+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 3 4 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 65

Thread: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

  1. Link to Post #41
    UK Avalon Member Sunny-side-up's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th April 2013
    Location
    Between here & there
    Age
    60
    Posts
    3,666
    Thanks
    39,531
    Thanked 16,722 times in 3,384 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    Quote Posted by Zanshin (here)
    sigma6 - with reference to all your posts above, well said.
    Ill second that.

    Too much Main-Stream, Old-School-Established science is corrupted, misdirected, and or conveniently substituted.
    This being done to make things seem to work, to keep new ways secret.
    Being done by those who have vast vested interest in keeping things moving along the their old lines and so saving their power and face and reality.
    Last edited by Sunny-side-up; 9th October 2017 at 09:58.
    I'm a simple easy going guy that is very upset/sad with the worlds hidden controllers!
    We need LEADERS who bat from the HEART!
    Rise up above them Dark evil doers, not within anger but with LOVE

  2. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Sunny-side-up For This Post:

    Baby Steps (10th October 2017), dynamo (10th October 2017), Foxie Loxie (9th October 2017), Jayke (9th October 2017), mojo (15th October 2017), Zanshin (9th October 2017)

  3. Link to Post #42
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    52
    Posts
    1,406
    Thanks
    15,065
    Thanked 6,413 times in 1,261 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    Quote Without any conclusive proof appearing in a hundred years.
    Relativity is the bed-rock of modern physics, as much as Newton and Planck. Haramein builds on it. One of the many proofs is light deflection.

    I found a good bio of Nassim here



    Quote This unification theory, known as the Haramein-Rauscher metric (a new solution to Einstein's Field Equations that incorporates torque and Coriolis effects) and his most recent paper The Schwarzschild Proton, lays down the foundation of what could be a fundamental change in our current understandings of physics and consciousness.
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  4. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Baby Steps For This Post:

    dynamo (10th October 2017), Foxie Loxie (9th October 2017), Sunny-side-up (15th October 2017)

  5. Link to Post #43
    United States Avalon Member Foxie Loxie's Avatar
    Join Date
    20th September 2015
    Location
    Central NY
    Age
    75
    Posts
    3,079
    Thanks
    67,683
    Thanked 17,357 times in 2,953 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    Thanks, Baby Steps! I see I have a lot to look through! One statement that caught my quick attention was "We are at the Center of Creation". I'm wondering how that applies to the "Others" as we are not the only biological entities in existence.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Foxie Loxie For This Post:

    Baby Steps (9th October 2017), dynamo (10th October 2017)

  7. Link to Post #44
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    52
    Posts
    1,406
    Thanks
    15,065
    Thanked 6,413 times in 1,261 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    Quote Posted by Foxie Loxie (here)
    Thanks, Baby Steps! I see I have a lot to look through! One statement that caught my quick attention was "We are at the Center of Creation". I'm wondering how that applies to the "Others" as we are not the only biological entities in existence.
    We use the term 'others' or even more disconnected 'Aliens'. The chances are that most of them, being very enlightened and recognising that they are us and we are them, are on a journey towards wisdom in which they attempt to refine their engagement with us, to a level that would be identified as 'divine'. They do not wish to cause any bad stuff, they respect free will, including our collective free will not to have contact , which we express whenever we, as a society, ignore events like the phoenix lights.
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Baby Steps For This Post:

    dynamo (10th October 2017), Foxie Loxie (9th October 2017)

  9. Link to Post #45
    Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    26th December 2010
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    9,560
    Thanks
    37,831
    Thanked 52,760 times in 8,858 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    pure science does not have to translate into technology, and if and when it does, it may take a few centuries before you seen the results. So repeatable results, within centuries, maybe. And yes pure science is often theoretical and often seems to be in the dream land. But without it, you would not have the actual technology you have actually.

    to me, your basic paradigm is wrong. Not everything on this planet has to give immediate results or be technology oriented. What about the planet evolution itself, it took millions of years. what about spiritual evolution that could be helped or proven through science? there is no immediate returns on this. Your view is very capitalistic, one slice of thinking over one tiny tiny slice of time on a whole planet evolution

    The only thing I agree with you here is that the results of pure science leading sometimes to technologies are escaping into dark projects, and this is a shame really.




    Quote Posted by Jayke (here)
    Quote Posted by Flash (here)
    That is precisely the actual problem with science and universities. In order to have grants, theres is to have a payback soon enough.

    However, just 50 years ago, scientific research was mainly pure science, pure research, mainly theoretical, with no application in sight. If you had wanted applications with the relativity theories of Einstein, and financial payback, too early in his research, you would not have had the relativity theory, nobody would have supported his research.

    Theoretical research, pure research, is a must of the advancement of science but it is very rarely done these days. So no, Harameins has not invented any application and he should not.
    I wish no one did listen to Einstein, he was living in the world of make believe, which is why how many inventions have been based on Einsteins theories exactly? The atomic bomb? Maybe some GPS satelites...but no they still use Newtonian mechanics to launch rockets. The theory of relativity is a dead that's continued to be a dead end for over a hundred years. How much money has been wasted in universities trying to prove it to be true? Without any conclusive proof appearing in a hundred years, where's the payout in that?

    Pure research has nothing to do with fantasy, that's called a hypothesis. A hypothesis isn't proven until you can create a repeatable experiment that leads to repeatable results, results that then lead to workable technology. The real actual problem with universities is that genuine science, science that leads to real technology, gets suppressed and shifted into the black projects, while the fantasists get free reign to promote their theories to the general public.

  10. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Flash For This Post:

    Baby Steps (9th October 2017), dynamo (10th October 2017), Sunny-side-up (15th October 2017)

  11. Link to Post #46
    UK Avalon Member
    Join Date
    20th February 2011
    Location
    Manchester
    Age
    35
    Posts
    1,005
    Thanks
    8,199
    Thanked 5,648 times in 930 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    Quote Posted by Flash (here)
    pure science does not have to translate into technology, and if and when it does, it may take a few centuries before you seen the results. So repeatable results, within centuries, maybe. And yes pure science is often theoretical and often seems to be in the dream land. But without it, you would not have the actual technology you have actually.

    to me, your basic paradigm is wrong. Not everything on this planet has to give immediate results or be technology oriented. What about the planet evolution itself, it took millions of years. what about spiritual evolution that could be helped or proven through science? there is no immediate returns on this. Your view is very capitalistic, one slice of thinking over one tiny tiny slice of time on a whole planet evolution

    The only thing I agree with you here is that the results of pure science leading sometimes to technologies are escaping into dark projects, and this is a shame really.
    To me, you've obviously misinterpreted (or theoretically imagined) what you perceive my basic paradigm to be, to label it as capitalistic is highly naive and shows how far off the mark your comments are from what I've actually suggested in this thread. but seriously, you're going to have to define what you see as 'pure' science, because my definition of science is similar to what you see on wikipedia:

    "Science (from Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe."

    Testable, provable (i.e. predictable), repeatable
    Am I mistaken, is that not what science is?

    As I mentioned in my first post in this thread "Effectiveness is the measure of Truth"...That's a maxim from the Huna spiritual tradition, and its a maxim I live by. Effectiveness means to use your knowledge to create a reliable result. Creating technology shows that you know how to use knowledge to create reliable results, understanding how to create reliable results with your actions is wisdom.

    The reason I look for inventors who've actually invented technology first, and then reverse engineered their theories based on what they see working in their engineering labs (people like Tesla, Bruce Depalma, Eric Dollard etc) is because their knowledge has grounded them in effectiveness, the implementation of their knowledge has grounded them in wisdom. There's nothing capitalistic about seeking effectiveness (seeking wisdom). Grounding yourself in effectiveness is what empowers spiritual growth and spiritual evolution.

    Theoretical science is just magical thinking imbued with fairy dust, great for throwing glamour into a persons eyes, and enamouring them with fantasies, but if you ever want to achieve anything productive in life, you have to work with provable and effective principles that operate in the here and now, not something that might manifest aeons from now after enough magical thinking has been thrown at it by enough minds to rearrange the limitations of the universal or collective consciousness.

    Theoretical thinking is great for conjuring up possibilities--I agree with that completely and see great value in it--but theoretical science just leaves you with a multitude of fantastical ideas, some of those hypotheses get filtered into reality through the trial and error approaches of refining how to make things work in the lab, other of those ideas have to be consigned to the garbage can, because as Tesla said "todays scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and...eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"

    Why waste time waiting for science to manifest in centuries when their are already a multitude of inventors building over-unity devices in the here and now (using completely different physics models than both Einstein and Haramein btw). Why sit under a barren tree waiting for something to sprout? Where's your support for the magical sciences that are already bearing fruit right now?

    and why call my view capitalistic? (for simply asking for proof of a theory?) identity politics should be kept out of 'pure' science altogether don't you think?
    Last edited by Jayke; 9th October 2017 at 20:08.

  12. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Jayke For This Post:

    Baby Steps (10th October 2017), dynamo (10th October 2017), Foxie Loxie (9th October 2017), Wind (15th October 2017)

  13. Link to Post #47
    Avalon Member sigma6's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th July 2011
    Location
    Tattooine
    Posts
    3,428
    Thanks
    8,905
    Thanked 12,629 times in 2,893 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    Quote Posted by Foxie Loxie (here)
    Loved the grapefruit analogy, Baby Steps! Of course, I understand none of this, but I did like sigma6's statement, " ...space is substancial & energetic, not an empty void." Could you intelligent guys tell me how The Electric Universe fits into all this? Is plasma the Aether?
    thanks Loxie, I can see your my sweetest supporter '; ) and btw ... I absolutely loved Chicken Little Lol... I love to watch it over and over...

    btw... the way I look at it... 'space' might not even be 'space'... if any of the simulation/holographic universe concepts apply, then there is no more space here then there is "space" inside a virtual reality video game... it's just "information"... with that example... I get what they mean it's all "information" (thanks to computers we can easily understand this...)

    re: electric universe and plasma... is a whole other equation... since I'd say that operates in our "3D" reality... i.e. we can see plasma discharges etc... it should fit in with Newtonian physics (knock on wood) so one is "classical" physics, the other (ether) is described more in relation to quantum physics... I watched that video and the model makes more sense than current interpretation... I might even add it could be touching on both realms... due to it's unlimited scalability (maybe why it's being suppressed so much?) another example of a perfectly valid model being suppressed for what appears to be petty political reasons?... (disgraceful!)
    Last edited by sigma6; 14th October 2017 at 15:57.
    We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time
    By faith we understand things which are seen were not made of the things which are visible

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to sigma6 For This Post:

    Baby Steps (14th October 2017), dynamo (15th October 2017), Foxie Loxie (14th October 2017)

  15. Link to Post #48
    United States Avalon Member Foxie Loxie's Avatar
    Join Date
    20th September 2015
    Location
    Central NY
    Age
    75
    Posts
    3,079
    Thanks
    67,683
    Thanked 17,357 times in 2,953 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    It's ALL, simply Consciousness.....could that be it?!

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Foxie Loxie For This Post:

    Baby Steps (14th October 2017), dynamo (15th October 2017)

  17. Link to Post #49
    Avalon Member sigma6's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th July 2011
    Location
    Tattooine
    Posts
    3,428
    Thanks
    8,905
    Thanked 12,629 times in 2,893 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    Quote Posted by Foxie Loxie (here)
    It's ALL, simply Consciousness.....could that be it?!
    I would agree... but it begs the question... what is consciousness?... I like Ayn Rand's (and other philosopher's) approach... it just is... she simply accepted it as an axiomatic constant... a given... and based all her analysis starting from that point... and in the process created two camps in the world of philosophy, pragmatics and realists who accepted their own experience and 'deniers' aka 'materialists' who insisted they were not really conscious... (i.e. insisting that their interpretation therefore was the result of pre-determined super sophisticated, but nonetheless robotic behaviour... (go figure!)

    Obviously it should be easy to decide which side would eventually win... but this was a real delineation in philosophy... ( and still is by some accounts, but why heed anything someone says who insists they're not conscious? LOL... that would be like falling love with a Turing test program... and that IS an illusion, a simulation... ) And I have met and been taught by people (apparently professors) who maintain this view (completely unaware of the irony apparently... ': o

    And I think Haramein's interpretation of how it could work (the mechanism) that explains WHY we experience consciousness is equally brilliant and a quantum leap (excuse the pun) in interpretation over and above Rand... (who just used simple logic and direct immediate experience...(insert "duhhh" here...) Haramein's explanation that because there is a "in here" (quantum, void, nirvana, ether, spirit world) and an "out there" ( the so called "3D physical reality" (that is not really "physical" at all...) so by definition, self awareness requires a feedback loop... and his answer, once again fits so beautifully... our conscious experience IS the proof... these two worlds must exist, one feeding into the other... in a reciprocal relationship...

    To build on Tom Campbell's analogy... that I use myself... i.e. the first player video game, I would suggest we are both the avatar and player... or we can directly experience being the avatar, and with practice... we can separate (like OBE) and see ourselves as the player... but if there was no player, there is nothing to "animate" the avatar... in that case then the materialists would be right ... the avatar is nothing more than a physical (or should I say "informational" construct)

    No wonder materialists have to deny their very own consciousness!

    (God!... I just can't get enough of this kind of topic... : D
    Last edited by sigma6; 14th October 2017 at 22:55.
    We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time
    By faith we understand things which are seen were not made of the things which are visible

  18. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to sigma6 For This Post:

    Baby Steps (14th October 2017), Foxie Loxie (15th October 2017), Jayke (15th October 2017), Wind (15th October 2017)

  19. Link to Post #50
    Canada Avalon Member Ernie Nemeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th January 2011
    Location
    Toronto
    Age
    61
    Posts
    3,636
    Thanks
    15,528
    Thanked 21,309 times in 3,399 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    Didn't like the line and circle analogy? Okay then.

    The two fundamental camps of science are interestingly divided on the topic of the duality of light. One team considers the particle aspect of light as fundamental, the others think it is the wave aspect. That's it. That is the history of modern science in one sentence.

    Since the turn of the twentieth century, Dadaists and their leaders have led the vanguard toward existentialism and the modern belief in the particle nature of reality. This is the old guard stance to this day, over 100 years later. The universe is driven by forces that are 'carried' by particles.

    Science is not driven by 'pure' research - it is driven by philosophical determination, by men like Satre and his ilk. They think the big thoughts, then others (scientists) venture forth to prove them right or wrong.

    Most do not understand this tenuous connection, and it has been circumvented in recent decades by the black projects that give the wrong people the right to steer research into operational technology.

    Research is no longer done for knowledge alone, if it ever was, following the trail wherever it may lead. No, now we research areas to do with vested interests and how to keep those interests and grow them exponentially via pys-ops, warfare, and information technologies.

    Pure science has no immediate payback and so for the most part it is not done.

  20. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Ernie Nemeth For This Post:

    Baby Steps (15th October 2017), dynamo (15th October 2017), Foxie Loxie (15th October 2017), Jayke (15th October 2017), sigma6 (24th March 2018), Wind (15th October 2017)

  21. Link to Post #51
    Canada Avalon Member Ernie Nemeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th January 2011
    Location
    Toronto
    Age
    61
    Posts
    3,636
    Thanks
    15,528
    Thanked 21,309 times in 3,399 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    The line: particles.
    The circle: waves.

  22. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Ernie Nemeth For This Post:

    dynamo (15th October 2017), Foxie Loxie (15th October 2017), Jayke (15th October 2017), sigma6 (24th March 2018)

  23. Link to Post #52
    UK Avalon Member
    Join Date
    20th February 2011
    Location
    Manchester
    Age
    35
    Posts
    1,005
    Thanks
    8,199
    Thanked 5,648 times in 930 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    Quote Posted by Ernie Nemeth (here)
    The line: particles.
    The circle: waves.
    Particles and waves. Materialism versus aether. It's all very left brain, right brain to me. Left hand path versus right hand path. Personally I've always been more interested in what happens when those two hemispheres are united in an alchemical wedding of insight, and the left hand and right hand combine in the spirit of harmony and collaboration.

    Within particle and wave there's also sound and cymatics...and in that regard I'd suggest leaving the binary dualistic world of left and right for a moment and incorporate the third element of movement to create a dynamic tripartite structure.

    A good place to start is Eric Dollards Versor Algebra, an algebra that combines lines and circles to create sound.

    http://www.gestaltreality.com/energy...-dollard-2012/

    Dollard is one of the only engineers since Tesla to recreate Teslas magnifying transmitter technology. Not only does he know how to recreate teslas work but he's also created his Versor algebra to teach people how to engineer the amplification of energy process. What does Dollard think of today's theories of quantum mechanics...

    (A qoute from the above article)
    Quote The music of today has degenerated into the gutter sounds of “Hump N’ Slap,” and “Eubonic Barking Savages”, then the Boom….Boom Boom…….. Accordingly it is seen that the so called Science has followed a parallel path. This is known as “Quantum Mechanics”, the science of delusions. This “Science” in reality is no more than one big “Khazarian Circle Jerk”. And finally? Art! What an absolute joke. To criticize it is like slaying the slain. Today one can obtain a grant from the “Sheisenburg Foundation” to express one’s “artistic talent” by smearing human fecal matter onto a large canvas. Upon calling it “God” it will be worth millions. This is society today, COMPLETELY DEGENERATE
    A "Khazarian Circle Jerk" lol that line cracks me up

    So What does Dollards Versor Algebra look like in practice...it looks like J.S. Bach and Mozart, the science of the music of the spheres.

    http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2qccdb

    If pure science has no immediate pay-off, why are the black projects supposedly 10,000 years (technologically wise) ahead of where we're currently at today? (According to various sources at least)

  24. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Jayke For This Post:

    dynamo (15th October 2017), Ernie Nemeth (15th October 2017), Foxie Loxie (15th October 2017)

  25. Link to Post #53
    Canada Avalon Member Ernie Nemeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th January 2011
    Location
    Toronto
    Age
    61
    Posts
    3,636
    Thanks
    15,528
    Thanked 21,309 times in 3,399 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    In the referred to article there is a mathematics that seems at first confusing, yet it is exactly the proportional relationship between line and circle that is being addressed, both in music and electrical fields. The mathematics is a phase relationship, just like the phases of the moon. In terms of electrical fields, the field strength and direction. In terms of music, the frequency and number of notes to a scale. Related harmonics are merely fractals of the original and resonate or relate in whole number intervals, thereby removing the small +/- error to all reasonable satisfaction (but not to perfection).

    Yet in each case the relationship is proportional and cannot be resolved in terms of whole numbers. That is the reason for the math - to smooth out, or to average, the discrepancy.

    A circle cannot be divided evenly by seven...

  26. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Ernie Nemeth For This Post:

    dynamo (15th October 2017), Foxie Loxie (15th October 2017), Jayke (15th October 2017)

  27. Link to Post #54
    UK Avalon Member
    Join Date
    20th February 2011
    Location
    Manchester
    Age
    35
    Posts
    1,005
    Thanks
    8,199
    Thanked 5,648 times in 930 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    To play beautiful music you don't need to play all 7 notes at the same time. I've watched how Dollard implements his Versor Algebra to find pristine chords i.e. find 2 or 3 notes on a scale whose harmonics don't cause any dissonance between each other, and the result is a resonance that allows aether to flow freely, without resistance, through an electrical circuit. With a series of overtone harmonics on a higher scale, that energy can be amplified through sympathetic resonance to the point that it generates more energy than required to put into the system to get the initial notes vibrating.

    That's my current understanding of how his stuff works at least, I'll probably have to refine my analogies as I get into it more deeply. But currently Dollard is using this method to build an early warning seismic device, that detects extremely subtle vibrations in the earths crust and amplifies those signals, giving a pre-seismic warning system that can alert to the onset of earthquakes before they happen, giving a much earlier window of warning for people to find safety than traditional seismic detection devices.

  28. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Jayke For This Post:

    dynamo (15th October 2017), Ernie Nemeth (16th October 2017), Foxie Loxie (15th October 2017), sigma6 (24th March 2018)

  29. Link to Post #55
    United States Avalon Member Foxie Loxie's Avatar
    Join Date
    20th September 2015
    Location
    Central NY
    Age
    75
    Posts
    3,079
    Thanks
    67,683
    Thanked 17,357 times in 2,953 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    Either that or watch Dutchsince & follow the logic!

  30. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Foxie Loxie For This Post:

    dynamo (15th October 2017), Ernie Nemeth (16th October 2017), Jayke (15th October 2017), sigma6 (16th October 2017)

  31. Link to Post #56
    Avalon Member sigma6's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th July 2011
    Location
    Tattooine
    Posts
    3,428
    Thanks
    8,905
    Thanked 12,629 times in 2,893 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    When it's in superposition (existing in more than one place at a time, essentially a distribution of positions... it's a wave...) when it is viewed, recorded, interacted with... it collapses and behaves like a particle... and the mind blowing part, is that there is an undeniable relationship between these two states and our conscious interaction... another proof that consciousness is tangible and effects the (was going to say 'material') external 3D realm we call 'reality'... 'intention' experiments (exercises in the focus and control of our consciousness) show that we can move random number generators to produce statistically proven non-random results... plus the Emoto experiments... consciousness is part of the equation... Tom Campbell has one of the most intriguing explanations on the how and why...
    We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time
    By faith we understand things which are seen were not made of the things which are visible

  32. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to sigma6 For This Post:

    Baby Steps (16th October 2017), Ernie Nemeth (16th October 2017), Foxie Loxie (16th October 2017), JRS (16th October 2017)

  33. Link to Post #57
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    52
    Posts
    1,406
    Thanks
    15,065
    Thanked 6,413 times in 1,261 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    I asked Nassim the following, the correct answer would be 'go read my work and stop distracting me'

    Anyway, maybe someone here could help. Sigma 6?

    Quote 1. I think I have grasped the idea behind your very significant discovery that the strong force is in fact gravity- the way I put it to myself is - think of the proton as a bubble with the surface moving at c. When interacting with it - at a distance when the system can be modelled as a point mass, it has a certain mass (and gravitational attraction) based on the amount of mass it is presenting to us. But it is a spinning system (in some way), so as much of that surface is spinning away from us, as towards us. in these circumstances the relativistic component of the mass cancels out, and we are left with the mass of the part of the psu's that are held in our space, which is much less. Hence a proton is much lighter than a black hole. But if you get very close, you can no longer consider it a point mass. You are so close that your event horizon is much closer to the near surface of the bubble than it is to the far surface. In that location, the relativistic effect of 'spin' on the psu surface makes it locally VERY HEAVY- enough to produce the strong force. Am I in the ball park?

    2. What holds a fixed proportion of the psu's in our reality? Can I assume that the psu's are in the same condition on all locations of the spherical proton event horizon (is it spherical?). If the force holding them in their condition is inertial, what kind of motion at the surface would produce identical inertial conditions over the whole sphere surface? Is that where coriolis forces come in?

    3. If the surface is travelling at c, and the proton event horizon can be considered a 'black hole' event horizon, under what conditions could a greater proportion of the psu mass appear in this space? This difficulty appears to my (very slight) understanding to question the idea of a holographic psu solution for a black hole (but not a proton)
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  34. The Following User Says Thank You to Baby Steps For This Post:

    Foxie Loxie (6th February 2018)

  35. Link to Post #58
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    52
    Posts
    1,406
    Thanks
    15,065
    Thanked 6,413 times in 1,261 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    The following is a great introduction to Elizabeth Rauscher a scientist of towering reputation, who co-wrote Nassim's paper: Scale unification- a universal scaling law for organized matter.
    Also a great you tube channel that I found on the following Collective Evolution article.(Covers the possible implications of entanglement.)

    This lady is very inspiring. Part of the Berkeley hippy physics scene of the 60's, wisdom just pours out of her on topics such as remote viewing, quantum physics, Turing and 'psychic computers' . She says that although an AI might be able to pass the Turing Test, because it could never be psychic, it could never be conscious. I was thinking that the human race would be out of the woods by now if people like her had double the life span. If you downloaded her knowledge and personality into an AI bot, I fear it would, due to lack of a psychic connection, do more harm than good.

    Her energy is fantastic and even without following the physics it is worth a listen to pick up on her sheer joy in exploring ultimate reality.





    Quote Elizabeth A. Rauscher, PhD, is a physicist and parapsychological researcher. She is author of over 250 scientific papers as well as co-author of several books including Orbiting the Moons of Pluto: Complex Solutions to the Einstein, Maxwell, Schrodinger and Dirac Equations and The Holographic Anthropic Multiverse: Formalizing the Complex Geometry of Reality. She is also co-author of a forthcoming book titled Mind Dynamics in Space and Time: A Physicist’s Exploration of the Nature and Properties of Consciousness. She has served on the faculty of the University of California, Berkeley; John F. Kennedy University; and the University of Nevada, Reno. She has also worked as a researcher at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Stanford Research Institute Radio Physics Laboratory, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Her work has been featured in a book written by MIT professor David Kaiser titled, How the Hippies Saved Physics: Science, Counterculture, and the Physics Revival.

    Here she explores the philosophical implications of quantum theory. She points out how “spooky action at a distance” has haunted physics since Isaac Newton’s theory of gravitation. Albert Einstein, who developed relativity theory, resisted quantum mechanics and developed the “EPR paradox” (with colleagues Podolsky and Rosen) as a way to show that quantum theory must be incorrect. Physicist John S. Bell later formalized the EPR paradox as a theorem. In recent years, John Clauser and other physicists have been able to test Bell’s Theorem and have shown – as Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen had predicted – that quantum theory does indeed imply “spooky action at a distance.” Particles are entangled with each other across space and time. This is also known as “non-locality”. Rauscher suggests that this entanglement may tell us something about how the human mind works.

    New Thinking Allowed host, Jeffrey Mishlove, PhD, is author of The Roots of Consciousness, Psi Development Systems, and The PK Man. Between 1986 and 2002 he hosted and co-produced the original Thinking Allowed public television series. He is the recipient of the only doctoral diploma in "parapsychology" ever awarded by an accredited university (University of California, Berkeley, 1980). His master's degree is in criminology. He serves as dean of transformational psychology at the University of Philosophical Research. He teaches parapsychology for ministers in training with the Centers for Spiritual Living through the Holmes Institute. He has served as vice-president of the Association for Humanistic Psychology, and is the recipient of its Pathfinder Award for outstanding contributions to the field of human consciousness. He is also past-president of the non-profit Intuition Network, an organization dedicated to creating a world in which all people are encouraged to cultivate and apply their inner, intuitive abilities. His American Indian name, chosen at age eight, is Soaring Eagle.
    Last edited by Baby Steps; 26th February 2018 at 13:37.
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  36. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Baby Steps For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (27th February 2018), Foxie Loxie (26th February 2018), Reinhard (28th February 2018), sigma6 (24th March 2018)

  37. Link to Post #59
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    72
    Posts
    27,723
    Thanks
    28,846
    Thanked 129,184 times in 20,635 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    Quote Posted by Baby Steps (here)
    The following is a great introduction to Elizabeth Rauscher a scientist of towering reputation, who co-wrote Nassim's paper: Scale unification- a universal scaling law for organized matter.
    Also a great you tube channel that I found on the following Collective Evolution article.(Covers the possible implications of entanglement.)

    This lady is very inspiring. Part of the Berkeley hippy physics scene of the 60's, wisdom just pours out of her on topics such as remote viewing, quantum physics, Turing and 'psychic computers' . She says that although an AI might be able to pass the Turing Test, because it could never be psychic, it could never be conscious. I was thinking that the human race would be out of the woods by now if people like her had double the life span. If you downloaded her knowledge and personality into an AI bot, I fear it would, due to lack of a psychic connection, do more harm than good.

    Her energy is fantastic and even without following the physics it is worth a listen to pick up on her sheer joy in exploring ultimate reality.
    ...

    Quote Elizabeth A. Rauscher, PhD, is a physicist and parapsychological researcher. ... In recent years, John Clauser and other physicists have been able to test Bell’s Theorem and have shown – as Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen had predicted – that quantum theory does indeed imply “spooky action at a distance.” Particles are entangled with each other across space and time. This is also known as “non-locality”. Rauscher suggests that this entanglement may tell us something about how the human mind works. ...
    I will confess to preferring the "energy" of another physicist, Dr Caroline_H_Thompson, who has published papers casting a serious shadow of doubt over the published results of the EPR experiments and over their conclusion that this results demonstrate the presence of quantum entanglement and spooky action at a distance.

    To put it simply, Dr Thompson shows that the results of these EPR experiments depended on showing that some measured values would be seen more often than other values, and that they incorrectly arrived at their conclusions, supporting quantum entanglement, by first discarding some of the data that would have otherwise led to the opposite conclusion.

    Her papers on this topic:

  38. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Paul For This Post:

    Baby Steps (27th February 2018), Bill Ryan (27th February 2018), Foxie Loxie (27th February 2018)

  39. Link to Post #60
    Avalon Member sigma6's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th July 2011
    Location
    Tattooine
    Posts
    3,428
    Thanks
    8,905
    Thanked 12,629 times in 2,893 posts

    Default Re: The unified field theory as explained by Nassim Haramein

    Quote Posted by Baby Steps (here)
    I asked Nassim the following, the correct answer would be 'go read my work and stop distracting me'

    Anyway, maybe someone here could help. Sigma 6?

    Quote 1. I think I have grasped the idea behind your very significant discovery that the strong force is in fact gravity- the way I put it to myself is - think of the proton as a bubble with the surface moving at c. When interacting with it - at a distance when the system can be modelled as a point mass, it has a certain mass (and gravitational attraction) based on the amount of mass it is presenting to us. But it is a spinning system (in some way), so as much of that surface is spinning away from us, as towards us. in these circumstances the relativistic component of the mass cancels out, and we are left with the mass of the part of the psu's that are held in our space, which is much less. Hence a proton is much lighter than a black hole. But if you get very close, you can no longer consider it a point mass. You are so close that your event horizon is much closer to the near surface of the bubble than it is to the far surface. In that location, the relativistic effect of 'spin' on the psu surface makes it locally VERY HEAVY- enough to produce the strong force. Am I in the ball park?

    2. What holds a fixed proportion of the psu's in our reality? Can I assume that the psu's are in the same condition on all locations of the spherical proton event horizon (is it spherical?). If the force holding them in their condition is inertial, what kind of motion at the surface would produce identical inertial conditions over the whole sphere surface? Is that where coriolis forces come in?

    3. If the surface is travelling at c, and the proton event horizon can be considered a 'black hole' event horizon, under what conditions could a greater proportion of the psu mass appear in this space? This difficulty appears to my (very slight) understanding to question the idea of a holographic psu solution for a black hole (but not a proton)
    This is too technical for me... and I am not even sure what the stated goal of trying to ask this type of question and what you hope for in an answer... It's like seeing a Maserati in your driveway... the spiritualists want to know how it got there... the geeks want to know how individual components were manufactured... the 'pragmatic realists' (for lack of a better label in this context) although they might want to look under the hood (who wouldn't) they will foremost want to find the keys and want to take it for a spin in a large empty mall parking lot to see what it can do... '; ) best I can answer this... : )



    On another note:
    Quote The following is a great introduction to Elizabeth Rauscher a scientist of towering reputation, who co-wrote Nassim's paper: Scale unification- a universal scaling law for organized matter. Also a great you tube channel that I found on the following Collective Evolution article.(Covers the possible implications of entanglement.)

    This lady is very inspiring. Part of the Berkeley hippy physics scene of the 60's, wisdom just pours out of her on topics such as remote viewing, quantum physics, Turing and 'psychic computers' . She says that although an AI might be able to pass the Turing Test, because it could never be psychic, it could never be conscious.
    Exactly my interpretation and rationale on the issue of "AI" and consciousness... (I just love it when someone or something independently confirms my own thoughts ; ) ) i.e. 'AI' will never be anything more than a hyper fast interactive database (that by definition, is constantly out of date...) and when an AI car runs over and kills someone... it will obviously have zero comprehension, remorse, and sadly this isn't an acceptable learning curve (or in the case of a computer... more additional info to file into said database...) i.e. there is NO CONSCIOUSNESS, NO AWARENESS...

    And btw ... the 'statistical' argument that was used almost instantly to "defend" the 'accident', despite the fact that even laypeople instantly latched onto it in mindless agreement (even more pathetic) is a completely erroneous and misleading argument... unbelievable... scary unbelievable...
    Last edited by sigma6; 24th March 2018 at 16:01.
    We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time
    By faith we understand things which are seen were not made of the things which are visible

  40. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to sigma6 For This Post:

    Baby Steps (24th March 2018), Foxie Loxie (24th March 2018)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 3 4 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts