"Ummo Letter 210"

MISTER ENRIQUE VILLAGRASA MADRID SPAIN Language: SPANISH READING AUTHORIZED TO YOUR OTHER BROTHERS OF EARTH ABOUT THE CONCEPT OF SPACE: Sir: You can imagine the enormous complexity that a subject seemingly as easy as the concept of space can represent, in order to be able to present it in a few typewritten pages. We thus want to respond to your request made by telephone at this level of popularization. Throughout these lines you can verify that some of the statements are already known by Earth specialists in Cosmology, Physics, and Philosophy. The rest corresponds to our scientific heritage. Since we do not know your cultural level, we will begin our report with some fundamental concepts known through the studies of your planet. Any of your brothers specialized in Physical Sciences, Astronomy, and Mathematics will be able to further develop or explain these ideas to you more precisely. Anyone who contemplates themselves in a mirror will observe that the image they see is NOT IDENTICAL TO THAT WHICH A BROTHER sees of themselves. (The imaginary being we look at is currently "LEFT-HANDED"). It is enough to hold a written page in front of a mirror to confirm what all men have verified without giving it much importance. The mirror seems to transpose left onto right. Any student from UMMO could speak at length about this peculiarity and we believe that at the Earth scientific level this transposition is also nothing enigmatic for an educated person on Earth. However, not long ago, one of our brothers who was in the United States informed us, surprised, that a North American essayist had written a popular science book in which he presented the following problem: If a person is able to see in the mirror their right and left reversed, why do they not also see top and bottom reversed and why do they not contemplate themselves in the mirror with their feet at the top? It seems that in the United States, only 2% of the people surveyed gave a satisfactory answer (ADULT INDIVIDUALS). Only 38% of a group composed exclusively of experts and students in Physics, Psychiatry, and Mathematics responded quickly. This perfectly illustrates that if a large percentage of Earth people are not prepared to understand certain fundamental concepts related to spatial symmetry, the vision of images, and perception at the neurocortical level, they will be even less able to analyze reasoning related to the 208 / 1373. Higher Mathematics. When two objects are symmetrical with respect to a plane, we say of them that they are INNUO VIAAXOO (You call them ENANTIOMORPHIC) see image 1 (S52-A). It is easy to observe that these two objects cannot be superimposed despite their obvious morphological identity: you yourself could select thousands of examples on Earth (right shoe and left shoe, left-handed screw and right-handed screw, the two ears of the OEMII (body), etc. Obviously, many INNUO VIAAXOO (enantiomorphic) bodies are superimposable when their morphology is symmetrical: for example the two pyramids in image 2. Is a real force field symmetrical? (1) You consider the isotropic field – This is false. (see the next report) (NdW: This note is handwritten and located at the bottom of the page). Any body that can be divided into two identical or INNUOVIAAXOO (enantiomorphic) parts by means of an ideal surface plane, we say that it is AA INNUO (symmetrical) image 3 (S52-B). The OEMII (human body (S52-s1), except for secondary physiological differences), and regular polyhedra among many other ideal and real bodies, are AA INNUO (symmetrical). Any student of Physical and Exact Sciences could define the concept of Field in its EARTHLY version. Imagine that in a "region" of the Cosmos free of asteroids, cosmic dust, gas, etc. we place a metallic sphere. Apparently, nothing has changed in the surroundings, but if we now place another small sphere at 144 enmoo distance, this one is attracted towards the large sphere with a force that you will call gravitational. Let us repeat the experiment at different points A, B, C... of this cosmic region. The closer we place the small sphere, the greater the impulse force, and consequently its speed towards the central mass. You will define the force field as the surrounding region of the sphere in which such a phenomenon manifests. Region whose radius is infinite. (image 3) (NdW: Although indicated "image 3" in the original, it is more likely that the following image at the beginning of the next page (S52-C) is referred to, which is not 209 / 1373). numbered on the original, but which would certainly have been named image 4.) (S52-C) Your physicists are accustomed to graphically representing a field by points to which they assign a symbol they call vectors (in this case FORCE-VECTORS). The central sphere represented by point M (image 4) is assigned the characteristic of INERTIA CREATING MASS of this mysterious GRAVITATIONAL FIELD. Inevitably, serious questions arise in the face of such a poorly presented concept. What is MASS? Does every particle, every body possess INERT MASS? What is the real nature of these mysterious FORCES? When we take an object, we know it has a volume and at the same time that it 'weighs', 'has mass.' Are MASS and VOLUME or SPACE the same thing, or are these two concepts intimately linked such that we cannot conceive of a voluminous object without mass and vice versa? This confusion inevitably arises when we start from the false premise that space is an entity foreign to our mental phenomena like SENSATION and PERCEPTION. Does space exist OUTSIDE of OUR PSYCHIC personality, or is it an illusion of our senses? Answering with a yes or no would be a serious aberration. WE on UMMo know for certain that there is a REALITY outside of ourselves, which stimulates our brain and develops a mental process we call BUAWAIGAAI (PERCEPTION). But this reality is also as different from MENTAL PERCEPTION as a mountain is from the word M - O - N - T - A - G - N - E -, which serves to represent it. This concept is not foreign to your thinkers and scientists: observe a few examples: what is common between COLOR (PERCEPTION) and the electromagnetic wave that stimulates our retina? Color is a purely psychological phenomenon. It does not exist outside of our SELF, and there is even the paradox that wave trains evoke different perceptions. Thus when the vibratory stimulus is (1) 398 mµ (NdW: This note is handwritten and located at the bottom of the page, as evidently the typist forgot to type the value) millimicrons earth, we interpret it as a red color spot but if it reaches our skin with a longer wavelength (image 5) 'we feel heat' something very different from CHROMATISM. The same external reality causes different illusions. Thus SPACE as such is another illusion of our senses. Yes, there exists a 'something' outside that provokes this psychological perception but this 'something' is .../... .../... is indeed as different from our illusory concept of space as a wave of trains is from the green or yellow patch perceived by the mind. And we tell you further: your specialists have relentlessly endeavored to differentiate the concepts of FORCE FIELD and SPACE as distinct realities. You admit that nerve pathways obscure the sensation of FORCE and the SENSATION of SPACE, and you develop a complex of mathematical equations to define this "something" outside our SELF called GRAVITATIONAL, MAGNETIC, AND ELECTROSTATIC FIELD, and this other "something" three-dimensional or N-dimensional called SPACE. You know that one cannot conceive of a FORCE FIELD without SPACE and that every SPACE is affected by these fields. We further assert: that FORCE FIELD AND SPACE are identical: one cannot conceive of a UNIVERSE foreign to ours in which, because there would be no particles, there would be no "deformations of this space" that we call FIELD. To be more concrete: The action of the gravitational field is what, by stimulating our nerve endings and conducting a series of coded impulses through the neurons to our cerebral cortex, brings forth in our consciousness this illusion we call SPACE. That is why when we talk about dimensions to define space, avoid believing that the length dimension in the WAAM (cosmos) is as we imagine it in our mind. As this may continuously require considerable mental effort, throughout reports (for convenience) you may admit that the length of a straight line is synonymous with dimension and in a certain way, this is accurate. We will also talk about spatial perception; how we conceive of the decamensional WAAM; what the true concept of asymmetry of our WAAM (cosmos) is that turns it into the ENANTIOMORPH of the UWAAM (anticosmos). We will explain how we polarize the sub-particles to make spatial travel possible by using the curvature of space, and we will also talk about the actual distances that allow for such journeys.