Sympathetic Vibratory Physics - It’s a Musical Universe
SVP Web indexWhat’s New FAQ SVPbookstore ContactWho
Please visit the VPwiki
Check out the SVPwiki SVP Cosmology 2.3

Frequently Asked Questions 4 of 7
concerning SVP, John Worrell Keely and His Discoveries
Answers given by Dale Pond. FAQ1 - FAQ2 - FAQ3 - FAQ4 - FAQ5 - FAQ6 - FAQ7

Q 100)
How can this basic knowledge of SVP be applied to meditation practices?
A 100) SVP helps us understand WHY we meditate which understanding permits us to let go of confusion and questioning that we may allow ourselves to accept or allow the meditative experience to be reflective of that NOW quietness.
Q 101) Dear Dale: Is there a book besides "The Physics of Love" in which I can learn the basics of SVP?
A 101) The Physics of Love is a compiled work resulting from me going through hundreds of other books and thousands of pages of research from other people. If there is another book out there with SVP basics I want to know about it! Please send me a copy! The next best source is 1) my web site, then the 2) SVP Forum, then 3) the SVP Cosmology which is THE definitive source for learning SVP.
Q 102) It can be misleading to present Keelys ideas as unique to him without a bit of context. Anyone familiar with the history of physics knows the role of Einstein in replacing the aether model following the famous Michelson-Morley experiment. There were others besides Keely who were exploring the nature of the aether and many were on the vibrating medium trail until M-M and Einstein buried it. It still remains the heart of free-energy research for many to this day.
A 102) Next time someone says the ether theory has been proved void ask them which definition of ether was proved false? Ether, we have learned, is the quantum soup being explored by science to this day. Dont be fooled or misled.
Q 103) Anyone familiar with the history of physics knows the role of Einstein in replacing the aether model following the famous Michelson-Morley experiment. There were others besides Keely who were exploring the nature of the aether and many were on the vibrating medium trail until M-M and Einstein buried it. It still remains the heart of free-energy research for many to this day.
A 103) I presume everyone who can think knows the MM experiment only proved those two guys couldnt measure ether with the equipment they used - nothing more. This "work" of theirs could not possibly prove or disprove ether one way of the other. BTW, their definition of ether was considerably different than Keelys - the one who could measure and work with it - according to his definitions. That the ether theory was buried is no mystery only the why and who remains so... Any sincere one who has really studied Keely knows he had a different kind of "ether" than the others working on it which may explain why he was successful and the others not. Also the orbiting electron theory, the heart of modern physics (which includes E=mc^2), is crashing and about to burn.
Michelsons daughter wrote in his biography (Master of Light?) he died believing in the ether and was disappointed he could not prove it....
Q 104) As an aside, the phenomenon of the making of Einstein (and his theories) into a popular icon is only rivaled by the success of Freud in this century and Darwin in the last. There are many reasons other than objective fact that go into the making of consensus reality.
A 104) It may be shown in the not-to-distant future that the "successes" of Freud and Darwin are currently over-celebrated. Basic premises of each may be considered "good stuff" but more insights into humanity and its history are coming from behind the general frauds sufficient to allow the development of more comprehensive and hopefully more accurate revelations. ACIM is an example. Both mens work has been shot threw with so many holes they are wobbling now. Psychoanalysis is all but dead already. Evolution is about to be killed off by materialist/spiritualist science with the revelation Time and Space do not really exist. ?!?!? This includes the Einsteinian posturings too. Popularization of theories (for whatever motive, see below) is not the same as so-called "scientific" proofs and/or demonstrations. This is cool stuff ... what is "science"? Is it a whore for sale to the highest bidder or when convenient? Or is it a cold-hard-look for truth regardless of whose sacred cow, belief system and fat contract gets skewered?
Q 105) What is really misleading (and irritating) is the loose use of attribution in promoting Keelys ideas on the SVP website and works of Dale Pond. It smacks of an agenda to show Keely right rather than proving/disproving a scientific theory. As an example, the novel Dashed Against the Rocks was authored by the theosophist William Colville and published in 1894. In the preface, Colville gives Keely all the credit for the technical dissertations. How accurate was that transcription? Yet, we are repeatedly fed those lines as if they came directly from the mind and pen of Keely.
A 105) If one cannot believe what one is reading why read anything? If one cannot trust their sources then one cannot trust anything? (Irritation is of the ego - it comes from fear. Sorry to see you suffering.) If showing certain theory is more or less correct happens to validate Keely as the originator of those theories what is the beef? Sorry to say Einstein and his cultist followers are doomed to revision - as are all "great" theoretical postulations. It is the way the world of "science" works. We have the sources and quotes we have. If you have better then please present them. Some of us have spent a lot of time researching materials and are fairly sure of their origin and sufficiency - enough to give us a premise and base to work from - until Keelys science journals and books make an entry or our self-financed research proves otherwise. There are a number of agendas going on in this forum. One is to present work that demonstrates principles. Another agenda (there are more) is the search for more understanding thus lending further support of the theoretical base to the demonstrations in actual hardware and life. These two efforts are a two pronged effort designed to yield up greater applicable wisdom and technology. We work with what we have to work with. What is being presented is what we have to present. No one, especially me, can present that which they do not have. So to complain about not seeing what you want ("valid" or "perfect" and "proven" data) is no reflection on my efforts but may be on your expectations.
As for Colville, do you know who he was? Have you read any of his many books? You would be amazed if you did. Supposedly he and Keely were best of buddies. After reading some of Colvilles works I can clearly understand some of their relationship. And I did laugh when I understood!!! How silly we can sometimes be!!! Just because one may choose to be unhappy or ungrateful with the paucity of FREE data on this forum does in no way imply more data is not existent. More research and thinking might go a long way to alleviating frustrations and "irritations". My suggestion is READ MORE before choosing to be irritated or unhappy..... ha! ha! when you discover who Colville was you will laugh too........ :) if Theo had put that in his book (did he know?) or if I knew it earlier you might not be complaining so....
Q 106) The Snell Manuscript is another example of the above, along with the way Bloomfield-Moores writings are referenced. Not to mention the chapter from Parkers Quadrature of the Circle that happens to reappear somewhere else as the work of Keely. The Keely story is fascinating in part because of this enigmatic interplay between fact and fiction, truth and fraud. Here is a good place to plug Theo Paijmans book for it does show the rich soup of ideas that Keely operated in.
A 106) Like Ive said so many times before: we present the information as we have it. I have the ORIGINAL Snell Manuscript in the event you wish to examine it in detail. I also have a photocopy of Parkers book "Quadrature of the Circle". These are what they are and no more, sad to say. Material is referenced as best we can. If you desire a special FORM of presentation of that data then that is your issue. Form is all important, right? Even more so than substance? Not being "properly" educated in fit and form so as to massage peoples expectations is not in my soup, Im not sorry to say. As to the Parker enigma well it is an enigma I think will eventually be resolved. The material appears verbatim in Parkers book and also appears word for word above Keelys name in Bloomfield-Moore s "Keely and His Discoveries". You make the determination - a little research would help. Right now it is as you say attributed to both men. Do you know who Parker was? Have you read any of his other works? In this regard I applaud Theos constant digging after the history of these people and revealing their interconnectedness. I went after the books Bloomfield-Moore referenced with the idea of reading what Keely read so I could develop the same mind-set so as to facilitate understanding what he was saying. My strategy worked. Now to understand who all these people were can only be approached in a similar fashion. Some of this work between Keely and Colville or Parker or Hughes may be like Ben Iverson and myself. So much of his work published under his name originated with me. Some of my work came from him as also from Keely, Tyndall, Jeans, and so many others. 100 years from now who is going to say which work came from which? Lets get real with these seeming ambiguities. The material is what it is. We can choose to be happy about what we have to work with (which isnt much) and be grateful or we can choose to be less than happy.
Q 107) It was Einstein, in his study of black-body radiation, that paved the way for quantum physics even though he personally was philosophically opposed to its conclusions. It was the relationship between frequency and energy that prompted the notion that the energy spectrum is not continuous. The rest, as they say, is history. Which is to say that Einstein did not produce E=mc^2 out of an environmental vacuum, so to speak. It solved a problem.
A 107) Good for him. The famous equation is simply an effort to resolve so much energy/matter dynamics to a simple equation. There is far more to energy and matter and especially now that we know there is a Mind connection. The fundamentals of the force/matter equations goes back to the 1850s. Everyone was working on those concepts. Keely took them to levels not yet understood while some faltered and some gained notoriety. Very interesting reading is Grant Allens "Force and Energy", 1888 and Sinclairs "Lux Naturae" just to name a couple. These are but tiny windows into that era and the scientific thinking preceding Einsteinian domination. There was a richness in exploration and understanding not seen since, until the resurrection of SVP that is. You see the same fraud that has been foisted onto the social and political realms during the past 100 or so years also was cast upon the sciences. There is just as much fraud in science as there is in schooling, politics, religions and money. Skimming through history to sort the chaff from the wheat as Theo did in historical pervue and Ive been doing in technical SVP and so many others are doing in their respective areas of interest is revealing this fraud and the truth is coming out all over the world thanks to the marvel that is the internet. It is a tragedy that so many have misplaced so much faith in these trappings for so long, ala the MM story. Our slumber is ending and the revelations are sometimes "irritating" to many to wake up from their dream realizing theyve been misplacing their trust and faith in so many wrong "experts", places and modes of thinking and believing. This forum is about sorting the chaff from the wheat concerning Keely and SVP. If we knew all the facts already (and could hand them up on a platter for FREE) we would be duplicating the work already.
Q 108) The historical tragedy is that the papers and machines that Keely actually did produce are largely missing. The question of why and where seems more compelling in real life than turning what we do have into the final answer. Keelys promoters raised a ton of money in capital (tens of millions in todays dollars), yet had nothing but a "secret" to show for it.
A 108) Tragedy? I think, personally, it was a blessing. As you come to understand more about SVP and its potential you will eventually agree with me on this. Yes, where indeed are Keelys research papers and inventions? Why have they been hidden from the world? Could you understand them if they were present? Do you understand the little we do have? During the Atlin project I asked Keely about this and his answer was the same as above. "Do you understand that which you already have?" His material is still in existence albeit hidden and will come forth when the time is right - whenever that is. Ive said for years that if those documents were before us today there is not a soul on earth who could read, understand and apply them - including me. The spiritual side comes in as a form of gratitude and appreciation for what we do have - even if it is mostly offered for FREE. Keelys promoters were primarily interested in money - not technology. There was not the emphasis placed on technology in those pre-technology days as there is today. The general value system(s) in the 1880s was considerably different than ours today. And this concept should have been apparent to all readers of Theos book. Bloomfield-Moore was interested in science sufficient to advance humankind and demonstrated her integrity by putting her money, effort and reputation where her mouth was. How many do so today?
Q 109) The validation of Keelys ideas rests in their application. Was he able to demonstrate them to a skeptical world? Certainly not in writing or math, only by his machines and, some say, his character. Did they work as described? How hard is it to demonstrate a new mechanical truth? Why all the failed promises? These are tough questions, but not overly harsh. The same ones that one would ask a Mr. Dennis Lee, no?
A 109) It is interesting you sneak in Dennis Lee. Does this imply you think Keely is a fraud? Do you think Dennis Lee is a fraud? I think the jury is still out on both. Here again we see an assumption ruling reason. Simply because Keelys writings are not available does not mean they were never created and do not exist. I can sympathize with your frustration at not having more FREE information. Now you are knowing the frustrations Ive put up with for many years. But Im not gonna whine about not having such and such handed to me on a platter for FREE. Ive embarqued on my search to learn and this forum and my web site are testiments to that past and continuing effort to answer questions like yours and many more than I can count or innumerate. Application of Keelys work is wholly dependent on understanding it. Who among us can say they understand? If so then where is the working hardware? So far as I know the only hardware remotely possible of applying SVP successfully is Atlin sitting in the other room. I like Bloomfield-Moores so very honest approach: putting up her own cash, effort and reputation for what she believed in. She also courageously blasted those who mindelessly attacked Keelys efforts all the while whining and complaining he didnt hand the secrets of the universe over to them for FREE.
Here is another FREEBIE: Let me just say this and it is entirely my theory based on my years of research and thinking about these issues and also reinforced by spiritual/mind communication of the points covered. Early on (mid 1880s) in Keelys work he understood the significance of his work and had a glimpse at its potential misuse as weaponry, etc. being a man of integrity he chose not to reveal most of his work but to preserve it for the future so he would not be blamed for all the destruction wraught by others with his discoveries which he researched out for the BETTERMENT of humankind - not its destruction or his enrichment. He and others with him felt mankind would not be well served if it had access to unlimited power which would be used for destructive purposes. The materials were purposefully hidden to be unearthed at a later date. This propensity for destruction and control was demonstrated shortly thereafter in all the wars since initiated by the nefarious Hegelian manipulators, who by the way, had Keely and later Tesla surrounded for control purposes. (They were afraid, see?, of these guys and their technologies. So they tried to control it and/or them.) When humankind is READY (already covered in this forum) this knowledge will be made available, we have been assured. This principle is being demonstrated in my own research by opening up incrementally new insights as Im able to understand and assimilate them. We were told humankind is ready for Atlin and associated tech NOW, today - so it is here for us to learn from.
Speaking of fraud check out the Hot Fusion cult. They *promise*, using their "scientific methods" to M-A-Y-B-E produce Hot Fusion in another *50 years or so* and they only require more free BILLIONS of YOUR dollars to make it happen. I have far more to show in results with Atlin than they with all the BILLIONS of dollars already spent. Lee has more to show than they. Same with Newman and a host of others. As perposterous as some of the stories about Keelys work is there is more to go on than all the Hot Fusion confetti and propaganda published at untold wealth expenditures. Perhaps we need a better definition of "fraud"? Maybe the Hot Fusion cultists are practicing a different kind of "science"? Why do the Hot Fusion cultists get the big bucks and we get the shaft? Do you suppose Hot Fusion is a delaying tactic designed to maximize income and profit from oil which we are told we are "forced" to use in the meantime while we are waiting for "The Promise" to be fullfilled? How many of us can successfully paint ourselves as victims in order to make more profit and thereby gain more power? Pretty slick stuff but then "slick" is currently "politically correct".
Electric vehicles were manufactured, purchaseable and useable in 1910. Why werent they developed more? Hydrogen powered cars, trucks and tractors were available in the 1940s. Why werent they successful and allowed to prosper? Dr. Clark has killed no one yet she is under attack from the so-called "legal system" backed by the AMA. Why? Licensed doctors have killed many. Unlicensed Dr. Clark has killed no one. Is the medical license then a "license to kill without retribution"? Move over 007!!! The AMA has many deaths at their feet but they are not being investigated. How come? You have wear a seat belt while operating a STATE OWNED motor vehicle (which you paid for) not to protect you but to protect the insurance companies from more expense. Surprised? Your "drivers license" is a contract binding you to all the rules and regulations of the DMV. Were you ever told that? Why not? The tales of fraud by the system, most blindly and erroneously consider to be legitimate, are more than can be listed (or stomached). So much for the "pot calling the kettle black" type stuff. Fraud? We need a better definition that fits everyone equally not just "the systems" self-serving (get and maintain power at all costs) definition.
Q 110) The Keely story is a fascinating blend of history, fact and fiction, in a realm that appeals to some of the key issues of life.
A 110) It really is fascinating isnt it? I love it. Lots to chew on and marvel about. Beats the heck out of the pithy dry stuff from the old elementary school days...
Q 111) Most come to the story with a rather limited agenda and find out that the story broadens out into a vast panoply of values. To know who John Worrell Keely really was is for me the most interesting aspect of this search.
A 111) Most come to the forum having only heard vague things about Keely. Now we see it is a far vaster experience than simply reading dry text and formula from a bland book of eruditic musings. Being on this forum then I reckon is part of your research effort to uncover more about Keely as a person. So far I havent seen much about this aspect on this forum. Do you have any you wish to share? Got any questions along these lines?
Q 112) To become "followers" of Keely seems a rather dubious goal at this point. Vindicating a wrong is a noble pursuit and if Keely was hounded into oblivion for the wrong reasons then we owe it to him and ourselves to bring the truth to light.
A 112) No one here is a "follower" of Keely although there are many "followers" of Einstein and his like. Keely is dead and he is not leading too many anywhere right now. My work is to understand what makes me and nature tick. I present (for FREE) what I find for your consideration without any obligation that you or anyone else believe any of it. I do not require followers. You can simply take it or leave it. My effort is not to convince anyone of anything. I have one obligation and that is to myself to awaken from my dream. SVP is proving a great aid for me in this effort. If SVP can help others then that is wonderful. 
So far as owing Keely anything this would again be misplaced values, I think. The furtherest reaches of SVP are showing us we are all One. How can we owe ourselves? Like the so-called national debt owed to ourselves? What a joke of the manipulators! Honoring another is honoring ourselves. Giving credit where credit is due is a moral arrangement within a persons own belief system. Taking for FREE and not giving due credit (or following through on promises made) is also consequence and sequence of belief system arrangments. Keely did what he did. He did not ask anything of posterity that Im aware of. He may have had hopes we could do better with his work than those around him. In 1984 there were maybe a dozen or so people on planet earth knowing about Keely and understanding ZIP, nada, zilch. Two people, Jerry Decker and I, independently for the most part, brought the memory back through our own efforts and expenses - often scoffed at. Now many are jumping on the band wagon - why do you suppose that is? Because they think he was a fraud? No because they sense a value and importance to their belief systems. Keely was laid to rest in an unmarked grave. He didnt even get the grave stone marking him as a "hum-bug". It took two guys barely able to pay the gas to get and put a simple cheap stone on that site - 100 years late. The effort was a token of respect and honoring. The Keely work, which was long forgotten, is simply presenting us, individually, with an opportunity to learn who and what we really are. It is for this possibility that I give thanks and appreciation. The so-called technology will come in its due time when we are able to deal properly with it. I hope others can derive similar pleasure and utility from this work. It would seem from some of the comments on this Forum that this is happening to some extent. I think that is cool....
Q 113) There are some who, for their own reasons (conscious and otherwise), have decided the case and seem to be a little presumptuous with the facts. That, to me, only muddies the waters for those who might choose to follow a path to their own conclusions.
A 113) Whose dream is more real than that of others? The entirety of science and social/political awareness is based on hearsay (opinions) of so-called "experts". Please choose which dream/illusion system you wish to participate in.... "presumptuous with *facts*"? please read on...
Q 114) > Yes, the quoted Keely Principles do seem to embody the concepts that Einstein would later formalize. Yet, in light of present theory there are some areas of seeming contention that need to be further explained. Remember our high school questioner many months back?
A 114) Research is research. Yes, you are correct - more reserch is needed. Keelys work was published over 100 years ago under "strange" arrangements sometimes." In light of present THEORY how much of anything 100 years old is still valid? In whose opinion/theory? When lacking acceptable "proof" any theory is as valid as any other. We are presenting here what we have - if that is not appealing one can exercise their right of choice with their power over the humble mouse.... If you have questions or "contention" do more research to find more answers. Your efforts and findings will be honored here like mine and as others are being honored.....
Q 115) From what I have seen so far, I still share the opinion of Tesla as recorded in a letter to Clara Bloomfield-Moore where he expresses his reservations:  
"I sincerely wish that I could share your opinion about Keely and his works. That he has skill and ingenuity in experimenting I readily believe. But his method is an unscientific one and his exposition is wanting in the extreme. It is painful to read his theories. Can he have recognized something and yet be utterly incapable of expressing it?... I devotedly wish that you may be spared the pain of deception. The solution will eventually come but from other quarters..." p. 83. Free Energy Pioneer: John Worrell Keely by Theo Paijman (1998).
This is not to say that my little irritations may not eventually result in pearls.
A 115) Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. Lets look at the above quote from the hand written letter I sent a copy of to Theo from which this quote arises. Tesla is thrown up in the above paragraph as though he were some legitimate "authority" or "expert" on the matters at hand. It is undoubted Tesla was unequalled in his field of electrical research and development. But did he know much about music? Did he know much about the physics of sound and vibrations? Hardly. Did he know anything at all about subatomic physics? No, such a field did not exist outside of Keelys lab. Then he is not and cannot be considered a valid "expert" to make any determination about Keelys work. Besides, he was after Bloomfield-Moore s money, if the remainder of the letter were quoted this would be seen. (I was shocked to read this myself!) And this brings us back to the MM fraud. These two guys did what they did in good faith and integrity. What was done with a distortion of their fine work by propagandists and the nefarious Hegelian manipulators is criminal. This was part of the beginning of the concerted efforts to distort real science and leave the great unwashed masses with distorted truths - that if objections were ever raised would result (and often did) in black-balling, dismissal from prestigious jobs and positions, no fat government contracts, ridicule and the like. The exact same tactics of control are in operation in the political realm. I have no bone to pick with you personally or any one professing blind faith in MM, Einstein or the orbiting electron theory. Like Ive said so many times: I present what I find in my work for your consideration. It can be accepted graciously or ignored. What others think or believe is really none of my business or concern.
About Keelys "unscientic method" what is an accepted "scientific method"? The one that "proves" deadly mercury placed in a persons mouth is healthy? Or the "scientific method" that "proves" adding rat poison to water and toothpaste is likewise healthy? How about the "scientific method" that says spraying raw food with deadly-to-bugs chemicals is healthy for humans? Or how about the well-established "scientific methods" that are used in the conventional disease management system that kills 300,000 or so "patients" a year and no one is investigated? Cayce, unscientific as he was, caused the healing of many thousands of people when "scientifically" proven and supported medical people could not. All the technology born of the "scientific method" of this century could not crack Keelys SVP until I came along with "unscientific methods" of psychic communication, meditation, day dreaming, hard work, general studying in many fields, courageously asking questions, passively watching nature, NO FORMAL DEGREE (Oh! My! No PhD??) or formal brain-conditioning, etc. (Have you ever asked why is it that the so well and expensively "trained" in formal "schools" have so much trouble with SVP?) Proof of the validity of this so-called "unscientific method" is in Atlins various motions to date. At least my unscientifically derived mechanical piece of expensive hardware has moved - has the "scientific method" demonstrated one of its own? Why not?
BTW, Michelson never got the same measurement of the speed of light twice according to his biography. Therefore it was not then a constant and cannot now be considered a true constant. Like so-called "scientific notation" in numbers - they are only approximations - like the "scientific" value for PI, as exposed by the mythic duo of Parker/Keely. If so-called "science" is built up of these types of approximations, assumptions and fabrications what, then, is the truth? If "science" is composed of these "unscientific" misbeliefs and generalities then whose "system of belief" are we to give credence to?
Q 116) The thing that bother[s] me the most, as a physicist is, that Keelys machines are supposed to work by mind power, or at least started that way. For a physicist this is a little too much. It seems unreliable or non technical an other domain not of our knowledge and understanding, and there are questions about reliability. Now, maybe a hundred years from now all these things will change and everything will blend. There is power in the mind, telepathy etc. But maybe this is not yet the time for humanity to use it and/or understand it. Do you see what I am saying?
A 116) I agree with your observations and reservations. People like to flip the wall switch and have power literally at their finger tips. I think my work is 1) geared towards bringing awareness to the possibilities and 2) developing pioneering prototypes from which we will eventually learn how to do all this. Time to market is an unknown but sometime in the future. The P.E.A.R. Project proved beyond any doubt there is power in Mind.
Q 117) If I push a button to run my machine, fine. But if I have to rely on you (or Keely) to stand beside me and push it, pretty difficult. and when or how will I learn it? do I have to build my own machine myself? I can not make many for may people?
A 117) Sorry, I cant start then operate your SVP-type machine for you. :) I dont have all the answers you would like right now. They are coming though, slowly. But what prevents us from exploring? If nobody does the "dog work" no one will ever know how. And there maybe other solutions to this as we learn more about it. Three years ago the whole thing was a big mystery. Today we have some of the pieces and theories are beginning to come forth. Three years ago we didnt have a dynasphere to work with or study. Now we do. I will be building more of them using what I learn from one to make the next. Subsequent copies will be better constructed and tuned. As far as quantity is concerned we do not yet need many of them. As we learn how they work and how to make them we will also learn how to make them in quantity. Right now the whole thing is ART just like everything else new in its infancy. The first airplane for instance.... was at first considered a fraud, then tentative acceptance, then fabricators sprouting up everywhere as the ART became known eventually becoming factories cranking out thousands of them. Im hopeful and expectant of our success and good fortune.
FAQ1 - FAQ2 - FAQ3 - FAQ4 - FAQ5 - FAQ6 - FAQ7
SVP Cosmology cover image
SVP Cosmology 2.3
on CD
John Keely portrait
Dale Pond portrait
SVP Tulsa Seminar
on CD
SVP Tulsa Seminar photo
SVP Web indexWhat’s New FAQ SVPbookstore ContactWho
Please visit the SVPwiki