Isnt this strange

[deandddd]

@Dick_Fojut

Dean... About "PHOTONS," those apparently universally
causative particles.

I continue to puzzle greatly about Cater's belief that "soft
particle" PHOTONS (Light)
from the Sun are responsible for most of
earth's important geological processes and possibly most other
familiar phenomena.

Dick,

Soft particles formed of photons. Photons themselves don´t penetrate
so far.

And I continue to be unable to reconcile posted

Cater views with views on the same subjects presented by BOTH
Churchward - AND by Pratt in Pratt's several revealing Earth and
Gravity web analyses.

Prat puts up a lot of Cater, his views on gravity are a summary on
Cater. When I first read it, I thought that he was working with
Cater, getting tutored by the guy or something.

@Dick_Fojut

When Cater uses the word "FREQUENCY," is he using the word to
describe the VIBRATORY rate Photons move? (vibrating faster or
slower, "lower" or "higher"?) Or (and) is he describing the wave
LENGTH of vibrations? Trying to understand approximately what he
means by "Frequency." Used "frequently," "FREQUENCY" seems
inseparably important to ALL effects resulting from Photons from

the Sun.

Slower vibration, longer wave-length and vice versa, so both.

@Dick_Fojut

According to one of your more recent emails plus a Cater
excerpt
about the Sun posted by Leslee, and your following
email "definition"
with explanations of Cater's soft particles theory, PHOTONS (light
particles) radiating from our Sun, ALONE seem responsible for most
(or all) of earth's geological phenomena.

The lion´s share. Gravity is also involved, I believe, but even
gravity is induced by the radiation of soft particles. That it why it
is not so readily perceived.

@Dick_Fojut

Correct me if I'm re-stating any of these incorrectly from
Cater's explanations, but does Cater believe the following to be
true?...

• Both earth's LIGHT and HEAT are caused by Photons from the
  Sun and/or their disintegration (in the atmosphere and especially
  in
  the crust).

No. Photons cause light, either directly or as a disintegrated soft
particle. Soft particles also arrive in the Sun´s rays. The soft
particles begin to break up and release photons of light as they
strike the atmosphere.

Heat comes from hard particles, the electrons recognized by science.
These hard particles lie within soft ones and get released upon
sufficient agitation and friction.

Dean,.as you explained below, Photons from the Sun

collide and stick together in aggregates, forming "soft particles,"
or "light, that's all."

Soft particles are not light and do not execute the function of
light. A photon can be compared to a brick and a soft
particle/orgone, to a house. You can´t use a brick in the same way
that you use a house. They function differently.

• The Sun's Photons become Earth's "Source of Gravity?" At
  one
  depth (50 miles or whatever) and a different "frequency," the
  Photon
  "soft particles" INDUCE GRAVITY EFFECTS.

Soft particles, the fundamental particles of matter within the Earth
and ether flow all combine to produce a negatively-charged radiation
which attracts positively charged matter. All atoms vibrate and
radiate, the atoms within the Earth emit the gravity inducing
radiation.

(Dean, that SEEMS a giant

deviation from Newton's thinking about masses and gravity - and a
deviation from Churchward's "central" magnet in the crust being the
source of gravity for earth's elemental particles.)

You said a mouthful. It disconnects gravity from mass in many
environments, such that mass can exhibit little gravity deep within.

• "Gravity shielding." Going deeper and at
  another "frequency"
  of the Photon "soft particles," Gravity diminishes.

Yes, because that gravity-inducing radiation doesn´t penetrate 100%.

• "Omnipresent luminosity." Further down the Photon "soft

Ø particles" get broken up and release LGHT.

Yes, they release the photons of which they are made just as a house
can break up into individual bricks, and then function like a brick.
They do this after a lot of penetration, i.e., a lot of friction and
a lot of breaking up.

@Dick_Fojut

• "From captured hard particles"... "responsible for
  HEAT"...
  when the Photon "soft particles" break up they release heat and
  electricity which powers geological processes such as Earthquakes,
  geysers and volcanos. (Does Cater believe these are the cause of
  ALL
  Earthquakes, geysers and volcanos?) Apparently so, because in the

Ø following he explains...

No, there is a type of volcanic eruption described in Etidorhpa which
is different. It is caused by the interaction of water and certain
elements, Potassium, I believe.

@Dick_Fojut

• EARTHQUAKES as well as "upheavals and the folding of
  strata
  to produce mountain ranges" come about from a "concentration of
  negative charges, resulting from the penetration of soft particles
  from the Sun."
  Specifically, he explained, Photon "soft particles from the
  Sun." combined with "radiation of the matter inside
  Earth"... "cause
  fractures and the sliding and folding of strata over each other."
  and
  when a critical stage of concentration of charges is reached, "The
  sudden discharge of hard electrons"... "produces an explosion."
  Because the "hard particles are partially confined,
  tremendous
  forces are released causing the Earth to shake" From the preceding
  descriptions Cater asserted: "The origin of earthquake is now
  apparent." and he added: "A similar phenomena produces lightning."
  • The Photon "soft particles" from the Sun penetrate earth's
    crust and "form and fuel the inner sun." It is made of aggregates
    of
    Photon "soft particles."
  • Photons result in the auroral display. Invisible
    Photon "soft
    particles," in the HE cavity, pushed "from behind" by sunspot
    activity, "shoot out of the orifice, and break up into their

Ø constituent photons of light."

Dick,

Yes, this is his model. You are mixing up some of my summarising, but
no harm, I am just explaining him.

• The Sun. Apparently as a authoritative statement of fact,
  not as his hypothetical theory, Cater explains conditions inside
  the
  Sun and the cause of Sunspots. Leslee posted a paragraph from P.

224

@Dick_Fojut

of his book. In the Sun's "relatively cool" interior "the
temperature
gradually builds up over eons of time. The effects of the
disintegration and dispersion of soft particles generated by the
activity of the fundamental particles, slowly increase the
temperature throughout the interior." Temperature increases "the
rate
of disintegration of particles." "The more stable particles
concentrate near the surface"...reach... "a critical state, and
explosion results..." "This is the cause of sunspots which
function
as relief valves. This condition has its parallel on Earth in the
form of volcanoes."

Dean, do the above mirror Cater's general beliefs about
Photons
and earth's geological phenomena? They cover a broad field, but

much
Ø is not mentioned...

Basically, yes. He wrote a whole book, you have to read the whole
thing. Remember that he uses the word " relatively " when he
describes temperature differences between the interior and exterior
of the Sun.

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

Here are some I'd like to know about. From reading his
books,
can you briefly describe his OTHER broad beliefs and his
explanations
about the following...

• Has Cater described in detail, THE BIRTH OF THE EARTH?

How

@Dick_Fojut

did it come into existence? From a nebula of hot gases? Ejected
from
the Sun? Space dust collecting on a spirit bubble as in Etidorhpa?
What is Cater's conception?

• How did a HOLLOW come to be geologically formed in

Earth's center?

In relation to the above two, I don´t think that he delineates much
on this part of things.

• Does Cater believe similar hollows exist in other planets
  (obviously not the Sun from his above earlier statements) and if so
  did they result from similar causes that formed Earth's hollow?

Yes, and that the Sun is hollow, too. He talks quite a bit about the
hollow nature of Mars. I quote him in my Mars article, Truths About
Hollow Mars. When he talks of temperature differences at different
strata of the Sun, this doesn´t mean that the Sun is solid.

• How were Earth's primary unstratified granite rock
  layers,
  overlaid with stratified Gneiss rocks layers formed?

He doesn´t specifically address this issue, but he does address the
transmutation of elements caused by ether and/or soft particle
radiation through the Earth´s shell. Thus, he says that deposits, at
least deposits such as gold deposits, were not deposited but that
they were " cultivated."

@Dick_Fojut

• Is Cater aware, like Churchward, that SIX atomic elements
  only, compounds of Oxygen, Aluminum, Silicon, Magnesium, Calcium,
  and
  Potasslum, went into the composition of Earth's primary granite
  rock?
  And that metals like iron, do not appear until higher up in the
  Gneiss rock layers? Pratt, also quoting Pari Spolter's similar
  opinion, suggested the rarity of those heavy elements deep down,
  seem
  to make it unlikely there is an iron-nickel ball at the center of

the
Ø earth.

He doesn´t present this specific logic, but it corresponds well to
his other points.

@Dick_Fojut

Also, is Cater aware the elements from which explosives are
formed are not included, such as Nitrogen, Hydrogen, Sulphur,
Carbon,
etc.? These gases did not in any way enter into the make-up of the
granite rock, but remained as gases, within the forming crustal

rocks.

He doesn´t specifically address this issue in his book. ( See my
next comment )

• What does Cater believe beginning earth looked like?

After

@Dick_Fojut

solidifying or whatever way he conceived it was formed, was Earth
first completely covered by water (as Churchward claims)? If not,
how did thick sedimentary rock layers come to be formed on top of
and
into upended Gneiss rock layers everywhere - especially now that
Pratt writes that unsuspected former surface rocks have been found
under ocean beds ?

He doesn´t enter much into the formation of the Earth, mostly he
dwells on geo processes as brought about by soft particles. It is a
book on soft particle physics, it is not specifically a geology book.

• Does Cater dismiss Churchward's explanation of giant
  bubbles
  of explosive non-solidifying gases (mentioned above) having formed

Ø within earth's granite rock crust at Earth's beginning?
Ø
Ø
Ø As I said, since it is not a geology book, he didn´t dwell on
the actual creation.
Ø
Ø

Since he is probably completely unaware of Churchward, does Cater
have any OTHER
explanation for the vast volumes of such explosive volcanic gases
existing in earth's crust now and in far greater volumes in past
millions of years?

I doubt that he is unaware of Churchward.

@Dick_Fojut

• Does Cater, with the orthodox, believe there was an ice
  age
  of thousands of years duration? And if so, does he believe there
  were
  gigantic glaciers capping both ends of the earth? And if he does,
  WHAT does he believe caused the ice age (or other presumed earlier
  ice ages)? Has Cater any awareness that (as James Churchward found
  on
  late 1800s expeditions to Russia and Asia) there is no trace of a
  great ice cap glacier almost to the pole on the Asian side at the
  SAME latitudes that miles thick of ice were supposed to be covering
  the Canadian and American side of the globe? Or was Cater aware
  that
  instead of an Asian glacier, there is evidence of great waves of
  water, without ice, that MOVED NORTH over the Gobi, parts of Asia
  and
  ancient Russia, heading to the pole, and beyond?

Again, as it is not confined to geology, Cater doesn´t address this.

• Does Cater have any comparable concept of a LIFE or
  VITAL
  FORCE existing IN earth's atmosphere? And that this LIFE FORCE

powers
Ø the elemental chemical compounds of living creatures and
plant life?

Yes! Soft particles are none other than prana, life force. The way in
which soft particles drive geo processes is analagous to the prana in
our bodies. Now you are touching on the thread of his book.

@Dick_Fojut

That explanation comes from Churchward...
As Churchward described the "Life Force," it is a compound
of
forces, similar in "appearance" to the electron, as a 4 cornered
"star," before separating into globes and going into orbit around
atoms, causing the atoms to rotate. The Life Force is responsible
for
"powering" all living organisms, according to Churchward.
The compound is composed of several other "invisible"
forces,
including a magnetic "combining" force - and THE HEAT FORCE, all in
exact proportions to one another. Who assigned the
proportions? "The
Universal Mind" (label meant especially for Frode).
As the general temperature of the earth dropped from
boiling
hot temperatures to super hot tropical, the volume of the compound
life force in the atmosphere also dropped in volume. According to
Churchward, as the Heat Force lessened in the atmosphere, it was
mirrored by a proportional lessening of the Heat Force in the
compound life force. One could know that as the temperature of the
Heat Force in the compound lessened, in proportion, the other
forces
in the compound also lessened. The dropping temperature of earth's
atmosphere was a measure of the lessening life force.
According to Churchward, the chemically SIMPLE compounds of
elements of earth's early life forms, required a LARGE VOLUME of
the
compound Life Force to "balance" their chemical compounds, to give
them Life. A large volume was needed to set their parts, starting
with atomic orbits, into MOTION and activity or "LIFE." (In
contrast,
the more complex an organism, the less volume of Life Force needed
to
power it.}
As the general temperature of the earth dropped, so did the
volume of the Life Force in the atmosphere. The lowered life force
became inadequate to "balance" the chemical compounds of the
SIMPLER
organisms and they died out. From their debris, "Nature" fashioned
brand new MORE COMPLEX life forms that could be "balanced" with a
lesser volume of the Life Force. Using debris, some resemblance
carried over to each form, but the new groups were chemically
different and more complex that the creatures of the former period.
Over many millions of succeeding years, as the earth's
temperature gradually continued to drop, with the volume of Life
Force in the atmosphere similarly lowered, a succession of new, a
little more chemically complex life forms began, reached maturity
and
died out, each group being replaced by a new group of MORE COMPLEX
forms. The great reptiles of the Jurassic period began to die out
as
the (relatively cooler) long Cretaceous period passed its mid
point.
The Life force was too low to "balance" their simpler chemical
compounds. Their eggs failed to hatch and their homes, the swamps
were turning to marshes. New sets of chemically MORE COMPLEX
reptiles
began, matured and began to die out as the EOCENE period
approached,
for the same reasons as prior reptile extinctions. Their eggs
failed
to hatch. The volume of Life Force in the atmosphere had become too
low to "balance" their generative parts and fluids.
By the Eocene period the giant reptiles had disappeared
and
were everywhere replaced by dog sized animals, like the Eocene
horse
(about 2 feet high at the shoulders) with long, wading toes for the
soft, marshy ground prevalent all over the earth at the time. By
the
time the Tertiary period began, earth temperatures became balanced
and the volume of Life Forces in the atmosphere stabilized to the
end
of time.
Dean, does Cater know anything at all about what I've
described above from Churchward? If so, what parts has Cater
discussed? Or if not, what are Cater's BIOLOGICAL beliefs about
earth's changing species - since Cambrian times? And also, if not,
how does Cater explain the dying out of the dinosaurs? Better be as
good or better an explanation than Churchward's!

Dean, I'd like to know about other of CATER's beliefs, but
the preceding cover a lot. Could keep you busy answering or
commenting for a long time. At least clear up what Cater means by
"FREQUENCY."
- Dick Fojut

Ø ---------------------------

I have done this, I think.

@Dick_Fojut

Additional question from Dick Fojut to Dean....
----------------------------------
Dean, following are some of those accepted orthodox
"definitions" I lampooned as imprecise, from Jastrow and Thompson's
textbook "Astronomy, Fundamentals and Frontiers." How do they Jibe

Ø with Cater's definition of Photon as used in your email
above, if at all?

Dick,

Cater´s soft particle physics does not disagree on any of the
definitions below. It just adds on the other half, i.e., particles
which form from light. I.e., prana and orgone, and how they function.
DD

• PHOTON: "Electromagnetic ENERGY in its particle form."

@Dick_Fojut

• QUANTUM (OF LIGHT): "Electromagnetic ENERGY in its
  particle form. Same as Photon." (Dean, RADIATED Electromagnetic
  energy particles.)
  * LIGHT: "Same as electromagnetic RADIATION. Usually
  light means the VISIBLE portion of the electromagnetic spectrum."
  * VISIBLE LIGHT: "Electromagnetic RADIATION to which
  the eye is sensitive."
  * ELECTRON: "A small negatively charged PARTICLE that
  may be found in orbit around the nucleus of an atom."
  ---------------------------------