The Devil's Chord: The conspiracy to open the portal of consciousness and mystery of the octave

Originally posted by ThoughtForms
Hi mary, I know u from previous incarnations, yup apparently fulllotusqigong is drew . . .

When I posted, I had not figured that out.

But after I posted, I did put two and two together, but not without raising more questions. I had thought fulllotusqigong was female after reading of taking music composition at Smith College, a women's college, but then I saw that Drew Hempel is male because an interview posted on martialdevelopment. com refers to a "he."

Also, the .pdf "The Alchemy of Rainbow Heart Music ... ," the book linked with 725 scholarly footnotes, in which fulllotusqigong talks about chapter two, saying, "I go into great detail about this," there is another name: Moose Dung. I take it this is a pseudonym or pen name? Why? (LOL I thought it was a legitimate Asian name, too.)

Originally posted by FutureOopart
reply to post by LightsideAssassin

 

Glad you found it! Now, I wish I had signed up alot sooner so I could've been jumping in some great discussions on ATS. Ah, well... better late than never!

Here's a link to a video you guys might find interesting:

The Shape of Sound

Sound is causing the salt to move into shapes resembling different mandalas at different frequencies. I might try this experiment with two tones set at different intervals at various octaves. I'd be curious to see what shape the tritone makes at different octaves. Hmm....

This stuff on nonlocality is just too mind blowing --



Professor Hiley relies on music as his explanation model in that a person anticipates the theme or melody based on the past -- there is a wholistic time dimension to music and he says this is the accurate way to understand quantum nonlocality.

He says thought (consciousness) is about becoming, not being. So it's the process of becoming as consciousness and the quantum process as thought is noncommutative, as I have shown is also true for Pythagorean alchemical harmonics.

reply to post by fulllotusqigong


What system should planet earth use to tune instruments?

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by fulllotusqigong

 

What system should planet earth use to tune instruments?

soundingthedepths.blogspot.com...

This book gives the tuning system through musical examples and analysis by a musicologist.

What I'm doing is giving the deeper alchemical esoteric healing meaning of that system -- he calls it the P/B tuning system. But I'll let him explain with the music example. So you have to go through the book -- it's a fascinating read as he's a Ph.D in musicology.

Dr. Victor Grauer.

reply to post by fulllotusqigong


Tip for people who want to view the Table of Contents for this book: Under BLOG ARCHIVES, click on the triangles to the left of the dates.

Originally posted by ThoughtForms
reply to post by Mary Rose

 

Hi mary, I know u from previous incarnations, yup apparently fulllotusqigong is drew, whose contributions to my research some years ago sort of made me trash the whole thing because I couldn't get my head around what he was saying and assumed that I could not continue until I did.

I'm reserving judgement at the moment but it seems he may not know all that he says or is perhaps deluded (sorry drew but at the same time whatever) I hope we will get some answers out of this exchange/debate because that's all i'm interested in to be frank.

Peace Mary, Hope your well

-TF

P.S) I'm usually a nicer person in general but I'm quitting ciggarettes... not myself lately...

edit on 13-2-2012 by ThoughtForms because: (no reason given)

Yes, although I don't know if this guy is your "drew" he does seem to be trying hard to prove he "knows" which makes me not trust, especially since he's dropping so much info, claiming to have corresponded with certail ppl without giving the result of said correspondence, and making absolute statements. What's funny is how many in this thread immediately bowed to him and accepted that he knows more than they. Just stating opinions strongly doesn't mean their correct In any case I'm enjoying Godwin's book immensely, and it has opened my eyes quite a bit.

reply to post by fulllotusqigong


All previous attempts to gain understanding of your points have been met by an avalanche of evasiveness and confusion. Simple question, simple answer please. In the OP:

So the Perfect Fifth is 3:2 as C to G and the Perfect Fourth is G to C as 3:4 but this is noncommutative mathematics! For Western symmetric logic C to G is 2:3 and G to C is 3:2. So the secret of the Devil's Chord -- the Tritone -- is that 3:2 as the Perfect Fifth is squared using Freemasonic geometry -- to 9:4 halved to 9:8 then cubed to the square root of 2

You seem to be hung up on the letters rather than their value. If my understanding is incorrect, let me know , I am trying to learn something.It seems to me if you replace the notes with numbers C=1 OR 8 (octave differential) and G=5 then C-G perf 5th 1-5. G-C perf 4th 5-8. YOUR example arguing noncommutative math appears to be
"bait and switch". Does this make sense to anyone?

Hi qi, i have been reading this thread for the last few days. I was wondering if you could summarize, the main ideas/discoveries as they relate directly to the OP. With all the different ideas being explored here i think i am missing the main point.. or rather.. it's escaped me. I am genuinely interested!

From what i understand, you are suggesting a conscious conspiracy to divert popular music from the Solfeggio scale to hide the true nature of the material manifestation.. vibration transmutation to light/matter. Is this right?

Or are you simply pointing out that vibration is the fundamental reality and our experience of the "correct" frequencies leads to a truer experience? Specifically because of our biological machine -- pineal, pituitary, chakra/energy system. What makes the Solfeggio scale more "real"? Our body? Or the frequencies themselves? I am not a big math guy.. Is there some other nomenclature you can use to describe it?

---------------------
Now to add to mud spraying and topic dilution.. If vibration is the key.. Would direct vibrational stimulation of the body, pituitary using the Solfeggio frequencies give us a more direct, truer experience of reality? Like using a vibrational speaker:

on one's head? What about a vibration helmet: sid.bek.no...? Is that too brute force? any benefit?

Has anyone check to see what frequencies the "strange sounds heard around the world" are?

Thanks qi!

I've been following this thread for quite a while and to this moment, haven't made much of what you are talking about. It's like a 19 page treatise on making a tuna sandwich instead of simply breaking down the core of what you're talking about. I'm fairly schooled in the whole frequency thing as well as music in general, so could you, in a couple sentences not polluted with too much wordy physics talk, tell us what you mean?

"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." Albert Einstein

For instance, when you talk about C to G and G to C are you implying that they should be equal distances in either direction?

Are you aware of the natural order of harmonics and overtones that are constant and unwavering and if so, how does this factor in.

What is it that you discovered and how would we (the world) use it or not use it, again, in simple terms. Please don't post videos (who has time to watch all of them) or links to material laden with jargon. In your words, as you might explain it to a young person not versed in all the quantum this and that.

Sorry, not trying to be insulting, but as versed as I am in sound/music (35 plus years musician/freq head) you haven't made anything very clear.

Originally posted by UncleV

The question of the natural overtones of the harmonic series versus the complementary opposite of the Perfect Fourth/Perfect Fifth is an excellent question -- one that I have not yet addressed in detail.As the harmonic series shows the Perfect Fifth is the third harmonic and the Perfect Fourth is the inversion of the Perfect Fifth as the fourth harmonic. So as the image shows

The C to C octave are the first and second harmonic and the G is the third harmonic as the Perfect Fifth and then the same G to the next octave higher C is the fourth harmonic as the Perfect Fourth. So again this means that 2:3 is C to G and G to C is 3:4. Now as per the logic I have used and the questions asked -- this inversion relies on a doubling of the octave or a squaring of the value of 2 to 4. We can also see this doubling in the harmonics series so the first harmonic is 1 and the second octave harmonic is 2 and the third octave harmonic is 4 and the fourth octave harmonic is the eighth or 8th harmonic in the series and the fifth octave harmonic is the 16th harmonic in the series. So this implies that the inversion of the Perfect Fifth and Perfect Fourth as C to G and G to C, showing noncommutative logic (i.e. A x B does not equal B x A).

So the Western trained musician does not learn this true origin of the noncommutative property of the Perfect Fourth and Perfect Fifth. Sure the musician learns about the Comma of Pythagoras and the Circle of Fifths and even there is mention of the Spiral of Fifths -- but this does not show the noncommutative relation of the inversion based on the Law of Pythagoras -- all those concepts rely on a logarithmic relation of the octave to the Perfect Fifth/Perfect Fourth inversion. Archytas used the Babylonian equation of arithmetic mean x harmonic mean equals geometric mean in order to create the tritone interval. As I have written:

When it's contended that the Pythagoreans recognized the harmonic mean (2AB)/A + B, the geometric mean (a square root) and the arithmetic mean (A + B)/2 there must be the correction that in fact these means were the innovation of Archytas to create the Greek Miracle. “Similarly, in Fragment 2, Archytas is clearly taking over the three means from his predecessors, although he renames one of them and adds his own additional characterization of each mean.”228 Or as Professor Luigi Borzacchini describes it in the Greek ratios: “the arithmetic mean, a-b=b-c, the geometric a:b=b:c, and the harmonic or subcontrary a-b:a = b-c:c.”229 12:6 as the octave with 9 as the arithmetic mean or 12:9:6, giving the perfect fourth music interval or 12:9 as 4:3 and the perfect fifth music interval as 9:6 or 3:2. 12:6 as the octave with 8 as the harmonic mean reverses the order -- 12:8 is 3:2 or the perfect fifth and 8:6 is 4:3, the perfect fourth. “It is not possible to find a geometric mean in the octave (e.g. there is no x such that 12:x::x:6). This was undoubtedly known to Archytas’ predecessors but Archytas, in accordance with his rigorous mathematical outlook, made an important new contribution here by proving it is impossible to put a geometric mean into any ratio of the form n + 1/n. (A19).”230

228 Carl A. Huffman, Archytas of Tarentum: Pythagorean, Philosopher and Mathematician-King (Cambridge
University Press, 2005), p. 54.

229 Luigi Borzacchini and Domenico Minunni (Dept. of Mathematics, University of Bari, Italy) A
MATHEMATICA NOTEBOOK ABOUT ANCIENT GREEK MUSIC AND MATHEMATICS

230 Carl Huffman, Archytas of Tarentum: Pythagorean, Philosopher and Mathematician-King (Cambridge
University Press, 2005), p. 62.

O.K. so what Archytas did was hide the complementary opposite inversion of the Perfect Fifth and Perfect Fourth natural harmonic overtones by using the equation arithmetic mean x harmonic mean equals geometric mean squared and this equation turns the Law of Pythagoras of inversion into a closed logarithmic tuning system that goes against the natural overtone harmonics of the Perfect Fifth and Perfect Fourth with the Octave.
As I wrote:

not only did the octave have to be doubled as the square but also the ratios of the intervals had to be reversed relying on the commutative property of geometric symmetry.

So that the third harmonic ratio of 2:3 as the Perfect Fifth or C to G has to be reversed to 3:2 and the fourth harmonic as the Perfect Fourth of G to C has to be reversed to 4:3. Why? Because otherwise the above Babylonian equation to create the Devil's Interval, the Tritone, does not compute. This reversal is the "bait and switch" that hides the complementary opposites of the Perfect Fourth and Perfect Fifth of the Pythagorean Tetrad 1:2:3:4.

Barbera does note that Archytas used the Babylonian tetrachord, an extension of the tetrad, 6:8::9:12 whereby 8 is the harmonic mean and 9 is the arithmetic mean between 6 and 12 with the above changed meanings as discussed.236 So 1, 4/3, 3/2, 2 were converted to 6:8:9:12. So 8 x 9 = 72 (harmonic mean x arithmetic mean = geometric mean squared) and the square root of 72 in simplified radical form is 6 times the square root of 2 – or the equal-tempered logarithmic tritone music interval, the 6th semitone of the 12 note scale aka the Devil’s Interval. In other words 9/8, the major 2nd music interval, cubed, is the square root of two as the most dissonant music interval of the Western logarithmic scale.

reply to post by DenyObfuscation

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
Should A to C interval = C to A interval?

Well asked.

A very simple question, which can and should be answered with a simple 'yes' or 'no'.

Instead, the OP hits us with another dose of word salad, hoping to distract us from the fact that he cannot actually answer the question.

Originally posted by fulllotusqigong
If the wavelength is 1 and the octave frequency is 2 with wavelength 1/2 then what is the start of the wavelength? Zero does not exist if sound is infinite. Negative infinity was created by Plato and Aristotle was against negative infinity -- the first example being the square root of two as the Devil's Interval the tritone. So zero is then the quadratic solution for harmonic mean times arithmetic mean equals geometric mean squared.

Woo-woo-hoo! Impressive-sounding or what? Let's look at it sentence by sentence:

1. "If the wavelength is 1 and the octave frequency is 2 with wavelength 1/2 then what is the start of the wavelength?"
   
   First, there is no such thing as the 'start of a wavelength'. Wavelength is measured between any two consecutive points along a wave that are in the same phase. Waves have a starting-point but wavelengths do not. Notice how the OP's posts are chock-full of this kind of basic scientific boo-boo.
   
   Second, the fact that an octave frequency is twice that of a fundamental (and that the wavelength is therefore half that of the fundamental) is not a condition for determining the (nonexistent) 'start of a wavelength'.
   
   The statement is meaningless and has nothing to do with the question being asked.
   
   
2. "Zero does not exist if sound is infinite."
   
   Sound is not infinite. There are no infinite quantities in nature. But even if sound were infinite (in what way? volume? pitch? duration? or –
   – phase?) it would have no bearing on the existence of zero, which is simply an idea invented by mathematicians. Sound and the concept of zero have no bearing on each other.
   
   
3. "Negative infinity was created by Plato"
   
   Plato, although he was a fan of Pythagoras and well versed in the mathematics of his day, did not write any mathematical treatises that have come down to us. His thoughts on the reality or otherwise of numbers and geometrical solids (see the Republic) was certainly influential, but that was philosophy, not mathematics.
   
   Plato certainly did not 'invent negative infinity'. If the OP denies this, I invite him to quote from the relevant passage in the works of Plato in which this invention appears. He will not find any such passage.
   
   
4. "the first example (of 'negative infinity') being the square root of two as the Devil's Interval the tritone."
   
   The square root of two is not infinite. It is a real number whose value lies between 1.4142135 and 1.4142136. The OP, who boasts that (people he calls) famous mathematicians have praised his mathematics, does not even seem to know the difference between an infinite quantity and an irrational number, something older members of ATS will remember being taught in high school. That tells you how much the OP's mathematical 'insight' is worth.
   
   
5. "So zero is then the quadratic solution for harmonic mean times arithmetic mean equals geometric mean squared."
   
   Absolute, utter, total gibberish. The OP, in spite of his vaunted mathematical knowledge, apparently does not know what a quadratic equation is.

None of the above is in any way an answer to the question asked by DenyObfuscation.

The OP's responses are like those of the bad boy in class who has neglected to do his homework, and when asked a question by the schoolteacher responds with a flood of high-sounding but meaningless nonsense, hoping to distract the teacher and impress his classmates with his brilliance. It never works in the classroom, and it doesn't work too well on ATS either.

reply to post by fulllotusqigong

Dr. Andrija Puharich was a CIA mind control scientist who was funded by the military and has many patents for operable mind control inventions. His book Beyond Telepathy is about his studies of psychics which provides the foundation for the remote viewing CIA program -- psychic spies.

He was a doctor of medicine who apparently had some connections with clandestine agencies of the US government. He was not a physicist or a mathematician, he did not invent the concepts of magnetic moment or spin angular momentum, and there is no such thing as 'magnetic momentum'. I can go on repeating the truth for as long as you go on spinning this yarn. It's up to you.

I gave the link for the de Broglie quote -- but "willful ignorance" is a silly tactic -- all anyone has to do is google the quote -- the references are given at the bottom of the page. Of course you can always insist that de Broglie didn't say this.

'The statistical theories hide a completely determined and ascertainable reality behind variables which elude our experimental techniques.'

I didn't deny that he said it. I denied that it means he believed in a superluminal consciousness wotsit. Again, you can keep spinning as long as you like. I will be back again and again to break your web of deception and remind your readers of the truth. I will continue to debunk the statements you post here to show everyone how meaningless they are. Deny Ignorance, don't you know?

haha.

I'd get something for that cough if I were you.

reply to post by fulllotusqigong

Conspiracy means "spiral unity" – so these opposite extremes meet through nondualism as consciousness itself -- as the formless resonance of complementary opposites creating spacetime and energy-matter.

Do you just make this stuff up as you go along?

'Conspiracy' comes from the Latin conspiratio, which means 'union'. Its roots are the Latin words for 'together' and 'breath'. Conspirators literally 'breathe together' – breathe the same air – hence the term.

You are committing the schoolboy howler of confusing spiro (Latin for 'breath') with spiro (Latin for 'coiled' or 'twisted'). See here.

Your knowledge of etymology appears to be on a par with your knowledge of physics, maths and music.

Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by DenyObfuscation

 

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
Should A to C interval = C to A interval?

Well asked.

The issue again is incommensurability which means the comparison of number to geometric symbol. The question asked does not refer to number just geometric symbol.

A person who knows music theory knows that A to C is a minor third and C to A is a major sixth. So their relation is one of complementary opposites -- and is therefore noncommutative.

A minor third in just intonation corresponds to a pitch ratio of 6:5 (About this sound play (help·info)) or 315.64 cents. In an equal tempered tuning, a minor third is equal to three semitones, a ratio of 21/4:1 (about 1.189), or 300 cents, 15.64 cents narrower than the 6:5 ratio.

A major sixth in just intonation most often corresponds to a pitch ratio of 5:3 (About this sound play (help·info)), or 884 cents, while in 12-tone equal temperament, a major sixth is equal to nine semitones, or 900 cents, 15.641 cents higher than the just major sixth

So the point is that

For many people, this is the hardest aspect of tuning theory: getting used to the idea that 5/12 = 5/6 = 5/3 = 10/3 = 20/3

5/6 does not equal 6/5 because 6/5 is the minor third and 5/6 is major sixth -- A to C and C to A are not both the same music interval. 5/6 = 5/3 as the major sixth, not 5/6 as the minor third. That is the secret of complementary opposites. This is lost when converted to the logarithmic mathematics.

Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by fulllotusqigong

 

Conspiracy means "spiral unity" – so these opposite extremes meet through nondualism as consciousness itself -- as the formless resonance of complementary opposites creating spacetime and energy-matter.

Do you just make this stuff up as you go along?

'Conspiracy' comes from the Latin conspiratio, which means 'union'. Its roots are the Latin words for 'together' and 'breath'. Conspirators literally 'breathe together' – breathe the same air – hence the term.

You are committing the schoolboy howler of confusing spiro (Latin for 'breath') with spiro (Latin for 'coiled' or 'twisted'). See here.

Your knowledge of etymology appears to be on a par with your knowledge of physics, maths and music.

Is it Latin or Greek -- you'll have to ask the philosopher F.W. Schelling. Dig a little deeper. haha.

The Greek root of conspiracy is spiro meaning spiral and with the prefix “con,” the word conspiracy is the structure of “spiral unity.” This spiral unity through a secret breathing together is the consciousness conspiracy, what philosopher F.W. Schelling called the conspiracy of life.118

Jason M. Wirth, The conspiracy of life: meditations on Schelling and his time (SUNY Press, 2003).

F.W. Schelling, with his “conspiracy of life,” was the contemporary colleague of Hegel and he was the main critic of Hegelian dialectics120 which Schelling considered to be a continuation of Platonic materialism. Hegelian dialectics creates spiritual evolution of matter based on a technofetish, a process driven, ironically, by dualistic opposites of extreme idealism and extreme materialism. The end paradoxical result is a materialist idealism philosophy that is the opposite of true mysticism as realism. Here’s how Schelling described this Hegelian paradox of absolute idealism as materialism: Neither science nor sentiment will be satisfied with a God who is not, because He is Being itself (er ist das Seyn selbst), who is not living, because He is Life itself, who is not conscious because He is pure consciousness. They [materialists and idealists] both demand a God who is there in a manner different from his essence (Wesen), who is not just knowledge according to his essence but who expressly and particularly knows, and whose operation is not contained in his essence but rather in the deed, that is, in a manner different from his essence.121

121 John Laughland, Schelling versus Hegel: from German idealism to Christian metaphysics (Ashgate
Publishing, Ltd., 2007), pp. 100-1, citing F.W. Schelling, Die Weltalter (1811), I/8, 238.

On the Latin meaning you give -- here's the original origin:

The term conspiracy comes from the Latin word conspirare used to describe the medieval ritual of secretly breathing together to bond the community to the land, as detailed by Ivan Illich: Conspiratio, the mouth-to-mouth kiss, became the solemn liturgical gesture by which participants in the cult-action shared their breath or spirit with one another….Explicitly, corporeally, the central Christian celebration was understood as a co-breathing, a con-spiracy, the bringing about of a common atmosphere, a divine milieu….documents reveal that the conspiratio [mouth-to-mouth kiss] created scandal early on.117

117 Ivan Illich, “The Cultivation of Conspiracy,” address given at occasion of receiving the Culture and Peace Prize of Bremen Germany, March 14, 1998. This mouth-to-mouth kiss was rejected by the Church fathers during the 3rd century – except being transformed into secret church sex slavery satanism as exposed by Father Martin Malachi and in recent days with the church sex abuse scandals.

reply to post by fulllotusqigong

Yes or no?

The issue again is incommensurability which means the comparison of number to geometric symbol. The question asked does not refer to number just geometric symbol.

Meaningless nonsense yet again.

There is no 'incommensurability'. Two notes an octave apart are not the same note. They have not the same value in terms of wavelength, frequency or aural pitch (measured in 'cents'). To expect A:C to be the same as C:A in any system of tuning or notation is absurd. It is like expecting 1:3 to be equal to 3:10.

A person who knows music theory knows that A to C is a minor third and C to A is a major sixth.

These are just conventionally agreed terms. They bear no relation to the numerical values of either the frequency or wavelength of the notes involved. We don't count in music the way we count in mathematics. There is no zero in music.

A to C and C to A are not both the same music interval.

Only a musical ignoramus would expect them to be – whether you are speaking of intervals used in just intonation, equal temperament, or any other system for dividing up the octave that may appeal to you.

That is the secret of complementary opposites. This is lost when converted to the logarithmic mathematics.

More gibberish.

Is (conspiracy) Latin or Greek -- you'll have to ask the philosopher F.W. Schelling. Dig a little deeper. haha.

The Greek root of conspiracy is spiro meaning spiral and with the prefix “con,” the word conspiracy is the structure of “spiral unity.” This spiral unity through a secret breathing together is the consciousness conspiracy, what philosopher F.W. Schelling called the conspiracy of life.118

Jason M. Wirth, The conspiracy of life: meditations on Schelling and his time (SUNY Press, 2003).

What rubbish. Jason M. Wirth is not F.W. Schelling. Conspiracy is a word with Latin roots, not Greek ones – you admitted as much in the second half of the post.

I notice you always quote some woo merchant instead of the original scholar whose thoughts you are claiming to represent. The truth is that you have no more read Schelling than you have read de Broglie or Plato, or studied music, or studied mathematics, or seen black triangles over your backyard that move in defiance of 'propulsion lift dynamics'. You have read a few things on the internet and woven them into a tissue of fantasy. That is the long and the short of it.

You have a fertile imagination, but the knowledge you lay claim to is also a figment of your imagination.

reply to post by Mary Rose


whoa! u have an eye for detail curious indeed... drew is an asian woman?

-TF

Originally posted by Astyanax


There is no 'incommensurability'. Two notes an octave apart are not the same note. They have not the same value in terms of wavelength, frequency or aural pitch (measured in 'cents'). To expect A:C to be the same as C:A in any system of tuning or notation is absurd. It is like expecting 1:3 to be equal to 3:10.

A person who knows music theory knows that A to C is a minor third and C to A is a major sixth.

These are just conventionally agreed terms. They bear no relation to the numerical values of either the frequency or wavelength of the notes involved. We don't count in music the way we count in mathematics. There is no zero in music.

Exactly! Frequency and wavelength both assume logarithmic values. I'm talking about music theory of inversion or complementary opposites. So the original question:

A to C = C to A.

6:5 is A to C and C to A is 5:6.

That is the commutative value. But the reality of music is that it is noncommutative or complementary opposite harmonics. 6:5 is the minor third and 5:6 is the major sixth. So they are not the same music interval and so their numerical inversion is noncommutative -- the number does not line up with the geometric symbol.

The Law of Pythagoras is the origin of frequency and wavelength and the Law of Pythagoras is based on complementary opposites -- not symmetric logarithms and irrational numbers.

The Harmonic Series diverges -- that's the origin of the title of the math book The Number Devil: Divergent series are the invention of the devil. — Niels Abel

Originally posted by ThoughtForms
reply to post by Mary Rose

 

whoa! u have an eye for detail

curious indeed... drew is an asian woman?

-TF

Dude I am an exotic German-Swedish Minnesotan male. Sorry to burst your fantasy. haha.