Comments by "Charles Brightman" (@charlesbrightman4237) on "Ever Wondered Where Did Gold Come From?" video.
-
Potential completion of the Periodic Table of the Elements:
I currently believe that there are 120 chemical elements in this universe. If a person were to look at how electrons fill up the shells in atoms: 2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 18, 8 (seven shells), and realizing that energy could freely flow in this universe if nothing stopped it from doing so, then a natural bell shaped curve might occur. An eighth energy shell might exist with a maximum of two elements in it, chemical element #119 (8s1) and chemical element #120 (8s2).
Chemical Element #119 (8s1):
#119 I put at the bottom of the Hydrogen group on the Periodic Table of the Elements. It only has one electron in it's outer shell with room for only one more electron. Energy might even enter the atom through the missing electron spot and then at least some of the energy might get trapped inside of the atom under the atom's outer shell.
Chemical Element #120 (8s2):
#120 I put at the bottom of the Helium group since it's outer shell is full of electrons. It might have some of the properties of group two, Beryllium group (Alkali Earth Metals group) since it has two electrons in it's outer shell; as well as some of the properties of the Helium group (Noble Gases group) since it's outer shell is full of electrons; and if you look at the step down deflection of the semi-metals and where #120 would be located on the chart, it's possible #120 might even have some semi-metal characteristics. #120 would be the heaviest element in this universe. I believe chemical element #120 could possibly be found inside the center of stars.
When a neutron split inside of this atom, it would give off one proton, one electron, neutrinos and energy. The proton and electron would be ejected outside of the atom since all their respective areas are full. One proton and one electron are basic hydrogen, of which the Sun is primarily made up of, and the Sun certainly gives off neutrinos and energy. And note, it's the neutron that split, not a proton. So even after the split, there are still 120 protons inside of the atom and the atom still exists as element #120. The star would last longer that way.
In addition, if the neutron that split triggered a chain reaction inside of the star, this could possibly be how stars nova, (even if only periodically).
If stars were looked at as if this theoretical idea were true, and found to even be somewhat true, then we might just have a better model of the universe to work with, even if it's not totally 100% true. And if it's all 100% true, then all the better.
2
-
SPACE IS FINITE AND TIME IS INFINITE:
('Space' being energy itself, 'Time' being the flow of energy):
Consider the following, utilizing modern science and logic and reason:
a. Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it's one of the foundations of physics. Hence, energy is either truly eternally existent, or modern science is wrong.
b. An 'absolute somethingness' cannot come from 'absolute nothingness', 'absolute nothingness' just being a concept from a conscious entity in 'absolute somethingness'. Hence, an 'absolute somethingness' truly eternally existed throughout all of eternity past, exists today, and will most probably exist throughout all of future eternity. That eternally existent 'absolute somethingness' most probably being energy itself.
c. The universe ALWAYS existed in some form and will most probably ALWAYS exist in some form, with no beginning and possibly no end. Alpha and Omega, beginning and end, have been replaced by actual reality.
d. And for me, 'space' is energy itself. Wherever space is, energy is. Wherever energy is, space is. They are one and the same thing. And 'time' is the flow of energy. Hence 'spacetime' being 'energy and it's flow'. 'Spacetime' had no beginning and will possibly have no end.
1
-
1
-
@ameerunbegum7525 Revised TOE: 3/25/2017a.
My Current TOE:
THE SETUP:
1. Modern science currently recognizes four forces of nature: The strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, gravity, and electromagnetism.
2. In school we are taught that with magnetism, opposite polarities attract and like polarities repel. But inside the arc of a large horseshoe magnet it's the other way around, like polarities attract and opposite polarities repel. (I have proved this to myself with magnets and anybody with a large horseshoe magnet and two smaller bar magnets can easily prove this to yourself too. It occurs at the outer end of the inner arc of the horseshoe magnet.).
3. Charged particles have an associated magnetic field with them.
4. Protons and electrons are charged particles and have their associated magnetic fields with them.
5. Photons also have both an electric and a magnetic component to them.
FOUR FORCES OF NATURE DOWN INTO TWO:
6. When an electron is in close proximity to the nucleus, it would basically generate a 360 degree spherical magnetic field.
7. Like charged protons would stick together inside of this magnetic field, while simultaneously repelling opposite charged electrons inside this magnetic field, while simultaneously attracting the opposite charged electrons across the inner portion of the electron's moving magnetic field.
8. There are probably no such thing as "gluons" in actual reality.
9. The strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force are probably derivatives of the electro-magnetic field interactions between electrons and protons.
10. The nucleus is probably an electro-magnetic field boundary.
11. Quarks also supposedly have a charge to them and then would also most likely have electro-magnetic fields associated with them, possibly a different arrangement for each of the six different type of quarks.
12. The interactions between the quarks EM forces are how and why protons and neutrons formulate as well as how and why protons and neutrons stay inside of the nucleus and do not just pass through as neutrinos do.
THE GEM FORCE INTERACTIONS AND QUANTA:
13. Personally, I currently believe that the directional force in photons is "gravity". It's the force that makes the sine wave of EM energy go from a wide (maximum extension) to a point (minimum extension) of a moving photon and acts 90 degrees to the EM forces which act 90 degrees to each other. When the EM gets to maximum extension, "gravity" flips and EM goes to minimum, then "gravity" flips and goes back to maximum, etc, etc. A stationary photon would pulse from it's maximum extension to a point possibly even too small to detect, then back to maximum, etc, etc.
14. I also believe that a pulsating, swirling singularity (which is basically a pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon) is the energy unit in this universe.
15. When these pulsating, swirling energy units interact with other energy units, they tangle together and can interlock at times. Various shapes (strings, spheres, whatever) might be formed, which then create sub-atomic material, atoms, molecules, and everything in existence in this universe.
16. When the energy units unite and interlock together they would tend to stabilize and vibrate.
17. I believe there is probably a Photonic Theory Of The Atomic Structure.
18. Everything is basically "light" (photons) in a universe entirely filled with "light" (photons).
THE MAGNETIC FORCE SPECIFICALLY:
19. When the electron with it's associated magnetic field goes around the proton with it's associated magnetic field, internal and external energy oscillations are set up.
20. When more than one atom is involved, and these energy frequencies align, they add together, specifically the magnetic field frequency.
21. I currently believe that this is where a line of flux originates from, aligned magnetic field frequencies.
NOTES:
22. The Earth can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic field, electrical surface field, and gravity, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other.
23. The flat spiral galaxy can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic fields on each side of the plane of matter, the electrical field along the plane of matter, and gravity being directed towards the galactic center's black hole where the gravitational forces would meet, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other.
24. As below in the singularity, as above in the galaxy and probably universe as well.
25. I believe there are only two forces of nature, Gravity and EM, (GEM). Due to the stability of the GEM with the energy unit, this is also why the forces of nature haven't evolved by now. Of which with the current theory of understanding, how come the forces of nature haven't evolved by now since the original conditions acting upon the singularity aren't acting upon them like they originally were, billions of years have supposedly elapsed, in a universe that continues to expand and cool, with energy that could not be created nor destroyed would be getting less and less dense? My theory would seem to make more sense if in fact it is really true. I really wonder if it is in fact really true.
26. And the universe would be expanding due to these pulsating and interacting energy units and would also allow galaxies to collide, of which, how could galaxies ever collide if they are all speeding away from each other like is currently taught?
DISCLAIMER:
27. As I as well as all of humanity truly do not know what we do not know, the above certainly could be wrong. It would have to be proved or disproved to know for more certainty.
1
-
@ameerunbegum7525 Here is the test for the 'gravity' portion of my TOE idea. I do not have the necessary resources to do the test but maybe you or someone else reading this does, will do the test, then tell the world what is found out either way.
a. Imagine a 12 hour clock.
b. Put a magnetic field across from the 3 to 9 o'clock positions.
c. Put an electric field across from the 6 to 12 o'clock positions.
(The magnetic field and electric field would be 90 degrees to each other and should be polarized so as to complement each other.)
d. Shoot a high powered laser through the center of the clock at 90 degrees to the em fields.
e. Do this with the em fields on and off.
(The em fields could be varied in size, strength, density and depth. The intent would be to energy frequency match the laser and em fields for optimal results.)
f. Look for any gravitational / anti-gravitational effects.
(Including the utilization of ferro cells so as to be able to actually see the energy field movements.)
(And note: if done right, it's possible a mini gravitational black hole might form. Be ready for it. In addition, it's possible a neutrino might be formed before the black hole stage, the neutrino being a substance with a very high gravitational modality with very low 'em' modalities.)
(An alternative to the above would be to shoot 3 high powered lasers, or a single high powered laser split into 3 beams, each adjustable to achieve the above set up, all focused upon a single point in space.)
'If' effects are noted, 'then' further research could be done.
'If' effects are not noted, 'then' my latest TOE idea is wrong. But still, we would know what 'gravity' was not, which is still something in the scientific world. Science still wins either way and moves forward.
1
-
@ameerunbegum7525 'IF' my latest TOE idea is really true, (and I fully acknowledge the 'if' at this time), that the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe, and what is called 'gravity' is a part of what is currently recognized as the 'em' photon, then the oscillation of these 3 interacting modalities of the energy unit would be as follows:
Gravity: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction;
Electrical: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction;
Magnetic: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction.
Then:
1 singular energy unit, with 3 different modalities, with 6 maximum most reactive positions, with 9 total basic reactive positions (neutrals included). Hence 1, 3, 6, 9 being very prominent numbers in this universe and why mathematics even works in this universe.
(And possibly '0', zero, as possibly neutrals are against other neutrals, even if only briefly, for no flow of energy, hence the number system that we currently have).
And also how possibly mathematical constants exist in this universe as well.
1
-
@amolbhole23 I am me, assuming "I" even actually even exist in the first place:
(copy and paste from my files):
Consider the following as well, even utilizing modern science:
a. Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed (a foundational principal of physics). Hence, energy is either eternally existent, or modern science is wrong.
b. Modern science claims that we have new cells that come into existence inside of our body on a daily basis. This appears to be really true.
So, since I have a body with energy and cells in it:
* A part of me is eternally existent and a part of me is being born anew on a daily basis.
* My current body extends from eternity past until now.
* Rising to a higher level of thought, the 'now' that I exist in is 'eternal'.
* I am currently existing in the 'eternal now'.
* I am currently an actual eternally existent conscious entity existing in the eternal now.
At least once in my life I reached being an actual eternally existent conscious entity existing in the eternal now. It's just that the current analysis indicates that it will not always be that way.
But then again, as I don't know what I don't know, and even what I believe I know to be really true maybe isn't, as well as my mind making up stuff to fill in the gaps of it's perceived existence, along with other items too, I will be the first to admit that I could be wrong. Maybe once attained, I actually have an actual eternal conscious existence in some form throughout all of future eternity. Can I really ever prove to myself that I don't?
And also: "IF" my TOE idea is correct, then:
* I am currently an actual eternally existent conscious being of light ('gem' photons) existing in an environment entirely made of light ('gem' photons), existing in the eternal now.
But then also: "IF" my definitions of Space Time and the TOE idea are correct, then:
* Do "I" and all things even actually exist in the first place, OR does ONLY the 'gem' photons exist as all things? How could "I" ever die if "I" never actually existed in the first place but the eternally existent 'gem' photons were existing as "me"? And if the 'gem' photons decided to exist as "me" throughout all of future eternity, whom am "I" to argue with them since "I" don't even actually exist at all in the first place? If the 'gem' photons decided to exist as "me" throughout all of future eternity, they might only have to will it to be so.
And note, this would apply to you too.
1
-
1
-
@amolbhole23 From a YT conversation I had, this is my part in part: (concerning 'cause and effect'):
I can clearly see what you are saying about the effect of a cause in itself may be a cause for a later effect. And in that regard, yes it could be seen as being the same. But a 'cause' usually comes before an 'effect'. And in that context, if something never ever changes, the cause brings about an effect (no change) which in itself is a cause (no change) which then brings about an effect (no change),......., and both the cause and effect are identical and no change occurs.
But now, if some state of existence changes somewhere in the process, either via a cause that is not identical to the effect or an effect that is not identical to a cause, then change occurs. But for a change to occur that causes some later effect still puts a cause before an effect. One total state of existence changing to bring about another total but different state of existence.
Logically speaking, I can't see how one could have a different state of existence (effect) from a previous state of existence that was not identical (cause) to bring about the later different state of existence. And sure, that later effect might possibly be the cause to future effects and so on and so forth and possibly life happens and evolves in a cause/effect/cause/effect.... kind of way.
And in essence, 'if' for example my latest theory of everything is really true, that the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon is the basic energy unit of this universe that brings about everything in this universe, including even numbers themselves for math to do what math does, a singular energy unit with 3 different modalities, each modality acting 90 degrees from the other two, while the basic structure of the 'gem' photon itself never changes, it's the interaction with other 'gem' photons in existence whereby other future effects occur in a cause and effect kind of way. And sure, later effects become the cause of later effects and so on and so forth. But the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photons themselves would eternally exist as they themselves make up space and time itself. Eternally the same, but yet interactions with other like 'gem' photons brings about change. (But I fully acknowledge that this TOE idea is dependent upon the results of my gravity test.) But in the context of this discussion, it is a possibility at this time of how reality truly is.
In essence, the basic pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon would be both the 'cause' and the 'effect' all contained within itself and in that context, both the 'cause' and 'effect' would be identical.
* Added note: The universe ALWAYS existed in some form and did not have a beginning, nor might it ever end. The creation accounts in the Bible and other religion's belief systems, as well as the singular 'big bang' theory, are all just fairy tales. The 'gem' photon would be it's own self causal effect, and hence, eternally existent.
1
-
@amolbhole23 Red Shift: Consider the following:
a. Current narrative: Space itself is expanding. (Even though science does not fully know yet what 'space' actually is nor how it could actually expand).
b. But consider: The net effect of solar winds, particles and energy pushing outward from galaxies, (even modern science claims 'em' has momentum), continuously, over a prolonged period of time, with other galaxies doing the same, with nothing to stop them from doing so, would tend to push galaxies away from each other and even potentially allow the cosmic web to form between galaxies.
And then, when we here in our galaxy, look at far away galaxies, with other galaxies in between, the net effect of all those galactic interactions would have galaxies furthest from ours move away faster the further those galaxies were from us, including us perceiving a red shift of energy.
c. Now, utilizing the scientific principal of Occam's razor, which way is more probably correct? What the current narrative is ('a' above), or 'b' utilizing known physics?
1
-
@amolbhole23 A better explanation to the dual slit experiment?:
It is only an idea on my part but it goes something like this:
1. Charged particles have their associated magnetic fields with them.
2. Protons and electrons are charged particles and have their associated magnetic fields with them.
3. Photons also have both an electrical and magnetic components to them.
4. Whenever a proton, electron, or photon is shot out of a gun, it's respective magnetic field interacts with the magnetic fields of the electrons in the atoms and molecules of the gun itself, the medium the projectile is traveling through (ie: air), and/or from around the slits themselves.
5. Via QED (quantum electrodynamics), newly generated photons might occur.
6. The projectile goes on it's own way and the newly generated photons go on their own way. It gives the illusion of a wave particle duality, but it is not that way in actual reality.
7. Specifically in the case of protons or electrons, the newly generated EM wave travels faster than the particles. The new EM waves go through both slits and sets up "hills and valleys" of field energy. When the proton or electron goes through one of the slits, it then follows whatever "valley" it enters thereby over time, even shooting only one proton or one electron at a time, the interference pattern will still emerge.
8. As far as detectors are concerned, they probably have an energy field that is one way when on and a different way when off. The interaction of this energy field (or the lack thereof) with whatever is passing through it, gives the indication that is observed.
Now, for those who hold fast to reality being probability waves that are condensed down by an observer into one single physical reality, then:
a. What exactly are these probability waves made up of?
b. Where exactly are these probability waves stored at until they are observed?
c. How exactly does an observer in physical reality actually observe these probability waves and condense them down into one single physical reality?
d. Who and/or what observed the first observer?
e. What exactly happens when two or more observers observe different probability waves? Which one takes precedent in physical reality?
For me, while this observer condensing probability waves down into one single physical reality might work well on paper, it does not appear to reflect actual reality.
Now, utilizing the scientific principal of Occam's razor, which way is more probably correct? My way by utilizing known scientific principals, or that is as discerned on paper as stated above is how reality actually is?
1
-
@amolbhole23 Existence and non-existence, side by side for all of eternity:
"IF" my Theory Of Everything is really true, (that what is called 'gravity' is a modality that is a part of the currently recognized 'em' photon, 'gravity' acting 90 degrees to the 'em' modalities, which of course act 90 degrees to each other, 'gravity' actually causing the sine wave pattern of 'em'), AND "IF" my view of space and time are correct, ('space' being energy itself [which is the 'gem' photon], 'time' being the flow of energy), then I could see where it might be possible that the inner spherical shell of the universe could possibly be made up of the 'gravity' modality of the 'gem' photon which is 90 degrees to the electrical modality of the 'gem' photon, which are both 90 degrees to the magnetic modality of the 'gem' photon, the magnetic modality existing both inside of and outside of the inner shell, the complete 'gem' photon interactions making up the entire spherical shell of all of existence itself. And then of course, non-existence would exist beyond existence. So, existence and non-existence might possibly exist side by side for all of eternity. It all depends upon whether the gravity test for my TOE is really true or not and whether my view of space time is correct or not, and whether the universal spherical shell exists as I believe it might or not.
But 'if' true, and as no photons (currently 'em', 'gem' in my view) would be absorbed nor reflected by the spherical universal shell, then when we look at the blackness in the night sky that is beyond the light of the stars and galaxies, we might actually be perceiving in part the limits of existence and the universal shell of existence itself, with non-existence beyond.
I am inside of a vast eternally existent universe, filled with everything in existence, and yet, somehow, I feel so alone. An existent universe unto itself alone with nothingness beyond.
1
-
1
-
@amolbhole23 Thought about space time:
Consider the following:
a. Wavelength equals speed of light divided by frequency.
b. Wavelength is how far a single 'em' photon goes in space, or possibly is the size of space itself. (Especially since 'space' itself has not been defined yet). Possibly different sizes of space for different 'em' frequencies.
c. Speed of light: 'light' being 'em' photons, 'speed' being distance divided by time, distance being two points in space with space between those two points.
d. Frequency being 'hertz', 'hertz being cycles per second, or how far an 'em' photon goes at a specific size during one second.
e. "IF" wavelength changes (the frequency changes) then the distance a single 'em' photon goes would change and/or the size of space itself would change (assuming that an 'em' photon makes up 'space' itself).
f. Possibly 'space' varies due to 'space' being made up of 'em' itself and as 'em' frequencies change, 'space' changes.
g. Another possibility would be that as the wavelength changes (frequency changes) then as the distance a single 'em' photon goes would also change in it's time of existence, 'time' would change for any given 'em' photon length. The effect of that single 'em' photon makes in it's given time of existence.
h. Possibly 'time' varies due to the wavelength of the 'em' photon.
i. So, possibly 'space' varies due to energy frequencies changing and 'time' varies due to the wavelength of energy changing, the 'em' photon being energy itself. And if as I currently believe that what is called 'gravity' is actually a part of the 'em' photon, then the 'gem' photon makes up the energy unit that possibly makes up everything in existence in this entire universe including the universe itself, including 'space' and 'time' or 'space time' itself. It is also how space and time can warp, bend and vary.
1
-
@amolbhole23 And for those who claim 'space' and 'time' do not actually exist except for as concepts, then:
Consider the 'speed of light':
a. 'Speed' is distance divided by time.
b. 'Distance' is two points in space with space between those two points.
c. If 'space' and/or 'time' did not exist in actual existent reality, except for as concepts, then 'speed' could not exist in actual existent reality, except for as a concept.
d. If 'speed' exists in actual existent reality, then 'space' and 'time' both have to have some sort of actual existent reality.
e. Likewise, 'light' which is currently considered as 'em' also has to have an actual existent reality, in addition to being a concept, for 'light' to exist in actual existent reality, in addition to being a concept.
f. So, if the 'speed of light' actually exists in existent reality, then 'space', 'time', 'speed' and 'light' ('em'), all also have to actually exist in existent reality, otherwise, the 'speed of light' could not actually exist in existent reality, other than just as a concept, (which would put a major kink in a lot of physics formulas).
1
-
@amolbhole23 The mathematics for the TOE doesn't even exist yet as far as I am currently aware. It goes beyond any quantum field theory formulas that I am currently aware of. The outline though is basically as follows:
The formula has at least 3 levels to it:
1. The Internal Photon Level: The 3 interacting forces, (which might even be just a singular force with 3 different modalities), all interacting at basically 90 degrees to each other and all simultaneously pulsating and swirling. A complex part of the formula but I believe to be totally doable.
2. The External Photon Level: For each pulsating, swirling photon, all the pulsating, swirling photons interacting with it. An exponential part of the formula that I am not even sure modern day super computers could adequately handle.
3. The Inter-dimensional Photon Level: For each modality within each photon would have an energy frequency associated with it. The energy frequencies could be seen as being in their own space time dimension. (For me, 'space' is energy itself of which is the 'gem' photon and 'time' is the flow of energy; 'temperature' is the interaction of energy), so one would be dealing with way more than just 3 spatial dimensions and way more than just 1 time dimension (as there would many different energy frequencies with many different flows of energy). Whenever like resonate energy frequencies resonated with each other, they would affect each other, kind of like 'spooky action at a distance'. Anytime energy frequencies overlapped, there would be a temporary spike of some sort in each space time dimension. In addition, if in reality the 'gem' photon is just a singular force with 3 different modalities, it's possible that energy could 'slip' between modalities which would also affect the results. A very complex part of the formula on top of all the complexity that came before it.
4. Any time any energy moved in the system, the entire formula would have to be recalculated due to potential ripple effects.
5. In addition, I am operating in a realm where one plus one does not always equal two, and often does not.
Like I said above, I don't even believe the mathematics exists yet for what I am trying to do, but at a minimum, the formula would contain the above levels the way I currently see it to be. And I never said it would be easy.
1
-
1
-
@amolbhole23 Thank You. If the gravity test can ever be accomplished, it will show what gravity is, might be, or is not. In any event, science still 'wins' and moves forward.
Also, you have some of my ideas above. Ask yourself and others over time:
a. What exactly is 'space'?
b. What exactly is 'time'?
c. What exactly is 'gravity' and how does 'gravity' do what it apparently does?
d. How exactly do numbers and mathematical constants exist for math to do what math does in this universe?
We need to figure out how to have artificial gravity, proper protections from harmful cosmic radiation (including from the effects of any long term neutrino impacts, while most neutrinos go right through us, not all of them do), along with thousands of other things that would have to be successfully accomplished, (if they even actually can be), OR all human life, and possibly all life including AI's and microbial life, all eventually die and go extinct from this Earth.
The very survival of at least 1 species from this Earth is literally at stake, otherwise, ALL life from this Earth eventually dies and goes extinct and life itself from this Earth would all be ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things, as one day, there would not be a conscious entity left to care about anything or anyone ever again, at least not from this Earth. It would not even matter that any of us exist, much less how we exist while we exist. Trying to save at least 1 species from this Earth to survive beyond this Earth, solar system and galaxy is one of my reasons to get up in the mornings.
If ever you have any questions, while I am still upon this Earth, you can email me at one of my email addresses: "001charlieb@gmail.com" as YouTube comment sections are not always 100% reliable.
(See 2 more posts to you after this one).
1
-
@amolbhole23 (copy and pastes from my files):
Consider the following:
* There are 3 basic options for life itself, which reduce down to 2, which reduce down to only 1:
a. We truly have some sort of actual conscious existence throughout all of future eternity.
b. We die trying to truly have some sort of actual conscious existence throughout all of future eternity.
c. We die not trying to truly have some sort of actual conscious existence throughout all of future eternity.
* 3 reduced down to 2:
a. We truly have some sort of actual conscious existence throughout all of future eternity.
b. We don't. And note, two out of the three options above, we die.
* 2 reduced down to 1:
a. We truly have some sort of actual conscious existence throughout all of future eternity.
b. We truly don't have any conscious existence throughout all of future eternity.
(And note, these two appear to be mutually exclusive. Only one way would be really true.)
And then ask yourself the following questions:
1. Ask yourself: How exactly do galaxies form? The current narrative is that matter, via gravity, attracts other matter. The electric universe model also includes universal plasma currents.
2. Ask yourself: How exactly do galaxies become spiral shaped in a cause and effect state of existence? At least one way would be orbital velocity of matter with at least gravity acting upon that matter, would cause a spiral shaped effect. The electric universe model also includes energy input into the galaxy, which spiral towards the galactic center, which then gets thrust out from the center, at about 90 degrees from the input.
3. Ask yourself: What does that mean for a solar system that exists in a spiral shaped galaxy? Most probably that solar system would be getting pulled toward the galactic gravitational center.
4. Ask yourself: What does that mean for species that exist on a planet, that exists in a solar system, that exists in a spiral shaped galaxy, in an apparent cause and effect state of existence? Most probably that if those species don't get off of that planet, and out of that solar system, and probably out of that galaxy too, (if it's even actually possible to do for various reasons), then they are all going to die one day from something and go extinct with probably no conscious entities left from that planet to care that they even ever existed at all in the first place, much less whatever they did and or didn't do with their time of existence.
5. Ask yourself: For those who might make it out of this galaxy, (here again, assuming it could actually be done for various reasons), where to go to next, how long to get there, how to safely land, and then, what's next? Hopefully they didn't land in another spiral shaped galaxy or a galaxy that would become spiral shaped one day, otherwise, they would have to galaxy hop through the universe to stay alive, otherwise, they still die one day from something with no conscious entities being left from the original planet to care they even ever existed at all in the first place, much less that they made it out of their own galaxy. They failed to consciously survive throughout all of future eternity.
6. Ask yourself: What exactly matters throughout all of future eternity and to whom does it exactly and eternally matter to?
Either at least one species truly consciously survives throughout all of future eternity somehow, someway, somewhere, in some state of existence, even if only by a continuous succession of ever evolving species, for life itself to have continued meaning and purpose to, OR none do and life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things.
Our true destiny currently appears to be:
1. We are ALL going to die one day from something.
2. We are ALL going to forget everything we ever knew and experienced.
3. We are ALL going to be forgotten one day in future eternity as if we never ever existed at all in the first place.
Eternal Death 'IS' Eternal Peace.
Currently:
Nature is our greatest ally in so far as Nature gives us life and a place to live it, AND Nature is also our greatest enemy that is going to take it all away. (OSICA)
* (Note: This includes the rich, powerful, and those who believe in the right to life and the sanctity of human life. God does not actually exist and Nature is not biased other than as Nature. Nature does what Nature does in a cause and effect kind of way. Truth is still truth and reality is still reality, regardless of whatever we believe that reality to be. And denying future reality will not make future reality any less real in a cause and effect state of existence.)
** Hence also though, legalizing suicide (or at least make suicide not illegal) so as to let people leave this life on their own terms if they wish to do so. Many people and species are going to die in the 6th mass extinction event that has already started, at least some, horrible deaths. Many will wish they could die, and all will, eventually. And the 6th mass extinction event will not be the last mass extinction event for this Earth. But if suicide were legal (or at least not illegal), at least some people would not have the added guilt of breaking societies' law before doing so. Just trying to plan ahead here. Giving people an 'out' if they wish to take it.
Added Note: As this is a search for the real absolute truth concerning the future, please feel free to copy and paste this elsewhere to further the analysis and discussion.
1
-
@amolbhole23 GOD DOES NOT ACTUALLY EXIST EXCEPT FOR AS A CONCEPT:
For those who claim God actually exists (besides as a concept), consider the following:
a. An actual eternally existent absolute somethingness truly existing.
b. An actual eternally existent absolute somethingness that has consciousness, memories and thoughts truly existing.
People who claim God actually and eternally exists basically are claiming that 'b' above is correct but yet simultaneously seem to be saying that 'a' is impossible to occur.
'a' above can exist without 'b' existing but 'b' cannot exist unless 'a' exists. Even per the scientific principal of Occam's razor, 'a' is more probable of being really true rather than 'b'.
I am one step away from proving God's existence, but am unable to find any actual evidence to do so. And nobody I've talked to seems to have any actual evidence of God's actual existence either. All humans appear to have are 'Theories of God'. Some humans appear to go their whole life basing their life upon their specific theory of God. They even at times kill other humans based upon their own theories. Many give their God human characteristics and cannot even prove the existence of their God much less the characteristics given to their God. Some have circumstantial arguments for a God's existence, but others have circumstantial arguments for no God existing. Not one has any actual factual evidence that their God actually factually even exists. Hence, at this time in the analysis, God does not actually exist except for as a concept created by humans for humans. Humans have personified Nature and called that personification "God". It appears many of them are delusional and are believing in fairy tales as if those fairy tales were really true. Instead of what is claimed "God creating man in God's image", it's more likely that "Man created God in Man's image".
Further consider that if the emotional parts of the brain override the logic and reasoning parts of the brain, people can be made to believe basically anything at all as being really true. Plus modern science has already proven that humans can have visual and audio hallucinations that are very real to that individual. All the more reason for critical thinking being needed and to follow the facts wherever those facts might lead.
In addition, while modern science does not know what consciousness actually is yet, memories and thoughts appear to require a physical correctly functioning brain to have those items occur. Where is God's brain? Where are God's memories stored at? How are God's memories stored and retrieved? How does God think even a single coherent thought?
If inside of this space time dimension we appear are existing in, then where?
If outside of this space time dimension we appear are existing in, then where is the interface between that dimension and this dimension? No such interface has been discovered as of yet as far as I am currently aware of.
* Note: Since this is a search for the real absolute truth concerning God, Intelligent Designer, Pre-existent Consciousness, etc, feel free to copy and paste this elsewhere to further the analysis and discussion.
1
-
1
-
@amolbhole23 You are welcome. One of my email addresses is included above if you have any questions. As I am approaching the end of my life here upon this Earth, if for some reason you write and I don't answer, it might be that I cannot answer.
If I do not get my ideas out now while I still consciously can, whether those ideas are correct or not, if not now, then when?
My oldest grandson married a woman from India and are living here in the USA. It's nice to know where people are at due to 'space' and 'time' differences. Ah...., but what is 'space', what is 'time'? What is 'gravity' that holds us all to this Earth? :-D
Keep safe over there in India, reports over here are that COVID is getting more deadly over there.
Additionally, as a way to potentially help India and as a way to potentially make money, help to implement Hydrogen into India's economy. See my Twitter page under the same name as this comment to see years worth of what just some of the nations of the world are doing as they implement Hydrogen into their national economies for various reasons. Hydrogen, the most abundant element in this entire universe. Hydrogen, it's not just the future, it's already here now.
And here is a further gift to ponder:
(copy and paste from my files):
Potential endless energy source basically anywhere in this universe:
a. Small aluminum cones with an electrical wire running through the center of the cones, cones spaced apart (not touching I'm thinking) but end to end.
b. Electromagnetic radiation energy in the atmosphere interacts with the aluminum cones.
c. Jostled atoms and molecules in the cone eventually have some electrons try to get away from other electrons of which those electrons gather at the larger end of the cone, of which also creates an area of positive charge at the smaller end of the cone.
d. The electron's in the wire are attracted to the positive end of the cone and the positive 'end' in the wire are attracted to the negatively charged end of the cone.
e. Basically a 'battery' has been created inside the electrical wire itself, different areas of electrical potential. Basically a 'wire battery' or a 'batteryless battery', however one wanted to call it.
f. Numerous cones placed end to end increases the number of 'batteries' in the wire.
Then of course, one could take that generated dc electricity to split H2O into H2 and O2 of which could be burned or utilized in a hydrogen fuel cell to get the electricity back with a byproduct of basically pure water. Species need pure water too.
With the increased cosmic radiation that is going to be impacting this Earth this century as well as possibly a mini-ice age, might as well put that cosmic radiation to work for us.
1