Networking and intercommunication is not for humans only. Plants can be wired and collaborate together, thanks to a web-like infrastructure generated by fungi. A new publication describes this world of connection and interdependence between different species. It looks like a collective intelligence, using the best resources available to drive their growth and reproduction, and their survival in case of imminent danger.
The Secret Doctrine (Vol. II, p. 590 – 1888 Edition) , talking about the “old Esoteric doctrine” teaches that :
“When the first ‘Seven’ appeared on earth, they threw the seed of everything that grows on the land into the soil. First came three, and four were added to these as soon as stone was transformed in plant. Then came the second ‘Seven’; who, guiding the Jîvas of the plants, produced the middle (intermediate) natures between plant and moving living animal.”
The nature of time and its flow remains a mystery from the point of view of modern physics. Many physicists argue that Einstein’s masterpiece, the general theory of relativity, and the Standard Model of particle physics, describe a timeless cosmos, sometimes called a “block universe” — a static block of space-time in which the totality of time already exists. In this view, all points in time equally “real,” which means that the future and past are no less real than the present. The flow of time, or passage of the future into the past, must presumably be a mental construct.
Although this idea remains controversial, it bears a very interesting resemblance with how H. P. Blavatsky explained the nature of time in The Secret Doctrine:
“Time is only an illusion produced by the succession of our states of consciousness as we travel through eternal duration . . . . The present is only a mathematical line which divides that part of eternal duration which we call the future, from that part which we call the past. . . . The real person or thing does not consist solely of what is seen at any particular moment, but is composed of the sum of all its various and changing conditions from its appearance in the material form to its disappearance from the earth. It is these “sum-totals” that exist from eternity in the “future,” and pass by degrees through matter, to exist for eternity in the “past.” No one could say that a bar of metal dropped into the sea came into existence as it left the air, and ceased to exist as it entered the water, and that the bar itself consisted only of that cross-section thereof which at any given moment coincided with the mathematical plane that separates, and, at the same time, joins, the atmosphere and the ocean. Even so of persons and things, which, dropping out of the to-be into the has-been, out of the future into the past — present momentarily to our senses a cross-section, as it were, of their total selves, as they pass through time and space (as matter) on their way from one eternity to another.” (SD I, 37)
Because the theoretical predictions for star formation in science do not match what is actually observed, scientist have lately begun to consider the possibility that electromagnetism plays a roll in the process.
The Scientific Journal Nature (538,8), published an article : ” Astronomy: Magnetism drives star birth”. In this article, Nature refers to an article from Astronomy & Astrophysics (593,L14, 2016), where a team of scientists made observations of a large gas cloud with the Atacama Large Millimeter/sub-millimeter Array (ALMA) telescope in northern Chile. They observed that the gas of a stellar system collapsed and fragmented, . . . forming a string of clumps. The clumps will eventually form the cores of future stars. From these observations, they ran numerical simulations to match the observations, and they discovered that these formations can be modeled, using strong magnetic fields. The study findings confirm theoretical predictions that magnetic fields play a major part in protostars formation.
Blavatsky proposes that electromagnetism (the primary manifestation of Fohat on the physical plane) is the main force responsible for cosmic processes. In the Secret Doctrine, she quotes an “ancient Commentary to Stanza IV,” which describes the formation of a cosmic systems in a way that matches what science observes today:
“The grains (of spawn) are soon attracted to each other and form the curds in the Ocean (of Space). The larger lumps coalesce and receive new spawn . . . and at the appointed time some of the lumps detach themselves and assume spheroidal form . . . after which . . . motion (the Breath) becomes the whirlwind and sets them into rotation.” (SD vol. 1, p. 97)
Space Sciences Date: March, 2018 Source: New Scientist
A theory in modern cosmology is suggesting that the Big Bang may not be the beginning of the universe. The Big Bounce Theory propounded by a number of physicists state that prior to the Big Bang the universe underwent contraction due to pressure until it reached a point that it expanded again. They say that the universe may have been undergoing continuous contraction and expansion. Paul J. Steinhardt of Princeton University, one of the proponents of the Cyclic Theory, says that this theory attempts to resolve the “homogeneity, isotropy, and flatness of the universe,” among other things observed.
This view is similar to the Hindu view about the periodic manifestation and dissolution (manvantara and pralaya) of the universe, a view also adopted by the Secret Doctrine of H. P. Blavatsky.
Sources: New Scientist, March 14, 2018; https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23731690-700-why-the-big-bang-was-not-the-beginning/