Paradox
©
Fisana

Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 2 votes

Electric Universe


  • Please log in to reply
122 replies to this topic

#21 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    ૐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ૐ

  • Moderator
  • 12,763 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 20 March 2018 - 06:00 PM

Okay, Wal Thornhill finishes off with electrical resonances in the video.  Since I posit that the motional and electrical components are reciprocal, I see no reason to disagree.   My idea of a gravity generator is based on a machine to create a vacuum by way of motion, and stir motion into that vacuum.   Again, materialist science will have a brain melt trying to see motion without matter.   For them, something physical has to be there for anything to be there to move.  

 

How will I create this vacuum (a nearly perfect one, by the way)?   I will construct it by way of setting up motions in the ethers, based on the reciprocal relationship outlined above.   My device will house something like the perfect vacuum, which is the true positive pole of electric charge.  

 

All the electricity applied in our use of electricity and electronics here presently has been of relatively different values of negative charge.  What we call, "positive," in our electric circuits would be better and more accurately called, "less negative."   When this new physics is understood, everything will have changed, and we will have mastered a natural way to escape the bounds of material attraction of Earth.   It raises the question, "is the rest of life in the universe ready to have our species turned loose from our self-built mental and physical planetary prison cage?"    We will have to prove ourselves first worth of their trust, quite likely.   This must be found in our spirit.


Edited by Alder Logs, 20 March 2018 - 08:14 PM.

  • wildedibles likes this

#22 Plant

Plant

    Mycophage

  • Free Member
  • 130 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 06:20 PM

I don't recall Thornhill mentioning the "ether", and neither has Otey. I am very new to this, but so far that doesn't seem intrinsic to the Electric Universe model. Am I wrong? Did Tesla believe in Ether? I am glad Wallace Thornhill was one of the first I came across, he definitely does not sound like an uneducated quack.


  • wildedibles likes this

#23 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    ૐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ૐ

  • Moderator
  • 12,763 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 20 March 2018 - 06:45 PM

Who but an uneducated quack would question the Law of Gravity?   Being a high school dropout turned out to be my ace in the hole.   Regurgitating what it takes to get that first science degree is to accept all the correct and incorrect data.   If I am correct about the most basic element of cosmology being totally wrong (except for maybe the attractive force of Earth diminishing as the square of the distance), then who but the uneducated could set the stage to begin to disentangle the theoretical tangle brought by the wildly wrong basic quantifications about physical reality?

 

Did you try to search, Tesla and ether?


  • Myc and wildedibles like this

#24 Plant

Plant

    Mycophage

  • Free Member
  • 130 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 06:51 PM

Well you seemed more than willing to elaborate so I asked you, but if you insist I will search it and read whatever.



#25 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    ૐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ૐ

  • Moderator
  • 12,763 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 20 March 2018 - 07:00 PM

tesla-quote.png


  • wildedibles likes this

#26 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    ૐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ૐ

  • Moderator
  • 12,763 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 20 March 2018 - 07:03 PM

Well you seemed more than willing to elaborate so I asked you, but if you insist I will search it and read whatever.

 

 

Do you imagine writing this stuff out isn't a bit of work?   Not to worry, it is a labor of love.    Please just appreciate that this is all ad lib, right off the tips of my fingers to the keyboard (except things like getting facts I have forgotten, like the year of Michelson's and Morley's interferometer experiment).  There, I must go to the search engines.  Most of what I write is straight out of my uneducated (formally) mind.


Edited by Alder Logs, 20 March 2018 - 07:07 PM.

  • onediadem, wildedibles and Plant like this

#27 Plant

Plant

    Mycophage

  • Free Member
  • 130 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 07:37 PM

Do all Electric Universe scientists believe in Ether? I ask you because you should know the answer to that after all these years, whereas I just discovered this whole rabbit whole like 3 days ago.


  • wildedibles likes this

#28 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    ૐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ૐ

  • Moderator
  • 12,763 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 20 March 2018 - 07:37 PM

Robert Otey disagrees with everyone but his own guy.    He calls it, "nebulous gases."  I call it, "pre-material fluids."  Gases are fluids, so he can have it his way, in his Russellian religious cannon.   It matters little.  Something is out there and moves as a fluid, producing or coalescing as matter.  He sees it as material, I don't.   Thornhill calls it, "plasma."   Most likely, it's what the alchemists of old thought of as "the forth state of matter," in their, Earth, water, air, and fire image (solid, liquid, gaseous, and energy).   Otey gets to have his pope while he calls down Tesla and Schauberger, burns their temples, and goes on.  Fine.  

 

Here for your viewing pleasure, Robert Otey:

 

[Direct Link]


Edited by Alder Logs, 20 March 2018 - 08:22 PM.

  • wildedibles and Plant like this

#29 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    ૐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ૐ

  • Moderator
  • 12,763 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 20 March 2018 - 07:55 PM

 

Do all Electric Universe scientists believe in Ether? I ask you because you should know the answer to that after all these years, whereas I just discovered this whole rabbit whole like 3 days ago.

 

Hey, I have lived as an old hippie, working a bunch of different jobs over time, and all that as a poorly attentive ADHD dyslexic with poor reading skills, a bad short term memory, and very little spending cash.   Overturning the cornerstone of physics is an avocation that came more from musing around the campfire than sucking up libraries' worth of previous theories and weighing each.    I just could see something was badly incomplete and wrong in how planet Earth was imagined and what was thought to be moving the universe before it eventually should run out of steam.   I just couldn't buy it.  I reject the materialist viewpoint of entropy.   My universe is powered and was designed for running itself.

 

For most of these years, I could not even find a place to discuss it.   When I came here in the spring of 2012, every time I brought up my scientific views, the threads were immediately moved to the Twilight Zone, where we are told to, "Post your delusions and illusions."   As you can see, things are changing, both out in the web-isphere, and right here in our little corner of it.   I couldn't be happier to see this change.   The open mind has come to be not so much a point of shame, all in just these past few years. 

 

So, I heartily welcome this discussion here in General Discussions, where just six years ago, it would not have been permitted.    I am truly glad that this change has happened, and even this old crackpot of a hippie has been given moderation powers over this portion of the site.   It won't be I who moves this thread to the Twilight Zone.   I am still grateful to those who came before, but not sorry the times have changed.   

 

One thing I can't argue with Einstein about, "Imagination is more important than knowledge."


Edited by Alder Logs, 20 March 2018 - 08:10 PM.

  • Plant likes this

#30 Plant

Plant

    Mycophage

  • Free Member
  • 130 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 08:17 PM

All my threads get moved, and then die. I hope it stays right here as well. Thanks for your input. Asking someone personally narrows things down faster than me searching and searching and watching hours of videos to get the general idea. You've sped things up for me greatly.


  • Alder Logs likes this

#31 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    ૐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ૐ

  • Moderator
  • 12,763 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 20 March 2018 - 08:25 PM

All my threads get moved, and then die. I hope it stays right here as well. Thanks for your input. Asking someone personally narrows things down faster than me searching and searching and watching hours of videos to get the general idea. You've sped things up for me greatly.

 

My pleasure.


  • Plant likes this

#32 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    ૐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ૐ

  • Moderator
  • 12,763 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 21 March 2018 - 10:35 AM

I recently discovered a whole new theory of the physics of the universe. I always thought the whole "quantum" thing was absurd, and notions of time travel and such concepts as Schrodinger's Cat . I am not educated in physics and don't claim to understand it, but the Electric Universe concept actually makes perfect sense. I will post a couple videos and see what the members think.

[Direct Link]

 

Okay, starting this at over an hour into the interview.   Needless to say both Otey and the interviewer are members of the same church.   I have to say I appreciate many of the viewpoints I have heard in this, but what continues to bother me is how everything I have heard from Otey in these few hours is presented in the spirit of debunking.   They here are going after The Tao of Physics.   I never read that book, but I have read The Tao Te Ching.  The single fundamental of this book is this, "the Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao."   This I take as truth, and in that, these guys' telling of how things actually are will not be it either.    My stating of reality will not be what I have been struggling to describe.  I only try to remove previous images that might prevent a truer, yet not true, understanding.  

 

Otey and his friend seem to want to be the next authority, which will place them in a long line of authorities which all come and go.   Okay, enough on the tendency we all have to become arrogant.   Better to say, "I don't know, but it looks this way to me at this moment."   

 

For a moment I will return to Otey's "debunking" of the ether; I never said that the ether was particles, which was the image Otey set up to debunk.   I described it as non-material and acting as if it were a fluid.   Listening to the interview brings me to the idea that when one looks into it deeply enough, one might see everything as fluid, and the illusion of a particle is made of a motional structure in fluid motion.   Remember here that a fluid vortex creates a measurable voltage with its highest differential across the region of its centripetal whorls.   When a high voltage potential is applied across a volume of fluid, it comes into motion of a vorticular form. 

 

The stillness that is referred to as gravity in the interview, in my view, would be embodied in the void center of an ether vortex.   The name of the machine I would build to be my "gravity generator" is, "ether vortex turbine."   In it, I would use a motive force, which could be gotten from what would be a standard engine or motor in this time, to magnetically and mechanically, draw all gases and so-called particles away from a center of motion, via an array of centripetal vortices.   The center of motion would become a void, decreasing even the etheric fluids, and would become the true positive pole of electric charge, something that cannot be found in material or ether, as both had to originate from it, and in doing so, became electrically negative.   The positive is the ultimate stillness.   Anything moving cannot be there. 

 

On a lighter note; their use of the term, "mythematics," I find humorous.  The term I have coined and like to use to describe what all the calculators of reality do is, "mathturbation."   Because Newton's law is believed and is so basic to all the math that pretends to be physics, we really have to go even farther than Einstein and the lot of them, and really just start over.   I am not the mathematician to do it.  I am a flunky who got a D in algebra, not because I didn't pass the tests with Bs and As, but because I did no homework and turned in none, to get a D.  

 

I repeated Algebra 1 because I really did want to go on to Geometry, and that required a C.   Sad thing is, I got As and Bs on the tests, but did no homework, and got another D.   So ended my mathematics career.   Because I did no academic homework in any subject, including my most loved field of art (did no art history reports that my two teachers required {both were history majors who were made art teachers because they could draw} so I was prevented to go on in art studies, just as I was in math), and this mostly because I could barely read (in a time before dyslexia or ADHD were yet even diagnoses) I had flunked three and a half years of English, and had not the credits to graduate.  So, I quit school and joined the navy, scoring high enough on tests that I got Electronics Technician Class A School, a school that high school dropouts did not get.  (The funny thing is, everyone in my high school class that had a pulse got a diploma -- it had all been a bluff.)

 

After the navy and a year with the phone company, and one semester of remedial courses in a junior college (B+ average), a computer programming error kept me from getting my GI Bill money and I was forced to quit and find a job pumping gas (Nixon's late Vietnam War recession).   I decided then that I should get a trade.   I joined the Carpenter's Union, and that required a high school diploma or GED.   I took the GED and scored in the 99th percentile in science, just from what I had picked up along the way, having never done any homework, even in the navy.   There I had learned to copy others' homework, and in that way, I graduated from ET School.    

 

I have been told that the autodidact has a fool for a teacher.   It is a possibility.   I can say that my way of saying what is is not going to be it, just as no telling of the Tao will be the true Tao.    So, let's keep at it and keep it all in the correct perspective so much as we are able.   It's true I have had so many teachers that I cannot count them.  Self taught is itself an illusion of the ego, yes?   

 

My motivation has moved from being right, and showing them what I have accomplished, to just enjoying myself in being here and now.  In the unfolding of understanding, from the physical to the infinity of what is, we will face situational questions unique to ourselves.    I feel I am ready for having my own flying saucer/free energy generator, but I can't say the human population of Planet Earth is ready for that too.   I will have to trust that everything is working out as it must and should.   It is great fun for me at present.    That's all I have to work with.   I pray I don't fuck things up out of ignorance or arrogance. 


Edited by Alder Logs, 21 March 2018 - 05:11 PM.

  • Plant likes this

#33 Plant

Plant

    Mycophage

  • Free Member
  • 130 posts

Posted 21 March 2018 - 05:01 PM

I found Otey's terminology amusing also, mythematics actually is a good description. I would also say he does it too much, to the point of seeming petty about it. I can relate to what you are saying about yourself and your life, and school. We sound much alike. Aside from a miserable homelife that fucked me up, I just couldn't accept things they taught as fact and just memorize it - I wanted to understand, and it always seemed like the teachers couldn't really explain anything.


Edited by Plant, 21 March 2018 - 05:01 PM.


#34 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    ૐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ૐ

  • Moderator
  • 12,763 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 21 March 2018 - 05:15 PM

I said that Viktor Schauberger was a hero of mine.  He wrote a text entitled: Nature Was My Teacher.


  • Plant likes this

#35 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    ૐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ૐ

  • Moderator
  • 12,763 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 21 March 2018 - 07:01 PM

A little over 30 years ago I published a small booklet on gravity and advertised it in the Pop. Sci., & Pop. Mech. classifieds.  In it I was suggesting that gravity found its source in vortex motion.  My understanding at that time was pretty short and simplistic.  But it got me in touch with some researchers who were ahead of where I was at, and a couple of them steered me to Viktor Schauberger.   A little over ten years later, I was an in-studio guest on a nationally syndicated radio broadcast; The Laura Lee Show.   That didn't go very well, as Laura had another Schauberger "expert" on the phone line and kept addressing almost everything to that guy.  I was polite and didn't butt in.   I didn't want to say the guy didn't seem to know much.  Anyway, the timing was bad, and that didn't turn into a career.   A guy named Callum Coats has been the one to fill that slot in the media. 

 

Viktor Schauberger, from the little that is known of him (more now than back then), studied vortex and fluid motion in the 1920s and thereabouts in Austria.   He did things that brought this lowly forester to quite some notoriety.   There is quite a lot about him now online.   Do check him out.  For one thing, he learned about the relationship of vortex motion to electric charge, and more, to what he called, "dielectricity."  Because of his influence, I realized this reciprocal relationship of motion to charge, though at the time,  I saw it as gravity to motion, and vice verse.   It wasn't going to hit me that gravity was electrostatic charge until I discovered the work and patents of Thomas Townsend Brown.  

 

Here's a pdf of a small book by a retired NASA space scientist named Rolf Scheffranke (for professional reasons, he published under the pseudonym, Rho Sigma):   http://u2.lege.net/c...a/EtherTech.pdf

 

I know we started with "Electric Universe," but how can this not bring everything physical into our scope?  The fact that if the universe is electric, we will have to see what the viewpoint that it isn't electricly powered, but just something that is somewhere in the middle of a mysterious mass-creating explosion process, which will be over someday, will entail.  Then, what fields of knowledge will our changing away from that viewpoint affect?   Perhaps this is the starting point of the Mycotopia Free University of Cosmological Studies.   Too bad Terence isn't here to see that flying saucers can actually exist beyond mushroom and DMT experiences.


Edited by Alder Logs, 21 March 2018 - 07:18 PM.

  • Plant likes this

#36 Plant

Plant

    Mycophage

  • Free Member
  • 130 posts

Posted 21 March 2018 - 09:26 PM

So what would you need to make an anti-gravity flying ship? If I understand correctly, you would need a way to create a powerful enough vortex to cancel out the Earth's. Or a way to block the Earth's field. It seems like the current view of gravity makes it impossible to even approach the problem, but the electric model gives much more hope to control the force we call gravity. But if there are people who see it correctly, then what do you need to make these things happen?



#37 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    ૐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ૐ

  • Moderator
  • 12,763 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 21 March 2018 - 09:56 PM

I would say it's already being done, and by someone who doesn't want anyone else doing it.  Hint: they have a big five sided building and friends in Langley, Virginia.

 

The form of a gravity/static electric field tends toward spherical, whereas a magnetic field is lineal.   The magnetic field has its poles at opposite ends of a line, from north to south.   Gravity/electric fields tend more toward spherical, having one field inward and one outward.   This is the way a vortex's sets up, always with the positive pole in the center, and the negative surrounding it in the centripetal whorls.  Spin direction does not matter to their polarity.

 

Just as an interesting note, the machine I would build to do this would have the general shape of a disc.  How odd, eh?


Edited by Alder Logs, 21 March 2018 - 09:59 PM.

  • Plant likes this

#38 GORF

GORF

    Mycophage

  • Free Member
  • 149 posts

Posted 21 March 2018 - 10:48 PM

The "leap" to a hollow earth is just not supported by the theory.

The charges can be attributes of matter, as in atoms, but not planetary excepting that they are collections of atoms.

We know by experiment and observation how stars are formed. They coalesce under the force of gravity, OR electricity based on which theory we use.

This continues until the gas is compressed and heated to the point where hydrogen fuses into helium. HOT and dense. The planetisemals coalesce in the same way. With Hot, dense cores.

The process of coming together and condensing is pretty much self evident. What the force is which produces these events is undergoing debate.
  • Plant likes this

#39 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    ૐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ૐ

  • Moderator
  • 12,763 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 22 March 2018 - 12:10 AM

The "leap" to a hollow earth is just not supported by the theory.

The charges can be attributes of matter, as in atoms, but not planetary excepting that they are collections of atoms.

We know by experiment and observation how stars are formed. They coalesce under the force of gravity, OR electricity based on which theory we use.

This continues until the gas is compressed and heated to the point where hydrogen fuses into helium. HOT and dense. The planetisemals coalesce in the same way. With Hot, dense cores.

The process of coming together and condensing is pretty much self evident. What the force is which produces these events is undergoing debate.

 

Not supported by which theory.

 

Please do elaborate.  Lay it out in an easily understandable way.


  • Plant likes this

#40 GORF

GORF

    Mycophage

  • Free Member
  • 149 posts

Posted 22 March 2018 - 05:59 AM

The theory which holds (in simple terms) that electric forces are the cause of the behaviour we attribute to the force of gravity.

Gotta get out and play in traffic now. Long day at work for me today
  • Plant likes this




Like Mycotopia? Become a member today!