Introduction

One of the advantages of being a subcontractor for “black ops” projects is that you often overhear the strangest things—things that sound like science fiction or a good Halloween story, but you soon learn are very serious topics and you need to keep your mouth shut, until you are well away from the situation. And when you are poking around in history with the Phoenix III equipment, a lot of unexpected things turn up. And so is the case with the origins of man. Jonathan Glassner and Brad Wright,¹ hold on to your hats… because you were a lot closer than you realized.

These papers discuss anthropology, the study of the origins and behavior of homo sapiens radically ferent world view that will not only make anthropologists scream in horror, but will make religious folks want to bring back burning at the stake. The proposed theory is a common denominator to a lot of other research, mythologies and doctrine. It is said that there is some truth in everything, but in this case, a lot more truth than anyone ever realized—just happens that a few things got “lost in the translation”² over the generations. And that is what this paper attempts to correct.

When Dewey Larson created his Reciprocal System of physical theory,³ he clearly defined what he wanted to accomplish—to define the physical universe. He set out using basic deductive and inductive reasoning processes to achieve his goal. When finished, he had a very powerful “theory of everything” that could explain the smallest photon to the largest super-galaxy, except there was one problem… there were still things that existed and were observed in everyday life, that his theory could not explain. Things like biologic life, extra-sensory abilities and the realm of ethics. So he took all these concepts and threw them into his “think tank,” removed everything that could be explained by his Reciprocal System of physical theory then took an objective look at what was left. The result of those left-over bits became his book, Beyond Space and Time, which discusses the concepts remaining in that think tank that cannot be explained directly by his physics. Beyond Space and Time was Larson’s last book (he died before it was published) and after he removed the pieces covering biology, basic metaphysics and ethics, there was still stuff remaining in that think tank for future researchers to figure out.⁴

I am taking a similar approach with these anthropology papers, which is not about digging up old bones but an attempt to put together a theory of origins of mankind using religious, scientific and mythological data under the common framework of Dewey Larson’s Reciprocal System, which has proved to be very effective in “explaining the inexplicable” over the last half century. It is my hope that pointing out some alternatives to unquestioned beliefs, we can take a similar approach with our mythological systems that Larson did with the physical universe—clean up the misunderstandings, take an honest look at what is left, and develop a theory from that premise as natural consequence.

And what is left in that “think tank” is going to be the really interesting stuff, for it will provide the opportunity to open an unexpected door to our future.

Geologic History

We’ve all been told about the Earth being billions of years old, with mankind not showing his Cro-Magnon face until about 50,000 BCE.⁵ Unless you have got a TARDIS⁶ or Bill & Ted’s phone booth⁷ parked in the garage, who is going to question that? I wasn’t around back then and neither was anyone I know. So we just accept what we’ve been told by the “experts,”⁸ as usual. Guess what… everything you know is wrong.

Geologic dating, also known as radiometric dating, gives us our geochronology that is based on radioactive decay rates. Sounds all well and good with one exception, pointed out by our old friend, Dewey Larson,⁹ in his discovery that radioactive decay is actually a temporal explosion, an explosion in 3D time—not space—. The rotational structure of the atom, existing in coordinate time, explodes and scatters its pieces around in 3D time. As our clock time proceeds, we just run into the bits and pieces of the atom that physics views as radioactive emission. Same location in space , but different locations in time

A rough analogy would be to take a bag of marbles (rotations in the atomic time region) and dump them out in a hallway. You dumped them in one instant—like an explosion—but as you walk down the hallway, you run into the marbles as individual pieces at different clock times. From a purely spatial point of view, it looks like you have the bag in your hand all the time, and a marble jumps out of the bag and onto the floor when you get to the position where it came to a stop in coordinate time.

When a large atom explodes in time, many pieces get scattered all over the coordinate time realm; some nearby and some quite far away. As a result of this distribution, the larger the explosion, the larger the error in clock time interpretation—what is known as the half-life. What science believes is millions of years, is in reality, only thousands. That consequence, alone, is enough to make most scientist’s hair stand on end. But it is a natural consequence¹⁰ of the structure of the atom proposed by Larson in his Reciprocal System.

The second bad assumption is that once an atom becomes radioactive, it continues to decay until stable. That is not necessarily the case. The atom only has to throw off enough rotation to bring it back into the zone of isotopic stability, which it does in a single, temporal explosion. The basic rotation of the atom is still intact,¹¹ so it can continue to aggregate particles, neutrinos,¹² that can build its mass back up to the point where another radioactive detonation is required to stabilize it.

According to the physics texts, Uranium-238 decays to Lead-206 in a mere 4.47 billion years. That is how the age of the Earth is calculated. Now consider Larson’s explanation. The first time you see a particle fly off U-238, the atom has thrown off all the particles it needed to, to become a stable atom again. Those particles are just scattered “down the hallway” across time, and actually have nothing more to do with the atom, itself. The atom goes back to behaving like a stable atom and eventually enough particles collide with it to bring it into the unstable zone. It explodes in time, again, and throws off more particles “down the hallway.”

In the meantime, physicists are sitting around with their stopwatch measuring clock time, waiting for it to stop throwing off particles. Since the atom is exploding over and over again in 3D time—and they are waiting to stop running across particle debris down the hallway—they end up sitting around a long time, say 4.47 billion years, even though it only took a few thousand years to run across all the particles from the original explosion.

Those particles with a short half-life are the ones that don’t make a very big temporal bang, so there is a good chance you will run across every “marble in the hall” and run out, before it reaches the zone of isotopic instability again. But the larger the atom, the less chance there is of that happening and the dating error becomes exponential.¹³

As we correct for these errors, we find that recent history is a bit more “recent” than we thought. With that new information, we can now make an accurate correlation to the records provided by mythology and various religious apocrypha; some of which provide enormous chronological detail.

Calendars

Our calendar is based on rotation, the rotation of the Earth around its axis (days), the moon around the Earth (“moonth” or month) and the Earth around the sun (years). Historically, different societies record their calendars in different ways. Some count days to calculate years, others observe celestial alignments to determine when a year starts and significant events (planting, harvest), but don’t really care about individual days. These different systems are all translated to our modern convention of days, months and years.¹⁴

Our current, 365-day calendar represents the way rotations and orbits occur now, but was this always the case? In order to be that , could not have changed over the millennia. The mass of the sun, Earth and moon would have to remain constant, despite all the meteoric dust they accumulate every day, and the internal structures would also have to remain constant—indicating that nothing much is going on inside the cores… not a very logical conclusion, given the observations. It makes far more sense that the lengths of the day, month and year have probably changed throughout our history.

If the length of the year was different, millions of years in the past, who cares? But, if it happened only a few thousand years ago, when mankind was alive and well, populating the Earth, he just might have recorded those events in his legends and that could make a significant difference to our account of history, particularly in correlating dates from different cultures.

Delving into historical and mythological records one finds that this is the case… everything changes, the length of the day, month and year, and observations of these events are usually associated with global cataclysms.¹⁵ These worldwide geologic events indicate that something has shifted and a new Epoch, complete with different lengths of days, months, years, and climatic change, has begun. But there is something you should first understand about modern accounts of ancient civilizations:

My grandfather once told me a story about archaeologists, out digging in the remains of an ancient city that was the home to a pagan people. Some of the people still lived in a nearby town and they had some local helpers to clear away the dust and debris of the centuries. At the entrance to many of these homes they found a “blessing bowl,” a small bowl that the residents used to sanctify themselves as their entered their homes, very similar to the Catholic practice of dipping ones fingers in a bowl of Holy Water and making the Sign of the Cross before entering a church. This was a major discovery, since it told much of the religion of these ancient people.

After a few weeks they began to run low on food, so they accompanied one of the locals to a nearby town to resupply. While walking through the street to the marketplace, they noticed those same, little blessing bowls by the entrances to the homes. Out of curiosity, one of the archaeologists asked their guide if they still practiced that pagan religion of centuries ago? The guide looked puzzled at first, looked at the bowl and replied, “No, but the dog still gets thirsty.”¹⁶

With that in mind, let’s ignore what the experts on the Mayan civilization have told us about the calendar and consider the words of an elderly K'iche' Mayan I met on a bus on the way to Chichen Itza, when he offered to explain the Calendar Stone I had on my T-shirt. I have long since forgotten his name, so we will just call him, “Bob.”¹⁷

Bob told me that at the start of the human world¹⁸ there was but a single calendar and count; what we know these days as the Tzolk’in¹⁹ and Long Count. There were 20 days in a month and 13 months, making the 13^th the last month. “13” was considered an “end number,” used to indicate the end of cycles.²⁰ When man was created, there were only 260 days in a year and the moon orbited the Earth in 20 days, not 28.

When I asked about the Haab’,²¹ Bob said that it did not come into existence until the end of the 4^th Baktun, after another great cataclysm²² that moved the land and water about, fire rained down from the sky and no one knew where anything was any more. The sky had so darkened that the sun was not visible for 20 years. After that, the gods gave them a new calendar, the Haab’, having 18 months of 20 days to match the heavens. Out of respect for Ahau, they kept the Tzolk’in along with the Haab’ and the dual-calendar system was born. Important to note is that there were only 360 days in a year at this time, for the 5-day month of Uayeb was not added until Huracan became angry and added the Uayeb (translated by Bob as “5 evil days”) at the end of the 6^th Baktun.²³

Fortunately, the Maya used the Long Count to count days, so we know exactly how many days have passed since the creation of the human world. And we can adjust the number of years using Bob’s calendar information. Shorter years early on mean more of them, so the calculated start of the Mayan was not 3113 BCE, but a bit further back… some 5773 years ago: 3761 BCE. Anyone familiar with the Christian Bible or the Hebrew calendar may recognize that year: the year Adam and Eve were created. A perfect match to the Mayan start of the human world.

Now that we have a very close correlation between the Mayan and Hebrew calendars, from opposite sides of the planet, other information becomes available. Hebrew accounts say the Great Flood occurred 1656 years after Adam. Converting that to a Long Count with the corrected calendar puts us near 2.19.16.0.0, which is about 6 years short of the end of the 3^rd Baktun, the date of the Mayan flood. The adjusted date for the Hebrew Exodus from Egypt is about 1550 BC, with its plagues, volcanoes, earthquakes and the darkening of the sun. The end of the 4^th Baktun was 1548 BCE.

Almost a 6,000 year period of history and the stories of the Deluge and Exodus match up with their Mayan equivalents to within 6 years? I'm sure that must be “coincidence”…

We’ve decoded the blessing bowl at the doorstep, so on to the “plates” in the kitchen.

Growing a Planet with Expansion Tectonics

The current geometry of the Earth is an oblate spheroid (flattened ball) of fixed dimensions, on which exist continental plates that slide around and bang into each other, an inch or two a century, creating mountains, valleys, earthquakes and volcanoes. The “science” is called tectonics,²⁴ and is the result of the standard, scientific approach of trying to create a theory to explain observation.

Let’s take Larson’s approach and use the concepts of the Reciprocal System to determine the inner structure of a planet, and find the natural consequences

An initial draft of this research was published in Peret’s 1998 paper, At the Earth’s Core: The Geophysics of Planetary Evolution.²⁵ It proposes a planetary model that is based on the remnants of a white dwarf star, the “B” component of the common red giant/white dwarf stellar binary. The idea is explained in detail by Larson in Universe of Motion,²⁶ where the “A” component, the giant star, reaches its age limit early and explodes in a supernova. What Larson failed to consider, and what Peret points out, is that the “B” white dwarf, sitting in close vicinity to a supernova, is unlikely to survive the explosion and will be destroyed in space and accelerated into time, producing a number of small, super-dense fragments that evolve into the cores of planets.

Now that we know we're sitting on a white dwarf core²⁷ Larson’s research on white dwarf stars provides a road map²⁸ to understanding what is going on beneath our feet. The Reciprocal System demonstrates that the same processes occur over and over in nature, just at different scales, so knowledge obtained from quasars (galactic implosions) can be used with white dwarfs (stellar implosions), planets (dwarf fragments), asteroids (smaller dwarf fragments)… all the way down to atoms and particles, which are also just motion in time, located in space.

The planetary interior, like its stellar parent, is divided into four, distinct layers, based on the concept of motion, and how many dimensions of that motion exist in either space or time—what Larson refers to as the astronomical “speed ranges.”²⁹

Each of these “speed zones” has specific attributes that contribute to the behavior of the planet:

1. 1-x: Low-speed range of normal matter that comprises the Sialic (continental) crust, Simatic (ocean bed) crust, asthenosphere (slippery, magma layer) and mantle. The mantle is part of the original dwarf star remnant, whereas the crust is composed of meteoric aggregate. The mantle exhibits the property of inward motion in space, that we call gravity.

2. 2-x: Intermediate speed range, where two dimensions of motion exist in space and one in time. This forms the outer core and has an inverse density gradient, where the shell of the outer core contains the densest materials, with a light, gaseous lower region. Since gravity requires all three dimensions of motion to be inward in space, and the outer core only has two, it exhibits neutral gravity.³⁰ Because of this presence of motion in time, the outer core produces an intense, scalar magnetic field.

3. 3-x: Ultra-high speed range, where one dimension remains in space, with two in time. This forms the inner core and exhibits anti-gravity motion, as well as other properties associated with the pulsar. It is the balance between the gravitation of the mantle and the anti-gravitation of the inner core that keeps a planet in a stable orbit, much like trying to go “up” the “down” escalator, at the same speed, and end up going nowhere.

4. : Inverse low speed range, where all motion is in 3D time. This is the inner, inner core that was only recently discovered by geophysicists and named by Mehran Keshe as the Caroline core.³¹ This appears as an empty, bubble-like void at the very center of the inner core that creates a link between the spatial and temporal structures of the planet, and when considered in a living aspect, would form the soul³² of the world.

Because of the faster-than-light motion involved in a white dwarf star, the core exhibits conditions that are the opposite to a normal star.³³ Rather than increasing in density and heating up, the white dwarf decreases in density and cools down, creating an inverse density gradient³⁴ in the core of the planet. Due to the drop in density, the core expands over time, cracking the mantle and the crust sitting on top of it, creating the observed tectonic plates.

However, like their stellar counterparts, the white dwarf cores do not just slowly expand, they expand in discrete stages analogous to the solar transition, remaining quiet for centuries then when reaching a critical level of compression, fracturing the mantle, expanding the planet and splitting the crust along the tectonic fault lines. Because of the increased surface area, those plates are free to slide around on the asthenosphere,³⁵ a slippery magma layer that exists between the crust and mantle.

The plates will then come to rest at their least energy configuration, which is usually a 90° rotation, bringing the massive weight of the ice caps to the equatorial region, like adjusting the clothes in an out-of-balance washing machine. Note that the mantle, inner and outer cores have not moved crust just slides relative to the magnetic poles, so it appears that the poles are bouncing around on the surface.³⁶

A simple way to understand this expansion is to take a balloon, inflate it, then cover it with mud and let it dry. Now inflate the balloon some more and watch what happens. The cracks in the mud become the ocean bed; the separate pieces of mud become the continents. And as the balloon gets larger, there is more room for those chunks of mud to slide around on, giving the appearance of plate tectonics.

So as a natural consequence of planetary design, we find not a static sphere, but planets that increase in size with time, in sudden steps that rearrange their surfaces, accompanied with a lot of volcanic activity and usually resulting in a crustal rotation. These features are observed on the Earth, planets and moons.

In our ancient history, the planet they describe was physically smaller, the oceans were not as broad as they are now and the continents were arranged differently. In the earliest of days, prior to any oceans, all the continents fit together like puzzle pieces in one, small, hardened-mud ball—Pangea was an entire planet of dry land prior to the expansion, not a super-continent on a waterworld.

Ancient Cartography

With what you know now about the size of the planet changing over time, look at some of the maps of the ancient cartographers:

Orontius Finaeus Delphinus (1531)

Note that Antarctica extends up to the Tropic of Capricorn and the map shows mountains on the continent, indicating minimal ice caps. The oceans are substantially smaller, and Italy is almost touching Africa.

The continental arrangement makes no sense now, but reduce the size of the planet and it tells a story of ancient times, of a smaller world with easily traversable seas, land bridges between continents for the migrations of peoples, and an entirely different climate than we have now. And this is not the only map of those times to indicate such a structure. Maps like these are found all over the world, indicating common knowledge among seafarers. Notes from the ancient mapmakers say that these were copied from even older maps, and how Christopher Columbus knew there was a “New World” out there to find again—he just did not realize the Earth expanded, and the oceans were a lot wider in 1492 than when the maps were originally made.

Abraham Ortelius’ elaborate double-hemisphere world map records the first English circumnavigation of the globe by Sir Francis Drake (1577-1580), as well as that of his countryman Thomas Cavendish a few years later (1586-1588). The map portrays the outlines of continents leaving the interiors blank, suggesting that the land areas were left unexplored. The marginalia includes the Elizabethan coat-of-arms, a vignette of Drake's ship the Golden Hind, and four corner illustrations. The drawing in the upper-left corner shows Drake's landing at Nova Albion in present-day California.

Jodocus Hondius’ world map first issued in the Mercator-Hondius Atlas Minor in 1607. This is one of the earliest thematic maps, featuring symbols illustrating the Christian, Moslem and idolatrous regions of the world.

Again, showing South America attached to Antarctica, as well as Australia being a peninsula of Antarctica. Why would so many ancient maps show this continental arrangement?

 

 

The Early Structure of the Solar System

Fortunately, the gods provided us with some detailed descriptions of the early days: our mythology. Knowing what we do about geochronology and the structure of the Earth, these mythological records take on a different meaning—one that tends to fit the natural consequences of our theoretical development. In order to understand what mythology is describing, a more detailed picture of the early solar system is needed—one that is based on natural, evolutionary consequences.

As mentioned in my Geoengineering paper, one of the most important discoveries Larson made from the natural consequences of his Reciprocal System is that astronomy is backwards. Astronomers work with snapshots of the Universe, and they lined up their Polaroids from tail-to-head, rather than head-to-tail, and then tried to make sense of it. So the natural flow of evolution of planets, stars and galaxies was completely missed.

Larson’s stellar evolution sequence proceeds from dust, to a red giant, orange giant, then on to the main stream and up to the blue supergiant, then a Type II supernova explosion (thermal limit),³⁷ following the spectral class sequence of N, R, M, K, G, F, A, B, O. But unlike conventional astronomy, stellar evolution does not stop with the supernova, because the supernova explodes its outer shell into space, and the inner core into 3D time. Whereas an explosion in time is analogous to an implosion in space, what you end up with is a super-dense, invisible object, emitting X-rays, surrounded by a large quantity of dust and debris concentrated in a ring (intermediate speeds): the black hole and its accretion disk.

Now we know the mechanism, we also know that this “black hole” isn’t a hole at all. It is just the spatial location of a temporal explosion. As spatial gravity pulls the dust and rock together to form a new, red giant star, temporal gravity will pull the black hole together in time, expanding and cooling it in space, moving it from X-rays to visible light, resulting in the formation of the very common “red giant / white dwarf” stellar binary. And the situation can repeat, ad infinitum, producing stellar triplets, quadruplets, quintuplets, etc., or stars with solar systems.

Larson refers to this recursion of stars as “generations.” The first generation is a star that has not yet become a supernova, being found primarily in globular clusters. The second generation is the stellar binary. The third generation can either be a stellar triplet or a single star with a solar system.

The formation of a planetary system during the 3^rd stellar generation occurs when the non-white dwarf star of a binary, what Larson calls the “A component,” explodes in a Type I supernova. The energy accelerates the white dwarf companion into ultra-high (pulsar) speed ranges—anti-gravity, so it begins to move away from the A component, then was broken up into a number of fragments. Should the white dwarf component explode instead, the mostly gaseous “A component” would just be splattered around, to reform into a star, producing a stellar triplet.

As we saw earlier, the two linear units from zero to the one-dimensional limit correspond to eight three-dimensional units. The constituents of the white dwarf are thus distributed to a number of distinct speed levels, with a maximum of seven.³⁸

When Larson refers to “speeds,” he is talking about a scalar speed, not a translational one. Scalar motion increases or decreases in integer steps, not a smooth transition. So any internal, scalar speed of a fragment, 2 <= n < 3 would be a speed of 2. There are no fractional parts. Because of this quantized separation, the fragments fall into tight, discrete orbits and the pieces tend to consolidate in those orbits, into one, large chunk we call a planet. This is unnoticed because of all the initial debris from a supernova explosion, and by the time the “dust settles” you just have a single planet in each discrete orbit.

But also notice that Larson states a speed limit of “eight, three-dimensional units” that are linearly distributed from zero to seven. That means that there are just eight, stable orbits in any solar system. In the RS2 reevaluation, it was found that there is no preferred direction of a scalar motion in space, so these eight units are equally divided (±4) about the center of the explosion, which forms a neutral speed zone. So these eight units actually form nine orbits; four inner, a “neutral zone,” and four outer, corresponding to the inner planets, the asteroid belt, and the outer planets.

This is an consequence, in that all solar systems are going to look just like ours does. The sizes of planets may be different, and there may or may not be planets in specific orbits, but overall, you’ll have none-to-four hard, inner planets, an asteroid belt, and none-to-four gaseous, outer planets. Like our solar system, anything beyond that (Pluto, Charon, Eris, etc) are in unstable orbits, primarily being determined by solar gravity and not by their inner cores.

Most people are familiar with Zecharia Sitchin’s series, the Earth Chronicles and the Sumerian cylinder seal VA 243 that he claims to be a depiction of our solar system with an extra planet, Nibiru.

However, we know that most solar systems look exactly like our own, so “what if” the solar system depicted on this seal is not ours, but another solar system? Perhaps the solar system the Annunaki originally came from? December 21, 2012 has come and gone, and no Nibiru on our skies… consider the possibilities.

Our early sun is a reconstituted, 3^rd generation red giant, a large, relatively cool star with low gravity. The planets, being the shattered remains of its former, white dwarf companion, are still strongly displaced in time with the inner cores providing a significant anti-gravity propulsion system to hold the planets into stable orbits fairly far out, but with each planet moving at a substantially faster orbital velocity³⁹ then we now observe.

 

The beginnings of a 3^rd generation solar system will initially be a large ring of dust and debris around a dull, red giant sun, with the fragments of the white dwarf maintaining an orbital position in that debris field.⁴⁰ Over time, gravity will do its job and the bulk of the debris field will be accumulated by the newly forming sun and planetary cores, making the sun smaller, brighter and hotter, moving it towards the main sequence. The planetary cores cool and expand, with a slowly-increasing layer of rock accumulating over them. The aggregated crust tends to be small, as the anti-gravity motion of the early core will tend to push away the larger fragments that would otherwise substantially add to the mass.

If a space-faring species were to visit the Earth in those early days, after most of the post-supernova debris had been cleared away, they would find eight planets in fairly close orbits, close enough that the rings of Saturn⁴¹ could be observed with the naked eye on near orbital approach, and Neptune would be visible in the night sky much as Jupiter is now.

One of the beautiful parts of Dewey Larson’s Reciprocal System of theory, is that everything works the same way; there is one set of rules that define structure from the smallest electron to the largest supergalaxy, so anything you learn in one, specific field of study is applicable to all others. And it is simply based on time and space, the yin-yang of the Universe. If we apply this basic yin-yang knowledge to the newly forming 3^rd generation solar system, we find that there are “yin” planets and “yang” planets, distributed around a neutral boundary. Looking at our solar system, the structure becomes obvious: this neutral boundary is the asteroid belt, with the small, condensed “yin” planets being the inner planets and the large, expansive “yang” planets being the outer gas giants. All the inner planets will have similar properties; all the outer planets will have similar properties; and the inner and outer will be conjugates of each other.

There are a few other consequences of this structure:

1. The asteroid belt was never a planet, it was a white dwarf star! It exists in a region where forces are relatively balanced, like a stagnant pool. Rock accumulates there and forms asteroids, so over time, a planet-sized asteroid may form from gravitation, but that planet will not have a planetary core like the other worlds, and as such, would never be able to sustain an ecosystem.⁴²

2. The early planets had no moons. It is a reasonable conclusion, as during the post-supernova aggregation phase, any moons close enough to a planet would be sucked in and add to the planet’s mass. The moons are a later stage of solar system formation, a product of outer planet nova activity, or someone dropping them off.

3. All planets have a scalar magnetic field. Magnetism is a consequence of intermediate speed motion in the Reciprocal System, and all planetary cores have intermediate speed motion. However, without something to give the magnetic field an orientation, the field is random and barely detectable by instrumentality. Once oriented, it normally takes the shape of the classic toroid.

4. The positioning of the planets is arranged about the neutral, unit speed boundary, the asteroid belt—not the sun! The sun controls where this neutral ring sits, in relation to itself. The planets adjust relative to the neutral ring. Gravity is still the controlling factor, but there are two kinds of gravity: spatial and temporal (gravity in time; anti-gravity in space).

There are a large number of factors that go into the positioning of planets, not just gravity. The interaction of the various speed ranges of the planetary core, the electric, magnetic and gravitational effects of the sun, and the effects the planets have on each other, since they share a common, white dwarf core that is still localized in time and distributed across space as planets.⁴³

Sister Worlds: the Inner Planets

“Yin is in.” Yin planets are compressive, resulting in hard, rocky surfaces that crack over time, as their cores cool and expand. This is observed as tectonic plates separating continents on Earth, and rills and fracture zones on the other hard planets and moons. These fracture zones and areas of upheaval are indications that there is a white dwarf fragment at the core of the structure, that is gravitating in time and due to the reciprocal relation, expanding in space.

However, without an oriented magnetic field, the early planets would be subject to exposure of all sorts of ionizing radiation and mass ejecta from the sun, which tends to inhibit, not stop, the development of life. Early forms of life on these worlds will either be resistant to radiation or make use of it as a kind of food source, similar to plants “eating” light through photosynthesis. Once a situation develops where a magnetic field becomes oriented, the resulting strong magnetic field deflects these damaging effects from the sun and an “explosion of life” occurs on the planet, as what occurred on Earth during the Cambrian period of the Paleozoic Era. This situation occurs when the planet obtains a moon.

Initially, the inner planets were in a gravitational lock with the sun. Like our present-day moon, the same face was always pointed at the sun, providing a “light side” and a “dark side.”⁴⁴ Even now, Mercury and Venus barely rotate on their axes; Mercury’s day is longer than its year.⁴⁵ This results in a dichotomy of heat and cold, with the face towards the sun getting exceptionally hot. The dark, shadow side, due to little to no atmosphere, will be almost as cold as the surrounding void of space. The thermocline, where hot meets cold, tends to be an area of stress and shear, cracking the young planet around its girth in great and yawning voids…

Consider this Norse creation myth:

The first realm to exist was Muspell, a place of light and heat whose flames are so hot that those who are not native to that land cannot endure it.

Beyond Muspell lay the great and yawning void named Ginnungagap, and beyond Ginnungagap lay the dark, cold realm of Niflheim.

Consider it to be a description of the early, inner planets, with the burning-hot side facing the red giant sun, a temperate region around the edges where the sun is low in the sky and the eternal, black cold and darkness of the side facing away from the sun. Again, the yang-boundary-yin structure, with the Norse equivalents being Muspell (fire), Ginnungagap (the great gap), Niflheim (ice).

The sister worlds of Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars originally looked very similar: dried out balls of rock and volcanoes, cracking their surfaces as the cores expand, with an inverse density gradient putting the heaviest elements near the surface. Not much good for the formation of life. At least not yet.

The ancient records describe things we could not possibly know about, but the “gods” did know, relating to us through mythology and apocrypha.

Brother Worlds: the Outer Planets

The outer planets, being the larger, more energetic fragments, will initially be dark bodies emitting X-ray and gamma radiation (part of their transition from solar to planetary status). As they cool, they will produce significant amounts of visible light, like miniature suns, starting with the most energetic, the outermost planet of Neptune, and moving in quantized steps inward. In essence, they behave like their larger cousin, the nova, as the cooling process will produce light elements that gravitate towards their centers, including hydrogen and oxygen—an explosive combination.⁴⁶ And eventually they do go off with a bang, scattering dust, rock and planetary chunks into nearby space, typically along the equatorial plane, which produce a series of icy moons and rings, much like the supernova that created the planets and asteroid belt. Again, it is the same process, just a different scale.

After their blaze of a nova subsides,⁴⁷ they will have large atmospheres of light elements, with a ring system and a number of moons scattered about. If the explosion is energetic enough, some of these moons may reach escape velocity and go wandering to the outer solar system (anti-gravity motion), to take up unstable orbits further out.⁴⁸

The sequence of events in the ancient sky, because of quantized transition and remembering that all the planets share the same core in 3D time, will be that when one planet drops in energy, the next lights up, a kind of “stair-step” effect.

As a result, there will be a dominance of brilliant, star-like planets in the sky:

• At first, no visible planets, but point-source X-ray and gamma ray sources are detectable where the planets will “form” (they are already there, just not emitting nor reflecting light).

• Neptune flares; the other planets are still dark, X-ray bodies. At this time, the planetary orbits of both inner and outer planets are much closer to the unit speed boundary, the asteroid belt, and are just now beginning to spread away from it.

• Neptune dies down to a planet with a ring system; the lower speeds move the planet into a more distant orbit. Uranus flares up and becomes dominant in the night sky, with Jupiter and Saturn still being dark bodies.

• Uranus dies down from the same conditions and Saturn becomes active, leaving only Jupiter a dark body.

• Saturn dies down and Jupiter flares up, becoming the dominant object in the sky.

• Jupiter dies down to planetary status. By this time, the planets have lost most of their anti-gravity motion, their orbital velocities have reduced, and they are in orbits much further apart from each other, but also will have moved closer to the sun. The sun has been condensing all along and getting smaller and brighter, heading towards the main sequence dwarf.

This is the current structure of the solar system. It has change significantly since its formation.

Note that the sequence of bright, star-like objects in the sky, a natural consequence of Reciprocal System astronomy, matches the mythological Ages (or “suns” as the Aztec say) or the domination of certain Titans: Poseidon (Neptune), Ouranos (Uranus), Cronus (Saturn) and Zeus (Jupiter). The changing dominance of these very obvious planetary “lights” in the sky plays a significant role in mythology, as the planetary orbits also change when the “ruler of the sky” changes. For example, when Jupiter became dominant over Saturn in the sky, the orbit of Saturn moved further out and the ring system could no longer be seen—Zeus/Jupiter overthrew his father, Cronus/Saturn, whom overthrew his father, Ouranos/Uranus. There is a mythological pattern that mimics the consequences of Reciprocal System astronomy.

The inner planets have not changed much, other than to slow down and move closer to the sun, as the core sizes are too small to sustain the drastic exhibitions of the outer planets. The occasional core flare will crack their surfaces and cause sudden expansion.⁴⁹

(spreadsheet table)

Magnetic ionization levels were initially very high because the core is a stellar fragment and decreases as the planetary core ages. Rather than a solar transition up to a higher magnetic ionization, the planets do a “planetary transition” down to a lower magnetic ionization. This infers that much of the material on the early planets was radioactive, and as the planets age, their minerals become less radioactive.

The chart indicates the zone of stability for elements at a given magnetic ionization level (using Larson’s “natural units” of magnetism). All the elements below the line will be stable in the environment; all the elements above will be radioactive. For an example, at a magnetic ionization level of 2, the stable elements are from hydrogen (1) to platinum (78). The radioactive elements would start with Gold (79, Au) on up to element #117, which is the maximum element⁵⁰ in the Reciprocal System.

One of the major consequences of the planetary cores having the similar inverse density gradient of the white dwarfs, is that the heaviest elements are on the outside, and the lightest ones are deep underground, until meteoric aggregation covers them up with dirt, and they have to be dug out.

Consider: if a bunch of extra-terrestrial engineers were out to exploit some “heavy metal,” along with all the gems produced by extremely high surface temperatures of the early core, the inner planets of a newly forming solar system would literally be a “gold mine.”

Using Atlantis to Correct Geochronology

People have suspected for a long time that our world has been visited by extraterrestrial species, as there is a considerable amount of evidence laying about that would indicate visitation by a space-faring race.⁵¹ The difficulty has been that researchers could not correlate the evidence with a mythological chronology or geography, because of the bad assumptions concerning geologic dating and the belief that the Earth always looked just as it does now. When we corrected the interpretation of years for the Mayan calendar, it matched the Hebrew calendar. The same thing happens when the “billions and billions of years”⁵² of geochronology becomes “thousands and thousands.”

There are a number of sources that can be used to build a correlation between the accepted geochronology and the corrected calendar; since Edgar Cayce’s references to Atlantis are fairly well known, I will start with them. Cayce identified three “destructions” of Atlantis:

1. 50,000 BCE⁵³: a technological attempt to eliminate the giant beasts ravaging the land failed, and resulted in a major upheaval of the land splitting the continent into the three, large islands of Poseid, Aryan and Og.

2. 28,000 BC: earthquakes and flooding that resulted in Poseidia’s climate changing for the worse, to the point where the island was evacuated before it froze over.

3. 10,000 BC: the final breakup of the islands of Atlantis.

When a person receives information from a non-sensory source, like channels or dreams, the expression of the information is limited to the symbols and motifs that the person is familiar with. This has been scientifically demonstrated in situations where primitive tribes describe aircraft as giant birds. The same situation works with chronology; when Cayce selected these dates, they were based on the information he accepted as truth, the geochronology of the period. In the case of the final breakup of Atlantis, the date was commonly accepted as 9600 BCE, which comes from Plato’s recounting of Solon’s story of the continent, 9000 years before his time. Solon’s time was circa 600 BCE, so 600+9000 = 9600, the accepted time of the fall of Atlantis that was known to Cayce.

Then along comes one Angelos Galanopoulos, pointing out in his 1969 book, Atlantis: The Truth Behind the Legend, that there was a slight error in the Egyptian translation of 9000 years—it was actually 900 years, making the time frame of the destruction of Atlantis about 1500 BCE (600+900). From the prior exploration of the calendar, we know that the end of the 4^th Baktun was 1548 BCE, corresponding with the Exodus from Egypt, the plagues, winds, shaking of land and fire falling from the sky. The final destruction of Atlantis now corresponds with the Mayan and Hebrew records of the period, and gives us a working point to make an educated guess at the 1^st and 2^nd destructions.

We already know the correlation is off by approximately 10:1, we can estimate that the 1^st destruction of Atlantis was no more than 5000 BCE, and the 2^nd no more than 2800 BCE, based on Cayce’s information. We also know that the year counts are off due to the “number of days per year” changing, we can make a quick estimate of what year 5000 BCE is actually referring to, on the corrected calendar. The early calendar was 260 days/year, and the final switch to 365 took place in 749 BC. So if we take the pre-749 BC years and adjust, (5000-749) x 260 / 365 = 3026 years past 749 BC, making the 5000 BCE date on our corrected calendar to be around 3775 BCE. And right there, at 3761 BCE, we have the start of the Mayan and Hebrew calendars, defining the creation of man.

If we apply the same logic to the 2800 BCE date, we end up at 2209 BCE, corrected calendar, with the Biblical Flood sitting at 2105 BC, a very close match. So we can now draw the following correlations as a starting point:

Year, BCE	Year, AM	Long Count	Accepted Year, BCE	Events
3761	0	0.0.0.0.1	50,000	Biblical Creation of Adam & Eve. Mayan Creation of Human World. First destruction of Atlantis.
2105	1656	2.19.16.0.0	28,000	Biblical Deluge. Mayan Deluge, only about 5.5 modern years from the end of the 3rd Baktun. Second destruction of Atlantis.
1548	2213	4.0.0.0.0	9,600	Hebrew Exodus from Egypt. Third destruction of Atlantis.

The inference is obvious; mankind was created by “God” or “gods” around 3761 BC, which we are incorrectly dating as 50,000 BCE. So it may be interesting to see what else may have been going on at 50,000 BCE that might be of interest, and we find: “These ‘types’ of Early Modern Humans [Neanderthals] supposedly evolved into the next step toward actual humans—the Cro-Magnons, living 50,000 to 60,000 years ago.”⁵⁴ With the corrected calendar, 50,000 BCE becomes 3761 BC and the Cro-Magnons, us, showed up in the geological record at the same time as Adam and Eve and the Mayan creation of man, right after the first destruction of Atlantis, and missing a link to the Neanderthals that were previously overrunning the land, much to the annoyance of the Atlanteans.

This is congruent with the Biblical accounts of the creation of Adam and Eve being the first humans that God created on Earth. First humans, yes, but not the first intelligent species to exist on Earth. The Atlanteans were intelligent—just not human—so they predate the Biblical accounts.

Of course it also begs the question of “Who is this God-Person, Anyway?”⁵⁵ showing up in mythology all over the planet, creating humans? This will be the subject in another paper of this series, but based on my Montauk experiences, I can sum it up in 3 letters: SMs. The Saurians known to the Sumerians as the Annunaki Elohim Æsir, to the Indians as the Asura

Planetary Moons

As previously mentioned, the early planets had no moons because all the fragments of the white dwarf destroyed in the supernova explosion would have predominant, ultra-high speed motion—anti-gravity—and therefore would move away from each other. The outer planets would experience nova-like explosions over the course of their cooling down, ejecting both planetary rings and many smaller moons. But what of the inner planets? Mercury and Venus have no moons, Earth has an exceptionally large one, for the size of the planet, and Mars has a couple of very small moons that don’t behave properly, orbiting in the wrong direction and faster than the planetary rotation.

Immanuel Velikovsky had some interesting perspectives with his rogue planet theories, but the difficulty with them is that planets, containing white dwarf cores are subject to the properties thereof, are not able to leave their orbital positions and go wandering about the solar system. Even the moon-sized ejecta from the outer planets would be unlikely to get past the neutral zone of the asteroid belt to reach the inner worlds. Asteroids and comets, containing no intermediate or ultra-high speed matter, operate solely on gravitational principles and can drift all over the solar system, but because they lack those very motions, they can never form a stable orbit around a planet.

natural The Case for the UFO

“Dean Swift was prescient in regard to his astronomy, predicting that Mars had two small satellites, one of which was close to Mars’ surface and made two revolutions daily. It has been pointed out that this inner body is too close to Mars to be in adjustment with any known postulate of the natural distribution of satellites relative to their parent body. This may be an indication that Mars’ inner satellite is artificial.”⁵⁶

In the Varo annotations of the book, it is noted that the Martian moons are “Also an old ‘Dead-Ark’ S-M MAKE.”

Noah! I Want You to Build… an Ark! Right! What’s an Ark?⁵⁷

An “Ark” is a term used by both the LMs and SMs to refer to the large, interplanetary “motherships” that they use as colonies and transportation between solar systems. They are constructed from asteroids that have intermediate speed motion (small, planetary “cores”) and therefore an inverse density gradient to their structure. With all the heavy, hard metals on the outside providing protection from the ravages of space and a “soft, chewy center,”⁵⁸ of lighter elements and atmospheric gases at the core, they are essentially a “prefab spaceship” ready for interstellar travel; being a smaller application of a Dyson shell.⁵⁹ All that is required is a navigation system to orient the scalar magnetic field, already present from the intermediate speed motion, into either paramagnetic diamagnetic

Also noteworthy in these Ark designs is that if ultra-high, anti-gravity motion is still present, as it is in planetary cores, the center of the atmospheric cavity will contain a small, sun-like object representing that “inner core” construct; a structure that exactly matches the “hollow Earth” theories. When the intermediate speed motion of the Ark finally slows to sub-light speeds, the ark “dies” and is no longer functional as a spacecraft. This is what the Varo annotations are referring to concerning the Martian moons as “Dead Arks.” (Montauk had references of there being a large number of “dead arks” scattered throughout the solar system, as they don’t last forever and are abandoned.)

If the Moon were an Ark, then there should be references to times when it was not in orbit, or missing altogether, in mythology. In his paper, “The Earth Without the Moon,”⁶⁰ Velikovsky cites many sources of a time when there was no moon in the sky:

The period when the Earth was Moonless is probably the most remote recollection of mankind. Democritus and Anaxagoras taught that there was a time when the Earth was without the Moon.⁶¹ Aristotle wrote that Arcadia in Greece, before being inhabited by the Hellenes, had a population of Pelasgians, and that these aborigines occupied the land already before there was a moon in the sky above the Earth; for this reason they were called Proselenes.⁶²

Apollonius of Rhodes mentioned the time “when not all the orbs were yet in the heavens, before the Danai and Deukalion races came into existence, and only the Arcadians lived, of whom it is said that they dwelt on mountains and fed on acorns, before there was a moon.”⁶³

The Roman Questions: “There were Arcadians of Evander’s following, the so-called pre-Lunar people.”⁶⁴ Similarly wrote Ovid: “The Arcadians are said to have possessed their land before the birth of Jove, and the folk is older than the Moon.”⁶⁵ Hippolytus refers to a legend that “Arcadia brought forth Pelasgus, of greater antiquity than the moon.”⁶⁶ Lucian in his Astrology says that “the Arcadians affirm in their folly that they are older than the moon.”⁶⁷

Censorinus also alludes to the time in the past when there was no moon in the sky.⁶⁸

Some allusions to the time before there was a Moon may be found also in the Scriptures. In Job 25:5 the grandeur of the Lord who “Makes peace in the heights” is praised and the time is mentioned “before [there was] a moon and it did not shine.” Also in Psalm 72:5 it is said: “Thou wast feared since [the time of] the sun and before [the time of] the moon, a generation of generations.” A “generation of generations” means a very long time. Of course, it is of no use to counter this psalm with the myth of the first chapter of Genesis, a tale brought down from exotic and later sources.

The memory of a world without a moon lives in oral tradition among the Indians. The Indians of the Bogota highlands in the eastern Cordilleras of Colombia relate some of their tribal reminiscences to the time before there was a moon. “In the earliest times, when the moon was not yet in the heavens,” say the tribesmen of Chibchas.⁶⁹

Religious apocrypha also relates that during the time of Adam in the Garden of Eden,⁷⁰ the sun remained fixed in the eastern sky and the cycle of days and nights only began upon their expulsion from the garden, which we now know correlates to the time of the first destruction of Atlantis—something big changed. (They did measure a daily cycle—the movement of the “celestial chariot” across the sky, as is common in many ancient myths. “Seven times the Lord crossed the heavens,” the seven domas, or hebdomas, what we now call a “week,” was original a measurement of a day, when the Earth had none. But the descriptions refer to a “Lord” meaning “shining star,” not something the size of the moon. The Garden had no nights, but did have an orbital object bright enough to be visible in the light of day.)

The observations that the Earth did not have a moon, and did not rotate on its axis (tidal lock with the sun), are supported by the natural consequences of Reciprocal System astronomy. Again, we find science, religion and myth all saying the same thing.

I did some checking of Velikovsky’s references and found that the Moon actually appeared and disappeared at fairly regular intervals during pre-Adamic times, the divine year. Velikovsky attributes this to a wandering Moon intersecting the orbit of Earth, until it was finally captured. It sounds good, but for one “reciprocal” exception. Moons and planets, having motion in time, will behave in the same manner as atoms, having their motion in time. When atoms go into “stable orbit,” we call it chemistry. That chemistry is based on the concepts of valence,⁷¹ which is just “matching speeds” in the Reciprocal System. The probability against a planet and moon to having exactly the right “chemistry” to achieve stable orbit is, shall I say, astronomical?

The largest factor is overcoming the unit speed boundary, the same limit that keeps all the atoms in the Universe from coming together to form a single, super-molecule of everything. The only way a moon could establish orbit around a planet, given the chemical requirements of the Reciprocal System, would be to adjust its motions as it approached to match the new environment. Not likely for a random fragment of a white dwarf, but very likely for an Ark, under intelligent control.

The natural consequences of our theory indicate that the moons of the inner planets are not “natural,” in the sense of evolving with the associated planets, but are actually “Arks” that were used by the SM Annunaki, placed in orbit around Earth and Mars, not very long ago. The Martian Arks of Phobos and Deimos are “dead,” and are now just asteroids in decaying orbit. However, the Earth’s Ark, the Moon, is still running on impulse power with its inverse density gradient, hard shell and gaseous core. Consider NASA’s “lunar mysteries” in this light:⁷²

1. Scientists now tend to lean toward the third theory—that the moon was “captured” by the earth’s gravitational field and locked into orbit ages ago. Opponents of the theory point to the immensely difficult celestial mechanics involved in such a capture. All of the theories are in doubt, and none satisfactory. NASA scientist Dr. Robin Brett sums it up best: “It seems much easier to explain the nonexistence of the moon than its existence.” [Captured, or parked?]

2. Incredibly, over 99 percent of the moon rocks brought back turned out upon analysis to be older than 90 percent of the oldest rocks that can be found on earth. [The Annunaki are not from this solar system; their Arks would be much older than the planets.]

3. The mystery of the age of the Moon is even more perplexing when rocks taken from the Sea of Tranquility were young compared to the soil on which they rested. [Meteoric aggregation, just like the crust of the planet over the mantle, is much younger.]

4. During the Apollo Moon missions, ascent stages of lunar modules as well as the spent third stages of rockets crashed on the hard surface of the moon. Each time, these caused the moon, according to NASA, to “ring like a gong or a bell.” On one of the Apollo 12 flights, reverberations lasted from nearly an hour to as much as four hours. NASA is reluctant to suggest that the moon may actually be hollow, but can otherwise not explain this strange fact. [Inverse density gradient makes it hollow.]

5. Astronauts found it extremely difficult to drill into the surface of these dark plain-like areas [maria]. Soil samples were loaded with rare metals and elements like titanium, zirconium, yttrium, and beryllium. This dumbfounded scientists because these elements require tremendous heat, approximately 4,500 degrees Fahrenheit, to melt and fuse with surrounding rock, as it had. [A white dwarf fragment has an initial surface temperature of 180,000° F—definitely hot enough to do that.]

6. The Soviets announced that pure iron particles brought back by remote controlled lunar probe Zond 20 have not oxidized even after several years on earth. [From Larson’s chemistry, Fe₅, which cannot oxidize.]

7. The upper 8 miles of the moon’ crust are surprisingly radioactive. [Starts at a high magnetic ionization, and works down, creating many radioactive elements. Though I do wonder how NASA got “8 miles” of core samples from equipment in that tiny lunar module.]

8. But after Apollo 15, NASA experts were stunned when a cloud of water vapor more than 100 square miles in size was detected on the moon’s surface. … The water vapor appears to have come from the moon’s interior, according to NASA. [Hollow, gaseous interior leaking out.]

9. Lunar explorations have revealed that much of the moon’s surface is covered with a glassy glaze, which indicates that the moon’s surface has been scorched by an unknown source of intense heat. [Prior to being an Ark, the lunar surface WAS a source of intense heat.]

10. Early lunar tests and studies indicated that the moon had little or no magnetic field. Then lunar rocks proved upon analysis to be strongly magnetized. [Intermediate speed motion.]

11. In 1968, tracking data of the lunar orbiters first indicated that massive concentrations (mascons) existed under the surface of the circular maria. NASA even reported that the gravitational pull caused by them was so pronounced that the spacecraft passing overhead dipped slightly and accelerated when flitting by the circular lunar plains, thus revealing the existence of these hidden structures, whatever they were. Scientists have calculated that they are enormous concentrations of dense, heavy matter centered like a bull’s-eye under the circular maria. [Core flare from early expansion activity.]

Considering the Moon as a white dwarf fragment that was converted to an Ark for space travel, readily explains all the observed anomalies, within the context of the Reciprocal System. And as a functional Ark, the moon could easily arrive and depart Earth’s orbit at the will of its operators.

New Jerusalem

The Book of Revelations describes the city of God as New Jerusalem, giving a description of its size:

And the city lieth foursquare, and the length is as large as the breadth: and he measured the city with the reed, twelve thousand furlongs. The length and the breadth and the height of it are equal.

If this is an astronomical object, its “Borg Cube” shape would have undoubtedly been covered in dust and debris over the centuries, turning it into a sphere and giving it the appearance of a celestial body. So, let us “do the math” and see if we can find something matching the description.

First, we have to determine the size of a furlong, in modern measurement. The furlong has changed values a few times, but is (was) accepted as 600 feet, reminiscent of the sexagesimal system used by the Sumerians (60×10). But how big was a foot, 2000 years ago, in Mesopotamia? Values on record range from 250mm to 330mm (France), with the accepted value being the British foot of 305mm. The “bigfoots” of Napoleon’s era seem to be the exception to the rule and Mesopotamians are physically smaller people than Englanders, so let’s split the range difference, (250+305)/2 = 278mm, as an estimate of the actual size of a Biblical “foot.” Now to some calculations:

278/305 = 0.91 of the normal “foot” size.
0.91 × 600 feet = 547 feet per furlong (ancient values were estimated around 550 feet).
547 feet × 12000 / 5280 = 1243 miles on a side (not the accepted 1500 miles).

To find the circumscribed sphere that would account for the dust and rock of centuries, we multiply the side by √3, giving a sphere that is at least 2153 miles in diameter. Taking a quick look at objects in our solar system, we have a potential “winner” with a mean diameter of 2159 miles, also having some very unusual, physical properties like being hollow—our Moon. Could it be that New Jerusalem is already here, parked in orbit around Earth? An “Ark?”

Pre-Cro-Magnon Geochronology

Attempting to calculate the geochronology of the period prior to the creation of man and the first destruction of Atlantis is challenging, as the Earth was not rotating on its axis, was physically smaller, in a different orbit, and the basic intervals of measure are drastically different.

The Sumerian Kings List is said to document the initial arrival of the Annunaki some 241,200 years ago—but it does not actually say that. What it lists are 8 kings that ruled for a total of 66 sars, 6 ners.⁷³ And the ancient Sumerians use “dates” differently. For example, there are intervals for 1 day, 30 days (month) and 360 days (year), but there is no “12 months in a year” concept. A month is a “watch” (1/12) of a “year” (360/1) = “month” (30/1). I’m not an “expert,” but it would seem that sars would be a of 3600 days. If we make that assumption, the longest reign of a king on the Kings List was 12 sars, which would be 43,200 days or about 118 modern years. As in most ancient cultures, Kings were Kings since birth. To quote Genesis 6:3, “And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be a hundred and twenty years.” So King En-men-lu-ana just made it in “under the wire” at 118. That also means that the reign of the Annunaki gods in Atlantis was only about 653 modern years, not 241,200 years, which again supports the premise of this paper that geochronology has been greatly exaggerated, to hide the history in the past.

Conclusion

I know I’ve raked a lot of concepts over the coals in this paper, from geochronological time lines, Atlantean civilization, the formation of solar systems and backwards stellar evolution, showing there was never any planet that made the asteroid belt, disproving Velikovsky’s rogue planet theories and pointing out Sitchin may have had the wrong solar system. Not only have I turned science upside down (which is easy, because everything is backwards), but also rocked the boat on both religions and New Age beliefs.

But consider this: now that you have a working understanding of a very advanced, spatio-temporal “theory of everything,” the Reciprocal System, that corrects errors in modern science, has its roots firmly planted in the ancient traditions of yin-yang and is working in sync with mythology and religion… for the first time you can actually deduce what is “out there,” as well as know where to look for it. Using Reciprocal System astronomy, we know exactly the stellar conditions to look for, for brave, new worlds for us to colonize, or exactly where worlds with extremely advanced civilizations are likely to be. No more guesswork, channeling, or trying to translate ancient records. Just “natural consequences” arising from the way the Universe was put together.

For centuries, people have wanted to understand the Universe to find their place in it. Well, now you have a map, complete with directions, rest stops and tourist highlights. We can continue to stick our heads in the sand with wild suppositions, hopes and dreams, or just grab on to this new understanding, learn and teach our brothers and sisters, and become that “good neighbor” to take our place in the Universe and pursue our own destiny.

---