[allplanets-hollow] A letter from Mr. Cater

Dean,

        It is interesting how Mr. Cater mentions a difference in the
quality of light in the hollow earth. In the Smoky God book it
is stated that the sun "shines" with a brightness equivalent to
2.5 full moons. This is a difficult amount of light for me to
conceptualize. One is not prone to thinking that this light is
going to be very bright if one went there, but I wish to point out
a couple of ideas.
        For one thing, in an environment where the light is not as
bright as on the outside of the planet, natural responses of the
human body as well as other organisms are a matter of adaptation.
I remember some years ago a television special that remarked
that the native peoples of that high lake in South American
Titi Caca I think it was, had extremely well developed respiratory
systems. It was said that their lungs are no different from ours
genetically speaking. It just takes about three generations for
the lungs of outsiders to adapt to the thin air at that altitude and
from thence on the third generation would share the incredible
lung capacity that the natives exhibit for functioning normally in a
thin air environment. Eyes could adapt to changes in environment
over long periods of time too.
        What made me think to reply was the idea that I find myself
often times going around during the bright summer months with a
squint in my eyes that has become so natural that I don't even realize
that I am doing it. Then I go into a heavily shaded area and I see
that my eyes relax from the natural reaction to a brief absence from
strong light. They relax. Just imagine a world beneath us that has its
own style of wonderfully adequate illumination and yet at the same
time there is a difference in the light such as visitors like ourselves
would not need sunglasses to cut out the harmful glare of the external
sun. I would be very surprised to find that peoples living on the inner
shell would have much need at all for dark sunglasses.
        I don't know how many on the list remember seeing this but they
used to run an add on television about an Eagle sight eye protection
system. It was so named due to the ideas its developers got from their
study of the Bald Eagle and its unique system for filtering light. These
glasses actually were a bit like sunglasses but they had the trait copied

from the eagle that lubricated and protected the eagles vision, a part
of that animals makeup essential for its survival. People that tried out

this eye ware system were really surprised at how restful it was for
their
eyes and with the way the glare was cut down the benefit of actually
seeing greater detail through a system that filtered the light.
        Our eyes all have a natural response to squint and for the pupil
to contract when exposed to overly bright light. Imagine for a second
taking a trip to the hollow earth, (as we believe it to exist). We would

see sights only a bare few have ever seen from the outer world and
not only would it be filled with wonder and awe, it would also be less
taxing on the eyes too. This would make for some very wide eyed
and excited exploration. It would be like Leitenant Greely had stated.
Their party was so anxious to see what lay just beyond the horizon that
it was almost a painful sensation.
        I would point out one difference. They were on the outer curve
of
the opening if we can trust their reports about the foreshortening of the
horizon. In the interior though, one would ever more "see" beyond the
horizon since the horizon would swing upwards in all directions. Just
how much further one would see with this type of terrain is difficult to
speculate on but I am fairly confident that we would see much farther
portions of the surface of the ground than we do on the exterior horizon.

A lot would depend on atmospheric conditions, cloud cover, etc.
I would anticipate that features at ever greater distances would be on a
direct line of sight and if anything would be the case in a cloud free
condition, we would perceive more details as long as the scale of the
region we look at is large enough not to shrink from sheer distance.
Great reason to bring a telescope!

Scott

···

On Sun, 27 May 2001 22:42:32 -0300 "Dean De Lucia" <[email protected]> writes:

Frode and All,

I just got a letter from Mr. Cater. I had asked him why light from
the inner
world wasn't visible beaming out of the polar orifices.

First of all he responded about the nature of light in the inner
world. He
said: " The light from the so called central sun is dull and does
not emit
any concentrated rays. the light experienced in the hollow Earth
does not
come from this so-called sun."

Frode, this makes so much sense. The soft particles which break up
on their
way through the earth's shell liberate photons of light and
illuminate
cavern worlds. They break up due to friction with other frequencies
of soft
particles, not so much due to any friction with matter of the
Earth's shell.
In the hollow cavity, they would continue to break up and emit
light. Thus
Olaf described the rich colors although he described the sun itself
as dull.
I want so much to go there!

About light beaming out, or not beaming out, through the orifices,
this is
now partly explained. The light is generated in an omnipresent
manner, it is
not beamed from a localized source.

About the lack of " beaming," he said: " No light shines out of the
North
opening for obvious reasons. Most of the opening contains no
atmosphere.
Thus nearly all the soft electrons ejected out of the opening do
not
disintegrate and thus no light is the result [ no photons are
liberated ].

Frode-

I think that we have been looking in the wrong direction. We have
anticipated a role for the central sun which it does not have,
basing our
anticipation on the sun of our experience. A so-called, dull "sun "
is there
because soft particles congregate in the center of the hollow
cavity. They
no doubt experience some friction and break up, releasing some
light. But
all throughout the cavity the soft particles, which are newly
introduced
though the shell, experience friction with soft particles bouncing
around at
different frequency, and disintegrate, releasing light all over the
place.

I just wish that I could visit with the guy, but I don't live in
Seattle.

Dharma/Dean

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

Dean,

        It is interesting how Mr. Cater mentions a difference in the
quality of light in the hollow earth. In the Smoky God book it
is stated that the sun "shines" with a brightness equivalent to
2.5 full moons. This is a difficult amount of light for me to
conceptualize. One is not prone to thinking that this light is
going to be very bright if one went there, but I wish to point out
a couple of ideas.

Scott,

Yes, interesting, indeed. There are so many possibilities, the devil is in
the details. I wonder if particles from the inner sun don't interact with
loose soft particles in the cavity to bring about light by the
disintegration of the soft particles. But Olaf would chalk it all up to the
inner sun while Cater might differentiate and refer to the inner sun as
being dull.

Your points about line-of-sight in a world of no horizons are intriguing.

Dharma/Dean

···

        For one thing, in an environment where the light is not as
bright as on the outside of the planet, natural responses of the
human body as well as other organisms are a matter of adaptation.
I remember some years ago a television special that remarked
that the native peoples of that high lake in South American
Titi Caca I think it was, had extremely well developed respiratory
systems. It was said that their lungs are no different from ours
genetically speaking. It just takes about three generations for
the lungs of outsiders to adapt to the thin air at that altitude and
from thence on the third generation would share the incredible
lung capacity that the natives exhibit for functioning normally in a
thin air environment. Eyes could adapt to changes in environment
over long periods of time too.
        What made me think to reply was the idea that I find myself
often times going around during the bright summer months with a
squint in my eyes that has become so natural that I don't even realize
that I am doing it. Then I go into a heavily shaded area and I see
that my eyes relax from the natural reaction to a brief absence from
strong light. They relax. Just imagine a world beneath us that has its
own style of wonderfully adequate illumination and yet at the same
time there is a difference in the light such as visitors like ourselves
would not need sunglasses to cut out the harmful glare of the external
sun. I would be very surprised to find that peoples living on the inner
shell would have much need at all for dark sunglasses.
        I don't know how many on the list remember seeing this but they
used to run an add on television about an Eagle sight eye protection
system. It was so named due to the ideas its developers got from their
study of the Bald Eagle and its unique system for filtering light. These
glasses actually were a bit like sunglasses but they had the trait copied

from the eagle that lubricated and protected the eagles vision, a part
of that animals makeup essential for its survival. People that tried out

this eye ware system were really surprised at how restful it was for
their
eyes and with the way the glare was cut down the benefit of actually
seeing greater detail through a system that filtered the light.
        Our eyes all have a natural response to squint and for the pupil
to contract when exposed to overly bright light. Imagine for a second
taking a trip to the hollow earth, (as we believe it to exist). We would

see sights only a bare few have ever seen from the outer world and
not only would it be filled with wonder and awe, it would also be less
taxing on the eyes too. This would make for some very wide eyed
and excited exploration. It would be like Leitenant Greely had stated.
Their party was so anxious to see what lay just beyond the horizon that
it was almost a painful sensation.
        I would point out one difference. They were on the outer curve
of
the opening if we can trust their reports about the foreshortening of the
horizon. In the interior though, one would ever more "see" beyond the
horizon since the horizon would swing upwards in all directions. Just
how much further one would see with this type of terrain is difficult to
speculate on but I am fairly confident that we would see much farther
portions of the surface of the ground than we do on the exterior horizon.

A lot would depend on atmospheric conditions, cloud cover, etc.
I would anticipate that features at ever greater distances would be on a
direct line of sight and if anything would be the case in a cloud free
condition, we would perceive more details as long as the scale of the
region we look at is large enough not to shrink from sheer distance.
Great reason to bring a telescope!

Scott

On Sun, 27 May 2001 22:42:32 -0300 "Dean De Lucia" <[email protected]> > writes:
> Frode and All,
>
> I just got a letter from Mr. Cater. I had asked him why light from
> the inner
> world wasn't visible beaming out of the polar orifices.
>
> First of all he responded about the nature of light in the inner
> world. He
> said: " The light from the so called central sun is dull and does
> not emit
> any concentrated rays. the light experienced in the hollow Earth
> does not
> come from this so-called sun."
>
> Frode, this makes so much sense. The soft particles which break up
> on their
> way through the earth's shell liberate photons of light and
> illuminate
> cavern worlds. They break up due to friction with other frequencies
> of soft
> particles, not so much due to any friction with matter of the
> Earth's shell.
> In the hollow cavity, they would continue to break up and emit
> light. Thus
> Olaf described the rich colors although he described the sun itself
> as dull.
> I want so much to go there!
>
> About light beaming out, or not beaming out, through the orifices,
> this is
> now partly explained. The light is generated in an omnipresent
> manner, it is
> not beamed from a localized source.
>
> About the lack of " beaming," he said: " No light shines out of the
> North
> opening for obvious reasons. Most of the opening contains no
> atmosphere.
> Thus nearly all the soft electrons ejected out of the opening do
> not
> disintegrate and thus no light is the result [ no photons are
> liberated ].
>
> Frode-
>
> I think that we have been looking in the wrong direction. We have
> anticipated a role for the central sun which it does not have,
> basing our
> anticipation on the sun of our experience. A so-called, dull "sun "
> is there
> because soft particles congregate in the center of the hollow
> cavity. They
> no doubt experience some friction and break up, releasing some
> light. But
> all throughout the cavity the soft particles, which are newly
> introduced
> though the shell, experience friction with soft particles bouncing
> around at
> different frequency, and disintegrate, releasing light all over the
> place.
>
> I just wish that I could visit with the guy, but I don't live in
> Seattle.
>
> Dharma/Dean
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos