Sound (split from "Why an ether/aether?")

[Valhalla]

Alton are you familiar with Milo Wolff and his Spherical Standing Wave Theory?
It would require a medium ... like a luminiferous aether.

>>In 1887 science with the aid of Michelson and Morley helped kill the luminiferous aether that the ancient philosopher had used as a crutch...
>>science effectively turned space into a vacuum back in 1887.
>>how wrong were they?
>>now science is trying to correct their apparent blunder of 121 years ago with a resurrection, something called Dark Matter and Dark Energy.

>>The Big B A N G from where I come from is both a SOUND and LIGHT show.

Why then is science silent on the issue of how SOUND plays a role in the creative process?
Why eh?
Why?

Maybe we would need to pay more attention to the SOUNDs that emante from our brains/hearts via our big mouths?


Maybe we would need to discuss why we have adopted 440 hertz (recommended by the propaganda minister Goebbels) as the KEY to which all of our noise making here on EARTH is tuned too?
Maybe we would need to discuss changing the international standard back to 432 (sun radius number) Hertz = note 'A'?
Maybe we would need to pay attention to what comes on the radio.
Maybe we would need to pay attention to what the boob tube is sharing with us.
Maybe things would NEED to change if people realized silence is golden for a real good reason.
In the silence are hidden messages.

Maybe it all starts with the note 'A', alpha, aleph, eh?

Where do I come from?
I come from where the Big BANG resembles both Thunder AND Lightening.
Not just the light show I hear soooo much about.
Even film is far more effective with an accompanying soundtrack...

So where is the SOUND component to String Theory or an Electric Universe?

Valhalla

[junglelord]

The universe is full of sound.
It began with sound, if it began at all.
However sound would preceed light in a big bang and then ignite light as well.
Since the Universe is eternal, it never needed a start up.
Sound is resonance in the EU.
Its not audible to our range of hearing.
There is no place without sound.
No place without charge.
No place without the prevading vortex spiral aether.
The Casmire Force is assesable anywhere, anytime, anyplace.
Zero Point.

[Valhalla]

Particles only push each other.

Alton the Chandra telescope has recorded ... emanating from Black Gravitational Holes...a SOUND dude.
Lets try to forget for the moment, about the LIGHT show, the photons and positrons and electrons and quarks and other group theory participants...
Alton please explain what effect a pulsating non-electromagnetic wave ... pulsating at 57 octaves below middle 'C' looks like?

Alton please explain how long such a wavelength ... 57 Octaves below middle 'C' would be.
Alton now place that SOUND wave in each and every laboratory that has ever observed wave / particle duality.

The observer affects the observation was the quantum conclusion, but wait ... Alton do you want to break it to the scientists that the room where they were conducting their light experiments was NOT a vacuum ... they did NOT account for this SOUND pulsation back in 1887, and I see the people still ignore SOUND...why?

Sorry dude...all Light experiments with lasers and photons are bogus/null and void until the ineffable name of God is accounted for ... SOUND was in each and every quantum experiment...
AUM ... know what I mean jellybean?

Alton those labs were not vacuums and either is space.
Michelson, Morley and now Alton are all wrong about the aether.
Don't fret dude...Michelson was awarded a most Noble prize for his blunder.
He even got the particle physicist to spend $6+ billion on CERN.
1$ admission for each and every human being...maybe the admission price to the big meltdown?
What a waste of a buck.


Alton a theory of everything MUST include SOUND.
Lightening and Thunder are critical.
Maybe we could borrow Thor's hammer to drive home the point?

No SOUND, only LIGHT?
Just a flash in the petrie pan...
Can't even hear the splash...
I guess the prophecy to be expected, to be fulfilled, is that the Messiah will be a mime eh?


Valhalla

[junglelord]

The truth of the matter is that the Four Crafts are
Sacred Math (Phi,Pi, e) (Art and Science)
Sacred Geometry (Synergetics) (Art and Science)
Music (Art and Science)
Astronomy (Science) Gods Art alone.

Sound is Thunder

Three of the Four Crafts involve Art and are not pure Science.
Spirit, Art, Creation, Divine Inspiration.

[Valhalla]

What's love got to do with it?
What's SOUND got to do with it?

I love you junglelord?

SOUND of music... the hills are alive with the SOUND of music.
Do you think the mountain Mohammed suggests we move, we move with SOUND?
Do you think the lever Archimedes was referring to...was that loooooooooooooong wavelength...clocked at 57 Octaves below middle 'C'.
If you have not figured out what a wavelenght pulsating at that frequency would look like...here is a clue...it is longer/wider than the spiral galaxy we inhabit....THUS from our puny perspectives, this wavelength would appear as the DIVINE PROPORTION that is the lance that divides our solar system...what if what if ... that line could be represented by....
you figure it out...
Why do I want you to figure it out?
It is how you learn...
Shhh, we can't say the name of 'god' ... shhhh not nice ... to repeat those SOUNDS.
Which SOUNDS?
Low low low sounds emanating from BLACK holes and high high high sounds emanating from exploding Super Novas?
What if?
Exploding stars + collapsing stars = a cycle = perpetual motion?
you figure it out...

The detractors of an aether theory...please read on.
You need to do some soul searching IMHO.

John Bell, interviewed by Paul Davies in “The Ghost in the Atom” has suggested that an aether theory might help resolve the EPR paradox by allowing a reference frame in which signals go faster than light. He suggests Lorentz contraction is perfectly coherent, not inconsistent with relativity, and could produce an aether theory perfectly consistent with the Michelson-Morley experiment. Bell suggests the aether was wrongly rejected on purely philosophical grounds: “what is unobservable does not exist” [p.49]. Einstein found the non-aether theory simpler and more elegant, but Bell suggests that doesn’t rule it out. Besides the arguments based on his interpretation of quantum mechanics, Bell also suggests resurrecting the aether because it is a useful pedagogical device. That is, lots of problems are solved more easily by imagining the existence of an aether.

Detractors of the universal aether, I have a simple question for you.
What responsibility do you have, do each of us have to upholding the truth?
Eh?
Can we arrive at the Universal truth using only math or do we need to apply a wee bit of myth to help us unlock the secrets of our ancestry?
Where we were, where we are, where we are going?

Shall we ask Plato and Pythagoras and Kepler and and and the Oracle of DelPhi the same question?
"man know thyself in proportion" would be their response in unison!!!!
What does that mean when we examine music?
"A" or EH?

Stop complicating a rather simple simple paradigm.
The indigenous believed the water cycle was a fine analogy for life itself.

The earth has a limited amount of water. That water keeps going around and around and around and around and (well, you get the idea) in what we call the "Water Cycle".

This cycle is made up of a few main parts:

* evaporation (and transpiration)
* condensation
* precipitation
* collection

4 simple steps/stages.
How do they match up with the 4 Ages or the 4 Yugas?
Why limit your perception using only one tool of interpretation?
Is not one of the co-founders of this site a lover/student/adherent/adept of myth too?
Or am I wrong again?

Valhalla

[junglelord]

Love you too Valhalla.
Your a refreshing sound to my ears....

[Valhalla]

Apparently you need to actually read what that "co-founder" has said about myth.

I would love to, I think it is obvious from reading my posts that I am open to new ideas.
How about you?
How open is your mind / soul to new ideas?
I have no idea if your background is rooted in science, religion or none of the above.
But if it is science...

Don't you agree however that if they did NOT account for WAVES, appearing as particles that pulsate at 57 Octaves below middle 'C', that when conducting their 'photon' experiments, BECAUSE they did not account for this PULSATION in their non-vacuum laboratory ... those experiments, their quantum conclusions are null and void...in regards to wave/particle duality?

No wonder they have not unified GRAVITY with the 3 other forces.
No wonder.
Damn obvious to me why they have NOT.


Are you conCERNed about CERN chasing only collisions?
You should be...
I wonder if the CERN scientists have placed microphones in that 27 mile tube / torus recording the SOUNDs of these quantum collisions...eh?
Well?

Could you now direct me to the specific link where Mr. Talbot discusses the meaning/importance of myth?
Are his conclusions similar to the authors who wrote the 1969 blockbuster Hamlet's Mill?
Does he mention the importance of SOUND to the end game?

thank you in advance for the link.

Valhalla

[Plasmatic]

Are his conclusions similar to the authors who wrote the 1969 blockbuster Hamlet's Mill?

In short ,No its a completely different approach. Although Hertha n company did have some useful discoveries about Saturn and planets in general. The difference is the conclusions about precession as far as I can tell.


"Quite frankly, there' s a lot of ground to
be covered, nothing less than the intellectual heritage of mankind the world
over going back to pre-historical times. It is at this point that we come into
direct conflict with currently prevailing astronomical views, needless to say.
Some scholars, such as de Santillana and von Dechend in the classic Hamlet' s
Mill, sought to account for the myths of these figures by reference to the
usual movements of the planets. Talbott and I, in contrast, have been forced
to the conclusion that Mars only recently moved upon a different orbit and
participated in great cataclysms in the sky for the simple reason that the
ancient records (astronomical, artistic, linguistic, and mythological)
describe Mars in such close proximity to Saturn and Venus as to preclude any
other explanation. Or so it seems to us. To paraphrase Dennis Miller: Of
Course it is possible that we are wrong."


http://www.kronia.com/library/journals/method.txt


http://www.kronia.com/library/journals/velmyth.txt

http://www.kronia.com/thoth/ThoIII17.txt

[altonhare]

Alton the Chandra telescope has recorded ... emanating from Black Gravitational Holes...a SOUND dude.

Black holes are one of the most ludicrous entities ever proposed by the establishment. Up there with space-time, point particles, and wave-packets.

Fundamentally all sound is, is a particular motion of particles/entities. So this just means there were some bits of something between the telescope and whatever the scope was pointed at, and whatever it was pointed at was pushing these somethings outward. Of course space is not a perfect vacuum. A perfect vacuum can only be conceptualized in a divergent universe full of discrete particles. Perfect vacuum is never realized in a convergent universe, i.e. a universe where everything is interconnected physically.

Alton please explain what effect a pulsating non-electromagnetic wave ... pulsating at 57 octaves below middle 'C' looks like?

The observation is that atoms/electrons move like a longitudinal wave i.e. by alternating expansion/compression of something in the direction of propagation. Light seems to move like a transverse wave, i.e. by some rotating oscillation of something around an axis that goes through the emitter and receiver. What is identified as "sound" is refers to the former observation and what is identified as "light" refers to the latter observation.

Particles can justify the former structurally. They cannot justify the latter structurally. This is a qualitative issue at the most basic level. A series of particles does not trace a rectilinear path from a rotating body A to another body B! The only explanation for rectilinear travel is that A and B are permanently interconnected. A structure such as a rope or chain physically connects every atom in the universe Valhalla, this is the non-Ptolemaic explanation for light, gravity, and magnetism:

Light:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-NB5vg7woM

The H Atom:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmE11_E-rdE

Magnetism:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evfUTmx0uh8

Gravity:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvWeYJg9Oxs

The observer affects the observation was the quantum conclusion, but wait ...

Quantum is a joke of a theory. It makes a mockery of physics by denying physical causality and identity.

He even got the particle physicist to spend $6+ billion on CERN.
1$ admission for each and every human being...maybe the admission price to the big meltdown?
What a waste of a buck.

Truly the modern state of "physics" is one of the greatest tragedies to befall humanity. I have stated elsewhere that as soon as I see something that is not what it is, I will give up on science and go work at CERN.

That would be the saddest of days.

What you don't realize is that a particulate aether is qualitatively no different than what the particle physics are doing. See the similarity? Particulate aether and phttp://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/post ... 186article physicist. The particulate aether is just a Ptolemaic rehashing of the particle hypothesis. The rope/chain theory is fundamentally different. There is no discrete, separate object in the entire universe. Every single one is physically interconnected. This justifies our observations structurally, this is not Ptolemaic.

Alton a theory of everything MUST include SOUND.

Sure, chain theory "includes sound". Every atom in the universe is composed of and interconnected by an anti parallel dual-strand chain. When something pushes a bunch of atoms towards you they collide with the atoms in front, which collide with the next atoms... and so on and so forth until they reach your eardrum! There is no problem justifying "sound".

John Bell, interviewed by Paul Davies in “The Ghost in the Atom” has suggested that an aether theory might help resolve the EPR paradox by allowing a reference frame in which signals go faster than light.

Aether peoples listen up! The rope/chain hypothesis physically explains the EPR experiment simply and elegantly! Check it out.

http://www.youstupidrelativist.com/06QM ... 06EPR.html

What responsibility do you have, do each of us have to upholding the truth?

A huge responsibility, or I would not still be fighting tirelessly in these forums hoping someone will hear the simple truth.

Can we arrive at the Universal truth using only math

I hate how mathematics has infested and practically supplanted physics. As a general rule I try to use no math when explaining observations. It is the aether people who keep harping on phi, E, etc., which are mathematical relationships! You never hear me harping on numerical relationships!

Stop complicating a rather simple simple paradigm.

Physically, chain theory is incredibly simple.

No wonder they have not unified GRAVITY with the 3 other forces.
No wonder.

No particle theory will ever successfully incorporate gravity because gravity involves the force of PULL, it is inherently a convergent force. Particles can only PUSH each other, a divergent force. A particulate aether is a bunch of particles... so yeah, hi.

Are you conCERNed about CERN chasing only collisions?
You should be...

[/quote]

The guys at CERN are not doing physics, they're correlating data with equations. Their model is the particle, which will never be able to justify gravity/inertia. They will never find the "fundamental unit of mass" (the so-called Higgs Boson). Besides the fact that particles can only push, their other fundamental flaw is that they are measuring inertial mass. Inertial mass is mathematical i.e. we can always find something moving a "little slower" before it is at rest. Physical mass, on the other hand, is a matter of counting the number of fundamental constituents involved. This is what they are looking for, but they are measuring the former .



Lizzie,

Can YOU tell me how a sea of particles can result in a convergent universe? JL stated explicitly that the aether is particulate, meaning it is a bunch of tiny golf balls. Can YOU tell me how this structure justifies its alleged function, or do you grant your aether particles magical properties to make up for the ineffectiveness of the particle hypothesis?

[junglelord]

Apparently you need to actually read what that "co-founder" has said about myth.

I would love to, I think it is obvious from reading my posts that I am open to new ideas.
How about you?
How open is your mind / soul to new ideas?
I have no idea if your background is rooted in science, religion or none of the above.
But if it is science...

Don't you agree however that if they did NOT account for WAVES, appearing as particles that pulsate at 57 Octaves below middle 'C', that when conducting their 'photon' experiments, BECAUSE they did not account for this PULSATION in their non-vacuum laboratory ... those experiments, their quantum conclusions are null and void...in regards to wave/particle duality?

No wonder they have not unified GRAVITY with the 3 other forces.
No wonder.
Damn obvious to me why they have NOT.


Are you conCERNed about CERN chasing only collisions?
You should be...
I wonder if the CERN scientists have placed microphones in that 27 mile tube / torus recording the SOUNDs of these quantum collisions...eh?
Well?

Could you now direct me to the specific link where Mr. Talbot discusses the meaning/importance of myth?
Are his conclusions similar to the authors who wrote the 1969 blockbuster Hamlet's Mill?
Does he mention the importance of SOUND to the end game?

thank you in advance for the link.

Valhalla

A432....A432....A432....A432...ETC.

[Plasmatic]

Valhalla perhaps you would be interested in readin this blog on black holes.


http://thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/guest.htm

[Valhalla]

Valhalla perhaps you would be interested in readin this blog on black holes.


http://thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/guest.htm

Plasmatic I knew somebody would suggest BLACK HOLES are bogus.
No problem amigo.
Ok they don't exist, you win.

Now your turn as the winner.
... explain why, where and what Chandra picked up that was pulsating at 57 Octaves below middle 'C'.
Eh...?
How many sources do you want me to post that recorded this event?
It happened.

THUS the existence or non-existence of a BLACK HOLE is not detrimental to my thesis dude.
It only strengthens it...
AUM do you get it?
SOUND is the KEY, at this point in our discussion, let's just agree that the LOW LOW LOW SOUNDs exist.
OK?
Agree, they exist.
Then we discuss what effect these SOUNDs low and high, might have on our feeble terra firma called Spaceship Earth.
Do you know what cymatics are?
I know you do...


Now as the winner of our little pissing contest regarding 'reality', you get to explain using your knowledge about the Electric Universe, what in an Electric Universe could be humming along at 57 Octaves below middle 'C'.
You have eliminated the BLACK HOLE.
What kind of theory you going to fill it with dude?
Stephen Hawking and company are waiting...
And I am still waiting for the link to Talbot's thread, thanks again.

Valhalla

[Valhalla]

If the aether is not particulate, what is it?

Ask Milo Wolff.
Ever heard of him?
He knows.

Here is his response to a letter I sent him.

You are a remarkable thinker to realize the importance of the Wave Structure of Matter (WSM).
and place it on your website. Here are some places to find new information about it.

1. SpaceAndMotion.com
2. QuantumMatter.com
3. http://members.tripod.com/mwolff/
4. http://www.glafreniere.com/matter.html
5. http://daugerresearch.com/orbitals/index.shtml
6. http://ryanhagan.net/mike/StandingWave3 ... Wave3D.htm

The Wave Structure is new, fascinating and growing rapidly everywhere. You may be one of the pioneers.

By the way, I have a new book (April 2008) just published: "Schroedinger's Universe - The Origin of the Natural Laws". Contains complete descriptions of the WSM. Buy at Amazon.com

Milo

Want to ask someone who helped put people on the moon about reality?
Ask Milo.
Want his e-mail address?
I have it.

Valhalla

[Plasmatic]

Plasmatic I knew somebody would suggest BLACK HOLES are bogus.
No problem amigo.
Ok they don't exist, you win.

Now your turn as the winner.
... explain why, where and what Chandra picked up that was pulsating at 57 Octaves below middle 'C'.
Eh...?
How many sources do you want me to post that recorded this event?
It happened.

Valhalla I dont know how you figured that correcting your statement about black holes has anything to do with the rest of your assertions or an onus on me to respond to everything else youve asserted..

THUS the existence or non-existence of a BLACK HOLE is not detrimental to my thesis dude.

Would you be so kind as to post the comments where I said ANYTHING about your "thesis" aside from your comments on blackholes? This is called a strawman chief!

Now as the winner of our little pissing contest regarding 'reality', you get to explain using your knowledge about the Electric Universe, what in an Electric Universe could be humming along at 57 Octaves below middle 'C'.

Would you also be so kind as to direct me to the post where you and I where discussing "reality" as such?

By the way I dont consider someone directing me to a blog that delivers me from the burden of ignorance "pissing" on me in anyway.

I have not made a single statement about "octaves" whatever! Just for your information it is the resposibility of the one who makes the claim to assert proof,not the other way around.

I am still waiting for the link to Talbot's thread, thanks again.

Valhalla

It is not my resposibility to educate you . Perhaps a change in attitude would make ones request more likely to be answered.

[altonhare]

The "scientific spirit" has been very much alive at various times. The Greeks in particular exhibited this quality. It's the pursuit of knowledge or understanding purely for its own sake. Others throughout history have demonstrated this quality also. With this alive science has been headed in the right direction overall until Newton set the precedent of no hypothesis. This led into 18th century empiricism where hypotheses were completely absent. Then after Einstein "science" engaged in steadily increasing censorship and became increasingly driven by profit instead of a pursuit of knowledge for knowledge's sake.

In short, the Greeks probably did the best job overall. Today "science" has become just another way to make a buck.

Peter Duesberg, a virologist, makes the observation (focusing on biology) that modern science is almost totally about using the latest technology to produce literally mountains of data, and then using computers to wade though all that data. Crafty thinking, figuring out what all that data means, to understand what you are looking at, is almost a lost art.

I read a quote a few years ago (maybe it was here?) that also pinpoints part of the problem: "sometimes it seems that the math guys treat the real world like a leper colony."

One of the best quotes I have ever come across (no idea who said it): "science knows much, but ignores PRACTICALLY EVERYTHING."

I missed this post at first, thanks bdw. It illustrates why we need to keep math out of physics. Math is good in technology, not in explaining qualitatively what happened.

... explain why, where and what Chandra picked up that was pulsating at 57 Octaves below middle 'C'.
Eh...?

Middle C is defined as the frequency 278.4375 cycles/second. An octave below this is half of it (139.2), another octave is half that (69.61), then 34.8, 17.4, 8.7, 4.35, 2.17, 1.08... etc. 57 octaves is 1.93E-15 cycles/second. This means something is hitting their detector every, err. 16.46 million years, assuming the speed of the sound is 1340 m/s(speed of sound in dihydrogen)? Can that possibly be right?

Could you give us a reference Val? How can we pick up something with a frequency of one/16.5 million years?

Ask Milo Wolff.
Ever heard of him?
He knows.

We're not calling in celebrities or authorities here. I want to know if YOU know what YOU are espousing. Can you actually make an argument for the aether you propose? If you are going around singing its praises you must have long ago thought deeply and critically about it, and come to the conclusion that it is, or is close to, the "Truth". What is the structure of the aether you espouse and how does it justify gravity and light?

The chain-rope justifies these behaviors in an elegant, straightforward manner. I know exactly why I support this theory. I don't need to reference authority. The videos are there to help you visualize. Ultimately it's just me and you on an island trying to explain why the coconut fell.