which I contend is the correct one, this force is derived from difference of energy potential which sunlight sets up by illuminating one face of the planet while leaving the other m darkness. A body which is balanced between two opposing forces (attraction and repulsion) has no weight and moves like a stone whirled round on the end of a string, the radius of its orbit being represented by the string. All the mechanical phenomena of the Universe are explainable.

Q: There is one great difficulty you appear to forget. If there is any logic in your theory that planets can be maintained between the attraction of the magnetic centre of our system and the repulsion by the light of the Sun, how can your theory be applied to satellites? For example, how can you reconcile these factors with the problem of the Moon's movements?

A: By the theory of centrifugal force which is what I have not yet explained. Before showing you the solution I would like to point out the difficulties in the theory that Earth's people have elaborated.

The Moon does not describe a truly circular orbit round the Earth. Sometimes it moves closer and other times it moves away. The distance between the planet and the satellite can vary by as much as 26,000 miles. If the Moon were maintained by the action of gravity against centrifugal force, its orbit should be perfectly circular and there being a balance of these two forces, the Moon would be unable to alter its distance from the Earth, unless there was some inconsistency in the laws of gravitation, which would be inadmissible. This does not take into consideration the fact that when it moves into close orbit, the balance is upset and the satellite should be drawn towards the Earth.

The first satellite of Mars represents a curious phenomenon which completely negates your conception of the truth; while Mars completes its axial rotation in 24 hours 37 minutes, its satellite completes three revolutions round the planet, taking 7 hours 39 minutes per revolution.

We are thus back to where we started, wondering what supplies the force which enables the satellite to disobey the gravitational force of the planet and complete three revolutions instead of one.

Even more curious is the behaviour of the ninth, tenth and eleventh satellites of Jupiter, which utterly defy the laws of gravitation as you suppose them to be.

Page 3 of 9Message


Jupiter and its satellites move anti-clockwise, whereas the above three satellites move in the opposite direction.

I will now show you why the Moon is held in space without colliding with the planet; it is because it lies within the periphery of the etheric envelope which surrounds the Earth. There is a magnetic attraction between the two bodies, the poles of the Earth acting on the poles of the Moon and vice versa. While there is attraction between their magnetic fields, the two bodies themselves are repelled by solar light.

Q: How?

A: Sunlight is reflected from the Moon to Earth and from the Earth to the Moon. The combined reflective action of the two bodies supplies the necessary repulsive force to overcome the magnetic attraction. The result is that the satellite maintains itself in orbit. When the reflection of sunlight between the two bodies is greatest, the pressure increases and the Moon moves away from the Earth; when, however, the Moon is waning the reflection of light is less, which proportionally decreases the force of repulsion and the magnetic attraction increases so that the satellite moves closer to the Earth.

FIG. 6. HOW THE MOON IS MAINTAINED IN ORBIT.

While the poles of the Moon are attracted by the Earth's poles the reflected light of the Sun coming from the Moon causes the two bodies to repel one another, and this repulsion balances with the magnetic attraction between them. Since the amount of reflected light varies, so the Moan's distance from the Earth varies too. The maximum variation is about 26,ooo miles. When there is an eclipse and less moonlight reaches the Earth, the repulsive force is thereby lessened; but as the Moon is at that moment still being repelled by the full pressure of the sunlight from behind, it falls rapidly through space towards the Earth. The time is, however, too short to seriously affect the orbit, and the proper balance is restored as soon as the reflection returns after the eclipse.

This variation causes the Moon to describe a perfect ellipse around the Earth (see Fig. 6).

It is wrong to suppose that tides are caused by the attraction of the Moon. What happens is the exact opposite; this can be proved by observation. Sunlight reflected from the Moon exerts a pressure on the liquid mass of the ocean. Being compressed at one point,

Page 4 of 9Message


this liquid is raised up at another. This is the explanation of the retardation of tides caused by the Moon25 (see Fig. 7).

Astronomers would run up against the same difficulty in explaining the orbits of the planets as they did when explaining the lunar orbit, because if, in reality, the Sun did attract them, they could not conceivably have elliptical orbits. But the movement of the Sun around the magnetic centre of the system makes its repulsive force stronger at times, in which case the planet moves away from it, and other times the magnetic centre is closer to the planet and the planet moves towards it. The difference in the eccentricity of the orbits of the various planets is due to the volume and density of each of them. So that it is more rational to calculate the density of celestial bodies by observing their diameter and their distance at aphelion and perihelion.

Q: But the pressure of light that is reflected between two bodies must be very small.

A: It is no less than the magnetic attraction. You can also prove for yourself that this attraction is minimal in view of the fact that the Moon moves around the Earth in little less than thirty days. If the attraction were strong the satellite should revolve round the Earth at the same speed and it should not advance or lag by more than so minutes a day.

Aristotle committed suicide by throwing himself off a cliff, because he could find no explanation for the tides. There are two tides a day. At the Equator they reach a height of about 30 in. at full Moon and about 20 inches. at other phases of the Moon. Tides can be regarded as a depression in the surface of the waters, with an elevation on either side of it-these elevations are not waves, but actual increases in the mass of water. If the tides were caused by attraction, there would be a single wave travelling directly under the Moon; but tides do not occur directly under the Moon, and take place 50 minutes later each day. According to current theory this daily retardation is caused by the angle of the Sun to the Earth at the time.

The waters of the Earth, on being compressed at one point, rise up in two other places, and this is the cause of the tides. The reflected light from the Moon causes a compression at one point, and the direct light from the Sun a compression at another. Thus it is that the tides are highest at the full Moon, these two pressures then being conjoined.

The pressure of light is not just the insignificant weight that is felt at the surface of the Earth; there is a very great pressure on the upper layers of the atmosphere, that gradually decreases until it reaches the surface of the planet where it is almost non-existent. It behaves like a bullet, whose power of penetration is very high at the beginning of its trajectory, but gradually tails off as the velocity decreases through resistance of the atmosphere until it eventually comes to rest. This pressure of light is transmitted through the atmosphere until it reaches the oceans.

This same compressive force of the Son's light causes winds. Pressing on the upper etheric layers, the force is then transmitted to the atmosphere proper. The difference of pressure on various parts of the atmosphere gives rise to air currents, and their intensity depends on the amount of pressure acting on them at the time. Most wind currents start near the Equator, where the pressure is greatest. However, a great deal depends on the speed these upper sir currents are able to maintain, very often they reach as much as 1250 miles per hour. This movable layer is subjected to the greatest pressure, which it translates into a movement parallel with the Earth's surface. If the speed of these upper layers drops, then the full pressure of the light of the Sun is transmitted to the Earth. It is this which gives rise to cyclones. We should not confuse those air currents that run parallel to the Earth's surface with the vertical ones. The former are caused by the pressure of the Sun's light, and the latter by temperature differences in the upper layers.

Page 5 of 9Message


Some of the great force that the waves from the Sun exert on this planet. maintaining it in orbit, is absorbed in producing high winds in both the upper layers of the atmosphere and those close to the Earth's surface.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Q: Does this mean that the satellite has no movement of its own?

A: That is correct. It is merely subject to the effect, at a distance, of the Earth's movement. The speed of the Earth's rotation produces an angular velocity on the Moon of almost one twenty-eighth. It is as though only the axis of the Earth exerted an attraction. This being the case there can be no attraction between the masses but there is a magnetic attraction.

Q: Knowing all these things, how do you set about travelling though space, or better still, how should we go about it if we were to attempt to do so?

A: I explained to you how the atmosphere can be ionised by cathode rays. The ionised "bubble" is absorbed by the atmosphere creating a vacuum in its rear into which the saucer is drawn, thus rising upwards. Now, the Earth develops a surface speed of 1,040 m.p.h., but no one feels it move. This means to say that if we continued to rise in relation to a point on the Earth's surface we should be increasing our speed, but would have no sensation of acceleration. On reaching a height of 250,000 miles from the Earth's surface we should, without any other effort than that of going upwards, reach a speed of 66,000 m.p.h., which is equal to the speed of revolution of the planet in space. We neither see nor feel the speed we have reached as we have no point of reference; but if there were a stationary observer outside the etheric envelope, in which we have no sensation of speed, he would see us moving at a terrific angular velocity.

Having reached this speed we would try to escape from the etheric coveting, falling into the vacuum. Due to the tendency of moving bodies to move in a straight line, we would leave the etheric envelope at a point at which the saucer, by following a straight line, would reach the planet we wanted to get to. The procedure would, of course, be different if we were using the "electric fluid" of the planet as our means of propulsion.

In order to explain one principle to you, I have had to omit another. I said "a straight line" in order to simplify the reasoning, but we have, in fact, to take into consideration the deflective action the forces of attraction and repulsion would have on us. We would, however, follow a rectilinear course because we have means of offsetting these differences. If we create a magnetic field with the powerful solenoids at our disposal, we should be attracted, and if we switch off the field, we should be repelled. That is why it is necessary to understand fully the laws of Nature, otherwise we would not reach any planet at all.

Also for the sake of simplicity I said that we leave the Earth at a speed of 66,ooo m.p.h. In practice the minimum escape velocity we use is 125,000 m.p.h., of which 66,000 are supplied by the Earth and the difference by the speed developed by the saucer within the atmosphere. Sometimes we use even higher speeds which to you would seem incredible. Nature has resources which the people of Earth have not dreamed of.

Using a speed of 66,000 m.p.h. with which the Earth provides us gratis, it would be possible for people to attempt a journey through space and reach other planets, but there would be certain dangers due to loss of energy though solar repulsion. It should be noted that we move at right angles to the direction of solar repulsion.

If we were to move in the same direction we should be impelled by it, and if we were to move in an opposite direction we should be repelled by it, in which case we would suffer a loss of kinetic energy. Therefore a higher speed is required, as the laws of inertia are valid to some extent.

A pilot who is used to making these flights could do so using this low speed, but it

Page 6 of 9Message


would take him a long time.

With a high escape velocity we only require fuel or 'other sources of energy in small quantities for use within the saucer.

We can completely disconnect the Crookes and Geissler tubes which bring about the atmospheric disturbance because we have no need for them. Once in a while they are used to deflect meteorites that we meet with en route.

We generally connect them up when wandering meteorites appear on the screens of our detecting apparatus.

At a certain height above the Earth's atmosphere a body begins to rotate violently. This fact has been observed by you countless times, and it is these same factors which cause the Earth to rotate. Under low atmospheric pressure a body illuminated on one face, with the other in darkness, tends to rotate on itself on an imaginary axis. This is a grave danger for the inexperienced for the same thing happens in space. In order to correct this we heat up that part of the craft which is away from the Sun, and this maintains our balance.

The principal technique in astro-navigation lies in establishing contact with the etheric covering of the planet we wish to reach. We must always approach the planet in the direction of its rotation. If we were to approach it counter to its rotation, our craft would be broken to pieces. For this reason we approach the etheric mass at a tangent, following the direction of its movement. Two bodies travelling in the same direction have no relative velocity; it is as though they were both stationary. Then the contact between them does not give rise to any friction.

I should also add that we have means of stopping and starting the saucer in space and, naturally, of increasing or diminishing its speed. If we were travelling at 175,000 m.p.h. it would be dangerous to make contact with the etheric covering of a planet with a low speed of rotation, even if this took place in the direction of its movement. In such cases we reduce speed until we are moving at the same speed as the etheric covering.

This is a convenient place to explain to you the phenomenon of meteorites which reach the planets. If they reach the etheric envelope against the direction of the planet's rotation, they are broken to pieces, but if they come into it following the direction of rotation they sometimes manage to reach the surface of the planet. This, however, depends on the speed at which they reach the planet.

If we go from Earth to Jupiter, we generally use Mars or Venus as staging posts, depending on the positions of the planets at the time.

In your case, as you would not have any reliable means of correcting your speed in space, you should, if you were to undertake a voyage to Jupiter, proceed as follows:

Earth moves in orbit at 66,000 m.p.h., Mars at 54,O0O m.p.h. and Jupiter at 29,000 m.p.h. The solution would be to use Mars as a staging post, and attain a speed identical to this planet's rotation, that is to say 54,000S m.p.h. A difference of 25000 m.p.h. between your speed and that of the ether of the planet will not produce too great a friction. In order to prevent accidents the Geissler tubes should be switched on at the moment of contact in order to avoid as much friction as possible. With the velocity supplied by Mars, the journey could be continued to Jupiter, but the trip would take a long time.

No landing should be made on Jupiter itself, but on the satellites. The small etheric envelope makes contact very dangerous, unless the craft has its own means of deceleration in space. You should aim by preference for Ganymede, which has a large etheric envelope and atmosphere moving at a high speed. Io can also be recommended. It would be wrong for you to pass via Venus since this planet has a velocity of 77,000 m.p.h. and the difference between this speed and Jupiter's would be too great.

Page 7 of 9Message


Q: What would happen if we were to stop the craft? For example, if we approached a planet with only vertical acceleration and no horizontal acceleration?

A: You would only do this once, there would be no second time. You would be utterly destroyed. The shock would be of unparalleled intensity. It would be as though you were standing on a railway line and a train ran into you at high speed.

We know because many of us made this mistake and died. It was also difficult for us to learn the secrets of space. You will not have these difficulties if you undertake a space journey one day, because we shall have told you the dangers that can dog the steps of the most courageous traveller.

You have only to listen to us and tell the pundits of Earth that it is wiser for an individual to profit by the experience of others than to reach the same result at the price of his own life. We are aware that you threaten to dominate and even to destroy us, but we do not wish to bring about your ruin that way. On the contrary, we should sorry to see the people of Earth fail, as we are sorry about many of the things they do.

We would prefer to see you as horsemen of space, holding the reins of a fiery chariot, or as intrepid sailors braving the turbulent seas of the Cosmos.

Maybe men would then come to understand the grandeur of the works of God who dispensed riches abundantly in every corner of the Universe, and see that there is no need to fight for land and lebensraum. To fight for these things shows an ignorance of the greatness of the Universe; man behaves like a turkey held within an imaginary circle, lacking the intelligence to see that he needs only to take a single step to freedom.

Maybe men would also cease destroying one another in warfare over some wretched oil wells which are no more important than holes in the ground. If they need energy, space sends it to them from all directions by means of cosmic rays. It is as though they were dying of thirst while sailing down the Amazon.

They have only to lower a bucket into the water and fill it as often as they wish.

If they would cease making war, and live like rational beings, we would show them how to harness energy, be it atomic, solar, magnetic or cosmic energy. If they learn to be peace-loving and merciful, the elder brothers in the solar system will show them how to turn this Earth into a Garden of Eden.

Do not believe that God made the world evil, for it is His wish that all should be happy. Nobody's suffering brings Him any satisfaction. Pain, physical or mental suffering and difficulties in general are of no help to anybody, but only show how debased his feelings have now become. If anything produces suffering, it is resentment and blasphemy against Him who continually showers blessings on us.

Everyone is responsible for the misery and oppression in which he finds himself If man changes his heart and makes up his mind to be merciful and good, he will at once have countless brothers at his side to help him, not to mention the help and joy from on High. Rest assured that the Father is more ready to give than the son is to ask.

If one day you should recount to others what I have told you, tell them that I, personally, in the name of the inhabitants of my planet, assure them if one day any country in the world decides to abandon destruction, I will come, together with thousands of others, to give them material help and moral support.

Even if this should happen to a man instead of a country, we would still come to this man, and not a hair on his head would perish. We do not rely on our forces. alone, but on the paramount power of the Universe, which always supports the efforts of beings who follow the right path.

Page 8 of 9Message


At the moment the Great Powers of Earth are preparing to make war. In a few years their swords will be drawn, making a holocaust in honour of their Moloch, and a host of victims will fall to the self-interest of a few potentates who stop at nothing to gain their objectives, even at the cost of many living.

Human blindness is deplorable. Men preach peace but destroy the Earth; they talk of love and perpetrate deeds of hatred; they believe in progress but disregard finer feelings, becoming worse than beasts.

We have been watching the carnage on Earth for some time and we had hoped that man might one day understand the work of God and repent. We waited for this transformation to come about, but in vain. However fruitless our efforts may be, we have come to present ourselves and to offer you help. In this we are obeying an order, and our hearts are glad to be able to extend a helping hand to others.

You must be wondering why I am revealing all our knowledge without restriction. It is because we would like to share what we have with those who have not. It is like giving medicine to a child, if the pill is bitter we coat it with sugar.

While explaining the scientific points we are at the same time making a desperate appeal to you to unite in the great Christian doctrine of brotherhood and to renounce wars for ever.

It is an indication that we are ready to help you with all our resources, asking for nothing in return save the right to call each other friends.

We are not interested in your raw materials, because we can obtain them at will by transmutation. We would like to see your Earth and land in your cities, to live together with the people and enjoy their company.

If we were in too much of a hurry to come down, we would greet you with a friendly dip of the wing.

You would come to us and be able to live in our world, making use of all that we have, because in our society, all goods are held in common. Among us the only currency is brotherhood. We do not bargain with the gifts that God gave us, but put ourselves in the position of being able to hand them out.

We offer our hand to you in these dire straits, and would not like it to be turned down, hoping to take back with us a warm friendship. However, we do not expect you to have any greater feeling of brotherhood for us than you have for each other. We would be quite content with a small corner in the human heart when it becomes full of love for its fellow beings.

If there should be misery as a result of wars, tell us, and we will help you. It saddens me, however, to see that wars take place against the wishes of most people, because poor people do not fight easily. Carnage has become the perquisite of the rich and powerful, of those who need no help and who even renounce God, seeing no necessity for the Divine Presence in their lives. Abundance blinded them, gluttony clouded their vision. Strife is the product of egoism. It cannot be said that they fight for principles, for a man of principles does not fight. The great principles that have guided the life of many men on Earth, and which also guide life on other worlds, are love of God and of one's neighbour.

Page 9 of 9Message


SUNDRY TOPICS, Chap. 6

Q: Taking your theory that the light of the Sun repels bodies in space, and that the tides are caused by the force of this light reflected from the Moon, why is it that the Earth's velocity in orbit increases when the Moon crosses this orbit ahead

of the Earth, and decreases when it crosses it in the Earth's wake?

A: When the Moon is ahead of the Earth, it is obvious that the pressure of light gives an impulse to the surface of the Moon. As the Moon is within the Earth's

magnetic field, this impulse is transmitted magnetically back to Earth as though it were impelling the Earth from the rear. This is like a system of transmission of

forces. The opposite happens when the Moon crosses in the wake of the planet. When the light presses upon it, it is as though it opposed the Earth.

Q: You told me that if a comet approached the Earth against the direction of the

Earth's rotation, it would be shattered. However, it seems that comets avoid approaching other bodies, since those that come too close to the satellites of Jupiter are deflected. Why?

A: This is again due to the force of repulsion which light exerts upon bodies. The light from the satellites does not only fall upon the planet, but goes out in all directions. Each satellite acts as a mirror on the comets, which are deflected by

their joint effect, and are forced to change direction.

One particular comet, for instance, approached the Sun and was at the same time repelled by it. This resulted in an acceleration of 1,400 miles per second.

Everything depends upon the speed with which one body approaches the other, and the position of the satellites at that moment. If the direction of the approaching body is such that it receives the effective light of the satellites at an angle, then it

will be deviated from its path, but if this light meets it anywhere near head on, then the comet will quite probably reach the planet, having sufficient acceleration

to overcome the repulsive force of the light.

This is what happened to Saturn. A comet entered the solar system, demolished a satellite in its path, and both satellite and comet were transformed into a huge

ring. The fragments of the comet and of the satellite can still be seen in this ring, forming concentric circles according to the density of their matter.

Q: You spoke, also, of an envelope of ether around the Earth; however, Michelson in

his famous experiment found no ether.

A: He found none, nor could it be found. The retardation which he thought to find in the speed of light, owing to the resistance of the ether, could not exist if the

ether moves with the same angular velocity as the Earth. When two bodies develop identical velocity in the same direction, they remain in the same relative positions. It does not matter what the speed is to an observer outside the system;

it is a question of relative velocity between two points in the same system. A mass M may rotate at any speed; the important thing is to observe whether two points of

the mass move at different speeds. The most difficult problems can be explained with the simplest illustrations. If a fly takes off from the rear of a bus travelling at high speed, and flies to the front in is seconds, would it take more

Page 1 of 8Message


than is seconds for it to fly back to the rear of the bus?

Q: No, it takes the same time because it is flying inside the vehicle.

A: Exactly, it takes the same time. Let us now suppose that one person is seated in the rear and another in front; the one behind throws a ball to the other in front,

who returns it. If the ball is thrown with the same force in each direction, it should take the same time to go as it takes to come back. You see that the speed of the bus is external, that is to say in relation to points outside the bus. Inside

the bus there is no speed. Michelson should have reasoned his experiment out in the same way; light being like thr ball going from one part of the bus to another,

without any loss of speed. It could no more be retarded in relation to the ether than the ball in relation to the atmosphere. It-is as though one were to say there is no atmosphere because it did not cause the ball to loose velocity when the bus

was travelling at high speed.

However, Michelson is not to be blamed. The blame lies with those who thought that the ether was universal and stationary in relation to Earth. On this false premise,

anybody would have come to the same erroneous conclusion. If a minor premise in a syllogism is wrong, the conclusion is wrong, just as it is if a major premise is

involved. False theories produce wrong results. As far as that experiment was concerned, it was a false premise on which the people of Earth have elaborated a whole theory. We must therefore go back to first principles.

Michelson found a constant for the speed of light. Is this constant correct? The answer is no. If he found that the ether had no retarding effect on light, it was because:

(1) There can be no retardation in the movement of a body if all points of its mass move with the same speed. That is to say that ether has the same impulse as light, less its velocity.

(2) The medium was a homogeneous one.

(3) The basis of measurement was very small (12 yd.).

(4) Retardation of light due to the resistance of the medium should be sought by comparing two different media, say air and water.

(5) Light is only visible on the planet if it has a speed of i86,000 miles per second.

Let us take this a stage further; the resistance which Michelson sought and did not

find is to be found in a mirror which reflects light, because a resistance is set up by the barrier, in this case the mirror, in the process of reflection.

In water, for example, the reflection is never complete because part of the light

is absorbed. This shows that there is pressure, resistance and absorption. On looking at the Moon, we notice that this reflected light is softer. In this case some of the visible light falls to a lower frequency and becomes invisible on

account of this resistance by the barrier.

It depends on what we call light. Something which is darkness for you may be flooded with light for me.

A single pressure on the eyeball or the optic nerve can demonstrate this fact.

There are species of animals which see in another frequency range and for them

Page 2 of 8Message


night is day and vice versa. Infra red rays are a form of invisible light and their

speed is much less than that of visible light. Again, chemical, actinic or ultra-violet rays are invisible light and travel with much greater speed than visible

light, as they have much higher frequencies; that is, always assuming that the speed equals frequency times wavelength.

If we say that visible light travels in space with a speed of 186,000 miles per

second, we should be right; but we should be wrong if we thought that this speed constant applied to waves of different frequency ranges.

We must consider certain aspects of the problem. For their propagation, these rays

require a medium adapted to their wavelength and frequency. Heat rays, or infra-red rays, require a dense medium, for they cannot pass through a vacuum.

Visible light can travel in a semi-vacuum and in a dense medium to a certain

extent, but not as well as infra-red rays do.

In an absolute vacuum there is no propagation of light. This can better be seen in the so-called holes in space, such as the "Coal Sack" in the Milky Way. In a

Geissler tube also, it can be seen that light ceases to cast a shadow when the pressure within the tube is very low. However, a vacuum is the ideal medium for the propagation of waves above the frequency of visible light.

Looking at the problem in this way, the light that reaches the Earth's surface is modified. If this were not so, the chemical rays would destroy life on Earth.

Behold the wisdom of God, who protects the planets close to the Sun by giving them

a cloak of dense atmosphere and ether, and gives those distant ones, whose speed of revolution is low, a thin covering.

The modification of solar light can be seen at sunrise or sunset, when it is red,

whereas at midday it is white. This modification from white to red takes place over a distance of 6,758 km., equal to the equatorial radius of Earth, which is the extra distance the light must travel to reach the observer, compared with the light

at midday. While the latter has to penetrate 400,822 km. of ether, the light of the rising Sun has to travel 407,200 km. Between white and red light there is a

difference of 30,000 mgcs. per second. If the light loses 30,000 mgcs. in 6,758 km., how much will it lose in 407,200?

If the wavelength remains the same and the frequency is considerably increased,

this must mean that the waves from the Sum reach the Earth's etheric covering at a much higher speed as shown by the formula:

Wavelength = distance travelled through etheric covering/ over 1

We can see the same thing in the difference of the speed of light in the

atmosphere. and in water. It is only 140,000 miles per second in water, as opposed to i86,000 in the atmosphere. Therefore, density has a considerable effect on its

speed.

Light which becomes visible on reaching the Earth's surface reaches the etheric envelope of the Earth at a speed of 6,250,000 miles per second; and light that is

above the visible spectrum on reaching the Earth arrives at far higher speeds. For the Sun emits its energy at various wavelengths and at different frequencies. Its emission is never uniform.

We have reached a point where we can say that the light of the Sun exerts on

Page 3 of 8Message


Earth a pressure equal to the weight of light, measured at the Earth's surface,

plus the energy lost in traversing the 400,000 km. of etheric mass. If we consider that the effect is twofold, since this "fatigue" of light is progressive or in

geometrical progression, we can arrive at an approximate idea of what that means.

Q: Why a twofold effect?

A: Because, as light loses weight, its frequency falls correspondingly and this, in turn, is a factor.

Having thus obtained the pressure of solar light, and reasoning that Earth's stability in orbit is due to the equilibrium between the forces of attraction and repulsion, it is evident that the magnetic field that causes the attraction must

exactly counterbalance the force of repulsion; we can then determine the flux density of the magnetic field.

The Danish scientist Olaf Roemer established the speed of light in 1676. as the result of observations he made of eclipses of an inner satellite of Jupiter.

Together with his teacher Cassini he observed an eclipse of this satellite when the

Earth was in conjunction with Jupiter and again when it was in opposition; the second eclipse taking place 1,002 seconds later than predicted. They came to the conclusion that the retardation was due to the Earth's position in relation to

Jupiter, and that as the diameter of the Earth's orbit was 300 million km ,then the speed of light must equal this figure divided by the 1,000 second delay, that is to

say 300,000 km. per second.

Waves above the visible spectrum may well have reached the Earth long before that, travelling at far higher speeds than the visible ones. The speed of waves in the

visible spectrum is actually 300,000 km. per second, but this does not mean to say that energy of a higher frequency is limited to this low speed.

Light is therefore not necessarily the fastest moving energy in space.

The visible spectrum covers a band of several frequencies, there is a great

difference between the wavelength of red and violet light. Chemical rays have a far higher speed of transmission than light. We must bear in mind that our power of

sight which only operates on one octave is very limited. It is possible that certain birds are able to see on other wavelengths, which are invisible to us. A raven, for example, can see in complete proves that even at night there is energy

in space. This energy may very well be beyond our range of perception. If man had the power of vision that certain animals possess, and then verified the speed of

the light that he was seeing with, his results would certainly be different to ours. If he then built up a relativist theory with these data his conception of the Universe would also be very different to ours. Relativist science can therefore

only show us the world as perceived by our senses, and never the ultimate Universe, where phenomena beyond our perception take place.

Man is an egocentric being. For a long time he believed the Earth was the centre of

the Universe. When this theory was disproved, he came to believe that the Universe was the result of our limitations, as though wishing to impose his will on Nature

by disbelieving anything beyond his senses. He believes that he is the ne plus ultra of Creation; there can be no intelligence superior to his, there can be no life outside the Earth, there can be no beings greater than he, man is the only god

there is. There can be no other light than that which he sees, in fact nothing

Page 4 of 8Message


exists that does not come within the scope of man's arrogant self-assertion.

Q: Notwithstanding the explanation you have just given, Olaf Roemer noted that light took a certain time to cover the distance represented by the diameter of the Earth's orbit, and on this basis calculated its speed at i86,000 miles per

second,which tallies with the results obtained by other experiments. How do you explain this?'

A: I have never studied Roemer's mathematical data, but as the results of his

experiments are at complete variance with the facts, let us study the optical phenomena which appear to take place in space and which are in fact illusions.

Roemer must definitely have taken one of these phenomena into his calculations.

In the first place we need to know more about the movements of the Sun. All the planets move in a given plane which we can call the equatorial plane of the system.

The Sun, however, revolves around the magnetic centre in a different plane which,

to be exact, lies at an angle of 460 to the mean plane of the planets.

The first optical effect that this gives rise to is to make it appear to the inhabitants of a planet that the angle of the planet's axis in relation to the

Sun changes as the planet moves round in its orbit every year, giving greater illumination to its northern hemisphere when the Sun is rising towards its upper node, and its southern when the Sun is going down into its lower node; we are also

subject to the illusion that the Sun describes a pendulum-like movement in space.

It is true that the orbits of all the planets are inclined to a certain extent, but for the most part this is optical illusion, due to the movement of the Sun.

The true inclination is due to the Sun exerting a downward pressure and pushing the

planet down in its orbit, when rising in its own plane of revolution; and pushing the planet upward when going down in its plane of revolution. The remainder is

optical illusion due to the fact that the displaced Sun is taken as a fixed point of reference, which gives the appearance that all the planets are also displaced.

The Sun moves around the magnetic centre in an orbit of 6,250,000 miles in diameter

and completes one revolution in 355 days.

Thus it is that the ancient astronomers based their calculations on a year of 355 days. which is the true solar year, and not the movement that the Earth describes

around the magnetic centre, which takes 365 days.

Roemer observed two eclipses of Jupiter at an interval of 2oo days. In this time, the Sun had moved though approximately half of its orbit, and was 6,125,000 miles

from its original position. This shift in the Sun's position caused the eclipse to take place at a different time.

If a point or a satellite were casting a shadow on Jupiter, the change in the Sun's

position in 200 days would have made a change of several miles in the position of the shadow. If the satellite revolves at a given distance from Jupiter, this would

cause an apparent retardation of approximately 1,000 seconds in the time of the eclipse, depending on the satellite's distance from the planet. What I mean is that the satellite would still have about 1,000 seconds to go before the predicted

eclipse would actually take place. This is why Roemer's calculation was incorrect.

In the second place, we need to take note of the angle at which Jupiter was seen

Page 5 of 8Message


from the Earth. If we had the exact time of the eclipse we could work out how far

the planet had moved in that time, and we could then make our calculation with accuracy. But in any case the eclipse can be said to have taken place at a given

time in relation to a point on Jupiter, but owing to the angle of observation we would get an impression of relative retardation. Let us take an example:

let us place two bodies in such a way that from the point of observation an

imaginary line from the observer to them would touch the surface of each at a tangent. If we move the bodies from this position, the line also moves. In this case one of the bodies would have to move again for the imaginary line to meet it

at a tangent. This is the second factor which may have passed unnoticed to any observer, however attentive he may have been.

Roemer could have made an error in calculation due to one of these phenomena,

either of which would have brought him into error.

Q: Has the angle of the ecliptic any effect on the spirit of human beings?

A: None at all. External factors do not affect the spirit, but only internal ones.

Good and evil derive from the heart. What virtue would there be in man being good if this were the result of conditions for which he was not responsible? The same thing would apply to evil.

If we give a man an injection which causes him to go mad, and he then goes berserk, no blame can be attached to him. How could God expect man to be good if He placed him in such adverse conditions? God does not tempt anyone. Evil is the result of

arrogance and the audacity of man in disregarding the divine laws.

If what you say were true, other planets would be far worse off, the

Earth's angle to the ecliptic is 23 degrees 25',

Mars, which you consider very advanced, 25 degrees 12',

Venus 32 degrees,

Saturn 26 degree 45'

Neptune 29 degrees and

Uranus 68 degrees.

Uranus then, would be in a state of moral depravity. Spirit creates conditions, and

never vice versa. The good people on Earth would be good even if the poles were reversed, and the evil-doers, even if there were no angle of inclination, or if they were in Paradise, would continue in the same way.

One should not confuse virtues with phenomena of a mechanical order. Good has nothing to do with gear wheels.

Q: Why is there a difference in the colour of light reflected from different

planets. Mars is reddish and the others white, yet the light all comes from the Sun.

A: It is due to the chemical light.

Page 6 of 8Message


Q: What is the chemical light?

A: Sunlight always maintains its direction of focus on its journey through space, whereas the other, chemical light, is diffuse. It originates from the passage of energy though hydrogen and sodium layers on the Sun. If one looks at a shadow, one

will see an illuminated band which represents this diffused light.

If it were not for this chemical light, many planets would be invisible. At the distance which Pluto is from the Sun, its light would not otherwise be seen. The

Sun, seen from Pluto, is small and the amount of energy it receives is insignificant. However, this little planet shines in space, giving off a light of

0.16, whereas Mercury, which is close to the Sun, only gives off 0.058."

This is due to the fact that Pluto's atmosphere is extremely sensitive to solar waves and sets up a violent reaction to this very small quantity of energy.

We should bear in mind that Earth, in spite of its relative proximity to the Sun,

is considered by terrestrial science to be a very poor reflector of light.

The Earth's reflection is given as 0.039, but other more distant planets have a greater reflective capacity; Jupiter 0.51, Saturn 0.5, Uranus 0.66 and Neptune 0.62

The light that we see on planets is the modified light of the Sun and also the physiochemical light. The resultant light depends on the intensity of the latter. Pluto's light is not of solar origin as this light, on reaching the planet, drops

too much in frequency to be reflected. The small amount of light that Pluto receives would be insignificant if it alone were reflected back into space.

There are other optical phenomena which would take us a long time to explain, but I

can tell you that the function of light consists largely in creating conditions in space by which various phenomena can be perceived at a distance.

This is not the moment to discuss metaphysics.

*27 The amount of light that a planet reflects back into space is known as the

Albedo.

Q: Although you do not wish to go into metaphysics, I would like you to give me one example, if that is possible. I gather from your words that light has to reach

us for us to be able to see a phenomenon taking place at a distance.

A: I will give you an example: in an ordinary Geissler tube, electrons are unable to penetrate the walls of the tube, or, for that matter, any other material except

alumimum. This has been proved experimentally by placing a cross inside the tube in the electron beam. This cross causes a shadow, showing that the electrons were

stopped. Even if this cross were made of glass, the electrons would not go through it.

So, if light or electrons are incapable of going through glass, how, I ask, can one

see shadows and Faraday bands inside the lighted tube. Light could not get out of the tube, yet one could see into it.

I could quote many other examples, but one is enough to disprove the theory. We

should not confuse light and image because universal phenomena take place everywhere at the same time. It would take a very long time to explain this in detail.

Page 7 of 8Message


Q: Some people say that the heat observed on Earth comes to us from the Sun. Is

there any truth in this?

A: Heat comes from the Sun, but in the form of high frequency waves, which are then transformed into heat waves. This transformation takes place in the atmosphere of

the planets. They do not come from the Sun in the form of heat because heat will not travel through a vacuum. Even the heat on the Sun is bearable, it is merely a

field in which electrical forces operate.

A generator is cold, but the currents it produces can give rise to high temperatures. It is nonsense to say that temperatures of several million degrees

exist on the Sun. Its luminosity is not related to its heat; on Earth there are also sources of cold light. A neon bulb shows that light is not always hot. Many insects develop cold light, as well as certain vegetables which produce a

luminescence by bacteriological action.

Besides the heat that is developed by the frequency of the Sun s rays, heat is also developed by the pressure of the light of the Sun. At sunrise the oblique rays of

the Sun do not exert any pressure and one has the impression that the Sun is a large red disc of no power; but when it is at its zenith one can sense the

intensity of its rays pushing against the ground. That is why we feel colder the higher we go.

At the Equator, where the Sun's rays pour down at right angles, the heat is great.

At the poles, these rays are to a very great extent repelled by the magnetic effect, and the pressure is very small. So, the polar cold is the result of obliqueness of the Sun's rays and their deflection by the magnetic effect.

Some aurorae are the result of electrical reactions in the ionosphere, but others are due to the deflection of rays at a height giving rise to luminosity in the upper reaches of the atmosphere.

Q: You say that it gets colder as we go up, but this is not always the case. At a certain altitude the thermometer goes up to 22000 F.

A: The heat that is encountered at these altitudes derives from the physiochemical

reaction that I mentioned. Various layers produce this reaction.

So you see, my friend, your science contains many errors. I am not surprised at this because things in life are not judged by the errors they may contain but by

their truth. We are all imperfect, therefore perfection is an attribute which can only be found complete in divinity. In us, it is always mingled with defects, the defects often predominating.

What surprises and pains me is that scientists of Earth should continue to put their trust in their false science. In spite of all its errors they have been unable to rectify and to deny the supreme science which is God. They are like glow-

worns enamoured of their own light, crying out to other glowworms, "The Sun does not exist; the light in my tail is the only light there is.

Page 8 of 8Message


OLAF ROEMER'S EXPERIMENT, Chap. 7

OLAF ROEMER'S conclusions regarding the speed of light certainly appear to be false. This Danish scientist noted that the eclipse of Jupiter's satellite lo always took place slightly later than the predicted time.

Having taken note of the time of the eclipse when the Earth was in opposition to Jupiter, he calculated the exact time at which a subsequent eclipse should occur, 200 days later, when the Earth went into conjunction with Jupiter. His actual observations showed that the eclipse took place approximately 1000 seconds later than predicted.

On the basis of Galileo's ideas, who postulated a speed of light, he calculated that this retardation must be due to the time that light took to travel across the diameter of the Earth's orbit. Taking this diameter as 300 million km. he merely divided this by the 1,000 seconds retardation and arrived at a figure of 300,000 km. per second for the speed of light.

Fig. 8 shows the position of the planets concerned at that time.

FIG. 9.

It is, however, not difficult to disprove Roemerr's reasoning. Let us take Fig. 9 and resolve it trigonometrically.

Page 1 of 13Message


Let us suppose that the Earth was in position E.1 in its orbit at the time of the first eclipse. If we take its position at E.2, we will see that the eclipse will already have taken place so that an observer at E.1 will note a delay in the time of the eclipse, and at E.2 an advance. The time difference observed can be mathematically shown as follows:

Distance Sun E.1 = 149,000,000 km.

Distance Sun Jupiter = 780,000,000 km.

Distance Jupiter I0(a) = 400,000 km.

Distance Jupiter IO(b) = 400,000 km.

allowing for trigonometric corrections due to lines of sight passing 70,000 km. from centre of Jupiter.

We then get the following:

Distance Sun/E1

----------------------- = 0.1910

Tan Distance Sun/Jupiter

Distance Jupiter/Io(a)

------------------------- = 76,400 km

Tan Distance Io(a)/Io(b)

Io's velocity in orbit around Jupiter is 20.67 km. per second, we can therefore see that the difference in time between a sighting from the Earth in position E.1 and from the position E.2 is:

76,400 km.

-------------- = 3 696 seconds

20.67 km. per second -

This means that a movement of the Earth in its orbit through 90 degree

causes a time difference in an eclipse of Io of 3696 seconds.

When Roemer reached the conclusion that there was a retardation due to the speed of light, the Earth had, at that time, moved through 197degree 122 degree in its orbit. Seeing that the Earth had moved in its orbit from position A to position B (Fig. 10) in this time, we can, for the purpose of trigonometry, consider it to have reached point C, which gives a difference of only 17.12 degree between position A and position C.

Page 2 of 13Message


Fig. 11 shows how points in an orbit can be projected on an

exterior point. On this scale,90 degrees corresponds to 100 per cent,

17 degrees corresponds to 29 per cent. Using this as a basis for the calculation, we get

3,696 seconds X 29

-------------------- = 1,071 seconds

100

There is a difference between our calculations and Roemer's of 71 seconds because we do not know the exact position of Jupiter when the eclipse took place. Eclipses of Jupiter and Io take pLace every 42 hours 28 minutes 33 seconds.

It is possible that Roemer based his calculations on an observation after or before the eclipse, and any variation would alter the result. Further, the data we are using are approximate. Jupiter may have been nearer or farther away from the Earth. Neither can we be sure that Io's distance from Jupiter is constant, as in the case of our Moon, where the distance varies as much as 42000 km. Any of these factors may have accounted for the difference.

But in any case the retardation noted certainly exists, but is not due to the speed of light, but due to an optical effect which can be clearly illustrated by trigonometry.

Page 3 of 13Message


We do not entirely deny that light has a certain speed at which it moves through space, we are merely pointing out Roemer's false assumptions which science has not troubled to revise, even though much research has been put into it since Roemer's day.

The fact is that no one would have thought it possible for a great personage to have made an error of trigonometry, especially as he was considered infallible. Right or wrong they accepted his conclusions.

As Roemer's deductions are false, it would be difficult to see how the relativist theory of physics would have developed without them, as the speed of light was the cornerstone of the whole theory.

We do not guarantee the absolute correctness of our calculations, but we do maintain that the time of an eclipse is advanced or retarded according to the position the planets occupy in space, quite independently of the speed of light, if this exists at all. If it does exist then it must move through our system with a speed that makes it virtually instantaneous.

However, we must also consider that contrary to our analysis, anyone versed in astronomy could raise the objection that Roemer did not base his calculations on the apparent eclipse that Io undergoes every 42 hours, but on its real eclipse due to its entry into the penumbra that is formed on the face of-a planet opposite the Sun.

However, if this objection were raised, it would be equally inconsistent as the penumbra also alters its position as the planet moves in its orbit through space, as shown in Fig. 12.

It is immaterial whether the lines Aji or CJ2 were lines of sight or were made by the light of the Sun, as both are the same. It is evident that Jupiter's continued movement in orbit would bring about a difference between a line of sight of an observer on Earth and that of the light of the Sun which makes the penumbra. In any case in Roemer's observations these lines coincide exactly and the variation amounts to 1,071 seconds,

The above illustration is only given to show the reader that a certain phenomenon may have various explanations with very divergent results. One cannot come to hasty conclusions without viewing the problem from all angles. It is not the intention to discredit the work of this famous scientist, who is worthy of our respect.

In the first edition of this book we refrained from inserting the full explanation of the captain's point of view. As the phenomenon of light and space is of fundamental interest to the whole of physics, and can even be considered the keystone to all science, we enlisted the opinion of various European universities and some famous physicists.

Where we first mentioned Roemer's calculations to the captain of the flying saucer, he stated he was not conversant with his theory, but gave us various explanations of the possible traps that Roemer could have fallen into. His views are given in the following pages.

Page 4 of 13Message


_________________________________________________________________________________________

Q: It is a pity that you cannot give a full explanation of this phenomenon as this would be of great value to us. To take a concrete example: on the basis of the phenomenon observed by Olaf Roemer, science ceased to believe in God. The scientists reasoned as follows:

They say that God is light, or akin to light. But if there is a time lag in the movement of light through space, then light cannot be said to be ubiquitous; God could therefore not be omnipresent since He would need time to get from place to place. Then, as there could be no real God subject to time and space, they concluded that He did not exist. If He is not omnipresent, it must be because He is finite rather than infinite and could not therefore sustain the Universe. No finite principle could be God.

This is, succinctly, the reasoning behind scientific materialism. If it is your wish to make us believe in God, you will never achieve this without a clear analysis of the principles that science has espoused. It is, indeed, not strange that you are not familiar with Roemer's calculations, because he never published them. It is said that after his death, his work was virtually destroyed and only came to be known through one of his friends publishing his findings.

However, the details on which science bases its conclusions are known to me, and I can quote them from memory. Perhaps if we examine these, we could arrive at a definite conclusion on which you can give your opinion.

A: (after having studied the mathematical background).

In the light of your information I can now give you a rapid review of the question. Let me have some sheets of paper and I will draw some diagrams by way of explanation. Let us look at the following diagram:

If the Sun were to revolve round the planets instead of vice versa, and if we noted the time of an eclipse with the Sun in position as S.1, and again in position S.2, we would note an advance in the time of the eclipse. That is, in position S.2 the eclipse would already have taken place. Now try and follow the reasoning very carefully.

The phenomenon is, however, unaltered by the fact that Jupiter revolves round the Sun. I do not know whether this comes in the scope of the "rational mechanics" on Earth, but

Page 5 of 13Message


there is a principle which states that all bodies moving in an orbit are subject to advance or retardation depending on the position they occupy in space.

Let us see how this operates with the aid of another diagram:

The horizontal lines represent the "line of sight" observation of the eclipses having regard for the direction of the planet's movement in orbit which in this case is anti-clockwise. The point at which this line of sight makes a tangent to the planet we will call A.

In this case we have to presuppose the existence of an equatorial diameter which is not included in your calculations. This is shown in the diagram as the line AF.

Note that in the case of the first eclipse the line of sight made a tangent to the planet at A, and in the case of the second eclipse it made a tangent at F.

The difference, therefore, is equal to the equatorial diameter, or in other words, the diameter of Jupiter. Note again that in the first eclipse lo was in position L1, and farthest away from the Sun, whereas in the case of the second eclipse it was in position L2 and between the Sun and Jupiter. Now we begin to see the reasons for the time lag which you maintain is due to the limited speed of light by which you try to banish God from the Universe.

To begin with, we do not know the exact distance of Jupiter from the Earth at the time of the eclipse. I will also take this opportunity to call your attention to a mistake made by astronomers which has a considerable bearing on the dimensions of the Universe, as we shall see later.

According to the astronomical data we have here, Earth should have moved through 197.122 degree of its orbit in 200 days, taking its mean sidereal day as O.98561 degree . Then deducting 1800 we are left with 17.122degrees, which, for the purposes of calculation, brings the planet back into its position of opposition.

In this time, Jupiter, with a mean sidereal day of only 0.08309 degree would have moved through 16.618, but this does not make sense, as with both planets moving in the same direction, there should be no difference in the angle at which Jupiter is seen from the Earth.

Now let us take this angle as a starting point; in 2oo days Io will have completed 113 revolutions of the planet. Yet Roemer could not have seen an eclipse either at the exact time of opposition or of conjunction, as the angle of sight was not wide enough to allow him to see this, He must have seen it happening before opposition and after conjunction. As the satellite completes 113 revolutions in 200 days, two further eclipses will bring it to 115,thus making the number of days to 2031/2. The angle that Jupiter moves through

Page 6 of 13Message


between opposition and conjunction with the Earth is 17.122degree. This would vary slightly in perihelion or aphelion due to the difference in speed brought about by the pressure of sunlight.

Jupiter's mean sidereal day is in the region of 0.08561 degree, with the corrections that we have made, so that if we add 3 1/2 days we would get a total of 17.47 degree. Let us say 17.45d egree to simplify the calculation.

If we can accept these figures, we can make a further diagram:

We saw that in Fig. 14 a movement of i80 degree of the Earth in its orbit will have brought about an inversion of the points at which the line of sight makes a tangent to the planet. In the first position the line touches A and in the second, 180 degree later, at F. But this inversion takes place slowly as the planet moves through space. Thus it is that with only 17.45 degree of movement the line of sight AP moves round to AQ, since we made it intersect exactly at point A. In this case the line AQ cuts through part of the planet forming an arc. The retardation occasioned by the movement of 17.45 degree will be found to be equal to this arc.

We now only need to see how to do the calculation with the aid of a further diagram.

Page 7 of 13Message


FIG. 16.

We can work this out by various means but we have adopted the one which is most easily shown graphically. We can now see how the phenomenon takes place. The line AQ determines a point of intersection on the circumference of a planet, which we shall call B. From this point we make a line from the circumference to the centre at E. EB is then equal to the equatorial radius of Jupiter and is the same as EA. From point B we draw a line at right angles to EA which will meet the latter at C. The retardation of the planet after moving through ~7.45 degree will therefore equal the distance AC.

Let us further work out what this distance represents in time. The angle EB EA is 33.80 or sin 0.558 the angle BC BA is 17.45 degree or tan 0.32O1.

Equatorial radius of Jupiter = EB = BA

Sin EB =BC

Tan BC = AC = 13000 km.

Having established the distance AC as 13,000 km., we now only need to convert this into seconds. Jupiter moves in its orbit at a speed of 13 km. per second.

13,000 km.

----------- = 1,000 seconds

13 km./seconds

Roemer observed a time difference of 1,000 seconds, which we also found. He attributed this to the time that light takes to cover the distance across the Earth's orbit; we have shown that this extraordinary hypothesis which led scientists to banish God from the Universe has a perfectly simple trigonometrical explanation. It was excusable for him to have made a mistake, because we all make plenty, but it is the conclusions which have been drawn from it which are not so excusable.

This would be more than sufficient to demonstrate the irrationality of Earth's people when they speak of a speed of light, and when they use this to support their materialist

Page 8 of 13Message


theories of limitation and curvature of space. But let us continue the reasoning and see whether our calculations are accurate.

When Jupiter was in position J.I and the Earth in opposition, the points ABC all coincided at point A, but when the planet had moved to position J.2 these points were moved as the line AP proceeded to form the line AQ. If we were to move the planet gradually back from the position J.2 through the ~7.45 degree that it had covered, we would see that the line AQ would eventually become the line AP, and that the points B and C would move closer together until they coincided at point A.

In the next figure we can see the variations of the movement of the equatorial axis we mentioned.

Fig. 17.

At the starting point 0 degree, points AB and C coincide and the line of sight is at right angles to the equatorial axis AF. As the planet moves so do points B and C, making a triangle whose area increases in relation to the angle the axis makes to the Sun. At 45 degree the distance between A and B is at a maximum and begins to decrease again until the 90 degee position, but the line AC continues to lengthen which means that the time noted for the eclipse will be changed very little. At the 90 degree position it will be seen that B and C coincide completely at F, when the relative time difference will be equal to the equatorial axis or diameter.

From that position to the 180 degree position, the position of points B and C is inversed and they again move towards point A; point B again moving round the circumference towards point A. We also notice that in this phase the triangle formed by ABC is on the opposite side of the baseline AF. At the 180 degree position, points ABC are again coincident. However, the time difference is equal to that of the diameter of the planet, as the line of sight of an eclipse must now pass through point F and no longer through point ABC, as was the case with the planet in the 0 degree position.

Having shown this, it would be easy to check the diameter of Jupiter and in consequence the optical problem. Let us proceed as follows (see Fig. 16):

If the line AC 13,000 km. the diameter of the planet will be

13,000 km.

Page 9 of 13Message


------------ =40,612 km. = BC

0.3201

where 0.3201 tan angle BC BA

BC __ 40,612

Sin = EB =72,780km

EB - 0.558

Having obtained the equatorial radius of Jupiter, you can compare this with the radius obtained by optical measurement, and you will find a percentage difference between the two. This would be due to the defraction of light as in the case of the Sun appearing larger at sunrise or sunset than it does at midday. This is why I told you beforehand what I based my calculations on, to avoid contradicting terrestrial mathematics. Thus it is that the mass and the volume of Jupiter are not exactly those given by you.

If Jupiter unwittingly contributed to the establishment of scientific materialism on Earth, what we have now shown may well mean that she will be able to supply the proof of the error of existing theories. We have seen that, like other planets, its speed of axial rotation is equal to its velocity in orbit. This axial rotation, which you have not thought of, explains the peculiarities of Mercury. Astronomers observing the planet on its equatorial plane have noted that it rotates once on its axis for each revolution in orbit, yet this is not the whole story.

It is the same effect as we saw in the case of Jupiter; science maintaining erroneously that light takes a certain amount of time to move through space. In the case of Mercury, science maintains equally erroneously that it revolves once on its axis for every revolution in orbit.

What happens is that Mercury has a very rapid axial rotation. This does not take place on the equatorial plane of the solar system, but at right angles to it. Mercury is really a satellite of the Sun and not, strictly speaking, a planet, because only satellites have this peculiarity.

Having put this detail right, we can go much further. We can disprove the theory of relativity and Planck's quantum theory. Planck observed radiation in dark bodies and finding no explanation for this in the wave theory of light, he established the quantum theory to show the discontinuity of energy. Roemer's fallacious theory of light lent him support.

Now an electron, as a wave form, is moved in an anti-clockwise circle. In this spiraloid movement it has a discontinuous wave surface rather like a spiral spring. The movement itself is not discontinuous, but only appears so by virtue of its spiralling movement. It also shows a magnetic phenomenon cancelling out the charge on one side which gives an observer the impression that the energy moves in jumps. Further, it is subject to the outcome of the difference of charge due to this magnetic effect, as well as the result of its rotation, behaving like a globe, as a planet does in relation to the Sun.

This is a rough resume of the quantum theory which physicists boast of. The whole thing is a misinterpretation of simple trigonometrical phenomena.

Before denying God on the basis of this reasoning they should ask the Father for insight as He is the only one who can reveal His secrets. No one will be able to penetrate the Universe with the support of only a very limited power of reasoning.

The Universe is a house with an owner, and nobody, however rational he may be, can enter without the owner's consent. Let them ask the owner to accompany them and show them the



peculiarities and details of every room. They should not try to emulate the toad who, wishing to be like an ox, swallowed so much air that his stomach swelled up and burst.

Man will not achieve anything by breathing the air of complicated theories in the hope of increasing his stature. True growth is always accompanied by humility. Science is a majestic palace with a narrow, low doorway which is barred to the proud. Here only the humble find reward, and those without faith and humility towards their Creator find nothing but confusion.

The foregoing were the words of our informant showing us the changes on Jupiter which gave the impression that there was a time factor involved in the movement of light through space, whereas this, in fact, was due to a trigonometrical phenomenon.

For people who are used to dealing with mathematical problems this simple demonstration will be sufficient for them to draw their conclusions and to correlate the movement of the satellite. But as this book was written for the general public, who may not have had time to go deeply into these matters, we will endeavour to illustrate the movement of the satellite lo in the simplest possible manner.

The arc formed by the line AB in Fig. 16 should be equal to 42,422 km. In 200 days time, the line AP (see Fig. 18) will only touch the circumference at a tangent. However, the movement that a point in the circumference would undergo in this time is:

42,4.22

------------ _ = 21,211 km. = AM = BM

2

If the position of point A moves the above number of kilometres in 200 days, this means that point A moves at a speed of 106 km per day.

The speed of IO in space is high, but low in relation to the surface of Jupiter, that is to say that it has a lower angular velocity. Thus the speed of IO in relation to the speed of the surface of the planet is only 3 km. per second.

Let us now study Fig. 18 again. At the time of the observation at opposition Io must have been at point P. At the time of conjunction it must have been at point Q. In reality, however, 1,ooo seconds before the eclipse took place, it must have been at R, RQ



representing the distance it moved in 1,000 seconds. In order to explain this, let us consider the following:

Science reckoned that Io completed a revolution in orbit every 152,913 seconds, that being the time required for the satellite to leave a point of reference and return to that same point again. The light of the Sun was taken as a reference point, by observing the exact moment which Io entered the penumbra. However, the light of the Sun, represented by the line AQ, moves at the rate of 106 km. per day. This change also changes the time of Io's movement through space, since the calculation of this movement is based on the line AQ. If the change in the surface of Jupiter is 106 km. per day, and if Io has a relative velocity of 3 km. per second, this means that the change brought about in the line AQ alters the timing of Io's observed movement by 35 seconds per day. Thus the true time of Io's revolution in orbit is 152,878 seconds and not 152,913 seconds.

At the rate of 35 seconds per day there will be a difference of 7,000 seconds in 200 days. If it moves in orbit at 20 km. per second, this will amount to 140,000 km., which is the distance between points P and R on Fig. 18. From this it will be seen that at the moment when the eclipse was expected to take place, Io was still at point R, it still had to cover the distance RQ before the eclipse could actually be seen.

Distance RQ is 20,000 km., and with a speed of 20 km. per second Io would move from R to Q in 1,000 seconds,

20,000

ie --------------

20 km./second.

Having shown this, one can conclude that light moves instantaneously through space. At a time when knowledge of astronomy was slight and when many people found it difficult even to believe that the Earth moved round the Sun, it would have been very difficult for Roemer to have arrived at a correct result.

With all its faults his work was admirable, taking into consideration the conditions under which he worked, the data at his disposal and the limited knowledge of his time.

Everything is, however, subject to the effect of uninterrupted progress, and changes as we move forward.

It would be folly to cling to theories, whether they be Roemer's or anyone else's, thereby trying to impede the progress of time and ideas that move like a river in flood, or to wish to put a limit to the understanding of phenomena like the cartographers of old who used to write on their maps at the Pillars of Hercules: Hic deficit orbis (Here ends the world). The theory of the speed of light is a modem equivalent to this attitude. However, the adventurous seamen of old were not deterred by these injunctions of their cartographers, who were the scientific elite of their times, and sailed onwards to discover a new continent.

In the great and wonderful unknown now awaiting discovery, the Universe will be revealed to you, no longer with limitations, but as infinitely great as its Creator. It is a mansion of infinite size which serves as a residence for an infinite God Who, wishing to show us the vastness of space, said: "The Heaven is my throne, and the Earth is my footstool: where is the house that ye would build unto me?" (Isaiah 66: i).

And we in our foolishness wish to build him a house to suit our ideas that are no larger than our small brains, as limited as relativity, and as cold and sepulchral as formulae.



We made a coffin of the Universe and placed within it a mummified God. We inverted the process of creation and made a god of our image and likeness, circumscribed by the boundaries of a Universe which was limited only by our reasoning.



The Aberration of Light, Chap. 8

Q: Up to now you have been dealing with matters that I can neither prove nor disprove. I would never be able to find out whether what you say is true or false. I would like you to talk about the aberration of light, by which Bradley calculated the Earth's velocity in orbit. This is something which has been fully substantiated, and your views on this would enable me to evaluate all that you have told me so far. If Bradley was right, then you must be wrong, or vice versa.

A: I will try to give you an answer and analyse the problem; however, it will not be easy for me to base my arguments on the data supplied by Earth's scientists, owing to the difference between their methods and ours. You use kilometres or miles as a measure of distance, whereas we take the galactic time as our yardstick. This is hard to explain to people who are unaccustomed to seeing things from our point of view. You go into complicated mathematical calculations to determine, let us say, the diameter of the Earth's orbit, whereas we are not interested in the number of kilometres this represents, but in its equivalent in galactic time.

However, let us forget galactic time for the moment, and assume that we are now using an Earth year as the basis of our measurements. Taking an Earth year as 31,558,149 1/2 seconds, we can obtain the time equivalent of the diameter of the Earth's orbit by dividing this figure by pi that is 10,045,247 seconds. Do you follow?

(Q) YES

A: But this might confuse you and lead you to think that time is something to do with relativity, as you already believe it to be. Time, for us, plays the part that metres do for you. We look upon it as the result of the force that impels a body through space. The greater the force the shorter the time, and the shorter also the space to be traversed-or in your terminology, the distance. Thus, if the force were infinitely great, time and space would be infinitely small; they would cease to exist.

But again the force is not everything, because in reality it does not exist; all that exists is the impulse that is applied to the' body in space and imparts momentum to it. The body's movement is then only limited by the resistance it has to overcome. What does exist then is the momentum that arises from the impulse of the force, and not the force itself. Again this impulse only exists as a function of a Will that gives rise to it. To sum up: time and space are the outcome of a powerful Will acting on the Universe, that is what we measure, taking note of its intensity in any given phenomenon. In our Universe this Will manifests itself as galactic time. But let us get back to Bradley. He maintained that the aberration of the light of stars was due to the time that light took to traverse space. On this basis he calculated that the Earth's velocity in orbit should be:

Speed of light x Tan of Aberration.

But light in space is diffuse, and wherever the Earth may happen to be in its orbit, the light of the stars will always be there ahead of it, in a sense waiting for the Earth to reach it, there can therefore be no question of any delay in the transmission of light through space. That theory is nothing more than an inept

Page 1 of 14Message


sophism, unworthy of science.

We cannot fully analyse the problem in your terms without studying the Earth's movements and correcting some of your data relating to its orbit.

You originally started by asking me scientific questions to find out where I came from. Very well then, I am going to correct your estimates of the Earth's orbit by a method which is still unknown to you on Earth. No inhabitant of Earth would be able to do this as easily as I can. Later I could how you a dozen other ways of doing it if you wished, without having recourse to any of your theories about light and without using your parallax methods. Let us first correct your figures.

A day in the Earth's tropical year is 86,400 seconds long. This the time the Sun takes to make two consecutive transits over a given point on the Earth's surface. But if two consecutive transits of the Sun and a star are taken, we then find that this sidereal day is only 86,164 seconds long, that is 236 seconds less than a tropical day. The movement of the Earth in its orbit in one day causes the light of the Sun to move forward over the Earth's surface in the direction of its rotation by just that much. When the Earth at the end of a year has made a complete revolution in orbit, this daily forward movement of the sunlight will have accounted for a whole day, or in other words one complete revolution of the Earth on its axis. This is to say that the time that should have appeared as one extra day in the year has been accounted for by a daily increment of 236 seconds in the length of each day.

The number of seconds in a sidereal year divided by the number in a sidereal day will give us the number of revolutions the Earth makes on its axis in a year. With 31,558,1491 1/2 seconds in a sidereal year and 86,164 in a sidereal day, we get 366.2567 revolutions. From. this we can calculate the daily sidereal movement of the Earth in its orbit in terms of degrees by dividing 360 degrees by the number of revolutions. Viz:

360 degrees

______________ = 0.982917 degrees or 3.538 1/2 minutes

366.2567

If an observer outside the Earth were to observe eclipses of the Moon at say twenty days' interval, he would notice that his predictions of the time of the second eclipse would be out by 19.65834 degrees (i.e. 20 X 0.982917 degree). We can convert this figure into terms of time by multiplying it by the number of seconds in a sidereal day and dividing this sum by 36O. degree Viz

86,164 X 1965834

_________________ = 4,705 seconds.

360

The eclipse will therefore appear to take place 4,705 seconds later than predicted. We can also arrive at the same result by another method:

(1) Convert the number of degrees into kilometres, taking the equatorial diameter

Page 2 of 14Message


of the Earth as 12,756 km., and using the following formula:

2*PI*radius*19.65834

_____________________

360

This gives us 27,883 km. which is the distance on the Earth's

surface represented by an arc of 19.65834 degree.

(2) Obtain the speed of the Earth's axial rotation in metres per second by multiplying the radius in kilometres by PI and dividing by the number of seconds in a sidereal day. Viz:

PI*12,756 465,102 m. per second or

________ =

86,164 1,674367 km. per hour.

(3) Divide the 21,883 km. obtained in (1) above by the 465,702 m. per second obtained in (2) above. This gives us 4,705 seconds once again as the result.

This then is the amount of the apparent retardation of the eclipse as seen by an observer in space.

These then are the first corrections, the mean sidereal movement of the Earth and is true speed of rotation. Without these data, we cannot calculate the Earth's orbit with any accuracy.

Now there is a second point to consider. Your astronomy attributes the time of the four seasons of the year to the movement of the Sun through the ecliptic. In fact, the Sun has a movement of its own which cannot be seen from the Earth.

At the vernal equinox on March 21st, the Sun rises in the East and sets in the West, between then and the summer solstice on June 2 1st, it appears to move northwards.

After the solstice it then turns southwards again. At the autumnal equinox on September 23rd, it again crosses the Equator and continues its southerly movement until the winter solstice on December 22nd.

It then turns northwards again until it reaches the Equator again at the next vernal equinox, having by then gained 1,223.898 seconds, or 20 minutes 23 seconds.

From this your astronomers concluded that the Sun has an annual movement of its own on the ecliptic, its elevation varying with the ascending and descending nodes of its movement.

Let us study the movement of the Earth with the aid of a diagram (a simplified version of this is given in Fig. '9).

Page 3 of 14Message


FIG. 19.

T1 shows the position of the Earth on June 21st, with the light of the Sun falling directly on to the northern hemisphere at an angle of 23.444475 degree to the Equator. As the Earth continues to move round its orbit in a horizontal plane (not a vertical one as shown in the diagram for ease of illustration), the Sun will be directly over the Equator on September 23rd (position T3). At position T3 on December 22nd, the Sun will be overhead in the southern hemisphere and the northern hemisphere will be cold.

It is thus obvious that the four seasons are not caused by either the Earth or the Sun moving up or down in the plane of the ecliptic; both bodies remain in the same plane. The change is due to the fact that the tilt of the Earth's axis is constant and always points towards a hypothetical point in space. (This tilt is illustrated by the angle of the brackets that support the globe in the diagram.)

The third point we must now study is the eccentricity of the Earth's orbit. We can do this by noting the exact time of the four seasons of the year, using my method of reckoning by time, which is more convenient and not open to errors.

The times elapsed between the four seasons are not all equal, viz:

(Times given below are for 1957-58, which we have substituted for earlier figures.)

Vernal Equinox (March 21st) to Summer Solstice (June 21st):

133.611 mutes.

Summer Solstice to Autumnal Equinox (September 23rd):

134.832 minutes.

Autumnal Equinox to Winter Solstice (December 22nd):

129.331 minutes.

Page 4 of 14Message


Winter Solstice to Vernal Equinox: 128.195 minutes.

The 1,223 seconds gained between the two successive vernal equinoxes has not been subtracted from these figures, the seasons being taken as sidereal time. We now convert these four periods into four radii of time. This works out as follows:

133611 X 4

______________ = 85.059 minutes.

2

FIG. 20.

134832 X 4

(2) _______________ = 85.836 minutes.

2

129331 X 4

<3) ____________ = 82.334 minutes.

2

(4) 128195 X 4 = 81.611 minutes.

With the aid of these four sets of figures we can work out the orbit of the Earth (see Fig. 20).

Page 5 of 14Message


This, then, gives us the Earth's orbit. The period between March 21st and September 23rd is more or less regular, but after this latter date, the orbit looks as though it has been pressed in towards the centre by some force. During this period the Earth moves slowly in towards the Sun.

The fourth point to note is that the 1,223 seconds gained between the two vernal equinoxes must have been accruing over the whole period of this uneven movement through space, and not all at once. The reason for this precession is as follows:

The direction of the tilt of the Earth's axis, which is always in line with a hypothetical point in space, changes very slowly all the time the Earth is revolving in its orbit. The tilt of the axis remains constant at 23.444475 degrees, but the direction in which the axis points changes by 50.2619" annually.

Q: But why does the direction of the tilt change?

A: Patience! We shall get to that in a minute.

This change in the direction of the axis causes the Earth to loose one sidereal day every 70.401 years, or in other words 1,223.898 seconds every year. This figure is obtained by multiplying the number of seconds in a sidereal year (31,558,I4 1/2) by the amount of change in seconds (50.2619) and dividing this by the number of seconds of arc in 360 degree (1,296,000). Furthermore, it can be calculated from this that one sidereal year is lost every 25,784.93 years.

The change of 50.2619" in the direction of the tilt of the Earth's axis corresponds to 1,223 seconds of time, and this is precisely the difference between the sidereal and tropical years, viz:

Sidereal year = 31,558,149 seconds

Tropical year = 31,556,926 seconds

____________________

Difference 1,223 seconds.

With these data we can now ascertain the true orbit of the Earth by a different method to yours.

At the time of the summer solstice the Sun climbs at zenith to 23 degrees 26' 494" but at the time of the winter solstice it climbs to 23 degrees 26' 498" in the southern hemisphere; a difference of 0.4'. This figure then is the difference in the elevation of the Sun every time the direction of the tilt varies by 50.2619".

A difference of 04" in the Sun's position would amount to 0.8" at a point on the opposite side of the Earth's orbit, since the Sun lies at the centre of the orbit. From this we can see that the relationship between the variation in the axial rotation and the orbital revolution of the Earth is:

50.2619"

_______________ or 62.82737: I.

0.8"

Page 6 of 14Message


Do you now see why the Earth's revolution is 62.82737 times greater than its axial rotation?

The Earth makes up for the precession that is brought about by the 50.2619" variation in the direction of axial tilt in 1,223 seconds; that is the same amount of time that its revolution in orbit takes to balance out the 0.4" variation in the Sun's elevation, which in turn amounts to 0.8" across the whole diameter of the orbit. So 50.2619 is the figure relative to axial rotation and 0.8 to orbital revolution, which means there are over sixty-two periods of rotation for every one of revolution. Do you follow?

Now we have previously obtained the true speed of the Earth's axial rotation (465.102 m. per second) by dividing 2 PI*r by the number of seconds in a sidereal day (86,164). Therefore if the Earth's velocity in orbit is 62.82737 times its axial speed of rotation, its true velocity must be 29,221'135 m. per second. With this we can now proceed to work out the exact length of the orbit, by multiplying the speed by the number of seconds in a sidereal year. This gives us a figure of 922,164,946 km. Dividing this figure by PI we get the diameter of the orbit, i.e. 293,534,466 km.; its radius is therefore 146,766,760 km.

Q: The figures arrived at by this method are not the same as those obtained by our methods.

A: That is true, but your calculations are based on a number of doubtful factors. One of the methods you use is to measure the diameter of the Sun at aphelion and again at perihelion;but at both these times the Sun is at a slight angle, so that its light has to traverse a greater amount of atmosphere. The resultant refraction introduces an element of error into the calculation, but in the method we use there is no room for error.

To go back to the diagram giving the times of the seasons (Fig. 20), we can now convert these minutes into kilometres by multiplying them with the Earth's velocity in orbit (29,221.135 m. per second). We shall then see that the Earth's closest distance to the Sun is 143,086,633 km. and its farthest 150,494,225 km.

Well, then, with the Earth's true velocity in orbit, we should be able to work out the speed of light, viz:

29,221135 km.

______________ = 294,443.229 km. per second.

O.O0O099242

Alternatively we could work it out from the length of the Earth's orbit:

The aberration of light is 2O.47" annually, which converted into distance on the Earth's orbit is:

922,164,946km. X 20.47"

____________ = 14,565.351 km.

1,296,0OO"

Page 7 of 14Message


In relation to a point on the opposite side of the orbit, this figure would be doubled, i.e. 29,13O.7O2 km. With a velocity in orbit of 29.221135 km. per second, the Earth will cover these 2O.47 in 9969 seconds, viz:

29,130702 km.

______________ = 996.9 seconds

29.221135 km./second

Or in other words the time taken for light to traverse the diameter of the Earth's orbit is:

Diameter of orbit 294,443 .229 km./second

_________________ or

Speed of light 293,534,446 km.

All this would be very interesting if it were true. I just did it to show you that I know enough about the subject to correct your figures. The fact that we were apparently able to deduce the speed of light from the data that gave us the velocity in orbit is purely coincidental.

Q: Well, then, if Bradley's system is incorrect, why is it that one, can observe an aberration in the light of the stars?

A: That is simple my friend. Whenever one travels in a vehicle of any kind, one gets the impression that all things exterior to the vehicle are in motion, whereas the vehicle itself appears to be stationary. The apparent speed of the stars' movement depends on the distance we are from them, or the angle at which we see them. Distant objects appear to move at a slower pace, until at infinity they would appear to us to be stationary. Light does not contribute anything to this phenomenon, any aberration there may be lies, in consequence, in our senses and not in light itself: As the Earth approaches or recedes from the Sun, following a more or less elliptical course, the stars will appear to follow this movement on a smaller scale. The 20.47" of aberration corresponds to the diameter of the Earth's orbit.

It must not be forgotten that all stars show the same amount of aberration, in spite of the fact that some are more distant than others. If there were no relationship between distance and the aberration, then the light from the Sun should show the same degree of aberration, but it does not. You might contend that the Sun is very close to us, but if we accept this then light from a greater distance taking more time to reach us should show a greater aberration, but this does not happen either. But in any case, even at that short distance, there should be a time difference of

996.9

______ seconds, ie 498 seconds

2

every time the Earth moves through 180 degrees of its orbit

Page 8 of 14Message


The Planets should also show a similar aberration, If this were the case all their movements would appear to us to be advanced or retarded, and as we drew closer to a planet there would be an apparent increase in its speed of rotation, or alternatively a decrease as we moved away; we would then get ourselves into the absurd position of seeing events happening before they actually took place.

Bradley's mistake was that he assumed light to have a speed of 300,000 km. per second in accordance with Roemer's theory. As this figure works out at about one-thousandth part of the diameter of the Earth's orbit, he jumped to the wrong conclusion, on seeing the two figures tally, and based his theory on that.

I do not wish to imply that light moves instantaneously, but only that sight is independent of light. If one sees a star rising in the sky, we perceive it before its light reaches us.

Q: At least I find your various methods of calculating the Earth's orbit convincing. I would, however, be obliged if you would explain why the Earth reaches the point of Aries 1,223 seconds before the completion of a sidereal year, and why the direction of its axial inclination changes by 50.2619" annually. There must be some reason for it.

A. There certainly is a reason. But strictly speaking there is no such thing as a precession of 1,223 seconds. It is an effect that can be explained when one knows more about it. I will explain.

The Earth, in common with the whole of the solar system, takes a spiral course through space. This is a retrograde spiral movement, with the Sun at its centre. I will illustrate this with the aid of a diagram (Fig. 21).

Note the inversion of the movements, the Earth revolving in one direction makes a spiral in the opposite direction.

Now this whole retrograde spiral itself moves in a circle through space, and at the end of every year it cuts across the circumference of this circle slightly earlier than in the preceding year, to be exact 1,223 seconds prior to the completion of the sidereal year.

As the Equator of the Earth lies at an angle of 23 degrees to the Sun, the retrograde movement of the Earth will cause the light of the Sun to reach the Equator 1,223 seconds before the Earth itself crosses this circumference. The annual rate of precession is 50.2619" on this spiral, means it takes the Earth 25,784.93 years to complete a whole cycle.

Page 9 of 14Message


The imaginary line that the spiral movement describes in space lies at right angles to the inclination. Since it contains the greater land mass, the North

Pole is thrown slightly off balance by the resultant centrifugal force and moves to the outside of the spiral track, whereas the South Pole, with the lesser land mass, moves to the inside of the track.

So the annual precession is not strictly speaking a displacement, but rather the direction the spiral follows, or a tendency of the poles to move under the unbalanced action of the differing centrifugal force at the two poles. This tendency throws one pole to the outside of the spiral track and pulls the other to the inside of it, this in turn causes the Equator to alter its position in relation to the Sun, without any alteration in the angle of the axial inclination itself.

Q:This means that there is no actual annual variation in the axial inclination?

A: At the moment there is not, but it could happen, and that would be a catastrophe, the like of which you have never witnessed in modern times.

It has happened in the course of the Earth's history, and many lands vanished to the bottom of the oceans. I will tell you how this could happen again. The North Pole, like the South Pole, is covered with ice. All the atomic tests are carried out in the northern hemisphere, so that; all the radioactive elements, known as atomic dust, settle on the North Pole rather than the South.

It is well known that radio activity repels magnetism, so that the atomic fall-out at the North Pole will cause a rise in temperature owing to the influence of the magnetic field there, and this in turn will cause the ice-cap to melt, thus bringing about a reduction in the mass at the North Pole.

The water from the melting ice-cap will distribute itself throughout the oceans. This reduction in the mass at one pole will affect the amount of centrifugal force developed, thus altering the inclination of the Earth's axis.

When this happens land will emerge from the Pacific Ocean, and from the North and South Atlantic. The emergence of these new land masses will change the level of the oceans, causing flooding in the low-lying countries. The present course of ocean currents will also be changed, giving rise to very different conditions to those now prevailing.



Q: Why will these new lands emerge.

A:I have already told you that a planet is a delicate organism. One change brings a number of others in its wake; even the biological conditions of life can be affected. The change in the mass at the North Pole will cause a reduction in the angle of inclination of the Earth's axis. It is the Earth's rotation that creates the centrifugal force that forms the continents. The present angle of 23 degree is responsible for the existence of the land masses in the northern hemisphere; if the angle of inclination is altered, then land masses will appear in other places, until the proper balance is restored. Some continents will re-appear the north of Russia, Greenland and the north of Canada will disappear.

The mean level of the continents will be slightly lower, but there will be no general cataclysm.

Q: This would only come about very gradually, would it not?

A: The process would be slow until the North Pole reaches a high enough temperature to cause a widespread thaw, then it could happen in a night. I believe it could happen sometime between 1968 and 1972. It will be brought home to you by a tremendous earthquake that will shake the Earth to its foundations. Cities will fall in ruins and great cracks will appear in the surface of the Earth. The effects will be catastrophic. The only advice I can give you, is that you should at least try to balance off the radioactivity at the poles, so that there is an equal thaw at both the South and the North Poles; this will prevent any undue unbalance in the mass and the Earth's spiral movement will remain unaffected. If you notice that the oceans of the northern hemisphere are getting warmer than usual, or that the ocean currents are beginning to change their course, then stop letting off bombs in the northern hemisphere be reasonable at least!

But let us get back to our subject. I showed you how the Earth, rotating anticlockwise, describes a retrograde spiral movement in space.

This is another illustration of the polarity that is to be found everywhere in the Universe. A movement in one direction gives rise to another in the opposite.

A positive is cancelled out by a negative. The Earth loses a year every time it completes a cycle of this spiral, or in other words it loses one day in every seventy years. When the cycle of the spiral movement is completed every 25,784 years, a complete calendar year is lost, just as a day is lost every time the Earth completes a revolution in orbit which you reckon as 365 days long instead of 366.

This great spiral that the Earth describes is not only responsible for the 1,223 seconds difference between the tropical and sidereal years, but it also affects every other body in the system, including the Sun. Even the Sun, which is looked upon as the centre of the system, itself revolves around a magnetic centre, and this centre also has a spiral movement of its own which corresponds to the movement of the planets.

Now pay careful attention to this: The Earth moves counterclockwise, the spiral is clockwise; this latter is in turn the result of the movement of the galaxy, which moves in the same direction as the Earth. Thus we get three different movements within the galaxy, two in one direction and one in another. The movement of the galaxy in its turn affects the movement of bodies, but as the time involved is very great, it is almost imperceptible to you. We take our measurement of time from this



movement of our galaxy in relation to the movement of other galaxies. However, we feel we are somewhat behind hand in this matter, and we have come to the conclusion, after some study, that it should be possible to change this system to Universal time which would be more exact.

Q: I do not quite understand, you were talking about galactic time, which implies time based on the movement of galaxies-is this not Universal time?

A: No. The galaxies are not the Universe, in the strict sense of the word. They, in common with the planets, have their own movements of rotation and revolution in space and in Universal time. Millions of galaxies put together would only make a tiny island in the Universe, for lack of a better word we could call these "island universes," and these are only part of the Universe as a whole. I would like to' define at this point the term "Flight of Nebulae." The nebulae that make up an "island universe" do not move away from one another, it is the "island universes" themselves that move away from one another. What you regard as the flight of nebulae is nothing more than an optical illusion, the real movement that takes place between the "island universes" themselves could never be measured on your instruments. Let us imagine four nebulae in the form of spheres, all moving in a common orbit, in an anti-clockwise direction. From a distance they would appear to be moving away from one another

(Fig.22).

One can see that the nebulae N1 and N3, even though they are moving in the same direction, will appear to an outside observer to be going in opposite directions. Nebula N3 will also appear to be flying away, whereas Nebula N4 will appear to be getting closer. Spectrographic observation of the nebulae would also give the same result.

As the orbits of nebulae in space are too vast and the time they take to complete a revolution in their orbit too long for measurement by ordinary optical instruments, it has not been possible to plot their actual orbits in space.

This is the explanation of the optical illusion that Earth's physicists have observed. The apparent speed of the nebulae depends on the positions they occupy in their respective orbits at the time as well as on the observer's angle of sight. Similarly, if an observer a long way outside our solar system were to observe a conjunction of the Earth and Jupiter, he would be under the impression that they were flying away from one another, and the Earth would appear to be moving the faster of the two.



However, there is an actual flight of the small island universes, due to the pressure of their radiation, and the type of electric charge they carry. They all end up in the same place in the end in the graveyard of the Infinite.

As soon as they come into being, they move away from one another, and only meet again at the end of their life cycle. They behave like a herd of elephants, making for the place where they know they have to die. They are all born in the same cradle, and then their radiation and electric charge came them to separate out and to gather momentum, each one following its own divergent path to the limits of space. After countless ages they eventually reach the end of their journey, coming together again at the opposite pole of the Universe, old, exhausted, there to meet their brothers: they still try to repel each other, and to get away from each other, but they no longer have the strength to do so. In their dying hour Nature forces them into a final embrace, and they pass away like minor gods in an ocean of blazing light.

But I cannot tell you everything about this life cycle. There are things in the Universe that I would not dare to probe. Some things are so subtle that man will only be able to understand them when a higher Power endows him with a brain that can cope with such vast concepts without blacking out. I know that the Universal Life has an enchantment beyond words; as though it were some mysterious song, sung by some immortal Being, whose voice brings worlds into being, then destroys them to re-create them. At the command "Talima Cumi" the universes stream forth again.

We know of the existence of a number of" island universes," all forming part of a common system, yet there must be countless other universes that we knew nothing of. We shall never know their full number, because life is infinite. Our Universe, which I mistakenly designated as "the Universe as a whole," due to a limitation of my mind, is itself only an island within the Infinite, perhaps little more than one of the grains of sand that desert winds carry to far off places; we do not know where the winds come from, nor whither they are going. As yet I know nothing, and many of the things that I have told you may be wrong. To an amoeba, a drop of water must appear infinite, and it could not even conceive of the Earth that sustained it. In a sense the amoeba would be right, as the drop of water marks the limit of its consciousness, but not the limit of life.

In relation to the Infinite, what more are we and our little world than the amoeba in its drop of water.

It is getting late for you, and it is time we took leave of one another.

Q: I have only one more question for today: if the axial tilt of the Earth is reduced, which places will suffer most as a result?

A: The continent in the Northern hemisphere with the greatest land mass, to be more explicit, Russia. The unbalance of the mass will cause a new continent to rise out of the Pacific Ocean, and the north of Russia will sink. Most of the steppes will vanish for ever, the northern sea will join up with the Caspian, and the remainder of her territory will be rocked by terrible earthquakes. It will not be Russia alone that suffers. Low-lying countries will be totally flooded. There will be a general fall in the level of all the land in the northern hemisphere, and a general raising in the southern hemisphere.

Q: Could the tilt of the Earth's axis disappear altogether?

A: No, if this happened life would be completely extinguished. If the centrifugal force were evenly distributed over all points of the globe, the bed of the sea would be on the same level as the continents, and all the existing land masses



would vanish below the waters. In the beginning the axis of the Earth was at right angles to its plane of rotation, and then the waters covered the planet. In order that life should flourish on Earth, the Creator caused the axis to tilt, so that the ensuing centrifugal force raised the continents from out of the waters. At that time there was a high degree of radioactivity around the planet, and this radioactivity, reacting against the magnetic field of the Earth at the poles, caused them to heat up. Then, as the radioactivity decreased, the poles cooled off again, and the Earth tilted on its axis. Then later there was another sudden change in the inclination, and some of the land that had risen out of the waters disappeared once more under the waves, and other land appeared elsewhere. Many species of fauna vanished when the radioactivity ceased, and they may well reappear and populate the Earth with their kind once again. Now that you have decided to make the Earth radioactive, you will quite shortly see that the so-called antediluvian species will appear in various parts of the world, for no apparent reason.

These may be marine animals or even mammals. The reason for this is that the movement of the Earth in space determines the biological life of the planet, and this movement can be upset if man inadvertently puts his finger in the gears.

Radioactive dust has the same effect on the planet as a grain of sand that some cheeky child puts into his father's watch.



MAN'S WASTED EFFORTS, Chap. 9

Q: Can you please tell us what you think of us, and give us some idea of our weak points. In a game of cards it is easier for an onlooker to see what should be played than it is for the players. Your views would obviously be unbiased. In what direction should we progress to achieve happiness?

A: You want to be happy, and think that material progress is the magic word which makes water spring from a rock. Neither worldly possessions nor knowledge can ensure a man s happiness. Knowledge is not an attribute of animals and yet they are happy as God made them. The savage in his habitat lives peacefully in spite of his poverty and ignorance. He would probably not exchange his discomforts and lack of knowledge for all the erudition of the scientist

taking part in scientific discussions.

True human happiness must rest on the understanding that it is God's will that man's destiny should be a glorious one, in obedience with the laws of the Creator and in love for his fellows. Of what avail are all his possessions and all his knowledge, his dominion over the forces of Nature, if he has no dominion over his own heart?

Many scientists placed themselves above the world, and in their arrogance felt superior to other men. But they died,

and their theories were subsequently disproved. They are remembered as individuals who thought they knew everything, but were deceived and did not even know themselves.

Others became famous though the possession of worldly goods, but death destroyed their dominion and at the last moment they felt unhappier than anyone when they saw that they had lived in illusion. Nobody dies happily with

science and money alone.

However, those who showed their wisdom through love still live in men's hearts.

They died happily having lived happily. Mary of Nazareth, Florence Nightingale, John the Baptist, still live on as true individuals, the light of their love illuminating the lives of many. Without doubt St. Francis of Assisi lived at so high a level that the scientists who designed the atomic bomb could not even hope to touch the soles of his feet. And yet he was not a learned man.

There are men of great riches on Earth, yet they could not prevent their sons becoming thieves or murderers. Did riches bring happiness in such cases? A rich man may send his son to university to return a few years later with his diplomas, but can a diploma make a person good? Cannot lawyers also be thieves, and doctors murderers, and priests immoral?

I maintain that a hungry father with a virtuous son would be happier than a rich father with a thieving or murderous

son.

Q: I realise that righteousness is superior to everything, but I would like to know, from our material point of view, excluding any ethical considerations, what the principal mistakes in our methods are, and how they might adversely affect our future.

A: Nobody can divorce progress from its moral aspect. But since you wish to know of the effects, and not the cause, I

will outline them to you:

Humanity's great failing is never being able to walk without its eyes glued to the road it has already covered; it has thus become a pillar of salt like Lot's wife. Man is basically conservative and prefers to live in the memory of times that can never return rather than in the hope of a radiant future.

He fears the day to come instead of helping the future and preparing its way. He expends an enormous amount of

energy on things that cannot help him, and wastes precious time on futile things; for instance, he wastes money,

Page 1 of 5Message


teachers' and pupils' time, maintains buildings, uses up brainpower, all to teach dead languages which should have

been buried long ago.

Paper, ink, books, chalk and a thousand other things that could be put to a better use are used in teaching useless things. Instead of a dead language, why not teach the functioning of photosynthesis. It would be more worth while to know the meaning of potential gradient, or the functions of the body, rather than the declension of an ancient language. Rather than look into a most promising future, they prefer to live among the mummies of history, and try to

resuscitate the past.

There is a multitude of things which children never hear about, and which they may never come to hear about. Rather than teaching recitation, it would be better to show them how to grow onions and celery, or teach them that wheat, besides providing good food, can also be used for making vegetable oil, viscose, xylose, acetic acid, soap, alcohol,

cellulose, syrup, textiles, fuel, etc., and that the stalks and leaves from which all these things are made should never be buried because they are unsuitable as fertiliser and are carriers of crop diseases.

Teach them rather the meaning of the hydrogenous potential of the soil, how to correct acidity, what soil requires in the way of nitrogen, caesium, cobalt, sulphur, manganese and phosphorus. Show them that vegetable hormones can

produce cabbage leaves ten feet high, and apples weighing several pounds.

Children can forget the names of those who brought devastation to humanity, but they should never forget that it is possible to transform the light of the Sun, virtually without loss, into usable energy by passing it though a coal gas which unites with water to form formaldehyde; and that the oxidised aldehyde can turn sunlight into electric current.

There is far greater beauty to be found in the saturation point of a solution than there is in the story of the destruction of Carthage.

Millions of individuals die of cancer, whereas schools teach children the colours of national flags, offending the innate gregarious instinct of man which intuitively abhors the artificial barriers which economic power has erected in the world.

Rather than dwell upon the word "China," they should learn more about caesium; instead of France, Brazil, U.S.A., U.S.S.R. they should learn more about the functions of nitrogen, phosphorus, sulphur and iron, teaching them that

these elements, among others, produce proteins, and that they, in turn, linked to caesium molecules, make up the anti-cancerous elements normally contained in the liver. Tell them that these same proteins, when linked to cobalt molecules, combat anaemia and are known as vitamin B.12.

Instead of sounding praises to the destructive power of an invader show them that heavy hydrogen is one of the main

causes of cancer when it gets into a cell, and that caesium has the ability to strip it of an electron making it into ordinary innocuous hydrogen. Show them, statistically, that cancer generally affects children who have not yet reached fertility, or old people who have passed it, that sex is thus a defence mechanism of the body, and that these hormones should not be wasted for the mere satisfaction of instincts.

Teach them that instead of drinks it would be preferable to take an extract of liver with enzymes, since these elements cause cancer to recede.

It surprises me that humanity, not having discovered a cure for tuberculosis, should learn rhetoric and dissertation at school. These things should be pastimes for people who do not have diseases to worry about that bring misery to millions of people. It is as though 'someone in mortal agony should begin to study the metre of Alexandrine verses..

But all the above put together are not as serious as humanity's main fault: the dispersal of his forces to an alarming

degree. I cannot quote the exact statistics for the world, or even for your country, but we can make an approximation.

There are about 50 million people in Brazil. About 30 million of these are children too young to take part in the productive life of the country, another 10 million are women, which leaves 10 million men.

In the latter figure one must include the retired and the unproductive, beggars, lepers, consumptives, lunatics, invalids, the blind, thieves, prisoners and the unemployed.

Page 2 of 5Message


A large proportion of work is in unproductive, speculative undertakings, such as wholesalers, retailers, advertising

men, estate agents, stockbrokers, lawyers, bankers. Others are employed in the police, army, navy, air force, magistrature, diplomatic and civil service, etc.

This leaves barely a million productive men employed in agriculture and industry. We would also have to be sure that this agriculture is productive in the true sense of the word, and that the industries are the ones that the country really needs.

In any case, even supposing that all the men were productive, we would still only have 2 million out of a total of 50 million, that is to say, one man working for every twenty-five people, which is absurd when we consider that this individual who does the work for the other twenty-five generally does so without mechanical aids, by the sweat of his brow, so that the others can maintain their standard of living.

Of the million or so who take part in agriculture, many work against the better interests of society, growing tobacco

and stimulants, or are engaged in the fattening up of animals which impoverish the land and subsequently poison man with their meat.

We could say almost the same for those employed in industry. There is nothing wrong with factories, their chimneys are, in a sense, lungs getting rid of carbon dioxide from the central organism.

But man does little to put them to proper use. Factories are by no means always built to solve fundamental problems.

The great majority are engaged in making cosmetics, jewels, useless trinkets for women, endless handbags, ridiculous hats, novelties, nail varnish, shoes which hurt the feet and ruin the carriage, stockings which offer no protection, cigars to poison the body, chewing gum, footballs, pistols and sporting guns, munitions, alcoholic drinks and other stimulants; yet there are countless useful and necessary things which could be mass produced, such as building

material, medicaments, synthetic vegetable hormones, machines for producing energy, electronic stoves, concentrated foodstuffs for distressed populations, philosophical and scientific books, plastic shoes, surgical and orthopaedic instruments, fertilisers, mechanical harvesters and sowers, insecticides, prefabricated houses, indestructible furniture,

prospecting instruments, nitrogen plant, etc.

But let us leave aside all this wasted effort and see how you make use of the work of these 2 million men who are at least doing something. The annual budget estimates for your country must be somewhere about 6.5 billion cruzeiros. Of this sum, about 4.25 billion are spent on the armed forces, and about 1.25 billion on civil service, the judiciary,

state loans, government expenditure, foreign ministry, electoral machinery, official journeys, banquets, etc.

The small remainder is used for beneficial purposes, such as education, public health and agriculture.

Imagine if all this money were ploughed into the construction of roads, schools, hospitals, churches, research institutes, sanitation, new industries, housing schemes, shelter, medicaments, transportation, etc. Imagine if this vast number of non-productive people were to be diverted into new productive enterprises.

Even then everything is not covered by the federal budget. What about State expenditure? Have you checked the

amount of money spent on local governments, public service, police, etc? How many police are there in your State alone?

The expenditure on horses alone which are kept for parades would go a long way to feeding and sheltering the hungry who walk the streets in the heat and in the rain. It is ironical that in a society in which its people can suffer from hunger and cold, horses should be given balanced rations and covered with good woollen blankets.

Is a police force necessary? Yes, it is necessary. It is the necessity of having a policed state that Rousseau spoke of. But

if it is necessary, it is only because men have made it indispensable. If a people waste their productivity on bad things, misery results from their irresponsibility. If there were an abundance, no one would think of killing or robbing. Human passions are stirred up by money because money gives rise to arguments, to profit, the voracity of financiers,

and to ruthlessness. If there is a robbery, it is not, with certain exceptions, because the thief enjoys the crime, but because he feels robbed

by society which denied him the right to have his own house,to till the land without paying rent, and to fully enjoy the liberty which Nature gives instinctingly.

Page 3 of 5Message


The waste of fuel under the present system is alarming. Cars, which could carry several people, are usually driven by

one person who, in the majority of cases, is merely amusing himself, whereas the person who is working has no means of transport. The avid desire for profit and business create a demand for petrol, oil, tyres, etc. If the structure of society were changed, the traffic that now blocks the roads in the rush hour would disappear, leading to economy in both fuel and vehicles.

Man could work less than a year in his whole life, and yet live better than the richest man on Earth. But for human

society, even progress is dangerous. If automation is developed, men will die of hunger owing to unemployment. Yet even the manual labour that men do today could be done by obedient and indefatigable electronic brains.

These "robots" could plough, sow, spread insecticide and fertilisers, prune and reap. If they sensed an ailing plant, they would be able to judge whether it should be treated or whether it constituted a danger for other plants and

should be uprooted. These "robots' could be developed to a point where they would be able to drive vehicles automatically without danger of collision or accident, they could pilot planes with safety, informing base about any possible defects, and taking steps to repair them in full flight.

They could be used to measure metabolism and act as doctors supplying restorative energy.

For less than the amount of money that is spent. on smoking every year, you could do away with cancer; for a tenth of

the money spent on drinks you can banish leprosy from the face of the Earth, and tuberculosis would no longer be a subject for statistics.

Control of the atmosphere could regulate the climate avoiding natural catastrophes, and saving crops.

Electric cells could be placed in streets to absorb all irritating noises.

Education could be changed. Naturally, any radical change would involve the dismissal of teachers which in the present world situation would mean that they would suffer serious privation.

Today most people spend the best part of their lives, from the age of seven until about thirty, poring over books, and

at the end of this, they are chagrined to find that they have learned nothing, and still have a long way to go. A lifetime is too short to learn everything.

However, using hypnosis in a truly scientific spirit, the whole scope of education could be changed. In a few hours a child could master a whole subject which at present takes the better part of its youth to master.

Further, he would do so with great accuracy. It would be sufficient to put a child into a controlled hypnotic sleep, with

the help of a drug such as canabissativa, or a combination of chloroform and morphia, administered at intervals with a psychologist at hand to dictate all the material to be learned.

This could be carried out on a large scale with thousands of pupils at once, making use of headphones. It would be easier, more convenient, and cheaper, and it would not bore a child with long lectures, it would not be subject to the shortcomings of the teachers, and other disadvantages of the present system.

Pupils could go to college early, sleep and come back with a scientific degree in their pockets. Do you think this is too short a time to learn so much? Surely a teacher would not be able to dictate enough in that time. The spirit pays no heed to the concepts of time and space, an eternity can be condensed into a second, or a second can be made into an eternity. One could create the system of rapid transmission. Human thought waves work on a band of about 5mm

wavelength. If electrical messages were sent within this band in successive waves, the whole of human knowledge could be transmitted in a very short time.

The same method could be used to do away with atavistic tendencies and criminal tendencies. In hypnotic sleep the mind becomes receptive and ready to learn and profit by sound teaching. One could go further and break down the

barrier between the conscious and the subconscious. However, this would require considerable technique which could only be mastered in time, as there is a risk of the concept of time disappearing from the mind altogether.

Prisons could be emptied, in the first place by deleting criminal tendencies from the human mind so that no further

Page 4 of 5Message


malefactors would come into being, and in the second because those with criminal tendencies already would be re-

educated. by the hypnotic process and reintegrated into society.

With its framework changed, society would overcome the moral prejudices which dog its steps. Man would overcome death and old age would no longer exist on Earth.

Q: How do we overcome death?

A: In order to overcome death, one needs to know the fundamentals of life. It is the spirit which gives life to the body, and is bound magnetically to the body.

The current flowing through a solenoid gives rise to a magnetic field which draws the iron core into the coil. Any field

must have a centre to act as a vehide for the lines of force which it generates. Once it has attracted the iron, the solenoid can be turned in any direction without the core falling out.

No visible bond is holding it, only lines of force, several thousand to the square inch, which are not visible to the naked eye. The relationship between spirit and the body is similar to that between the solenoid and the iron core. The body

corresponds to the solenoid and its current can be measured with an encephalograph; the spirit represents the iron core.

If the magnetic field made by the body is interrupted, or its lines of force broken, or if the electric current which feeds it stops flowing, then the spirit is freed. This is death.

However, if the lesion which gave rise to the interruption could be cured by suitable apparatus, the field would be restored, and the spirit, if we called it back, would return and unite with matter, falling again into the restored

magnetic field.

For this, one would use human or vegetable ectoplasm which would cure the injured part.

Death is therefore a defect which can be overcome. I do not mean to say that man could live eternally, but he could get as far as making Methuselah envious.

He did not live longer because the Flood swallowed him up, but if mankind were good, the forces of Nature, instead of destroying man would continue to preserve his life.

I have told you what I think from the material point of view, but I could tell you much more from the spiritual point

of view, exploring avenues which science, up to the present, has not even dreamed of. You showed a preference for the material point of view. You got what you asked for.

Page 5 of 5Message


The Atomic Danger, Chap. 10

Q: Please tell me why you think our use of atomic energy is dangerous?

A: I do not say that the use of atomic energy is a danger to humanity. What I do

say is that aggressive hatred coupled with atomic energy will destroy the earth.

There are two sides to every picture. It depends which you choose.

Electrical energy is useful to man, as it turns motors, runs factories, produces

abundant light, and in fact supplies, all the requirements of modem life. Yet it is

also used m electric chairs to take another's life.

Dynamite can also be put to peaceful uses, breaking up rocks, mining, making

canals, etc.; but it is also used in weapons of war.

Aviation represents a step forward on the road to peace, and the brotherhood of

man, yet it is used to rain destruction on cities, bringing death to many homes,

orphaning thousands of innocent children who know nothing of the commercial

interests of the potentates of Earth.

In the story of Croesus, all that he touched was turned to gold; mankind is a

Croesus in reverse. If he touches the pure gold which God offers him, he turns it

to filth that pollutes the world.

Atomic energy is a gift of God, when used sparingly and for peaceful ends. Its

wanton use and its application to war could mean the complete and utter extinction

of the life as we know it today on this planet.

The last chapter of atomic energy has not yet been written neither on Earth nor in

any other part of the Universe.

It cannot, in fact, be written by anyone because it has no end. You are, then,

still beginners in this vast subject.

Soon you will use hydrogen, nuclear fusion, and then gamma rays, as means of

destruction. If you do not destroy the globe with hydrogen bombs, you will do so by

other more powerful means. One day the end will come. If nothing else, when you

discover the magnetic effects of the planets, you will destroy everything.

Put a monkey in a laboratory and see what happens.

The people of Earth have two roads ahead: life or death. May they make a wise

choice!

Q: Do you mean to say that atomic energy is good, except when used for warlike

purposes? In that case, its effect can only be harmful from the moral point of

view, but not inherently harmful.

A: I meant both. The moral aspect is obvious, but I implied the material aspect

too.

Page 1 of 7Message


Q: What is its effect upon the material order of things?

A: In a short time you will have hydrogen bombs of devastating power. Remember I

told you that in the upper regions of the atmosphere physiochemical reactions take

place which prevent the penetration of rays from the Sun.

These layers not only filter radioactivity, but also maintain the Earth in space.

One must often admire man's acts of generosity, when he becomes good and is endowed

with intelligence.

At other times he shows himself to be a fool. If a slight increase in solar

activity disturbs life on Earth, changing human beings, Hertzian waves, climate,

etc., how much more harm can be done by an increase in radioactivity directly

injected into the heart of Earth by hydrogen bombs?

Solar disturbances are periodic and their effects soon disappear because they are

the result of waves; but radioactivity produced by hydrogen bombs has a lasting

effect, because atomic dust remains in suspension and takes time to fall. While in

suspension it damages the higher layers; when it falls it poisons everything.

A planet is a delicate organism, whose natural equilibrium cannot be upset with

impunity. This excess radioactivity begins by influencing men's brains, upsetting

them noticeably. Soon you will see madness range over the Earth.

The use of hydrogen bombs will unleash the horsemen of the Apocalypse, who were

designated for that day and hour. Elements now unknown will appear and poison the

vegetation and, consequently, men and animals.

The seas will be poisoned and the fish will die. Water will be contaminated at its

source, because it will fall from radioactive clouds. Showers of particles will

fall to Earth and the crops will perish.

Moreover, the atmospheric layers will be changed. Upon their composition depends

the stability of the planet. They will then cease to produce light and affect the

luminosity of the Sun. They will no longer be able to filter the solar emanations

and the Sun will turn black and you will experience indescribable sensations.

There will be Dantesque scenes. It will be then that Earth's people discover how

wrong was the theory based on the fixed speed of light at 186,ooo miles per second.

Earth will be subject to energy in the form of ultraviolet waves, with speeds of

millions of miles per second.

Meanwhile, in spite of this intense solar energy, there will be no light, but only

a rusty red glow near the ground. Man will suffer from terrible cold, but his flesh

will be burned as with a hot iron by actinic radiation. If man looks at the Sun,

his eyes will be destroyed.

The upper layers of the atmosphere produce or prevent earthquakes. A major

alteration of these would make the whole Earth tremble and its cities will collapse

like a pack of cards; a quaking earth below, and darkness and burning heat above.

Enormous waves will form on the seas, compressed violently by the solar energy. The

poles will be subject to greater solar pressure and will melt, raising the level of

the seas so that people in maritime cities would be struck with terror.

Page 2 of 7Message


The roaring of the waters will play a fearful duet with the groaning of the earth.

The present rate of atomic explosions has already caused the mean heat of the Earth

to increase, and it will continue to do so at the rate of 0.3 degree C. each year.

If there were to be a hydrogen war, there would be pandemonium.

Radioactivity in the upper layers is already enough to melt the polar caps and

flood low-lying cities.

In twenty years there will be a difference of 6C. Before then, all the ice of the

poles will have melted.

Strange diseases will appear. The liver is a living laboratory and on being

attacked by the ingestion of radioactive elements scattered about the world, it

will lose its ability to produce the elements for bodily defences.

Leukaemia will destroy children who have not reached puberty, as well as old people

whose sex force is spent. Cancer will spread rapidly. Ghastly pestilence will

attack the skin and the eyes and there would be no cure.

Nursing mothers will weep with sorrow, knowing that their milk, which should

nourish the child, carries lethal poisons which will destroy its bones and bring

leukaemia. Many, unable to withstand such suffering, will seek death, cursing life

and those who launched such despair upon the world.

Then humanity will see whither progress without God has brought them maniacs in the

streets, the maimed everywhere, hospitals overflowing, cemeteries full, larders

empty, millions destroyed by war, orphaned children, ravaged cities, contaminated

fields, poisoned waters, terrorised multitudes, plague, terror, blasphemy, grief,

desolation. On Earth, people in anguish; in the heavens the cosmic laws upset.

Will you not understand that only spiritual progress linked to God can be of any

value, and lead mankind on the road to peace? Will you not yet see that only love

can uplift man to reach eternity?

But this is not all. While atomic potential is being prepared in your. arsenals to

destroy Earth at one blow, guided missiles will be improved.

The day will come when armies will lose their raison d'dtre, navies will be

useless, and even the most advanced air force will be obsolete.

Men will destroy themselves by pressing buttons. Then the great danger will

threaten. In a moment, like a flash of lightning, a cloud of flame could annihilate

all life of Earth.

For a rocket, to get from one continent to another, needs to climb to heights where

only pure hydrogen exists. There would be a hydrogen bomb in the nose of this

rocket. Now, in the upper layers of the atmosphere, atomic reactions are subject to

different laws. Magnetic fields are weaker and the bomb more easily triggered off.

The critical mass and the critical distance are not the same. The great mass of

pure hydrogen in the upper regions and the whole earth would be transformed into a

blazing inferno. Even with a bomb working with heavy hydrogen alone, the

homogeneous medium would ensure the sudden transformation of these layers into

helium. That would be the end. Perhaps it would be better than a slow ending.

If this should happen, the prophecy of Saint Peter, written in the last chapter of

his second letter, would be fulfilled:

Page 3 of 7Message


"But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the Heavens

shall pass away with a great noise and the elements shall melt with fervent heat,

the Earth ~o... shall be burned up."

No one will know when this day will be, because the blow would be struck by

surprise, without formal declaration of hostilities. Men will think they are safely

leading a normal life, when a madman presses the button, stabbing the Earth and

murdering its inhabitants. Man, for having sown all these years, life without God,

shall shortly reap a harvest of tares, because the ears of science are ripening

already.

Q: What are the elements which will bring about changes in the liver, causing

disease?

A: The radioactive elements will cause changes in proteins and these will attack

the liver. Radioactive carbon will alter the metabolism. Cobalt, which normally

helps to prevent anaemia, will, in this radioactive state, destroy the blood cells.

An isotope of strontium will unite with calcium and affect the bones.

Phosphorus, which is concentrated in the brain, will reach motor nerve centres and

radioactive iodine will work its way into the main glands of the body. Radioactive

aluminium and magnesium will influence the sex-glands. Because of the destruction

of parts of the hypothalamus, man will suffer from terrible hunger, but there will

be nothing to eat; others will 'have an uncontrollable sexual desire. If the

activity of the thyroid is impaired, it will upset the balance with the adrenal

glands, which will either produce an excess of adrenalin or none at all.

Q: What has the thyroid got to do with the adrenals?

A: In the case of a tiger, whose existence in the wild state depends on his

ferocity, the adrenals are twice the size of the thyroid, whereas in man, the

thyroid is large and the adrenal small. The relationship is obvious.

Q: Is all this a mere possibility, or is it all inevitable?

A: That is something I cannot answer. It is up to you on Earth to decide whether

all this stays in the realm of possibility,or whether you turn it into reality.

Man has free will. No one can tell him what he must do.

The only thing I can say is that these will be the consequences. Do not do as the

sorcerer's apprentice did, not knowing what he was toying with.

Men are letting off bombs, not realising that their effects are not always

immediate. It is like the saturation point in chemistry; one can keep putting drops

into a liquid without anything happening; then, suddenly the critical point is

reached and the whole solution changes. From then on, it is impossible to control

the reaction.

Persistent radioactivity in the upper layers of the atmosphere produces the same

effect. No one has gone high enough up from the Earth to measure and observe what

is happening. If you could have known Earth's luminosity before, seen from outside,

and could observe it now, you would see a difference. The radioactive dust which

stays in the stratosphere already gives rise to fear for the future of men.

If bomb tests continue, one day war will be thrust upon you, bringing with it

increased radioactivity. Let Earth's scientists explode bombs for another fifteen

Page 4 of 7Message


years and you will see the result of their madness. It will be too late. If anyone

could calculate the effect of two hundred hydrogen bombs upon the uppermost layer

of the ionosphere, he would want to shout from the housetops to put an end to this

folly.

Unhappily, my friend, Earth is in the hands of raving lunatics; they are unbalanced

enough to accuse us of lying if we tell the truth. Evil must come, but woe to him

who commits it. His fate is sealed. He should not imagine that he will not be

called to account for lives he has sacrificed to one interest or another. We all

expect a day of reckoning, when we shall be called upon to account for the gifts

that the Creator gave us.

The good need not worry, because God will know how to deliver them in the hour of

peril. The just will not suffer for the sinner. This only happens once, and it

happened a long time ago. If it were so decided, we ourselves could evacuate

Earth and remove the worthy from it. We have thousands of saucers, each one capable

of carrying thousands of people. However, we cannot intervene unless this be

decided from on high, when we would be told whom to deliver from this hell. Rest

assured that the just shall not be forsaken, because unseen eyes watch over this

little planet and they know full well who acts without evil intent.

Pick up your Bible, and read how Lot was delivered from Sodom when it was about to

be destroyed, and see the parallel. Read, also, how Enoch and Elijah were carried

up in a chariot of fire. There is therefore no difficulty at all about this, and if

we were to receive such an order we would carry it out to the full

Furthermore, if it were decided from on high that Earth ought to be destroyed we

would trust in the wisdom of this decision and carry out the orders without

hesitation. We would never question them, We would do as Abraham did, when he was

ready to sacrifice his son to do the will of God. We could, in a second, raze this

planet and leave nothing alive on its surface. The planet would be sacrificed in

the twinkling of an eye.

We have the means and we know how to use them. If Earth, after only a century of

scientific progress, can develop so great a destructive power, how much greater

must ours be; for at a time when Earth's people had not even attained to knowledge

of mathematics, we were already making interplanetary voyages, with cosmic energy

for propulsion.

Q: But could this happen? Would anyone be capable of ordering our destruction?

A: Perfectly well. It is not right that man's folly should endanger the stability

of the planetary system and destroy the lives of others far away.

The entry of a new Sun into our system will be less dangerous

than the explosion of the Earth's hydrogen cover. It would wreak havoc on several

inhabited planets. The unbalance of forces would be fatal to many, if it happened

suddenly. Then there would only be one preventive measure; destruction of all

living matter of Earth. It would be rendered sterile in a matter of seconds.

However, I am not in a position to make decisions of such magnitude, nor, for that

matter, is any inhabitant of any planet.

The time has come for scientists to stop and think, for man to cease thinking of

himself as the Lord of Creation and come down from the pedestal his vanity has put

him on, and realise that as he has been in the habit of oppressing the weak, the

Page 5 of 7Message


time could well come when someone stronger shall silence him.

The conquest of other planets and the subjugation of their inhabitants has already

been mooted. This is the height of human impertinence. It would also be suicide. We

would like to draw the attention of these people to the chapter of Isaiah which

reads as follows: "How thou art fallen from Heaven

O Lucifer, sun of the morning For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into

Heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God. I will sit also upon the

mount of the congregation in the sides of the north. I will ascend above the

heights of the clouds, I will be like the most High. Yet thou shalt be brought down

to hell, to the sides of the pit" (Isaiah I: i~: xii-xv). We could also remind you

of what happened to the men of Babel who tried to reach the heavens with their

tower. Today this tower again threatens the heavens, and is represented by earthly

science; let us hope there will be no need for us to knock it down.

So long as men waged their petty wars of conquest, we tolerated it all. We merely

kept our distance, avoiding further contact with those who could not understand us.

Now man constitutes a serious risk for everybody, and tomorrow it may be worse.

I do not know how all this will end; I do not even know whether men will mend their

ways, and far less whether a superior intelligence will go on tolerating them much

longer, or will resolve to act.

I am a being of very limited attainment and it is not within my grasp to say what

should be the fate of earthly things.

But it is time for man to stop and think. A little thought costs nothing.

Enough of this folly. Away with these crimes. His salvation is our salvation, may

he not force us to an act of desperation; may he not lead us into evil.

May he not bring us to the violence which we so thoroughly condemn and which we

would eternally rue. Let him live and allow us to live.

We know your affairs better than you know them yourselves; we know when the war

leaders meet and what they plan.

We are present at your cabinet meetings; we know the hypocrisy with which they

exchange platitudes; we read their motives.

Rest assured that we would act before they endangered us. We have orders to defend

ourselves.

We have done everything possible to show that there are powers superior to those on

Earth; we wished to show men that the possession of power does not give rein to

violence and that we have no desire to seize the planet. We have flown high, low,

singly and in formation.

We have performed aerobatics over cities, air bases, fortifications.

I personally received an order to move in against an armed aircraft which was rash

enough to open fire against my craft. But nothing convinces men on

Let him continue along the atomic road he is following. One day the end must come.

Page 6 of 7Message


Someone, either we, or man himself will press a button to end the story of a

humanity which preferred to die rather than to live happily in accordance with the

laws of God.

Page 7 of 7Message


Life on Other Worlds, Chap. 11

Q: Are all the planets inhabited?

A: Some are and some are not. In our system the following are inhabited: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto. Jupiter and Saturn are not inhabited, as they have no atmosphere. Jupiter has one, but we cannot consider it as such, as it has virtually no depth, and Saturn has none at all.

It is a sphere of low density, almost entirely composed of heavy gases, with a small solid centre. It is a world in formation. As it solidifies it will contract, liberating the elements that will eventually form its atmosphere.

It could he that the entry of another Sun into our system will bring about a "cracking" process, by which the denser elements will be precipitated.

Jupiter, also, is a new body which recently developed a rarefied atmosphere.

However, it is still unsuitable for life.

As these bodies become more dense they will move closer to the gravitational centre of our system, in view of the fact that their diameters decrease and their density increases. They will thus be increasingly subject to attraction, and decreasingly subject to repulsion. However, many of Jupiter's and Saturn's satellites are inhabited.

Q: But can Mercury support life, when it is so near the Sun?

A: Certainly. Its great etheric mass filters the rays of the Sun. Bear in mind that whereas Earth's etheric covering extends a mere 250,000 miles, Mercury's extends 390,000 miles.

God-or Nature, whichever you like to say-covers bodies to keep out cold, but in our case the opposite takes place, the greater the heat, the greater the covering. If you calculate the speed of solar rays in space as I showed you by checking the difference between the luminosity of the rising Sun and the Sun at zenith, with the equatorial radius of the Earth as a base, you will see that Mercury, subject to intenser radiation, has been given an etheric covering exactly large enough to filter these rays to a point where they fill into the visible spectrum on reaching the surface of the planet.

From the calculation we made together you saw that the farther bodies are from the Sun, the less covering they have, until we come to Saturn, which has none at all. Up to that point the ether and atmosphere are there to filter the rays of the Sun. From Saturn outwards, however, the planets again acquire an etheric cover on an increasing scale, no longer with the object of filtering the Sun's rays, but to produce a positive reaction to them, so as to provide sufficient heat to maintain life. So the atmospheric and etheric compositions of these planets are not the same as those of planets on this side of Saturn.

The amount of diffused light is much greater than on Earth. Their atmosphere, though rarefied, is a good conductor of heat, which may seem absurd to you.

Q: I find it hard to see how a distant planet can have an atmosphere sensitive to the rays of the Sun, in view of the tiny fraction of light they receive.

A: There are many kinds of light. Its origin can also be chemical. Certain species of vegetation emit light

Page 1 of 6Message


under bacteriological action. Insects produce quite a strong light by utilising their own internal enzyme reactions. You can make cold light by electrical discharges through gas.

Why then deny that Nature has other methods of giving life to a planet? Put an electric charge through a tube of hydrogen and it will produce a bluish light; mix other gases with the hydrogen and you will obtain other kinds of light.

What more spectacular demonstration could one wish for than that which takes places when one mixes a small quantity of chlorine with water, and then subjects the mixture to a ray of light. This will give rise to a violent explosion and emission of light and heat.

If similar reactions were produced within the atmosphere of the planets, avery small ray of light could produce a tremendous reaction with vast magnetic storms.

Q: Have the beings on these planets a material form?

A: What do you expect them to be made of? They cannot be made of energy because only spirit is energy.

Q: But is our constitution very different from that of the people of other planets?

A: There are differences, but the human form is Nature's chosen form. The metablism of a man from Pluto is not precisely the same as that of an inhabitant of Mercury.

Nevertheless one can visit the other and remain alive for a long period.

A fish lives in a dense medium, but can keep itself alive for a certain time by breathing air. But the difference between Pluto's and Mercury's atmospheres is not nearly as great as that between air and water, so one could stay alive a long time.

Q: But has gravity no effect?

A: None. Gravity is an illusion, like others you entertain. We discussed how gravity is a combination of phenomena, wherein an important part is played by the atmospheric covering which is responsible for differences in density.

But we also came to the conclusion that all inhabited planets have an atmosphere, so the difference is a small one. All have warmth, too, either by solar radiation or by chemical reaction.

The principal factor in gravity is the vertical component of magnetism, but the difference between one planet and another is insufficient to prevent interchange between people of different planets.

Q: As regards appearance, what are the chief differences between the people of the various planets?

A: We cannot say, for example, that the people of Mercury are tall or short. There are all sorts, as you have pigmies. However, their maximum stature is 5 ft. 10 in. They are strong, dark, intelligent, energetic and active, with small eyes, no beards, low foreheads, well made noses. On Venus they reach 6 ft. They belong to various races, predominantly a fair type. Their bodies are well made, but they are the most like Earth people, both in appearance and in spirit. They are energetic, talkative, kindly, and above all, spiritually minded.

On Mars there are two root races; one fair and one dark. The fair race is the most tractable and gentle. The dark race is composed of people who are short of stature and of a lively disposition. They are the gayest in the planetary system. There is no life on Jupiter, only on its satellites. But there is a great variety of life on these heavenly bodies. There are all sizes, from men of 7 ft.4in. down to Lilliputian beings.

Page 2 of 6Message


But we all live in the same family. The little people are in the majority.

There is no life on Saturn either. Due to its lack of atmosphere, its surface will be riddled with meteorites. Two of its satellites are inhabited. There the men are intelligent and kind. They have their space crafts, but they do not use them much. For you these beings would be quite inexplicable because they never die. They possess what one might call the body of resurrection. They never commit any sin, yet they are material beings. They are tall, with large magnetic eyes. Not even we can fathom all their wisdom, they are enigmatic.

On Uranus and Neptune the inhabitants are very similar. They are tall and muscular, well built, with large eyes and very well developed heads. Organically they function in a different way from the inhabitants of other planets. They do not feed on heavy substances as we do, but on liquids or gases, and their blood is different.

On Pluto life is very similar to that on Earth. The people are identical in nearly everything. But not withstanding their advanced intelligence, they incline to evil and neglect God. They allow their baser instincts to rule them.

They learned to travel though space a long time ago. They do not war among themselves-war, alas, only exists on Earth. But they are dangerous beings, and any instances of saucers doing harm to people on Earth can be attributed to them.

The only reason they do not harm any other inhabitants of the system is because they know that these other beings are more evolved, and any attempt at conquest would be fatal. But their fate is sealed.

The people of Earth have committed many misdeeds, and this planet is regarded as the centre of evil, but its inhabitants are yet in their infancy, and in the dawn of their intelligent life, with the exception of a small elite who have settled down here as teachers. For this reason, God will punish humanity, but with moderation, without expelling this planet from the solar system. Those who cannot adjust themselves to the higher order of things will be evacuated from the planet, leaving it in the possession of others who will be like the inhabitants of the satellites of Saturn. As for Pluto, justice will take its full course. Evil will not be allowed to continue indefinitely. The transgression of law is not a natural phenomenon, because if it were a basic condition for the evolution of individuals of various worlds, then it would itself become a law. It is absurd to think that evil should itself be a law. There are only two tenets that can claim immortality on any inhabited world, these are love of God and love of one's neighbour. Anything that departs from these tenets is a transgression. The in-habitants of Pluto were fully aware of divine laws, but chose to ignore them. They became prey to sexual pleasure and as a direct result of this laid themselves open to other sins such as idolatry, sodomy, rebellion and disrespect for the physical integrity of others, and so fell under the whole sway of evil. It is like an avalanche, which can start off with the fall of a small stone, and finish up as a complete landslide.

For this reason, Pluto will be torn away from this system, and 'will wander towards the nearest constellation. Its inhabitants will suffer untold horror and will not be able to escape. They will be degraded to the state of cave men under atrocious conditions. The splendour of their cities, their rapid transport systems, brilliant lighting and communications and, in fact, all that a highly intelligent humanity can attain to through millennia of constant progress, beyond your imagination, will be written off and crumble into ruin like historical Babylon, with its hanging gardens.

Then our system 'will return to normal and we shall become as one large family, all under the banner of love.

Q: As far as I can gather from your statements, Earth will be left with a humanity similar to the inhabitants of Saturn's satellites. Does this mean human beings will be changed?

A: This is exactly what I wanted to convey. Human beings have gone as far as they can go. Their intelligence cannot go beyond the normal senses.

You talk in terms of biological evolution, but let us see if this is true or not. There should be a pari-passu

Page 3 of 6Message


development between intelligence and the physical body if this theory were true. Whereas intelligence has reached a high stage of development, the body has been attacked by strange diseases which are on the increase.

We thus get a picture of mental development accompanied by physical atrophy.

The human race has reached a point in its development where it should disappear.

Races are like men with their infancy and adolescence, maturity, old age and death.

The physical body as it is would not give intelligence very much more room for development. Earthly science and techniques will reach such an advanced stage that the brain will no longer be able to cope with the problems involved, which may have to be done by machines. Does this imply that inanimate machinery is superior to spirit? Not at all. But this requires the appearance of a new race on Earth, composed of beings with sufficient brain power to grasp all the increasingly complex problems associated with progress. These bodies would have the capacity to take a further step along the path to wisdom.

How can you talk of indefinite progress when you are bound to a body of limited capacity and of a low order. It is wrong to say that Nature does not progress by sudden leaps. Its progress is based almost entirely on this, as, for example, in the chemical combinations of carbon and hydrogen. Knowledge is garnered until, at a given instant, there is an integral transformation of brain and body.

If one adds an atom of hydrogen to an atom of oxygen, the result is still a gas, but if a further atom of hydrogen is added, there is a sudden transformation and they cease to be gases and turn into liquid. The same thing happens in the case of carbon and hydrogen. CH2 is a gas, and we can go on adding to either element without anything happening until we get to C2H4 when there is a sudden transformation and the gas changes its characteristics radically.

There was no gradual change in the gas, but it preserved its characteristics until sufficient elements were added to bring about the sudden transformation.

In life the process is the same. Many races are buried in the life cycle of a planer. Earthly science, believing in natural selection, sought for the links in the chain of evolution. It did not find them, and never will find them, because they do not exist.

It finds many things which are not links, which proves their non-existence. It is strange that all races have left their traces on Earth, except those that constituted the links in the evolutionary chain. Why should Nature have played such a trick to hide them if everything that exists is for man's enlightenment? This, therefore, is not what happens.

When a race is no longer capable of keeping up the struggle against constantly changing climate and circumstance, then the race disappears like any other living thing. If a sun has its old age and disintegration, then why should this not also apply to a race?

What is impossible for man is easy for God. He can cause a planet to be inhabited in a moment.28

Q: But how can a planet come to be inhabited if all its people have perished?

A: God performs an act of resurrection.29 -

Q: How?

A: Spirit acts on matter and fashions it to its will where such super-physical phenomena are commonplace, the spirit manipulates the ectoplasm of a passive agent and moulds from it a body which is visible ~o the living. Its organism is real and its activity can be controlled. It has all the organs that a normal individual has. After manifestation the ectoplasm is generally reabsorbed by the passive agent,

Page 4 of 6Message


and disappears. However, it would only need an act of will on its part to continue living a lifr of its own. In many of these cases of manifestation hairs and pieces of clothing have been left and preserved intact. If such fragments can remain in existence, there is no reason why a whole body should not remain. It would only have to sever its connection with the passive agent.

If God were to ordain that a new race should populate the Earth, the spirits could manipulate the ectoplasm of the Earth itself and create bodies from it, far superior to those of the present race. These new beings would have fantastic bodies and brains. This is the act of resurrection I spoke of. If ordinary spirits of a lower order can mould a body in accordance with their will, how much greater then would be the power of God, should He decide to repopulate the Earth?

Q: Does this mean to say that the present race came into being in this way?

A: There is no doubt about it. Adam was in fact moulded from the dust of the Earth, that is to say, from its ectoplasm. The ancient race had used up the whole of its evolutionary energy, and there had to be an intervention of the heavenly powers which created the new race. This event is very clearly depicted in the case of Eve. God caused Adam to fall into a deep sleep, using him as the passive supplier of ectoplasm, and the body of Eve was moulded from this. She was, indeed, flesh of Adam's flesh, and the Biblical narrator is correct when he stated that woman was moulded from Adam's rib.

Q: But is not ectoplasm a by-product of the nervous system? How could it be drawn from the Earth?

A: Everything is drawn from the Earth. Vegetables also have their ectoplasm and their roots draw it up from the soil. If any power were capable of forming a new body, surely it would draw the necessary elements for it from the ground. It would be a slight on the powers of the Supreme Spirit to think that He who made matter should not also have the power to make ectoplasm.

Q: If there were an atomic disaster, and the planet became uninhabitable, how could the spirit mould new bodies that could keep alive?

A: Lift could well be impossible for the body as it is now, but on the other hand it could be ideal for other bodies. God creates types of beings to suit the medium in which they are placed. Earthworms live in the same world as man, but the soil is their ideal medium; fish live in water; the amphibian can live in air or water; the eagle prefers heights where the atmosphere is rarefied.

If life now manifests itself in various forms, do you think Nature has run through her repertoire and exhausted her possibilities on Earth? A lion would die in the Arctic, whereas a bear is quite happy there. Whether the Earth is covered with ice, whether it becomes too hot, whether it is radioactive or not,

Nature will in every case devise an appropriate life form. And if Nature, with this wonderful power of creation, were supplemented by a spiritual power, what marvels could it not perform? Man will have to disappear from the face of the Earth, and homo sapiens will be replaced by spiritual man, so long as he allows Nature to effect this transformation quietly on her own. When the first man of the present race, who was the resurrection of a dying race, made his appearance on the planet, there were still some men of the old race left who were dying off.

There was no total disappearance of living beings from the planet. However, home sapiens appears to be in a hurry to get to the end of his career and to deprive

Nature of its right to put an end to him by exhaustion. Perhaps it is just because he is bent on self-destruction."

"There are various Biblical references to the complete destruction of living beings. In Isaiah we read the following: "Until the cities be wasted without inhabitation ~ and the houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate. And the Lord have removed men far away, and there be a great for salting in the midst of the land" (Isaiah 6: xi-xii); "Through the wrath of the Lord of Hosts is the land darkened, and the people shall be as the fuel of the fire: no man shall spare his brother" (Isaiah 9: xix); "The consumption decreed

Page 5 of 6Message


shall overflow with righteousness, for the Lord God of Hosts shall make a consumption" (Isaiah to: xxii-xxiii); "Behold the day of the Lord cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it .

For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine. And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogance of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible. I will make a man more precious than fine gold; even a man than the golden wedge of Ophir.

Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place..." (Isaiah 13: ix-xiii); .... for the extortioner is at an end, the spoiler ceaseth, the oppressors are consumed out of the land" (Isaiah 16: iv);

"Behold the Lord snaketh the land empty and maketh it waste, and turneth it upside down, and scattereth abroad the inhabitants thereof.... The land shall be utterly emptied, and utterly spoiled for the Lord hath spoken this word....

Therefore the curse devoured the earth, and they that dwell therein are desolate, therefore the inhabitants of the earth are burned, and few men left.

The earth is utterly broken down, the earth is clean dissolved, and the earth is moved exceedinly. Thee earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, and shall be removed like a cottage and the transgressions there of shall be heavy upon it;and it shall fall,and not rise again"(Isaiah24)

While talking about destruction, they also assert that earth will be inhabited by other men: "Then shalt thou say in shine heart, Who hast begotten me these, seeing I have lost my children, and am desolate, a captive, and removing to and fro? and who hath brought up these? Behold I was left alone; these where had they been?" (Isaiah 49: xxi); "They shall inherit the land for ever, the branch of my planting, the work of my hands, that I may be glorified" (Isaiah 6o: xxi);

"For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; and the former shall not be remembered nor come into mind" (Isaiah 6~: xvii).

In seances 28" They are created now, and not from the beginning; even before the day when thou heardest them not; lest thou shouldest say, Behold, I knew them" (Isaiah 48: vii).

29St. Clement of Alexandria, a disciple of Panthaenus, who was in turn a disciple of St. John, when talking about resurrection, indicated that this was a phenomenon which occurred at regular intervals in the world, q.v. Letters to the Corinthians, Ch. 24. He maintains that the human race is created and lives until it is in time succeeded by another. In Chapter as of the same letter, he gives the divine phoenix as an example, which is born from the body of its predecessor when it is ageing and near death. According to other Fathers of the Church, the human race rarely survives more than 7,000 years, having in this time exhausted its capacity to adapt itself to a constantly changing medium.

Page 6 of 6Message


FAREWELL! Chap. 12

We met at the Roosevelt station in Sao Paulo. To begin with we continued our

discussion on various scientific subjects, and later talked about ethics and

religion. Then he said to me: "Now I am going. If you wish to see me again, meet me

on Angatuba Avenue between November 14th and 17th, 1956. Should there be any hitch

from your side, I will see you again in 1959 if you are still here. Once again I

shall keep my word.

"I should like you to always remember one thing, do not attach too much importance

to all the scientific things we have talked about.

Science is only a means of giving us certain facilities, and of teaching us how to

use the forces of Nature. Seek that science which will bring happiness to all, and

above all seek God because only He has meaning in the Universe. Love is the true

science.

"What shall it avail man if he knows all things and all the secrets of the

Universe, if he should lose his soul? Science is like a law, it is only beneficial

when it guarantees the tights of man, and when it protects, shelters and serves

him. If it loses its protective character and becomes oppressive, then it is time

it was abolished and replaced by another. Such laws cannot and should not be

respected.

It is like the salt that Christ referred to, if the salt should lose its savour and

its strength, it should be cast away. Science exists so that man may live well and

that there should be an abundance of all things. But if this science, instead of

being a gift of God, should become a source of destruction to the human race, then

it should be put aside.

A man can live without science, enjoying all the things that Nature provides; but

with no spirit of compassion and respect for the lives of others, life on Earth

would be inexorably destroyed. God does not destroy anyone, but man the aid of

science could destroy himself and his fellows.

"Do not seek the salvation of your soul through science. If this were a means of

spiritual progress, on this false basis, men would have arrived in hell long ago.

The possession of scientific knowledge has no significance.

Without it many could lead a spiritual life, but with it millions will meet nothing

but affliction. Of what use is knowledge that used a whole people as guinea pigs,

killing thousands, destroying innocent people and bringing grief to those Japanese

cities whose names remain as milestones on the road to destruction.

"It is to no avail. All of us who travel through space, men from different planets,

are moved when we see those cities and never tire of saying that here was where the

first blow of brute power struck the Earth and its inhabitants.

Here are the paths which lead to Armageddon. Here Christian people crucify Jesus

again and proclaim the supremacy of the Beast who is to rule the Earth. It is a

pity that human beings have insufficient scientific knowledge to dominate all

Nature, and not be as poor as they are now. Since science is a great evil for them,

Page 1 of 4Message


it would be better to live without it, because then they would at least live.

It is preferable to live in ignorance and allow others to live than for all to be

drowned as a result of a little knowledge.

"They worship Christ in vain and fruitlessly pay homage to Him. The only thing that

He wishes is that they should love one another.

Man should not pray so much with pretty words; God is not moved by rhetoric. Rather

should they make a constant prayer of their own lives and their love for their

neighbour.

"There is yet time to save the world, an opportunity is always given to him that

repents. There is no criminal who cannot be pardoned. If the crime is great, God's

love is greater still. If man needed time to be pardoned, God could make a fraction

of a second into an eternity.

Divine acts are not subordinate to time and space. This is the reason why some

criminals, in a moment of repentance, become saints and martyrs. For an instant

they departed from the ways of evil with all the power of their heart, and by

divine action this second's repentance was made permanent.

If God cares so much for a single soul, should He not care that much more for

humanity? Therefore pay more attention to spiritual things and use science as a

means of explaining them.

"I know that you will refuse to tell others about the meetings we have had, but one

day you will have to do so by force of circumstance. Do not imagine, however, that

when you do tell others, they will take much notice. Many have spoken without any

apparent result, and the only reward you should expect is something which nobody

can take away, because it exists within your heart alone. But there may be someone

unknown to you to whom your work will be of great value.

"And now, farewell! I shall take with me some books in order to study Earthly

science a little more. When I return I will do my best to bring you something in

writing about our science and our ethics. Until that time we shall be linked in

thought."

"Supposing I am not here when you come back," I asked him.

"It would perhaps be better if you were not here, because then you would be

somewhere else where it would be easier for us to make contact. But do not leave

without telling your friends that life extends through the infinities of space from

sphere to sphere and from world to world, and that beyond death there is hope and

consolation. Tell them that wherever there is spirit, God will have prepared a

vehicle for it. In life, swans are mute, but they never depart without a song."

He gave me his hand and took leave of me again. I would like to have followed him

to the place where he was to board his saucer, but he told me: "Why follow me? Do

not come 'with me. My saucer is quite close and it would not be pleasant for you to

see the circumstances in which I leave; you would be upset. There is always a

moment of separation and before I got into the saucer you would no longer be able

to see me. May God be with you."

I saw him vanish round a corner. I had a strong desire to follow him at any cost,

but decided that this would be disloyal to someone who had shown such friendliness

to me.

Page 2 of 4Message


CONCLUSION

We have given an account of things as they happened, and have told you what we

heard. The ideas expressed in this book, whether they be good or bad, are not our

own.

We have tried to render them as we heard them, using our notes as a basis. Nothing

has been added. We have, on the contrary, had to cut out a great deal, partly to

avoid making the book too long, and partly because we saw no point in publishing

things that could not help to solve our most immediate problems.

What would be the point in discussing the use of anti-electrons in breaking down

matter, if this process were only to be used as yet another weapon of destruction,

instead of being put to a constructive use? We already have enough ways of slaying

one another.

Would that man did not use the knowledge he already has to the detriment of other

people's lives and property.

All we have endeavoured to do, is to expound the ideas which could be used to

improve human relations. Even in this sphere we have left a number of topics

pending, until we see how this book is received. We have naturally not said very

much about how saucers fly, and even less about the scientific methods used to give

them their phenomenal stability.

It seemed unfair to publicise things that could be of use to our own country in

solving many of the pressing problems that face it. With its vast area, its

impoverished population in the interior, no country could derive greater benefit

from a craft of almost unlimited speed and payload than Brazil.

The saucer is a vessel which makes all our knowledge of aerodynamics obsolete.

Its speed and carrying capacity are unaffected by its shape, which can be tailored

to fit the cargo. Saucers can be made bell-shaped, flat, cigar-shaped, square,

oval, etc. They are far more than winged cargo ships. Ten of these craft could

transport the whole of the harvest from the Parana in a matter of minutes without

having to have special landing fields built for them.

Roads and railways, slow and susceptible to climatic conditions, would lose their

importance. In fact, one of the purposes of this book was to try to illustrate the

forces the saucers use to navigate in our atmosphere, and the means they use to

travel through space on interplanetary voyages.

Many people believe that saucers are Earth-made craft; others believe them to have

come from other worlds. Some people even go so far as to assert that they hail from

underground cities belonging to a civilisation that had hidden there to avoid

contact with us. We have not gone into a discussion about their origin as this

could not benefit anyone.

Why should people worry about where they come from?

What could be of great interest to our tortured and problem-ridden planet would be

to know the methods they use, and then to modify our Earthly knowledge accordingly,

and see whether we could not do the same thing, or at least something like it.

Anything else is merely arid, academic discussion of no practical interest.

Page 3 of 4Message


However, that is entirely our own point of view and the reader may well disagree

with it. Our only crime consists in claiming to have been in contact with beings

who say they are from another world. It is up to the reader to form his own

judgment; whether this be one of criticism or of praise, our own conviction will

remain quite unshaken.

It does not really matter whether people believe saucers come from outer space,

from the Earth, or from below the Earth:

we know that the things that have been revealed to us are true, and we have good

reason for saying this. Let us not forget the injunctions that man should follow a

path of peace and compassion.

An appeal has been made at a time when the trumpets are summoning humanity to the

holocaust that is to take place in the valley of Jehoshaphet, in honour of the god

of war.

He has given us a categorical affirmation of the existence of God at a moment when

the world is wallowing in iniquity, and has appealed to man to do good and to

follow the path of moderation and restraint.

If he were only blessed with the capacity for making men remember God and follow

his Commandments, and proving that everything written by the early Christians was

true, anything else would, by comparison, be unimportant.

Page 4 of 4Message


My contact with ufo's

Science

Transcript of My contact with ufo's