Have no desire to be productive today. Just watching a Nassim Haramein interview on the nature of reality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRgGyfNyXZ0
What does it matter if I do something or nothing? I just want to know the truth.
Discussion
Ok you got me. I’ll watch.
Not mention of Tesla or the Aether?
I'm not sure why anyone would build on top of the work of people who have never created anything tangible from their theoretical postulations.
Until people understand that there is a background medium of energy at rest (inertia) from which we can manifest energy, they can postulate all they like but it will never make coherent sense to anyone listening, since these explanations always lack specificity due to conflating theories that are fundamentally opposed to eachother.
Force in motion and inertia & acceleration, and how these manifest via magnetism and dieletricity are all one needs to understand to piece this together in a coherent fashion, IMHO.
I think that's mostly what he’s saying — ZPE is basically the aether from what I can tell.
His analogy with the drain is pretty close to my understanding. Adding to it using Ken Wheelers explanation, the drain is in an infinite loop with a shower head.
I agree that ZPE is very real. But he's suggesting 'gravity' is making things spin around a center, and I think he still has a fundamental misunderstanding of what gravity is, because he appears to be working with Einstein's definition. He still talks about the speed of light, even though entanglement is instant over any distance. To my understanding, light doesn't travel. It's a rate of induction of the medium.
With reference to toroidal geometry (a magnetic field), he's saying it's going to flow out at the equator and flow in at the poles. Anyone can look at a magnet under a ferorocell and determine that this isn't quite accurate. Maybe he misspoke, perhaps there is a slight language barrier, but he said the same thing a couple of times. Dielectricity is what powers magnetism, the lines of interference diverge from one 'pole', loop around and converge into the top 'pole'. The 'equator' would be the inertial plane which divides the toroid into two vortices.
I guess my main point of contention is he seems to be mixing theories that are opposed to eachother when trying to explain it, which won't paint an accurate picture and make it more difficult to comprehend. Defining a field, magnetism, gravity, dielectricity, light, and how they all are expressions of the same thing - the aether - really simplifies everything. I've seen very few people who even attempt to define these things, let alone explain their relationship to eachother.
But I'm just a lowly pleb also trying to find the truth.
He was saying at one point information between entangled particles can traverse the universe in 10^-22 seconds. So not instant, but much much faster than the speed of light, and it would seem instant to us even at a distance the universe.
I don’t know much about the other stuff. I’m just trying to conceptualize it. And I don’t have the math chops to check his equations but I trust (somewhat) that he’s not bullshitting about that, though open to finding out he is.
Within the mainstream framework, nothing is said to be moving faster than light, meaning that entanglement invalidates that claim. The speed of light changes depending on the medium, so it's inversely proportional to the density of the medium it is 'travelling' through. Light is a sound wave in the Aether, a disturbance of the medium. I don't think it moves.
We don't need equations to understand these things, I don't think. But, we do need to throw out most of what we think and start over with an open mind. All these regards who have been running around saying ZPE is impossible are going to eat their words, because they base this belief in fraudulent science mixed with theoretical dogma sold as absolute fact.
These things appear to have been suppressed over time. I need to look up his paper and examine it in more detail, but he would be smart to publish in an open source format or if he does stumble onto anything significant, the same suppression will happen. Along with fiat, controlling energy production is a key to our enslavement.
I agree we don’t need the equations to understand these things, but if they predict/describe known phenomena, it’s confirms the understanding, and I don’t have the math to double check what he’s saying rigorously, His claim is this isn’t just theory and philosophy but that it’s rigorous because the equations bear it out.
Seems A LOT has been surpassed. I used to love physics when I was young, but was dissuaded from really getting into it because it was presented as boring and only possible to make incremental progress in some uselessly specialized aspect. Told my wife today that within our daughter’s lifetime (and hopefully ours), think we will have unimaginable technological advancement — 1000-years worth.
I was much the same way. Things will get very interesting in the coming years. There's a lot more than this that will be exposed.
"What's popular is rarely true, and what's true is rarely popular."
I will add, math is descriptive but not explanatory. A heavy reliance on equations does not necessarily make for a good representation of reality. Most of these things are theoretical and cannot be adequately explained by those who base their understanding on math alone.
yeah, I don’t think he’s implying the math alone explains it, but if you were to put your theory to the test by using known equations for the things about which you were theorizing, and the math checked out, it’s a good way to confirm you’re on track.
I'm not trying to be disagreeable lol, there's truth here. There is a fine line though, where people like Einstein applied physical properties to concepts (space and time). Even if the maths checks out in such an instance, it is based on fallacious logic and I am forced to reject such theories on that basis.
But I'm all for people doing this work, it will get us to the truth eventually.
you think Einstein is wrong?
I do. He stole his work from Henre Poincare, and as mentioned, you can't apply physical properties to concepts.
Gravity is an effect of magnetism and dielectricity. We can manipulate objects and make them go up or down using electrostatics. Magnetism is a much stronger force than gravity is claimed to be, and it can be experimentally validated by anyone. Warping and bending of spacetime? Heh.
I think it makes more sense to adopt the views of people like Tesla on this basis. He, among others, was responsible for the basis of the AC motor that gave us our electrical grid. He wasn't a fan of Einstein either.
how about quantum computers. they are a rality now. I'm far from comprehending all things involved, I don't see how to explain that without Einstein's work.
It's a lot to get into through text alone. I think it's worth understanding quantum vs aether as explanatory frameworks for the universe. Have a look here:
One more, perhaps more apt: https://youtu.be/1Y0yIMZgt6E