Godlikeproductions

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Godlikeproductions

Unread postby Divinity » Tue Apr 22, 2008 3:25 pm

Good Evening,

I have been reading your website now for over six months and view all of this not so much from a scientific viewpoint but from a holistic one. I am what 'woo woo' land might call a Lightworker and believe that the Universe is an active, intelligent, plasmatic, eternal, complex, system. Thank you for all you are doing in trying to prove to the world that it is not clockwork/mechanical. This is vital to Mankind's evolution, in my opinion, particularly in view of today's need for a more holistic approach to the environment and other - presently corrupt - systems/structures.

I hope you don't mind but I have a successful group/thread running on a very emotive but highly popular discussion forum called http://www.godlikeproductions.com. There have been a few threads running there on the Electric Universe theory (you can use the search function at the top to find them) and my own thread: "Calling Lightworkers" has quoted much of the EU theory in an effort to discuss this unified plasmatic field, i.e. that God is not a man in the sky, but an active force we can tap into, in order to improve our planet.

The main problem I have is that as much as I'd like to advertise your work and get it 'out there' into mainstream news groups on the internet, I don't have much scientific back-up. I was wondering if some of you guys would mind popping over to this thread in particular, and posting some of your viewpoints. As much as I try to defend you, as you will probably guess, there is much criticism and ignorance about your work, and I do not wish to misquote any of you.

If you are interested in doing a little public relations, please beware that this forum has a reputation for being downright rude and deadly honest. There are, however, some incredible minds there - people who know what they're talking about on subjects such as science, philosophy and consciousness. Anyway, thanks for listening. I hope you can join me/help me to defend your stance:

Is the Universe Electric?
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum ... 539332/pg1

(I took the liberty of posting some opinions of Junglelord, Millenium and McGirkin...apologies in advance but my intent was pure!).

Please correct me if you do not wish the presence of a normal lay-person at your forum or if you are uncomfortable about my spreading your information as far and wide as possible. I will understand but feel that Millenium, in particular, would appreciate what I'm trying to do.

Many thanks,
Love
Divinity
xxxxxxxx
Divinity
Guest
 

Re: Godlikeproductions

Unread postby pln2bz » Tue Apr 29, 2008 1:05 pm

that God is not a man in the sky, but an active force we can tap into, in order to improve our planet.


I'm not quite religious myself, but it may interest you to know that David Thomson -- who claims to have unified the forces with his Aether Physics Model -- claims that all of the forces are in fact nothing more than manifestations of one primordial force, the GForce. This GForce has no physical explanation for itself, and yet, Thomson can explain how everything we see around us results from it. It's an interesting situation that he proposes because there is no explanation for the GForce that can be proven. People will in fact infer different explanations based upon their pre-existing tendencies (religious or non-).

Although you will hear Wal Thornhill and a handful of others dismiss Thomson's APM as mystical or metaphysical in nature (metaphysical in that it requires the existence of an invisible aether), it appears that based upon my own readings and personal communications with Thomson, the APM is actually quite compatible with Ralph Sansbury's model (which Wal Thornhill advocates). We are in the process right now of trying to understand exactly how compatible the two are, and where they differ.

Of particular importance is the fact that Thomson has generated an electron binding formula that works with reasonable statistical deviations for all of the elements of the periodic table. He does this by describing quantum structure and by invoking the existence of a vortex-based aether. Now, traditionally, such dramatic claims would have warranted some deserving attention. But, you will generally find that Thomson is typically dismissed by people who refuse to actually read his APM. I'm about 1/3rd of the way through it myself now, and I've been pleasantly surprised by most of what I've found.

It does appear that you can make quite a bit of progress by just carefully contemplating the units of physics -- which is what Thomson advocates. Units should have physical meaning -- as opposed to merely representing some mathematical convention. In particular, it appears that conventional science has bastardized many physical units so badly that apples are often equated with oranges (E=mc^2, for instance). The first step that one must take in order to unify the forces is to take a closer look at the units themselves. When David Thomson did this, he came to realize that there are in fact two distinct charge carriers: the electrostatic charge is in fact different from the electromagnetic charge. That few others are taking this approach concerns me somewhat. Even those people who dismiss Thomson's work have never claimed that he is wrong on this point. They may agree in principle with Thomson on this point, but they never go through the process themselves of rigorously re-evaluating the units of physics. Until this becomes standard practice for all Electric Universe advocates and a conversation that we are all at least familiar with, I worry that we are merely spinning our wheels here. But, more than that, I believe that there can be some argumentative progress on the point of physical units. When people, for instance, are explained that quantum mechanics assumes ideal point sources for particles within their calculations, it's not hard for them to realize that this is nothing more than an idealization. When we dive into conversations about what a neutrino and all of the various particle and subparticles are, based upon experimentation, it becomes clear that quantum mechanics was constructed in an ad hoc manner not much differently from the standard astrophysical models.

The problem though in the Electric Universe, however, relates to its strength: there is not really a whole lot of consensus within this community within the particle domain. Everybody develops their own unique knowledge based upon their own readings. It takes many hundreds, if not thousands of pages, of dense reading before a person can formulate an intelligent opinion on things like the quantum domain and aether. So, not only are we trying to understand what experiment is telling us, but we're also just trying to figure out who to listen to. And in the end, it will almost surely turn out that we have to combine different theories from different people to get one unified view of the universe. That's why we need to expand our horizons broader than what we might normally consider to even include people who discuss God within their theories (like Thomson). The good news though is that God is not at all integral part of the geometry or mathematics required to construct the APM. It only appears in the GForce, and only if you are religious enough to infer it.

Unfortunately, David Thomson is not going to be making any appearance on a forum any time soon. He's burned out on them.

I greatly respect your desire to advocate for the Electric Universe, but you must take great care not to burn yourself out in doing so, as others before you have. Focus on those people who are willing to listen and learn, who are cautious about scientific consensus, and who understand that science is full of controversy. Ignore all of the rest, for they will lead you to become negative and discouraged.
pln2bz
 
Posts: 248
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:20 pm

Re: Godlikeproductions

Unread postby Divinity » Tue May 13, 2008 11:33 am

Thank you for your very thoughtful reply. I took note of what you said and have decided not to burn myself out although I do keep my thread updated with your announcements on a regular basis. :)

I was fascinated to see the massive volcano, earthquake and cyclone phenomena occur (in one week!), all of which have tremendous implications for proving the Electrical nature of natural phenomena on Earth.

I've found the latest developments Jungelord has come up with extremely exciting so continue to watch them (in awe) and hope he gets the credit he deserves from the Peer Review people. I'm sure you have many anonymous observers as you appear to be one of the most intelligent boards on the Internet.

David Talbott's work on myths and legends is a real favourite of mine. It's very important we know humanity's real history and I, for one, believe there was a Golden Age/Cataclysm, the memories of which remains dormant in our DNA, and once we realise the true, living, nature of our Universe, mankind may well be on the road to creating another Golden Age. Knowledge is so desperately needed now. :ugeek:

Thanks, again.

Divinity ;)
Divinity
Guest
 

Re: Godlikeproductions

Unread postby Divinity » Sun May 25, 2008 1:43 pm

Hi there, Just browsing the Aether Physics Model site, I came across this:

http://www.16pi2.com/gforce.htm

As shown elsewhere on this site and in our white paper, "A New Foundation for Physics," the Gforce is a non-material force that originates from beyond the Aether. The importance of the Gforce to the pro Intelligent Design debate cannot be over-emphasized. Although the Gforce does not support a particular religious dogma, the quantum structure does clearly show that a God-like source created the physical Universe.

The Gforce is a constant expressed as:

(1.1)

where

(1.2) (mass associated with the Aether)

(1.3) (quantum length - Compton wavelength)

(1.4) (quantum frequency)

The Gforce is related to Coulomb's constant (kC):

(1.5)

where

(1.6)

and ea is strong charge associated with the Aether.

The Gforce is also related to the gravitational constant (G):

(1.7)

And the Gforce is related to the Aether unit constant (Au):

(1.8)

The three force constants for electrostatic charge (1.5), mass (1.7), and strong charge (1.8) mediate the electrostatic force, gravity, and the strong force, respectively. The so-called "weak force" is the proportion of electrostatic charge to strong charge. These three forces bind and guide the entire physical Universe. The value and dimensions of the Gforce are equal to:

(1.9)

How would we describe a force, equal to 121 million billion billion billion billion newton, that drives each quanta of space-time and mediates each of the forces that holds the Universe together? The Gforce is omniscient in that it is enormously powerful and encompasses the entire physical Universe. The Gforce is non-material in nature, and yet gives rise to all physical existence. The Gforce produces the space-time (Aether) in which we live. Further evidence gathered from the neurosciences show that conductance is a direct measurement of emotions, and conductance is also shown to be a quality of the Aether. Thus there is a physics link to suggest the Aether is involved with certain aspects of mind, if not all aspects of mind. Some people might notice the striking resemblance between the omniscient, non-material, and mind-like quality of Aether and compare it to the similar description often ascribed to a Creator God of the physical Universe.

Getting down to the heart of the matter, either God exists, or God does not exist. If God truly does exist and God is the Creator of the physical Universe, then God must be represented in quantum physics. In our book, "Secrets of the Aether," we scientifically explore the connection between God and quantum physics. The discovery of the Gforce is certain to become one of the important arguments for Intelligent Design as it provides solid evidence for God.


Updated 2 May 2008


Divinity wrote:"Calling Lightworkers" has quoted much of the EU theory in an effort to discuss this unified plasmatic field, i.e. that God is not a man in the sky, but an active force we can tap into, in order to improve our planet.


Just to REPEAT:

The discovery of the Gforce is certain to become one of the important arguments for Intelligent Design as it provides solid evidence for God. :o

It fills my heart with JOY that scientists are finally proving what I have believed for so long.

Thank you!!!!!!

With love,
Divinity
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Divinity
Guest
 

Re: Godlikeproductions

Unread postby upriver » Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:04 pm

Although Aetherometry does not propose a Gforce or that God is even detectable by us, their work is very complete.
They also have the grace to allow the reader to make up their own mind about such issues.
To imagine the discovery of God or a godforce by a human in a universe of incredibly ancient beings that are powerful enough to appear to be Gods but are not, seems a little forward.

The Correa's have a most complete and thorough experimentation of Tesla's work(for humans ;) ).
They have instruments for measuring the massless ambipolar aether.
They also have technology that extracts energy from it.

The only problem is that it requires some focus to read and understand the concepts. And as such I am willing to make baby steps to understanding the universe before trying to prove the existence of a god or goddess, or even posture that I'm on the right path.....

Aetherometric Theory of Synchronicity (AToS)
A new concept of energy and a new integral function for its forms
The fundamental aetherometric concept is the expanded function of energy. Energy is a five-dimensional event, capable of phase superimposition in multiples of five-dimensional events ('raising energy to the nth power'). With this new functional approach, the energy-event becomes a micromachine, a wave-synthesizer capable of fine-structure definition. Energy is not simply the potentiality of work, but work seen or unseen, useful or useless, converted or not. The continuous creation of Space across sequential instants of Time is the ontological work of energy, the evidence that a flux of energy has a power and performs sensible work. Space is, in this sense, the work of the perpetual flux of massfree energy, just as universal Time is at once its synchronous beat and its eternal duration. Energy flows in packets, in quantized units, whether Planckian or not. Energy flux is "molecularized" or particulate. Every energy unit (see Leibniz's monad), irrespective of physical nature, is a synthesis of a spatial volume flowing or 'beating' with a resonant simultaneity, the production of a difference being found at the core of the new concept of energy: energy is a synthesis of the different - particle and waves, Space and Time manifolds, conjugate series of physical objects, different constituents, different properties or qualia.

Intrinsic simultaneity
At the core of every energy unit there is a structural simultaneity that keeps particle and wave solidary, and permits noninterpretable, exact spatiotemporal maps of events and physicochemical processes. This structural simultaneity is directly expressed by the specific synchronisms of the Time manifold constitutive of any given energy unit, whether massfree or massbound. Hence, at the antipodes of Relativity (itself an undue generalization of the relationism of all motion - also called exoreference or relative coordinatization of motion), Aetherometry uncovers the fundamental synchronism (and its variations as synchronicities) that gives consistency to all energy units, and proposes a method for endoreference or absolute coordinatization of motion and physical quantities. The simultaneity of a universal Time is not merely qualitative, as for Henri Bergson, but quantitative and intrinsic to energy units and processes: energy itself (and every one of its units in any form) 'is' able to time itself, or measure itself, with immanent metrics (endoreference) put into evidence by the fine-structure solutions to every energy form.
http://www.encyclopedianomadica.org/English/atos.php

Fundamental Concepts of Aetherometry
Aetherometry, the exact science of the metrics of massfree energy (Aether), is a novel biophysical and nanometric science, or scientific discipline, developed by Dr. Paulo N. Correa and Alexandra N. Correa as a synthesis of experimental and analytical work that replicated, revised and continued the scientific contributions of Nikola Tesla, Louis de Broglie, Wilhelm Reich (orgonomy, orgonometry), René Thom (catastrophe theory) and Harold Aspden. Its object of study is massfree energy.

Massfree energy
Massfree energy is energy devoid of inertia; it is everywhere 'present in space' or associated with various states of motion of material particles or bodies. In a wide sense, massfree energy encompasses Aether manifestations, as well as photon and kinetic energy states. The primordial or Aether manifestations of massfree energy include graviton and antigraviton states affected to matter or its particles, and, more profoundly, the cosmological manifestations of dark energy, in both electric and nonelectric forms, which are associated with the cosmological creation of material particles.

Aetherometry proposes that the world of Matter relates solely, in a strict sense, to the electromagnetic and inertial properties of mass-energy particles, and that even the motion of material or mass-carrying particles or bodies results from the interaction of mass-energy with massfree energy. However, its object of study is not, per se, massfree energy in states that are directly dependent on mass, such as the transient kinetic energy of massbound particles or the electromagnetic energy of blackbody photons. Rather, the primary focus of Aetherometry is the study of massfree energy in nonelectromagnetic forms.
http://www.encyclopedianomadica.org/Eng ... ometry.php

From a holistic point of view, massfree energy is what could allow spirits to exist without interacting with "matter".
I think it also provides a good fit to Rupert Sheldrake's work and other ideas of information structured aether..
It is also part of FTL information transfer(entanglement, tunneling).
There are so many reasons why a massfree aether provides and ideal foundation to all that we experience.
upriver
 
Posts: 542
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 7:17 pm

Re: Godlikeproductions

Unread postby Divinity » Fri Jul 04, 2008 10:16 am

Thank you very much Upriver. :D I started a new thread called 'Evidence of God' on GLP

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum ... 554188/pg1

where I quote much of the discussion here on Thunderbolts and, indeed, your info on the G-force. The concept is not received all that well at the moment but I have noticed, recently, a new-found interest these days in sacred geometry, vortices and the nature of reality (a la Nassim Haramein, David Sereda, etc.)...as the information filters down gradually about the 'living Universe'. The crop circle season this year has certainly helped with that too as people start to understand the relationship between shape, geometry and atomic structure.


Thunderbolts is probably the coolest discussion forum on the www because of its integrity, intellect and cutting-edge scientific discussion.

Well done to the owners, mods. and contributors. :D :D :D

Divinity
Divinity
Guest
 

Re: Godlikeproductions

Unread postby Zonei » Thu Jul 24, 2008 3:45 am

Godlikeproductions is a black hole of the internet. In the mathematical sense, thatis. It is a cesspool of frustrations. It is a lunatic fringe and they openly advertise it. GP is an entertainment site, where real science is LAST on the priority list. Ridden with religious freaks, zealots, and people who are spreading disinfo for pure fun and often profit.

Personally I'd advise against any official representatives of EU theory to show there, as that would immediately discredit both their personae and their work.

The toxicity and carcinogenic effect of GP on any real science is starting to show in this thread as well....
Zonei
Guest
 

Re: Godlikeproductions

Unread postby Divinity » Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:01 pm

Are you saying that real science and generic truth are to be restricted to 'clean', 'scientific' or 'sensible' forums only?
I considered GLP to be the 'devil's playground' at one time. Not now because amidst the religious zealots and freaks, as you call them, there are genuine seekers of truth. Why would you want to limit education at all? Are you saying we are throwing 'pearls before swine' on such forums? It's very easy to pass judgement on something at face value...perhaps you might look a little deeper? Some people might consider the mainstream physics forums to be full of toxicity too. In fact, it's probably more toxic because they are pushing theories of the Standard Model which we know are full of inconsistencies and blatant lies.

Can you give us some examples of how you see this kind of 'toxicity' spreading to this forum, please?

Toxicity - I presume - can extend to 'closed mindedness' too, don't you think? I thought scientifically-minded people/minds were supposed to have the most open minds of all?

If I were the authors of the APM or Electric Universe theories, I would be happy to disseminate my theories everywhere. Of course I understand your point about peer review and respect, which is why at the moment, they cannot do that.

I'm sorry you feel the way you do. But I also feel it's an overreaction. I have a thread running there entitled 'Evidence of God' which I feel contains much generic truth. I am, however, the first to realise that those who don't wish to see, won't.

Divinity
Divinity
Guest
 

Re: Godlikeproductions

Unread postby Zonei » Thu Jul 24, 2008 1:03 pm

It's mentioning EU in the same paragraph, let alone the same sentence with the regular nonsense that is floating in and around GLP, that is cancerous to EU as a scientific theory. If regular people are to be introduced into the theory, they better don't read about it in some lunatic fringe, or in the same context.

And I really fail to see what spirituality or "god" have anything to do with EU as a serious alternative to mainstream gravity-driven paradigm. What does the nonsense of "Intelligent Design" have anything to do with EU as a scientific paradigm? This is the toxicity I am talking about. Leave the "ID" nonsense to a lunatic fringe that is GPL, please do not introduce it in any serious scientific debate.

EU has enough troubles as it is, fighting the mindless mainstream. Bringing EU close to fairy tales and general nonsense that is GLP is really not helping the cause.
Zonei
Guest
 

Re: Godlikeproductions

Unread postby Divinity » Thu Jul 24, 2008 2:11 pm

Zonei wrote:It's mentioning EU in the same paragraph, let alone the same sentence with the regular nonsense that is floating in and around GLP, that is cancerous to EU as a scientific theory. If regular people are to be introduced into the theory, they better don't read about it in some lunatic fringe, or in the same context.

And I really fail to see what spirituality or "god" have anything to do with EU as a serious alternative to mainstream gravity-driven paradigm. What does the nonsense of "Intelligent Design" have anything to do with EU as a scientific paradigm? This is the toxicity I am talking about. Leave the "ID" nonsense to a lunatic fringe that is GPL, please do not introduce it in any serious scientific debate.

EU has enough troubles as it is, fighting the mindless mainstream. Bringing EU close to fairy tales and general nonsense that is GLP is really not helping the cause.



Firstly, people like me learned about the Electric Universe from GLP, after somebody posted the Thunderbolts of the Gods Video series.

As you probably know, I am drawn to the theory because of the spiritual aspects I attribute to it, which have not yet been full realised. The reason I'm on this forum is to fine-tune my own beliefs about an intelligent, life-supporting, universe which communicates symbiotically with Its inhabitants. I am not breaking the forum rules as I don't raise religious or political beliefs here. Let me refer you to the last paragraph of the Synopsis of the Electric Universe theory, on Holoscience:


http://www.holoscience.com/synopsis.php?page=12

We are not hopelessly isolated in time and space on a tiny rock, orbiting an insignificant star in an insignificant galaxy. We are hopefully connected with the power and intelligence of the universe.

The future in an Electric Universe looks very exciting indeed!



One would think the notion of 'Intelligent Design' was particularly pertinent in a unified field theory or TOE because of the obvious elegance and order of the Electric Universe. As the months go on, this is becoming increasingly evident as we discover more. I do not mean this phrase in any Christian or quasi-religious sense. The facts speak for themselves. Humans are built to replicate the Universe and as we know, all plasma phenomena scales up and down, and apply to the natural world as much as the cosmological world. This theory is exciting because it does extend across a broad spectrum of study...from chemistry, biology, physics, nano-technology to sociology, cosmology and philosophy, etc.


Quoting the APM site itself:

Getting down to the heart of the matter, either God exists, or God does not exist. If God truly does exist and God is the Creator of the physical Universe, then God must be represented in quantum physics. In our book, "Secrets of the Aether," we scientifically explore the connection between God and quantum physics. The discovery of the Gforce is certain to become one of the important arguments for Intelligent Design as it provides solid evidence for God.

http://www.16pi2.com/gforce.htm

And from the Introduction, Thunderbolts:

“From the smallest particle to the largest galactic formation, a web of electrical circuitry connects and unifies all of nature, organizing galaxies, energizing stars, giving birth to planets and, on our own world, controlling weather and animating biological organisms. There are no isolated islands in an electric universe".

David Talbott and Wallace Thornhill


How can the above statements be made without one drawing to a conclusion that the nature of reality has eluded humanity up until now? And why would one not wish to explore the nature of reality in the scientific context in conjunction with the traditional mystic/shaman/pagan/spiritual viewpoint? Are you saying the latter are nonsense? You must dismiss any intuitive ability you have in favour of logic. The Electric Universe requires logic and an open-mind to fully understand its implications.

My cause is not for the Electric Universe to become peer reviewed and approved. My cause is to get the truth out to the people - all the people, not just the elite. If that means frequenting with the strange ones as well as the 'regular ones', so be it. This theory is not going to go away; it's here to stay for good because I know where it's leading. And it's high time the 'common people' did get a chance to participate, share, discuss and review Science's discoveries in 'real time'. Only the internet has enabled this to happen so please, do not impose your limited and restrictive view to try and stop this. It's you who do the disservice. I believe in freedom of speech in all areas/subjects/aspects of Society, including the lunatic fringe.

'The fringe' as you call them are sometimes on the cutting-edge. They push back the normal boundaries of human consciousness and thank goodness they do because how else do we grow?

Divinity
Divinity
Guest
 

Re: Godlikeproductions

Unread postby nick c » Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:27 pm

Hello Divinity,
Though we express it differently, I share your enthusiasm for the EU . It is exciting because it involves a new way of looking at things, volumes and volumes of text books in a variety of fields have been made obsolete or in need of radical revision. And of course, the problem is that those books are still being used, and most people are not aware of the intellectual revolution taking place in our own time.
A few points concerning your post:

1.
[And from the Introduction, Thunderbolts:

“From the smallest particle to the largest galactic formation, a web of electrical circuitry connects and unifies all of nature, organizing galaxies, energizing stars, giving birth to planets and, on our own world, controlling weather and animating biological organisms. There are no isolated islands in an electric universe".

David Talbott and Wallace Thornhill


How can the above statements be made without one drawing to a conclusion that the nature of reality has eluded humanity up until now?[...]

Yes, but that view of the "nature of reality" has been arrived at through the EU's use of the scientific method. The gap "up until now" was caused by the failure of scientists, bound by gravity only assumptions, to realize the role of electricity and magnetism in space. Science is steps in the process of discovery, leading to a deeper understanding than what went before. It is a journey along a road- not a destination. Sometimes we take a wrong turn into a cul de sac, and have to back out and return to the main road.
[...]And why would one not wish to explore the nature of reality in the scientific context in conjunction with the traditional mystic/shaman/pagan/spiritual viewpoint? Are you saying the latter are nonsense? You must dismiss any intuitive ability you have in favour of logic. The Electric Universe requires logic and an open-mind to fully understand its implications.
My cause is not for the Electric Universe to become peer reviewed and approved. My cause is to get the truth out to the people - all the people, not just the elite.[...]

The key here is "scientific context," there is nothing mystical about the Electric Universe, in itself. One can reach mystical or aesthetic revelations, if one is so inclined, from any experience or knowledge, electric or otherwise.
Although, there is much criticism of "mainstream science and scientists" and the peer review system in EU literature, that is not to be construed as rejection of the scientific method. The criticism is directed at the improper (or lack of) application of the tool, not the tool itself.
"Mystical/shaman/pagan/spiritual viewpoints" are of value only to the point of the information they can convey. Much like a detective questioning witnesses and assessing testimony of varying qualities...the blind man, the professor, the priest, the child, the b&w surveilance camera, etc.


2.
I would not call anything 'fringe' or 'crackpot,' after all, those are the slanderous statements made against all of us here, at some time or another. A theory has to be judged in the context of the evidence, for and against, it's ability to predict, and the 'falling into place' of future discoveries. My problem with the g-force or Intelligent Design is where is the falsifiability? What tests can be devised that, if it fails the test, give us reason to discard the theory? What does it predict? To call something mystical or metaphysical is not an insult unless it is trying to be passed off for something it is not, ie. science.

3.
The Gforce acts on mass with "reach" (length squared per mass squared) to produce the Newton gravitational constant. http://www.16pi2.com/chapter_3_secrets_ ... aether.htm

This says that the Gforce is equated in a formula where one of the components is Newton's Gravitational Constant. This is in conflict with the EU, since the EU does not recognize a "gravitational constant."
Newton developed a mathematical expression that related an apparent force, gravity, between ponderous objects, to their masses and the distance between them. The expression involved a constant, G, given the grand title of the Universal Gravitation Constant, with no evidence whatsoever of its universality or its constancy. The electrical model of gravity has G a variable that depends also upon the charge distribution in the body. That would explain why G is the most ill defined “constant” in physics
http://www.holoscience.com/news/antigravity.html

So if the gforce has a mathematical relationship to the gravitational constant, which does not exist, where does that leave us?

Nick C
User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2457
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Godlikeproductions

Unread postby Zonei » Fri Jul 25, 2008 3:46 am

Divinity wrote:How can the above statements be made without one drawing to a conclusion that the nature of reality has eluded humanity up until now?


What do you mean by "now"? The quantum physics showed well before the advent of EU that everything was interconnected.


And why would one not wish to explore the nature of reality in the scientific context in conjunction with the traditional mystic/shaman/pagan/spiritual viewpoint? Are you saying the latter are nonsense? You must dismiss any intuitive ability you have in favour of logic. The Electric Universe requires logic and an open-mind to fully understand its implications.


Please do not equate GLP with any concept of "serious exploration". GLP is a place where sanity is ridiculed, and not in a fashion of one scientist ridiculing the ideas of another. GLP is an insult to entire human intelligence.

Also, there is nothing wrong with using EU to explain mystical viewpoints, but "logic" and "intelligent design" cannot co-exist in the same sentence, and if they do coexist, they should coexist far, far away from any effort to show EU as a serious scientific theory. Also, please do not put shamanism, paganism and general spiritualism in the same basket. Especially not with the concept of "intelligent design".


My cause is not for the Electric Universe to become peer reviewed and approved. My cause is to get the truth out to the people - all the people, not just the elite.


I am sorry, but there are no absolute truths. Until "recently" the truth was that the Earth was flat. Until "recently" quantum discrete states of energy were unimaginable. Until "recently" charge separation in space was absolutely impossible. Etc, etc... So you see, one truth is only as good until the next one comes and replaces it.

So yes, EU should be supported to become peer reviewed and approved by the scientific body. That should be the first and foremost goal of anyone who wants to support EU.

If you see any other truths in that, good, that's your right to have your own beliefs. Just please don't shove them in people's faces as some kind of absolute truth, because there is no such thing. And yet again, let us all remember Gallileo and what happened to him, last time they tried to shove absolute truths down peoples' throats.

'The fringe' as you call them are sometimes on the cutting-edge. They push back the normal boundaries of human consciousness and thank goodness they do because how else do we grow?


Sure they do. I won't argue with you what GLP is or isn't because this is not the place for it. Any sane person can go look and make their own mind up. I just want to warn them, in advance, that the place might poison their minds.
Zonei
Guest
 

Re: Godlikeproductions

Unread postby Zonei » Fri Jul 25, 2008 3:56 am

nick c wrote:I would not call anything 'fringe' or 'crackpot,' after all, those are the slanderous statements made against all of us here, at some time or another. A theory has to be judged in the context of the evidence, for and against, it's ability to predict, and the 'falling into place' of future discoveries.


I don't think you have really seen GLP in action. That level of "fringe" and "crackpot" is several orders of the magnitude bigger than any statement made against EU by other scientists. GLP is not about mad new ideas, if only it were. 90% of the GLP is about predicting the end times (half with dates in immediate future, half set on 2012), of which 99% is quoting the bible, and 1% are crackpots who are talking to the aliens. The 10% are conspiracy theories like we never landed on the moon, 911 was inside job, chemtrails, etc... mostly posed by people who slept through their science classes, or can't read well enough to go through any book on high-school grade physics to realize that water can, indeed, condense and make wonderful patterns....

Now, if saying that charge separation in space is possible with extensive empirical evidence to prove the effects, is "crackpot" and "fringe", then what is saying that JPEG artifacts in LOW RES images of Moon and Mars are ancient ruins? And when high-res images come, showing no ruins, of course, then NASA is accused of conspiracy.

Now, do _you_ wish to push EU into that? I certainly don't.
Zonei
Guest
 

Re: Godlikeproductions

Unread postby Divinity » Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:19 am

[quote="nick c"]
Hello Divinity,
Though we express it differently, I share your enthusiasm for the EU . It is exciting because it involves a new way of looking at things, volumes and volumes of text books in a variety of fields have been made obsolete or in need of radical revision. And of course, the problem is that those books are still being used, and most people are not aware of the intellectual revolution taking place in our own time.
[quote]

Thank you, I completely agree.


[quote="nick c"]
Yes, but that view of the "nature of reality" has been arrived at through the EU's use of the scientific method. The gap "up until now" was caused by the failure of scientists, bound by gravity only assumptions, to realize the role of electricity and magnetism in space. Science is steps in the process of discovery, leading to a deeper understanding than what went before. It is a journey along a road- not a destination. Sometimes we take a wrong turn into a cul de sac, and have to back out and return to the main road.
[quote]


Agreed, and it's time now we returned to the main road. :D The way I see it is that the failure of our scientists has put our global cultural development back at least 100 years. If we had pursued the 'great' scientific minds of Russell, Tesla and many others who knew about the Electric nature of the universe at the turn of the century, this world would have been a vastly different place...free energy being the obvious, initial, change in our culture. But, as we know, there are agendas within agendas, and Science isn't the only field the Powers that Be have controlled up until now.


[quote="nick c"]
The key here is "scientific context," there is nothing mystical about the Electric Universe, in itself. One can reach mystical or aesthetic revelations, if one is so inclined, from any experience or knowledge, electric or otherwise.
Although, there is much criticism of "mainstream science and scientists" and the peer review system in EU literature, that is not to be construed as rejection of the scientific method. The criticism is directed at the improper (or lack of) application of the tool, not the tool itself.

"Mystical/shaman/pagan/spiritual viewpoints" are of value only to the point of the information they can convey. Much like a detective questioning witnesses and assessing testimony of varying qualities...the blind man, the professor, the priest, the child, the b&w surveilance camera, etc.
[quote]


The aesthetic revelation about the Electric Universe is that it proves we are all connected at a physical level (and, therefore, mental and emotional levels too), i.e. the Butterfly Effect as a concept becomes a generic truth ("you can't separate structure from function" - functions must be connected...thank you, Junglelord :D ). Mystics have known everything was energy and it is connected (in the etherial sense) but we had not been able to prove this given the physics we were being told. Soon, there will be no need for 'mysticism' or superstition.

Correct about information. Up until now, it seems humanity have been running scared, blind and with both hands tied behind it's proverbial back. Even when certain truths were revealed, such as everything being 'energy', mankind either used it for personal gain or to push fear onto others. This is the Age of Enlightenment, not in any mystical sense, but inasmuchas it's time for generic truth to be understood.


[quote="nick c"]
I would not call anything 'fringe' or 'crackpot,' after all, those are the slanderous statements made against all of us here, at some time or another. A theory has to be judged in the context of the evidence, for and against, it's ability to predict, and the 'falling into place' of future discoveries. My problem with the g-force or Intelligent Design is where is the falsifiability? What tests can be devised that, if it fails the test, give us reason to discard the theory? What does it predict? To call something mystical or metaphysical is not an insult unless it is trying to be passed off for something it is not, ie. science. [quote]


Yes, everything has to be tested in a scientific manner - and much success has been achieved in the laboratory regarding plasma physics. The beauty of this theory is it scales up and down so tests can be carried out locally which reflect the same results universally. As the years go on, the realisation that Plasma is more than 'all things to all men' will finally hit. In fact, I'm amazed we've come this far while still being told 'it's the 4th state of matter'. I don't feel we will have a problem proving intelligent design or an intelligent, solid state, universe which is a complex system once we get enough momentum going. In fact, it's been harder trying to disprove these things, particularly when you look deeply at the properties and potentialities of plasma and/or aether.

In an Information system, which I believe this is, it's only natural for the Information Source (Creator) to disseminate information to its creations, LOL! (Sorry, thats still a bit mystical, but ulimately, this is what we are dealing with. Intelligent design + consciousness + intelligence + information, where electricity is simply the carrier). :D


[quote="nick c"]
This says that the Gforce is equated in a formula where one of the components is Newton's Gravitational Constant. This is in conflict with the EU, since the EU does not recognize a "gravitational constant."
[quote]


Newton observed effects and attributed the cause to gravity and, therefore, declared a universal law of gravity that said all observed effects were caused by gravity. The G-force clearly shows that those effects were not attributed to gravity at all but were attributed very loosely to electricity, i.e. the make up of electricity which includes the G-force, is the cause of all effects including gravity.

It doesn’t matter if there is a planet, and it doesn’t work to say "it has mass, therefore it has gravity" because, without electricity, in the broadest of terms, there would be no planet or gravity, LOL! So, Mr. Newton wrongly attributes the universal cause that he detected throughout the universe to gravity and not to electricity.

This, itself, is still being dissected and Junglelord, Steven O and others are at the forefront of such dissection. I await, with interest, the results of that dissection and where it takes humanity, but one thing we are clear about is we left Newton's Gravitational Universe long ago and we are now in the Electric Universe. APM actually says:

http://www.16pi2.com/chapter_3_secrets_ ... aether.htm

The Gforce acts on mass with "reach" (length squared per mass squared) to produce the Newton gravitational constant. The precise symmetry of Coulomb’s constant and Newton’s gravitational constant is astonishing. Both seem to be based on the same quantum length and Gforce.

This means the G-force is the cause, previously attributed to Newton’s Gravitational Constant, and fulfils its criteria admirably.



The only manifestation of force is either a push or a pull relative to mass or charge. The Gforce is equal to 1.21 x 1044 newton. That is written out as:
121,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 newton or 121 million, billion, billion, billion, billion Newton


Obviously, Newton did not have this information :D


The observed effects were put down to the fact that 'gravity' was the constant. Those same effects fit like a glove when you know the actual cause is the G-force.

Divinity
Divinity
Guest
 

Re: Godlikeproductions

Unread postby Divinity » Fri Jul 25, 2008 9:21 am

Zonei,

I will break this discussion off now as I know it will be awkward for the Moderators, so will finish by simply saying that if you do not ever expect to find generic truth, then you won't. And I will continue to relay the information I glean about the EU and APM theory to the members of GLP despite what you believe it/them to be.

Divinity
Divinity
Guest
 

Next

Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests