Why spiritual girls talk about "frequencies" and why they get debunked?

[tvaeli]

https://github.com/tambetvali/LaeGOS-Alpha/blob/main/LaeGOS-Skydrive/DataRfx/I-ChingPhilosophy.md - here is my I Ching Laegna philosophy.

- It mainly notes that changes, rhythyms etc. are for auditory thinkers.

 

Classically, sound theory has been proven able to map ethical concerns, changes etc. - harmony, distruption, most physical forces are naturally expressible in these terms, just as much as one can recognize them by hearing or more clearly, by absolute hearing perhaps.

 

About their scientific views they typically give me some narratives and mythos:

- That they are atheist and they do not believe, nor be able to do.

- That in their history, their common people have been cheated by someone who believen this; bring some mythical person with no name.

- Some story about money or war money - either they asked money for higher support, or said they have this thing to attack.

 

In original versions they told about their charlatans of their bloodline history perhaps, a depleted fool:

- Now they tell of thing itself.

 

I definitely use octaves, frequencies and lengths in my theory because:

- Visual thinking and auditory thinking are basically based on wave resonance;

- while the visual has 3D in space, auditory has 3 major channels in time, this is why number of notes 12 divides by 3.

 

I want to point out both theories, either drawing illustrations or talking about frequencies, are equivalent conversions of physical information; both are also used in modelling - thermodynamics allows to model sociality.

ChatGPT: Further note: Laegna treats visual and auditory models as equivalent representations of physical information. Both describe wave resonance: visual thinking maps spatial structures, while auditory thinking maps temporal rhythms, frequencies and harmonics. Octaves, the 12-note division into three major temporal channels, and harmonic relationships provide a mathematical language for expressing change, balance, disruption and even ethical relations. These are not competing explanations, but different ways of modelling the same underlying reality — much as thermodynamics can describe both physical and social systems.