IPB




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

7 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Science Is Broken

dMz
post Apr 28 2008, 02:16 PM
Post #1



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



This topic really runs through all others in the GW/CC threads, but I would like to posit the following:

Most, if not all of the "mainstream" sciences AS TAUGHT are inherently flawed and over-simplifications of often poorly-explained strange and wondrous natural phenomena here on Earth (and elsewhere). This is often due to political and academic reasons, but I won't get into that now.

As I believe in being part of the solution (rather than part of the problem) and in "hacking at the root," I suppose I must refer back to one of the true scientific geniuses and to the very early 20th century: Nikola Tesla.

For those that don't know, this is one of the 2 men IMHO who [inadvertently] made possible the Industrial Revolution when he invented the Alternating Current dynamo (AC power). I contend that the other man is James Watt, NOT Thomas Edison. James Watt's "fossil fuel" paradigm is the cause of the "Global Perspectives" threads in my opinion. I personally find it offensive that one of Tesla's original Niagara Falls AC dynamos is on display in the Smithsonian next to Thomas Edison's bust, but what does one do? How little have we learned in the last century?

Tesla wrote an excellent treatise about this very subject about 100 years ago. I'll let Mr. Tesla continue:

Nikola Tesla- The Problem of Increasing Human Energy

http://www.rastko.org.yu/rastko/delo/10793
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Apr 30 2008, 06:39 PM
Post #2



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



OK- case in point- electric charge.

I haven't seen a satisfactory, non-circular definition of electric charge yet provided by "mainstream" science. Not 'q,' not the fundamental constant 'e,' not a description of its behavior, but a definition of what it is and what causes it.

Anyone?

This post has been edited by dMole: Apr 30 2008, 06:41 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
painter
post Apr 30 2008, 06:56 PM
Post #3


∞* M E R C U R I A L *∞


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 5,870
Joined: 25-August 06
From: SFO
Member No.: 16



QUOTE (dMole @ Apr 30 2008, 03:39 PM) *
OK- case in point- electric charge.

I haven't seen a satisfactory, non-circular definition of electric charge yet provided by "mainstream" science. Not 'q,' not the fundamental constant 'e,' not a description of its behavior, but a definition of what it is and what causes it.

Anyone?


You're already way over my head with 'q' and 'e' -- color me a CLUELESS artist

BUT, I've always wondered what electricity "is" so you have my attention. All I've ever heard is that it is what happens when all the electrons line up forming a lattice work. Or something like that. blink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Omega892R09
post May 1 2008, 06:41 AM
Post #4





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 2,194
Joined: 29-September 07
From: Hampshire, UK.
Member No.: 2,274



QUOTE (dMole @ Apr 28 2008, 09:39 PM) *
OK- case in point- electric charge.

I haven't seen a satisfactory, non-circular definition of electric charge yet provided by "mainstream" science. Not 'q,' not the fundamental constant 'e,' not a description of its behavior, but a definition of what it is and what causes it.

Anyone?

I figure this is where we disappear down the particle physics rabbit hole of gluons, bosons, quarks and flavours by chasing electrons and anti-electrons, positrons and neutrons in search of a theory of everything.

Just my immediate thoughts.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lunk
post May 1 2008, 07:21 AM
Post #5



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,982
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



I thought everything was electric.
And wherever there is electricity,
you'll get magnetism.

A magnet has a magnetic field,
and a polarity that will affect
other magnets around it...
like magic...

Ever noticed the similarities in the spelling.
MAGnet MAGic,
I just did.

Where's that link to the Electric Universe?

imo, lunk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post May 1 2008, 04:00 PM
Post #6



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



Next item: How many "Maxwells Equations" are there exactly? The last time I looked at Jacksons grad-school "classic" Classical Electrodynamics, I remember there being 4 differential forms and 4 integral forms (of supposedly the same 4 equations).

I think I may have already told O892 this answer via PM a while back. Does anyone know the title of James Clerk Maxwells thin little book that I am holding in my hand or how a famous Royal Society mathematician "fixed" Maxwells work 20 years post-facto "for simplicity?" Does anyone know what "special" branch of mathematics is needed to properly work with electrical and magnetic problems and whose book is needed here (electrical engineers use an Eulerian sub-set of this, unwittingly IMHO)?

There is no index in the book, but I have not found Maxwell use the word "charge" yet. He discusses the electric and magnetic forces, and currents, but not charge per se. As an aside, Maxwell also mentions "electric elasticity" [by far the best description of dielectric "constant" and capacitors that I have seen anywhere].

I do not have the source handy, but I seem to recall Tesla once saying that there is no energy- just power (with energy being a calculus-derived theoretical construct). As one cannot tangibly measure energy (or heat or entropy for that matter- there is a can of worms), I mostly tend to agree.

Note: my apostrophe key is acting strange today.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
painter
post May 1 2008, 04:07 PM
Post #7


∞* M E R C U R I A L *∞


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 5,870
Joined: 25-August 06
From: SFO
Member No.: 16



QUOTE (lunk @ May 1 2008, 04:21 AM) *
Ever noticed the similarities in the spelling.
MAGnet MAGic,


Even more interesting, IMO, are the similarities between spelling and SPELLING.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post May 1 2008, 04:14 PM
Post #8



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



QUOTE (painter @ Apr 30 2008, 04:56 PM) *
BUT, I've always wondered what electricity "is" so you have my attention. All I've ever heard is that it is what happens when all the electrons line up forming a lattice work. Or something like that. blink.gif


Sorry, forgot to address painters question. The "electron line" model sounds a little like the DMV to me wink.gif. That is a fairly good model of (electrical) current density though. Magnetic currents- well... that is entirely another story.

In my opinion and at the risk of sounding Ouspenskian, the most honest and shortest answer is that we simply do not know what electricity and electric charge are... Again we can describe its behaviour and build EM generators and circuits, but that really is not the same thing as understanding electricity is it?

To further complicate things- there is rumored to be a "cold" form of electricity. I have a photograph of Edwin Gray lowering an illuminated standard incandescent light bulb into a jar of water circa 1978. I doubt anyone is foolish enough to try that with "common" 50 or 60Hz AC power.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
George Hayduke
post May 1 2008, 04:27 PM
Post #9


Got aliens?


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 2,052
Joined: 21-October 06
Member No.: 120



Science is a means, a tool, of political socialization. Other means of political socialization are: Television and the media in general, religion, the education system. In fact the scientific method is fatally flawed in that it implies that reality is limited to what can be physically measured by current existing means. Existence is not limited, boxed into, only that which can be seen, felt, tasted, heard and smelled and can, in other words, be measured. The tao that can be measured is not the True tao, brothers and sisters. Thus, science is a means of boxing in the mindset of what otherwise would be free humanity. It is a Luciferian discipline seeking through differentiation to put a numerical label and value on each individual part of the whole when in fact such cannot be done because individuality is illusory, all is one, and thus differentiation is a futile, perhaps even destructive, exercise. Like religion and education, science has enormous potential when properly employed. Alas, demons run this hell and all waters lead into their ocean. But not for much longer, my brothers and sisters. ...



I deplore violence, but sure do love watching the stormtroopers receiving swift deliverance by force projection of the righteous. Gorge on feces and die Tory scum!

This post has been edited by George Hayduke: May 1 2008, 04:36 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post May 1 2008, 04:56 PM
Post #10



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



Nice GH. That SOAD video is footage from the [rather rare] movie Absolon, if I'm not mistaken.

First it was the Roman Empire, then the [un?]Holy Roman Empire, then the Renaissance/Reformation, then the Scientific Age, then the Industrial Age (which we are still reaping). Some claim that there was an "Information Age" since then, but I have my doubts there- things changed a lot back in 1947.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
George Hayduke
post May 1 2008, 05:25 PM
Post #11


Got aliens?


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 2,052
Joined: 21-October 06
Member No.: 120



You are right. Let me tweak your ideas a bit though, if you could be so kind. Rome never fell. What is the Vatican, but the superficial headquarters of the Roman Catholic Church.

In history there has only been one war. At one point in time we lived, er, mostly at peace with each other and we lived as one with the Mother, Gia, Earth, and one with the spirit world, with which we were in constant contact; then something was embedded in our collective consciousness, the idea that material possessions are of inate value. Once the belief in the material was established, a war broke out, between the haves and the have nots. This war has gone by many different names throughout the nightmare that is our history. WWI, WWII, Vietnam, the War on Drugs, all the same war, just different packaging.

Now let's do a logic leap. If this is the case, then all warfare is really spiritual warfare, which is to say it is conducted to keep the materialist mindset (material existence is all there is to existence) rooted and dominant in the collective conscious, which is to say that all warfare is MindWar, not won with bullets and bombs but in the mind and in the mindset.



Rome was not an empire of cities, roads, economies and militaries. It was a spiritual empire. Let's look at one brief example, the Inquisition, which pitted the Vatican against the Cathars. The Cathars were basically gnostics, which is functionally a precursor of Budhism. They believed in the unity and synchronicity of the all and that through deep thought, or meditation, we tap into the fountainhead of thought that is "God." With the Cathars, the individual is the pipeline to God and through discipline experiences God directly. Contrast that with Vaticanism or Roman Catholicism, which is the whole pyramid-modeled, top down, authoritarian system. (Science is just such a system as well. Right? Something is so b/c some doctor somewhere said it was so.) In Roman Catholicism, the individual is subservient to an authority that brings God into their lives. The war was fought with spears and swords, but make no mistake, it was a MindWar, it was spiritual warfare.

The Roman Empire lives on. Science is but a means of political socialization within the Empire. For humanity to be freed, Rome must fall.

This post has been edited by George Hayduke: May 1 2008, 05:28 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
painter
post May 1 2008, 06:42 PM
Post #12


∞* M E R C U R I A L *∞


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 5,870
Joined: 25-August 06
From: SFO
Member No.: 16



QUOTE (George Hayduke @ May 1 2008, 02:25 PM) *
MindWar


Didn't have time to watch all that video, on the run, but the first statement is incorrect. Mind Science is one of the oldest IF NTO THE OLDEST science.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post May 1 2008, 07:37 PM
Post #13



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



QUOTE (painter @ May 1 2008, 02:07 PM) *
Even more interesting, IMO, are the similarities between spelling and SPELLING.


Ah sigils... thought manifesting as reality? Now where is that Science and Religion thread?

Odd how large these "icebergs" truly become once one's head breaks the surface of the water...

The higher dimensional mathematics and Linear Algebra lend themselves well to this type of reasoning. Here we are, 3D [or 4D or more?] creatures crawling around in a mostly 2D "Flatland" universe [with pilots and mountain dwellers being notable exceptions wink.gif ] Once you project a 3D or higher object/event into a 2D "world," you only see a "shadow" of the true object in that plane (think of a basketball and its shadow, or a half moon- those still seem strange to me).

Which brings us back to Plato's cave allegory- thanks painter.

What if it were not a rabbit hole at all, but rather a [world wide or universal] web?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lunk
post May 1 2008, 08:39 PM
Post #14



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,982
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



Here is something that I heard;
magnetic lines of force are the wrong way
of looking at magnetic fields.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lunk
post May 1 2008, 08:56 PM
Post #15



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,982
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



Here is another broken piece of science:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOp8j6eOBlI

I got a thread started here:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10738634
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bill
post May 9 2008, 07:31 AM
Post #16





Group: Guest
Posts: 1,922
Joined: 23-October 06
Member No.: 147



I have tried wading through Tom Bearden's discussion of the Maxwell equations

http://www.cheniere.org/references/maxwell.htm

snip

“Maxwell’s” vector equations taught in university are actually Heaviside’s truncated equations, and are only a simplified version of what Maxwell originally wrote.

The Maxwell-Heaviside theory of electrodynamics is now well over a century old, and is actually a serious truncation of Maxwell's 1865 theory of 20 equations in 20 unknowns (those are specifically listed in the original published paper in 1865). Because it was “tainted” with a higher group symmetry algebra (quaternions), even Maxwell himself came under intense pressure to simplify it, after the publication of the first edition of his famous Treatise in 1873. Consequently, Maxwell was rewriting and greatly “watering down” his own Treatise, having finished rewriting and greatly reducing some 80% of it at the time of his death in 1879. The second edition and third edition, therefore, are NOT the original Maxwellian theory, but a very serious truncation.


guess I'm just a plain old chemist -- my brother is the mathematician of the family
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bill
post May 9 2008, 07:36 AM
Post #17





Group: Guest
Posts: 1,922
Joined: 23-October 06
Member No.: 147



Magnets are very weird thngs

why are there just 2 exactly alike but oposite poles ?

They seem very close to magic indeed
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lunk
post May 10 2008, 01:02 AM
Post #18



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,982
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



Like repels and opposites attract.

It makes me wonder, when I'm hungry, I have a desire for food.
That is sort of like a magnetic attraction.
But once I'm full, it doesn't matter how good the food was,
I no longer have the apatite for it...
well some times.

It's almost like when opposite poles of two magnets come together,
those fields are neutralized.

I find I am repelled from any room, these days, if a TV set is on in them.

Where ever there is electricity there is magnetism...
I suppose that it must be true the other way around too.
Though, I can only guess at where the electricity is in a permanent magnet,
the electrons zinging around the iron atoms, I guess.

There is no way one human being can know everything...
but to know you're a magnet in control of your own field...

I'm rambling,

Lets see, what needs fixin' in science?

imo, lunk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post May 12 2008, 05:25 PM
Post #19



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



QUOTE (bill @ May 9 2008, 05:36 AM) *
Magnets are very weird thngs

why are there just 2 exactly alike but oposite poles ?

They seem very close to magic indeed


Hi Bill,

I've seen a source that claimed there are actually 4 types of magnetic poles (don't have that book with me right now, but I got it from Bearden's website, and I believe the now-deceased author was named Johnson IIRC). I highly recommend Bearden's theory book [Energy From the Vacuum IIRC] for the math/physics inclined, or Bearden's/Bedini's book for the less-technical, more experimental crowd. John Bedini's website is currently at:

http://www.icehouse.net/john34/

EDIT2: I'm not referring to Halbach Arrays above (but those are pretty nifty too in their own right)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halbach_array

The "magnetic monopole" still remains elusive as far as I know, but there is some interesting reading for the electrically (or radio/ham) inclined over at:

http://www.antennex.com/preview/monopole.htm

I still consider myself as a novice in the field of magnetism (pun intended here wink.gif ), but my knowledge has been known to surpass that of the textbook "explanations" or of the academic "experts" in this area. Magnetohydrodynamics is not a field for the timid or for the easily-deterred, by the way. If your "theory" doesn't explain the observed phenomena, then roll up your sleeves and experiment (with a thick notebook handy).

The quantum mechanics types like to hang magnetism on the hook of "electron spin" [but they don't seem to ever explain how that works exactly, from what I've seen]. Then they like to throw the middle Roman alphabet at you with a bunch of "operators" and mathematical gyrations. A cloud of chalk dust later-Voila! Magnetism! [or not IMHO...]

Thomas Valone's and Bruce de Palma's [and later a Japanese and an Indian scientists' (Tarawi and Peshawar???)] work on "back EMF" and "N machines" is related to all this, somehow. Still digging there...

Magic is certainly a simpler explanation. Interesting that the US Patent Office had/has? a standing "ban" on magnetic and/or "over-unity" devices... Most refrigerators and heat pumps are "over-unity" devices FWIW- they've just got no respect for that 2nd "Law" of Thermodynamics.

*** EXTREMELY RARE US PATENT OFFICE MEMO from 2006 ***
http://www.orbitfiles.com/download/id3071629862.html


P.S. I love it when lunk rambles. thumbsup.gif

EDIT: The points go to Bill- he mostly answered my Maxwellian questions above. I read from Thomas F. Torrance's edit of James Clerk Maxwell's The Dynamical Theory of The Electromagnetic Field. 103 pages of SHEER GENIUS from 27 October 1864, imho. E.T. Whittaker published Hamilton's quaternion mathematics formally in 1903- got an antique copy of that book as well.

You don't need to be a mathematician [I'm not, but it is a "hat" that I'm often forced to wear] to appreciate the beauty [or is it wisdom?] of fractals/quaternions. Free software is at:

http://www.fractalarts.com/ASF/Download.html

This post has been edited by dMole: Oct 5 2008, 03:00 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lunk
post May 14 2008, 05:48 PM
Post #20



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,982
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



I think the universe is in a steady state of growth.
The aether, forms atoms, the atoms form stars and planets,
the stars and planets are points of gravity, that attracts more aether, that creates more atoms at each gravitational point, causing them to grow. when a planet grows big enough, it too, turns into a new star and is flung off into the galaxy, where it grows it's own planets, and the process continues, forever, expanding outward into infinity.

Yes, I see a fiery future but it is a very long way off.

If the aether exists,
and we are deceivingly told, it doesn't,
then we are stymied.

imo, lunk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

7 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 25th April 2014 - 01:00 AM