Introduction to Figmentalism
"Voice" Home Plain Background View this Fractal
Celestial body Relationships
From our perspective here on Earth we view the heavens and then apply current scientific explanations to the various phenomenon. The most obvious object floating in sky/space is the Sun. We are told by science that it is much larger than either the moon or earth but when we observe a solar eclipse, the moon seems to fit perfectly over the disc of the sun. It does this so accurately that it is possible for cosmologists to study the sun’s corona. That’s quite a coincidence but then if you observe a lunar eclipse you will realize that the Earth, too, is the perfect apparent size to block the rays of the sun from the disc of the moon. This latter relationship is also responsible for the production of the beautiful crescent moon phases that we enjoy on this globe. For a planetary system this would have to be considered quite perfect and ideal. Richard and Robin Heath have a website called "Matrix of Creation" in which they outline synchronicity of the earth’s rotation with the moon’s orbital cycles and solar year. The Earth, Sun and Moon move in concert with each other!
Amazing as all that is, lets not forget that the moon and sun are in such convenient sync that the sun passes by in the day and the moon in the night. Occasionally the moon shows up in the daytime sky but just enough to make the whole system believable. The moon only shows one face. It’s always the same side that rotates in view of the earth. Before the telescope was invented cosmic observers would have no rotating celestial body to study. They would have seen the moon as an unchanging landscape. Figmentalism would explain that; for our predecessors a rotating moon would be threatening, much less pleasant than a stationary one and just generally not the ideal moon. To accomplish this the moon must rotate exactly once every time it circles the earth.
To be a perfect moon it should have no atmosphere, and there is none. It should be highly reflective and marked enough to give it texture to the unaided eye. Our moon is blessed with every special attribute that a moon could posses yet science still insists that millions of these solar systems exist and ours is just the result of matter-borne happenstance.
Science has developed a myriad of complex solutions for the Sun’s longevity and brilliance but all create more questions than answers. Generally they feel that it is some kind of sustained nuclear reaction but no model that we have on earth would suffice. Any nuclear reaction that we can produce that creates light is very short lived indeed. Science stumbles on using formulas for particles that can’t even be detected to explain this phenomenon but it still remains a complete mystery. Gravity is another of these that defies explanation on a material level. Physicists have recently began toying with "String theory" that not only gives an entirely new model to the atom but is said to open an avenue to the explanation of Gravity. Unfortunately the theoretical size of strings should be somewhere near the length scale of quantum gravity, called the Planck length, which is about 10-33 centimeters, or about a millionth of a billionth of a billionth of a billionth of a centimeter. This means that strings are way too small to see by current or expected particle physics technology (or financing!!) and so string theorists must devise more clever methods to test the theory than just looking for little strings in particle experiments.
Figmentalism explains the solar system quite handily. The Sun, Moon and Earth are just typically what we expect them to be, they don’t require material explanation because they don’t exist on a material level. Gravity is also easily explained in this way. The human brain is the only mechanism that detects gravity and it does so by relying on the body of senses. One "feels" the pressure of personal weight on the soles of the feet. You may see something fall and hear the thud of it hitting the ground. Beyond this sensation of gravity there is no need for another explanation.