The problems with the "Hollow Earth" theory

One of the things the controversial author Lobsang Rampa is known for is a theory that the Earth is actually hollow. According to this theory, rather than having a crust floating on a mantle over a molten outer core and solid inner core of iron (see, for instance, here and here), there is an inner "sun", then a gap of air, and then a shell about 800 to 1,000 miles thick around this (see here, for instance).

Now, there are a lot of problems with this theory - particularly as it was presented at the time I read it, with claims that there haven't been flights over the poles, etc: there have been a lot of such flights, and satellite passes, and no evidence of the claimed entrance at the poles. 

More fundamentally, this is why I have a problem with the claims: 

• the speed of sound varies depending on the density of the matter it is travelling through, and there are various effects (refraction and reflection) at changes of density. As a result of this, over dozens of years and many earthquakes (we have dozens of minor earthquakes every day, and moderate ones relatively frequently as well), geologists have been able to build up a good picture of the earth - the mostly solid core, liquid mantle, etc;
• if the Earth truly was hollow as claimed, the real observations would need to be accounted for. Maybe that would suggest something like a denser layer in the middle of the outer shell, for instance (although I would hate to be the one to try to work out such a distribution of density and match it to hundreds of thousands of observations); 
• now, the next problem this runs into is gravity - and in particular, the orbits and spins of planets.
  The preceding alternative could possibly account for total mass by compressing the outer shell, but then that would change the spin of the earth - think of an ice skater, who spins more quickly by bring their arms in closer.
  Before you say "perhaps that has already been included in the derivation of calculations", it would also have to apply to gaseous planets. Also, we know what the gravitational constant is from lots of small scale experiments - including measuring the sideways gravitational pull of a mountain. 

I cannot see any way this theory stands up.

There may, of course, be smaller caverns (albeit caverns much larger than we have come across) in the Earth, and people may be confusing or rationalising having passed through some sort of dimensional portal, but those are different matters. (And I trust someone has ruled out that the claims of confusion on the part of some polar explorers was not just ergot poisoning or simple disorientation from stress, etc.)

I'm putting this theory in the category of disproved, and have done so pretty much from the time I first came across it. 

medium

As I have used this word on these blogs, it is in reference to someone who acts as an intermediary between the physical world, and the nonphysical world (as opposed to, say, cooking at a medium temperature, or the avoidance of extremes)..

Psychics can pick up impressions from things or places or people in the physical world, whereas a medium in the same circumstances will relay information from a person who is present as a nonphysical entity (whether that is someone who is ‘dead’ or the astral of a person who is still alive).

Mediums may relay the information they receive, which is referred to as ‘mental’ mediumship, or allow their astral to step out and have an entity come in and control their body, for the purpose of relaying messages more directly - from the spirit’s mouth directly, even if the spirit is temporarily borrowing a physical mouth, so to speak. This is referred to as ‘trance’ mediumship - these two terms overlap considerably.

There is also what is termed "physical" or "phenomena" mediumship, where physical effects happen.

For more on this topic, see:

• http://theothersidetv.ca/ghost-hunting-resources/glossary/.

For more on physical mediumship, see:

• https://www.ghostcircle.com/physical-mediumship/, https://www.ghostcircle.com/physical-mediumship/2/, https://www.ghostcircle.com/physical-mediumship/3/ and https://www.ghostcircle.com/physical-mediumship/4/; 
• http://psychiclibrary.com/beyondBooks/physical-mediumship/;
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCGo9sHBhks; 
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tW6pVFOpE6Q (original - in German - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9Y5TLve7yA).

I have some pertinent comments in these posts:

• http://gnwmythr.blogspot.com.au/2010/05/briefing-for-landing-on-planet-earth.html (Stuart Holroyd's critique of mediumship is the best I've ever come across);
• http://gnwmythr.blogspot.com.au/2011/10/quality-of-medium.html; 
• http://gnwmythr.blogspot.com.au/2011/05/dawn-hill.html; 
• http://gnwmythr.blogspot.com.au/2011/04/rescuing-uncooperatives.html; 
• http://gnwmythr.blogspot.com.au/2010/11/miscellany-on-leadership-growth.html, and http://gnwmythr.blogspot.com.au/2010/07/reading-and-registers.html;
• http://gnwmythr.blogspot.com.au/2010/08/book-rave-spirit-release-by-sue-allen.html; 
• http://gnwmythr.blogspot.com.au/2010/08/rapping.html;
• http://gnwmythr.blogspot.com/2008/05/mediumship-part-three-last-part.html.

Some books which might be useful (see here for some brief reviews I did, back in the days when I didn't know how to copy text from Word documents SIGH ):

• "Out on a Limb", by Shirley Maclaine
• "Supernature", by Lyall Watson
• "The Founders of Psychical Research" by Alan Gauld
• "The Mediums” Book" by Kardec and
• "The Spirits” Book" by Allan Kardec (translated by Anna Blackwell, 1875)
• "Eileen Garrett and the World Beyond the Senses" by Angolf
• “Child Possessed” by David St. Clair

cynicism

Unlike the old philosophy of Cynicism (which included living "in agreement with Nature" ... and a few sillier things, some of which may have been taken up by early neochristianity), modern  cynicism is far less noble. In fact, I am tempted to define it with links along the lines of http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/stupidity, but is really more about evading or surrendering  responsibility, perhaps out of despair or being overwhelmed by the size of a task facing one, which, whilst understandable, is basically irresponsible. The exception to that is people who are fashionably cynical, perhaps out of a very much mistaken opinion that it makes them somehow look intelligent or informed, or to create a sense of belonging (that is based on something unhealthy): for those people, my best definition of cynicism is http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/stupidity.

A recent example of the sort of outcomes that one can expect from cynicism is the myth that Brexit was attributable to too few young people turning out to vote: we actually don't know how many young people voted, but the notion that cynicism could have led to that outcome is a very valuable example of the fundamental problem of cynicism.

If there is a valid basis to a belief - GENUINELY valid, based on objective evidence, then the matter is no longer, as far as I am concerned, a matter of cynicism.

See also what I've written about conspiracy nuts (who also have the same qualification - i.e., if there is genuine, objective evidence, of the sort an investigate journalist would uncover (e.g., Watergate], it is not a conspiracy theory; also, some so-called conspiracy theories are actually an awareness of what is happening psychically, with earthbound entities and those using psychic control, and the presentation of them as physical is mistaken and, ultimately, stupid).

communication

Another massive topic ... for the moment, see my flow chart at http://regression-rescue.blogspot.com.au/2010/12/general-flow-charts-discussion.html. 

Also, a definition I channelled for someone decades ago is that "communication is a process of mutual exploration to a shared, common understanding".

come through

This is a phrase associated with trance work: the entity being channelled is said to “come through” the medium, in much the same way that a radio programme “comes through” a correctly tuned radio set.

Or, if you were discussing a trance or channelling session that you weren’t at, you may perhaps ask a sitter who was “Who came through?” (the channel).

channelling

In the context I use it on this series of blogs, channelling is a term for trance – a fairly recent US term, as I understand it. The idea is that the “channeller” (i.e., the medium) is acting as a channel between physical and nonphysical levels by allowing their physical body to be used by a nonphysical entity. The medium’s nonphysical moves out, to greater or lesser extent, and the entity being channelled takes over control of the channel’s body – to greater or lesser extent.

In my case, because I was such a sticky beak it was always lesser extent :)

trance

This is another topic which requires a major post. However, as I do not have the time or energy to do that now, I will just throw a few basic bits and pieces together, and hopefully come back and do this properly at some other time.

Trance is often described as "any state of awareness or consciousness other than normal waking consciousness" (see here) - but that is too vague, and covers sleep state awareness states such as lucid dreaming, hypnosis, etc. Rampa described trance as a state entered after meditation - which I dispute, as not all meditation leads to or is trance-like in nature.

For me, trance is probably best defined along the lines of:

a deliberately intended state of enhance spiritual and/or psychic awareness, including of nonphysical realms

I know people enter such states accidentally, but I consider such "accidents" need to be referred to along those lines. And drug-states of consciousness are trips, not a proper trance.

See also:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Altered_state_of_consciousness&oldid=721689013;

Vulcan ears

This is a reference from the 1960s TV series “Star Trek”, which had several spin offs and recently a "reboot". One of the main characters, known as Spock and renowned for being ultra-logical (initially, at least), had distinctive pointy ears.Reference to such ears is used by some people as a comment about being logical / being too logical / trying to be logical - depending on context and dellivery.

walkabout

Walkabout is a term used in the context of Australia’s traditional owners – Kooris, Anangu, Bama, Murri, Nunga, Nyoongar, Palwah, Wangai and Yolngu amongst other names and identities. 

It is generally understood to mean a form of spiritual quest or initiation involving time spent living in the bush. The spiritual aspect was tied to traditional “songlines”, I believe. For more, see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Walkabout&oldid=721815503. 

In the context of whites, it was often a somewhat derogatory term used to describe someone disappearing for reasons that the whites didn’t know – possibly to attend a corroboree or ritual. Fortunately, most people have evolved beyond that level of disparagement, although some people do still use it amongst themselves as a light hearted term, and I am very much aware that I and many other whites have a form of wanderlust which is basically the same thing.