New "connected universe" theory offers alternative explanation of gravity and the source of mass (Nassim Haramein)

[Studeo]

Kilauea, Hawaii (May 7, 2013) - A groundbreaking paper published last week sheds new light on the theory of gravity and the potential to significantly impact global issues facing the human race, including alternative energy sources.

Nassim Haramein, Director of Research at the Hawaii Institute for Unified Physics (HIUP), has authored a paper titled “Quantum Gravity and the Holographic Mass,” which has been validated and published in the peer review journal, Physical Review and Research International. This paper discusses Haramein’s “Connected Universe” theory, which offers a new and alternative understanding of gravity through basic algebraic and geometric equations.

Haramein’s work indicates everything in the universe is connected, from the largest to the smallest scale, through a unified understanding of gravity. He demonstrates that it is the space that defines matter and not matter that defines space.

“Remember that matter is made up of 99.9 percent space,” Haramein said. “Quantum field theory states that the structure of spacetime itself, at the extremely small level, vibrates with tremendous intensity. If we were to extract even a small percentage of all the energy held within the vibrations present in the space inside your little finger, it would represent enough energy to supply the world’s needs for hundreds of years. This new discovery has the potential to open up access and harness that energy like never before, which would revolutionize life as we know it today.”

At the basis of Haramein’s research is a bold prediction about the charge radius of the proton, which was recently verified by experiment. Less than a month after Haramein sent his paper to the Library of Congress, the Paul Scherrer Institute in Switzerland released a new measurement for the size of the proton, confirming Haramein’s prediction.

“Protons are the primary building blocks of our universe – they are at the center of every atom and therefore are everywhere and in everything,” said Chris Almida, Executive Director of the Resonance Project Foundation, parent organization of HIUP. “It is critical that we accurately understand proton structure if we are to even begin to understand the ‘connected universe.’ Nassim's prediction was confirmed and is exactly right (within the margin of error of the experiment), whereas the Standard Model theory is off by a significant amount.” Almida continued, “If Nassim’s theory is correct, insight into solving some of mankind’s most prevalent problems could be within our grasp.”

Haramein’s approach could potentially unlock new discoveries in the areas of energy, transportation and even space travel.

A twenty minute documentary from filmmaker, Malcom Carter, illustrates these new ideas in a compelling fashion. View the trailer at Resonance.is. More information, visual media and a layman's paper will be released through The Resonance Project Foundation’s website, Resonance.is and HIUP, the official site of the Hawaii Institute of Unified Physics.

For a Science Press Release, visit the Hawaii Institute of Unified Physics website.

For the PR Newswire Press Release Click Here.

ABOUT THE RESONANCE PROJECT FOUNDATION

The Resonance Project Foundation is a 501c3 non-profit organization chartered to conduct research and education in the field of unified physics. The Foundation’s initiatives include The Hawaii Institute for Unified Physics (HIUP), a growing scientific research community working to advance the principles on the forefront of the unified field theory. For more information, visit Resonance.is.


Source: Quantum Gravity and the Holographic Mass (Trailer and Press Release - requires Macromedia Flash) (http://resonance.is/explore/quantum-gravity-and-the-holographic-mass-trailer-and-press-release/)

Download Paper: Quantum Gravity and the Holographic Mass (pdf) (http://resonance.is/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/1367405491-Haramein342013PRRI3363.pdf)

[ThePythonicCow]

The trailer video, on Youtube:bn35qoCjLYA

THE CONNECTED UNIVERSE (Published May 7, 2013)

[ThePythonicCow]

Abstract for this paper, from http://www.sciencedomain.org/abstract.php?iid=224&id=4&aid=1298




We find an exact quantized expression of the Schwarzschild solution to Einstein’s field equations utilizing spherical Planck units in a generalized holographic approach. We consider vacuum fluctuations within volumes as well as on horizon surfaces, generating a discrete spacetime quantization and a novel quantized approach to gravitation. When applied at the quantum scale, utilizing the charge radius of the proton, we find values for the rest mass of the proton within 0.069x(*)gm of the CODATA value and when the 2010 muonic proton charge radius measurement is utilized we find a deviation of 0.001x(*)gm from the proton rest mass. We identify a fundamental mass ratio between the vacuum oscillations on the surface horizon and the oscillations within the volume of a proton and find a solution for the gravitational coupling constant to the strong interaction. We derive the energy, angular frequency, and period for such a system and determine its gravitational potential considering mass dilation. We find the force range to be closely correlated with the Yukawa potential typically utilized to illustrate the exponential drop-off of the confining force. Zero free parameters or hidden variables are utilized.
(*) Place 10 to the power of -24 here. This forum software lacks support for superscripts.

[onawah]

I hope Nassim's discovery turns out to be everything the video predicts.
Possibly this young man will be taking up where Nassim leaves off.
Uq-FOOQ1TpE
Read more about Jacob at:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/autistic-boy-genius-iq-higher-einstein-article-1.1340923

Jacob Barnett, who was diagnosed with moderate to severe autism at 2 years old, is now studying for a master's degree in quantum physics.

As a child, doctors told Jacob Barnett’s parents that their autistic son would probably never know how to tie his shoes.

But experts say the 14-year-old Indiana prodigy has an IQ higher than Einstein’s and is on the road to winning a Nobel Prize. He’s given TedX talks and is working toward a master’s degree in quantum physics.

The key, according to mom Kristine Barnett, was letting Jacob be himself — by helping him study the world with wide-eyed wonder instead of focusing on a list of things he couldn’t do.

Diagnosed with moderate to severe autism at the age of 2, Jacob spent years in the clutches of a special education system that didn’t understand what he needed. His teachers at school would try to dissuade Kristine from hoping to teach Jacob any more than the most basic skills.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/autistic-boy-genius-iq-higher-einstein-article-1.1340923#ixzz2T9bygQab


(I wonder if he had all his vaccines, which is causing massive numbers of artificially induced autistic cases, esp. in the US...)

[Azt]

oqurHHu5CF8 - Coast to Coast AM

Nassim Haramein shared his Unified Theory about the structure of the universe, drawing from such fields as theoretical physics, cosmology, quantum mechanics, biology, chemistry, and anthropology. We could be part of a multiverse, he noted, in the sense that our universe is probably embedded into a larger universe, which itself is embedded in a larger universe, and so on, scaling into infinity. While the material world makes up less than 99.9% of our universe, the space around it is not empty-- rather it's a vacuum that's filled with energy and only appears empty because it's everywhere, he explained.

Haramein suggested that all organized matter from black holes to atoms share basic properties and structures on different scales. Inside a single proton is the energy of the universe, and since all protons are connected (in what is called entanglement), everything that exists is part of a oneness, he stated. Access to infinity is within ourselves, through the very atoms of our being, he continued.

Eliminating the strong and weak forces of the atomic world, Haramein's Unified Theory is based on the fundamental forces of gravity and the electromagnetic, which are in a feedback loop, and cause the universe to expand and contract at the same time. He has formed the Resonance Project to bring scientists and physicists together to further research unified theories and applications.

Biography:

Nassim Haramein has spent most of his life researching the geometry of hyperspace, theoretical physics, cosmology, quantum mechanics, biology, chemistry as wells as anthropology and ancient civilizations. Combining this knowledge with a keen observation of the behavior of nature, he discovered a specific geometric array that he found to be fundamental to creation, and the foundation for his Unified Field Theory emerged. Mr. Haramein founded a non-profit organization, the Resonance Project Foundation, where, as the Director of Research, he continues exploring unification principles and their implications in our world today.

[ThePythonicCow]

SCIENCEDOMAIN International (SDI) is the publisher of the "Physical Review & Research International" journal which published this paper. SDI publishes a number of scientific journals, listed here (http://www.sciencedomain.org/journals.php). SDI provides rapid turn around, with review feedback within a few weeks.

SDI's primary source of income appears to be an Article Processing Charge (APC) (http://www.sciencedomain.org/page.php?id=publication-charge) charged to the author of submitted papers. They also sell advertising in their journals, here (http://www.sciencedomain.org/page.php?id=advertisement). SDI does not charge a subscription fee to access their published articles, and they are not supported by a separate scientific or academic institution or professional society.

The Open Review history for this paper of Nassim's is available at: http://www.sciencedomain.org/review-history.php?iid=224&id=4&aid=1298

[ThePythonicCow]

Less than a month after Haramein sent his paper to the Library of Congress, the Paul Scherrer Institute in Switzerland released a new measurement for the size of the proton, confirming Haramein’s prediction.
This result is described in this Huffington Post article: Proton Size Smaller Than Physicists Thought, Puzzling New Measurements Suggest (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/14/proton-size-smaller-physicists-new-measurements_n_3080196.html).

This article begins:



By: Stephanie Pappas, LiveScience Senior Writer
Published: 04/13/2013 03:10 PM EDT on LiveScience

DENVER — The size of a proton, long thought to be well-understood, may remain a mystery for a while longer, according to physicists.

Speaking today (April 13) at the April meeting of the American Physical Society, researchers said they need more data to understand why new measurements of proton size (http://www.livescience.com/26563-shrinking-proton-smaller-measurement.html) don't match old ones.

"The discrepancy is rather severe," said Randolf Pohl, a scientist at the Max Planck Institute of Quantum Optics. The question, Pohl and his colleagues said, is whether the explanation is a boring one — someone messed up the measurements — or something that will generate new physics theories. [Wacky Physics: The Coolest Particles in Nature (http://www.livescience.com/13593-exotic-particles-sparticles-antimatter-god-particle.html)]

The incredible shrinking proton

The proton is a positively charged particle in the nucleus of atoms, the building blocks of everything. Years of measurements pegged the proton at 0.8768 femtometers in radius (a femtometer is a millionth of a billionth of a meter).

But a new method used in 2009 found a different measurement: 0.84087 femtometers, a 4 percent difference in radius.

[greybeard]

I am really pleased that Nassim at last seems to be receiving recognition for his work--- at least the door is open for him to be taken seriously.
Chris

[ThePythonicCow]

A message from Nassim, posted here (http://resonance.is/news/a-message-from-nassim-haramein/) on April 30, 2013, regarding this work:



I am excited to announce that my latest paper, Quantum Gravity and the Holographic Mass, a document four years in the making, has passed peer review and is now published in the Physical Review and Research International Journal (http://www.sciencedomain.org/abstract.php?iid=224&id=4&aid=1298#.UYmwF6tgZEZ), at ScienceDomain International. Although simple mathematically, as the algebra mostly expresses geometric relationships, the paper has deep significance to physics and profound meaning to our understanding of ourselves and the universe…

I am in the midst of writing a complementary manuscript for the layperson to describe step by step the implications of each section of the technical paper. Stay tuned for the release of this article very soon. As well a wonderful 20 minute documentary is being produced walking you through the journey from the cosmological to the quantum world. Click here to view the trailer (http://resonance.is/explore/quantum-gravity-and-the-holographic-mass-trailer-and-press-release/). I believe that this may be a pivotal moment in our understanding of the inner workings of nature and I’m delighted to be able to bring it to you. Please help us share it far and wide.

(Bold added above by myself.)

[ThePythonicCow]

The Open Review history for this paper of Nassim's is available at: http://www.sciencedomain.org/review-history.php?iid=224&id=4&aid=1298
Here is the text of these reviews:

Review 1:



The author defined the holographic mass and applied it to the black hole and the proton. There are some interesting coincidences, e.g. similarity with strong force and Yukawa potential in short range in the study. However, There are still some questions to be answered:

The meaning of holographic principle(HP) is definitely not that used in the paper. Moreover, the area in Eq.(4) should be surface area. Generally, HP is no problem when used in black holes, but it is problematic when used in the weak gravitational field. How to guarantee its validity when used in the system of protons?
The black hole mass and proton mass were obtained from different formula (Eq. 9 and Eq. 24), although they were explained in holographic principle. Why?
The author described a system in section5 to use the gravitational interaction to explain the strong force. Where could we see the evidence of gluon? Or does the gluon derived from the evolution of graviton?
For the system consisted of two protons, there indeed are many coincidences. But if they cannot be extended into other systems, e.g. three protons etc., the phenomena described in the paper is not enough to support their conclusion. In a word, the conclusions obtained in the paper are highly implicative in the physical mechanism. However, it is interesting to understand further these coincidences found by the author.

The paper is not proper to be published in the present form.
Review 2:



This manuscript contains trivial mathematics and algebraic manipulations expresed as more important than they are. The manuscript is filled with nonsensical sentences without proper definitions etc. If there is an explanation, why the product of proton charge and Schwarzschild radii is about equal to the square of Planck length, it not given in this manuscript, where is explained nothing. This text should not be published.
Review 3:



The Paper is well-motivated, well-written and contains interesting results. All calculations are correct and the presentation is also suitable. I recommend publication of this paper. The only thing that is necessary to be considered before publication is a reference to the Planck scale physics. This can be done by referring to [arXiv:hep-th/0508078] and [arXiv:1205.0158].
Review 4:



Although there are still some unclear things in the present work which might need further exploration, the results about nuclear force are enough interesting and also possibly helpful for the present research of quantum gravity or Grand Unity theory. So the paper deserves publication.

Review 5:



The revised version of the paper is suitable for publication. I recommend it publication.

[ThePythonicCow]

I added the qualifier "(Nassim Haramein)" to this thread's title, since the fact that this thread is discussing Nassim Haramein's work will have a substantial impact on member's level of interest in this thread.

[TargeT]

I added the qualifier "(Nassim Haramein)" to this thread's title, since the fact that this thread is discussing Nassim Haramein's work will have a substantial impact on member's level of interest in this thread.


Haha, your favorite "scientist" strikes again!

Good job of interjecting some ballance to this, his work does raise some questions.

[Mike Gorman]

I hope Nassim's discovery turns out to be everything the video predicts.
Possibly this young man will be taking up where Nassim leaves off.
Uq-FOOQ1TpE
Read more about Jacob at:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/autistic-boy-genius-iq-higher-einstein-article-1.1340923

Jacob Barnett, who was diagnosed with moderate to severe autism at 2 years old, is now studying for a master's degree in quantum physics.

As a child, doctors told Jacob Barnett’s parents that their autistic son would probably never know how to tie his shoes.

But experts say the 14-year-old Indiana prodigy has an IQ higher than Einstein’s and is on the road to winning a Nobel Prize. He’s given TedX talks and is working toward a master’s degree in quantum physics.

The key, according to mom Kristine Barnett, was letting Jacob be himself — by helping him study the world with wide-eyed wonder instead of focusing on a list of things he couldn’t do.

Diagnosed with moderate to severe autism at the age of 2, Jacob spent years in the clutches of a special education system that didn’t understand what he needed. His teachers at school would try to dissuade Kristine from hoping to teach Jacob any more than the most basic skills.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/autistic-boy-genius-iq-higher-einstein-article-1.1340923#ixzz2T9bygQab


(I wonder if he had all his vaccines, which is causing massive numbers of artificially induced autistic cases, esp. in the US...)

I think there are varying degrees of this thing called 'Autism' and our horrendous School systems completely nullify a lot of potentially gifted people
and our pre-conceived ideas about learning dictate the way Teachers are 'taught' to teach (!)and importantly, Evaluate children's abilities-oh yes...
This guy is excited as hell-reminds me of myself as a kid-you couldn't drag me out of the public library and museum (Chester -museum, thousand year old city)
Anyway, what a great kid, we need to really think about education, and how set in concrete our systems are-we need to ban IQ tests* and get down to real nurturing of learning.
*IQ tests are a lot of crap-they are based on eugenic dodgy science.

[onawah]

I think it's a shame that a thread on Nassim's work needs a qualifier, though I understand the reasoning, but I agree with Chris (Greybeard), who wrote, "I am really pleased that Nassim at last seems to be receiving recognition for his work--- at least the door is open for him to be taken seriously."
As for young Jacob, it looks like he will soon be opening up the field up to even more creative thinking rather than rote learning and mechanical theories.
And as soon as the alternative, awake community manages to prove conclusively to all that vaccines and drugs to quell the enthusiasm and eagerness, and dull the inquisitiveness of children like Jacob are criminal, the sooner we will have more bright young minds assisting in the creation of a new and better paradigm.

[ThePythonicCow]

Less than a month after Haramein sent his paper to the Library of Congress, the Paul Scherrer Institute in Switzerland released a new measurement for the size of the proton, confirming Haramein’s prediction.
This is an unfortunate claim, in my view.

The "gold standard", both for scientific theories and bold predictions in other arenas, is to predict something that seems unobvious or unlikely when predicted, but turns out to be verified or to occur as predicted.

The above quoted claim makes it sound as if Haramein's paper successfully made such a prediction.

His paper did no such thing.

What happened was the following.

As Haramein documents in his paper, in 2010 Aldo Antognini's team at the PSI found a new, lower, value for the charge radius of a proton, using a "muon hydrogen atom" (which is a hydrogen atom with the electron replaced with a much heavier, but still negatively charged, muon). Quoting from Haramein's own paper:




Recently, in 2010, an international research team from the Paul Scherrer Institute (PSI) in Villigen (Switzerland) and scientists from the Max Planck Institute of Quantum Optics (MPQ) in Garching, the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) Munich and the Institut für Strahlwerkzeuge (IFWS) of the Universität Stuttgart (both from Germany), and the University of Coimbra, Portugal obtained measurements recently published in Nature of the spectrum of muonic hydrogen that found a significantly lower value of rp = 0.84184 ×10−13 cm [10] compared to the CODATA value of the proton charge radius.

The first half (I have not digested the second half yet) of Haramein's paper is primarily concerned with correlations between the size and the mass of objects sufficiently dense to capture light, be they (small) protons or (large) black holes such as in the black hole Cygnus X-1 with a radius of 25 km.

Haramein's paper calculates an estimate of the proton's mass closer to experimental data using this PSI 2010 result than using the previous estimates of the proton's radius.

Or, reversing the calculations, starting with the proton's experimentally observed mass, he calculates an estimate of the proton's radius that is closer to the PSI 2010 result than it is to previous estimates of the proton's radius.

Then on Jan 25, 2013 (here (http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/01/25/shrinking-proton-particle-is-smaller-than-thought/) and here (http://www.sciencemag.org/content/339/6118/417.abstract)), PSI updated their results with a newer, more careful measurement that changed the value slightly and improved the precision. This result was received for publication by the Science journal on 11 September 2012, and accepted for publication 30 November 2012.

Then on Feb 21, 2013 (here (http://www.sciencedomain.org/review-history.php?iid=224&id=4&aid=1298)) Nassim Haramein submitted this paper to SDI. His paper discusses in detail PSI's 2010 result, as quoted above, but does not mention PSI's 2013 refinement.

Nothing in Haramein's paper predicts or anticipates anything in PSI's 2013 refinement that wasn't already published in their 2010 result! This is so even though PSI's 2013 result had been published for a month before Haramein first submitted his paper to SDI (and PSI's result was accepted for publication two months prior to that.)

Here is a table of the various estimates of the charge radius in femtometers (fm) of a proton relevant to the above scenario:

0.8768 fm -- generally accepted radius using electron hydrogen
0.8418 fm -- PSI 2010 radius using muon hydrogen
0.8408 fm -- PSI Jan 2013 radius, refining their 2010 result
0.8412 fm -- Haramein's Feb 2013 radius estimate from proton mass


The implication that Nassim Haramein's paper successfully made this important prediction is false and misleading.

[Hypnos]

Wow.

Regarding the theory and the trailer, I had a dream a few years ago that I will mention here.

I found myself in a place where people wore strange clothes. At one point, I entered a room where a man was offering healing services.

Spirals of energy left his hands.

He looked at me and said, "energy moves in spirals."

I told this dream to a woman I knew back then and she said, it sounds like you went to Avalon in your dream.

I think I must be in the right place now.

- H

[onawah]

I've reworded this post because I realized on rereading preceding posts that there was no accusation per se against Nassim.
Nassim has been accused of a lot of things by his detractors, but it's really hard for me to believe that he would do something so obvious, or so dishonest as to deliberately claim accomplishments that are not really his.
It may be simply a question of who got to the finish line first, which as Chris points out, is a common occurrence in scientific circles.
But it would be nice if the more hidebound scientists who are so resistant to any new insights were subject to the same kind of scrutiny as non conformists like Haramein.

[greybeard]

Nassim has been accused of a lot of things by his detractors, but it's really hard for me to believe that he would do something so obvious, or so dishonest as post #15 describes.

I dont think Nassim is being accused of anything here and now onawah.
It seems that several "inventors" can be on track for discovery at the same time---- TV and Wireless classics.
If one hadn’t got it another would have.
The fact that one comes out before another does not detract from the work put in by all.
One may be more complete than another at the end of the day.
I know nothing of science so I cant judge the mechanics of it-- hopefully the end result of it all will be of benefit to the human race.
I just like the way that Nassim explains things with gusto, enthusiasm and clarity.
Is he at the cutting edge of science? I have no way of knowing--- however I don’t doubt his dedication and honourable intention.

Chris

[onawah]

Good points, Chris!
What I especially appreciate about Nassim is that he goes to the trouble of explaining scientific theories to the layperson, and he is apparently preparing to do just that in this case as well.
I look forward to his coming presentation.

[_Justice_original]

The implication that Nassim Haramein's paper successfully made this important prediction is false and misleading.

If you are willing to hear it, this is actually not true. There are two important points to take into consideration that show Nassim is not misleading people by saying his paper predicts a smaller-than-before charge radius of the proton.

1) He calculates the charge radius through equations, while the PSI studies calculated the proton charge radius through experiment. So far, Nassim's equations are the only equations that produce a similar result that these two experiments found. He is achieving this without using data from the experiments in order to calculate the charge radius, therefore he is 'predicting' the results of the charge radius independently.

2) He calculates a result that, although very close to experimental data, is different by a small amount. Therefore it stands as its own exact 'prediction' of the proton's charge radius. His result happens to fall within the excepted margin of error as determined by the people at PSI, which means that the EXPERIMENTAL data verifies Nassim's THEORETICAL results.

The table that Paul provided shows the difference in these results quite clearly:


0.8768 fm -- generally accepted radius using electron hydrogen
0.8418 fm -- PSI 2010 radius using muon hydrogen
0.8408 fm -- PSI Jan 2013 radius, refining their 2010 result
0.8412 fm -- Haramein's Feb 2013 radius estimate from proton mass


Because he is approaching his calculations of the proton's charge radius purely using mathematics unrelated to the experiments, Nassim is in fact predicting his own results regardless of the timeline of when the experiments took place. This is further proven by the fact that he comes up with a value for the charge radius of the proton that is different from either experiment. The fact that he calculates a value that is so close to the experimental data should be seen as evidence that his equations can withstand experimental validation.

[ThePythonicCow]

He is achieving this without using data from the experiments in order to calculate the charge radius, therefore he is 'predicting' the results of the charge radius independently.
Welcome, Justice.

Nassim calculated his result using other experimental results. As I wrote above:
Or, reversing the calculations, starting with the proton's experimentally observed mass, he calculates an estimate of the proton's radius that is closer to the PSI 2010 result than it is to previous estimates of the proton's radius.
Thus Harameins' results are not "purely using mathematics", but working back and forth, between the mass and charge radius, estimating what one would be, given some experimental result in the other.

The calculations are a bit circular, and the claim that the PSI Jan 2013 PSI results confirmed Haramein's (subsequent) Feb 2013 paper remains, in my view, a misleading claim.

But it has long been obvious to anyone reading my comments on this forum regarding Haramein that he and I are on "different wavelengths".

[Prodigal Son]

I hope Nassim's discovery turns out to be everything the video predicts.
Possibly this young man will be taking up where Nassim leaves off.
Uq-FOOQ1TpE
Read more about Jacob at:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/autistic-boy-genius-iq-higher-einstein-article-1.1340923

Jacob Barnett, who was diagnosed with moderate to severe autism at 2 years old, is now studying for a master's degree in quantum physics.

As a child, doctors told Jacob Barnett’s parents that their autistic son would probably never know how to tie his shoes.

But experts say the 14-year-old Indiana prodigy has an IQ higher than Einstein’s and is on the road to winning a Nobel Prize. He’s given TedX talks and is working toward a master’s degree in quantum physics.

The key, according to mom Kristine Barnett, was letting Jacob be himself — by helping him study the world with wide-eyed wonder instead of focusing on a list of things he couldn’t do.

Diagnosed with moderate to severe autism at the age of 2, Jacob spent years in the clutches of a special education system that didn’t understand what he needed. His teachers at school would try to dissuade Kristine from hoping to teach Jacob any more than the most basic skills.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/autistic-boy-genius-iq-higher-einstein-article-1.1340923#ixzz2T9bygQab


(I wonder if he had all his vaccines, which is causing massive numbers of artificially induced autistic cases, esp. in the US...)
Thanks for posting this. I don't mean to derail this thread into off-topic land... but I have a 20-yr old autistic son, and it has been my belief for a few years now that whatever imbalance in the brain is being caused by vaccines/pollution/whatever ... resulting in autism ... causes the mind to process quantum reality better than average folks while severely hampering linear processing. I believe it is a preview of what more fully evolved human beings will be able to do in the future (as in the past). This young man demonstrates the capability of the human mind that we have not yet even begun to comprehend. Developing what he is able to do best instead of focusing on what he cannot do is a novel idea, isn't it?

Whatever the cause, the savant abilities of autistic children demonstrate what we all have latent within us. My son taught himself to play the piano and read music. His social skills? Almost non-existent. Guess what are the only two things in our world that are "quantum"? Music and art. Speech is linear. A symphony orchestra is quantum. A choir is quantum. As long as it is all in harmony, the more the merrier. But speech is linear. Try listening to several different lectures at the same time. The cacaphony will soon make you insane. But the London Symphony Orchestra performing Die Fledermaus is like coming face to face with God :)

[_Justice_original]

Thank you for the reply Paul, I am happy to be here!

I understand your concerns, but think you should keep an open mind about the findings in this paper.

I see that saying "purely using mathematics' was unclear on my side. What I meant was that he did not use the experimental data from either of the muonic hydrogen experiments, in 2010 and Jan 2013, to determine his value for the proton charge radius. He does use the standard proton mass. I can see where the equations appear somewhat circular, but after looking at them over and over I do not see any true circularity. What I see is that he runs the equations backwards using the new findings to make sure they achieve acceptable outcomes with other important measurements of the proton (happy to explain this in more detail when I have more time).

I also see your concern with the dates of the publication of the new paper in respect to the Jan 2013 findings. I would like to point you to the US Copyright Office where you can find that they received "Quantum Gravity and the Holographic Mass" in December 2012. It is also relevant to note that providing a theoretical approach to finding the proton charge radius is a much different feat than providing experimental data. Both are very important to science. Experimental data proves what we think is true while accurate theory provides us with greater understanding of why things are the way they are.

It is my belief that Haramein is working in the direction of a theory that will provide us with a framework to understand the universe with much more clarity than before.

[greybeard]

Nassim has experienced Professionally qualified people working with him checking his theories working with him.
One video I watched, he said he is dyslexic so the "numbers" are always checked for him.
Im dyslexic and it brings with it a different way of processing information.

I cant say whether Nassim is correct in his theories or not but I do believe he has integrity.
He is not bought and paid for by some large concern as far as I can see.
We will just have to wait and see.

Chris