title: Cosmic Summit V3 deck — extraction notes source: Cosmic Summit Presentation V3.pptx · 627 MB · 51 slides · presented by Jordan Collin (Alchemical Science) status: extracted to sources/decks/cosmic_summit_v3.txt + media in sources/decks/cosmic_summit_v3/ppt/media/

Cosmic Summit V3 — what’s in it

Who, what, where

Presenter: Jordan Collin, identified slide 1 as “Alchemical Science · Open source researcher”. Alchemical Science is the YouTube channel + blog where Sheela Rahman / Xosar’s PUM-frequency video is hosted (referenced in notes/12_art_materials_formulas.md).

Event: Cosmic Summit — an annual catastrophist + alternative-science gathering in North Carolina (Randall Carlson’s circuit). The “V3” suggests this was the third iteration of the deck.

Title slide: “HOW TO DILATE TIME AND GENERATE POWER AND PLASMOIDS?”

This identifies a third figure in the PUM corpus alongside Bendall (inventor) and Greenyer (LENR translator):

Collin’s role is to make the Bendall framework legible to an audience that wants citations, history, comparative tables, and careful sourcing. Where Bendall asserts “the Great Year is 25,920,” Collin walks through why — Plato, Hipparchus, the Babylonians, the Mayan calendar, the Vedic Yugas — and shows the parallels.

Section structure

The 51 slides break into roughly:

New material this deck contributes

1. The “Lifetime of Brahma” math (slide 13)

Vedic time scales using exactly Bendall’s PUM cardinal numbers:

1 Maha Yuga = 4 Yugas = 4,320,000 earth years
  Satya-Yuga   = 1,728,000  earth years   (= SUN_OCTAVE = 144,000 × 12)
  Tetra-Yuga   = 1,296,000  earth years   (= RFEU × 10)
  Dwapara-Yuga =   864,000  earth years   (= SUN diameter scalar)
  Kali-Yuga    =   432,000  earth years   (= SUN_RADIUS)

1 Day of Brahma = 1,000 Maha Yugas = 4,320,000,000 earth years
1 Year of Brahma = 360 days = 8,640,000,000 deva years
Lifetime of Brahma = 100 years = 311,040,000,000,000 earth years

The bottom line is 311,040 × 10⁹ × 10⁶ = SANSKRIT_TIME × 10¹⁵. Bendall’s “Sanskrit All Time” cardinal lands here with breathtaking precision — if you accept the Vedic chronology as primary data.

2. Other ancient calendars (slide 14)

Mayan World Age (1 Bak/Tun)    = 144,000 days   (= AETHER scalar)
Egyptian King's List           =  36,000 years
Reign of Sumerian God-Kings    = 432,000 years   (= SUN_RADIUS)
Hebrew calendar                =   6,000 years
Saros Cycle / Ancient Chaldean =   3,600 years

3. Imperial weights + measures (slides 15–18)

The pound, ounce, drachm, scruple, grain hierarchy in British, Roman, Sicilian, French apothecaries’ systems are all built on multiples of 12, 60, 144, 288, 576, 1,728, 5,760. These match the PUM number lattice. Collin’s claim: this is not coincidence — these traditional systems all encode the same number harmonic Bendall calls PUM.

4. The Platonic solids identity (slide 34)

Tetrahedron (4 faces)    sum of internal angles =   720°
Octahedron (8 faces)     sum =                     1,440°
Cube (6 faces)           sum =                     2,160°
Icosahedron (20 faces)   sum =                     3,600°
                                          subtotal  7,920°  = Earth's diameter in miles
Dodecahedron (12 faces)  sum =                     6,480°
                                          total    14,400°  = LIGHT × 100

This is the strongest specific Platonic-solids → PUM-cardinals identity in the corpus. The first four solids’ angle sum is exactly the Earth-diameter scalar.

5. Tesla coil harmonics (slide 41)

A Tesla coil tuned to 432 kHz has harmonics at 648, 864, 1296, 1728, 2160, 2592 kHz — every harmonic is a PUM cardinal (1296 = RFEU × 10; 1728 = SUN_OCTAVE/1000; 2160 = MOON; 2592 = GREAT_YEAR/10; 864 = SUN/1000; 648 = ?). Collin’s claim: “the harmonics are currently wasted.” Implied: a properly designed Tesla-style apparatus tuned to 432 kHz with multiple secondaries each tuned to a PUM harmonic would be a PUM-resonant power-distribution device.

6. The Plasmoid → bee analogy (slide 47)

Collin frames plasmoids as miniature thunderstorms with elemental consciousness — analogous to bees fanning heat from the hive to keep it in homeostasis. Plasmoids equalize charge / time. This is a poetic claim, but it’s the first appearance of a “function” framing for plasmoids: they are stabilising agents in the larger system, not just energy stores.

7. Ancient acoustic levitation (slide 49)

Detailed equipment list from a 1939 account by Swedish engineer Henry Kjellson, attributed to Dr. Jarl (Olaf) and a Tibetan monastery: 19 musical instruments arranged in a 90° arc, including 13 drums (8 large 1m × 1.5m, 4 medium 0.7m × 1m, 1 small 0.2m × 0.3m) and 6 trumpets (0.3m × 3.12m). Citation: Bruce Cathie, Acoustic Levitation of Stones. Collin’s frame: this is an early acoustic plasmoid generator, scaled up to move stone blocks.

This connects the PUM Sanskrit Shiva Lingam (device 07) to a specific historical claim about how stones were moved at large scale before the modern era.

References Collin cites (slide 24)

Required reading for anyone wanting to engage with the systematic-case version of PUM:

• Malcolm Bendall — the PUM corpus itself
• Marko Rodin — Vortex-Based Mathematics (VBM); the toroidal number system
• Randall Carlson — Sacred geometry + cyclic-catastrophe geological framework (Joe Rogan circuit)
• Edward G. Nightingale — The Giza Template (sacred-geometry architecture)
• Walter Russell — Russell cosmology (1920s-50s, “the divine illiterate” cosmology)
• Don Odijk — ?
• Jamie Buturff — frequency / harmonic researcher
• Bruce Cathie — Harmonic Conquest of Space / world energy grid
• Papus — French occultist (Gérard Encausse, 1865-1916)

This is not the LENR research community — these are the sacred-geometry + alternative-cosmology + tradition-revival lineages. Bendall’s framework lives in this stream of thought; Greenyer’s translation pulls it into the LENR / Fleischmann-Pons stream. The two streams touch through the device but otherwise rarely intersect.

What’s NOT in the deck

• No specific calorimetric / engineering claims (this is the theory deck, not the device deck)
• No Greenyer / EV physics references (Collin’s audience is sacred-geometry people, not LENR people)
• No skeptical engagement with the cosmology (the deck is the cosmology, presented sympathetically)
• No build instructions (refer to Bendall’s lectures)

How to read it

If you want the structure of the cosmology — how the seed numbers relate to traditional knowledge systems — Collin’s deck is the cleanest single document. It’s better organized than Bendall’s lecture series for that purpose, less mystical-rambling, more like a comparative-religion lecture.

If you want engineering or physics, this is not your document. Stick with the Bendall lectures + Greenyer hypothesis.

If you’re trying to explain the framework to a non-technical reader who likes systematic comparison, the Cosmic Summit deck is the source. Probably better to point them at it than at our plain-language summary, if their interest is the cosmology rather than the device.

Updated three-figure map of the corpus

                  THE PUM CORPUS

      Bendall                Collin              Greenyer
    (inventor)           (systematizer)       (LENR translator)
        │                      │                     │
    builds the           presents the           re-frames the
    hardware,            academic-style         device in Ken
    claims the           comparative case       Shoulders EV
    cosmology            for the cosmology      physics terms
        │                      │                     │
    Lectures             Cosmic Summit          MFMP videos +
    + patents +          deck (51 slides)       "Hypothesis for
    publications         + Alchemical           operation of TSG"
                         Science blog           transcript
        │                      │                     │
    Audience:            Audience:              Audience:
    enthusiasts +        sacred-geometry +      LENR research
    investors +          tradition-revival      community +
    builders             + Cosmic Summit        instrumented
                         circuit                replicators

Each presents the same underlying claims to a different audience. None has a financial or scientific peer relationship with the others — they are independent voices that converge on shared interest in Bendall’s hardware.