© 2006 Carmelo Martínez, Antonio Moya, Eduardo Altuzarra
© 2006 Urantia Association of Spain
| Luz y Vida — No. 7 — Presentation | Luz y Vida — No. 7 — December 2006 — Index | A way to get closer to the consciousness of God |
By various authors
(This article is the second part of a three-part series)
¶ Eduardo Altuzarra
I think that we should not try to link what science says and what the UB says, there is not enough time. I am inclined to try to visualize what I interpret from UB. For me, science remains small and, on top of that, they don’t know what the UB says. I only use science to shape my interpretation of UB. As Antonio rightly says, the only thing we must start from is that Sagittarius is in the Milky Way and that it is the center of the Ensa Minor Sector nº 3 and that galaxies do not exist in the UB. We only have to count on nebulae, the origins of the Local Universes. That Orvonton is made up of more than 100,000 spiral nebulae despite containing 100,000 Local Universes; that some are in their original state, that is, primary, come on, it is loose soles. But the vast majority of them are well established in large clusters of stars or suns.
I consider that a nebula is a very small creation within the seventh segment, Orvonton, something unimaginable even knowing its “measurements” roughly: wider than taller and longer than wide, that is, approximately a rugby ball, but not that much“ belly”, something “alentejado”. Imagine something like this, but with enormous measurements and try to place more than 100,000 spiral nebulae inside, of very different sizes and shapes; that the Magellanic Clouds could also be there, as Santi explained, and all of them well organized and well distributed. That would be Orvonton, more or less. And I continue to think that this ”shape“ does not have to have ”arms." The appendages have them, only, the nebulae.
But I am left with a dilemma: How come the Orvonton super universe contains 10 trillion suns and our Local System 2000? The proportions are not fulfilled since if we divide, as Antonio proposes, 10 billion by 100,000 UL corresponds to 100 million stars per UL and if we continue dividing by 100 Constellations, 1 million suns per constellation result and if we continue dividing by 100 local systems it is up to 10,000 soles per SL. If ours, Satania contains 2,000, it just doesn’t add up to me. But I don’t agree that Andronover has 1,013,628 soles either, since the proportion is not met, since 100 million should correspond to it for being a Local Universe. Well, although some more matter will be added, as the UB says, it should be nine times more, right? Where is that? I simply don’t understand it, unless the UB, due to misinterpretation as Troy warns in his article, does not say things as they should be. Although it is possible that we do not interpret very well what is exposed in the UB and that of the suns is something that is not very important.
¶ Carmelo Martínez
Santi raised in one of his last messages that the Maltese cross shape of space had to be taken into account. He further indicated that he tended to think that the seven superuniverses are not on the same plane.
I have thought about it and I still think that all the superuniverses have the same plane of maximum density, that this plane coincides with that of the Milky Way (and Orvonton) and also coincides with that of the seven circuits of Havona and that of the three circles. of sacred spheres of Paradise. And I also believe that the Maltese cross shape supports this thesis.
I’ll explain. To do this I start with three quotes from section 7 of paper 11 (the whole section is interesting).
Quote 1: “The vertical cross section of total space would slightly resemble a Maltese cross, with the horizontal arms representing pervaded (universe) space and the vertical arms representing unpervaded (reservoir) space. The areas between the four arms would separate them somewhat as the midspace zones separate pervaded and unpervaded space. These quiescent midspace zones grow larger and larger at greater and greater distances from Paradise and eventually encompass the borders of all space and completely incapsulate both the space reservoirs and the entire horizontal extension of pervaded space.” (UB 11:7.3)
Quote 2: “If you imagine a finite, but inconceivably large, V-shaped plane situated at right angles to both the upper and lower surfaces of Paradise, with its point nearly tangent to peripheral Paradise, and then visualize this plane in elliptical revolution about Paradise, its revolution would roughly outline the volume of pervaded space.” (UB 11:7.5)
Quote 3: “There is an upper and a lower limit to horizontal space with reference to any given location in the universes. If one could move far enough at right angles to the plane of Orvonton, either up or down, eventually the upper or lower limit of pervaded space would be encountered. Within the known dimensions of the master universe these limits draw farther and farther apart at greater and greater distances from Paradise; space thickens, and it thickens somewhat faster than does the plane of creation, the universes.” (UB 11:7.6)
These limits that we would “finally meet” are close (relatively) in Havona and far away at the end of the fourth level of outer space. This makes me think that on the space level of the superuniverses, especially near the borders of the central universe, there isn’t much space up and down the “plane of creation.” Of course at a certain distance from Havona this width of space is the same regardless of which superuniverse we are in. The closer to Havona the less vertical dispersion there is. Within Havona this dispersion is even less; in fact, all the spheres of the central universe move in circuits that are on the same plane, which I believe to be the plane of the seven superuniverses.
Naturally, on the space level of the superuniverses there are spheres outside of that plane, further from the horizontal the further from Havona we are. In outer space this plane is “blurred” by the effect of the progressive removal of the upper and lower limits.
Despite my poor drawing skills (by hand or with a computer) I have dared to continue with my schemes. I am attaching one that I had sent you before, slightly corrected, and a new one that tries to reflect the distribution of the seven superuniverses. The correction to the first refers to the direction of the paradisiacal north as a consequence of having drawn the second. You will see in the second drawing that I draw superuniverse seven outlining the first one, but both are complementary. The other superuniverses are imprecise blobs (too bad Urantia astronomers haven’t gotten that far yet).
I am more and more convinced that the borders of the superuniverses are very irregular; that each one is assigned an area of the spatial level, and that it is expanding to go “civilizing and integrating” everything that exists and appears to exist in that area. The division into zones was made, I believe, at the beginning of time taking into account that all had the same space charge-force added to all its derivatives (even the same matter).
For me it has been a good exercise trying to locate the graphics that I send you in the diagrams of the Atlas of the Universe (www.atlasoftheuniverse.com). I refer you to the text that I already sent you for the location relative to us of superuniverses 1 and 6, and the direction of the central universe in the zero direction of the Milky Way (although perhaps now their distance should be reduced to a million light years ).
¶ Eduardo Altuzarra
Indeed, I already interpreted at the first moment that all of Creation is based on a single plane. As for the size, shape and direction of the Orvonton, I also think I am “almost” in agreement with you and I am attaching some graphs to see if we agree.
Here (yellow dot in the center of the upper image) is the Earth more or less. When we look towards the thickest part of the Milky Way we see a whole group of suns or stars and clouds of dust. When we look out we see thousands of nebulae in the making. When we look up and down and always within Orvonton we see a lower density of stars, hence all Creation is on a plane and hence the Maltese Cross. This is when I apply my theory that what is seen outside has nothing to do with what is inside. Outside, there are thousands of nebulae in the process of formation in a primary state; Inside, the thousands of nebulae practically do not exist, they have been grouping together and have already passed into a quaternary state, that is, stellar groups. Hence my theory that Orvonton does not have to have arms or appendages, but rather something similar to what I have exposed in the attached graphic. The two pictures below are taken by Hubble. The rest is my design.
¶ Carmelo Martinez
My interest in this matter is not so much to represent in pictures what the Book says (suspiciously clear, to me, in some respects), but rather to fit what it says into what our current science says about it (in the image it gives us of the cosmos).
In this there are some questions to answer. For example, what part of Orvonton is the Milky Way? I think that Eduardo and I do not agree on this.
For example, where is and what is the non-permeated (non-penetrated) space? or where and what are the zones of intermediate space of separation? Can the image of space be literally interpreted as a large Maltese cross rotated on its axis? What does it mean that space does not touch Peripheral Paradise, although it is very close, since Paradise is not in space?
Hence my determination to imagine what Órvonton is like and where it is; in which direction is the central universe and how far away. Where could we look for the other superuniverses, etc…
Regarding the “plane of creation”, I think it is less “flat” the further away from the central universe we are. I think that already at the periphery of the superuniverses (where we are) it has lost some of its “flat” character and has a certain “width”. And certainly on the first level of outer space it has little of ‘flat’. I believe that this width grows more than proportionally, so that in one or two million light years away (between us and Andromeda, for example) the width has grown enough to not be able to speak of “flat” with some property.
Can it be thought, as the Book states quite clearly (too clearly for me), that if we were able to leave our Earth traveling perpendicular to the plane of the Milky Way we would reach the end of impregnated space and enter the space between?
Indeed, today’s astronomy knows very little, and the little it does know decreases as we move further from this planet. The maps of the universe are like those maps of the Earth from several hundred years ago in which, for example, a line appeared with a part of the coast of Africa and something that was nearby, and inside an immense void. Even the coastline was cut off from where it had not yet been explored. It is very possible that the situation of astronomy today is worse than that of geography 600 years ago, but that does not prevent us from working with these maps, as did the geographers-explorers of that time. And this work is not useless or waste. I like to look at the night sky and imagine which way is Uversa or Havona; imagine the effervescence of worlds and their distribution in superuniverses, and look to where they might be. And it is even possible that what the UB says serves to add a grain of sand to the advancement of Urantia astronomy. I would like there to be more astronomical information about our local universe, about our constellation or about our system in the UB, since they are much closer (in time and space) and would probably be of more immediate application; Maybe that’s why no clues are given. I would also like to be able to imagine in which direction Satania, Edentia or Salvington is “near”, but I have not found that information, so I have to settle for “far” Uversa or Havona. There will be some reason for this lack.
Returning to one of the issues, it is very possible that the Milky Way is more than half the energy-mass of Órvonton, but of course I am convinced that it is much less than half its volume, otherwise the information would not fit. that Uversa is 250,000 light-years from the periphery of our superuniverse.
I also like to wonder about this curious “structure” of the master universe, with its impregnated and non-impregnated space, and its space in between, and the currents of energy-power that run through it, and I wonder if that is a symbolic description or is it really in the three-dimensional space we know.
In short, that they are parallel lines of work, as I have already said, and that both may result in works of interest.
(End of the second part)
¶ References
- Light and Life Magazine (all old issues): https://aue.urantia-association.org/numeros-antiguos-del-lyv/
| Luz y Vida — No. 7 — Presentation | Luz y Vida — No. 7 — December 2006 — Index | A way to get closer to the consciousness of God |