The Rings of Saturn.
They are there since hundreds of years ago.
Probably thousands, or more.
And we know that even Jupiter and Uranus have rings.
Get a look at this video of the Rings of Saturn, made with NASA Cassini probe, and see how thin are the Rings:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PA9iIqIAUT4
Now, how can the Rings be there?
According to the "Standard Model" of the so called "mainstream science" - based on Gravity – the Rings could not be there.
The inner part of the debris should have fallen very early back on the planet, and the outer part dispersed into Space.
But we know the Rings are there, and have been for a long, long time.
The existence of the Rings of Saturn have extremely important consequences.
First Consequence:
1.- it demonstrates that the "Standard Theory" based on Gravity is wrong.
-------------------------------------
Now let us see what could keep the Rings of Saturn in place for thousands of years.
It is going to be an amazing, mind-blowing journey.
The Rings are made of space debris, placed in a very thin disc around the equator of Saturn.
We have seen that Gravity cannot explain their existence.
Then, what could?
There must be a sort of "Anti-Gravity effect" - a sort of "Force Field" which keeps the Rings in place.
My Theory is this:
There is a "Singularity" in the center of Saturn,
which generates a Force Field with very specific geometric characteristics.
This Force Field must be of electromagnetic nature.
This Force Field is what keeps the Rings of Saturn in place.
The effects of such Force Field can be seen also at the poles of Saturn
(weird storms that we know of...)
Thus, the same kind of "Singularity" exists also in the center of Jupiter and Uranus.
(as we said, also Jupiter and Uranus have Rings...)
Now, let us see the Solar System...
All the orbits of the Planets of the Solar System (except Pluto) are positioned on a rather thin disc...
The same geometry as the Rings of Saturn...
What keeps all these orbits in place in a thin disc?
The "Standard Theory" based on Gravity does not even dare to explain this.
Do you see the same pattern?
What if a "Singularity" exists also in the center of the Sun?
A "Singularity"which generates a Force Field with very specific geometric characteristics.
And keeps all the Planets orbits on a thin disc.
(and we have the mysteries of the measured temperatures of the Sun which corroborate this: Corona at 2 million degrees Kelvin, Photosphere – the surface of the Sun – at a mere 5,700 degrees Kelvin)
There is no "Standard Model" capable of explaining this.
If there is a Singularity in the center of our Sun,
there is a Singularity in the center of every Star.
Let us see a bigger picture, now....
The Spiral Galaxies.
Same Pattern: a Disc.
All the Stars of a Spiral Galaxy are placed on a thin disc.
And it is extremely probable that a "Singularity" exists in the center of each Galaxy.
(on this point, even the mainstream scientists agree, and they call it a "Black Hole")
I would rather not call these Singularities "Black Holes", I prefer to call them "Singularities" and accept the mystery of their nature, at least for the moment.
Now you got the picture.
Of course, the Singularity at the center of a Galaxy is much more powerful than the Singularity at the center of a Star,
which in turn is much more powerful than the Singularity at the center of a Planet.
Back to Planets.
Saturn has a Singularity at its center.
Jupiter has a Singularity at its center.
Uranus has a Singularity at its center.
Now, what if even the Earth has a Singularity at its center?
Forget the Standard Model of the Earth now, and consider the Hollow Earth Theory.
The Hollow Earth theory speaks of a small "Central Sun" at the center of the Earth, which gives off huge amounts of Energy.
What if this small "Central Sun" - called "The Black Sun" in certain mythologies – is the Singularity?
And the Auroras at the Earth Poles could easily been explained as electromagnetic interactions between the Singularity at the center of the Sun and the Singularity at the center of the Earh.
Food for thought.
Let me know what you think.
And there is much more about this...
Interesting thread.
I agree with your observations about the implications of Galaxy shapes and Saturn's rings (and Uranus or Neptune I think) for standard theories of gravity. My explanation is more in line with Rupert Sheldrake's "Morphic Fields"
QuoteThe Hypothesis of Formative Causation states that the forms of self-organizing systems are shaped by morphic fields. Morphic fields organize atoms, molecules, crystals, organelles, cells, tissues, organs, organisms, societies, ecosystems, planetary systems, solar systems, galaxies. In other words, they organize systems at all levels of complexity, and are the basis for the wholeness that we observe in nature, which is more than the sum of the parts. For a more formal definition of morphic fields, see the Glossary
SOURCE: http://www.sheldrake.org/Resources/faq/answers.html
In other words the fields are almost like a "soul" that organises matter.
I am not clear on why you think there needs to be a singularity present. Could you clarify on this?
All "objects" "organise" the matter within their system, from a galaxy, through living beings right down to the the atomic level. I'd suggest that the rings of Saturn and the shape of Galaxies are due to a combination of a field ("soul") that interact with (effect space-time to create?) a form of "dark energy" which as part of it's properties has an anti-gravity like effect.
See also this page of Sheldrake's, Presence of the Past.
Thank you, Pimander.
Yes, I can clarify on the "Singularity".
It has to do with the "Geometry" of it.
In other words, you see the same pattern on all these scales:
- Saturn (and other Planets)
- Solar System
- Spiral Galaxies
and the pattern is that matter gets "organized" and kept on a disc shape
- Rings of Saturn (and Jupiter, Uranus and Neptune)
- Planet orbits (in Star Systems)
- Stars (in Spiral Galaxies)
They are all "organized" and kept on a disc shape - even on very different scales.
Therefore, I deduce that these "Singularities" must have some special properties in terms of "Geometry" in which they affect and organize matter around them.
Perhaps this is connected with Torsion Fields
(re: "Die Glocke").
and I ask myself: "What else could keep the Rings of Saturn for thousands of years in that position?"
I find it amazing.
In my opinion, Saturn is the Key.
The existence of such a Singularity, with the specific geometric properties described, can explain it.
And we can go and elaborate further...
Adding to the point: "Why everything spins?"
I think these two aspects are related.
(Torsion Fields, again?)
It seems to me like there is more than one thing creating gravity. Though I suppose you could look at a car and say it is one car, there are soo many different things that make it a car.
I tend to believe that everything is balanced between equal but opposing forces. Between these forces are varying degrees. Like a rheostat on a light switch, can change between two opposites such as total light or total darkness with varying degrees of both inbetween.
Perhaps things like the rings of planets have found what appears to be a "balance" between forces, both "pulling" and "pushing"?
Quote from: Captain Dave on January 28, 2012, 09:36:26 PM
Perhaps things like the rings of planets have found what appears to be a "balance" between forces, both "pulling" and "pushing"?
Thats the standard theory but Saturn's rings have properties that cannot be explained just by that theory. Why would they keep their disk shape if that were the only thing happening?
What Floyd and I are discussing here is the organising "force" and it's nature. I think we are in agreement that there has to be one. Floyd seems to think it is related to a singularity but I still don't see why that is relevant. The singularity has position but no volume (Kether in Qaballah) so cannot have shape (morphic - form). I do agree that there is an organising principle at work. It is my ally. ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2YQJsbbWNA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEuA5Y_Cc88
Captain Dave,
thank you for your reply.
I think it has not do to with "Gravity".
I think it has to do with the Electromagnetic Force.
In other terms, I think that Gravity is just an expression of the Electromagnetic Force.
Manipulating the Electromagnetic Force, you can alter gravity, and you can bend Time-Space.
(this is what they did with Die Glocke in 1944-1945, and this is what they do in the Secret Space Program).
And I think that mainstream science is totally out of the way in understanding Universe and how it works.
I think that the Scientists have been completely misdirected, on purpose, by the Control Group of the Secret Space Program.
(the one which was called "Majestic 12" in the old times).
- probably John Lear knows something about this... ;)
and I think that the Strong Nuclear Force and the Weak Nuclear Force do not exist - they are just inventions of the normal level Scientists - just as Dark Matter and Dark Energy do not exist - and neither the Big Bang, for that matter.
At this point, after many years of research, no data, no observation demonstrate the existence of Dark Matter and Dark Energy - Nothing.
And no data, no observation demonstrate the existence of the Strong Nuclear Force and of the Weak Nuclear Force. - the effects on Atom Nuclei can be explained in totally different ways
(Singularity, again? - perhaps...)
I mean by dark energy, an energy (or field effect) that hasn't been measured. I agree with a lot, in fact most, of what you say here.
You haven't explained the singularity bit still. Why do you think it has anything to do with a singularity. An organising "field" could exist without the singularity. Why do you think a singularity is involved.
I'm not saying it has nothing to do with singularities. I'm trying to see why you think it is. ;)
I should explain how I see this "Singularity" works...
it's not easy to explain with words. I should make a drawing to visualize.
I'll try to do in the next days.
For now, with words:
Imagine a double torus - like two toroidal transformers, for instance, placed one above the other, and with opposite electromagnetic force lines.
The resulting outside force field would be on a thin, round plane, right from the middle between the two toruses,
With energy flowing outwards,
and energy back inwards from the poles
can you visualize the concept?
Imagine this double torus in the dead center of Saturn...
I totally get that. But that is a "double toroid like" (EDIT: I couldn't think of a better term but don't like this lol) field, not a singularity. Surely we don't know what causes the field? It might be a singularity but it could be something else if you catch my drift....
NOTE: I'm playing now but..... Maybe Saturns interior has the properties of a toroid or several but no singularity? That's why it isn't a black hole?
Quotethank you for your reply.
I think it has not do to with "Gravity".
I think it has to do with the Electromagnetic Force.
In other terms, I think that Gravity is just an expression of the Electromagnetic Force.
Manipulating the Electromagnetic Force, you can alter gravity, and you can bend Time-Space.
Thanks for the Thread! ;D
I agree to some extent, but to me electromagnetic force itself has mass, is created by mass, and is affecting non magnetic mass. I think it plays it's role, but is not the only force involved.
I'm thinking that "simple gravity" for a lack of better terms is created by many things, both magnetic forces and the movement of mass etc.
When mass moves, it affects other objects of mass within a specific proximity creating areas of higher or lower force as it moves. (Based on both objects of mass being within the same dimension/field...)
Ie: drop a pebble in a still pond and the ripples flow outward equal to the force that was applied - eventually dissipating once an equal oppositional force pushes back and balance is re-established. The old "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction".
To me this is why everything is where it is - constantly opposing "fields of force" moving or stopping objects of mass within their field depending upon where the object is within the opposing fields.
While on Earth, we are pulled to it. To get off of Earth, we would have to exert a greater and opposite force - Or remove ourselves from the fields of force altogether.
For instance, a tornado exerts greater force than gravity, Helicopter, Blimp, hot air balloon...
I'm just a philosopher when it comes to physics so please feel free to laugh at my theories - I do. ;D
http://www.thelivingmoon.com/forum/index.php?topic=512.msg5301#new
I think You're on to something... Consider a planet going around the sun 2 billion years ago. A major meteor hits. This perturbs its orbit ever so slightly, but, like the butterfly effect, in 2 billion years, the orbit would be WAY out of kilter.
Now We are fairly certain that all of the planets have been hit at least once over the course of things by at least one major impact. The solar system should have planets running hither and yon.
Unless We presuppose that equal and opposite strikes have occurred to all Our planets...which requires probabilities off the charts...something OTHER than gravity is holding Us firm. (Pluto may be in the act of restabalization after some event, like a near passing of a large body.)
Excellent thread!
As above, so below.
The heart centred dualistic toroid is at the heart centre of all.
Everything only exists because of this, every atom and every part of every atom is oprating to this self same system, and it transfersvia birkeland currents about universe.
The scars on the moon and planets are discharge craters, not impact.
ANU .
http://www.greatdreams.com/grace/126/134anuqa.html
I can detect and verify this , and YOU are composed of zillions of these compounded together in Your overall such field.
I can achieve this detection and measure of each field via dowsing, and I am as good as it gets, not arrogance that, just how it is.
There is no force called gravity, it is all about attraction and repulsion.
look at the clouds, and their different layers.
There is no aunty gravity, or anti gravity, as it doesn't exist, hence nobody can achieve such, but locally divert one of the whorls, and then so called gravity will vary relative to the divergance.
And John Worrell Keely was correct to say
"Time is gravity."
hobbit
Quote from: Amaterasu on January 28, 2012, 11:32:50 PM
I think You're on to something... Consider a planet going around the sun 2 billion years ago. A major meteor hits. This perturbs its orbit ever so slightly, but, like the butterfly effect, in 2 billion years, the orbit would be WAY out of kilter.
Now We are fairly certain that all of the planets have been hit at least once over the course of things by at least one major impact. The solar system should have planets running hither and yon.
Unless We presuppose that equal and opposite strikes have occurred to all Our planets...which requires probabilities off the charts...something OTHER than gravity is holding Us firm. (Pluto may be in the act of restabalization after some event, like a near passing of a large body.)
Excellent thread!
Interestingly enough, here we have what appears to be large impact areas both at the equator and the tip of south America.
(http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/1493/topsamericaimpact.jpg)
(http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/2176/tipsamericaimpact.jpg)
thank you Amaterasu,
and thank you all for the intelligent discussion.
I want to add 2 more elements on the table:
1.- 99.9% of the observed matter in the Universe is at the Plasma state.
(this means that matter as we know it on this Planet - solid state, liquid state, gaseous state - is just a very, very rare exception in the Universe)
and we know very little about matter at the Plasma state
(given the level of pressures and temperatures involved - just think about the 2 million degrees of the Solar Corona)
2.- at the atomic/quantum level, the "Force of Gravity" is 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000 times weaker than the Electromagnetic Force (1 with 39 zero's weaker)
Thus, irrelevant with respect to the Electromagnetic Force
Quote from: hobbit on January 29, 2012, 12:22:15 AM
As above, so below.
The heart centred dualistic toroid is at the heart centre of all.
Everything only exists because of this, every atom and every part of every atom is oprating to this self same system, and it transfersvia birkeland currents about universe.
The scars on the moon and planets are discharge craters, not impact.
ANU .
http://www.greatdreams.com/grace/126/134anuqa.html
I can detect and verify this , and YOU are composed of zillions of these compounded together in Your overall such field.
I can achieve this detection and measure of each field via dowsing, and I am as good as it gets, not arrogance that, just how it is.
There is no force called gravity, it is all about attraction and repulsion.
look at the clouds, and their different layers.
There is no aunty gravity, or anti gravity, as it doesn't exist, hence nobody can achieve such, but locally divert one of the whorls, and then so called gravity will vary relative to the divergance.
And John Worrell Keely was correct to say
"Time is gravity."
hobbit
In a sense You're right... It seems that positively charged particles have positive "gravity" (attraction) and negatively charged particles have negative "gravity" (repulsion). But for convenience's sake, We call it gravity.
And the force is quite strong in both cases. It only appears so weak because the positive charges are cancelled out by the negative charges...almost. The positive "gravity" particles have just the smallest degree more attraction than the negative "gravity" particles have repulsion. The accumulated positive excess of the planet is what We observe as a weak "gravity" force.
Quote from: HeywoodFloyd on January 29, 2012, 01:08:38 AM
thank you Amaterasu,
and thank you all for the intelligent discussion.
I want to add 2 more elements on the table:
1.- 99.9% of the observed matter in the Universe is at the Plasma state.
(this means that matter as we know it on this Planet - solid state, liquid state, gaseous state - is just a very, very rare exception in the Universe)
and we know very little about matter at the Plasma state
(given the level of pressures and temperatures involved - just think about the 2 million degrees of the Solar Corona)
2.- at the atomic/quantum level, the "Force of Gravity" is 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000 times weaker than the Electromagnetic Force (1 with 39 zero's weaker)
Thus, irrelevant with respect to the Electromagnetic Force
Most welcome. [smile]
You might want to check out My post above (reply to hobbit). In subquantum kinetics, as hobbit says, there is no "gravity" per se. As I describe, positive particles have attraction, negative have repulsion - but We can call this positive and negative gravity. Subquantum kinetics predicts the Biefeld-Brown effect, in fact. (And unifies "gravity" with EM.)
So "gravity," as I said above is quite a strong force, but the net between positive and negative charged particles is quite weak.
Amaterasu,
you mean in the atom nuclei - protons?
Any positively charged particles will exhibit positive "gravity;" any negatively charged particles will exhibit negative "gravity."
So... Yes. They only calculate out the "force" of gravity by using the pull of the earth, and compare it to the forces observed in the atom... But that is misleading, with gravity ununified in the Einsteinian description (which requires One to take on faith that matter "bends" space-time). Subquantum kinetics returns to a more Euclidean perspective, yet still predicts the lensing of light and the apparent time dilation.
Ok, so what do you guys think? Could it be the dual toroid that generates these fields that explain how matter is organised in these systems. That there does not have to be a singularity necessarily at its heart.
Some may contain singularities, like a black hole at the centre of the Milky Way. But perhaps there are torus (toroids?) where the energy does not reach infinity but remain within the temporal and generates these fields. In other words it is the absence of a singularity that creates the field and the the singularity is illusionary. This removes some of the paradoxes associated with the idea of a singularity too.
God this stuff is so hard to express in English/words!
HAHa I agree, using words to describe what you see in your mind is often a pain in the bum!
Sooo, we just need to create an antigravitational chamber - Create multiple duplicates of what we think the planet is and stick em in there.
Solid Earth model with 2 poles, dirt water etc...
Hollow Earth...
You follow me? :) Duplicate all the conditions we think exist using all forces we know of on a small scale within a controlled chamber... :o ;D 8)
(Of course if any life forms on the planets during the experiment, we're responsible for them.)
( UH-OH Hope were not just an experiment in someone elses chamber? and if we are - we should petition for the right to exist without tragic interference. ;) ) - Preferably before we go down the big drain hole! lol
Earth rotated 180 degree's so South is up in this pic...
(http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/9757/46872417.jpg)
Ok!, let me throw in my 2 cents worth ;D
In regards to the Singularity idea, the Corona of the Sun being hotter than the surface, and the nature of Electricity in regards to gravity:
We must first set some ground rules:
There are the following states of 'Stuff' in existence:
1. Solid
2. Liquid
3. Gaseous
4. Plasma
5. Aether
Electricity (Dielectric and Magnetic) exists in the Aether domain!
With reference to the works of Rudolf Steiner, he showed that in the 'matter realm' all vectors of change (dx/dt) point 'away' from a central point and grow towards infinity 'outwards'.
He also showed that in the 'Counter-Space' realm that the vectors point 'inward' and that all vectors of change point towards a central point.
So in the Space/Matter realm, you have a central point whose vectors point outward. i.e. It expands towards Infinity outwards.
In the Counterspace Realm (Aether/Electricity) the vectors come from an plane at infinity and they increase (grow) towards infinity at a central point.
So what happens at this central point? Well, current physics calls it a black hole, and they make up all sorts of crap about other dimensions and light getting trapped etc. etc.
What really happens is that inside this point, Counter-Space increases towards infinity.... therefore we can see that this is the realm of Aether/Electricity.
This is the only explanation that allows the Sun to have a Corona hotter than it's surface: The idea of a central Fusion furnace is incorrect!, it is necessary to think of the processes of the Sun occurring "From the outside in"!
So yes there is most probably a 'Singularity' at the centre of every Astronomical body! From Galaxies to planets, all in varying degrees of power output! But this power isn't the Fusion of present theories it is a Black Radiation, hence the "Black Sun" of Hollow Earth fame.
Hence we see from this that the Dielectric form of Electricity want's to compress inwards, and the Magnetic form want's to expand outwards.
This can be shown by the fact that in a Capacitor (Dielectric) the smaller the area bounded by the plates, the larger Dielectric Field that may be maintained! And Vice Versa, in a Coil/Magnetic Inductance the larger the Area 'outside' the coil, the larger Magnetic field may be contained.
So from this, it should be obvious that the cross product of Dielectricity and Magnetism (The 2 constituents of Electricity) are in a Harmonic balance and that any 'Force' which is seen to only draw inward (Gravity) is a result of the Dielectric being more predominant (in that area) than the Magnetic.
I hope this isn't too technical, but I am sure you can see that your ideas have a very good theoretical basis. ;)
That isn't what I thought a singularity was. They say the key to understanding is the definition of terms. I'll PM you for a better explanation about your definition of a singularity as I'm slightly confused by it, unless you want to throw it on this thread or point me to a link. It looks like you are saying what I thought was a singularity is an illusion or doesn't exist which means we may be on the same page???
It's interesting how you talk about this. Because I reckon we are using different terms to describe things this is going to be a bit difficult to get across my thoughts.... e.g. I think of the Aether as a universal medium. All energy is transmitted through it. (Dirac never abandoned the idea). Do you? :-\
However, Black radiation does sound remarkable like the Dark energy I had in mind (but apparently doesn't exist) but again, do we mean the same thing?
Quote from: Pimander on January 29, 2012, 08:34:11 AM
That isn't what I thought a singularity was. They say the key to understanding is the definition of terms. I'll PM you for a better explanation about your definition of a singularity as I'm slightly confused by it, unless you want to throw it on this thread or point me to a link. It looks like you are saying what I thought was a singularity is an illusion or doesn't exist which means we may be on the same page???
It's interesting how you talk about this. Because I reckon we are using different terms to describe things this is going to be a bit difficult to get across my thoughts.... e.g. I think of the Aether as a universal medium. All energy is transmitted through it. (Dirac never abandoned the idea). Do you? :-\
However, Black radiation does sound remarkable like the Dark energy I had in mind (but apparently doesn't exist) but again, do we mean the same thing?
Yes, i do believe in the Aether, and also see it as a Universal Energy Carrier, but I go further and state that it is the basis of everything in existence.
My idea of a Singularity differs from the 'Black Hole' theory in that i see it as existing in 'Counter-Space'. Counter-Space exists at the infinite end of Compression, and can exist anywhere (i.e. in the space between atoms).
Dark Energy is an energy that doesn't exhibit the usual characteristics of what we term energy (light, heat etc). It is only detectable in it's interaction with matter.
Tesla himself showed that there is 'no energy in matter' and that all energy comes from the Aether. He showed that all radioactive decay energy comes from the Aether, and that the decay rate of such energy, could be 'modified' by manipulation of this energy, that pervaded all matter.
What he called 'Radiant Energy' is the same thing.
To better understand this, you should read anything by Charles Proteus Steinmetz, J. J. Thompson, and Eric Dollard.
Steinmetz was the guy that GE hired to decipher the Tesla Patents so they could work around them.
If this isn't clear give me a PM and I will try to explain it better, or ask any specific question you have. :)
These may help you:
Radiation, light and illumination; a series of engineering lectures delivered at Union College by Charles Proteus Steinmetz (1918)http://ia600502.us.archive.org/15/items/radiationlight00steirich/ (http://ia600502.us.archive.org/15/items/radiationlight00steirich/)
Theory &Amp; Calculation Of Electrical Apparatus (1917)http://ia700504.us.archive.org/3/items/TheoryAndCalculationOfElectricalApparatus/ (http://ia700504.us.archive.org/3/items/TheoryAndCalculationOfElectricalApparatus/)
Electric Discharges, Waves And Impulses (1914)http://ia700402.us.archive.org/4/items/ElectricDischargesWavesAndImpulses/ (http://ia700402.us.archive.org/4/items/ElectricDischargesWavesAndImpulses/)
Counterspacehttp://www.nct.anth.org.uk/counter.htm (http://www.nct.anth.org.uk/counter.htm)
Quote from: HeywoodFloyd on January 28, 2012, 10:46:53 PM
I should explain how I see this "Singularity" works...
it's not easy to explain with words. I should make a drawing to visualize.
I'll try to do in the next days.
For now, with words:
Imagine a double torus - like two toroidal transformers, for instance, placed one above the other, and with opposite electromagnetic force lines.
The resulting outside force field would be on a thin, round plane, right from the middle between the two toruses,
With energy flowing outwards,
and energy back inwards from the poles
can you visualize the concept?
Imagine this double torus in the dead center of Saturn...
Like this....
(http://i562.photobucket.com/albums/ss64/Micjer_2009/Hypersphere-1.jpg)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sTvGOfgSg0
I would recommend this,
http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter.htm
And if You can imagine ANU been about everything in creation, then YOU are ANU.
I hope that doesn't make You nakki?
hobbit
Quote from: starwarp2000 on January 29, 2012, 02:10:12 PM
Yes, i do believe in the Aether, and also see it as a Universal Energy Carrier, but I go further and state that it is the basis of everything in existence.
Same page. (http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Bluebird/thumbup.gif)
QuoteMy idea of a Singularity differs from the 'Black Hole' theory in that i see it as existing in 'Counter-Space'. Counter-Space exists at the infinite end of Compression, and can exist anywhere (i.e. in the space between atoms).
Great. If you don't see a singularity as a point with infinite parameters, but see it as energy/matter entering another set of dimensions due to the compression then we are talking a similar language. (http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Bluebird/thumbup.gif)
Quote from: starwarp2000 on January 29, 2012, 02:10:12 PM
Dark Energy is an energy that doesn't exhibit the usual characteristics of what we term energy (light, heat etc). It is only detectable in it's interaction with matter.
That's what I meant by dark energy. (http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Bluebird/thumbup.gif)
For a horrible moment there I was going to get my BS detector out to you guys but no need obviously. :)
QuoteTesla himself showed that there is 'no energy in matter' and that all energy comes from the Aether. He showed that all radioactive decay energy comes from the Aether, and that the decay rate of such energy, could be 'modified' by manipulation of this energy, that pervaded all matter.
What he called 'Radiant Energy' is the same thing.
To better understand this, you should read anything by Charles Proteus Steinmetz, J. J. Thompson, and Eric Dollard.
Steinmetz was the guy that GE hired to decipher the Tesla Patents so they could work around them.
If this isn't clear give me a PM and I will try to explain it better, or ask any specific question you have. :)
Thanks for the links. I'll take a look when I get the time. I have a feeling some of my esoteric nous might be helpful with some of this. We're clearly not as far apart in our take as I feared.
We may differ in one regard. I see little difference between energy and information. Therefore I DO THINK ENERGY EXISTS WITHIN THE ZERO POINT/AETHER.
It is extremely refreshing to communicate with a scientist who understands that the Aether is the key to why most of 20th century physics was unable to unify theory.
BThe info below, combined with Sheldrake's ideas, is pretty much the secrets of the universe in a nutshell members. ;)
The spiritual and the rational or scientific - may be united through the concept of what is variously called the quantum field, the zero point field, nature's information field or, as Laszlo describes it following ancient mystical description, the akashic or A-field. It takes its name from the Hindu philosophical concept of "akasha", the primordial energy from which "prana", the totality of all matter, was created.
The concept of the akashic field is hypothetical, like the strings and quarks of particle physics. Like the gravitational field, it cannot be directly observed but is postulated to exist from the effects it produces, which are capable of coherent mathematical interpretation. The A-field provides a theoretical underpinning for the appearance of design in the ordering of the universe and the natural constants that allowed human life to evolve. It supports the primacy of consciousness in creation and evolution, as suggested by Pfeiffer and Mack, Goswami, and others. It explains the interconnectedness of all forces and fields suggested by particle physics and of all created matter as believed in eastern mysticism. In short, the subtitle of this book is entirely appropriate: An integral theory of everything.
Ervin Lazlo is onto something. Click the picture below to see his book.
(http://store.innertraditions.com/assets/skins/innertraditions_skin/images/products_lg/1594771812.jpg) (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1594771812/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=pegasreseacon-20&link_code=as3&camp=211189&creative=373489&creativeASIN=1594771812)
Science and the Akashic Field: An Integral Theory of Everything
Ervin Laszlo (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1594771812/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=pegasreseacon-20&link_code=as3&camp=211189&creative=373489&creativeASIN=1594771812)
I thought I was going mad at Uni when I started learning all this but none of the science I was being fed mentioned it. Then I read Laszlo and realised there are lots of us. I think the advanced humans are just re-iterating (i.e. re-learning what we carried from a past life). That is why we have been able to grasp advanced concepts so quickly despite the "education" straight jacket. ;)
Quote from: micjer on January 29, 2012, 02:25:40 PM
Like this....
(http://i562.photobucket.com/albums/ss64/Micjer_2009/Hypersphere-1.jpg)
Oh Yeah baby, me likey pictures!
Whats that you say? - a picture says a thousand words?
[attachment deleted by admin]
Interesting thread! :)
"Today, nothing is more important to the future and credibility of science than liberation from the gravity-driven universe of prior theory. A mistaken supposition has not only prevented intelligent and sincere investigators from seeing what would otherwise be obvious, it has bred indifference to possibilities that could have inspired the sciences for decades."
From Thunderbolts.info
How true! Black holes, The Big Bang Theory, Quasars, dark matter! Theories invented to fit mathematical equations. But the truth is probably somewhere else. Here's an interesting video. Do check out the links at the end of it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7oPdXN_gt4
Cheers!
Mike.
Quote from: Mikesingh on February 01, 2012, 12:39:35 PM
Black holes, The Big Bang Theory, Quasars, dark matter! Theories invented to fit mathematical equations. But the truth is probably somewhere else.
Totally agree !!
The Truth is Elsewhere.
and now I'm going to see the video clip.
I apologize to everyone above for not having replied yet to the previous posts, due to time constrants.
I'll be back soon and reply, and include some more "meat" ...
and let's put these concepts forward!
Quote from: Mikesingh on February 01, 2012, 12:39:35 PM
Interesting thread! :)
"Today, nothing is more important to the future and credibility of science than liberation from the gravity-driven universe of prior theory. A mistaken supposition has not only prevented intelligent and sincere investigators from seeing what would otherwise be obvious, it has bred indifference to possibilities that could have inspired the sciences for decades."
From Thunderbolts.info
How true! Black holes, The Big Bang Theory, Quasars, dark matter! Theories invented to fit mathematical equations. But the truth is probably somewhere else. Here's an interesting video. Do check out the links at the end of it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7oPdXN_gt4
Cheers!
Mike.
Thank you for the video, Mikesingh!!.
Excellent!
I totally agree with what is said there.
Also in my opinion what governs the Universe is Plasma and Electromagnetic Energy.
The video tells exactly what I wrote in one of my previous posts:
Quote from: HeywoodFloyd on January 29, 2012, 01:08:38 AM
1.- 99.9% of the observed matter in the Universe is at the Plasma state.
(this means that matter as we know it on this Planet - solid state, liquid state, gaseous state - is just a very, very rare exception in the Universe)
and we know very little about matter at the Plasma state
(given the level of pressures and temperatures involved - just think about the 2 million degrees of the Solar Corona)
2.- at the atomic/quantum level, the "Force of Gravity" is 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000 times weaker than the Electromagnetic Force (1 with 39 zero's weaker)
Thus, irrelevant with respect to the Electromagnetic Force
The works of Eric J. Lerner and Nassim Haramein are infact in line with these points:
Plasma and Electromagnetic Energy are key.
And – as said in the previous video clip:
Dark Matter and Dark Energy do NOT exist (until PROVEN otherwise) – they are just mathematical speculations.
There are no data and no evidence of their existence.
Without Dark Matter and Dark Energy, the Big Bang Theory goes belly up.
Yet, according to Big Bang belief system acolytes – Dark Matter and Dark Energy together would account for 94% of what exists in the Universe ...
If this is not blind faith, I don't know what is faith.
The Big Bang Theory is fit only for one thing:
the dustbin.
HeywoodFloyd
Here I am posting 2 parts of an excellent video called "The Cosmology Quest" that I first viewed 6 years ago.
It is about an anomaly of the Galaxy NGC 7603,
which puts in jeopardy the whole Big Bang Theory,
about the firing of Halton Arp, an Astrophysicist from the Carnegie Institute,
because he refused to stay "in line" with the mainstream.
It is a 1 hour video, well produced and worth viewing.
It was a Norwegian Production, if I'm not wrong.
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6EGpg_BVBg
"The Cosmology Quest" - Part 2
Part 2 is an examination of the weak points of the Big Bang Theory.
Eric J. Lerner participates in the documentary.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7uT0JuKT8Q
enjoy...
(if you wish... ;) ..)
HeywoodFloyd
Quote from: HeywoodFloyd on February 04, 2012, 11:11:31 PM
And – as said in the previous video clip:
Dark Matter and Dark Energy do NOT exist (until PROVEN otherwise) – they are just mathematical speculations.
There are no data and no evidence of their existence.
Without Dark Matter and Dark Energy, the Big Bang Theory goes belly up.
Yet, according to Big Bang belief system acolytes – Dark Matter and Dark Energy together would account for 94% of what exists in the Universe ...
If this is not blind faith, I don't know what is faith.
The Big Bang Theory is fit only for one thing:
the dustbin.
HeywoodFloyd
Yes, I agree with you on the point that the present use of the terms 'Dark Matter/Dark Energy' are erroneous , but only in the context of the Big Bang Theory.
As %99 of the Universe is Plasma, it should be obvious by observation, that all of it isn't in excited states. In other words some of it is 'Dark' and doesn't emit any radiation.
So, in an Electric Universe there is still Dark Energy (that energy that isn't observable until it interacts with Matter), but the current use of these terms has muddied the waters.
I suggest that the terms be changed as they have been tainted, to maybe, Non-Reactive Matter/Energy.
But, don't get me wrong, I agree whole heatedly with your conclusion, "The Big Bang is Incorrect" ;)
Since the sun is a giant ball of plasma, the idea of it being not hot is perhaps not so rediculous.
I found this intesting.
Remote viewer says Sun is Not Hot!
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1816126/pg1 (http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1816126/pg1)
QuoteThe sun is not hot. We have been manipulated and programmed to feel and believe this. The sun is a dock or... mother ship rather. These bangs we are hearing are purposely being emitted from our sun down to us. Basically the sun is hollow with many cities inside. They are sending about a ship within the sun to park near our atmosphere to help protect our atmosphere while the electromagnetic grid is down until the shift happens in a few months. If they didn't, we would be bombarded with different dimension entities, space rocks and many other things that have been blocked in the past. The sounds the sounds of the temporary shield they are covering us with...they know we can hear it...it's basically them saying.."Hey we are trying fixing some stuff temporarily...don't mind the noise" The triangle on the sun is a door where the ship will come out of...when it does, we WILL see it.
Comments....Is she on to something or crazy like posters on GLP are implying?
Did I miss something? What "triangle?"
8th post down
http://www.thelivingmoon.com/forum/index.php?topic=958.0
Somehow I missed Your response, sky. Thanks. Now I am clearer.